Burnt Orange Report

The Hispanic Vote in Dallas County...

By Byron LaMasters

Is decisive. One of my Winter Break projects is to crunch the numbers in Dallas County, and figure out how Democrats can strategically use their resources to sweep the county in 2006. Democrats won six of twelve countywide races this year in which there was a Democrat and a Republican on the ballot. According to one study, there was one key difference between the Democrats that won Dallas County, and the Democrats that lost Dallas County -- the Hispanic vote. Via the Dallas Morning News:

Dallas County Sheriff-elect Lupe Valdez and judicial candidate Don Adams effectively used the Dallas County Hispanic vote to get elected.

According to a study just released by Dallas mathematician and political consultant Dr. Dan Weiser, Ms. Valdez and Mr. Adams got 60 percent or more of the Hispanic vote and 88 percent or more of the black vote.

They won.

In contrast, Mr. Kerry got 88 percent of the black vote, but only 56 percent of the Hispanic vote.

He narrowly lost Dallas County to Mr. Bush.

All three Democratic candidates got 40 percent of the white vote.

Dr. Weiser says the rise of the Hispanic electorate here signals that the county is trending Democratic.

Dallas County is extremely winnable for Democrats in years to come. If Democrats can win 40%+ of the White vote, demographics should make it easy to win assuming we turn out our base, and maintain our advantage among Hispanics. Having a Hispanic woman (Lupe Valdez) leading the county ticket in 2004 probably helped in that regard.

That Old Time Religion

By Jim Dallas

One of my favorite Internet toys is the NORC's General Social Survey analysis site.

Here's an interesting statistic I discovered running the cross-tabulations module:

Of white "Strong Democrats", 77.3 percent either "know God exists" or "believe but have doubts" (334 respondants of 432 between 1992 and 2002). 58.8 percent "know God exists."

Of white "Strong Republicans", 88.1 percent do. (449 respondants of 510). 76.1 percent "know God exists"

However....

Of white "Strong Democrats", 44.4 percent believed that hell "definitely" exists (36 of 81 respondants). 48.1 percent believe in religious miracles (39 of 81)

Of white "Strong Republicans", 69.8 percent believe that hell "definitely" exists
(67 of 96 respondants). 64.1 believe in religious miracles (59 of 92).

Ponder that. A pretty strong majority of both hard-core Democrats and hard-core Republicans believe in God, but Republicans by far are a lot more likely to believe in damnation and miracles.

What is really odd is that there doesn't seem to be a strong partisan divide over the nature of the Bible; white "Strong Republicans" seem to be slightly more likely to think the Bible is the literal Word of God, but only by about 10 points or so. Not like the big 30 point divide over hell.

I don't think that "literalism" or "fundamentalism" are the sine qua non of religious conservatism (which, let us stipulate, is a far more powerful force in the Republican Party); rather, I think, it's rooted in a sort of mysticism.

What I'd like to see is a partisan breakdown of belief in faeries and angels.

Frost for DNC?

By Byron LaMasters

He's making the calls. The AP reports:

Defeated Texas Congressman Martin Frost is among potential candidates for chairman of the Democratic National Committee who are telephoning members about the situation, a leading Democrat said Monday.

"The following candidates are making phone calls to DNC members -- Howard Dean, Donnie Fowler, Martin Frost and Leo Hindery," said Mark Brewer, party chairman in Michigan and president of the Association of State Democratic Chairs.

[...]

Former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb has sent videos to the state chairmen promoting his interest in the job, Brewer said. Fowler is a Democratic strategist and son of a former national chairman. Hindery is a New York businessman and former chairman of the Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network LLC, a New York-based sports cable channel that televises New York Yankees baseball games.

Frost spokeswoman Susan McAvoy said: "Martin is taking some calls and has placed some calls" but emphasized he was merely exploring possibilities.

As a Democrat who grew up in Dallas, I've always been a fan of Martin Frost. Still, I think that my first choice would be Simon Rosenberg, and while I haven't done much posting on the DNC race, I'll be sure to post more on the DNC race in the next two months.

More thoughts from Political State Report and MyDD.

Stick, Opiela Contesting Stealing Elections

By Byron LaMasters

I can see the point of one commenter on Andrew's post with this one. Why is Jack Stick contesting the election of Mark Strama? Only challenging the elections of a Hispanic woman (Yvonne Gonzalez-Toureilles), and a Vietnamese-American man (Hubert Vo) would just kinda look bad, and might give some folks the wrong impression that Republicans in Texas only want to steal elections against minorities. So what's the solution? Throw in a challenge against a White guy, too.

The Austin American Statesman reports:

Republican state Rep. Jack Stick of Austin has become the latest House candidate to file a challenge over his Election Day defeat.

Democrat Mark Strama defeated Stick by 569 votes. Stick filed a challenge with the Texas House of Representatives through the Texas Secretary of State's Office on Thursday.

So yall know what to do. Donate to Mark Strama so he can afford to defend himself from those who want to usurp the democratic process and steal elections. (Strama also has a good deal of campaign debt, so your contribution will help retire that as well).

The San Antonio Express News has more:

A Republican legislator from Travis County, unseated by a challenger Nov. 2, has filed paperwork asking the GOP-majority Texas House to reverse the results and award him the seat or call a new election.

[...]

Earlier last week, Rep. Talmadge Heflin of Houston filed a contest of his 32-vote loss to Hubert Vo, his Democratic challenger, and Eric Opiela of Karnes City filed a contest of his 835-vote defeat at the hands of Democratic candidate Yvonne Gonzalez-Toureilles of Alice.

Vince has more over at Political State Report. When will Republicans stop trying to steal elections? Here's what the Austin American Statesman said in their editorial today:

Defeated state Rep. Talmadge Heflin of Houston is giving his Republican colleagues in the Texas House a major league headache by asking them to overturn election results that cost him his job.

[...]

It could be disastrous for the GOP if the committee recommends overturning Vo's victory and the full House membership seats Heflin. Vo is a Vietnamese immigrant who came to America after the fall of Saigon in 1975 and worked his way into a successful career in computer sales and real estate. His victory is not one the House Republicans can plunder without immense fallout.

Republicans already are accused of gerrymandering to assure the outcome of elections, of grabbing power voters didn't give them and changing the rules to protect their leaders. Awarding a House seat to a favored member who lost the vote could only be viewed as election theft through uncontained GOP arrogance.

Majority party arrogance is an issue nationally as well as in Texas. U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who strong-armed the Legislature into the redistricting mess that the U.S. Supreme Court has questioned, has serious ethical problems. The U.S. House this month changed its rules to protect DeLay in the event he is indicted for campaign violations.

[...]

Heflin is asking his House colleagues to give him the seat he didn't win anyway. They should reject that path because it is the way to more rancor, bitterness and another disastrous legislative session.

The Texas Democratic Party has the wall of shame on their website for the three thieves:

After Democrats gained seats in the Legislature for the first time in a generation Republicans are getting desperate. Three of the defeated incumbents are trying to steal the elections right before our eyes, filing election contests in the Craddick Cartel run House. Talmadge Heflin was narrowly defeated by Democrat Hubert Vo, Jack Stick was beat by more than 500 votes by Democrat Mark Strama and Eric Opiela was defeated by almost a thousand votes by Democrat Yvonne Gonzalez-Toureilles, and now all of them want to overthrow the will of the people. Keep checking with TXDemocrats.org to find out the latest on GOP attempts to deny the people the representatives they chose!

With the exception that Eric Opiela is not an incumbent, it's hard to argue with the TDP folks. More thoughts on the election contests at mUUsings.

Poor Aggies Continued

By Byron LaMasters

I HAD to take a picture of this when I saw it today...

You'll see the sign on your left going northbound on Guadalupe just north of campus. Kerbey Lane is a favorite campus area hangout. It has that grungy / granola "old Austin" feel to it. It's open 24/7, and they've got Kerbey Queso to die for, even if their service is well... a bit lacking at times (meaning all the time).

Speaking of Kerbey... a little bird told me that Howard Dean was spotted at Kerbey Lane a few weeks ago. Apparently, he was in town for some tournament that his daughter was in, but made no public appearances -- just a few very small, private events with old supporters. And yes, he's sending out feelers for a run for DNC chair, although I'm personally more of a fan of Simon Rosenberg.

Recounts Begin in Heflin Case- GOP Files Contests

By Andrew Dobbs

So my prognosis on the Heflin-Vo race seems to be only half right- Heflin will most likely ask for a contest (seeing as his attorney is still making ludicrious claims of fraud), but I figured he wouldn't call for a recount as that would reduce the viability of his claim to have actually won the election. I was wrong on that count. Heflin requested a recount last week and that recount begins tomorrow in Harris County.

Now why are the claims of fraud ludicrous? As I've said before- to steal an election you have to control the people who count the votes. The votes were counted by a Republican, there were a dozen Republican operatives overseeing the process alongside her, Tom DeLay's favorite attorney (and Heflin's counsel in this case) Andy Taylor was looking over her shoulder as well and several members of the news media were keeping an eye on the process. So 14 tough, DeLay friendly Republicans decided to steal an election for a Democrat over a longtime Craddick/DeLay ally? Unlikely.

Now the fear is that the elections supervisors will cherry pick the boxes to recount- looking just in heavily Vo boxes. This is wrong- if they want to recount the vote, fine. But they should count EVERY vote and see why it is that Vo's victory margin went from 110 votes to 31 votes in the middle of the night when the election supervisor had already gone home. The process raised the eyebrows of even Republican Secretary of State Geoff Connor to the point he had to admonish the elections workers in Houston. So if anybody is guilty of some dirty dealings, it would have to be the GOP.

Heflin will ask for a recount, he'll try to cherry pick the boxes to reduce his own risk of losing votes and he'll either end up with a win there or he'll contest the election in the House on the grounds of "massive irregularities" which could only have happened if more than a dozen rock-ribbed Republicans decided they wanted to elect a Democrat. Word on the street is that Heflin could care less about this- he's disappointed but he knows that a lucrative lobbyist job is his for the taking. Craddick is the one pushing this, this is a top-down sort of effort. The GOP is using its institutional power to steal an election.

And two other races are now up in the air- Jack Stick (who lost by more than 350 votes to Mark Strama) and Eric Opiela (who lost by several hundred votes to Yvonne Gonzalez-Toureilles) have filed contests in the House, just like Heflin is likely to do. Craddick now gets to pick the judge and jury for these cases and either Strama and Gonzalez-Toureilles will be seated or new elections will be held. This process is sure to be a sham, and the people of Texas will lose money, lose faith in their elected officials, and lose the peace of mind knowing that their vote counts for something- no matter who they elect. The GOP is ruining Texas politics.

This is just the latest in a long string of Republican abuses of power, a rejection of the will of the voters when it goes against their hopes. When Clinton was reelected, they decided to impeach him. When Al Gore won the popular vote and probably won Florida, Republicans stopped his recount in order to take the presidency. When Texas voters elected Democrats to Congress even in GOP districts, Republicans redrew the districts to force Republicans into office. When Gray Davis was reelected governor of California, Republicans paid for a huge petition effort to get him kicked out of office early. And now they are trying to cancel legal elections so they can keep 3 new Democratic faces out of the legislature. The whole thing makes me sick to my stomach and represents the biggest reason to oppose this party, whether you are conservative, liberal or otherwise.

Keep your eyes open and keep checking BOR for your news on this topic.

Update: Turns out Heflin already filed the contest in addition to the recount. If the recount comes out for Vo, his ground in the contest hearings will be severely limited. The recount should come out for Vo and it will be very interesting to see what will happen.

Contact Your Rep-Elect on the DeLay Rule Change

By Byron LaMasters

The Daily DeLay and Josh Marshall have been doing a fantastic job hounding Republican congressmen on their vote on the DeLay rule change. However, I still don't know if or how my Republican Congressman-Elect, Michael McCaul voted. Since new members will probably not yet have D.C. and district offices set up until after the begining of the year, I had no way to contact my congressman-elect (even though Lloyd Doggett is still my honorary congressman, and should I have a federal concern, my mail will most likely go to his office). I mentioned this in a post last week, and sure enough, one of my readers emailed me with contact information for the five Texas Republican Congressmen-Elect.

DISTRICT 1: Louie Gohmert - 903/579-7544
DISTRICT 2: Ted Poe - 281/358-8866
DISTRICT 10: Michael T. McCaul - 512/342-0001
DISTRICT 11: Mike Conaway - 432/685-1033
DISTRICT 24: Kenneth Marchant - 972/245-3311

So, if you live in any of these districts, please call their office and ask how they voted on the Tom DeLay rule. Here's my sample script that I used:

Hi there. My name is __________. Is this the correct contact number for Congressman-Elect ________?

Ok. Well, I was just calling as a concerned voter, and as a new member of congress I know he's probably busy setting up constituent service contact information and such, but I was under the impression that congressmen-elect are able to vote in party caucus meetings? Is that correct?

Well, I was interested in Rep-Elect ________'s vote on the rule change in the House Republican caucus to allow indicted members to serve in the party leadership? Can you tell me how Rep-Elect _______ voted?

I have messages into all five. I'm not expecting a reply from the other four, but I'll keep calling Rep-Elect McCaul everyday until I get a reply, since I am his constituent after all (they drew central Austin into his district, so he'll have to deal with us). I honestly do not know the GOP House caucus rules on the issue. I would be shocked if any of them voted against the DeLay rule. These guys not only owe their victory to Tom DeLay -- none of them would have even run for congress in 2004 without the DeLay/Craddick redistricting saga. I know that Democrats allow Representatives-Elect to vote in their party caucus votes. Two years ago the Democratic candidate for CO-7 (in an undecided race at the time) was the decisive vote that elected Robert Menendez (D-NJ) the caucus chair over Rosa DeLauro (D-CT). I don't know what the deal is with Republicans, but I figure that it's time to find out. So call your Rep-Elect, and let me know via comment or email ( Byron AT BurntOrangeReport DOT com) what you find out.

Update: Ted Poe's office just called me back. They said that Congressmen-Elect have no voting privledges in caucus elections until they are actually sworn in. That's not the case in the Democratic caucus, but I have no idea what the GOP caucus rules are. I'm still going to be sure to get an answer from Rep-Elect McCaul's office, and you all are welcome to call the other guys as well.

Goodbye, Vince

By Byron LaMasters

Well, not really. He'll still be around. Vince has decided to shut down his blog, the Free State Standard - one of the half dozen or so Texas blogs I try to check most every day. Vince had to take a leave of absense from blogging while he was working on a campaign the past couple of months, and its difficult to build back an audience if you quit for awhile (I guess that is unless you were the Bush Campaign webmaster or the other half of Markos Zuniga's consulting firm). But not all of us are that lucky.

Vince will still be around, though. He'll continue to write at the Van Zandt County Democrats Blog (he's the county chair) and the Political State Report (which reminds me, I need to add PSR to my blogroll, and maybe post on there again). I'm sure that Vince will also contribute to whatever we decide to do with Texas Tuesdays. Anyway, best of luck, Vince.

You Get What You Vote For

By Byron LaMasters

Yesterday, I was chatting with my friend Chris who was complaining about his unwanted Republican troll posting comments on his blog.

Then today the good folks over at the Panhandle Truth Squad respond to their Republican commenters by telling them exactly what they voted for. I could have used some of those points when I ran into a friend in Dallas over Thanksgiving that I hadn't talked to since the election who voted for Bush.

Personally, I'm thankful for our Republican commenters. Even though they might think that I'm anti-Christian and intolerant, this is our blog, we have the final say, and that's good enough for me. If you aren't willing to take a little heat from time to time, you shouldn't allow comments in the first place.

I Demand A Recount In Ohio!

By Jim Dallas

58-48... Bengals?!?

"It was crazy," said the Bengals' Rudi Johnson, who ran for 202 yards and two touchdowns. "Just crazy."

The 106 combined points were the second most in an NFL game, trailing only the Redskins' 72-41 victory over the Giants on Nov. 27, 1966. Until Sunday, the most points in a game since the NFL-AFL merger in 1970 was 99 - Seattle beat Kansas City 51-48 in overtime on Nov. 27, 1983.

By far, though, the most fulfilling game of the day was watching the Texans stuff the Titans (or as I like to call them, the fake Oilers versus the ex-Oilers), coming from waaay behind to win the game 31-21 in Houston. In part, though, the spectacle occurred because the Titans offense completely melted down in the second half, with three big turnovers.

Let the Bloodbath Begin

By Byron LaMasters

Also known as the 2006 GOP primary for governor in Texas.

Free State Standard has the latest.

A little known provision in the end of the year congressional spending bill allows for candidates to spend money raised for a federal race to be spent on state / local races subject to state law. Of course, Texas being Texas means that our state campaign finance laws are minimal to nil. Thus, this bill would allow Senator Hutchison to spend the $6.7 million in her federal account for a race for governor. However, it wouldn't surprise me if Governor Perry responded by trying to push through a change in state law that would prevent Hutchison from spending her federal money. I just hope they're both able to raise and spend as much money as possible, so they can saturate the Texas airwaves starting just about a year from now saying nasty things about one another. That would make for a most joyful holiday season.

I'll be watching the endorsements line up in the race as it heats up. Rick Perry already has a big one. Former candidate for Texas governor, Clayton "Rape: just lie back and enjoy it" Williams has endorsed Rick Perry for reelection over either Comptroller Strayhorn or Senator Hutchison. Alright then, I guess that Rick Perry now has the people-who-think-anologies-comparing-rape-to-weather-are-funny vote locked up. I wonder who will be endorsing next?

Poor Aggies

By Byron LaMasters

Well, it just wouldn't be Thanksgiving weekend without my writing a Poor Aggies post. However, it's really "Poor Longhorns" again this year. Yeah, we beat the Aggies again in one of the more bizarre football games (at least the first half) I've ever seen -- how often are three missed (combined) extra points followed up by 44 and 52 yard field goals? And what's up with a one-point safety?

Still, we put together a damn good football team. The 26-13 score doesn't give justice to the degree that the Longhorns dominated the last three quarters of the game. If we had a timeout at the end of the first half, and had been a bit less classy at the end of the game, that 26-13 victory could have easily had been 40-6. Go back and give us a couple of touchdowns against Oklahoma (ok, I know that's asking a lot), and we'd most likely be competing for the national championship come January. Coulda, woulda, shoulda won't a change thing. But it's also not fair that one of the best football teams in the country has to hope that some computer formula will arbitarily rank us ahead of California to even get a BCS bid. That's just about as stupid as creationism if you ask me. The system needs change, and its good to see Mack Brown leading the fight.

"This is one of best teams in the country," said Texas coach Mack Brown. "This team deserves to play in the BCS and if they don't, then we don't have a system (that works)."

Amen to that.

Update: More thoughts at the People's Republic of Seabrook.

I'm Thankful For Rich Alumni

By Zach Neumann

I was going to bitch about Iran tonight, but I find this story about UT Alum Joe Jamail a lot more entertaining (and less depressing). The NY Times writes:

Of the more than a dozen statues peppering the University of Texas campus here, one glorifies the first native-born governor, two pay tribute to deceased American presidents, and others honor Confederate leaders. Another statue is poised to join the cast on Friday, honoring a graduate who is a successful trial lawyer. The subject, Joe Jamail, a Houston alumnus who has donated $21.7 million to the university and its athletic programs, already has one bronze likeness at the law school and his name is on several campus sites. The newest statue of Mr. Jamail, who won billions of dollars for Pennzoil in a landmark suit in the 1980's, is scheduled to be unveiled inside the football stadium before the annual game against archrival Texas A&M. "It is absolutely appropriate to say thank you," said William Powers Jr., dean of the University of Texas Law School. "He is an avid Longhorn sports fan." But not everyone looks forward to another likeness. The statue, a donation from the law firm of Vinson & Elkins in Houston, makes Mr. Jamail the only person with two on the 350-acre campus, university officials say, and that distinction has rankled some faculty members. "One is enough, with due respect to whoever," said a journalism professor, Gene Burd. Professor Burd added that, at a time when public universities are desperate for money because of fluctuations in state financing, the new statue sent the wrong signal for people "who see this as another white male capitalist." "Considering all the talk about other statues, it is almost asking for a demonstration or incident," he added.

I’ve got no problem with white-male-capitalists, especially when they keep our football team on top. Speaking of which, I’m calling tomorrow’s game for Texas, 35-21.

The Biology Blues

By

George Bush wants more money for Abstinence Only programs.

I'm not sure this is worth $131 million...

(By the way, Happy Thanksgiving, all...:))

This plan is yet another attempt to not only legislate morality, but to show the Christian right that Bush and his minions are ready to play ball with them. It is a dog and pony show, pure and simple. As the gay marriage issue scared people witless into thinking that Adam and Steve on the next block's legal union would shatter the sanctity of marriage, this is a shameless ploy into scaring people, thinking that Susie and Johnny are going to engage in teenage sexual escapades as a result of high school biology classes offering a comprehensive cirriculum that includes methods of birth control.

If properly taught, a comprehensive sex ed program, as opposed to Abstinence Only, is more effective in saving the kids' lives. There is no evidence that Abstinence Only works--as a matter of fact, I have read evidence to the contrary. Do some high schoolers have sex? Yes. Is it a good idea? No, not really. Abstinence education, while it should be taught as part of a program, does not offer education regarding birth control and statistics (it's usually a good idea to prevent unwanted pregnancies), and correct condom use, which, as we all know, prevents many STDs. Abstinence is a good idea, not it is not always a reality. It should be part of the cirriculum, not the whole.

A personal aside here--my sex ed began in 4th grade. It was more thorough beginning in 7th grade and going through high school. The cirriculum included topics such as birth control, STDs, pregnancy, and their consequences. However, here were additional topics such as self-esteem discussions, statistics of birth control failure, and in middle school, a very graphic video of a woman giving birth that scared every female silly. We discussed consequences at length--health-wise, life-wise, stressing that girls who gave birth during high school had a much harder time and were very likely to drop out, therefore possibly forgoing college and a good career. No one I know was inspired to hook up because they could get a condom in school or knew about birth control and sexual consequences. Those who were already sexually active were at least more informed, and protected. They had a better idea of possible outcomes of their actions.

Although I do believe that Bush is concerned about the nation's youth to some extent--after all, he has two daughters--his shameless pandering to the Christian right will inevitably leave millions of young people grossly uninformed, and may lead to increased teen pregnancies and a declivity in propho use, which can result in a serious STD epidemic. Students often get all of their sex ed at school, and they deserve to be informed. We owe it to the next generation to keep them safe and healthy so they can be our future leaders. And Bush owes it to them to finally act like the fiscal conservative he claims to be by refraining from asking for millions of dollars for a program that has yet to prove successful.

Happy Thanksgiving

By Jim Dallas

Go Colts!

We've always been at war against Eurasia

By Jim Dallas

Vladimir Putin is the next Saddam Hussein. That is, by the magic of popular amnesia, in five years Americans are absolutely gonna hate this guy, despite the fact that our conservative leaders were going gaa-gaa over him.

It was only a few months ago when righties were absolutely giddy about Putin being "tuff on terror" (just like our President!). Dubya looked into his soul. Putin returned the compliment with a nice endorsement. Meanwhile, liberals, such as myself, have always had a queasy feeling about Putin. I'll admit it - from the very begininng, I was hoping that a nice liberal or social democrat would win the Russian election so that we could be happy hippy comrades. But since, I've had serious concerns about efforts to crack down on the freedom of the press, the whole Chechnya mess, and the fact that Putin was KGB. And then of course last week's announcement about nukes.

Now that the Russians are looking like they're ready to party like it's 1979 as the Ukraine post-election drama unfolds, there appears to be a little bit of a falling out. My cybernemesis, Canadian blogger Adam Yoshida, (almost) goes as far as comparing Russia to Nazi Germany.

Give Thanks

By Andrew Dobbs

Today is the national day of Thanksgiving. Peter Jennings referred to it tonight as the "singular American holiday"- the only holiday that is unique to our country and universal to all of our people. Let's keep the spirit of that holiday alive by remembering what we have to be thankful for.

We ought to be thankful, first and foremost, for the brave men and women fighting for our freedom and the freedom of faraway peoples in Iraq and Afghanistan. It saddens me that I won't see my father this year, but I know that what he is doing will make every Thanksgiving I have from here on out that much sweeter. They sacrifice everything and take a road less traveled these days so that we can all live happily. When we travel on safe roads and through safe skies, gather in warm homes, laugh and pray freely and speak openly about our opinions, let's remember that those men and women are the reason we have this freedom and comfort- because they sacrificed theirs.

Remember also that we can be thankful to live in this country. Yeah, we lost an election. But there wasn't violence in the streets, there weren't mass arrests of Kerry supporters, we are safe despite our opposition to the president. 5 snot-nosed kids can write a blog that bashes the president and his colleagues almost every single day and not one of us sleeps in fear or worries about our families' safety. Our country has been through much worse than 4 more years of George W. Bush and we're still here. We'll be fine- and that is something to be thankful for.

Finally, be thankful that God's grace gives us so much to share with those we love on this day. I hope that all of you are near the ones you love today, and if you aren't, I hope that you can find something to give thanks for regardless. We live in a place where there is so much to be had, so much opportunity, so much generosity and so much decency as opposed to lands full of want, greed and hate. Over the last 3 years, because of our strength, we managed to put 2 more countries on the road from cruelty to hope. Let's hope that we can continue to use our power, wealth and opportunity for ends as righteous as these for as long as we live.

And one last thing- I am thankful to all of you out there who read what we have to say. It gives us a way to affect our world, even when we feel small. Keep on coming, and have a Happy Thanksgiving.

Why simply rebranding won't work

By Jim Dallas

I like Oliver Willis, but it sure didn't take long for the twits* to turn the tables on us.

* by which I mean, those Republican apologists who are so smug as to be completely intolerable and worthless to us, politically speaking (as in, when you add up the people who are persuadable, they ain't them). I'm sure there are probably a few loyal readers of the conservative bent who think the same about me, for what its worth. Why resort to name-calling then? Because sometimes it's just inevitable, and I'd like to get the first shot in.

* Is anyone else disturbed by the cognitive dissonance that said twits employ, when, for example, they remind us (correctly) that some Democrats were right-wing crazies (e.g. segregationists), but then accuse us of all being left-wing crazies (e.g. Stalinists)?

Thieves and Thugs

By Byron LaMasters

Otherwise known as the Texas Republican Party.

A lot of readers have emailed me, encouraging me to take a harder line in my previous posts on the Heflin / Vo race. I actually agreed with the Republican commenters who asked why it was alright for Al Gore to ask for a recount, but not for Talmadge Heflin. Asking for a recount was the right thing to do. Any race decided by 500 votes when millions are cast, or by 32 when over 40,000 are cast should have a recount. If I were a candidate on the short end of such a situation, you can damn well bet I'd want a recount, if for no other reason than to have peace of mind in defeat.

So, Talmadge Heflin asked for a recount, and I had no problem with it.

Now, Talmadge Heflin wants to usurp the democratic process, ignore the will of the people of house district 149, and steal an election that he lost to a Vietnamese-American immigrant and first time candidate Hubert Vo.

That makes Talmadge Heflin (and his lawyer Andy Taylor, and their buddies in the Texas GOP) a thuggish thief in my book.

Last year, Texas Republicans engaged in an unprecidented mid-decade congressional redistricting so that politicians could pick their voters, instead of voters picking their politicians. This year, Texas Republicans are taking things a step further. As Jim noted, there is talk of contesting not one, not two, but three elections in the state house. This is worse than politicians picking their voters. This is having the politician with the most money hiring the toughest lawyer to argue which votes count in front of a rigged jury. Pure thuggery.

So what can you do? First of all, donate to Hubert Vo. Vo will need to spend tons of money on lawyer fees to defend his election in the state house. Second, head on over to Greg's Opinion for a whole list of things that you can do.

Finally, I've archived the Houston Chronicle story on the race today in the extended entry, so we'll have the full story here once the Chronicle archive expires.

State Rep. Talmadge Heflin asked the state House of Representatives today to overturn the results of his failed re-election bid and either order him returned to the Legislature or call for a new election.

Heflin's attorney, Andy Taylor, said the election results in state House District 149 in southwest Harris County were fraught with voting irregularities and potential fraud, most of which occurred in predominantly Democratic precincts.

"The true outcome of this election was stolen from the voters in House District 149," Taylor said Tuesday. "We will prove that Representative Talmadge Heflin was re-elected."

Heflin, a Republican member of the House since 1983 and chairman of its Appropriations Committee, lost to Democratic businessman Hubert Vo by 32 votes earlier this month. But Heflin's campaign alleges that those election results include at least 248 irregularities that could have altered the outcome.

Taylor said he will file notice today that the Heflin campaign intends to contest the election in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. That will require that House Speaker Tom Craddick order a House committee to investigate Heflin's allegations.

After the committee reports its findings, the full House will decide whether to seat Vo or Heflin or call for a new election. The House's decision will be binding, said a spokesman for the Texas secretary of state's office.

A decision by the House committee, which would have subpoena power and take depositions, would likely come no sooner than late January. The Legislature is scheduled to convene Jan. 11, and Vo would be limited to voting only on procedural matters until the dispute is resolved, the secretary of state's spokesman said.

Although there have been several election contests in the Texas House in recent years, none has reversed an election result, and most were withdrawn after they were filed.

Officials with the Vo campaign have said they are confident that their candidate won a fair election and have called on Heflin to concede.

Taylor said a review of county voting records from the Nov. 2 election shows that 101 voters were allowed to vote in the district illegally despite having moved out of Harris County. Twenty-seven voters were allowed to cast their ballots twice, he said — once in early voting and again on Election Day.

The Heflin campaign also found at least 120 other cases in which ineligible voters were allowed to vote or eligible voters were not allowed to cast ballots, Taylor said. The overwhelming number of those irregularities occurred in Democratic-leaning precincts that supported Vo's election, he said.

"I don't know if that's the result of human error, negligence or outright intentional wrongdoing," Taylor said. "We won't know until evidence is obtained under oath in connection with our election contest."

Heflin and Taylor have scheduled a news conference this afternoon to discuss their plans for the contest. Taylor said the campaign also intends to forward its findings to Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal.

Heflin's decision to contest the election is part of a two-pronged effort to return him to the Legislature. On Monday, Heflin requested a manual recount of all ballots cast in the election.

His best chance for recapturing his House seat probably lies with the election contest because the recount is not allowed to go into the issues of voting irregularities but must focus exclusively on the ballots cast in the election.

Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt, the county's voter registrar, said Tuesday that he was somewhat familiar with the Heflin campaign's allegations.

Bettencourt, a Republican, agreed that many of the allegations raised by the campaign would involve illegal votes, but he said such votes are not uncommon in large elections.

Bettencourt said that in the heat of conducting an election, precinct judges often mistakenly allow ineligible voters to cast their ballots or reject ballots from eligible voters.

The number of such complaints is usually too small to affect an election's outcome, he said, although it could have an impact in an election as close as the Heflin-Vo race.

How did your Congressman Vote on the DeLay Rule?

By Byron LaMasters

The Daily DeLay and Josh Marshall have been doing great work in outting the GOP congresscritters who voted their values in allowing an indicted member to lead their caucus. The Daily DeLay has categorized the GOP House caucus into these groups:

Shays Handful (25) voted AGAINST the DeLay Rule
Refusers (14) simply REFUSED to say how they voted
Letter Writers (28) will WRITE LETTERS TO CONSTITUENTS with their vote
Loud and (Not So) Proud (53) voted FOR the DeLay Rule
Did Not Vote (29) NOT VOTING for a variety of reasons
What is the Story? (1) cannot get a STRAIGHT STORY about what they think

My only complaint is that nothing is listed for representatives-elect. It's hard to contact those folks, because they're just getting their office staff in place, and don't have their D.C. or district offices set up yet, BUT they do have a vote in caucus elections. So as soon as I get contact information for the new Republican Congressmen in Texas, I'll be sure to post it so we can start badgering these guys. (Although I'd be shocked if any of them voted against the DeLay rule. Tom DeLay got Marchant, Poe, Gohmert and McCaul elected, so I fully expect them all to be Tom DeLay's bitch on basically everything).

The internal logic of "election stealing"

By Jim Dallas

What exactly, praytell, are Tal Heflin, Eric Opiela, and possibly Ken Mercer smoking?

It's true, you can't take the politics out of politics, but asking for election challenges is a sure fire way to make the 79th Texas Legislature just as polarized and miserable as the 78th. And even if they do win, they get... a new election. When George W. Bush is not on the ballot. In districts where they apparently already lost and which are (in sum) getting more Democratic (particularly District 149). Surely they just want to hand us a big issue to lash them with for two more years?

And remember, control of the House is not resting on these challenges. It's the difference between the Republicans having a lot of power in Austin and having... a lot of power in Austin. The law of diminishing marginal returns applies in politics.

Finally, if the Republicans want to indulge in silly, paranoid theories about election thievery, then why don't they just go ahead and challenge Ohio or Florida's electoral votes when the new Congress meets in January? We're cool with that. After all, if the election was corrupt in Alief, it could be corrupt anywhere!

Granted, there are times to be paranoid. If I were Christine Gregoire or Dino Rossi, I'd be pretty paranoid right now. We're not talking about the presidency, or a governorship. We're talking about three seats in the Lege which won't affect the balance of power.

I've never seen folks fight over a $8,000 a year job like this before, and I don't think it's because any kind of Marxian "crisis of capitalism" is forcing lowly proles like Heflin to "fight or starve." McDonald's is hiring, Mr. Chairman.

(Snark.)

But I can't possibly see any reason for Republicans, in Texas, (aside from ego) for launching a temper tantrum over this. I'm for counting every vote, not for having a new vote just because Tom Craddick didn't like the outcome.

That's the end of my rant for the day.

ADDENDUM: The incomparable Greg Wythe, my antidisestablishmentarian hero, has a list of things for YOU to do.

Blackadder references

By Jim Dallas

I see Atrios likes British comedies, too.

Republican Moral Values

By Byron LaMasters

Read Ronnie Earle's Op-Ed in the New York Times today:

Politicians in Congress are responsible for the leaders they choose. Their choices reflect their moral values.

Every law enforcement officer depends on the moral values and integrity of society for backup; they are like body armor. The cynical destruction of moral values at the top makes it hard for law enforcement to do its job.

In terms of moral values, this is where the rubber meets the road. The rules you apply to yourself are the true test of your moral values.

The thinly veiled personal attacks on me by Mr. DeLay's supporters in this case are no different from those in the cases of any of the 15 elected officials this office has prosecuted in my 27-year tenure. Most of these officials - 12 Democrats and three Republicans - have accused me of having political motives. What else are they going to say?

For most of my tenure the Democrats held the power in state government. Now Republicans do. Most crimes by elected officials involve the abuse of power; you have to have power before you can abuse it.

There is no limit to what you can do if you have the power to change the rules. Congress may make its own rules, but the public makes the rule of law, and depends for its peace on the enforcement of the law. Hypocrisy at the highest levels of government is toxic to the moral fiber that holds our communities together.

The open contempt for moral values by our elected officials has a corrosive effect. It is a sad day for law enforcement when Congress offers such poor leadership on moral values and ethical behavior. We are a moral people, and the first lesson of democracy is not to hold the public in contempt.

I couldn't say it any better, Ronnie. The moral values of a political party ought to be embodied by the men and women its members choose as their leaders. House Republicans choose to be led by Tom DeLay. If they choose to be led by a man who has a felony indictment, that will say a lot about their moral values.

Texas Re-redistricting

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Read the DCCC report.

Heflin Asks for a Recount

By Byron LaMasters

This is what I expected. Republican State Rep. Talmadge Heflin, who lost Hubert Vo by 32 votes has asked for a recount:

State Rep. Talmadge Heflin has asked the state to order a manual recount of all ballots cast earlier this month in Heflin's unsuccessful bid for a 12th term in the Legislature.

Heflin's attorney, Andy Taylor, said that the Heflin campaign had uncovered "deeply disturbing evidence of voter fraud and election irregularities" and that the problems may have contributed to Heflin's 32-vote loss to businessman Hubert Vo earlier this month.

"Illegal votes were counted, and legal votes were rejected," Taylor said this afternoon.

Officials with Heflin's campaign filed a petition with the Texas Secretary of State's office today asking that the Harris County Clerk's Office hand-count the approximately 42,000 ballots cast in the race for state representative in House District 149 in southwest Harris County.

That recount could be complete by the first week of December, Taylor said.

Although Heflin and his supporters decided to seek the recount, Taylor said no decision has yet been made on whether to contest the election results in the state House of Representatives. Campaign officials have until the end of the day Thursday to decide that issue, he said.

Contesting the election in the state House would require that lawmakers either seat Vo or overturn the election and require a new vote. Although there have been several requests for election contests in the Texas House in recent years, most were withdrawn and none has reversed an election result.

Vo's narrow victory was the first Democratic gain in the House in 32 years and knocked off the veteran Heflin, who -- as chairman of the House Appropriations Committee -- was one of the state's most powerful Republican legislators.

Some in Austin had advised Heflin against challenging the election results, and his former colleagues have already moved to claim his third-floor Capitol office and his Appropriations Committee chair.

A recount is fine. But things could get pretty suspicious rather quickly. Here's what one person familiar with the situation said to me in an email:

Tom DeLay's favorite lawyer, Andy Taylor, today filed a formal request for a manual recount in the Vo-Heflin race and privately intimated to reporters that this recount is just the first step in a "complicated" process.

Taylor alleges that he has uncovered evidence of "minority voters" casting ballots illegally and even voting twice.

The only legal forum in which Andy can surface these allegations and present evidence to back them up is in a House challenge; the Texas election code specifically states that the House has "exclusive" jurisdictions over legislative election contests. So, Craddick appoints a committee to review
evidence, examine and cross-examine witnesses, and make a recommendation to the full House about whether to seat Vo or order a new election.

Is this an attempt by Heflin, who tried to intimidate a minority woman into giving up her own child in June, to use his power to intimidate a minority candidate into giving up his own election?

Will Tom DeLay's lawyer call a series of newly registered minority voters to the stand in a House contest and try to intimidate them, not to mention any other minority voters who may have the temerity in the future to consider exercising their voting rights? And not to mention force Vo to shoulder the financial cost of his defense?

There's more at Off the Kuff, Free State Standard and Greg's Opinion.

To Our Readers

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

I know that some of you may be worried by the slow down in BOR content. That is due to a couple reasons.

Elections are over for this fall (minus that state to the East of Texas which has two House races). We'll be covering that.

Most of the writers on here are headed towards finals or end of year tests. It's just the nature of a blog run by college students.

But fear not. With the Texas Leg starting in just a few short months, BOR will (hopefully) be your front line report for finding out what is going on in the StateHouse. With Andrew adding insight from the Texas Democratic Party, Byron adding knowledge with the fact that he just knows a lot of people, and me adding the insight of University Democrats action and the chance that I may end up roaming around the chambers a lot in the spring, you should be fully served. (Sorry Jim, being out in Houston you will just have to keep us up to date on, um, city council elections? :)

And Austin will have City Council elections of our own in May. So there will be some reporting on what is happening there.

So pardon us a bit for the break. Readership is dropping off for most of the blogs this month. I don't feel that it is long term, just that the election spiked readership. You are still one of more than 1000 daily visitors here at Burnt Orange and we are happy to have you.

Spread the word. Comment. Maybe write for BOR? We write because of you.

Our Mis-Leader

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Rawstory.com brings us this gem...

Mysterious ‘George W. Bush: Our leader’ Clear Channel political public service billboard graces Orlando freeway

The text on the bottom of the Clear Channel owned board says that it is "Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. A public service message brought to you by Clear Channel Outdoor"

The original sighting brought to you by the Democratic Underground boards.

If you want to drop them a line, in order of impact...

For the Orlando branch....

Clear Channel Outdoor
5333 Old Winter Garden Road
Orlando , FL 32811
Phone: (407) 298-6410
Fax: (407) 297-8176

Outdoor Corporate HQ
1-602-957-8116

Clear Channel Main HQ
1-210-822-2828

A Daily Kos Diary has some great comparison pictures.

I'm Intolerant and I'm anti-Christian

By Byron LaMasters

Because I think creationism is stupid. Uhmm... that's because creationism has no basis in scientific fact. Its that simple.

Is the Texas SBOE Pro-Slavery?

By Byron LaMasters

Just when you thought things over at the Texas State Board of Education couldn't get more wacky, I read this:

Conservatives' efforts over the years to edit textbooks are legendary here. In a nod to those who believe God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, a sentence saying the ice age took place "millions of years ago" was changed to "in the distant past." Descriptions of environmentalism have been attacked as antithetical to free-enterprise ideals; a passage describing the cruelty of slavery was derided as "overkill."

Ya know, slavery wasn't that bad. Via Pandagon.

Instant Runoff Austin?

By Byron LaMasters

I generally support the idea of instant runoff voting. It's a good way of allowing third parties (or alternative voices in the case of city elections) into the political process without being a spoiler. Also, it would avoid the need (and the cost) of runoff elections. So check out Instant Runoff Austin. Via Sarah.

DeLay Off the Hook?

By Byron LaMasters

Let's hope not, but that's what CBS is reporting.

Also today...

Alandwilliams takes a look at Tom DeLay's supporters and their political donations.

Meanwhile, Tom of Houston's Clear Thinkers reminds us that 12/15 elected officials prosecuted by Travis County's hyper-uber-partisan D.A. Ronnie Earle were Democrats. But you won't hear that from FOX News.

Meanwhile, Chris Elam joins with Tom DeLay in chiding Chris Bell for being critiqued for technicalities in his complaint after the ethics committee admonished Tom DeLay several months ago. Am I wrong, or was Tom DeLay the one who was admonished here? Is Tom DeLay not the most admonished man in Congress? That is the truth, so I'm sure that any good political consultant would tell him to do one thing. Play the victim. Attack Ronnie Earle. Attack Chris Bell. Now, DeLay wants Chris Bell to pay for his legal fees. As Martin Frost said at Chris Bell's press conference, this is a very unique idea. The idea of loser-pay in civil suits has been around awile. But the idea of winner-pay is quite novel. Chris Bell filed an ethics complaint against Tom DeLay. The ethics committee admonished Tom DeLay. Now, Tom DeLay wants Chris Bell to pay. Huh?

Scary

By Byron LaMasters

*sigh*

Only about a third of Americans believe that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is a scientific theory that has been well supported by the evidence, while just as many say that it is just one of many theories and has not been supported by the evidence. The rest say they don't know enough to say. Forty-five percent of Americans also believe that God created human beings pretty much in their present form about 10,000 years ago. A third of Americans are biblical literalists who believe that the Bible is the actual word of God and is to be taken literally, word for word.

Need I say more? Via Political Wire.

Update: I don't disagree with Ezra's comment: No wonder Bush won.

Hope makes a good point as well. The United States ranks 16/21 in science achievement among industrialized countries. How can we expect our citizens to know better than to believe stupid non-scientific creationist theories when we don't bother to do a good job teaching them real science?

On Tom DeLay

By Byron LaMasters

So much to say.... so little time.

I've meant to write a post on all the Tom DeLay stuff for about three days now, and well, I just haven't found the time. And sure enough, I'm about to head to my classes for the day, so I won't have a chance to post again until mid-afternoon.

So briefly, if you haven't been reading Josh Marshall on a daily basis, then you've missed a lot. Just start reading and scroll down until you get overwhelmed. He's been urging everyone to ask their representative if they supported the House GOP conference rule change last allows an indicted member to remain in the leadership. A handful of Republicans led by Chris Shays apparently opposed the rule change, so they've been dubbed the "Shays handful". Not surprisingly, more than a "handful" of Republicans are now stepping forward to say they opposed the rule change (although I doubt any of Tom DeLay's bitches fellow Texas colleagues are among them). Still, feel free to call your rep and report to Josh.

From last week (I'll catch up with everything new today this afternoon) here's some good links:

Yellow Doggerel Democrat looks at the basis of the GOP conference rule -- to embarrass then Rep. Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL) who was having ethical problems of his own back in 1993. Media Matters takes on the media for allowing the GOP to smear Travis County DA Ronnie Earle. The Stakeholder has plenty of good stuff, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

Archpundit has some thoughts on the DeLay handful from the Illinois GOP delegation, and the Daily DeLay has plenty on the action as well.

Off the Kuff also had an editorial roundup last week, and a follow up here.

Ok, time for class...

Amend, but not for Arnold

By Byron LaMasters

Unlike the Federal Marriage Amendment, the recent proposals to amend the constitution to allow naturalized American citizens to run for president is a worthy idea looking into. For once, I think that Orrin Hatch is on to something. I agree with most of what Andrew wrote on the subject two months ago. My problem is not with the concept, but with the idea of amending the constitution to benefit one particular person. In the eyes of its supporters, this amendment seems to be less about a its merits, than it is about the political career of Arnold Schwarzenegger. All you have to do is take a look at the two leading supporter sites:

Amend for Arnold and Amend US.

This is also an issue where Democrats can easily get trapped. Patrick Ruffini, back to blogging after his stint as the official Bush / Cheney 2004 re-election blogger outlines an approach for Republicans to take on the issue. I'm personally doubtful that Republicans can pull off unanimity in support of the amendment. At the very least, Republicans will have to do a lot of convincing of the anti-immigrant and social conservative (why would most social conservatives support an amendment making it possible for the GOP's most popular social liberal to run for president) wings of the party. Still, Democrats have largely been silent on the issue -- something that poses problems for us. If Republicans are smart, they'll turn this into a campaign about supporting immigrants, and enlist prominent Hispanic elected officials and donors to bankroll the campaign. They'll turn this into a wedge issue to paint Democrats not supporting the amendment as anti-immigrant. And frankly, there's no reason Democrats should be running from this issue. After all, we've historically been the party of immigrants.

So how do we balance the concerns of supporting immigrants and of not wanting an amendment to our constitution designed to benefit one particular person? I see an easy solution that would take the politics out. As long as this amendment is seen as benefiting one politician or one party or another, there's no way that it will pass. There's no way it gets two-thirds majorities in both houses and three-quarters of the state legislatures if this is seen as a partisan issue. So take the politics out of it.

Pass an amendment that allows naturalized American citizens to run for president that are born after 34 years prior to the amendment's enactment. For example, should the amendment pass in 2005, any naturalized citizen born after 1971 would be eligible to run for president (assuming they meet the other requirements). Thus, no current politician would benefit, but within a few decades most leading non-U.S. born politicians would be eligible to run for president. My year suggestion may sound hopelessly arbitrary, but I think that it's nescessary in order to remove politics from this otherwise worthwhile amendment.

BIAS!

By Jim Dallas

Here's the current list of Wikipedia articles which are being disputed for lack of a neutral point of view.

It's kind of amusing to see what sort of nonsense stuff people throw around.

Not these Democrats

By Jim Dallas

One of the many problems (among many), that Democrats face is our inability to market ourselves effectively. Granted, it's time to turn around the Democratic brand name.

But let's face facts: we're not going to accomplish a lot with a little bit of magic fairy dust.

Looking at the "Brand Democrat" logos put out, my Republican acquaintances (naturally, laughed). That was expected, because they're the folks you can't convince. Remember Jesus's parable about the seeds.

Moreover, though, some on the left found the "Brand Democrat" things to be, at best, a bit hokey. To wit,

"We Won World War 2"? Come on, America won World War 2. Franklin Roosevelt won World War 2. The kind of Democrats who used to inhabit Washington in the early 1940s won World War 2.

The kind of Democrats that now run the show did not win World War 2 (so they say).

And the same for domestic agenda items. "Civil rights came about because of the civil rights movement!" Labor rights? Social security? Blame the Wobblies and the pinkos for those.

Now, I'm not bringing these points up because I necessarily agree with them, but the point is this: looking in the mirror, are we the same sort of folks who would be able to accomplish any of the sort of things Democrats used to accomplish?

The temptation is to say "no, because unlike previous generations of Democrats, frankly, we suck." And that temptation can be an awfully strong one.

Nonetheless, I happen to think the answer is not "no," but "yes, we are!"

But the way to go about proving that isn't going to be through the magic of marketing. The way we prove that we rehabilitate our party's image is to shoot straight and shoot often (among other things).

There's a certain part of me that thinks that "Brand Democrat" conjures up all the excitement of Diet Sprite. Meditate on that for a moment.

(Hint: think about our party's tendencies (1) towards low risk/low reward politics and (2) away from bold, memorable pronouncements.)

For what it's worth, I still think that Oliver Willis's idea can bear fruit. But the Washington boys (and girls) really need to get their act together.

The Second Term Bush GLBT Agenda

By Byron LaMasters

You think I'm kidding, right?

Nope. Gay conservative Boi From Troy puts together a four-point GLBT agenda for Bush's second term:

• Federal Recognition of Domestic Partnerships and Civil Unions
• Reform Social Security (i.e. Privatization)
• Eliminate the Estate and Gift Tax Permanently
• Tax Simplification: Eliminating child deductions, etc.

My first reaction was you gotta be kidding. Of these, I only consider the first to be a GLBT issue. As I wrote in Boi From Troy's comments, there are inequities in Social Security and the tax code against the GLBT community, but the way of addressing those issues is not to simply do away with any tax that discriminates against gays and lesbians in relationships unrecognized by the federal government -- but to get the federal government to recognize those relationships. As for child deductions -- as I wrote in Boi From Troy's comments, he seems to