National Public Air Pollution

In a recent segment of NPR’s all things considered John Burnett stated, “Texas is the country's largest emitter of global warming gases.” This came as a shock to me; I always assumed it was California. But the story was uplifting as it mentioned how the mayors in some of the State’s biggest cities are working together to change the mind of more high ranking officials. Burnett also mentioned how, “State Sen. Kirk Watson, a Democrat representing Austin, proposed a bill that would have merely set up a task force to study climate change. Though it passed the Senate, it died in the House.” I remember when that guy was mayor of Austin, so it’s nice to see that Green is moving up in the world.

Things move at a slower pace here in Texas then the rest of the country so the fact that we are still a bit behind on the environmental ball compared to the other 35 states that have climate action plans in place or under consideration is of no surprise to me. Especially when our own Governor, Rick Perry, mentioned recently, “that the largest source of carbon dioxide is Al Gore's mouth” it gives some of us a feeling of environmental unease. This state lives and breathes pollution, Gas guzzling trucks and Suv’s are the first thing that come to mind when you think about our highways. Not to mention all those pretty little twinkling lights that comes from oil refineries upon any number of great Texas cities.

The economy here is Texas is dependent upon those pollution causing companies and they are fighting environmental change every step of the way. With all the money in the corner of the Texas Oil and Gas Association, the Gulf Coast Lignite Coalition, the Texas Chemical Council and the Texas Automobile Dealers Association I’m sure the fight to get bills like the one Senator Watson would like to pass will be an uphill battle.

But we have some beautiful things on the horizon. With wind power in West Texas and Willie’s Bio Diesel maybe the, “out of the box” thinking of some whimsical locals will inspire more of us to do the right things and maybe make this state not look so bad. Burnett also statedthat on the bright side of things, “There are signs that that things are changing in Texas. Earlier this year, the state's largest utility, TXU, dropped plans to build eight coal-fired plants, in part, because of a popular uprising over their impact on air quality and the atmosphere.” So public opinion may actually cause change here in Texas.

None Of Your Business

A recent report found that the Texas based fortune 500 companies have donated twice as much to Republican candidates as they have to Democratic candidates so far in 2007. This really comes as no surprise and in fact it is actually an improvement for Democrats compared to past years. The report stated that 58 percent of Republican candidates campaign cash came from these 46 companies. If this isn’t factual proof that corporations have more power in government, and especially Texas government, than individuals, I don’t know what is.



The reason given for the mass support to Republican candidates is that they are pro-business and support the free enterprise system. Well, obviously Democrats are going to have a hard time being pro business when corporations have become their worst enemies and opponents larger than any Republican candidate. Many Democratic candidates have been pushed into a corner where they have to fend off big business to stay afloat. It is more apparent than ever that legislation needs to be passed that bans corporations from funding political campaigns. Through this mass overhaul of they way government is run, Democrats would no longer be forced into a position where they often need to hinder business to keep themselves from being run over, and rather they would be put into a position where they can in fact represent the desires of corporations. Conversely so, Republicans could represent the desires of individuals more than they have in years past, and we would move closer to a bi-partisan government.



We have become a state that is divided by political ideology in a way that supporting one sides preference means being at opposite ends with the other. We support a form of government that ideally corrects itself and balances out overtime, but it has come time to find a way to support a politics that is more balanced all of the time. Progress as a whole is close to impossible if support of one political party or side always means starting a fight with the other.



Legislation to ban corporations from financing campaigns would be seen as a partisan issue even though it could bring benefits to both sides of the political spectrum and better representation for every individual as a whole. Therefore, it will never fly unless Democrats gain a major majority in Texas. So I guess Democrats will have to stick to the political game of fighting off corporations and relying on major contributions from equally influential PACs, or supporting big business and starting a fire within their own party lines.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5328077.html

- Garrett

Huck, Chuck, and what the...

I'll be the first to admit I don't follow the race for the Republican ticket in '08, since it seems like kind of a lost cause. Mike Huckabee, apparently a very popular former Governor from Arkansas has teamed up with that powerhouse of kung fu and unwitting comedy, Chuck Norris, to form an unstoppable duo that will make every 18-35 year old male in the country groan. I first saw it posted on YouTube (the world's dry-erase board), but have recently seen mention in more respectable media (though the latter is technically a blog.)

First, watch the video. If you don't get it, you haven't missed much. I'll catch you up in the next paragraph. If you DO get it, you're probably really embarrassed, like when your parents try to use slang they hear in top 40 songs without realizing the sexual implications. Anyway, why would they do this to America? Does Huckabee really want to gamble his credibility by presenting himself as outright silly? Sure, Chuck does put in a good word, but the overwhelming focus is on the fact that Chuck Norris is even complicit in the political ad, and that he's awesome (which is arguable.) It seems Huckabee's campaign strung themselves between the college-age non-voters who would even understand the aim of the ads, and those who look to Norris as a cultural symbol.

Let me just go ahead and say it: this is a stupid ad. This isn't like Mike Gravel's genius ad, where you're not sure if it was a blooper, some kind of mistake, or the most postmodern political ad you've ever seen, this is pointedly, clearly tongue-in-cheek, winking-at-the-camera stupid, not to mention it doesn't work. First of all, let me explain Chuck Norris jokes, the crux of the ad's “comedy.” Chuck Norris is (ironically) considered on par with every divine figure and tall tale rolled into one, and this fact is played to jokes that involve how awesome he is, by reversing causality, anthropomorphization etc. Think of them as Yakov Smirnoff jokes, but an iota more sophisticated. The problem with putting Chuck Norris center stage of the ad is that these were funny about two years ago. Youth culture moves fast, and if you're going to get their attention you have to be timely. Most everyone I know groans at the mention of a Chuck Norris joke these days, much less a political figure co-opting him for comedic ends.

So how would this have been done more correctly? Well, I'd like the Republicans at large to try to make a more concerted effort at being timely. There are plenty of young conservatives out there, but those who identify as conservatives are usually politically aware enough to vote. Capturing the swing, untapped youths can easily be done with clear presentation of the ideology: not reactionism (I.e. Illegal immigrants get out) or radicalism (I.e. abolition of the IRS,) but clear and concise exploration of the cause and effect of conservative philosophy (lower taxes allows greater control over your own fortune, obligation bills like Medicare and Social Security affect taxpayers for generations), dressed in the motion, color, simplicity, and most of all irony that appeals to kids our age. The problem with the ChuckHuckFacts ad is that it dresses the irony, color, and motion that appeals to 18-35 year olds with a thin, transparent ideological veneer.

Thanks for reading Party Hoppin'! Last call, and you bums are out on the street!

Obama to Surpass Expectations

By Noah

At a recent political rally in Austin, Senator Obama said when he is the Democratic Party nominee, his opponent won’t be able to say he voted for the war because he opposed it. Obama criticized Clinton on her vote with the president on war powers and lobbyist ties. Obama has promised to end the war in Iraq and within 16 months bring all the troops home. He wants to continue the fighting against the al-Quida in Afghanistan. Obama has also promised to reform health care within his first term if elected. He slashed at Clinton for using the political strategy of “triangulation.” Now all three Clinton, Obama, and Edwards are so close at the polls it is hard to tell who will come out on top. Obama cites principles, not calculations and poll testing should be on the minds of Democrat contenders. Obama appears to be leading in Iowa with 30% of the poll’s vote.

The U.S. has formally announced a date for Mideast talks. The meetings begin Nov. 27th and the U.S. has invited 49 countries with key Israel and the Palestinians scheduled to attend the important Washington peace talks. Great news considering we have not reached serious peace negotiations with them for seven years. Bush will open the meeting with a speech from he, the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Praying that Russia and Saudi Arabia attend, President Bush remarked at the importance the talks would hold if the key countries participated in the meetings. If all will attend then further negotiations will ensue providing the conference tackles the tough issues. (The Palestinian State and a Palestinian-Israeli peace resolution.) Good news concerning past reluctance.

Bush claims Hillary can be beaten at the races by a tough Republican candidate. He says Hillary will probably win the primary and be nominated, because she is experienced in politics and is not scared to play hardball against opponents. Bush has hailed her on occasions and believes she can understand the klieg lights and withstand pressures. Bush also feels she has the best national presence, which means Hillary will be able to raise the most money. Hillary feels this weird obsession with her that the GOP feels means that she is communicating effectively about the presidency. They must be onto Hillary. Better wait to see what Edwards and Richardson will do come horn blowing time.

What will the Republican Party do next now that the President is becoming increasingly more interested in involvement in this race? Will Mitt Romney stay on top of Giuliani, or will he pull forward as Governor Perry suspects? Chances are everyone might be surprised.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/5318529.html

POSTED BY NOAH AT 10:00 AM 0 COMMENTS

Wired Cash Cow

Democratic Judge Susan Chriss is doing something very unorthodox in the realm of judicial campaigning. Online campaign contributions have been on the rise for presidential campaigns but not so much for local and state wide campaigns for judges. She is the first of her kind to take advantage of the internet, drumming up money for her campaign. The Galveston Democrat is running for Place 8 on the Texas Supreme Court. The seat is currently held by Justice Phil Johnson, a Republican. As I have recently learned in my Texas government class most judges get most of their campaign contributions from either law firms of big corporations, usually in hopes of gaining favor in legal cases. Money most certainly corrupts the system we currently have in place. So if the common individual can step up to the plate and donate, grassroot campaigns like Susan Chriss’s may be the long awaited answer we Texans have needed to hear.

According to the Houston Chronicle’s main blog Texas Politics, “Criss, who said in a phone interview this afternoon she has already raised $5,000 through her web site, wants to use the money to buy statewide TV ads.” Television ads are the life’s blood of a campaign. If you don’t have money for the TV face time then you may as well just hang up your ten gallon now. The fact that it takes so much money to win a campaign in Texas is mind boggling. But according to a survey done by the league of women voters, “A statewide survey of judges by the League of Women Voters of Texas in 2001 disclosed that most judges surveyed preferred elections, but a majority believed elections should be nonpartisan. A substantial number agreed that they had been victims of negative and misleading campaign advertising. They disagreed that campaign contributions had an influence on judicial decisions. Over half opposed public financing of judicial elections in Texas.”

This statement seems almost contradictory to common sense, and not to mention what I’ve learned in class. According to statistics campaign contributions do affect the outcome of a case, take Texaco vs. Pennzoil for instance.It’s hard to wipe the slate clean, when doing so means having to bite the hand that feeds. Although I do find it funny that on Judge Chriss’s home site the first page that pops up is the contribution page. You have to actually click on another link on the page to get to her beliefs and politics.

Maybe the internet will be the answer to all our problems, the economic decline and the current recession we can all feel despite the fact that we never actually hear anyone talk about it. Watch dog websites will become more main-stream then news organizations owned by major corporations. And Judges will be able to earn money in a more honest way, if more eyes are watching then maybe the internet can keep em honest.

Ron Paul soon to be homeless? Not in our hearts.

Ron Paul, that paragon of traditional fiscal conservative values is apparently in danger of losing his seat as Galveston's congressman, but this doesn't mean much for his political career considering his track record.

If you haven't heard about Ron Paul by now, you probably don't spend enough time on the internet or on the road reading bumper stickers, where his few but very vocal supporters make themselves heard the most. He's considered a very fringe candidate, though many insist that he's exactly what the country needs. He votes based on fiscal policy alone, making him a bizarre relic of 19th century politics. Because of this, he probably will never gain enough mainstream support to actually be electable in his bid for the White House, but stands as a symbol, a boundary of fiscal conservatism rather than a practical politician. His approach to politics - completely eschewing social issues - is a brilliant strategy for breaching the battle lines between major political parties and fringe elements, in this case Libertarians, but this obviously comes at the expense of mainstream viability.

That's Paul's biggest problem: viability. And that's why his losing his Congressional seat would be hardly a loss for his overall political career. Dr. Paul (as his supporters LOVE to call him) has rooted out a niche as a bona fide celebrity not with his function as a congressman, but as a sentinel for political principles. His opponents smear him for voting against obviously humanitarian legislation, but his supporters love him for his conviction to longsightedness instead of compromise. This shedding of compromise is what keeps him unelectable, and would be the undoing of his Congressional seat, but the legitimacy that the seat grants him is, in my estimation, far outweighed by the legtimacy of his disturbingly impeccable voting history.

Why did Paul choose to run as Republican in '08? My belief is that Paul is using the Republican ticket for the publicity – running as an Independent (or moreso independent, with the little “i”) brings to bear a certain “tinfoil hat” element. His selecting the Republican ticket has catapult him into serious discussion, not as a viable contender, but as a man with popular policy ideas. My bet is that Paul will run as an independent in '12 as a hostage-situation issue vote draw (like Perot in the '92 election), forcing Republicans to reconsider their overall strategy or severely risk the 2012 presidency, which is these days based more on emotions (read: scare tactics and moral authority) rather than its fiscally traditional role concerning itself with the collective national pocketbook.

We're Gonna Have Fun, Fun, Fun

By Noah

Today Houston state Rep. Rick Noriega is traveling to Las Vegas as a guest of the Democratic National Committee to meet with the national party donors who are also attending the Nevada Democratic Party’s presidential debate, which started around 7:00 p.m. Central Time. Since the departure of millionaire attorney Mikal Watts from the 2008 race for U.S. Senate, Noriega is being treated by the national Democratic Party as the only hope of facing and defeating Senator John Cornyn in the 2008 election. Watts’ dropping out really impacted Noriega because the amount of money he could raise from individual donors was decreased dramatically. Watts had signed the special millionaire exemption from the campaign finance laws so he could personally fund his campaign. This dropped Noriega’s ability to raise 13,800 dollars from each donor for each election in the cycle to about 2,300 dollars a donor. Sort of a kick to the groin of poor Noriega whose campaign manager and consultant say he will need big money in this race where he compares himself to a David and Goliath.

As I said President Bush vetoed on Tuesday another spending bill for Democrats and set up a showdown with them screaming no funds for the war. That is if the president does not agree to pull out of Iraq. This 606 billion dollar spending bill to fund education, health and labor problems was vetoed from Bush on the grounds that it was too fatt and was larded pork. A few hours later Senate majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Declared Bush would not get more money until he accepts the plan to withdraw all troops by the end of next year. The president picked apart the bill and found many faults, about 10 billion dollars worth he told the Congress now 22 billion dollars over the budget. Bush also chided leaders for failing to act on his energy plan.

U.S. House Rep. J. Dennis Hastert, who served as House speaker longer than any other Republican, said goodbye to his colleagues today and said that he will not complete his 11th term. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. and others attended his farewell speech and applauded the distinguished speaker. His resignation and departure early this year will trigger a special election in his strongly Republican Chicago area district. He will be missed by all and many.

With the primaries so close by I see so many candidates are becoming more accustomed to throwing mud and playing games with peoples’ minds. The races become tighter and stress and pressure increases and human nature and imperfections become apparent. That is the nature of the beast.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5305325.html

POSTED BY NOAH AT 9:57 PM 0 COMMENTS

Who Shot the Sheriff?

The campaign for Dallas County Sheriff is currently one of the most watched political races in the state. It seems odd that a race for Sheriff would be so widely captivating but the race has drawn the attention of the Texas Democratic Trust as a must win election. The current Democratic Sheriff Lupe Valdez won the office in 2004 giving Democrats a foot in the door of the Republican controlled county. In 2006, Democrats swept every countywide race in Dallas County shocking many, and placing Dallas County into Democratic control. This time around, the GOP is going to be energized and on the offense trying to regain some of what they lost in 2006.
In 2006, an estimated 40,000 would be voting Republicans stayed at home. This time around that number is likely to decrease, and the Democratic Trust fears its voters may stay at home instead. A sense of comfort is felt from many Democratic voters after their gains in 2006, and their energy at that time may not be matched in 2008. The 2006 election came at an ideal time for Democrats as opposition to the War in Iraq and President Bush was escalated, as well as scandals among the Republican party which gave many voters a sense of corruption within the GOP. The Republican Party is fielded by three strong candidates who are vying for the selection by the party in the upcoming primary. A win by the Republican Party in this election might just give them the leverage they need to take back control of the county in 2010.
It is extremely difficult to predict who has the upper hand in this campaign and who will come out on top in the end. On one hand you have a Hispanic population who is growing and their voting numbers are increasing by about 2 percent each election, and on the other you have a highly energized Republican party with a chip on their shoulder. Whereas it seems the Democrats have the edge in potential voting numbers in the county, realistically the Republican population is far more likely to show up to the polls, and that may be enough to grant them victory.
At the same time, the Republican Party in general has been losing popularity among the American people, and even those in Texas. Two Republican officials switched over to Democratic lines earlier this year and just recently their was a slew of Republican officials in Fort Bend County who resigned over disenchantment with the party. Most likely, it will end up being a race based on who can dig up the most dirt on the opposing candidate like many local races have been in Texas. Whereas the Republican Party is pressing hard, the Democratic Trust has found ways to win unlikely elections and has the backing of many Washington operatives and strategists, and most important of all, they have the finances. In that light I think Lupe Valdez will come out on top, but if she doesn’t it may bring the Democratic Trust back down to human status and give the Republicans a chance to redeem themselves.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/local/stories/DN-jeffers_14met.ART.State.Edition1.cf41e4.html

- Garrett

Obama LIVE @ The Backyard

Democratic Senator Barack Obama, is back in Austin this Saturday at the backyard. This is pretty appropriate since Obama is treated more like a rock star then a politician here in Austin. When I ask people why they like Obama the answers I get back are usually pretty lame. I for some reason am a bit unsettled about Obama, mostly because he is so ambiguous about his faith. In my heart I have always ideally wanted the president of the United States to be a sort of philosopher king. I want our leader to be more than just an executioner of a set of well planned policies, but someone who embodies the kind of person I can respect and look up to. I want the person I call president to have a strong character and even stronger convictions. So when the question of Obamas religious background comes up his answer bothers me. It makes me doubt his character and question the kind of person he is at the fiber of his integrity. Obama’s camp plays down the fact that he was raised a Muslim and this is something Camp Clinton has picked up on. There is nothing wrong with being a Muslim or even being a Christian Convert, but the down-playing of his religious background makes him seem almost ashamed of it.

This is the rub, and the main reason I don’t really trust the Obama camp. It would be nice to live in a world where men like Obama didn’t have to walk on Political eggshells because of their religious background. The whole country made such a big deal about Kennedy being a Catholic, but Kennedy didn’t shy away from that fact. He was very proud of his religious background and it made him a more respectable person in some people’s eyes. So what if I’m a Catholic was his attitude, he didn’t make excuses for it, and he certainly didn’t convert to Protestantism.

I went on to the Chicago tribune’s website where they have a pretty lengthy article answering any questions one may have about Obama’s religious background in his early life. However its his reasons for converting to Church of Christ that I would like to read about. His spiritual awakening makes me curious about him and it also makes me wonder why he switched over. Its a huge subject but one that get little press. So when he comes to town I hope he takes questions from the audiance. The ticket prices are at least afordable $15 for students. This Austin encore is guaranteed to be a big moral boost for Obama, the last time he was here it may have been the biggest political rally since Regan ran for re-election. For a Democrat to get that much love in Texas, it must feel pretty good.

According to the Houson Cronicle, "He is third among Democratic candidates in fundraising in Texas, with more than $2.1 million collected here. Hillary Clinton has raised more than $3 million in Texas and John Edwards more than $2.4 million, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks filings with the Federal Election Commission." This is a pretty big chunk of change so I hope he doesn't just make a pit stop. Its always such a bummer when the man of the hour only stays for 30 minutes.

Top Shelf

By Noah

As you may already know all sixteen amendments propositions will be added to the Texas State Constitution. The GOP is not worried about losing a state House seat even though prior to the runoff election Democrat attorney Dan R. Barrett had received 32% of Tuesday’s vote with his opponent Republican Mark Shelton at 23%. Excited to find out who will win? I am. The one that wins will take 76 year old state representative Ann Mowery’s place thru 2008. Mowery retired after 19 years of service in the conservative district. Mayor Bill White of Houston is re-elected by a landslide. Currently interesting news: Democrat White is considering running for governor in 2010. Proud mayor will serve next 2 years of his third term as a popular leader in a city with crime, drainage, and property tax problems. White has a good chance for bid if he can reduce taxes and cut fat.

The House has approved the 471 billion dollar defense budget. The Pentagon received a 40 billion dollar increase in budget. The bill passed 400-15 on Thursday, but does not include President Bush’s 196 billion dollar war money request for operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq. The bill however does include a 12 billion dollar infusion for the troops’ new bomb resistant vehicles. There is a House-Senate compromise on 12 appropriations bills for this budget year beginning October 1, that Bush will supposedly sign into law. The President promises to veto any Democrat-driven domestic program increases. The House will vote as early as Friday on legislation for spending as much as 50 billion dollars for the war with the clear intention that President Bush begins bringing troops home. This is only enough money for four months of the war and is significantly less than the president’s requested 196 billion dollars. The bill would require troop withdrawals to begin immediately up to ending combat by December 2008. Democrats are reported to be holding a shaky majority and will have much trouble overriding a Bush veto.

Congress has just overridden a Bush veto for the first time though on Tuesday. The 23 billion dollar water resources bill was enacted with a 79-14 vote. The president claims that he is standing up for tax payers and is budget conscious and will not spend on every little project out there that will benefit these Congress peoples in their districts. Bush has not vetoed too many bills since he has been in office and clearly objected to the WRDA Act as being too expensive.

U.S. Senator John Cornyn of Texas is in the news again and has had another 1.3 million dollars added to coffers from a rather successful fund-raiser held in River Oaks. President Bush attended and met with space shuttle Discovery astronauts and their families. State Representative Rick Noriega of Houston it seems will have a long way to go to at least semi-match him on campaign funds. I feel hard work will pay off now not later like an ant and a grasshopper who? will make food storage for the long winter a top priority.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5285633.html

POSTED BY NOAH AT 6:41 PM 0 COMMENTS

Who can you TRUST?

The Texas Democratic Trust may just be the most powerful and influential political action committee in Texas you have never heard about. The PAC began in 2004 with a goal of rebuilding the Texas Democratic Party from the ground up in an attempt to eventually convert the state back to blue once again. So far, they have been largely successful helping Democrats win back 7 seats in the House and helping Democrats to sweep Dallas County in the 2006 elections. However, their may be a few signs pointing to future slip ups.

For instance, thus far the PACs success has largely been due to the fact that they were able to stay under the radar and not draw much media attention. Now, they have made their way into many headline news stories in Texas politics and the little criticism they have received may just begin to get ugly. From the beginning of the PACs birth, many Democrats didn’t like the idea of a powerful group using “Washington like” political tactics to be directing the party. It’s as if they have become what they hated, a big money, political scheming machine, with the desire for power being the top priority over the issues. Many say, the Trust and the state party have become largely one in the same.

The Trust is walking a fine line in gaining the approval of many Democratic citizens. Earlier this year when state rep. Kirk England switched from the Republican to the Democratic Party, the changed was negotiated not with local democrats and voters, but with the trust. This left many people feeling left out and disconnected with the process. As well, the group is not even ran by many homegrown Democrats, but rather by political hotshots shipped in from D.C. To top it all off, the biggest friend of the group is Fred Baron who has donated almost 700,000 dollars this year alone and is the finance chairman for John Edwards. As expected, Mr. Baron is not looked upon highly in the eyes of conservatives and the Democratic Trust fares even worse. The two have the potential to give conservatives enough heat to start a fire. As we have learned in the past, Texas Republicans know how persuade voters and their opposition can be a powerful tool. As the Trust is forced out of hiding, look for conservatives to attack them with anything they can find within reason and sometimes without. More so, the Trust endangers itself by being a divisive figure within the Democratic Party, and may find itself turning many party faithful off from the whole process as they adopt methods many Democrats have come to hate.

In the end, the Texas Democratic Trust may be the only realistic way of helping the Texas Democratic Party win back the state. The party can’t fight the huge machine it is up against with grassroots methods forever. Eventually they have to become what they hate in order to have any real chance of putting Democrats in office. Though, at the same time they may find themselves dividing their own party, and putting Democrats at even worse ends with Republicans, and as they say “Divided We Fall.”

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/local/stories/DN-demtrust_30met.ART.State.Edition2.4214475.html

- Garrett

Searching For Didley-Squat: local news and third parties

Where are the third parties? ive searched repeatedly for news relating to third parties in Texas, and to no avail...

OK, i know that its essentially a one-party state in a two-party system, but there seriously has to be more going on. Austin is supposed to be the liberal, independent mecca of Texas, a blue island in the middle of a GOP-crimson sea. Were the state capitol, if any lobbyists from any strain of the political spectrum are going to focus efforts anywhere, its going to be in that big pink dome somewhere near the center of downtown. So why cant we hear about anything other than how the republicans and the democrats are mimicking the national slap-fest that is our political atmosphere?
So, i had some fun. I logged onto the Statesman's and the Chronicle's websites and searched the Libertarian, Green, Socialist, and Constitution parties; here is a play by play summary of my searching:
"Libertarian Party":
Both the Statesman and the Chronicle had some coverage of the libertarian's opposition to the much-discussed prop. 15 on this past election date; the Statesman had some mention of Ron Paul's stance; the Chronicle mentioned libertarian opposition to The Domain subsidies. But there was little discussion of the partys stances, presidential projects, or any comprehensive coverage of the workings of the party, it is treated as instead what seems to be a political philosophy buzzword.
"Green Party":
For a party that suceeeded on having a nationally recognized presidential candidate in 200, i was dismayed at the lack of coverage. the Statesman yielded essentially nothing, it picked up on the two words separately in articles related to North Korea and a few things here and there, but nothing about the party or its policies. The chronicle had only one recent mention, and it was related to the documentary that discusses Ralph Nader's career. Which came out in Febuary. My friend Bill Hollway is the Chairman of the Travis County Green Party, and i know through him that this is an active party that is always pushing its policies, so needless to say i was dismayed at the lack of coverage within Austin, one of the greenest cities in the nation.
"Socialist Party":
There was some international coverage related to nations in south america and eastern europe, but overall there was nothing to be found about the socialist party in the U.S. So much for rounded coverage.
"Constitution Party":
Nothing on the Statesman, small mentions in 2 articles on the Chronicle, dating 2005 and 2000. Its only a party based on the founding document of the nation, nothing important.

To be honest, it doesn't surprise me too much that these parties are ignored, after all, its not like they are winning elections, its not like they really matter, right? Well, nationally perhaps not, but locally they might have more sway than they are estimated to have; locally your vote counts for alot more sway than it does nationally and it dictates policy that effects you personally - ironic considering that most people dont vote in local elections. So locally third parties have more sway than you might think. I am most disenchanted by the Chronicle, Austins much coveted indipendant rag, for not picking up the proverbial ball on ths one. I might even write a somewhat irate letter to them, which i will certainly share with you, dear reader.

If i am to tack any Postscript onto this, its this slight tangent: vote in local elections. I know its past and really has little to do with tis particular Blog, but please remember to vote on the stuff that most directly affects you.

Giuliani to raise money in SA

Rudy Giuliani, is at the present moment the front runner for the 2008 presidential election for the Republican Party. He is planning to hold a pretty nice shin dig in San Antonio to raise money for his campaign. In all actuality, saying the name Rudy Giuliani and San Antonio is a bit odd. Texas is known for its staunch conservativeness and very Pro-Life stance on abortion. San Antonio especially is known for its very Roman Catholic people. So I found it odd that it would be the even penciled in for Giuliani’s fundraising stations. Houston seems more up his alley and pace, assuming he pronounces the name Houston right.

It would be nice to hear the man speak, so I hope he makes a pit stop here in Austin. If not maybe we can get Bob Cole to call his cell live on the air like he did Governor Perry last week. All the talk around town seems to link up the two men. In a month we have had Perry’s endorsement of Giuliani and now fundraisers in towns where you can’t fling a dead cat without hitting a pro-life Catholic. Something seems very off kilter here, but if you don’t rock the boat I certainly won’t. Giuliani has some very palpable policies that I can really get behind. Having been born and raised here in Texas I’m sure Statements like that are really reassuring to his camp.

This all and all has been a bit of a slow news month here in Texas considering there are 16 proposed constitutional amendments on the statewide ballot. Not much noise from our politicians either way on those proposals. Perry voted today, opting for early voting instead of waiting for Election Day. According to the Austin American Statesmen Perry stated, “I couldn’t find a lot wrong with any of the 16,” Perry said after voting. He encouraged citizens to go vote but said “you can’t make people exercise their right to vote.” This is true, you can’t even with millions on the ballot we have things to do and people to meet

I personally think I’m gonna just say no to everything on the ballot. Nothing struck me as important enough to alter the Texas Constitution. Besides if Perry is behind all the proposals my inherit instinct is to go the opposite direction. So his endorsement of Giuliani has me in a bit of a perplexed state. Maybe he knows something I don’t. Either way I’m glad the presidential election isn’t until 2008, because I have no idea who to vote for. My man doesn’t seem to be gathering any steam.

Perry for Prez in '12? '16?

Governor Rick Perry hasn't announced it yet, but he's dropping hints left and right that, when taken as a whole, point to bigger plans beyond the Texas Governorship. He's most likely to break records for number of terms as Governor in the state of Texas, but recent policy and political shifts seems to indicate he plans to follow in the footsteps of George Bush to national policymaking.

The 2008 presidential election season started earlier than ever, and so far has been breaking all manner of records. Without a clear leader, Governor Perry has chosen to endorse Rudy Giuliani for the Republican ticket. In a state without a record of Giuliani's liberal-mixed policy, Perry's endorsement of Giuliani seems queer, considering there are several candidates besides Giuliani that appear to align with the Governor's policy record. Perhaps Perry is more populist, or (gasp) even liberal than his public steering lets on, but I would consider it equally likely (or equally effective) that he's vying for national legitimacy.

The position of Governor in Texas is very different from that of other states. Essentially, it's the Crown of England to the Lieutenant Governor's Prime Minister. The Governorship in Texas seems to be acquainted with a very hands-off, or perhaps just narrowly-focused policy set, meant really for handling sweeping disasters (I wouldn't doubt that some part of Perry wishes he could claim Hurricane Rita as his 9/11,) but otherwise out of the way of the grindstone of the bureaucracy or congress. It appears that the Governorship best for grooming future Presidents.

Perry sure does seem to be pushing Prop 15 hard, the 3 billion dollar appropriation to cancer research (and half as much in interest) that was pushed through by the Lance Armstrong's yellow band bloc. I don't know about you, but I was never aware that Texas cared so much about health care? The incongruity between public health policy in Texas and this (as well as the HPV vaccine that Perry unconstitutionally pushed through earlier this year) paint a picture of a man who is trying to appear more moderate than his record would indicate. When combined with his soaring (if lethargic) public support, the only solution is Perrys' bid for the national spotlight sometime in the future, hopefully in the footsteps of Bush (and LBJ?)

Send Me the Money

By Noah

This Nov. 6 sixteen proposed Amendments are on the ballot and could be added to our Texas Constitution if approved. Lawmakers fear a low-turnout this year. Proposition 11 is in the political spotlight, because of excitement over this new rule affecting a lawmaker’s accountability. What this means is taxpayers can see how individuals in Congress voted on the issues with a recorded vote vs. yeas and nays. I myself feel this could be a good thing, because this info made public and via the internet would allow voters to see how these politicians really stand or stood on these bills and issues. The League of Women Voters, the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas, the Texas Association of Broadcasters and the Texas Daily Newspaper Association all support this proposition. With no major opposition this proposition is sure to pass.

Democrats in Congress are up in arms on whether to approve at least 70 billion dollars of President Bush’s 196 billion dollar war spending request. This large amount of money would only keep the war financed for about ¾ of year. This means a lot for Texas troops with Army recruitment this year at a record low. The U.S. Army is complaining that they need thousands more highly trained troops to fuel the war. Iraq will need 20 to 30 billion U.S. dollars to reach full oil production of 5 million barrels per day. President Bush shot down increases in health and education programs. The Pentagon budget is set at 459 billion dollars. There is a 932 billion dollar request for agency budgets passed each year in Congress. The Democrats’ spending bill is going to receive more cuts; up to 4 billion dollars worth.

Although Iran publicly denies it, U.S. officials claim Iran has been sending weapons to Shiite militias in Iraq. With the deaths of U.S. troops down now to recorded low, the president claims a resolution and not a military strike will improve diplomatic relations.

The environment takes a stand in Congress with the bipartisan global warming bill. This makes me think it is time now to do something to protect the environment and not tomorrow has finally become an option less choice. I feel safe in saying money can’t buy you everything and it sure can not buy you the environment back. Nothing short of a miracle will get back for our children clean, cool air and water. Poisonous gases and filthy mineral stripped, burned out land is certainly no substitute for what our Forefathers had laid out for themselves some several hundred years ago. Time now for America to come forward together as a Democracy and impose limitations on pollution and release of greenhouse gases to save our world for the children.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/5265897.html

POSTED BY NOAH AT 8:50 0 COMMENTS

WHY the hell not.

Kinky Friedman now claims to be a Democrat, and that he will possibly run for Governor again in 2010. Lets be honest, he IS going to run for Governor again and once again our state will be covered in chic propaganda that will amount to nothing except another loss and more of Kinky's post-election whining.

I can’t help but think that if Kinky had not run for Governor in 2006, Chris Bell would have defeated Rick Perry. He may have run as an Independent , but I will bet most of his votes came from voters who would have voted Democratic otherwise. As a so called Democrat, he will not fare any better, and instead he will have a negative impact on the party.

Part of his appeal in the 2006 race was that he was the kind of anti-political politician, or statesmen as he liked to say. He didn’t conform to party lines, and he didn’t play the typical political game. But, now that he has realized you have to play the game to win, he has just become a radically eccentric politician. One that Texas can’t handle, and even the Democratic Party won’t have a part of.

The Texas Democratic Party has been working hard to regain respect from Texas voters by presenting a dedicated, honest, and moral image. They are at a point where Texans are starting to realize that the Democratic party does in fact represent some of their interests and should therefore be taken at least with some seriousness. Kinky Friedman puts the liberal stereotypes Texans have too often had back into their heads and therefore puts the Democratic Party in jeopardy of losing the ground they have recently worked so hard to achieve. The Democrats simply won’t let that happen and therefore will not nominate Kinky as their candidate. Can you imagine a race between Kinky and Kay Bailey Hutchinson? A gritty, off-kilter Jew versus a clean-cut Christian who has proven experience and statewide likability. Even if Kinky doesn’t get the parties nomination, I have a feeling he will once again be in the race as an Independent, and he will once again take enough votes away from the Democratic candidate to allow the Republican reign to continue. Kinky or not, it is still too earl for the Democratic Party of Texas to win the Governors office unless they can find another Tony Sanchez who can rally the growing Hispanic vote.

So Kinky, please do us all a favor and stick with what you do best, and leave politics to the politicians.

http://media.www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2007/10/31/News/Why-The.Hell.Not.Again-3067408.shtml


- Garrett

Hispanics may alter vote outcomes...Duh?

By Solman

Hispanics could affect the outcome of political elections in the near future according to people in the know around the capitol. By 2030, they could evidently even have chipped away at the Republican majority enough to change election outcomes.

No shit, huh? Didya figure that one out on your own?

There’s approximately 2,000 miles of border between Texas and Mexico, approximately 35% of Texas residents are of Hispanic Origin, and it’s the largest growing ethnic group in the state. So it kinda makes sense that politicians of all parties are paying attention; they kinda need the votes. According to Juan Castillo in the Statesman article linked below, one in 6 votes cast in Texas is cast by a Hispanic voter.

Hispanics traditionally vote Democratic; after all dems are usually the ones who support what (traditionally) are most important to Hispanics. From health care to employment to economic security, dems just seem to strike the right chord with Latinos. They attempted to appeal to this with the Dream Team a few years ago, but poor Sanchez just was too sleepy (and perhaps too white) to really appeal to Hispanics.

Republicans want their vote too, but with their most prominent members both statewide and nationally seemingly constantly calling for immigration reform and generally having an unfavorable and unfriendly attitude to Latinos, its gonna be slightly harder for them to successfully court the vote from Hispanics.

So according to Castillo’s article, by 2020 the republican majority could be unbalanced and even compromised by 2030. Maybe it’s a testament to number-crunching, but it seems pretty apparent to me regardless of statistics. When you’ve got an issue over the licensing of “taco trucks” in the capitol, id say Hispanics are worth noting in the population. When the Mexican American Cultural Center opens after a decade-old push for its construction, that sheer tenacity suggests a presence to me. When you see billboards in Spanish west of I-35, it’s a trend worth paying attention too. Especially for politicians, whose job it is essentially to keep an eye on the public, if for no other reason than to be ready for the next election.

So come on you guys, I suppose the numbers are helpful, but if your just now figuring this out, its no wonder our state is in the shape its in.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/22/0922latinopol.html

Stop Drop and Roll Fire Campaign

In response to the massive devistation of the California fires, Texas has a new campaign called, "Ready or Not" that encourages Texans to prepare for an emergency. This statewide emergency plan isn't just for fires. The plan extends for hurricanes, terrorist attacks, and disease outbreaks. The Department of State Health Services or DSHS is launching the preparedness campeign. But is is really more like a do it yourself plan in some aspects of the plan. They boast an interactive website TexasPrepares.org. where locals can create their own emergency plan that best suits their needs along with all the necessary supplies. This looks like a throwback to the 50's bunker stock full of canned foods and tang.

The Emergency Preparedness video on the website is pretty funny. It's common sense put into words by Austin's own Ron Olivera. This grade school Plan is all fine and good in an ideal world, however it's a pretty weak response to the massive destruction of the California fires. I guess the message here is one of do it yourself security. This website is pretty handy but it doesnt really make me feel safe. I don't think any website would. What are the lessons we as a state can learn from the mass destruction of the California fires and Katrina? What party is ready to chime in on this debate?

In a recent political poll on CNN.com it looks like Republicans are standing by their man and giving him all the kudos he deserves for the quick response in California. Although Im sure quite a bit of the locals would agree the response wasn't quite quick enough. The people in these ares were loaded. The richest in the nation, so yeah maybe that had sometyhing to do with the respose. I'm not so sure if a national disaster, like a hurricane happend in Corpus Christi where the majority of people are hispanic, the response would be so quick and well orchestrated. So this lame little Texas website is what we have for now. So maybe for those of us that dont have millions should keep some canned foods, maps and water in a closet just in case.

I was living in Corpus when Katrina hit, watching the eye of the storm move away from Texas and closer to NewOrleans. But when all that devistation happend and that poor response was upon us. I couldn't help but think, man those poor black people could have very easily have been man those poor brown people, if the storm had hit Corpus instead. Watching the devistation that is around us in other states should be all the wake up call we need as a state. So maybe the adiquite amount of money will be available to us if this ever happens here.

Texas' primaries closed to the people's voice

The state of Texas seems to be a bit confused in terms of its primary process. Officially, Texas has closed primaries, meaning that one is unable to vote in multiple party's primary elections, though it's said that in practice Texas enjoys open primaries due to the lack of election-to-election party constance that other closed primary states enforce. It's my belief that closed primaries, even in Texas' weakened form (and even some implementation of open primary legislation,) run counter to the democratic process and only serve to further the dilluting effect that two-party politics has on legislation.

First of all, the nature of a primary is the selection of candidates to run on the national ticket. Under either system, each voter is only allowed to vote for one candidate, period. This, in essence, turns the primary into a pre-election, forcing the voters to vote before they cast their final ballot.

The primary argument against open elections is that it provides voters with an opportunity to vote for the opposition and dilute or manipulate an opposition party's nomination. This argument appears to have a hole in it, namely, that voters throw away their vote on a manipulative vote and do not get to select the candidate they actually prefer, but rely on the remainder of supporters for their party to make the right decision. This is,unfortunately for the anti-open primary bloc, a valid democratic expression, and it's entirely legitimate to vote specifically against a party. Obviously manipulation and dillution can happen, but what prevents both sides of the aisle from doing it? This argument supposes that only one party, probably the locally dominant party, will engage in dillution to keep its power, but who says that an open primary wouldn't give us Dennis Kucinich v. Ron Paul in 2008's presidential election, an election between unelectables?

Suppose a voter in Texas decides to be sneaky and vote Democrat in the upcoming Presidential primary. He'd vote for the candidates who are most likely to be both nominatable and defeatable by his own party. While he's busy voting for Barack Obama or Mike Gravel, his own party goes on to nominate Rudy Giuliani, the most liberal Republican of the major candidates, no thanks to Dr. Sneaky. He loses either way!

Both open and closed primary legislation has been indicted for constitutionality, namely the process of publicly declaring or registering your party affiliation. Now this is something I can get behind. I believe that ideally, a voter should be able to vote “by office” not “by party” when the Primaries roll around. This is currently impossible in either of the dominant primary systems, disabling independents and the two diametrics (libertarians and statists) from effectively voting their mind, instead choosing a party that suits all their needs on all levels of government.

Crack Under the Pressure

By Noah

Right now at the polls Senator Hillary Clinton is leading her Democrat rival Barack Obama 48%- 17%. She is ahead of Republicans in general-election match ups, with Giuliani behind by 6 percentage points. Giuliani 32% Republican voters backing him, his biggest lead this year. That is twice that of Fred Thompson. I believe this trend will continue throughout the year and the struggles will deepen with a closer look at Americas’ Health Care Reform Resolutions. Democrat Bob Kerrey won’t enter race to replace the retiring Republican Senator Chuck Hagel from Nebraska as so many Democrat supporters had hoped. Would the Democrats fix the ailing Health Care Industry with funds siphoned away from the Defense Department’s War on Iraq? President Bill Clinton vowed to do it and succeeded in lowering medical inflation rates while in office. Old war and is guaranteed to continue … and means big money and contracts. Some support the spread of Democracy throughout Middle Eastern Nations. I myself feel peace will come through talks and a gradual lifting of sanctions.

In the area where previous “party hopper” candidate Giuliani is apparently lacking Hawks help Giuliani to develop his foreign policy objectives. He believes in aggression towards terrorism, and is committed to intensifying military strength. Oddly enough Giuliani seems to share dislike for the United Nations. Strange character development for such an intelligent man. These neoconservative “hawks” are all prominent Republicans, and one Norman Podhoretz cites bombing Iran as soon as logistically possible and Mr. Daniel Pipes claims a much stricter eye should be placed on Muslim Americans in airports and in law enforcement fields. In a recent interview Giuliani reports that he does not feel Iran should be bombed as soon as possible. That is to his credit. Haven’t the Middle Easterners caught in the middle of all this suffered enough already?

U.S. is seeking strictest new sanctions on Iran to punish Iran’s military. Unilateral sanctions with the Revolutionary Guard Corps named as proliferators of weapons of mass destruction and elite Quds Force designated as terrorist supporters. These people want nuclear weapons to protect themselves and what is to say they won’t just blow up Israel and then just turn the gun on the U.S. Bush administration has made clear attitude toward Cuba to remain confrontational amidst problematic relations. Same old communist scare over these two countries still preventing real peace relations programs backing the people from being implemented.

Celebrating the victory of Bobby Jindal, elected governor of Louisiana, President Bush attended fundraiser hosted by Republican Governors Association, just blocks away from the White House. They raised almost ¾ of a million dollars for Republican gubernatorial candidates across the nation. Louisiana, Mississippi and Kentucky are the only states electing governors this year, and both states with Republican incumbents. Polls like LA Times/Bloomberg finding America dissatisfied with Pres. Bush and a Democrat controlled Congress doing nothing for health care. Maybe should large employers help pay for coverage and could health care insurance be mandated? U.S Senate went against Bush’s education and health cuts. President Bush’s drug war plan draws fire in both the U.S. and Mexico.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/5236314.html

POSTED BY NOAH AT 10:28 PM 0 COMMENTS

Throwing in the Towel

Texas Senator John Cornyn got a dose of good news on Tuesday; his highly fundraised Democratic opponent Mikal Watts dropped out of the 2008 race to try and boot him out of the Senate. Watts had out-raised Cornyn with a total of 8.6 million dollars compared to Cornyn’s 6.6, though 7.7 million of Watts total was out of his own pocket.

Watts stated he threw in the towel because he felt like his rigorous campaigning was having a negative affect on his children. However, despite his large sum of campaign money, many pundits believed that his Democratic opponent Rick Noriega had a better chance at winning the nomination and eventually booting Cornyn out of office. Noriega is an Afghanistan War veteran and a Hispanic giving him a better chance at winning the Hispanic vote unlike the very wealthy Watts. As well, Watts had taken plenty of scrutiny from liberal Democrats because of his pro-life stance on abortion.

So, way to go fellow Democrats.You convinced the only man capable of beating Cornyn to quit. Yeah, Noriega may have had a better chance of winning the Democratic nomination, but with his limited funds, he doesn’t have what it takes to get his message heard across the state like Watts did. I admit, I am not a fan of Watts elaborate spending for his own cause, but I will gladly accept a selfish rich man that can improve our health care and education systems in Texas over an honest man who can’t win office.

The attention paid to his stance on abortion is absolutely ridiculous. So the man is conservative on one issue, that doesn’t mean the issue is going to be at the top of his agenda. If anything, the Democratic Party could use more politicians who are pro-life to sway more Christian votes. This could be especially important in gaining a majority of Roman Catholic voters and ensuring a strong hold on Hispanic voters. Sadly, there are many people who vote solely on the issue of abortion, and if they were faced with two pro-life candidates, they would be forced to look at other issues.

In the end, voters are gong to be faced with the choice of an experienced and recognizable Senator who has the support of the president, or a man who no one knows much about. The question will be whether the Hispanics ever show up to the polls to give Noriega enough support to win, or whether Cornyn will be so unpopular that voters will vote for anyone to get Cornyn out of office. Either way, it should be a race that demands attention.

- Garrett

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-cornynrace_24tex.ART.State.Edition1.42082c7.html

Cancer Research $ bad news for Libertarians?

Texas Libertarians might be standing alone this time. Not that its the first time, but it seems like this time they are dancing with political suicide. They dont like Proposition 15. They are opposing cancer research. Whoops.

Ok, so im not telling the whole story. Its the sources of the funding they dislike; the $3 billion would come out of taxpayers pockets whereas the Libertarians (and other, mostly conservative groups) feel that it should be funded by private contributions. The bill, going to the polls on Nov. 6th, has received widespread support across the political aisle and this seems to be the only group voicing any opposition towards it. Spokespeople clarify they have no opposition to the research, but in keeping with Libertarian philosophy they want government to have no role.

I can understand. The medical industry nationwide grosses massive amounts of profit, and it certainly seems like it would be in the interest of pharmaceutical companies to pursue a cure for a disease that kills an immense amount of people each year. It would seem then that government funding would be on the verge of superfluous, especially with national trade debts bulging at the seams and bridges collapsing under car’s wheels. But at the same time I have to wonder: if we are making daily advances towards a cure, surely an additional $3 billion would simply speed or improve the chances of eliminating cancer. And with cancer being such a hot topic issue and garnering so much public attention, doesn’t it make sense in a (theoretically) representative government that the publics money be used to fund something so many people seems to support? Though often populist in nature, I cant help but wonder if the Libs are missing the point on this one.

And from an exclusively political standpoint, aren’t libertarians committing suicide on this one? Intentions may be best, but it seems like this will work to limit the efforts of a party already hobbled by the American two party system. Their intentions are voiced, but I fear the thing most voters will hear will be something along the lines of ‘Libertarians oppose cure for cancer.’ Id like to hope no news outlet would be so hyperbolic and one-sided, but its hard to find faith in modern media treatment. So I really cant help but wonder if there might be weighty fallout over the issue. Perhaps the efforts biggest hindrance is also its saving grace come next election, for as this story could be warped to portray libertarians negatively, perhaps it’s a boon of the two-party system as it does little to affect already miniscule media coverage of Texas Libertarians.

Blessing or curse? Maybe we can find a cure for that.

http://www.news8austin.com/content/your_news/default.asp?ArID=193957

Who Do I Thank for the Bond Proposal?

This week in Texas politics the news about student loans on the ballot caught my attention. A $500 Million bond proposal for a college lending program is on the ballot for Texas voters. Of the two proposed constitutional amendments concerning higher education, Proposition 2 would authorize the Texas Higher Education board to Borrow $500 million for low interest loans to college students. I know my voting habits and I tent to say yes to stuff like this. Money for a library sure, cash for teachers why not? I have a soft spot when it comes to money for education.

However the question I bade to ask is what party is responsible for this proposal? To my surprise it looks like the proposal is nonpartisan. These loans for college are to be given out by private lenders. But I seem to remember something that happened earlier this year concerning student loan fraud and colleges and maybe there is just a little too much money floating around these days. If there is such a thing as to much money, someone show me. I seem to remember my mother telling me you could never be too rich, too young, or too thin; I don’t have any of those problems. But I do have a student loan and I am pretty sure I will be acquiring more. So this is one constitutional amendment I may actually pay attention to.

The Higher Education Commission is a nonprofit state agency. Commissioner Raymond Paredes said in an interview with Ralph Haurwitz of the Austin American Statesmen, “there is no cost to taxpayers, as a nonprofit state agency we make student loans at rates significantly lower than what student can typically get in the commercial market.” This all sounds really good and I hope this sort of good will for students lasts. I also hope that Texas Colleges and students can keep their nose clean so these sorts of loans can continue for generations to come.

I have yet to begin paying off any of my loans but the future feels a little better knowing I will only have to pay it back with small interests. It is also interesting to read that some of the proposed amendments that come to the Texas senate are actually nonpartisan. Who do you vote for to make sure stuff like this type of bond proposals come to the ballot box? Maybe this is one issue that all political parties agree with. Money for college is good.

Perry And Giuliani Marry Minds

By Noah

Big Texas news, on the morning of Tuesday October 17, 2007 Governor Rick Perry endorsed former mayor of New York and Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani for president. Perry appeared on Fox News saying he would campaign for a man who would be America’s best leader during a war on terror. The governor has apparently thought long and hard about this endorsement for the past several months. Perry is very conservative and has some different views on the issues with Giuliani who supports abortion and gay rights. Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson supports U.S. Senator Fred Thompson, but Perry backs Giuliani stating that he has the ability to make our America a safer place and move our economy forward. These are two very positive steps to get results on during a war on terror.

Governor Rick Perry is being looked at strongly for possible contender for vice presidential candidate; if Giuliani definitely chooses him to run along side in 2008. Perry has commented on Fox Network that he has no desire to run, but would rather finish out his term in a great state with a great economy and stay away from Washington. Will Governor Rick Perry, not unlike his predecessor President George Bush, decide to play a roll in Washington D.C. politics and run for office?

Governor Rick Perry is a “party hoppin’” ex-Democrat himself. James Richard Perry was born on March 4, 1950. He has a chance of being the longest serving governor in Texas history, with 10 years of total uninterrupted service. Perry was elected as a Democrat to the State Board of Education in 1978. He then served 3 terms in the Texas House of Representatives as a Democrat, and was well known as an effective legislator. Governor Perry joined the Republican Party in 1989. The governor was agriculture commissioner from 1991-1999.

Governor Perry instituted the CHIP program designed to insure 500,000 children. He has increased health funding by 6 billion dollars. Perry has allocated 9 billion dollars to schools. He supports a tough stance on crime and has backed block grants for crime programs. Planning to reduce taxes and increase numbers of jobs in Texas, Perry supported bills like HB-3, the property tax reform bill. Recently Perry has come under fire for his alleged violation of the Logan Act, while attending the Bilderberg Group’s meeting in Istanbul, Turkey.

Whether you like Rick Perry or not, you should know he has a chance to become governor again in 2010, and plans to run. Governor Perry the Methodist social conservative who has the record for the most vetoes during a legislative session has evidently become softer amidst fire that he is one of the poorest Texas governors. Scores of people would like to see him impeached. His recent endorsement of Giuliani proves to me that Perry wants to be accepted. Is this Perry’s old Democratic side coming out again? Perry is handing Texas employers tax credits due to a surplus of money, and has named Robert Scott Texas Education Commissioner. Will the stunned GOP continue to back Perry on all the issues? I believe the governor will continue to campaign with Giuliani and may increase his support at the polls for the gubernatorial 2010 election for more modest views.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/ap-interview-perry-says-giuliani-will/n20071018160109990...

http://www.rickperry.org/


POSTED BY NOAH AT 8:45 PM 0 COMMENTS

The Money Game

The race to debunk John Cornyn from his seat in the U.S. Senate is well under way. The top two contenders are Democratic state representative Rick Noriega and San Antonio lawyer Mikal Watts. However, as of right now the race has largely been focused on fundraising rather than platforms and policies. The winner so far has been Mr. Watts who has brought in 8.3 million dollars. However, this is an inaccuracy because 7.5 million of it has been out of his personal bank account. In comparison, his Democratic opponent has raised only $510,000 although this is more than Watts has raised from individuals.

Is it really fair for a person to be able to fund their own political campaign? In this case I think it is flat out unfair. A politics that is limited to the economically elite is dangerously present and dangerous in and of itself. Candidates who have dedicated their profession to less economically prosperous causes such as community service are going to find it much more difficult to win office. Frankly, these are the types of people who should be the ones to represent us in office. But when campaigning becomes a game of who can dish out the most from their own personal bank account instead of fundraising from fellow citizens, politics walks a fine line of becoming a group of selfish individuals who represent their own interests rather than the interests of the community.

The motives of anyone willing to spend 7.5 million for an attempt to become a senator should be questioned. It begins to look very much like a hunger for power, a dream being chased, or an investment that could pay off later on. As a voter, I would rather see politicians in office that see politics for the dirty game that it is, but believe they are called to be an instrument of positive change rather than politicians that just seem to be buying themselves into the political game. Our government is supposed to be for the people, but when campaigns are hardly financed by a large population, we are given candidates that we didn’t help to run and boost into the political spotlight based upon their capability. Instead we are forced to choose from a group of candidates who could afford to shell out the most of their own money.

We are limited to contributing $2,300 to political campaigns so I believe candidates should be limited to the same amount for their own campaigns. The sad truth however is that John Cornyn has raised 6.6 million dollars and for him to be defeated next November, it is going to take someone with a lot more money than that.

- Garrett

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D8SA00000.html#

Not Easy Being Green

The Green Party’s stance on the death penalty is to abolish the death penalty. The website for the Green Party of Texas has a posting for an upcoming statewide march to end executions. http://txgreens.org/drupal/node/129 Before writing this blog entry I had no idea the Green Party even had a stance on the death penalty, I just assumed their whole platform was just concerned with the environment. That sort of thinking is something, I think is more common than not. Most people are uninformed about the Green Party. We as a society have been immersed in the two party systems, that even the huge issues that the outside parties cover go unnoticed. It seems that the Green Party has a very solid and well rounded platform that doesn’t just center on the environment.

In this article the writer, Art Browning left a link to a very touching tribute article he wrote for the Houston Independent Media Center and states, “Friends and supporters joined the families for a graveside commemoration, bringing memories, songs, photos, and poems to share, honoring the memory of these three innocent people who were taken from us by the state of Texas: Shaka Sankofa (Gary Graham), Frances Newton, and Joseph Nichols.” It’s very depressing to see pictures of real family members having to deal with the knowledge that their loved ones were not only wrongly imprisoned but wrongly executed. I don’t know how I would deal with such an injustice if I were in their shoes. Personally this is the only reason I’m against the death penalty, the ‘what if it’s the wrong guy’ clause that I just can’t seem to get past.

The Green Party’s website was very informative on many big issues besides the environment. They have many events and marches planned for the recent future like the, Troops Out Now pro-peace rally on January 27. Stuff like that is really important for that party to align itself with. A solid stance on the issues is key to keeping a solid base. That’s something the Green Party seems to possess, an unwavering commitment to their ideals. I’ve noticed the Green Party for years and always considered the people I met associated with it to be very smart individuals.

The 3rd party platform debates were a bit of an eye opener for me. The Green Party has some very clear and eloquent speakers that give off a well educated grasp of the issues. It will take time for this party to really make headway and get on the Texas ballot permanently but I see this happening in my lifetime. Its exciting to see a grass roots party come to fruition like the Green Party is doing. They are a good example of what American government can be if you just stick to your guns.

Will Democrats gain Senate power in 2008 Elections?

By Noah

Come November, the Texas State Senate seats are up for reelection in the 2008 state elections. Primary voting will be in March of next year. Currently the Texas State Senate is composed of twenty-seven men and four women. There are twenty Republicans and eleven Democrats and twenty-six incumbents with only five new members. Our senators have an average of twelve years of legislative experience and the average senator’s age is fifty-four years old with the youngest senator being thirty-six years old.

The Texas Legislature is considered to be the most powerful branch of state government. Meeting at the Texas State Capitol in Austin for regular sessions on the second Tuesday of January of each odd numbered year for one hundred and forty calendar days; senators work on bills in select committees. Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst presides over our Senate. Right now the Republican Party holds a majority of seats in both the Senate and House Chambers. A Texas State Senator must be at least twenty-six years old and citizen of Texas for five years prior to election. I could run myself. Senators serve a four year term and one half the senate membership is elected every two years with no set term limits. Some of the current senators have been in there since the invention of color television.

The current President Pro Tempore of the Texas Senate is Senator Mario Gallegos, Jr. (D-District 6). Senator Gallegos is up for reelection in 2008 having served in the Senate since 1995 and should have no problem getting reelected. Senator Royce West (D-District 23), former 2006 President Pro Tempore is also up for reelection in 2008. Senator West has served in the Senate since 1993 and is Chairman of the Intergovernmental Relations Committee. With a solid working relationship with Governor Rick Perry, he should easily be reelected. Senator Judith Zaffirini (D-District 21) has previously won her seat by an overwhelming landslide. She is currently Chair on the Senate Higher Education Sub-committee.

Austin is split into two State Senate Districts: District 14 with most of Austin and District 25 with a small southwestern portion. Senator Kirk Watson (D-District 14) was elected in 2006 replacing former democratic Senator Barrientos. This past legislative session he served as Chair of the Texas Air Control Board. Senator Wentworth (R-District 25) is serving his sixth term since 2006.

In a place where seniority means everything and experience lends a hand, the Texas Senate is in Republican control. How will the 2008 elections change the face of Texas? Sure the incumbents have one leg up, but your vote will definitely count.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Gallegos%2c_Jr.
http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/Senate/members/dist25/dist25.htm
http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/Senate/Facts.htm


POSTED BY NOAH AT 11:10 PM 0 COMMENTS

Children of the Cornyn

Good news for Texas Democrats, Republican Senator John Cornyn recently voted against expansion of the Childrens Health Insurance Program. While this positive outlook may seem contradictory to those that support expansion of CHIP, the Senator’s vote may end up helping the Texas Democratic Party defeat Cornyn when he is up for re-election next year. The issue has proven quite costly for Texas legislators who have voted against it resulting in losses for two Republicans and one Democrat in the 2004 elections. These Senators supported cuts that were made to the program in 2003 that led to almost 200,000 Texas children being knocked off of CHIP’s coverage. The fact that an incumbent Democrat lost re-election largely because of his unsupportive stance on children’s health insurance is proof that the issue is at the forefront of a wide range of voter’s decision making. Expansion of CHIP has drawn bipartisan support including a majority of Republicans in recent voting including Senior Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson.

Winning a seat in the U.S. senate would be huge for the Texas Democratic Party who has not held a seat in the U.S. senate since 1993 and has not held one of the major offices in Texas since Lieutenant Governor Bob Bullock in 1999. Winning a seat would be a small step for the Texas Democratic Party in regaining some power in the State.

To defeat John Cornyn in next year’s election, the party needs to press hard on the issue of children’s health insurance in hopes of winning the hearts of voters. At the same time, they need to be careful to not take their support too far. President Bush has continually voiced his opposition to the expansion of CHIP’s and has reflected that through his veto pen. While national support of the president’s polices are extremely negative, support of him and his policies is still fairly strong in Texas. To completely and harshly oppose the President’s policies could result in loss of support from even the middle of the road voter in Texas. Those voters on the fence are going to be the most important to a potential Democratic win and defeat of John Cornyn in 2008 so it is crucial that Texas Democrats play the moderate political game.

As for Cornyn, he may just want to think about compromising as his approval rating has dropped below 50 percent and will likely take another hit. He has yet to win the hearts of the Texas voter as his counterpart Kay Bailey Hutchinson has, so in order to keep his office, voting to approve expansion of CHIPs may win him enough respect back to fend off the charging Democrats. His reputation of being one of Bush’s biggest allies may have helped him before, but it is likely that those days are fading, and possibly his as well. - Garrett

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/stories/DN-cornynchip_05tex.ART.State.Edition2.42261a7.html

Kinky: buck up in Blue in time for 2010.

By Solman



Kinky Friedman is whispering his campaign again. But this time, he’s donning the blue Stetson of the Texas democrats. Maybe.
Kinky is discussing a potential bid in 2010, but an early poll places him with only 9 percent of democrats and dem-leaning independents giving him the primary vote if they were held last August (Selby). I’m a little disappointed, but not too surprised. From news clips and headlines, I am hearing echoes of 2006 coming from Kinky which tell me he might be falling into the same pitfalls he did as an independent.
I was an ardent supporter of Kinky in the last election, right up until I stood at the polls and voted for (democrat) Chris Bell. I prized his independence, which I viewed as both an asset and a challenge for without political ties throughout the government he could function out of conscience and not be forced to appease interest groups, although he therefore had perhaps less clout because of the lack of ties. But what disappointed me in the end was the pattern of joke telling he lapsed into, it seemed that in the final campaign days when he should have been addressing the issues with honesty and seriousness he was still spouting off his one-liners about how politics was really about sucking blood. I feel that helped cost him the election, for he was making a sort of a mockery of the system but it was not the effective satire he had hoped for. And now, he sounds like he is doing it again.
An article posted on Bloomberg news this week featured an interview with Kinky, and I am very disappointed to say he sounds like a broken record. I hear ‘save a horse, ride a cowboy,” “fight wussification,” and a series of old-hat jokes about politicians. This would be fine, I agree politics have a certain degree of blood-sucking, but it’s almost all he’s saying. he doesn’t discuss policy to any great degree, he doesn’t make any serious accusations about current officeholders that wouldn’t be at home on Comedy Central, and he seems unable to come up with any new jokes for that matter. He is certainly playing the role of a non-politician, but in doing so he is missing the point; he has his head so far up this self-righteous independent streak he’s missing the facts and points he needs to be a serious candidate, not simply a walking editorial cartoon. I still want Kinky to run in 2010, I want him to win because I think he could play his cards well enough to make some changes at the pink dome downtown. But he has to step up to the task, and jokes and half-hearted political jabs are not going to get him anywhere. But that might just be who Kinky is, and I might be inflating him to be something he really is not; he might be the sum of his jokes.
We’ll find out sometime in 2009 I suppose, apparently donned in blue.



http://www.statesman.com/search/content/shared/news/stories/2007/09/SELBY_COLUMN_0921_COX.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=aVioiTGnLMaM&refer=muse

What's Your Beef?

To my knowledge being a Democrat means that you tend to have a more liberal stance on most political view points. I realize that because of that stance certain likeminded people flock towards the Democratic Party’s liberal opinions on very passionate principals. Then vola the creation of a stereo type is born. Stereotypes like tree hugging hippies tend to get equated with the environmental movement and then when such movement gets equated with the Democratic Party it all gets garbled and perceived as one big Dead Fest. Just because Al Gore is a democrat and an environmentalist doesn’t mean he should also be a vegetarian. Being a Democrat, an environmentalist, and a vegetarian are all three very different personal choices one person can make, and two out of three isn’t bad.

So when Al Gore decided to grace us with his presence on Monday October 1st his message was met with some unlikely protest. According to Asher Price writer for the Austin American Statesmen, “People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals brought a campaign to Austin attacking Gore because he is not a vegetarian. Meat-eating, the group says, is a major cause of global warming”. I think this protest is completely ridiculous. I mean jeez haven’t these people heard the phrase don’t bite the hand that feeds. The man is doing his half, more than his half actually. Heck, I had no idea polar bears were drowning in the arctic as a result of global warming until I watched, An Inconvenient Truth.

The Peta people have always rubbed me the wrong way. First off their pronunciation of the acronym sounds so pretentious, and would make more sense if they pronounced it pƐta. They don’t know how to educate the public civilly and respect peoples personal choices. I am personally not into wearing fur; however if some jackass from peta threw red paint all over my mink coat I would physically make them eat it.

Al Gore has done more for the environmental movement not just as a Democrat with all his years in public service, but as a human being with true conviction for his cause, then any individual peta activist. He is a house hold name and is recognized and respected globally. His decorum earns him and as a result his cause respect. People are more apt to listen to him. Sometimes I think people should rethink how they choose to get their point across and the peta people might just catch more flies with honey then with vinegar. I know plenty of meat eating Democrats who would agree with me here.

Merely Super Tuesday

Primaries are the essence of the single party state elections, replacing the importance of the general election, but the brief era of Texas' Republican dominance seems to be after its zenith. Lt. Governor Dewhurst expressed the opinion that he is considering running for Governor in 2010 – and the only reason someone who occupies the most powerful position in Texas politics would want to give that up is national aspirations. Dewhurst also expressed interest in running for national Senate (where he would face off against the popular Hutchison), but he can't seem to decide which office he wants to pursue. With his limited time comes the proposal for so-called Super Duper Tuesday, with support in the barely-Republican-controlled house, where the campaign season before state primaries is cut down significantly.

Some have argued that this will only allow well-off candidates, both politically and financially, a shot at any sort of election in the national landscape, but with the tide slowly turning toward an inter-party competitive political atmosphere, the Super Duper Primary seems to be losing its significance in Texas. Until Texas's Democrats pose a real threat at the national level, the benefits that other states see in moving the primary forward are lost in the Lone Star State. But there's whispering that Dewhurst is responsible for the earlier primary's stalling, an effort to give himself more time for his campagning to sink in with the public should he decide to run for the Senate, this perspective seems to preclude more readily available explanations, and though probably with a grain of truth, it's probably not the primary reason for Super Duper Tuesday's buffetting support.

W. Gardner Selby, a columnist for the Austin American Statesman, thinks it's simply a matter of fickle support among Republicans, and a pretty rational concern with the negative effects of moving the date outweighing the positive. According to a memo circulated by the Republican County Chairman's Association, moving the primary forward would put a huge amount of pressure on election officials, who would have to work straight through the holiday season. Texas is not a huge player in the national elections, at least not in terms of campaign money and media attention, but states like Arizona, Idaho, and Indiana are sorely battling for campaign tourism. This could change in the next decade or so if the Democrats organize their untapped support, but right now, adding the Duper wouldn't have an impact on Texas politics.

Senator Cornyn feels Wattage increase in Texas power struggle

By Noah

As so many of us know there is an upcoming election in 2008 for the United States Senator from Texas. Mikal Watts is seeking the Democratic nomination to run against incumbent Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) and the primary will be in March 2008. Watts is primarily known as a very powerful, wealthy plaintiff’s attorney that has given large sums of money to Democratic candidates nationally and in Texas. He has been quoted as saying, “Washington’s values are up-side down. Texans deserve a United States Senator who shares their values and is willing to work as hard as they do to make all of our lives better.” Will the National Democratic Party put their support behind a candidate that already has $7.5 million dollars raised or support another Tony Sanchez candidate like State Representative Rick Noriega (D-Houston)? Noriega has reported raising only $570,000. Watts may buy the primary nomination with $4 million of his own dollars?

Mikal Watts lives in San Antonio, Texas. He was born and raised in Corpus Christi. He attended public school and was very athletic. Watts received a Bachelor’s degree from the University of Texas in just two years in 1987 and then attended University of Texas School of Law. Watts clerked for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Texas, the Honorable Thomas R. Phillips before working for six years at a Corpus Christi based private law firm of David L. Perry and Associates. He formed the Watts Law Firm and has won over $2 billion for his clients in massive law suits against companies like Firestone, TXU, Centerpoint Energy, and AT&T. He also attacked drug companies for the supply of Rezulin, the diabetes drug. Name one of the best trial attorneys in the United States, Watts has a large firm with 130 employees and offices in Corpus Christi, Houston, San Antonio, Edinburgh, and Austin.

Besides being a Baptist and philanthropist, here is where he stands on the issues… He is a pro-life “rare bird Democrat.” He wants our troops home from Iraq, universal health-care, the saving of social security system, a middle class economy, more grants for college, honoring veterans, and a strengthening of national security. Watts sounds a little like Barack Obama in his political views. Will his oratorical skills and well-funded campaign pay off for him?

Already feeling out Senator Cornyn’s weaknesses, the primary Democratic nomination should go to Watts. It has been stated he will need over $25 million and a large South Texas backing to defeat the incumbent. We will find out the results in March 2008.

More reading:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/casey/5119547.html
http://www.thetexasblue.com/senator-watts
http://wattsforsenate.com/index.php/content/pages/issues/

POSTED BY NOAH AT 11:10 PM 0 COMMENTS

The Green Elephant comes to Texas

Green Elephants are making a visit to San Antonio this weekend. However, their not stopping for the circus, but instead they will be attending the Republicans for Environmental Protection’s very own leadership conference. Key speakers at the event include conservative commentator Rob Dreher, evangelical pastor Joel Hunter, Republican pollster Whit Ayres, and the co-author of Newt Gingrich’s new book A Contract with the Earth, Terry Maple.

The interest group REP is establishing their 10th chapter in the state of Texas tallying in at a total of about 200 members making it the second largest of their chapters after California. The group was created in 1996 and prides itself on past conservatives for conservation such as Theodore Roosevelt and Barry Goldwater. In my opinion, you can make a pretty strong argument that Theodore Roosevelt would have been considered a liberal by today’s ideology and Barry Goldwater was liberal on many social issues. Despite their early success, the group is still yet to get any Texas politicians to align themselves with the group.

So why pay any attention to this group? Well, as exhibited in the past, the Republicans have mastered the technique of creating powerful political machines and if the Democrats aren’t careful, they could see some potential swing votes taken away. In particular, many Christians have begun to move back to the center of the political spectrum partially due to concern of environmental issues related to global warming. If the REP can get some politicians on board, those torn between parties may believe they can vote for both their concern over social issues, and the environment in Republican candidates.

To me the group seems like a walking contradiction. Politically, protecting the environment has meant putting caps and regulations on business, and directing governmental funding towards environmental issues. Last time I checked, supporting regulation of business and increased governmental spending on anything other than defense and the military made you a liberal. So how do you protect the environment while remaining a conservative? Well maybe you can privatize environmental protection, leaving it up to the Boy Scouts to try and stop TXU from building 14 coal plants across Texas. Something makes me think the members of this group should be liberals, but they’ve been told that all liberals are baby killing adulterers for so long that they just can’t bring themselves to accept the awful truth. Don’t expect any Texas politicians to align themselves with a group or cause too often associated with Al Gore anytime soon.

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA100307.02B.greenelephant.2ca3802.html

- Garrett