What might we expect with Straus?

So let's assume that nothing crazy happens, and that Rep. John Smithee - or as Rep. Leo Berman would call him, Rep. John What's-His-Name - can't peel away enough of Rep. Joe Straus' supporters (now up to 94, make that 96), and Straus gets elected the next Speaker of the State House. Given this, what can we expect? I have a couple of thoughts on that.

1. Less turmoil. At least, less turmoil generated by things like declarations of absolute authority, for which ex-Speaker Craddick was notorious. I also presume there will be less turmoil due to the lack of Craddick henchmen in positions of authority, like Terry Keel and Ron Wilson. I suppose that will make for less blog fodder, but I'll take that trade. Of course, as I have suggested and Burka has echoed, Craddick can still cause chaos in any number of ways, legitmate and otherwise. On the one hand, he may prefer to bow out with dignity. On the other hand, what has he to gain from magnaminity? We may yet see unprecedented shenanigans.

2. Fewer egregious bills on the floor. I have to presume that the List of 64 Dems got themselves some kind of plums for their unified support of Straus. They did always have the option of being coy and letting the chips fall where they may. Some people believe that the Dems would be better positioned for 2010 with Craddick still in charge, after all. I'll have more on that in a minute, but I heard rumblings to that effect well before November 4, so it's not like that's a radical notion. In any event, whether it's a better assortment of committee chairs or just keeping stupid stuff like xenophobic anti-immigration bills and voter ID legislation from getting oxygen, I trust the Dems extracted a few promises along these lines before they gave it up for Straus. I sure as hell hope they did, anyway. And if I don't hear some way-off-the-record whispers to that effect within an hour or two of posting this, I'll be surprised.

3. A chance to actually address some of Texas' real problems. It should be clear by now that Tom Craddick didn't give a damn about things like school finance, the encironment, or CHIP. While it may still not be possible to really move meaningful legislation through the House on these subjects - and even if you could, there's still David Dewhurst and Rick Perry to contend with - at the very least I expect to have to play less defense against measures to do even more damage in these areas. I also expect that even if the kinds of bills I want to see ultimately get voted down, we'll still see debates on them on the kind of terms they deserve to be debated on. I see the possibility of being for stuff, instead of just against stuff.

For that reason, I agree with Phil that the change in Speakership will not put the Dems at a political disadvantage in 2010. The effect may wind up being neutral, since I think 2010 is likely to be fairly static in legislative races anyway, given the current makeup of the House and the paucity of districts that appear ripe for turnover. But being able to debate better legislation, regardless of whether it gets passed or thwarted by nefarious foes other than the former Speaker, should be something we all welcome.

I could certainly be wrong about any or all of this. As I say, we still haven't even officially voted Straus in yet, and we don't know who his leadership team and committee chair choices will be. But I know I feel a whole lot better about this session now than I did a couple of weeks ago. BOR has video and Elise Hu has photos from Straus' press conference today.

UPDATE: It's official. Straus is the last man standing as Smithee and Gattis withdraw. All hail the new Speaker!

UPDATE: The ubiquitous Elise Hu has video of Smithee's concession speech.

Five years of the Main Street Line

Christof notes that with the arrival of the new year, the Main Street Line has reached its fifth birthday.

Today, by every measure, the Main Street Line is a huge success:

• It carries 40,000 people on an average weekday. That's remarkable for a line so short; it's more than the 12-mile line in Minneapolis, the 25-mile system in Pittsburgh, 27-mile system in northern New Jersey, the 30-mile system in Baltimore, or the 42-mile system in San Jose. Only one other light rail system in the United States carries more passengers per mile, and that's Boston's, which had a 100-year head start. Dallas carries less than twice as many passengers on seven times as much track built for $2 billion.


• It's turned out to serve a lot of trips very well. About half of rail riders have a one-seat ride, compared to only 34% of Houston bus riders.


• It has attracted new riders to transit. Half of riders have a car available; 40% didn't ride transit before the line opened. It even seems to have attracted people to connecting bus routes: 12% of Houston bus riders weren't riding before rail opened.


• It's made service faster, more reliable, and more frequent for many existing transit riders.


• It has proven (again) that Houstonians will walk. 2/3 of light rail trips start on foot.


• It has attracted a wide range of riders going to a wide range of destinations. Unlike the Park-and-Ride buses, which are full during rush hour but idle during the day, the light rail line is carry lots of people all day, every day. Average weekend ridership is around 15,000, more than any Houston bus route carries on a weekday. Only about half of trips are home-to-work. I've found myself on standing room only trains on every day of the week and nearly any time of day.


• It's reduced the number of accidents on Main Street. Yes, that's true: there were more car wrecks on Main before rail was built than there are now.


• It has supported extensive development along the line: new highrises Downtown, new hospitals in the Medical Center, and new apartments in the Museum District: at least 50 significant projects.

Hard to believe it's been five years already. Almost as hard as it is to believe that this is still all we have so far. It's hard to imagine conditions being much more favorable than they are now not just for finishing off the remaining projects from the Metro 2012 referendum, but also for starting the discussion about where we go from here. How shall we expand the system to accommodate more riders and make more of Houston accessible by means other than driving and parking? I plan to do some of that discussing myself in the coming weeks, but in the meantime feel free to leave any ideas or wish list items you may have in the comments.

Sheriff Garcia asks for more recruits

Yes, Sheriff Adrian Garcia. Not Sheriff-elect any more, as he's been officially sworn in now, and a new era is underway.

Harris County needs more "boots on the ground" to arrest criminals, prevent crime and help residents of its far-flung neighborhoods feel safer, newly elected Sheriff Adrian Garcia said Sunday.

In an inaugural address to hundreds of supporters, Garcia said he would ask county commissioners to pay for additional academy classes while he took steps internally to free up more deputies for patrol duties. About 800 deputies now patrol an area that would be the seventh-largest U.S. city, Garcia said.

The sheriff's department has no "cold case squad" to re-open old investigations, Garcia said, and its academy needs more trainers. Deputies complain of being overworked while residents say they rarely see a patrol car, he said.

"Among the highest priorities," the county's first Hispanic sheriff said, "is getting more boots on the ground. I will serve as the chief recruiter for the Harris County sheriff's department."

[...]

After the event, [County Judge Ed] Emmett said commissioners would carefully consider any requests by Garcia for new positions in the sheriff's department. The timing of the request is good, Emmett said, because the county is just starting its annual budget process.

Garcia didn't specify how many more deputies he needs, but said it should be enough that deputies can get to know people in the neighborhoods they serve and establish a regular presence. Such tactics reassure the public and deter criminals, Garcia said.

That's good to hear. I hope that one of the things our new Sheriff will focus on is removing deputies from jail guard duties, in order to get them back on the streets as he wishes. That will necessitate some work on reducing jail overcrowding in Harris County, which perhaps is something else Commissioners Court can assist with, by making it clear that we've got all the jail space we need, we just need to use it more sensibly. I really hope that's a direction we'll take, though that will be up to our new District Attorney and the judiciary as much as it will be for the Sheriff and the County Commissioners. Here's to some new policies for the new year and beyond.

After the event, Garcia said two former high-ranking deputies who sued him last week after he fired them had every right to take their grievance to court. The officers claim civil service rules and state law entitled them to demotions.

Garcia said his actions were justified.

"I need to be able to determine who shares my vision" for the department, Garcia said. "The taxpayers who elected me voted for change."

I tried, I really did, to feel...I don't know, something...about that weekend story concerning the ousted employees and the persona-non-grata fliers that appeared. All I can say is that if that's the worst thing that happens during Garcia's tenure, he'll be the best Sheriff we've ever had. Greg has more.

The "scourge" of straight-ticket voting

I continue to be surprised at how much attention the "issue" of straight ticket voting has received since November.

[I]n the legislative session starting Jan. 13, Republican state Sen. Jeff Wentworth of San Antonio plans a second run at deleting the straight-ticket option from Texas ballots. His repeal proposal didn't advance in 2007 .

"Both political parties need to stop being quite so partisan," Wentworth said.

He said that if a voter wants to favor every Republican or Democrat running, "that's fine with me; I'm not trying to tell them how to vote. I'm just saying they ought to be more informed by seeing the name."

[...]

Wentworth traced his interest in the issue back to when he served on Bexar County's Commissioners Court three decades ago.

Despite working for African American support, he said, he didn't draw much; many voters pulled the Democratic lever. He said supporters told him: "If they'd seen your name, some of them would have voted for you."

"I have been aggravated by that actual fact ever since."

I take Sen. Wentworth at his word when he says he's been interested in doing something about this for years. I suspect, however, that this is the first time his interest has merited a stand-alone story in the newspaper, however. Amazing what a little change in the electorate can bring about.

Richard Winger, editor of San Francisco-based Ballot Access News , a nonpartisan newsletter that tracks the attempts of individuals to appear on ballots, opposes the one-shot, straight-ticket option.

"People ought to make up their minds what they're doing and not vote unconsciously (on candidates)," Winger said. "It's also extremely unfair to independent candidates because they don't have a straight-ticket device."

Richard Niemi , a political scientist at the University of Rochester , said the option doesn't irk the major parties, who want voters to embrace their tickets, but individual officeholders can see the choice as a threat.

"It almost certainly increases the number of voters who don't know who they're voting for, other than their parties," Niemi said.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I knew who I was voting for, in every race. I voted straight ticket this year, for the first time in my voting life, because there wasn't a Republican worth voting for. If that's different in 2010, I'll vote differently. The straight ticket option saved me a few minutes of my lunch hour, and freed up my voting machine quickly for whoever was on line behind me. So there.

College issues

Once we finally do get past the Speaker's race, various college-related issues will be on the agenda for the Lege.

[E]xpect lots of debate about freezing tuition when the Legislature convenes in mid-January.

But with dozens of bills dealing with higher education already filed, it won't be the only topic under consideration. Other measures look to expand financial aid, cut the cost of textbooks, make schools more accountable and help veterans attend college.

Legislators often pay lip service to higher education, but several say this year may be the tipping point, sparked by a middle-class outcry over tuition rates, national reports blasting lack of affordability and access, and a growing acknowledgment that Texas needs more and better universities to serve its growing population.

One bill already filed would freeze tuition at public universities for two years. Another would limit tuition and fee increases to 5 percent a year.

All sound good to cash-strapped families, who saw tuition at Texas' public, four-year schools rise an average of 53 percent in the first four years after legislators allowed them to set their own rates.

But changing the status quo may not be so simple.

Legislators deregulated tuition in 2003 in exchange for cutting state higher education funding during a budget crisis. Public universities rely on a mix of state funding and money from tuition and fees for their operating costs, along with money from endowments, donations and other sources.

State spending has increased since 2003 but hasn't kept up with enrollment growth and inflation.

"It's easy to say, 'Freeze tuition,' " said Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, chairwoman of the Senate Higher Education Subcommittee. "I don't think it would be fair to freeze tuition without raising state funding."

Forget fairness. It simply won't be possible to freeze tuition without raising the state's share of funding. The whole reason for tuition deregulation in the first place was to enable the state to cut its funding level back in 2003. You can't have one without the other. The question is where the funding comes from, not just for tuition relief but also for all those other items on the wish list, including Tier 1 status for UH and others. The ends are noble, but what are the means? I think this is a high enough priority that there will be a real effort to answer that question, but for now it's a mystery.

By the way, since the Speaker's race will never be too far from the surface of this session, tuition deregulation was something Tom Craddick pushed for. Even though he won't be wielding the gavel, I can't see him sitting back and watching that work be undone. Maybe he'll go all Talton on the House and become an assassin by point of order. You don't think he's going to go quietly, do you?

Thus endeth the Tom Craddick era

I still can't believe it's happened.

Rep. Joe Straus trotted out more than enough names of supporters Sunday night to virtually guarantee that lawmakers would elect the San Antonio Republican speaker of the Texas House next week -- assuming they don't waver.

The move came as a key ally of incumbent Tom Craddick said the Midland Republican has dropped his bid to be re-elected leader of the House and has released lawmakers pledged to support him.

"He has withdrawn his candidacy and freed up his pledges," said Rep. Will Hartnett, R-Dallas. He said the "vast bulk" of those who had been pledged to Craddick -- including himself -- are now supporting Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo.

Craddick, who was meeting with supporters at a downtown Austin restaurant this evening, arrived in a white Lexus but continued driving around the block after seeing a media mass gathered at the entrance. Later, at a side entrance, Craddick emerged from the vehicle and tersely said, "We're not talking" before entering the restaurant.

Hartnett said those who had supported Craddick "are regrouping quickly and reaching out to folks that have not been on Craddick's team" to try to win over support for Smithee.

Quite a change in tone for Rep. Hartnett, who had talked a lot of trash in the comments at Burkablog all during this saga, as well as for Craddick spokesperson Alexis DeLee. No worries, though, I see that Rep. Sid Miller has taken up the slack.

Rep. Sid Miller, R-Stephenville, tonight dismissed a list of 85 supporters released by Speaker candidate Joe Straus, R-San Antonio.

"I don't think it will matter," Miller said. "The dynamics of the race have changed. It's not a Straus-Craddick race any more. It's a whole new day."

Psst! Hey, Sid! You might want to check your figures. According to Elise Hu, Straus is up to 88 names now, with former Craddick Ds Sylvester Turner and Ryan Guillen, plus Republican Rep.-elect Angie Chen Button jumping ship. That just leaves Al Edwards and Harold Dutton among Democrats still out in non-Straus-land, for those keeping score at home, and it officially removes Turner from the Speaker sweepstakes.

I think at this point I've just about run out of things to worry about. The anti-Craddicks did everything they said they would, and the momentum has been in their favor from the beginning. I suppose it's possible Smithee could woo a few of them, but it's hard to see how he gets past 75 names, and it's hard to see how he could be a unifying force as Craddick's designated alternative. I suppose anything can still happen, but it's stretching my imagination at this point to think of a plausible scenario where Straus fumbles the ball. It's a little weird, but in a very good way. Now we just have to wait and hear what happened behind the scenes. I'm sure the gossip and scuttlebutt will be freely flowing soon.

UPDATE: The Straus number is now 89, I am told.

The Straus list

Rep. Joe Straus has released a list of 85 supporters - 15 Republicans and 70 Democrats - which would seem to put Team Craddick in a pretty tight spot. You can see the list here (Word doc) sorted by name, or at the end of that KXAN story, broken out by party. I'm going to reproduce it here with some comments:

Democrats:

Alma Allen
Roberto Alonzo
Carol Alvarado
Rafael Anchia
Valinda Bolton
Lon Burnam
Joaquin Castro
Norma Chavez
Ellen Cohen
Garnet Coleman
Yvonne Davis
Joe Deshotel
Dawnna Dukes
Jim Dunnam
Craig Eiland
Kirk England
Joe Farias
David Farabee
Jessica Farrar
Kino Flores
Stephen Frost
Pete Gallego
Helen Giddings
Veronica Gonzalez
Yvonne Gonzalez Toureilles
Roland Gutierrez
Joe Heflin
Ana Hernandez
Abel Herrero
Scott Hochberg
Terri Hodge
Mark Homer
Chuck Hopson
Donna Howard
Carol Kent
Tracy King
David Leibowitz
Eddie Lucio
Diana Maldonado
Barbara Mallory Caraway
Marisa Marquez
Armando Martinez
Trey Martinez Fischer
Ruth Jones McClendon
Jim McReynolds
Jose Menendez
Robert Miklos
Joe Moody
Elliott Naishtat
Rene Oliveira
Dora Olivo
Solomon Ortiz
Aaron Pena
Joe Pickett
Paula Pierson
Chente Quintanilla
Richard Raymond
Tara Rios Ybarra
Allan Ritter
Eddie Rodriguez
Patrick Rose
Mark Strama
Kristi Thibaut
Senfronia Thompson
Chris Turner
Allen Vaught
Marc Veasey
Mike Villarreal
Hubert Vo
Armando Walle

Members listed in bold were not on the List of 64 from last week. The four remaining holdouts are Reps. Harold Dutton, Al Edwards, Sylvester Turner (all of Houston) and Ryan Guillen (from South Texas). For the rest:

Republicans

Dan Branch
Byron Cook
Rob Eissler
Gary Elkins
Charlie Geren
Delwin Jones
Jim Keffer
Edmund Kuempel
Brian McCall
Tommy Merritt
Doug Miller
Jim Pitts
Burt Solomons
Todd Smith
Joe Straus

The four bolded members here are from outside the Gang of Eleven. In total, that's ten new supporters for Straus since he emerged as the consensus candidate on Friday night. Note that Dan Gattis and his three acolytes are missing as well - according to the Statesman, they're headed to Rep. John Smithee's camp. According to Brandi Grissom, it's officially Smithee versus Straus. Can Smithee peel away some of those 85 names? He'll need at least ten. Once again, game on.

Is this really the end for Craddick?

It is, according to Rep. Pena on Twitter:

The Speaker's race is over. Straus will be the Speaker for 81st Legislative Session.

And now according to the Statesman as well:

Rep. Sid Miller, R-Stephenville, confirmed that Speaker Tom Craddick is dropping his bid for a fourth term as House leader.

"He's pulled out," Miller said of the Midland Republican.

Miller and other Craddick loyalists are meeting tonight to see if they can block San Antonio Republican Joe Straus who claims he has the votes to be the next speaker.

Meanwhile, Rep. Dawnna Dukes, D-Austin, confirmed that she told Craddick this afternoon that she would be supporting Straus.

"He was very congenial," she said. "He was a gentleman."

According to KXAN, Craddick may have an alternate candidate in mind:

Craddick supporters are convening at Sullivan's Restaurant in Austin at 7 p.m. Sunday evening to discuss the possibility of replacing Craddick with [Rep. John] Smithee as their candidate. This move would allow Craddick to step out of the controversial spotlight and still maintain control of the House through his ally, Smithee. KXAN's Jenny Hoff is stationed outside the restaurant as members approach and filing reports as the continuing drama unfolds before the first gavel comes down on the next legislative session.

Seems a bit late for that, especially if Straus releases a list of 80 supporters, as he's reportedly about to do. Burka thinks it's too late for Smithee, and I agree.

One "Dear Colleague" letter from him in the past seven weeks could have ended Craddick's speakership. He wouldn't do it. His decision to wait from Friday until Monday was typical. He doesn't yearn for power. His reticence doesn't stem from fear. It's just his personality. The two day delay from Friday makes it hard for him to pull it together. It may be too late now, depending upon whether Straus has gained some new recruits, and how many. The pool of uncommitted members is shrinking, particularly on the Democratic side. The only reason for D's to switch to Smithee is if Straus can't close the deal and Craddick stays viable. Otherwise, why would they go for a rural guy at the backside of his career than an urban guy on the way up? On the R side, the only way for Smithee to get traction is for Craddick to give up and pass the torch.

Which may happen, but 80 supporters would trump that, if it holds. For what it's worth, I think Smithee as Craddick's man would hold less appeal for most members than Smithee as his own man would have. He's going to try to appeal to Straus' supporters anyway. There may yet be some twists to this. I sure hope not.

Weekend link dump for January 4

Have we forgot auld acquaintance yet?

The twelve days of HMNS. And may I be the first to wish y'all a happy hundredth birthday.

Sixteen more days.

Why, Australia, why?

Is there any problem for which Republicans do not prescribe tax cuts as the solution? Anything? A related question that really needs to be asked these guys is "What level of taxation is low enough that no further tax cuts are needed, and why don't you just propose that instead of all these apparently insufficient intermediate steps?" I think we all know what the answers to those questions are, but they should still be asked.

Did 2008 feel like it would never end? It did last a little longer than usual.

Ask a question about cheesy 80s hair bands, get an answer.

Congratulations to Karen Brooks on her new gig.

Mike Tomasky's 19 Worst Americans of 2008. Plus a few suggested additions from Steve Benen.

Along similar lines, here are some of the worst predictions of the Presidential race.

James Kendrick's Tech Predictions for 2009.

Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control, according to a new study. Yeah, no one could have predicted that.

Flickr: "The Far Side" Re-enactment Pool. Have I mentioned lately that I love the Internet? Via Chad.

Straus says he has the votes

I certainly hope so.

Republican lawmaker Joe Straus said he collected enough pledges from House colleagues Saturday to knock out incumbent House Speaker Tom Craddick.

"We're at 76, and we're adding them up," Straus said of the threshold number needed to clinch the top leadership spot. "I feel real good about our numbers."

Straus, who emerged as the consensus candidate of 11 maverick Texas House Republicans on Friday night, planned to formally announce his victory today, when he hopes to have close to 90 pledges.

The controversial Craddick, however, was in no concession mood, and he plans to meet with his own supporters today.

"We have grown stronger in the last 24 hours. The size of the field has narrowed, and the speaker has picked up momentum and is in a great position," Craddick spokeswoman Alexis DeLee said. "The meeting is on, and I am not going to discuss strategy."

I'm going to agree with Burka here. The sooner Straus releases the names of his supporters, the better. He says he's got 90, and I believe that's possible - BOR claims Rep-elect Doug Miller is in Straus' camp, Chron reporter Gary Scharrer mentioned a new convert in the comments to that Burka post, San Antonio Craddick D Ruth Jones McClendon will likely go along, Gattis' crew may not go back to Craddick - and it's likely to build on itself once members see that his support is real. Everyone wants to be with a winner, and if that looks to be Straus, the rest will take care of itself. It can all still fall apart, mostly if some of the Dems on the list of 64 get cold feet, but so far, so good. Team Craddick meets today amid rumors (hotly denied by Craddick loyalist Will Hartnett in Burka's comments) that it will have a number of no-shows. We'll see if they can live up to Alexis DeLee's big talk or if this is the end of the road for Big Tom.

For much more on Straus and the state of the Speaker's race:

RG Ratcliffe reports on Straus' campaign finances, and has both podcast and video interviews of him.

Laylan Copelin says both sides are focusing on six Dems from the List of 64, including Houstonians Carol Alvarado and Hubert Vo. All I can say is that Alvarado told me when I interviewed her before the March primary that she would not support Tom Craddick; as for Vo, I can't imagine what the appeal would be for him in crossing over. Whatever.

John Coby rounds up some newspaper editorials that call for Craddick's ouster.

PDiddie and McBlogger think Craddick will still pull it out.

TFN Insider rounds up the religious right's support for Craddick, while Vince examines a particular charge the social conservatives are making against him. Meanwhile, Rick Perry Versus The World speculates that there will be an effort for require Republican legislators to support "the pick of the majority of the House Republican Caucus". You know, technically the Democrats already have such a rule - they're supposed to vote for a Democrat for Speaker if one is running. Needless to say, that isn't much of an obstacle in real life; there are still five Democrats who have filed for Speaker this session, after all. I'll simply observe that this whole saga has some real potential to expose a sizable rift in Republican unity. That would be just fine by me.

UPDATE: Via Twitter, Rep. Pena says Rep. John Smithee has filed for Speaker. Burka had previously suggested the possibility of Straus versus Smithee for Speaker. Rep. Pena also says that Rep. Senfronia Thompson has withdrawn from the Speaker's race.

UPDATE: Laylan Copelin reports Straus may have a formal announcement that he's got all the votes he needs to win as early as today, possibly tomorrow. Harvey Kronberg says Rep. Thompson is supporting Straus:

Thompson told QR, "I am going to support this guy. I looked at the other candidates but he is the best. I think it might be the beginning of something different."

Maybe this really is the endgame. I almost can't believe it. Finally, BOR is trying to sniff out where the Team Craddick meeting is. If you're in Austin, see if you can help them out.

UPDATE: Rep.-elect Marisa Marquez of El Paso confirms her support of Straus. All San Antonio Dems, with the notable omission of Ruth Jones McClendon, do likewise. And Rep. Hubert Vo's chief of staff, Karen Loper, sent out the following email:

[Laylan Copelin's] report in not correct. Hubert Vo signed a pledge card for Joe Straus on Saturday.

More details as they come.

Third Court absolves itself again

I imagine that if the Austin-based Third Court of Appeals had a Christmas party this year, it was an awkward affair.

The 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin, split along partisan lines, has ruled that Republican Justice Alan Waldrop did not have to excuse himself from a case against two associates of former U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land.

The ruling does not immediately affect the money-laundering charges against DeLay and his associates, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis. But the justices question one another's motives in how the polarizing case has been handled by the appellate court.

[...]

In August, Justices Waldrop, [Kenneth] Law and Robert Pemberton, all Republicans, upheld the constitutionality of the money-laundering statute but added that they did not think that the law in 2002 covered checks. The $190,000 in the DeLay case involved corporate checks, not cash.

That ruling prompted a firestorm. Prosecutors argued that the three-judge panel had gone beyond the legal question before it. Earle spoke of "the dark shadow of corruption" looming over the case as he filed a motion asking Waldrop to withdraw or be dropped from the case. His complaint was that before Waldrop became a justice, he helped a group of DeLay's political allies, Texans for Lawsuit Reform, stay out of a lawsuit arising from the same circumstances as the criminal case.

Waldrop characterized the lawsuit as "politically motivated."

Two Democratic justices on the 3rd Court objected.

Justice Diane Henson complained that her GOP colleagues were wrong about the money-laundering law and had bottled up the case for years to thwart prosecution of the high-profile case.

Justice Jan Patterson accused Law of ignoring her dissent when the 3rd Court ruled earlier this year on Waldrop's standing in the case. She also questioned why the two men's constitutional challenges were combined into one case and assigned to an all-Republican panel of justices to consider. Previously one man's challenge was assigned to an all-GOP panel and the other case was being handled by a panel containing one Democrat.

On Wednesday, the Republican majority struck back in an opinion written by Justice David Puryear. Law and Pemberton joined in Puryear's opinion.

There's also been a criminal complaint filed against now-former Justice Law, who was defeated in November, for allegedly violating the Texas Elections Code in his campaign filings. Previous blogging about the "checks aren't cash" ruling is here. I swear, we should have just sent the whole thing to the International Court in the Hague at the beginning and been done with it. We might even have a resolution by now. No such luck here.

Study claims smoking ban leads to fewer heart attack deaths

Consider this to be a data point in the ongoing debate over a potential statewide smoking ban in bars, restaurants, and other indoor workplaces.

A smoking ban in one Colorado city led to a dramatic drop in heart attack hospitalizations within three years, a sign of just how serious a health threat secondhand smoke is, government researchers said today.

The study, the longest-running of its kind, showed the rate of hospitalized cases dropped 41 percent in the three years after the ban of workplace smoking in Pueblo, Colo., took effect. There was no such drop in two neighboring areas, and researchers believe it's a clear sign the ban was responsible.

The study suggests that secondhand smoke may be a terrible and under-recognized cause of heart attack deaths in this country, said one of its authors, Terry Pechacek of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

At least eight earlier studies have linked smoking bans to decreased heart attacks, but none ran as long as three years. The new study looked at heart attack hospitalizations for three years following the July 1, 2003 enactment of Pueblo's ban, and found declines as great or greater than those in earlier research.

"This study is very dramatic," said Dr. Michael Thun, a researcher with the American Cancer Society.

"This is now the ninth study, so it is clear that smoke-free laws are one of the most effective and cost-effective to reduce heart attacks," said Thun, who was not involved in the CDC study to be released Thursday.

The study is dramatic but not necessarily conclusive, as it didn't take some other possible factors into account, such as an overall decline in smoking in Pueblo. Of course, it's also possible that some number of people quit smoking once it became impossible, or at least highly inconvenient, for them to smoke at work. The point is that there's a clearly identifiable public health benefit to such bans, and that the benefits accrue to people who are not taking part in the unhealthy behavior. I say that since several people complained in the comments that the next step would be to ban unhealthy food. The key distinction is that your Big Mac habit doesn't threaten my health. Like this or not, expect to hear more about it in the spring, when the Lege debates Sen. Rodney Ellis and Rep. Myra Crownover's bills.

The gas tax

I was listening to the podcast version of Car Talk the other day, and towards the end of the show Ray went off on a rant about how we should implement a 50-cent-per-gallon gas tax. You can read what he said here. (Thomas Friedman is also on it.) Basically, he noted that gas was far cheaper now than it had been in recent months, the tax would encourage less driving and incentivize fuel economy, and the revenue collected could be used towards rebuilding infrastructure. He even suggested funding high-speed rail infrastructure with the money, and suggested that was something the Big Three could get into. Click over and see what you think, and check out the discussion that goes with it and is surprisingly non-negative towards the idea.

I don't know what the economic implications of such a tax in a recessionary economy might be, but I do know this: Ray's argument that at least in terms of the price of a gallon of gas there's never been a more opportune time to raise the gas tax works just as well here in Texas as it does nationally. We all know that the gas tax here is woefully inadequate, thanks to the fact that it hasn't been raised since the early 90s. We know we have a large number of unmet transportation needs, even if the only numbers we have are bogus self-serving TxDOT numbers. And we know we need more money for our schools, which get a piece of the state gas tax as well. We could solve an awful lot of problems right here if we embraced even a ten-cent gas take hike, and indexed future increases to inflation, which won't do much to raise it further right now. Naturally, it'll never happen because folks like Rick Perry and David Dewhurst aren't interested in solving these problems, at least not with solutions that have aren't ideologically pre-approved. But if the rest of us care about them, this is what we should be looking at. Who will take up the mantle for this in the Lege? Don't all raise your hands at once.

We have a contender. Now what?

So as we know, we have a designated champion to take out House Speaker Tom Craddick, San Antonio Rep. Joe Straus. Early reaction from people whose support he'll need is positive. Here's a roundup of that.

Chron:

Straus emerged as the unanimous choice after several rounds of balloting, said longtime Rep. Edmund Kuempel, R-Seguin -- himself a candidate before the group chose Straus.

"He's a fresh face. He's a uniter. He brings new ideas and lets every member have their say," Kuempel said. "He's been a lifelong Republican, a precinct chairman and a businessman. He's got solid credentials. He's the foundation of the Republican Party."

Rep. Mike Villarreal, D-San Antonio, said Straus will draw strong Democratic and Republican support.

"I am part of an effort making phone calls to Democrats, and we're hearing very positive things," Villarreal said.

He said he was ecstatic with the choice of Straus.

Express-News:

Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio, called Straus "an excellent choice," saying, "In the two terms that he's been there, he's demonstrated a true spirit of bipartisanship. He's been able to stay above partisan fights, and he's shown that he can work with everyone," Castro said.

Straus also would be a powerful ally for San Antonio and South Texas in getting critical infrastructure, Castro said.

[...]

Several conservative groups worry that Craddick's defeat would result in more liberal legislation moving through the House and are calling upon members to contact their lawmakers.

"It is crucial that you call your state representative immediately and demand that he/she not participate in this coup," the Free Market Foundation said in an e-mail message to members. "Ask for an answer. Let him or her know that if he joins in this effort, you will take it as a message that he is opposing everything you care about and the traditional values of life and family for which you stand. This will dramatically impact every issue you care about."

The Free Market Foundation promotes limited government, opposes abortion, supports traditional marriage and family, parental rights, and public religious expressions.

I'll pause here to note that Straus is pro-choice and has been honored by the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, so the Free Market Foundation has reason to fret. Which is fine by me.

Straus' outreach efforts will extend to about 10 Democrats who have been aligned with Craddick to see if he can switch their allegiance. One of them will be Rep. Ruth Jones McClendon, D-San Antonio, who prefers to be called "an independent Democrat" instead of a Craddick Democrat.

McClendon said she wants to talk to all of the remaining speaker candidates -- including Democrats Sylvester Turner and Senfronia Thompson of Houston -- before deciding whom she will support.

"Several of the speaker candidates have indicated some of us will not be able to serve in leadership positions again," said McClendon, who is chair of the Rules and Resolutions Committee under Craddick.

She also expressed concern about the ability to represent her district but chuckled when asked if she thought Straus would impede her efforts to represent San Antonio.

Needless to say, getting some of the Craddick D's on board would be a big step forward for Straus.

Statesman:

House members had been anticipating Friday's meeting of the 11 ABC Republicans to give direction to the speaker's race.

Ten of the lawmakers met at the Tarrytown home of Rep. Byron Cook of Corsicana, for more than two hours.

Rep. Rob Eissler of The Woodlands was on the phone and a webcam. Reps. Burt Solomons of Carrollton and Ed Kuempel of Seguin were thought to be front-runners, but after three ballots, the less-experienced Straus won the support of his colleagues.

Except for Eissler and Rep. Delwin Jones of Lubbock , who left early, the group emerged together to announce their choice. They all emphasized Straus' GOP credentials and his ability to unify the House.

Morning News:

"I look forward to hearing what he sees as his goals for the session," said House Democratic Caucus Chairman Jim Dunnam of Waco, adding that he hadn't talked to Straus yet. "I think we're on our way to change."

[...]

Republicans who form "the Group of 11" are trusting that their number, coupled with 64 Democrats who have signed a pledge not to vote for Craddick under any circumstances, will prove a momentum and a math that is hard to overcome: 75 out of 150 House members oppose Craddick's re-election as speaker.

Those 64 Democrats, presumably, will be hearing from Straus over the weekend.

"I do know from observing him during the session that he's a thoughtful person who is a person of his word," said Dunnam, contacted by phone after the meeting. "Those are good traits. I haven't talked to him, and I imagine every Republican and Democrat is going to want to visit with him."

Star Telegram:

"Things are falling into place very well," said state Rep. Pete Gallego, D-Alpine. "He's a conservative that people can talk to. He has a reputation for being fair."

Nearly a dozen lawmakers known as ABC Republicans -- "Anybody But Craddick" -- united behind Straus during a meeting at a home in central Austin. Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, a member of the group, praised the selection.

"He listens well. He's a consensus-builder. He understands how the House should be run," Geren said. "I think he'll do a great job."

[...]

Incoming freshman Rep. Chris Turner, D-Burleson, who spoke with Straus by phone, said that the San Antonio lawmaker's urban credentials could make him more sensitive to problems in North Texas, such as transportation and pollution.

"I think from Tarrant County's perspective, it will be great to have a speaker from an urban area," Turner said.

El Paso Times:

El Paso legislators, who are among 64 Democrats who have pledged not to vote for Craddick under any circumstances, mostly cheered the choice of Straus.

State Reps. Joe Pickett, Norma Chávez and Chente Quintanilla and state Rep.-elect Joe Moody all said they would support Straus, who has served just two terms in the Texas House.

"I have full confidence he will help us restore peace and respect on the House floor, and that is beneficial to El Paso's entire legislative agenda," Chávez said.

State Rep.-elect Marisa Marquez said she would not commit to supporting Straus until she met him.

"I think it's the most responsible thing to do," she said.

So there you have it. Some blog reactions are here, here, here, and here. Team Craddick is meeting Sunday, but you can be sure they're working the phones as hard as Team Straus is. Nobody knows yet where John Smithee or Dan Gattis or Gattis' three followers will wind up. If a bunch of previously uncommitted-but-presumed-for-Craddick folks start talking up Straus, or if some of the Dems on the List of 64 start wavering, this could be over one way or the other very quickly. I think there's a pretty decent chance that the official vote for Speaker on the 13th will be a formality, but it's too soon to say yet. What do you think of this choice?

Rep.-elect Walle to hold town hall meetings

State Rep.-elect Armando Walle, who will be sworn in to represent HD140 in ten days, is holding a few town hall meetings in the district before he heads off to Austin. Here are the details:

Monday, January 5th - 6:00 PM
MacArthur High School Cafeteria
4400 Aldine Mail Route

Tuesday, January 6th - 6:00 PM
Sam Houston Math, Science & Technology Center Cafeteria
9400 Irvington Blvd.

Tuesday, January 6th - 7:30 PM
Aldine-Greenspoint YMCA
10960 North Freeway

If you want to RSVP for one of these meetings, please send an email to representativewalle@gmail.com. As you know, I think highly of Walle, so if you live in his district please take the opportunity to get to know him and tell him how you want him to represent you. Thanks very much.

A pardon for Clemens?

Seems unlikely to me, too.

Two Houstonians -- former Enron executive Jeff Skilling and former Astros pitcher Roger Clemens -- are on a watch list kept by P.S. Ruckman Jr., a political science professor in Illinois who writes a blog on pardons and has written a book on the subject.

Skilling's lawyer, Daniel Petrocelli, said no request is being made on behalf of Skilling, who is in prison and appealing his conviction. No other Enron defendants were on Justice Department request lists as of Wednesday.

But Clemens' lawyer, Rusty Hardin, notes that a clemency request would make no sense, since Clemens is not charged with any crime, although the FBI is investigating whether he lied to Congress about steroid use.

There have been only very rare pre-emptive pardons, like President Gerald Ford's pardon of President Richard Nixon.

"That's an insane invention of people who have too much time on their hands," Hardin said of the question of a pardon for Clemens.

The blog post in question is here. It also mentions former baseball player Willie Aikens and quarterback Michael Vick; like Clemens and Skilling, none of them have an application in. Much ado about nothing, if you ask me, but it's a slow news period, so what the heck.

Speaking of Clemens, Richard Justice writes about the recent decision by Memorial Hermann to remove his name from the sports medicine institute he helped fund. He's critical of Memorial Hermann, but I found these paragraphs the most interesting:

This column isn't a defense of his behavior. He chose a path that might land him in prison and probably will keep him out of the Hall of Fame.

[...]

Few reporters ever get to know the people they cover. We don't usually know if they drink too much or chase women or pull the wings off butterflies when they disappear into the night.

That's the problem with confusing accomplishments on the field into judgments on character, integrity, etc.

So since Justice apparently does understand the distinction between the two, does that mean he'll vote accordingly when Clemens is up for induction? Check back in four years and find out.

RIP, Sharon Levine

Sharon Levine, who was a Houston defense attorney that played a key role in the ultimate downfall of former Harris County DA Chuck Rosenthal, has died at the far too young age of 38, from Hodgkins' disease. Defense attorney Paul Kennedy fills in the details.

Ms. Levine represented one of the Ibarra brothers who were arrested for videotaping a police raid on a house in their neighborhood. Believing that her client had been arrested without cause, Ms. Levine took the matter to trial - twice. After the first trial ended in a hung jury, the state offered a $1 fine in exchange for a guilty plea. Again Ms. Levine and Mr. Ibarra declined and set the matter for trial.

The jury in the second trial found Mr. Ibarra not guilty. That verdict set the stage for the civil rights suit filed by the Ibarra's against Harris County. The judge in that matter ordered then-D.A. Chuck Rosenthal to turn over e-mails to the Ibarras. After defying the court's order, Mr. Rosenthal was forced to resign from office earlier this year.

The toppling of the Rosenthal regime was the result of Ms. Levine's tireless devotion to her client in a fairly meaningless (except for Mr. Ibarra and his family) case.

The rest you know, but the history of her representation of the Ibarra brothers was something I hadn't known. It's amazing what can happen when one refuses to accept an injustice, isn't it? My sincere condolences to Sharon Levine's family and friends. She made a difference in her lifetime, and that's more than most of us get to say. Thanks to Mark Bennett for the link.

Straus for Speaker?

As you know, today is the day of the ABC meeting, in which a consensus candidate for Speaker is supposed to emerge. According to Harvey Kronberg, we have ourselves a Speaker alternative:

ANTI-CRADDICK REPUBLICANS PICK JOE STRAUS AS UNIFIED SPEAKER CHALLENGER

Reliable sources tell QR, the eleven Republicans have picked San Antonio Rep. Joe Straus as their candidate.

That's interesting, because speculation had shifted to Plano Rep. Brian McCall after he filed his paperwork for a Speaker candidacy this afternoon. I know Rep. Straus is generally well-regarded, and frankly if I had to pick among the Republicans he'd have been close to the top of my list, but he's not exactly long-serving - he won a 2005 special election to replace former Rep. Elizabeth Ames Jones, who had been appointed to the Railroad Commission. Burka, in a writeup of each ABC's credentials for the Speakership, said "Straus has a great political future, but speaker in 2009 is too much too soon". Well, if Kronberg's sources are correct, we'll find out soon enough. Keep an eye on Kronberg and Elise Hu, who's been staking out the ABC meeting, for more.

UPDATE: Corroboration comes from Rep. Pena on Twitter.

UPDATE: And now Gary Scharrer reports it as well.

Straus quickly filed his official paperwork after the group unanimously turned to the San Antonio lawmaker, who arrived in the state House after a 2005 special election.

"It's gratifying to have the support of fellow Republican members who are committed to moving past this difficult spot that all House members have been in for a long time," Straus said. "We are going to be making calls over the weekend to show our solidarity. and our commitment.

Game on, y'all.

UPDATE: Burka is dubious, while his commenters go bat$#!+. Elise has video. Vince hates this development and disagrees with my take on it. I'll leave the last word to Rep. Garnet Coleman.

"This is a choice made by Republicans. All we would be doing in reality is saying, 'yea' or 'nay' on that choice," Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, said Friday afternoon.

All I know is we can't afford another session with Tom Craddick in charge. I did everything I could last year to get him out of that position. I wanted that done with a Democratic majority in the House, but I say that goal was a worthy one even having fallen short. I see no reason to back off now.

Friday random ten: My sister's list

My sister sent me the following Christmas-themed Friday Random Ten list after reading my list from last week. Since I really didn't get a chance to do much iPod listening this week, I figured I'd use her tunes today instead. Here you go:

1. "Dominick the Italian Christmas Donkey" by Lou Monte
2. "Deck the Halls" by Twisted Sister (Declan's Favorite!)
3. "Jingle Bells" by Barenaked Ladies
4. "The Twelve Pains of Christmas" by Bob Rivers
5. "Up on the Housetop" by Gene Autry
6. "We Need A Little Christmas" by Percy Faith
7. "White Christmas" by The Drifters
8. "You're A Mean One Mr. Grinch" by Thurl Ravenscroft
9. "Sleigh Ride" by Amy Grant
10. "(I'm Gettin') Nuttin for Christmas" by Bill Pressman

Declan is her five-year-old son, and also my godson. Clearly, she's raising the kid right. Thanks for the list, Eileen!

While I haven't had much time to really listen to the iPod this week, I have been busy getting new music, mostly from the iTunes store. There's still plenty of time to recommend some songs to me as I work my way through the gift cards. Please leave your suggestions in the comments. As we begin the new year, I'll have a lot of new music on which to base the next few Random Tens, so that ought to be fun. So please take the opportunity to affect those future entries and tell me what tunes I should be downloading. Thanks very much.

Speaker strategizing

Tomorrow is going to be a very busy day for pretty much everyone in the Lege.

On Friday evening, a group of Republicans informally known as the ABCs -- Anybody But Craddick -- are planning to huddle at an undisclosed location in Austin, and one of their leaders is predicting that a consensus candidate will emerge by the end of that gathering.

"When we finish Friday night, there will be one candidate," said Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, one of the main coup plotters. "Hopefully a lot of people will get behind that person."

A group of Democrats vowing to oppose Craddick "under any circumstances" is also expected to hold a speaker strategy session on Friday. Craddick, meanwhile, has asked his supporters to gather in Austin on Sunday. His aides won't say where.

"I think if I was a betting man, I would bet that Tom Craddick is still going to be speaker," said Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, a Craddick loyalist. "You always want to bet on the man with the gavel."

I seem to recall reading somewhere that Team Craddick will be getting together for its own jam session, but can't remember where I saw it. Even if such a thing hasn't been reported, you can be sure they'll all be in constant contact. Hope everyone got themselves an unlimited call/text plan for Christmas.

As for Geren's statement about the One True Challenger for Craddick, you know where I stand on that. If that person and his or her former rivals for that role present a united front, then I will begin to truly believe Craddick's days as Speaker are numbered. If not, well, I'm used to disappointment by now. A key indicator will be whether the Craddickites who are associated with one challenger and aren't themselves ABCs - specifically Lois Kolkhorst, Mike Hamilton, and Patricia Harless - have left the reservation permanently or are crawling back to their master, begging for forgiveness. It's going to be an interesting weekend, that's for sure.

On a related note, I received an anonymous email that made the following claim:

There is another layer of "gossip" and whipsering gathering steam in the hallways out there about the aftershocks of Craddick's likely departure. Lege council executive director [Milton] Rister is a long time Craddick protege. The gossip in the capitol, senate and house, is that Rister is toast as council executive director if Craddick exits because of Rister's past heavy handed past campaigning and loyalties to Craddick.

You can read more about Milton Rister here, here (see comments), and here. I do not know who sent me this email, so I cannot personally vouch for its accuracy. But I hope it's correct.

Was the red light camera study flawed?

I don't know the answer to that question, but it's certainly the case that the long-awaited study of Houston's red light cameras didn't give any clear answers about what effect they might have had on the accident rate at intersections where they were installed.

One specialist from a renowned traffic research organization who reviewed the study for the Houston Chronicle said the methodology was "flawed" and has serious "limitations."

The main problem is a statistical one, said Anne McCartt, senior vice president for research at the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The institute has conducted several studies that were published in peer-reviewed journals on traffic research.

Because red-light cameras are known to have a spillover effect -- meaning that they have been shown to impact the number of accidents at intersections where there are no cameras -- robust examinations of camera programs always compare crash data with that in other cities.

It's what statisticians call a control group. Unless the study authors compare crashes at the 50 intersections where red-light cameras have been installed with other intersections in which they have not been -- preferably in other cities -- no conclusions can be drawn from it.

"The design of the study doesn't allow you to draw a conclusion about the effect of the cameras," McCartt said. "We believe very strongly based on lots of other good studies that red-light cameras reduce violations and crashes. ... But I don't think this study allows a person to draw a conclusion about the effects of the program."

Bryan Porter, an associate professor of psychology at Old Dominion University who has conducted red-light camera research, said he believes study authors did the best they could with the data.

"The methods are different, as they admit, which has some weakness, as well as some interesting twists on how cameras can be evaluated," Porter wrote in an e-mail.

You could say that. All I know at this point is that more data is needed. Maybe the next one will tell us something more clearly.

He added that most research has shown red-light cameras are not revenue generators. Over time, as people learn and remember where they are, they either break even or cost money.

Somehow, I don't think that's going to settle anything, either. I suspect that whatever level of revenue these things ultimately generate, it will always be about that for some. Having said that, there is a danger that, as with cigarette and lottery revenues, the city will project a certain amount from the cameras and budget accordingly, then find itself in a squeeze because of fewer violations than expected. That happened in Dallas, and it could certainly happen here. Grits adds his criticism of the study.

The border fence versus nature

Dear President-elect Obama,

When you take office (in 20 days, not that I'm counting or anything), please make sure that one of the first things you do is to order that lawsuits filed by Homeland Security to take land to build the border fence are dropped. Like this one, for instance. Thank you very much.

Sharp makes it official

As expected, former Comptroller and two-time candidate for Lieutenant Governor John Sharp has officially filed the paperwork for a run at Kay Bailey Hutchison's presumably-to-be-open-eventually Senate seat.

In a news release, Sharp announced that he had filed his campaign papers with the Federal Elections Commission. He also said he would work to halt Wall Street bailouts and focus instead on using emergency funds to give homeowners mortgage relief.

"The challenges we face at home and abroad demand innovative solutions, not politics as usual," Sharp said. "Texans are looking for that kind of leadership."

Hutchison, whose Senate term expires in 2012, has said she may leave the Senate as early as next year to campaign. She has formed an exploratory committee to run for governor in 2010. If she leaves her Senate seat before her term ends in 2012, the governor would appoint a replacement until a special election is held.

I've reproduced the press release beneath the fold, if you're interested. Looks like he wants to talk about the economy and the Wall Street bailout, which seems like a good idea to me.

The question at this point is when exactly will the election to fill KBH's not-yet-vacated seat take place? Here are the scenarios as I see them:

November 2009 - There was a time when this was likely. Last year, I was told by a Republican insider that KBH was planning to resign just after the legislative session, to establish to any remaining doubters that she really did want to be Governor and wasn't just teasing again. With Bill White's announced entry into the race, this now seems very unlikely, since there isn't a Republican in the state who'll want that race taking place at the same time as a high-turnout Houston Mayoral election. Barring a change of direction from White, I think this just won't happen.

May 2010 - The main advantage to this scenario for the Republicans - and let's face it, the main consideration for KBH's timing is going to be what works best for the GOP, since anything she does that might be seen as a bad thing for the party will be gleefully latched onto and hammered relentlessly by Rick Perry - is that it can be timed for after the November 2010 filing deadline. That puts the Dems in a box regarding their statewide lineup for the fall. While I still think that anything can happen regarding that, I guarantee you this possibility will cause a lot of hand-wringing, and more than a few attempts to push someone one way or another. The main disadvantage from the GOP perspective is that if a Dem actually wins, then with Al Franken's apparent victory in Minnesota, the Dems will achieve the magic 60 in the Senate, if only for a few months. The Rick Casey scenario is a low-probability one, but it's still greater than zero, and who knows what may happen in a D-versus-R runoff. I think this option has a small chance of coming true, but not much more than that.

November 2010 - Has most of the advantages and disadvantages of the May 2010 scenario, though a hypothetical 60th Democratic Senator would have less time to help break filibusters. This obviously assumes KBH has won the GOP gubernatorial primary - while she could still resign anyway if she loses, I think she sticks it out till the end, if only to ensure Rick Perry doesn't choose her successor. This option has the most to do with what's best for KBH. Will she be a more effective fundraiser and get more positive press if she's still in the Senate while campaigning, or will she need to quit and concentrate full-time on her hoped-for new gig? I rate this case as slightly more probable than that of May 2010.

May 2011 - Here, KBH sticks it out in the Senate, wins her race for Governor, and resigns as close to her swearing in as she needs to in order to ensure that she taps her fill-in. That may not be as sweet a prize now thanks to the current unpleasantness in Illinois, but I'll bet it's still pretty irresistible. I think this is the single most likely choice for her, which is why I think Bill White should shift his focus to Austin, as I've suggested before, and give himself a contingency plan. And I think I'm going to be pounding on that horse till the bitter end.

November 2012 - Until KBH actually resigns, we can't say for sure she really means it this time. And even if she does resign, she hasn't won anything yet. Rick Perry certainly won't roll over. The candle I've lit for the Bill White For Governor dream is still flickering. We'll all feel pretty silly if she winds up serving out her term, won't we? Hell, she may run for re-election to the Senate at that time. You just never know. I actually think this is the second most likely outcome. Stranger things have happened.

So there you have it. Which scenario do you think is most likely? Leave a comment and let me know.

MORE...

Meet the new bosses

Today and through the weekend, the newly-elected county officials and judges who haven't already been sworn into office will take their oaths.

Harris County Judge Ed Emmett will administer the oath of office to Adrian Garcia, who becomes sheriff after having defeated incumbent Tommy Thomas in the Nov. 4 election.

Garcia, who gives up his seat on the Houston City Council, will swear his duty to the office in a private ceremony.

But Democrat Garcia will be sworn in again Sunday -- in a public celebration at Union Station at Minute Maid Park, with Emmett and Mayor Bill White scheduled to speak.

For out-in-the-open pomp and speech-making, the seating of a new district attorney, Patricia Lykos, tops today's oath-takings by dozens of public officials elected two months ago.

Her event will be stuffed with references to the justice system. D. Gibson Walton -- a former Texas Bar Association and Houston Bar Association president whose late father, Dan, served as Harris County DA -- will administer the oath to Lykos, who becomes the county's first female chief prosecutor.

Lykos and Dan Walton served together as felony court judges in the 1980s.

Her 10 a.m. ceremony will take place in the county Jury Assembly Room, 1019 Congress.

Lykos' swearing-in has caused some controversy. I suspect that while she will almost certainly be a large improvement in many ways over Chuck Rosenthal, there will be no lack of colorful stories that emerge.

As for Garcia, now that he is officially a former Council member, the process to fill his seat should begin soon. I believe the vacancy has to be formally declared, then City Council has to call for the election, which will be in May. If there are any more potential candidates out there, expect to start hearing their names soon.

More on e-waste recycling

My post on e-waste recycling drew an interesting comment from Zac Trahan, Houston Program Director for Texas Campaign for the Environment that I thought was worth sharing on the front page:

You are correct -- municipal governments throughout Texas do collect mountains of electronic waste. Each city or county must then decide on a recycling partner, and as you might guess, cities and counties must usually go with the lowest bidder. As you might also guess, the lowest bidder is in many cases a company that exports e-waste overseas, since this shameful practice is currently more lucrative than real recycling.

So far as Houston's recycling efforts go, the picture is cloudy. If a recycler is listed as an "E-Steward" then we can be sure they are not exporting. As the article mentions, there are no E-Stewards in Houston. However, if they are not E-Stewards, that doesn't mean they are exporting -- it just means we can't be sure they aren't. And we the taxpayers are paying for it whether it's really recycling or not.

This touches on the heart of the issue. Even if none of the e-waste Houston collects is exported, the companies that design and sell electronics have no concern for where they might end up. Instead, the manufacturers should be responsible for the entire life of their products. Producers should be accountable for what happens to their toxic electronic waste, not local governments and taxpayers.

Texas passed such a law to cover computer equipment in the 2007 session. Although its provisions to stop export were lacking, now all computer manufacturers selling products in Texas must offer free recycling. You can see the results so far at www.texasrecyclescomputers.org. We have also been successful in convincing several TV makers to offer recycling. Visit www.texastakeback.com for more on how to recycle your e-waste in Houston. We urge people to make use of the manufacturer recycling programs whenever possible.

Texas Campaign for the Environment will be pressuring lawmakers to strengthen this law and extend it to cover other e-waste, such as TVs. We are also working with U.S. Congress member Gene Green on federal legislation to stop export. We make progress by building broad community support and public pressure to hold our lawmakers accountable. Visit www.texasenvironment.org for more on this issue.

Good to know. And it seems to me that a simple thing that cities like Houston can do to ensure that they are not part of the problem here is to partner with computer manufacturers, and hopefully eventually TV and other electronics makers, to use their recycling centers like Westpark as dropoff locations for such e-waste, since they are already generally well known. The manufacturers can then take it from there by whatever arrangement is mutually agreeable. People will still be free to take their stuff directly to the manufacturers, but those who continue to patronize the city locations should be accommodated as well. That seems like a no-brainer to me.

And speaking of the city's recycling centers, now is the time to take your Christmas tree in to be mulched. The city's Christmas tree recycling program is going on now through January 7, though locations are closed today. There are 14 locations around the city for this. Please note the following:

Please remove tinsel, plastic bags, tree stands and water bowls. NO FLOCKED TREES ACCEPTED. Trees will be collected curbside.

For more information, call 3-1-1.

At least you know your tree will be disposed of properly this way. Please take advantage of this.

RIP, Penthouse Club

Back in September, the city won a temporary injunction against The Penthouse Club, as part of a wider effort to sue a bunch of strip clubs out of business on the grounds that they represent public nuisances. That injunction has now been made permanent.

[Tuesday's] ruling, issued by outgoing State District Judge Caroline Baker, is permanent. The location will be shut down as any kind of business for the next year, and as real estate, the location can never again be used as a sexually oriented business, no matter who the owner is, the ruling states.

I'm not sure what the point is of requiring the location to be fallow for a year. Seems to me that has a fair amount of potential for being a nuisance as well. Be that as it may, this is another big win for the city in its decade-plus war on strip clubs. The Penthouse Club was one of four establishments that the city sued as part of this tactic; as far as I know, it's the only one to have been closed, temporarily or otherwise. I don't know what the other clubs are or what the disposition of their legal cases are, but I suspect that one of Mayor White's legacies when he leaves office in a year will be fewer such places operating than when he came in. I'll leave it to you whether you consider that a positive development or not.

UPDATE: From the updated version of the story:

Now, the city intends to file a massive lawsuit this month using similar measures to close 30 to 40 of the businesses at once.

Police and city officials believe as many as 120 sexually-oriented businesses in Houston may be operating against the law, although about a dozen have obtained a legal permit.

Better plan that bachelor party now, while you still can.

End of the year Speaker race update

We've already had an exciting and eventful 2009 legislative session, and it's still 2008. The release of the Democratic list of 64 has moved things forward, starting with an admission by Team Craddick that they really aren't in such good shape after all.

House Appropriations Chairman Warren Chisum said his side became angry over the fact he told me House Speaker Tom Craddick is "five or six" votes short of winning re-election. Chisum is a key Craddick lieutenant in the House.

Chisum said he made his comment based on his own beliefs of where House members stand in the election. Chisum said he hasn't seen Craddick's list of supporters.

"They (Craddick's close advisers) said they weren't any shorter" after state Rep. Dan Gattis, R-Georgetown, announced as a speaker candidate, Chisum said.

Chisum said without seeing the list he will have to take Craddick's nose counters at their word.

But Chisum said with three other Craddick Republicans announcing support for Gattis it was hard from his point of view to see how Craddick could not have lost some votes. He said that is why state Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo, is calling members to find out whether Craddick can win re-election.

"If Tom's got the numbers, he's got them. If he doesn't, we need to know," Chisum said.

That's actually a much softer version of Chisum's earlier comments, in which he estimated Craddick's committed supporters in the 50 to 53 range. Democrats are openly pressing Craddick on this point, as witnessed by a "Dear Colleague" letter from Austin Rep. Eddie Rodriguez, who calls on Craddick to step down and let a successor emerge peacefully. I don't think that's going to happen, at least not without a larger number of current Craddick supporters publicly breaking ranks, but it's out there. And for the first time, we get an indicator that Craddick himself is genuinely worried.

Over the weekend, there were some telephone calls made by Tom Craddick in which (according to the report from one of the people on the receiving end of a call) the Speaker sounded 'worn out, tired, and despondent' and that for the first time in several months, the Speaker was calling on others to ask them to report what that members were hearing, rather than the Speaker himself being the provider of news as to the current state of battle between the Speaker and the ABCs. It sounded like Tom Craddick for the first time in a long time, actually found himself to be somewhat out-of-the-loop and truly unaware as to who the ABCs plus the Dunnam D's would unite their support behind on January 2nd and what it would mean to Craddick's future it they are able to actually pull it off.

The report I received was that the Speaker felt unsure as to how best to move forward between now and January 2nd because he has no credible intelligence to suggest who the consensus candidate might be. The Speaker did discuss additional filers for Speakers coming in the next few days. Further, both Chisum and Swinford had spoken to Smithee to see if the reports they were hearing were true and Smithee responded by saying that he was indeed seriously thinking about entering the Speaker's race. Dan Gattis's entry on Saturday means one fewer R vote for Craddick, while Smithee getting into the race would mean the dam is getting ready to bust the flood gates wide open and that Craddick is in serious jeopardy of losing dozens of current supporters. Craddick seemed unsure how to react--a unique position for a Speaker who is always operating from a well orchestrated script.

In theory, we will all find out who that consensus candidate is early next week, at which point we can either start singing "Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead" or lamenting what might have been. I'm hopeful that this time the insurgency will hang together, but I'm going to maintain low expectations until it actually happens. In the meantime, enjoy what remains of 2008, and get ready to hit the ground running in the new year.

UPDATE: Chisum tells the Quorum Report that he was misquoted.

Chisum said, "Last night, I was misquoted on the Fort Worth Star-Telegram website as saying that Speaker Craddick had 53 votes. That number is a misinterpretation of what I said, and certainly not what I intended to say. The speaker carries all the Republicans except for the ABCs, and his position remains very strong."

Make of that what you will.

Texan of the Year 2008

Press release from my colleague Vince Leibowitz, the chair of the Texas Progressive Alliance:

The Texas Progressive Alliance Tuesday announced that the Harris County Democratic Party Coordinated Campaign had been named its "Texan of the Year" for 2008.

Also earning honors from the Alliance were Texans for Obama, TexBlog PAC, and the late Jim Mattox, who were each named "Gold Star Texans" for 2008.

Winning 27 of 34 countywide races in Texas' most populous county didn't happen overnight, and the Harris County Democratic Party's Coordinated Campaign managed not only to win seats with quality candidates, but to increase Democratic voter turnout and revive the Democratic Party in Harris County.

"The Harris County Democratic Party Coordinated Campaign is a shining example of what is possible with the help and support of thousands of grassroots Democrats and a well-run party infrastructure," said Texas Progressive Alliance Chair Vince Leibowitz. "Every person who knocked on doors, made phone calls, and volunteered in Harris County should be very proud of what they accomplished in 2008," he continued.

The Harris County Democratic Party Coordinated Campaign is the Alliance's fourth recipient of its "Texan of the Year Award." The campaign joins former State Rep. Carter Casteel of New Braunfels, who won the award in 2005; Carolyn Boyle of Texas Parent PAC, who took home the honor in 2006; and the trio of State Reps. Garnet Coleman, Jim Dunnam, and Pete Gallego who shared the honor in 2007.

Also honored this year were the organizations Texans for Obama and TexBlog PAC along with the late Jim Mattox, the former Texas Attorney General who passed away on November 20.

The Texan of the Year Award is voted on annually by the members of the Texas Progressive Alliance, the largest state-level organization of bloggers, blogs, and Netroots activists in the United States.

You can read more about the honorees here. Congratulations to all, and especially to the HCDP08 coordinated campaign for their hard work and dedication to turning Harris County blue.

Will the Lege go green?

Short answer, probably not. But they may at least not take any backward steps, and they may take some grudging action to head off future federal requirements. That counts as progress around here.

McLane: Please regulate me!

Oh, Drayton. You must think we're all a bunch of idiots.

Astros owner Drayton McLane is one of the wealthiest men in the country and is accustomed to hearing about multimillion-dollar deals being made in any of his numerous business ventures.

But even McLane finds himself astonished at the kinds of cash the New York Yankees have been throwing around this winter. So much so that McLane said he would be in favor of Major League Baseball adopting a salary cap.

"We would love to have a salary cap, but the (players') union has been very resistant to that," McLane said this past week.

I just love how sports team owners, who are otherwise some of the most vocal advocates of an unregulated free market economy you'll ever encounter, quail and cower at the idea of a free market for their employees' salaries. It's as if they don't trust themselves to spend their money wisely without the firm hand of regulatory restraint. Or maybe it's just that they think the fans are gullible enough to believe that if the owners can finally get that cap on player salaries they've always wanted, it will somehow translate to lower costs for themselves, and not millions more in profit for the owners. Either way, it's all pathetic. I mean, even Richard Justice can see this for what it is. Do us all a favor and give it a rest, dude.

UPDATE: The reason for the wide spectrum of MLB payrolls isn't that the Yankees spend too much. It's that too many teams spend too little. Odd how seldom that comes up in the conversation, though again, even Richard Justice realized it. Thanks to Dan Drezner, who notes that if American corporations were acting like the Yankees we'd be well on our way out of the current economic downturn, and LGM for the pointer.

Texas Voices gets an ally

Remember Texas Voices, the fledgling advocacy group that seeks to ease some of the registration requirements for sex offenders? They now have a champion in the Legislature.

"Some offenses don't rise to the level" of needing registration, Rep. Roberto Alonzo, D-Dallas, said recently.

He's filed a bill, HB190, that would give certain first-time sex offenders the ability to petition the courts to shorter their registration periods, or to have their registration completely waived . The vast majority of sex offenders in Texas must register on the state's Department of Public Safety website for life.

The bill is being hailed by Mary Sue Molnar, the mother of a convicted sex offender who is one of Texas Voices key organizers. "I have to tip my hat to him," Molnar said of Alonzo. "It's a very good start."

Molnar and her group have spent months meeting with lawmakers in an effort to find someone willing to carry a bill that would roll back some of the state's toughest sex offender laws.

The group never met with Alonzo. Alonzo said he filed his bill at the request of a Dallas judge who was fed up with low-risk offenders brought in on technical violations tying up the court's docket.

Good on Rep. Alonzo for taking this up. I still don't see any such legislation having a chance of making it out of the Lege, but at least now the issue will be debated. If there is to be any hope, I'd say this is the right approach, pointing out how much money and effort is spent on people who aren't dangerous. It's still going to be a tough sell, but it's got to be done. Good luck, Rep. Alonzo.

School finance: Sorta kinda important to the Lege

Just not so important that it will get anything more than another Band-Aid, but you take what you can get, I guess.

"Are we going to start school finance from the ground up? I don't think so," said Rep. Rob Eissler, R-The Woodlands, who chairs the House Public Education Committee. "But we'll certainly look for a way to be more effective."

In 2006, the Legislature revamped the school funding system when it ordered districts to lower their property tax rates. While the move granted relief to some homeowners, school officials complain they are strapped for cash since the state essentially capped their funding.

Rep. Dan Branch, a primary author of the 2006 legislation, said he has several bills in the works that would bring more money to school districts. One proposal, which he has yet to file, would raise the minimum level of per-student funding that districts receive. Under the current system, some districts end up with around $12,000 per student while others get closer to $3,000.

Branch, who chairs a special committee that has spent the last year studying school finance, said his per-student funding change would affect between 200 and 250 of the state's 1,000-plus school districts.

The Dallas Republican also is working on a plan that would give all districts more money for middle school reform.

Two years ago, the Legislature targeted the upper grades, giving districts an allotment of $275 for each high school student.

"We're doing well in the elementary grades. There's evidence of that all over the state," Branch said. "Where are we slowing down? Middle school."

The state's two largest districts, Houston and Dallas, also would get relief under Branch's bill to slightly revise the so-called Robin Hood formula, which redistributes money from property-wealthy districts to poorer ones. His plan would remove the two districts, which serve large numbers of poor, at-risk students, from the wealthy category.

State Sen. Florence Shapiro, who chairs the Senate Education Committee, said she expects that any financial fixes adopted this session will be "a bridge to get to that major overhaul that's necessary."

"It does need to be restructured," she said of the state's school funding system, "but that is a very large undertaking. You prepare for that change a year-and-a-half before you go into a Legislative session."

Always put off till next session that which you're not under a court order to fix today, that's their motto.

Houston's red light camera numbers

The city of Houston has now released its own red light camera study, and to say the least the numbers are interesting.

The number of crashes at Houston intersections with red-light cameras doubled in the first year after their installation, according to a city-financed study released Monday.

But Mayor Bill White argued that the cameras' presence prevented even more collisions and that the study proves the monitoring program is keeping drivers safe.

[...]

The analysis examined crash data at intersections that had a camera monitoring at least one of the four or more traffic signals in an intersection. Most intersections had a camera installed in only one direction, meaning that there were three other signals at that intersection without cameras.

Interestingly, it was those unmonitored points in the intersection that saw the greatest increase in accidents. Where there is a camera, the accidents remained relatively flat or showed only a slight increase.

"Collisions are going up all over the city," said Bob Stein, a Rice University political science professor and one of the report's authors. "But red-light cameras have held back that increase at approaches where they have been installed."

But they supplied no data other than the examination of the non-monitored directions of the 50 intersections to support the conclusion that accidents are up citywide. Stein acknowledged that data from the Houston Police Department shows accidents have declined in the city since 2004, although he said the data is problematic because police officers no longer file reports on every wreck.

If that's the case, then I'm not sure how any study based on accident reports can paint an accurate picture. Right off the bat, it seems you're working with incomplete data. Maybe that means there were more crashes at the monitored approaches than what was studied, but it seems unlikely there would have been that many more to make the spike at unmonitored approaches look less aberrational. About the only thing I get from this is that we'll need to see at least another year's worth of data before we can try to draw any real conclusions about the cameras' effects, if any exist.

The report itself is here (PDF). Cory says it has "some of the most convoluted prose I've ever seen". I actually thought it was the tables that were indecipherable, and as a numbers guy, that's saying something. I have no confidence in my ability to interpret the figures and charts this thing contains, so you're on your own.

Study authors -- who include Robert Dahnke, Benjamin Stevenson and Stein from Rice University's Center for Civic Engagement, and Timothy Lomax from Texas A&M University's Texas Transportation Institute -- plan to analyze insurance industry data in the coming months. They believe that will more definitively prove their supposition that accidents have increased so dramatically. The results of that further research are expected to be completed sometime around August.

I think that's a good idea, and assuming I'll be able to make head or tail of it, I look forward to reading it.

I've been wanting to see a study like this for awhile. I thought it would show some decrease in accidents, as well as a decrease in the severity of the accidents that do get caused (that issue is not explored in any detail in this survey), as that appears to be the usual experience elsewhere. Unless the police reports are greatly understating the situation, I don't see how this result can be taken as evidence for that here. It may well be that the spike in accidents at unmonitored approaches is a one-time fluke, though even if that is the case, it doesn't really enhance a claim that the unmonitored approaches saw any improvements. Maybe we'll see something different next year, and maybe the study of insurance data will clarify the picture, I don't know. All I can say is that this study raises a lot more questions than it answers, and it's far from a triumph for the cameras.

One more thing:

Last week, several attorneys who have opposed the program previously in court filed a lawsuit to force disclosure of a draft copy of the study, attempting to gauge whether the conclusions were somehow changed to suit White's support of the program.

Stein has repeatedly denied this was the case, noting that although some language has been revised, the substance of the study has remained consistent for months and did not change.

As I said before, I see no compelling reason to withhold the earlier versions of the study. Just make it all public and be done with it.

More on the Dems' anti-Craddick list

Here's the Chron story about the list of 64 Democratic House members who say they won't vote for Tom Craddick for Speaker under any conditions.

"We need a new direction in the Texas House because the status quo means gridlock, and we cannot afford gridlock with the issues staring us down in the upcoming session," said Rep. Dan Gattis, R-Georgetown, who declared his candidacy Monday.

Gattis, a former committee vice-chairman under Craddick, said a bipartisan leadership style is needed now that the Republicans hold a thin advantage in the House. The Democrats' election gains last month left House Republicans with just a 76-74 edge. By contrast, Craddick was elected speaker in 2003 when the Republicans controlled 88 seats.

"He doesn't have the members behind him well enough for him to be able to lead a 76-74 House," Gattis said.

Several Craddick supporters -- including Rep. Mike Hamilton, R-Mauriceville; Rep Patricia Harless, R-Spring; and Rep Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham -- have switched sides and are now backing Gattis.

"It's pretty evident that Tom doesn't have the votes," Hamilton said.

That's three more Republicans who have at least expressed a willingness to vote for somebody other than Craddick for Speaker. The Statesman, which notes that current Craddick supporter John Smithee of Amarillo is also contemplating a run for Speaker, adds it up and says there's 79 (or 80, if you count Smithee), anti-Craddick votes. Burka notes that it's a bit more complicated than that.

[E]vents may have overtaken the Democrat-ABC coalition that has 75 votes against Craddick. Gattis's candidacy for speaker provides members with a chance to realign in coalitions FOR someone instead of merely against. Suddenly the timing is off for the ABCs. Their announcement of a candidate won't come until the end of the week, and in the meantime Gattis can be adding to his list of supporters.

In the meantime, both the Morning News and the El Paso Times note that at least one Democrat on the list of 64, El Paso's Rep. Chente Quintanilla, had only just recently said that he hadn't ruled out a vote for Craddick, so that list may not be rock solid. On the other hand, while Team Craddick is busy denying the claim of majority support against him and making their own claims about having 70+ supporters (not a majority, you'll note), they haven't made any lists public. I'll say again, if this were a retention vote, Craddick would lose. But until there's one consensus candidate to oppose him, he hasn't lost anything yet. I feel we're getting closer to that point, but that's not good enough. One opponent plus 75 more votes for that person, that's what I want to see.

UPDATE: From Rep. Aaron Pena on Twitter:

The Speaker's race appears to have narrowed to a few candidates. The end is in sight. Look for the smoke from the Sistine Chapel in days.

Pena was a Craddick supporter in 2007, and was not on the list of 64. Make of that what you will.

UPDATE: And Burka says the next Speaker will be Smithee, Gattis, or Burt Solomons. Does that count as white smoke?

End of the year Texas blog roundup

2008 was a heck of a year for Texas Progressives. The Presidential Primary came to Texas (for real), we caucused, conventioned, challenged, credentialed, voted, elected, counted, re-counted, brought Netroots Nation to Texas, watched Tom Craddick fight for his life, said farewell to legends, got a head start to on the race to replace Kay Bailey Hutchison and more. A lot more.

It is in that spirit that we bring you the final round-up of 2008. Enjoy.

MORE...