Runaway train - the data, the hype, and CapMetro's reality

Tonight, Ben Wear with the Statesman revealed some of the not-so-shocking truth about CapMetro's experiment in hubris (also known as MetroRail).  It is not living up to the hype, it is costing taxpayers an absurd amount of money, and in the end it is hurting commuters, not helping them.

My favorite bit? "So 779 boardings probably represents somewhere around 400 people a day using a train line that cost something well above $120 million to build and will cost more than $8 million a year to operate."

CapMetro's agenda is clearly revealed now as they begin talking about cutting back on the commuter buses that run from Leander and Lakeline because of the "competition" they represent to the train.  Never mind that in doing so, they lengthen the commute for people traveling from those hinterlands, and there are already people complaining about the possibility.  CapMetro, and the civic leaders who prop it up, want the train to be successful at the cost of actual mobility.  This isn't about improving transportation for central Texans, not for the CapMetro board and their cheerleaders.  It is about proving they are right even when the facts are obviously not in their favor.

I direct you back to James Skaggs' excellent commentary on the issue of commuter rail, from way back in 2004.   "There are no cities similar to Austin today, or the Austin projected fifty years from now, that have successful commuter rail. CapMetro has offered no model cities or comparisons. The percentage use of public transit for US work commuting declined in every census since data was first reported in 1960. Based on experiences of similar cities, this train will have low ridership of a few hundred people and will not measurably impact congestion or pollution. In fact, the proposed train will cross 53 public streets and 20 driveways 225,000 times per year, increasing congestion and creating safety hazards for citizens. The train’s high emissions, low ridership and supporting bus circulators will result in more pollution than automobiles per passenger mile."

The evidence is already coming in.  MetroFail is exactly that.  Voters should be paying attention now - Leffingwell and his band of merry tax-and-spend socialists at city hall are chomping at the bit to pull the wool over voters' eyes once more with a rail bond election in 2012.  Seems awfully far away, I know, but it looms.

PR: Austin Legislators Sell Out Texas to EPA Bureaucracy

From the Travis County Republican Party:

AUSTIN, TX – Big government is coming to Texas and Austin area legislators are putting out the red carpet. Not content to keep their failures confined to the national level, Washington bureaucrats are determined to expand their influence and control within the states. With unfunded mandates and coercive legislation they are working to shift the burden of big government onto state governments like ours which have been responsible and limited their spending and protected their people and businesses as much as possible from the economic downturn.

The latest target of the power-hungry bureaucrats is Texas' remarkably successful clean air program which has us well ahead of nationwide trends in the reduction of pollutants like ozone and nitrous oxide, and has reduced carbon dioxide emissions by more than 48 other states despite a population which has grown by 1000 people a day since 2000. We have even built more wind power generation capacity than any other state at the same time as creating more new jobs than any other state.

We've gotten clean air right and done it without sacrificing jobs or damaginc our economy. Washington ought to be commissioning studies on how other states can be as successful. But instead, activists at the EPA are trying to expand their power at the expense of Texas' energy industry because we don't do our paperwork the way they want us to. They have ruled that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality's permitting system is in violation of the Clean Air Act because its Flexible Permits Program, which has allowed our energy industry to prosper and create jobs while still having the cleanest air in the nation, is not "consistent" with their bureaucratic requirements.

Attorney General Greg Abbott and Governor Rick Perry are looking out for the best interests of the people of Texas and have filed a legal action to defend the state's rights and block this interference with our regulatory practices. Yet four of our Travis County legislators; Dawnna Dukes, Donna Howard, Elliott Naishtat ad Eddie Rodriguez, are not standing up for us. They have signed onto a letter to President Obama applauding the EPA for their actions against Texas. For these legislators the best interests of Texas and the citizens of Travis County come second to their loyalty to the Obama administration and the federal bureaucratic machine which it has already increased in size by more than 30% in just a year.

"Texas already has the cleanest air in the nation," said TCRP Chair Rosemary Edwards. "The EPA should be coming to us for advice, not trying to meddle in a system which has worked extremely well while also protecting Texas jobs and businesses." This effort to break down our control over our own environmental regulation is just the first step in expanding the power of the regulatory bureaucracy. Its ultimate goal is the unconstitutional implementation of cap and trade regulations and carbon taxes which will massively increase energy costs for every Texan.

We urge everyone in Travis County who believes that government is best when it is limited, local and taxes us no more than is truly needed, to contact these legislators. Tell them you want them to oppose meddlesome federal bureaucrats who want to expand their power at the expense of Texans and Texas business.

Texas Democrats' increasing ethical trouble

Today, State Rep. Tara Rios Ybarra (D-South Padre Island) has been indicted on fraud charges.  Rep. Rios Ybarra has had a host of trouble in her short legislative career,  and being held in federal custody is just the latest chapter in the ongoing saga. 

But she's hardly the first Texas Democrat in recent memory to have such trouble.  In celebration of this weekend's Texas Democratic Party state convention, let's go through a short list, shall we?

Former State Rep. Terri Hodge (D-Dallas) reported to jail this week, to serve her term after being convicted on bribery charges.

State Rep. Joe Heflin (D-Crosbyton) has violated Texas campaign finance rules and been hit with a $1200 fine.

State Rep. Kino Flores (D-Palmview) is under indictment for a variety of ethics rules violations.

State Rep. Abel Herrero (D-Robstown) was fined in February for ethics violations.

Former Houston mayor and Democratic nominee for governor Bill White is a walking scandal machine, not least of which includes his relationship with BTEC, his refusal to release tax documents from his tenure as
Deputy Secretary of Energy and as state chairman of the Texas Democratic Party. 

Tip of the iceberg, folks.  When you include Democratic legislators' relationships to individuals like George Soros (Austin's own Rep. Mark Strama received campaign funds from Jennifer Soros in 2004) and Fred Baron (legions), you have to start feeling suspicious.  Oh, and hey Austin, remember how Rep. Dawnna Dukes failed to pay her property taxes, business franchise taxes, spent her campaign funds on credit cards? 

There have been lesser problems with Texas Democrats that still raise concerns.  Rep. Harold Dutton's issues with child support.  Former Rep. Borris Miles' party-crashing, gun-wielding habits.  Rep. Eddie Rodriguez' recent DWI.  Former Sen. Gonzalo Barrientos' own issues with drunk driving. 

And the deafening silence from Matt Angle and the Texas Democratic Trust continues....

Birdwell claims decisive victory in SD-22 runoff

Congratulations to Brian Birdwell, who just beat Waco establishment candidate David Sibley in a runoff election for the Texas State Senate, District 22!!

Does Sibley have an invisibility cloak?

It does seem like Sibley is less interested in courting Republicans than his opponent - especially now that rumors abound about Waco Democrats showing up to vote for him.  And, this was seen on Twitter, posted by CarolofWest:

Sibley claims he was at #RPT10 in Dallas but no one from #SD22 saw him. Did he have his invisible cloak on? Vote #Birdwell 

Will Rep. Berman open up Speaker Race 2011?

That's the story over at the Texas Tribune tonight, and the timing is extremely interesting.

Republicans have been home for just over a week from their most interesting convention in a decade or more.  As they clean out their bags from the convention, they will probably find copies of two things, depending on what they grabbed and took home.  One is a proposed platform resolution that was distributed to delegates on the floor by the Prosper Tea Party, entitled "Remove and Replace Speaker Joe Straus."  The other is a four-page document that showed up in some SD caucus rooms - a letter to delegates explaining the conservative position against Straus, and signed by Wallbuilders leader David Barton.

In Senate District 14, we discovered one-page flyers reminding people that Speaker Straus headlined a fundraiser for liberal Democrat Rep. Patrick Rose.

Other interesting things happened at the convention.  When Rep. Dan Branch was introduced to give remarks introducing Speaker Straus, a chorus of boos could be heard coming from various places on the floor.  As he spoke of Straus' Republican credentials, an exodus of delegates could be seen headed for the exhibition booths. The exodus continued as Straus came to the podium, and what courteous clapping was heard was spiced with boos, catcalls, and general negativity.

Since the convention, the media have tried to paint the convention as a successful one for the Straus "wing" of the party.  Given the reaction we saw, the scuttlebutt we heard, and the flyers that made it into the hands of every delegate, alternate, and guest on the floor, I don't think this is true at all.

Cue Rep. Leo Berman, one of the most vocal representatives in his animosity toward the current speaker.  A week after the convention, rumors begin flying that Rep. Berman is about to file for speaker, starting a race for the position that is sure to take us all the way through to session's beginning.

Rumors have flown prior to this about other possible candidates, but nothing has actually come of any of those, and in the meantime, the grassroots vitriol against Straus for things like the Rose fundraiser has become palpable.  Berman's a grassroots favorite, and makes a natural candidate for them to rally behind while the deal-making and handshaking happen behind the scenes.

My initial thoughts:  Berman, if he files, is a stalking-horse for someone else, someone less lightning-rod.  Berman is a vocal conservative who doesn't back down from an ideological battle - and that's where his weakness lies as a speaker candidate, who will need votes from swing Democrats who are just as upset with Straus as many Republicans.  There are more likely, and less volatile, possibilities for speaker.  Keep in mind how Straus got where he is to begin with - a group of Anybody-But-Craddick Republicans got together and determined who would be the least offensive person to all sides of the ABC legislators.  I would expect that a successful coup against Straus from within the Republicans would have to happen in a similar fashion.  Critical mass against the current speaker, a meeting of the minds, and a selection.  While some of the best choices for speaker in terms of seniority and gravitas (not to mention conservative credentials) are leaving the House (Isett, Gattis, Swinford), there are definitely some left standing.  And Straus' very selection as speaker opens up more possibilities - Straus had served just two terms as a legislator before being chosen, when tradition holds that the speaker has significant seniority.

There is general agreement among the punditry and the consultancy that an actual race for speaker depends entirely on what happens in November.  Straus, whose Democratic support outweighed his Republican support in 2009, needs to keep things almost exactly like they are in order to maintain his position without a threat or power struggle.  A gain of six or more Republicans on top of what are currently in the House could cause a serious threat to Straus, and so could the Democrats taking the majority (less likely, but still in the realm of possibility even with the expected anti-Obama backlash).  Republican gains of at least five could make it necessary for Straus to come to the table with conservative Republican leaders and play ball.

Meanwhile, Straus isn't unaware of his precarious position, and he's not taking many chances.  Putting Rep. Larry Taylor on sunset, for instance, was a move designed to keep the Republican House Caucus leader busy and happy, and to quell chatter among conservatives that the Speaker isn't interested in furthering the conservative cause (but it was also a lateral replacement - with Isett gone, the easy and smart thing was to fill the spot with another conservative).  His public declaration that he would not campaign against any incumbent is another important point - especially since he has since shown that he will go a step further and campaign FOR incumbents, even back during the primary when he made an appearance for Rep. Tommy Merritt.  The Rose fundraiser was followed, reportedly, by one for Rep. Trey Martinez-Fischer (yes, another Democrat).  Remember what Will Lutz said in this Dallas Blog piece: "It’s one thing — as House Speaker Joe Straus does — to refuse to campaign against an incumbent in the interest of preserving cordial relations in the House. Actively fundraising for the other party’s candidates is another matter entirely."

The "politics of politics" that makes up the speaker's race will continue to pop up from time to time as we move through the last stretch of the election cycle, and already the skies in Austin are darkening in nervous anticipation of the Legislature's return.  There are a ton of issues legislators will face (redistricting, TxDOT sunset, PUC sunset, school finance), but before they get there, they'll have to decide who will lead them with the gavel.  And you can bet that it will be just as interesting this time around as it was in 2007 - though, perhaps, with less Shakespeare and general color.  It is true that Straus' return as speaker is the most likely scenario even now - but that doesn't mean there won't be fireworks first.

Obama....Strama....2010

Doesn't that thought just make you....gag?

Apparently it was quite the "gag" for Rep. Mark Strama's reelection bid in 2008.  In fact, Strama was so enamored with the idea of a rhyming ticket that he made sure to link the names in people's minds - in fact, in 2007, Rep. Mark Strama was one of the first elected officials in Texas to endorse Barack Obama for president. A clever move in a year when Barack Obama's brand was solid gold - though you have to wonder, how would Strama feel about this now, with Obama's approval rating plummeting? From Rasmussen just today: 41% approve, 58% disapprove.  


Strama has been a leader for the far-left of his party, filing campaign finance legislation that amounted to incumbent protection legislation, voting against moving appraisal board appointments to the hands of elected officials, voting to remove control of the Permanent School Fund from the elected SBOE to an appointed board,  stood against voter identification legislation, for hate crimes legislation, for mandating pre-kindergarten statewide....and there is a lot more where that comes from.  Strama has received the majority of his campaign support from outside the state of Texas, and his donors include George Soros' daughter Jennifer and pro-abortion advocates Annie's List.

Whether Rep. Strama feels the need to publicly link himself to the rapidly-falling-from-grace administration in Washington is irrelevant - the connection is clearly there, in ideology and goals.  I don't think it takes very much to tie the two together, aside from the coincidental rhyming scheme.  They're both extreme liberals who are out of touch with the people they claim to represent.  They both skated into power masquerading as moderates, and still manage to fool some people.  Obama....Strama.

It does have a certain ring to it.

The year of the GOP Woman just got even better

I just found out today that Star Parker is running for Congress, in California's 37th.

Sarah Palin issued an endorsement for Star today, joining Ed Crane from the Cato Institute and Grover Norquist from Americans for Tax Reform, among others.  Since I'm usually focused on whatever is happening at the pink dome here, I missed the announcement about Star's candidacy until the latest endorsement.

I had the opportunity to meet Star Parker at a Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute lunch at CPAC in 2007.  She's an amazing person, and she knows what it is like to pull yourself up by your bootstraps.  She is the founder of CURE, the Center for Urban Renewal and Education, a policy think-tank that promotes market-based solutions to fight poverty.  I fully believe that Star Parker would be an asset to Congress and a wonderful representative of the people.

For awhile, I've wanted to post about the popular meme that this is the Year of the Conservative Woman, and I will do so at some point.  In the meantime, it is clear that if someone as conservative, and classy, as Star Parker is out there putting her neck on the line for real change in this country, then you know this is an important year.

Please, if you have some to spare, give a few bucks or more to Star Parker's effort to become the next congressman from California's 37th district.

Signal Boost - Outrage at Cornell

A friend sent me this information earlier today, and I debated about posting anything, because what has happened is horrific.  I need to warn you, dear reader, that what follows is disturbing in nature, and may be a trigger for anyone who has suffered sexual abuse.

"Medical research" is what this supposedly falls under, but I call it abuse, and I'm not the only one. At Cornell University, Dix Poppas (a pediatric urologist) has been engaging in genital mutilation on young girls. From Dan Savage (WARNING: Graphic description): "[Poppas has been] operating on little girls with what he judges to be oversized clitorises, cutting away important clitoral tissues, and then stitching the glans to what remains of the shaft. Poppas claims that, unlike past clitoral-reduction procedures, his procedure is "nerve sparing."

Oh, it gets worse. After the procedure has been performed, Poppas has "stimulated" the girls in question to see whether his operations were successful.

The mind absolutely boggles.  And I'm furious about this.  If you are, too, there is some action you can take.

Write about your outrage and send it to:
Weill Cornell: http://weill.cornell.edu/visitors/contact-us.html
Office of Research and Sponsored Programs, ORIA at med.cornell.edu, (646) 962-8200
Dean of the hospital, Antony M. Gotto Jr, dean at med.cornell.edu
The college's general address: Weill Cornell Medical College, 1300 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065.

I urge you, too, to "boost the signal" on this outrageous act and post on your own blogs, or link back here so people can find out more.  There is a ton of information here at the Slog as well, including links to the research reports and more.

Pelosi's New District Office Costs $18,736/Month

I would much rather talk about things going on here in Texas, but when I saw this headline in my inbox this morning, well, how could I not share it with you?

Roll Call reports that while most urban-area members end up paying high rent for the privilege/convenience of having a district office downtown (New York's representatives in particular), Speaker Pelosi's district office is still one of the more expensive of them.  After Pelosi's, the next most-expensive district office belongs to Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D), from Manhattan, coming in at about $10,600/month.

Extravagant?  I'd say so.  All you really need for a district office is a phone, a computer (and you can get wireless internet for less than $35/month these days), and some well-placed, tasteful patriotic decor.  And a smiling, patient district director and intern, of course.  But perhaps Speaker Pelosi, who one presumes spends much more time in the "District" than in her district, prefers digs with a fashionable address so that she doesn't have to mingle with the "little people" who can't afford to hang out in the lap of luxury like that.

Yes, yes, she's the Speaker, and a 20-year incumbent, and so has "greater needs" than the average legislator.  Fine and dandy.  I still think $18,736 a month (IN TAXPAYER MONEY) is extravagant and unnecessary.  Not that I expect anything else from the Speaker who has helped usher in the greatest national debt load and worst budgeting practices in American history.

Sibley and illegal immigration

Thought I would share this press release from Young Conservatives of Texas.  Early voting in the SD-22 special election run-off has begun, and it is really important that the voters in the district understand what they'd get out of Sibley - since he's been a senator before, his voting record is available for the world to see.

It's also important to note that in the platform passed by the convention on Saturday, and the platforms prior to it, Texas Republicans have stood strongly against in-state tuition for illegals.  Not that many legislators seem to have paid attention to that fact.

Young Conservatives of Texas Calls Out David Sibley Vote For In-State Tuition For Illegal Immigrants

As early voting begins in SD 22, the Young Conservatives of Texas, a non-partisan, independent, grassroots organization with chapters at universities all over the State of Texas calls out David Sibley, Republican candidate for Senate District 22, for voting in favor of illegal immigrants receiving in-state tuition.

House Bill 1403, which allowed illegal immigrants to be offered in-state tuition rates by Texas colleges and universities, was passed through the state legislature in 2001. As a state senator, prior to becoming a lobbyist, David Sibley voted in favor of HB 1403.

“HB 1403 encourages more inflow of illegal immigrants into Texas and penalizes foreign students who come legally to the United States to study,” Tony McDonald, Senior Vice-Chairman of Legislative Affairs said. “In addition to voting in support of tuition breaks for illegal immigrants, David Sibley donated thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates and officeholders. Sibley even donated to Dem. State Rep. Rick Noriega, the author of this bad bill who later ran against Sen. John Cornyn.”

YCT, which was founded in 1980, issues the most respected ratings of the state legislature and is the only conservative group to have done so without interruption over the last 18 legislative sessions. YCT has chapters at universities all across the state. To learn more about YCT, their legislative ratings, or their endorsements visit www.yct.org.

A message from a concerned Republican convention attendee

I received this comment over the weekend, and did not want it to get buried in the mix of things below.  I hope to answer some of PoliticalJules' questions and concerns, but in the meantime want you to see what she had to say:


"I was an alternate that got seated as a regular delegate this weekend in Dallas. This was my first time, and I can tell you I was overwhelmed to say the least. I am glad Steve won, but I did not feel very informed at first.

My biggest problem is the overwhelming disappointment I am feeling right now with the way the convention ended. Our party platform looks ridiculous and we were brow beaten into accepting it only because people were too tired to fix it!!

We are not talking a few typos here and there, but rather some very stupid and wordy demands for specific legislation that hurts some of the very people we claim to support. There are several positions that are harmful to special needs children, and I do not even think the platform committee knows it. There are special provisions all over the platform that demands teachers get special treatment and extra pay. Not that I hate teachers, but the language in our platform is very unionesque and we cannot give favor to one special group and not expect people to be upset. There is more really disturbing stuff but I could not get through the whole thing yet.

I seriously came away disillusioned with the republican party and certain of the impending doom of our party in Texas and perhaps nationally. The confusion and disorganization made me wonder who put together this convention so poorly and why did they not care to take such a fabulous opportunity and use it to launch the party to new heights? There was no web site and the agenda was barely understandable. I had no idea the experience would be so disturbing. To be honest, it has caused me to reconsider my involvement with the whole process. Although my husband does not want me to quit, I am not sure my mental state could handle the disappointment again. I am sorry to be such a downer, but I am trying to reach out to whoever I can for encouragement or perhaps some advice.

Thanks for listening."

Petition to Obama : Lift the Restrictions Hampering the Gulf Cleanup! Waive the Jones Act!

WHEREAS:

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill is dumping up to one million gallons of crude oil per day into the Gulf of Mexico;

The coastal waters of the Gulf Shores region are home to thousands of species of marine life threatened by the millions of gallons of crude oil from the Deepwater Horizon spill;

Skimmer ships and other critical resources needed to assist in coastal cleanup and wildlife rescue efforts have been, and continue to be, available and standing ready from sources around the world, but are being prevented by the Obama Administration from being deployed;

The Obama Administration has blocked the use of many of these resources in the coastal waters of the United States, citing certain provisions of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 known as the "Jones Act";

The President of the United States is fully empowered by law to waive the provisions of the Jones Act by Executive Order when necessary, but has so far refused to do so; and

The President of the United States has cited no legitimate reason whatsoever why why the use of these resources should be further delayed and why all available resources should not be employed in this critical cleanup effort;

The economies of the Gulf States are heavily-dependent on the continued vitality of fish, shrimp and other wildlife living in the coastal waters of the Gulf Shores; and

Marine biologists have made clear that time is of the essence if the ecology of the Gulf Coast region is to be rescued and the regional economy protected;

WE THE UNDERSIGNED call on President Barack Obama to immediately waive the Jones Act and allow all available resources to be employed in the cleanup effort to save the fragile marine life of the Gulf Coast region and protect the economies of the Gulf States.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/savethegulf/

Back to business - City of Austin budget and more

This message hit my inbox this morning, from the folks at ChangeAustin.  The cold reality of politics - you're never done fighting.

"Quote of the Day: "Perhaps Austin's budget is so transparent, you can't even see it," Anonymous City Planner.

This year the City's one public forum allows us to discuss less than 2% of the budget - a budget we can't even see beforehand. But what they hey, why don't you come on down for comic relief and watch the city extort a tax increase by threatening our libraries and pools.

Tomorrow! Tuesday, June 15, 6-9 pm, Austin Convention Center, 500 E. Cesar Chavez St. Join us at the City's one and only preliminary and live budget discussion for the general public. (Hold on to your hats for lots more concerns we'll be sharing on the budget in coming weeks.)

THIS Thursday, June 17, 6:30-8:30 pm, Mock Property Tax Appraisal Hearing - Watch a mock formal hearing played by experts and audience members. Carver Library (1161 Angelina). Reserve a free seat here if you haven't already.

Please forward this message!

Linda Curtis & Brian Rodgers, ChangeAustin.org

Chairman's Race round-up

Some links for those of you interested in what's happening, or who need to make a decision.

This is where I stand.

You can check out candidates' websites:  Cathie Adams, Tom Mechler, Steve Munisteri.

Read Ed Hubbard's reasons why he is supporting Steve Munisteri for chairman.

Gary Polland chimes in on the chairman's race and convention at Texas Conservative Review.

There is a blog dedicated to the chairman's race called RPT Chairman's Race 2010.  Lots of information there.

The Republic of Dave is in favor of Steve Munisteri.

You can follow what's happening at the convention via Twitter.  The hashtags are #rpt10 and #tx2010rpt.

I'll be updating from the convention on Twitter, having access to just my Blackberry (proud PC here :-).  Y'all be good and have fun.  I will try and update tonight if anything terribly interesting happens.  In the meantime, Kathleen McKinley will be blogging from the convention and you can check her blog out here.

Texas Social Studies debate tonight

If you can't go to this tonight, you should at least check out Ramparts360's video about the so-called Texas Freedom Network.

TONIGHT: 7:30 P.M. Austin.
Jewish Community Center
7300 Hart Lane
Free to Public

Panelists: Kathy Miller, Texas Freedom Network; Jonathan Saenz, Liberty Institute; Abby Rapaport, Texas Observer.

Topics for discussion will include:

· The SBOE's role/authority and accountability

· Composition of the SBOE and the upcoming elections

· The size & apportionment of districts

· The recent standards approved: social studies, science, and health, and the controversies sparked in the process


We plan on about 45-50 minutes of moderated questions and about 35-40 minutes of audience questions.

More information on the Summer in the City Speaker Series here.

The RPT State Chairman's Race

I'm sure putting this up here now will cause a bit of a headache.  I don't particularly like putting up internal party political stuff (well, I prefer not to).  But in the last 48 hours, a lot of email and phone calls have flown back and forth with which I am quite disturbed and upset.  So I decided, it is past time that I make public my feelings on the Republican Party of Texas state chairman's race.

I am supporting Steve Munisteri for state chairman of the Republican Party of Texas.

If you are a delegate or alternate to the convention, by now you've received mail for all three of the candidates for chairman. Hopefully you've had a chance to take a look at what they've all had to say. The party has been through some rough times in the last few years, and it is clear that we need a fresh perspective on what needs to be done to win elections and support our candidates and elected officials. Let me explain why I am supporting Steve, with such a good field of candidates to choose from.

Many of you know, I was heavily involved in Young Conservatives of Texas in college and after. I can credit YCT with getting me involved and informed; it was through that organization that I discovered where my passions and skills lie.  Steve was the founder of this organization, which grew out of Young Americans for Freedom and the Reagan campaigns in 1976 and 1980. I've seen firsthand Steve's organizational skills, and the lasting impact his dedication has had on Texas. From campaigns to legislative work, campus political advocacy and more across Texas and even the nation, Steve's organization is still the only one of its kind. I feel confident in Steve's ability to bring that success back to the Republican Party of Texas.

In the last several years, I have campaigned for candidates up and down the ballot in several locations across the state. Many of you have heard the story about the 2006 campaign season in Dallas County, where I witnessed an absolute slaughter. Republican voters have been reacting to poor leadership from elected officials, but also from the party. I believe that Steve is the person with the plan, the motivation, and the skill set necessary to get the party back on its feet and stop the electoral bleeding happening at the bottom of the ballot.

Finally, I believe absolutely that Steve is a solid conservative, and his record of campaigns and issues advocacy proves that. Steve is pro-life, pro-family, and a thorough fiscal conservative. His values are the same as most Republicans' in Texas, and he will stand by the platform that is crafted by delegates at the convention.

Steve is a qualified, experienced conservative who will work full-time as state chairman.  In this crucial time, I believe this is what our party needs.

This election for chairman is not a referendum on personalities, and it is not personal.  I have known the interim chairman for a long time as well, and consider her a friend.  I've met the other challenger and I think he is a good and honest man with the party's best interests at heart.  I intend to continue working hard to elect Republicans in Texas, regardless of outcome. This is a time for unity, and I hope that you feel the same way.

The Gulf Oil Spill: What Would Sarah Palin Do?

She still rocks my world.  Just sayin'.

From her Facebook note:

My experience (though, granted, I got the message loud and clear during the campaign that my executive experience managing the fastest growing community in the state, and then running the largest state in the union, was nothing compared to the experiences of a community organizer) showed me how government officials and oil execs could scratch each others’ backs to the detriment of the public, and it made me ill. I ran for Governor to fight such practices. So, as a former chief executive, I humbly offer this advice to the President: you must verify. That means you must meet with Hayward. Demand answers.

In the interview today, the President said: “I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar. We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick.”

Please, sir, for the sake of the Gulf residents, reach out to experts who have experience holding oil companies accountable. I suggested a few weeks ago that you start with Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources, led by Commissioner Tom Irwin. Having worked with Tom and his DNR and AGIA team led by Marty Rutherford, I can vouch for their integrity and expertise in dealing with Big Oil and overseeing its developments. We’ve all lived and worked through the Exxon-Valdez spill. They can help you. Give them a call. Or, what the heck, give me a call.

And, finally, Mr. President, please do not punish the American public with any new energy tax in response to this tragedy. Just because BP and federal regulators screwed up that doesn’t mean the rest of us should get punished with higher taxes at the pump and attached to everything petroleum products touch.

Primaries to watch today

Maine, Nevada, California, New Jersey, Iowa, South and North Dakota, Montana, and South Carolina all have primary elections today.

The real biggies are California and Nevada, where the primaries for U.S. Senate are hot (home states of Boxer and Reid, so you can imagine why).  There are a lot of interesting congressional races as well, and in California the primary to choose candiates for governor is also happening.

Why I Support David Reiter for ACC Board

You know, frankly, the first reason you should consider not voting for Vic Villareal for Austin Community College Board of Trustees is the hard-to-read, hard-to-concentrate-on design of his website.  From the social media crowd, can I get a loud chorus of "fail"?  Luckily, dear reader, you have me, and I will climb through the mess to bring you the meat.  What there is of it, at any rate.  The first thing I have to report is that when I clicked on a link, it took about five minutes to load.  I could blame Roadrunner, but I think it's the site's problem.  This is not a good start.

So the first place I go on a candidate's website is always "Endorsements."  I think it says a lot about a person, and Villareal's list tells me volumes.  Teacher unions, labor Democrats, the Austin Chronicle.  Right away I know, this is not a list of people I would like to be affiliated with.  Next we have "Issues."  Villareal talks a good game on low tuition rates.  Okay, great.  Read a little further along.  The rest of his positions are in direct contradiction of that idea, things that will cost more, expand the ACC tax base, etc.  Things like "lowering ACC's carbon footprint" and "increasing the graduation rate" tell me that he's willfully unaware of what community colleges are about - affordable commuter schools for people looking to get supplemental education.

Frankly, I just can't support this guy.

David Reiter is also on the ballot (the runoff date is June 12).  I voted for Reiter in May, and I will vote for him again.  I got his flyer in the mail today, so let me just go off that directly.

Reiter is a businessman who serves on the board of directors for the Austin Chamber of Commerce.  I know from that, Reiter is someone who understands what the role of ACC should be with regards to the business community in Austin.  While on the CofC board, he co-chaired a task force assessing ISD performance in central Texas.  Reiter is someone who understands, then, the budgeting and finance issues inherent in taxing entities, and understands school finance to some degree as well.  His issues are not the fluffy feel-good liberal issues - Reiter is concerned with making sure educational/training opportunities are available district-wide, and talks about making sure ACC can absorb the increasing demand as students turn to two-year education.  He talks about the need for industry and business continuing education, and developing a long-term economic plan to avoid overcharging students (and taxpayers - Reiter actually addresses taxpayers, on whose dime ACC gets to function!).  Reiter has the support of local businessmen.

Taking a gander at Reiter's website, he does have the endorsements of Reps. Mark Strama and Eddie Rodriguez.  Notably, however, the local Dem organizations haven't touched him.  And he isn't standing on the endorsements - his mailer today focused on the issues, and his stances are right in line with what I think on community college issues.

These elections are non-partisan for a reason, and you have to drill down past party affiliation (both Villareal and Reiter are voting Democrats).  I need to point out, I've also actually spoken with Reiter, who made a point of reaching across the political aisle to get his message out.  Democrat or not, he's a businessman and a family man who understands that local taxing authorities are not there to freely spend and tax at will.  He gets that there are legitimate issues that ACC faces that need to be taken seriously ("carbon footprints" are not on his radar screen).

I encourage you to take a look at David Reiter and give him a fair shake.  Early voting goes through Tuesday, June 8, and election day is June 12.

I'm going to start calling them 'idiot taxes'

Okay, ladies and germs.  Let's have a little civics lesson, shall we?

What is the function of city government, exactly?  Most of us would say "transportation," "police protection."  Some of us would add "essential services," by which we mean water, electricity, wastewater treatment, and probably trash/recycling service.  There are some, especially in Austin, who will then chime in with "parks and recreation," and "libraries."

We can dither on all of the above some other time.  Today's lesson involves cities, or other government entities, involving themselves in entertainment.  Like, oh, sports stadiums.

Check this out.  Washington, D.C. instituted a tax in order to pay for the new stadium for the Nationals.  The tax was supposed to be temporary (hey, don't spew your drink - they really thought they meant that!).  Now the city intends to extend the tax indefinitely to pay for other things. "A citywide business tax the D.C. Council passed to help to help pay for the $611 million Washington Nationals ballpark has become such a cash cow that the city is now using it to help close its nine-figure budget gap." (Washington Examiner)

I love baseball as much as the next person - possibly more, but that's off-topic.  I cannot see the justification for taxpayer-funded stadiums.  All the money in sports and teams can't afford their own stadiums?  Pfooey!  Citizens are often blinded by the shiny - take Arlington, Texas, where taxpayers willingly increased their local sales taxes to pay for the silver cockroach known as Cowboys Stadium.  Of course, having all the sports and other attractions in town means that the City of Arlington gets a huge dollop of Homeland Security funding from the feds - and they use their "destination" city status as an excuse to spend untold amounts on lobbyists to schmooze legislators in hopes of levying more taxes for transportation boondoggles.  Endless cycle of madness.  Hence the term "idiot taxes."

Just so this post has a Texas tie to it - y'all heard last week about Formula 1 racing coming to Austin?  Well, there's corporate welfare involved there as well. From Michael Quinn Sullivan: "A mostly unnoticed budget rider in 2009 put $25 million into the fund, contingent on lawmakers passing Democratic State Sen. Kirk Watson's SB1515, which added "Formula One" to the kinds of events eligible to receive tax money. Only 16 House members and four senators voted against the legislation."

Interesting things to note on SB 1515.  First, one of the House sponsors was Dawnna Dukes.  She's the representative covering Manor.  There has been some speculation at our house that the Formula 1 track would be built out on land the city bought for a new airport, but never developed.  So there's an incentive for Dukes to be involved.  I could not properly account for the others, except to speculate that they just don't know better.  The "nay" votes in the House on third reading were (copied from the House journal): Anderson; Aycock; Berman; Brown, B.; Christian; Crabb; Creighton; Fletcher; Harper-Brown; Legler; Lewis; Miller, S.; Riddle; Sheffield; Truitt; and Weber.  In the Senate, the "nays" were Huffman, Nelson, Nichols, and Patrick (Wentworth voted against suspending the rules to bring up the committee substitute, but voted for the bill on third reading).

Absurd, and given that sixteen House members voted against it, the relative late reading in the House (on May 20, 2009) is a poor excuse for ignorance, should any claim it.  Someone was paying attention, even if not everyone was.

So, civics lesson.  Don't vote yes on taxes for shiny things that you know are not government's job or responsibility.  Taxes do not go away - they are tenacious little suckers, and they will eat up your livelihood until you can't remember a day when you didn't pay those taxes.  Also, not every neat-o idea your city wants to engage in is a good idea, and there is no free lunch (or magical sports stadium) when it comes to what government deems right and proper use of your money.

Here endeth the lesson.

Guest Post: Shouting from the Digital Rooftops

from American Majority by Raz Shafer

Originally posted at LibertyJuice.com

Our country’s battle for independence was a fight which extended well before the first shots were fired and drops of blood fell. In the years before the Revolutionary War there was a concerted effort on the part of America’s Founding Fathers and fellow patriots to influence the hearts and minds of their fellow Americans and unify the colonies and their inhabitants under the banner of revolution.

In an 1818 Letter to Hezekiah Nile, John Adams wrote of the real American Revolution: “But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American war? The Revolution was affected before the war commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people; a change in their duties and obligations. This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments and affections of the people was the real American Revolution.”

Adams’ point is that without the unity of opinion that was achieved among the colonists, there would have been no nation to free from British tyranny. It was during the 15 years prior to the war that the public opinion was enlightened and informed.

This end was accomplished by individuals like you and I taking up the cause of liberty. The conversation that was created transcended the boundaries of class and geography to connect mechanics, merchants, farmers, ministers, land owners, sailors, women, servants and all other members of society.

The tools they used to achieve this goal were the highest technology of their time but consider how it compares to our ability to touch hearts and minds today:

• By 1775, there were 38 newspapers in the mainland colonies.  In November of 2009 there were 20,340,000,000 indexed web pages.
• Philadelphia printer John Dunlap printed 200 copies of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th…Over 1 million Americans received Obama’s VP pick via text message (this was the first ever political announcement made through your phone)
• Over 100,000 copies of Thomas Paine’s Common Sense were distributed (Market penetration of 5%).  111,212,840 Facebook Profiles exist (Market penetration of 35%).
• Today we sit at another revolutionary moment in our nation’s history. It’s one of ballot boxes rather than muskets and Tea parties which involve peaceful flag waving rather than tarring and feathering enemies. The tools that we use to promote our increased liberty are different but the principles which we champion are the same: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
• During the Revolutionary era they used Pamphlets while today we use blogs. They spread information by meeting in Taverns and we use Wikis to broadcast information (some of us still meet in taverns…).  The Sons of Liberty and Paul Revere’s Midnight ride spread news and ideas while today we use Twitter and foursquare.

The battle that we are engaged in is one for the hearts and minds of our countrymen. We know from polling that self identified conservatives outnumber liberals 2-to-1 and yet we loose elections and are outgunned in the traditional media as well as online….so what’s the answer?

I’m convinced that our success or failure in engaging effectively online will determine the end result of our movement.  It is no longer a choice whether we should get involved online and in social networks.  The jury has been in for awhile now and conservatives have been well behind the curve.

My homework for you is this: Get on Twitter and Facebook.  These two social networks will allow you to leverage the freedom and speed of the internet to reach the widest possible audience.  You can define your purpose and the scope of your efforts as widely or narrowly as you like but your presence is required.

American Majority has two great guides that will give you all the information you need to become a power user on each of these networks.  These are free resources that American Majority offers to compliment their full line of Political Training seminars.

With American Majority’s Twittivism Guide, you will learn not only what Twitter and tweeting is all about, but how to use it effectively in your activism. Topics include everything from simple vocabulary to hosting offline “Tweetups.” Confused?  Don’t’ worry.  It’s all in the guide.

The American Majority Facebook Guide will walk you through setting up a profile and organization’s fan page.  We will also discuss ways to increase your fan base, “hack” the content on your page, attach other social networks, and much more.

Becoming a powerful conservative voice online doesn’t require you to pledge your life, fortune, or sacred honor, like our Founding Fathers did. All it takes is a few minutes to acquaint yourself with the websites and then begin sharing your love for liberty with your social networks.

Tweet forth and get on Facebook!