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

Early Primary for single party? Not worth it...

So Texas didn't give itself a boost on the field of politics.

So what?

The Ledge decided not to move its primary elections up a month, a trend nationwide that places states in a more influential spot on the presidential campaign tour. In an interview with the Austin American Statesman Lt. Governor Dewhurst cited "a lack of consensus among Democrats or Republicans" as not being able to resolve the issue, but i have to wonder about that. yes, these days it seems both sides of the aisle are constantly at each others throats over every issue (save maybe their pay raises), but considering the dominance of the Republican party, especially in Texas, whats the big deal? are we that anxious to give the Republican candidate a boost?

Because of our single-party dominance in the state, early primaries seem a little, well, superfluous. Swing states benefit greatly from early primaries, by getting their candidates selected early they are placing themselves in a position to greatly effect the campaign outcome, which may not have any specific benefit to the state but it does gain political clout and bragging rights. Plus, the attention cant be bad. But with the presidential season starting copiously early this year, and with (yes, we say it every time, but maybe its true) the importance of the election growing as the global climate - political and literal - heats up, early primaries seem to be appropriate.

But Texas really shouldn't worry. even with a hotly contested race for the party nomination, Texas really doesn't seem to benefit greatly from early primaries. In November of 2008, the maps on network news will paint the state a deep crimson, whoever the candidate may be. Even Rudolph Giuliani would (almost) undoubtedly sweep the state.

Dewhurst may very well be correct when he says that the two sides of the aisle couldn't reach a consensus on the issue of the primaries, but (here's my bias coming out) i wouldn't be surprised if the republicans didn't feel it necessary to grant the concession of early primaries to the democrats, who would most likely benefit most from early primaries. Had the ledge moved the primaries up, the Dems in the presidential race would then give more attention to Texas Dems, for despite they're few numbers they would then have greater influence over the national race. So perhaps the Republicans, who don't really benefit from early primaries, didn't feel it necessary to give that clout to the Democrats.

This is Rove territory, after all.

More reading:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/09/30/0930dewhurstqa.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primary_elections

Is Ron Paul a RINO?

The term ‘RINO’, an acronym for, ‘Republican in Name Only’ is the only educational thing I’ve learned from listening to Rush Limbaugh. In Texas where some people vote Republican because that’s how their parents voted. Being a ‘RINO’ is probably a good way to go to secure an election from people who wouldn’t know a party platform from a party tray. I’ve observed in my own life that for some people here in Texas, being Republican has nothing to do with actually agreeing with the party platform, but is more like a family tradition.

RINO or not, Congressman Paul has some serious crossover appeal. In a recent debate he was the only Republican candidate who was against the war in Iraq. Online according to an Austin American Statesman article, “Alone among the contenders, Paul, a veteran Texas congressman with a libertarian streak, made the case for withdrawing troops. That drew a sharp challenge from Chris Wallace, one of the debate questioners, who asked whether the United States should take its marching orders from al Qaeda. "No! We should take our marching orders from our Constitution," Paul shouted back, pointing his pen at Wallace for emphasis. "We should not go to war without a declaration" by Congress.” http://www.statesman.com/search/content/news/stories/nation/09/06/0906gop.html

This sort of statement from Paul separates him from the other Republicans running for office. However ideally and theoretically he’s right. That statement strikes to the heart of republican doctrine. Following the laws of this country and the principles of international etiquette are policies that should be held in high esteem.

I watched to debates earlier last week on the local PBS affiliate KLRU and agreed with most of Paul’s answers. His stance on the death penalty and the war on drugs contradict with that of most Republicans. Those are not small issues to have opposing viewpoints on. When running for president most candidates hold tightly to their base and their tried and true beliefs. But in the case with Paul he seems to be playing an angle that just may bring this country together. The United States is not ready for a third party president, so a ‘RINO’ may be just the compromise we can all live with.

A middle of the road president for a middle class country sounds too good to be true. After the last two heartbreaking elections that showed us just how divided we are as a nation. I am not getting my hopes up; I’m just going to cast my ballot.