Williamson County Democrats really trying to win votes

Hat tip Williamson County Conservative.  Looks like Democrats in Williamson County are working so hard to win over voters!

There are more pictures at the other blog - check them out.

ObamaCare fanatics flood the Texas House

Given the full-throated endorsement of Barack Obama's agenda by many Texas legislators, it should come as no surprise that some of them were working to implement that same agenda before he got into office.

It should never be forgotten that a core group of liberal Democrats in Texas, and across the nation, were simply waiting for someone like Obama to come along, take charge, and take the White House.  They were already scurrying to enact liberal policies that would bankrupt the nation and tie, with crippling debt, the hands of hardworking Americans for generations to come.

This from the newly-launched ObamaCareFanatics website:

During the late days of the Texas Legislature’s 80th Session, even before Obama was elected, a core group of liberals championed the cause of “Universal Health Care in Texas” by trying to slip in an amendment that would compel the State to report on how the government of Texas could “implement a system of universal health care”.

SB 23, Amendment #15, RV 1578, 80R

Voting "nay" on the motion to table (which means, in favor of the amendment)?  Some of Blue Dot Blues' "favorite" Texas Democrats:  Valinda Bolton, Ellen Cohen, Dawnna Dukes, Jim Dunnam, Donna Howard, Mark Strama, Patrick Rose, Mike Villareal......the list goes on.

Never mind that some of these same Democrats have been utterly silent about the actual ObamaCare legislation - they clearly support the idea, and have supported Obama to date without blinking an eye.

"Trial lawyer" - more than just an epithet

Baselice and Associates has released data from a recent poll showing that a majority of Texas voters still don't like trial lawyers very much.

Texas trial lawyers have a bad reputation, and given the success of medical malpractice lawsuit reform several years ago, it's no wonder.  As time goes on, the Texas Trial Lawyer Association has become a force for the dark side in our state - funding the Texas Democratic Party and mostly Texas Democratic candidates in the name of a rarely defined agenda.  Connected to Steve Mostyn and Matt Angle, those nefarious partisans hell-bent on permanently destroying Texas' fiscal sanity, the TTLA is continuing in their mission this election cycle.

So, if it is true that so many Texans aren't fond of trial lawyers, it oughta bear out in the voting booth this November, taking aim at the TTLA's pet legislators like Jim Dunnam, Kirk Watson, and others.  Check out this list of Texas Trial Lawyer Association beneficiaries, dating from January 2009 to the present.  I've highlighted the ones of particular interest to Travis County readers - here's a small sample:

VOTE 'EM OUT, beginning October 18.

More warts for Bill White

The Texas Conservative Review had a heads-up today on a new story in Houston, regarding the possible misuse of federal funds in Houston during Bill White's tenure as mayor.

The city may have to return tens of millions of dollars to the Department of Housing and Urban Development for errors it made in the use of federal funds dating back to 2001.

Mayor Annise Parker said she was aware of "no recent developments" with HUD and noted that the city is in negotiations with the agency over problems that date to 2001.

"I don't intend to send any money back, but if previous administrations have done stupid things, we're going to have to fix them," she said.

Parker compared some of the city's challenges with HUD to those she has dealt with at the Metropolitan Transit Authority, where the decisions of Metro officials to ignore Federal Transit Administration procurement rules have delayed construction of new light rail lines and are expected to force the local transit agency to rebid a multimillion-dollar rail car contract.

"Just as there is a new Metro, there's a new housing department, and interestingly, there were some of the same problems," she said. "We're in complete compliance since I've been in office and we are trying to clean up some of the problems that have been lingering out there for nearly a decade."

The more voters learn about Bill White, the less likely they will be to vote for him.  This kind of story is nothing new in White's history - you're talking about a former mayor of one of the largest cities in the United States who bankrupted his city, stood against taxpayer protections and reforms, helped fund and build the world's largest abortion clinic in his city, perpetuated a double standard on property taxation, and who is even now out there lying to voters about his intent to govern as a "fiscal conservative."

Bill White was bad for Houston, and he's really bad for Texas.

Fox 7 this morning - The Race for Governor

Republican Party of Texas communications director Chris Elam faced off with Rep. Mark Strama, talking about the race for governor, the polls, and what needs to happen for either candidate to pull it off in November.

Oh, also?  The more the voters get to know Bill White, the less likely they will be to vote for him.  Who would vote for this?

Crickets chirping in Strama camp over Obamacare

In all the discussions about the Texas budget, the probable shortfall projected by the comptroller, and what on earth state legislators intend to do about it, no one has really brought up the impending impact on state spending stemming from the Obamacare legislation.  We know that Texas' Medicaid expenditures will expand by as much as $24 billion in the next four years, for instance.  Insurers are projecting premium increases of as much as 25%, and that will affect state employees' premiums (and the taxpayer-funded portion).  The impact on small businesses and job growth is going to be substantial, and Texas is already falling behind in private-sector job growth.  And all of this is just for starters.

We are facing not just one, but probably several legislative budget cycles in which tough decisions will have to be made to make up for the federal government's intrusion, as well as economic reality in Texas.  The danger comes now from the leftists credited with influencing the Texas legislature far more than their minority status should have let them.  With just 40 days left until the election, Texans have serious choices to make.  The opportunity is there to stand up against federal health care mandates, but where will the backbone to do so come from?

Some Democratic legislators have made their positions known - a letter, signed by thirty-five Texas Democratic senators and representatives, was sent to Washington in 2009.  Just because a name isn't on that list, doesn't mean there aren't many more Democrats in the Texas House and Senate who are fully supportive of the president's obscene power grab.

One can only assume that Democratic incumbents like Mark Strama, who have credible challengers and who wish to pretend otherwise, shied away from the letter because of the possible political backlash.  Why, then, would Strama (as an example) continue to tout his full-throated support for the Democratic agenda?  Why not take down reminders that they backed Obama?

The letter is not the whole story.  The truth of the matter is, Democrats like Mark Strama count on hoodwinking select moderates and independents (and yes, even Republicans!) in order to continue working as "stealth" agents for the liberal agenda in the Texas legislature.

Voters deserve to know whether their elected officials support Obama's health care mandates.  With $18 billion to make up for in the coming biennium, and a financial burden looming for future cycles, it is important to know who is for the taxpayer and the business owner, and who is for federal control and financial ruin.

Mourning in America

Political commercials begin: Rose lies right off the bat

I was home not more than five minutes tonight when I turned on KVUE to catch the weather, and was instead confronted with Rep. Patrick Rose's (D-Dripping Springs) first extraordinary commercial of the season.

In it, Rose takes credit for putting more "equipment" and "men" on the border - which, since the budget passed unanimously, would rate a "Barely True" by PolitiFact standards.  Moreover, he calls for a "crack down" on border security.  He stops short of actually calling for an Arizona-style law in Texas, but unwitting dupes some voters may not remember that when they go to the polls.  While nothing Rose's commercial contradicted his party's agenda (except possibly the call for a "crack down"), it was all soft rhetoric that simply sounds conservative, and constituents expecting a hardliner on illegal immigration will not find one in their current state representative.

For years now, Patrick Rose has tried to make it seem like he's a "friendly" Democrat, like he's conservative, like he's a bipartisan cipher.  The truth is radically different.  This week, TRHC launched The Rose Record, a website with the truth about Patrick Rose's record and history.

Commercials with conservative-sounding talking points, and red "fiscal conservative" signs, won't dig Patrick Rose out of the pile of half-truths and flat-out lies on which he has built his political reputation.  Voters will do well to remember that on November 2.

Texas still leader, California still faltering

Texas vs. California.  A couple of economic heavyweights, with high population and a huge impact on the state of the nation.  The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has a great report on the differences between the states, and why Texas remains the economic winner.

The report came out earlier this year, and as talk continues about whether the recession really ended in 2009, Texas' position as an economic leader remains relatively untarnished.  Of course, the general economic status of the United States is punishing Texas as well - the Texas Public Policy Foundation report I talked about yesterday shows that - but California was ill-prepared for the kind of financial hit the nation continues to take.  Texas, on the other hand, in remaining business-friendly and attracting new residents every day with a relatively low tax burden, is weathering the storm quite well. Great visual proof of the differences comes in this chart from the ALEC report (click to view larger):

Remember in November

The Travis County Commissioners' Court voted today to allow for taxpayer-funded abortions in the Travis County Health District budget approval.

There are two Republican challengers to sitting members of the court.  Mike McNamara for Travis County judge, and David Buttross for Pct. 2 commissioner.

Just saying.

New report: Texas needs to work on private sector job growth

The Texas Public Policy Foundation released a report today called "By the Numbers: Texas Stimulus".  Fiscal Policy Analyst James Quintero broke down some of the facts about Texas' economy and the impact, or lack thereof, from the major stimulus package, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

From the report:

While the indicators....are not an indictment of the success or failure of the stimulus, per se, it is fair to say that despite per capita state and local government stimulus spending of $708.40, Texas’ private sector job market remains weak and the overall economy is performing worse than expected, considering the nearly $20 billion being pumped through the state.

What we've been told is "job growth" is largely government jobs - and despite that, the unemployment rate is still creeping upward.  Per capita income has also declined.

"Hope" seems to be just about "crossing our fingers and hoping for the best" while "change" is just "putting more burdens on taxpayers" instead of fostering small business or private-sector job growth.

You can read the entire report here.

Mostyn, Angle, and the Democratic elite in the Texas House

We have heard the word "establishment" thrown around a lot in the last few days, mostly aimed at Republicans in the "ruling class" of northeastern elites.  And while I think the discussion about the Republican elite is worth having, I think we should table it - the primaries are over, save for Hawaii on Saturday, and all our efforts (ALL our efforts - do you hear me, punditry and Karl Rove?) need to be aimed at taking out the Democratic elite at the knees.

Frankly, I am worried that September 16, 2010, is about two years too late to begin this conversation, and it will take a lot of effort to boost the signal far and wide enough to make a dent in the national conversation.  I'll settle, for the time being, on getting this into the Texas political conversation.  Thankfully, my good friend Bryan Preston over at Pajamas Media has started the ball rolling nicely.

You probably haven't heard the name Steve Mostyn, and that is largely by design - he doesn't want you, the average voter/taxpayer/citizen, to know who he is.  He does want you to vote his way, however, and he's not above handing out cash like candy on Halloween to those who support his cause.  What is that cause, pray tell?  It is the permanent destruction of not only the Republican Party, but the conservative and libertarian movement in Texas.  Mostyn has started with pledging $3 million to the Bill White campaign and other Democratic campaigns in Texas this November.  More than that, Mostyn is the brain and cash trust behind the Texas Trial Lawyers Association - the group in Texas that fights more than just tort reform, with operatives all over the Capitol, staffing Democratic offices, and funding Democratic state House and Senate candidate like Mark Strama, Rene Oliviera, Jim Dunnam, and many more across the state.  Click on the image below for a sample of the 2009-2010 beneficiaries of the TTLA's cash flow (from the Texas Ethics Commission website):

If you've hung around politics and the blogosphere long enough, you've definitely heard the name Matt Angle.  Angle is the Democratic operative behind a good portion of the worst of the Democratic-leaning PACs and organizations responsible for several of the candidates and Democratic incumbents in the Texas House, and behind the majority of the leftist rhetoric infecting the issues debate.  The organizations in question:

• Key – Lone Star Project – Angle’s online attack vehicle
• Texas Trial Lawyers Association – Houston trial lawyer and Democratic bankroller Steve Mostyn’s organization, pushes against sensible tort reform on behalf of trial lawyers
• Texas Freedom Network – anti-Christian organization run by Cecilia Richards
• Back to Basics PAC – Texas version of MoveOn.org, bankrolled by Houston trial lawyer Steve Mostyn, has launched extreme attack ads on Republican Gov. Rick Perry
• Texans for Public Justice – nominally non-partisan watchdog funded by Soros and Heinz-Kerry that attacks Angle’s chosen targets
• Texas Democratic Trust – Angle’s massive slush fund, left to him by John Edwards’ benefactor, the late Fred Baron
• Texas Democratic Party – under Angle’s control from Washington
• Texas Progress Council – left-wing PAC that funds Democratic candidates

Angle and Mostyn are a team of deadly vipers, and together they operate an efficient machine.

To get an idea of what exactly is going on, and why it matters, I suggest reading this 2008 Weekly Standard article by Fred Barnes, and checking out some of Rob Witwer and Adam Schrager's The Blueprint:  How the Democrats Won Colorado.  

Now, what does this mean in 2010?  Probably not very much - unless their campaign against Governor Perry is successful, which has far less to do with electing Bill White than it does about starting a chain reaction down ballot to keep Republicans from taking a clear majority in the Texas Legislature.  This is indisputably about redistricting, and controlling the debate - you don't have to know what happened in Colorado, but it helps.  Please don't underestimate these guys - they've been around awhile, and they've learned patience.  This may well be the Republicans' undisputed year, all the way down the ballot.  But they will wait for complacency and a shift in the national mood, and strike just when we're no longer paying close attention.

Frightening ideas from DC school super

It wasn't really Michelle Rhee's idea - she's quoting Warren Buffet - and Courtland Milloy at the Washington Post took it and ran with it in this article, but it's a frightening, dictatorial idea nonetheless.  Outlaw private schools, make public school mandatory, and assign students to schools by random lottery.  Yikes.

It has to be frustrating to be Michelle Rhee.  She's in charge of one of the worst school districts in the country, and she's opposed by many who would otherwise seem to share her views.  I've liked a lot of what I've heard - she does not suffer failing teachers in her schools, and made cuts from day one - but this latest tidbit takes the idea of reform and chokes the life out of it.

But Milloy's WaPo piece did make me think about the situation in some of our nation's most challenged school districts.  The argument is always about "resources" and funding, and never about the individual children who come through the system.  I would like to think we can all agree that there is no magic bullet for every child.  Public schools in particular suffer because the focus becomes churning out graduates who pass standardized tests so the district can claim "exemplary" status and get more money.  There isn't a better system for corruption to develop, and while more and more students fall through the cracks, and more schools fail inside the system and cry out for more resources and funding, too few are willing to point out the flaws for fear of being labeled and shut out.

Outlawing private schools, and one assumes from the general gist of Milloy's piece he would also outlaw homeschooling, charter schools, and other alternative education, is exactly the wrong idea.  In Washington, D.C., there is no such thing as school choice.  Programs that helped underprivileged children get to schools that would better suit their needs have largely been eliminated, and increased funding in D.C. public schools has not curbed the astronomical dropout rate or the pitiful graduation rate.

The problem is, there are not enough advocates for real school choice, for all parents to have the ability to choose the best schools for their children, without reference to arbitrary and uncaring bureaucracy.  There should be education tax credits, there should be options for students in failing schools for in-district and inter-district transfers.  There should be greater support for homeschoolers, and more charter schools opened.  If education is the highest good, as so many believe, than shouldn't it be as varied, as diverse, and as deep as we can make it?  Why should it be only the province of government, which exists only to perpetuate itself?

Let's not even get into the problems with compulsory public education that tread on the side of Orwellian training facilitation.  Every child, learning the same things, required to do so in lockstep with all the other children, with no reference to parents, and none to the needs of the individual child.  Imagine for a moment that we instead give each child the tools that he or she needs to succeed, utterly divorced from cultural "standards" that require a rigid path from birth to the grave.  Now that is radical!

There are too many people who would rather throw money at the problems in public education without addressing the problems directly.  Competition would make all schools improve, but more importantly, choices in education would allow for more individualized attention to students who need it.  There is not a one-size-fits-all program for children - and there should never be an effort to impose one, because we're already seeing how badly that has failed.

Hard decisions will characterize Texas budget debate

The question has to be asked, especially after today's not-so-startling revelation that 70% of Texans support cutting state spending to address the looming budget shortfall.  Just what could be cut from the Texas budget?

State agencies have been asked to cut their budgets in anticipation of the shortfall expected for the next biennium, and many have complied.  Many more, however, have neglected to take a hard look at their expenditures, and the Legislature will have hard, and probably unpopular, decisions to make come January.  It won't be as nasty as the 2003 fight - this time, the comptroller has given ample warning, and the Legislative Budget Board warned state agencies that this would happen.

Texans who participated in the UT/Tribune poll are opposed to radical revenue creation schemes like gambling expansion and a state income tax, and less radical ideas like increased sales taxes and sin taxes.  They also made clear that they want to protect public education funding (K-12 and higher ed), health care, and prison funding.  Ironically, they didn't specify transportation (I guess those who were polled haven't driven in any metropolitan area in Texas lately).  But every state agency is someone's sacred cow - there will always be someone arguing to save their cow and kill their neighbor's cow.

A hard look has to be taken at the budget growth since the last shortfall, and compare it to population and inflation growth.  Population growth plus inflation was 27% between 2003 and 2009.  So it might come as quite a shock to learn that some state agencies saw their general revenue appropriation increase as much as 816% (Programs in the Governor's Office).

Some university systems, crying as they always do that the state is cutting funding, should be served their crow now while it's fresh - the University of Texas System Administration saw an increase of 416% between 2004 and 2009.  That isn't the individual campuses, that's just system admin.  The Texas Tech system admin saw an increase of 357%.

Compare these huge growths to some of the decreases (of which there were not many).  The Teacher Retirement System actually saw their total appropriation decrease by 11% over the stated time period.    The Department of Information Resources saw theirs decrease by 69%.

The point of all this, and there is a lot more where it came from, is that we need to look hard at every agency, and that each function of state government is going to have to learn to live on less to achieve their goals and provide services.  At the very least, the waste needs to be curbed severely, and government bureaucracies in Texas will need to channel funds to the most important of their functions (in the case of education, less should be spent on administrative overhead, and the money saved put back into the classroom).

What is also disturbing - transportation funding in this state is supposed to come from the Highway Fund, and not general revenue.  Yet, TxDoT actually saw an increase in their G.R. appropriation - and money going to the Highway Fund, from sources like the state gas tax, is partially diverted to other agencies which are supposed to fall under general revenue.  The result?  Percentage increases for TxDOT and select other agencies look astronomical - and the actual dollar amount suffers in comparison to those gargantuan sacred cows, education and health/human services.

A good starting point for the 2011-2012 budget will be the 2003-2004 budget, adjusted for population growth plus inflation.  Government is going to have to learn to live on less, the same way citizens in Texas are having to do in these leaner economic times.

Video - Meet Patrick McGuinness

Patrick McGuinness is challenging liberal Obama Democrat Mark Strama for House District 50.

The bullhorn speech

Chisum may jump into speaker race

Just under two months before Election Day determines how many Republicans will join the legislature, and Rep. Warren Chisum (R-Pampa) is getting his feet wet for the upcoming session.

Chisum told the AP he's considering running for speaker, and that he'll make up his mind before the November election.

If he gets in, he joins Rep. Leo Berman (R-Tyler) in challenging Speaker Straus.  Straus, who has come under fire from conservatives in the past, and who is working to make amends, has been speaker since 2009.

The election season just got that much more interesting, but I don't think that anything I said back in June really changes.  You still need a net gain of six or more Republicans in order for there to be a serious challenge to Straus' leadership.  It all depends on who you talk to, when you're curious to know what the chances are for an 83-Republican House (remember, they're sitting at 77 right now).  Some say we'll get to 81 comfortably, others are far more pessimistic and claim we'll get to 79 and suffer a net loss at the same time, and you do have the optimistic crowd that is reading the polls and surmising that 85 is not only in our reach, but a foregone conclusion.

Should Republican gains not meet those more optimistic predictions, you have to take the Democrats' wishes and history into account.  The 64 who pledged not to vote for Craddick were directly responsible for Straus' election, whether anyone likes to admit it or not.  Even if Republicans do meet or surpass expectations on Nov. 2, there's no guarantee they'll be interested in rocking the boat - remember, there is something to be said for unity, especially going into a session when we face redistricting, a massive budget deficit, a bevy of major sunset bills, and more.

Three speaker candidates isn't nearly the signal of chaos that we saw back in 2009 - remember the 12 speaker candidates?  But as the 2008/2009 timeline showed, it ain't over till the gavel falls, and as 2007 showed, it might not even end there.

The other thing you might want to watch for if speaker politics interests you at all - the 30 days out and 8 days out reports at the Texas Ethics Commission.  Who has money, and where they're getting it, could be extremely interesting if speaker politics is at all at issue in legislative races.

What the Doggett Amendment did to Texas schools

I am having a hard time not cussing on this blog, after looking at the Texas Education Agency's Education Jobs Bill spreadsheet (posted here).

The TEA said:

The Texas Education Agency has received a number of inquiries regarding the impact of the Doggett amendment to HR 1586, also known as the Education Jobs Bill. The amendment creates additional hurdles that only Texas must overcome to draw down the $830 million that is allocated for Texas public schools, including making Texas the only state required to use federal Title I formulas instead of state funding formulas to distribute these funds to school districts. [The] spreadsheet that shows the amount of funding that districts would have received with and without the additional hurdles put in place by the Doggett amendment.

So the spreadsheet is the most enlightening thing I've seen with regards to what Congressman Doggett's amendment did to Texas schools.  It won't take you long to realize that the schools losing funding are the schools in relatively affluent places, and the schools gaining funds are those with high minority populations - put another way, property-rich districts will take the hit.  Incidentally, some of those school districts that "benefit" from the Doggett amendment have been beset by scandal, administrative bloat of galactic proportions, crippling debt, and failing schools.

Here in Travis County, Pflugerville ISD will take a nearly $2.6 million hit - and they're already comparatively "underfunded" by the state of Texas.

I want to make clear that I don't think a hit in federal funding will strip any school district of "essential" services for children - but what I do think might happen is a demand during the legislative session for higher state funding for schools, and I think the districts might decide they need to ratchet up tax rates to "make up the difference."  Doggett's amendment pits Texas schools against each other, even more so than they have been as a result of Robin Hood funding, and it definitely creates a situation in which taxpayers are pitted against teachers and the deafening cry of administrators who don't want to take a pay cut "for the children."

Congressman Doggett is playing the Washington "gotcha" game with the livelihood of Texas schoolchildren, their parents, and state lawmakers.  The sooner Doggett and his ilk are boosted from Capitol Hill AND from the Pink Dome, the better.  We'll have our chance in 60 days' time.

Where do Texas Democrats get their money?

The short answer:  trial lawyers.

Of course, the long answer is far more complicated than that.  You can dig into individual Democrats and find a variety of sources, but overwhelmingly you find unions, gambling interests, bureaucrats, pro-abortion activists - and you find trial lawyers.

Steve Mostyn is a name you should become familiar with, if you're wondering where the worst of the attacks are coming from.  Mostyn is a Houston trial lawyer who wants to erase tort reform in Texas, and he's pledged $3 million to elect Bill White and start the ball rolling in that very direction.  The Steady Conservative has more about this here.

But you know, it's much worse than a single trial lawyer who is striving to take down the governor who signed tort reform legislation into law.  The self-defeating interests on the "right" - well, those who claim such status - who protect and defend "friendly" Democratic incumbents are hurting just as much.  Think of it this way:  if Bill White wins in November, and a litter of "friendly" Democrat incumbents hold on to their seats and protect the narrow division in the Texas House, whose agenda do you think will carry more weight?  The tort reformers' - or the trial lawyers?

Beware the sleeping dragon, and vote against the Texas Democratic agenda in November.

Make those liberal chickens come home to roost

Michael Becker at 73 Wire has this to say about Democrats, emphasis mine: "Every elected Democrat supports the Obama/Pelosi/Reid agenda. All of ‘em. There is no such thing as a “conservative Democrat” and there is nothing as offensive as the idea of a “pro-life Democrat”.... And it’s time to start making these hypocrites pay for the positions of their party. As in pay with their jobs."

I COULD NOT AGREE MORE (and hey, lookie there, I've said so!)

Becker is specifically referring to the Democrats in Arizona who are fighting SB 1070 (also known as the Arizona immigration enforcement law).  But I dare say this applies across the board to all incumbent Democrats - in every elected office.

I know it's true about the state representatives in Travis County.  ALL OF THEM, not just one or two.  Believe me, no matter what you may be hearing about "friendly" incumbents, there is no such thing.

As I've heard someone say - if you're not helpin' me, you're hurtin' me, and if you're hurtin' me, you gotta go.

Spend-o-crats' latest support from Education Austin

Louis Malfaro, president of Education Austin, a local teacher "group" that funnels money to liberal Democratic candidates, announced this week that he's leaving his post.  I know some will miss him - I don't think I will.

If you read the above and sat wondering what the big deal is about a teacher group that goes by the seemingly innocuous name of "Education Austin," well, you should keep reading.  Education Austin is a de facto teacher union that has one mission - spend, spend, and spend some more.

I'm all for teachers being paid fairly (teacher pay is another blog post altogether, really), but let's get at the root issue - they are frequently denied raises in part because of the administrative bloat in school districts.  Austin ISD is one of the big offenders here, and I do not recall ever hearing Education Austin clamoring for budget restraint.  In fact, looking at which candidates receive support from Education Austin PAC, you'd think they were most in favor of a leaking faucet of cash.

Just this year, Education Austin PAC has doled out the following:

$1500 to Rebecca Bell-Metereau (Democratic candidate for SBOE 5)
$1000 to Mark Strama (Democratic state rep. in HD 50 with a terrible record on education legislation)
$1000 to the Committee to Elect Patrick Rose (Democratic state rep. in HD 45)
$1000 to Eddie Rodriguez (Democratic state rep. in HD 51)
$16,000 to Texas AFT Committee on Public Education (Malfaro is going to work for Texas AFT)
$1000 to Pati Jacobs (Democratic candidate for HD 17)
$1000 to Donna Howard (Democratic state rep. in HD 48)
$5000 to Texas State Teachers Association PAC
$1000 to Valinda Bolton (Democratic state rep. in HD 47)


In 2007, I wrote the following about Education Austin, for the Americans for Prosperity blog, and I think it still applies today:

"Do it for the children", they squeak while fumbling through Austinite pockets for more money. But Austin taxpayers would do well to turn a deaf ear to pleas from this supposedly politically independent organization.

Education Austin’s slogan, “Putting Education First,” is horribly misleading. Their agenda is about money; that’s the real goal of an employee union. It’s easy to feel sympathy for someone who holds out their cupped hands and with a tearful sniff begs for more money “for the children,” but we should not be fooled. The children don’t need more money. The real priority in education needs to be getting more of it for the money we are already spending – and in AISD, with over $800 million in expenditures, taxpayers should demand to know exactly how that money is being spent (and calling for spending limits).

Perhaps the most perplexing thing about Education Austin is their funding. 100% of their money comes from donations in increments less than $50; that means they do not have to report on just who is giving them money. They’ve raised enough money to give $10,000 to educrat candidate Valinda Bolton, and $12,000 to Texas State Teachers Association PAC. 

Independent teacher union or a Democratic front? No matter; obviously, Education Austin is no friend of the taxpayer, and neither are the candidates they support. The best thing we can do for the children is demand accountability and fight to get spending under control.