Defense attorneys in the Enron Broadband trial are claiming that a video which shows one former EBS executiva making false claims about the company's capabilities, was never shown to stock analysts, contrary to prosecution claims.
Defense attorney Tony Canales on Friday showed jurors video production records of a 2000 analyst meeting that did not reference the taped presentation that was shown to the jury on Tuesday.He also introduced into evidence raw video footage taken of the entire Jan. 20, 2000, conference in Houston that he says proves the tape was never shown there.
But U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore ruled that the raw video could not be shown to jurors until Monday, after the prosecution team had a chance to review it.
The Enron Task Force has said it will not comment while the trial is ongoing.
Throughout the 2000 presentation, video speeches of company technology experts were played to explain to analysts the capabilities and business plans of Enron Broadband Services.
Jurors on Tuesday saw two brief video segments that featured Rex Shelby, the former senior vice president of engineering and operations for EBS, who is one of the five executives currently on trial.
The first segment focused on the Enron broadband network, which had some technical capabilities. The second was of Shelby touting current capabilities of operating-system software that prosecutors maintain never worked.
Canales, who represents Scott Yeager, a former vice president of the Internet division, claims the latter segment was inserted sometime after the conference.
[...]
Under questioning Friday, Ken Rice, the former co-CEO of EBS, maintained the tape was indeed shown to analysts at the conference.
Rice, who is cooperating with the government as part of a plea agreement, told jurors Tuesday he had seen the Shelby video at the conference and at the time was "surprised that it was so consistently present ... because I knew we hadn't created that."
Yes, I managed to survive Olivia's swim lesson today and make it to my cellphone on time to do the weekly gig on BizRadio 1320 today. And before anyone asks, no, I wasn't talking while driving - Tiffany drove us all home while I gabbed. We talked about Olivia's poolside debut (and later on, Olivia spoke up to make her radio debut as well), about the mega telecom bill that you've been seeing ads about, about the Enron Broadband trial (check for an update on that one today), and finally about the awesome Plunk Biggio blog. Kevin (who talked about homeowners' association madness, a sexual harassment lawsuit against HPD, and the new library rules) and I were on for quite awhile this time, longer than either of the first two times. That was cool, but boy do I expect a much bigger MP3 file this week.
And speaking of which, here at long last are the MP3s from the first two weeks: my radio debut and my Peter Brady voice-change performance. I will probably only keep two or three of these on my site at a time, so click to listen now as they won't be there forever.
Dwight asks a good question:
Why do cellular-phone ringtones -- which last about 15 seconds at most -- cost $2.50, while the full songs from which they are derived are only 99 cents?
I will say this: if I ever do decide to change ringtones, I'm going to ask Lair for a copy of his.
Tomorrow is my now-apparently-regular gig on BizRadio 1320 at 10:30 along with Kevin. This one will be from the road, as Tiffany and I are taking Olivia to her first swimming lesson at 9:30 out in West Houston (long story short - we "won" these baby swim lessons at a silent auction). The lesson is supposed to be done by 10, so I will hopefully be out of the pool and dried off in time for their call to my cell at 10:15. If not, Tiffany may have to pinch hit for me, in which case hijinx is certain to ensue. Tune in tomorrow morning to see for yourself if I can avert catastrophe and make it to the phone on time.
Roger Clemens faces off against Greg Maddux tonight in a rare battle of 300-game winners. Not counting four matchups between Pud Galvin and Tim Keefe in the 1890s, such an event has happened only four times before, all involving Don Sutton, and all in the 1980s. If you're at the Juice Box tonight, be sure to enjoy being a part of history.
Of course, we can't have a story about 300-game winners squaring off without a bit of existential woolgathering on the nature of winning 300 games as a Major League pitcher.
Sutton doubts there will be many more of these types of games once Clemens and Maddux retire. With 263 career victories, Mets lefthander Tom Glavine is the closest active player to 300 victories, but he's 39 and hasn't won as many as 12 games since 2002. Randy Johnson, 41, is next on the active victories list at 248, followed by David Wells, 41, at 214 and Mike Mussina, 36, at 212.[...]
Clemens tends to agree with Sutton's assessment that specialization in relief roles and the money invested in pitchers are reasons why today's young starters might find it more difficult to claim 300 victories.
"With specialization now, everybody watches pitch counts," Clemens said. "Early in my career, I was able to complete games and reach 125 pitches. You don't see that much anymore. And it's really hard to control whether you're going to get a win or not."
Once a starter gets to 100 pitches these days, the manager and pitching coach start plotting a plan to call on the bullpen. And some of today's pitchers actually take pride in going six innings without giving up more than three runs.
When Seaver, Sutton, Carlton and Niekro were active, a pitcher would want to fight a manager who called on the bullpen in the sixth of seventh inning. Nolan Ryan, another of Sutton's contemporaries in the 300 club, was only getting warm at 100 pitches.
"Unless there's a change in philosophy in managing and coaching, there won't be many more 300-game winners," said Sutton, who is tied with Ryan for 13th on the all-time list with 324 wins. "There are some very talented young men pitching who are probably more talented than I was but probably won't have a chance to win 300."
If Sutton lasted only six innings, he would be embarrassed. His motto was simple: "Go nine innings and either win it or lose it."
In any event, I don't believe the macho ethic of completing games has much of anything to do with winning 300 games. I think the two biggest factors are the levels of offense and the five-man rotation.
Here are the all-time leaders in wins. Twenty-two pitchers have 300 or more victories to their credit. Of those, eleven debuted in 1911 or earlier, in the original dead-ball era. Eight others came into the league in 1962 or later, with six of them clustering their rookie seasons between 1962 and 1967, at the beginning of a 30-year stretch of relatively low offense (you can see season-by-season league totals, including ERA, here and here). Only three began their careers in between 1912 and 1961 - Warren Spahn, Early Wynn, and Lefty Grove.
What I'm getting at is this: You're more likely to have pitchers with long careers and gaudy win totals in an era that depresses offense, which in turn favors pitchers. If and when conditions in the leagues begin to turn in the hurlers' direction - and though I remain a skeptic of the whole thing, perhaps the focus on steroids will help to accomplish that - then the odds that someone will have the kind of long and fruitful career needed to win 300 games will increase.
By the same token, the five-man rotation, which reduces the number of starts a pitcher can make over the course of a season, is a factor. Look at the yearly leaderboard for games started. The high-water mark these days is 35 or 36. Thirty years ago, in the four-man rotation days, workhorse pitchers would regularly get 40 or more starts. No one has had that many since Charlie Hough in 1987; no one has done it in the NL since Phil Niekro took the hill 44 times in 1979. That can be the difference between winning 18 or 19 games and winning 21 or 22, which over the course of a 15 or 20 year career can really add up.
But everything in baseball is cyclical. I believe that we'll see a lower-scoring period again, I believe some innovative managers will experiment with a four-man rotation again, and I believe we will see 300 game winners again, though it may well be that the next one is in Little League right now. Who knew in 1962, as Warren Spahn's career was winding down and no heir to the 300-win club was in sight, that we were about to usher in the next great wave of pitching stars? Never say never in this game.
Well, if push comes to shove, Governor Perry would prefer privatizing CPS to stigmatizing gay foster parents. I guess that's progress.
Perry said he didn't think the House amendment against gay foster parents, which faces strong opposition from senators, will survive a House-Senate conference committee.But he added, "If the bill has the funding in it (and) if it does the things that we've laid out needs to happen, I'm going to sign the bill if that amendment's on it or not.
"CPS is really important, getting it fixed," Perry said, noting he had declared the legislation an emergency in the wake of a series of highly publicized deaths of children who weren't adequately protected by the agency.
Perry said that in an "ideal world" he would want foster children placed with "a family that had a mom and a dad."
But gay foster parents who are "loving and caring," he added, are "better than having the kids being abused, obviously."
Crazy Bob does have company, though, in the form of Cathy Adams of the Texas Eagle Forum, who cited some incredibly bogus research in an appearance on CNN defending his anti-gay amendment.
Ms. Adams told me that her source for the claim was an article she had read on the conservative site WorldNetDaily, about a study published in February by Paul Cameron, chairman of the Colorado Springs, Colo.-based Family Research Institute, a group that says homosexuality is a major public-health threat. In the journal Psychological Reports, Dr. Cameron analyzed cases of sexual abuse committed against foster children and children in subsidized adoption homes, as reported to Illinois's Department of Children and Family Services from 1997 to 2002. There were 270 reports, and 34% of those were same-sex in nature: committed by a male adult against a male child, or a female adult against a female child. Dr. Cameron called those homosexual acts of abuse, and, citing several studies, including a joint report by the University of Michigan and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, concluded that gays make up between 1% and 3% of the adult U.S. population. "Thus, homosexual practitioners were proportionately more apt to sexually abuse foster or adoptive children," Dr. Cameron wrote.This required several leaps of logic, some of which I'll discuss later. The biggest is that Dr. Cameron had no data about the makeup of homes in which the Illinois children were abused; indeed, a state DCFS spokeswoman told me the agency doesn't record whether households are same-sex. It's possible that much of what Dr. Cameron calls homosexual abuse occurred in what would be considered heterosexual homes.
Yet Ms. Adams simply divided 3% into 34% to get her 11 number. When I asked her about this discrepancy between what the study found and what she said, she replied, "I believe I didn't have that articulated as well as I should have." But she also said it seems unlikely that abuse would be homosexual in nature yet committed by an apparent heterosexual. "It just requires more explanation than what you can do in soundbites," she said.
HB1348, the Smith-Eiland campaign finance reform bill, appears to be dead after an attempt yesterday to circumvent the usual committee process and bring it directly to the floor for a vote. That attempt failed on a 95-36 vote and some harsh words on the House floor.
"This is an unusual tactic," said Rep. Craig Eiland, D-Galvston, one of the bill's 93 sponsors. "But we're afraid we'll never see (the bill) again."But Republican Rep. Terry Keel of Austin, also a sponsor of the bill, questioned whether Democrats were using the bill as "a political tool to take shots at a member of the House."
[...]
Rep. Tommy Merritt, R-Longview, whose Senate run last year was stumped partly due to corporate-funded political ads that ran against him, asked Craddick Thursday afternoon to allow a vote to expedite the bill.
But Keel discouraged his colleagues from allowing the bill to circumvent the committee process, charging House Democratic Caucus Chair Jim Dunnam of using the bill to get a "partisan shot at the speaker."
Merritt said Keel also told him that pushing this legislation would mean "your political career will be over."
Keel said he didn't want to discuss the specifics of his exchange with Merritt, but said: "I do believe his effectiveness as a Republican in the House is over. ... Tommy Merritt betrayed the Republican Party today."
He said he thought Merritt's motivation in pushing for the measure stems from his dislike for Craddick, which Keel said is "commonly known around the House floor."
Merritt dismissed Keel's statements as politics and said he thought it was all part of an effort to draw attention away from campaign finance reform.
"This has nothing to do with the speaker. This whole issue is all about ethics," he said.
"A lot of people say things," he said. "And when the bill dies, the issue dies."
Dunnam said Republicans overreacted to Merritt's measure.
"They don't want to vote on an ethics bill," he said. "The use of corporate money in this manner is a trademark of the Republicans and I don't think they're willing to bring it up. Obviously it's not in their interest."
Rep. Mary Denny, the Elections Committee chairwoman, has said the bill probably will die on a 4-3 committee vote as early as Monday.Although almost two-thirds of the House co-sponsored the bill, supporters considered its passage a long shot because Craddick, R-Midland, and several of his lieutenants, including [Rep. Bryan] Hughes and Denny, were helped either directly or indirectly in the 2002 elections by corporate money, the type of spending that would be banned under the bill.
Cicero and The Jeffersonian talk about the Alamodome, quite likely the least utilized stadium in all of Texas. I believe they are both correct in saying that San Antonio will never get an NFL team, but I don't believe it has anything to do with media market size. Since the NFL's TV deal has always been a national deal, one in which each team shares equally, the physical location of the franchises doesn't matter that much. If the NFL really cared about that, they never would have let the Rams leave LA for St. Louis or the Oilers depart Houston for Memphis. I agree with The Jeffersonian - the single biggest obstacle to an NFL team in the Alamo City is the Dallas Cowboys (or as I like to think of them now, the Dallas Cowboys of Arlington), with the Texans next in line.
I also think the biggest reason why San Antonio is such a relatively small media market is because there's no big suburbs around it. Here's the census map for Texas. The biggest county neighboring Bexar is Guadalupe, with 97,000 people, followed by Comal with 88,000. There are four counties adjacent to Harris that are each bigger than those two combined - Fort Bend, Montgomery, Galveston, and Brazoria. Together those four counties have well over a million people in them. The combined population of Collin and Denton counties up near Dallas is also over a million. Bexar has nothing like that. San Antonio is a big city, but that's all there is.
I'm racking my brain trying to recall what was the justification for building the Alamodome (I believe it was the San Antonio Current that gave it the Dillo Dome nickname that Cicero refers to), but I'm coming up blank. I don't recall there being any serious speculation about getting an NFL expansion team - heck, at the time I don't think there was any speculation about any further NFL expansion, period. Didn't the Spurs play there briefly in between the old HemisFair Arena and the new SBC Center? There may have been some pie-in-the-sky dreaming about the place being the dual home of the Spurs and a longed-for NFL team, I don't remember. I can't see the city tearing it down now, though, whatever it may cost to maintain, as that would be a huge and embarrassing admission of defeat. Like it or not, it's yours to keep.
After taking the first two games on the road against Dallas in their playoff series, Coach Jeff Van Gundy reminded the Rockets that the franchise has been here before from the other side.
The locker room was rocking.The Rockets had not just won Game 2 to take a 2-0 lead in their playoff series with the Dallas Mavericks, they had won a sensational game with a thrilling fin- ish.
Then coach Jeff Van Gundy entered the room, bringing a question. Van Gundy asked if anyone knew how the Rockets' "Clutch City" nickname was born.
No player raised his hand.
Van Gundy gave them more than a history lesson. The Rockets received a warning.
The Rockets were told that their 1994 descendants lost the first two games of a playoff series at home, as the Mavericks have, and headed to Phoenix in desperate trouble. The Rockets rallied to win Game 3, won the series and beat the Knicks, with Van Gundy a Knicks assistant, for the NBA championship. And "Clutch City" was born.
"I could tell he had that ready as soon as we won Game 2," Rockets guard Bob Sura said. "That's the first thing out of his mouth. We're all aware of it now.
"The locker room was clearly excited. Guys were pretty fired up. He came in in his typical manner. 'Sit down for a second. Does anybody know where the Clutch City thing came from?' He refreshed our memory pretty quick."
Only 14 NBA teams have done what the Rockets have done in the series, winning Games 1 and 2 on the road.Of those 14, only two failed to win the series, most recently the Suns, as the Rockets drove to their first championship, turning the Western Conference semifinals around in Phoenix after dropping the first two games at The Summit.
No team has come back from a 3-0 deficit to win an NBA playoff series.
Anyone else noticed the ads on Time Warner Cable lately that are agitating against letting "mega-telcos" get their way in the Legislature, which (we're told) would lead to only rich people getting cable TV? I'd assumed these spots had to do with HB789, but wasn't sure what TWC's angle was. Now I see.
The bills would remove certain barriers to competition such as unequal treatment and take out ambiguities that lead to lawsuits, said sponsor Phil King, R-Weatherford. The legislation would affect cable TV, wireless and landline phone service, Internet and other video companies.The first bill, House Bill 789, overwhelmingly passed the House last month, and the second part, HB 3179, was approved by the Regulated Industries Committee Tuesday and will be eligible for debate by the full House if it is cleared by the Calendars Committee.
"We've regulated this to death," King said. "This is aimed at allowing new competitors to come in and fight for business and remove unnecessary legislation."
The Time Warner ad claimed passage would lead to redlining, where cable companies could pick and choose which markets they want to serve, said Ray Purser, vice president of public affairs for the company. A similar ad was placed in Sunday's Houston Chronicle.
Current law mandates that telecommunications companies must get separate franchises in each city they want to service. If a city grants a franchise, the company must serve all residents within the municipality, Purser said.
King's legislation would give franchises automatic rights to do business in any city in Texas and would allow companies to pick and choose who they serve, Purser said.
"It is state-sanctioned redlining," he said. "It allows telecommunications providers to only build in the wealthier neighborhoods. We are trying to educate the consumer on the fact that it is bad public policy to allow redlining."
King said consumers benefit the most from competition, and cable companies such as Time Warner are upset because they have had a monopoly on the market for so long and don't want new competitors.
"The cable companies' arguments are not valid," he said. "What they're promoting is bad policy. They want to continue the monopoly and I don't think the legislators are buying it, so they're going to the public."
Hoping to compete with cable companies, SBC recently announced plans for a new project to provide cable service, and King's legislation would help push that initiative forward.
The Austin Chronicle notes that these bills are another form of intereference in municipal revenue by the State Lege.
Municipalities can also generate revenue through leasing rights-of-way, through fees charged to cable and telecom providers in exchange for the use of public streets. Last year, Austin took in just under $22 million in rights-of-way fees from cable and telecom providers. But under HB 3179, cities would no longer be able to negotiate right-of-way use agreements. A statewide standard would determine such things as the maximum number of PEG (public educational government) channels any cable provider was required to offer, and right-of-way fees would be replaced by a statewide 3.95% fee on each sale of a communications service. The precise provisions are still to be worked out (should the bill advance), but municipalities fear a legislated sweetheart deal for providers, with a consequent loss in revenue for cities.
Kimberly Reeves has a nice article in this week's Press about the upcoming privatization of many Texas Health and Human Services Commission functions. Did you know that a fundamental aspect of the privatization plan is to outsource a bunch of work to volunteer charities? That was news to me.
Suzii Paynter and her small band of intrepid, faith-based foot soldiers recently found themselves trouping down to the basement of Christian Life Commission in Austin for an unusual experiment of sorts.Most of her crew were longtime retirees who had helped the needy and helped the state in the past. They were First Baptist "regulars" who volunteered their time at the downtown homeless shelter. Paynter, public policy director of the Christian Life Commission of the Baptist General Convention of Texas, had several co-workers along.
They were committed to providing more assistance in what has been touted as a major overhaul of the welfare system in Texas.
[...]
Then they found out just how much of the load they were projected to shoulder to make this new system as success: one million volunteer hours of work every year, much of it in tedious chores like entering data into state computers.
"We were a significant part of the plan, yet no one had held a forum or sent out a letter or recruited a round table or asked for an advisory committee," says Paynter. "There had been no outreach about this plan whatsoever to say we were written into this role, and certainly no money for it."
[...]
Stephanie Goodman, spokesperson for the human services commission, argues that the million-hour volunteer component was an estimate of the time already spent by nonprofits in assisting the process of helping the needy obtain benefits.
That time can account for simply referring a client to a phone to make a call to the state's call centers, she says. If that's the case, they've got a lot of community groups fooled. They are mobilizing to figure out their role in the process.
Joe Rubio of the Diocese of Galveston-Houston Catholic Charities is already talking about additional training and liability needed for his own volunteers. Basically, the nonprofits have advised and assisted the needy who look to them for help, but they hardly embrace the idea of taking over the bureaucratic work of state agencies.
Rubio says this new role for religious groups -- replacing government, rather than assisting -- is slowly eroding the effectiveness of faith-based organizations.
Some leaders of nonprofits say it's one thing for government to embrace the faith-based community. It's another thing to balance the budget on the backs of volunteer groups and the poor in the process.
"It's missing a certain spirit, a caring spirit, that we're going to make it better to serve people better," says Rubio. "I just see us trying to cut back on government by exposing the vulnerable to more risk than they're taking already."
According to the business plan, faith-based and community-based organizations would handle the initial application process for up to one-fourth of the needy seeking welfare.
The business plan expects all enrollment and screening -- that is, the work not done by faith-based and community-based groups -- to be done over the phone or online. Paynter can already feel the tug of desperate non-English-speaking hands on her sleeve, given that the average call-center call is estimated to last only seven minutes.
Paynter says, "When you talk about the initial stage of the application, any kind of face-to-face meeting is going to happen with these community organizations."
Greg Wythe gets to burn a few minutes off of his fame clock tonight as he appears on "Texas Politics-The Real Deal", a talk show hosted by liberal Democrat attorney David Jones and former Harris County GOP chair Gary Polland. It's on Time Warner channel 17 in Harris County from 6:30 to 7:30, and you can call in and heckle him at 713-807-1794. I need to tell the TiVo that this channel exists so I can record it. Knock 'em dead, Greg!
You know how I had a smidgeon of hope that HJR6 would fail to make it through the Senate? Looks like that hope was sadly misguided.
Senate leaders Tuesday predicted support for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages in Texas but said senators will oppose a separate effort by the House to prohibit homosexuals from being foster parents."The Senate's very, very united in our belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman," Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said, one day after the House had approved the gay marriage ban 101-29.
It's pretty sweet to see the Republicans in the House retreat on yet another special rule they implemented to coddle and swaddle Tom DeLay, isn't it?
"I'm willing to step back," [House Speaker Denny] Hastert said after a closed-door meeting with members of the GOP rank and file at which he stressed the need to end the controversy."Now that we again will have bipartisan rules in place, we can begin to rebuild Americans trust in the ethics committee," said Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. "Members of the House must allow the ... committee to do its job without partisan rancor and ensure that its deliberations command the respect they deserve.
The Republican lawmakers had endured weeks of intense Democratic criticism — and hometown editorials — complaining that the GOP rule changes were an attempt to protect Majority Leader Tom DeLay from further investigation.
DeLay, R-Texas, was admonished by the committee on three matters last year, and new questions have been raised about whether a lobbyist paid for some of his foreign travel in violation of the rules. DeLay has denied wrongdoing and has volunteered to appear before the ethics committee.
Republicans leaving their weekly meeting in the Capitol basement generally praised Hastert for pivoting on the issue. DeLay seemed annoyed at the crowd of reporters.
"You guys better get out of my way," he said. "Where's our security?"
Compare the reactions to the latest retreat from the Texas delegation:
"I don't know that I'm necessarily uncomfortable with the way things are right now," said Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Flower Mound. "The rules we put in are not bad rules."[...]
Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Dallas, said Democrats had "politicized" the ethics committee, but added, "I think it's important the ethics committee get on with its work."
[...]
"I think we should do what's right and not respond to political news every day," said Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-San Antonio. "This is not an issue that everyone is talking about at the fairs, in the malls, at the rotary clubs."
I said to him, 'You're the only one who can resolve this thing,'" said Rep. Ray LaHood (R-Ill.), recounting a conversation he had with Hastert last week. "He knows that. He knows it is in his lap."LaHood said he also told a senior Hastert aide: "You have to pivot, you have to eat some crow, you've got to get it behind you."
Hastert, however, is expected to face some resistance today when, aides said, he plans to put his proposal before his GOP colleagues at their weekly strategy session.
[...]
LaHood said many Republican lawmakers were frustrated at the prospect of being asked — for the second time this year — to roll back a vote that had proved politically unpopular.
"People fell on their sword" when they rescinded the rule in January concerning possible indictments of GOP leaders, LaHood said. "Now it's the same thing."
He and others are concerned about negative publicity that the rule changes involving the ethics committee have generated, LaHood said.
"My hometown [newspaper] in Peoria has written three editorials about this — every editorial writer in the country is writing about this," he said.
UPDATE: When someone asks "Who's your daddy?", these guys know what the answer is:
The 20 Republicans who voted against the reversal included seven Texans: Reps. Joe Barton, of Ennis; Michael Burgess, of Flower Mound; John Carter, of Round Rock; John Culberson, of Houston; Louie Gohmert, of Tyler; Ted Poe, of Humble; and William "Mac" Thornberry, of Clarendon.
How can you resist a blog that's devoted to one man's (probably unintentional, possibly unconscious) quest to become baseball's all-time hit-by-pitch king? I can't, so I've added a subscription to the oddly compelling Plunk Biggio to my Bloglines subs. Thanks to Lair and Pete for the heads-up on this one.
In the Pink points to this article on Capitol-focused blogs. It's a good piece - in fact, I'd say it's the piece I thought Gardner Selby was going to write when he contacted me last month on the same topic. Kudos to Aman Batheja for taking us seriously.
ItPT's Eileen Smith gets some nice publicity out of this, but the part I liked best was the quotes from various reps, starting with the Lege's own blog evangelist, Rep. Aaron Pena.
Peña has become an avid reader of blogs in recent months, sometimes re-evaluating his positions after considering their arguments.Last month, Peña started his own blog, originally called Aaron's Blog but now titled A Capitol Blog. It's a great way to communicate directly with his constituents, he said.
"For me, it is apparent that this is the future. There is a very democratic element of communicating via the Internet as a blogger," Peña said.
This month, Peña started Lone Star Rising, for which he's solicited legislators from both parties to write.
Peña said some colleagues expressed interest in contributing to the blog, but others were wary.
"Politicians generally don't like putting something in writing because they fear it can be used against them in a subsequent campaign," Peña said.
Among the first to accept his invitation was Rep. Rafael Anchia, D-Dallas. His April 13 entry focused on his work on a campaign finance reform bill.
"I thought it was a good way to take the message straight to the people," Anchia said, adding that he likes the way blog postings can't be reduced to a sound bite by the media.
Anchia said he occasionally reads political blogs, as do other politicians and members of their staff.
"There's valuable strategic intelligence in those blogs," Anchia said. "I think it's becoming an important part of legislative culture."
Who better to comment on campaign finance reform than a true insider?
A Republican political consultant under indictment on charges of taking illegal corporate contributions in the 2002 House races is urging lawmakers to defeat a bill to tighten the state's ban on corporate and labor union spending in Texas political campaigns.John Colyandro was indicted by a Travis County grand jury last year on charges of illegally accepting corporate contributions for Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC.
Colyandro, as executive director of the Texas Conservative Coalition, a bipartisan group of 83 House and Senate members, recently wrote an analysis for the group urging legislators to vote against a bill that would completely ban corporate and union money from Texas elections.
"The Texas Conservative Coalition cannot support any attempt to curtail or limit the freedom of speech as secured under the First Amendment," the analysis says.
Fred Lewis, executive director of Campaigns for People, said Colyandro should have stayed away from commenting on the bill as long as he is under indictment on campaign finance law violations.
"It seems to me that someone who has been indicted for allegedly violating a statute should not be allowed to analyze bills to clarify the law," Lewis said. "It seems to me that they are too emotionally involved and have too many conflicts of interests."
I haven't had much to say lately about everyone's favorite corrupt House Majority Leader. Not because there hasn't been anything to say or because I've lost interest in watching his inexorable descent, not at all. It's just that there's so darned much out there, it's impossible to keep up. Thankfully, there are several good places to go for a regular and fairly comprehensive dose of DeLay coverage. Jack, who suffers from being a DeLay constituent, is on a tear with his And it couldn't have happened to a nicer demagogue series. The HoustonDemocrats.com blog has been keeping up with the local anti-DeLay protests as well as the more national stories. And of course there are the heavy hitters, the Daily DeLay, the Stakeholder, and Josh Marshall, all of whom cover a broad and deep range of territory. Keep these sites in your rotation and you'll stay on top of all the dirt. And don't worry, I'll be looking for stuff to post on as well. I'm just happy for now to enjoy their hard work.
Former Enron Broadband Services CEO Ken Rice, who has already pled guilty to a charge of fraud for his role in the EBS flimflammery, has been testifying busily for the past couple of days in the trial of five other ex-EBS execs. This is from his early testimony:
"I lied about the status of Enron Broadband Services," said Rice, who appeared nervous at the start of his one-hour testimony near the end of proceedings on Friday."Did you do this alone?" asked U.S. Attorney Ben Campbell.
"No," Rice replied.
He then named [Jeff] Skilling, who is not being tried in this proceeding, and four of the five former EBS executives who are currently on trial as accomplices in making analysts, investors and the public believe that Enron's Internet business had more capabilities — and in turn more value — than were true.
[...]
Prosecutors showed jurors video clips of a Jan. 20, 2000, analyst meeting in Houston and had Rice respond to statements made by some of the executives.
In one clip, [Joe Hirko, the former co-chief executive of EBS and the highest-ranking executive now on trial], standing beside Rice, touts the capabilities of EBS's software capabilities, which Rice then told the court did not work at the time. He said it was a lie designed to bolster Enron's stock value.
At another point in the video, a smiling Hirko motions to Rice and asks him in the style of a showman if the capabilities of the broadband network were "a pipe dream" or even years away from being developed.
"No," answered Rice "This is something that exists today."
Prosecutors turned off the video and asked Rice if that was a true statement.
He replied the statement was also a lie.
Prosecutors also showed a clip of [Rex Shelby, the former senior vice president of engineering and operations for EBS] touting the software that Rice again testified was untrue.
Prosecutors said they would be showing the jury more clips of the analyst meeting as well as the video in its entirety.
Rice testified that the lies were to puff up Enron's profit.
"The purpose in telling the lies was to make Enron Broadband Services look better than it was," Rice said, adding that in turn, Enron's stock would rise.
The Jan. 20, 2000, meeting is widely seen as the catalyst for a huge increase in Enron's stock price in the following year.
Enron's stock climbed 25 percent that day and began its gallop up to a record high of $90.56 that August.
I kind of hope that the trial examines the ill-fated deal EBS had with Blockbuster to deliver video on demand, because I never really understood how that was supposed to work. Was the idea really to pipe movies to people's computers? I have a much nicer computer now than I did in 1999, with a much nicer monitor, but I'd still never choose to watch a movie on my PC instead of my television. Did they believe enough people would do so? If that wasn't the idea, didn't they also need to have deals in place with cable companies so that there'd be a channel on which the movies could be viewed and controlled? Was anyone asking these questions at the time, or was it all just hype?
And it wouldn't be an Enron trial without a sideshow diversion, in this case Jeff Skilling being asked to leave the courtroom because he's a potential witness in the case. Tom thinks he got a bum ruling, however.
You know, I was just thinking that the problem with buying lottery tickets these days is that you have to actually leave your house and go to some kind of retail store to do it. Well, thanks to our ever-forward-thinking Lege, that may not be true for much longer.
A bill approved Monday by the House Appropriations Committee would make Texas the first state to let lottery players buy tickets via the Internet and pay with a debit card.Players also could also establish a Texas Lottery Commission account that would draw down as they purchase tickets.
House members barely discussed the measure at Monday's meeting. It was inserted in a larger bill that also allows drivers to display only one license plate if it's on the rear.
Letting lottery players use their credit cards first surfaced a year ago as one of several wacky schemes by Governor Perry to fix school funding without doing anything substantial. It was a bad idea then and it's a bad idea now, with or without the new online-purchase bit tacked on. I do wonder if Perry still supports it, though, given his 180 degree turn on other gambling matters.
The Lottery Commission was taken by surprise. Officials said they weren't told of the bill ahead of time and don't yet know what kind of games they would offer via the Internet.
Remember the days when the air was filled with promises from the statewide leadership that they would cut property taxes by one-third, maybe even one-half? Reality can be such a bummer sometimes.
Texas property owners would get a small tax break next year, with another cut coming in 2007 if voters approve a statewide property tax, under the latest version of the Senate's school finance plan unveiled Monday.The plan would reduce taxes for school maintenance and operations by 20 cents to $1.30 per $100 assessed valuation next year. In 2007, property owners would see another 20-cent reduction to $1.10 if a constitutional amendment authorizing a statewide property tax passes.
If the amendment fails, the tax rate would remain at $1.30.
In January, senators promised to lower property taxes from the current $1.50 to $1. Senate leaders said they still would like to provide the full 50-cent reduction but may not be able to fund the final 10 cents until 2008.
The finance committee still is working on the details of a business and sales tax plan to pay for the property tax cut and education spending boost. [Senate Finance Committee Chairman Steve] Ogden said the long-awaited bill might be discussed by the committee on Friday.
D Magazine has a long essay by Midlothian resident Tom Boyle, whom I've mentioned here before in conjunction with the fight against pollution from cement plants there, on how he and his wife Julie came to be environmental activists. It's a very interesting read, and the followup story about birth defects in children and animals in the area since the plants started burning hazardous waste is hair-raising. Check them out.
So there were a couple of op-eds in Sunday's Chron that had blog themes to them. One was by Cragg Hines in which he chided bloggers on the right for their role in the case of the "Schiavo memo" that emanated from Sen. Mel Martinez's office. All I really want to do here is offer some advice to Hines: Next time you do this sort of thing, name names and quote excerpts. Not only will it help the sizable portion of your audience which isn't up to its eyeballs in blog stuff on a regular basis know what it is you're talking about, but it's what other bloggers (myself included in times past) will do to you. Arguing with unnamed and unknown opponents is not a winning strategy.
Elsewhere there was this piece by Scott Henson on the demise of the federal drug task force in Harris County (more background on that here). I can't help but note that the byline they ran did not include Scott's blog URL, which seems to me to be a pertinent omission. I've commented before about the Chron's inconsistent byline policies, and this is another example to add to my collection. But don't let that keep you from reading Scott's piece - it's a good one.
After sending out his withdrawal email yesterday, Richard Morrison posted a Kos diary with the same message, getting many well-deserved messages of thanks and expressions of support for his mother. He specifically responded to several people who muttered about DCCC interference and was quite clear about there not being any, and exhorted his followers to support whoever the nominee winds up being, Nick Lampson or Gordon Quan. He's a class act to the end, and that's a big part of the reason we all like him so much. I'll take this opportunity to thank Richard Morrison again for being the kind of candidate who could make us all believe that DeLay had a glass jaw. We wouldn't be where we are now without that.
It's been 24 hours since I first heard the news now, and it's still a bit unreal. Having been a supporter of Richard's for so long, it's hard to say goodbye, especially in such a sudden fashion after a frenzy of activity. That's life, I guess.
I've invested a fair amount in Richard and his candidacy. While I never feared the prospect of a contested primary, I did feel as though he had more than earned the right to a second shot at DeLay. I've talked many times about his overperformance relative to other Democrats in this district, and as a result I have always believed that he was the candidate with the best chance to win. I believe his performance was as much about his hard work and personal qualities as it was about the sleaze and corruption of his opponent. I can't help but feel a little disappointed that he won't get the chance to build on that.
But that's the reality, and dwelling on what might have been is a fool's game. I don't know if Nick Lampson will now have a clear path to carry the banner next year, or if Gordon Quan or some other contenders will jump in as well. I do know that if Richard had to bow out, I'm glad that a candidate as strong and qualified as Lampson is already in place to keep going. Of the Congressmen forced out by DeLay's redistricting scheme, Lampson was my favorite, and had he chosen to take on DeLay in 2004 instead of now I'd have been as passionate a supporter of him as I was of Morrison.
In addition to being a good, solid progressive candidate, Lampson brings a number of assets to the table - fundraising ability, name recognition, and a story line ("Congressman drawn out of a job by DeLay takes the fight to the embattled Hammer") that the media ought to find enticing, especially in conjunction with DeLay nemesis Chris Bell running for Governor. I can't say he ran the best campaign I've ever seen in 2004, however. I do hope he's learned from that experience.
If Lampson gets challenged by Quan, I expect I'll remain neutral through the primary, as I think both men are worthy of fullblooded support. I can't really think of anyone else who might give this a try, but if someone does, I'll reserve judgment. You all know where I really want Quan to run, so let's just leave things at that for now.
The Chron picks up the story today. I have to wonder who wrote the headline, since Nick Lampson is a declared candidate, something the Chron itself reported last week. Whatever.
To wrap things up before I get into total ramble mode, I'm sad about yesterday's events but as optimistic as ever for the future, and ready to regroup and move forward. Richard, we salute you, we'll miss you, we wish you the best for you and your family, and we hope to see you on the scene again soon. Nick and Gordon, get your game faces on. Time's a-wasting.
Reaction to yesterday's announcement from elsewhere: BOR, Nate, Dos Centavos, The Red State, Pink Dome, Stina, Lyn Wall, Greg, The Jeffersonian, PDiddie, Fort Bend Democrats, The Stakeholder. Kos gives Richard a front page sendoff today though he can't help speculating about nefarious DCCC involvement. Fortunately, the commenters seem to be looking past that to Richard's statement (he's also added a comment reiterating what he said) and the level of support for Lampson appears to be good. Unity is a good thing here.
UPDATE: Supreme Irony chimes in.
HJR6, the bill that would make gay marriage Double Secret Illegal via a constitutional amendment, passed out of the House today by a 101-26 vote. As this was a vote on a proposed Constitutional amendment, the magic number was 100, as in 100 votes to pass. With every Republican but Martha Wong (who did not vote) casting an Aye plus three Republicans absent, that means it took 17 Democrats to take this disgusting thing one step closer to reality. Eighteen of them shamefully stepped up. Here are the bad guys:
Rep. Robert Cook, D-Eagle Lake – Yes
Rep. Al Edwards, D-Houston – Yes
Rep. Juan Escobar, D-Kingsville – Yes
Rep. David Farabee, D-Wichita Falls – Yes
Rep. Stephen Frost, D-Atlanta – Yes
Rep. Yvonne Gonzalez Toureilles, D-Alice – Yes
Rep. Ryan Guillen, D-Rio Grande City – Yes
Rep. Mark Homer, D-Paris – Yes
Rep. Chuck Hopson, D-Jacksonville – Yes
Rep. Tracy King, D-Batesville – Yes
Rep. Pete Laney, D-Hale Center – Yes
Rep. Jim McReynolds, D-Lufkin – Yes
Rep. Dora Olivo, D-Rosenburg – Yes
Rep. Joseph Pickett, D-El Paso – Yes
Rep. Inocente Quintanilla, D-Tornillo – Yes
Rep. Richard Raymond, D-Laredo – Yes
Rep. Allan Ritter, D-Nederland – Yes
Rep. Patrick Rose, D-Dripping Springs – Yes
UPDATE: Ignore the paragraph above. If there is a referendum on this stupid resolution, it will be this year. Thanks to Karl-T and Bobby in the comments for the correction.
How bad is this thing? Let's count the ways:
The measure would change the Texas Constitution's Bill of Rights to define marriage as "a union between one man and one woman." Fourteen states have similar constitutional bans.Mr. Chisum's measure would also prevent the state or any city or county from creating or recognizing "any legal status identical or similar to marriage." He called that a pre-emptive strike against any future Legislature allowing civil unions, which afford all the legal benefits of marriage for same-sex couples.
Earlier in the session, Mr. Chisum was warned by House Republicans to abandon a section of his bill that he said addressed civil unions. Some GOP attorneys had said the language in that section could have banned common-law marriages, domestic-partner benefits, power-of-attorney contracts, living wills and other contracts.
The bill went to the House floor Monday as simply a definition of marriage. Mr. Chisum's proposed addition of a ban on civil unions – worded slightly differently from the version that nearly killed the whole amendment in committee – passed the House with an overwhelming majority.
The current version, Mr. Chisum and other supporters said, does not affect the contracts at issue. But Democrats, saying that the state attorney general had yet to issue an opinion on the new language, weren't so sure.
There is one minor consolation at this time:
For the ban to be incorporated in the Texas Constitution, it must next be approved by 21 of 31 senators. Chisum said no senator has agreed to sponsor the bill in the upper chamber. If approved by the Legislature, the ban must also be approved by a majority of Texas voters Nov. 8.
The LGRL has more info. Doing yeoman's work following this crapper through the process were PinkDome (here, here, here, and here), and In the Pink (here, here, and here).
Talk about things happening quickly: Richard Morrison has sent out an email to his supporters in which he announces his intent to withdraw from the CD22 race next year. Here's the email:
Dear Friends and Supporters,It is with great sadness that I must withdraw my name from the race for District 22. As you all know I devoted 2 years of my life to win and placed my law practice on hold. With the prospects of having to spend another 2 years winning a primary and then challenging DeLay, my family’s financial situation is not the rosiest. My wife is expecting our 5th child in August and I feel that I must devote my time to getting my financial house in order. I think the biggest issue this county faces is our national debt and for me and mine to be facing debt that could quickly become unmanageable is irresponsible and unwise.
My mother and children's grandmother has also been diagnosed with cancer of the pancreas. She has vowed to me that she will fight it every step of the way and I have committed to help her with that fight. I ask for your prayers for her and my father.
I am not giving up my fight. I will continue to stay active and work hard for Democrats. I ask that you do the same. Tom DeLay is bad for democracy and bad for America. If I can be so bold, I demand that each one of you will commit to work as hard for Congressman Lampson or Councilman Quan as you did for me. Democracy will suffer if you slack off even one bit.
Please do more in your community than just Democratic politics. Become active in Rotary, the local Chamber of Commerce, or your church, mosque or synagogue. Volunteer and began to carry the load in these organizations. Become indispensable to them. And when the conversations turn to politics, let them know that you are a Democrat. Demonstrate by your service that the Democratic Party cares. Through our service we can win back what we have lost and make this great county better.
Finally, I want to thank each one you who has contributed their time, talent and treasure. This campaign was a campaign of service to the people of District 22 and each of you deserve all of the credit. I would not have been the candidate I was without your support.
Fight on!
Richard Morrison
Greg comments on this story from the weekend which assessed the odds of a primary challenge to State Sen. Jon Lindsay (a prospect which makes my fellow toll-road critic Anne Linehan positively giddy). I'm sure almost any one of the State Reps mentioned could give Lindsay a good fight if they wanted to, but I think there's an angle here that's been overlooked. Every single rep mentioned, with the exception of Moldy Joe Nixon, is in an extremely safe district. Are they willing to give up that kind of security for a 50-50 shot at a better job? Note that in this case, any of them with covetousness in their political hearts would be better off jumping in now with the stated intent of taking out Lindsay, since if they did they'd probably scare off anyone else and wind up in a two-person race with those even odds of winning. Instead, if they wait it out they run the risk of Lindsay deciding to call it a career, which would open the floodgates to multiple challengers and thus reduce their overall odds of winning. So who among that crowd is the least risk averse?
That in turn is a compelling argument for Nixon to switch races now and be the one who chases off the others, since the hold he has on his State Rep seat is a bit shaky to begin with, and that's before the HCDP and TDP put the target on his back as they surely will next year. He may be an underdog in any primary for SD7, but it can't be much worse than his chances of staying put are, and the prize is not only more power but a safe seat again. Frankly, I can't think of a good reason for Nixon not to go for it, and the sooner the better for him.
As to the other possibilities Greg mentions, two thoughts: One is that the idea of nutball former CD10 candidate Ben Streusand spending more of his millions on this seat is almost enough to make me cancel my cable now, before there's even the slightest chance I'll hear his godawful nasal twang on the tube again. Two, regarding City Council member Mark Ellis, this is the one place where Jared Woodfill could extract a pound or two of flesh for Ellis' refusal to aggressively oppose Mayor Bill White. I'm sure Steve Radack's endorsement will carry weight as Greg says, but I can already see the anti-Ellis attack mailers that will bubble up from the swamps if he sets his sights on SD7. Sometimes karma really will run over your dogma, you know?
The Chronicle brings up an interesting point about CD22:
The two words that usually follow U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay's name in the news are "Sugar Land."After DeLay leaves Congress, some political experts say, the next representative of the 22nd District will likely come from Houston, not his hometown.
Because of redistricting, the area he represents is no longer dominated by the landscaped subdivisions and small towns of Fort Bend County. The district takes in parts of Fort Bend, Harris, Brazoria and Galveston counties, with Harris making up the largest piece.
This, however, is just wrong:
[Bob Stein, professor of political science at Rice University] said DeLay has strong support in all four counties.
Tom DeLay REP 9,193 41.46%
Richard R. Morrison DEM 12,377 55.82%
Tom Morrison LIB 400 1.80%
Michael Fjetland IND 203 0.91%
I know the races in San Antonio and CD22 have us all spellbound, but the City of Houston will be having an election this year, and while I don't expect this year's slate to be full of barnburners, there are certainly some races of interest going on. The following is an email from the Houston Democratic Forum about some upcoming Council campaign events of interest:
Peter Brown (candidate for City Council At-Large Position 1) will have a campaign kick-off event from 5:30pm to 7:30pm on Monday, April 25 at the Holiday Inn Select on 2712 Southwest Freeway (between Kirby and Greenway Plaza). All are welcome, minimum donation of $25 for event.Mark Lee (candidate for City Council District C) will have a campaign kick-off event from 5:30pm to 7:30pm on Wednesday, April 27 at the Holiday Inn Select on 2712 Southwest Freeway (between Kirby and Greenway Plaza). All are welcome, no minimum donation listed for event.
Jay Aiyer (candidate for City Council At-Large Position 2 and former President of the Houston Democratic Forum) will have a fundraiser event from 6:00pm to 8:00pm on Wednesday, May 4 at the Continental Club on 3700 Main Street. All are welcome, minimum donation of $10 for event.
I saw the story of the Case of the Mistaken Candidate Identity in San Antonio last week but never had a moment to talk about it. The San Antonio blog crowd had it covered - see here, here, here, here, here, and here.
The first thought that came to my mind in hearing about this was the strange case of the other Bill White from Houston's 2003 elections. Obviously, that caused Mayor White no difficulty in getting elected, though it seems clear to me that there are a couple of important distinctions between that and the Castro Twin Switch. For one, while both happened towards the end of the campaign cycle, the White story was still a month out from Election Day, while this little circus is happening with two weeks to go, meaning that it will likely still be news as early voting begins. The Jeffersonian shows that not too many people are paying attention and most of those who are don't care all that much, but it seems clear to me that this will further (if not fatally) wound Julian Castro's chances of avoiding a runoff and the uncertainty it will bring. In addition, Bill White had more money than God and was in a position to respond forcefully if he had to - Castro's war chest is almost nonexistent compared to his main rivals. It may be risky for them to pursue that line of attack, but if you're running third and have little to lose, why not hope to peel off enough votes to vault yourself into the runoff? Finally, while the "other Bill White" imbroglio was a bit hard to boil down into a sound bite, this one's a no-brainer. If Castro comes out of it with no loss of support, he should consider himself very, very lucky.
I'm sad to say that between this and his campaign finance reporting woes, I've lost some respect for Julian Castro. These are errors of carelessness and overconfidence, neither of which are particularly attractive. I'm glad I don't have a vote to reassess.
I love this line from this Washington Whispers piece on how Howard Dean is doing so far as the Chair of the DNC:
So far, Washington likes what it sees, surprised he's not the oddball that newsies pegged him as last year.
(Link via Political Wire.)
Sen. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa has apparently been targeted by the South Texas Specialized Crimes and Narcotics Task Force in retaliation for some bills he's filed that they don't like. It's pretty ugly. See Grits for the full story.
Now that I'm feeling more like a human being, I want to catch up on the state of things in CD22 on the Democratic side. Richard Morrison wrote a Kos diary asking if he'd still get netroots support if he had to face a well-funded primary opponent - I haven't read through all the comments, but I'd say the clear answer is Yes. Kristin Mack wrote about a meetup between Morrison, Gordon Quan, and Nick Lampson in Houston, the goal of which was to come to a meeting of the minds regarding the CD22 race, though in the end it now appears that Lampson has committed to running (link via Houtopia). Finally, there are now a couple of blogs which are either anti-Morrison or at least openly skeptical of a second run by Richard. What to make of this?
I think everyone knows how I feel about Richard Morrison. I think he did an awful lot with an awful little in 2004, and I think he's a big but underappreciated reason why DeLay drew his infamously soft 55% (and why DeLay has had to be dishonest about the makeup of the district he drew for himself). That said, my goal is to unelect Tom DeLay. To some extent, I don't care who the candidate is because Morrison or anyone who could replace him as the Democratic nominee would be several orders of magnitude better than DeLay. If someone else thinks he or she can present a bigger challenge to DeLay than Morrison can, I'm open minded. Prove it to me and I'm yours. If that means a big nasty contested primary, so be it. May the best candidate win. It's the American way. And for the record, if someone does knock off Morrison next March, I promise no hard feelings on my part as long as the race is clean. The goal here is beating DeLay. Everything else about this race is secondary.
There are three reasons why I support Richard Morrison, and why it will be very difficult for any other candidate to get me to change my mind. First and foremost is that I've met Richard several times, and I have a great deal of affection and respect for him as a person and as a candidate as a result. I've said before that Nick Lampson is the first candidate I ever gave money to, so I still like and respect him a lot, too, just not any more than I do Richard. I've not had the pleasure of meeting Gordon Quan, but I've no doubt I'd feel similarly about him. Nobody gets more than a break-even here.
Second is Morrison's performance in 2004. Everybody talks about DeLay's weak showing, but it's important to remember that this wasn't simply a case of people abandoning a corrupt, amoral politician out of disgust, for if it were, then Morrison wouldn't have consistently outperformed every other Democrat on the ballot with him. Voters did not have a binary choice in CD22. They could have selected Mike Fjetland, the two-time Republican primary challenger to DeLay, or the Libertarian Thomas Morrison, if all they wanted to do was cast an anti-DeLay vote. (Or, of course, they could have not voted in that race at all.) That's not what thousands of them did - they chose Richard Morrison. Despite having more competition than other Democrats, he consistently drew more votes than they did. That's something concrete to build on in 2006 that no other candidate will necessarily have.
You may try to tell me that a different Democrat would have done even better than Morrison in 2004 given the same conditions. If you do, you're basically arguing that Kansas would have made it to the Final Four this year if only they hadn't lost to Bucknell in Round One. It's utterly meaningless, and frankly, any candidate who would make that claim now, such as Lampson whom I know from personal communication was contemplating a run in CD22 last year, will have to explain why they didn't put their money where their mouth was. The wouldas-coulda-shouldas cut no ice with me.
Lastly, while I'm glad to see so many Democrats on board with the idea that CD22 can be had, there were way too many potentially competitive races last year which went wanting for a decent candidate. In order for me to accept the opportunity cost of a Lampson or a Quan or anybody else who'd have to move into CD22 not running elsewhere, I have to be convinced that the odds of their winning are sufficiently greater than Richard's to cover that cost. I can think of four or five races I'd like to see Lampson enter. I want to see Quan run in CD07 so bad I can taste it. You guys want my support in a CD22 primary? Tell me why that race and no other is the best use of you as a resource.
Byron has some thougts on this as well. Like him, I don't expect the DCCC to have anything to do with this race until after the primary, and like him I don't fear a primary. I just want to know that those who are entering it are doing so for the right reasons. That's a tall order to fill.
The Senate author of a bill designed to overhaul the state's protective service agencies said Thursday that she will work to strip a controversial provision that would prohibit gays and lesbians from serving as foster parents."I will strenuously object to that amendment going onto the bill," said state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville. "I do not want this bill being at risk of being tied up in court."
Nelson's remark came two days after the Texas House voted to include the ban on gay foster parents in what state leaders say is a desperately needed measure to fix systemic problems in the state Department of Family Protective Services. The agency oversees Child Protective Services and Adult Protective Services, which have been under criticism for more than a year amid reports of widespread and sometimes deadly abuse and neglect.
Nelson said she is concerned that the ban on gay foster parents, pushed by state Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, would probably become a magnet for lawsuits and that it might cause upheaval for the thousands of children in homes where the foster parents might be gay or bisexual.
The House sponsor of Senate Bill 6, state Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, R-Lampasas, said she would not support uprooting children already in a foster home. Hupp said she might be amenable to language in the bill saying that gays and lesbians should not serve as foster parents, but would not require state workers to determine an applicant's sexual orientation."I understand the concern," Hupp said. "My concern is for the child. I could care less what two consenting adults do behind closed doors. I just don't care. But, when we are yanking a child out of a home ... it's traumatic to that kid. And then we're planting them into the home of strangers, which is traumatic.
"If [the child is placed] in a home with an openly gay couple, I think that could create further upheaval in that child's life," she added.
We'll see who's stronger, Senator Nelson or the Talton wing of her party. I'd make Nelson a slight favorite, but you can bet there will be an awful lot of public pressure coming from the so-called "family values" crowd to keep any waverers in line.
More from the Lesbian and Gay Rights Lobby, Inside the Texas Capitol (both of which feature this photo of the gentleman from Pasadena, which should be in every mailout his opponent next year makes), Pink Dome, Burnt Orange, and most intriguingly from Hope, who posts the following from a Senate staffer:
As repulsive as the vote for Talton's amendment is, rest assured that it is dead. Sen. Nelson is telling other senators that its adoption would kill the bill. Not sure if that is because of a filibuster or the fiscal note or that Republican senators are even saying they'll oppose it or all of the above. It also would take away all the great publicity they and the Governor want from reforming CPS and APS. But the senators are really just laughing about it as just the latest from Crazy Bob Talton.
Had my second appearance on BizRadio 1320 yesterday. Good thing it was relatively early, because I was a zombie for most of the rest of the day. I think I sounded like hell, but at least I was able to speak. I'm doing much better today - antibiotics are wonderful things when properly applied. I'll find out how I sounded when I receive the MP3 recording, which I'll post along with last week's when I get it. I probably won't keep them up for too long, since I don't want to fill up my disk space that way, but they'll be there for a few weeks at least.
Kevin was on as well, of course, and he talked mostly about security problems at Metro Park & Ride lots (see here for an example). I talked about The Smartest Guys In the Room and Mary Denny. It's kind of funny to me that I've been asked about movies each time I've been on so far, since the last flick I caught in the theaters was the last Harry Potter movie, which we saw the day before Olivia announced her intention to arrive.
Anyway. It was fun again, and I'm looking forward to doing it again. The first time I do this from the road will be interesting, whenever that may turn out to be.
The good news is, I don't have strep throat. The bad news is, I feel like a rottweiler's chew toy. If I sounded like I was drowning in helium on the radio today, that's why. I've got stuff planned for posting, but I don't have the energy. See you tomorrow.
Just wanted to note that Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist have been subpoenaed by the Senate subcommittee on Indian affairs as part of its probe into the activities of DeLay associate Jack Abramoff. The Chron picks up the story today.
"As part of the committees oversight function, we are examining instances of potential defrauding of Indian tribes," said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who chairs the committee.Reed, who is running for lieutenant governor of Georgia, said through a spokeswoman that he would turn over all records to the committee.
Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform said it would not release all the documents requested by the Senate committee, including lists of donors.
"In the past, ATR's donors have been harassed and abused when their names have been made public, and the organization has no intention of allowing this to happen again," said spokesman Christopher Butler. A subpoena was issued for the records that ATR has refused to release, McCain said.
Lots of review for Enron: The Smartest Guys In the Room today. Greg got to see it at the official opening and has some interesting reports from the Q&A session that followed. Ted gives his perspective as a former Enron employee. Both the Chron and the Press give it good reviews, with the Chron throwing in a comparison to the wonderful 1983 film Local Hero.
One thing from the Chron review: In the print edition, the review notes that the movie is unrated and "contains no objectionable material". Either they cut out the five-minute stripper montage from the screener DVD, or someone has an interesting definition of "objectionable".
I received the following email from two different people last night:
Sylvester Turner
St. Representative, District 139
Speaker Pro Tem
April 21, 2005
"There has been some confusion surrounding my vote on Representative Talton's amendment to SB 6. The vote was cast mistakenly while I was at the appropriation conference committee working group. I am NOT in favor of the amendment, and my previous record and actions reflect that. Foster children need loving comfortable homes and I would never let prejudice or discrimination stand in the way of these children finding those homes. I am hopeful that the conference committee on SB 6 will remove discrimination from this piece of legislation."
Sylvester Turner
Byron and Greg aren't impressed, either. I'm sorry, but we deserve a more thorough explanation than this.
(Yes, I'm back. The conference was good, the cold I picked up while at the conference, not so good. Regardless, it's good to be back.)
UPDATE: More from Save Texas Reps.
Like so many of my blogging colleagues, I'm disgusted by the action taken by State Rep. Robert Talton (R, Pasadena) to bar gays from being foster parents. I'm at a loss to understand the public policy rationale for this, since there's no evidence at all that children of gay or bisexual foster parents suffer in comparison to children of straight foster parents. Do we have such a surplus of foster parent wannabees that we needed to shrink the overall pool? Who will be bump out next because we don't approve of their lifestyle? The childless? The non-churchgoers?
Another point to consider:
Talton's amendment would require the Department of Family and Protective Services to ask potential foster parents if they are homosexual or bisexual and to refrain from placing children with those parents. Currently, the agency does not ask that question.The department also would be required to remove a child from a foster home if it determines that the parents are homosexual or bisexual.
Finally, Byron notes the Democrats who voted for this expression of homophobia (do I really have to tell you that Al Edwards was one of them? And Sylvester Turner, who keeps making it hard for me to defend him. And Richard Raymond and Patrick Rose - shame, shame, shame.) and the Republicans who voted against it. Note the comments made by State Rep. Carter Casteel (R, New Braunfels) in voting against the measure:
It was clear from the debate that the cost was astronomical and that the agency would have to consider becoming an investigatory agency into the sexual preference of foster parents.It was also clear that women who roomed together in college or men also would be suspect. It was clear that single men or women would be suspect.
With all the talk about which Democrats may or may not try to run against Tom DeLay in CD22, seldom is the question asked "What about the Republican primary?" Stina points to this Lawtalkers thread which indicates there are rumblings on the Republican side of the house. One of the names being mentioned is two-time primary challenger Michael Fjetland. I sent Mike an email asking about all this, and here is his reply:
FYI, former GOP Rep Pete McCloskey is coming to Houston to interview me April 30 - he's leading a 'revolt of the elders' - basically he wants the GOP to reform or the moderates bail out and become Democrats. LOL. So this is the last attempt.
Strategy wise, it would help Dems to help a GOP challenger to DeLay - he can be knocked out with only 30,000 votes in the GOP primary (the max who voted in the last primary I ran in in 2002) vs the 150,000 Republcian votes DeLay got in the general in '04.
Dems maxed at 110,000 in Nov '04 -- enough to influence a primary (and give their candidate a 'newbie' to challenge instead of an incumbent) but 110,000 is not enough to win a general in a 60/40 district.
If Morrison or Quan are the candidates even I could beat them. If it's Lampson, it would be tough for any GOP candidate to beat him, since his old district is part of the new D22.[...]
But I'm telling McCloskey there is no use running again unless there is FUNDING. He says if I run as a Republican, there is national funding available.
Elsewhere, DeLayWatch From The District reports on other activity:
The Forum has been contacted several times by Republicans from the District and by some National Republican interests about the dissatisfaction that many mainstream Repbublicans feel about how Tom DeLay has taken his extremism beyond their values. As one might hope, many Republicans do not share Tom DeLay's weird worldview. Now some are voicing their discomfort with their politics being lumped in with what Tom DeLay has come to stand for.Patricia Baig is a Repbublican from Fort Bend County (in the District) who put her money where her mouth is and took out a full page ad in her local paper to invite Republicans to protest Tom DeLay's recent speech at a local convention. The Republicans tried to discredit her, as they always do when they don't like the message, but she stands tall as a Republican who cannot tolerate Tom DeLay's intolerance for people. The Forum and Patricia Baig made contact and are entering some interesting areas for further discussion.
After a lengthy talk on the phone the Forum agreed to forward the contact information for several Repbublicans who have been contact with the Forum to Ms. Baig to see if they would be interested in working with her in future efforts. Watch this blog for further announcements regarding whether this will be a bi-partisan Forum or whether it will be working with a Republican group with similar objectives. Ms. Baig is not going away and she represents a growing sentiment in the District that Republicans have had enough of Tom DeLay.
I referenced Greg Moses in the previous post, so I feel compelled to note that he's also got a series in the works on the privatization of Texas' voter registration database. What, you didn't know this was going on? Neither did I, but it's pretty far along. Learn more about it here, here, and here, with further installments sure to follow.
State Rep. Mary Denny, author of the execrable HB1706, shows her ignorance during the committee hearings on her awful bill:
"You have to show ID to rent a video at Blockbuster," Denny said. "That's something simple and not nearly as sacred to us as casting our vote."
Renting a movie from Blockbuster, on the other hand, is a privilege. Blockbuster is under no obligation to do business with you. They can refuse service to any person at any time and for any reason. They can also put arbitrary requirements on the privilege of diong business with them, such as showing photo ID. (As Greg Moses points out, what they really want is to ensure that they can collect what you owe them.)
If Blockbuster turns you away, you can still get your hands on whatever movie it is you wanted. You can join Netflix. You can order video on demand from your cable company. You can buy DVDs at Walmart. These options are also available to you if you decide that Blockbuster's photo ID requirement is too onerous for you. No such alternative exist for anyone who gets turned away at the ballot box.
Comparing a fundamental Constitutional right to renting a movie shows nothing but disdain and contempt for all citizens. If you think I'm being overly dramatic here, you go back and review what the NRA has to say about gun ownership, because I feel the same way about voting.
But fraud over the years has caused mistrust of the current system, Denny said. She said she has heard many tales of dead people voting and of people who falsified their identities casting ballots."People are tired of it," Denny said. "They want to know their vote counts and that it was cast by them."
"In this day and age everyone has a photo ID," Denny said. "You have to have it to exist in today's world."
UPDATE: Adina comments:
There are four bills in Mary Denny's committee to add a voter-verifiable paper trail, with sponsorship from both parties.Chairman Denny has so far refused to allow the bills a hearing. If you'd like to move this forward, please call her office and ask her to schedule a hearing on any of these bills. The number is (512) 463-0688.
The bills are HB166 (Pena, D), HB1289 (Liebowitz, D), HB2269 (Baxter, R), HB3038 (Kolkhorst, R).
Anne has updates on on Toll Road Mania, with news about neighborhood groups near South Post Oak Road opposing a proposed alteration to that thoroughfare (and also endorsing the CTC resolution (PDF) to make the Harris County Toll Road Authority more accountable at a local level), plus an update on the situation in Fort Bend.
Regarding the former, here's an alternate perspective on HCTRA.
These situations are a classic case of "greater good vs. vocal local interest", sometimes referred to as NIMBY ("not-in-my-backyard"). The whole region benefits from better mobility, but there can be negative neighborhood effects, and balancing those is the job of our elected politicians. The trick, of course, is what level of politicians: federal vs. state vs. county vs. city vs. neighborhoods. IMHO, Texas has historically done a pretty good job at this by putting the decisions at a high enough level to take into account the greater good, while still getting input from localities - one good example being the recent county-level approval of the Port of Houston expansion. When you push more power, esp. veto-level power, down to the localities, it becomes impossible to get anything done and you get gridlock.So I guess I'd have to say I'm opposed to the changes they're proposing. If neighborhoods want to influence a toll road, they should contact their elected Harris County Commissioner. On the other hand, I would like to see efforts to:
1. Acknowledge the concerns of local neighborhoods
2. Mitigate impacts where economically feasible
3. Give affected neighborhoods reasonable compensation in the form of other capital improvement projects they might not otherwise get anytime soon: other road improvements, parks, libraries, community centers, flood mitigation - whatever they'd most like to see.
I just got an email from the CTC saying that Mayor White and the City Council have given their toll road accountability resolution a strong statement of support. I'm very happy to hear it.
This is the kind of ten-years-after elegy for The Houston Post that I wanted to see. Hey, Lynn Ashby: Another perk of blogging is no word limits. Just a little food for thought, you know?
There's a limited number of terminals available here and there's often a crowd, so I've got to pick my spots for blogging. I want to call your attention to these two posts by Greg concerning the email Tom DeLay has sent out to his fans in Fort Bend (you can see the whole email here). Greg has covered the relevant points here, so I'll leave you to him. Poor, poor Tom. Karma sure does suck sometimes, doesn't it?
One way you can tell you're at an IT conference - in particular, one way you can tell you're attending a keynote address by a CEO - is by the creative use of nouns as verbs. Today's entry: "de-risked", as in "We've de-risked the deployment process". I nearly de-seated myself when I heard that one. And to think, it's only Day One.
Today is the tenth anniversary of the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City, which killed 168 people. It remains the second-largest terrorist attack on American soil, and its effects are still being felt today. This is what I wrote about Oklahoma City three years ago. We must never forget.
Greetings from Orlando. I'm still getting my convention legs under me, but I expect to have an interesting tale or two to tell in the coming days. This sort of thing is always good for that.
The recent I-45 town hall meeting was videotaped, and will be shown on local access cable tonight and next Wednesday. Click the More link for viewing times, and for some other news items from an email received from the I-45 Coalition, whose nascent web page can now be seen.
If you were not able to attend, or would like to see the meeting again – Time Warner has scheduled it for viewing tonight, Monday 4/18/05 at 10:30 pm, on Channel 17. It will be aired again on Wednesday, 4/27/05 at 8 am. It is 3 hours and 38 minutes long…so get your video recorders rolling to watch it at your convenience! Thank you Time Warner!
On a related transportation issue, the City of Houston is hosting a discussion about solutions to Houston's railroad crossing problems. The TxDOT Commissioner and Federal Railroad Administration staff will attend, along with reps from the railroads and HISD officials, to hear your concerns.
Thursday, April 21, 2005
6:30 p.m. - 8 p.m.
George R. Brown Convention Center, Meeting Room 312
Hosted by:
Mayor Bill White & Council Members Berry, Galloway & Alvarado
I'm about to take off for Florida for a couple of days to attend a conference (this one, if anyone reading this happens to be there). As such, things will be a tad slow this week, especially in the approving-comments area. I'll pop in as I can. Try not to let too much happen this week, OK? Thanks.
So, um, is it just me, or has anyone else been mentally substituting "political bloggers" for "comics characters" in the last two Opus strips?
(For those whose newspapers don't carry it, the last two strips have been about there are no anthropomorphic female comic strip characters. Auxiliary girlfriends like Daisy Duck and Minnie Mouse don't count.)
The Star Telegram reports on another potential casualty of the Abramoff casino scandal: Senator John Cornyn, from his time as Texas' Attorney General.
The closing of the Speaking Rock Casino near El Paso in February 2002 was one of John Cornyn's proudest moments as Texas attorney general.His determination to shut down the Tigua Indian tribe's casino because it was opened in violation of state law earned the Texas Republican kudos and pledges of support from Christian political organizers -- backing that proved helpful as Cornyn made his successful run for the U.S. Senate that year.
[...]
The shuttering of the Speaking Rock Casino is being explored by investigators for the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, as well as a federal multi-agency task force and grand jury that are examining the actions of Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff and public relations associate Mike Scanlon.
Abramoff and Scanlon had many Indian gaming clients, including the Tigua Ysleta de Sur Pueblo, as the Tigua are known. The lobbyists are at the center of a fraud and fundraising scandal that has embroiled DeLay.
Cornyn, elected senator in 2002, was supported in his anti-Speaking Rock effort by a grassroots campaign led by conservative Christian lobbyist Ralph Reed, who organized pastors around the state to oppose gaming and back the attorney general.
Senate investigators discovered that Abramoff hired Reed to block gaming expansion in Texas and Louisiana -- and that the $4 million that Reed was paid actually came from Abramoff's Indian gaming clients.
Then, Abramoff and Scanlon secured the Tigua as a client on the day the casino was closed and charged them $4.2 million for a campaign to reopen it through federal legislation.
In an interview, Cornyn said he was "unaware" of Reed's role in Texas although he knew Reed from GOP political circles.
"I, of course, had filed the lawsuit earlier on. That was already a done deal," Cornyn said. "It was nice to receive that support, but it didn't have much to do with what we were already doing."
Cornyn's office filed the lawsuit, charging the tribe with violating the anti-gambling terms of a law giving them federal recognition, in September 1999.
"I never met with him," Cornyn said of Reed, dismissing e-mail traffic in 2001 and 2002 between Reed and Abramoff that suggests a close alliance with the Texas attorney general during the lengthy court decisions and appeals.
"I'm sure my name has been taken in vain before, so I'm not surprised," said the Texas senator. "Maybe lobbyists were engaged in self-promotion. I was doing my duty to enforce the law."
[...]
Asked about Abramoff's alleged double-dealings with the Tigua, Cornyn said, "Without prejudging, I find it somewhat disturbing."
In a series of e-mails released by the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, Cornyn's name appears numerous times in communications among Reed, Abramoff and Scanlon. As a result, he has drawn some criticism.
"Cornyn is getting a pass that he doesn't deserve," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, referring to the lack of attention to the senator's involvement.
"My concern is that he's working with Ralph Reed, who's being paid by Indian gaming interests," Sloan said.
On Nov. 12, 2001, Abramoff and Reed discussed strategy for supporting Cornyn. Reed writes Abramoff: "Great work. Get me details so I can alert Cornyn and let him know what we are doing to help him."
Cornyn said he had no contact with Reed.
I had the opportunity recently to watch a screener DVD of the documentary movie Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room, based on the book by the same name. It's a fairly comprehensive and snappy overview of the rise and fall of Enron, the players involved and the corporate culture they spawned. It's done in an interview-and-flashback style with subjects like book authors Bethany McLean and Peter Elkind, former Enron employees like whistleblowing VP Sherron Watkins, and various connected outsiders like Jim Chanos of Kynikos Associates, the analyst famously called an "asshole" by Jeff Skilling in a public conference call, and John Olsen, a former stock analyst for Merrill Lynch whose firing Andy Fastow forced when Lynch was about to give Enron's stock a "hold" rating.
There's some pretty strong material in this movie. A couple of internal videos, one of which features Jeff Skilling spoofing the concept of mark-to-market accounting (he called it "HFV", or "Hypothetical Future Value", and said the company stood to make "kazillions" by it) and another with Andy Fastow explaining why his stake in the LJM partnership would not be a conflict of interest, are particularly jaw-dropping. And there's a really poignant scene in which Portland General Electric lineman Al Kaseweter matter-of-factly states that he sold his entire retirement portfolio, which was worth $348,000 at its peak, for $1200.
Some of their story arcs felt incomplete to me. An early segment is on a scandal from 1987 involving Enron Oil, in which a couple of traders were getting inexplicably positive results from a series of risky trades, which the film likened to shooting craps. Former Enron employee Mike Muckleroy, who'd be on Central Casting's short list for "Veteran Texas Oil Man", is the key player in ferreting out the doubledealing and somehow saving the day for Enron. The details of what the traders were doing and how Muckleroy cleaned up after them are maddeningly unclear. We're told that these trades are hugely risky but the traders are making a killing, then we're told that they cooked the books but that Ken Lay had earlier told them to keep doing what they're doing because they were the only unit making money. Finally, we're told that they lost a $90 million gamble and after Muckleroy finally got to see the real accounting he "bluffed the market" and pulled their chestnuts out of the fire. I still can't make sense of what actually happened, and wish the filmmakers had taken the time to fill in a few blanks.
The point of this "prequel" was to show that early on Ken Lay knew that things were sometimes shifty at his company - Muckleroy emphatically confirms that Lay knew what was happening at Enron Oil because he told Lay himself. Much of the rest of the film, and especially the conversations with former insiders like onetime executive Amanda Martin-Brock, is spent on the question of what Lay and Skilling knew and when they knew it.
There's a big segment later on regarding the manipulation of California's energy markets. Former Governor Gray Davis and a couple of his state officials testify to how Enron took unfair and illegal advantage of them. I want to be sympathetic to that view, but it's a little self-serving of them to say so. This would have been a good place for an economist or legal expert to explain what it was about California that Enron was able to exploit like they did. We've all heard that California's deregulation laws were a mishmash of compromises. Was Enron just acting like any other hungry capitalist? It would have been nice to address that. Having said that, however, hearing the tapes of the traders leaves little doubt as to the morality involved.
There's a great bit towards the end. After Skilling suddenly resigned in 2001 for "personal reasons", Prudential analyst Carol Coale was going to downgrade Enron stock, but after interviewing Skilling she decided to believe him, and thus kept the "buy" rating intact. She admitted that he "spoke to the right analyst" and marveled at his acting skills. I thought that took guts to do, though it made me wish they had spoken to writers at the Houston Chronicle (such as former business columnist Jim Barlow, who was using trivia forwarded to him in email as the basis of a half-dozen or so columns a year towards the end of his term) to ask them how they missed what was going on at 1400 Smith Street.
Bottom line: This was a worthwhile movie to watch, and I believe it is accessible regardless of one's level of knowledge about Enron, but it left me wanting a little more. I suppose I need to read the book now so I can see what they left out. Oh, and they answered the eternal question about why Enron is associated with strippers. That in and of itself made it worth watching.
You can find out more about the film at their official movie blog. It opens on the 22nd here in Houston, which is pretty good timing given that the Enron Broadband trial is set to begin.
I had nearly 55,000 hits in March, putting it just a notch below January's total. The scourge of referral log spam continues, but I suppose I'm getting a little amount of perverse satisfaction in knowing that the clowns who are clogging up my logs are getting absolutely no hits from it as a result.
It's practically meaningless to track this sort of thing, since I had to change Sitemeter accounts last year, but at the rate I'm going, sometime in May I should get my one millionth hit. Like masterpoints for bridge players, beyond a certain point it's all just noise and ego, but I figure that next order of magnitude is a long ways off, so I may as well at least note this in passing.
Top referrers and search terms are beneath the fold. As always, thank you all very much for visiting.
Aggregators, collections, indices, etc ====================================== 385: http://www.bloglines.com 366: http://blo.gs/Weblog referrers
================
2046: Daily Kos
2021: Political Animal
776: Air America Radio
551: TAPPED
426: Atrios
277: The Burnt Orange Report
277: Pink Dome
269: In the Pink Texas
200: Liberal Oasis
155: Greg's Opinion
127: Pandagon
Top search terms
================
#reqs: search term
-----: -----------
848: diane zamora
791: ashley mcelhiney
409: real men of genius
280: 97.5 kiol
272: armadillo palace
267: schlitterbahn galveston
230: kiol
182: walton and johnson
175: kiol 97.5
174: off the kuff
174: buy girl scout cookies
166: extreme home makeovers
163: michael lefkow
159: american idol tryouts
111: texas cheerleaders
109: joan lefkow
88: pat summit
84: baseball and steroids
82: wichita falls tornado
80: prime number algorithm
John Cobarruvias has a report from the anti-DeLay protest outside the NRA convention yesterday. Pictures can be found here, here, and here. Sure is nice to see DeLay described by a mainstream source as "embattled", isn't it?
Grits reports that the Harris County drug task force is kaput. This is a good thing, since the main legacy of these things is the Tulia fiasco. It also allows for the money earmarked for the task forces to go to better uses such as drug courts.
Meanwhile, a bill to create regional crime labs for DNA evidence processing is dead for this session amidst finger-pointing between State Rep. Kevin Bailey (D, Houston) and HPD Chief Harold Hurtt.
Earlier in the session, Hurtt, along with the police chiefs of the five other largest cities in Texas, had endorsed the proposal.But Bailey now says he is not sure whether Hurtt and the city were ever committed to funding the labs.
"That's how their lab problems started to begin with. They didn't want to commit sufficient funds. And to some degree, I think that still exists," Bailey said.
Hurtt acknowledges he was concerned about the issue of turnaround time, given the DPS's current six-month backlog in processing DNA evidence.
"But there was no issue about a guaranteed turnaround," Hurtt said. "We wanted to discuss the issue of turnaround time."
As for the fees, Hurtt pointed out that some smaller law enforcement agencies have their evidence processed by the DPS without charge.
"What we were concerned about was that everybody pay their share," Hurtt said.
But Bailey maintained that Hurtt was more concerned about the costs to the city.
"We were in a situation basically where the city wanted everybody else to pay for the facility," Bailey said.
"I'm not convinced at this point that the city is willing or capable of running a lab on their own," he said.
State Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, confirmed that the regional DNA lab bill is dead for this session.
He acknowledged that there was resistance to the legislation from some rural law enforcement agencies but said those agencies may have to find a way to contribute in the future.
"I mean, that's the breaks," said Whitmire, chairman of the Criminal Justice Committee. "They need to come on board and pay the cost of doing this."
Monday will mark the ten-year anniversary of the death of the Houston Post, and its former editor-in-chief Lynn Ashby commemorates the event. I liked The Post - I signed up for a subscription my first week on campus as a grad student at Rice in 1988 and took it continuously until it was killed off (my Chron subscription lapsed for a few years during that time). I unfortunately can't remember too much about it now. They endorsed Ann Richards in 1990 over Clayton Williams, and they used to occasionally talk back in the Letters to the Editor, and they're where Ken Hoffman and Betsy Parrish once hung out. I'd rather have them around than not because I think two newspapers are better than one and a little competition never hurt anyone. Alas.
(I wonder - has anyone suggested to Ashby that he start a blog? I bet he'd get a wider audience than he has now with the Houston Community Newspapers.)
Thanks to Banjo for the link. Kevin also comments.
The Jeffersonian notes a new Survey USA poll which shows Julian Castro continuing to hold a solid lead in the San Antonio Mayor's race, but still falling short of a majority of the vote. He also has some analysis from a televised debate last night. A longer analysis is provided by a newcomer on the scene, SA Elections 2005. He was a bit unimpressed:
Goldilocks would find little to sustain herself in the porridge offered by the three major mayoral candidates last night. Julian Castro is too young, Phil Hardberger is too old, and Carroll Schubert is too cold.
I've heard a few tidbits from Richard Morrison's trip to DC to meet up with the DCCC and various persons of interest. The DCCC made him an offer, which he ultimately declined (sorry, no details available). I am told that Morrison and the DCCC are in agreement that a Democratic primary in CD22 should be avoided. Morrison is in close touch with Gordon Quan and Nick Lampson, the others being mentioned as possible nominees, and all are confident that a coordinated plan will be worked out to send DeLay back to Sugar Land. They also are working to field the strongest candidate in not just that race but in all the most promising local races.
As for what some of those races might be, I think everyone knows where I want Quan to run. It's possible he may not be the only person looking at CD07, and if so, that's great - there's a place where a contested Democratic primary would be a fine thing. I could see Lampson trying on a couple of races for size, with State Senate District 17 being one that could be winnable, regardless of whether or not Kyle Janek runs again. This is just me talking here, so take it with the usual salt.
I have been told that the original source that inspired my post on 2006 targets was an article from Capitol Inside. One thing it mentioned which I did not know at the time was that there are plans to make targets of U.S. Reps. John Carter in CD31, Ron Paul in CD14, and Lamar Smith in CD21. I believe that it doesn't make much sense to target Carter without also targeting State Reps. Mike Krusee and Dan Gaddis - I actually don't think you can beat Carter until you've beaten at least one of those guys, but in the meantime laying a little groundwork surely can't hurt. I hope someone will talk to Jon Porter, the guy who ran against Carter last year, about the Krusee and/or Gaddis races. Going after State Rep. Gene Seaman will help whoever runs against Paul. It will take a candidate with a strong presence in Bexar County to make a race against Smith.
Lastly is Kristin Mack's column from Friday, which covers the Menendez amendment and the Democrats who missed out on voting for it. Not much new there other than the attribution to absentee Kevin Bailey that Democrats "might benefit from more cooperation with the GOP leadership". This is the first I've heard any such sentiment from Rep. Bailey - is this a change of heart or has he just been playing it coy all along? If I get the chance, I'll ask him that question.
My debut on BizRadio 1320 went pretty well, I thought. Kevin led off and they talked to him about lonely toll booth operators and Sports Authority shenanigans, then it was my turn and we discussed hosting the Super Bowl and The Year of The Yao. I wasn't sure what to expect - I was prepared to talk about any number of things - but the way it worked was that host Jon-Michial Carter and his two cohosts (whose names I unfortunately did not catch) led the way, which made it very easy. I kind of wish we had more time, it was fun. Having Kevin go first was nice, too, since that helped me know what was coming. He did a good job, too, so I had to live up to that. All in all, I was happy.
In theory, we'll be back next week, and some time between now and then I expect to receive an audio file from the show, which I'll post. Whether I'm back next week or not, I'd like to say thanks to Jon-Michial Carter. I enjoyed the experience. If anyone here was listening, I hope you can say the same.
Meant to post on this earlier, but things got a little crazy around here: Here's the latest installment from Father John on the privatization of Colorado's Benefit Management System (CBMS), which is described in this Denver Post article as being "a pathetic state of affairs". Father John makes a point at the end that I want to touch on:
One of the more telling comments above is the one about how they wanted to dump EDS as a vendor, but then realized this would cause more problems than it would solve. This shows the danger of the privatization of such essential elements of a welfare system. It's sort of like checking into the roach motel, you can check in, but you can't check out. Once these vendors get their hooks into the system, they become indispensible, and can then start jacking up the price, and/or simply fail to live up to all their contract obligations, and what can the state do? ...nothing, but like it.
I don't know how long this will be up, but there's a poll on the Click2Houston.com website that says "Should it be illegal to live together in a sexual relationship when not legally married?" I can only wonder how much of my readership would have a record if this law were in effect.
What I want to know is what in the world prompted them to ask this question? Is there a worse bill than HB16 lurking in the Lege that I don't yet know about? Is this connected to a news story that I missed? I didn't see any obvious related links on their page.
On the plus side, "no" was winning by 79% to 21% when I checked it. That's still way too many people who want the government in other people's bedrooms, though.
Thanks to Charles M for the tip.
The Year of the Yao, a documentary about Yao Ming's first year in the USA and NBA, opens this weekend in Houston.
The film presents the incredible pressure placed on Yao, not only as a basketball player and the top pick in the 2002 NBA draft but also as an icon from a nation relatively unknown to Western sports fans. It lets viewers tag along through Yao's rookie season, largely through the eyes of his interpreter and friend, Colin Pine. It peeks behind the usually closed doors of the practice courts, charter jets and training rooms and even briefly into his home near Katy.
By the way, I think the best thing that ever happened to Yao was the arrival of Lebron James on the scene. King James has done a pretty masterful job of taking the media monster off Yao's back. Having Dikembe Mutombo around probably hasn't hurt, either.
If anyone in town reading this is awake and near a radio tomorrow (Saturday) morning at 10:15 AM, you can tune into BizRadio 1320 AM and hear me talk about This Week In Blogging. Kevin did this last week, and will be there again this week. This may even turn out to be a recurring gig for me, assuming that my voice doesn't set off car alarms for a ten-county radius. You can listen to an MP3 of Kevin's performance from last week for a preview. Wish me luck, and let's hope that the baby and the dog don't try to upstage me.
There's been some mighty tough competition this session, but I'm going to nominate HB16 as the biggest PLOB of them all. That's the bill that would allow a pharmacist to refuse to sell birth control to an adult woman with a valid prescription from her doctor in the name of salving the pharmacist's conscience. (NOTE: It's actually about morning-after contraception. See update below.) Pink Dome is there for the committee hearings.
I'm absolutely appalled at the idea that an adult could be denied access to a legal product at the whim of a stranger, but I have to ask, why are we stopping here? If this bill becomes law, would it mean that a Jehovah's Witness working at CVS could legally refuse to dispense any blood-related products? Would it mean that a Catholic working the deli counter at Randall's could legally refuse to sell you a steak on Fridays? Could a Wiccan working at Academy refuse to sell you hunting equipment? Where exactly would it end?
I have a personal reason for feeling so strongly about this. When my sister was a teenager, she had such bad menstrual cramps that she couldn't go to school during her period. The ultimate solution to ease the problem and let her live normally was the pill. Later, in her twenties, she stopped menstruating after she lost some weight and started exercising regularly. I called her on the phone while composing this post, and she said it was similar to what competitive gymnasts go through because they're so skinny. Had this condition continued, she might have begun menopause at a very early age. The only thing that worked to reverse the effect was taking the pill. I defy any so-called "Pharmacist for Life" to tell me that this was immoral of her.
(Side note: Naturally, her insurance did not cover the cost of the birth control pills. Despite a letter from her doctor explaining that they were for treatment of a medical problem and not for birth control, they refused to pay. As she said at the time, she could pay to get a period once a month or not have it at all for free. Such a fun choice, no?)
(Oh, and before anyone asks, no, my sister did not have an eating disorder. It's true that anorexia and bulimia sufferers are at risk of menstruation problems, but that was not the issue here.)
I don't want to create the impression that there's some kind of distinction between women who take the pill to treat a medical condition and the vast majority of women who take the pill for the traditional reason. My point is that it's none of any pharmacist's damn business why a woman is using a legal product for which she has a valid prescription from her doctor. I see no reason why some pharmacists should be granted a special right to impose their will on other people. If they're not capable of doing their jobs, they're perfectly free to find other work.
UPDATE: After reading this In the Pink post, I see that HB16 is about morning-after contraception, not the birth control pill. That doesn't make it any less bad an idea, nor does it mean that it couldn't be amended in the future to broaden the scope of legal pharmacist meddling. I have the same objections and for the same reasons.
UPDATE: 'stina tells her story.
Greg observes President Bush's evolving relationship with Tom DeLay. Parallels to his friendship/nonfriendship with Kenny Boy Lay are strictly coincidental.
Nice to know that someone in Utah still loves The Hammer.
Media Matters rounds up a bunch of anti-DeLay editorials from papers that all endorsed Bush in 2004. Most of them express the idea that DeLay's resignation as Majority Leader would be good for the Republican Party. One wonders, if DeLay hangs on and continues to get the support of 95+% of the caucus, at what point (if any) they will conclude that the problem is deeper than just one man.
New resources for the enterprising fan of these sagas: Tom DeLay's House of Scandal (via The Stakeholder) and Jack in the House, as in DeLay's buddy Jack Abramoff (via HoustonDemocrats.com).
And of course the Daily DeLay is always invaluable. It really is hard to keep up with all this, but they do a fabulous job. Just start at the top and keep reading.
Will the TRMPAC scandals reach the Governor's office? Republican State Rep. Tommy Merritt is claiming that Rick Perry's former chief of staff Mike Toomey urged him to sign a pledge card for Tom Craddick in return for a promise to not be attacked again by a sleazy out of state pressure group with ties to Perry.
Perry spokesman Robert Black denied that Toomey asked Merritt, a maverick Republican close to former Democratic Speaker Pete Laney, to pledge his support to Craddick as he sought a second term as speaker."That's silliness," Black said. "It didn't happen."
Merritt said he asked Toomey for the governor's endorsement in his House re-election primary last March after Perry had campaigned against him in a special Senate election in East Texas a month earlier.
More important, Merritt said, Toomey agreed that Americans for Job Security — an out-of-state organization that used corporate money in radio attack ads in Merritt's Senate race — would not repeat them in his re-election bid to the House.
A Perry consultant, Dave Carney, heads up Americans for Job Security, which paid for radio ads that Merritt said mischaracterized his stance on taxes.
Merritt said he also agreed to endorse Perry's choice for the East Texas state Senate seat: Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler.
Black said it didn't happen that way: "Merritt just came hat in hand and asked for our endorsement, and he got it."
Black denied that Toomey demanded anything in return for the governor's endorsement.
There's another angle to consider here, and it involves HB1348, the Smith/Eiland campaign finance reform bill, which would outlaw the kind of attacks that Merritt once faced:
[A]s the bill gets its first public hearing [Thursday], there is concern that the legislation might not survive a gantlet of elected officials from the House to the governor's office, who either directed or benefited from corporate money in Texas elections.Reps. Mary Denny, R-Aubrey, and Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, got help in 2002 from the Texas Association of Business and Texans for a Republican Majority. Denny chairs the Elections Committee, and Hughes leads the campaign finance subcommittee where House Bill 1348 is lodged.
Rep. Beverly Woolley, R-Houston, served on the advisory board of Texans for a Republican Majority. Woolley leads the House Calendars Committee, which schedules bills for floor votes.
All three lawmakers, plus Craddick, have not signed on to support the bill. The three members said they have been too busy to make a decision on the bill, and Craddick has said he will stay neutral.
The authors, Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, and Todd Smith, R-Euless, aren't ready to point fingers, although the legislative clock is running out on the bill.
"What I call the invisible hand of government can kill it and leave no fingerprints," Eiland said.
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said the Senate is waiting on the House to act: "If it comes over here, we're passing it out."
That would leave Perry, with his ties to Toomey.
Keith Gaddie of Sooner Politics has a personal interest in the maelstrom surrounding Tom DeLay.
I have a little issue of my own, in the interest of coming clean. I’m working on a book on the Texas redistricting, and nothing would make a more satisfying ending for the market than for the architect of the remap to fall. But, I also have worked, in redistricting, with the lawyers who defend DeLay and his lieutenant, Jim Ellis. They used me in two trials and never paid my bill. The lawyers blame the Texas GOP delegation, saying they have not paid the bill. I can’t sue them, because no lawyer in Texas will take the case, because they are afraid to sue the Hammer’s lawyers (though the state AG saw fit to use us and pay our 2003 consulting fee, for which I am most grateful). So, yes, I would take some small joy in seeing him lose; it would be worth the price of not getting paid. Even without the billing issue, as an observer I would appreciate the irony of DeLay taking a tumble.
Dwight has located and summarized the 2002 Texas Liability Insurance Closed Case Annual Report (pdf), which provides data on the burden borne by the Texas business community as a result of the tort system. The information it provides may surprise you. Check it out.
The Poor Man makes a connection that had eluded most of us (well, me, anyway) until now.
State Rep. Aaron Pena has gotten his colleagues on board the blogging train with Lone Star Rising, a group blog for House Dems. There's three posts up so far, all by blogging newcomers, with more sure to follow.
Also noted by a bunch of people:
Burnt Orange
The Red State
Pink Dome
Grits for Breakfast
A Little Pollyanna
Greg Wythe
Rhetoric & Rhythm
And probably others whom I've overlooked. I think it's safe to say that this idea is very well received, and I hope it inspires broad participation in the House and maybe a copycat in the Senate.
My slightly belated congratulations to John Cobarruvias of HoustonDemocrats.com for being recognized by KHOU for his good works as a volunteer with Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings.
"We help everbody who has a defect with a homebuilder," said Cobarruvias. "We do this out of our own time and with our own money."For many frustrated homeowners, Cobarruvias and HADD are the last resort.
"We give people the ideas and tools to use so they can get their house fixed without the use of an attorney without the legal system," said Cobarruvias.
HB1348, the Smith/Eiland campaign finance reform bill, still gets no respect.
All 63 members of the House Democratic caucus have signed on as co-authors of the bill, as have 30 of the 87 House Republicans, the Democrats announced. But Democrats are worried that the House Republican leadership under Speaker Tom Craddick is allowing the bill to languish in committee."Time is getting of the essence," said the bill's lead sponsor, Rep. Craig Eiland, D-Galveston. "If this does not get moving soon and fast then the time clock, which I call the invisible hand of government that leaves no fingerprints, may be able to kill it."
[...]
Craddick acknowledged that when elected speaker in 2003 he promised that he would not bottle up legislation that had broad support in committee. But Craddick said he did not know how many members had signed on in support of the legislation.
"I didn't even know how many co-sponsors there were to the bill. Rather than having a press conference they ought to have said something to us," he said.
House Elections Chairwoman Mary Denny, R-Aubrey, said she has not held up Eiland's bill, but set a hearing for it in the order that bills were referred to her committee."It's being heard in the order it came in. That's the best we can do," she said. "Everybody's bill is important to them."
The bill is getting a hearing today in a subcommittee of the House Elections Committee, but only 27 days remain before House bills become ineligible for preliminary debate before the full chamber.
Denny said the full elections committee is unlikely to take a vote on Eiland's bill before the week after next.
Some good news on the PLOB front - Scott reports that HB2893 has been amended to remove the requirement of RFID tags in vehicle registration stickers. That's certainly a relief, but there are still some privacy issues with the bill, so check out Scott's post for more.
Apparently, I was featured on the "Inside the Blogs" feature of CNN's Inside Politics yesterday. Here's CNN's Jacki Schechner:
On the other side of the political spectrum, before we run out of time here, we go over to Off the Cuff for the latest in the DeLay barrage. That is Charles Cuffner (ph) at offthecuff.com. He calls it his "Tour DeLay." He's got a list of news articles talking about House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and the latest going on with regard to him.
Rep. Beverly Woolley, come on down! You are our next contestant on The Price (For Getting Favorable Legislation) Is Right!
A Houston legislator who chairs the committee that sets bills for House debate once promised a gambling promoter that she would get fellow lawmakers to listen to his pitch for a legalized video lottery if he would contribute money to a Republican effort to win control of the Texas House.A lawyer for state Rep. Beverly Woolley, R-Houston, said her promise was nothing more than politics as usual and violated no state laws, but a public interest advocate said it "smells of influence peddling."
The new revelations are contained in evidence in a recent civil lawsuit involving Texans for a Republican Majority. They also surface as a House committee prepares to start hearing testimony today on whether video lotteries, VLTs, in Texas should be legalized at horse-racing tracks. No action is expected.
House Speaker Tom Craddick last week said he believes there will be a "big push" to legalize video lotteries as the Legislature looks for ways to finance the state's budget. The state has predicted it could earn $1.5 billion a year from video lottery terminals, also known as video slot machines.
But the issue was almost unheard of in 2002 as Woolley raised money for Texans for a Republican Majority, TRMPAC. Woolley is chairwoman of the House Calendars Committee, which controls when the House debates specific bills.
Her testimony in a deposition in a lawsuit brought by losing Democratic House candidates against TRMPAC treasurer Bill Ceverha shows she did not understand what VLTs were when she first discussed them with Charles Hurwitz, head of Maxxam Inc., owner of the Sam Houston Race Park.
1. We first heard of the Woolley-TRMPAC connection last year. The continued stream of documents from the various lawsuits against TRMPAC has added quite a bit to our overall body of knowledge, has it not?
2. If there's an expansion of legalized gambling in the state of Texas, it's because Republicans want it. Tina Benkiser can yell and scream all she wants, it's her team that'll be the ones to push it through.
3. I can't begin to tell you how hard it was to make it this far without using some lame joke based on the song Wooly Bully. The sacrifices I make for this blog sometimes, I swear.
UPDATE: In the Pink yields to Woolley Bully temptation faster than I do.
This editorial, which takes Roy Moore and the Alabama Christian Coalition to task for their stance that public education is a gift and not a right, is outstanding.
Take their stance on whether or not Alabama's children should have the right to an education, which they espouse in a lengthy position paper available on the Coalition website. They spend 4,228 words arguing that education is a "gift" to be given by the state, rather than a right Alabama's children can demand.Of those 4,228 words, not one of them is "Jesus." Not one of them is "Christ." Not one of them is "God." Not one of them is quoted from Scripture.
Evidently, what the Christian point-of-view on the topic might be and what the Bible has to say about it is beside-the-point to the Coalition. Quote Christ? Nah. But the paper does quote any number of other sources, from the United Nations to the AEA to something called Education International, in its effort to prove that the "right to an education" is a liberal fabrication to justify out-of-control spending. The guidance our Lord and Savior could offer in a decision that affects thousands and thousands of Alabamian lives is irrelevant; what a foreign education official named "Mr. van Leeuwen" has to say is critical, though. This is Christian leadership?
Bob McNair is tanned, rested,and ready to knock 'em dead with his proposal to host the 2009 Super Bowl.
"We think it's a very strong proposal," Texans owner Bob McNair said Tuesday. "We're going to have to do even more this time than the last time, but we're prepared to do that. I know the NFL knows we can perform. We just have to convince them that this is the place to be in '09."[...]
Unlike in 2000, when the NFL awarded the Super Bowl to Houston after McNair paid $700 million for the Texans' expansion rights, McNair expects some tough competition.
"They owed me one the last time, and I paid for it. I had some assurances there," McNair said. "Now we are competing with everybody. Now we have to realize we don't have an inside track as we did before. We've got to go out there and give the NFL the best possible proposal."
Oh, and you folks up in Dallas will be pleased to know that your reward for building Cowboy Stadium II: Taxpayer Subsidy Boogaloo is in the works.
Let's start our Tour DeLay today with the top story in the Chron, which is a recap of the Abramoff saga. Not much really new there. Cragg Hines muses about what an actual smoking gun from Abramoff might look like. He also notes that Abramoff has made the obligatory denial of what he said in that Newsweek story (see The Stakeholder for more).
Over in the WaPo, DeLay takes his "I AM the conservative movement!" tour to the Senate, where he says that the agenda of the Republican Party should be to say that the Democrats have no agenda. Or something like that. Via Josh Marshall.
Locally, DeLay will be in town this weekend to give a keynote address to the NRA convention at the George R. Brown Convention Center. The Houston Democrats invite you to give him a warm reception on Saturday. Here's a flyer (PDF) from the Bay Area New Democrats, which stresses that this is a bipartisan event and is NOT a protest of the NRA itself, just of DeLay.
KHOU reports on another self-proclaimed anti-DeLay Republican in Sugar Land. That's nice and all, but the fact that it's remarkable enough to be newsworthy means we've still got a ways to go. Via the Daily DeLay, which also brings us another DeLay flashback, this one on mass transit, and another editorial roundup from such deep blue places as Nebraska.
The newly MovableTyped Houtopia brings us the latest from USA Today and the Christian Science Monitor, the latter of which has a couple of provocative quotes:
The gap between what House Republicans say on the record about their embattled leader Tom DeLay and what they say in private is wide but narrowing.In public, most Republicans say that what's driving the criticism of the House majority leader is politics, not ethics. The Democratic "hit machine" is pouring millions into a campaign to oust the most powerful Republican in Congress. But the real target is the Republican majority and its agenda.
But in private, some senior leaders are saying it's only a matter of time before the most powerful Republican in Congress is forced from office. "Democrats should save their money. Why murder someone who is committing suicide?" said a senior GOP lawmaker, on condition of anonymity.
[...]
While the "gathering storm" has yet to hit local conservative talk radio as it has the national news media, there are also signs that the ethics allegations are beginning to rankle the GOP's conservative base. "Personal ethics are very important to the average evangelical," says the Rev. Richard Cizik, vice president of governmental affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals. "When a person is seen to profit from their political connections, it doesn't speak well for that individual."
But he adds that he is not prepared to call for DeLay's ouster "because of appearances.... There's a benefit of the doubt."
Policital Wire notes that things are bad enough for DeLay that the White House had to issue a statement of confidence in him. Of course, in pro sports that's usually the last thing an owner says about a coach before he fires him.
Last but not least, a little humor, from The Onion (via Andrea) and from Shakespeare's Sister.
Anne brings news of the latest development in the quest to build an extension to the Grand Parkway in Spring, whether the residents there want it or not.
Homes in north Harris County could soon be up for sale without their owners consent. That's because the properties may be in the path of the expanded Grand Parkway, Houston's proposed super loop.[...]
"They're ruining the whole landscape of Spring," said Sheryl Badoni, homeowner.
Badoni fears the potential path of the Grand Parkway will take what has been home to her family for seven years. "They're supposed to take our whole property, come right though our house and right through our property," she said.
Badoni and several of her neighbors are upset about the letters from the Harris County Toll Road Authority, requesting permission to survey their property.
"It says they want to conduct a survey for the acquisition of right-of-way and design of the Grand Parkway," Badoni said as she read part of the letter.
But the Grand Parkway Association said the final decision on where the road will go has not been made.
"If I can find a route that doesn't take anybody's home, that doesn't take any wetlands, that's the route I'm going to pick," said Robin Sterry, Grand Parkway Association. "I don't like having impacts if I can avoid them."
"I think we can't believe a word they say," said Badoni.
Badoni said she wouldn't be allowing any surveyors on her property.
The Grand Parkway Association said some subdivisions didn't exist when the project first started. And that's why many homeowners in those areas said they want the Grand Parkway moved a lot farther north, where there are fewer people to impact.
Anne also notes an earlier item, which brought up a bill by State Sen. (and HCTRA godfather) Jon Lindsay, which as noted here and here appears to be a way to avoid submitting the Grand Parkway to environmental impact review and public meeting requirements while still allowing the state to ultimately assume its debt. You almost have to admire the gall involved in that.
I should note that the WHCA became something like the 25th civic association to formally sign the CTC's resolution (PDF) on toll road accountability. The goal is a show of support for a couple of bills filed by Rep. Martha Wong (HB2496 and HB2497) which would at least put some limits on the HCTRA. The main issue that's still unaddressed (though HB2496 may get amended to deal with it) is that municipalities have no legal power (Word doc) to veto, alter, or slow down HCTRA projects - this is the first point in the CTC resolution that the WHCA endorsed last night. If you want to see that happen, contact the CTC or write to your elected officials and tell them so. You never know on whose door the next HCTRA surveyor may be knocking.
UPDATE: Forgot to mention earlier that the CTC will be at the City Council meeting next Tuesday, April 19, and they're looking for speakers and supporters to join them. See below the fold for more info.
CTC Folks and Supporters:
It is time to take our message to Houston City Hall on April 19th. Here is a quick summary of the basic details on how to sign up to speak before City Council and give forth our message that citizens deserve more of a voice in toll road projects.
Each Tuesday afternoon, any member of the public can speak before Houston City Council at the weekly "pop off" sessions. I encourage everyone who can to attend the Tuesday, April 19th pop off at 1:30pm. However, with a little coordination and preparation, we can make our voices stronger and better received.
- How to sign up to speak.
Everyone who would like to speak must call the City Secretary at 713 247-1840 to schedule your time at pop-off. She needs to know your name, address, telephone, topic, and number of minutes (1,2 or 3) you request. Please call this week (sooner the better).
Our goal is to be recognized as a group. To help get ourselves into one group, you will need to say "toll road accountability resolution" for your topic, please ask for 1 minute and say that you want to be grouped with others on the same topic (feel free to say this is part of the Citizens Transportation Coalition). I am working with a couple of City Council members to ensure that we will officially recognized by the Mayor. This will increase our notoriety. Note: if you ask for more than one minute, you will go farther down the line and probably not be with everyone else (first all of the 1 minute people speak, than all of the 2 minutes people, and so on).
I recommend that everyone who wants to speak to show up around 1:15pm. We may end up being the first group up, and we need to get our heads together before the session starts.
- What if I just want to attend, but not speak?
Great. The more people in the audience who supports the CTC position the better. While we only need 10 people to speak, having more folks in the audience to show solidarity will greatly add to our punch. We will provide CTC name badges to make sure we look organized and together.
Please drop me an e-mail if you signed up to speak or will attend in the audience.
- What is our message?
Our goal is to convince Mayor White and City Council to support our resolution pressing for toll road accountability and citizen input (i.e. the same resolution that neighborhoods are supporting). This will greatly help in getting legislators from the Houston area to support legislation in Austin.
Even a quick statement by an individual in front of City Council saying: "I am Jane from Timbergrove neighborhood, I deserve a voice, support the resolution, etc" would work well. CTC will put together talking points.
- Will we get press? CTC will put together and send out a press release the day before and call reporters.
Thanks for everyone who plans on participating. See you on the 19th.
Peter Tyler
Advocacy Chair
Citizens Transportation Coalition
713-256-9205
p_tyler@swbell.net
A bill to cap property tax appraisals, Governor Perry's self-proclaimed #1 priority this legislative session, is dead.
"I'm disappointed in the vote. I don't mind saying that," Perry said. "This is not going to go away."Rep. Dwayne Bohac, R-Houston, has been trying for weeks to gather the 100 votes needed to pass his constitutional amendment to halve the amount appraisals can grow each year. Currently, tax appraisals can grow as much as 10 percent annually.
"It's a sad day for the taxpayers of the state of Texas," Bohac said.
Perry vowed to keep up a public campaign to limit what he calls property appraisal "creep." He championed a bill set to be debated Wednesday that will reduce the cap on property tax revenue increases in cities and counties.
Proponents of appraisal caps said they would safeguard property-tax reductions that are part of the school finance plans in the House and Senate. Bohac's measure had support from the Republican leadership, including House Speaker Tom Craddick, who said today he supported appraisal caps.
"We need to take the burden of unfair taxation off the homeowners' shoulders," said Rep. David Leibowitz, D-San Antonio.
Both rural Republicans and Democrats have staunchly opposed the constitutional change, saying it would shift the tax burden to those who can least afford it and hamstring the ability of local governments to pay for vital services such as police and fire protection.
The Texas Association of Counties and the Texas Municipal League have also decried the legislation.
"I think common sense prevailed rather than a political soundbite," said Elna Christopher, spokeswoman for the county association.
On a vote of 81-65, House members stopped debate on the legislation.
"The time to kill a snake is when you've got the hoe in your hand," said Rep. Fred Hill, R-Richardson, who has ardently opposed appraisal caps.
The Chris Bell campaign was quick on the press release draw here, but the tone feels a bit off to me:
HOUSTON- The Chris Bell for Governor Exploratory Committee today called the defeat of property-tax appraisal caps in the House of Representatives a "failure of leadership" by Rick Perry."This was Rick Perry's top priority in reforming school finance, and its defeat represents a clear failure of leadership," said Jason Stanford, spokesman for the committee. "It wasn't too long ago that Rick Perry was on the House floor, hat in hand, begging for votes on this issue from a Republican-led legislature. If he can't lead the elected officials in his own party, then Rick Perry has to do some serious soul searching about why his influence within the party is eroding so rapidly. Rick Perry has to mark this up in the loss column."
UPDATE: In the Pink piles on, while Rep. Aaron Pena liveblogged the debate from the floor.
UPDATE: The Texas Legislature Observed jumps the gun on its announced April 15 debut date to comment on the death of HJR35.
Ted Barlow gets a chance to hear Rep. John Culberson at a local town hall meeting. Despite not having a recording device, he gives a pretty darned detailed account. Check it out.
We're less than four weeks out from the San Antonio municipal elections of May 7, and The Jeffersonian is doing yeoman's work in following all the races, Mayoral and otherwise. Today he notes that the Julian Castro campaign is under some fire for campaign finance reporting errors. Combine that with Castro's low cash on hand and things may be getting a bit tight over there. There's no new polls, however, so we can't say for sure.
The weekly San Antonio Current has several stories pertaining to the elections this week, including a piece on the mysterious push poll that I noted earlier. Since that report came out, there have been some questions about who really was behind it, and that story suggests it may have been the Castro campaign in a bit of machiavellian maneuvering. I'm a little skeptical, since it just seems like a really dumb thing for a frontrunner to pull, but I suppose you never know. I'm also a little disappointed that the reporter of the Current piece didn't try to find out more about the anomalous poll experience Kevin Allen talked about, but in fairness I know since she used me to contact Kevin that she was operating close to her deadline and may not have had the time for that. That paragraph still sticks out, though, and maybe should have been dropped altogether if there was nothing more to it than that.
Anyway. Other Current stories include this piece on opposition research, featuring Jason Stanford of the Practice What You Preach PAC, and this piece on political consultants which features a quote from The Jeffersonian. Finally, Jaime Castillo has a nice article on Lori and Joe Bravo, the couple behind SAElections.com. Check it out.
Remember last year when the Lege passed the so-called "Defense of Marriage Act", which outlawed gay marriage? Apparently, that wasn't enough to hold back the big gay menace.
A proposed constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage was passed Monday by a House committee that rejected a broader proposal that could have banned civil unions.Although Texas has an existing law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman, locking that definition into the state constitution would make it more difficult for a future Legislature to change.
Rep. Martha Wong of Houston was among six Republican members of the State Affairs Committee who voted for House Joint Resolution 6. Rep. Jessica Farrar, D-Houston, cast the sole vote against the measure, and two other Democrats who sit on the committee were absent.Wong, whose district includes Montrose, long the center of Houston's gay community, recommended against consideration of a broader version of the legislation that could have banned civil unions and domestic partnerships.
"I don't think we should deny people rights to a civil union, a legal arrangement, if that's what a state chooses to do," Wong said.
The vote took Farrar by surprise, coming just minutes into the early-morning meeting."I was disappointed that we weren't more deliberate in this. It was just political," said Farrar, D-Houston.
Farrar said she had hoped to hear testimony from the Texas attorney general's office about whether a court challenge of the constitutional amendment is expected and how much the state might have to spend to fight such a lawsuit.
What about those two absent Democrats?
"Was I surprised that it came up for vote at 8 a.m. Monday morning ... when it was not on the copy of the agenda we were provided? Yes, I was," said Rep. Mike Villarreal, D-San Antonio.The State Affairs Committee's agenda had a specific list of 13 bills it was to hear testimony on, including several dealing with stem-cell research and cloning, which drew a packed house to the hearing room.
"I am (angry)," said Rep. Trey Martinez-Fischer, D-San Antonio. "I was told by the chairman that the questions I raised (in an earlier committee hearing) were valid and that we'd get an (assistant) attorney general to come talk to us, and that didn't happen."
[...]
Swinford, who could not be reached for comment on the lawmakers' complaints, acknowledged earlier in the day that the specific item wasn't on the agenda, "but it was pending business."
Typically, a committee like state affairs handles hundreds of bills, often hearing testimony on larger, more controversial bills at one hearing, but voting on them at a subsequent hearing. The same-sex marriage ban did not get a second hearing.
"I do not understand why such a divisive and controversial issue as this was treated as if it's a minor policy matter — hearing testimony one week and voting it out the following week," Martinez-Fischer said.
"I am all for efficiency, but I believe this deserved a lot more debate and discussion, instead of it flying out of committee the way it did," he said.
The lawmaker said he had also raised concerns with Swinford that the bill's language could impact existing civil contracts, wills and other issues. Gays and lesbians in Texas can enter into civil unions or sign contracts that can be enforced in civil court.
"What I wanted, and what (Swinford) assured me of, was an (attorney general's official) to come tell us that it is going to cost the taxpayers some money to defend in court against the challenges that are sure to come," Martinez-Fischer said.
He noted that "when we are told this measure won't have a fiscal impact, that is not correct. Anytime you have a constitutional issue, there will almost certainly be a court challenge, and I'd like to know how much in time, effort, and resources defending this bill will cost Texas."
In an interview before the lawmakers raised their objections, Swinford said he was unaware of any "issue of concern. It is a simple one-sentence bill ... and we want to put it in the constitution so that some activist judge out there won't overturn the wishes of the people. It's that simple."
As for Martha Wong, I say this: You chose ideology over the wishes of your constituents, and you will face their wrath next year. Everybody knows what you did: Randall Ellis, BOR, Pink Dome, In the Pink Texas, Texas Law Chick. Enjoy what's left of your time in office.
Final thought: Mike Villareal is apparently going to be leading the fight against HJR6 in the House. Whatever you may thought of him during the budget votes, I think he's doing plenty to balance the scales. Go get 'em, Mike.
Sen. Barack Obama (D, IL) now has a blog on his official Senate webpage. Someday, when it will be remarkable that an elected official does not communicate to his or her constituents (and potential constituents) in this fashion, we can look back on this as a significant step in the process. Via Greg.
Via SixApart, here's a guide from the Electronic Frontier Foundation on how to blog safely. The part on anonymousness is too late for me, but you can still help yourself if you're teetering on the brink of blogging. Check it out.
The Sunday Chron talks about the dynamics of the potential GOP primary race for Governor.
The brewing Republican family feud over the re-election of Gov. Rick Perry involves more than a clash of personalities. It potentially is a fight to overcome the dominance of evangelical social activists in Texas GOP politics.George W. Bush, as governor, successfully bridged the gap between the business establishment and faith-based conservatives without fully embracing the social conservative agenda.
Perry, after he became governor in 2000, made social conservatives the cornerstone of his support. With these voters comprising a third or more of the Republican primary turnout in gubernatorial years, challenging Perry seems like a formidable task.
But that hasn't stopped two top Texas Republicans, U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, from considering such an effort.
If either runs and hopes to win, she will have to find ways to cut into Perry's social conservative base while appealing to moderate Republicans and attracting people who are not regular primary voters.
Is it too early to start talking about which Republican state reps the Democrats may be going after in 2006? Politico doesn't think so. Here's his list, grouped and ordered a bit differently, with my comments:
State Rep. Joe Nixon
State Rep. Martha Wong
State Rep. Robert Talton
I think it's fair to say that Moldy Joe Nixon is the #1 target in Harris County for the Democrats next year. He barely got a majority of the vote running against an independent candidate last year, and his district is rapidly trending away from the Republicans - compare with the 2002 partisan index and you'll see what I mean. Add on the fact that Nixon keeps generating campaign material for us, and this is a race the Democrats have to feel is a must win next year.
Martha Wong won the second closest state rep race in Harris County last year. She just voted to pass the anti-gay marriage HJR6 out of committee, so she's just pissed off a big part of her constituency. Candidate recruitment is ongoing here, and that will be key.
Robert Talton is a bit of a dark horse. Like Joe Nixon, he ran unopposed by a Democrat last year, and also like Joe Nixon was on an underwhelming number of ballots cast, though in his case the partisan index did not decline noticeably from 2002. A good candidate could make a race of this, but I'd call it a longshot. If the Dems do well here, we're doing very well in Harris County and probably statewide, too.
Not mentioned but worth noting: Two-term Rep Dwayne Bohac, who improved on his 2002 numbers last year, and Fort Bend's Charlie Howard, against whom Richard Morrison is recruiting an opponent. Neither is likely to be endangered, but as always, I like seeing Republicans get contested.
State Rep. Todd Baxter
State Rep. Ray Allen
State Rep. Tony Goolsby
State Rep. Roy Blake Jr.
State Rep. Bill Zedler
Arranged in order of closeness, all five of these folks had tight races in 2004. If that's the criteria, I can't say why they're on the list and Toby Goodman, John Otto, Mike "Tuffy" Hamilton, Doc Anderson, Scott Campbell, and Linda Harper-Brown aren't.
As noted before, Seaman did poorly in 2002, then drew a free pass in 2004. I'm glad to hear he's being targeted this year, I just wish we hadn't sat out a cycle.
State Rep. Kent Grusendorf
State Rep. David Swinford
State Rep. Geanie Morrison
State Rep. Warren Chisum
Going after some committee chairs here - Grusendorf is the Public Education chair and author of the much-maligned HB2, Morrison chairs Higher Education and thus can be dinged for tuition deregulation (she was also a player in redistricting), and Swinford oversees State Affairs, which is now considering HB16, or as Pink Dome puts it, the Separation of Church and Pharmacist bill. I guess these races can be used to a certain extent as proxies for the Governor's race next year. None of these people are in particularly swingy districts - only Grusendorf at 63% was even remotely challenged - so there'd have to be some symbolic value in these races. As for Chisum, he's basically a piece of homophobic furniture, also ensconsed in a safe district. I'd love to see him join his fellow dinosaurs in ExtinctionLand, but I'm not going to bet on it. I can't say I see the value of going after him as opposed to, say, Toby Goodman or Dwayne Bohac.
Finally, I should note that in my post where I argued that Democrats should be on the attack because they don't have that much turf to defend, I overlooked a couple of Dem incumbents who won squeakers last year: Stephen Frost, Mark Homer, Chuck Hopson, Jim McReynolds, and Robby Cook. I'd rather see their positions fortified than see resources go into a windmill-chaser like Chisum. This is of course the position that Red Dog has been advocating vis a vis Richard Morrison. I agree in principle, I just draw the line someplace else.
One last thing - if the Dems manage to run the table on these thirteen targets while holding onto all their own seats, they'd regain the majority by a 76-74 count. That won't happen, and for reasons cited above the playing field needs to be bigger than just these races. Nonetheless, thirteen is the magic number.
UPDATE: Apparently, State Affairs also has an anti-stem cell research bill before it. That makes more sense.
UPDATE: Byron adds on.
Via Technology Review, here's an interesting perspective on the ChoicePoint debacle, from the Direct Marketing News. It's part one of two, so I'll have to check back again and see what else he's got to say. One thing to bear in mind as the legislative beast rumbles to its feet:
In the last Congress, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-CA, introduced a federal security breach notice law modeled on the California statute. The legislation languished, but is now a hot item. It’s hard for politicians to explain to their constituents why they don’t deserve the same protections as the folks in California. I expect a federal notice law to pass, though its terms remain to be fixed. The business community wants to use the opportunity to weaken the California law through preemptive federal action.
Contrary to my earlier speculation, it seems that former Congressman Nick Lampson is indeed thinking about a run in CD22 next year. He has a couple of interesting things to say about such a race and about Richard Morrison.
Mr. Morrison plans to run again, and Mr. Lampson said he deserves another shot."He took him on when it wasn't cool, and now it's cool," said Mr. Lampson, who has been working since his defeat as a consultant to a company that distributes antibiotic lotion, and to another firm that turns soybean oil into diesel fuel.
"The fact that there is so much interest and so many people are making calls tells me that Tom must be on the ropes," Mr. Lampson said. But he added, "If a Democrat beat him, it would be because he lost, and very likely [the Democrat] could not win a second time. I realize that that's a Republican district."
Frankly, I'm not sure that this logic is true anyway. (If it is, by the way, it probably applies to Chet Edwards in CD11 as well, since he ran against possibly the worst candidate the GOP could have thrown at him.) We had Democrats win in some pretty heavily Republican areas prior to redistricting, and I say it has to do with knowing the district, and being in touch with the constituents and in line with their beliefs. Given that, I think if any one of the potential candidates can hold onto CD22 after beating DeLay, it's the hometown boy. We know who that is.
But Mr. Morrison predicted voter backlash on a number of fronts, including the half-million dollars Mr. DeLay paid his wife and daughter for campaign work in the last four years – an arrangement DeLay aides defend as both legal and in line with duties performed."Everybody in Texas understands that Texas is a community property state, and when your wife's making money, it's your money just as well," Mr. Morrison said. "That doesn't play well with the folks in District 22."
So there's a hubbub over naming a stretch of highway after Willie Nelson.
Legislation to name the Texas 130 turnpike from Georgetown to Creedmoor after the man who put Austin music on the map cleared its first committee Wednesday. But it lost more than 18 miles in the process, and there were signs that some Republicans might not be so comfortable honoring the well-known Democrat.Even with a toll road.
Texas 130, under construction now and scheduled to open in 2007, will be 49 miles long. And state Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos' bill as filed would have named the entire length for Nelson.
But when Barrientos, an Austin Democrat, unveiled Senate Bill 802 to the Transportation and Homeland Security Committee on Wednesday, he said that Republican Sens. Steve Ogden and Jeff Wentworth told him they didn't want the parts of the road in their districts to carry Nelson's name.
That trimmed about 17 miles off the north end in Williamson County, represented by Ogden who hails from Bryan-College Station, and the southerly mile-and-a-half in the small piece of Travis County in San Antonian Wentworth's bailiwick.
[...]
Asked about their reservations about Nelson, Ogden said he doesn't favor naming roads after people who are still alive and declined further comment. Wentworth, meanwhile, made it clear he has several concerns.
"Let's be candid: This is a political deal," Wentworth said, Nelson "was out there having fund-raisers, raising money for (Democratic presidential hopeful) Dennis Kucinich against President Bush, and that was just last year."
Wentworth said he has a general leaning as well against naming roads for living people. He was in the Senate and Ogden in the House when the Legislature in 1995 and 1997 named roads for the first President Bush and former U.S. Sen. Lloyd Bentsen, both very much alive.
"To compare a former president of the United States with a country singer, surely that's self-explanatory," Wentworth said.
The Legislature, in that same 1995 bill honoring Bentsen, named a road in Brazoria County after Nolan Ryan, at that point only just retired from his baseball career.
Wentworth and Ogden both voted for that bill. Ryan, a Republican, has never served as president of the United States.
That said, spare me the crap about country singer versus President. If Willie Nelson hasn't done enough as a Texan to earn this kind of honor, then who has? You don't want to name a road after a guy who votes for the other team, fine. Just admit that's your problem and don't try to hide behind reasons that don't apply to those who do vote for your guys.
But Ryan, unlike Nelson, also hasn't had any trouble with the Internal Revenue Service or brushes with the law over marijuana. To Wentworth, at least, Nelson's past matters."All of that figures into it, from my standpoint," Wentworth said. "He's not exactly a role model."
Via Eye On Williamson County and email from HellieMae.
UPDATE: A Lasso reader thinks Sens. Ogden and Wentworth are missing a marketing opportunity here.
Couple of stories in the Chron regarding the construction of traffic circles on Washington Avenue, one in today's paper and one in the This Week section. I noted this back in 2002, though as with many capital improvement projects in Houston, its genesis goes back much farther than that.
Today's article gives some nice history of Washington Avenue, and somewhat to my surpirse, both pieces say that the circle at Westcott will soon be joined by others at Heights/Yale and Houston Avenue. I find this interesting, since the Washington/Westcott interchange is a complicated, multi-street, non-90-degree junction for which a circle would be a good fit, while the others are fairly normal intersections. I guess the one at Heights is close enough to Yale to incorporate that as well, but the one at Houston is run of the mill. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of a little flair here, I'm just wondering what the advantage is, or if there is one.
Anyway. You can see more on the Westcott circle here, though you need IE to see their slideshow. If I get a chance, I'll try to drive by and take a few pics myself.
There's been speculation for some time now that one or more of the TRMPAC defendants may choose to turn state's evidence on the Toms Craddick and DeLay, since jail time is not likely to appeal to pampered consultants like them. Looks like that may be even more true for Jack Abramoff.
"Everybody is lying," Abramoff told a former colleague. There are e-mails and records that will implicate others, he said. He was noticeably caustic about House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. For years, nobody on Washington's K Street corridor was closer to DeLay than Abramoff. They were an unlikely duo. DeLay, a conservative Christian, and Abramoff, an Orthodox Jew, traveled the world together and golfed the finest courses. Abramoff raised hundreds of thousands for DeLay's political causes and hired DeLay's aides, or kicked them business, when they left his employ. But now DeLay, too, has problems—in part because of overseas trips allegedly paid for by Abramoff's clients. In response, DeLay and his aides have said repeatedly they were unaware of Abramoff's behind-the-scenes financing role. "Those S.O.B.s," Abramoff said last week about DeLay and his staffers, according to his luncheon companion. "DeLay knew everything. He knew all the details."
Via the Daily DeLay, which also has a nice roundup of other DeLayabilia. Check out also this analysis from yesterday's Chron and this op-ed in today's.
Greg and Save Texas Reps are on the story of the six absent Democrats who let a proposed amendment to give teachers and other school employees $1000 to apply towards health benefits cut in 2003 die on the vine after 20 Republicans crossed over to vote against tabling it. Their disappearance was the difference between the amendment ultimately passing and failing. All six, including Houstonians Sylvester Turner and the increasingly notorious Al Edwards, are part of Speaker Craddick's leadership team. Their vanishing act came after Craddick announced his opposition to the amendment.
Now, I'm not one to require strict adherence to a party line, but this is pretty craven, and in light of the E-N article, Turner's protestations (see Greg's post) seem awfully lame. The rationale given by the likes of Turner for working with Craddick is that they can help moderate some of the things that the Republicans would push through. Maybe so, but it sure looks to me like this was a golden opportunity to do just exactly that, and a half-dozen Democrats chose instead to powder their noses.
Partly for actions like this, some of those Democrats may find themselves getting primaried next year. This self-described old Texas politico says the target list includes no-shows Edwards and Vilma Luna, plus Mike Villareal who did the right thing on this vote. Politico thinks that kind of infighting is bad for the Democrats, but I'm not so sure. There are times when you have to stand up for your core principles. If you must go against them for whatever the reason, the least you can do is have the guts to cast that vote and explain your actions. Not voting and claiming you would have voted the right way if only you could have been there is just cowardly. I can't say the Democratic Party would be any worse off by attempting to enforce a little of this on the likes of Edwards and Luna.
The Chron's Andrew Dansby asks an interesting question:
In postmodern-mix-tape fashion, could a one-hit wonder iPod playlist sustain toe-tapping interest without slipping into novelty jingledom?
(Side note, since I'm feeling a bit snippy: It may not have been the exact moment that they started to suck, but the general time frame in which erstwhile 80s station 106.9 The Point stopped playing songs like The Proclaimers' 500 Miles (I'm Gonna Be) and started playing The Same Damn Songs Over And Over Again (Now With Steve Miller and Boston!) is pretty damn close.)
The 1st Texas Court of Appeals has declined to reconsider its ruling to vacate the murder convictions against Andrea Yates.
Assistant District Attorney Alan Curry said he was disappointed by the decision and plans to take the case to the Court of Criminal Appeals, Texas' highest court in criminal cases.If that court refuses to hear the case, Yates could receive a new trial.
[...]
Curry said prosecutors will retry Yates, if necessary, to keep her in prison.
"And I would fully expect the same result as we received at the first trial," he said.
I just want to say that I can't think of any other couple getting married in recent memory who deserved each other more richly. That is all.
We had a second conference call with Richard Morrison last night, for the bloggers who couldn't make it on Tuesday. There are a couple of recaps up this morning, one from the Hope/Mike/Sam triumvirate representing the Appalachia Alumni Association, and three from the prolific Nate Nance: here, here, and here; I especially recommend the second of those.
I'm very pleased with how these conference calls went. We got a good response from the blog community, including from those who couldn't be there but wanted to be kept informed of future opportunities, of which I hope there will be (I'm already working on another one). Most importantly to me, I think Richard really made a good impression on everyone who attended. If you've read this blog at all over the last year and a half, you know that I think very highly of him. Hearing the response on the calls and seeing what has been written has been very gratifying for me in the way that finally introducing a person you've been enthusing about to all your friends and finding out that they think he's cool, too.
I want to talk a little about the continued speculation over other Democratic contenders jumping into the quest to dethrone DeLay, noted most recently by Kristin Mack at the Chron and discussed by Greg , Byron, and Marc Campos. I don't mind contested primaries - it's certainly nice to see Democrats thinking various races are worth running in, and maybe a matchup between Morrison and one or more of Gordon Quan, Nick Lampson, and Rick Noriega (where in the world did Kristin Mack pull that name from?) would generate some media coverage that actually includes mentioning Morrison's name in more than just passing. And when Morrison wins that primary going away - make no mistake, he's the favorite - then maybe there'll be some appreciation for what he's been doing since mid-2003 when no one wanted to touch this one. That'd be fine by me.
I also want to address the question of why we should bother to support anyone in this race when the odds are long, the opponent is entrenched and well-funded, and there are other battles to be fought. I'll start by saying that in 2006, Texas Democrats can count on their fingers the number of incumbents they'll have to truly defend: Chet Edwards, Hubert Vo, Mark Strama (in my opinion, those last two will have a much easier go of it this time around, owing to their strengths and their performance so far), David Leibowitz, Yvonne Gonzalez-Toureilles, and maybe David Farabee. Thanks to safe districts (the Republicans had to put Democratic voters somewhere, and their strategy was to pack them together wherever possible) and strong performances from the likes of Scott Hochberg and Patrick Rose, pretty much everyone else is darn near untouchable.
What that means is that Democrats should be aggressive about going on the attack. We have statewide elections this year, so of course a lot of resources will go into those. But that doesn't mean we should hoard what's left for those few seats we have to defend and the likely fewer seats we see as close contests for the Republicans. Quite the reverse, I say.
We're never going to win if we refuse to take our case to as many places and as many people as possible. Democrats are outnumbered in this state. We can't win on turnout, we have to win on persuading people to change their minds. That means going places we think of as unfriendly and talking to people we think as being aligned against us. The Republicans have been doing that for years, which is one reason why Bush did so much better in South Texas last year than in 2000. We can watch them eat into our turf, or we can make them defend their own.
Having more candidates means having more people make the case for your side. If Richard Morrison can persuade a person in Sugar Land or Clear Lake or Brazoria County that it's okay to vote for him even though he's a Democrat, then maybe that person will be a bit more open to the idea that there could be other Democrats worth voting for as well. Morrison is likely to go places that, say, Chris Bell won't be able to. Who else is going to help make those voters understand that they do have a choice?
Finally, it's been suggested that we Morrison supporters are giving in to our emotions instead of coldly focusing on where we "should" be trying to win. Is there no place left in politics to be inspired? There's more to all this than demographics and databases. You've got to believe in something or else it isn't going to matter to you. Inspiration, a vision of something better, a commitment to good and honest principles - that's how you get people to change their minds and give you their support. I like the way Nate put it:
So why do I support conservative Democrats like Chet Edwards? Is it just because I'm willing to abandon my beliefs for cheap political gain?I don't think so.
I think that in addition to being a liberal Democrat, I'm also a partisan Democrat. But I don't think those two things are at odds with each other. I think they supplement my belief that America is great and that it was the Democratic party that got labor unions organized. It was the Democratic party that got us through the Depression and two world wars. It was the Democratic party that finally got civil rights legislation passed and it was the Democrats who were bold enough to ask "Why not?"
And the people who put their names on the ballot with a big D next to it are part of that tradition. Chet Edwards is very conservative because he's from a conservative part of Texas. But he has some of the same beliefs and he's a decent man.
Likewise with Richard Morrison. I'm not just going to support him because he is a Democrat or because I want to get rid of Tom DeLay, although those are factors. Listening to him, I was genuinely impressed with his ideas. I've never really heard anyone talk about the idea of subsidizing energy companies to make wind power more affordable and popular. I've never heard a Texas Democrat talk about how patriotic it is to drive a hybrid car. I don't normally hear someone describe themselves as pro-Life but Libertarian on abortion, which matches my own beliefs so closely.
We're not talking the lesser of two evils here; we're talking about a really good progressive candidate vs. pure evil.
So we need to see what support we can give him to make this a no-brainer for the people of Sugar Land. We need to get Richard Morrison elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.
UPDATE: Stace makes the case for Gordon Quan. I like Gordon Quan. I want Gordon Quan to run for Congress. I just want him to run in CD07, where he currently lives.
UPDATE: Grant Davis was also on the call and has a writeup as well.
UPDATE: And Kerry adds on.
The Agonist has all the linkage you need on GannonGuckert Day at the National Press Club. Apparently, it's being rerun on C-SPAN2 tonight at 7 PM EDT, so set your TiVos accordingly if you're into that sort of thing (and I can only wonder what kind of TiVo recommendations you must get if you are). Or watch the video here, and ask yourself if C-SPAN2 is to C-SPAN as ESPN2 is to ESPN, which if it is would make this the punditry equivalent of Celebrity Blackjack. Not that there's anything wrong with that, I suppose.
I'm a little tied up right now, so I'll have to mark these for future reading:
Joe Conanson on Randy DeLay
Tom DeLay's Extreme Makeover. All I can say is that if it involves hair extensions, I'm outta here.
Couple of editorials to check out, from the Kansas City Star and the Tamps Tribune, with the latter being on Sen. Mel Martinez. I include it partly because they really rip him a new one for his embarassing behavior since one of his (since resigned) senior staffers admitted to writing the so-called Schiavo talking points memo, and partly because everyone's been abuzz about the connections between said staffer (Brian Darling) and DeLay. Frankly, if there's anything less surprising than a connection between some moral midget like Brian Darling and Tom DeLay, I can't think of it. That's the whole point about DeLay - he's into everyone and everything Republican. That's why the wagons are circled around him - everyone who is anyone is connected to him, and if he falls, they're worried that they may fall, too. He didn't get to be as powerful and as corrupt as he is by working in a vacuum.
In the meantime, Big Media Matt has worried about those who oppose DeLay achieving too much success too soon, and that there's a risk of getting an insufficient political payoff in DeLay's eventual downfall. Others have touched on this as well (see here for more), so as a way to keep that in mind, read this post by Shakespeare's Sister (link via Amanda).
Remember the Bedford tax rollback vote? How have things panned out so far? The DMN has an update.
The library is padlocked, the recreation center is boarded up, and the weeds are running riot on the broad lawn outside City Hall, where they've stopped mowing the grass.The swim season isn't here yet, but a sign warns that the city-owned water park won't open this summer.
[...]
Depending on whom you believe, this is either a case of cantankerous anti-tax cranks too cheap to pay their fair share, or of profligate city leaders whose extravagance pushed cash-strapped residents into open rebellion.
It's probably a little bit of both and a little bit of neither, but more than anything, it's a civics lesson.
Lesson One: A small group of persistent and well-organized people can have a dramatic impact on the electoral process.
Lesson Two: National and state politics may be a lot more glamorous and newsworthy, but it's local government that plays the most intimate role in your life.
Lesson Three: It's at your peril that you dismiss local politics as too boring to be worthy of your attention.
"This is democracy in action," said Terry Clower, associate director of the Center for Economic Development and Research at the University of North Texas. "Everybody says, 'We want lower taxes.' And that's fine. But there's a consequence to having lower taxes."
[...]
It's certainly possible that the city could have chosen equally devastating but less visible (and newsworthy) cuts than shutting down the swimming pool and padlocking the library. It's also possible that it's making a statement: You want a tax cut? OK, you got it!
The AusChron reports on HB6 (man, that's one big bill), which would provide for the near-complete privatization of Child Protective Services. As with other privatization mandates within the Health and Human Services Commission, this would be done statewide all at once. Fortunately, there seems to be a willingness here to maybe try a smaller pilot first and see how it goes before they go whole hog. State Rep. Elliot Naishtat of Austin is the point person for that. There's a lot in that article, so check it out.
Inside the Texas Capitol is also on this from the Senate side. The main point made in both places is that privatization by itself won't solve CPS' real problem, which is severe underfunding - according to the AusChron piece, Texas "spends 60% less than the national average on child protection, and 40% less than the average spent by Southern states".
And of course I can't mention HHSC and privatization without checking in on Father John, who's kept up with the failings in Colorado and their portents for Texas. He deals with benefits like food stamps and Medicaid, but the parallels should be obvious. His most recent posts on the subject are The Price Tag Just Went Up Again, Please Take A Number And We'll Call You Back, and this pointer to his colleague and Texas State Employees' Union member Samm Almaguer, who gives us a TSEU update called TIERS Not Ready.
I've tried and failed to come up with a snarky-but-not-tasteless way to describe this story, so I'm just going to present it without comment. I'm not sure it needs comment anyway.
Newly divorced Russell Yates said in a newspaper interview that he is ready to move on with life and might like to start another family.Yates finalized his divorce last month from his wife, Andrea, three years after she was sentenced to life in prison for drowning their children in the bathtub of their Clear Lake home.
"We still care about each other ... (but) I couldn't live that way," Yates, 40, said in an interview in today's editions of The Dallas Morning News.
[...]
"I'm kind of in a phase where ... I'm through, I think, a lot of the healing and at a point where I'm starting to look more to the future," Russell Yates told the newspaper.
Yates, who has a new assignment with NASA as project manager for development of a sensor to detect damage on the space shuttle, talks of earning a master's degree in software engineering.
He's dating, though he declined to give details. He said he might eventually remarry and have more children.
"I have the freedom now," he said. "I'd like to do that someday and possibly have a family again. ... But I'm not 20. I'm 40. So I have to reassess where I'm at, what I have to offer."
[...]
"I've never put a lot of blame on myself," he said. "There's certainly some things I'd do differently (but) the same way I'm able to forgive others I forgive myself for things I may have missed."
Some of Andrea Yates' relatives have also placed blame on Russell Yates, holding him partly responsible for his wife's deterioration. But her brother, Patrick Kennedy, says he wishes Yates well.
"I'm a Christian, and so is Rusty," Kennedy said. "I forgive whatever shortcomings he had towards my sister, and I hope my mom does to."
I confess, I haven't been paying nearly close enough attention to the budget debates going on in both chambers right now. Inside the Texas Capitol and The Red State have some excellent analyses that I urge you to read. Eddie from The Red State notes that not only is the mantra about "fully restoring CHIP funds" misleading, but there's a little political gamesmanship going on, too:
And what would an appropriations bill be without some gubernatorial politicking. The "Pass the Buck" rider in the Article 9 of this bill would require the Office of the Comptroller, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, to make budget cuts if the budget does not balance. Strayhorn, a fierce critic of Gov. Perry, is thinking about/maybe or is running for governor in 2006. So, if the budget falls apart due to bad numbers (and it usually does) or for whatever reason, the Comptroller would be the bad guy in the black hat. This situation is a win/win for Perry because if she cuts the budget more, then she plays the heavy, and if she refuses to cut then she is abdicating her responsibility and not doing her elected job. In addition, the power of appropriation belongs to the Legislature and arguably is unconstitutional to pass this responsiblity.
Here's the Chron story on Saturday's I-45 town hall meeting. It's got a lot more detail about the presentations, so be sure to check it out. One thing I want to highlight from the article that I didn't mention in my writeup:
Jim Blackburn, an environmental attorney who previously worked with the Katy Corridor Coalition, said the state does an inadequate job of protecting the rights of those who live near freeways, and could thus potentially suffer the negative health effects of freeways."Texas is supposed to be a property rights state, but we never seem to get around to protecting the property rights (of) people who live next to freeways," Blackburn said, telling those who planned to fight the transportation department on the freeway expansion, "if you frame this as a property rights issue, you'll get people to listen."
Gonzalo Camacho, an engineer and member of the I-45 Coalition, proposed that TxDoT turn portions of I-45 that run close to downtown into an underground tunnel, an idea that met with positive reaction among those in attendance.
Scott is right - you just can't make this stuff up. Rep. Larry Phillips has proposed HB2893, which would put RFID tags in vehicle registration stickers. I can think of many reasons why this is a bad idea, but you should read Scott's post to get the full flavor of this one.
I don't know about y'all, but where I grew up folks tagged cattle, not each other. It's none of the government's business where you go unless they have probable cause to believe you did something wrong. We have a freedom to travel and, at least until recently, what was once quaintly known as a "reasonable expectation of privacy."
New Houston rock station KIOL is fixing to move to a new spot on the dial.
Moving trucks have been spotted in the vicinity of Cumulus Rocker KIOL/Houston, which is poised to annex the 103.7 signal of currently silent sister KUST on April 23. Cumulus Market Manager Pat Fant tells [us] the Rock will spew forth on both signals until around the second week in May, when 97.5 will flip to a new, top-secret format and 103.7 will become KIOL's new home.
DeLay defense fund donations slow
Donations to Majority Leader Tom DeLay's defense fund have slowed considerably in the last few months. Some of his critics hope to cut the money flow even more with a new line of attack launched Wednesday demanding that corporate donors stop covering his legal bills.The Tom DeLay Legal Expense Trust took in about $50,000 during the first quarter of 2005 – far below the pace that pumped in $430,000 during the second half of last year.
[...]
In recent weeks, leading conservatives have expressed concern that the drumbeat of allegations about Mr. DeLay's foreign travel and fundraising tactics have tainted his image and threatened his political future.
The latest barrage came Wednesday from the Center for American Progress. The Democratic think tank, founded by Bill Clinton's former chief of staff, John Podesta, launched a campaign to try to embarrass corporations that have helped pay Mr. DeLay's legal bills. Its new Web site, www.dropthehammer.org, spotlights donations from American Airlines, Bacardi USA, Nissan USA, RJ Reynolds and Verizon, and some of the legislation those companies have sought help with over the years.
"Consumers shouldn't have to facilitate Tom DeLay's unethical behavior with their purchases," said Laura Nichols, a vice president of the center. "We demand that these companies ask for their money back and drop their support of Tom DeLay."
At American Airlines, which gave $5,000 in late 2002, spokesman Tim Wagner said that "we were told that Mr. DeLay, a member of Congress from our headquarters state of Texas, was facing substantial legal bills that he was unable to pay personally because of their size and his limited resources." He added that American made no further donations.
If and when the amount of money DeLay can raise and spread among fellow Republicans falls below the amount of trouble he's causing them by being such a corrupt sleazeball, then he'll be truly on his way out. They don't love him for his sparkling personality, that's for sure. Via The Daily DeLay. Check out the links they have to a bunch of reports on DeLay's paybacks to various industries, too.
House Bill 1348, the Smith-Eiland bill to tighten campaign finance laws, now has eighty-four coauthors. That's more than enough votes to pass out of the House right now. So why hasn't it already done so? This might be a clue:
Speculation is that the bills might be in trouble because Gov. Rick Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and Speaker Tom Craddick all remain on the sidelines on the bill.An ongoing grand jury investigation into Craddick and lobbyist Mike Toomey, who was Perry’s chief of staff, also isn’t helping.
Obviously, I gave John Cornyn too much credit when I said he'd "apologized" for his stupid and offensive remarks about threats to judges, since he clearly doesn't understand what he did wrong.
"The lesson I learned is that Washington is a very tough political environment and if people can take what you say out of context and use it against you, they will," the first-term Republican said in an interview with the Houston Chronicle.Cornyn said the speech gave Democrats a weapon to attack him and other Republicans who want to change Senate rules to limit the Democrats' ability to block President Bush's judicial nominees.
[...]
"I guess the other lesson I learned was not to wonder aloud on the Senate floor," Cornyn said.
I know that there's now bipartisan opposition to increased gambling this session, but we all know that it's going to raise its ugly head again one of these days. There's just too much money pushing for it, and too much lily-liveredness around state finances for it to ever truly be dead.
So with that in mind, how much has the state taken in from the current form of legal non-lottery gambling, namely horse tracks? How does bupkis grab you?
After 14 years of gambling at horse and greyhound tracks, live racing in Texas creates no tax revenue for state government.That is $200 million less than racetracks said they would raise in 1986, when lawmakers approved pari-mutuel racing. Racing advocates also said the sport, which kicked off five years later, would create more than 10,000 jobs and pump $1.25 billion a year into Texas' economy; the industry's own studies acknowledge that it has fallen far short of both.
And while some tax money is now generated by simulcasting, a type of remote betting that was approved in 1991, heady predictions of a state windfall from live racing in Texas have not materialized.
Now, as they have many times before, the tracks' lobbyists are asking lawmakers to make the tracks more competitive – this time by letting them add video lottery terminals, devices that work like slot machines.
Via the Quorum Report, the exploratory campaign committee for Chris Bell has been fleshed out. The name most likely to turn heads is Joe Trippi. Click the More link for the full story.
We ran into former Congressman Chris Bell at the Capitol this afternoon. He was in town touching base with legislators and Democratic poohbahs as part of exploratory effort.
Bell has two campaign operations in motion. One is in his hometown, Houston. For the time being, the other is shared office in Austin with his media/research operative, Jason Stamford. Bell presumes that his official campaign office will ultimately be in Austin.
While his effort is still deemed "exploratory", Bell has already assembled a campaign team. Heidi Kirkpatrick is doing fundraising. Joe Trippi is bringing his experience with the Howard Dean presidential campaign to bear building Bell's internet community.
Bob Doyle has been retained as general consultant. Doyle is a DC based and specializes in winning GOP leaning consgressional seats with Blue Dog Democratic candidates.
Neil Kammeron of Fenn Communications has been retained to do media. Duane Baughman will do mail. Baughman has done mail for both Howard Dean and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
Bell will make his first Capitol appearance as a potential gubernatorial candidate before the Capitol Area Democratic Women at Nuevo Leon on April 14. The next day, he will be speaking to the Young Democrats at their state convention.
Noted for future reference: arguments made in the lawsuit over whether the city of Houston is required to adopt last year's Proposition 2 in addition to Prop 1, even though Prop 1's language barred that from happening. I assume Mayor White ran this past a squadron of high-priced lawyers before it went on the ballot, all of whom assured him that the courts would buy the only-one logic. But then, you never know what those pernicious activist judges will do.
As you've probably read elsewhere in the Texas progressive 'sphere today, Richard Morrison spent some time last night talking to a bunch of us bloggers. From the very beginning of his campaign last year, Morrison has been a friend of the grassroots, and the feeling is very mutual.
I'm not going go deep into AnalysisLand here, since there's going to be a repeat performance by Morrison on Friday (if you're a progressive blogger and you want in on that, drop me a note) - I'll save it for after that. The links below give a great overview of what we talked about - check out the Southpaw and Texas Law Chick writeups in particular for details. For now, I'm just going to say that if you ever get the opportunity to speak with Richard, you should take it. I guarantee you'll come away impressed by him. He's honest, straightforward, likeable, and down to earth, four adjectives which I'm quite certain have never been used to describe his opponent. Check out his webpage, get to know him a bit better, and please help him out in his quest to make Congress a better place.
Other bloggers' posts on the conversation and on Morrison:
I'm kind of amused that ol' Clayton Williams is dispensing wisdom to Republicans about next year's Governor's race. Maybe we should be asking Garry Mauro what he thinks Chris Bell ought to be doing while we're at it. Be that as it may, I think Senator Hutchison shouldn't have too much trouble responding to this:
"Sen. Hutchison should explain directly to the voters why she doesn't want to finish her job when we contributed our money and efforts to elect her to the U.S. Senate. She should explain to everybody why she wants instead to be fighting one of our kinfolks, a fellow Republican. I think he's been a damn good governor."
But hey, keep that good advice coming, Clayton. I'm sure Kay appreciates it. Via Greg.
This LAT article gives a good overview of why cities around the country are looking at installing WiFi networks. In addition to the usual perks of making their cities more attractive to businesses and residents, they have discovered new ways to make that technology work for them in ways that you might not have considered:
The completion of a network of WiFi-equipped utility meters in Corpus Christi, Texas, for instance, will allow the city to reassign 40 employees who now have to hunt around garages and backyards to read them, said Leonard Scott, an information technology manager.
Got an email yesterday (reproduced below the fold) about another PLOB: House Bill 2881, which would create a new government agency designed to keep people from suing polluters. I think we've finally stumbled onto the master plan to limit activist judges - make it so hard to get access to the courthouse (tort "reform" has already done yeoman's work on this) that we eventually won't need any judges. I can't wait for the creation of the Texas Street Crime Resolution Commission, to which all victims of mugging must first apply for remediation before they can press charges. And mad props to Bill Keffer for doing his best to make sure that our state government never gets too small.
Many of you will recall the "Texas Residential Construction Commission" created last session to effectively immunize Texas homebuilders (a/k/a Perry Homes and Weekley Homes) from suit. Under that act, homeowners who have a gripe with their builder about a plumbing defect are now required to have a "State of Texas Plumbing Inspector" dispatched to their home who passes of their complaint. Not surprisingly, the new law imposes arbitration as part of the continuing "neutral resolution process."
Not wanting to miss a trick, Rep. Bill Keffer of Dallas has just introduced H.B. 2881, which adopts the same protections for oil and gas companies accused of wrongfully polluting land during oil- and gas-related activity. The bill prohibits a landowner from bringing suit for remediation or damages without first filing a complaint with the Railroad Commission. A Commission "field inspector" first investigates the complaint before the entire Commission proceeds with a hearing and makes formal findings. Naturally, the land owner pays all costs of the investigation if the findings are against the claimant.
My favorite provision of this proposal is Sec. 91.716 that prohibits the parties from entering into a voluntary settlement agreement that might provide for the payment of damages without Commission participation.
Rep. Bill Keffer Bill is the managing partner in the Dallas law firm of Miller & Keffer, which according to his website, "specializes in environmental litigation across the United States." The firm lists as representative clients: ChevronTexaco, Oxy USA, ConocoPhillips, BP Amoco.
So Senator Cornyn has now revised and extended his original remarks.
Cornyn tried Tuesday to stop what he called the misrepresentation of a speech about the judiciary that he made on the Senate floor a day earlier.With the criticism of his comments escalating throughout the day, he returned to the Senate floor late Tuesday.
"We should all be disturbed by overheated rhetoric about the judiciary from both sides of the aisle," he said. "I regret it that my remarks have been taken out of context to create a wrong impression about my position, and possibly be construed to contribute to the problem rather than to a solution."
He said he had not meant that attacks on judges or their families could be justified.
In the original remarks, he questioned whether recent violent strikes against federal judges were the result of jurists' issuing political rulings.
After pointing out the "increasing politicization of the judicial decision-making process," Cornyn, a former Texas Supreme Court justice, said he wondered "whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds and builds to the point where some people engage in violence, certainly without any justification."
Tuesday night on the Senate floor, he attempted to clarify those earlier remarks.
"I want to make one thing clear," Cornyn said. "I'm not aware of any evidence whatsoever linking recent acts of courthouse violence to the various controversial rulings that have captured the nation's attention in recent years."
I must say, if Cornyn were really concerned about retribution against judges, there are a number of things he could have done. He could have denounced all the overheated rhetoric we've been subjected to since the Schiavo case, something which he has now at least addressed by distancing himself from Tom DeLay's "they will pay" statement. Of course, doing so would have meant attacking a nontrivial segment of the Republican base. No Sister Souljah moments for him! He could have announced an intention to introduce legislation that would broaden protections for judges against that kind of threat and intimidation. He even could have simply skipped over his offensive speculation about cause and effect and talked more about his time as a judge and the unpopular decisions he had to make, maybe drawing a distinction between decisions that are unpopular because they stick to the law and decisions that are unpopular because they are "activist", whatever that means to you.
But he didn't do that. I'm glad to see that he's apologized, but it's not enough. I stand by what I said.
It's not just a DeLay drumbeat out there, it's an entire marching band. Yet another lobbyist-paid junket (of which DeLay knew nothing! nothing!) along with Jack Abramoff and a nice fat paycheck for his wife to do...something, I guess. The Chron has the WaPo story on Page One today. Read 'em and weep.
Atrios and Kos think that someone on the Republican side has okayed a hit on DeLay, figuring that he's gonna go down anyway so it may as well happen now before anyone's thinking about 2006. Atrios cites the "first-hand" accounts of the Moscow trip in the WaPo articles as evidence; there's also the fact that Matt Drudge is giving these stories prominent play. There's a certain logic to this, and there's also a case to be made that some of this is coming from a genuine reformer faction within the GOP, but I don't think DeLay will ever go away voluntarily. He built the Republican Congress and the K Street Project and the moneymaking machine, and I don't think he's going to let anyone take it away from him. I'm thinking he knows where a lot of bodies are buried. But hey, whoever you are over there, knock yourselves out trying to defenestrate DeLay. We'll enjoy the show.
The title of this post refers to Laurence's suggestion for a new theme song for DeLay. I can't think of anything more fitting. Check it out.
Greg comments on the contested primary in CD22 story. He's a bit rough on Bob Stein, and he makes a point about this district and how it was drawn I want to expand on:
It was drawn to be a point or so more Republican than DeLay's old 22nd. Reason being, DeLay saw his support fading in even THAT drawing of the map. Now he's in a district that he can't find that 56th percentage and he's high on the DCCC list of targeted seats. Truth of the matter is that Richard Morrison ran about 6-7% better than the top of the ticket in getting his 42%.
Consider some of the territory that DeLay took on. In Harris County, he now represents the Clear Lake area that used to be Nick Lampson's. I haven't yet compared the 2004 results with 2002, but no one would describe the Clear Lake area as being Democrat-friendly. Besides, DeLay had his best showing in Harris County, with a little more than 60% of the vote, so even if he did take on some enemy territory, he had room to spare.
In Galveston, also former Lampson turf, DeLay got whupped by Morrison but the Presidential race was a tossup. Chris in the comments to the previous post said that Lampson lost this area by a hair in 2002 (I also haven't checked this yet but I'll take his word for it for now). This is genuine swing territory, but it's also fairly small compared to Harris and Fort Bend - 22,173 votes there compared to 109,565 in Harris and 109,829 in Fort Bend.
And speaking of Fort Bend, DeLay represents less of it now (99 precincts) than he did in 2002 (137 precincts). Thirteen of those precincts are in Al Green's CD09, the rest are in Ron Paul's CD14. If you go to the Fort Bend Election Results page and look at the precincts which are now in CD09 but which used to be in CD22 (there are some that were not used in 2002, which I've omitted), you find that the Dem/GOP split was 8474/4076 in 2004, and 4084/2278 in 2002. In other words, DeLay rid himself of a bunch of Democratic voters in Fort Bend. And in doing so, I might add, the candidate he really helped was Al Green, who carried Fort Bend in the primary by a 4114-1367 margin.
Bottom line: If this district is more Democratic than it used to be, it's not because of Tom DeLay's generosity as a mapmaker. It's because of his faults as a candidate. Don't let him tell you otherwise.
Via The Stakeholder, there are now rumors of a contested Democratic primary in CD22 for next year.
Houston city council member Gordon Quan has confirmed for that he's talked with national Democratic Party leaders about running against DeLay.Democratic activists say former Congressman Nick Lampson, who didn't return calls, is also considering campaigning for DeLay's job.
And then, there's Richard Morrison, who ran against DeLay last year. The self-described "no name" candidate won 42 percent of the vote.
"If I have primary opponents, that shows that there is true vulnerability with Mr. DeLay because, as we all know, throughout the whole history no one wanted to run against him because they assumed he was unbeatable."
I like Gordon Quan and I'll be happy to support him in his next race, but if I were his chief strategist, this isn't the race I'd advise him to jump into. I'm far from certain he'd win the primary. Maybe a countywide race (unfortunately for him, there's already two Democratic candidates lining up for the County Judge nomination), maybe a State Rep race (he's in Martha Wong's district), maybe even running against the Congressman who currently represents him (John Culberson - yeah, I know, in my dreams). I think there will be better races for him, in 2008 if not 2006. Bottom line, I would not make him a favorite to face DeLay, let alone beat him.
As for Lampson, I had a chance to speak to him at a grassroots activism workshop he co-sponsored in 2003, before the new Congressional map was finalized and before anyone had heard of Richard Morrison. He told me at the time, off the record, that he was considering a run against DeLay if he got screwed by re-redistricting. The new CD22 does contain some of his old turf, around NASA and in Galveston, but as we know, he chose to fight it out in the new CD02, which contains his home base of Beaumont. My guess is that this speculation is someone's "hey, wouldn't it be cool if..." scenario, and that no one has asked Lampson himself what he thinks of it.
Long as we're tossing around names, I got an email from Carl Whitmarsh's listserv yesterday from someone who's pining for Chris Bell to give up on the Governor's race (the letter writer seems to take it as a given that the GOP nominee will be Kay Bailey Hutchison, a notion which is more than sufficient in my mind to question the judgment behind it) and move into CD22 to go mano-a-mano with DeLay. There are many reasons why I think this is a bad idea, not the least of which being the implied defeatism over the Governor's race, but it ain't gonna happen so I ain't gonna worry about it.
Frankly, I think Morrison's comments here are dead on, and off the top of my head I can't think of any truly likely challengers whom I'd mark as the favorite over Morrison in a contested Democratic primary. I'm not saying such a person doesn't exist - if Lampson really is a contender, he'd have to be taken seriously - but I'm not convinced there is one by this story. I also think that not currently living in CD22 - something that's true for everyone mentioned here other than Morrison - is a big strike against any potential comer. Do we really want to let DeLay run as the "home town boy" against "outside agitators" and "meddlers from Washington"? One of DeLay's exploitable weaknesses is his lack of connection to the district. Let's please not take that issue off the table.
One more thing:
"Of course, it's a Republican district, but not as heavily Republican as it has been. DeLay had to bleed that district to help out some of his friends. So the result is that the district is only about 54 to 56 percent Republican," says KHOU political analyst Bob Stein.
According to Stina, the Museum of Fine Arts will have several interesting baseball-themed exhibits over the next few weeks. Check out the panoramic view of the Astrodome from Jim Dow's showcase of stadium photos, on display from May thru August. I'm sensing a family outing in my future.
Via Josh Marshall, the following words were spoken on the floor of the Senate by the junior Senator from Texas, John Cornyn:
I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that's been on the news and I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in - engage in violence.
You are a disgrace, John Cornyn. I cannot express my contempt strongly enough.
UPDATE: Supreme Irony has a statement by Rep. John Conyers in response. AmericaBlog has Cornyn's full (and fully deplorable) remarks.
UPDATE: Here's the (rather tepid, if you ask me) Chron coverage, via Greg.
UPDATE: From the Washington Post:
In a recent New York Times article, John Kane, a senior judge in the U.S. District Court for Colorado, wrote: "Since 1970, 10 state and federal judges have been murdered, seven of them in job-related incidents. Those who threaten judges are almost always disturbed individuals seeking revenge. . . . Of the three federal judges killed in the last quarter-century, all were killed by men disgruntled with their treatment from the federal judicial system."
The Statesman takes a look at the question of jurisdiction over Tom DeLay, a question that I've ruminated about a few times.
State law generally prohibits spending corporate money on campaigns. But [Travis County DA Ronnie] Earle always has faced a high hurdle, due to the jurisdictional issues within state law, in trying to indict DeLay. He cannot just accuse him of accepting or giving corporate money as campaign donations as he did [Warren] Robold and [John] Colyandro.The election code gives the authority to prosecute campaign-related crimes to local prosecutors where the defendant lives, not to Earle's Public Integrity Unit. Earle has jurisdiction only over suspects living in Travis County or outside Texas.
To make a case against DeLay, Travis County prosecutors would have to look outside the election code, to the criminal code.
They did that when the grand jury indicted Colyandro and [Jim] Ellis on charges of money laundering.
Colyandro, who directed Texans for a Republican Majority from Austin, and Ellis, who was DeLay's Washington-based eyes and ears for the Texas committee, are accused of exchanging $190,000 of corporate money for the same amount of money from individuals that could be legally given to Texas candidates.
[...]
The prosecution of the money-laundering case will be more complex and difficult than just pursuing charges of accepting or making illegal campaign donations. In essence, prosecutors will have to prove two points: that Colyandro and Ellis laundered money and that the cash was illegal corporate campaign donations.
Austin lawyer Bill White, a former prosecutor under Earle who represents DeLay, first raised the jurisdictional issue last summer as part of DeLay's efforts to convince the national media that he would not be indicted.
White acknowledges the jurisdictional issue is not a free pass for his client.
"There are a whole lot of possibilities out there having nothing to do with the election code," he said.
White said the money-laundering charges against Ellis and Colyandro are trumped up and DeLay was nowhere near the transactions.
"He doesn't play down at this level," White said. "He's way too busy a man. His fingers aren't really in every pie."
White insists that DeLay will never be indicted for anything he did in the 2002 elections.
"I know that Ronnie Earle, whom I've known for 25 years, if he had evidence against Tom DeLay, he'd indict him," White said. "And he hasn't."
Of course, Earle has not cleared DeLay, either. Earle, who declined to comment for this story, routinely refuses to speculate about where his investigation might end.
White does not question Earle's motives.
"I don't think it's a political prosecution," he said. "He believes in what he's doing."
But White also said Earle had to show some results after putting so much effort into investigating the Republicans.
"If you spend taxpayer money for two or three years, you have to indict somebody," he said. "You'd look like a fool if you didn't."
In the meantime, there's the cases against the DeLay Three, plus the civil lawsuits, whose discovery efforts have uncovered documents which may eventually lead to charges against Tom Craddick and maybe others, Abramoff and Scanlon and Reed, all the other insults to ethical behavior on DeLay's part that have come to light lately. Who knows, maybe indictments in Austin would be overkill.
My dad emailed me yesterday to give me the sad news that my middle school band director, Laurence Laurenzano, had passed away. If there's one person responsible for instilling in me a love of making music, it's Larry Laurenzano. I beg your indulgence while I stroll down memory lane for a moment.
My high school band director once said "There's a special place in heaven for middle school band directors." He wasn't saying that because he was a sentimental Mr. Holland's Opus kind of guy (note to fellow Stuy grads: that's Max Watras I'm talking about - you may commence guffawing now), he was saying it because anyone who could put up with the earsplitting cacaphony of fifty twelve-year-olds honking out the Marine Corps March in eight different keys with the enthusiasm and determination needed to eventually produce musicians that high school conductors like himself could tolerate was made of very stern stuff. Larry Laurenzano was all that and more.
What I remember most about Larry is that as long as he knew where to find you, there was a band he was putting together that he wanted you to join. The Big Apple Band, various street-festival jazz bands, the venerable Morris Intermediate School Alumni Band (one of my classmates at Morris is a professional jazz saxophone player), and on and on. How he found time for all of these bands has always been a mystery to me.
My first real exposure to jazz music came from Larry. The summer after I graduated from Morris he had a jazz band going that rehearsed in a classroom at Curtis High School. Imagine a 20-piece band in an un-air conditioned room, with the windows open so we won't overheat and roof work going on a couple of floors down. I can still smell the tar, but I didn't care. It was fun. You couldn't help but have fun in Larry's bands. And I have an abiding love for the music of Glenn Miller, Dizzy Gillespie, Lester Young, and Maynard Ferguson as a result.
Larry was an unflappable conductor. One of the consequences of having so many bands going was that once in awhile one of those bands would get on stage and perform without having fully worked out all the bugs. I remember one time when another one of his "hey, let's put on a show!" bands was playing a piece that had a confusing entrance after a long solo section. We all missed the cue to come in, but Larry recovered. Without batting an eye, he simply pointed to the bass player (the only person actually playing by this time) and extended the solo section a little further. We got the cue right the second time around, and as far as I know, the audience never knew anything was amiss.
I've reproduced the obit from the Staten Island Advance below the fold. This paragraph really touched me:
News of Mr. Laurenzano's death inspired impromptu memorials in schools around the Island Friday. At Tottenville High School, where Mr. Laurenzano never taught, the concert choir sang "Route 66" to honor their "Grandfather of Music." At Staten Island Tech, his band members took it upon themselves to spend the entire school day in the band room, playing his favorite songs, this time without a conductor.
Lifelong Staten Islander Laurence Laurenzano, 61, remembered as Staten Island's own "Music Man," whose devotion to his work as a music teacher and school administrator touched thousands of lives, died Thursday in Staten Island University Hospital, Ocean Breeze.
Mr. Laurenzano, of Westerleigh, spent his life bringing music to young people, almost single-handedly constructing several reputable, competitive music and performing arts programs in intermediate and high schools in Staten Island and Brooklyn.
He spared no effort for his students, his colleagues said, and taught and conducted with an effervescent and tender spirit that extended far beyond his maestroship.
"He was a giant in his field," said Dennis Giurici, assistant principal at Staten Island Technical High School, New Dorp, where Mr. Laurenzano was teaching up to his death. "He brought our band students to heights never before seen. He touched the students on an individual basis and made them reach their highest potential."
News of Mr. Laurenzano's death inspired impromptu memorials in schools around the Island Friday. At Tottenville High School, where Mr. Laurenzano never taught, the concert choir sang "Route 66" to honor their "Grandfather of Music." At Staten Island Tech, his band members took it upon themselves to spend the entire school day in the band room, playing his favorite songs, this time without a conductor.
"That's what he did to everyone," Giurici said. "He just made things happen, and the kids are so much better for it."
Maria Palma, a longtime colleague of Mr. Laurenzano's and district supervisor of the arts for the city Department of Education, said:
DEDICATED TO STUDENTS
"He was unstinting in his love and dedication, and it was always about his students. We have lost a great music educator, a dear friend and a peerless maestro."
In 1997, Mr. Laurenzano told the Advance he was "the richest man in the world," because he loved his life, family and job.
Music touched every corner of his life; his three sons worked with him at music festivals throughout their life, while his wife of nearly 40 years, the former Silvia Perrotta, attended every one of his concerts.
"It's amazing that a man this busy found time to be a wonderful father and loving husband," his family said yesterday.
Mr. Laurenzano was born in Port Richmond, where he lived for the first 23 years of his life. He graduated from Brooklyn Technical High School, where he was a member of the school band as well as fullback on the city championship football team.
Shortly after high school, he entered the armed forces, serving in the Air Force Reserve and the Air National Guard of New York, becoming a sergeant and working actively with the band before he was honorably discharged in 1973.
He met Mrs. Laurenzano while taking trumpet lessons from her father.
Mr. Laurenzano earned a bachelor of science degree in 1969, a master of performance degree in 1971 and a master of education degree in 1972, all from New York University.
STARTED SPRING CONCERTS
He began his music career in the then-new Morris Intermediate School, Brighton Heights, in 1971, building a music program from scratch. He created orchestral, vocal and instrumental programs, tiered the band classes by skill and started the school's annual tradition of putting on a spring musical.
In 1975, Mr. Laurenzano helped introduce the New York State School Music Association Adjudication Festivals to Staten Island, allowing young musicians to receive critical feedback.
"These festivals have brought credibility and prestige to our schools by giving our students the highest standards with which they can be evaluated," said David LaMorte, assistant principal at Tottenville High School.
In 1985 he moved on to another then-new school, Paulo Intermediate School in Huguenot, where he was the assistant principal for the performing arts, nudging the music and performing arts programs to their feet.
"He had this great smile on his face, that's what you remember," said Mark Hermann, assistant principal at Paulo. "You can't put his loss into words, when a person touches so many lives."
In 1991 he moved on to Fort Hamilton High School in Brooklyn, to become its assistant principal. According to Advance archives, there were 23 students and two teachers in the instrumental music program at the time. In under a decade, he turned it into one of the largest magnet musical programs in the city.
NAMED IN HIS HONOR
The school dedicated its auditorium The Laurence Laurenzano Theater for the Arts in his honor.
He retired from teaching in 2001, but the quiet life was not for him. He returned in 2003, to teach music at Staten Island Tech.
Mr. Laurenzano's esteemed conducting brought him work directing ensembles in 1973 and 1978 at Carnegie Hall. He also arranged and had his orchestra play a portion of the score for Martin Scorcese's 1973 film "Mean Streets." He was then musical contractor for street scenes in the 1974 movie, "The Godfather II."
In addition to Mr. Laurenzano's work with the Department of Education, he taught hundreds of kids music privately, giving three or four lessons a week over a 30-year span.
Many of Mr. Laurenzano's former students have gone on to teach music and become administrators in other Staten Island schools.
He was the music director of the Staten Island Community Band for more than 30 years, and directed the Staten Island Borough Wide Band. He was the director of the Big Apple Band of New York City, and a trumpeter with the Staten Island Musicians Society Band from 1964 to 1980, returning to the SIMS band in 1986 as conductor.
Mr. Laurenzano also owned a house and motel in Ocean City, Md., and liked to fish on his boat whenever he could.
"Larry lived life the same way he conducted ensembles and played trumpet, by making every detail perfect, beautiful and memorable," said JoAnne Nolemi, choral teacher at Tottenville, who counted Mr. Laurenzano as her mentor since her teens.
He was a parishioner at Our Lady Star of the Sea R.C. Church, Huguenot.
Mr. Laurenzano's family has instituted the Laurence Laurenzano Memorial Fund in his honor.
In addition to his wife, Silvia, Mr. Laurenzano is survived by his sons Robert, Russell and Rocco Laurenzano, and his sisters Lucille Brunette, Marie Trovato and JoAnn Fanticola. The funeral will be Tuesday from the Matthew Funeral Home, Willowbrook, with a mass at 9:45 a.m. in Our Lady Star of the Sea Church. Burial will be in St. Mary's Cemetery, Grasmere.
The official Tom DeLay response to the poll that shows voters in his district don't like him so much is sticking his fingers in his ears and chanting "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!"
A DeLay aide pointed out that the congressman from Sugar Land has been elected with solid support for two decades."(Voters) do that because he's getting things done for the area. He's also earned their support because they know he's guided by principles, not polls," spokesman Dan Allen said.
But Republican DeLay's constituents seem to be rebuffing his frequent assertion that they support his actions leading Congress to intervene in the Terri Schiavo controversy. The brain-damaged Florida woman died last week.
Nearly 69 percent of people in the poll, including substantial majorities of Democrats and Republicans, said they opposed the government's intervention in the case.
Nearly 58 percent were critical of DeLay's leading role in spurring Congress to pass a special law to get a federal court review of Schiavo's parents' attempts to have her feeding tube kept in place.
This is my favorite part of the whole poll:
DeLay has said the media have treated him unfairly.However, slightly more of his constituents, 46 percent, said the news coverage has been fair. Forty percent said that reports about DeLay have been unfair.
On the editorial front, both the Morning News and the Star Telegram spanked DeLay over the weekend. Get used to it, Tom: You're the one that's out of touch.
UPDATE: Managed to miss The Duality of Tom DeLay somehow, even though a commenter reprinted it in the comments to this post. Thanks to Boadicea for the heads-up.
UPDATE: More from The Stakeholder here, here, and here.
Opening Day. Yankees over Red Sox. Life is good.
It was a little strange seeing the Yankees in the first game of the season (I for one kinda liked the tradition of the Reds kicking things off), and on a Sunday night, no less, but what the hell. Play ball!
Looking for a nice easy-to-understand bullet point list of reason why drug task forces are a bad idea? Grits is the place.
The Dallas County Democratic Party seems to have restored peace and order within its ranks. Byron and StoutDem have the scoop.
I attended the town hall hosted by Rep. Jessica Farrar on the I-45 expansion yesterday. Here are a few highlights:
- The opening presentation by Rice architecture prof Stephen Fox and preservationist David Bush was okay, but marred somewhat by the failure of Bush's slideshow on historical homes in the Near Northside. We were told that this will be available on the I-45 Coalition's webpage shortly. I'll link to it when I find it.
- One thing I didn't know from Fox's presentation was that what preceded I-45 was a linked network of parks around the bayous, including Woodland Park and the now mostly gond Hogg Park. I suppose building on green space is one way to sidestep eminent domain issues, though probably not a viable option around here nowadays.
- Next up was Dr. Winifred Hamilton from Baylor College of Medicine, who gave a long and amazingly detailed talk on the deleterious health effects of living and working near a freeway, mostly due to particulate matter in various emissions. The danger zone, where there's a measurable impact on one's health, is being less than 1000 feet from a highway, which she called the "pink zone" since that's how it's colored on her maps. Several dozen schools in Harris County, including Travis Elementary in the Heights, fall within the pink zone. This Press article on County Judge Bob Eckels has some good stuff on Hamilton's work as well - start on page four for that.
- The most provocative thing Dr. Hamilton talked about was a link between more roads/longer commutes and the spiraling health care costs in the US. Basically, more driving can be linked to things liked obesity and kidney problems, while more pollution can be linked to respiratory and pulmonary diseases, and all of these things require the kind of expensive, long-term care which insurance companies hate and which put enormous stress on family budgets. There's a political issue to be made out of this, but I'd have to think about it some more before I could turn it into sound bites. For now, I'm quite certain there's not a lot of people who've given this much consideration.
- Jim Blackburn and Drexel Turner answered a bunch of questions related to neighborhood and grassroots activism as a means to get TxDOT to do no harm to communities as it builds. The question I asked them is "Given that the people affected by the US59 widening (of whom Turner was a leader) got more or less what they wanted, and given that the people affected by the Katy Freeway widening more or less did not, what did one do right and the other do wrong, and what can we learn from that?" Their answer was basically "Have the right person in Congress represent you". Sheila Jackson Lee was credited for being a big help in getting the residents' wishes heard prior to the US59 widening, while John Culberson was excoriated as being unresponsive, indeed antagonistic, to anyone who was not on board with the existing Katy Freeway plans. Given than Jackson Lee represents the area affected by the I-45 widening, that's good news for us.
- Other advice from Blackburn and Turner: Have at least one alternate plan for TxDOT to consider, start raising money (Turner suggested $60K, Blackburn thought $25K might suffice) to pay for expert consulting for those alternate plans, be prepared to go into total opposition mode (which may mean filing suit) if you must, and get as many people involved as you can.
- I had another engagement, so I left before the I-45 Coalition made its presentation. I'm told that engineer and former City Council candidate Gonzalo Camacho showed a plan for turning I-45 into a tunnel system, which I must say I'm sorry I missed. I've sent him an email to inquire about that.
All in all, a useful experience. I understand there will be a writeup in Thursday's This Week section, so I'll look for that as well.
Lo! there were chickens. And they did come home to roost.
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's footing among his constituents has slipped drastically during the past year and a majority of his district disapproves of how he handled the Terri Schiavo case, according to a Houston Chronicle poll.Nearly 40 percent of the 501 voters questioned Wednesday through Friday said their opinion of the powerful Sugar Land Republican is less favorable than last year, compared with 11 percent who said their view of him has improved.
Half of the respondents gave DeLay a somewhat or very favorable rating.
Yet 49 percent said they would vote for someone other than DeLay if a congressional election in the 22nd District were at hand; 39 percent said they would stick with him.
"There seems to be no question that there has been an erosion in support for the congressman," said John Zogby, whose polling company, Zogby International, performed the survey. "He is posting numbers that one would have to consider in the dangerous territory for an incumbent. And he isn't just an incumbent, he is a longtime incumbent."
Seventy-eight percent of those Republican voters said they picked DeLay in 2004, and 63 percent said they would do so again. "He hasn't lost a majority of conservatives, but he has lost enough of them to pull him down,"said Zogby, who has conducted public opinion polls since 1984. "These are not good re-election numbers."
One thing the poll notes is that the Schiavo grandstanding has hurt DeLay. Not that he's noticed, mind you.
On the Schiavo issue, DeLay consistently has stated that his constituents backed his decision to lead Congress into the dispute over whether to continue nourishment to the severely brain-damaged Florida woman."Everywhere I went (in the district) people were ... very supportive of the efforts to try and save her," DeLay said Wednesday at Sugar Land Regional Airport.
But nearly 69 percent of people in the poll, including substantial majorities of Democrats and Republicans, said they opposed the government's intervention in the longstanding family battle.Respondents in the Chronicle survey also were critical of DeLay's individual role. Nearly 58 percent disapproved of his decision to get Congress involved.
Slightly more Republicans approved of DeLay's personal action on Schiavo than opposed it, however, while Democrats overwhelmingly opposed his efforts to involve Congress.
"The congressman is in trouble, but the burden will be on the Democrats to find a candidate, fund the candidate and make a case," Zogby said. "It's not a slam dunk against DeLay."
UPDATE: You can find a copy of the poll results here (PDF). The Stakeholder has more.
B and B gives some background on the Edwards Aquifer and the groups that aim to protect it from excessive development, while PinkDome notes HB2832, which appears to be the House version of the noxious Armbrister bill. I'm sure there will be more to say on all this shortly.
Catching up on a few things...
Bill Hammond and the Texas Association of Business have been added as defendants to an existing lawsuit filed in 2002.
The suit alleges the group and Hammond conspired with Texans for a Republican Majority, a fund-raising group, to elect Republicans to the House in part so they could help Tom Craddick become speaker.The association also is accused of violating election laws by spending $1.9 million of corporate money on mailings to voters.
The allegations are similar to those made against the group in a civil trial against Texans for a Republican Majority. A judge's ruling in that case is pending.
"They all did this together. It was like one big happy family," said Buck Wood, the Democrats' attorney. Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle is conducting a separate criminal investigation of the election spending that has resulted in some indictments.
More bad news for Tom Craddick.
Rep. Tom Craddick and a pro-Republican group shared extensive phone calls, fundraisers, campaign checks and mutual promotion while the Midland lawmaker was pushing to become House speaker, a review of civil court records shows.The contacts and cooperation between Mr. Craddick and Texans for a Republican Majority were so extensive that two experts on state campaign laws say that the ban on outside influence in speaker races may have been violated. Mr. Craddick's attorney said the activities were nowhere close to illegal.
A Travis County grand jury is looking into whether Mr. Craddick received an illegal boost from the political action committee when he sought the leadership post in 2002. Three individuals and eight corporations have been indicted, and the case has drawn national attention because of ties between TRMPAC and U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.
While the grand jury deliberations are secret, thousands of pages of civil court records culled by The Dallas Morning News show:
•TRMPAC helped Mr. Craddick ingratiate himself to GOP colleagues by sending him TRMPAC campaign checks to deliver. In all, 25 checks to Republican House candidates worth $177,000 were routed through Mr. Craddick.
•E-mails, phone records and depositions show that TRMPAC shared its campaign intelligence on key races with Mr. Craddick and set up a Washington breakfast for him to meet large corporate donors.
•A TRMPAC official kept tabs on whether potential Republican House candidates would support Mr. Craddick in the speaker's race.
•Committee officials invited Mr. Craddick to accompany them on appointments to solicit individual donors.
•Several corporate checks made out to TRMPAC had cover letters sent in care of Mr. Craddick, even though he has said that he was unconnected to the committee. In at least one instance, Mr. Craddick wrote a personal thank-you note for a contribution made to TRMPAC.
[...]
After reviewing the list of shared activities, Austin attorney Buck Wood, who helped write the 1973 law governing speakers' races, said he believes TRMPAC went too far in helping Mr. Craddick become speaker.
"Taken as a whole, if this doesn't violate this statute, I don't think that the statute can be violated," said Mr. Wood. He is suing TRMPAC on a separate matter, alleging that it used corporate money in the 2002 campaign.
Craig McDonald, executive director of the campaign finance reform group Texans for Public Justice, said after reviewing the overlapping events compiled by The News that the raising and distributing of money are problematic.
"TRMPAC was a thinly-veiled PAC on behalf of Tom Craddick's race for speaker. That's our opinion," Mr. McDonald said.
He said Mr. Craddick's "intimate and singular involvement" in TRMPAC campaign funds, many of which went to candidates who later supported Mr. Craddick for speaker, is a violation of the law.
"TRMPAC-style committees to support a candidate for speaker or give one person an advantage because they're doling out campaign money – that's exactly what the statute was aimed at prohibiting," Mr. McDonald said.
[...]
The court records reviewed by The News came in one of those lawsuits, filed by five Democrats who lost 2002 House races to Republicans helped by TRMPAC.
The Chron covers the Lautenberg rebuke to Tom DeLay, on which Ezra's guest blogger Michael has more. The Daily DeLay has some coverage of the anti-DeLay ad campaign. And it wouldn't be a real roundup without some more anti-DeLay editorials.
Those who want to know how to run against DeLay elsewhere should read this story from Virginia.
Delegate Jeffrey M. Frederick plans to hold no ordinary state-level political fund-raiser on April 19.For starters, U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, will host. And the event will be held outside the Woodbridge delegate's 52nd District.
[...]
[S]ome might question the choice of holding a fund-raiser with U.S. House Majority Leader DeLay. In recent months he has faced an inquiry by the House ethics committee and a criminal investigation of his Texas-based political action committee.
He also spearheaded the controversial congressional involvement in the case of Terri Schiavo, a brain-damaged woman who died Thursday after being the subject of a long legal battle between her husband and her parents.
Frederick refused to comment on DeLay's ethical troubles.
"The bottom line is that if Mr. Frederick has decided to tie his fortunes to Mr. DeLay's, then it really casts considerable doubt on Mr. Frederick's judgement," said Rick Coplen, Prince William County Democratic Committee chair.
"If there was a national Democrat that was as tainted and as ethically challenged as Mr. DeLay is, I would certainly strongly recommend to any Democratic candidates that they not do a similar fund-raiser," he said.
DeLay, known as "The Hammer," might help Frederick retrieve financial support, but it could cost him some votes, Farnsworth said.
"Tom DeLay is a pretty polarizing figure," Farnsworth said. "You're not going to generate a lot of interest in your campaign from centrist voters if you stand side-by-side with this highly controversial, highly partisan and apparently scandal-plagued politician."
Local Republican leaders did not return calls for comment Thursday.
It's not just the boyos in Washington that can grandstand about baseball: The North Dakota Senate has unanimously passed a resolution calling on Bud Selig to Roger Maris the single-season home run king again.
"In North Dakota when we think something has been wrong, we try to make it right," said Sen. Joel Heitkamp (D), who sponsored the resolution. "And when it comes to Roger Maris, and when it comes to steroids, and when it comes to how people have taken this record away . . . that's not right."Maris grew up in Fargo, N.D., where he was a high school star in baseball and football. State senators approved the measure 45-0. It now moves to the North Dakota House for additional review.
Mark McGwire broke Maris's record by hitting 70 home runs in 1998, when Sammy Sosa hit 66. In 2001, Barry Bonds broke McGwire's record with 73 home runs.
I have always believed that the record book is what it is, and we do ourselves a disservice when we claim that this achievement or that is somehow illegitimate. Have we forgotten the attempt to downplay Maris' accomplishment in 1961 when the self-appointed historical purists claimed that he didn't really break Babe Ruth's record because Babe Ruth played a 154-game schedule while Maris had 162 games? Commissioner Ford Frick's attempt to distinguish between the two by ordering the record books to list both results - something that was only ever done for the home run record, by the way - was an insult to everyone involved, one that was eventually removed when wiser heads finally prevailed. Let's please don't do that again.
Finally, I should note that for all the huffing and puffing, Roger Maris is still the American League record-holder for home runs in a single season. He's not in danger of being forgotten any time soon. Let his legacy be. It doesn't need your help.
Greg has a long list of rumors of candidates jumping into and out of this race and that in the Houston area. I don't have anything to add to it at this time, though I'll join with the commenter who wants to see City Council member Gordon Quan take a shot at CD07. Almost certainly not gonna happen, though I'm still hoping someone with decent name recognition and fundraising ability will give it a try. Anyway, check it out.
Why do they call you Smokey Joe, Congressman Barton?
U.S. Rep. Joe Barton wants to include a provision in upcoming energy legislation allowing Dallas-Fort Worth and other smoggy regions of the country to miss deadlines mandating compliance with federal ozone standards.Dallas-Fort Worth faces a 2010 deadline to comply with ozone regulations or face severe sanctions, including the potential loss of hundreds of millions in federal highway transportation dollars.
The proposal being pushed by Barton, R-Ennis, would allow the federal Environmental Protection Agency to extend deadlines in areas that can prove they're affected by pollution that blows in from other cities and states.
Dallas-Fort Worth officials have long claimed that pollution from Louisiana, and even from Houston 250 miles to the southeast, is at least partly to blame for the region's poor air quality.
Barton's Energy and Commerce Committee is expected this month to begin debating the controversial energy bill, which has been stalled in Congress the past two years. The deadline extension proposal is included in a "discussion draft" that Barton's committee will use to craft a formal bill for the full House to consider.The deadline extension option would provide breathing room for regional leaders struggling to lower Metroplex ozone -- among the worst in the nation.
[...]
This marks the fourth time Barton has proposed legislative action to allow extending the ozone-compliance deadlines, according to his office.
Larry Neal, Barton's spokesman, defended the proposal. In a written statement, he said Barton believes that it has bipartisan support and that the issue has not "prevented the bill from becoming law."
Yoo hoo! Republican Congressional leaders! Want to find a painless budget cut? Here you go.
Nearly a decade after he was appointed to investigate then-Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros, independent counsel David M. Barrett spent more than $1.26 million of federal money in the last six months of fiscal 2004, the Government Accountability Office reported Thursday.Since its inception, the Cisneros investigation has cost nearly $21 million, a total rivaling some of the largest independent counsel investigations in history.
Barrett was appointed in May 1995 to investigate allegations that Cisneros lied to the FBI about money he paid to a former mistress. Cisneros pleaded guilty and in September 1999 and paid a $10,000 fine and a $25 court assessment. He was later pardoned by President Clinton.
By then, Barrett had spent $10.3 million on his investigation, and Congress had allowed the independent counsel law to lapse.
But Barrett stayed in business to investigate whether anyone in the Clinton administration had attempted to obstruct justice during the probe. In July 2001, the three-judge panel gave Barrett permission to continue, but Judge Richard Cudahy questioned the expense.
"Whether a cost-benefit analysis at this point would support Mr. Barrett's effort is a question to which I have no answer," Cudahy wrote, noting that Barrett had been spending about $1 million every six months.
I consider myself quite the aficionado of anti-Tom DeLay editorials. This one may be the harshest I've seen yet.
THE LATE Okie troubadour Roger Miller sang about a man who treated his wife so shabbily that, during her testimony in divorce court, his own lawyer shot him a dirty look. That's when you know you're in for it. Poor Tom DeLay.The House majority leader is now being pilloried by the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, whose specialties include cleansing right-wing lepers. But earlier this week, the Journal lit into the Texas Republican for a series of improprieties involving free-spending lobbyists, trips that Henry and Myrtle have to save 40 years to take, and Mr. DeLay's keen interest in legislation that the lobbyists who allegedly sprang for the junkets happened to be pushing. The Journal castigated Mr. DeLay as "the living exemplar" of some of Big Government's "worst habits."
The indictment, alas, fell short. In counting Mr. DeLay's ethical shortcomings, the editorial confined itself to his cowabunga dives into what is nonetheless conventional Beltway sleaze. His truly inspired offense against the Republic, in our view, was his engineering of a special redistricting in the Texas legislature before the 2010 Census--a novel gerrymandering ensuring GOP dominance of both Austin and Texas' congressional delegation. Now in-parties elsewhere are following suit, redrawing political boundaries in a way that robs voters of real choice as it enthrones incumbents.
What he has taken from democracy, however, Mr. DeLay has added to national unity: Here is a Texas Republican all can despise.
All that is mere pettifoggery compared to DeLay's threats of retribution against those who failed to follow his own law in the Terri Schiavo case. There are already numerous threats of violence against Michael Schiavo, the judges who upheld the law, and the hospice where Terri Schiavo passed away. The people making these threats are some very ugly characters, and Tom DeLay is standing with them. If he had any capacity for shame, he should be feeling it now. He should also be feeling heat from all those who believe that threatening judges is a bad idea. I hope there's more of that to come.
It's not just Texas that's aiming to make voting harder.
Legislation that would require voters to show photo identification before casting ballots has touched off fierce debate in three states, with opponents complaining the measures represent a return to the days of poll taxes and Jim Crow.
Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita, a Republican, noted that people already need photo ID for basic bank transactions. "Is everyone a racist? Are bank tellers racist?" he said. "I simply don't believe it is going to have the effect that they claim it does."South Dakota enacted a photo ID law last year but allows voters to sign a one-paragraph affidavit of identity if they do not bring ID to the polls. In the November election, 2 percent of voters signed the affidavit, said Secretary of State Chris Nelson, a Republican. But some counties with large numbers of American Indians saw up to 25 percent of voters arrive at the polls without photo ID, he said.
"There are people that simply don't have photo identification," he said. Similarly, in Georgia, the state chapter of AARP estimated that 36 percent of Georgia residents 75 or older lack driver's licenses.
Opponents of Indiana's measure contend there is no solid evidence of fraud at the polls. But supporters argue that perception matters as much as reality, and people who think fraud is going to cancel out their ballot will not bother to vote.
UPDATE: Via Political Wire, the Georgia Lege has done the deed. Shame on them.
The Warwick Hotel has been sold again, this time to the Hotel ZaZa, which is in Dallas. I'm trying to keep a straight face as I type the name "ZaZa", but I may have to take a moment to compose myself.
All right. I just want to note that the Warwick is where Tiffany and I had our wedding reception in 1998 - it had been sold a few months earlier by the Wyndham chain to the Park Plaza chain, which caused us a bit of consternation, since we'd signed the ballroom and guest-accomodation deals with the old ownership, but everything went well in the end. Tiffany's parents had had their reception at the Warwick in 1968, so that made it a bit more special. As you might imagine, I'm rather fond of the place, so I hope its new owners take good care of it, however silly their name may be. Tom has a few words to say about it as well.
