Redistricting misinformation causes minor panic

So this afternoon, KSAT in San Antonio reported that the 2012 elections for Texas House and U.S. House would take place according to the 2003 maps, because the courts had not ruled in time for the new maps to take  effect.  A bit of a panic went through the social media sphere, and Robert Pratt of the Pratt on Texas radio show in Lubbock called in William Lutz, Lone Star Report editor, to clarify what was going on.

The actual court order made no such assertion.  It simply officially relieved elections entities from duties that hinge on what the districts look like, because the court has made no ruling in the case.  The maps can't go into effect until the court rules - which is just a reiteration of the law, because Texas can't enact a map that hasn't received preclearance in the first place.

So, really, status quo.  You will definitely be voting in your new state Senate and State Board of Education districts.  We're still waiting to hear what will happen with your Texas House and U.S. House districts.  There's every chance that your county has already made changes to your local districts (ISDs excepted).  Also, KSAT has since corrected their information and the report is much clearer.

Thanks to Mr. Lutz for the clarifications.

Dewhurst's manufactured position on in-state tuition for illegal immigrants

If there is an issue where Governor Perry has some real baggage, it's in-state tuition for illegal immigrants.  This is the issue that Mitt "universal health care" Romney has really gone after Perry on (he's not the only one, he's just the most articulate), and Perry's response has been to insinuate that those who don't support his position could be racist and that they really are just "heartless."  Incidentally, this isn't anything new from Perry, who has called opponents of this provision "heartless" for years.

This morning we're greeted with the news from Lt. Gov. Dewhurst that he wouldn't have signed HB 1403 in 2001 the way Perry did.  Dewhurst wasn't in a position to comment on the matter at the time, though it is interesting to note that this wasn't an issue he felt merited comment when he was running for lt. gov. in 2002.  Or, really, an issue he's ever felt merited comment in all his time as the Riker to Perry's Picard.

This is a really disingenuous position for Dewhurst to take.  Couple of reasons.  One, he's not running against Rick Perry, and he's not asking for Rick Perry's job (yet - that's another post).  As far as I know, in-state tuition for illegal immigrants isn't an issue in the Senate race, though I recognize that Dewhurst's seeming absence from the campaign he's running may have triggered this statement.  Two, if he were actually opposed to in-state tuition for illegal immigrants (or really, any higher education reform), he was in a position to help reverse the law while lieutenant governor and did nothing - he continued to appoint the anti-reform Judith Zaffarini as chairman of the Senate Higher Education committee, he referred legislation to overturn the law to her committee (following a different line than the House, where such legislation usually goes to State Affairs), he refused to admit Senate amendments to overturn the law to other legislation.

The race for U.S. Senate certainly has been an odd one.  It has been going on since 2009, when it looked like Sen. Hutchison may leave her seat, and Dewhurst has been the "heir presumptive" in most conversations ever since.  He's certainly behaving like presumptive heir at present, not really doing much to court voters (he's refused invitations to every straw poll or forum in the campaign thus far, and is limiting his contact with voters to obscure, hardly-advertised "town hall" events - the next one is in Austin on a Monday morning).  I've wondered for awhile if there's a deeper reason than just believing name recognition and money will overcome everything else.  Dewhurst is in a position to walk into the governor's office without really trying for it, if everything goes Perry's way in the presidential race, and it doesn't seem as if the Senate race is really and truly a lock for Dewhurst.  Why not make sure all your bases are covered?  This statement about illegal immigrant tuition really gives me pause - as I said, this isn't an issue in the Senate race and Dew isn't running against Perry, so why speak up now?  Could it be that Dewhurst is laying the groundwork now for an eventual  campaign for governor - could it be that Dewhurst is courting voters for an entirely different race, albeit one that won't happen until 2014?

Occam's Razor doesn't often apply well in political discourse and speculation, and in any case, there is not an easy answer when it comes to what David Dewhurst really intends to do.  He's very good at keeping himself to himself.  He also doesn't make strong policy statements on highly controversial issues like this, almost ever. But the Republican Party of Texas platform is very clear where Texas Republican primary voters stand on this issue, and Dewhurst has never been above catering when it suits his purposes.  Since the only way we can really guess what he's up to here is by what he's saying, it doesn't hurt to assign motive.

And no, I really don't believe Dewhurst when he says he would have vetoed HB 1403.  Lots of reasons why, but let's leave it at the belief that Dewhurst is a slicker politician than any of the slick cats running for president right now.  He's really good at saying something emphatically enough that people believe him, and then not acting on it in any way and letting "circumstance" explain why there was no action taken.  This is that whole "let the will of the [Senate] body prevail" approach to governing.  Never mind that you have a majority and more than likely the votes to accomplish something.

The kind of news that makes you go "um, what?"

Okay, I have to do a quick round-up tonight and just let some of this speak for itself.  That's how flabbergasted I am at all of this.

The Hill reports that Facebook has filed paperwork to form a PAC to support political candidates.

State Senator Tommy Williams and State Rep. John Otto plan to file legislation to force Texas A&M and the University of Texas to continue playing each other in football.

The Bluebonnet Electric Co-Op is being sued after confirming that it was a broken tree limb that downed a power line that started the Bastrop Complex fire. (I'm sure the lawyer involved is right - more lawyers will definitely want in on that).

The Obama administration is getting ready to ban asthma inhalers because of environmental concerns.  You can't make this crap up!

The EPA is asking for approximately the same number of new employees as existed in the precursor to the KGB in the Soviet Union.

Don't feed the trolls!

Like a great many activists in the greater Austin area, and I suspect a larger area than that, I've been getting crackpot emails from a certain thorn-in-the-side individual.  Said individual's emails and Austin Chronicle ad have made the news, though the media's interest was deservedly brief.

I've been on internet forums for a long time.  There's a popular maxim that I think applies to this situation - don't feed the trolls.

A troll is someone who is out there to make trouble.  This person is going to spout the same drivel regardless of what you say to them.  Regardless of whether you threaten them (they'll take that as confirmation that they're in the right).  They'll follow you around and call you out if you attempt to dissuade them from their cause - which is to make trouble, period, whether they appear to have a greater agenda or not.  A troll will have acolytes, but they'll probably look, smell, and sound an awful lot like trolls themselves.

How do you deal with a troll?

Don't antagonize them.  Don't respond to them.  Ignore them.  Put their email address, monikers, etc. on your spam lists.  Don't accept their Facebook friend requests and block them from following you on Twitter.  Put your blog comment system on "moderation only" and delete and mark as spam their comments.  Be the bigger person and move on with your life - the troll will probably not go away, but continuing to give the troll what he or she wants (read: attention!) will only prolong the situation.

Rather like a two-year-old with crocodile tears pouring from his eyes, a troll just wants you to reward him.  A troll's reward is not cookies or anything like that - it is getting you riled up and defensive, because that proves to the troll that there is a reason to keep spouting ever more ridiculous drivel.

Don't feed the trolls.  This is the best advice for staying sane on the internet - but even more so in politics.

Thoughts on campaigns

Not on what is happening with the politics of campaigns, but rather, thoughts on what is happening with the execution of campaigns.  I get a lot of emails from a lot of campaigns.  Some I've chosen to receive, many more I haven't, and I make an effort to at least skim all of them.  I like knowing how campaigns are communicating, what it is that they are saying, and how they are asking people to respond to them.

A few things have gone through my mind this week as I've read various emails, and also Facebook messages and the like.  

1 - No campaign should be using PayPal as their online donation platform.  Every single email I get from someone who is using PayPal, and has embedded PayPal links in their emails, goes straight to spam.  There were half a dozen in just the last two days.

2 - Why does your campaign not have a website?  Do we really need to go over all of the data from Pew and other research groups that proves that more Americans go to the internet for campaign information than to television, radio, or other platforms?  If I type your name into Google or another search engine, I should be able to find detailed information about your campaign within five or six results.  That means you must have a website.

3 - If you don't have a dedicated scheduler for your campaign, with a personalized email address (something other than info@bobsmithforcongress.org), and you don't provide that information very clearly on your website or Facebook page, you have just lost potentially dozens of speaking opportunities.  I'm a club president and I serve on the board for another.  If I can't reach out to you directly, and I do not mean through a form on your website, I can't invite you to our club's next meeting.  This is a more egregious offense if you're running statewide or for federal office, but even if you're running regionally or locally, you need to offer this to your potential supporters.

4 - Facebook.  Use it.  I can't stress this enough.

It is kind of appalling that we're already in the 2012 election cycle - 16 years after the Clinton administration and campaign discovered the usefulness of the internet in communicating with constituents and voters - and so many candidates still don't get how to use the internet to their advantage.  It is flat-out infuriating that we have so many tools available to us that are designed for ease of communication and that candidates aren't using them to the fullest potential (I know, Facebook is eliminating "ease" from their vocabulary, but that's a different post).  Some campaigns are successful in using every option available to them to reach out to voters, but others are stagnant, clinging to old ideas as if those are the ONLY ideas.  

Look, I'm not suggesting that a campaign use the internet to the detriment of older campaign techniques.  Blockwalking is still invaluable, for instance, and there are rural areas even now where the internet plays almost no role in voters' decision-making.  But making yourself available and communicating are two of the key things that make any candidate successful, and you have to make it easy for people to donate and contribute to your campaign by spreading the word.  You have to meet them where they are - they aren't going to just come to you, especially if they can't find out who you are in the first place.

That's been building up all week.  I feel a little better now.

Austin council votes against November election

And that would be marginalizing voters.

I'm kind of surprised I'm linking to a post at Burnt Orange Report this evening, but for once Katherine Haenschen and I are in total agreement.  Austin's city council voted 4-3 today not to move the May 2012 election to November 2012.  BOR's analysis is here and you really should read it.  But to summarize, Laura Morrison, Sheryl Cole, Bill Spelman, and Kathie Tovo (I told you not to vote for her!) voted against the move.  The council has to vote on this two more times, so yes, you should weigh in.  Frequently.  Loudly.

Why?  May elections have ridiculously low turnout.  For the establishment in Austin politics, this means those elections go in their favor; the suburbanites don't get out to vote during high school graduations, Mother's Day weekend, and preparation for the school year's end.  Few people remember there is an election, fewer participate, and the status quo is more likely to be maintained.

Even our notorious county clerk, Dana DeBeauvoir, thinks the election being held in May is a bad idea logistically - and she wrote a memo to the council to that effect.

So, for just a moment, let's be partisan again.  Y'all know the shenanigans on the council.  You know that there is a small contingent of limousine liberals who run the show here.  We need a lot of things to make it even possible to change the scene (like single-member districts, something Republicans and LULAC happen to agree on).  November elections are a step in the right direction.  Voters are more informed in November, they are more likely to be tuned in to politics because November is the time of year when they've quite literally been trained to go vote.

And let's not forget the most important thing here - MONEY.  Since the Legislature made the decision to move things in the primary around to accommodate military and overseas voters, the city/county would be on their own conducting the May city council election.  The cost could be as much as a million dollars, not to mention the logistical nightmare of preparing for both a city election and a primary runoff.  The city of Austin is already planning to hold an election in November 2012, on rail, bonds, and the city charter.  Combining efforts in November with the state is a smart idea and it is financially responsible, something certain councilmembers like Tovo claim is a major issue.

Increasing democratic participation IS important, something else I agree with Haenschen about.  She points out that new voters make up a negligible percentage of May election voters, compared to a whooping 42.4% of the November vote (just imagine what kind of impact that could have in a year like 2012 is going to be...).

Incidentally, Councilman Bill Spelman thinks you can't handle more to vote on in November.  He has no problem handing you matters like rail, but deciding who should serve on the council?  Forget it, your mind just can't handle such weighty things!  His argument is a complicated ballot.  Never mind that relatively speaking, the Travis County ballot is lightweight, and that relatively speaking, Austin is a very politically savvy place where people understand their duty at the ballot box (even if I don't always agree with how they choose to act at the ballot box).  What really has Spelman in a twist, I think, is that he and his cronies may suffer real damage at the polls in November 2012, when things like taxing and spending are major issues, and when the council's role in rail and bonds will be scrutinized.  People might - gasp! - actually go to the polls armed with information that could make some of these councilmembers vulnerable.

The council is wrong on this.  Flat, dead wrong.  Go tell them so.

Moneyball and steroids - musing on Minkoff's theory

The one trial about being a political blogger is that when something other than politics consumes your brain for part of your day, it is really hard to justify posting about anything other than government and politics.  Luckily for me, baseball enjoys special flower status from the feds, and steroid investigations happen in Congressional hearing rooms, so there's a tiny thread of connection for me to work from here.  *wink*

Neil Minkoff wrote a very intriguing post about Moneyball and steroids over at Right Field (which is a blog on National Review Online - see!  politics!).  Now, you have to know a little about baseball's immediate history to get the idea behind Billy Beane's "moneyball" strategy.  Basically, as Oakland A's general manager, Beane had to find a way to compete with the big money in baseball - you know, the Evil Empires in Boston and New York - without a whole lot of money.  Money is what has attracted flashy strike-out pitchers and homerun-hitters since time immemorial (well, maybe not that long), but Beane found a way to rocket the A's to 103-win season without the money.  It was pretty complicated and it was considered a revolutionary strategy, finding middling low-pay players who could hit and converting them to new positions to build a scrappy team that could rack up three-run homers and the like.  Minkoff's post on Right Field takes on the question of why the Athletics weren't able to sustain that kind of success, and he arrives at the theory that it was steroids testing that did 'em in.

There's something to be said for Minkoff's theory.  Prior to Beane's rise as general manager, MVPs for the Athletics go like this: Mark McGwire, McGwire, McGwire, Kenny Rogers, Jason Giambi, Giambi, and Giambi.  That's practically a poster for steroids abuse awareness right there.  And when you look at the seasons after Beane's first and most successful season, up until now, you notice that the season home run totals drop pretty drastically.  Steroid testing started in 2003.  Several former Athletics, some who played with Beane and some who played for him, show up in steroids investigations like the Mitchell Report.  And I really doubt anyone interested in baseball and in CSPAN can forget Mark McGwire weeping his regret during questioning.  Or for that matter, Jose Canseco's arrogant book about his role the rise of steroids use in baseball, which supposedly began while he wore yellow and green in Oakland.

Minkoff wonders if the Athletics' front office knew about steroid use in the moneyball era, and I want to take that further.  Did anyone in the MLB front office know about steroid use?  After all, the A's were an exciting team to watch in 2002.  Any time a "small market" team shines and gives some trouble to the perennial favorites on the east coast, it creates and attracts fans.  The AL West gave birth to some of the more well-known power-hitters, some of whom have admitted to steroid use and others who have just been accused, and even more who are just suspected in whispered conversations.

I have long said that if we're going to be serious about stopping steroid use in baseball, including HGH, and if anyone is going to be blamed for the increased use after the last players' strike, it should be the MLB front office, chiefly (acting) commissioner (for life) Bud Selig.  The strike hurt baseball.  I still meet people who haven't watched a game since that season.  Home runs and showy players were "butts in the seats" strategies as much as they were finds of decent talent scouts.  And if there was one thing that could just about guarantee both home runs and showy players, it was steroids.  I believe a blind eye was turned to something that MLB's higher-ups not only knew about, but condoned, until such a time that public outrage outweighed financial advantage in the clubhouses.  Every time a player is brought before a Congressional tribunal committee to be questioned, I want to know why they haven't just cut to the chase and summoned Selig to their witch hunt.  The answer is obvious - they make a point of going after the "names" and "faces" in baseball in order to make a point with the upcoming generation.  Hence Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, and more recently, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.  (I have a real beef with the Bonds thing, which I think was a case of Selig and the MLB choosing to sacrifice Bonds instead of owning up to the idea that they themselves created Bonds - they wanted the publicity of a run at the home run record, they wanted it to come from a "small-market" team, and it had to be someone who looked like Hank Aaron, hence the blind eye to his obvious steroid use and his spectacular fall from grace and public flogging.  I'm just saying).

So, back to the Athletics.  Did steroid use make the moneyball era possible, and did the subsequent investigations kill the moneyball strategy?  It certainly looks like that might be the case.  Once the power-hitters with their high OBPs (on-base percentages) and multiple-run homers began to fade, the era of the pitcher has returned.  Witness the 2010 World Series (Cliff Lee vs Brian Wilson and Tim Lincecum) or the Phillies' 2011 pitching staff (Lee, Roy Oswalt, Roy Halladay, Cole Hamels) that helped them get to the best record in all of baseball this year.  That's just what we've seen in the last two years, but I think as the steroids crackdown reverberated throughout baseball, and as some of Minkoff's commenters pointed out, stats became more relevant for all of baseball, the less likely it was going to be that small-market teams with low cash flow could continue competing.

Meanwhile, back in the Blue Dot

So much happening elsewhere that it's hard to pay attention locally, but here goes.  I had it on fairly good authority tonight that former Travis County commissioner Gerald Daugherty announced his intention to run for his old seat (Pct 3) today at the Lake Travis Republican Club luncheon.  This seat has also attracted Jim Strickland, former Eanes ISD school board trustee.

The other big races in Travis County are going to be the 3rd Court of Appeals races (deserving of their own post, but so far it's David Puryear, Bob Pemberton, and Jeff Rose for reelection, and Scott Field challenging Democrat Diane Henson) and the State Board of Education, places 5 and 10.  SBOE 10, as I mentioned earlier, is open as current member Marsha Farney announced intentions to run for the Texas House.  In SBOE 5, Ken Mercer is running for reelection and faces opposition from Judson ISD trustee Steve Salyer.

It does appear that Senate District 25, held currently by Jeff Wentworth, will be home to Republican primary.  There is good reason to believe Donna Campbell, who took a heck of a chunk of the vote for CD 25 in 2010, may make an announcement about her intentions for the Senate seat shortly.

Speaking of, I shouldn't forget Congressional District 25, where the real question is who ISN'T running.  This is the newly-drawn seat that runs from Travis County all the way up to Tarrant County, with the bulk of the population in Travis.  So far, it's Michael Williams, Dianne Costa, Bill Burch, Wes Riddle, Ralph Pruyn, Chad Wilbanks, Brian Matthews, and Dave Garrison, but I know I'm probably missing someone(s) as that field seems to widen daily.  Don't be fooled by the district number - current CD 25 incumbent Lloyd Doggett lives in and will presumably run in the newly-drawn CD 35 (facing a challenge from Democrat Texas House rep. Joaquin Castro, but no formally announced Republican).

The only formal reelection notice I've seen from the Democratic Travis County contingent in the Texas House is Donna Howard, but one has to assume the others will follow suit.  The lone Republican, Paul Workman, is running for reelection.

There is a good chance there will be a Republican running for county commissioner in Precinct 1, though no formal announcement has been made.  Rumblings about other races are all rumor and conjecture right now, nothing formal.  Remember, filing doesn't begin until November 12.  As I always caution, everything and anything may change.

Watch the dominoes fall - more announcements from Williamson County

Whew.  I never thought the place to watch today would be Williamson County - after Ken Paxton's announcement that he's running for State Senate Dist. 8, I expected a flurry of HD 70 news from Collin County (already hearing that Collin County commissioner Joe Jaynes is "strongly considering" a run, but there have been no official announcements today).  But WilCo turned into quite the show within hours of this morning's announcement from State Senator Steve Ogden on WTAW in Bryan/College Station that he is not seeking reelection.  Not a surprise - Ogden intended to retire last time and even announced his intention to do so, but got back in the race after heir apparent Dan Gattis pulled out.  Ogden's announcement set off a domino effect that isn't fully over with, too.

First off, current HD 20 rep. Charles Schwertner made his clear his intent to seek Ogden's seat almost immediately.  It's very possible that others will seek this seat, since SD 5 stretches across central Texas into College Station and beyond, but Schwertner's was the only announcement I saw today.  Of course, running for another seat means your current one will be "open" (you can't appear on the ballot twice).  HD 20 was suddenly bereft, and speculation abounded in political circles all afternoon as to who might emerge.

Then, bam, a one-two punch just around supper time.  Jeff Fleece, a former HD 50 candidate and former vice chairman of the Travis County Republican Party, who also just finished a stint with the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, announced his intent to run (he and his wife Nicole have been in Williamson County a couple of years now).  Almost at the same time, word circulated that Marsha Farney, a freshman member of the State Board of Education in District 10 with a background in public education, is also planning to run for HD 20.

Farney's announcement opens up another race - SBOE Dist. 10.  So far, no announcements for that seat, which stretches from Travis County north of the Colorado River down into the Fort Bend area.  This is the one previously held by Cynthia Dunbar.

Busy week so far, and obviously, the full effect of Ogden's retirement remains to be seen.  Who announces for SBOE?  Are we done hearing from anyone in HD 20, a seat that contained a four-way primary in 2010?  What if more currently elected officials make the leap?

Watch those dominoes fall....

Shaking up the Texas Senate

Food for thought.  Thanks to retirement announcements from Florence Shapiro and now Steve Ogden, and Mike Jackson's run for Congress, the Texas Senate is losing its Education chairman, Finance chairman, and Economic Development chairman/Senate pro tempore.  If Dewhurst is gone from the Lt. Gov's chair, whether by election to the U.S. Senate or a bump up to the Governor's office, the Senate will be in a position to choose their leader.

That's a lot of top-of-the-heap clout and power shifting fairly quickly, with or without the Dew moving anywhere.

Just, you know, in case you were looking for something to speculate about.

Big primary news - HD 149 and SD 8

Huge election news today, out of two of the fastest growing areas in the state.

Corbin Van Arsdale has announced he's not running for HD 149 after all and promises to return the donations he's received to date.  He cited Cedar Park city councilman Tony Dale's entry into the race as a driving force behind his decision.  From his statement: “With Tony or Cynthia [Long, county commissioner] running, it makes it more difficult for a relatively new person like me to run.”

Dale's response went up on Facebook not long after: "I look forward to earning the support of Mr. Van Arsdale and the rest of the voters of western Williamson County. We are a unified community and Mr. Van Arsdale's decision to drop out of the race gives us an opportunity to come together and unite behind one candidate as we work together for Brushy Creek, Cedar Park, Leander and north Austin."

Also, up in Collin County, Senator Florence Shapiro has announced that she's not running for reelection.  This confirms some rumors that had been coming out of the area.  What happens there now, anyone's guess.  The area is definitely booming, especially in the northern portion of the district, and Collin County has a reputation for being just as, if not more, conservative than Williamson County.

We're just short of two months until filing officially kicks off.

The measure of righteous indignation

Every once in awhile, there will be some political issue that people grab onto and really get up in arms over in righteous indignation worthy of the best righteous indignation movements over the centuries.  And almost invariably, there comes a point when political observers will cease enjoying the ruckus, feeling like they've come upon a piece of tinfoil while chewing.  For me, that moment usually comes when righteous indignation comes off as feigned, as just an excuse to attack a particular unloved politician, or otherwise impotent in nature.  (reference my earlier post on the SBOE primaries)

What is beginning to taste faintly of tinfoil tonight is the hype over Governor Perry and Gardasil (or, more clearly, the HPV vaccine mandate from 2007).  I was pretty incensed back in 2007 over this, even though I wasn't in a position to worry about a child directly - I was young enough to have to ask my doctor if this would affect me, and she told me no, that the vaccine was only going to be necessary for teenagers and sexually active young women in their early twenties.  I've known people affected by HPV, and there's an argument to be made for vaccination, but mandates are hard to swallow.  The natural checks and balances of government saved the day for Texas schoolgirls, and I went back to getting up in arms and active about other things.  The governor's mandate wasn't successful - not one girl in Texas was inoculated against her parents' wishes as a result, because our republican form of government worked.  I kind of feel like there was a victory there.  Was Perry wrong?  Yes.  His intentions may have been as pure as he states, I don't know.  If they were, well, plenty of conservatives (and politicians of every other stripe - yes, even those sainted libertarians) have erred on the side of feeling while in elected office.  Does this excuse what he did?  No, not really.  But I'm not really interested in this as a federal campaign issue, because I think there are WAY bigger things at stake right now (and I do have some faith in checks and balances at the federal level, if it comes down to it).  I also think there are bigger things in the Republican primary campaign (for instance - has anyone pointed out that Mitt Romney was a hedge fund manager during his private sector years, or that he's the biggest establishment goon in the race, being the son of George Romney and a direct heir to the feel-good compassionate conservatism we have already been witness to in three presidential terms???  Sorry, sidetracked there for moment).

What I'm most concerned over is the righteous indignation being aimed at Perry because of the Gardasil mandate, putting aside the Merck question for a moment.  Seems like, at this point, the indignation is just about having to have something to grab onto to attack a politician, because it sells and not because anyone's interested in an actual debate.  The HPV vaccine, like most controversial medicine (especially that dealing with women, or women's personal issues), is one of those issues that deeply divides Americans on an emotional level.  Some of the concern is warranted, and some is irrational anger.  I find it slightly amusing that comparatively few people are pitching fits over the increase in chicken pox vaccine mandates, or are making MMR vaccines campaign issues.  The HPV vaccine, because HPV infection is linked to underage sex, gives people absolute fits.  Perry was early to the bandwagon, though, judging from the revelation today that several other states are trying for HPV mandates - in fact, California Governor Jerry Brown has legislation on his desk right now that would require it in his state. So where are the picket lines, where are the pundits (K-Lo excepted), where is the national righteous indignation aimed at California?  Virginia and Washington, D.C. are the only places with active mandates - anyone care to bring this up with politicians there?   A mandate has failed in every other state it has been tried, including Texas.  Beyond that, it appears that there is no political will to pass even a voluntary, opt-in for this vaccination, five years into its existence on the market.  Has righteous indignation quelled the thirst for curtailed parental rights on this issue?  It would appear so.  It even did so in Texas.

So, now, the Merck question.  Lots of stuff out there about what kind of money did Perry get from Merck and when.  Interesting to ask, though:  if Merck, the sole company dealing with Gardasil at the time, was interested in pushing through a mandate, why only give money to the governor?  Why not the speaker of the House, and the lieutenant governor?  Why not lobby the committees that deal with health issues, and craft legislation to pass it into law - even in such a way that could bypass the governor's signature?  I really wonder about this, and I wonder how serious Merck was, if they were indeed the driving force.  It isn't to say they weren't - but lobbyists are smarter than that, especially in such a field as pharmaceuticals.  This could have been successful in Texas had the insurance companies gotten in on it, too, and the hospital associations or doctors' groups.  Yet, they didn't.  They were quiet that whole time.  And when it came down to it, there was exactly one legislator who didn't fight the governor's mandate, and the righteous indignation at the time was successful enough to defeat the mandate without bloodshed.

Amazing what a little concentration of effort will do.  There is something to be learned here about what can be accomplished by that, channeling righteous indignation in such a way that you effect change.  By the way, Perry did get his way on something else in 2007 - he got a constitutional amendment approving bonds for cancer research.  So the "conservative" state of Texas was incensed over mandated vaccinations, but couldn't be arsed to vote against spending more money on something the private sector can handle.  Amazing.  Simply amazing, and it kind of shows the priorities of the electorate (if Perry had wheeled out a cute teenager with cervical cancer caused by HPV, would it have been as effective as Lance Armstrong on his bicycle?  Excuse my cynicism for moment).

All of this makes you wonder - if Kay Bailey Hutchison couldn't torch Perry on this issue, what makes anyone think he's going down over it now?  He lost, he didn't get the mandate he wanted, and the state moved on.
If Perry is going down in this primary over this issue, it isn't being reflected in the polls (double-digits and up over Romney according to Bloomberg today) or even in the MSM.  Tonight's Perry attack on NBC Nightly News was over the death penalty in Texas.  HPV is an issue playing out state by state, where it should be, and it isn't a serious presidential campaign issue.  It's another wedge issue, a conquer-and-divide issue that is surely making certain political consultants and cable news pundits in this country grin with malicious glee.

More primary news - SBOE

Quorum Report's buzz hit this afternoon with a one-two punch of State Board of Education announcements.  Geraldine "Tincy" Miller is looking to run for her old seat in District 12 (currently held by school administrator George Clayton) and District 5's Ken Mercer has drawn a challenger in Judson ISD board member Steve Salyer.  Salyer has some electoral experience, having tried for the state House twice and then ending up on the JISD board.  Miller, we know, has long experience with the SBOE and electoral politics.  These two races are sure to be interesting.  I'll have more on this in the coming days.

Meanwhile, I notice that tea party activists have gotten pretty riled up about lobbyist Thomas Ratliff, who sits on the SBOE after knocking out Don McElroy in the 2010 primary.  Would be very interesting to see if they recruit a candidate to run against him, and a bit disappointing if the rhetoric comes to naught.

Town hall meeting re: Colorado River Corridor

The City of Austin has announced a town hall meeting for September 22 at 7:00pm, at Dailey Middle School, to discuss the draft Colorado River Corridor Plan.  This is a joint venture for Travis County, the city of Austin, and the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA).

Date:
Thursday, September 22, 2011

Where:
Dailey Middle School
14000 Westall Street
Austin, TX 78724

When:
Open House begins at 6:15 p.m. and the Public Meeting begins at 7:00 p.m.

From the press release: "Travis County and the City of Austin (COA), with technical assistance from the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) are planning the future of the Colorado River Corridor. The area of interest covers over 30,000 acres in eastern Travis County, bounded by US 183 on the west, east to the Travis/Bastrop County line, and by FM 969 on the north to State Highway 71 on the south."

Tax rate news ranges from good to really, really bad

The board of trustees for Round Rock ISD met last night and adopted a lower property tax rate.

I could say that sentence all day and I'd still have to pinch myself.

Despite Superintendent Jesus Chavez's best attempt to dissuade the board, RRISD voted unanimously to lower the tax rate from $1.38 to $1.335 per $100 of property valuation. That's a 5 cent decrease. (Thanks to board member Terri Hardee-Romere for the heads-up via Facebook this morning)

Apparently, this is all thanks to a surplus of $8.9 million, and board members who think that it would be wrong to ask for more than what they need (paraphrasing board member Glen Colby) in light of the economy.

The news won't be as good for residents in other area districts.  Leander ISD, which had to postpone yesterday's planned vote thanks to an error in public notification, is proposing a 4.5 cent rate hike (taking theirs to $1.49 per $100 of property valuation).  Eanes ISD already raised theirs by a penny, back on August 31.  Austin ISD, having reached the tax rate limit, can't raise their rate without putting it on the November ballot, and has ruled it out as of August 1.

Other taxing entities in Travis County are making changes as well.  The Travis County health district, known as Central Health, approved a rate of 7.89 cents per $100 of assessed valuation, or a 6.5 percent increase over last year.  The City of Austin is raising property tax rates by 3.6%, and hiking water rates and possibly energy rates as well (water rates go into effect Nov. 1, and the council will vote on Austin Energy rate increases in October).  Austin should think about taking a page out of Pflugerville's book.  P-ville's city council didn't increase the budget, and they decreased their tax rate for the eighth straight year.  For the first time since 2007, however, Pflugerville ISD has approved a tax rate hike, going to $1.48, an increase of two cents over last year's rate.  Austin Community College voted to decrease their rate by three one-hundreths of a penny to 9.48 cents per $100 of property valuation - likely due to the fact that they've annexed more territory since last year, and more people are now paying those taxes.

Travis County is holding a bond election in November, with two ballot propositions agreed upon on August 16.  Lake Travis ISD voted to stick with their current tax rate for the fourth consecutive year, but is asking voters for $158.5 million in new bond money in November.

Surprisingly, even the Austin American-Statesman had to admit recently that no tax hike is "minimal," no matter what the spin from elected officials who make the decision.  Every penny has an impact, especially when you take into consideration all the various taxing entities that take a piece of the pie.  The Statesman points out that the average Austin resident is paying taxes to the city, their county of residence (Travis or Williamson), their school district (Austin, Leander, Round Rock, or Pflugerville), Austin Community College, and Central Health.  The average Travis County resident may have it even worse, paying emergency service district and municipal utility district taxes on top of county, community college and health district taxes.  Most people don't have a real idea of where all the taxes they pay are going, either, and since tax rate elections are fairly rare, they don't know when the rates increase or decrease.

This is just a local example of what's happening with tax rates.  I'd encourage you to check out your local school districts, cities, counties, etc. for what they're planning in terms of budget and taxes for 2012.  Chances are if they haven't voted on it already, they will soon.  And your pocketbook, like so many others, probably needs the preparation time.

HD 149 race begins to take shape

The most interesting races usually happen in open seats, and we have a doozy of a race shaping up in Williamson County.  For the first time, Cedar Park and Leander have achieved the population worthy of their own seat in the Texas House of Representatives, and Williamson County Republicans have quite the investment in the race already.

Mike Hailey with Capitol Inside reported earlier this week that when Cedar Park city councilman Tony Dale kicked off his campaign with an event at El Patron in Cedar Park, a veritable "who's who" of WilCo politicos was present.  County Commissioners Cynthia Long and Lisa Birkman, as well as Cedar Park city councilman Matt Powell, all announced their endorsements of Dale at the event (Powell and Long had been on the potential candidates list at one point).  Ted Pataki, the most talked-about would-be candidate this summer, endorsed Dale before the event.  Present Tuesday night were Cedar Park city councilman Donald Tracy, State Rep. Larry Gonzales and County Attorney Jana Duty.

Grassroots leaders reported that the room was filled to standing-room only, echoing a kick-off party in Round Rock two years ago for Gonzales.  WilCo Conservative blogger Holly Hansen reports that many more county leaders, including Cedar Park city councilman Mitch Fuller, County Constable Robert Chody, and leaders from the Brushy Creek MUD and city of Leander were there.

Quite the splash to start off the campaign, really.

Meanwhile, Corbin van Arsdale, who announced his candidacy in August and within 24 hours of that announced he had raised $100,000 (a healthy starting sum for running a suburban race of this magnitude), is enjoying the public support of former representative Dan Gattis.  Gattis' popularity and pull in the county are still very much felt, especially in the northern parts of the new HD 149.

There's always reason to believe, especially in an open seat, that the candidate field is not quite complete.  Official filing begins November 12 and ends on December 12.  We're only in the middle of September and there's plenty of time for candidates to begin announcing and fundraising.  Some of the more interesting races over the years didn't get really hot until filing was almost over, when last-minute candidates would come in and then do a little "shock and awe" that got them through the primary and elected.  I believe that's less likely to happen in HD 149 than other seats.  Dale and van Arsdale carry a lot of weight between them - Dale's a popular city councilman and very involved in the party, and van Arsdale is an experienced representative with street cred and a legislative voting record.  Cedar Park and Leander are very young areas that haven't traditionally been the focus for campaigns, since the bulk of the vote for HD 20 and HD 52 lay in Georgetown and Round Rock respectively.  We're talking a lot of transplants, a voting age population that averages about 28-45, and probably more conservative than neighboring Austin but less so than neighboring Georgetown.  The question for both candidates is whether they're able to successfully tap the base.  The question for a third candidate would be whether he or she would need to run to the right or left - and whether they could overcome the significant name recognition (Dale) and money (van Arsdale) already in the campaign.

Whew.  Seriously, folks, this is one to watch, even if you aren't from here.  Everything a political junkie could want in one Republican primary.

New York CD-9 and redistricting

It was interesting listening to Rush Limbaugh today, because he had a discussion going about congressional redistricting and how it will affect New York.  It was very clear from the 2010 census numbers that New York will lose two congressional representatives.  They simply do not have the population to support those seats as they have in the past.  So, when it came down to it, a "deal" was made so that Republicans would give up one seat, and the Democrats would give up another.  As it happens, the seat the Dems were willing to shake was Congressional District 9 - suddenly in Republican hands as of last night. American Thinker has a post up today that gives some of the background to this story.

New York is a Democratic state, and the area covered by NY Congressional District 9 (Queens and Brooklyn, to give you a sense of what we're discussing) has been represented by a Democrat in Congress since 1923.  That is, until last night, when Republican Bob Turner pulled off quite the upset in a special election to replace Anthony Weiner.

If you think redistricting in Texas is a bloody nightmare (and it is, it really, really is), imagine what it must be like to go through the process when you've lost seats instead of gained them.  I don't envy politicos in New York (especially their staffs).  You can't make everyone happy, and worse, the wrangling and political conniving that takes place creates enemies and strife where there might have been harmony.

Back to the discussion on Limbaugh's show.  He pointed out, and he's totally correct about this, that if that seat is still drawn out as planned, it isn't a conspiracy against Republicans or the tea party or even Bob Turner as an individual.  New York loses two seats, period, and if Democrats and Republicans there don't come to an agreement to shed a different seat (and I don't know NY population well enough to know how that might work), then it is just a crappy consequence.

That being said - Turner's election last night should be taken as a wake-up call within the current Washington establishment and White House administration.  Weiner certainly burned most of the bridge himself, but his scandal was relatively weak (and it was - consider some of the really outrageous sex scandals in the last few decades, and Weiner's scandal seems petty).  Still disgusting, still ridiculous, but not enough to explain why a seat that has been in Democrat hands since the age of Warren G. Harding could flip all of a sudden.  There is a deeper animosity in this country, aimed at the party in charge, and for the population of Queens and Brooklyn (largely blue collar and minority) to make this statement resonates soundly.

Should we lose Bob Turner because of redistricting, it will be a loss, but it is more important to focus on the fact of his election to strengthen our resolve nationally.  It isn't just that we need a Republican House in Washington - we need a direction and perspective change, in the White House, in the Senate, and we need it strengthened in the House.  Turner's election gives me hope that such a thing isn't as out of our reach as it sometimes feels.

Being poor in America

Why, hello controversy - I don't know if I missed you or not.

In today's Morning Bell email, the Heritage Foundation sent out some likely-not-surprising statistics about the poor in America.  You can read the full thing at this link.  The U.S. Census Bureau released their poverty report today, saying that 46.2 million (one in seven) Americans are classified as poor, or living below the poverty level. This is a striking number, and no wonder when the definition is so broad.  Some examples of what those defined as poor by the Census Bureau standard have in their lives:

• 80 percent of poor households have air conditioning
• Nearly three-fourths have a car or truck, and 31 percent have two or more cars or trucks
• Nearly two-thirds have cable or satellite television
• Two-thirds have at least one DVD player and 70 percent have a VCR
• Half have a personal computer, and one in seven have two or more computers
• More than half of poor families with children have a video game system, such as an Xbox or PlayStation
• 43 percent have Internet access
• One-third have a wide-screen plasma or LCD television
• One-fourth have a digital video recorder system, such as a TiVo

A good friend of mine, on returning from a trip to Haiti this summer, told me that it is really hard to grasp true poverty, the kind he witnessed there - because in America, he said, it is "illegal to be that poor." In this new report from Heritage, "Understanding Poverty in America," the authors revealed stats from the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 2009 that would seem to verify my friend's experience: 96 percent of poor parents stated that their children were never hungry at any time during the year because they could not afford food, 83 percent of poor families reported having enough food to eat, and over the course of a year, only 4 percent of poor persons become temporarily homeless, with 42 percent of poor households actually owning their own homes.

What does all of this mean for policymakers?  For one, it means having to tailor economic policy to meet the real needs of the poor in the United States - and it likely means there needs to be a major shift in the way we think about poverty as it exists here.  We need to address the causes of poverty in the United States head-on, and stop treating symptoms as if that will relieve the cycles of poverty we find in various subcultures and groups.

I think, too, that our churches and communities must respond, without waiting for government to step in.  Part of that is government getting out of the way of such response, but it can't be a "he said she said" situation.  The point is to simply get up and give.  Time, money, whatever.  Churches and communities sounds far too bureaucratic, in fact - what we really need is individuals helping individuals.  Government's involvement has dampened a natural desire to help others, to come together in crisis, forcing us to rely on red-tape-laden agencies and bureaucratic mazes for something as simple as a bottle of water, or as grand as a new home.  Never mind that our government, through our sanction, as incentivized poverty - incentivized unemployment, lack of education, lack of ambition or willpower.  Why work for your living, to your full potential, if Uncle Sam will write you a check every month?

Why, indeed.

None of this is saying there is not abject poverty in the United States or that those people do not need help; what it does illustrate, however, is that our definition of what poor means is as reliant on a purely Western, "first world" POV as other things in this country, and we have to break ourselves of that habit in order to truly "get" what is happening.

I think Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield have written a report that serves as a great starting place.

Guest Post: Looking Back to the GOP Presidential Candidates’ Debate of September 7, 2011, with a Personal Bias by Angel Abitua

(Disclaimer - the views expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the maintainer of this blog.)

First, this commentator needs to issue the appropriate disclaimers. I am a conservative Hispanic from Texas, born and raised. I have retired from almost everything that I can think of, certainly from 38-years of employment and 41-years of community service. I am not an active member of any organization, except that I will offer volunteer services when needed for one organization. That organization is Americans for Prosperity. AFP believes in what I believe in: limited government, lower taxes and leading our country away from the precipice of massive national deficits that are, today, as large as the Grand Canyon.

So far, no pollsters from Gallup or Rasmussen have called me to ask the following questions: (a) Do I approve or disapprove of the job President Obama is doing? (b) Do I think that our country is in dire economic straits or not? (c) Are we, as a country, heading in the wrong direction or the right direction?
My answers would put me with the respondents who are in the majority. (a) I disapprove of the job the President is doing. (b) I think we are in serious economic straits. (c) As a country we are headed in the wrong direction.

Therefore, I am looking for the best Republican candidate who I can support for election as the next President of the United States. I have found that candidate; he is the Governor of my state. He is Rick Perry. I have known Governor Perry since he was first elected Lt. Governor, in 1998, and I have followed his career ever since.

Of course, I was rooting for my candidate during the GOP Presidential candidates’ debate on September 7, 2011, broadcasted from California. Since this was the first debate where Governor Perry was in the mix with the other GOP candidates he had to accomplish what I thought was Job #1. What was Job #1? He had to immediately lay claim to the same level of stature and image that Governor Mitt Romney has been able to attain all these months that he has been running as a candidate. Governor Perry did not need to surpass that level of stature and image, but just equate it. No question in my mind, Governor Perry was able to accomplish Job #1. He seemed Presidential. He seemed confident and he stuck to his guns, metaphorically speaking. He was not diminished in the presence of Governor Romney, who, again, had a lot of time to achieve top-tier status. Governor Perry seemed to belong there, and he did not disappoint his supporters in the GOP and supporters who call themselves independents, all those who have catapulted him to the top of the national polls. He was there, projecting a Presidential-level presence. We could all see he had arrived.

Okay, let’s get down to a few of the specific issues, the nitty-gritty of it all in the debate, and see how Governor Perry performed.

*The Governor was challenged by the media to respond to negative statistics related to public education in Texas, but the Governor responded with what he deemed to be positive statistics or trends. For example, it is true Texas, like many other states, has a bad drop-out rate problem. But to counter that criticism, the Governor referred to high-ranking achievements of our minority students on national assessment tests. At the same time, the Governor made the point that Texas faces a unique challenge in the job we do in public education because of geography. It goes without saying that with the great influx of immigration, both legal and illegal, through the border with Mexico, Texas is doing a pretty good job in educating the student population of two countries, one being a third-world country.

*The Governor stuck to his “provocative” assessment of the fatal fiduciary outlook for future social security recipients (today’s young people). But, wait a minute. The assessment may be “provocative,” but is it true or false? And whether you use the “provocative” term of Ponzi scheme or not—the question remains: Are today’s young people going to be guaranteed a return on their contributions to Social Security? Will it be there for them? Take the challenge, ask them to their face. Go ahead. Ask any educated 20-something or 30-something if they think social security will be there for them? I predict you are going to get a look of incredulity. It is common knowledge that many decades ago, we had a plenty of workers paying into the system to support a retiree on social security. Today, we only have 2 workers per each retiree in the system. Tomorrow that will dwindle to 1. And, then what?

*Since liberal media debate moderators were in charge, of course we expected them to try to portray Governor Perry as holding a Neanderthal’s view on Global Warming. The Governor has been on record with the position that he does not think the entire scientific community has confirmed that Global Warming is a real natural phenomena caused mainly by mankind. But his response at the debate was precisely right on the money, no pun intended. He simply said that he does not believe the American economy should be jeopardized by blind adherence to a theory that has yet to be proven as indisputable fact. The Governor makes total sense. We face one of the worse economic malaises in our history. But you have a man in the White House who seriously believes thousands and thousands of “green” jobs will appear and save our economy. And when is that going to happen? Will it happen now, or later? Well, give the President credit for wishing for something, but “wishing” does not make it a reality. What is reality is what Governor Perry sees and what he is placing importance on—jobs based on an economy unleashed from government over-taxation, government over-regulation, and government interference.

*Speaking of bias of the liberal debate moderators, that was completely exposed when Brian Williams asked our Governor whether he lost sleep at night worried about the possibility that some convicted murderers might have been innocent victims of the criminal justice system in Texas, which has been responsible for more executions in the country than another other state. What a wonderful, un-wincing response by our Governor. Rick Perry gave Williams that deep, dark, steely eye look and said “No.” He explained that we carry out justice in Texas based on Texas state law and federal law, with an extensive appellate process and all the fairness our legal system can offer. In the Presidential debates that will precede the national elections next year, one will NOT expect for someone like Brian Williams to ask President Obama if looses sleep at night thinking about the fact that his policies (gigantic deficits) led, in part, to the first ever lowering of the country’s credit rating from a AAA level to a AA level.

Admittedly, and in complete candor, Governor Perry may not be the perfect candidate for President. But, with complete certitude, I know he is the best candidate who we can vote for in 2012. Even his detractors cannot ignore the positive results of his leadership, as Governor of Texas in the last 10 years. It is by no means an accident that Texas, compared to all the other states, enjoys the best economy with the most jobs created. Because of conservative governance, and the positive climate for a thriving economy that conservative governance has produced, the Governor has a good record to run on.

Now, more than ever, we need a proven, effective leader to help our country. We need Rick Perry.

Angel Abitua is a retired former employee of state of Texas.  He also recently concluded 41 years of service and leadership with the League of United Latin American Citizens [LULAC] in Houston and greater Austin.  Beyond his involvement with Americans for Prosperity, Angel enjoys traveling, reading, and spending time with his grandson.  He can be reached by leaving a comment on this post.

Best. Cover. Ever.

National Review's September 19 issue arrived in my mailbox today.  I admit, I giggled.  A lot.  Click the picture for NR's website.

Wildfires: New place for info

With the fire situation in Texas drastically changed from what it was just last Friday, I've compiled a list of links to major resources for relief efforts and fire info.  You can check it out on the righthand sidebar on the main page of this blog - it's there any time you view a post on the blog itself (so, mobile users and feeder readers, this means click here to get those links).

Fire danger remains very high across the state, as the weather pattern solidifies and the heat returns (there was a new record high in DFW today - 103F at the airport).  The Texas Forest Service has some great info for homeowners on how to protect your home from fire danger.  Here are some suggestions from the folks at Magnolia TX Fire and Evacuation Information Facebook page:

1) Mark your address on your mailboxes and homes
2) keep your garden hoses connected to your outdoor faucets
3) clear all brush, leaves, trash 30-60 feet away from your home.
4) Clean out your gutters and leaves from roof valleys
5) Keep access to your property clear for emergency vehicles
6) no outdoor burning (should include BBQ pits too)

Election 2012 - More updates from the campaign trail

So, let's see what we have here.  I've heard a lot and seen a lot and will probably miss a few.  After all, fire danger is still high (and the Bastrop County fire is only 50% contained tonight), and there have been other things going on.  But here are some things of interest.

Texas Supreme Court - Justices up on the ballot are Nathan Hecht, David Medina, and Don Willett.  I've heard that Steven Wayne Smith, who previously served in Place 5, was defeated in 2004 by Paul Green, and challenged Willett in 2006, may be running again, but I've not gotten confirmation of that.  Hecht and Medina do not have primary challengers and I do not yet know if the Democrats plan to field candidates for any of these seats.

3rd Court of Appeals - This is the appeals court that handles the things that come out of Travis County, making it of interest statewide.  Four seats are up on the court, three of which are held by Republicans (Jeff Rose, David Puryear, and Bob Pemberton).  Each has announced they're running in 2012.  Diane Henson is the lone Democrat facing an election year - and she's drawn a challenger in the form of Republican Scott Field.  Field's announcement happened over the last week.  So far none of the Republicans, including Field, have primary challengers.

HD 24 - With Larry Taylor's announcement that he's running for State Senate (to replace Mike Jackson, who's running for Congress), two Republicans have emerged to duke in out in the primary in Galveston.  They are neurosurgeon Greg Bonnen (Rep. Dennis Bonnen of Angleton's older brother), and Rhett Eubanks, executive veep of Cannonball Trucking.


HD 26 - Charlie Howard announced today that he will not seek reelection, citing health concerns.  Jacquie Chaumette, currently mayor pro tem in Sugarland, has announced that she will seek the seat.  Sonal Bhuchar, a board member in Fort Bend ISD, has also announced for this race.  That's an interesting Republican primary shaping up, in what is a traditionally heavily Republican county.

HD 35 - Freshman representative Jose Aliseda says he's not seeking reelection, and will instead run for district attorney in Bee County.  Meanwhile, rumor has it that Eric Opiela, former executive director for the Republican Party of Texas and current legal advisor, is exploring a run.  He got 49.07% of the general election vote for this seat in 2004, so he'll come in swinging if he does run.

HD 69 - Another freshman rep., Lanham Lyne, announced last week that he isn't seeking reelection either.  Lyne was pretty vocal about his discontent with "politics as usual" in Austin, so this didn't come as a huge surprise.  No word on who might step up to run in his place, but this seat (Wichita Falls) was considered the "soft" win for Republicans in 2010 and will likely stay Republican.

HD 88 - Freshman rep. Jim Landtroop has every intention of going forward with his own reelection bid, but he'll do it with primary opposition.  Canadian ISD school board president Ken King is going to run, and there is a lot of speculation that former legislator Gary Walker will also join the race.

HD 106 - Former Lewisville ISD board member Amber Fulton has joined the Republican primary race in this new Denton County seat.  Frisco city councilman Pat Fallon had previously announced.  Andrew Kerr at Empower Texans has a great summary of what this race is shaping up to be (in short: tax-and-spend educrat vs fiscally responsible city councilman).

HD 149 - After a dormant summer of little more than speculation in Williamson County's new district, we have the one-two punch of announcements from former legislator Corbin van Arsdale and Cedar Park city councilman Tony Dale.  Van Arsdale had announced that he raised $100,000 in the first 24 hours after announcing a couple of weeks ago.  Dale is having his kick-off party and formal announcement tomorrow.  Expect WilCo Republicans to fall hard on either side - it is doubtful now that a third candidate could make much of an impact beyond "spoiler" and causing a runoff between Dale and Van Arsdale (cough*costing-taxpayers-money*cough).  The Williamson County Examiner also reports that Ted Pataki, who had been considering a run, has decided not to get in.

Remembering 9/11: Lasting impact

I was 21 years old when the towers fell.

That didn't used to mean much to me.  Over the last several years, though, as Randy and I have had the privilege to get to know some incredible kids at UT and other universities across the state in various capacities, it has started to hit me that it did actually have a big impact on the way I would think about, react to, and act on what happened that terrible September day.

Today at church it was brought home once again, more forcefully than ever.  We go to a church in Austin with a very high number of college-aged attendees.  When I turned around to greet the people sitting behind me, I was greeted with beaming smiles from four young women, not one of whom could be older than 20.  Making them all about ages 8-10 in 2001.

Now - older readers, please please bear with me ;-) - I was 8 when President GHW Bush was elected.  9 when the Berlin Wall fell.  10 when we went to war in the Gulf the first time.  And so on.  I thought a lot today about what each of those events had meant in my life at the time, and how they had shaped me, if they did at all.  What struck me was that while I remember most of the really big events that happened when I was younger, I didn't have an emotional attachment to many of them.  And while some of them, like the Berlin Wall, have had a lasting impact that grew over time, more of them resonate only as "yes, I was alive for that moment in history."  Period.

I wonder what 9/11, and the massive outpouring of memorials and remembrances and moments of silence that are taking place today, really mean to the generation just behind mine.  And I wonder what it could be like to be 10 years old right now - or even 5 or 6, the ages I can point to as those when I started becoming aware enough of the world around me to ask questions.  In a few months, I will have my first child in my arms, and this baby will know such a totally different world - always true, of course, but oh, the ways in which this world changed!

Over time, I have experienced every possible emotion in response to 9/11, and I experienced them during a decade of my life that was also filled with a lot of growth and self-awareness.  On this side of my twenties, I'm left contemplating what the decade might have held had the world not shaken so violently when it began.  Would I be writing at all, would I be so involved?  Would I have become a teacher after all, as I was planning in 2001?  Would I have stopped to talk to a group of my fellow students in late 2003, people who became like family to me when I joined their organization?  It is pointless to follow a "what if" path like that, but widen the lens - if September 11, 2001, had been just another day for all of us, what would the world look like?  Less of a need to communicate 24/7, perhaps?  No war?  A totally different political landscape?

I said earlier this week that my reaction to the fires in Texas was something I knew came from what 9/11 did. I have a sensitive "panic" button, one triggered far too many times since 2001.  I suspect I'm not the only one, but I wonder, does my generation collectively jump when we hear breaking news sounds on television, or is it just me?  Did the plane that flew into the IRS building in north Austin in February 2010 trigger a need to call friends and family for anyone else?  I've heard and read that as a nation we suffered collective PTSD after 9/11.  Is that true only for those of us who were "of age" in 2001?

Not being in New York, or Washington, or Pennsylvania on 9/11 didn't seem to matter then - we were all looking up at the sky with fear and anxiety for days, weeks afterwards.  Some of us couldn't fly for quite some time.  Still others fell back into routine and felt no lasting impact, except the urge to cry every September 11 as the footage was replayed over and over.  I don't think you had to be from those places to feel it keenly, though, for it to still sting or for the scars to have a strangely acute feeling all these years later.  The bright blue sky this morning, lightening as we made our way to the State Cemetery for the memorial, was so like that of ten years ago that I had to pinch myself - or wait for the baby's kick - to be reminded that time has indeed passed.  It wasn't some long, vicious nightmare.

Our generation's Pearl Harbor, prominent assassination, or whatever you want to compare it to - it was the real "game changer" for us.  There were things that came before, yes - Lockerbie, the Challenger, the Berlin Wall, the 93 WTC bombing, Oklahoma City, Waco, the USS Cole, so many things I'm forgetting - but 9/11 really did alter things, perhaps our perception more than anything.

This day has worn on in a familiar pattern.  It is a pattern, though, determined in part by what happened that particular September day in 2001.  

(post to share - Belle at Capitol Hill Style reflects on 9/11 - Belle works in Washington and has some interesting insight, and is encouraging discussion)

Remembering 9/11: Project 2,996

I originally wrote this post while participating in Project 2,996 in 2009.  Project 2,996 is dedicated to online memorials for all of those who perished on September 11, 2001, as a result of the attacks in New York, Washington D.C., and Shanksville, PA.  There are still many men and women left on the list - if you are a blogger or even just someone with a Facebook page and a little time for Google, you can be tremendously helpful to the project.

----

Luis Jimenez worked for Marsh & McLellan in the World Trade Center. He was 25 on Sept. 11, 2001, and his life was cut short by the terrorist attacks on that horrible day.

Luis graduated from Queens College University in 1998. He was an accountant for MMC for 2 years. His family and close friends called him by his nickname, Luigi. He was a baseball fan (loved the Mets). In September of 2001, he was planning to be married; he had just talked to the young lady's parents and was making plans to buy a ring. By all accounts, he had a bright and successful future ahead of him. It was stolen on 9/11.

There is a wonderful tribute page on the MMC site for Luis here. Luis was remembered in 2006 by Chickpilot here. You can read the tribute to Luis in the book Portraits 9/11/01 here.

Luis, I didn't have a chance to know you at all, but I do know you're missed here. May God watch over your family and I hope you are safe in His arms now.

Project 2,996

Project 2,996 on Facebook

Allahpundit remembers 9/11

Pitching in to help fire victims and first responders this weekend

Many of the opportunities to help that have been listed here over the week are still valid for this weekend.  I've tried to scrub the lists I made as much as possible so that only the still-active information is presented.  This post will include just ways you can help this weekend that weren't previously available here, and it's for all over the Austin and Houston areas.  I will not update relief effort information again until Sunday night or Monday morning - this is just what I was able to find and fit here as of 5pm Friday afternoon.

There are still new fires cropping up and many blazes being fought around the state.  The stat for Thursday was 41 total fires, including 9 new fires.  Montgomery, Grimes, and Waller counties have had a lot of trouble today and the winds and low humidity elsewhere are contributing to smaller blazes.  You still need to BE PREPARED no matter where you live or how safe you think you might be.

Over the weekend, the best place to get fire updates is from the Texas Forest Service.  Another good place to get updated fire information has been Facebook.  Check out Texas Storm Chasers for some of the best info. There is a page on Facebook collecting all the information pages in one spot so you can find what you're looking for quickly.  Central Texas Fires 2011, Montgomery County Wildfire Info, Grimes County Sheriff's Office, Williamson County Office of Emergency Management, and Navarro County Office of Emergency Management have all been very useful as well.

RELIEF EFFORT INFO for 9/10 and 9/11

The Austin American-Statesman has a list of donation drop-off locations and places accepting both physical and monetary donations.

The Distribution Center for Victims of Bastrop County Fires will take donations through the weekend. This Distribution Center is located at 210 Main Street in Smithville (The old Winn's/Dollar General). They are currently accepting donations of all kinds. Shoes, toiletry items, diapers, blankets, bags, etc. They also need volunteers of all kinds. Please call Megan Hancock at 979.968.1632 (landline of the Dist. Center) if you can help.

Texas Hearts Bastrop is coordinating a workday convoy on Saturday and possibly a second on Sunday. They'll leave from the Austin Stone St. John's Campus in Austin at 10am Saturday. The address is 500 E St. Johns Avenue, Austin, TX.

KVUE is sponsoring a benefit concert Saturday, Sept. 10 at the Nutty Brown Café. The growing line-up can be viewed here. A suggested donation of $10 will be taken at the door, or you can purchase tickets in advance here. All proceeds will go to our neighbors in need. There is a Facebook event to view as well for more info.

Alamo Drafthouse and Highball are donating 5% of all their Friday-Sunday sales at all Austin locations to local wildfire relief efforts.

KXAN, The Salvation Army and Walmart will hold a two-day donation drive to help the disaster victims. Donations can be made online and also in person at participating Walmarts. The donation drives at the stores (see here for map/list) will run Friday and Saturday from 8 a.m. until 8 p.m. All of the money raised and items donated will go directly to provide for the disaster victims and the relief workers.

The Steiner Ranch Post has a list of needed items for the families affected by the fire there. There is detailed information on this page.

H-E-B and Stubbs BBQ are hosting a benefit luncheon and concert for Steiner Ranch on Saturday, Sept. 10th, from 11 am until 2 pm. at John Simpson Park. They will be hosting lunch for all of the Steiner Community, Firefighters, EMS, Travis County Sherriff, and any one that wishes to join the community. Complete information available here.

The El Cerrito Animal Clinic in Bryan is accepting donations to help animals affected by the wildfires. Feed, hay, monetary donations, blankets, toys and anything else that would help dogs, cats, horses, cattle and other animals is welcome. Donations can be dropped of at the clinic, 1730 Barak Lane. Call 846-7771 for more information.

Briarcrest Cleaners is taking water and Gatorade donations at all of three of its locations for the next several days. The supplies will be taken to firefighters in the region. Donors can drop the supplies or monetary donations off at any of their three locations: Briarcrest Drive in Bryan, Boonville Road in Bryan or 4030 Texas 6 in College Station. The business dropped off some of the much-needed donations Tuesday afternoon.

KBTX Media is helping get food to the East Texas Food Bank, which serves Leon County and will go to victims of the wildfires. To donate, go to www.easttexasfoodbank.org/kbtx

In Round Rock on Saturday, Angela Johnson is hosting a convoy to get supplies to Bastrop. Meet at 9am at 3434 Yogi Berra Way, Round Rock, TX. There is a Facebook event with more info. They will need people with trucks or SUVs if possible!

All North Houston Banfield's Pet Hospitals are opening their doors to house pets (cats and dogs) for FREE to anyone that has been evacuated and needs someone to house their pet(s). This extends from Cypress all the way to Conroe. Please call first to make sure they have room. List of locations with contact info can be found here.

Baker Vet Clinic in Waller is in need of volunteers tomorrow 9/10 to help with animals being brought in by officials. Starting at 8 am. They will need help 24/7 for the next few days. Call (936) 857-3207 for more info.

Donation drop-off locations in the Grimes/Waller/Montgomery County area:

- Tomball Fire Department 1200 Rudel, Tomball, TX 77375
- Living Waters Assembly of God Church in Magnolia 281.356.1687
- Pattison United Methodist Fellowship Hall on FM 359 in Pattison 843-721-8293
- All Wal-Marts, Randall's, Kroger, and HEBs are drop off locations for Montgomery County Fire Department . Also all City Halls in Montgomery County. (Tomball Walmarts ARE NOT drop off points because they're in Harris county.)
- Room with a View at 3500 West Davis Ste. 300, Conroe, TX.
- Zach's BBQ in Willis
- Crescent Moon Wine Bar440 Rayford Road #115 Spring, TX 77386 (281) 364-9463
- Grace Crossing Church @ 105 FM1488 (near I-45) is taking in donations on Friday from 8:30am-4:30pm.
- Fields Store Elementary off of 1488

(more info on the Tri-County Wildfire Volunteer and Donations page on Facebook)


Previous posts:
Travis, Hays, Williamson County Relief Efforts
Ways to Help Outside of Greater Austin
Wildfire Situation and Relief Master Post

At what price bureaucracy?

In the mornings, I generally listen to KLBJ 590 AM here in Austin.  Sometimes this works for me, and sometimes I end up yelling a lot at another inanimate object (a favorite pasttime).  In any event, today I was half-listening to Todd Jeffries and Don Pryor (half-listening because my dog was going a little bonkers over the tree butchers hired by Austin Energy to trim around the powerlines behind my house).  There was a very interesting conversation going on.

Callers to the Todd and Don Show this morning were getting pretty heated about the rumors that FEMA workers on the ground handling the fires refused to let volunteer firefighters in to help quench the flames.  As you might recall, on Sunday evening the Austin Fire Department let out a call for all firefighters who were off for the holiday weekend or who were otherwise off-duty to call a certain number and return to work, because they were short at least 25 firefighters for what was happening.  At some point, the call stopped - I think this was on Monday.  Meanwhile, there were separate calls going out for anyone who had previous firefighting experience to show up and help if they could.

I don't think it is much of a stretch to imagine that FEMA, or another government agency involved in fighting the fires and offering relief to victims, has micromanaged some willing volunteers out of the way.  Bureaucracy does that; fear of lawsuits does that.  There is something to be said about having too many cooks in the kitchen, so to speak, and a glut of volunteers (especially ones who may or may not have the training to really handle a specific situation) can be detrimental instead of helpful.  That being said, redirecting the willing and able would be a better approach, and if cash-strapped FEMA really is turning people away, then I would suggest that those people go to the Red Cross, Salvation Army, or a church to help out in other ways.

The statistic I heard this morning, unverified, is that 75% of Texas' firefighters are volunteers.  Given the sheer amount of rural area in our state, I think that's possible, though maybe a little high.  Meanwhile, the rest are paid firefighters.  And yes, despite the fact that Texas is a right-to-work state, we have firefighters' unions in many of our major cities.  In addition to the FEMA rumors, there is some reason to believe that when off-duty firefighters (who were willing to work, even if it meant volunteering their time) called in on Sunday and Monday, some were told that they could not come in because it would bust union rules - such as the amount of overtime a person could work, the amount they were supposed to have off work each week, etc.

If true, this story about the unions brings home an incredibly hard truth.  What unions have wrought in terms of protection for our civil workers is undoubtedly important, but at what cost?  Real human tragedy has been unfolding in Texas since the west Texas fires erupted in the spring, and the last week in particular has been horrific to behold.  Over 1600 homes have been lost in Texas since Sunday - and the number may climb, as even now fires rage and citizens are being evacuated in Montgomery County and elsewhere.  At what point do the union rules stop mattering, in the face of so much horror?  At what point does bureaucracy stop so that compassion may step in?

I somehow doubt a conversation about these things, an investigation into whether they happened and a real questioning of whether they should have happened, will actually take place when the smoke clears.  It certainly did not happen after Hurricane Katrina, when the incompetency of the government (and in some cases, the willful mismanagement) caused an exponential increase in human tragedy and cost.  But amidst the cries for the disbanding of FEMA and the castrating of union power, there should be a real discussion about solutions, and preventing the ham-handed handling of unavoidable disasters in this country.

Texas Forest Service Statewide Update

I am still refreshing the master posts for each area on relief and fire info as I get it.  This is the comprehensive update shared by the Texas Forest Service - I don't know what time this was posted, but it is the most current information they have collected.  The situation is still fluid, especially as weather conditions remain dangerous.

• Yesterday (Wednesday), the Texas Forest Service responded to 20 new fires for 1,422 acres, including new large fires in Red River, Smith, and Cherokee/Rusk counties.
• In the past seven days Texas Forest Service has responded to 176 fires for 126,844 acres.
• A more comprehensive assessment has been completed on the Bastrop County Complex by FEMA and the State Operations Center. The total number of homes destroyed on that fire is now confirmed at 1,386. Approximately 240 additional homes have been reported lost on other fires since Sunday, for a total of approximately 1,626.
•  250 of the 254 Texas counties are reporting burn bans.
•  Daily detailed fire information can be found at inciweb.org.

New large fires from yesterday (more than 100 acres in timber, 300 acres in lighter fuels; or where homes were lost):

CLARKSVILLE, Red River County. 350 acres, 90 percent contained. Two homes were lost on this timber and grass fire burning near Clarksville.

#526, Smith County. 450 acres, unknown containment.

#521, Cherokee/Rusk County. 256 acres, 90 percent contained.

There is also detailed information on the existing or previous fires in the following locations (click here to view all the information, which is too long to post here):


BASTROP COUNTY COMPLEX, Bastrop County; BEAR CREEK (#536), Cass County;  PEDERNALES BEND (Spicewood), Travis County; RILEY ROAD, Grimes/Montgomery/Waller counties; 
UNION CHAPEL, Bastrop County; TAMINA ROAD, Montgomery County; WHITE OAK ROAD, Gregg County; PETERS CHAPEL, Harrison County; STEINER RANCH, Travis County; #538 (Lansing Switch Road), Harrison County; #491, Limestone County; DELHI, Caldwell County; BAILEY, Colorado County; DIANA (#545), Upshur County; LUTHERHILL, Fayette County; BONBIEW RANCH, Van Zandt County; MOORE, Smith County; BOOT WALKER (#553), Marion County; TOAD ROAD (#552), Upshur County; HOPEWELL (#854), Walker County; HALSBRO COMPLEX, Red River County; #507, Anderson County; #504, Anderson County; #502, Nacogdoches County; ARBOR, Houston County; OLD MAGNOLIA, Gregg County; PETTYTOWN, Caldwell County;  101 RANCH, Palo Pinto County;  #839, Leon County (Concord Robbins)