Former Texas Attorney General Dan Morales has been sentenced to four years in Club Fed for the mail fraud and tax evasion charges to which he pled guilty in July.
The mail fraud charge stems from Morales' lawsuit against U.S. tobacco companies, claiming they owed Texas reimbursement for smoking-related health care. The lawsuit ended with the companies agreeing to pay $17.3 billion to the state.When it came time to pay the lawyers their fees, which reached $3.3 billion, Morales added his friend Marc Murr to the attorney list and tried to get him 3 percent of the settlement. The other lawyers protested that Murr, a Houston lawyer, did little to nothing on the case.
Morales later admitted to back-dating a contract to make it look as if Murr had done more work than he had. It was a federal crime because he shipped the contract across state lines to the California arbitrators appointed to decide how to divide the legal fees.
Murr, who later declined payment, pleaded guilty earlier this month to mail fraud. Prosecutors recommended six months imprisonment, five years on probation and a fine of up to $250,000. His sentencing is scheduled for Dec. 19.
Morales' tax evasion charge comes from $420,000 he took from his campaign account for "personal use" — money that he didn't report to the IRS.
I went and voted this morning, so all you candidates out there can stop calling and mailing me, at least until the runoffs begin. My slate of candidates is remarkably similar to Greg Wythe's. Here's how I voted:
Mayor: Bill White
Controller: Annise Parker
At Large #1: Brian Wozniak
At Large #2: Gordon Quan
At Large #3: Peter Brown
At Large #4: Sue Lovell
At Large #5: Beulah Shepard
District H: Adrian Garcia
Metro: Yes
Collective bargaining for firefighters: Yes
Like Greg, I was torn on At Large #1. What eventually tipped it for me was that Brian Wozniak had an actual web page that I could read and get a feel for his positions, while Andrew Burks didn't. As for Beulah Shepard, I kinda went with the heart over the head on this one, but she's got a pretty strong resume, too.
District H was another tough call. In my opinion, there are two excellent candidates. The rules say I can only pick one, and it was Adrian Garcia by a nose. I should note that my next-door neighbors are in a sense the mirror image of Greg on this one - they broke the tie in favor of Diana Davila Martinez because they know and like her husband. In any event, I can endorse a vote for either, and I will put a sign in my yard for whichever one ends up in a runoff against Hector Longoria.
Speaking of District H: There's some buzz in my neighborhood over a campaign flyer that was received in the mail yesterday by many Heights residents. The flyer, which purports to be from a group called "Citizens for a Better America", is a straight-on hatchet job on Adrian Garcia, including grainy photos, three context-free quotes (none of which, in my opinion, were particularly damning) from the Chron, the Statesman, and the Express-News going back as far as 1991, and an exhortation to "call Adrian Garcia at 713 xxx xxxx and tell him to stop messing with our neighborhoods" or words to that effect. I've been mailed a copy of the flyer in PDF format from a neighbor, but it's 2MB in size so I haven't FTPed it to the site. I may put it up over the weekend if there's interest in seeing it.
Anyway, the only contact info on the flyer is the name "Citizens for a Better America" and a return address. It turns out there is such a group, and they're a traditional-values organization in the Moral Majority mold. If you actually click on that link, you'll note that they have specifically denied any involvement in the mailer. From their "Open Letter to the Citizens of Houston":
Citizens For A Better America ® has not sent out any mailings or spent any money to influence the Nov. 4, 2003 election in Houston, Texas. Any use of our name is unauthorized and is identify theft and will be treated as such.Citizens For A Better America ® is a registered trademark with the United States Patents and Trademarks office, Registration Number: 2500525. Any search of the name Citizens For A Better America ® on the internet brings up our website at http://www.cfaba.org. We have been an organization, using our name, since October 15, 1992. We are on file with the Federal Election Commission our number is C00278333. We have a very high national visibility and we do not consider the unauthorized use of our name to be accidental.
We take it very seriously when someone(s) uses our name without our permission. If you have any information about the individual or individuals who are using our name please contact us by either e-mail, regular mail or phone.
The better question is who in Houston is responsible. George Strong thinks it could be Longoria.
Could it be that the Chair of the Harris County Republican Party, Jared Woodfill, whose law partner is running against Garcia got that group involved the that race? Hector Longoria is that candidate and his jumping into the District H race at the last minute has been of some concern. Longoria claimed he made his switch from At-Large 5 to District H the day of the filing deadline, on Monday September 22. In Thursday's mail, that same week, voters in District H got a very specific Longoria mailer, clearly not something that was created & mailed in 3 days. Longoria's next mailer, that came a few days later, claimed endorsements that have actually gone to other District H candidates, but which Longoria had when he was in his first race, for At-large 5. It including the Houston Police Officer Union, HPOU, which later went to its member a fellow police officer, Adrian Garcia. The Gossips are told that Bob Perry of Perry Homes is the largest contributor to Hector. Perry has lots of Condos in the Heights and apparently wants to build more.
Finally, at least two other candidates in District H have specifically denied any knowledge about this mailer. I myself got to ask Diana Davila Martinez about it, last night at a happy hour for the Houston Democratic Forum, and she said she knew nothing about it. She has since replied to an email from a WH message board poster, which he replicated on the board, again saying that "neither I nor my campaign had any knowledge of this effort". Gonzalo Camacho was also contacted via email by a member and gave a similar denial. Hector Longoria was emailed as well but as of this writing had not replied. I will keep an eye on that and will post an update here if I see a reply from him.
I don't have any guest posters here, but once in awhile I'll publish someone else's words here. This is one of those times. One of my readers is a legislative assistant to Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D, Dallas). He sent me the following op-ed she wrote about Rep. Joe Barton's clandestine effort to delay a deadline for compliance on the federal Clean Air Act in the upcoming energy bill, which you can see underneath the More link. It was intended for the Dallas Morning News, but since they printed an op-ed piece from her on this topic last week, they passed on this one. Their loss is our gain. Without further ado, here's Rep. Johnson's piece, entitled "Clean Air Horror Story".
Children celebrate Halloween by dressing up in costumes, by going trick or treating and by reveling in horror stories about things that "go bump in the night." This year is no exception. It is not without irony that during this season the House of Representative is considering the long-delayed energy bill.
It contains a provision so horrific that instead of helping the Dallas-Fort Worth area to solve its long-standing air pollution woes, it could cause the area to get "bumped up" into a classification of compliance that proves more costly to local taxpayers.
It is safe to say that my Republican House colleagues from Texas and I disagree on many aspects of the bill, but one thing we should all be able to grasp is that the future of energy policy in this country is of the utmost importance. It is certainly too important to be used as an excuse to weaken the provisions and mandates of the Clean Air Act.
But unfortunately, my colleague Joe Barton has turned the energy bill into the proverbial Frankenstein's monster. He is using his position as Chair of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality to graft on all sorts of extraneous provisions that have nothing to do with making our energy future safer or more secure - and in fact will seriously undermine public health. His plan would let our community's air stay among the dirtiest in the country, and let polluters off the hook nationwide.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency, 127 million Americans breathe air that violates federal standards for smog and soot pollution. EPA's own consultants found that each year almost 370 residents of the Dallas-Fort Worth area die just because of the pollution from the oldest and dirtiest unregulated power plants, and 10,500 asthma attacks are triggered.
The 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act, signed by the first President Bush, classified cities based on the severity of their ozone smog problem. Areas with higher classifications were given more time to meet clean air standards - but once their deadline came due, they also had to adopt stronger anti-pollution measures. If a city missed its clean air deadline, the Act required that it be reclassified ("bumped up") to the next highest classification.
But during the past several years, EPA gave several metro areas a free pass, extending clean air deadlines for dirty areas without bumping them up to the higher pollution categories that would require more protective standards. Four separate federal appellate courts all ruled that EPA's extension policy violated the language and purpose of the Clean Air Act. Appropriately, that led the agency to abandon the policy.
With so many Americans breathing dirty air, it should be obvious that air quality standards are already not being enforced enough. But rather than accepting the judgment of EPA and the courts, Joe Barton and his allies are now seeking to amend the Clean Air Act. His changes would turn back the clock, extend the clean air time frames once again, without raising the bar for air quality. Though it sounds like a bureaucratic distinction, what it will mean in real terms for real people is simple: dirtier air, for longer.
In their desire to pass any comprehensive energy bill, some of my colleagues may be willing to overlook the massive damage this bill would do to our existing clean air policies. Including the Barton dirty air rider means ignoring compelling scientific evidence on the serious health effects of ozone pollution. It will mean pollution in these areas will go unchecked for longer and longer into the future, and could even skyrocket. Asthma attacks, respiratory problems and pulmonary disease will go up, while the amount of time children can spend playing outside will go down.
Developing lungs process 50 percent more air, pound-for-pound, than do those of adults. Children suffer most from the current air quality shortfalls. Letting the situation worsen for years and even decades does nothing for a child unable to go outside today.
It's true that we must secure our energy future, and that's why a comprehensive energy bill is moving forward. But this Halloween trick rolls back critical safeguards. We must not pass a bill with great shortfalls simply because we need to pass a bill. We must instead work towards a fair bill that protects us all - and does not endanger ourselves or our children.
Chron columnist Rick Casey follows up on the story of the disappearing yard signs in Timbergrove (see here for Part One). If you can get past his cutesy tone, he actually did some good reporting, as he discovered what happened the last time a homeowner and a homeowner's association battled over this point.
It was 1992 and a couple in Meyerland had the audacity to display a Clinton-for-President sign in their yard.It disappeared, replaced by a notice of deed restrictions prohibiting political signs.
They put up a second sign. Same result.
They lost five signs during that campaign.
Two years later, they posted a "Paul Colbert for U.S. Congress" yard sign.
Again it disappeared.
A discussion with the Meyerland Community Improvement Association over First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech did not help. The consensus was that tacky political signs damage property values.
The couple, Marco and Jeanette DuBose, finally had enough. They hired attorney David A. Furlow, who specializes in fighting homeowners associations.
The association hired attorney Stephen K. Hamilton, who specializes in defending homeowners associations.
They ended up in the court of state District Judge Tony Lindsay. I asked if she is a pinko liberal commie, and she assured me she isn't. I believe her because Republicans keep electing her.
Furlow made the case that a neighborhood organization could not deprive people of the fundamental constitutional right to freedom of speech.
He also called a prominent real estate broker as an expert witness. She testified that River Oaks was often festooned with political signs and it didn't seem to hurt the property values.
Hamilton agreed that the U.S. Supreme Court had prohibited cities from banning political signs by ordinance, but he argued that this was different. By accepting the deed restrictions when they bought the house, the DuBoses had contractually agreed not to put the signs up.
At the end of the hearing, Judge Lindsay ruled for the DuBoses. She found the deed restriction to be a violation of both the Texas and the U.S. constitutions.
She entered a permanent injunction prohibiting the enforcement of the restriction by the Meyerland Community Improvement Association -- an injunction that remains in force today.
The association accepted the advice of its attorney not to appeal. As it is now, the ruling is not binding on other associations. But if the association appealed and lost, it would be.
Yet another Enron exec has copped a plea.
Former Enron executive David Delainey, a close business associate of former CEO Jeff Skilling, pleaded guilty today to one count of insider trading and agreed to cooperate in the government's Enron investigations.Delainey agreed to pay the government $4.2 million, and he also entered into an agreement with the Securities and Exchange Commission to hand over an additional $3.7 million. As part of that deal, he has agreed not to serve as an officer or director of any traded company.
Delainey, a 37-year-old Canadian citizen, left Enron in March 2002 as the chief executive officer of Enron Energy Services, the retail contracting business arm of the company. He's also been CEO of Enron North America.
Delainey was said to have been a favorite of Skilling in the company. He took over EES in 2001 and was one of the names bandied about on Wall Street in the late summer of 2001, just before the company's fall, for a top position at the company after Skilling left and Lay was looking to groom someone new.
[...]
Attorneys watching the Enron cases believe Delainey could help the government get to Skilling.
I can see a future Surgeon General's warning: Reading too much Harry Potter may be hazardous to your health.
A Washington doctor warned that he has seen three children complain of headaches caused by the physical stress of relentlessly plowing through the epic 870-page adventure.Call them Hogwarts headaches, named after the wizard school that Harry attends.
Dr. Howard Bennett of George Washington University Medical Center wrote in a letter to this week's New England Journal of Medicine that the three children, ages 8 to 10, experienced a dull headache for two or three days.
Each had spent many hours reading Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.
After ruling out other potential causes, Bennett told his patients to give their eyes a rest. But the spell cast by the book was clearly too powerful.
"The obvious cure for this malady -- that is, taking a break from reading -- was rejected by two of the patients," Bennett said, adding that the children took acetaminophen instead.
In each case, the headache went away only after the patient turned the final page.
Order of the Phoenix, the fifth book in the series, has nearly three times as many pages as Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, the first book, and J.K. Rowling still plans two more tomes.
"If this escalation continues as Rowling concludes the saga, there may be an epidemic of Hogwarts headaches in the years to come," Bennett predicted.
Now, I may not be a doctor, but I bet I can diagnose the real problem here.
[voice of every woman I'm related to, wife and any future daughters included]
"How can you read in the dark like that? You're going to hurt your eyes!"
[/voice]
Someone tell the NEJM they can expect my monograph real soon now.
In the final televised debate before the election (and may I say that with all the debates and candidate fora we've had, no one can legitimately claim to be unfamiliar with the three hopefuls), Bill White and Orlando Sanchez stepped up their attacks on each other.
White, CEO of a large investment firm, questioned whether Sanchez would be capable of running City Hall with its staff of 20,000, asking how many employees he has had in his work history.Sanchez responded with an attack of his own.
"You're running to represent big business, Enron-size business," Sanchez said. "I'm a small-business person."
White pointed out that Sanchez did not answer the question.
"I've built many small businesses, and I know how many people report to me," he said.
Given an opportunity to question each other, White and Sanchez acted more like runoff opponents, attacking each other instead of Turner. White even complimented Turner's commitment to after-school programs.The most recent polls show a fairly close race, with White leading the field and Sanchez in second place. If the two do make it into a runoff, neither would want to alienate Turner's supporters.
I was reminded of that story as I read about how Turner, currently running third in the polls, is being allowed to be above the fray while White and Sanchez attack each other. It would be pretty ironic if the negativity turned off enough voters to allow Turner to get into the runoff. White has more to lose from this in the general election, since Turner seems to be likelier to pick up disaffected White supporters, but if he makes it to the runoff he should be in good shape. I can't see Sanchez successfully wooing too many Turner voters, not after his orgy of using the Clintons as a club against White. As noted before, Kevin sees it differently.
It's almost jarring after reading that article to peruse this Houston Press cover story on Bill White. No one in this piece, and that includes White's ex-wife and a former boss who lost a million bucks investing in a business White set up a few years back, had anything negative to say about him. That's pretty amazing, and quite the contrast to this earlier profile of Michael Berry, in which there was no shortage of naysayers.
UPDATE: Christine comments on a Sanchez TV ad that has stuck in her mind.
Here's a great story about the Pearl Brewery in San Antonio, which was purchased last July (not longer after I'd noted that it was having difficulty finding a buyer) by a San Antonio-baed company that appears to be committed to preserving and restoring the historic site. That's excellent news. Check it out.
Has it really come to this? Don Luskin threatening to sue Atrios for...well, what, exactly? Definition of character? Excessive snarkiness? Operating a blog without the express written consent of Major League Baseball? Hell if I know. Didn't anyone learn from the O'Reilly-sues-Franken fiasco? I'm with Orcinus - if this is anything but unadulterated bluster, discovery ought to be a hoot. (Speaking of hoots, as always The Poor Man has the best response. Standard beverage warning applies. Oh, and I'm with Jesse.)
Let me be up front here: Luskin is a snivelling crybaby who deserves to be mocked mercilessly. Go ahead, big boy, sue me for that. Maybe you can have your mommy serve me the papers.
Atrios has a roundup of comments, some of Don Luskin's more charming behaviors, and his original response to Luskin.
It will be interesting to see how the mainstream media plays this - and make no mistake, this will be in the mainstream media. I wonder if Luskin's attorney will be as laughable and ungracious as O'Reilly's were. Hard to imagine, but then so was this.
In case you're bored with Enron's shenanigans, there's always Tyco, where former CEO Dennis Kozlowski sure knew how to throw a party.
Jurors saw a videotape Tuesday of dancing women, half-naked male models and "Margaritaville" singer Jimmy Buffett at a $2 million party that L. Dennis Kozlowski, former CEO of Tyco International, threw for his wife's birthday on a Mediterranean island.Prosecutors maintained the party, more than half of which was paid for with company money, was a "stark example" of how Kozlowski and former chief financial officer Mark Swartz looted hundreds of millions from Tyco for their personal benefit.
"It's going to be a fun week," the tape shows Kozlowski telling about 75 guests arriving to celebrate Karen Mayo's 40th birthday on the Italian island of Sardinia on June 11, 2001. "Eating, drinking, whatever. All the things we're best known for."
The tape shows five young women in scanty, diaphanous frocks cavorting around a swimming pool, half-naked male models posing in snapshots with female guests and a performance from a pop star.
It's worth keeping in mind what Kozlowski and his minion Mark Swartz are on trial for:
Prosecutors say the two stole $170 million from Tyco by taking and hiding unauthorized pay and bonuses, raiding company loan programs and forgiving loans to themselves. They say the defendants made another $430 million on their Tyco stock by lying about the conglomerate's financial condition from 1995 into 2002.Defense lawyers say Kozlowski and Swartz earned all the compensation they got from Tyco and all the appropriate overseers knew about their compensation and loans.
UPDATE: Damn. As Jim D notes in the comments, Kozlowski outspent P Diddy by a 2-1 margin. Of course, it was only P Diddy's 33rd birthday, while Mrs. Kozlowski was celebrating the big 4-0. Pretty impressive, though, no matter how you slice it.
I guess I hadn't been following the recent Enron goings-on all that closely, because I was unaware that Lea Fastow's lawyers had petitioned for a change of venue, a request that the judge will rule on shortly. I knew they'd been working on delaying her trial until after her husband's, a move that failed awhile back. The reason for the change-of-venue request: too many people in Houston, amazingly enough, have heard of Enron and have an opinion on it.
"We have no confidence in people who say they can set aside opinion. We want a jury that doesn't have opinions," said Mike DeGeurin, the lead attorney for Lea Fastow, who attended the hearing today. DeGeurin complained that the Houston community has been saturated with publicity, enormously effected and that even just the pictures of Lea Fastow in handcuffs the day of her May 1 arrest creates undue prejudice.He asked the judge to allow individual questioning of potential jurors by the lawyers and in the judge's chambers.
DeGeurin suggested Galveston, New Orleans or Austin as alternative settings if Hittner does not agree to extensive questioning of potential jurors.
DeGeurin said that a survey conducted in this federal district about Andrew Fastow showed that 84 percent of people in Houston had heard of his case, but only 54 percent had heard about it in Galveston.
Enron Task Force prosecutor Linda Lacewell agreed to questioning potential jurors but noted that the jury pool need not have ignored all the publicity about Enron.Lacewell indicated the government does not think preset individual questioning would be necessary.
"A defendant, yes, is entitled to an impartial jury. But she is not entitled to an ignorant or uninformed jury," Lacewell said.
Here's a cute site for people who like numbers and random odd facts about them. Clearly, the author missed an opportunity here - what's special about the number 138 is that it's the smallest number about which there is nothing special. One can iterate from there, but it's probably not what he had in mind. Anyway, check it out. Thanks to Binkley for the tip.
Here's another example of how private entities can restrict your freedom more effectively than the big, evil guvmint can in some situations. A homeowner named Claire Gonzales in Timbergrove Manor (a neighborhood not far from my own - it's where the Little League team that I coached played its games) has had "Bill White for Mayor" signs removed from her yard, with a note left behind saying that the signs violate Timbergrove deed restrictions.
Gonzales did what citizens do these days. She went online and found the Web site for Timbergrove Manor Civic Club, to which she voluntarily pays dues. There she found the deed restrictions."Section 10. No signs, advertisements, political placards, or billboards shall be erected on any Lot," except for-sale or rent signs, small signs saying the house is protected by a security service, or plaques awarded by a governmental entity.
Gonzales put the sign back up and delivered a lengthy but respectful letter to Randy Klein, the civic club's president, protesting the deed restriction and asking that the Civic Club inform all residents "that it is illegal to go on someone else's property to 'enforce' a deed restriction."
Later her sign was stolen. Some neighbors had Orlando Sanchez signs stolen, she said.
But a deed restriction prohibiting political signs is likely no more legal than the once-common deed restrictions prohibiting the sale of houses to persons other than those of the Caucasian persuasion.
In a 1994 decision, City of Ladue v. Gilleo, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously struck down an ordinance prohibiting political signs in a River Oaks-like suburb of St. Louis.
Stephen Schueler, attorney for the civic club, says this case was different because it dealt with an ordinance, not a deed restriction.
"These restrictions are agreed to before they purchase the property," he said.
In reference to racist deed restrictions, Schueler says, "There are certain deed restrictions that the courts have held are so against public policy that they cannot be enforced."
He believes the restriction of political signs is not in that category, but it's not at all clear the Supreme Court would agree.
In a 1971 case, the court said, "Speech on public issues occupies the 'highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values' and is entitled to special protection." Can a person be forced to sign away something so valuable in order to buy a house?
I should note here that I'm not anti-deed restrictions. Our neighborhood has them, and I enthusiastically support them. Our restrictions are there to prevent developers from subdividing lots and building to the property line, which is the only option we have in our zoning-free city. I also don't object to restricting yard signs to a reasonable degree, but this is a pretty clearcut case of taking a well-intentioned idea way too far. As such, we now need a state entity to come in and enforce the rights that a private entity wants to deny. Don't you just love irony?
(For an earlier example of private entities restricting your rights, see here. At least Timbergrove appears to be an equal-opportunity sign-remover, unlike some other neighborhoods.)
Man, I love 24. I think Season 3 is going to kick even more butt. Don't read this Chronicle story about the season premier until and unless you've seen it.
I gotta get me the season 1 and 2 DVDs...
Election day is a week from today, so the most expensive mayoral race in Houston's history is, well, not exactly drawing to a close, but about to enter a new phase. Greg notes that Sylvester Turner has the most cash on hand right now, so he should be in good shape to get his supporters out on Tuesday. He also notes that George Strong has projected a Sanchez/White runoff, but Turner's total is sufficiently close to White's to keep him from resting easily. Strong has presumably made some different assumptions about turnout than this poll, which shows White leading Sanchez and Turner by 38-32-26. It's a Survey USA poll, though, with a 4.7% margin of error, so take it with some salt.
Meanwhile, Kevin thinks Turner might be stronger in a runoff against Sanchez than White would, and Steve Bates has already cast his ballot for Turner. Early voting ends Friday, so there's not much time to waste.
We got a mailer from the Sanchez campaign today that was a total "Bill White is a big Clinton-loving LIBERAL!!!" piece, including the de rigeur grainy photo of White with Her Hillaryness, presumably taken during a weekly meeting of the Communists for Totally Confiscatory Taxes Club. Some free advice, Orlando: If you're still courting voters who aren't already Republicans, this is probably not your most effective message.
I know who I'm voting for in the Mayoral and Controller races, but I still have to figure out who I'm voting for in some of the Council races. It's hard to judge some of the candidates because they either have no websites (something I completely fail to understand in this day and age - more on that in a later post) or their websites are, for lack of a better word, crappy. Since I got such good information on Adrian Garcia and Diana Davila Martinez by writing about my indecision in District H earlier, I'll try again. If any of the following candidates want to contact me and give a short pitch as to why I and anyone reading this should vote for you, pleaes drop me a note at kuff-at-offthekuff-dot-com: Andrew Burks, Brian Wozniak, Peter Brown, Jolanda Jones, Sue Lovell, Ronald Green, Dwight Boykins, and Beulah Shepard. Short notice, I know, but at least you know people have started to pay attention.
It's a bit late in the game for this, but Rock the Vote is sponsoring a contest aimed at registering people to vote. They've got some good prizes, and it's certainly a worthy cause, so check it out. The contest ends on October 31, so don't dawdle.
Also new on the radar screen is American Choices by E The People, which aims to help people understand foreign policy debates. The design is cool, and they appear to have some useful stuff, so click over and take a look.
Those crazy kids Yuri Malenchenko and Yekaterina Dmitriyeva, who got married while he was aboard the International Space Station (see here, here, and here for the details) are finally together after a near-perfect touchdown in Kazakhstan, meaning they can finally have their honeymoon.
"It's wonderful. Now I just have to wait for a few hours and I'll see him -- for real, not by phone," [Dmitriyeva] reported [from Moscow]."Yuri is always full of energy," she said. "I cannot even say how excited I am."
The Chron has a longish article about the prospects of an American sports franchise moving to or being founded in Mexico City. It has the standard reasons why a league (most likely the NBA or Major League Baseball) might do this, but I think it overlooks some obvious reasons why not.
Perhaps the biggest hurdle will be finding a suitable stadium. The mayor has talked of two options -- building a new stadium in the district of Azcapotzalco (the northwest part of the city) or renovating and covering the existing Foro Sol, home of Mexico City's Diablos Rojos of the Mexican Baseball League.
More important is the question of currency. Canadian teams are often at a disadvantage in signing and retaining players because they pay in Canadian dollars and are subject to Canadian taxes. I can't imagine any player accepting his salary in pesos, and I can't help but think that having to continually exchange between pesos and dollars will be a big headache, not to mention a unique operating expense. Again, this may or may not be a dealbreaker, but it certainly deserves a mention in a story about the feasibility of locating a franchise in Mexico.
I do think southward expansion is coming, perhaps as a single franchise up front, perhaps as a subsidiary league a la the World League of American Football. It's been talked about for some time now, though, and I'm not convinced we're any closer to overcoming the associated obstacles than we were back in 1994 when the Oilers and Cowboys played their exhibition game in Azteca Stadium. I figure I'll read a lot more of these articles before I read one about an actual relocation or expansion.
UPDATE: I stand corrected. As Greg V. notes in the comments, Canadian sports franchises pay salaries in American dollars as a rule. Of course, while that does mean they shouldn't have problems with player recruitment as I had thought, the fact that they generate revenues in Canadian dollars serves to support the point I was making: currency conversion issues, especially for a team that will be operating in Mexico, will be a significant obstacle to overcome before a franchise can be located there.
It's Carole vs. Rick again, in what's sure to be the longest-running soap opera between now and 2006.
On Monday, Strayhorn repeated her earlier attacks against Perry over budget cuts in health care and funding deficiencies in the public schools and added community colleges to her list."The community college finance system was built around the notion that the state should cover instructional costs and the local (college) district should be responsible for providing the buildings and other facilities," she said.
"This administration, however, has not funded the formula at a level where the state's paying the full cost of instruction. Instead, community colleges through local revenues have been paying a chunk of instructional costs, as well as paying for facilities."
The comptroller said community colleges, which raise local revenue from property taxes, will see a further decline in state funding while their enrollments continue to increase.
The state funded 67 percent of the instructional formula in 2002-03, but that will drop to 52 percent during the 2004-05 biennium, Strayhorn added.
"That's unacceptable," she said.
I still have, and will probably always have, my issues with our Comptroller and her self-aggrandizing ways. I may never fully forgive her for sandbagging on the 2003 revenue projections and for blaming the shortfall on the 2001 Lege. She still doesn't have the right solutions - raising cigarette taxes and promoting video gambling are short term fixes that do nothing to address the erosion of the sales tax base and the continued upward pressure on local property taxes - but she's consistently right on about the problems and Governor Perry's utter inability to even recognize them. If she doesn't make Greg's party-switching dreams come true, I will have to give serious thought to voting for her in the 2006 GOP primary. We already get the Republican campaign mail, so what the hell.
Halley Suitt has brought up an issue that's come up in the past: is there gender bias in the blog world? Says she:
This week as we looked into the Perseus Study, which David Weinberger linked to in his excellent post "When Blogs Get Really Popular" to find out that "56% of hosted blogs" are created by women.Connect that with Dana Blankenhorn's interesting post on Corante called Everybody Wants To Rule The World and his assessment that the most striking thing one might notice when reading Blogstreet's 100 Most Influential Blogs is how many are about politics ... call me crazy, but isn't the MOST STRIKING THING rather that in a new technology dominated by women so few women are in the list? This would be like reading a list of the Most Influential Civil Rights Leaders and not having any African Americans in the top 100. Imagine a list that read "Lyndon Johnson, Bob Dylan, Robert Kennedy, Joan Baez," and on and on. Martin Luther who?
Which, of course, gets us to the definition of "influential" and Blogstreet's algorithm for determining who is influential. They say it is based on who blogrolls whom. I will email them today to ask about this in greater detail. If you look at some of the most influential blogger's blogrolls, they all have women listed. Many have the same women listed -- so how is it that none of these women are on the Top 100 list? Women like Shelley Powers, Virginia Postrel, Mena Trott, GnomeGirl Cheyenne, Jeneane Sessum, Elaine Kalily, Asparagirl, Esther Dyson, Karlin Lillington, Elizabeth Spiers, Reverse Cowgirl, Denise Howell, Moxie, Betsy Devine, Xeni, Susan Mernit, Jennifer Balderama, Amy Wohl, Jenny (Shifted Library) Levine, Elizabeth Lane Lawley. I am throwing this list up in no particular order -- actually referring to the top 5 male blogger's blogrolls. [If I forgot you, remind me.]It's clear that the top male bloggers are not denying women their blogroll inks, for the most part. It's clear that the top male bloggers take every chance to list women bloggers and engage the topics that they raise. These men are too smart not to take us seriously. We are their colleagues, friends, girlfriends, sisters, bosses, moms, daughters. They want the best for us. Guys, feel free to blogroll us anytime.
Still we are almost inviisble and I want to know why. What are we doing wrong? Are we not publishing our blogs in RSS? Are we not promoting ourselves enough? Are we not expressing ourselves clearly? Our footprint is illegible, although our actual influence is not inconsequential. If you take a look at the list of women above, there are a few pioneers listed who could actually be considered founding fathers ... whoops, I mean, founding mothers, no, ... well you get the idea.
First, as far as I can tell, being among the Top 100 Most Influential Blogs is like being one of the top prizewinners on the Professional Bowlers' Tour, without the money and glamour. It's a big deal to a very small audience, and meaningless to everyone else. For what it's worth, I get something like one or two referrals a month from that Top 100 list, according to my Sitemeter stats, so even within this small audience, it has little practical effect beyond a button on my sidebar and some egoboo.
Second, despite Ginger's skepticism about the "women blog personally and men blog politically" meme, all I can say is that counting expats and at least one blog that hasn't updated since February, there are 14 blogs among the 91 Texas political blogs that I know of which are at least co-written by women. Given Ginger's accurate observations about how Blogstreet compiles its list, if this ratio is representative (which of course it doesn't have to be), it goes a long way towards explaining the discrepancy.
Compare this, by the way, to the list of all Houston bloggers, a group that's overwhelmingly nonpolitical. Just click on a few at random - they're mostly written by women. For sure, turnout at the various get-togethers we have are usually majority female. I don't see a single blog in the Blogstreet list that's in the personal-diary style that most of the H-Town Blogs are.
I don't know what Blogstreet's algorithm is, and I don't know if being a "most influential" blog is something anyone should worry about. I do know that every time this issue comes up, a bunch of interesting and new-to-me blogs written by women get publicized here and there. That's reason enough to be happy to see it again.
(Link to Halley's post via Joanne McNeil.)
This is somewhat unusual, but I'm willing to try this out once and see what happens. I received the following email from a reader:
Do you know who (attorneys) are all involved beyond the ones you listed in your June 27 piece?Major curiosity here that has implications with a legal hearing I am having in the near future. My attorney dumped my case to supposedly go to work on Dan's...Won't give his name as the above mentioned hearing is one of those "closed" ones that the legal system blinds us all to their machinisms.
It would be a GREAT help to know if in fact this individual did actually go to work on Dan's team.
It's been said that Bambi was the best piece of anti-hunting propaganda ever produced. From this description of two new reality-based TV shows, there are some new contenders for the title of best anti-wealth propaganda out there.
Television's embarrassment of rich kids begins this week on cable's two most trend-setting channels. HBO presents the documentary Born Rich at 9 tonight, followed Tuesday by MTV's Rich Girls at 9:30 p.m.As you might guess, Rich Girls is the more lighthearted, if less entertaining, of the two. It replaces the courageously stupid adventures of marginal pop idols with the materialistic odysseys of Tommy Hilfiger's teenage daughter Ally and her best friend, Jaime Gleicher.
How Rich Girls and Born Rich will strike the average viewer just scraping by, though, is hard to say. If you have any element of class consciousness in you, enjoying these socialites can be difficult.
[...]
Go ahead, nod in wistful appreciation as Gleicher declares, "Shopping is a drug. It's my drug." Force a giggle as Jaime laments being used by false friends while sharing a lollipop with her teacup Maltese, Star. But just in case we begin to think them shallow, spoiled brats, Ally says: "Just because we're rich doesn't mean we're not good people."
Since we don't see the girls hammering any nails into a Habitat for Humanity home, we'll just have to take her at her word.
On the flip side, the kids in Born Rich are brutal in their honesty, but in a way you kind of appreciate, like the whole "If you have to ask, you can't afford it" line.
[Johnson & Johnson heir Jamie] Johnson directed the film as part of his 21st-birthday quest to figure out what he called "the voodoo of inherited wealth." To help, he called upon moneyed pals such as Georgianna Bloomberg, S.I. Newhouse IV, Ivanka Trump and Josiah Hornblower, heir to the Vanderbilt and Whitney fortunes, all sources of forthright interviews about the taboo subject of wealth.
"I live in a country that everyone wants to believe is a meritocracy," he says as the documentary opens on a Gatsbyesque celebration overflowing with champagne. "We want to think that everyone earns what they have. I guess if it makes you feel better, keep telling yourself that."
Blunt but refreshingly honest. The same can't be said of most his subjects; the unabashedly snobbish statements of model, socialite and all-around jerk Cody Franchetti, who feels "no moral obligation for anyone," might make the average kindhearted person green with illness, not envy.
An interesting article from Sunday about the battles, philosophical and otherwise, between residents in Midtown, which is just south of downtown Houston, and developers. Midtown is one of the few places now where you can see real mixed-use development. With its close proximity to downtown, and with the free downtown shuttle that passes through, it's an attractive place for people who don't want a long commute to live.
IAN Rosenberg watches every move in Midtown. A passionate advocate of urban living, he has been pleased with some of the neighborhood's development.But the sight of a bulldozer at Gray and Bagby makes his blood boil.
He and other Midtown community leaders are trying to create something unique in Houston: a charming neighborhood where people walk to their favorite bookshop, diner, movie house and grocery -- a bustling retail and residential mix.
It's a challenge, because they're going against the Houston grain.
At Gray and Bagby, CVS Pharmacy is constructing a suburban-style store, with a parking lot in front, next to the spot Midtown leaders are holding up as the model of what the neighborhood should be. They say the drugstore's suburban design may destroy much of what they're trying to do.
The CVS/Midtown conflict is emblematic of a bigger struggle in Houston, pitting the developer-friendly, suburban car culture against the effort to create a walkable urban environment designed to attract the "creative class" of young professionals who are said to drive 21st century economies.
CVS sees it differently: Focused on the present, it wants to lure the tens of thousands of commuters driving to and from downtown each day with easy parking.
"You can't have a store that looks pretty but creates barriers to customer use," said Todd Andrews, CVS' director of corporate communications. "They'll go somewhere else."
Well, we've seen the Sanchez and White camps go negative lately, and now there's a flyer being circulated by some fringe elements which accuses Bill White and several City Council candidates of conspiring to "eliminate black leadership".
After a decorous debate earlier this month, the mayoral candidates and their entourages emerged from a local television station to find splashy fliers pinned under the windshield wipers of their cars."Is Bill White secretly funding a campaign to eliminate black leadership?" the flier read as it advertised a town hall meeting in the Third Ward to "preserve black leadership now." The meeting was convened by grass-roots activists, including Robert Muhammad of the Nation of Islam, Quanell X of the New Black Panther Party and several Baptist ministers.
They apparently were reacting to news stories about a scheme to dilute the share of mayoral candidate White's vote by getting another man with the same name to run for mayor. Candidate White paid a woman engineering the scheme $5,000 after she abandoned it, and she claimed she had been paid by Sylvester Turner's campaign to put it together. Turner angrily denied any connection, and his supporters suggested White was trying to discredit Turner.
Anyway, the story has some intriguing angles in it.
White's campaign says the attacks are unfounded and unfair."It's offensive, especially for those of us who know how committed Bill is to inclusion," said White campaign spokeswoman Myra Jolivet, who is black. "That inclusion is very visible in our campaign. You can come over to our headquarters any day and see people of every ethnicity, race and walk of life."
Other racial overtones are peculiar to this race.
Former Harris County Democratic Chairwoman Sue Schechter, a former state representative who worked alongside Turner in the House and has endorsed him, says most of her white Democratic friends automatically assumed she would back White.
"Turner's done incredible work in the time he's been in the Legislature and no one can dispute that. He's also speaker pro tem and serves on the appropriations committee overseeing the state's budget. Why can't that be enough to show he can be trusted? It's a subtle racial issue that I'm arguing over and over everyday," Schechter says.
"The money factor also poses the same kind of racial barrier because there are not that many minorities in the upper financial echelon here to do what White is doing," she adds, pointing to the more than $2 million of his own money White is pouring into his campaign.
[Marc] Campos, the Turner consultant, bluntly calls it "the great white hope factor."
"A lot of white Democrats, particularly in this state, are frustrated because there's less and less opportunity for them to vote for other white Democrats. Most single-member districts go for minorities and most Republicans vote for whites," Campos says.
Over on today's editorial page, Andrea Georgsson adds a little gasoline to the fire by speculating about Turner as Houston's Ralph Nader. After concluding that "voters who want a competent mayor" must choose between White and Turner, she wonders if voting for Turner will ultimately help Sanchez.
The nail-biting decision for many voters who support Turner is that they might be throwing their vote away on him, either by preventing Bill White from winning outright -- dubious -- or putting Turner in a runoff with Sanchez, where Turner could lose in a two-man match-up. As much as some might want to see Turner win what he, some say unfairly, lost to Bob Lanier in '91, they don't want to live with the kind of regrets some Democrats have because they voted for Green Party candidate Ralph Nader in 2000, sinking Al Gore's candidacy and putting George W. Bush in the White House.The real question is why there is this undercurrent to Turner's campaign. Is it lingering doubt that there really was something to the news reports linking Turner to a scandal, one that most people have long forgotten the details of? Or is it because Turner is black? Some people believe that some voters won't vote for a black candidate no matter what his qualifications are. Some people believe that because Mayor Lee Brown -- despite his successes on rail, the new ballpark, the new football stadium, the convention center hotel, the Super Bowl -- is perceived to have been a mediocre black mayor, Turner will be tainted because he's also black.
Turner, for his part, has worked hard to court broad support. He shows a certain amount of frustration with race-based questions: He answered a question about whether Houstonians would be willing to elect a second black mayor in a row with glossed-over, but obvious frustration.
Naturally, many voters will agree with the Chronicle Editorial Board that Bill White would be the best choice for Houston's next mayor. But if voters look at Turner's record and qualifications, decide he is the best candidate and then reject him because they don't believe he can beat Orlando Sanchez, then Houston has not come as far as I have so fervently hoped.
I don't really have much to say about the election of Charles Soechting as the state Democratic Party chair on an interim basis to finish out Molly Beth Malcolm's term, but StoutDem, Greg Wythe and Andrew D all do. Sounds like this isn't over yet. I just have one request of the powers that be in the state party: Can we all remember that we're supposed to be fighting against the Republican Party? You know, those guys who win all the elections? Thanks.
Good grief, how in the world did I miss this?
Popular radio talk show host Jon Matthews is off the air and we've learned Sugar Land police are investigating him.Houstonians have been listening to the conservative radio talk show host for more than 15 years. He's a former Marine with loyal listeners, but on Friday those listeners didn't hear him because his boss took him off the air.
"I think that was the best thing to do," said KSEV General Manager Dan Patrick.
Patrick yanked Matthews off the air after learning from Eyewitness News about the investigation and then speaking to detectives.
"I just told him, 'John, since there's an investigation going on, it's just not the wise thing for you to be on the air until all the facts are known'," said Patrick.
The Sugar Land Police Department would not talk about this case on camera, but they do say on the record that they're investigating Matthews after an allegation of indecency with a child. They are, however, reluctant to release any specifics.
Sugar Land Police Captain Mike Lund says, "We have an ongoing investigation and I'm not going to go there."
Matthews shut the door on us when we tried to talk to him on Friday. He wouldn't discuss the investigation. His boss hopes people will reserve judgment until the truth is determined by police or a jury.
"Let the investigation play out," said Patrick. "Let's see if there are any charges brought, if there are not. I don't know what else you'd like me to say."
Congressman John Culberson, who appears weekly on Matthews' show says he can't imagine the talk show host being involved in any indecency with a child. He said "I just can't even imagine…I refuse to believe it…It must be a mistake."
It's important to stress that at this time, Matthews has not been arrested or charged with any crime.
UPDATE: Since everyone seems to be coming to this post via their Google searches, an update is posted here.
Congratulations to the Florida Marlins, a very deserving World Series champion. Josh Beckett was amazing, and he needed to be since Andy Pettite pitched very well also. I'm rather surprised that the one name no one mentioned during the game last night in talking about Beckett was Johnny Podres, who threw a 2-hit shutout in Game 7 of the 1955 Series to give the Brooklyn Dodgers their only title. Whoever you want to compare Beckett and his effort to, the comparison will be favorable to the Marlin hurler.
The Yankees, by necessity, will be a very different team next year. I've got a longish post working on that, but I'm a little too depressed to do it right now. Enjoy it while you can, all you Yankee haters. We'll be back.
Better get to this before October ends - September continued a trend of Best Months Ever, a trend that will be broken this month thanks both to a perfect storm of events that pushed me to new heights and my travel schedule. Some 33,000 visitors stopped by last month, drawn here by the soon-to-be-resolved redistricting saga, the What Texas Democrats Should Do Next blogburst, and National Talk Like A Pirate Day, which attracted gobs of search engine requests. As always, thanks to everyone for reading and for returning. I really appreciate it.
Top referrers and search terms are under the More link.
Aggregators, collections, indices, etc ======================================418: http://blogdex.media.mit.edu/
204: http://www.technorati.com/
189: http://subhonker7.userland.com/rcsPublic/
120: http://www.kooqoo.com/Weblog referrers
================2461: Daily Kos
1307: Atrios
1113: Calpundit
558: TAPPED
504: The Agonist
415: The Burnt Orange Report
385: Political Wire
186: Political State Report
172: Liberal Oasis
160: TalkLeft
156: Coffee Corner
153: Pandagon
134: The Poor Man
124: Tom Spencer
115: Talk Like A Pirate
114: Rob Booth
114: Rhetoric & Rhythm
113: Cooped Up
112: Blah3
110: Matthew YglesiasTop search terms
================#reqs: search term
-----: -----------
440: national talk like a pirate day
397: proposition 12
235: marnie rose
170: prime number algorithm
169: national pirate day
149: darlie routier
148: ugly people
135: talk like a pirate day
122: sock puppets
119: ben glisan
105: diane zamora
104: dr marnie rose
100: abigail perlman
91: rush limbaugh espn
74: houston mayoral race
71: redneck neighbor
68: jerry lewis sick
66: academia waltz
66: women of enron
64: pirate translation
This is hard for me to comprehend.
[Ed Wulfe, the Houston developer who heads Citizens for Public Transportation, the pro-rail political action committee] said Texans for True Mobility's refusal to reveal its backers demonstrated the organization's "contempt for voters." Wulfe further said the organization is running ads based on the "misleading information conjured up by Mr. Culberson" and should pull them off the air.[Chris Begala, spokesman for Texans for True Mobility] said the campaign had no plans to do so and called Wulfe's demands "absolutely ludicrous."
The backers of Texans for True Mobility did not wish to reveal themselves to the public, Begala said, because "they are scared of (retaliation from) very powerful entities affecting their ability to live and work in this community."
That said, I have a hard time taking the TTM members' stated reason for wanting anonymity seriously. We're not talking about lowly proles who are worried about being fired or evicted for being troublemakers. We're talking about people who have the wherewithal to make contributions, very likely large contributions, to a political action committee. People like this have money, power, and connections. They are, in short, very powerful entities themselves, and they would very much be not without recourse if there were retaliation against them for their contributions. What are they really afraid of? If it's the idea of being associated with this anti-transit group, then maybe they should think about why it engenders such shame in them.
There's another point to consider here, which is that we just have Chris Begala's word for it that it really is individuals who are balking at having their names released and not corporations. I'll say it again: the notion that there's a First Amendment right for corporations to make anonymous campaign contributions is ludicrous on its face.
Finally, as Rick Casey notes, the pro-rail side has no such compunctions about being publicly known, and as I noted before, the fact that TTM is exploiting a legal loophole to be anonymous seriously undercuts any moral force they may have to their choice. If these guys want to be players, they ought to have the guts to appear in the scorecard.
Harris County has had electronic voting machines for some time now. Not the crappy Diebold machines, but that doesn't mean that people haven't been voicing concerns about them since before their adoption. Recent events have not done anything to change skeptics' minds.
Birnberg said some voters don't trust the machines because there is no way to prove to them that the vote counts are accurate and confidential."If you have ever hooked up a computer, you know they come with glitches," he said.
In the 2002 election, about 25 local Democratic voters complained that they used eSlate to select a "straight party" vote for every Democrat on the ballot, only to find on the summary screen that the machine had not recorded a vote for Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Ron Kirk, Birnberg said. The voters were able to go back and mark a vote for Kirk before pressing the "cast ballot" button, but suspicion was born.
Election workers impounded the eSlates in question, checked them and found no sign of a technical problem, Kaufman said.
She said the voters may have been confused by campaign literature urging them to vote for Kirk and all other Democratic candidates. Choosing the "straight party" option and then marking a single candidate might make the machine "de-select" that candidate.
Birnberg surmises that voters accidentally pressed a different sequence of buttons that somehow canceled some of their votes, meaning the machines -- not the voters -- made a mistake.
The Democratic chairman acknowledged that because of the Florida voting debacle and more recent controversies such as the drawing of new boundaries for U.S. House districts in Texas, Democrats across the nation are on edge about voting systems chosen by GOP election officials.
In contrast, Harris County Republican Party Chairman Jared Woodfill said voters seem satisfied with eSlate and that he has heard no complaints.
"The burden is not on me to say it is flawed. The burden on them is to prove it is safe and they have not done that," Rice University computer science professor Dan Wallach said of electronic voting system manufacturers, including eSlate's.Election officials test voting machines to see if they have recorded votes correctly, but Wallach said the machines can be programmed to report they have worked correctly when in fact they have not. So when local officials said they have found no evidence of tampering or error, that is not evidence that such a thing never took place.
Like some of his counterparts at other colleges, Wallach says the best voting system would use machines like eSlate only as sophisticated printers that produce paper ballots, which would then be tabulated by a computerized "optical scanner" like the ones used to produce standardized academic test scores. Creating a "paper trail" would increase voters' confidence that their selections are recorded correctly and provide an independent backup record for all votes, Wallach said.
I found out about this through editorials: The Double Secret Energy Bill, which the Republicans in Congress are working on and the rest of us proles will only learn about 48 hours before it's up for a vote, contains a provision that would give nonattainment areas, such as Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth, another two years to get in shape. One can argue the merits or demerits of such an idea, but wouldn't it have been nice to have known about them in order to argue them, instead of finding out about it by accident? Rep. Joe Barton is the culprit here, and he gets taken to task by the WaPo and the DMN. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, who unlike Barton actually represents Dallas, also chastises him. Not fully related, but still amusing and worthwhile, is this Toles cartoon.
The title to this post is cribbed from Angry Bear, who reminds me that the forces of darkness are gathering again in Texas for the annual vote on textbook purchases. From Bob Park's What's New newsletter.
3. INTELLIGENT DESIGN: URGENT APPEAL TO TEXAS SCIENTISTS.The Texas Board of Education has scheduled the science textbook vote for November 6. The books they approve will be used by Texas students for several years and will influence the choice in many other states. The Discovery Institute, based in Washington state, pushes I.D., and seeks to dilute arguments for evolution. C.A. Quarles, the Chair of the Texas Section of APS, is gathering signatures on a letter to the Texas Board of Education. For info Texas scientists and teachers should e-mail slakey@aps.org.
As I mentioned earlier, I got a call from Diana Davila Martinez after I'd published an email from Diane Mosier of the Greater Heights Democratic Club. Ms. Davila Martinez objected to some of the things that had been said about her, and I promised her an opportunity to respond. Here's the email she sent me, so you can judge for yourself.
Let me start by saying that we are excited about the widespread support we are receiving in this effort. In addition to the Houston Chronicle endorsement I am proud to have received yesterday, I have been endorsed by Houston Voters Against Flooding, Council Members Gordan Quan and Carroll Robinson, State Representative Harold Dutton, Former District H City Council Member Felix Fraga, Latina PAC, HCC Trustees Bruce Austin and Herlinda Garcia, Baptist Ministers Association of Houston and Vicinity, Houston Black American Democrats and Harris County Democratic Party Secretary Francisco Sanchez.While I understand politics well, I like most voters detest backroom politics and strong armed maneuvers by political bosses. I am very disappointed that several organizations, including HGLPC and Harris County Democrats, totally denied me, the only candidate with a solid voting record of support for their issues, the opportunity to even screen before them.
I am a Democrat, one that not only espouses the principles of the party, but has as a State Representative for three terms fought hard to implement them in
public policy. I have been a strong voice on redistricting, affirmative action, labor issues, education, women's rights, and civil rights. And contrary to some of the misinformation that is being circulated or insinuated about me, I am not supporting any Republican candidates and I have not received any money from Mr. Perry.As a candidate, being afforded a fair opportunity to present my qualifications and what I hope to accomplish through this office is all I can ask of voters. I grew up in District H and I'm rearing my boys in District H. District H will be well served with my academic training and legislative experience. I intend to be a strong independent voice on Council who can effectively represent the residents of District H.
Let Calpundit have his cats. For those of us right-thinking people who prefer dogs, here's a great article in the Times about how to tell where someone lives in the City by what kind of dog they own. Be sure to look at the slide show - in the second picture, the one that features the jumping fox terrier named Bosco, the dog next to Bosco looks an awful lot like Harry, enough so that I'm starting to wonder just what he was up to while we were in Paris.
Speaking of Paris, it's another city that's full of dogs, and unlike most places in the States, they're allowed to go pretty much anywhere their owners want to take them. We saw them in the lobby of our hotel, in the Galeries Lafayette department store, and in various restaurants. One side effect of taking your dog everywhere is that it gets to be very socialized, and thus more comfortable in crowded, noisy situations. Only once in the entire week do I recall hearing a dog bark. Keep that in mind the next time you're swearing about a yapping dog in a backyard somewhere.
Mark Evanier catches Jerry Falwell saying something really dumb on Crossfire.
BEGALA: General Boykin said -- and I'm quoting him here about our president -- "Why is this man in the White House? The majority of Americans did not vote for him." He's right about that. "Why is he there? And I tell you this morning, he's in the White House because God put him there for a time such as this." Now, in case General Boykin is watching, and for our folks at home, let me show a couple of images here. First, this is God. God is depicted, actually, by Michelangelo in his masterpiece in ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. On the right side of your screen is William Rehnquist. He's the chief justice of the Supreme Court. He's the one who put George Bush in the White House, isn't he, Reverend Falwell? Not God.FALWELL: Well, if -- if you don't take the Bible seriously, what you and Hussein just said would be true. But the vast majority of believers worldwide, Christian, followers of Christ, believe that God rules in the affairs of men. And history would support that.
BEGALA: So God put President Clinton in office?
FALWELL: You worked for a long time for Bill Clinton. You worked for a long time for Bill Clinton.
BEGALA: So God put him there?
FALWELL: I think that we needed Bill Clinton, because we turned our backs on the lord and we needed a bad president to get our attention again to pray for a good president. That's what I believe.
Full transcript here. It should be noted that there was laughter after Falwell's last line, so perhaps it was all intended and interpreted as a joke, I don't know. Doesn't change what I said, though.
Ezra attempts to answer a question that President Bush recently posed:
Who can possibly think that the world would be better off with Saddam Hussein still in power?
Who can possibly think that I would be better off not buying and eating food? No one, of course. But if you were to learn that my entire food budget was spent on Cheetos and vodka, would you think that this was a good use of my resources? What if you found out that I was spending so much on food that I could no longer pay for my mortgage? That doesn't sound very smart, either.
Let's play what-if for a second. Suppose we could turn back the clock to before Bush's speech in fron of the UN, before we really started to beat the drums about Iraq. Suppose at that time we made a deal that Saddam would immediately step down from power and disappear from the earth as his army was disbanded, and in return we'd withdraw $150 billion from our Treasury and burn it. In other words, we'd achieve the end of deposing Saddam, which as time goes on seems to be the only justification for this adventure, and all it would cost us is the money we wound up spending anyway. No soliders or Iraqi citizens killed, "Old Europe" is still our buddy, and the fate of Iraq is left up to the Iraqis themselves. Is this preferable to what actually happened?
If so, then we can begin to discuss the real questions, such as "Did we do the right thing in deposing Saddam the way we did? Was the cost of our actions - in blood, in money, in everything - worth the results that we gained? Were there other goals in our war against terrorism that we should have focused on first before we dealt with Saddam?" Those are questions that don't have answers anywhere near as easy as the one our President would like to ask. But if Don Rumsfeld can ask some tough questions about whether or not we've been doing the right things, then so can the rest of us.
Allow me, somewhat belatedly, to add my voice to those (such as Patrick) who have cited and praised Slacktivist's ongoing series of posts about the "Left Behind" books (start here and look for posts whose titles begin with "L.B.") As others have noted, Slacktivist is himself a devout Christian who brings a deep understanding of the Bible and theology to this discussion. He's only up to page 15 of the first book (this could turn out to be the longest book review ever) and there's a ton of material for him, which he handles with wit and aplomb. Check it out.
I don't know how many people get mail from the Houston Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus PAC and the Harris County GOP PAC on the same day, but it sure feels special to be in that group. The HCGOPers endorsed pretty much the same group as the Conservative Republicans of Harris County, with three exceptions: MJ Khan instead of Terry McConn in District F, Jeff Daily instead of Greg Myers in the all-GOP District G, and fascinatingly, no one in At Large #5. I'm not sure if they've got an axe to grind with Boy Wonder Berry or what, but that oversight really stands out to me.
Not too surprisingly, there's no intersection with the HGLPCPAC, whose picks are: Bill White for Mayor, Annise Parker for Controller, Brian Wozniak, Gordon Quan, Jolanda Jones, Sue Lovell, and Dwight Boykins for At Large #1-5, Malaki Sims, Ada Edwards, Vickie Keller, Derrick Wesley, and Adrian Garcia for District C, D, E, F, and H, plus Michael Gomez and Dr. G. San Miguel for HISD #3 and 4. For the most part, these line up with my own choices, which I'll post about shortly.
We also got a mailer from the Houston Police Officers Union, who endorsed White for Mayor and the Republican candidates for At Large 1, 3, 4, and 5 as well as Districts C and E. Say this for White, he's got support that crosses ideological boundaries.
If all that ain't enough for you, the Harris County Democratic Party and the Harris County GOP both have useful candidate info pages with links to their email addresses and relevant websites. Take some time and check it all out, there's a lot of new names and faces to learn about.
Normally, I consider business bankruptcies to be a Bad Thing, but every once in a while there's one that makes you reconsider.
SEATTLE - X10 Wireless Technology, known for ubiquitous Internet ads showing scantily clad women as seen from miniature wireless cameras, has filed for protection in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition.
LONDON -- British Airways' last Concorde flight for fare-paying passengers took off for New York today, a day before scheduled supersonic service ends for good.Both today's London-New York flight and Friday's final trans-Atlantic return are expected to be full, but Friday's passengers will all be invited guests of the airline, including actress Joan Collins and Concorde frequent flyer Sir David Frost.
Thousands of planespotters are expected to gather near Heathrow Airport on Friday to watch the near-simultaneous landing of the New York flight and two other Concordes -- one carrying competition winners from Edinburgh, the other taking guests on a circular flight from Heathrow over the Bay of Biscay.
With that, the era of supersonic commercial flight will be over, at least for now.
Looks like some of the external fundraising that the Killer D's/Texas 11 did has borne some fruit.
Since the redistricting fight erupted last spring, 13 of the 17 Texas Democrats in Congress have donated more than $230,000 to the state Democratic Party and a political fund dedicated to re-electing state lawmakers.Some of the funds have been used to rally public opposition to the redistricting effort, party leaders said, while much of it has been set aside to help re-elect Democrats in the Texas House who managed to delay the process by hiding out in Oklahoma.
"Some of those members put their political lives on the line," said Rep. Gene Green of Houston, who has given $15,000 to the state party this summer and another $25,000 to the Majority Political Action Committee of Texas, or MPACT, formed this year to re-elect Democrats to the Texas House.
"I think all of us have realized that if you're going to be in the battle, you have to be there with everything you can. So sure, we talked with each other and said, 'We need to help these folks,' " he said.
[...]
Quarterly financial reports filed by last week show that 13 of the state's 17 incumbent Democrats donated a total of $141,000 from their campaign funds to the state Democratic Party, ranging from $5,000 from Reps. Nick Lampson of Beaumont and Sheila Jackson Lee of Houston to $50,000 from Rep. Martin Frost of Arlington, dean of the delegation.
"I don't think it's any secret that Martin's been a supporter of the Texas Democratic Party for at least the 25 years he's been in Congress," said spokesman Jess Fassler.
The reports also show that nine of the Democrats sent checks totaling $91,200 to MPACT, formed this year as a counterbalance to various GOP political action committees. The bulk came from three congressmen who each gave $25,000: Mr. Green, Chet Edwards of Waco and Rubén Hinojosa of Mercedes.
Most of the incumbents have also put up $5,000 to $20,000 each for legal fees, and that is expected the grow. The last big legal fight over the state's congressional districts cost Democrats about $1.7 million.
[...]
State Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco, chairman of the Democratic Caucus in the Texas House, said the congressional money has been vital to get the MPACT up and running, but the committee has raised "considerably more" at events last weekend in Maine and fund-raisers in Colorado, Austin, Dallas and elsewhere.
"We're trying to save money and use it to help re-elect Democrats next year," Mr. Dunnam said, adding that the donations show the solidarity forged this year among Democrats in Congress and the Legislature.
"We really are in the same boat together. We fight for the same things, we just do it different places. Too much in the past the delegations have sort of not paid much attention to one another, and that's one thing we were able to change this year," he said. "Frankly it took Tom DeLay to get us unified."
Now if we could only get all of the Houston-area incumbents to send a few bucks back to the Harris County Democratic Party, then we'd really be on to something.
The Chron has endorsed Diana Davila Martinez for City Council District H, which is where I live, citing her past experience as the key.
Davila Martinez served ably in the Legislature from 1993-1999. A graduate of Harvard University, she spent much of her time in Austin giving neighborhoods and civic clubs the tools and powers they need to clean up blight and shut down or control irresponsibly or illegally operated bars.Davila Martinez has served on the boards of Catholic Charities, Association for Community Television, Children At Risk and other charitable endeavors. She promises to support mass transit improvements, prudent spending and better performance by city employees.
Before I get to the main purpose of this post, I'd first like to address this, which was cited by Atrios.
CHANGE OF MENU. Jeffrey's at the Watergate, a restaurant that served Texas cooking, has closed its doors, reports The Washington Post. The restaurant, which claimed to be a "'hot spot' of the First Couple," served such meals as "Secretary Evans Roquefort and tomato salad" and "Condoleezza Rice lemon meringue tart with raspberry sauce."The restaurant has returned to its old name, Aquarelle, which was a popular spot during the Clinton administration; it now serves Mediterranean cuisine. The Post writes that this is "not a symbol or a sign or a portent." Ever the optimists, we beg to differ.
Look, it's very simple: There are many restaurants in Texas at which one can find a wide variety of cuisines (see here for a sample of what's available in Houston, for example), but there are only a few styles (such as barbecue and Tex-Mex, to name two) that can be correctly called "Texas cooking". The examples cited are not among them.
Now then. According to this front-page Chron story, the high price of beef is giving restauranteurs heartburn.
"It's killing us," Sambuca Jazz Cafe chef Carl "C.J." Johnston moans. "It's gotten to where every time we sell beef, we lose money."[...]
"When you come to my restaurant, the waiters are going to push the fresh seafood specials," Johnston confesses. "If we sell equal amounts of seafood and equal amounts of beef, we'll be OK. We've got to get creative because it's not economically sound right now to raise prices."
Six months ago, a 10-ounce beef filet cost Johnston $8. Today, he's paying $10.60, and by December, he expects to pay $12 or more for the same cut.
"It's scary," he said. "But can we not serve beef and stay open as a restaurant? I don't think so. In Houston, Texas, you've got to have beef."
The United States shut down cattle imports from Canada after a lone cow was diagnosed with mad cow disease in May. According to the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, Canada provided 7 percent of our beef supply prior to the ban. Although the U.S. government has partially lifted the embargo, the amount coming in is shy of earlier levels because live Canadian cattle are still barred."But that's just a small part of it," said Rick Hamilton of Chicago-based Allen Bros., which supplies beef to high-end restaurants nationwide. "This has actually been going on for several years. There's been a steady decline of cattle because of drought conditions (in Nebraska and Kansas). The ranchers have nothing to feed them on. The number of cattle on feed has dropped by 8 percent. Right now, they're holding back heifers to build up stock. But it'll take 30 months before we really start to see results."
While cattle production has slackened in the last decade, the demand for beef has increased.
Casual steakhouses saw a 12 percent rise in consumer spending over the past two years. And U.S. demand for beef has increased 10 percent since 1998, Texas Beef Council marketing manager Russell Woodward said.
The reason?
"People are very confident in the safety of beef," Woodward said. "Now they've got permission to consume it."
Blame Dr. Atkins.
"We did a little survey," said Texas Land & Cattle Steak House President David Franklin, "and it indicated that 30-40 percent of our customers are on the (high-protein) Atkins diet."
Today we get to meet the low profile candidates in this year's Mayoral race. It's quite a collection.
Come Jan. 1, Houston will have a new mayor.It will not be Anthony Dutrow, Douglas Robb, Jack Terence, Ralph Ullrich or John WorldPeace.
That much is known.
Anyway, you may recall John WorldPeace from his 2002 gubernatorial campaign. Jack Josey Terence, also known as Jailbird, has run for Mayor before, on the same ballot as "The Outlaw Josey Wales IV". I thought the two might have been the same person, but apparently not. Luis Ralph Ullrich has run for Mayor before, but other than a citation in a ten-year-old copy of the U of Houston Daily Cougar which says he's also known as "Ralph the Plumber", I couldn't find anything interesting about him. I could find nothing about Douglas Robb or Veronique Gregory, either.
In my Copious Spare Time, I'd love to interview some of these people to get a better feel for why they do this. The article hints at some of the reasons, such as a desire to get a message out and a belief they can actually win, but there's only so much you can cover in an overview like this. It could be very enlightening, or it could be a complete trip down the rabbit hole, I don't know. I just think someone ought to find out.
Oh, and on a side note, a pet peeve of mine. From the article:
To call them campaigns of ideas is apropos, as there seems to be little else in the way of traditional electioneering and fund raising.
Main Entry: 1ap·ro·pos
Pronunciation: "a-pr&-'pO, 'a-pr&-"
Function: adverb
Etymology: French à propos, literally, to the purpose
Date: 16681 : at an opportune time : SEASONABLY
2 : by way of interjection or further comment: with regard to the present topic
It's a sad day today: Fred "Rerun" Berry has passed away, apparently from natural causes, at the age of 52. By his passing, he leaves behind an eternal mystery:
He wore his red beret and suspenders in real life, and it was unclear whether he originally brought his own style to the character of Rerun or whether he was forever mimicking the goofball character that made him famous.
I think we can all agree that what the world needs now is more Latin translations of hiphop music, such as this stunning effort to bring the words of Sir Mix-a-Lot into the realm of Cicero, which inspired an equally compelling continuation here. I think the English re-translation would make for an excellent dramatic reading, as Steve Allen once did for Donna Summer's "Hot Stuff", a Babelfish English->Italian->English version of which can be found here.
(Thanks to Matt for bringing this to my attention.)
Kos points out an interesting new blog called the Swing State Project, which aims to analyze the upcoming Presidential race in 19 states that were decided by less than 5 points in 2000 (full methodology explained here). It looks pretty promising so far.
You've probably already heard that Jeff Cooper is going on an indefinite hiatus due to some unfortunate health problems his young son is experiencing, but in case you haven't, drop by and leave him a note of well-wishes.
Jim Capozzola is also going through some hard times, in his case more of an economic nature. He's got a PayPal button if you are inclined to toss him a few coins.
There is some good news out there: Dwight Meredith, who retired his well-respected PLA blog recently, is now guest posting (second chairing?) at Wampum. It's good to have him back.
Finally, I linked to one of his posts earlier, but I want to give a full intro to Jonathan Ichikawa, who is now the third current or former member of the Rice MOB to enter the blog world, joining myself and Doug Haunsperger. He's doing the philosophy grad student thing at Brown and has some interesting stuff on his blog. Check it out.
UPDATE: I am covered with shame as Michael (a one-year MOBster himself from before my tenure there) reminds me in the comments that my own blogfather, Mike Tremoulet, is yet another former MOB member. Argh! Sorry about that, Mikey!
Jonathan Ichikawa points out the case of tax loony Irwin Schiff, who was recently hit with a restraining order that forbids him from distributing his latest tome, Federal Mafia: How the Government Illegally Imposes and Unlawfully Collects Income Taxes, from speaking about income taxes, and from preparing someone else's tax return. It also required him to turn over his customer list to the government, an order which was stayed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
I've written about guys like Schiff and the scams they peddle (most recently here), and it's vitally important to understand that what he is doing, no matter how fervently he may believe in it, is fraud. People go to jail and pay hefty penalties to the IRS for following his advice. Check out the invaluable Tax Protesters FAQ and see how often Schiff is mentioned by name or by court decision and you'll see the extent of the problem. As such, I totally understand the government's desire to keep him from getting even more otherwise law-abiding citizens into trouble.
That said, this order overreaches by at least half. Preventing Schiff from preparing tax returns strikes me as within the bounds of constitutionality, and preventing the sale of his book could be justified as an anti-fraud measure (had he been giving it away, he'd have a clearer free speech argument in my mind). Preventing him from speaking about the income tax, however, is wrong. He still has the right to his stupid opinions. The practical effect of doing this is to make him seem like a rebel or a martyr instead of just a grifter. In a perfect unlimited-resources world, the ideal answer would be to have someone follow him around at all times to counter what he says. We can't do that, so some folks will have to learn the hard way.
As for his customer list, no way in hell, and I'd say that even if the Attorney General wasn't John Ashcroft. I'd like to believe that the government is motivated at least in part by a desire to give those customers some education and the opportunity to voluntarily amend their returns, but that won't be what happens. I'm sure all Schiff-inspired tax returns have a fair amount of commonality among themselves, so fire up the computers and let the pattern-matchers do their thing. Nice try, but no dice.
Big Media Matt says he's "puzzled" by this story in which a majority of GOP politicians and strategists polled named Rep. Richard Gephardt as the Democratic candidate that they think is the strongest challenger to Bush. I can understand his lack of enthusiasm for Gephardt, but I don't think there's anything puzzling about this, nor do I think there's anything as sinister as a feint by the GOP to get us gullible Dems to back the wrong horse.
No, I think this simply means that the GOP is as unsure right now who the most "electable" Democrat is as the Democrats are. Each of the six major candidates has different strengths, and if you focus solely on those strengths, as appears to be the case here, it's easy enough to construct a solid case for this guy or that one. The fact of the matter is that any Democratic candidate who succeeds at using his strengths and minimizing his weaknesses will have a good shot at the Presidency. It's just that none of us right now knows who is the most likely do this, so we pass the time speculating. Maybe these Republicans are right and maybe they're wrong, but the bottom line is nobody knows, and we won't know until it's too late for us Democrats to change our minds. That more than anything is what scares me about this race.
I do have one nit to pick with this article:
One of the main reasons many other Republicans fret about Gephardt is the electoral map, which many in the GOP say points to the Midwest as the region that will decide the presidency.
UPDATE: Nick Confessore has a good take on this at TAPPED.
UPDATE: A very different take on the merits of a Dean candidacy at Tacitus.
I'm not exactly sure how "The Kuffner Family" got on a mailing list for the Conservative Republicans of Harris County, but we got their voting guide for the upcoming election in the mail yesterday. As a public service, here's who they recommend. I trust you will use it as a guide of whom to avoid, something that's not always obvious on these nonpartisan ballots. Click on the More link for the list. I'll publish my own endorsements later this week.
Mayor - Orlando Sanchez
District A - Toni Bracher Lawrence (open seat)
District B - No endorsement (Carol Mims Galloway is the incumbent)
District C - Mark Goldberg (incumbent)
District D - No endorsement (Ada Edwards is the incumbent)
District E - Addie Wiseman (incumbent)
District F - Terry McConn (open seat)
District G - Mike Howard (open seat)
District H - Hector Longoria (open seat)
District I - No endorsement (Carol Alvarado is the incumbent)
At Large #1 - Mark Ellis (open seat)
At Large #2 - John Elford (Gordon Quan is the incumbent)
At Large #3 - Shelley Sekula-Gibbs (incumbent)
At Large #4 - Bert Keller (open seat)
At Large #5 - Michael Berry (open seat)
Controller - Bruce Tatro (open seat)
Metro Rail Plan - Against
The Texas Association of Business has finally surrendered documents to Travis County investigators who are looking to see if secret donations had been made last year that helped pay for campaign ads.
Since January, the association has fought -- and lost -- at every appellate level to stop the investigation into how it raised and spent $1.9 million in secret corporate donations in 24 state legislative campaigns.Association President Bill Hammond refused to surrender correspondence, billing records and other details about the ads. Association employees Jack Campbell and Cathy DeWitt refused to testify about their roles in the ad campaign.
[...]
State law forbids corporations from spending corporate money for electioneering. [TAB attorney Andy] Taylor said his client's ads were beyond regulation because they educated voters without advocating election or defeat of candidates.
The association's argument that the ads were protected free speech would be undercut if [Travis County DA Ronnie] Earle proves coordination between the association and the candidates or their campaigns.
You can see all of the Statesman's coverage of this story, which kicks the Chron's butt from here to Galveston, here. The Austin Chronicle has also been all over it.
Hope has a friend who's a reporter for the Associated Press, and he was kind enough to respond to a few questions she emailed him. He spent time in Afghanistan and was embedded in Iraq, and he's now in East Africa. Check it out.
It would appear that some of Rep. John Culberson's constituents are not happy with his ideas about mobility solutions.
Residents of the 7th congressional district this week launched a petition to oust U.S. Representative John Culberson. Leading the effort is Paul Staton a Katy freeway daily commuter who accused Culberson of representing the Texas highway lobby and not the "little guy stuck on the freeway" when it comes to local transportation issues.Staton is a longtime Houston oilman who identifies politically as independent. He said he is just one in a "groundswell" of voters who first bristled when Culberson referred to opponents of the I-10 expansion project as "environmental whackos" on a local talk radio call-in show lastyear.
Culberson denied making the remarks even after he repeated them at a town hall meeting weeks later.
"He's not a bad man and we're not trying to be malicious, but we're his constituents and he needs to treat us better," Staton said. He called Culberson a bully and accused him of using intimidation tactics to try to kill the Metro light rail plan.
Culberson drew fire last month when he sponsored legislation requiring Metro to list each section of rail on the November 4 ballot.
[...]
Staton said in three weeks he plans to collect 1,000 signatures, enough, he hopes, to get the Congressman’s attention. He says he’s using word of mouth and a free web site to advance the cause.
"This isn't militancy, it's not an attack. It's just the only way we could get his attention," he said. "In the strongest terms we’re shouting out please listen to us."
Culberson said it won’t matter how many names Staton collects. The only way he’ll leave office, is if constituents vote him out in 2004.
On the other hand, if the new Congressional map does stand up in court, Culberson may have bought himself a bigger pro-rail constituency.
In the new map adopted by the Legislature, the Texas Medical Center and the University of Texas Medical Center move into the 7th District of U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston.
From the Things That Happened While I Was Out Department: Sen. Leticia Van de Putte has retracted her charge that a Republican Senator, whom she has not named, made an ethnic slur to her in the presence of others.
The San Antonio Democrat also said the unidentified senator has apologized and called it "a closed matter.""I have nothing but respect for the men and women of the Texas Senate, Republicans and Democrats alike," Van de Putte told the San Antonio Express-News after the Legislature adjourned. "And I am withdrawing any statements about comments in the members lounge."
"What does that mean?" asked Sen. Jeff Wentworth of San Antonio, among the 19 Senate Republicans who signed a letter to Van de Putte demanding she reveal who made the comment or retract her story.
"At a minimum, she's admitting she misspoke," Wentworth said. "I guess it's a step in the right direction."
[...]
Van de Putte said she had intended to retract the account in remarks on the Senate floor Sunday during debate on a motion to remove 11 Democratic senators from probation — a penalty leveled by the GOP majority after the Democrats returned from holding out in New Mexico at the start of the session.
But the matter wasn't taken up, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said, because there was not a majority in favor of lifting probation.
Van de Putte said she fielded an apology for the slur after it became public last week.
"Apology was made. Apology accepted," she said. "It's a closed matter."
Wentworth said Van de Putte's comment about the apology "continues to leave a cloud over all Republican senators. That is unfair."
Sen. Kyle Janek, R-Houston, informed of Van de Putte's withdrawal, called the action "ambiguous" and said the 31 senators might need to sort out the issue in a closed-door caucus.
"The case would be closed if she were more forthcoming," Janek said. "If it (the slur) was said, someone needs to come clean.
"If it wasn't said, someone else needs to come clean."
There's another possible interpretation of what happened, given more recent relevations that she's experiencing health problems.
Democratic Sen. Leticia Van de Putte revealed Thursday she is undergoing treatment for a serious medical condition, but is "absolutely not resigning" from the Texas Senate.The San Antonio senator, who'll be undergoing more tests today for several tumors found in her thyroid and other areas, responded to rumors raised by an online publication that she may step down from the Senate.
"This is a health problem but it's not something worth resigning over," said Van de Putte, 49, who has been under fire recently for alleging an unnamed Republican senator directed racist comments at her.
Van de Putte, up for re-election in 2004, said she went in for routine exams last week and a shadow appeared on one of the test results.
She declined to be more specific until doctors perform biopsies to determine a diagnosis.
"The weekend was kind of a scary time," she said. "People need to be reminded to get stuff checked."
It's District H's turn to get a quick candidate overview in the Chron. No one says anything shocking or profound in the two paragraphs or so they're allotted, but if you're still unfamiliar with the names this ought to help.
I came home last night to find a message on our voice mail from Adrian Garcia. Apparently, Diane Mosier of the Heights Democratic Caucus emailed him about my earlier blog ruminations as well. I called him back and we had a nice chat. As it happens, I received a mailer from his campaign yesterday, the first one I'd gotten from him (I'd gotten several from the obviously well-financed Longoria campaign prior to this), and later in the evening a call from a campaign volunteer asking for support. Garcia didn't get off to an early start, but he's making up for it now. I also noticed while walking the dog yesterday that yard signs, mostly for him with a few for Gonzalo Camacho thrown in, have sprouted up all over. Early voting has started, Election Day is two weeks off - play ball!
I have to say, after obsessing over the whole redistricting thing for waaaaay too long, it was good to head off to a foreign country where I had no Internet connection and only the International Herald Tribune for any news. I knew that a deal had been reached, and I saw a brief note in the IHT about the Senate finally passing the new map, and that was about it. If the next thing I hear about redistricting is a ruling from the courts, that'll be fine by me. I think I speak for many people when I say that I'm glad and relieved that our Semi-Permanent Legislature has finally gone on hiatus, at least until the dreaded special session on school finance reform finally gets called.
I don't believe that the map which passed will survive the various legal challenges (two and counting so far) to it, so I'm not going to follow speculation too closely about who may run where and who may win or lose where. We'll know soon enough which map will be in place, and we can go from there.
There was lots of coverage and analysis while I was gone. There's good stuff here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. With luck, Rob will keep his promise to post about the mistakes the GOP made.
There was a brief moment yesterday when I wondered if I'd find anything to blog about now that redistricting has been put to bed. I got over it pretty quickly, though.
Seems Tom DeLay is catching a little flak for his attempts to shoehorn an amendment favorable to Bacardi into an unrelated bill.
Watchdog groups and some business interests have already objected to the Texas Republican's efforts.Last week, four House Judiciary Committee members protested after an article in the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call reported that DeLay planned to slip an amendment revising U.S. trademark statutes into the annual defense authorization bill.
The amendment had not been properly vetted by their panel, which is supposed to oversee trademark law, said the letter signed by the Judiciary Committee objectors.
Several major corporations have joined in asking Congress to repeal Section 211 altogether to avoid possible retaliation by Cuba's President Fidel Castro against their own trademarks.Citizens Against Government Waste, a conservative watchdog group, also opposes special treatment for Bacardi.
"We think it has an adverse influence on the taxpayers, on consumers and on the economy," said the group's president, Thomas Schatz.
Also objecting is a liberal group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, whose director Melanie Sloan links Bacardi's success in Congress to its donations. The company has spread more than $650,000 to political party committees since 1997, with a little more than half going to Republicans. Bacardi has also been one of DeLay's top benefactors, giving a total of $40,000 to political action committees that he founded.
This is fun and all, but the most eyecatching part of the article is this quote from DeLay spokesman Jonathan Grella.
"It's wrong and unethical to link legislative activity to campaign contributions."
But "unethical"? I'm somehow "unethical" for thinking that maybe a politician who's been given a large check by Three Initial Corporation and coincidentally happens to sponsor legislation that directly benefits TIC's bottom line at the expense of everyone else was perhaps not doing so because he believes from the bottom of his heart that he was serving the greater public good? I'm somehow "unethical" for thinking that a rational profit-maximizing entity might give thousands if not millions of dollars to those who mold law and policy without considering it an investment on which they might hope to see a return? I'm somehow "unethical" for noticing a pattern and wondering what its underlying structure may be? Why stop there, Jonathan? Why not take it to the logical conclusion and call me stupid for ever daring to question your boss' motives? It's what you clearly believe.
(Thanks to the intrepid AJ Garcia for the tip.)
UPDATE: Also via AJ, Molly Ivins was as gobsmacked by Grella's comment as I was. How nice it would be if the so-called Liberal Media (SCLM) were to report this a bit more widely.
I just got some feedback regarding my dilemma about who to vote for in the District H City Council race. The following is from an email from Diane Mosier, President of the Greater Heights Democratic Club, which has made an endorsement in the race:
ADRIAN GARCIA has been endorsed by every local democratic elected official, Harris County Tejano Democrats, AFL-CIO, HGLPC, Houston Police Officers Assn, Harris County Council of Organizations, and many, many other progressive organizations.The other candidates are: Diana Davila-Martinez, whose husband has been on the Orlando Sanchez website as an endorsee; Richard Cantu, who is a Democratic Precinct Chair but who has very little connection to other areas in District H except the east end; Gonzalo Camocho, who would not declare himself to be a democrat at our last democratic club meeting. Gonzalo has been a U.S. citizen for one year and told me that he has never voted. I asked him point blank if he leaned toward democratic or republican issues and he said that he is neither. He is very nice and well meaning but we felt that he not quite ready for the rough and tumble of city politics. Then, there is Hector Longoria, the republican who switched races. He initially raced $75,000 for an at-large position and then moved into District H which is a historic district. $30,000 of his money comes from the Bob Perry family... that would be high-density builder, Perry Homes.
So there you have it. That's a good enough reason for me to punch the chad by Adrian Garcia's name. Let's hope he can make it to the runoff against Longoria.
You know, I was just thinking that what the world really needs right now is a rap CD about the fall of Enron.
The words "Enron" and "rap" don't normally go together unless someone's talking about "taking the rap for Enron."But if a former Enron employee has his way, we'll associate the corporate deadbeat with the thumping bass and braggadocio of rap music.
David Tonsall, 39, a former technical manager for Enron Energy Services, is unleashing rhyming words of wrath against the disgraced company under the hip-hop moniker "NRun."
His CD, Corporate America, drops Dec. 3, the second anniversary of the day Enron laid off 4,000 employees, including him.
"It's a spin on Enron," Tonsall said of his hip-hop handle. It also stands for "never run."
"Skilling, going to find you, rain, sleet or snow," go some of his lyrics. "There's nowhere on earth that you can go ... ready to get you for the Enron scam. Consider yourself a sacrifice for the pipeline workers that gave their lives, maintaining (the) lines that made you rich. When justice comes around you're going to get hit."Another line from the rap goes: "America, NRun has a story to tell, how the judiciary system slowed down like a snail. Gave ... corporate crooks time to plan their escape. So when I see you, Jeffrey, I won't hesitate."
Tonsall said his lyrics are set to the bangin' beats created by his producer, Slim Pimp.
Hey, remember when Governor Perry took credit for a reduction in homeowner's insurance rates? Yeah, right.
Gov. Rick Perry last week listed among his accomplishments saving taxpayers more than half a billion dollars in lower home insurance costs.But rate relief is coming slowly, if at all, to most Texas homeowners.
Acting under authority given him in a new law, Insurance Commissioner Jose Montemayor in August ordered insurers operating in the state to drop their rates by a collective $510 million.
However, two large insurers that jointly write 42 percent of policies, State Farm and Farmers, are challenging their rate cuts in court. And most other insurers reached a settlement with the department that cut their rate rollbacks in half, with a promise that the balance of the rate cuts will be given to policyholders next year if the weather holds and there isn't an unexpected surge in claims.
In addition, consumer groups and lawmakers are criticizing Montemayor for two proposed rules affecting how insurers use credit history and neighborhood location to calculate rates.
"The reforms were modest, and now they've been watered down even more," said Dan Lambe, executive director of the consumer advocacy group Texas Watch.
Both Clay Robison and Cragg Hines speculate about the next governor's race in 2006 and which of Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kay Bailey Hutchison will be more likely to challenge Rick Perry at that time. Robison does a good job of summarizing the contradiction that is Strayhorn. On the one hand, it's fun to watch her slap around the feckless Perry for his lack of budget leadership, his disingenuousness about "no new taxes", and his misplaced priorities. On the other hand, Strayhorn is a shameless opportunist who sandbagged us all on the budget last year, stupidly tried to pin the blame for the deficit on a "spending party" by the Legislature (when you tot up reasons for the recently-passed bill that clips her wings, you can start right there), and didn't really bring anything to the table herself when it counted.
I just don't know what to make of Strayhorn. I was as vocal as anyone in criticizing her ever-changing budget projections lasy year, and I stand by that. Yet if she really does want to take on Perry in 2006, she may find that it makes more sense for her to do so as a Democrat rather than a Republican, a scenario Greg has been rooting for. If she does make the switch, I'll certainly support her, but I'll feel more than a little unclean for doing so. Yeah, I know, a party that doesn't welcome new members, especially converts, is a party doomed to eternal irrelevance. I'm just saying it'll take some time before she gets on my Christmas card list, you know?
Is Perry really worried about Strayhorn? Rob does the math and thinks he ought to be. I'm not fully convinced by this, though. Perry had a well-financed opponent who flung a lot of mud at him and his record, and as such I'd expect he managed to convince a few people to not vote for him. Strayhorn ran against a nobody (quick, do you remember his name?) and surely got all but the true yellow-dog vote. The question is really "How many of those Republicans who voted for both Strayhorn and Perry will choose her instead of him?", and it's a question I can't answer.
Well, Cragg Hines suggests some of them would, but the person Perry really ought to worry about is KB Hutchison. For sure, Kay Bailey has led a charmed political life since moving to Washington, having not had a credible opponent since 1994 and being generally well-liked. She'd have no baggage to carry along with her aura of goodness, and that's got to be scary to Rick Perry.
A lot can happen between now and 2006. Perry still has to deliver on school finance reform, and I think that will be a bigger determinant of his ultimate fate than redistricting or the 2003 budget will be. If the economy continues to stumble, the 2005 budget process may make us all nostalgic for this summer, and if so Perry will really be in the soup, but if things turn around Perry can use the fatter receipts to give something to everyone and claim credit for all of it. It's fun to speculate about the season, but we're not even in spring training yet.
(Greg has a take on this as well.)
Such a shame we didn't have time to visit Austria while we were overseas, or we could have stopped in on the Schwarzeneggar Museum.
In Graz, travelers can visit the Arnold Schwarzenegger Museum in the Fitnessparadies gym, with photo displays of Schwarzenegger's bodybuilding victories alongside his old metal barbells. Or they can take in an event at the 15,350-seat Arnold Schwarzenegger Soccer Stadium, dedicated on his 50th birthday in 1997.According to a report in the Orange County (California) Register, recent plans for a massive 82-foot-tall steel statue of Schwarzenegger were "terminated," as the local media liked to say, by the movie star's assertion that the estimated $5 million cost would have been better spent on local charities and services.
The Chron has started endorsing candidates in the last week or so. I'm not at all surprised to see today's endorsement of Bill White for Mayor, since White is exactly the kind of candidate the Chron generally endorses. I'm moderately but pleasantly surprised to see yesterday's endorsement of Annise Parker for City Comptroller, mostly because Bruce Tatro and Gabriel Vasquez good candidates who also fit the Chron's endorsement profile. And I'm disappointed but not too surprised that they endorsed Boy Wonder Berry for City Council At Large Position 5.
Two items of interest in the Chron's endorsement of White. First is how they handled the Other Bill White mini-scandal.
White, in a much publicized incident, paid political activist Brenda Flores $5,000 for "information on effort to confuse voters," when he learned of a scheme to get a second man named William "Bill" White to enter the mayoral race. Flores said she took money from a consultant for another mayoral candidate but backed out of the trick and needed to pay the money back.Candidate White demonstrated at best a remarkable political naivete and appalling lack of judgment, and worse, a troubling tin ear on how engaging in murky dealings with campaign cash might be interpreted.
We believe, however, that White will learn from the mistake.
White has risen to challenges and shown innovation, as when in 2001 he headed a civic task force that formulated a plan to restructure city debt and raise millions of dollars for parks and libraries without increasing taxes or damaging the city's bond ratings.
Mayoral candidates Sylvester Turner and Orlando Sanchez used a televised debate Saturday to double-team opponent Bill White, criticizing him for helping Mayor Lee Brown with city finances in 2001.Turner said White's assistance in refinancing bond debt, which helped the city find an additional $120 million for parks and libraries, also created $51 million in additional debt payments.
[...]
[In 2001], White responded to a request by Brown, the Greater Houston Partnership and the City Council to restructure the city's debt. His plan also included suggestions on how the city could finance its capital improvements program over the next decade, replenish its "rainy day" coffers, and still allow future councils and administrations the financial flexibility to handle contingencies.
The bond package White helped devise allowed the city to issue $776 million in bonds for streets, drainage, police and fire facilities, parks, libraries, housing, and general improvements without a tax increase.
During the debate, Turner said a better plan would have been a debt restructuring that did not cause any additional debt payments.
"Let's not restructure it like we restructure a debt on a credit card, because I think homeowners try to avoid that," Turner said.
White responded that while the average maturity of the debt lengthened from just over six years to eight years, the annual debt payments were lower.
"This is why this plan was endorsed by the major employers in town, the Greater Houston Partnership, was passed through council, was endorsed by the city controller and had no organized opposition," said White, a member of the partnership's executive committee. "The voters of this community voted 80 percent in favor of the bond issue."
Anyway, with the election two weeks off, expect to see an endorsement a day from here on out. I can't wait to see who they select for District H.
During one of the brief times that I got to do a little websurfing last week, I was shocked to read (via Making Light) that there had been a deadly crash involving the Staten Island Ferry. I took the Ferry every day through four years of high school and two summer jobs, and though I was once on board for a ferry accident, I have a hard time wrapping my mind around this one.
It was May 6, 1981, during my freshman year at Stuyvesant High School. I was on the 7 AM ferry, the American Legion, sitting on the top deck with other Stuy kids. It was a very foggy day, a common enough occurrance, but sufficiently foggy that visibility was a few feet. I was peacefully reading the New York Post (my usual habit back then - we got the Daily News home-delivered, and I could get the Times at school) when out of the corner of my eye, I saw someone a row away get up and run towards the back of the boat. I was puzzling over this when I realized that everyone, myself included, was now doing the same thing, and the reason was immediately apparent - another ship was headed right at us, on the right.
It was, I later learned, a Norwegian freighter called the Hoek Orchid. It wasn't going very fast, but it was a lot bigger than the Legion, and it plowed right into us. Wood splintered, glass shattered, the Legion groaned and rocked leftward, and we all watched in awe. The impact slowed the Orchid to a stop, then after a few seconds it backed out and disappeared into the fog again.
I don't really know how far the ferry was from Manhattan, but it reversed engines and headed back to Staten Island, where a bunch of ambulances dealt with the injured. My friends and I were all fine, just shaken up. As it happened, my parents were visiting England at the time and my grandparents were staying with us. I called home and had my grandmother come and get me, figuring that the stars were telling me that this was not a good day to go to school. It was the only day I missed that year.
My next door neighbor Lizzie, who attended the High School for the Performing Arts (you know, the school from Fame, which we just called "PA"), remembered in time that she was carrying a camera with her. She took a roll of photos, including some that showed the bow of the Orchid piercing the walls of the Legion, and sold them to the Post for $500. They ran one of her pics on the front page of their afternoon edition and another the next day.
When I returned to school the next day, one of my homeroom classmates, a girl named Jan, told me that she was really glad to see me. Everyone knew about the crash, and when I didn't show up she was worried I'd been killed. Thankfully, there were no fatalities in that crash.
The Staten Island Advance has a page dedicated to crash coverage, including a listing of ferry accidents since 1871, when a boiler explosion killed 126 people. The most bizarre incident is surely the 1986 one where a deranged man pulled out a machete and went on a rampage, killing two people and wounding nine others. I see that the boat involved in this crash, the Andrew J. Barberi, had a similar but less deadly incident in 1995, in which the same operator was at the helm. That man, Richard Smith, fled the scene of this accident and tried to commit suicide shortly thereafter. We'll see what he has to say about what happened. I'll be checking back, that's for sure.
Among the things that went down while I was off eating cheese and swilling champagne was the revelation that the folks behind the anti-Metro referendum group don't want you to know who they are.
Texans for True Mobility has declined since Monday to release statements about the money it has collected and spent in its campaign to defeat the Metropolitan Transit Authority's Nov. 4 expansion referendum.State Sen. Kyle Janek, R-Houston, a member of the group's advisory board, said that in general, political contributions should be open for public review.
"It is always good when people disclose," Janek said. "When you get into these political issues, I think disclosure is better than nondisclosure."
Harris County Republican Party Chairman Jared Woodfill, also a TTM adviser, said he would have no problem disclosing the names of contributors who don't specifically ask to remain anonymous.
Texans for True Mobility, led by developer Michael Stevens, has blitzed voters with advertisements this week trashing Metro's expansion plan, the centerpiece of which is a $640 million bond issue to add 22 miles of light rail by 2012.
Advocates for open political campaigns decried TTM's decision to form two separate entities bearing the same name: a nonprofit corporation to "educate" voters about the flaws in Metro's plan and a political action committee to "advocate" for the referendum's defeat.Donations to nonprofit corporations are not required to be disclosed under state election laws. Contributions to political action committees, on the other hand, must be disclosed.
TTM's nonprofit arm funded the initial ad blitz, which is why the group said it did not file a campaign finance disclosure by Monday's deadline. But those ads cross the line from education into advocating against the Metro plan, several observers said Thursday.
A four-page color mailer from TTM arriving in mailboxes this week, for example, has phrases such as, "Metro's Rail Plan: Costs Too Much ... Does Too Little," "What's Wrong With Metro's Plan? Just About Everything," and "We cannot afford to waste these precious public dollars."
TTM responds it has a First Amendment right to speak out on a plan proposed by a government agency so long as does not advocate "vote no Nov. 4" or "kill this plan." Andy Taylor, the group's attorney, said it is carefully following the Texas Election Code.Though the code appears on its face to broadly require disclosure of any spending "in connection with an election on a measure," Taylor said, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled such a provision is unconstitutional unless interpreted to ban only spending advocating for passage or failure.
I suppose one can believe in the principle of a First Amendment right of corporations to make secret campaign contributions, but I personally think it's nuts. As Bob Stein alludes to in this article, the only conclusion that I can reach is that these folks don't want to let the masses know what they're up to, presumably because we wouldn't like it if we did know.
Of course, by the time the courts and our toothless Ethics Commission rule on this, we'll all have forgotten about it. The Chronicle is trying to get a list of these contributors and has asked Harris County DA Chuck Rosenthal to investigate, but he won't reveal anything till after the election. In short, TTM can thumb its nose at all of us and has nothing to worry about. That's democracy for you.
Rice has signed on the dotted line to join Conference USA, along with SMU and Tulsa, thus rejoining its former mates Houston and TCU.
Rice University president Malcolm Gillis signed an agreement Friday with Conference USA, paving the way for the Owls to begin play in the league beginning with the 2005-06 academic year.In a statement released by the university Friday, Gillis said the agreement is "contingent upon certain other changes in the national athletic scene," most likely the anticipated departure of current C-USA members Louisville, Cincinnati, Marquette and DePaul to the Big East.
"We're still waiting for the last little piece to the puzzle, but the agreement is in place," Rice athletic director Bobby May said. "We're excited about the opportunity to be a part of Conference USA. It's going to be a lot of fun, and it's going to be challenging. We're very excited."
SMU president Gerald Turner and Tulsa president Robert Lawless issued similar statements, meaning both schools will follow Rice to a revamped 12-team league.
Rice, SMU and Tulsa will join Houston, Tulane and TCU in a Western Division of C-USA, which the schools hope will ease the demanding travel burdens they've found in the WAC and help foster regional rivalries.
"This configuration will allow for very substantial savings in travel costs," Gillis said in the statement. "Even more important, the proximity of these schools will benefit our men's and women's athletic teams through large reductions in time away from class.
"We especially welcome the opportunity to renew old Southwest Conference rivalries with TCU and the University of Houston. We expect to have in the near future a formal announcement with Conference USA regarding its membership realignment."
As for the WAC, the future looks kinda grim to me.
WAC commissioner Karl Benson had been hoping to lure TCU, UH and Tulane away from C-USA but lost the tug of war between the two leagues."I'm obviously disappointed and wanted Rice, SMU and Tulsa to be part of a Central Time Zone division that would have provided them exactly what they expect to receive from Conference USA," Benson said. "I knew that one of us was probably going to lose, and Conference USA probably had the advantage in that they had the existing claim to the region. We'll certainly miss those schools, but I strongly believe the WAC will recover and go on and be successful in some configuration."
Benson had tried to get Rice, Tulsa and SMU to sign an agreement binding them to the WAC, but the schools were concerned about the lack of commitment from the teams in the western portion of the league. The Mountain West Conference is eyeing some WAC teams for expansion, including Fresno State, Nevada, Boise State and Hawaii.
I caught a bit of this in the IHT earlier this week (thankfully, both our B&B and the hotel in Paris had this lifeline for me), but the story has advanced since the last I'd read of it. Apparently, the falling conference dominoes will result in Rice rejoining some traditional rivals in Conference USA.
Rice, a member of the Western Athletic Conference since 1996, will be invited to join C-USA along with fellow WAC schools Tulsa and SMU in the near future, and sources say Rice will accept. Marshall and Central Florida of the Mid-American Conference will also get invitations.[...]
By joining C-USA, Rice and SMU would be reunited with former Southwest Conference foes Houston and TCU. Rice competed in the SWC from 1914 until the league broke up in 1996.
[...]
The four Texas schools would join Tulsa and current C-USA member Tulane in a six-team Western Division that would ease travel burdens and perhaps promote regional rivalries.
The Eastern Division would include Memphis, Southern Mississippi, East Carolina, Alabama-Birmingham, Central Florida and Marshall. Saint Louis and Charlotte, current C-USA non-football members, reportedly will join the Atlantic 10.
We have returned, and in true Houston fashion our arrival was greeted by an overturned 18-wheeler on I-45, thus adding a half hour to our 20-minute drive home. Ah, well, we were enthusiastically greeted by our dog, who'd been picked up from the kennel by our neighbor. We'll be sorting through laundry and mail for the rest of the weekend, but for now it's good to be home. Regular posting will resume tomorrow. Thanks to everyone for the good wishes on our trip!
Bonjour from France! I've got a few minutes and have dropped in at an Internet access shop to get a fix on news and blog stuff. We had a great time in the champagne country, visiting the Mercier, Moet, and Taittinger houses in Epernay and Reims before making the trek back to Paris. Tiffany speaks French fluently, and I know enough to get by, so we've had no problems other than navigational ones (I hate traffic circles). Tiffany is here for a conference, so her touristing is done. I've just left Versailles and am about to head back into town to do some museum hopping before dinner. I may visit another Internet cafe tomorrow (with luck, this one will have an English keyboard), we'll see. I will have a trip report and eventually some photos after we've returned. A bientot!
I'm about to take off for a week in France, in the champagne country outside of Paris over the weekend, and in Paris from Tuesday till Friday when we return. It's possible I'll have some brief Net access while in Paris, but don't expect any regular updates until I get back on Friday. In the meantime, enjoy the many fine blogs linked to on the right and on subpages from there. I'll see you next week.
I have to say, it's not been looking good for Sen. Leticia Van de Putte. Her Democratic colleagues don't recall the "if you act like Mexicans, you will be treated like Mexicans" slur that she says she heard, she's been unavailable to comment for the past two days, and now Republican Senators are demanding that she come clean, even if it means violating the usual tradition of confidentiality in the members' lounge.
Skeptical GOP senators said Van de Putte should say who made the remark."I'll challenge her right now to tell us who said that," said Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound. "If she cannot tell us who said that, then I will have to assume she's not being truthful."
Sen. Kyle Janek, R-Houston, said: "We'll waive confidentiality on this one." Otherwise, "we need to entertain the possibility it wasn't said."
Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, also calling for Van de Putte to name the senator, said: "I am a Republican senator along with 18 other Republican senators. So (she's) put a cloud over all 19 of us."
"There's got to be some way she misunderstood or exaggerated," Wentworth said.
Her Democratic colleagues still believe her:
"All we can do is take our colleague's word on these kind of things," said Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos, D-Austin.Sen. Mario Gallegos of Houston said he believed Van de Putte.
"There's no misunderstanding about a quote like that," Gallegos said. "For the lieutenant governor to say she misunderstood, is an insult to her."
And Sen. Eddie Lucio of Brownsville said: "Whoever said that, there should be sanctions and penalties."
Ram Chavez, the state commander of the American GI Forum, a national Latino civil rights group, said Dewhurst should force an apology from the responsible senator.
"He is the leader of the Texas Senate," Chavez said. "He should call in his state senators and talk to them."
Man, considering that the original article which has spawned however many posts across at least four blogs was, like, eight sentences long, this topic sure is getting a beating. Anyway, here's the latest from Kevin and Rob (here and here).
Let's talk first about partisanship, since Kevin brings it up:
The majority of military personnel who vote absentee vote Republican. But the Democrats, already perceived as weak on foreign policy (and, during the Clinton Presidency, as anti-military), can't really come right out and say they'd like to make it more difficult for those votes to be counted. It's more palatable politically to advocate seemingly reasonable provisions regarding residency.
State party chairs often say egregious things in the name of advancing their side's interests. Susan Weddington supported Rick Perry's decision to let the courts draw Congressional borders in 2001, for example, because she said at the time that the courts would do a fairer job than the Democratic House would. A better question to ask would be whether what White said at that time was a throwaway line in the aftermath of a surprising defeat (i.e., sour grapes) or an actual policy position that he lobbied for? Note that unless the Val Verde election was held in the early spring, the next chance White or any Democrat could have had to push for a bill restricting voter registration in this fashion would have been 1999. Has anyone checked to see if such a bill was actually filed, and if so if Bill White was quoted supporting it? It's fine if you want to hold this against him anyway, I just want to put his sin in perspective. If he did in fact get someone to sponsor a law like this, then you've got my attention.
And of course we can't discuss the partisanship in this issue without noting that Jerry Patterson, the Republican Land Commissioner who brought it up, does not currently reside in Houston, meaning that his primary interest here is nothing but partisanship.
Now, then. On to what Rob says.
I remember this event, it was one of the major events in my life. I was stationed in Virginia at OSIA (now DTRA), lived in Maryland, and had volunteered to take investigational new drugs because I was urged to work on some biological weapons dismantlement projects. I was happy to do it, I thought it was important work and liked the idea of working with something a little dangerous. Being a military interpreter and in cryptology, I sat behind a computer most of the time and wanted to risk my life (a little) in defense of the Constitution of the United States.I was also proud to be a Texan and serious about voting. I had to jump through some hoops to vote absentee and even though I didn't always plan ahead well enough, I got to vote most of the time. I researched issues, called friends back home for advice, my mother mailed me voting guides.
That said, I note that Rob chose to vote in Texas, where he came from, rather than in Virginia or Maryland. I presume he did so because he had a connection to Texas and he cared more about Texas elections than those in his temporary home. Which was exactly my point when I said that the default should be where the person came from. And given that the ballots in question in Val Verde were all mail-in ballots, the level of hassle would have been the same wherever these people chose to vote.
In Rob's later post, he quotes from the Federal Voting Assistance Program.
MILITARYWhere is my "legal voting residence?"
For voting purposes, your "legal voting residence" can be the state or territory where you last resided prior to entering military service or the state or territory that you have since claimed as your legal residence. To claim a new legal residence you must have simultaneous physical presence and the intent to return to that location as your primary residence.
Now, I don't know (and couldn't find via a quick search) when these rules were adopted. Maybe they came into play after 1997 as a result of some Clintonian conspiracy to disenfranchise military voters, and maybe they're widely reviled throughout the armed forces. Maybe not. If they were in place nationally in 1997, then either White was advocating that Texas get in step with the rest of the country, or he was speaking from ignorance since this was already in place. Once again, I have to ask: What's the big stinking deal? We're not saying military folks on domestic or overseas assignments can't vote. We're saying they must vote where their permanent address is, and their permanent address should reflect where they last lived or where they plan to live next.
Given that I'm about to take a week-long hiatus, this is undoubtedly the last thing I'll say on this subject, which is surely a relief to anyone who's read this far.
Lest I forget before I toddle off to Europe, check out this interview that The Talking Dog did with Dick Morris. Interesting stuff.
Looks like Speaker Craddick got the check from the mail and is happy to cash it: The "agreement in principle" is now official.
House and Senate negotiators reached a final agreement early this morning on new congressional districts, said Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine.Staples said the agreement was reached at about 2:30 a.m. Bob Richter, spokesman for House Speaker Tom Craddick, said, "It’s a done deal. It’s a beautiful baby, too."
Gov. Rick Perry’s office scheduled a news conference for this morning.
(UPDATE: You can see the new map here. Thanks to Tom for sending me the link.)
For all the statements about an agreement in principle on a new Congressional map, there sure seems to be a lot of caveats and qualifiers. Take a look at this, for instance.
"I think we're pretty much in agreement on the map, but we haven't seen the map, per se," [House Speaker Tom] Craddick told reporters. "We're very hopeful that we'll have an agreement."His spokesman, Bob Richter, had already offered up a caveat that speaks volumes about the deep divisions that have blocked all previous agreements: "We reserve the right to back out," he said.
One key player in the negotiations, state Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, was not on hand when the agreement was announced by Dewhurst. Duncan and Craddick have wrangled mightily over the configuration of West Texas, with the speaker insisting that a district be drawn anchored in his hometown of Midland.
Duncan had expressed deep concerns that giving in to Craddick's demand might undermine his commitment to protecting a district dominated by West Texas agriculture interests. Craddick came away with his Midland district.
"I think when it became clear that the governor and the speaker were going to get a District 4 Midland, I just tried to get the best deal I could get for the communities of interest in my area," Duncan said.
Legislative leaders said they hope to vote on the new map by Friday -- a day before the Texas-Oklahoma football game in Dallas that many members plan to attend. Less clear is whether they will have to change the date of the 2004 primary election.
"We were told there's a check in the mail," Craddick spokesman Bob Richter said. "We want to see the check."
Today's coverage is here, here, here, and here. Items of interest include uncertainty about the primary date, concerns that several West Texas Republicans in the House will vote against this plan, confidence from Democrats that the courts will not approve of this map, and Tom DeLay taking a victory lap. The Statesman has the most complete word on DeLay's role in all this.
For the three days, DeLay shuttled maps between the offices of the speaker, governor and lieutenant governor as he tried to finish what he had started.In 2001, the Legislature punted to the courts because it was split between Democrats and Republicans. After the 2002 Republican landslide, DeLay insisted that state GOP lawmakers redraw the boundaries to send more Republicans to Congress.
DeLay lobbied state leaders during the regular legislative session this spring and met with Gov. Rick Perry and legislative leaders at the Governor's Mansion this summer before Perry called the first of three special sessions.
DeLay, whose nickname is "the Hammer," kept pounding away for a deal.
"I'm going to stay here as long as I'm useful," he said Tuesday.
State Rep. Pete Gallego, D-Alpine, said he had never seen someone outside the Legislature negotiate a final bill the way DeLay did.
"I don't believe he was here as 'the Diplomat,' " Gallego said. "I believe he was here as 'the Enforcer.' "
In Washington, [Rep. Lloyd] Doggett went to the House floor to underscore DeLay's absence. Saying he wanted to discuss scheduling federal budget matters with DeLay, Doggett said: "He has not been here all week long. He has developed such an affection for my hometown of Austin that we may have to make him an honorary citizen."
Editorials:
The Statesman's Dave McNeely reiterates what he wrote yesterday about this being the swan song for redistricting no matter what until 2011.
The Express News chastises DeLay for his involvement in a state legislative matter.
The Waco Trib decries the specter of moving the primary date.
The Chron slaps DeLay and criticizes the cost of the special sessions.
The Austin Chronicle has some extra coverage here and here.
I suppose you could file this under Good Problems To Have, but I'm trying to figure out which of the myriad of candidates for the District H City Council seat to vote for. I'm hoping that one of Hector Longoria's many opponents can get into a runoff with him, but the question for now is which one to support in the meantime. The establishment candidate seems to be Adrian Garcia, who has the backing of Sylvia Garcia and Carol Alvarado, according to this Press article. Rob Humenik likes Diana Davila Martinez, while Tiffany says she's voting for Gonzalo Camacho, whom she cited as a competent voice of reason on the Woodland Heights email list. There's a candidate forum on October 14 at Zion Lutheran Church, but I'll be inconveniently out of the country at that time.
Hmm. Maybe, in my copious spare time, I'll call some of these people and ask them why I should vote for them. That might be cool.
Tim Fleck has his take on the Dueling Bill Whites story, though there's not much new ground covered. This is interesting, though:
Media coverage of the Bogus Bill scheme was almost as convoluted as the plan itself. Political consultant George Strong was the first to post stories on the subject on his Texas Political Resource Web page. He found out about it at a Planned Parenthood fund-raiser the Friday before the filing deadline. Strong was chatting with White's wife, Andrea, and asked how the campaign was going. She replied, "Bill's real worried because he heard today that somebody's going to get somebody else named Bill White to file for mayor."Strong then made a beeline for White to inquire about the details. When he asked about Bogus Bill, the surprised candidate exclaimed, "Where'd you hear that from?"
Strong posted his first item on his Web site the next day, alerting Houston media. Even with the heads-up, the Houston Chronicle held its potential scoop by John Williams for a week, printing it only after both the Forward Times and KHOU/ Channel 11 had produced stories. It seems that epic libel case filed by Turner against KTRK/Channel 13 after his 1991 race has left a lasting impression on Chronicle editors.
Kevin has some further thoughts on this, including a link to this Chron story which says that the DA's office will take a peek at this.
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said Tuesday that he has started an investigation into an aborted scam to confuse voters by getting a second man named Bill White to run for mayor.Rosenthal said he is uncertain any laws were violated.
"You have to know what the facts are before you know which laws come into play," Rosenthal said.
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst says he hopes Sen. Leticia Van de Putte simply misheard another Senator make a racial slur.
Dewhurst also backed off the previous stance of his office calling for an investigation into whether an unnamed senator told Van de Putte that if Democratic senators acted “like Mexicans, you will be treated like Mexicans.”"It's unbelievable," Dewhurst said, speaking to reporters shortly before a luncheon speech in San Antonio. "I really can't believe any person in the Texas Senate would say such a thing.
"Sen. Van de Putte is a dear friend of mine, but maybe she didn't hear correctly," he said.
"The thing that is offensive to me personally is that she hasn't identified the senator," said Sen. Jeff Wentworth, who said Van de Putte owes it to the public and the Texas Senate to name the senator who allegedly made the comments."I am a Republican senator along with 18 other Republican senators. So (she's) put a cloud over all 19 of us," he said.
Wentworth stopped short of saying Van de Putte lied about the incident, which she said occurred after 11 Senate Democrats returned to the capital last month from New Mexico, where they went to stall consideration of redistricting legislation.
"I just believe there's got to be some way she misunderstood or exaggerated," Wentworth said. He added that the "Capitol rumor mill is very healthy and I just can't believe if that actually occurred, nobody has heard about it in three weeks."
"The senator who said this should identify himself or herself," Ram Chavez said.Asked how Dewhurst should draw an apology for a comment Dewhurst did not hear and from an unidentified senator, Chavez said, "He is the leader of the Texas Senate. He should call in his state senators and talk to them."
Chavez was accompanied by Jesus Castillo of San Antonio, a GI forum member, who said he believes Van de Putte's recollections.
"I believe her 100 percent. I know her. I grew up with her," he said.
LUBBOCK -- Some West Texas men on probation are in trouble again, this time for allegedly using the Whizzinator to help them pass court-ordered urinalysis tests.In the past six months, five men on probation were caught using a realistic-looking prosthesis that dispenses synthetic, drug-free urine, Lubbock County sheriff's officials said. One was caught by an alert officer who heard something unusual in the restroom.
"A body part when it's up against a plastic cup isn't going to go 'clink,' " said Tom Madigan, interim assistant director of the Lubbock County adult probation office.
The device, reusable and available in five flesh colors, is sold by California-based Puck Technology for $150. A prosthetic penis is attached to an undergarment resembling a jock strap and connects to a pouch containing dehydrated urine. Water is added to the pouch, and a heat pack can be attached to keep the urine close to body temperature.Company owner Dennis Catalano has sold the device and one designed for women for about four years, mainly through an Internet site. He said what he does is legal.
"How people choose to use it is beyond our control," he said. "But we manufacture this and sell it for people who believe we still have a semblance of privacy in this country."
At 12:13 PM, the Quorum Report says:
HOUSE AND SENATE REDISTRICTING NEGOTIATORS REACH DEALOfficial announcement to be made early this afternoon
UPDATE: Oopsie! QR has a later entry that says:
WE JUMPED THE GUN ON THE REDISTRICTING MAPNo map yet. Confirmation is that House and Senate adjourned until Friday.
If there was a map, it would be laid out today or brought to the floor of both chambers tomorrow. While there has been some modest movement, as far as we can tell, it is marginal at best.
UPDATE: The papers are now reporting that a deal has been struck in principle. Here's the Dallas Morning News, the Statesman, the Chronicle, and the Star-Telegram. The map is currently being vetted for compliance with the Voting Rights Act and if it passes muster will probably be unveiled tomorrow and brought to the House and Senate floors on Friday. According to Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, if the lawyers give the plan a thumbs down, the Senate will not take up the matter again this year.
"(T)his is the last bite at the apple," Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst told the Statesman on Wednesday. "If our lawyers tell us our plan is legally defensible, we're going on to address school finance, Medicaid reform and other issues. And the governor's office and the (Republican) congressional delegation understand and agree that the Senate's not going to take up this issue again."Dewhurst said the Senate would not consider redistricting again if the Justice Department failed to clear the plan and Gov. Rick Perry called yet another special session on congressional redistricting.
"We're not going to take it up," Dewhurst declared, without going into specifics about how that would occur.
UPDATE: Dewhurst has confirmed the deal, according to the Quorum Report, although the "final details of the map still needed to be ironed out". It should be available tomorrow.
On Day Two of Hammer Time, the newspapers are all reporting that this time, the Republicans really truly are thisclose to finalizing a map.
No compromise maps were released, but both sides agreed that Rep. Tom Craddick, R-Midland, the speaker of the Texas House, had beaten back Senate opposition and prevailed in his dogged pursuit of a district centered in his hometown -- where a former business partner of President Bush is waiting in the wings to run.A House negotiator said some tweaking of districts in the Panhandle and Central Texas remains - and any haggling at this late hour could kill a fragile compromise.
Late Tuesday night, a deal appeared to be close but elusive. "The progress has slowed somewhat, but I am hopeful," said state Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine.
Staples said he hoped he would be able to announce a deal today.
"The primary haggling is not over District 11, the Midland district, but over 13 and 19, the Amarillo and Lubbock districts," said state Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, the chief House negotiator.Another way to put it, as Craddick spokesman Bob Richter did, is that the House speaker "pretty much got what he wanted."
Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, had fought to keep the current lines intact, which made possible the election of Stenholm, a popular conservative Democrat who keeps getting re-elected in Republican territory.
In an interview with the Star-Telegram Tuesday in Washington, Stenholm called Duncan "solid as a rock" and expressed optimism that he would be able to run in whatever district is drawn for him.
But Dave Beckwith, a spokesman for Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, the president of the Senate, said it had never been Duncan's goal to keep a winnable seat for Stenholm.
"Whoever put that out, that he was trying to protect Stenholm, was either wrong or maliciously wrong," Beckwith said. "In order to get these [new Republican] seats, we need Stenholm's."
Beckwith also agreed that Craddick had prevailed in his insistence on a Midland-centered district. K. Michael Conaway, a longtime friend and business partner of President Bush, is Craddick's favored candidate for the seat.
"Craddick won a brand new district for Midland. He won that. That's for sure," Beckwith said.
Stenholm, meanwhile, would face freshman U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, in a GOP-dominated district.
The Republican leaders raced against the clock to get a deal Tuesday, fearing they would lose a GOP quorum in the House this weekend to the Texas-Oklahoma football game."They feel like to get into the Texas-OU weekend, you might lose members on Friday," said Richter. "If you have to go to next week, there's a good chance that a filibuster would throw it off in the Senate."
The University of Texas usually gives free football tickets to legislators, but it is unclear whether lawmakers are being given tickets to this weekend's game, Richter said.
If House and Senate negotiators can hammer out an agreement by early today, the chambers could vote on the final GOP redistricting plan by Thursday. Any further delay would push a floor vote off until at least Friday.
State Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, the lead House negotiator, said he did not think the Texas-OU game would interfere with a Friday House vote if needed.
"I think whenever we're going to have a vote, I think everybody will be here. We're pretty close. If we get a map worked out tonight or tomorrow, and it gets signed off on by everybody ... we could be on the floor Friday, easy."
Anyway, the rest of the coverage is here, here, and here. Not much else there.
While Democrats here (myself included) are spitting mad about the possibility that the primary date may be changed, the various Presidential campaigns weren't sure it would affect them.
"This will sacrifice Texas' voice in the presidential selection process," said Geronimo Rodriguez, an Austin lawyer and state adviser for the presidential campaign of Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, on the moving of the primary back to March 9. "We will know the nominee by the time Texas votes in the primary."But Texas leaders in the presidential campaigns of Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry and Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt were not as certain of the potential influence.
"If they don't go much further than that, we are probably OK," said former Land Commissioner Garry Mauro, Gephardt's point man in Texas. "But March 2 makes Texas more of a player."
Former Lt. Gov. Ben Barnes, the Texas coordinator for Kerry, has projected for months that the nomination would be decided even before March 2.
"It's still hard for me to see a scenario that the presidential race is not over before the first week of March," Barnes said. "I still think the primary will be over before Texas votes, but that one week could make a big difference."
Former state Rep. Glen Maxey of Austin, director of the Howard Dean presidential campaign in Texas, said it's too early to tell what the key date will be.
"Just because we get moved back does not mean we are out of the game in this multicandidate field," he said.
State Rep. Dan Branch, a Dallas Republican and sponsor of the measure that moved the primaries to March 2, said Tuesday that there would be a cost to counties, but not the state, to moving it back to March 9.Branch wanted to move the primaries to avoid the costs involved in opening the schools and other polling places that are closed for spring break on March 9.
"We were saving money because to hold a primary election in a darkened schoolhouse on spring break is 20 to 50 percent more expensive than when schools are opened," he said.
On a lighter note, Alec Baldwin has a gift for Governor Perry.
Actor Alec Baldwin came packing a box of Milk Bones at a Tuesday fund-raiser for Texas House Democrats embroiled in a nationally noticed fight with the GOP over congressional redistricting."I wanted to give this to Tom DeLay's lap dog, Rick Perry," Baldwin told reporters at the private fund-raiser downtown, noting that Gov. Perry has called three special legislative sessions to try to achieve GOP-friendlier congressional districts as sought by DeLay, U.S. House majority leader.
Perry's spokeswoman Kathy Walt, with the governor on a New York trip, returned the shot.
"Alec Baldwin is to acting what Democrats are to Texas — irrelevant," she said.
The fund-raiser was for the "Killer Ds," as supporters call the House Democrats who stalled redistricting in the regular session by fleeing to Oklahoma. More than $50,000 was raised, said Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio.
The money will be used to help re-elect Democratic House members, said Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco, head of the House Democratic caucus.
On to the editorials. The Star-Telegram has a three part piece decrying various aspects of the whole redistricting process. The Morning News says keeping the primary date is more important that the GOP feud. The Statesman bemoans the whole thing. The Express News takes a similar tack while fretting about uncompetitive districts and plugging the Wentworth plan. The McAllen Monitor feels Craddick and Duncan's pain.
Republicans such as Craddick and Duncan have had a taste of what redistricting does — it separates us into haves and have-nots when it comes to congressional representation. While those politicians’ districts get a fair shake under the compromise map, Hidalgo County is once again gerrymandered into two congressional districts, one of which stretches all the way into Central Texas, far from the border with Mexico.This unfairness in drawing the congressional districts won’t go away until the state Legislature has the courage — has the guts — to bring about a fair, impartial redistricting system. There are at least two ways this could come about. The Legislature could create a nonpartisan redistricting committee made up of demographers, geographers and other experts; or it could use a computer program that automatically draws district boundaries according to preset specifications. Either of these methods, or even some combination of the two, would be better than the political mess Texas must endure.
We don’t feel too sorry for Duncan and Craddick. But we’re very familiar with what they’re going through.
Yesterday I pointed to a column by Jan Jarboe Russell in the Express News in which Sen. Leticia Van de Putte said that a Republican Senator, in response to a query about punitiveness, told her that "If you act like Mexicans, then you will be treated like Mexicans." Van de Putte did not name the Senator in question, since the comment was made in the members' lounge, for which there is a tradition of confidentiality, but she said that the exchange was witnessed by Sens. Frank Madla and Judith Zaffirini.
Today, neither Senator verified Van de Putte's claim.
"What senator said that?" Madla said. "I don't recall that comment being made, to be honest with you. Unless we can verify that statement being made, I would rather not make any comment."Zaffirini, saying she was taking painkillers for a broken shoulder at the time, said: "I don't recall the exchange. I recall her (Van de Putte) telling me about the exchange. That was when I was on pain medication. ... I'm sure I was there, but I don't recall it."
Sen. Van de Putte is in a very precarious position right now. She may be telling the truth, but without corroborating evidence it will be very difficult to get anyone to believe her. If she's exaggerating, misrepresenting, or just plain making this up, then she's done herself and her colleagues a grave disservice and she needs to start making it right double quick. I hope she knows what she's doing.
10. At least there won't be a recount.
9. After last week, Arnold now has a much better idea of which women won't mind being groped.
8. Maybe this idea of tossing out people who turn surpluses into deficits will catch on, say, next November.
7. I'll take any distraction from Cubs fans moaning about last night's game at this point.
6. With any luck, Terminator 4 will be shelved indefinitely.
5. You know how everybody loves the backup quarterback until he actually has to play in a game? That's what Arnold will feel like when he finally has to come up with a specific proposal on the budget.
4. California once again takes the lead over Texas in the Most Embarrassing State Politics race.
3. As such, when I'm in France next week, I can tell people "Well, at least I'm not from California."
2. Whoever reserved RecallArnoldNow.com got their money's worth.
And the #1 Silver Lining from the California Recall Election:
1. The next time I hear someone gripe about know-nothing celebrities spouting off on politics, I will say "Two words: Governor Schwarzeneggar."
If this story is really true, it's pretty shocking, even after all that's occurred so far.
San Antonio Sen. Leticia Van de Putte says that on Sept. 18, shortly after the Democrats returned from their 45-day exile in New Mexico, she was in the members lounge and approached a Republican senator with a question: "Why are you being so punitive?"She asked the question moments after Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, had been warned that if she parked her car at the Capitol, it would be towed and after Republicans had placed the Democrats who fled on "probation." Any Senate Democrat absent more than 72 hours will face $57,000 in fines, levied by the Republicans.
Van de Putte, who refers to herself as a "probationer" these days, refuses to name the senator to whom she posed the question. She says one of the rules of the Senate is that anything said in the lounge is privileged. However, she told the Express-News Editorial Board on Monday what the unnamed senator said.
According to Van de Putte, the senator looked at her and said, "If you are going to act like Mexicans, you will be treated like Mexicans."
It's difficult to imagine exactly what the senator could have meant, but it's hard not to read the term "Mexican" as a racial slur. In this day and age, its use is unconscionable. The meaning, at least to Van de Putte, was: If you're going to act like a second-class citizen, then that's the way you'll be treated.
The unnamed senator made the remark, according to Van de Putte, in the presence of Zaffirini and state Sen. Frank Madla, D-San Antonio, as well as four other Republican senators.
What's worse, she says that the four other Republican senators agreed. They nodded their heads and indicated that in 10 years the number of Mexican Americans will increase, but for now, Anglo Republicans have all the power — and they plan to use it.
If Van de Putte is correct, this means that five of the 17 Republican senators are Neanderthals who view the world through dangerous, racist eyes. (Ed. note: There are 19 Republican Senators, not 17.)
Why won't Van de Putte name names? She said she doesn't want to be accused of betraying the confidentiality of the members lounge, but she wants the public to know that it's not just Democrats who are playing the race card — the card is part of the entire redistricting deck.
Moments after that heated encounter, Madla lividly told a news conference: "The last time that I was treated the way we were today on the Senate floor, I think I was about 6 years old when I entered the first grade. I was a little Mexican boy who had his first taste of what white supremacy was about."
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst widely criticized Madla for raising the subject of race. Dewhurst called Madla's remarks "simply cheap, distasteful, juvenile partisan spin."
Why didn't Van de Putte report the senator's slur at the news conference the day it happened? Why wait until now?
"I was startled," she said. Now she wants people to understand the context of Madla's remarks, as well as the context of the Senate's debate.
I did not catch last night's mayoral debate, but like Beldar I'm a bit disappointed that neither Sylvester Turner nor Bill White gave definitive answers to the questions about their role in the Brenda Flores contretemps. I tend to agree with Beldar that White is guilty of nothing more than foolishness, but he's not doing himself any favors by not simply admitting to it. I don't think this will have the kind of legs to be an issue to anyone who's not paying close attention, but why take the chance?
Of course, it's easy for me to say that. The Chron does not appear to be pursuing this story, and it isn't easily described in sound bites, so there's a decent chance it may die a quiet death, in which case making vague noises about looking forward and moving on will suffice to distract most people whereas an admission of something that sounds like wrongdoing even if it's just dumbassery will be a giant red flag. I suppose this is why they pay campaign consultants the big bucks.
Meanwhile, Rob notes a more substantial criticism of Bill White.
Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson attacked Houston mayoral candidate Bill White on Monday for a position he took in 1997 on the voting rights of soldiers.White, as then-state Democratic chairman, advocated that state law be changed to prevent military personnel from voting in local elections unless they intended to return to the state after their service to establish residency.
UPDATE: Alex has a reasonable objection to my complaint, pointing out that folks in the military may not have any other permanent address or they may have joined the military to get away from their prior permanent address. Fair enough. I still believe that the default should be where you came from, but it should not be hard to override that.
Can I just say now how glad I will be to never hear the words California recall election again? I have no guess who will win, and frankly I'm finding it hard to care. Unfortunately, I suspect the only outcome that will guarantee no more recall efforts is for Gray Davis to survive, and I don't know how likely that is. Between this and the neverending redistricting fiasco, it's pretty easy to see why so many people hate politics.
(And is it just me, or is anyone else disappointed that Larry Flynt was a total nonentity in the campaign? I mean, the least he could have done was try to blackmail someone. He's losing his edge.)
You know that redistricting negotiations have really fallen down when Tom DeLay swoops in to try and get a deal brokered.
"I'm a Texan trying to get things done," said DeLay, R-Sugar Land, as he spent hours engaged in cross-rotunda shuttle diplomacy between House Speaker Tom Craddick and the state Senate leadership."There is progress being made. People are working together," DeLay said. "We're close. We're just working out the specifics."
[...]
Legislative sources said DeLay told Craddick last Friday that he did not want the fight over Midland to kill the entire map, which would give the Republicans at least six additional seats in Congress.
"I'm not going to talk about specifics," DeLay said when asked Monday about that discussion with Craddick.
DeLay met for several hours Monday morning with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and Republican Sens. Todd Staples of Palestine and Robert Duncan of Lubbock, who are the lead Senate redistricting negotiators.
DeLay spent most of the afternoon meeting with Craddick and two of Gov. Rick Perry's aides, Chief of Staff Mike Toomey and Deputy Chief of Staff Deirdre Delisi.
After meeting with DeLay, Craddick left the Capitol for about an hour to get a haircut. He refused to talk to reporters.
DeLay then spent much of the evening shuttling between Craddick's and Dewhurst's offices. At one point, Duncan emerged from a meeting with DeLay -- whose nickname in Washington is "the Hammer" -- holding his arm as if it had been twisted.
"There still is no deal," Staples said early in the evening.Sen. Kip Averitt, R-Waco, said that what he knew of Perry's proposal for Central Texas was unacceptable to him. He said it would turn the district of U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, into a district dominated by Tarrant County voters.
Averitt said he supports a proposed Senate map that likely would elect a Waco Republican to replace Edwards.
U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady, R-The Woodlands, and two members of the governor's security detail flanked DeLay as he strode about every half-hour from Craddick's office to Dewhurst's office."We're close," DeLay said Monday afternoon. "Just working out the specifics."
Yet negotiators ended the day with nothing resolved.
Brady said the negotiations were tough because every change caused a ripple effect in other areas of the state.
"Texas is the equivalent of five states," Brady said. "If this were South Dakota, it wouldn't be so tough."
The back-and-forth hiccupped about 8:30 p.m., when Mr. DeLay arrived at Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst's office to discover that Mr. Dewhurst and lead negotiator Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, had left.It was unclear when the talks would resume, as Mr. DeLay tried to broker a deal that has so far defied the mediation skills of Gov. Rick Perry who was out of state Monday to ceremoniously ring the New York Stock Exchange's closing bell.
Let's get back to the negotiations. How are things going, guys?
One negotiator likened the discussions to a divorce dispute, where the parties begin with major disagreements and end up squabbling over custody of a lawnmower."I mean, we're fighting over Deaf Smith County, a place most people couldn't find with a map," said the negotiator, who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity.
Mr. DeLay laughed and declined to comment when asked whether Republicans should have sorted out their differences while Democrats were in New Mexico, blocking a quorum for six weeks.
DeLay may find the question of why Republicans still don't have this issue worked out among themselves, but some other Republicans aren't laughing. Let's see how many familiar themes we can find here.
"This is the strangest thing I've ever seen in my 14 years in the Texas House," state Rep. Toby Goodman, R-Arlington, said Monday. "One would certainly think that the Republican leadership would have had an agreed-to map before we went into all of these special sessions. And here we are nearing the end of the third special session, and we still don't have an agreed-to map."I am getting e-mails by the bucket saying, 'What are you guys doing down there?' "
State Sen. Kim Brimer, R-Fort Worth, called on both players in the impasse to put the state's overall interests ahead of any local concerns."There is frustration out there with our constituents that we're bogged down with redistricting," said Brimer, who served 14 years in the House before moving to the Senate this year. "I'm frustrated, too. I wish these guys from West Texas would quit thinking they run the whole state. It's time to do what's best for Texas."
"When Texans learn that all of this is costing them $57,000 a day, not to mention the $10 million, at least, it will take to defend any map from the legal challenges, they're going to be hopping mad," said state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, an El Paso Democrat who was among the 11 who left for Albuquerque.State Rep. Charlie Geren, a Fort Worth Republican in his second term in the House, said many of the Texans he knows have already made the calculation. And Geren said he gets an earful on the topic from his customers at the Railhead Smokehouse in Fort Worth.
"Every time I go into the restaurant, I hear about the $57,000 a day it's costing the state for these special sessions," Geren said. "I get calls every day saying with the money we're spending, we could be funding more of CHIP [the state-paid Children's Health Insurance Program] or some other program. And they're right."
"How does this end? Somebody's got to blink," Brimer said. "The governor has got to be the one to go tell somebody to back off. If he's going to avoid having to call a fourth special session, he'd better get the third one wrapped up."Goodman expressed doubts that a solution would be that simple.
"I don't think the governor has the political capital to get it done," Goodman said. "I don't think Tom Craddick is going to bow to the will of Rick Perry any more than he would bow to the will of Robert Duncan or [Lt. Gov,] David Dewhurst."
Gene Acuna, Perry's spokesman, said that although the governor was in New York on state business Monday, he has been active in the effort to find a solution."The governor's office has been actively and appropriately engaged in the process," Acuna said. "We are involved."
Whatever finally happens, the effects of this exercise will be felt for awhile. I know the GOP leadership doesn't care, but I for one will be pissed if I don't get to cast a meaningful vote in the Democratic Presidential primary. There's also the potential costs of moving primaries around.
A typical primary runs the state about $10 million, said Jonathan Black, a spokesman for the Texas secretary of state's office. If the entire primary were to be moved to another date, there would be no added costs.But if legislators decide to split the primary into two — one for congressional seats and runoffs and another for all other races — the state would have to come up with $7.2 million more.
In Bexar County, a primary costs about $250,000, said Bexar County Elections Administrator Cliff Borofsky. If the Legislature decides to have a split primary, that cost would double. Local party offices would pick up some of that tab, he said.
What has been lost during these fabricated hostilities is that these cities and towns — Abilene, San Angelo, Lubbock, Brownwood, Sweetwater, Big Spring, Midland/Odessa — share a vast range of common interests that is being overshadowed and disrupted by petty, provincial bickering. These cities should be working together for the mutual benefit and economic development of all of West Texas, not working against each other for the narrow, small-scale advantage of one or two.Abilenians don’t have anything against people in Lubbock or Midland or anywhere else in West Texas, and aside from the jockeying for position forced by redistricting, residents of those places wouldn't have anything against us, either. Divisiveness among ourselves will only lessen this rural region’s political status and further enhance that of the faster-growing metropolitan areas to the east.
No matter where we end up with congressional districts, rifts have been torn between communities that will not be repaired overnight. The creation of antagonisms where none previously existed may be a more significant, longer-lasting and detrimental effect of redistricting than any advantage that might be gained by temporarily altering the partisan makeup of Congress.
Finally, here is Rep. Jim Dunnam's account of what happened on Sunday.
A number of House members were present for the 2:00 PM House session Sunday. We arrived early, intent on objecting and amending the motion to adjourn, which we knew would be coming. Along with other members present, I asked our Deputy Parliamentarian specifically how we could be assured that our objections to the motion that day would be timely considered by the Speaker. She informed me that all we had to do was orally object when the motion was made.I was not privy to our Parliamentarian's conversation with the Speaker prior to convening on the dais, but we assume she advised the Speaker of our intentions since they spoke on the dais before the roll call. Immediately after gaveling in the House, which totally ignored the proper order of business, the Speaker announced that Rep. Phil King was moving to adjourn. All of the Democratic members present objected repeatedly, in the end yelling our objections since the Speaker appeared intent on ignoring us.
The Speaker immediately left the dais and the Sergeant's office proceeded to shut down the House chamber as we informed the Parliamentarian that we had sufficient members and wanted to appeal the ruling of the Speaker regarding the adjournment motion. In brief, everyone from the Parliamentarian to the Journal Clerk and Chief Clerk left the chamber almost immediately.
This NRO piece by Jennifer Graham is stupid, condescending, and racist. Jesse has a great and appropriate response. Check it out.
Some positive news and an head-slap moment for rail this week. First, a Page One story about commuter rail from Fort Bend County.
While the battle over the referendum for Metro's 22-mile Houston rail expansion heats up, leaders in Fort Bend County are putting together a commuter rail project that could deliver thousands of suburbanites to downtown and the Texas Medical Center.Fort Bend leaders say a commuter line connecting the fast-growing county with Metro's light rail system could be one way to ease traffic problems and provide greater mobility to a wider area.
Missouri City Mayor Allen Owen said people eventually will want to take rail from Fort Bend County to such destinations as Hobby Airport, the Galleria and Bush Intercontinental Airport.
"Every day when I am out in public, someone walks up to me and asks, 'How is the train line coming?' " Owen said.
The Fort Bend line would use the U.S. 90A rail corridor to shuttle riders from Rosenberg to Metro's light rail station in the area of Fannin and Loop 610.
The final report has not been released, but some preliminary findings have been made public.The 25-mile project would start in Rosenberg and run through Richmond, Sugar Land, Missouri City and Stafford to Houston. The line would connect to Metro's Fannin South Park & Ride lot near Reliant Stadium, where commuters could change trains and head on to the Texas Medical Center and downtown.
Stations are planned in each Fort Bend County city and one in southwest Houston.
Earl Washington, special transportation planner for the council, said the final report should be finished in December.
In March, Washington said the preliminary report found that building the project would cost between $75 million and $126 million. He said ridership was estimated at 3,000 to 5,000 each weekday. Owen said new ridership figures are higher than originally thought, between 6,000 and 11,000 people on weekdays.
Sugar Land Mayor David Wallace said new construction estimates put the price at between $350 million and $700 million.
Anyway, the general tone from the folks who live out that way is that they want this to happen, and though he leaves himself plenty of wiggle room later to change his mind, even Tom DeLay sounds like he'd allow such a thing. (I know, it's one of the seven signs.) So far, so good.
If only Metro weren't its own worst enemy, we might someday have a rail system that includes commuter lines to the far-flung suburbs.
As conservative opponents gear up to derail Metro's transit referendum, there's also dissatisfaction with the agency from an unlikely quarter: Hispanic rail allies. They are unhappy over the decision by the pro-rail Citizens for Public Transit political action committee to hire a San Antonio-based ramrod for the campaign.The campaign manager, Eddie Aldrete, also worked for former Democratic congressman Ken Bentsen in his unsuccessful U.S. Senate bid last year. Critics claim he was hired at the behest of former Bentsen congressional staffer Pat Strong. She signed a personal services contract early this year with Metro to coordinate communications activities with a maximum payout of $120,500 through next month.
Aldrete's last Texas rail experience was hardly encouraging. He managed the San Antonio transit agency's unsuccessful light rail referendum three years ago.
"It's totally insulting to our community and our politics," says consultant Marc Campos. He works for mayoral candidate Sylvester Turner and did not apply for the campaign manager position himself. Campos argues Houston has plenty of experienced candidates for the job who are familiar with the community, but Metro PAC officials made it clear they were not interested in the locals.
He says he told Metro chair Arthur Schechter that "we don't deserve to be treated that way. You guys do all this stuff and come to us and expect us to be there for you. Those days are over."
Bruce Davidson cites a report by former political director of the Texas Republican Party and current analyst for the Quorum Report Royal Masset on current demographic trends and its likely effect on Texas' voting patterns.
"Republicans will start losing judicial races in Dallas County in 2004. After the 2008 general election, Democrats will hold many state level district judicial offices in Dallas County," Masset wrote in a January study conducted for advocates of a merit/retention selection system for Texas judges.He added, "By 2017, most district judicial offices in Harris County and all in Dallas County will be held by Democrats. These projections are based on ineluctable current trends."
The statewide growth of the GOP has masked the changing voting patterns in Dallas and Harris counties, he said.
"The election of judges is largely determined by the partisan tides of any given election and by longer-term demographic factors," Masset noted.
In Dallas and Harris counties, Republican candidates have continued to win, but by margins smaller than the statewide results. The growing weakness of the GOP is more pronounced in Dallas than Harris. For example, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Judge Paul Womack, a Republican, snared 57.39 percent of the statewide vote in 2002. But Womack got 51.21 percent of the vote in Dallas and 54.85 percent in Harris. Other statewide races show the same trend.
In 1990, Dallas County's Anglo population was 60 percent, but it dropped to 44 percent in 2000. Harris County's Anglo population dropped from 54 percent to 42 percent in the same period.
In Dallas, Hispanic population increased from 17 percent to almost 30 percent from 1990 to 2000, while Harris' Hispanic population jumped from 22 percent to almost 34 percent.
Republicans have made inroads among Hispanic voters, but Hispanics still tend to vote Democratic. "The most favorable Republican interpretation of Hispanic voting patterns in Texas would lead to the conclusion that Hispanics voted about 35 percent for Republican candidates in 2002 compared to 25 percent for Republican candidates in 1982," Masset concluded.
Mark Evanier mentions an aspect of the Roy Horn tiger-mauling story that I hadn't considered.
Beyond the obvious tragedy here, it's sad to think about how many lives this accident has impacted. Most of the 150-180 people who worked on the show are suddenly unemployed at a time when no other show is hiring.[...]
Years ago, I heard someone talking about what it meant to do a good job running a business...any business. He said, "One measure of being a good executive is to make sure that if you get hit by a car tonight, someone could walk in tomorrow morning and begin doing your job and keeping the company functioning." It probably doesn't work that way all the time in most industries but it almost never works that way in show business.
Life sure is tough at the University of Houston these days.
In the abstract, Kathy Anzivino believes there must be some pinnacle of amenities that universities simply cannot surpass, some outer limit so far beyond the hot tubs, waterfalls and pool slides she offers at the University of Houston that even the most pampered students will never demand it and the most recruitment-crazed colleges will never consent to put it on their grounds.She just has a hard time picturing what that might be.
"There's got to be one, but what it is, I don't know," said Ms. Anzivino, director of campus recreation at the university, which opened a $53 million wellness center this year.
Beyond its immense rotunda stands a five-story climbing wall that looks as if it was transported straight from Arches National Park, while boulders and palm trees frame the leisure pools outside.
"Everyone says it looks like a resort," she said.
And so the Sunday drop-dead deadline has whooshed past with map in sight and the Lege adjourned until Wednesday. What a glorious mess this is.
Hardly any ink was expended on the reason for the Republicans' failure, since the reason hasn't changed since the get-go: Tom Craddick wants a Midland district, Robert Duncan doesn't, and never the twain shall meet. The big issue now is what to do with the primary date.
Secretary of State Geoff Connor has said that if a plan is not adopted by midnight today he will not be able to conduct a primary as scheduled on March 2. Connor, the state's chief elections officer, said the primary would have to be moved to March 9."I know the Senate was very determined to get this done before we had to change any primary dates," said Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, one of the Senate negotiators. "We have, in essence, missed that deadline."
Duncan said that if a redistricting bill is passed, the primary date will have to be pushed back for the new congressional district lines to be used in the 2004 elections.
"Right now, we don't have any choice if we want to move a redistricting bill forward," said Duncan.
But Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, leader of the House negotiators, said he does not believe that deadline is firm. He said once a redistricting agreement is reached, negotiators will ask Connor to reassess whether the primary date must be moved.
"I think there's a little bit of flexibility. I'm going to rely on the secretary of state," King said.
If a redistricting bill is passed, it would not take effect until 90 days after Gov. Rick Perry signs it. Connor's office then would need enough time to allow candidates to file for the races, print ballots and hold early voting.
The primary date was shifted from March 9 to March 2 under a bill approved during the regular legislative session. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, said the primary was moved so it will not be held in the midst of the public school spring break.
Branch last week said he did not believe there were enough votes in the House to move the primary back to March 9.
King and House Speaker Tom Craddick said they have the votes to move the date. Duncan said he did not know whether the Senate could support the date change.
By moving to March 2, Texas joined some of the nation's largest states in holding a presidential primary on the same day. The other states include California, New York and Ohio.
"If the primary is moved from March 2, Texas Democrats will have no voice in who will be the nominee of the Democratic Party," said state House Democratic Chairman Jim Dunnam of Waco.
Dunnam said most candidates will have been winnowed out of the race either before or on March 2.
"I'd like to have a voice in who is going to oppose George Bush," Dunnam said.
Rep. Garnet Coleman, D-Houston, described moving the primary as un-American.
"That's something that happens in other places," Coleman said. "We don't move elections in the United States of America to make room for power grabs."
Once it became known that the committee negotiations had broken down again and that the Lege would adjourn, the real action from yesterday was set in motion.
With redistricting at an impasse, both legislative chambers had been out of action since Thursday. But they had to reconvene Sunday to avoid breaking a state constitutional requirement that prohibits either chamber from taking more than three consecutive days off during a legislative session.So [Speaker Tom] Craddick called the House to order to hear a motion to adjourn until Wednesday. But just as he was slamming down his gavel to make the adjournment official, about a dozen Democrats shouted their objections.
If Craddick had not ignored them, the Democrats would have offered an amended motion to call off the session and send House members home. And it might have worked because almost none of the Republican members had shown up to vote it down.
"Our intention was to move to adjourn sine die and put an end to all of this," said Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, using the Latin phrase that translates roughly to "without a set date" and is legislative slang for calling it quits.
Democrats later accused Craddick of ignoring House rules and operating in a "dictatorial" fashion. Through a spokesman, Craddick, R-Midland, said that the Democrats were late in announcing their objection and that the gavel fell before their voices were raised.
"He didn't know what they were up to," said Bob Richter, the speaker's press secretary. "He knew there were certain troublemakers out on the House floor, and [House leaders] were expecting something, but they didn't know what it was."
Outnumbering the Republicans 12-2, the Democrats tried to turn a routine adjournment into a coup. They attempted to amend the motion to adjourn for the day and end the third special session over congressional redistricting.But one of the two Republicans, Speaker Tom Craddick, would have none of it.
He gaveled the House to adjournment until Wednesday as the Democrats yelled their objections. The speaker then stormed off the House floor.
"He called us Chicken D's," said Rep. Rick Noriega, D-Houston, recalling Craddick's nickname for the 51 Democrats who fled to Oklahoma in May to stop a vote on congressional redistricting. "But I never saw anyone run as fast as he did. It was a complete act of cowardice."
The rare Sunday meeting had been called in case Senate and House Republican negotiators had resolved their differences over their versions of a new congressional map. They hadn't, so Craddick expected a routine adjournment in which only one member shows up to make the motion to adjourn.
Instead, Rep. Jim Dunnam, the leader of the House Democrats, had organized a dozen Democrats to be on hand to fight any attempt to make the House meet today, Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish year. Austin Reps. Elliott Naishtat and Eddie Rodriguez were among the dozen.
But when the Democrats realized they outnumbered the Republicans, they thought they'd try to end the special session altogether.
Dunnam said the speaker's quick gavel was another example of an autocratic leader with a Republican majority overrunning the Democrats -- even when the Republicans didn't show up. He said Sunday's brouhaha is likely to end up in litigation over a final map.
Craddick, through press secretary Bob Richter, said a speaker has two choices when there is no quorum to conduct business: put out a call for missing members or adjourn
So anyway, there probably won't be any further news until Wednesday. The special session has one week left to go - it expires on October 13.
Finally, Carl Leubsdorf of the Dallas Morning News takes a ride on the Hutchison for Governor bandwagon. Expect to see more of this if Perry is forced to call a fourth session.
UPDATE: Austin TV station KVUE filmed the Dems' attempt to adjourn sine die. Judge for yourself if they objected before the gavel hit the podium. Registration required. Via the Quorum Report.
The crew at The Agonist have put together a timeline of events in the ongoing Diebold electronic voting machine scandal. Check it out, and check out their initial report on why there's such a fuss to begin with. It's a good intro if you're not familiar with what's been going on, and a good recap if you are.
Today the Chron has the second of its overviews of the three major Mayoral candidates with a profile of Sylvester Turner. It's more straightforward than last week's Sanchez piece, most likely because there were no swooning women to quote about Turner's good looks. Turner has a good resume and a good case to make, and in other years I'd support him. If it's him versus Sanchez in the runoff, I'll support him. But until then, Bill White is still my guy.
I presume the White profile will be next week. I hope I can still find it on the Chron's webpage after I get back to town.
The legendary King Ranch is holding its first cattle and horse sale since 1988 to help celebrate its sesquicentennial.
A unique bull fetched $45,000, and a 15-year-old mare that had never been bred sold for $41,000, bringing the auction's grand total to $838,000. Of that amount, $179,000 will go to the new King Ranch Institute of Ranch Management at Texas A&M University-Kingsville.San Antonio Spurs owner Peter Holt, a Blanco rancher whose family has held a hunting lease on the King Ranch since the 1930s, spent $20,000 apiece for a horse and saddle.
"My wife likes horses," he said with a smile.
"It wasn't just generosity," Holt added. "We're glad to do it, but we very much are in the horse business."
[...]
[Captain Richard] King founded the ranch in 1853 when it was part of the Wild Horse Desert. From a few thousand acres, it has grown to 825,000 acres. Houston-based King Ranch Inc. also has extensive land holdings in Florida, but its renown continues to come from its South Texas horse and cattle operations.
Tio Kleberg of Kingsville, the last family member to have lived on and run the ranch, said the anniversary events allowed the owners to show gratitude to the community and the ranch's patrons for generations of collaboration.
"There's a lot of nostalgia here. It brings back a lot of people that we haven't seen for years, and it's really nice to have them back and to share this tradition with us," Kleberg said.
Ranch general manager Paul Genho said the horse and cattle sale, one year in the making, enabled the ranch to share some of its finest products with the public. Bidders came from throughout Texas, the United States and Mexico.
"King Ranch has always been progressive, but the last five to 10 years we've focused a lot on making our product meet consumers' needs," he said.
"We just sold a bull that carries all the desirable (steak) genes -- every one of them -- for $45,000. I think it was about half of what it's worth," he said, explaining that the Santa Gertrudis bull named Ricardo was unique.
"It's the only bull in the breed with all those genes, and there's been a lot of bulls tested," Genho said. It was purchased by a consortium of 11 breeders in Texas, Alabama and Arkansas.
"They're going to collect the semen and spread it around," Genho said.
While the animal sales were for the ranch's benefit, auctions of the saddle, hunting trips and other items were devoted to the institute, which has an endowment goal of $10 million.
In the coming months, an endowed chair will be filled and eventually students will learn how to manage large ranches by taking business, agriculture and other related courses.
"We've raised $7.5 million," Genho said proudly. Most of the funds came from the ranch's stockholders.
UPDATE: Here's some more on the King Ranch, from the Chron's Sunday magazine, which I managed to miss the first time around. Did I mention that the King Ranch has a website? Well, now I have.
There's still no deal on a new Congressional map as the joint committee keeps lobbing maps back and forth with no progress being made.
Despite working around the clock the past couple of days, House and Senate Republicans late Saturday had not agreed on a map that would increase the number of Republicans from Texas in Congress. Democrats currently hold a 17 to 15 advantage under a map drawn by three federal judges in 2001. Republicans believe they can increase their clout in Congress by four to six seats with new districts.Gov. Rick Perry has said the Legislature must give him a map sometime Monday to avoid postponing the state's primaries. But state lawmakers were bumping up against internal legislative deadlines for producing a compromise over the weekend.
Senate and House negotiators swapped maps Saturday and blamed one another for their failure to agree to a deal.
Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, the House's chief negotiator, said the House made a "great offer" at 3 a.m. Saturday. The Senate countered with another offer later Saturday.
"I'm willing to keep negotiating, but this map couldn't get a majority in the House," King said of the Senate counter-proposal.
He then went home to nap.
Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, King's counterpart, said House negotiators are "obviously sleep deprived" because of their criticism of the Senate map.
Staples and Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, planned to dine with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst Saturday night, then return to the Capitol in case negotiations resumed.
If not, Staples and Duncan said they planned to watch the Texas Tech-Texas A&M game on TV. Staples is an Aggie; Duncan is from Tech. On the redistricting field, however, they are allies.
Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, the House's lead negotiator in the redistricting effort, said Saturday that his side could not accept a Senate-backed plan because it would be too generous to Democrats.King's counterpart in the Senate, Palestine Republican Todd Staples, said later that the House negotiators must be "suffering from sleep deprivation," because they were rejecting a map that, in many respects, was identical to one he said they had offered a day earlier.
Both sides have been working into the wee hours of the morning trying to reach an agreement on a redistricting plan that would give Republicans as many as six additional seats and end the Democrats' 17-15 advantage in the state's congressional delegation.
"I'm willing to keep negotiating, but this map couldn't get a majority in the House," King said of the Senate version.
The problem, he said, is that the Senate plan would have only 17 solid Republican seats with the possibility of the party winning two more. The most recent House offer, King said, contains 19 solid Republican seats and gives the GOP a chance at two others.
Staples disputed King's assessment, saying that the Senate's plan would produce 20 or more Republican seats.
"The Senate map is eminently fair and should elect more Republicans than the House map," Staples said.
The Republicans want to eliminate the district of Frost and make up for it under the Voting Rights Act by increasing the black population in U.S. Rep. Chris Bell's Houston district.Both districts currently are districts in which minority voters influence the outcome of elections and thus are protected under federal law.
Republicans have contended that by cutting Bell's home out of his district and increasing its black population, they are creating a new black district that offsets the loss of Frost's district in Dallas. The Republicans would change the number of Bell's district from the 25th to the 9th.
King said he was caught by surprise when one of his lawyers raised questions about the proposed District 9, which has been in every House map passed in three special sessions.
"Obviously, when you have one of the attorneys say, `This is a problem,' and you're 24 hours away from voting something out, that's a concern," King said.
"They're concerned the (black population) enhancement in 9, or Chris Bell's district, is not sufficient to offset the loss of Martin Frost's district."
Meanwhile, [State Sen. Rodney] Ellis said he has no doubt that the Republican proposals for Bell's district would doom the GOP redistricting effort in a federal court trial.
"They will come perilously close to having their effort to do mid-decade redistricting struck down in the courts, if they tinker with the 25th," Ellis said.
"The 25th already is a minority opportunity district. If a strong African-American challenger got into that race now, they probably would win."
Ellis disputed remarks by state Rep. Ron Wilson, D-Houston, who said increasing the black population of the district would guarantee the election of a black politician.
Ellis said a black candidate could win there now but that most black leaders would rather save Democratic districts in general than gain a single black representative.
"Most of the African-American leaders are able to count. To pick up one African-American seat sooner and lose six to nine, that's just bad math," Ellis said.
Ellis said blacks know they can count on Democrats to vote to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act when it comes up for renewal in 2006.
Bell spokesman Eric Burns said the congressman won the Democratic runoff in 2002 with 32 percent of the black vote. Burns said that since that time, Bell has worked with the black community and believes he could win re-election even under the Republican plan.
U.S. Rep. Gene Green, D-Houston, another Anglo, is cut out of his heavily Hispanic district in the Republican plans. But most of the new district would be what he represents now. Green likely could win re-election, though he might face a tougher Democratic primary involving a Hispanic challenger.
Republican infighting had Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo, longing for a fresh exodus."We're just praying the Democrats will leave again, to take the heat off of us," Smithee said.
Finally, the editorialists have gotten back into the game. The Statesman again calls for a nonpartisan redistricting committee for the future; the Star-Telegram chastises Rep. Phil King for his remarks that the public doesn't care when the primaries are; the Corpus Christi Caller-Times notes that the GOP has no one but themselves to blame for the current impasse; and the Chron rebukes Speaker Craddick for scheduling a House session on Yom Kippur.
More comment spams, from a different jerk. The IPs to ban are:
64.191.20.166
216.228.168.110
206.163.168.8
I'm going to keep track of these in the original post for eacy reference. Look for a link on the sidebar.
So I met a number of Houston's finest lefty bloggers at Two Rows brewpub last night, during which time we talked about music, hoisted a few beers, and finalized our plans to take over the world. In attendance were Michael Hatley and a nonblogging friend of his whose name sadly escapes me, Bob Dunn, and Stephen Bates, all of whom I was meeting for the first time and all of whom now need to be added to my list of Bloggers I know personally, and also Michael Croft, who's an old friend. A good time was had by all, and a sequel will be planned for next month.
This morning Tiffany and I dragged our bodies out of bed bright and early so we could drive up to Conroe to work on a house. Tiffany's employer is partnering with Habitat for Humanity of Montgemoery County, and today was our day to be part of the work crew. I spent the morning measuring, sawing, drilling, hammering, and caulking, mostly hammering and mostly up on a ladder. It was an interesting experience, and given my usual level of cluelessness with tools, I did all right. Not that hammering is all that challenging, but hey, you have to start somewhere.
Tonight is Rice versus San Jose State, tomorrow is gardening and some prep for our trip to France. I'm gonna need the rest at this pace.
As if redistricting weren't enough to fry my brain, there's this strange story of an attempt to run a fake mayoral candidate with the same name as a real one in order to confuse voters.
It is a bizarre tale that includes a Democratic U.S. congressman, a secret tape recording, a $5,000 campaign check and a floppy straw hat sold for $1,200.And it is a tale that raises as many questions as it answers.
At the heart of the story is a $5,000 campaign check that mayoral candidate Bill White cut to political gadfly Brenda Flores after thwarting plans she said she devised to put another Bill White on the Nov. 4 ballot.
During the week before the Sept. 22 filing deadline, Flores claims, she gave an Acres Homes man named William White $1,200 in cash after he signed candidacy papers to run for mayor.
Flores backed out of her plans to file the papers the day before the filing deadline, after meeting at her Spring Branch home with candidate Bill White and Democratic U.S. Rep. Chris Bell, a friend of Flores' since his days on City Council.
Flores told White and Bell that she had originally received cash to carry out the ballot chicanery from a consultant associated with the mayoral campaign of state Rep. Sylvester Turner.
Turner vehemently denied that his campaign had any involvement in the scheme, calling the claim "outlandish."
"There is no basis in fact to that," Turner said.
Flores said she has no knowledge that Turner was personally aware of the plan.
Flores claims she used $2,600 of the money White gave her to repay the Turner consultant after Flores backed out of the plan. A friend of Flores', Dennis Keim, said he delivered the cash to Turner campaign headquarters and secretly tape-recorded the encounter.
Turner said he is worried that his campaign may have been set up. He questioned why White would give Flores money.
"I think I am entitled, and so is the public, entitled to know -- did he (White) write this check because he was extorted? Did he write this check in order to concoct this story?" Turner said. "I think I am entitled to know this."
White said he was not extorted. He said he did not concoct the story to hurt the Turner campaign.
Instead, White said, he gave the money to Flores two days after the filing deadline because she said she had spent most of the money she received from the Turner consultant and feared retaliation if she did not repay it.
White said there was no discussion about paying Flores during the meeting at her home and that the idea was presented to him after the filing deadline.
"She called Chris Bell several times to say that she had been threatened, and I relied on his judgment that she felt threatened," White said. "So, I relied on the judgment of an experienced and credible person."
Kevin has some good coverage of this as well. I'd never heard of Brenda Flores before now, but I wholeheartedly agree with Kevin on this point - the design of her Housnitch.com (no link - it's not worth it to me) web page sucks rocks and takes forever to load to boot (and I've got a cable modem and a fast machine). I've now written the name Brenda Flores down on the same piece of paper that contains the likes of Sam Texas and Whitney Broach so I'll know to pay attention to the alarm bells that will ring the next time I hear her name mentioned.
UPDATE: Stephen Bates has a take on this as well.
UPDATE: Beldar asks some good questions and points to this account from White and Rep. Chris Bell on George Strong's site. Having read that, it reminded me that I'd seen this earlier mention of the "two Bill Whites" but never gave it a second thought. Jack wonders if being Mayor is worth all this. No update in today's Chron.
Well, after reading the usual five sources for redistricting news, I officially have no idea if a deal is imminent, on the horizon, or nowhere in sight. There's compromises, cut-n-paste jobs, still no agreement on West Texas, and a renewed attempt by the GOP to move minority voters around in order to kill off Martin Frost and Chris Bell without violating Voting Rights Act laws. Both chambers are now adjourned until Monday instead of Sunday, and now Governor "What, me worry?" Perry is saying that the drop-dead deadline of Monday isn't so drop-deady any more. My brain hurts.
Judge for yourself here, here, here, here, and here. I just want to quote one bit, from the Express News, in which our Governor shows once again why he is the leader that he is.
Gov. Rick Perry, who has pushed for redistricting, has said he'd prefer not to change the filing deadline or primary date, but he'll support such a move if redistricting hinges on it."The world doesn't stop turning on its axis if we don't get something done by Monday," he said Friday. "Obviously my druthers would be that we have a bill by Sunday close of business and we don't have to move filing deadlines or primaries. But again, if that does not occur, it doesn't long-term substantially do damage."
He said he remains optimistic that negotiations would end successfully, and he continued to blame Democrats.
"When you leave and go to New Mexico, you're not just protecting some political cronies, you're also costing people in the state of Texas a heck of a lot of money," Perry said, referring to a 45-day walkout by 11 Senate Democrats who fled to Albuquerque to stall the redistricting issue.
Anyway, something to look forward to when this mess winds up in court: According to the Quorum Report, four Texas Democratic members of Congress have joined the Texas House Democratic Caucus in filing amicus briefs in the case of Vieth v. Jubelirer, concerning whether a state legislature, in this case Pennsylvania, can redraw congressional districts so as to minimize the likelihood that a particular political party’s candidates will win in the election. From QR:
Reps. Martin Frost (D-Dallas), Chris Bell (D-Houston), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Houston) and Nick Lampson (D-Beaumont) hope the court will set a new standard for partisan gerrymandering that would impact any new congressional plan passed by the Texas Legislature."The Pennsylvania case could become a very important issue," said Frost, leader of the Texas congressional delegation and a target for many Republicans in the current redistricting shake-up.
We finally broke down and got TiVo recently. Actually, more accurately, I finally convinced Tiffany that we needed TiVo. Our VCR had coughed up a hairball, and rather than replace it, since we mostly used it to tape stuff that we watch regularly, we agreed that TiVo was the way to go.
We havn't installed it yet, though. It requires a phone jack to connect to the TiVo network, and there isn't one where the TV is. I'm off today, and had a guy come in to add a jack, only to discover that our phone box is not actually on the exterior of the house - it's on a pole behind the garage, with a buried cable running into the house. As that made adding a jack extra difficult, I'm going to follow the guy's advice and hit a Radio Shack for a wireless jack. I'd better be prepared to sacrifice a chicken to ensure it doesn't interfere with the wireless router. Cross your fingers for me.
Meanwhile, I loved Wednesday's Angel premier, but I'm confused about Charisma Carpenter's departure from the cast. This article makes it sound like it was not her decision, which surprises me greatly. She's still got a cast bio up on TheWB.com, even if it's not linked directly from the Angel main page, and surely Joss Whedon wouldn't leave Cordelia's status so unresolved, but her absence from the show will be really felt.
I still loved the opener, and unlike this reviewer (warning: contains minor spoilers) I liked the new character Eve. But I really want Cordy back. It's just not the same without her.
Things continue to be a mite sticky for Republicans in Austin, with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst letting out a little steam over Speaker Tom Craddick's negotiating style.
Frustrated by negotiations over congressional redistricting, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst on Thursday accused Speaker Tom Craddick of negotiating like an "Iranian cabdriver."Craddick earlier in the day had denied Senate accusations that the House is negotiating in bad faith. Craddick spokesman Bob Richter later declined to comment on Dewhurst's remarks.
"We would prefer to negotiate with the senators face to face rather than through the news media," Richter said.
Dewhurst said Craddick for months has set only one condition for a new Republican redistricting plan for the state: a district that can be won by someone from Midland.
But as deadlines for passing a plan draw near, Dewhurst said Craddick and House negotiators have suddenly added more demands. Those include drawing a Dallas-area U.S. House district that can be won by state Rep. Ken Marchant, R-Carrollton.
"At this late hour, I think we need to come together on a map ... and stop playing the Iranian cabdriver negotiations, where you get what you want and then you start adding two or three other requests," Dewhurst said.
Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, the lead Senate redistricting negotiator, said Craddick is insisting that West Texas be resolved before any other portion of the state is negotiated. Staples said that is threatening a total breakdown of the redistricting process.
"If one person wants to implode the entire negotiations because of a certain set of parameters that are unreasonable, then the Senate cannot do anything about that," Staples said.
Dewhurst said Craddick also was not letting any conference committees meet on other legislation until the West Texas issue is resolved. Richter said that is not correct.
The Senate and House have passed different plans, and a conference committee has been trying to iron out the differences. Dewhurst and Senate negotiators said they were at the bargaining table for 12 hours, starting Wednesday afternoon.Asked to respond to Craddick's comments that the Senate was stalling talks, the author of the Senate plan, Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, was interrupted by Dewhurst.
"Give me a break," Dewhurst said. "Staples has drawn 274 maps at last count. I am not sure that (House members) have even begun negotiating. Every time (Senate conferees) ask (Rep. Phil) King a question, he has to run back and check signals with the speaker. It is clear they have no negotiating authority."
Despite the escalation in Dewhurst's rhetoric, Senate sources reported a breakthrough in the negotiations and alerted reporters that a deal could be struck as early as today.The Senate on Thursday offered the House two proposals. One keeps Travis County divided between U.S. Reps. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, and Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio. The other splits the county among three districts that would run to Mexico, San Antonio and toward Houston. The House's chief negotiator, Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, already has said he favors a statewide approach that would divide Travis County at least three ways. That approach also would make it easier to defeat the senior Democrat in Congress, Martin Frost of Arling- ton.
Negotiators from the House and Senate were expected to work overnight Thursday for the second night in a row.
The House and Senate recessed until Sunday afternoon in hopes that a deal can be hammered out by then.That timetable would keep alive Gov. Rick Perry's and Mr. Dewhurst's hopes of final passage by Monday, thus avoiding the need to push back the March 2 primary. If the bill is not passed by Monday, the Republican leadership is concerned that the district lines won't be in place in time for candidates to file for congressional seats for a March 2 primary.
With that possibility in mind, the House on Thursday sent an elections bill to a conference committee that could be used to delay either the filing period for congressional seats, or the election, or both.
Democrats oppose such a postponement because it would cost Texas its role in influential "Super Tuesday" balloting for their party's presidential nominee.
In addition, some Republicans, especially in the Senate, warn that such a delay could legally complicate the process of getting U.S. Justice Department approval of the map. Officials review electoral changes to ensure that they do not diminish minority voting power.
Some quiet resistance to a delay has surfaced for another reason: After three special sessions and months of messing with redistricting, lawmakers of both parties are quietly grumbling about the need to end the process.
"You can't go through this three times and have the Republicans blow it up over a parochial thing like Midland," said Sen. Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, adding that as long as the GOP has the legislative votes to move the election, the game can continue.
"There's never an absolute deadline around here," he said. "I have never been opposed to a September primary."
The DMN also has news on the other action taken yesterday, regarding future sanctions for quorum busting, defined as an absence of at least 72 hours without a "justified reason":
Approved on a virtually party-line vote reflecting continuing tension over the Democrats' quorum-busting during the second special session, the new rules would strip an offending senator of seniority-based privileges, such as choice offices or parking spaces.Four Republicans broke ranks to help Democrats defeat a GOP proposal – by a 16-12 vote – that would have slapped an additional $1,000 penalty on truant senators.
"This rather symbolic, $1,000-a-day fine gives additional incentive for people to stay here and do their job," said Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, who offered the measure.
Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, said the fines would only hurt Senate staff members. Under the defeated amendment, most of the fines would be paid from a senator's $408,000 annual payroll account.
"What is fair about that, penalizing those hard-working state employees?" Mr. Whitmire said.
"All the farmers that come in here every day are talking about [redistricting]," Kris Thomas said as he stood outside his Lubbock Cotton Growers Gin, a cooperative that processes about 40,000 bales a year.Thomas has been managing operations here for nearly 10 years. Before that, he worked on a farm and before that grew up on one. He says he knows the business, knows the players and knows firsthand what many farmers want.
And if it means losing Democratic U.S. Rep. Charlie Stenholm, it's not congressional redistricting.
"We want the same maps we have now," Thomas said. "Any redistricting plan where the districts change, we're going to lose a voice. How can we possibly be for that? How can that possibly be in our best interest?"
[...]
"Charlie Stenholm has done more for us than most of the Republicans have," he said. "And now there's a scheme to take him away? You sort of scratch your head on that. ... The guy has seniority. If we lose that, how are we going to get that back?"
[...]
One hundred thirty-seven miles to the south, fellow West Texas Republican Ernest Angelo expresses a mixture of exasperation and disdain.
While those in Lubbock talk about furthering agricultural interests, Angelo and others in Midland talk about petroleum interests. While Lubbock residents talk about preserving two friendly congressmen, Angelo and other Midlanders complain that they lack even a single hometown boy.
And Angelo, for the life of him, cannot understand why any Republican would oppose a plan that puts the pressure on Democrats. All this coddling of Stenholm is a disgrace, he said.
"I think it's unfortunate that these Republican versus Republican differences come down to protecting a Democratic congressman," said Angelo, a petroleum engineer. "I don't think the rank-and-file Republicans are for that. I think the leadership [in Lubbock] are out of touch with the voters."
[...]
"The Permian Basin has not had someone who is knowledgeable about the oil industry representing them since the early '60s," Angelo said. "The people in the oil and gas industry would like to see someone elected to Congress that we don't have to educate about oil and gas issues when they get there."
[T]he House voted Thursday to adjourn until 2 p.m. Sunday for possible debate — which could go on beyond sundown — on any map approved by House-Senate conferees. House Speaker Tom Craddick said that if there is no map to be considered Sunday, the House would convene Monday.Monday is Yom Kippur, the Jewish day of atonement that begins at sundown Sunday. For Jews, the day is marked by fasting, daylong prayers and not working.
In an attempt to avoid a conflict with Yom Kippur, Rep. Jim Dunnam, D-Waco, on Thursday asked the House to adjourn until 8 p.m. Monday, when the observance would be over.
"I'm told by some of our members on the floor that they will have to be out of here by 3 o'clock p.m. (Sunday) so they can make their arrangements to observe the holiday," Dunnam told colleagues. "And I know and you know that we wouldn't do this on Easter."
Dunnam's motion was rejected, and the House, by a 66-35 margin, then voted to convene Sunday afternoon.
Rep. Scott Hochberg, D-Houston and one of three Jews in the House, said he had informed the House leadership about the holiday conflict.
"The possibility is that I will have to either choose to not follow the teachings of my religion or not be here to vote on an important issue," Hochberg said.
"It appears that the desire for redistricting is so strong that respect for people's religious beliefs gets trampled in the process," he said.
[...]
Rep. Elliott Naishtat, D-Austin, another Jewish lawmaker, said the schedule leaves him in a difficult position.
"I think it's unfortunate and insensitive to insist on scheduling the House to convene on Yom Kippur, the holiest day in Judaism, when there is no legislative necessity to do so," he said. "People of all faiths should be outraged."
Naishtat said he could attend a Sunday session that begins at 2 p.m. but would have to leave by early evening.
"I don't work on Yom Kippur. I spend part of the day in synagogue and part of the day reflecting and atoning for my sins," he said, adding he has made no decision on what he would do Monday if the House is in session.
Rep. Steve Wolens, D-Dallas and the third Jewish member of the House, was unavailable for comment Thursday.
The Senate's only Jew, Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, said she will observe the holiday and not be in Austin for Sunday or Monday sessions.
"I'm disappointed, but the problem is we have a deadline," she said. "And that deadline is Monday."
"We are a victim of circumstances over which we have very little control at this moment. Time is the enemy and it landed on a very difficult day for me," she said.
The Spoetzl Brewery, makers of Shiner Bock, has announced that it will start brewing a light beer.
With Shiner Light, the Spoetzl Brewery in Shiner hopes to take advantage of Texans' growing thirst for light beer and their mounting aversion to carbohydrates."The bottom line is that Texas is a light beer state," said Gary Hudman, Shiner brand manager. "It's been a long time coming."
Shiner Light will debut at the 10th Annual Shiner Bocktoberfest Concert Oct. 18 in Shiner and will be available the following week at stores, bars and restaurants in Texas. Although Shiner products are sold in 23 states and Washington, 85 percent of sales are in Texas.
This is Spoetzl's first new beer since 2001, when Shiner Hefeweizen came out. The brewer has been working on the light beer for four years, Hudman said.
Meanwhile, down in Galveston, there's a guy who wants in on the microbrew business and who's trademarked the name Star Bock, which he said was a combination of Lone Star and Shiner Bock. Not too surprisingly, he's gotten some flak for this.
Plans progressed, and the trademark process was sailing along, until the situation suddenly changed in July. Another brewer -- one not even involved in producing beer -- had taken a keen interest in the small bar's efforts to create Starbock.Starbucks Coffee Company weighed in with all the subtlety of its corporate-colossus status. All Bell had to do to make Starbucks happy was immediately drop his beer's name and destroy all materials containing images of its trademark.
Do that soon, the corporation ordered, or face "other necessary legal action."
UPDATE: Michael has some more about Rex Bell.
I was going to do a rundown on Rush Limbaugh's bad day yesterday, which included his resignation from ESPN and a screaming headline about allegations of drug abuse, but why bother when Eric McErlain's on the case? He's got all you need, in these three posts.
A few of my own thoughts: I do believe what Limbaugh said, in addition to being plain old stupid, was racist. He said that there was in effect a media conspiracy to make Donovan McNabb look good because he's black. By my definition, that's a racist remark. The crux of this remark is not whether or not Donovan McNabb is overrated, it's whether or not McNabb's reputation comes from some media gestalt. Here are his exact words, for reference:
"I think what we've had here is a little social concern in the NFL,'' Limbaugh said. "The media has been very desirous that a black quarterback do well. They're interested in black coaches and black quarterbacks doing well ... McNabb got a lot of the credit for the performance of the team that he really didn't deserve.''
Look at it this way: If Dontrelle Willis wins the National League Rookie of the Year award over Brandon Webb, whose stats are inarguably better, it will almost surely be due to media hype. But is that hype the result of Willis' race, or is it the result of Willis' big initial splash, his fun-to-watch pitching motion, his outgoing personality, and the fact that he contributed towards a playoff team while Webb is at home? If McNabb really is overrated - and I haven't been keeping up on the Philly papers' coverage of him so far this year, as I suspect Limbaugh hasn't either, so I can't say if this allegation is even true - could it maybe be because of factors other than race?
Here's the thing: It's possible Rush could have been right, in that not only is McNabb overrated but that "the media" gives him a pass on things that they criticize in white quarterbacks. There's only one way to actually make that case, and that's to cite a ton of examples, something Limbaugh wouldn't have had time for in his limited format even if he'd given the matter more than passing thought. The fact that he did bring it up when he was clearly unprepared to back it up is what says to me that he had an axe to grind rather than a point to make.
On a side note, I do think Limbaugh would have weathered this storm had it not been for the out-of-the-blue drug allegations. As noted here, the Sunday NFL Countdown ratings had ticked upwards this season, which usually insulates someone from this kind of criticism. My belief was they'd get an initial boost but would be at normal levels by season's end. I'm almost disappointed that we won't get to see that theory tested.
UPDATE: Via Big Media Matt, I see that NRO's Robert George made the same points as I did.
The top story in today's Chron is this interview with Philip Carroll, the senior American oil official in Iraq. It's pretty upbeat, as you would expect from a man in his position, but it demonstrates that we have only just begun to spend billions of dollars over there:
Carroll suggested that any recovery by Iraq's oil industry would take place over the long term and would require billions of dollars in foreign investment."Iraq's present capability, as close as I can assess it, is to produce right at or maybe a little less than 3 million," barrels per day, he said. "They are not going to be able to go above that much without significant investment."
Of that amount, he said, about 2.5 million barrels per day would be available for export.
Carroll said it is realistic to foresee a day in "a minimum of six or seven years" when, fueled by as much as $40 billion to $50 billion in additional foreign investment, Iraq could become an oil colossus exporting as much as 6 million barrels a day. Iraq's proved oil reserves are estimated at 112.5 billion barrels, second in the Middle East only to Saudi Arabia's 259 billion barrels.
"That would provide them with very large export earnings and the ability for their economy to grow rather attractively," Carroll said. "They are not going to get there in 2004 and they are not going to get there in 2005. It is going to require tens of billions to fully develop that kind of capacity."
If there's a more beautiful sound right now than Republicans sniping and griping at each other over a new Congressional map, I don't know what it is. Governor Perry's self-imposed deadline of Wednesday has come and gone, and the joint committee is no closer to approving a new map than they were when they started. Here's a taste, from the Statesman:
For now, however, Senate and House negotiators seem focused on West Texas.Sen. Todd Staples complained that the narrow focus is detrimental to the rest of the map.
That's why Staples, R-Palestine, and Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, jumped on what they considered a compromise on West Texas. They claimed the West Texas portion of a map by Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth, R-Burleson, as a "promising advance."
"We trust this is a serious plan and not another ploy to divert attention from real progress," Staples said. "How could a top Republican leader, part of the leadership team, author a compromise for West Texas that the speaker had rejected?"
The House wasn't biting.
"I'd like to remind Senators Staples and Duncan, however, that Representative Wohlgemuth is not a member of the House Redistricting Committee, has not participated to date in the House-Senate negotiations on redistricting and did not speak to me or for me — or the House — in drawing her map," Craddick said.
Wohlgemuth, through a spokeswoman, said Staples and Duncan had changed her version of West Texas. She said her map was an attempt to help the counties in her district near Fort Worth and did not represent the speaker's position.
[H]ardly had Sens. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, and Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, told reporters they were reluctantly accepting a House compromise map, when House Speaker Tom Craddick and the author of the House-passed measure said they hadn't offered any such thing."It is not a map that the speaker would support," said Bob Richter, Craddick's press secretary.
The "compromise," it turned out, was a combination of the Senate-drawn map and a map suggested by state Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth, R-Burleson, one of Craddick's top lieutenants.
[...]
The senators argued that Wohlgemuth's map was identical to one favored by the Texas Republican congressional delegation, which could change the delegation to 21 Republicans and 11 Democrats. Currently, there are 17 Democrats and 15 Republicans.
"That being the case, and (Wohlgemuth) being a top member of the House leadership team, how could a top Republican leader offer a compromise on West Texas that the speaker has rejected?" Staples questioned.
But a Wohlgemuth aide countered that the legislator had no idea the senators were going to take just the West Texas part of her proposed map. It's not even the part she wanted changed.
"She had no indication they were going to take her map and graft it like they did, and she is a little surprised, needless to say," said Erica Phillips, Wohlgemuth's legislative director.
[...]
Told that Craddick had rejected their plan, the normally soft-spoken Duncan sounded exasperated.
"It would be nice to be able to negotiate, instead of this take-it-or-leave-it stance," Duncan said. "We have not been able to negotiate with the speaker, and no one else seems to have the authority to make any decision about West Texas except him."
House Speaker Tom Craddick, R-Midland, swatted aside the Senate's version of an olive branch, a proposed plan his spokesman said "would not do any of the things that the speaker would want.""They're absolutely apart" on the specifics of a plan to boost the number of Republicans in Congress, said Bob Richter, Mr. Craddick's press secretary.
Senate mapmakers, in announcing their offer of a compromise over West Texas districts, accused their House counterparts of stubbornness.
Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, the author of the Senate's map, said Mr. Craddick appears ready to block passage of any redistricting plan if he doesn't get his way on every detail of a Midland-dominated congressional district the Senate's already agreed to create.
"We believe that position is unreasonable," Mr. Staples said.Another Senate negotiator was more harsh about the bickering between House and Senate Republicans over a final plan to boost GOP representation in Congress.
"The House has been negotiating in bad faith," said Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa of McAllen, the lone Democratic senator on the House-Senate conference.
Likewise, Mr. Staples accused the speaker's office of "insensitivity" to the need for quick approval of a map.
Last week, Mr. Perry called next Monday a "drop-dead" date for passing a bill. As his timetable appeared in jeopardy Wednesday, the governor downplayed his opposition to shifting the primary date."If that is what's required, then that is what's required," he said. "When we have that election is not as important as having the election" using a map drawn by elected legislators instead of the current map, which was drawn by judges, Mr. Perry said.
"Now with that said, I would rather them not have to be changing primary dates," he added.
Perry alluded to deadlines that would affect the primary date. Here's the scoop from the Chron.
If a compromise is not reached among Republicans in the next several days, they likely will have to move the Texas 2004 primaries from March 2 to March 9 to be able to use a new redistricting plan.If the debate goes beyond next week, the primaries likely would have to be moved to March 30, according to a letter by Secretary of State Geoff Connor.
While President Bush is unlikely to face a major challenge for renomination in the Republican primaries, the battle for the Democratic nomination could be held as late as March 9. But some candidate likely will have sewn the nomination up before March 30.
Hinojosa said moving the election date would have the effect of suppressing minority turnout in the Democratic primaries.
Staples said Republicans are aware that could cause problems implementing a new redistricting map under the federal Voting Rights Act.
"We know that moving election dates could possibly involve a pre-clearance issue with the Department of Justice," Staples said. "We know there would be an additional expense to moving the election date."
"I don't think the public cares whether the primary is in early March, late March, April or September," King said. "I'd rather we take our time and not rush it here in the last hour, even if it means we have to keep going for a couple of more weeks in another special session."
Finally, some muddled thinking from Karen Hughes in the Chron:
Meanwhile, presidential adviser Karen Hughes weighed in on the Texas redistricting battle. She said it would be good for Bush to erase the 17-15 majority Democrats currently hold in the state's congressional delegation."Our congressional delegation frequently votes in a way that is opposed to what the president supports and to what the people of Texas, polls show, support," Hughes said.
"This is not as a White House official. This is not as an adviser to President Bush. This is as Karen Hughes, who lives in Texas and would like my congressional delegation to represent my views," she said.Hughes is represented by U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio.
UPDATE: That last bit about Hughes and her Congressman is even funnier than I originally thought. I was emailed the following article from the Statesman, but I can't find the URL right now (I'm still looking). Apparently, when Hughes made this complaint, she didn't realize who her Congressman was:
She's worked at the White House, traveled the world with the president and
played politics at the highest level.But, like many rank-and-file Americans, Karen Hughes of Austin discovered
Wednesday that she didn't know who represents her in the U.S. House.At a news conference with Gov. Rick Perry, Hughes, an adviser to President
Bush, complained that local Democratic congressman Lloyd Doggett doesn't
adequately represent her in the House.Hughes later determined that Doggett doesn't represent her at all.
Republican Lamar Smith of San Antonio does.Hughes' comments about Doggett had come as she discussed the congressional
redistricting effort under way at the Texas Capitol. She sided with
Republicans trying to draw a new map that will give them a majority of the
state's 32 U.S. House seats."I don't believe he frequently represents my point of view, but individually
that happens," Hughes said of Doggett, who is as ideologically anti-Bush as
anyone in the House.When Hughes got home, she pulled out her voter registration card and found
she lives in Smith's district. Doggett did represent Hughes until the
congressional maps were redrawn in 2001.Hughes dutifully called around to correct her error.
"This is terribly embarrassing but I believe I told y'all my wrong
congressman today," she said. "I think I may be in Lamar Smith's district,
which I'm sure is a big relief because I'm sure (Doggett) didn't want to try
to represent me anyway," she said.
UPDATE: Here's the link, courtesy of Byron.
Grrr. Last night I was hit by a comment spammer, who injected an ad for his scummy website all over my blog. His IP address is 65.77.116.28, and the IP address of his accursed website is 207.44.162.33, so all you MT users should take preventative action and ban those addresses now. Meanwhile, I'm slogging through my recent comments deleting each one, which is an annoying and tedious task.
I forget who pointed me to this, but A Small Victory has a recent post about a gaggle of comment spams she's received, and she's included a list of IPs that she banned as a result. Even better, one of her commenters has pointed to this method for banning comment spam based on content, which I will be investigating.
Meanwhile, back to deleting I go...
UPDATE: All gone. I'm lucky that the jerk only spammed me about 20 times, instead of several hundred times. On to more productive things.
UPDATE: Here's another IP to ban: 206.163.168.8. I think I'm gonna have to bookmark this post, for everyone's easy reference. And I need to get off my butt and implement that aformentioned general solution.
UPDATE: The complete list of comment-spammer IP addresses to ban:
216.228.168.110
206.163.168.8
64.191.20.166
65.77.116.28
207.44.162.33
66.75.80.169
65.77.116.28
63.155.192.3
24.184.91.227
212.179.192.76
216.145.86.238
65.64.78.72
80.14.97.44
216.145.86.238
68.211.236.172
68.153.65.193
61.181.5.155
208.147.1.4
80.50.242.152
166.180.133.53
68.160.245.170
204.251.10.215
148.233.3.242
81.23.232.93
81.218.227.11
209.210.176.21
209.210.176.22
61.181.5.69
66.154.47.203
213.222.2.35
81.23.232.93
24.64.223.205
65.125.231.178
216.98.141.250
24.108.209.164
213.206.5.5
63.209.26.172
209.210.176.21
209.210.176.33
209.210.176.20
209.210.176.22
68.160.248.55
82.80.6.80
62.219.182.250
210.220.73.5
81.23.232.93
64.72.132.17
66.154.47.199
This includes the address from which the comment was posted as well as the address of the website they're shilling for. I'll add more as I need to.
UPDATE: Added two more IP addresses. I also see that Jay Allen has released a new version of his comment de-spammer. Must download...
UPDATE: Ironically, as I came to this post to add three more IP addresses, I saw that it had been comment spammed, something I failed to notice the last time I updated this. Sheesh.
Senators Staples and Duncan have announced that they have a map that solves the West Texas issue. Here's the AP report:
AUSTIN - Senate negotiators hammering out a congressional redistricting plan today presented what they called a good solution to solve a dispute with the House over how to draw West Texas on the new map.It was not immediately clear how the House viewed the proposal.
The plan by Sens. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, and Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, would create a district that includes the cities of Midland and Abilene. Another district would include San Angelo and Lubbock.
Republican House Speaker Tom Craddick of Midland has been pushing for a district that would make his hometown the base for a congressional seat. The existing map has Lubbock and Midland together in a district represented by U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer, a rookie Republican from Lubbock.
"This is a reasonable solution to this problem," Duncan said.
The senators unveiled the map shortly after noon, saying they wanted to meet Gov. Rick Perry's deadline of today for a compromise between the House and Senate plans.
In an impromptu press conference at noon today,Senate conferee's Robert Duncan (R-Lubbock) and Todd Staples said they will accept Arlene Wohlgemuth's (R-Burleson)west Texas solution with the exception of the Henry Bonilla (R-San Antonio)district.That leaves South Texas intact and at least temporarily removes Martin Frost's (D-Dallas)vulnerability.
The two chairmen believe that the west Texas portion of the map is acceptable to the Republican congressmen from that neck of the woods.
[next post]
Contacted after the Staples-Duncan press conference, Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth (R-Burleson) said, "While I'm very honored that the Senate accepted by West Texas solution, it's not my West Texas solution. It leaves Taylor county whole."
If Taylor county remains whole, Charlie Stenholm (D-Stamford) could still win re-election.
UPDATE: More from the Quorum Report.
Sen. Robert Duncan (R-Lubbock), said he can accept a compromise on Congressional map that maintains a solid agriculture seat in the Texas delegation for the future. In a news conference today with conference committee chairman Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, and Sen. Juan Hinojosa, D-McAllen, Duncan said the West Texas portion of a map offered by state Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth, R-Burleson, is acceptable.Speaker Tom Craddick issued a statement distancing himself from the Wohlgemuth map. He said, "While the House leadership always welcomes input on any bill from any House member, I have not seen the redistricting map offered by Rep. Wohlgemuth. I'd like to remind Sens. Staples and Duncan, however, that Rep. Wohlgemuth is not a member of the House Redistricting Committee, has not participated to date in the House-Senate negotiations on redistricting and did not speak to me or for me -- or the House -- in drawing her map."
Senator Leticia Van de Putte, (D-San Antonio) Chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus raised serious concerns today about the potential impact of plans such as that proposed by Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth. She pointed out that such plans threaten Hispanic representation in South Texas and Dallas-Ft. Worth, reducing the statewide number of effective minority opportunity districts from eleven to ten. She also included a fact sheet.
Tom DeLay is coming to the aid of another corporate benefactor with a law designed just for them. The details are in this Roll Call article, which requires an account. Here's the key bits, with thanks to AJ Garcia for emailing the article to me.
With help from House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), Bacardi-Martini Inc., the U.S. subsidiary of the Bermuda-based rum maker, is on the verge of scoring a big victory in the long-running battle over who owns the rights to the legendary "Havana Club" rum label, a victory that could prove very lucrative in a post-Fidel Castro world.DeLay is lobbying to include language in the 2004 Defense authorization conference report to amend U.S. trademark law to make it comply with a ruling by the World Trade Organization last year that threatened Bacardi’s claim to the Havana Club brand.
Opponents of DeLay’s proposal point out that his measure was never vetted by any committee in either the House or the Senate, and benefits Bacardi alone, and they claim it could potentially harm U.S. companies that have intellectual or property claims in Cuba.
[...]
DeLay aides strongly dispute any link between his proposal and Bacardi’s donations and say the Texas Republican’s interest in the issue is purely ideological. They point out that DeLay wants to continue the U.S. embargo of Cuba as long as Castro is in power and argue the WTO ruling could give Cuban companies a chance to sell products in this country unless they are specifically blocked from doing so. Jonathan Grella, DeLay’s spokesman, said his boss is "working in conjunction with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick" to bring American trademark law into compliance with the WTO ruling. USTR officials said they are now looking to Congress for help.
[...]
Bacardi has been locked in a bitter struggle for years with Pernod Ricard of France and CubaExport, a Cuban government-controlled company, over control of the Havana Club trademark. In 1993, the French-Cuban alliance formed a joint venture to market Havana Club, which the Cuban government registered with the U.S. Patent Office in 1976. Bacardi was later able to convince American officials to back off from their recognition of the Cuban government’s claims.
Bacardi, which has opposed lifting the U.S. embargo of Cuba, fearing a flood of Cuban rum into the U.S. market, purchased the rights for Havana Club from the original owner, Jose Arechabala S.A., in the mid-1990s. The two sides have since waged a protracted contest on both the political and legal fronts.
The provision DeLay is proposing would alter a 1999 law known as Section 211, pushed through Congress at Bacardi’s request by then-Sen. Connie Mack (R-Fla.), to ensure that U.S. and foreign companies are prevented from registering or defending in court trademarks associated with property expropriated by foreign governments. After a challenge by the European Union on behalf of France, the WTO ruled last year that U.S. law as it is written applies only to foreign companies and thus needs to be changed. The United States has until Dec. 31 to comply.
Grella said DeLay is "seeking to protect American companies from predatory French companies that are conspiring with a murderous dictator."
DeLay’s activity on Bacardi’s behalf has brought loud complaints from at least one liberal watchdog group."It’s like Westar all over again," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Sloan was referring to allegations that Westar Energy gave $25,000 to a DeLay-affiliated political action committee in 2002 to win his support for a legislative measure potentially worth billions to the firm, a charge that DeLay has denied repeatedly. Westar officials were later indicted for fraud and the proposal was withdrawn.
Bacardi has spent heavily during the past several years to build a relationship with DeLay and other leaders in both parties, relationships that have repeatedly paid off when the company flexes its political muscle.Bacardi gave $20,000 in soft money to Americans for a Republican Majority PAC in 2001, with another $20,000 going to Texans for a Republican Majority PAC in July 2002. DeLay cut his ties to the two organizations, which he controlled, after last year’s campaign finance legislation banned soft-money fundraising by Members.
Bacardi also donated $3,000 to DeLay’s legal defense fund following a civil racketeering lawsuit against the Texas Republican by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2000. That case was later dropped, although it cost DeLay hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills.
And Bacardi helped DeLay pay the bills for events he hosted at the 2000 Republican National Convention in Philadelphia, as well as supplying the liquor and gifts for DeLay-run golf tournaments.
Bacardi officials declined to comment for this article.
A Houstonian with a 25-minute commute spent 55 hours extra in 2001 -- a full work week plus two days -- creeping along in traffic instead of sleeping late, earning money or reading the newspaper, according to an annual study by Texas A&M University.Those whose commutes took longer than 25 minutes, the national average, wasted even more time locked in their wheeled cubicles.
There is some good news in these all-too-familiar statistics. The amount of time needed for a typical commute increased just 1 percent from 2000 -- a blip compared to increases in other major cities such as Denver, which recorded a 3.5 percent jump.
Today is Governor Perry's preferred deadline for getting a redistricting map approved by the bicameral committee, but they're still bogged down in the same West Texas dispute, and now they've got a new dispute over how to apportion seats for minorities.
The dispute is about whether to approve a map that would eliminate the seats of Mr. Frost, D-Arlington, and U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, in exchange for districts that minorities are sure to win. The new disagreement pushed to the back burner a feud among Republicans over the creation of a West Texas district and imperiled the GOP's self-imposed Wednesday deadline for reaching a deal."We're still days away, I think," state Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, author of the House map, said late Tuesday.
The House has demanded a plan that not only would bolster GOP strength in Congress, but also eliminate a number of incumbents who are white Democrats, even if some are replaced by minority Democrats and not Republicans.
The new disagreement among Republicans over minority seats is mainly about how many white Democrats to try to take down.
[...]
Republicans in the Texas congressional delegation support the House's late-hour quest for an "8-3 plan," or one that would have eight safe Hispanic seats and three safe seats for African Americans.
But the Senate and its presiding officer, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, prefer keeping the state's 11 minority districts the way they are now – with seven likely to elect a Hispanic; two likely to elect a black; and two where blacks and Hispanics together form a majority. (Mr. Frost and Mr. Bell now hold the latter two seats.)
Retaining that configuration is the surest way to win quick approval for a new map from the federal Justice Department, Mr. Dewhurst said last week.
"We're willing to take a look at an 8-3 map," Dave Beckwith, Mr. Dewhurst's spokesman, said Tuesday. "We haven't seen a map yet that was better than the Senate map, but we're going to give the latest [House] maps a hard look."
The House's latest push slowed Republicans' internal deliberations and obscured progress they had made toward a West Texas solution. On Monday, Mr. Dewhurst and the Senate signaled they would find a way to accommodate Mr. Craddick's call for a Midland-dominated congressional district, although no deal has been reached as to exactly how.
A different approach to this issue comes from another new map, this one proposed by State Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth. Her map would also remove Martin Frost's seat by splitting Fort Worth into two districts.
"My primary concerns were making sure that my county, Johnson County, was contained wholly in [one district], and that we don't split up cities in Tarrant County," Wohlgemuth said. "My plan accomplishes those goals, with the exception that Fort Worth has to be split because it's so large."A spokesman for Frost said the map would not withstand a legal challenge, chiefly because inner-city minority neighborhoods that are currently represented by the 24-year congressional veteran would be appended to a district dominated by affluent Anglo suburbs.
"It's clearly illegal," said Jess Fassler of Frost's Washington office.
"We really haven't been able to make much progress on the remainder of the state, because the House's concept is to work on West Texas and then the rest of the state," said Sen. Todd Staples, R-Palestine, leader of the Senate conferees.Staples said the Senate is committed not only to drawing a map that creates the Midland district Craddick wants, but also to preserving a district for freshman U.S. Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, without creating an election contest with veteran U.S. Rep. Charles Stenholm, D-Abilene.
Lubbock and Abilene have economies based on farming, while Midland and its sister city of Odessa are based in oil production. Midland leaders want the district to be linked to San Angelo, which also has oil production and ranching interests.
The basic problem is that West Texas' population growth has lagged behind the rest of the state, making it almost impossible to add a district there. So to create a Midland district, either Neugebauer or Stenholm's existing district has to disappear.
The Statesman looks at the main marked man, Charlie Stenholm, who is feeling good about his prospects no matter what happens.
"It's kind of ironic. A lot of Democrats have criticized me because they perceive that I vote Republican," he said Tuesday, reclining behind his Washington desk and its stunning view of the U.S. Capitol -- one tangible perk of being ranked 29th in seniority among 435 House members.An ardent social and fiscal conservative, the straight-shooting Stenholm is blunt in his criticism of the Democratic Party. "We got into the minority the old-fashioned way. We earned it," he said. "We went too far to the left."
But his sharpest punches are aimed at Republicans.
"I consider myself to the right of center, and the Republican Party has now been captured by the radical right," Stenholm said, predicting that the GOP will pay the price in the 2004 elections. "If they want to brag about their economic game plan, be my guest. They gave us the largest deficits in the history of our country. A net job loss of what, 3 million? Trade deficits as far as the eye can see and growing. Continuing not to address the Social Security ticking time bomb."
As for redistricting, Stenholm doesn't flinch when predicting that he'll win any district Republicans want to craft for him.
"I never felt better about our political fortunes," he said. "Our friends have seen what they're trying to do. There be a whole lot more people out there working for Charlie Stenholm than working against him."
[...]
"Basically, I'm a Republican and I'm for Charlie Stenholm. This area is probably 65 percent Republican," said Abilene Mayor Grady Barr. "He has been so successful for this area, not only in health care, but he has done us some good in oil. He is particularly strong in agriculture. And he is a strong voice in the Pentagon for our Dyess Air Force Base.
"History has shown him to be hard to beat. He's very conservative, like this part of the country," Barr said. "He's just a straightforward person that looks after his constituents."
Still, last November's closer-than-expected vote fuels GOP hopes of defeating the 13-term incumbent. Stenholm outspent Rob Beckham, a two-term member of the Abilene City Council, by more than $1 million, yet won by only 6,514 votes.
"I think if (legislators) are agonizing over what to do about Charlie Stenholm, just give us 12 months because we're going to beat him next year," said Paul Washburn, Taylor County GOP chairman. "Even though he is, among Democratic congressmen, an apparent conservative, he is not in step with the people in his district. This is why he keeps having close races."
Stenholm, who won 51 percent of the vote in 2002 and 59 percent in 2000, scoffs at the notion, saying he expects his fiscal restraint to carry him to future victories. As an example, he points to a recent vote against a bill supporting faith-based charities.
"I'm in favor of the bill, but it added on another $12 billion to the deficit," he said. "The message we're trying to send all our colleagues is you can't keep ignoring the deficit and digging the hole deeper."
Still, Stenholm acknowledged that the vote will likely cause him trouble in next year's election.
" 'He said he was for this, but he voted this way' -- that makes a great 20-second commercial," Stenholm said. "(So) we'll run our own ads saying, 'you bet,' and then try to slap them upside the face, with a two-by-four, saying this is the kind of half-truth that causes people to be turned off in a political sense.
"We hit back as hard as we can hit back, but with a smile on our face and a good Christian attitude. That's West Texas."
While Democrats fight a Republican-led effort to pass a redistricting bill aimed at strengthening the GOP in the state's congressional delegation, Duncan is going up against House Speaker Tom Craddick. Despite being outranked by the fellow Republican, Duncan has shown no willingness to concede."I am here to represent my constituents, and that is where I am headed with this," Duncan said last week after the Senate approved the redistricting bill he backed.
[...]
Duncan was elected to the Legislature in 1992 and served in the House. His colleagues voted him Freshman of the Year in 1993 and he has picked up other awards for his service. He was elected to the Senate and served his first term there in 1997. Duncan now chairs the Senate Jurisprudence Committee, which handled the congressional redistricting bill.