Baby Bush ready to claim his birthright

Perhaps we should just skip straight to the coronation once George P. Bush figures out what office he wants.

George Prescott Bush is gearing up to run for a little-known but powerful office in a state where his family already is a political dynasty and where his Hispanic roots could help extend a stranglehold on power Republicans have enjoyed for two decades.

The 36-year-old Fort Worth attorney says he is close to settling on campaigning for Texas land commissioner next year. He doesn’t expect to make up his mind until he knows what Texas Gov. Rick Perry, a fellow Republican, decides to do.

“We for sure are running, the question is the office,” Bush told The Associated Press during the first interview about his political future since filing paperwork in November to seek elected office in Texas.

Bush’s father is former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, his grandfather is former President George H.W. Bush and his uncle is former President and Texas Gov. George W. Bush. Perry has been governor since George W. left for the White House.

Land commissioner traditionally has been a steppingstone to higher office, but Bush said little about any plans to eventually become a national political force.

His grandfather Prescott Bush was a US Senator, too. The past four years have been a rare period in American history where a member of the Bush family has not held some office. It will be interesting to see how he handles the inevitable tea party opponent he gets for Land Commissioner or whatever else he runs for. Will he adopt their positions, or will he remain blandly Bushy and presume that his name, money, and connections will suffice to handle it? The Trib has an interview with our future overlord if you want to better prepare yourself for the inevitable.

Posted in Election 2014 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Baby Bush ready to claim his birthright

Mental health court coup

Interesting.

Judge Jan Krocker

Citing problems with the administration of Harris County’s mental health court, a board of judges has ousted the court’s founder and presiding judge, Jan Krocker, officials confirmed Friday.

“There were a lot of valid complaints about Judge Krocker’s administration of the court, and she didn’t like the idea of oversight,” said Michael McSpadden, Houston’s most senior felony court judge. “We are all behind a mental health court. We just want it run the correct way.”

Krocker will continue to preside over the 184th State District Court, a bench to which she was first elected in 1994, but two other judges, David Mendoza and Brock Thomas, will oversee the mental health court.

Krocker said the move was the natural evolution of the program.

“Once we knew the court would be funded for another year, I had hoped to reduce my involvement because it had become so time-consuming,” she said in an emailed statement. “I would have been glad to transition out and turn it over to Judge Mendoza and Judge Thomas. It is too bad this wasn’t handled differently.”

What’s interesting about this is that the mental health court has only been in existence since October. That’s an awfully short period of time for everyone to lose patience with the person who brought this thing to reality. Or maybe there was something else going on.

The abrupt removal may have been spurred by Krocker releasing a statement in December accusing another judge and newly elected District Attorney Mike Anderson of trying to kill funding for the court.

Last year, Krocker said then-District Attorney Pat Lykos had promised $500,000 for the court to continue. When that promise dried up days before Lykos left office, Krocker blamed Anderson and state District Judge Belinda Hill.

Anderson and Hill, who was the chief administrative judge over the 22 district judges and is now Anderson’s first assistant, have both publicly supported the mental health court.

The problem was not the court, McSpadden said. It was Krocker.

“She wasn’t following the mental health advice of the people we hire, the doctors we hired,” McSpadden said. “There were a lot of complaints, from inside and outside the court.”

As a non-lawyer I have no insight into this, so let me throw this out to those of you who who may have some insight for your comments. What do you think?

Posted in Crime and Punishment | Tagged , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Austin to get bike sharing

About time, y’all.

City Council will vote Thursday on a five-year contract with a newly formed nonprofit organization, Bike Share of Austin, to operate the system.

The Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization awarded Austin a $1.5 million grant last summer that would fund most of the project. Bike Share of Austin, the only organization that applied for an operating contract, would provide $500,000 in matching funds. Officials hope memberships, grants and sponsorships will sustain the system, which they say would cost about $225,000 a year to operate.

Proponents say bike sharing would ease traffic congestion, help close transit gaps in the bus and rail systems, offer an alternative to single-occupancy vehicles and improve users’ health.

“This is no longer one of those things that’s out on the edge. It’s becoming a fairly standard part of transportation infrastructure for cities,” said Council Member Chris Riley.

Bike-share programs operate in about 20 U.S. cities — including San Antonio, Denver, Miami and Washington — and more than 400 cities worldwide. Houston and Fort Worth are putting in systems, too. Most municipalities team with a nonprofit or private-sector partner for operations.

Houston of course already has a system, which as we know is about to be expanded. I’m one part amused and one part amazed that it’s taken as long as it has for this to come to Austin given its overall proclivity for biking, but hey, you never know.

Austin’s plans call for 40 stations and 400 bicycles. If approved, the system could launch as soon as late spring or summer.

Exact station sites haven’t been set, but they would be focused in downtown and popular destinations such as Zilker Park, said Adrian Lipscombe of Austin’s Public Works Department, which would implement the program. Stations would be an average of two or three blocks apart.

[…]

Austin is hillier than downtown San Antonio, though, and some have questioned whether users can handle the 40-pound bikes on the city’s rolling terrain. Some downtown streets are not what many would consider beginner-friendly, either. But proponents say the city’s young workforce and mild climate make it a perfect fit.

San Antonio’s pretty hilly overall, though, and I don’t know that its downtown streets are any beginner-friendlier than Austin’s. I’m sure Austin will take to this just fine. Took ’em long enough, that’s for sure.

Posted in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Expanding Medicaid is about more than money

It’s a matter of life and death

Not to Rick Perry it doesn’t

If Texas doesn’t expand Medicaid, it will reject more than $100 billion in federal money the first decade, according to the state’s own figures. To get that sizeable federal reimbursement, the state would have to spend about $16 billion over 10 years. The governor’s refusal to take the federal government’s billions puts him in an awkward position opposite some of the state’s most powerful economic players: hospital chains, local governments and chambers of commerce. Given that political pressure, Perry might strike a deal with the Obama administration, or the Texas Legislature could push for a Medicaid expansion.

Beyond the economics and politics, lives are at stake. Lack of insurance will certainly mean more deaths. How many more? Approximately 9,000 a year, according to Dr. Howard Brody, director of the Institute for Medical Humanities at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston. Brody calculated that figure by extrapolating from a recent Harvard University study published in The New England Journal of Medicine that found that states that expanded Medicaid saw a 6.1 percent reduction in the death rate among adults below 65 who qualified for the program. In a recent op-ed in theGalveston Daily News Brody wrote, “This means that we can predict, with reasonable confidence, if we fail to expand Medicaid . . . 9,000 Texans will die each year for the next several years as a result.”

Too often the political debate around Medicaid expansion is about dollars and cents, Brody told me recently. “It’s presented as if it weren’t about life and death,” he said. Brody teaches ethics to medical students at UTMB, so for him, the issue of Medicaid expansion, when you cut through the rhetoric and endless policy discussions, is a deeply moral question: Should Texas allow people to die simply because they can’t afford health insurance? “Whose life and death are we talking about?” said Brody, who treated Medicaid patients for decades before becoming a professor at UTMB. “Politically, the Medicaid population are simply invisible folks. Most Americans may not care very much, because they think, ‘I’m not in that group of people and that’s somebody else and so it’s somebody else’s problem.’”

Perry has contributed to this attitude by arguing that uninsured Texans can receive health care in emergency rooms. “Everyone in the state of Texas has access to health care, everyone in America has access to health care,” Perry said at a New Hampshire campaign event in November 2011, according to the liberal website ThinkProgress. “From the standpoint of all people in this country, our government requires that everyone is covered.” Perry is correct that anyone can get treated in an emergency room—but it’s expensive. And not everyone in Texas has access to health care. People with chronic conditions—especially those with cancer—face a bleak future without health insurance. They are among the thousands of Texans whose lives could be saved by Medicaid expansion.

[…]

Medicaid expansion would help people like Mario Reyes, said [Kevin Moriarty, CEO and president of Methodist Healthcare Ministries], who is frustrated by Perry’s rejection of the program in Texas. “We’re talking 1.5 to 3 million people around the state who are going to get late care or no care,” he said. “They’re going to suffer, they’re going to be in pain because we can’t make a better policy decision.”

Sure is a good thing Rick Perry is pro-life, huh? Read the whole thing.

Posted in The great state of Texas | Tagged , , , , | 6 Comments

Point of disorder

New House, new rule.

"Objection Overruled", by Charles Bragg

The Texas House’s Democratic minority was dealt a blow Monday when the House passed an amendment to the chamber’s rules to limit legislators’ ability to derail a bill based on clerical errors. Calling “points of order” on such errors is a strategy lawmakers have often used to block measures they oppose.

State Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, authored the amendment to the House rules to limit abuse of typographical mistakes to kill legislation. Points of order on those types of mistakes send bills back to committee to be corrected before they can return to the floor to be voted on.

“The practice has been to allow bill after bill after bill to be defeated because a clerk at midnight, a sleepy and tired 25-year-old, made a typographical error,” King said. “That’s just not appropriate.”

Several Democrats and one Republican spoke against the provision, arguing that it weakens minority power. Rep. Armando Walle, D-Houston, said the amendment takes “tools out of the toolbox” for the minority party.

Since Republicans became the House majority in 2002, Democrats have often called points of order on the paperwork, including committee minutes and reports, that accompanies legislation. Under the new rule, a point of order may be overruled if it is “substantially fulfilled and the violation does not deceive or mislead.”

You can see the amended rule here. This is potentially a big deal, because Democrats have indeed been very adept at using points of order, known colloquially and amusingly as POOs, to stymie, delay, and sometimes kill outright bills they don’t like. Not just Democrats, of course, as anyone familiar with the oeuvres of Robert Talton and Arlene Wohlgemuth can attest, but it’s certainly been the main arrow in their quiver these past few sessions. Limiting their ability to wield this weapon will limit their ability to influence the outcomes. Having said that, I do have some sympathy for what Phil King says. There’s not really a principle behind POOs, and as they say about holding in the NFL, you could probably find such errors on every bill if you wanted to. It’s a matter of how much sway the minority is allowed, and how much authority the majority thinks it ought to have to enact its agenda. How you feel about these things is almost certainly directly proportional to your feelings about the majority and minority parties in the legislative body in question.

It occurs to me that this is also a potential trap for Speaker Straus. If he takes this rule to heart and regularly slaps down POOs he deems to be non-worthwhile, that could galvanize Democrats to abandon him and coalesce around a future challenger like David Simpson, who by the way was one of three Republicans (Jim Keffer and Gary Elkins were the other two) to vote against this amendment. If he continues to let Democrats knock bills down – and note that as a general rule, POOs only delay bills by a few days, so except in deadline situations they can be fixed and re-introduced; this happened several times last session – he’s unlikely to endear himself to his Republican critics. I think Straus is smart and slick enough to walk the tightrope, but it will be a challenge. BOR, Rep. Mike Villarreal, Trail Blazers and Texas Politics have more.

UPDATE: More from the Observer.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

What they’re saying about transportation

So far in all the stories I’ve read about the beginning of the legislative session, education and transportation are two of the biggest items everyone talks about. Here’s a sample from the Chron.

Story #1:

[Rep. Ed] Thompson said funding for transportation is another high priority going into the session.

“The gas tax has not been visited since the early 1990s,” he said. “It’s not generating enough money. We’re going to have to figure out a way to fund highways going forward.”

[Sen. Larry] Taylor agreed. “Transportation is a huge issue particularly in our area,” he said. “We have to get more dollars to our roads and highways, and how we do that is up for debate.”

He said fuel taxes and increased registration fees are possible options.

“To build roads and maintain what you have, you need to have funds,” Taylor added. “And the system we have is not doing the job. We need additional funding.”

I cited that article in my earlier post about education discussion. I wanted to revisit it after I saw what was said in story #2:

Transportation is another key issue, [Rep. Bill] Callegari said.

“Texas is doing really well bringing business to the state, but if we can’t bring adequate transportation, they’re going to stop coming,” he said.

Funding for transportation could be a topic for debate, he added.

“We have a gas tax that we use to fund transportation,” he said. “Cars use less gas, and less gas means less income. We’re going to have to look for ways to finance transportation in the future.”

Improving infrastructure is how Callegari believes the state can protect the economy.

“Our economy is doing well, but it is contingent on making sure we have more funding for transportation, water and rail,” he said. “The most important thing is that we can keep rolling to work and keep moving goods across the state to keep our economy moving.”

So is this genuine concern about finding adequate funds for transportation – and they’ll need a lot of funds – or just boilerplate talking points going in to a new session? With the happy budget news, it seems to be more the former, but we’ll see how that actually plays out. For now at least I will note that the discussion has mostly centered on what the state needs and the need to pay for it – water issues are another common thread – and there’s little to no talk about the need to cut back. Again, maybe this means nothing, but it is a different sound than what we were hearing two years ago. Make of it what you will.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What they’re saying about transportation

Aereo

From Dwight:

Aereo, which already has disrupted the television landscape in New York City, is coming soon to Houston and 21 other U.S. markets – but only if it survives legal attempts to kill it.

On Tuesday, Aereo CEO Chet Kanojia announced at CES in Las Vegas that the company would embark on a major expansion of its service, which currently is only available in the Big Apple. Aereo will fuel its efforts with a $38 million financing round.

Aereo lets you receive traditional broadcast television on non-traditional devices, streaming the signals to PCs, tablets, smartphones and even Roku boxes. It works by providing each subscriber with his or her own dime-sized antenna – clustered by the thousands in arrays – which then pulls in local signals for each market. The service includes an in-the-cloud DVR so you can pause, rewind and fast-forward shows.

Aereo starts at $8 or $12 a month for a subscription, or you pay $80 a year. There’s also a $1 day pass. You can also try out Aereo, but only if you’re in New York City.

Even though it collects cash from its customers, it doesn’t pay broadcast stations a penny, and that’s caused some consternation – and, as you’d expect, legal challenges.

Here’s more on those legal challenges.

A federal judge in New York ruled in July that the service doesn’t appear to violate copyright law because individual subscribers are assigned their own, tiny antenna at Aereo’s Brooklyn data center, making it analogous to the free signal a consumer would get with a regular antenna at home. Aereo spent the subsequent months selecting markets for expansion and renting space for new equipment in those cities.

“The court decision was the green light in our perspective,” CEO and founder Chet Kanojia said in a recent interview at Aereo’s sparse offices in a former engine factory in Queens. “This is an opportunity of a lifetime to build up something meaningful to change how people access TV.”

Aereo is one of several startups created to deliver traditional media over the Internet without licensing agreements. Past efforts have typically been rejected by courts as copyright violations. In Aereo’s case, the judge accepted the company’s legal reasoning, but with reluctance.

If the ruling stands, Aereo could cause a great deal of upheaval in the broadcast industry. It could give people a reason to drop cable or satellite subscriptions as monthly bills rise. It also might hinder broadcasters’ ability to sell ads because it’s not yet clear how traditional audience measures will incorporate Aereo’s viewership. In addition, it could reduce the licensing fees broadcasters collect from cable and satellite companies.

Broadcasters have appealed the July ruling. At a November hearing, appellate judges expressed skepticism about the legality of Aereo’s operations. In addition, the original judge’s ruling was preliminary, made as part of a decision to let Aereo continue operating while the lawsuits wind their way through court. Even if courts continue to side with Aereo on the legality of its setup, broadcasters still could nitpick on the details and try to argue that the antennas don’t actually operate individually as claimed.

I’d certainly call Aereo’s business model disruptive, so there’s quite a lot at stake here. For now, all you can get on Aereo is broadcast channels plus the Bloomberg Network, which reached a deal with Aereo. I’d think that if Aereo survives the challenges, or gets Congress to clarify the law in a way that accommodates what they do, it’s likely they’d make deals with other cable channels to carry them as well. It’s possible that this could lead to the kind of a la carte TV service that people have been predicting/demanding for years. Or it could get squashed and nothing will change for a decade or more. Who knows? Aereo’s press release is here, and you can pre-register for their service here. Hair Balls has more.

Posted in Technology, science, and math | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Aereo

Interview with Todd Clark and Chris Gonzales of the firefighters’ pension fund

I have written numerous times about the ongoing battle between Mayor Parker and the Houston Firefighter’s Relief and Retirement Fund, which is to say the firefighters’ pension fund. After I noted a legal victory by the city in its attempt to get more information from the fund, I was contacted by a representative of the HFRRF asking if I would like to discuss the matter with Todd Clark, the chairman of the HFRRF. Of course I said yes, and we arranged an interview. Chris Gonzales, the Executive Director/Chief Investment Officer of the Fund, was also on the call. Here’s what we talked about:

HFRRF interview

Clark recently had an op-ed published that decried the city’s lawsuit. That District Court ruling has been appealed, though not to the Supreme Court as that Hair Balls story notes; it was argued last week before the First Court of Appeals. I’m neither an accountant nor an expert in these matters, but I hope I’ve helped shed a little light on this. If I get any response from the city to what was said here, I’ll be sure to let you know. My thanks to Todd Clark and Chris Gonzales for their time.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Sports Authority’s finances are back in the news

I still have no idea whether this is something we need to worry about or not.

The firm that insures the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority’s $1 billion in bonds – sold to finance the homes of the Texans, Rockets and Astros – is calling on the cash-strapped authority to bolster its depleted reserves and warning of potential consequences if it does not.

MBIA Insurance Corp. Assistant Vice President Kenneth Epstein said this week the authority’s reserves are half what they should be and that the bulk of the agency’s debt, issued in 2001, has fallen short of revenue projections every year but one since then.

“We’ve been a willing participant over the last four years in trying to come up with a solution to the authority’s problems. The authority has not come back with any solution to what’s been happening,” Epstein said. “We want the authority to recognize that a problem exists, to bring people to the table, and to try to come up with a solution.”

The depleted reserve should be $55 million but is $25.4 million, Epstein said, putting the authority “in a very precarious position” and limiting its ability to handle dips in hotel and car rental taxes, its main revenues.

Sports Authority Chairman Kenny Friedman said the group is looking for a deal that could let it replenish its reserves and lower its payments in the long term, but said his board does not share MBIA’s urgency. The deal is structured to protect the city’s and county’s credit ratings and the stadiums, he noted.

“They are focused on what they should be focused on, which is protecting MBIA’s insurance obligations, and we’re focused on what we should be focused on, which is what’s right for this community and for these venues,” Friedman said. “We’re not going to do a deal just because it’s good for MBIA. It’s going to have to be good for the community. If we find one of those, we’ll do it.”

Friedman called MBIA’s concerns “strange” given that the insurer’s 2009 downgrade amid the financial crisis contributed to the strain on the reserves.

Important question: Are “Kenny Friedman” and J. Kent Friedman the same person? Because if they are, it’s the first time I’ve ever heard the name “Kenny Friedman”.

Be that as it may, see here, here, and here for some background. Not being a finance guy, I struggle to understand this stuff every time it comes up. County Judge Ed Emmett is quoted in the story telling MBIA to calm down, which reassures me somewhat but doesn’t really clarify things. I don’t know what else to add to this, so just consider this latest chapter in the saga noted for the record.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , | 2 Comments

On conflicts of interest

Many members of the Texas Legislature have conflicts of interest, or at least they would if the rules on such in the Lege were more clear.

Advocates of a part-time legislature say the system keeps lawmakers in touch with their constituents. Lawmakers are expected to serve their communities, and check their personal interests at the Capitol’s massive oak doors.

A study of the personal financial statements filed annually by lawmakers with the Texas Ethics Commission shows most lawmakers’ professional lives are deeply intertwined with their government service, or are directly affected by legislation debated each session.

For example, last session saw Rep. Gary Elkins, R-Houston, lead a fight against payday loan controls while candidly acknowledging that the proposed restrictions would hurt his personal payday loan businesses. When pressed during debate whether his vocal opposition constituted a conflict of interest, Elkins replied, “On this particular issue, I am probably as knowledgeable as anybody, and I think the body (the House) needs to hear the expertise.”

Knowledgeable legislators also weighed in last session on reform of the Texas Windstorm Insurance Agency: Rep. Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, a lawyer who handled hundreds of thousands of dollars’ worth of claims against the insurance agency, and then-Rep. Larry Taylor, R-Friendswood, an insurance agent who has sold windstorm policies. Taylor, recently elected to the Texas Senate, chaired the committee overseeing TWIA; Eiland was vice chair. Both weathered a storm of criticism for their involvement in legislation with a direct impact on their private livelihoods.

What exactly constitutes a conflict of interest for a Texas legislator?

“The laws are too weak to provide any meaningful guidance for legislators and there is no meaningful enforcement,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of the Texas office of Public Citizen.

One solution, Smith said, would be for lawmakers to follow the Texas Local Government Code, which advises local elected officials to abstain from issues affecting businesses in which they have more than a $15,000 investment or receive 10 percent of their income. “That bright line would be more effective,” he said. Currently, lawmakers do not have to disclose a dollar amount for each source of occupational income.

A big part of the problem is that being a legislator means needing to take a six-month leave of absence from your job every other year, for which you get paid all of $7,200. It’s not particularly conducive to holding a regular job, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of people who want to hire you. It’s just that these are often people and organizations with interests in particular legislation, and they want to hire you for your expertise as a legislator. As you might imagine, that can be a problem, especially since the rules of financial disclosure for legislators allows them a fair bit of leeway in describing how they earn their money. To me, the answer is to recognize that being a legislator is a fulltime job regardless of how much the Lege is actually in session, and pay legislators a salary that recognizes this. Once you do that, you can very strictly limit the amount of things for which they can be paid outside of their legislative duties, and ensure there are sufficient punishments for breaking those rules. I don’t expect anything like this to happen any time soon, but until then I don’t think we have much grounds to complain about what these folks do, or think they have to do, to earn a living.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

More on metal recycling

The Chron has a followup story on metal recycling and hexavalent chromium.

Houston air experts plan to deepen their investigation into the air outside metal recycling companies after their measurements showed – apparently for the first time – that the businesses could be a source of potent fumes known to cause cancer.

“We are searching for money for more in depth testing, and also to get a feeling for what good controls would be,” said Loren Raun, an environmental statistician at Rice University, who works with the city of Houston.

[…]

Now the nation’s fourth largest city plans to expand its investigation of communities where the air may be affected. This week the Bureau of Pollution Control and Prevention’s mobile air monitoring lab returns to service following maintenance. On one of its first assignments, it will go to Holmes Road Recycling in the south of the city. Managers there are about to test a new vacuum system that operates while a worker is torching: It pulls smoke through a cyclone system to remove particles.

“In theory, it should make a significant difference in smoke and particles from any facility using the equipment properly,” said Don Richner, an analytical chemist with the Bureau of Pollution Control and Prevention.

If the new device makes a difference, the city could encourage other recyclers to employ it.

Another result of the testing is that Houston officials are questioning whether recyclers are exempt from the requirement to obtain air pollution permits. Businesses that pollute below a certain threshold are allowed to operate under what’s known as “Permit by Rule,” in which they state emissions are low. Pollution bureau chief Arturo Blanco said authorities will ask for proof.

Rice University’s Raun says researchers hope to return to the plants to test at a distance of one or two blocks. “We want to get a feel for what people farther out in the neighborhood are exposed to,” she said.

This would address a question raised by scientists that hexavalent chromium converts quickly to a less dangerous form of the metal. The city is collaborating with community groups, the University of Texas and Rice University in an application for a federal grant to pursue that research.

Background here. This sure seems like the sort of thing for which grant money ought to be granted. It’s groundbreaking research, and it could affect the way the EPA calculates the risks of air pollution. I look forward to seeing what their further tests find out.

Posted in Elsewhere in Houston | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on More on metal recycling

Weekend link dump for January 13

Be on the lookout for pantsless people today.

Triskadekaphobes, unite! You have nothing to lose but your mild anxiety. The Bloggess can be your patron saint.

The top ten skywatching events to look for this year.

“There are many advantages in this world to knowing June Foray and that was one of them.”

“I really like that computer you’re wearing.” “Oh, this old thing? I just threw it on because I had nothing else clean.”

John Scalzi on how his first novel came to be published, beginning ten years ago.

“It is striking to what degree the Washington establishment has come to normalize Republican hostage-taking of the debt limit, to see it as a predictable and almost natural element of the political landscape.”

Who controls our online legacies after we die?

Along those lines, you can be Facebook dead without being actually dead.

Do you like Cool Whip? You may not after clicking that link.

Whose face should be on the trillion dollar platinum coin?

Fifteen-year-old Neil Ibata has co-authored a study on dwarf galaxies. What were you doing when you were 15?

You get what you pay for with free apps.

We’ve already done a ton of deficit reduction. It would be nice if the people who insist on nattering about the deficit would at least acknowledge that.

“Studio quality video of giant squid finally in hand”. Awesome.

To me, selling out necessarily involves prostituting one’s art and/or talent in the service of selling something other than one’s own work. Think “This Note’s For You”.

This is why we can’t have nice things.

Christianity Today is required by law to provide every member of its staff access to booze and porn.”

In case you’ve ever wondered what a brontosaurus burger might be like.

It is entirely within Congress’ power to make call time a relic of the past. Not that it will ever happen.

Are the Republicans signaling a retreat on the debt ceiling? Even the Chamber of Commerce wants the GOP to release the hostage and back down.

Which Monopoly token would you vote to discard?

Tina Fey + the Muppets = awesome. Make this happen, universe!

Remember the name Mary Gonzalez, the first openly gay woman to be elected to the State Legislature.

This is not the petition response you’re looking for.

Science, schmience.

RIP, Aaron Swartz.

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged | 2 Comments

Three days of early voting in SD06

I’m not sure that the Chron’s classification of early voting so far in SD06 is accurate, but I’m not sure how I myself would characterize it since we have so few precedents to draw on.

Three days into early voting, the race to replace the late state Sen. Mario Gallegos continues to heat up, as does the balloting.

The first large batch of mail-in ballots was returned Friday, outpacing voters who visited the polls in person. Since early voting began, 1,561 ballots have been cast, two thirds of them in person. More votes were recorded Friday, 805, than in the two preceding days, 756.

Early voting continues through Jan. 22. Election Day is Jan. 26.

You can see the EV totals so far here. As noted, the difference was the arrival of mail ballots on Friday. 451 absentee ballots were received on Friday, which is more than the in-person total on any of the three days so far. I expect early voting to pick up as it always does, and every day of EV is from 7 to 7 except for next Sunday, which should be a boost as well, but I also expect that more than half the total ballots will be cast early. It sure would be nice to see some bigger daily numbers going forward.

Rice University political scientist Mark Jones describes the relatively late date as “a strategic delay” on the part of Gov. Rick Perry and his fellow Republicans, who realize that the likely winner will be one of the Democratic candidates.

“Under the Senate’s two-thirds rule, until the new SD-6 senator arrives, the Republicans need to convince only one Democrat to vote with them to pass legislation, whereas once Alvarado or Garcia arrives in Austin, they will need two,” he said in an email.

On most legislation the difference is irrelevant, Jones said, but not on such controversial issues as the fetal pain bill, for example.

“With only 30 senators, the Republicans will need to tailor the final legislation to obtain the backing of only one of the handful of pro-life Democrats, not two of them,” he said. “The result will, quite possibly, be legislation that is closer to the Republican ideal than would have been the case if the support of both was required.”

There are three “pro-life” Dems in the Senate – Eddie Lucio, Carlos Uresti, and Judith Zaffirini – and it took all three of their votes to let the awful sonogram bill through. That was because Republican Jeff Wentworth joined the other nine Dems in opposing it, but he was ousted in favor of the wingnut Donna Campbell in last year’s GOP primary, so as noted once the new Senator is seated the GOP will only need two defections to overcome the two-thirds rule for further atrocities. Until then, one is enough.

For those of you still making up your minds about whom to support, the League of Women Voters Houston is here to help:

The League of Women Voters of Houston Education Fund is pleased to announce that the full two-hour Conversations with the Candidates telecast covering the Texas State Senate District 6 Special Election is now available for viewing on demand.

The Conversations program was originally telecast live on Thursday, January 10, 2013 on the channels of Houston MediaSource TV (Comcast Channel 17, ATT Uverse Channel 99 or livestreamed at www.hmstv.org, and will be re-telecast on:

Monday           1/21/13            3:00 pm

Tuesday          1/22/13            8:00 am

Tuesday          1/22/13            4:30 pm

Wednesday     1/23/13             2:30 pm

Thursday         1/24/13            4:30 pm

Friday             1/25/13            8:00 am

All eight declared candidates were invited to attend.  The seven who participated, in order of appearance, were:  Sylvia Garcia, Carol Alvarado, Maria Selva, Joaquin Martinez, Rudy Reyes, R. W. Bray and Dorothy Olmos.

The unique “candidate conveyor belt” format allowed each candidate the opportunity to explain his or her philosophy of governance and positions on selected issues.  Each candidate separately, in an order determined by drawing numbers, sat at a round table and participated in a friendly conversation with two League officials.

Members of the media are welcome to use Conversations material in their reports, and are encouraged to offer the public viewing opportunities via websites, social media or other vectors.  However, we ask that the program be made available in its entirety and without edits.  Our on-demand viewing page notes the order of candidate appearance for those who wish to scroll through to watch particular segments.

There have been numerous candidate forums as well, including one on Friday that was boycotted by Green Party candidate Maria Selva because it was sponsored by TransCanada, the company constructing the Keystone XL pipeline. From her press release, which you can see here:

“Tar sands refining will increase toxic air pollution along the Houston Ship Channel, negatively impacting the health of the people in District 6. The whole tar sands operation from mining to refining drastically increases carbon dioxide emissions which contribute to global warming and climate change, and is at odds with the push for clean, safe energy that is one of the principal goals of my campaign,” Selva said.

“This controversial firm [TransCanada] that Houstonians and Texans have been fighting to keep out of the state should not have inappropriate influence over the candidates by sponsoring a debate among candidates who would make decisions affecting it,” said Selva.

“Candidates who seek to represent the citizens of Texas Senate district 6 should not be attending events sponsored by corporations that will poison the air of the people they claim to want to represent. We need to keep money out of politics, and that starts with removing money and inappropriate influence from the decision-making process of citizens.”

I realize that opinions tend to differ about this sort of tactic, but I personally think it’s more effective in general for a candidate to participate in an event where she has issues like this with a sponsor and tell everyone in attendance at her turn to speak exactly how she feels. It’s almost certainly the case that the vast majority of attendees have no idea about any of this, and as such you have the opportunity to inform them. A press release is easy to ignore, assuming you ever knew of its existence in the first place. Someone telling you something to your face isn’t. Just my opinion.

And while I’m on the subject, I really have no idea what if any role the state government has in this. I know the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline is a federal matter. You know who would be in an excellent position to educate ignoramuses such as myself about what the state government can do to affect or prevent the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline? Someone who’s running for a state government office, like Maria Selva, that’s who. Yet on her campaign website, her Facebook page, and this article about a protest in which she was quoted, I have learned nothing more about the Keystone XL pipeline than the fact that Maria Selva opposes it, which I already knew. Look, there are more starting quarterbacks in the NFL than there are members of the Texas Senate. There are very few people in Texas who can affect what happens in Texas more than the 31 Senators. What exactly would Maria Selva do as one of these uniquely powerful people to put her beliefs into action? Is there some bill she would introduce, or try to block, or some existing law she would seek to repeal? Is there a hearing she could hold, or some official she would seek to influence? I can only speculate because Maria Selva has not provided that information anywhere I can find, and she declined a golden opportunity to inform an audience that would have been well served to hear it.

As you know, I interview a lot of candidates, and I generally don’t press them to be this specific about the process. Usually, just knowing what their principles are, and whether they support or oppose something that’s already out there, is sufficient. This is one of those times where it isn’t, for two reasons. One, as I just said, is because it’s not clear how the elected office in question is relevant to the candidate’s belief and the action she would like to take. If the main thing that will happen when you get elected is that you’ll go from a protester/activist to a protester/activist with an honorific, I’m not sure you’re making the best case for your candidacy or the best use of the political process. Second, if one of your complaints as a “third party” or “fringe” candidate is that you get no respect from the establishment, by which I mean the media and the various actors in the political process, and that your views never get a fair hearing, I say it’s on you to make it clear what is being missed by your exclusion. Show me how your perspective that doesn’t neatly fit into a two-party system would bring something new and needed to the table. If I were to ask Carol Alvarado or Sylvia Garcia – or RW Bray, for that matter – about Keystone, I’d expect them to say something like “That’s a federal matter”, and I’d find that to be an acceptable answer. Maria Selva had the chance to demonstrate why that isn’t an acceptable answer, but she didn’t take it. Further, from what I can tell it’s not clear that she could demonstrate that.

Putting this another way, if I still lived in SD06 I almost certainly wouldn’t vote for Maria Selva regardless, because I think Alvarado and Garcia are the two best candidates in the race. But if Maria Selva could articulate a way for a Senator to take on this issue – or any other, for that matter, especially one that isn’t being addressed by other candidates – and it made sense to me, I would at the very least press the candidates I would consider voting for to take a position on it. You want someone to listen to you, give them a reason to listen. I don’t think I’m asking for too much here.

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Abbott reportedly tells the money people he’s running for Governor

One would think that if Greg Abbott were to tell anybody what his 2014 plans are, it would be the money people.

Still not Greg Abbott

A source who has spoken with Republican donors says Attorney General Greg Abbott is saying he’ll run for governor next year, challenging Rick Perry. With the 83rd Texas Legislative Session underway this week, Gov. Perry says he’s focused on state business not re-election.

“I’ll make my decision about what I’m going to do at the appropriate time, which will be June, July of this year,” he said.

But until then, he can’t raise any money.

State law doesn’t allow Perry to accept campaign cash from Dec. 8 until after the regular session, June 17. The blackout covers Abbott, too.

However, a Republican source who knows of fundraising activity at this level told News 8 that, ahead of that December deadline, Abbott told big donors eager to back him in a run for governor that he would.

When asked for a reaction Thursday by KVUE-TV in Austin, Perry recalled the last prominent Republican to challenge him in a primary.

“Sen. Hutchison also announced that she was going to run for governor back in 2009 so everybody gets the freedom to do that,” Perry said of the just retired senator he easily beat in 2010. “I’m real focused, which I hope the General is, too, on this legislative session.”

I like the way When In Session characterized Perry’s response:

I can’t quite see Perry and Abbott as Wesley and Inigo, however.

So does this mean anything? Burka thinks Abbott is running and that Perry will not run. PDiddie and BOR take it seriously as well. Me, I’m still waiting to hear the words from the horse’s mouth. I did want to get another opinion on this, so I asked three Magic Eight Balls. In response to my question “Will Greg Abbott run for Texas governor?”, I got one “Without a doubt”, one “Most likely”, and one “Ask again later”. I don’t think it gets any more definitive than that.

Posted in Election 2014 | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Abbott reportedly tells the money people he’s running for Governor

We’re still looking at a drought here

I know we just got a lot of rain this week, but that doesn’t mean that drought conditions are over.

The latest seasonal drought outlook from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows that for much of Texas and the rest of the Southwest, the drought is likely to “persist or intensify” over the next three months. Currently, 97 percent of the state is in drought conditions, with Texas’ water supply reservoirs only 65 percent full overall. And a late December briefing by NOAA on the climate notes that drought continues in over 61 percent of the country.

“During the upcoming three months, a much drier pattern is expected across the southwestern quadrant of the nation, limiting the prospects for further drought improvements during the wet season in California and Nevada,” NOAA says in its drought outlook.

State Climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon adds on.

2012 was a drought year. Following the driest 12 consecutive months on record and second driest calendar year on record, 2012 was running 0.14″ above normal through September. This wasn’t enough to end the drought statewide, but many parts of Texas, especially in its eastern half, drought became a distant memory and a distant problem. Elsewhere, reservoir levels continued to drop, but rain in most of the major metropolitan areas of the state made things seem much better.

Then, starting in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, and eventually spreading to much of the rest of the state, the rainfall stopped. The final three months of 2012 were the third-driest October-December on record for Texas. Drought spread, and Galveston even had to impose water restrictions, although restrictions on outdoor watering aren’t much of a problem this time of year.

With the year ending up with below-normal precipitation, the combined two-year period 2011-2012 was the fourth-driest on record, beaten only by 1916-1917, 1955-1956, and 1909-1910.

Click over to see the pictures. We headed into January last year expecting a dry winter and were very pleasantly surprised to get an unusually large amount of rain over the next few months, enough to erase the drought in many places. We got lucky, in other words. We need to be lucky again, but more than that we need to be better prepared for when we’re not so lucky. Oh, and 2012 was really warm, too. It’d be nice to be better prepared for that, too.

Posted in The great state of Texas | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on We’re still looking at a drought here

Saving the T Rex skeleton

How cool is this?

Little did Houston attorney Robert Painter know that his decade-old friendship with the president of Mongolia would lead to unraveling an archaeological mystery worthy of Indiana Jones.

In a story that reads like a Hollywood script, Painter played a leading role – including flying to Dallas and New York over a single weekend ­­- to thwart the sale of a 70-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus bataar skeleton to a private buyer.

Although the rare skeleton was initially sold in May at an auction in New York, the transaction hinged upon resolution of litigation and ultimately was canceled after the U.S. government in June seized the bones.

After further investigation, Florida resident Eric Prokopi, the consignor who had placed the skeleton for auction, pleaded guilty Dec. 27 in federal court in New York to two counts of smuggling and one count of conspiracy.

[…]

The remarkably intact set of bones looks like a smaller version of its Tyrannosaurus rex cousin, measuring about 30 feet long and 10 feet high, Painter said.

It was set to be auctioned May 20 in New York through Dallas-based Heritage Auctions.

Two evenings earlier, Painter received an urgent email from an adviser to Mongolian President Tsakhiagiin Elbegdorj. Could anything, she asked, be done legally to stop an auction in less than 48 hours in New York.

Painter flew into action. He got involved in the case through his 10-year friendship with Elbegdorj, whom he met at a conference in New Orleans, while Elbegdorj was studying at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. The two quickly hit it off and began collaborating on projects.

“We would have never thought of dinosaurs,” Painter said, although in the past year he has learned that many of the world’s dinosaur fossils are found in Mongolia’s Gobi Desert.

“So what did you do this week?”

“Oh, not much, really. I teamed up with the President of Mongolia to save a T-Rex skeleton from being illegally auctioned. How about you?”

“Well, I was going to say I wrote a memo about the need to clean out the office coffee pot when it’s empty, but I think I’ll just sit here quietly instead.”

Posted in Around the world | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Saving the T Rex skeleton

Saturday video break: Hard To Handle

Song #36 on the Popdose Top 100 Covers list is “Hard To Handle”, originally by Otis Redding and covered by the Black Crowes. Here’s the original:

I’ve known for awhile that this was an Otis Redding song – not as far back as when the Crowes version came out and was all over the radio, but for a few years now. I don’t think I’d ever heard Redding’s original, though. Do oldies radio stations play this song? I don’t know why they wouldn’t, but then the way radio stations come up with their playlists has always been a mystery to me. Anyway, here’s the cover:

I’ve always really liked the Black Crowes’ version. Off the top of my head, I can’t think of any other songs they’ve done, but they’re worth remembering just for this. What do you think?

Posted in Music | Tagged , | Comments Off on Saturday video break: Hard To Handle

School finance dispatches

Some bad news for the state in the school finance lawsuit.

State District Judge John Dietz directed state attorneys Wednesday to redo a key study that underestimated the funding advantages of higher-wealth school districts — a blow to the state’s arguments in a school finance lawsuit that current differences among districts are insignificant.

Dietz asked that the study be corrected after attorneys for school districts suing the state cited multiple miscalculations in the report. It was offered as evidence by the state to show that the funding gap between higher-wealth and other districts has diminished in the last six years.

Rick Gray, an attorney for one of the plaintiff groups, said the gap has actually increased more than 50 percent during the period. The 152 wealthiest districts in Texas have $1,671 per student more to spend than the rest of school districts.

In a class of 22 students, that amounts to an extra $37,762 per year.

[…]

One big mistake in the state study was that it counted twice the amount of revenue that higher-wealth districts had to surrender last year under the “Robin Hood” provisions of school funding law. That miscalculation artificially reduced the funding levels for higher-wealth districts listed in the study.

Gray said the gap between wealthy and other districts actually increased from $1,084 in 2006 to $1,671 in 2012 — unlike the original study, which showed the gap decreased during the period. He also said that tax rates were 1.3 cents lower in higher-wealth districts in 2006, but 9.8 cents less in 2012.

Gray then asked [Lisa Dawn-Fisher of the Texas Education Agency] about wide funding disparities among school districts located in the same county.

One example was in Dallas County, where the Irving school district has a slightly higher tax rate than the Highland Park district, but receives $1,615 less per student than Highland Park. That difference means an extra $35,530 per classroom in Highland Park.

“Is there any reason to justify that kind of funding difference?” Gray asked.

That’s a critical question for the part of the lawsuit that focuses on inequity. I don’t think there’s a good answer to Gray’s question, but we’ll see what the state has to say. My suspicion is that they won’t directly rebut the point but will simply argue that there’s no proof the disparity makes that much difference.

The lawsuit is also about adequacy, which is to say the claim that the state is not providing enough money for the standards and requirements it mandates. To that end, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst expects the state will need to pony up, though not just yet.

Given the state’s $8.8 billion surplus—a relative bonanza compared to the rough situation during last legislative session—will the Legislature share some of that bounty with the schools?

Dewhurst doesn’t seem to be thinking in those terms. Instead, he told the Observer, he’s concerned that if legislators aren’t careful, that excess money will quickly run out.

“Well, we knew our economy was rebounding from the recession, so my advice to people is don’t get greedy,” Dewhurst said. “We don’t know what’s going to happen in a year or two from now, but we need to leave some savings in the Rainy Day Fund.”

Dewhurst said it’s imperative that the state set aside money, since so many districts are suing for more money in the funding system. “I would expect the odds are that whatever the courts decide will mean more money that the state will put in,” he said, suggesting the state needs to budget for the likelihood of a court-mandated funding system that’s more expensive. “I think it’s imperative that we set aside some money to go ahead and cover that decision.”

Not really clear what that means. It’s consistent with the idea of at least restoring the funds needed to cover enrollment growth, but it’s also consistent with the idea of being as penurious as possible. Why pay now if you have to pay later, right? The Trib goes into some more detail.

Dewhurst said the Senate’s base budget, which will be proposed next week, will include “$88 or $89 billion” in general revenue spending. He said the budget would include enough funding to account for growth in entitlement programs and public school enrollment, but said it would be based on the current public education budget and not on education spending patterns before budget cuts two years ago. A loud chorus of education groups and Democratic lawmakers has called for restoring the last session’s school cuts as well as increasing the budget to account for the state’s population growth, a task that would require an $108 billion budget, according to the Center for Public Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank in Austin.

The supplemental appropriations bill, needed to cover spending in the current budget, will initially total about $5.2 billion, Dewhurst said. That includes $4.5 billion to carry the state’s Medicaid program through the end of the year, with the balance being spent on health care in the state’s prison system and on money Texas unexpectedly spent fighting wildfires. It doesn’t include $1.9 billion to offset a public education payment delayed into the next fiscal year to balance the budget; Dewhurst said that would be included in the next two-year budget instead of in the supplemental bill.

Ongoing school finance lawsuits have prompted predictions that lawmakers will have to punt on public education funding until the suit is resolved later this year. Dewhurst said he wants lawmakers to prepare for a ruling that requires the Legislature to put more money into schools by putting some money aside in the current budget for that purpose.

“Based on my experience in 2006, in which the courts came back and said we needed to put several billion dollars more in public education. … I’m saying it would be wise to leave some money,” he said.

If lawmakers don’t plan ahead, the extra funding that the courts may mandate might force lawmakers to break the state’s spending cap, a move that requires support of four-fifths of lawmakers. Crossing such a hurdle would be difficult, if not impossible, Dewhurst said.

“We’re not going to have a lot of room,” he said. “If the courts require us to break the spending cap, I want everybody to realize that or we’re not going to get the [required] four-fifths vote.”

Perhaps the court should include a provision in its ruling that allows for the incarceration of any legislator who prevents complying with its order. Regardless, given all this and Dewhurst’s desire to tackle water and transportation issues as well, I hope he expresses similar reservations about tax cuts until we know what the courts say about school finance. Wouldn’t be prudent to cut a bunch of taxes and then have to go searching for more revenue to fulfill the court’s order, would it?

On the other hand, while there may not be much appetite to restore funding for things like classroom instruction, libraries, or science labs, we may get funding for weapons training for teachers. Boo yah!

Finally, this AP story says that Rep. Lon Burnam has filed a bill to restore all of the $5.4 billion cut from the state’s public schools in 2011. However, I can’t find any such bill at this time, and neither a press release from Rep. Burnam’s that lists his opening day bills nor this report detailing the impact of the education cuts mentions such a thing. I’m sure there will be such a bill filed, whether by Rep. Burnam or someone else, but as far as I can tell Rep. Burnam has not done so yet.

Posted in Budget ballyhoo | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on School finance dispatches

No injunction in state lawsuit for Planned Parenthood

Bummer.

Right there with them

Travis County District Judge Stephen Yelenosky on Friday refused to grant Planned Parenthood’s request for a temporary injunction to be included in the Texas Women’s Health Program.

“Probable injury is not really sufficient,” said Yelenosky, who ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood at a hearing in December, “… because it is unlikely that the plaintiffs will succeed at trial, I will deny the temporary injunction.”

Although Yelenosky agreed with Planned Parenthood’s arguments that the organization’s exclusion from the Texas WHP could endanger access to health services, his ruling indicated he did not believe their legal arguments would be successful at trial. Yelenosky also cited a “poison pill” rule that would cause the Texas WHP to self-destruct if a court overturned the Affiliate Ban Rule in the reasoning for his ruling.

“This allows us to continue to provide important family planning and preventive care to low-income women and fully enforce state law,” Dr. Kyle Janek, the state’s executive commissioner of health and human services, said in a statement on the ruling. “We’ve got the Texas Women’s Health Program up and running, and we’ll continue to provide help to any woman who needs to find a new doctor or clinic.”

Pete Schenkkan, a lawyer representing Planned Parenthood, said the organization is “confident in the merits of our case,” and will still consider taking the case to trial.

See here and here for the background. It’s not looking too good for Planned Parenthood at this point, though of course it’s the women who depend on their services that are the real losers. I suppose they could still win at trial, but as I said before it’s ultimately at the ballot box where the fight really matters.

As for the state’s claims that everything is peachy keen with their replacement WHP, Rep. Lon Burnam joined his colleague Rep. Donna Howard in checking with the providers that are listed on the Texas WHP website. You will I’m sure be shocked to hear that most of the providers listed are not in fact participating in the program. See his release beneath the fold and his much more accurate list of providers in Tarrant County here.

On top of this, the Better Texas blog reminds us that the problems run deeper than just the WHP:

Over the last year much attention has been paid to the fate of the 130,000 women in WHP, and especially the 40,000+ who choose Planned Parenthood as their provider. While this is certainly worthy of attention (and even outrage), comparatively little attention has been paid to the DSHS family planning cuts that took effect in 2011 and have already resulted in 147,000 women losing access and 53 safety net family planning clinics closing.

It seems the media followed WHP more closely, because of the attention-grabbing dispute between Texas and the federal government, and lawsuits between the state and Planned Parenthood. By comparison the 2011 Legislature’s votes to cut DSHS family planning by two-thirds ($73 million over the biennium) provided less drama, even though they’ve harmed more women and slashed or eliminated funding from more safety net providers. And the DSHS cuts didn’t just hurt that program. Clinics that closed in the wake of the DSHS cuts also provided care in WHP and had staff on site that helped women through the WHP enrollment process. Since the DSHS cuts took effect, client enrollment in WHP has declined.

On the bright side, the Lege is reconsidering that decision to slash family planning funds since someone explained to them that less birth control means more babies. So they have going for them.

Continue reading

Posted in Legal matters | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments

What does it mean to be a “craft” beer?

The Chron has a Q&A with beer aficionado Jenn Litz that raises an interesting question.

Q: How are the major breweries responding to the craft beer trend?

A: Mostly through the acquisition route. They know the milliennials are drinking craft, and the margins are good with craft beer. The majority of craft beer drinkers either don’t know or don’t care if the label is owned by MillerCoors or Anheuser-Busch. A lot of these craft breweries don’t have succession plans, and they’d be open to selling to a big company.

As we know, one strategy the major breweries have adopted is to create brands that imitate craft-brewed beers. I’ll be honest, I’d have a hard time with it if my favorite craft beer were to be acquired by one of the mega-brewers. For one thing, I would not trust the big boys to maintain the quality of any craft brew they’d acquire. I mean, in any other industry, how often does a small startup retain its defining qualities when it gets bought out by a bigger competitor? Generally speaking, the idea is to “integrate” the newcomer into the brand of the buyer, which is to say make it more like what the big company does. I don’t see how that could be a good thing. Second, while I’m not a fanatic about “buy local”, all things being equal I’d rather spend my money on a company that’s based here and that invests here. Finally, to the extent that brand identity matters, I’d rather identify and be identified with something small and independent than something big and corporate. Obviously, your mileage may vary. I fully expect that there will be some consolidation in the beer industry – the big brewers can see what the trends are, and they like making money – but I can’t say I’m looking forward to it.

On a side note, Scott Metzger of Freetail Brewing is busy posting again. See his thoughts on the start of the session and of the Alcohol Working Groups hosted by Sens. John Carona and Leticia Van de Putte that have been going on for several months. He’s sounding optimistic about the way things are going for microbewers, which is good to hear. Check it out.

Posted in Food, glorious food | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Friday random ten: Life, liberty, and property

The new Congress was sworn in last week, and the Texas Legislature reconvened this week. This seemed like an appropriate occasion for a Friday Random Ten.

1. (You’re Not The) Boss Of Me – They Might Be Giants
2. One Bourbon, One Scotch, One Beer – John Lee Hooker
3. The Deal (No Deal) – from “Chess”
4. Re: Your Brains – Jonathan Coulton
5. What A Fool Believes – Doobie Brothers
6. Stick It Where The Sun Don’t Shine – Nick Lowe
7. Suits Are Picking Up The Bill – Squirrel Nut Zippers
8. Easy Money – Billy Joel
9. Sh*t Got Crazy – A.Dd+
10. Stupid Texas Song – Austin Lounge Lizards

I think that about covers it. I managed to refrain from including “Send In The Clowns” (by Mel Torme), but just barely. What songs would you dedicate to the legislative body of your choice?

Posted in Music | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Friday random ten: Life, liberty, and property

Here comes that B-Cycle expansion

Excellent.

Houston’s bike-sharing program downtown is getting a boost from Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, city officials announced Wednesday.

The insurance company will contribute $750,000 to expand the B-Cycle system from three stations and 18 bikes to 24 stations and about 200 bikes, the city said in a news release.

“Bike Share is a great new transportation program for Houston and with the support of BCBSTX we are able to expand our pilot into a thriving program, providing a real commuter and recreational transportation option for workers, residents and visitors, improving health and quality of life,” Mayor Annise Parker said in the release.

The partnership could accelerate the program, which has been delayed by slow movement on permits and federal grant agreements. The U.S. Department of Energy is another major sponsor of the program, via a grant.

With the expansion, officials believe the system could generate about 25,000 trips annually, a roughly 12-fold increase from the current use.

[…]

“We hope this investment will help Houston children and families, not only find more convenient transportation, but get healthy and stay healthy through increased, fun physical activity,” said Bert Marshall, president of Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, in a news release.

The Mayor’s press release is here, the full Chron story is here, and my previous updates on Houston B-Cycle are here and here. Click on the story link to see a map of the forthcoming B-Cycle kiosk locations. You’ll be very well covered downtown, and there are other useful locations as well. I expect the college campuses will be next in line, most likely via a similar partnership, and beyond that I’d like to see further expansion along the new rail lines and into the Washington Avenue corridor, which might even help a bit with the parking situation there. Longer term, I hope they’ll look at Upper Kirby and the Uptown/Galleria area, neither of which are terribly bike-friendly (though I’m sure there are things that can be done to ameliorate that) but both of which also have nasty traffic and parking problems that can use all the help they can get. It could hardly take longer to bike from Richmond to San Felipe along Post Oak than to drive it, and you can literally park by the front door of your destination if you pedal it. Once funding is available, that’s got to be a no-brainer. Anyway, this is great to see. Expansion launches in March, so it ought to be done by the time my office moves downtown in May. I’m very much looking forward to taking advantage of this.

Posted in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

School Land Board votes to transfer $300 million to Available School Fund

From the Trib:

The School Land Board voted Tuesday to release $300 million into the Available School Fund for public schools.

The money will be released in two $150 million installments, one in February and the other on June. The funds had been caught in a standoff between the Legislature and the School Land Board, which operates out of the General Land Office and oversees the state’s public school land.

A constitutional amendment proposed in 2011 by state Rep. Rob Orr, R-Burleson, allowed the board to put a portion of earnings from investments on real estate assets into the Available School Fund, which along with property and sales taxes helps pay for public education.

Voters passed the amendment last November, but the little-watched School Land Board decided not to distribute the money in July. Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, who sits on the three-member board, said it wanted to protect the funds for upcoming investment opportunities.

“It’s the age-old question of whether you save the money to send your kids to college or borrowing when they do,” he said at a House appropriations meeting in December.

Usually the proceeds from the sale and management of public school lands would go into a $26 billion trust whose revenue feeds into the Available School Fund. Proposition 6 made it so that the School Land Board, if it chose, could bypass that step and put money directly into the fund.

Background here. Given Commissioner Patterson’s previous opposition to the transfer of these funds, I was curious how he voted, since the story didn’t specify. I sent an inquiry to his office to check, and was told that he did vote no. You can read Commissioner Patterson’s statement here, the crux of which is as follows:

Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, chairman of the board, cast the lone vote against the payment. He said the decision was frustrating because lawmakers passed a flawed budget last session that addressed short-term problems without providing a coherent long-term vision.

“We need to strive to do better,” Patterson said. “Spending down our kid’s trust fund to pay today’s bills is a path I don’t want to go down any further. Fortunately, the fund is healthy enough to protect Texas schools from one year of bad budgeting.”

I sympathize with that, but I don’t have a whole lot of optimism about better budgeting. Anyway, the money that the Lege assumed would be there after the constitutional amendment passed is now in fact there, so that’s one thing less to worry about.

Posted in Budget ballyhoo | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on School Land Board votes to transfer $300 million to Available School Fund

Student RFID lawsuit rejected

A win for the school district in federal court.

A federal judge Tuesday ruled that Northside Independent School District can transfer a student from her magnet school for refusing to wear her student ID badge to protest a new electronic tracking system.

U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia rejected a lawsuit brought by Andrea Hernandez, 15, through her father, Steve Hernandez, backed by lawyers provided by the Rutherford Institute.

The lawsuit had sought an injunction so she could stay in Jay High School’s magnet school for science and engineering without having to wear the identification badge.

The badges contain a chip used to track students’ on-campus whereabouts but Northside ISD officials had offered to let her wear it without the chip.

Andrea refused, saying it violated her constitutional rights and religious beliefs, and after Northside officials reassigned her to Taft High School, her regular neighborhood school, the family filed suit in November.

“Today’s court ruling affirms NISD’s position that we did make reasonable accommodation” to Andrea’s religious concerns, the district said in an emailed statement. “The family now has the choice to accept the accommodation and stay at the magnet program, or return to her home campus” later this month.

[…]

Administrators use [RFID] mainly to identify students who are in the building but missed morning roll call, although the system also can locate individual students any time of day. It keeps an electronic history of each badge, so operators can retrace a student’s general movements. In a 25-page ruling, Garcia said the five claims of violations of federal and state civil liberties and religious laws that the lawsuit asserted failed to meet requirements to get the injunction.

The issue of school safety trumps some of the claims, he wrote, and cited examples from Northside Superintendent Brian Woods’ testimony that the RFID program has allowed educators to quickly find students during emergencies.

“In today’s climate, one would be hard pressed to argue that the safety and security of the children and educators in our public school system is not a compelling governmental interest,” Garcia wrote. “One could envision many different methods of ensuring safety and security in schools, and the requirement that high school students carry a uniform ID badge issued for those attending classes on campus is clearly one of the least restrictive means available.”

See background here and here, and via Wired you can see the court’s opinion here. The Rutherford Institute, which represented Andrea Hernandez, has said that it would support an appeal to the Fifth Circuit. I continue to not understand the fuss, given that NISD has allowed her to remove the RFID chip from her ID card. Requiring high school students to carry and display an ID card seems to me to be a pretty basic security measure. We’ll see what if anything happens from in the courts and the Legislature.

Posted in School days | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

In praise of CODIS

We’re catching more crooks thanks to DNA. Not exactly an earth-shattering revelation, but it’s always nice to have some numbers.

I want one of these

The number of Texas crimes solved after a suspect’s DNA matched with offenders’ DNA samples stored in the national repository known as CODIS (Combined DNA Index System) recently passed the 10,000th mark.

The state averaged only about 200 matches a year during the first five years after the database was created in 1996. That number leaped to an average 1,000 hits a year for the next 10 years. In just the last 11 months, the number of matches has nearly doubled to 1,943, records show.

[…]

Harris County now processes an average of 400 cases a month, compared to about a dozen cases in the past, said the lab’s director, Dr. Roger Kahn, explaining how automation has replaced the tedious repetitive tasks once done by human hands.

The number of samples of offenders’ DNA stored in Texas’ database also has mushroomed to more than 660,000. Texas law requires all registered sex offenders, felons sent to prison or placed on community supervision, and juveniles committed to Texas’ juvenile justice system to submit a DNA specimen.

“The more samples in the pool, the greater opportunity for a match,” said Skylor Hearn, who oversees the crime lab that manages the state’s database. “There is a degree of recidivism in (the) criminal world, and we’re catching up to them.”

At the same time, the ability to make a match is increasing because DNA profiles can be developed from material that’s often invisible to the eye.

“Originally, we required a blood stain the size of quarter. Now it’s not visible. A dandruff flake is enough; just touching something leaves behind cells that can be enough. The systems are much more sensitive,” Kahn said.

Harris County also has a special “CSI-style” seven-member team that it can dispatch to collect potential DNA from sensitive murder scenes.

That last bit is somewhat of a commercial for the Harris County crime lab, which as you know is getting a new facility soon, but what the heck. Keep up the good work, y’all.

Using DNA analysis is often associated with innocence and exoneration these days, and for good reason. It’s important to remember that every time DNA absolves someone who had been convicted of a crime, it also points a finger at the real perpetrator. For every innocent person in jail, there is some number of guilty people who aren’t in jail. (Some may be in jail for other reasons, or they may be dead, or as with some questionable arson cases, there may have been no crime in the first place.) None of those exonerations, and subsequent arrests of the real criminals, would have been possible if the original DNA evidence had been destroyed upon conviction, as prosecutors like now-former Williamson County DA John Bradley have advocated. If he had gotten his way in the Michael Morton case, not only would Morton still be incarcerated, but a man who is now also suspected in the murder of at least one other woman would still be walking free. Think about that. And while you do, be sure to read Pam Colloff’s outstanding two-part story in the November and December editions of Texas Monthly about the Michael Morton saga. If you don’t have a tear in your eye, and a belly full of outrage, by the ending, you should consider talking to your doctor. See also Grits’ interview with Colloff for more.

Posted in Crime and Punishment | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on In praise of CODIS

A first look at the 2013 elections

It is 2013, right? So while we have the SD06 special election and the new legislative session to worry about, it’s not too early to start talking about the 2013 elections. Let’s start with a peek at the campaign finance reports from last July of the Houston officeholders who will be on the ballot this November:

Dist Name Cash on hand ================================= Myr Parker 1,281,657 Ctrl R Green 9,983 AL 1 Costello 57,345 AL 2 Burks 3,160 AL 4 Bradford 20,590 AL 5 Christie 14,535 A Brown 22,641 B Davis 64,211 C Cohen 45,597 F Hoang 6,429 G Pennington 119,951 H Gonzalez 57,899 J Laster 31,816 K L Green 9,107

I omitted the three Council members who are term-limited out (Melissa Noriega, Wanda Adams, and James Rodriguez), as well as newly-elected Dave Martin, since his July report would not be relevant. Normally there would have been five open seats this year, but with Mike Sullivan stepping down due to his successful candidacy for Tax Assessor and Jolanda Jones losing in 2011, there are only three vacancies, and as such there will likely be a stampede for those seats. But we’ll get to that in a minute. Let’s take a closer look at where the non-term limited incumbents are.

Mayor

As we know, Mayor Parker will probably by challenged by former City Attorney Ben Hall, will possibly be challenged by her former Housing Director James Noteware, may possibly be challenged by some yet unknown candidate or candidates, and will certainly have a few fringe challengers as well. It could be quite the crowded race at the top of the ticket. While Hall would certainly be a more serious opponent in terms of money, resume, and presumed base of support than the 2011 hopefuls were, with Noteware and the others also possibly having more juice, I have believed for some time now that Parker starts out in a stronger position this year than she was in two years ago. The much-improved economy and real estate market mean that the city’s budget is far healthier than it was, which means the Mayor can do positive things rather than negative things like layoffs and service reductions. Distractions like red light cameras and Renew Houston are in the past, while the overwhelming passage of the city’s bond referenda gives the Mayor some wind at her back and a nice accomplishment with which to begin the year. Anything can happen, and we’ll see who if anyone else emerges to run against her, but I believe we will look back and say that 2011 was the better chance to beat her.

How would one go about defeating Mayor Parker if one were inclined to do so? The conventional wisdom is to aim to replicate the 1991 campaign, in which State Rep. Sylvester Turner and eventual winner Bob Lanier squeezed then-Mayor Kathy Whitmire into a third place finish. This is the vaunted “pincer strategy”, combining African-Americans and Republicans to shrink the remaining voter pool for the white Democratic lady Mayor. I’m skeptical of this. For one thing, Whitmire – who garnered an incredibly low 20% of the vote in that election – was running for her sixth term in those pre-term limits days, at a time when the term limits movement was gaining steam. There was a strong case for change, or at least there was a more restless electorate that was going through an economic downturn that year. Whitmire was also coming off a bruising defeat, as her $1.2 billion monorail proposal was killed by Metro’s board chairman, who was none other than Bob Lanier. Lanier promised to spend that money on roads, which was much more popular. There isn’t an issue right now that could be used as a cudgel against Parker, which makes the argument to fire her that much more challenging.

Which isn’t to say there aren’t issues to be used against Parker, but they’re not issues that I think are likely to be used effectively by an establishment insider like Hall, or any Republican who may file. Given that Hall is who he is, I think a more potent strategy would be to pair him with an outspoken liberal, who can compete with Parker’s base voters in District C by attacking her for things like the homeless feeding ordinance, the lack of any effort to advance equality in Houston, and the Metro referendum if one believes the University Line is mortally wounded. Quantifying the irony of Whitmire losing for promoting a rail plan, and Parker losing for being perceived as insufficiently supportive of rail, is left as an exercise for the reader.

And as long as I’m giving out advice, my suggestion to Team Annise is to work on building its ground game and seeking to increase turnout. There were 160K ballots cast in the 2009 runoff, but only 123K in 2011. Neither of these are particularly high totals for a city election – indeed, the 2011 total failed to reach the puny 125K ballots cast in the sleepy 2007 election. There are plenty of people who have voted in city elections, certainly as recently as 2003, but haven’t done so in the past few cycles. I rather doubt that Parker versus Hall et al is likely on its own to draw any more voters than Parker/Locke/Brown/Morales did in 2009 (181K, in case you’re curious), but there’s no reason Parker shouldn’t be working to identify and bring out voters who have a less consistent history of voting in city elections. I think that offers a better path to 50% plus one than another dreary exercise in talking to only the same old hardcore voters. You know, like me. She has plenty of money, she’ll have plenty more after the curtain comes up on fundraising season. Target a bigger universe, I say.

Controller

I’m wondering if Ronald Green has a typo in his finance report. He reported $46K on hand last January, then his July report showed that he raised $26K and spent $13K, so I have no idea he could have had only $9,983 on hand. I guess we’ll see what this January’s report says. Beyond that, not much to see here. He’s still not a big fundraiser, and he still has no credible announced opposition despite his recent negative press.

Council At Large

Is it just me, or are those some anemic cash on hand totals? Six out of eight district Council members have larger campaign treasuries than three of the four At Large members. Bradford often reports a lot of in kind contributions – he has listed some things we might normally think of as expenditures as in kind contributions – which tends to reduce his COH figure. Burks, who raised $35K but had $34K in expenses, paid off a number of debts, including the $10K loan from his wife and two items dating from the 2009 campaign that totaled $4650. Christie also spent nearly as much as he raised – $66K raised, $63K in expenditures. This included $45K for “printing”, which I presume was a deferred expense from his runoff campaign.

As was the case in 2011, there’s only one open At Large seat, At Large #3, so once again I expect a cattle call in that race. I know Jenifer Pool, who ran in At Large #2 in 2011, is in for AL3 this year, and other names will surely emerge in the next few weeks. I have to think that it would be worthwhile for a Council wannabe who might be concerned about getting lost in that shuffle to consider taking on one of the incumbents instead, specifically Burks or Christie. Burks’ winning campaign in 2011 after however many previous tries was, to put it gently, atypical. The only policy item I can recall that he originated last year was a proposal to revamp Houston’s term limits ordinance, which never made it out of committee. He also drew scorn for suggesting that the propane tanks used by food trucks might potentially be used as weapons by terrorists. He doesn’t have much money, doesn’t have a history of fundraising, has generally run do-it-yourself campaigns, and his main asset is the name recognition that a dozen or more previous campaigns has earned him. You can make a similar case for Christie, who made an interesting proposal relating to shelters for homeless people that as far as I know went nowhere and who also said silly things during the food truck debate. Unlike Burks, Christie has been and should continue to be a good fundraiser, but also unlike Burks he has no natural constituency – he’s a moderate Republican who isn’t beloved by county GOP insiders. His win in 2011 could also reasonably be described as out of the ordinary. I’m not saying either would be easy to beat this year, I’m not even saying someone should run against them. I’m just suggesting that a multi-candidate open seat race where getting to the runoff is more crapshoot than anything else doesn’t necessarily offer the best odds of being sworn in next January.

District Council

Just so you know, former Council Member Brenda Stardig reported $26,574 on hand in July. If she aims for a rematch with Helena Brown, she starts out at parity in the money department. I’m not sure what’s up with CMs Hoang and Green, but I don’t expect either of them to have much difficulty this year. Everyone will be watching District A, probably even more than the two open seats, but I’d keep an eye on Jerry Davis in District B as well. Davis has worked hard, but doesn’t appear to have won over the insiders in the district, being a new resident of B himself. It would not shock me if he gets a serious opponent. Beyond that, Dwight Boykins appears to be in for the open seat in District D, and while other names will soon emerge we may have to get a judge’s opinion about whether Jolanda Jones can be among them. There are already two candidates for District I; if history holds, there likely won’t be too many more.

HISD and HCC

It’s a bit confusing because the County Clerk webpage doesn’t track uncontested Trustee races, but I’m pretty sure that the following people are up for election:

For HISD Trustee: Mike Lunceford, Anna Eastman, Greg Meyers, Lawrence Marshall, and Harvin Moore. Lunceford and Eastman are finishing their first terms; Moore and Meyers were unopposed in 2009; Marshall won in a runoff. I have not heard anything so far to indicate that any of them are not running for re-election. If Anna Eastman runs for and wins re-election she will be the first Trustee in District I to do so since at least 1997 – I can’t check any farther back than that. Gabe Vasquez was elected that year, followed by Karla Cisneros in 2001, Natasha Kamrani in 2005, and Eastman in 2009.

For HCC Trustee: Mary Ann Perez’s election to the Lege in HD144 means there will be a vacancy in HCC Trustee District III. The Board has appointed former Trustee Herlinda Garcia to replace her. Garcia, about whom you can learn more here, will need to run in a special election to be able to serve the remainder of Perez’s term, which expires in 2015. The three Trustees whose terms are up this year are Bruce Austin, Neeta Sane, whose district includes a piece of Fort Bend County, and Yolanda Navarro Flores. It’s fair to say that Trustee Navarro Flores’ current term in office has been rather eventful. She won a close race last time, and if she runs again I would expect her to get a strong challenger. Sane is completing her first term, while Austin, the longest-serving Trustee, was first elected in 1989. I am pleased to note that this year the Trustee candidates’ campaign finance statements are now available online. Sometimes, a little bitching and moaning goes a long way.

That’s all I’ve got for now. January finance reports are due next week, and a few will probably trickle in early. I’ll keep an eye out and will post a report when they’re all up, or at least at some point after they’re all supposed to be when I’ve run out of patience waiting for them. I’ll throw in the reports for County officeholders who are up in 2014 as well, just because. Please add your own speculation and rumormongering about who is or isn’t running for what in the comments.

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 13 Comments

Endorsement watch: Why not both?

I should have seen this coming.

[Sen. Mario] Gallegos’ passing opened the Senate District 6 seat after the deceased man polled 70 percent in the November general election against a Republican opponent. No fewer than eight candidates are seeking to replace him in the Jan. 26 special election.

From among that number, we encourage District 6 voters to cast a ballot for either state Rep. Carol Alvarado or Sylvia Garcia, a former Harris County commissioner and city controller. In our judgment, these two are best suited by experience and familiarity with the turf to represent a sprawling, geographically unwieldy district whose needs are many.

This is of course not the first time the Chron has gone the multiple-choice route. They made a dual endorsement in the 2009 Mayor’s race, and a three-way endorsement in the GOP primary for CD36 this year. As one who has proclaimed himself to be resolutely neutral in this race – which I can do since I now reside in SD15 – I suppose I can’t be too critical. I just wonder if and how they’ll break the tie in the likely event that both Garcia and Alvarado make it to the runoff.

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Endorsement watch: Why not both?

Hall of Fame elects nobody

Truly, utterly, ridiculous.

Steroid-tainted stars Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa were denied entry to baseball’s Hall of Fame, with voters failing to elect any candidates for only the second time in four decades.

Bonds received just 36.2 percent of the vote, Clemens 37.6 and Sosa 12.5 in totals announced Wednesday by the Hall and the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. They were appearing on the ballot for the first time and have up to 14 more years to make it to Cooperstown.

Craig Biggio, 20th on the career list with 3,060 hits, topped the 37 candidates with 68.2 percent of the 569 ballots, 39 shy of the 75 percent needed. Among other first-year eligibles, Mike Piazza received 57.8 percent and Curt Schilling 38.8.

“I think as a player, a group, this is one of the first times that we’ve been publicly called out,” Schilling said. “I think it’s fitting. … If there was ever a ballot and a year to make a statement about what we didn’t do as players — which is we didn’t actively push to get the game clean — this is it.”

Jack Morris led holdovers with 67.7 percent. He will make his final ballot appearance next year, when fellow pitchers Greg Maddux and Tom Glavine along with slugger Frank Thomas are eligible for the first time.

It was just the eighth time the BBWAA failed to elect any players. There were four fewer votes than last year, and five members submitted blank ballots.

I’ve run out of ways to express my loathing for the Hall of Fame voters, who to my mind are as contemptible as a room full of Rick Perrys. I had to stop the embedded video on that ESPN link because I was about to start yelling obscenities at Pedro Gomez and Harold Bryant. At least Tim Kurkjian was making some sense, as do Jayson Stark, David Schoenfeld, and Joe Posnanski. But hey, it’s not all negative. Despite the BBWAA’s epic fail, there will be inductions this year, as Deacon White, Jacob Ruppert, and Hank O’Day will all be enshrined. If you have any idea who even two of these fellows are, go to the head of the class. If this isn’t a clarion call for a complete John Byrne does “Superman”-style reboot of the whole process, I don’t know what would be. Linkmeister has more.

Posted in Baseball | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Hall of Fame elects nobody

Texas blog roundup for the week of January 7

The Texas Progressive Alliance welcomes the 2013 Legislature and hopes that it actually tries to make Texas a better place as it brings you this week’s roundup.

Continue reading

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged , | Comments Off on Texas blog roundup for the week of January 7

Interview with Carol Alvarado

Rep. Carol Alvarado

The special election in SD06 to succeed the late Sen. Mario Gallegos is Saturday, January 26, and early voting for this election begins Wednesday, January 9. There are two serious candidates in this race, former County Commissioner Sylvia Garcia and State Rep. Carol Alvarado. I published an interview with Commissioner Garcia on Monday, and today I bring you one with Rep. Alvarado. Like Garcia, Carol Alvarado’s resume of public service is long and accomplished – three terms on City Council, Mayor Pro Tem, beginning her third term as representative for HD145. She too has been a strong advocate and ally for many progressive causes, and also boasts the support of numerous Democratic elected officials as well as police and firefighter unions. Here’s the interview:

Carol Alvarado interview

Feel free to add your speculation here about who will finish first and whether or not there will need to be a runoff.

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Chron overview of SD06

The day before early voting begins in the SD06 special election (which is today), the Chron previews the race. It has a lot of stuff we already know, and it mostly focuses on the two frontrunners, Sylvia Garcia and Rep. Carol Alvarado, so I’m not going to recapitulate that. There are a couple of interesting tidbits that I want to mention.

With eight candidates in the race in an overwhelmingly Democratic district that includes Houston’s East End, the race is likely to come down to a battle between two prominent Democrats, state Rep. Carol Alvarado, whose House district overlaps much of the Senate district, and former Harris County Commissioner Sylvia Garcia.

Also running are R.W. Bray, the Republican candidate who lost to Gallegos last fall; Democrats Susan Delgado, Joaquin Martinez and Rodolfo “Rudy” Reyes; Republican Dorothy Olmos; and Green Party candidate Maria Selva.

If a runoff is needed – and with so many candidates, one is likely – it will be held between Feb. 23 and March 9, with Gov. Rick Perry scheduling the exact date.

[…]

Among the state’s 31 senate districts, this predominantly Hispanic district ranks last in the number of registered voters (284,000) and in 2012 voter turnout (138,000). [Rice poli sci prof Mark] Jones estimates that fewer than 1 in 10 registered voters and 1 in 25 district residents will cast a ballot.

While there have been a number of legislative special elections in recent years, there hasn’t been one like this, in a strongly Democratic district with two clear leaders and at least one Republican who will likely do better than the default background candidate rate. The closest match is the 2005 special election in HD143 in which Rep. Ana Hernandez was elected to succeed the late Rep. Joe Moreno. It’s not an exact match because there were no declared Republicans in the race, though one of the minor candidates was the same Dorothy Olmos who is running in this race (and has run in many others since 2005) as a Republican. Hernandez and runnerup Laura Salinas combined for 68.4% in that race, with four other candidates splitting the remaining 31.6%. PDiddie does some crunching to suggest a vote total that would win this race in the first round. I look at it this way: Assume Bray gets 15%, and the other five combine to take 10%. For either Garcia or Alvarado to win it on January 26, one would have to beat the other by at least 25 points, i.e., by at least a 50-25 margin, since 25% of the vote is already accounted for. Do you think that’s even remotely possible? I sure don’t. And if the non-Sylvia and Carol candidates combine for more of the vote, a first-round winner would need an even wider margin. Ain’t gonna happen.

As for the vote total that Jones predicts, here’s a look at the four most recent Senate special elections:

Dist Date Num Votes Top 2 ================================ 22 May 2010 4 29,851 81.47 17 Dec 2008 2 43,673 84.52 31 Jan 2004 7 69,415 66.27 01 Jan 2004 6 69,206 75.50

“Num” is the number of candidates, and “Top 2” is the combined percentage of the top two candidates. There was a runoff in each case, and I’m cheating a little with the SD17 special election – the vote total (“Votes”) is from the runoff, since the special election itself (which had 6 candidates) was on the date of the 2008 general election, and thus had the kind of turnout (223,295) one would expect for a regular Senate election. I don’t know how much you can extrapolate from all this, but you write your blog post with the data you have, not the data you wish you had. For what it’s worth, from chatting with the campaigns I’d say they’re expecting a slightly higher vote total than Jones is projecting. We’ll see.

One more thing:

If a runoff is needed – and with so many candidates, one is likely – it will be held between Feb. 23 and March 9, with Gov. Rick Perry scheduling the exact date.

[…]

Meanwhile, the district’s approximately 813,000 residents will be without representation in the state Senate until the latter half of March, when the newly elected senator will be sworn in.

I would think that if the runoff is no later than March 9 that the newly-elected Senator would be sworn in sooner than “the latter half of March”. I know there’s a canvass period for election results that can take a week or more before the result is certified, but does that hold everything up until it’s done? It’s not usually a consideration because we have elections in November and swearings-in in January, but obviously here it does matter. The statutes on elections to fill a legislative vacancy were not clear to me on this, and the last time we had a vacancy during a session (2005, when Rep. Moreno died in an auto accident), the ensuing special election was not called until November. Anyone have a good answer for this?

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Day One of the Lege

What do we know so far?

Same old Rick Perry.

Gov. Rick Perry called for tax relief and a lean approach to budgeting as he addressed the Senate, even as the state faces a lawsuit from school districts over funding and concerns over the effects of budget cuts approved two years ago.

[…]

Perry said the state’s economic rebound is due to a fiscally conservative approach, telling lawmakers that interests across the state see the positive revenue picture as “ringing the dinner bell”

“They all want more for their causes they all figure we have manna falling from heaven and they all have your phone numbers and addresses,” Perry said.

Instead, he said it is time to put the state’s fiscal house in order by implementing his call to reduce diversions of dedicated funds, set a tighter constitutional spending limit, oppose any tax increases and stand against using rainy day fund money for ongoing expenses. He said lawmakers must stop writing IOUs and delaying payments.

“With a better budgetary picture now is the time for us to set the books straight… it’s also time for us to take a look at tax relief,” Perry said.

You didn’t really expect him to say that now was the time to restore services that had been needlessly slashed last session, did you? The man still thinks he’s running for President, but even if he weren’t, he showed us who and what he is a long time ago.

Joe Straus is still Speaker.

After the last of his challengers dropped out Tuesday, San Antonio Republican Joe Straus was elected to a third term as speaker of the Texas House.

That last challenger, Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview, never found enough support to threaten the incumbent. An earlier challenger, Rep. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, dropped out weeks ago as Simpson entered the race.

Saying he wasn’t certain of victory and didn’t want to put other members at risk by forcing a vote, Simpson withdrew from the race. “Absent certainty at winning this contest, at the request of my colleagues, I withdraw from this contest,” he said in a speech to the full House.

When it came time for the House to vote Tuesday — the first day of the 83rd Legislature — Straus was re-elected by acclamation.

The process to select the next “Bachelor” had more drama.

The two thirds rule still lives, or at least it most likely will still live.

Speaking after the Senate adjourned Tuesday, [Lt. Gov. David] Dewhurst said that the contentious issue of the two-thirds rule had already been settled and that he expected a vote on the rules on Wednesday.

“In my conversations with the Senate Republicans and the Senate Democrats yesterday, I believe that’s where the senators are, to maintain the two-thirds rule for this regular session,” Dewhurst said.

He did not fully rule out sidestepping the rule for a particular bill, as Senate Republicans have in the past on high-profile measures such as voter ID and redistricting.

“The record is replete with different lieutenant governors in different sessions doing different things, and I’m not going to restrict anything lieutenant governors can do in the future,” Dewhurst said. “But it’s my understanding that the two-thirds rule will be in place for this session.”

Voter ID and redistricting were last session, so there probably isn’t anything that’s sufficiently controversial and sufficiently partisan to warrant an attempt to kill it by the Rs. They know that it’s sometimes convenient to let the Ds kill something that they’d rather not have to vote on. Still, it’s a bit amazing after all the drama of recent sessions that this still lives. Tradition is a powerful thing.

That’s probably the only news of interest for the week from the Dome. As Ed Sills said yesterday, only 139 more days to go. Burka, PDiddie, Stace, the Observer, and TM Daily Post have more.

UPDATE: More from Burka and EoW.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Day One of the Lege

Fix what’s broken first

What Texas Watch says.

Texas Watch

Imagine this scenario. Texans are facing a physician shortage. Under-served rural and poor communities struggle to attract doctors to serve their needs. Politicians scramble to find a solution to the crisis. That is where we were 10 years ago. Things aren’t so different today.

Back then, the lobbyists and political spinmeisters promised that if we gave up our ability to hold a dangerous doctor accountable, then we’d see the physician supply problem – and a host of other problems in our health care system – evaporate. So, voters narrowly passed an amendment to our state’s constitution that gave politicians the ability to eviscerate legal accountability when you are needlessly harmed by medical negligence.

Flash forward to today. Under-served communities continue to struggle to attract good doctors. Our state ranks near the bottom in per capita physicians. Not to mention the fact that our health care costs are higher and quality of care is worse. And, yes, politicians are scrambling to find a solution.

Evidently the policies enacted 10 years ago haven’t worked. Otherwise, why would this still be a problem needing additional legislative action?

This time, they are considering legislation by Sen. Jane Nelson, chair of the Senate Health & Human Services Committee, to improve physician supply by increasing the number of residency slots available, rewarding medical schools that find ways to keep doctors in Texas, and forgiving medical school loans for doctors who agree to see poor patients. These are laudable goals and lawmakers should support the bill.

The real question, however, is this: Since we know that tearing up our constitution under the guise of better health care is a failed policy, why don’t we restore the patient protections first? Not only has this failed idea not solved the doctor supply problem, it hasn’t lowered health costs for families or the state. Nor has it improved the quality of care. We are, in fact, dead last in the nation in terms of quality of care.

Politicians – including Gov. Perry – should stop defending this policy that has torn a hole in our constitution. Instead, they should restore accountability so that when one of the very few doctors who commit most of the medical negligence harms a patient, they are held responsible for it. They and their insurance companies – not taxpayers or the injured patient – should bear the cost and face public scrutiny for their decisions.

Let’s move forward to address the physician supply problem honestly and without cynicism. Sen. Nelson is on the right track. Incentivizing good doctors and hospitals to serve Texans is a great idea worthy of support. But the first step is admitting when we have made a mistake and fixing it.

I don’t really have anything to add to that. Tort “reform” has always been a crock and a scam, and the only beneficiaries of it have been the insurance companies and bad doctors. And because it’s in the constitution, we’ll probably never get rid of it.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Fix what’s broken first

Julian 2016?

I have five things to say about this.

Mayor Julian Castro

Texas Democratic powerbrokers are quietly promoting rising star Julian Castro as a consensus building leader with bipartisan support as they position the charismatic San Antonio mayor for the party’s 2016 presidential ticket.

In Julian Castro, who vaulted into the American spotlight at the Democratic National Convention last September, Democrats believe they have what one party leader called “the next Obama” who could be vital to retaining the White House.

The 38-year-old mayor would give Democrats the inside track to the ever-increasing Latino vote, which is expected to be even more pivotal in 2016 than it has ever been.

But Castro’s political Achilles heel is that his home state has been solidly red for a generation and that, even with Texas’s large Hispanic vote, Democrats have not won a statewide race in almost two decades.

Top Democratic leaders, though, believe that Castro would give the party a unique opportunity to capture the state’s 38 electoral votes in 2016, given his pull among Latinos as well as by positioning him as a consensus builder along the lines of Texas legend Lyndon Johnson.

The Texas electoral votes together with the 55 of solidly blue state California could potentially give a Democratic nominee 93 electoral votes, more than a third of the 270 needed for election.

Some Texas Democrats who are preparing behind-the-scenes to soon begin working on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign are even wishfully talking about a Hillary-Julian dream ticket.

1. I have absolutely no idea who these “powerbrokers” and “top leaders” are. Hell, I can barely say those things with a straight face. The article quotes absolutely no one, not even anonymously or on background, so one is tempted to imagine that this is all shorthand for “a couple of consultants and/or staffers I was drinking with”. Seriously, I got nothing. But feel free to speculate about their identities in the comments.

2. With President Obama having gone from state senator to President in just over four years, I hesitate to say anything is impossible. But I will note that Obama won an election for US Senate in between, so he had some exposure on the national stage that went beyond a keynote speech and someone else’s Presidential campaign. I can see Julian Castro being an attractive choice as running mate in 2016, though his lack of experience above the municipal level would surely be seen as a liability among the Very Serious types. Maybe I’m just old-fashioned, but I have a hard time seeing how a path to the White House for Castro doesn’t include a successful run for Governor or Senator first. Go on, tell me that a Castro win over Rick Perry or Greg Abbott (or hell, George P. Bush) in 2014 would not catapult him onto the short list for 2016.

3. Whether or not Julian Castro is on the ticket in 2016, the way to put Texas’ electoral votes up for grabs is to spend the money and invest the time and people-power in a massive registration and turnout operation. Perhaps what those powerbrokers and leaders are hoping for is that a Castro candidacy would force that to happen, and would finally bring some national campaign dollars here instead of us being a cookie jar for everyone else to reach into. Not a bad thing to hope for, but last I checked hope was still not a plan. Oh, and as long as we’re dreaming, it sure would be nice to give that operation a test drive in 2014, don’t you think?

4. Given that Presidents tend to get re-elected, if Castro isn’t on the ticket in 2016, it’s likely that 2024 will be his next best chance. Being elected VP in 2016 is a good strategy for being the Presidential nominee in 2024, but if that fails to come about, it would be nice to have a Plan B. See item #2 above for my suggestion. Serve two terms as Governor beginning in 2014 and you’d be pretty well positioned for 2024. I’m just saying.

5. All that said, Hillary/Julian, or Clinton/Castro, sure does have a nice ring to it.

Posted in The making of the President | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments