Burnt Orange Report

Linking Talton

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

It's hard to think things are funny about Rep. Talton when it comes to his gay parent hating ways, but apparently it can be funny, according to another austin blogger.

As a side note, there will be a protest of HJR 6, the anti-gay marriage amendment tomorrow (Sunday) at noon. Meet at the TX DOT parking lot down at South Congress and Riverside, they are going to march up to the Capitol.

Ann Coulter to Speak at UT

By Byron LaMasters

This should certainly provide some fireworks on campus. I'm not particularly pleased that my student fees are being spent to bring this lunatic to campus, but then again, I'm sure that many conservative students felt the same way about Michael Moore. If anyone has an idea on how progressives on campus should respond, leave your thoughts in comments:

ANN COULTER TO SPEAK AT UT AUSTIN

The Student Endowed Centennial Lectureship (SECL) and the Student Events Center Distinguished Speakers Committee (DSC) are pleased to invite UT Austin students, faculty, and staff to a lecture with Ann Coulter, political columnist and best-selling author. Ms. Coulter will speak on Tuesday, May 3, 2005, at 7:30 p.m. in the LBJ Auditorium. Passes are free and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis to those with a valid UT ID (students, faculty and staff) beginning at 8 a.m. Monday, May 2 at the Student Events Center front desk, located at the north end of the 4th level of the Texas Union (UNB 4.300).

Passes do NOT guarantee admission. For the sake of gaining quick and easy admission to the LBJ Auditorium, please arrive early. Be advised, all bags are prohibited and, to maintain a safe environment, all persons are subject to search.

Coulter is the legal correspondent for Human Events and writes a popular syndicated column for Universal Press Syndicate. She is a frequent guest on many TV shows, including Hannity and Colmes, Wolf Blitzer Reports, HBO's Real Time with Bill Maher, The O'Reilly Factor, Good Morning America and has been profiled in numerous publications, including Time, the Guardian (UK), the New York Observer, and National Journal.

Coulter clerked for the United States Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.

After practicing law for a firm in New York City, Coulter worked for the United States Senate Judiciary Committee. Following her tenure with the Senate, she became a litigator with the Center for Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.

A Connecticut native, Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.

For questions about passes, please telephone the Student Events Center at 512-475-6630.

There's fascism and then there's Fascism

By Jim Dallas

Good Lord, if you're going to ban and/or burn books, at least do it for a good reason.

Republican Alabama lawmaker Gerald Allen says homosexuality is an unacceptable lifestyle. As CBS News Correspondent Mark Strassmann reports, under his bill, public school libraries could no longer buy new copies of plays or books by gay authors, or about gay characters.

"I don't look at it as censorship," says State Representative Gerald Allen. "I look at it as protecting the hearts and souls and minds of our children."

Books by any gay author would have to go: Tennessee Williams, Truman Capote and Gore Vidal. Alice Walker's novel "The Color Purple" has lesbian characters.

Allen originally wanted to ban even some Shakespeare. After criticism, he narrowed his bill to exempt the classics, although he still can't define what a classic is. Also exempted now Alabama's public and college libraries.

Librarian Donna Schremser fears the "thought police," would be patrolling her shelves.

"And so the idea that we would have a pristine collection that represents one political view, one religioius view, that's not a library,'' says Schremser.

Rep. Allen goes on to go through the whole "the homosexuals are destroying America" spiel.

Personally, I favor banning people like Rep. Allen from holding public office. "It's not healthy for America, it doesn't fit what we stand for... they will do whatever it takes to reach their goal." But then again, that just wouldn't be right, would it?

Rick Perry on Talton's Amendment

By Byron LaMasters

Rick Perry has offered his opinion on the gay foster care ban. He predicts that it will be taken off in committee, but will sign it either way. The Houston Chronicle reports:

Legislators writing the final version of a bill overhauling the state's Child Protective Services system will kill a controversial provision that would prohibit homosexuals from being foster parents, Gov. Rick Perry predicted Thursday.

But if the House-approved ban survives, Perry said he would sign the measure, provided it was adequately funded and made other necessary improvements in the embattled agency.

"I don't think it (the amendment) is going to be on there (the bill) when it comes to my desk," he said. "This bill's too important to have it bogged down." [...]

Perry said he didn't think the House amendment against gay foster parents, which faces strong opposition from senators, will survive a House-Senate conference committee.

But he added, "If the bill has the funding in it (and) if it does the things that we've laid out needs to happen, I'm going to sign the bill if that amendment's on it or not.

"CPS is really important, getting it fixed," Perry said, noting he had declared the legislation an emergency in the wake of a series of highly publicized deaths of children who weren't adequately protected by the agency.

Perry said that in an "ideal world" he would want foster children placed with "a family that had a mom and a dad."

But gay foster parents who are "loving and caring," he added, are "better than having the kids being abused, obviously."

Well, it's not obvious to Robert Talton.

This Is Just Not Right...

By Andrea Meyer

This is just wrong!

The partisanship on the Republicans' side has officially gone too far.

Willie Nelson is an important part of Texas culture, not to mention a country music legend, with fans belonging to all political parties. Even people like me who are not country music fans enjoy his work. The man has even made guest appearances on King of the Hill. He has the Hank Hill seal of approval.

The reasons given by these state reps are completely ludicrous. Do Democrats in Houston like having an airport called Bush International around? Maybe not, but the man is an ex-president. DC is predominantly Democratic, and they have an airport named after Reagan. Ames, IA has a street named after Mamie Eisenhower, and Democrats live there. Pembroke Pines, FL, has a lot of streets named after former presidents, and my Republican ex-friend never complained about living on Johnson Street--not to my knowledge, anyway.

I don't think that a simple road named after a Texas legend would ruffle anyone's feathers or cause rioting among constituents. And I don't think that either of the stick-in-the-mud state reps would ever be associated with drinking, smoking, or supporting Democrats.

I think that Reps. Ogden and Wentworth deserve a few calls to their offices...

What an original idea

By Jim Dallas

Princeton University's "Filibuster" is now going into it's 76th hour.

Making The Pie Higher

By Jim Dallas

I don't make mere idle threats. Enjoy. (Click here to download .WMV).

Oh yes, my career as a 1970s B-movie director has only begun... muahahahahaha... :: cough :: (Please keep in mind this is a parody, it's kind of supposed to be extremely cheesy).

Conservative Groups Support Gregg Knaupe

By Byron LaMasters

In recent days, Austin Place 3 city council candidate Gregg Knaupe has received support from two conservative organizations - The Young Conservatives of Texas and the right-wing newspaper, The Austin Review.

YCT writes the following about the Place 3 race (via email):

Austin City Council Place 3 - The four candidates are all Democrats, but there are big differences. Endorsed by the Austin Police, centrist Gregg Knaupe opposes the smoking ban, supports building roads, and denounced the affirmative action taxpayer-funded bailout of a private nightclub. Left-wingers Margot Clarke and Mandy Dealey have both been lobbyists for Planned Parenthood and can be counted on to put salamanders before humans. Jennifer Kim gave money to liberal Ann Kitchen when she ran against Rep. Todd Baxter and supports quotas in city hiring.

The editorial board of The Austin Review writes the following in their endorsement of Gregg Knaupe:

It would be a travesty if some conservatives voted for a leftist like Margot Clarke simply because she opposes toll roads. Both Clarke and Mandy Dealey have had as their lifelong occupations liberal political activism for groups like Planned Parenthood and the Sierra Club. Both support the smoking ban and will be guaranteed votes on the Council for higher taxes and more regulation. In contrast, Gregg Knaupe opposes the smoking ban, spoke out against the outrageous Midtown Live night club bailout, and will be a common sense voice for fiscal restraint on the Council.

Conservative Austin blog, Voice in the Wilderness has also endorsed Gregg Knaupe:

This is the most competitive race of the three. Clarke and Dealey are liberal ideologues and clearly out of the mainstream, even for Austin. Kim and Knaupe are more intriguing. Both seem less nutty than the others and have some economic development chops, at least for Democrats. I like Knaupe’s vision for the medical school and how it can help with both economic development and indigent health care. Pulling it off will be tricky, but he seems to have thought through the idea and his health care cache will help make it happen.

VitW endorses Greg Knaupe for City Council, Place 3.

Gregg Knaupe is not a Republican, but it is clear to me that many of his supporters represent the right-wing of Austin City politics.

City Council Endorsements

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

If you wanted to know how all the Groups in this City have endorsed for the City Council races, see below.

Austin Progressive Coalition PAC (Central Austin Democrats & University Democrats)
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley
Smoking Ordinance -- FOR
ACC Expansion -- FOR

Austin Tejano Democrats
Place 1, Runoff vote resulted in No Endorsement
Place 3, Runoff vote resulted in No Endorsement
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley
Smoking Ordinance -- AGAINST
ACC Expansion -- FOR

Austin Lesbian Gay Political Caucus
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke and Mandy Dealey
Place 4, Betty Dunkeryley

Black Austin Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Jennifer Kim
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

Capital Area Progressive Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

Central Austin Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley
Smoking Ordinance -- FOR
ACC Expansion -- FOR

Huston-Tillotson Young Democrats Coalition
Place 1, Andrew Bucknall
HTYD's will not be making endorsements in either Place 3 or Place 4.

North by North West Democrats
Place 1, No Endorsement
Place 3, No Endorsement
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

North East Travis County Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

Saint Edward's University College Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Gregg Knaupe
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

South Austin Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

South Austin Tejano Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Mandy Dealey
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

South West Austin Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

Stonewall Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, No Endorsement

Texas Environmental Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, No Endorsement
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

Travis County Democratic Women
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Dual endorsement: Margot Clarke & Jennifer Kim
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley

University of Texas Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Mandy Dealey
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley
Smoking Ordinance -- FOR
ACC Expansion -- FOR

West Austin Democrats
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, Betty Dunkerley
Smoking Ordinance -- FOR
ACC Expansion -- FOR

Anti-Gay Foster Parents Amendment not Dead

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

We thought it was over. We were told and assured that it would die in committee. But this is Texas and things are of course, always too good to be true.

Speaker Craddick announced his 5 appointments to the conference committee for SB 6, the Child Protective Services (CPS) Reform bill:

Rep. Suzanna Gratia Hupp (R- Lampasas), Rep. Carlos Uresti (D-San Antonio), Rep. John Davis (R-Houston), Rep. Robert Talton (Bigot-Pasadena), and Rep. Toby Goodman (R-Arlington).

As the Statesman Blog says:

Talton seemingly has little connection to the bill: he wasn’t a member of the Human Services Committee that crafted the House plan. He is chair of the Urban Affairs Committee and is a member of the civil practices and redistricting committees.

Rep. Suzanna Hupp, R-Lampasas, is chairwoman of the Human Services Committee and author of the House reform plan. She, along with Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, will head the negotiations. Nelson is author of the Senate reform plan.

Reps. John Davis, R-Houston, and Toby Goodman, R-Arlington, both members of the Human Services Committee, were appointed to the conference committee. Rep. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio, the fifth committee member, was chairman of the Human Services Committee last session and crafted the Adult Protective Services reform part of SB 6.

So now it comes down to Republicans v. Republicans. The author of the Bill v. the author of the amendment. But don't let the conference committee stop Talton's idiocy. From another Statesman article...

"If I can find it in another bill, I will certainly do that, if it doesn't survive SB 6," Talton said. "I can't imagine the Senate pulling that out. I would be very surprised."

Lawmakers can add amendments to bills that deal with related topics. Late in the legislative session, legislators often attach bills that have little chance of passage on their own to larger pieces of legislation....

Hupp spoke against Talton's proposal but ultimately voted in favor of it. Gov. Rick Perry has dismissed the ban as a secondary issue that could get in the way of overhauling Child Protective Services.

What, Gov. Good-Hair not towing the Right Wing Faction's "Gays-Are-The-Antichrist" line? What's he thinking, that it's a shitty piece of legislation (duh)?

And for all you in the Austin area, here's how Central Texas House members voted on the amendment to ban gay, lesbian and bisexual people from being foster parents. The amendment passed the House last week by a vote of 81-58.

In favor: (meaning wrong) Reps. Dan Gattis, R-Georgetown; Patrick Rose, D-Dripping Springs; Mike Krusee, R-Williamson County; Todd Baxter, R-Austin.

Against: (meaning right) Reps. Dawnna Dukes, D-Austin; Terry Keel, R-Austin; Elliott Naishtat, D-Austin; Eddie Rodriguez, D-Austin; and Mark Strama, D-Austin.

Leffingwell Stays in Race for Place 1

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Lee Leffingwell, frontrunner for Austin City Council Place 1, is staying in the race as announced at his press conference this afternoon. His wife had passed on last week.

"My wife was a wonderful woman who cared for people and who cared about her community. Losing her is a great tragedy in my life," Leffingwell said at a Thursday morning press conference. "But it cannot and will not be the end of my life . . . I know that is not what she would have wanted.

"If I am fortunate enough to be elected by the voters, I will serve in honor of her memory," Leffingwell said.

I think that every Democratic group in town is also breathing a collective sigh of relief. Partly because if he had dropped out of the race, it would have made it wide open very late in the game, forcing people to re-endorse or actually have to look at the rest of the field again. My best wishes to Lee, and I hope to see him happy on election night when gets elected to the council.

Texas Campaign Finance Likely Dead

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

I was in the process of writing a story about Democrats attempt to bypass committee and bring the campaign finance reform bill to the House floor for a vote (considering there are 92 co-sponsors) but the Statesman online has a breaking news note (no story yet) that the issue may now be dead.

BREAKING NEWS

Campaign finance reform scuttled. Measure may be dead for the session. More to come at statesman.com on this developing story.

I mean, seriously, the legislature has much more important things to be doing like protecting the State from already illegal gay marriages.

Update: Statesman article is now up.

Campaign finance legislation apparently died Thursday on the House floor in a unusual showdown over rules between Speaker Tom Craddick and proponents of House Bill 1348.

The House voted 95-36 against a motion that would have taken the legislation out of the Elections Committee and straight to the House floor for a vote.

Rep. Terry Keel, D-Austin (Ed note- that should be an R, and did you know Keel voted with Democrats against the anti-gay foster care amendment? Maybe Rose could chat with him and Casteel), who is Craddick's expert on legislative rules, warned members they were driving a stake in the heart of the legislation.

"I think this stunt kills it," he said after the vote.

Keel, who had been a co-sponsor of the legislation, said the bill was being used as a partisan shot at Craddick and he argued that Thursday's vote was in support of the orderly legislative process.

Rep. Tommy Merritt, R-Longview, raised the motion calling for an immediate House vote. He denied that Democratic colleagues had put him up to it....

The bill has been co-sponsored by more than half the House's 150 members and Craddick has promised that the Elections Committee will vote on the measure next week. But committee chairwoman Mary Denny, R-Aubrey, says, it doesn't have enough support to clear her panel.

Craddick- 1
Ethics- 0

These Men Have A Plan, A Plan to Destroy Social Security...

By Jim Dallas

Bush and DeLay made the front page of the Houston Chronicle together last night. Meanwhile, Brad DeLong gives the Galveston Plan the golden raspberry. As does the H-Chron.

Someone please cut an ad. If you don't I will. And I know how to use Flash now so you all better be scared!

In other news, former Senator (and 2004 Dem VP nominee) John Edwards was in town last night. I missed because I was studying for exams, but I hear it was good!

Lighter Side Of The Lege: Wild Hogs

By Vince Leibowitz

I wasn't aware that the Texas Department of Agriculture had asked the Legislature for a half-million dollar appropriation to study--of all things--the state's wild hog population.

My problem is that I can't decide whether or not the appropriation is as stupiud as it really sounds or not.

The appropriation request came to my attention via an AP story which happens to mention Van Zandt County, my home county.

Our little hamlet made news back in 2003-04 when our County Commissioners actually placed a $7 bounty on each wild hog killed. You had merely to bring a complete set of wild hog ears to the County Extension Office to collect your bounty. And, in a time of tight budgets, the county shelled out about $14,000 for about 2,000 killed feral hogs.

I don't dispute that wild (or feral) hogs are a problem. I've seen first-hand the damage they can do to land and crops.

What I'm wondering is why it will take $500,000 to study how to control the population? Can't the state look at some other population control studies for other incorigible species and perhaps transfer some of those methods to the wild hogs, maybe to the tune of $100,000 or $250,000 instead of half a million?

If you have no idea what a "feral hog," is or what they do and are wondering why in the heck the state would appropriate one red cent for such a project, read a selection from the AP article:

In short, the nation's largest feral hog population is making a mess of Texas.

Farmers and ranchers - who sustain an estimated $52 million annually in damage at the snouts of the rapidly growing wild hog population - are asking the legislature and hunters for help controlling the estimated 2 million animals.

"Bring an AK-47, because that's what you'll need," Canton cattle rancher Don Metch said.

The nocturnal, omnivorous hogs can grow to 400 pounds and have four fierce-looking tusks that can extend five inches from their top and bottom jaws. They're more bristly and muscular than domestic pigs, and they can be ill-tempered when cornered.

Feral hogs are found in 230 of the state's 254 counties, according to Texas Parks and Wildlife Department estimates. Nationwide, hogs number 4 million in 42 states, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates.

[...]

The Texas Department of Agriculture has asked legislators for $500,000 to start a two-year pilot program to study the hogs in hopes of controlling them. In the meantime, Texas relies on its year-round hunting season.

Still, the hogs are causing all sorts of damage in the nation's No. 2 agriculture state.

They uproot sweet potatoes, peanuts, corn, rice and other crops. So keen are their snouts that hogs can pull up plants one by one. But they're typically not so tidy and just tear up pastures. Sweet potato farmers have reported dozens of acres destroyed in one night.

Beef producers say the hogs knock down fences and tear holes in pasture to get to grass roots and grub worms. They also kill goats, sheep and other small livestock.

[...]

The hogs are descendants of domestic pigs brought to America in the 1600s by French and Spanish explorers, and of Eurasian boars brought for hunting in the early 1900s.

They reproduce so rapidly that there's a joke among wildlife officials: When a sow has six piglets, you can expect eight to survive.

Two years ago in East Texas, the damage was so bad that Van Zandt County officials offered a $7 bounty for a matched set of hogs ears. The program ended in 2004 after residents cashed in on more than 2,000 hogs.

But wildlife officials hope hunters keep on hunting - and even expand their efforts.

"What we need is more processing plants," said Brian Cummins, an extension agent in Van Zandt County. "And a good sausage recipe."

Aside from arming farmers with AK-47s, or embarking on a study for a better sausage recipe, as our often humerous (and very qualified) County Extension Agent suggusts, what exactly will the Department of Agriculture do with $500,000 to study the wild hog population?

I'm wondering if some of the farmers who have problems with the feral hogs are scratching their head about the half-million appropriation request, too. After all, I'd venture to say individual farmers could give the DOA some innovative ideas on feral hog population control--for free.

For some reason, thinking about a group of people in the nearby city of Grand Saline who "capture" feral cats and have them neutered/spayed and then release them back to the dumpsters from whence they came, I had a fleeting thought of Texas Department of Agriculture agents wandering the swampy bottoms of Van Zandt County with tranqualizer darts and hog contraceptives. Is there such a thing as a hog contraceptive? Maybe they could use tracking devices and follow the feral hogs using spy satellites and then call ahead and warn farmers: "They're coming your way! Get the AK!"

Since a mind is a terrible thing to waste, I'll stop wasting mine on potential solutions for the Department of Agriculture. After all, they are the ones getting $500,000 to come up with a plan.

Vince Leibowitz is County Chairman of the Democratic Party of Van Zandt County and 3rd Vice President of the Texas Democratic County Chair's Association.

Ethics, Delay, and more Controversy

By Katie Naranjo

Not surprising, but still annoying Tom Delay is being accused of fraud again, only this time it is a lobbyist and trips to foreign countries. Both sides in the house seem to be on edge, as Democrats are not willing to provide a 6th vote in the Ethics commission and Republicans are trying to not make concessions. At least Democrats still have a voice with the Ethics Commission, since it is divided into 5 Republicans and 5 Democrats. It is the only arena where the minority has some power.

Hopefully something becomes of the claims from the Democrats since it has made the body ineffective and crooked in the international media. Maybe after all of the bad press and hometown editorials condemning the rule changes the GOP will make concessions to Democrats and there will be action taken.

Thank God though that Chris Bell is from Texas and filed the complaint against Delay, I am really impressed with this fellow Texan who will stand up against others. Is it not ironic that Delay and Bell are from Texas?

For more on the Delay saga and the Ethics Commission, click here.

[Byron - I've added Lloyd Doggett's statement on today's events in the extended entry]

STATEMENT OF WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEE MEMBER REP. LLOYD DOGGETT
On the House GOP's Retreat on the Partisan Ethics Rules

Washington, DC- Today, the Republican-controlled House of Representative belatedly reversed itself on the misguided partisan ethics rule changes made previously this year in an attempt to protect Tom DeLay. In response, Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-TX) issued the following statement.

"By unilaterally weakening the rules, removing the Republican ethics chair who had the courage to discipline Tom DeLay, and firing bipartisan professional investigative staff, the House Republican leadership has shattered meaningful ethics enforcement. Belatedly restoring the prior, bipartisan rules is only a first, tentative step to reversing this outrageous misconduct. It is too early to tell if this is just more eyewash and hogwash or whether it represents a genuine willingness to restore accountability."

Speedy Response

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

My hometown Representative (now that I'm registered to vote back in Fredericksburg again) is Carter Casteel, a Republican woman who comes from a four county, 80% Republican district. The other day when I was in the gallery watching the HJR 6 debate on the floor, it was interesting to see how active she was being the second termer that she is (in addition to having a very snappy Blue dress and a House website picture that reminds me of Bea Arthur from Golden Girls which makes her that much more cool).

That aside, I was quite suprised when she voted against Amendment 60 to SB6, the Child Protective Services Bill amendment that would have banned gay foster parents and spent $8 million dollars of Texans money to create an investigative unit in CPS to root out all those homo-sech-u-als attempting to parents children already abused or displaced by their heterosexual parents. Though there was some crossover in voting on the amendment, I certainly didn't expect my hometown rep, from one of the most conservative districts in Texas to stand against the rest of her party on this one. Makes me that much more sad that Rep. Patrick Rose whose district neighbors Casteel's, went ahead and voted for it.

I can understand Casteel voting for HJR 6. I can maybe understand Rose doing so though I'm still very upset on that one. But when Casteel can vote against the Talton-gay-families-are-evil amendent, and Rose votes for it, it makes me really upset. Thank goodness it's coming off in committee. Below the fold is the e-mail I sent Rep. Casteel. I received a response an hour later to my suprise, even if it was short, it's nice to know that some Reps can get back to their constituants directly without form letters.

Representative Casteel,

I wanted to thank you for what I see as a couragous vote against
Amdendment 60 to the CPS reform bill, an amendment that could have
stripped thousands of children out of loving foster homes and forced the
CPS system to become an investigative body reminiscent of the SS in WWII
Germany. Having had relatives who were taken out of their homes and
placed in concentration camps because of their political ideology during
the war, I feel that such actions made possible by that amendment would
have hurt Texas families as much as it hurts people's opinion of the
Legislature. Thank you again.

---

That statement in SB 6 should come out in Conference Committee. It
should have never been put on in the House. carter

What are the Chances of a Democrat Winning in Texas?

By Byron LaMasters

Via Rick Perry vs. The World is speculation by Texas Monthly's Patricia Kilday Hart on Democrats chances to take back the governor's office in 2006. Hart writes:

The chance of a Democratic upset in the 2006 governor’s race is as likely as, well, Bill Clements winning in ’78. Or Mark White winning in ’82. Or Ann Richards winning in ’90. Or... [...]

Another reason the Democrats have to field a candidate is that Texas gubernatorial elections have been nothing if not unpredictable. In 1972 the backlash from the Sharpstown scandal wiped out Preston Smith in the Democratic primary and elected Dolph Briscoe. Six years later John Hill upset Briscoe in the primary and was poised to waltz into the Governor’s Mansion until Bill Clements exploited Jimmy Carter’s unpopularity to become the state’s first Republican governor since Reconstruction. Clements was regarded as a shoo-in for reelection, but Democratic attorney general Mark White rode the crest of a national anti-Republican fervor to oust him in 1982. Clements returned the favor in ’86. And who could forget how GOP oilman Claytie Williams had the 1990 race sewn up, until Ann Richards reaped the benefits of his self-inflicted wounds? That surprise was matched in ’94 when a certain political newcomer with a certain famous name beat Richards despite her widespread popularity. But the past two elections have produced the expected easy victories for George W. Bush and Perry.

The past quarter century of Texas politics should teach skeptical Democrats a lesson. It could be argued that of the past seven gubernatorial elections in this state, five (1978, 1982, 1986, 1990 and 1994) were relative upsets. Does this mean that Democrats should be confident of victory in 2006? No, but it should teach us the lesson that anything can happen. Races for governor see much more cross-over voting than other races. When Bill Clements was elected the first Republican governor since reconstruction in 1978, there was only one other Republican statewide elected official (U.S. Senator John Tower).

Recent elections of Democratic governors in some of the reddest states in the country such as Montana, Wyoming, Kansas, Oklahoma and Arizona (and on the other side, Republican governors in states like Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Vermont and Maryland) show that it is not uncommon for a state to vote against their partisan leanings in a race for governor. Chris Bell frequently uses the Kansas analogy as an example of how a Democrat can win in a red state.

Democrats have a lot to capitalize on in the 2006 campaign. First, since Republicans control state government on every level, Democrats can run as outsiders and reformers who will prevent too much single party power and corruption. Second, Democrats can specifically run on a reform message against the corruption of Tom DeLay, Tom Craddick, TRMPAC, etc. Third, Democrats can run a campaign against the backwards priorities of Republicans in this state - an entire summer of special sessions and millions of taxpayer dollars on re-redistricting, proposals to fund our public schools by lap dances and slot machines, cutting health care for kids and teachers and preventing Texas from being a leader in new science such as stem cell research.

It is overly optimistic to suggest a Democratic victory next November, but the stars are aligning for a competitive race - a divided Republican party with a very bloody primary looming, a second mid-term election of a president that has increasingly less public support (even in Texas), and a Republican Party that has utterly failed to find solutions to school finance and other critical issues to Texans.

Rick Perry vs. the World pegs the Democrats chance of winning the race for governor at 5-7.5% (13-1 to 19-1). I'm not an oddsmaker, so I'll pass on making a guess, but I'd give Democrats more of a chance than he does, but still well under a 50% chance of winning. Anyone else out there want to venture a guess?

Pardon me while I contemplate a revolution

By Jim Dallas

For quite some time, I've argued that Texas Democrats need to be more aggressively pro-tenant, at the very least because we need to give renters a reason to vote. To be sure, the distinction between Texas Democrats and Republicans is already fairly stark. But after studying the Texas Landlord and Tenant Code (Title 8 of the Property Code), I'm almost upset enough to take up arms. Or at the very least, be very suspicious of ever renting in this state.

To say that the Code is "pro-landlord" would be an understatement; it is of, by, and for the landlord lobby in reaction to "activist" judges who, among other things, started requiring landlords to make their properties habitable. In Texas, that's a good idea, but it's not required.

Put another way: since it was drafted, commercial tenants (who are not covered by the more-regressive attributes of the Code, because, after all, commercial tenants don't have to live in the buildings they are renting) have acquired more rights under common law than residential tenants.

My constructive proposal: ditch the Landlord-Tenant Code and adopt the Uniform Residential Landlord and Tenant Act. After all, if the URLTA is good enough for at least 15 other states, it's good enough for Texas.

On the good side, I am glad to see that Texas has banned rent-control.

New Chris Bell Website

By Byron LaMasters

The official relaunch is tomorrow, but the new website is now up. It has many of the bells an whistles that you would expect from a campaign website in 2005. The campaign has a podcast and blog, and most importantly an easy way to sign up and donate money.

Irony

By Byron LaMasters

It's a bit ironic that Rick Perry and Elton John both attend an event in Austin a day after John made a marriage announcement, and the same day that the Texas legislature voted to make gay marriage double secret illegal. The Austin American Statesman writes:

A day after announcing plans to marry his longtime partner, Elton John performed just blocks from the Texas Capitol, where lawmakers are working to put a gay marriage ban in the state constitution.

John performed at a fundraiser for tennis star Andy Roddick's charitable foundation, with Republican Gov. Rick Perry also in attendance.

In an interview with The Associated Press, John would not discuss personal matters, including Monday's reports that he planned to marry David Furnish, his partner of 11 years, later this year.

The same day as John's marriage announcement, the Texas House of Representatives approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage. State law already bans gay marriage from being recognized.

Also from today's irony department, check out this post from Pink Dome.

Another Blogger Story

By Byron LaMasters

This time from the Fort Worth Star Telegram. My position remains the same - any publicity is good publicity, so thanks for the plug to BOR. We get top listing under "Popular Texas political bloggers":

Burnt Orange Report -- Byron LaMasters of Dallas, a student at the University of Texas at Austin, and friends cover state politics. They support the Democratic party. www.BurntOrangeReport.com

I can't complain with that, and I certainly appreciate the plugs from State Rep. Aaron Pena's blog.

Texan: Dems should act like Dems

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

The Daily Texan takes some shots at the state Democratic Party in today's editorial. Some of the choice lines...

The only surprise is that 18 Democrats voted for the ban; 16 didn't vote at all. Less than half of the state's Democratic reps actually voted against the gay marriage ban, an appalling statistic.

Monday's vote underscores the fact that Texas has no liberal party. The state's Democratic party is centrist, at best. They just look liberal compared to state's overly conservative population.

The "yes" vote from Patrick Rose, D-Dripping Springs, is particularly distressing. Rose, 26, went to UT Law School. If you can't count on a young Democrat from UT to support gay marriage, who can you count on?

In addition, in a separate story, the Texan seems to like me as after yesterday's front page photo, I get this quote in today.

Karl-Thomas Musselman, a government junior and representative with the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Allies Affairs Agency in Student Government, said there were more important things for the state to worry about than maintaining the status quo and preserving “the second-class-citizen standing of a group of people.”

“This legislation was created out of fear,” Musselman said. “This regulation is completely unnecessary to the function of the state.”

Garnet Coleman Takes on Al Edwards for Bigoted Remarks

By Byron LaMasters

Good for Garnet Coleman. Coleman wrote this letter to the editor in response to Al Edwards remark that homosexuality is a "social ill". Here is the letter via email and Greg's Opinion:

Dear Editor:

As reported in Tuesday's Fort Worth Star Telegram, Rep. Al Edwards called homosexuality a "social ill" on the floor of the House. He stated, "I take offense when people associate me and my race and my culture with a social ill. I don’t see how the two relate."

Representative Edwards ought to be ashamed of himself. His comments are bigoted, hateful and just plain wrong. No one is comparing race with sexual orientation -- they are not the same thing, but discrimination is discrimination. As an African American, Edwards should know what it feels like to hear such hurtful words. The only way to stop prejudice is to practice what you preach. Bigotry says a lot more about a bigot's own insecurities than it says about those they target.

-- Representative Garnet Coleman (Houston)

Rep. Coleman represents District 147 in Houston and is the Chair of the Legislative Study Group (LSG) and the Texas Legislative Black Caucus (TLBC).

As the chair of a minority caucus in a minority party, it would probably be easier for Coleman to just let Edwards's comments slide. With that in mind, I'm very pleased to see Coleman do the right thing, and call out his colleague on his bigoted remark.

Ralph Hall the Gentleman?

By Byron LaMasters

Democrat-turned-Republican Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX) held a fundraiser this week to help his 2004 Democratic opponent pay off his campaign debt. Ralph Hall was never much of a Democrat, but it's hard to say that he's not a gentleman. This is certainly unusual. The Texarkana Gazette reports:

U.S. Rep. Ralph Hall, R-Rockwall, whose district this extreme northeastern corner of Texas has recently fallen into, held a fund-raiser for his Democrat challenger, Charles Nickerson of Pittsburg.

A prominent, longtime Republican helping his also-ran Democrat challenger pay of his campaign debts? [...]

It's raised a few eyebrows throughout the region but there don't appear to be any ulterior motive on Hall's part. He was once a Democrat. [...]

It wasn't anything Hall was obligated to do. He said he was compelled to do it because Nickerson ran a clean race against him.

Area Democrats and Republicans turned out to attend the fund-raiser.

Karl-Thomas on the front page

By Byron LaMasters

I probably wasn't the only one a little bit surprised to see this picture when I opened up my Daily Texan today.

Heber Taylor on the Galveston Plan

By Jim Dallas

Heber Taylor, Galveston County Daily News managing editor and voice of sweet reasonableness, wrote on Sunday:

As the hometown newspaper, we're sometimes asked what we think of this plan. We're open to changes in Social Security but don't think the Galveston Plan is the best model for change. The plan has two problems.

The first is that it benefits workers at the top of the pay scale more than it benefits those at the bottom. We'll admit that's a hotly contested conclusion. We've followed the debate. We've studied the arguments on both sides.

The conclusions that make the most sense are those drawn from a study conducted by the Government Accounting Office in 1999. In general, the study found that the alternate plan benefited higher-paid employees. The study found that low-income workers would fare better under Social Security.

Obviously, that's a problem that any attempt at reform should avoid.

The peple who most need an adequate guaranteed income are those at the bottom of the pay scale. Any effort to reform Social Security must take that truth as a starting point.

The second problem with the Galveston Plan is that a worker can opt out of the deal. Some county workers have done so. Over the years, we've talked to some who cashed in their chips, bought a new car and started looking for work elsewhere.

What do they have to show for their time with the county? Nothing. No Galveston Plan. No Social Security.

What happens when those workers retire? The burden of caring for them probably will fall back on the public. That burden is one of the things Social Security was designed to alleviate.

If you think about the analogy between Bush's proposal to reform Social Security and the Galveston Plan you'll come to one conclusion. The analogy is awfully superficial.

Bush wants to let workers invest some fraction of their contributions in the stock market. The county's alternate pln invests all of an employee's withholdings and county's contributions into conservative investments such as insurance annuities.

People who are looking at the Galveston Plan in hopes that it will shed light the President's proposal should look elsewhere for illumination.

Nonetheless, if President Bush wants to claim his plan is "like" the Galveston Plan, then I'm more than willing to make him "own it."

P.S. Incidentally, there seems to be a bit of cognitive dissonance about the Galveston Plan. Initially put forward of as proof that a privatized system could work, subsequent criticism has resulted in other privatizers backing off the claim and, indeed, blaming the "liberal media" for even suggesting the analogy. Did Dubya get the memo? Apparently not. He's not getting many of the memos these days.

(Also, George, we're putting the coversheets on all TPS reports. Did you get the memo about this? If you could just go ahead and make sure you do that from now on, that would be great. Uh, I'll go ahead and make sure you get another copy of that memo, ok?)

The Bush-DeLay Social Security Destruction Plan

By Jim Dallas

Coming to a town near you.

Two thumbs down - Charles Grassley, Republican Senator from Iowa.

They really just keep handing us talking points, don't they?

(Hat tip to Kos, et. al.)

DCCC's Role In Lampson's Decision?

By Vince Leibowitz

Sources in D.C. and Texas this morning tell me that, though Richard Morrison withdrew from the CD 22 race on his own and for personal and financial reasons (see earlier post), the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) and some of its major donors played a major role in getting former Congressman Nick Lampson to enter the race.

Evidently, in spite of the fact that Richard Morrison has a large grassroots base in CD 22 and came closer than anyone has to beating Tom DeLay, the DCCC and some of its major donors reportedly recruited, encouraged and possibly even promised Lampson financial support if he would enter the race. My sources indicate to me that Beltway, D-Trip-types--many of whom couldn't find CD 22 on a color-coded map with written instructions--determined that Lampson was the more "electable" candidate than Morrison.

Interestingly, in his last race, which I'd think the DCCC would consider, Lampson vastly outspent his opponent, former State District Judge Ted Poe, and still lost. However, Richard Morrison raised relatively little compared to DeLay's warchest, and came just as close to DeLay as Lampson did to Poe.

Lampson garnered 42.91 percent of the vote in his district, while Morrison got 41.09 in CD 22.

Furthermore, Lampson, who was a fine Congressman (not trying to attack anyone here, just reporting what the sources tell me), can't be terribly well-known in CD 22. I'd venture to say that, in a name recognition poll, Morrison is more well known in CD 2 than Lampson is in CD 22.

If I were Richard Morrison, I would have given Lampson a challenge similar to one that was brokered but never utilized when Ted Kennedy first ran for U.S. Senate in the Democratic Primary against Edward McCormick, nephew of then-U.S. House Speaker John McCormick (the late House Speaker Tip O'Neill covers it in his book, Man of the House, if you want to read about it):

Why not commission a poll of voters in CD 22--both likely election-day voters and likely Democratic Primary voters in separate polls over separate periods of time. Ask who the the voters are most likely to vote for: Morrison or Lampson. Also, poll on Lampson vs. Morrison name recognition.

After the poll (and, what the heck--both sides can conduct one by the same methodology using their own pollsters), compare the results and the guy with the best chance stays in the race.

To me, that seems like the most fair way to go about something like this.

HJR 6 Update

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Ok, I had to go hunt this down on the LGRL blog to find out why today's second reading vote on HJR 6 means it was passed to the Senate without needing a third reading in the House.

Joint resolutions are used to propose amendments to the Texas Constitution, ratify proposed amendments to the U.S. Constitution, or request a constitutional convention to propose amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Joint resolutions proposing amendments to the Texas Constitution require a vote of two-thirds of the total membership of each house for adoption. Other joint resolutions require a simple majority vote in each house for adoption. A joint resolution takes the same course through both houses as a bill and is like a bill in all respects, except that, in the house, if it receives the required number of votes at any reading after the first reading, the resolution is passed. Three readings are still required to pass a joint resolution in the senate.

And to think, any 2 Aye votes could have just voted present and not voting and this would have been that much closer to dieing. My personal gripe, shame on Rep. Patrick Rose. I gave money to your last campaign but don't be expecting any from me the next go round.

Richard Morrison Withdraws from CD 22 Race

By Byron LaMasters

Does this mean that the path is clear for a Nick Lampson campaign in CD 22? Here is the email that Richard Morrison sent out to supporters this afternoon. I'm sure that speculation as to whether Morrison was forced out of the race will quickly ensue:

Dear Friends and Supporters,

It is with great sadness that I must withdraw my name from the race for District 22. As you all know I devoted 2 years of my life to win and placed my law practice on hold. With the prospects of having to spend another 2 years winning a primary and then challenging DeLay, my family’s financial situation is not the rosiest. My wife is expecting our 5th child in August and I feel that I must devote my time to getting my financial house in order. I think the biggest issue this county faces is our national debt and for me and mine to be facing debt that could quickly become unmanageable is irresponsible and unwise.

My mother and children's grandmother has also been diagnosed with cancer of the pancreas. She has vowed to me that she will fight it every step of the way and I have committed to help her with that fight. I ask for your prayers for her and my father.

I am not giving up my fight. I will continue to stay active and work hard for democrats. I ask that you do the same. Tom DeLay is bad for democracy and bad for America. If I can be so bold, I demand that each one of you will commit to work as hard for Congressman Lampson or Councilman Quan as you did for me. Democracy will suffer if you slack off even one bit.

Please do more in your community than just Democratic politics. Become active in Rotary, the local Chamber of Commerce, or your church, mosque or synagogue. Volunteer and began to carry the load in these organizations. Become indispensable to them. And when the conversations turn to politics, let them know that you are a Democrat. Demonstrate by your service that the Democratic Party cares. Through our service we can win back what we have lost and make this great county better.

Finally, I want to thank each one you who has contributed their time,
talent and treasure. This campaign was a campaign of service to the people of District 22 and each of you deserve all of the credit. I would not have been the candidate I was without your support.

Fight on!
Richard Morrison

I know that I join many Democrats in thanking Richard Morrison for his tireless work for the Democratic Party, his fight for ethical government, and perhaps most significantly - his efforts to take on and expose Tom DeLay. I wish Richard and his family the best, and I encourage them to contiune their service to our Democratic Party, and their community.

Update: The DCCC denies attempting to force Morrison out of the race, and point to this comment by the Morrison campaign on this Kos diary.

Blogging HJR 6

By Byron LaMasters

In the Pink Texas is liveblogging HJR 6 with the appropriate title of "Smear the Queer". Pink Dome is also liveblogging the HJR 6 debate. For the short version, just read the preview.

I've been watching some of the debate on television, and I believe that Karl-Thomas is watching the debate, and hopefully he'll have some thoughts later.

Update: Some of my favorite parts of the debate - Senfronia Thompson wants her 40 acres and a mule, while Rafael Anchia, Garnett Coleman and Paul Moreno in particular have been very articulate against the bill today. Robert Talton just looks like the face of evil - oh wait, he is, and Warren Chisum just appears like a misguided grandfather. I'll update later with the vote count.

Update: Final vote, 102-29 with a bunch of abstentions (100 votes needed for passage).

Update: Another post from In the Pink Texas and lots more at Pink Dome. Statements from Senfronia Thompson and Garnett Coleman here and via their comments is the actual vote. Also in Pink Dome comments is a statement by Al Edwards that I also recall hearing. The statement by Edwards was something along the lines of how he took offense that a "social ill" (GLBT Texans) was being compared to other civil rights issues. Fortunately, most of Edwards's African-American and Hispanic colleagues felt differently as expressed by their votes.

Jump to the extended entry for the roll call vote.

AYES - 102
Allen, Ray(R); Anderson(R); Baxter(R); Berman(R); Blake(R); Bohac(R); Bonnen(R); Branch(R); Brown, Betty(R); Brown, Fred(R); Callegari(R); Campbell(R); Casteel(R); Chisum(R); Cook, Byron(R); Cook, Robby(D); Corte(R); Crabb(R); Craddick(R); Crownover(R); Davis, John(R); Dawson(R); Delisi(R); Denny(R); Driver(R); Edwards(D); Eissler(R); Elkins(R); Escobar(D); Farabee(D); Flynn(R); Frost(D); Gattis(R); Geren(R); Gonzales(D); Gonzalez Toureilles(D); Goodman(R); Goolsby(R); Griggs(R); Grusendorf(R); Haggerty(R); Hamilton(R); Hamric(R); Hardcastle(R); Harper-Brown(R); Hartnett(R); Hegar(R); Hilderbran(R); Hill(R); Hope(R); Hopson(D); Howard(R); Hughes(R); Hunter(R); Hupp(R); Isett(R); Jackson, Jim(R); Jones, Delwin(R); Keel(R); Keffer, Bill(R); Keffer, Jim(R); King, Phil(R); King, Tracy(D); Kolkhorst(R); Krusee(R); Kuempel(R); Laney(D); Laubenberg(R); Leibowitz(D); Madden(R); McCall(R); McReynolds(D); Merritt(R); Miller(R); Morrison(R); Mowery(R); Olivo(D); Orr(R); Otto(R); Paxton(R); Phillips(R); Pickett(D); Quintanilla(D); Raymond(D); Reyna(R); Riddle(R); Ritter(D); Rose(D); Seaman(R); Smith, Todd(R); Smith, Wayne(R); Solomons(R); Straus(R); Swinford(R); Talton(R); Taylor(R); Truitt(R); Turner(D); Van Arsdale(R); West, Buddy(R); Woolley(R); Zedler(R)

NAYS - 29
Allen, Alma(D); Alonzo(D); Anchia(D); Bailey(D); Burnam(D); Coleman(D); Davis, Yvonne(D); Deshotel(D); Dukes(D); Dunnam(D); Dutton(D); Farrar(D); Gallego(D); Herrero(D); Hochberg(D); Hodge(D); Martinez Fischer(D); McClendon(D); Moreno, Joe(D); Moreno, Paul(D); Naishtat(D); Noriega(D); Puente(D); Rodriguez(D); Strama(D); Thompson(D); Veasey(D); Villarreal(D); Vo(D)

PRESENT-NOT-VOTING - 5
Castro(D); Chavez(D); Giddings(D); Jones, Jesse(D); Wong(R)

ABSENT - 14
Eiland(D); Flores(D); Guillen(D); Homer(D); Luna(D); Martinez(D); Menendez(D); Nixon(R); Oliveira(D); Pena(D); Pitts(R); Smithee(R); Solis(D); Uresti(D)

Guest Post on Dallas County Democratic Party Chair Race

By Byron LaMasters

Here's an email that I received from Jake Sapiens regarding the April 22nd Grand Prairie forum for Dallas Democratic Party County Chair candidates:

On Friday I attended a candidates forum hosted by Grand Prairie (and now Irving?) Democrats at Monterey's in Downtown Grand Prairie.

Of course I came into it with a bias: I already know and respect Bruce Rothstein as a longtime Democratic grassroots activist, and on this note the forum reinforced my opinion of him as the best candidate for these reasons. He had the strongest message about message, and had more nuts and bolts understanding of what goes into the political work of a county party structure. His vision seemed the most ambitious as well as the most based in concrete knowledge. I don't forsee any on-the-job training necessary should he become the interim or even regular party chair. His longtime experience as an activist and precinct chair makes him a favorite on those values which the last party chair found herself most in conflict with. On the subject of Susan Hayes, however, he stressed the need for all party leadership both past and current to communicate with each other. "We can't afford to lose institutional knowledge." I was impressed with his intelligence and ability to move into the future. All of the candidates expressed similar sentiments and impressed me with their positive attitudes and the lack of needless dwelling on the now-publicized party conflict which brought the party to this point in the first place.

I am not unfamiliar with Walter Hofheinz; he has become a friend-in-democracy of mine through this last election cycle as I've run into him at numerous fundraising and social events. Since I had never seen him address a group like this, I previously viewed him as just a low-key and friendly guy. Nothing had particularly impressed me of his leadership potential until the forum. Now that I look up his background as a candidate and his history of convention involvement I suppose I shouldn't have been as surprised as I was at the smoothness of his communication and his confidence in working with a room of people the way he did. Of all the candidates, my opinion of him changed the most through the forum, his communication skills seeming the best. If elected, I think he could be a fast-learner and would inspire the kind of confidence that potential Democratic candidates for office would want in deciding to put their own name on the line.

Darlene Ewing came into the forum as the most unknown to me, however her connections and loyalty are not unfamiliar. I "know" her through her work in Citizens for Equality. On the issue of election protection all of the candidates were on the same page, however she had the strongest and most informed message on this. With the transition to electronic voting machines and the irregularities many have actually experienced first hand, she impressed me as the candidate who would best address ballot protection. She stressed her fundraising experience which on further research I see is considerable, and her unique skills as a family lawyer in relation to dealing with the kind of recent conflicts. Her presentation came across as upbeat and can-do.

All of the candidates seemed to know and genuinely like each other, sticking around afterwards to talk to each other, precinct chairs, and other assembled Democrats. Katy Hubener was an excellent moderator for the event, letting the candidates shine while sticking to the tough concerns of the group through pointed questions. The tone of the forum and all of the candidates inspired hope in me for the Democrats of this county.

A Defense of Sylvester Turner

By Byron LaMasters

Political consultant Marc Campos (who includes Sylvester Turner on his client list) offers a defense of Sylvester Turner:

Everyone's favorite state Dem legislator, Sylvester Turner (Houston), is getting a lot of email play of late. Late last week, word surfaced that Turner would make an appearance on a national TV talk show that is hosted by one of those looney conservatives. Someone then opined over the internet that maybe Sly was fixing to make the party switcheroo on national TV - become a GOPer. Turner's trusted media advisor then put out an email explaining Turner's scheduled TV appearance - he's supposed to talk about state legislative matters.

When you step back and look at the entire situation, there was no justification to suggest that Sylvester would jump to the other side. Yeah, there have been a couple of questionable votes or non-votes or voting machine snafus. Yeah, he's the Speaker Pro Tem, selected by a highly partisan GOP House Speaker. Yeah, he missed the bus to Ardmore - but some in the health care community are glad he stayed and worked on their funding issues as a member of the budget conference committee. All in all he has a pretty impressive Dem voting record.

Now Dem activists - particularly those from the Houston area, and particularly those from the Anglo and Latino persuasion - conveniently forget another factor, selective memory loss. When Sylvester put his impressive Dem Party credentials up for review when he ran for Mayor of the City of Houston in 2003, Anglo, Latino, and Gay/Lesbian Dems said "get lost pal". Dems failed to show up for him when he wanted help, yet these same Dems want him to act like their kind of Dem. It does not work that way. Wasn't it less than two months ago that the State Dem Party Chair released a statement praising Turner for his legislative heroics? If the Chair got it wrong on Turner, lay some wood on him. Nope, of course not. That would be called fair play.

How about starting rumors about GOPers, like did you hear that top local GOP leaders met over the weekend at a Houston downtown law office to devise a strategy for Tom DeLay to gracefully give up his leadership position? Now Dems, isn't this rumor better than Sylvester jumping ship?

I get the point here, but the very reason that many Democrats said "get lost" when Turner asked for their help in his mayoral bid is due to his serving in the Craddick leadership team. I've been tough on Sylvester Turner because of his work with the Craddick leadership, and his frequent bizarre explainations for certain votes and decisions. I will continue to be critical of Sylvester Turner and other Democrats when I see fit, but as anyone who knows me or reads this blog, would certainly know that I always save my harshest wrath for GOPers like Tom DeLay.

Abramoff Paid for DeLay Trip to London

By Byron LaMasters

It is against House rules for a registered lobbyist to pay for the travel expenses of a congressman. Jack Abramoff is a Washington lobbyist, and friend of Tom DeLay. Edwin A. Buckham is also a Washington lobbyist. Abramoff and Buckham paid for a 2000 trip to London and Scotland for Tom DeLay. The Washington Post reports:

The airfare to London and Scotland in 2000 for then-House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) was charged to an American Express card issued to Jack Abramoff, a Washington lobbyist at the center of a federal criminal and tax probe, according to two sources who know Abramoff's credit card account number and to a copy of a travel invoice displaying that number.

DeLay's expenses during the same trip for food, phone calls and other items at a golf course hotel in Scotland were billed to a different credit card also used on the trip by a second registered Washington lobbyist, Edwin A. Buckham, according to receipts documenting that portion of the trip.

House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting travel and related expenses from registered lobbyists. DeLay, who is now House majority leader, has said that his expenses on this trip were paid by a nonprofit organization and that the financial arrangements for it were proper. He has also said he had no way of knowing that any lobbyist might have financially supported the trip, either directly or through reimbursements to the nonprofit organization.

The Houston Chronicle has a handy breakdown of the expenses for Tom DeLay's London trip:

Details of a trip to Britain taken by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in May 2000, based on travel and other documents:

• Business Class tickets for DeLay and his wife to London on Continental Airlines and British Airways: $6,938.70


• Golfing fees at St. Andrews: $5,000 per golfer, including DeLay.


• Deluxe room at the London Four Seasons Hotel: $790 a night for four nights.


• Private car from Heathrow airport to the hotel: $302.


• Six theater tickets: $434. (DeLay's attorney said the lawmaker did not recall attending the theater but the tickets were charged to his room)

More at the Daily DeLay.

HJR 6 On the Floor

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

The UDems GLBT Committee is up at the Capitol right now before HJR 6 starts to be debated (live feed here). Apparently the DPS in the gallery would not allow us to wear our "Hate is not a Texas Value" shirts, because it would be a "distraction" even though our plans are to remain silent and say nothing. So they are talking to some of the Reps and Senators officers to work around it since it's a rule that we havn't heard of before (and I can only imagine be related to the raucus redistricting crowds).

Texas Union not my Friend

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

I'm not happy with the Texas Union right now. University Democrats was there tonight working on making some T-shirts for our silent protest of HJR 6 (join us in the gallery Monday morning at 10 AM, look for the shirts that say "Hate is not a Texas Value" on them, and come wear one). Some manager person came over and asked us to please removed our pizza boxes, because we had ordered some from Austin's Pizza for the volunteers.

Why did we have to remove them? Because the Union apparently has some contract with Mustachio Pete's (also not a Union vendor) and can only allow their pizza to be eaten in their common dining area. We could eat it, the man said, if we ripped the tops of the boxes off with the competitor's labels on them. It was about the most ridiculous reason I can possibly think of to kick us out of the Union. Mr. Union Board Representative James Burnham has a blog, so if this is an issue or policy that he might have any control over, I'll be sure to let him know about this entry. So leave your comments. I hope it isn't against the rules to drink Starbucks or eat dorm food, or anything else that I might be eating while working on homework, socializing with friends, or meeting non-UT people for any particular reason. So much for a Student Union.

Galveston News

By Jim Dallas

President Bush is going to be in Galveston (UTMB Levin Hall, specifically) at noon on Tuesday the 26th -- which also happense to bemy 23rd birthday! -- to pitch his Social Security phase-out non-plan. Galveston County, as some may know, opted-out of Social Security about twenty-five years ago, and has had mixed results ("success" in Republicanese) with a private system.

I'd like to go down there with a big sign saying "Forty-two years from now, I'm going to want my Social Security the way it is now!" But I've got obligations all day long. So somebody please go down there and stick it to the man for me (hint, I hear labor and other folks are trying to form a protest.)

Meanwhile, via Carl Whitmarsh, I hear that they're still having trouble finding a new Democratic county chair; apparently the State Party goofed something up in appointing John Patrick to be the designated-helper-outer. From news reports as well as over-heard gossip, it looks like once the temporary chair situation is figured out, former state rep. Lloyd Criss will probably win election.

Best of luck to Criss or whoever wins. Galveston County Democrats need a real cat-herder these days to turn the county blue again.

Dean-Style

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

From Washington Whispers for all of those interesting in the head of our Party...

Let's just state the obvious: New Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean is no Terry McAuliffe . Where the flashy former Clinton fundraiser was a gregarious ringmaster accustomed to the bling-bling of the highest non-publicly elected Democratic job around, Dean is almost a seminarian in his approach to the post. And, oddly, his style seems to fit with the party's bid to build its blue-collar base--just as McAuliffe's meshed with the DNC's need to raise gobs of money and go high tech.

What's so different? McAuliffe would limo around town, dropping in at the Palm to huddle with Washington big shots. The 2004 presidential hopeful, by contrast, takes the bus or subway, buying his own $1.35 ticket. Sometimes he bums rides from staffers or walks the four blocks to the Capitol for meetings. "Please Call Me Howard" never flies first class and always carries his own bags.

Other signs of the ex-guv's modest style: He eats at his desk, stays in a cheap D.C. hotel, and likes oxford shirts and penny loafers. Affectionately dubbed a "geek" by pals, he's often glued to his cellphone and loves E-mail. "His expertise is grass roots and his lifestyle is no different," says an associate. So far, Washington likes what it sees, surprised he's not the oddball that newsies pegged him as last year. Says an aide, smiling: "They're giving him a shot."

Radnofsky Raises $350,000

By Byron LaMasters

The Quorum Report has the news. Barbara Ann Radnofsky is the only announced 2006 Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Texas. You can check out her website here.

Lampson, Morrison committed to take on Tom DeLay

By Byron LaMasters

The Houston Chronicle reports that Richard Morrison, Gordon Quan and Nick Lampson met in the past days about who will take on Tom DeLay:

Three Democrats who want to challenge House Majority Leader Tom DeLay without a divisive primary were unable Friday to agree on a single candidate against the powerful Sugar Land Republican.

Sugar Land lawyer Richard Morrison, who ran against DeLay last November, former U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson, of Beaumont, and Houston City Councilman Gordon Quan met at Morrison's behest.

Morrison said he and Lampson still are committed to the race. Quan said he will form an exploratory committee. Lampson could not be reached.

As you might have noticed, Frontier PAC is running a blogad on BOR, urging the DCCC to get behind Morrison. My understanding is that the DCCC will not be financially supporting any candidate in the primary, but will financially support the Democratic nominee for the district. Of course, I have no idea if the DCCC has encouraged another candidate (Lampson, Quan, etc.) to enter the race, but I don't particularly have a problem with a competitive primary as long as all candidates run a positive campaign.

Several weeks ago, many Texas bloggers held a conference call with Richard Morrison. I didn't have the opportunity to write on the call at the time, but Morrison was very clear that he was not "considering" the race. He had no plan to step aside for anyone. He said that a candidate from outside the district (Lampson, Quan, etc.) might have trouble selling himself to conservative voters in the district - especially areas such as Richmond, Rosenberg, parts of Galveston, etc. If an outside candidate won the primary, Morrison fears that Tom DeLay would be able to successfully label the candidate as an "out of touch liberal" from outside the district.

I'm inclined to agree with Morrison here. Lampson could probably raise more money, and Quan might be able to appeal to some Republican-leaning Asian-American voters, but Morrison is the candidate that has been building a grassroots organization for two years now, and he's determined to not only take on Tom DeLay, but to build a true Democratic organization in the 22nd Congressional District.

More Legislator-Bloggers at Lone Star Rising

By Byron LaMasters

We noted earlier that State Rep. Aaron Pena started Lone Star Rising as a group blog for state representatives to post. Earlier there were posts from State Reps. Joe Deshotel, Veronica Gonzales and Raphael Anchia. Since then, Reps. Richard Raymond, Joaquin Castro, Mark Strama - and in the spirit of bipartisanship, Republican Bryan Hughes - have joined the world of legislator-bloggers. Who's next?

Sen. Nelson Opposes Talton Amendment

By Byron LaMasters

The LGRL blog found this Fort Worth Star Telegram article:

he Senate author of a bill designed to overhaul the state's protective service agencies said Thursday that she will work to strip a controversial provision that would prohibit gays and lesbians from serving as foster parents.

"I will strenuously object to that amendment going onto the bill," said state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville. "I do not want this bill being at risk of being tied up in court."

Nelson's remark came two days after the Texas House voted to include the ban on gay foster parents in what state leaders say is a desperately needed measure to fix systemic problems in the state Department of Family Protective Services. The agency oversees Child Protective Services and Adult Protective Services, which have been under criticism for more than a year amid reports of widespread and sometimes deadly abuse and neglect.

Nelson said she is concerned that the ban on gay foster parents, pushed by state Rep. Robert Talton, R-Pasadena, would probably become a magnet for lawsuits and that it might cause upheaval for the thousands of children in homes where the foster parents might be gay or bisexual.

So, which will win out? Republicans desire to limit lawsuits, or their desire to hate gay people? That's a tough one...

Sylvester Turner to Switch Parties?

By Byron LaMasters

Save Texas Reps speculates. I wonder what the GOP is offering him?

Update: Via email and Greg's Opinion is a statement on Turner's FOX News appearance:

St. Rep. Sylvester Turner will appear on "Hannity and Colmes" Monday to discuss HB 1093. It would release seriously-ill bed-ridden sex offenders from prison into strict medical supervision. Just one of these people cost the state $1.5 million for medical care in 2004. The bill has widespread support and is expected to easily win passage in the House early next week.

To quote from Friday’s Austin American Statesman: (the entire story is attached)

"In 2003, inmates serving time for sex crimes were barred from a program that allows some convicts who are critically or terminally ill to be paroled to a nursing home, hospice or other approved location. That change affected six of the 20 convicts who had the highest medical bills that year, racking up a total of more than $7.4 million, and six of the top 20 in 2004, records show.

"A study last year by the Legislative Budget Board estimated that the state could save more than $3 million over the next five years by paroling convicts like the Million Dollar Man to facilities where they can draw federal Medicaid money to cover their medical expenses. While they are in prison, they are not eligible for Medicaid."

Leffingwell's Wife Found Dead

By Byron LaMasters

The Austin American Statesman reports that the wife of Austin City Council Place 1 candidate Lee Leffingwell was found dead this morning:

Mary Lou McLain, the board president for Family Eldercare and wife of City Council candidate Lee Leffingwell, was found dead this morning inside her Northeast Austin home.

Police are investigating the death as a suicide.

Police spokeswoman Toni Chovanetz said authorities received a call at 10:19 a.m. that a person had died inside a home on Bradwood Road. When they arrived, they found McLain's body. Police have not released the cause of death.

Mark Nathan, a spokesman for Leffingwell, said the campaign has suspended all activities and that a memorial service is being planned. He said Leffingwell likely won't decide for several days whether he will continue running for the Place 1 seat being vacated by Daryl Slusher.

There will certainly be political ramifications of this, especially if Leffingwell decides to drop out of the race, but at this point, it would be inappropriate to ponder such possibilities. For now, I know I speak for the entire BOR team in saying that our thoughts and prayers are with Lee Leffingwell and his family through this tragedy. I also hope that our readers, and the greater Austin community join all of us tonight as we pray for Lee Leffingwell and his family.

Santorum to Privitize the Weather?

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Matt Hardigree over at East End brings to my attention that Man-on-Dog Senator Santorum (R) has a bill filed in the Senate to privitize Weather (meaning, let's get rid of that silly NOAA and restrict them to just "emergency" weather reporting).

The Palm Beach Post reports...

Do you want a seven-day weather forecast for your ZIP code? Or hour-by-hour predictions of the temperature, wind speed, humidity and chance of rain? Or weather data beamed to your cellphone?

That information is available for free from the National Weather Service.

...

The bill, introduced last week by Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., would prohibit federal meteorologists from competing with companies such as AccuWeather and The Weather Channel, which offer their own forecasts through paid services and free ad-supported Web sites.

Supporters say the bill wouldn't hamper the weather service or the National Hurricane Center from alerting the public to hazards — in fact, it exempts forecasts meant to protect "life and property."

Many 'private' companies use NOAA information to complement their own forcasting, so why should I be forced to then pay for weather information which I've already payed for through my federal income taxes? Talk about double taxation Mr. Santorum.

"The National Weather Service Web site would have to go away," Bradner said. "What would be permitted under this bill is not clear — it doesn't say...

A spokesman for Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said the bill threatens to push the weather service back to a "pre-Internet era" — a questionable move in light of the four hurricanes that struck the state last year. Nelson serves on the Senate Commerce Committee, which has been assigned to consider the bill.

"The weather service proved so instrumental and popular and helpful in the wake of the hurricanes. How can you make an argument that we should pull it off the Net now?" said Nelson's spokesman, Dan McLaughlin. "What are you going to do, charge hurricane victims to go online, or give them a pop-up ad?"

Good point, but the next one made by AccuWeather's Exec-VP are really choice...

"The National Weather Service has not focused on what its core mission should be, which is protecting other people's lives and property," said Myers, whose company is based in State College, Pa. Instead, he said, "It spends hundreds of millions of dollars a year, every day, producing forecasts of 'warm and sunny.'"

Well I'm sorry that we have so many days of just howdy-ho, average hum-drum weather Mr. Myers. If all you are going to do is bitch about the NWS making forcasts, then why do you want to have them so bad, like you can make them any more warm in sunny? Are we going to have "Extreme-Weather" to boost your sales? Maybe Reality-Weather programing, pitting cirrus clouds against cumulonimbus with a suprise visit by a monsoon.

If they want to limit NOAA to just doing "severe" weather, how in the world are they supposed to cover just that without compiling data on all weather patterns. They can't. Weather is dynamic and I think it would be hard to suddenly lose or gain control over reporting or providing data because a storm becomes "severe" or weakens just enough it no longer qualifies. They make is seem as if there are only two categories of weather, warm and sunny, and "severe" as if they existed in their own little worlds, 7 day forecasts by zip code, and news stories about submerged cars in floods and tornadic mobile home destruction.

Thankfully, NOAA can have quippy quotes as well so I'll leave you with this related line.

"If someone claims that our core mission is just warning the public of hazardous conditions, that's really impossible unless we forecast the weather all the time," Johnson said. "You don't just plug in your clock when you want to know what time it is."

Rally to Save Texas Families

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

I'm floating this up since the event is in a few hours. The following is from Jake Holbrook, director of StandOut, recognized as the "Best New Organization" on campus this year.

In light of recent attacks on the LGBT community by the Texas legislature in the form of SB 6, an anti-gay foster care bill. It would seek to further solidify the place of the LGBT community’s members as second class citizens. StandOut of the University of Texas at Austin is organizing a Rally and Protest at the Texas Capitol, this Friday April 22nd.

What: Save Texas Families Rally and Protest
Where: In front of the Capitol Gates, 11th and Congress
When: Friday, April 22nd –
12:00 pm Gather and make posters,
12:30 pm Rally begins,
2:30 pm Rally ends.

Why:
StandOut has organized this Protest and Rally in reaction to SB 6 which seeks to reform the Texas Child Protective Services Agency. Rep. Robert Talton’s amendment to this bill though would do, among other things:

• Prevent Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual people from fostering children in the state of Texas
• Take the children away from all 43,000 Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual people already forming families
• Remove these children from loving, stable families and place them back into the already overburdened Foster Care system
• Emotionally destroy these Texas families
• Allows the new CPS Agency to conduct “investigations” into suspect foster parents not already officially identified as Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual
• Will cost the state of Texas an additional $8 million dollars every year

We will not tolerate this kind of discrimination. We will stand together. We will fight. We will make ourselves heard.

Jake Holbrook
Director, StandOut
Young People For, 2005 Fellow

Byron's Austin City Council Endorsements

By Byron LaMasters

I figure that I might as well make endorsements for Austin City Council for what it's worth. I voted on Wednesday for Andrew Bucknall, Mandy Dealey and Betty Dunkerly in Austin City Council Places 1, 3 and 4. I also voted for the smoking ban and for ACC expansion. My endorsements:

Place 1: Andrew Bucknall and Lee Leffingwell

I've been impressed with Lee Leffingwell's civic service, progressive Democratic record, and environmental activism. The more I've seen of Leffingwell, the more I've liked him. It is extremely likely that Leffingwell will win this election to fill the seat of Daryl Slusher, and he would serve Austin well. However, Bucknall also has a progressive Democratic record of activism in east Austin. Bucknall has revitalized the Huston-Tillotson University Democrats, served as a precinct chair, and on citizens' committees addressing affordable housing. Either Bucknall or Leffingwell would serve Austin well. I voted for Bucknall, but both are a solid choice for progressive leadership.

Place 3: Mandy Dealey

Place 3 has four qualified candidates to replace Jackie Goodman. All four bring new ideas and energy to Austin politics, and any of the four would be an asset to the council.

Margot Clarke and Mandy Dealey clearly have the longest record of Democratic and progressive activism. Clarke's work has been on the grassroots side of things, whereas Dealey's work has been more related to fundraising and serving on numerous boards. They've both contributed valuable work that certainly qualifies them for the council.

Jennifer Kim and Gregg Knaupe round out the field. Kim is an impressive first time candidate, and is very well-spoken, but she lacks the experience of Clarke or Dealey. Knaupe is running an impressive campaign, but he has received a great deal of money from developer and Republican sources, and while I trust his Democratic credentials, I worry that he may be strongly influenced by his developer and Republican friends.

As the campaign has progressed, it is clear that Margot Clarke and Mandy Dealey bring the best progressive credentials to the race. Of the two, I am most impressed with Dealey. Clarke is the type of anti-growth, anti-development candidate that is less likely to be able to compromise and negotiate with others on the council. Furthermore, of all four candidates, Clarke has the least comprehensive website as to her agenda on the city council. On the other hand, Dealey's background with progressive nonprofits make her the best qualified candidate to work towards consensus on the council from a progressive perspective. She also has an extensive plan of action for Austin on her website. I was proud to vote for, and I am proud to endorse Mandy Dealey for Austin City Council.

Place 4: Betty Dunkerly

I've already indicated my support for Betty Dunkerly, but I'll do it again. Dunkerly entered politics during the economic downturn, because she believed that her background in public finance and as assistant city manager of Austin put her in position to help the city through the economic downturn. She's always been very accessible and has the best interests of Austin at heart. We need more people like her in politics. I wholeheartedly endorse Betty Dunkerly for re-election.

Smoking Ban: Yes, no, maybe so, ok, I guess, yes

I debated with myself over the smoking ban for awhile. I'm pretty much indifferent to it. In the end, I found the arguments for the ban more genuine than the arguments against the ban. People who I respect have spoken passionately on both sides of the issue. I know that Andrew feels strongly about this issue, but I was also moved by David Butts's support of the smoking ban at the UD/CAD/APC endorsement meeting. I've constantly debated the merits of the bill and weighed the rights of property owners and the rights of smokers versus the rights of non-smokers and the health risks of second-hand smoke, especially for people that work at bars.

In the end, I still couldn't decide, but I broke the deadlock with the statement by one of the anti-smoking ban guys at the UD/CAD/APC meeting. He said something to the effect that there was little evidence to prove that second-hand smoke was a health risk to which a lot of us were very much taken aback. There are good arguments against the smoking ban, but questioning the health risks associated with second hand smoke is not one of them. For me, this was a tie-breaker. I voted for the ordinance.

ACC Expansion: YES

This was an easy vote. Austin Community College (ACC) expansion allows more young people the opportunity for a higher education, and forces suburbanites to help pay for it. If this isn't a no-brainer, I don't know what is.

Sylvester Turner on His Vote for Talton's Amendment

By Byron LaMasters

Sounds like a lame excuse to me:

"There has been some confusion surrounding my vote on Representative Talton's amendment to SB 6. The vote was cast mistakenly while I was at the appropriation conference committee working group. I am NOT in favor of the amendment, and my previous record and actions reflect that. Foster children need loving comfortable homes and I would never let prejudice or discrimination stand in the way of these children finding those homes. I am hopeful that the conference committee on SB 6 will remove discrimination from this piece of legislation."

The vote was cast mistakenly while Turner was gone? Why did Turner not have his voting machine locked? Who cast the vote by accident? Will Sylvester Turner tell us this, or should we demand an investigation? I know that Sylvester Turner is often a sell-out to the Craddick leadership team, but I would at least hope that he wouldn't let Craddick's team cast his vote for him when he is away. However, Turner's explaination can only lead me to this conclusion (unless there was some legitimate malfunction of the voting machine). I'm really getting tired of one excuse after another coming from the office of Sylvester Turner.

So, who's next? What's Al Edwards's excuse? What's Richard Raymond's excuse? What about you, Tracy King? As Houston Democrats points out, the Texas Democratic Party Platform is very clear on this issue.

Wasn't this the plot for a live-action Disney movie?

By Jim Dallas

This is slightly amusing:

Mayoral hopeful Julian Castro acknowledged Wednesday that his twin brother took his place in a parade this week, waving at onlookers who mistook the stand-in for the candidate.

Castro told The Associated Press he had a conflicting event and didn't intend to deceive anyone when state Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-San Antonio, boarded the City Council barge in the city's River Parade.

"We can't help that we look like each other," said Julian Castro, a council member and leading contender for the mayor's post.

As many as 250,000 people gathered along the famous River Walk to watch the decorated barges float by on Monday night. Many mistook the state representative for the mayoral hopeful.

"When he was waving, they would say, 'Julian,' and he would say 'No, it's Joaquin,' but you can't really yell at 200,000 people along the route," Julian Castro said.

Phil Hardberger is trying to spin this into a scandal. I sense that reeks of desperation, but then again, San Antonio is a city I've never really particularly understood.

This reminds me somewhat of the oft-mentioned (at least by Molly Ivins) case of "the wrong Don Yarbrough," although I sense this will have a much happier ending.

The San Antonio election blog posts on this here and here; and of course the Jeffersonian has still more.

Lamar Smith is Coming to Town

By Byron LaMasters

From the Travis County Democratic Party:

*Saturday, April 23, 2005 - Cong Dist 21 Town Hall mtg*

The two meetings on Saturday, April 23, are set as follows:

10:00 AM - Wimberley Junior High Cafeteria, 200 Texan Blvd., Wimberley

1:00 PM - Hill Country Senior Citizens Center, 1310 West Hwy. 290,
Dripping Springs

Cong. Lamar Smith, whose district covers a large slice of Travis and most of Hays Counties will be holding a Town Hall meeting. This will be the first such meeting in the district this year and the first opportunity for constituents to question Rep. Smith on important issues. For more information, www.lamarsmith.house.gov

Show up at the meeting and ask him why he's Tom DeLay's #1 lackey, or tell him why Bush's Social Security privatization scheme is a bad idea.

This May Explain some things about the Lege

By Byron LaMasters

Ever wonder why our lege is so screwed up? Quotes from the speaker such as this one may explain a few things (kudos to the Austin Chronicle for the catch):

"Up there [in the U.S. Congress], they have 400-and-some on the House side – 454 – and they have fewer on the Senate side: 60." – Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick, guest-teaching a Mendez Middle School class last week, and revealing the need to do a little cramming before he takes the TAKS test. (For the record, there are 435 U.S. Representatives and 100 U.S. Senators.)

Well, Kinky's at least right one thing (see below). These folks (Craddick, et al.) not only don't know a damn about education, they don't know a damn about government.

Kinky Comes to Campus

By Byron LaMasters

Kinky Friedman was on campus yesterday, yet for some reason I didn't notice.

Two bits of the Daily Texan article caught my eye:

Friedman said problems in education are linked to uncaring legislators who know little about education. [...]

Friedman fielded questions from students on city-wide smoking bans (which he opposes), education reform (which he encourages) and tuition deregulation (which he heard about for the first time yesterday).

Ok, so Friedman blames our problems in education on legislators who know little about education, yet he admits ignorance to one of the most important higher education issues in this state. Ok.... next.

No Pants Day is on its Way

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

May 6th, the last day of classes, it's coming...

Come on, you know you want to share the No Pants Day love. Click on the icon and take it from there to save it and add it as your icon.

You Student Government types...be prepared is all I have to say.

Latinos for Texas Endorse

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Andrew Bucknall - Place 1
Margot Clarke - Place 3
Betty Dunkerly - Place 4

Via here

Early voting at the UGL on campus today yielded 178 voters.

Votes on the Gay Foster Parent Vote Ban

By Byron LaMasters

Pink Dome points to LGRL's list of the recorded vote on the gay foster parent ban in the Texas House on Tuesday. I've made a list of those who voted against party lines. First, here are the Democrats who voted for the Talton amendment:

Dems (yes): Robby Cook, Al Edwards, David Farabee, Stephen Frost, Tracy King, Jim McReynolds, Richard Raymond, Patrick Rose, Sylvester Turner.

Cook, Frost and McReynolds represent conservative east Texas districts, so that explains their vote. Rose and Farabee also represent conservative districts, but I'm still pissed off at them regardless. Finally, Al Edwards, Tracy King, Richard Raymond and Sylvester Turner represent safe Democratic districts. Raymond is considering a run for congress, and many progressives who would be likely support him in a primary might think twice about it after this vote.

On the Republican side, there were three votes of interest. Todd Baxter (R-Austin), who voted for the Dignity for All Students amendment, voted against the GLBT comunity on this one. Rep. Jim Keffer (R-Eastland) voted, well, you know. Also, Dan Branch (R-Highland Park), who represents much of the Oak Lawn area voted for the amendment.

GOP (no): Ray Allen, Carter Casteel, Peggy Hamric, Will Hartnett, Bob Hunter, Delwin Jones, Terry Keel, Brian McCall, Martha Wong.

Some surprises here. Martha Wong does something right, but the damage has already been done. Keel and McCall are relative moderates on some issues, so their votes don't surprise me, but the other votes here do. Also, it should be noted that Pete Laney voted the right way. He represents a conservative west Texas district, so this was a difficult vote for him, and should be applauded for doing the right thing.

Your Ever-Impenetrable Burnt Orange Report -- now with five percent more evil!

By Jim Dallas

I got this idea from Kevin Drum, who writes at an 8th grade level, so blame him.

I conducted a readability analysis using this website of the last ten posts by Byron, Karl-Thomas, and myself. I didn't analyze Katie, Dobbs, Andrea, or anyone else, since there aren't a whole lot of recent posts from them. Full results below the fold.

The results? Well, let's just say you'd better have at least a tenth-grade education:

Jim - Flesch-Kincaid Grade: 9.53

Byron - Flesch-Kincaid Grade: 9.98

Karl-Thomas - Flesch-Kincaid Grade: 8.50

All Fog indices were higher than 11.6. This is roughly equivalent to the Wall Street Journal.

Meanwhile, I re-analyzed BOR's RSS stream using the gematriculator, which reports that:

Granted, this is a slight change in methodology from our last report, which probably explains how the presence of an aspiring lawyer only results in a five percent increase. Then again, we've added Katie as a contributor since, so I'm sure that gives us a lot of "light side of the Force" brownie scout points.

Which reminds me, one month until the last Star Wars and two weeks until the fourth season of The Family Guy debuts!

Jim:

Summary Value
Total sentences 154
Total words 2,520
Average words per Sentence 16.36
Words with 1 Syllable 1,612
Words with 2 Syllables 486
Words with 3 Syllables 271
Words with 4 or more Syllables 151
Percentage of word with three or more syllables 16.75%
Average Syllables per Word 1.59
Gunning Fog Index 13.24
Flesch Reading Ease 55.91
Flesch-Kincaid Grade 9.53

Byron:

Summary Value
Total sentences 107
Total words 1,899
Average words per Sentence 17.75
Words with 1 Syllable 1,182
Words with 2 Syllables 407
Words with 3 Syllables 235
Words with 4 or more Syllables 75
Percentage of word with three or more syllables 16.32%
Average Syllables per Word 1.58
Gunning Fog Index 13.63
Flesch Reading Ease 55.13
Flesch-Kincaid Grade 9.98

Karl-Thomas:

Summary Value
Total sentences 158
Total words 2,644
Average words per Sentence 16.73
Words with 1 Syllable 1,748
Words with 2 Syllables 570
Words with 3 Syllables 257
Words with 4 or more Syllables 69
Percentage of word with three or more syllables 12.33%
Average Syllables per Word 1.49
Gunning Fog Index 11.63
Flesch Reading Ease 63.94
Flesch-Kincaid Grade 8.50

This better not be a whitewash

By Jim Dallas

MSNBC says there's going to be a House ethics probe of Tom DeLay.

Great. But let's remember, the House of Representatives is where justice goes to die these days.

The heat is on, boys. Don't expect us to turn it down until we're finished cooking your goose.

Gay Foster Parent Ban Passes State House

By Byron LaMasters

Because of Rep. Robert Talton (R-Pasadena)'s amendment to the Child Protective Services reform bill, your tax dollars will be spend on witch hunts seeking to learn the sexual orientation of potential foster parents (should the amendment pass the senate). The Austin American Statesman reports:

House lawmakers on Tuesday voted to prohibit gay or bisexual people from becoming foster parents as part of the chamber's overhaul of child and adult protective services.

The amendment was rolled into the bill approved by the House of Representatives that, as expected, would also lower caseloads for investigators and hand over to private agencies some of the duties associated with protecting Texas children. [...]

Talton's amendment would require the Department of Family and Protective Services to ask potential foster parents if they are homosexual or bisexual and to refrain from placing children with those parents. Currently, the agency does not ask that question.

The department also would be required to remove a child from a foster home if it determines that the parents are homosexual or bisexual.

"It's a learned behavior, and I think a child . . . ought to have the opportunity to be presented to a traditional family as such," Talton said. "And if they choose to be homosexual or lesbian, then that's their choice when they turn 18."

Talton said he tacked the amendment onto the CPS reform bill because he knew he wouldn't get a hearing for it if he filed his own legislation. The amendment passed 81-58, mostly along party lines. Talton had tried unsuccessfully in the past to pass such legislation.

Kathy Miller, president of the Texas Freedom Network, a government watchdog group that bills itself as an alternative to the religious right, said in a statement that the House put personal and political biases ahead of children's interests.

"Representative Talton's amendment to ban gay men, lesbians and bisexuals from acting as foster parents will further strain a foster system that is already overburdened, forcing more children into institutions rather than safe, loving homes," she said. "Texas children who most need the state's protection have been cast aside in favor of a narrow, mean-spirited agenda."

More at the Pink Dome. Also, read the statement from the LGRL. Also blogged at Appalachia Alumni Association and 100 Monkeys Typing. Anyone that doubts that this is anything but a witch-hunt that would spend millions of state funds to determine the sexual orientation of potential foster parents need not read any further than the text of the amendment (PDF File):

Section 264.1064c. "Notwithstanding the applicant's or foster parent's statement that the applicant or foster parent is not a homosexual or bisexual, if the department determines after a reasonable investigation that the applicant or foster parent is homosexual or bisexual the department may not: (1) allow the applicant to serve as a foster parent; (2) place the child with the foster parent; or (3) allow the child to remain in foster care with the foster parent."

What the heck is a reasonable investigation?? Talk about screwed up priorities... we have a foster care crisis in this state, and Republicans would rather spend millions of dollars to take kids out of loving homes, and investigate the personal lives of law-abiding adults.

The Daily Texan Endorses

By Byron LaMasters

The Daily Texan Austin City Council Endorsements:

Place 1: Lee Leffingwell
Place 3: Mandy Dealey
Place 4: Betty Dunkerly

Smoking Ban: NO (dissenting opinion here)
ACC Expansion: YES

Vatican Coverage Atrocious

By Andrew Dobbs

I've had a passing interest in the selection of the new pontiff over the last couple of weeks as it is an incredibly important process that I've never had the chance to witness in my lifetime. Unfortunately for me the quality of news coverage of the event has been truly awful.

The biggest problem seems to be that the media seem to regard the process as something akin to American politics, and their mindset is so skewed towards covering American political processes that they shortchange both the conclave and the expectations that people have. Want proof that they are completely clueless? How about this article from the Christian Science Monitor which has the title "Benedict XVI will test religion's 'red-blue' divide" and this quote:

Supporters welcome a global figure unwilling to water down his faith. Others see his election as widening the global religious "red-blue" divide between conservative moral absolutists and liberals of all faiths who say religion must be more inclusive.

I suppose that the idea is valid, but the rhetoric of a "red-blue" divide is so inane as to immediately cause severe nausea in conscientious readers. The fact that the colors chosen by network news broadcasts during the 2000 elections are now being applied to theological debates among the world's oldest Christian church is idiotic at best and downright blasphemous at worst.

And the media's conception of this divide is also completely wrong. The fact of the matter is that if you let Michael Moore and Gloria Steinem pick the most liberal cardinal in the entire conclave, the person would still be against abortion, gay marriage, female ordination, allowing priests to marry and contraception. In any system, including ours, there are things which are so bedrock that nobody within respectable discourse questions their value. Nobody in American politics wants to get rid of the Senate or elect the President for life or legalize child pornography. Those things are so basic as to be unquestionable. In the same way, Catholic teachings on the sanctity of human life, the sexual purity and patricarchal nature of the clergy (and I don't use that term in a derogatory way, simply descriptive) and traditional family strucuture are so basic as to have very little opposition in the mainstream of the Church's hierarchy. To call Benedict XVI or any of the cardinals "conservative" because they support the traditional values of the Church is like calling Ted Kennedy a "conservative" because he doesn't want to legalize heroin.

The American media are forcing American political debates and American political processes on a system that is almost 10 times as old as our Republic and operates on a completely different plane. To define Catholic "liberals" and "conservatives" by the issues of gay marriage, abortion and women's liberation is to ignore the truly salient discussions in the Church- local control versus centralization, liturgical reform, political economy, etc. We need some intelligent discussion on these topics, and God knows (I mean that in the most literal sense) that it won't come from CNN and the Christian Science Monitor.

Blacklisting Pictures

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

First off, I have to thank Matt Hardigree (former SEC President here on campus) for posting this picture. I'm trying to think of a better caption, maybe some of y'all can help him out.

But as a follow up to last night's meeting, I'd like to hear your thoughts as the broader BOR community on the nature of the word "Blacklist" since there may be a resolution against it at next week's SG meetings. Where else have you seen movement's against terminology like this, what are your thoughts on it, is it racist, is this one step below the master/slave PC arguements....

Burnt Orange Report from the Floor

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Tuesday= Student Government reporting. I'm sorry if you find these totally local, but there is a large community of BOR readers that appreciate this commentary. I'm extended entry-ing the report so you can skip over this if not interested or refresh the entry for the latest snarking. Anyone who wants to bring me food, feel free to, or IM me at howarddean13.

Agenda Here

Major Bills this Week:

AB1: The Election Improvement Act of 2005
AB2: Election Reform
AB3: Improving Student Government Operations
AB4: Internal Rules

7:15- This week we are in the Gregory Games room, in an attempt to appear "Open" and more Connected to students. Of course this happens every year so unless this is repeated more than once or twice, I'm not going to sound the bells for free and open government quite yet. The fact that KVR-News (new awesome website!) is here broadcasting the meeting and taping it for later in the week if far more productive to open government in my opinion. Though granted there are a few more non-SG people in the audience tonight, meaning more than Tim Allen (liveblogging), Director Kennedy, and the people who lost their way to the Vending Machine and stumbled in.

7:22- I'm so loving the rolling rrr's by El Presidenta Omar Ochoa of representative's names. Rrrrowwrrr!

7:23- The KVR camera gal behind me keeps talking on her headset and is upsetting many of us trying to listen to the President's Report.

7:29- Woot, Vice President's Report. Brummett rocks the house but kills the mood by mentioning the dreaded phrase "sign-up sheet". It gives me shudders every time.

7:30- Business Rep. Grant Stanis is just loving the cameras. I can't imagine how much more annoying it will be this meeting because of that. Maybe cameras are a bad idea after all, and to think that he has legislation up tonight, good grief!

7:40- Lots of cheering about SG getting a slot in the Orientation session over the summer. Are they mad?! More exposure, and to freshman... that should be helpful for building earlier ties to next year's SG campaigns.

Honestly I have a hard time blogging anything in the Exec reports. Especially considering I'm SOOOOO hungry.

7:43- Mmmm, Rep. Stanis suspends the rules! I'm sure that freaked out some of the KVR viewers that don't know it's standard procedure to do most anything. Of course, that would assumer there are people watching this (which would include me, Tim, and Director Kennedy if we weren't here).

Now up for approval to 2 Year at Large is Morgan Rucker. She's a freshman, coordinated the Jester dorm GOTV effort for Connect, lists Executive Director Dan Paschal as her reference, and just got approved without opjection or debate. Because asking questions, any questions might not look good on camera. Though I just realized that in SG elections, freshman drive the vote, but in reality are totally getting used by the upper-classmen that actually are on the ballot. A point to ponder.

7:52- Reps at the Mic. Smile for the cameras! E. Brummett sure is...

8:08- So I just got finished speaking at the mic, giving one of my few reports of the year. Plus I'm just a media whore like 80% of the people in the room. I hear I was subdued, though it's really just because I got the look from E-Brum (my new nickname for the VP) who I think was watching the clock. Hey at least mine wasn't as long as Elliott Reep's.

On to AB 1. As Tim has already noted, SEC has requested that the Union Board office be separated issue is now out of the bill. Rep. Stanis has an amendement to change wording related to solve the stacking issue that happens to fill the end of tickets. It's quite confusing to me so I'm not going to think about it.

Well, they tabled it for 20, so yay for getting that out of my mind.

8:35- I've been talking with Jennifer Harris (University policy Director, one of the new positions created by Omar) by aim, because we committee and agency chairs are totally about flouting the unwritten rule about AIM in the meetings. I'm glad to have helped her out with extending her battery life as she attempts to survive this meeting. I would support a resolution to have more plugs available for all of SG during meetings. Tracking down the best plugs are about the only reason I show up early most of the time.

8:49- Still not paying attention. This is why I wanted to just get rid of tickets, less talk about this kinda crap. I'm going to grab some food instead.

9:01 Yay for voting down moving the iPod raffle forward. People should have to suffer 5 hours of this if they really want it. Plus maybe no one will stay and SG can keep it and thus, make money off of it for having had not to give it away. And then give it to me.

9:45- And Tim and I are back from JCL to get food. The body was in the same debate as when we left, a motiong by Rep. Stanis to strike Section 3 from the Bill (which eliminated ticket labels from just the ballot). That of course, after all that debate we missed, failed.

Then the vote on AB 1 was up, and it passed 22-15. Hooray for watered down election reform. There was little fanfare.

AB 2 was withdrawn. AB 3 is now in debate. Why, I have no idea. But Director Chris Kennedy (ITECH) is not looking thrilled.

10:05- AB 3 passes. There was much rejoicing. I think because we got another piece of legislation behind us.

Talking now about the TSP resolution which is going to be tabled according to the author? I'm confused. Oh well, no matter.

Announcements time. This is the point where everyone talks but nobody listens. Compared to the meeting where everyone listens, but nobody cares.

I think the best part of tonight were the various attempts to move the iPod drawing to the next item on the agenda! The only remaining announcement will be the iPod winner which I will make in comment form.

10:20- I thought there would be nothing better, but someone is bringing up the fact that they might bring up a resolution next week complaining about the word "Blacklist" in the webmail system and that it should be changed to a more acceptable word like "Block". I know that here at BOR we use MT-Blacklist to deal with spam and you know what, it does a hell of a good job and you know what, it has nothing to do with blacks or negative connotations. Taking PC too far methinks.

The iPod. First went to Grant Cohen who wasn't here. Then it went to James Burnham, Connect's Union Board Rep which caused a bit of consternation and led me to motion that the UB people not be eligible which was denied I guess for not having a clue what kind of motion it was. Sorry, but it was far too much fun to argue about.

Pope Benedict XVI

By Byron LaMasters

As you might imagine, I'm disappointed with the election of Cardinal Ratzinger as the next Pope, but it could certainly be worse. I agree with the Kos post that progressives ought to refrain from calling this guy a Nazi, because he was not a Nazi, and actually had the courage to stand up to the Nazi's on several occasions. Furthermore, as a 78 year old man, it is unlikely that he will serve nearly as long as John Paul II, and is most likely to serve in a more transitional role.

While I believed it unlikely that a socially progressive pope would be elected, I had hoped that the next pope would focus more on social justice issues such as poverty, hunger and HIV/AIDS. I still hope that is the case, as opposed to the pope focusing on controversial social issues, but we shall see. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this. Use the comment section as an open thread to discuss the new pope.

Update: Andrew Sullivan has some thoughts on the election today that are certainly worth taking a look at.

Castro Leads San Antonio Mayoral Race

By Byron LaMasters

The poll is from last week, but I just noticed it today. Survey USA took a poll for the San Antonio mayoral race. Here's the results:

Castro - 43%
Hardberger - 28%
Schubert - 22%
Other/Undecided - 7%

Data Collected: 4/11/05 - 4/13/05; Geography, City of San Antonio; Sample Population, 443 Likely Voters; Margin of Error, 4.8%; Client, WOAI-TV San Antonio

SDEC Meeting

By Vince Leibowitz

I haven't seen anyone blogging on this weekend's SDEC meeting, so I thought I might share a few thoughts of my own with regard to Saturday's session--though what little I have to say could hardly be considered a comprehensive account. Further--though the journalist in me says otherwise--I firmly feel that most of what happens at the SDEC is private to those of us within the party and probably shouldn't be disseminated except among those in the party.

But, since no one has shared any thoughts, I'll just throw out a few.

First and foremost, you can't attend an SDEC meeting without realizing how full our party really is of vibrant county chairs, activists and party leaders. The full house of people from across the state that attend these meetings is testament to that.

I was priviliged to be at the meeting and sitting with the SDEC as proxy for Dr. Martha Williams, our very capable SDEC SD2 member from Terrell, who was unable to attend. As such, I felt more a part of the "action" as opposed to the "audience," which I was part of in other SDEC meetings.

There were a number of resolutions discussed and acted on, and I was very proud of our party and its leaders for the very classy way it was all handled. Major gatherings of bodies of this sort--whether political or not--can sometimes descend into chaos when it comes to dealing with tough issues. However, the SDEC was able to discuss the issues in a very dignified and appropriate manner.

Although there were a couple of moments that were somewhat tense relating to a committee report, the meeting seemed to go very well.

In the press earlier this year (and on this blog) there was some discussion of party finances, particularly with regard to the $250,000 set aside for purchase of a headquarters building which was instead used on elections. It resulted in some criticism of our party and especially our Chariman, Charles Soechting, for his "command decision." Shortly after the post on the Statesman article, fellow BOR contributor and TDP staffer Andrew put up this post talking about the Chairman and some of his impressions.

I will admit that I was an early critic of Chairman Soechting. And, as a county chair, I nearly flew off of, into and through the wall when he sent all county chairs a letter asking us to raise $5,000 and send it to the state party.

However, time, more experience and interaction with the party, and being a beneficiary of some of the program's Soechting funded as Chair while working on Dr. Bob Glaze's campaign in THD 5 last year have made me--I must confess--a Soechting supporter.

I do believe he is the leader we need right now. And, in saying that, I may be going against some of my east and northeast Texas colleagues who may think--as I did when Soechting took over--that we need a chair from a smaller rural county because, well, most of our counties aren't mega-counties like Harris and Dallas. I initially thought Soechting would be "out of touch," with the people in counties like mine, but I've quickly learned that he's not. He knows what's going on and knows what we're facing out here in the trenches. Whether it's because he researched it, because a staffer or adviser has told him, or because he's been to some of the "non urban" counties, I don't know. But I do know from my brief dealings with him personally, that he seems to have a handle on what's going on--even in little old Van Zandt County.

No one has asked me to write or post this and, I suspect, I'll probably receive some heat over my "conversion." But, that's just the way I feel. The manner in which the way the Chairman conducted himself at this weekend's meeting--sometimes in tense situations--to me speaks volumes about what kind of leader we really have at the TDP. If you do something, "take the heat or get out of the kitchen." Chairman Soechting may have made a decision or two that was unpopular with some folks. But, he's taken the heat, taken steps to make things even better, and he's still in the kitchen--hopefully cooking up a way to make the party even better.

Blogging from Abroad

By Katie Naranjo

Soldiers from Iraq are getting their messages to their loved ones, in the form of e-mails, chatting on AIM, and more recently blogging. Stories from the front line are documented by soldiers and Iraqi civilians and retold in their own words for all to read. One such blog recounts the emotions of one marine who lost a fellow soldier from his platoon in crossfire in Baghdad. He provided details and insight on the emotional trauma, and reactions felt by men in his group, especially his close friends.

Another blog found consisted of soldiers in Iraq providing information and strategies for combat teams before they got to Iraq to aide fellow soldiers. Tips on urban warfare, Muslim praying rituals and social practices, and general desert survival are available for soldiers. Blogging by soldiers has led to an increase of communication for family members and the rest of the world; it provides a real world perspective of the war through the soldiers eyes.

Although some may argue that it could cause problems with information leaks and distractions with thoughts of home, this is a moot point. For centuries, when in war, soldiers think about their families at home as a driving force in their lives to protect their country. Also, the military had kept close surveillance of blogs by soldiers and will continue to do so. I am glad to see the new bloggers and read their stories, it does touch those who read them and connects those disenfranchised by the war.

To read blogs of soldiers: www.missick.com & www.companycommand.com

John Lewis at UT

By Byron LaMasters

Civil Rights leader, U.S. Rep. John Lewis (D-Georgia) will be at UT next week. Here's the info:

U.S. Rep. John Lewis, (D-Ga.) will be the featured speaker at the 19th annual Heman Sweatt Symposium on Civil Rights, which celebrates the 40th anniversary of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

The symposium, April 25-29, will feature a week of activities at The University of Texas at Austin and is free and open to the public. Lewis’ keynote address will be given at 7 p.m., Friday, April 29 in the Lyndon Baines Johnson Auditorium, 2315 Red River St.

Preceding the talk, Lewis will sign his book, “Walking with the Wind,” at 6:15 p.m.

HJR 6 Update

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

The chair of our UDems GLBT Caucus has gotten some info back from our State Senators on where they stand on HJR 6, recently passed out of the Hate Affairs Committee in the House 6-1. Since the House is not the best ground to fight this battle, here is the scoop on the Senate Democrats. All of these were in the Senate for the 2003 vote on the Texas Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Three Democrats supported that, Madla, Lucio and Armbrister (a co-sponsor!). We need 11 of the 12 to kill the bill.

Senator Gonzalo Barrientos: (D-14th District) Does not support this legislation.

Senator Rodney G. Ellis: (D- 13th District) Will not form an opinion until bills comes to the senate, but voted against the 2003 Defense of Marriage Act and is committed to the civil rights of all people regardless of lifestyle.

Senator Mario Gallegos: (D-6th District) Firmly against the policy and a major force against the legislation.

Senator Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa (D-20th District) "The Senator believes these kinds of amendments are ridiculous and has consistly voted against them."

Senator Royce West (D-23rd District) Awaiting a return call (but likely against the bill)

Senator John Whitmire (D-15th District) "Has not specifically spoken to the Senator on this legislations but is against discrimination and will vote with his gay and lesbian constiuates.

Senator Leticia Van de Putte (D-26th District) Awaiting a call from legislative aid, but "the senator is for equal rights."

Senator Eliot Shapleigh (D-29th District) "The Senator is against theses amendments"

Senator Judith Zaffirini (D-21st District) Awaiting a return call from her office. (but likly to vote against it)

Senator Ken Armbrister (D-18th District) No opinion, very impatient with me, was in a hurry to get me off the phone.

Senator Eddie Lucio, Jr. (D-27th District) No opinion, listening to all sides.

Senator Frank Madla (D-19th District) "Doesn't feel that this is appropriate to be in the state constitution"

So it looks like we have 8 of the 11 votes needed to kill these bills in the Senate. I anticipate that the two Senators that I'm awaiting return calls from (that didn't state any opinion) will vote our way as well. That gives us 10 of 11.

Something else that might be a snag, a few of the offices that I called said that the office doesn't consider House bill until they leave the house and enter the Senate.

Lucio is the swing vote. Armbrister is pretty much a DINO. Lucio will probably do the right thing if preasured enough.

So we are going to see if we can find a delegation of UT students from Brownsville / south TX and request a meeting with Lucio on the matter. I'll keep you updated.

Blogging the San Antonio Mayoral Race

By Byron LaMasters

For all of you interested in following the race for mayor in San Antonio, check out the San Antonio Election 2005 Blog

Ivy League Grad Students Strike

By Andrew Dobbs

I don't know how many Ivy Leaguer's read our website (my guess, very few), but I wanted to show our solidarity with striking teaching assistants and all other workers seeking to organize in a union.

One line in the story gave me pause:

University administrators say the strikes should have minimal effect on classes. The number of strikers was not immediately available because graduate students teach classes at different times throughout the day.

"All the classes and sections scheduled today appear to be covered, either because the grad student involved is not participating in the strike or because the faculty have made other arrangements," Yale spokesman Tom Conroy said.

Many Ivy Leaguers probably grew up in a family without union member parents. My father was a representative of something pretty close- he was the spokesman for the Richardson Police Officers Association (which could not strike). A reminder of strike ettiquette is in order. Unless you are a big fan of the Bush Administration, whose anti-union National Labor Relations Board refused to recognize the union last year, you should refuse to attend any scab-taught classes. Also, you should never cross a picket line. These are the basic rules of showing support for striking workers.

And a message to any scab TAs at an Ivy League college- you are among the lowest scum in my opinion. Your colleagues are putting their livelihoods on the line in order to fight for better benefits and pay for you. When you refuse to join them, and in fact side with an administration that is fighting to keep your wages low ($18,000 a year in Boston doesn't go very far) and to deny your family members health care, you are demonstrating your lack of courage and self-respect. Undergraduates should stand tall with striking TAs by declining to be taught by pusilanimous scabs.

Just thought I'd throw my two cents out there-- the University of Texas and Burnt Orange Report stands in solidarity with striking grad students.

(BTW- I haven't talked to our other authors, but we are all pretty strong union supporters, so I can't imagine that they'd differ. If you all do, let me know)

Weekend Update in the Guv Race

By Byron LaMasters

Rick Perry vs. the World has a good recap of the news from the guv race over the weekend.

Democrat Chris Bell was in Austin over the weekend. He spoke at the Texas Young Democrats fundraiser at Scholtz's on Friday night. I was busy campaigning, but the speech covered many of the same points from his earlier speech at Scholtz's in March. Bell also spoke to the Capitol Area Democratic Women earlier this week.

Last night, Bell spoke at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner of the Brazos County Democrats. Our Aggie Democratic friends who came to the TYD convention had to rush back for that event. I'll try and get a guest post on that event if possible. Meanwhile, the Austin American Stateman quotes Bell that he is 70% sure that he will make a run for governor.

KBH tried to win favor with gun owners by saying this at the NRA convention:

"The French government has raised its terror alert from 'run' to 'hide,'" she joked, bringing a round of laughter. "The only higher levels in France are 'surrender' and 'collaborate.'"

Am I the only one who is a bit troubled that our senior senator finds it appropriate to publicly mock one of our NATO allies? The Houston Chronicle editorial page rightlyfully responded:

Speaking to the convention, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison joked that the French government has raised the terrorist alert level from "run" to "hide." Had she stopped there it would have been funny, but she went on to suggest that the French were capable of surrendering to or collaborating with the terrorists. The French have suffered mightily at the hands of Islamic terrorists, and few French citizens would accuse Americans of cowardice on 9/11 or collaboration with the enemy.

In other guv race news, there have been stirrings going around the capitol that another Democrat may jump in the race, but I'll hold off on posting until I hear more.

More on the Kerry Event

By Byron LaMasters

For some rather snarky coverage of Saturday's Kerry event, check out In the Pink Texas. I sat near Eileen Smith in the press section, and we had the opportunity to chat a little bit afterwards. For some great pictures of Kerry at the event, check out these by frequent BOR commenter John W Walthall.

Update: More pictures from Jake McCook, here.

Statesman Endorses Leffingwell, Kim and Dunkerly

By Byron LaMasters

Leffingwell and Dunkerly were forgone conclusions, but Kim is a bit of a surprise. You can read the Austin American Statesman endorsements here.

TYD Elections

By Byron LaMasters

As Jim noted below, we held our Texas Young Democrats (TYD) convention this weekend. I first became involved in TYD's in 2002, and this year was the largest convention since that time. Much of the reason for the increase in involvement has been due to several contested elections, along with renewed interest in working to take back Texas for the Democratic Party.

I was actively involved in the convention, and hosted the workshop on weblogs and websites where I tried my best to restrain myself from speaking too much, and asked my panel of BORers Jim Dallas and Karl-Thomas Musselman (also UT webmaster), and Dallas County YD webmaster Kirk McPike to speak on many of the questions that the workshop participants asked.

The elections today were the first contested elections since I became involved in TYD. My friend Mike Apodaca of El Paso was elected president unanimously. I ran on a ticket with several other candidates, and all of us were elected, including the three of us in contested elections.

David Wilkins (Dallas Co. YDs) defeated Erica Contreras (Harris Co. YDs) for Executive Vice President by a vote of 40-31. I defeated Bill Kelly (Harris Co. YDs) for VP of Finance by a vote of 46-25, and Angel Lopez (San Antonio YDs) defeated Jess Kline (UNT UDs) for VP of Membership by a vote of 39-32. It may surprise many of you that UT Democrats and Aggie Democrats voted together in all three races. Tonight, just this once, I will oblige our Aggie Friends with one token "Gig 'em" to show our appreciation.

My successor as UT UD President, Haley Greer (Capitol City YDs), was elected Treasurer without opposition. DCYD President David Hardt (Dallas Co. YDs) was re-elected as National Committeeman, and Shondra Wygal (Harris Co. YD) was re-elected as Secretary unopposed. After defeating Erica Contreras for Executive VP, David Wilkins nominated Erica for Chair of the Regional Directors, where Erica was elected without opposition.

Katie Naranjo of the UT UDs ran to replace me as Region 6 Director, and she was elected without opposition. Karl-Thomas decided to run for Region 6 Judicial Director, and he also was elected unanimously.

I am looking forward to serving as the next TYD Vice President of Finance. As VP of Finance, I will chair the Committee of Budget and Finance, and I hope that my former opponent will serve as a member of that committee, because he has many good ideas and connections to offer for our organization.

During the next year, I am looking forward to working with major donors as well as enacting a sustaining membership program so that the TYDs will be on solid financial footing going into the 2006 elections. As soon as our sustaining membership program gets underway, I'll be sure to inform our readers of all the details.

TYD Wrap, and a few brief comments on health care

By Jim Dallas

The TYD convention is now over, which means life can start to return to normal for the BOR gang. As usual, there were are all kinds of mildly dramatic moments, including:

• The surprisingly close race for VP of Membership!

• The passage of a resolution on the floor ripping state Rep. Ray Allen in rather harsh terms!

• A fire alarm at five in the morning!

OK, maybe going down this list is about as exciting as doing color commentary for a parcheesi tournament. Still, it's always a whole lot of fun for yours truly. Congratulations also to Byron, the new TYD vice president of finance, Katie, the new Region 6 coordinator, Karl-Thomas, the new Region 6 Judicial Director, as well as to all the other newly-elected leaders.

(BTW, Mr. President Mike et al., can we please return the convention venue to the capitol next year, or at least a room a little larger?)

As promised, I have a few words summing up the Kerry Kids First event yesterday, below the fold.

I recently found out that I am losing my health insurance. For some reason, my parents' insurer no longer can cover me, which was unexpected since previously I was told that I would be covered as long as I remained a full-time student, until I turned 25. I will be 23 about a week-and-a-half from now.

So it looks like I'm going to have to buy my own coverage, most likely through the University of Houston. Funded, as usual, by borrowing against my future income. That's another $750 I'll have to borrow next year, which might not be so bad if it weren't for the fact that student aid of every kind is under assault. Nonetheless, it looks like I'm going to have to "insure now, pay later."

I'm not particularly more deserving of health care than anybody else is, and, moreover, as a 23-year old who is no longer totally reckless and not yet an old fart, I'm a member of the demographic least-likely to need a lot of health care, at least in the immediate future.

I am very grateful for the fact that student health insurance is greatly discounted; nonetheless, it seems to me that it would be more efficient for there to be a social compact among generations providing everyone my age with health insurance, in exchange for a promise to pay for tomorrow's young adults (in the form of higher taxes for the well-off, which we'll be soon enough) -- instead of just allowing a few lucky ducky college students to make this sort of deal with themselves, open this sort of "insure now, pay later" model up to all. Sort of like what we do with SCHIP now, anyway.

A disproportionately large number of the uninsured are young workers who recently started working and haven't yet landed in jobs affording benefits. As noted, covering this age group is not horrendously expensive, and provides the cheapest means of reducing the number of uninsured people (although, to be sure, there are other folks who need the security of insurance a lot more than we do).

Of course, keeping CHIP alive is priority number one; kids first, indeed! But let's dare to dream.

Mayor Kerrey?

By Andrea Meyer

You heard it here first.

A lot of Democrats tend to like Bloomberg because of his socially progressive beliefs. Kerrey, from what I understand, is to the right of Bloomberg socially. This should be interesting, if nothing else.
I'll probably comment on this again when I find more stories and can offer better perspective, but for now I definitely wanted to post the link.

Liveblogging Kerry at UT

By Byron LaMasters

John Kerry is at UT today, and we have several thousand people packed into the Rec Sports center for his town hall meeting. I'm sitting next to Jim in the press section, and we'll be taking pictures and writing on the event. Sightings so far include U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Austin), State Rep. Elliott Naishtat (D-Austin) and the Margot Clarke campaign greeted everyone with Margot flyers. Just what I need...

10:17: God I feel like it's Fall of 2004 again. Bruce Springstein is on in the background. It's kind of sad, actually. Back in the days when I actually believed that John Kerry would be the next president of the United States.... *sigh*

Jim takes over the keyboard

10:36: Sightings of city council candidates Jennifer Kim, Lee Leffingwell, 2002 state rep. candidates Jim Sylvester and Lulu Flores, and Sheriff Greg Hamilton.

10:38: And Bruce Elfant.

10:38: Looks like it's game time...

10:42: Senator Kerry gets a wild reception. A salmon tie? With polka dots. Boldness.

10:45: Rep. Doggett gets a few words in about this democracy thing.

10:47: Doggett does introductions. Notices Reps. Naishtat and Dunnam (Byron: "I thought I saw Jim Dunnam"), constable Elfant, family, etc. etc.

10:48: Lloyd: "Austin to Boston connection". Introduces Kerry in full.

10:48: Kerry: "I kinda expected I'd be in Washington and Bush would be back here in Texas..."

10:52: A few well-phrased swipes on Tom DeLay and the theocons = crowd goes wild!

Byron takes back his laptop

11:02: Kerry took a brief shot at Tom DeLay, and there was more wild applause. Wow, we're all on message, we're running against the Tom DeLay congress in 2006.

Kerry noted that he won won almost half a million more votes in Texas than Al Gore? I didn’t know that. Let's do some research here:

2004:

George W. Bush/ Dick Cheney(I) - 4,526,917 - 61.08%
John F. Kerry/ John Edwards - 2,832,704 - 38.22%

2000:
George W. Bush /Dick Cheney - 3,799,639 - 59.29%
Al Gore /Joe Lieberman - 2,433,746 - 37.98%

Ok, more like 400,000 votes more than Gore (not mentioning that Bush increased his Texas vote by over 700,000).

Ok, moving on. Kerry notes the disgrace that 11 Million kids are without health insurance in this county (one of four children in America). He talks about values and that Republicans value millionaires more than they value children.

Back to Jim

11:15: Dr. Garcia from down the street is talking about the lack of access to medical care for children without health insurance. It's a familiar tale, but one which bears repetition.

11:16: Kerry: "You see how personal it gets..." And it's true!

11:17: Kerry is opening up the floor for questions...

11:18: "On my campaign we never required anyone to sign in." (apparently, a swipe at the heavily-scripted Repulican 2004 campaign).

11:19: Takes a question from an Iraqi immigrant and former Massachusettian about missing money from CPA Iraqi Reconstruction.

11:20: Kerry: Will try to get Armed Services committee to look into it. Says a few words about Iraq. Says goal is to get American troops home.

11:22: Takes a question about Wal-Mart not providing health care to its employees. Incidentally, you can tell the Senator is from Massachusetts when he says "Wal-Maaaht." Talks about small businesses.

11:24: Takes a question from a woman who doesn't think she has health care insurance. Asks what can be done for middle class people. Kerry: "Great question!" Mentions guest who, ironically, could not be here because her child was sick. "The middle class in America is constantly under siege."

11:27: Kerry makes mention about Pell grants going down. Actually, I have a few thoughts about that. Will post later.

11:27: "Things didn't stop on November 2nd!"

11:29: Kerry talks about tax fairness, minimum wage, job creation. Hmm...

11:31: Fields a question about childhood obesity. Kerry: "soda pop machines in schools are crazy." And back to child immunizations.

Trying hard to keep the focus on health care.

11:32: Kerry says he's writing a book, "wants to change the language on the environment." Starts going off on a Lakoffian rant about framing of air quality issues, etc.

(HAHAHAHA, I'm sure Greg'll just love that!)

11:34: Kerry says parents can't take kids fishing in 28 states (or parts of 28 states?) because of poor water quality?!?! America is doomed.

11:35: Kerry talks about deductibles and co-payments, mechanics of the Kids First bill. Minus 20 points for excessive wonkery in a public forum (wink).

Byron Again

11:42: Kerry, “if it weren’t for the unconstitutional redistricting in Texas, we would have won” seats in Congress in 2004. Although he stretched things a bit by blaming retirements for the Senate losses, and noting gains in Colorado, New Hampshire and Montana as reason for hope. Ok, I guess it got someone energized, though. My friend in the row behind me started stomping his feet rather loudly in the bleachers as Kerry got another standing ovation.

11:43: Gosh, I never saw this one coming... questioner, "how can we help"? Kerry, "visit JohnKerry.com". Well, Kerry at least learned on thing from the campaign. Direct people to your website, and do it right. As long as no politician ever sends people to the wrong fact check website again...

11:48: Kerry calls on the guy in the Boston Red Sox cap. Someone came prepared.

Jim takes the keys

11:50: Questions about mental health parity, and the bankruptcy bill.

11:53 Byron, "There's Katy Hubener", HD 106 Democratic nominee in 2004.

11:56 Back to Congressman Doggett... Thanks Kerry for "inspiring thoughtful leadership."

11:57 Kerry takes his last question about health care for illegal immigrants. This is not sitting well with a lot of people. Managing to keep the hall togeher, Kerry says immigration system is "broken" and it needs to be compassionate. "We're a country of laws." Says we need "comprehensive reform" and "earned legalization." Diplomatic response with a dash of artful dodging maintains peace between pro- and anti- immigration attendees. Feel the love, America.

Texas Young Democrats, Liveblogging Kerry

By Byron LaMasters

Today kicked off the Texas Young Democrats convention, and our fundraiser at Scholtz's was a rousing success. More importantly, it provided the first opportunity in just about all of our memories for much of the BOR team to meet in one place. When we realized that five BORers were at one place, and I just happened to have my digital camera, we had no choice but to take a picture. It could have turned out better, but you take what you get (Jim, Karl-Thomas, Katie, Andrew and Byron left-to-right):

We had a little better luck with pictures of some of our guest speakers. U.S. Senate candidate Barbara Radnofsky kicked spoke first, followed by State Rep. Mark Strama (D-Austin) and former Congressman Chris Bell (D-Houston). Here's some pictures I caught of them:

Finally, I have press credentials for the Kerry event at UT tomorrow (or rather, later this morning). I plan to liveblog the event, and I just might be able to get an audio copy as well.

Not a good day for the Governor

By Jim Dallas

The Houston Chronicle picks up the story (referred to me by this diarist) about Perry's chief of staff attempting to influence the House Speaker vote, which might have been illegal. ("Tons more entertaining than watching The Apprentice" - Pink Dome).

Meanwhile, the Statesman reports that Rep. Yvonne Davis sent the tax-cap bill, already beleaguered and effectively gutted, back to the dark hellish cave the committee from whence it came.

Finally, In the Pink Texas directs us to the Dallas Morning News, where we love that Comrade Senator Hutchison has over $7.2 million in her campaign kitty. Almost as much as Kommissar Perry himself, and despite efforts by Republican money-folks to blackball the Hillary-hugger. To be fair, the Perry camp can't raise money until the end of the legislative session (which makes it a tad wink easier for Comrade Kay to catch up.) Still... $7.2 million buys a lot of green slime.

Canton School Shooting Update

By Vince Leibowitz

Several days ago, when Canton, where I reside in Van Zandt County, hit the news because of the unfortunate school shooting, I noticed that a couple of my fellow bloggers here blogged on it.

Since we're pretty much to the "aftermath" stages right now--waiting for the coach to recover, waiting to see what the judicial system will do, etc.--I thought it might be interesting to let readers of this blog know a little more about the rest of the "aftermath" of the shooting. In particular, the impact the shooting may end up having on our local elections next month.

First of all, a little background is necessary. For several years until the fall of 2004, the Canton Police Department and the city of Canton provided Canton ISD and Canton High School specifically with a "School Resource Officer." This was a police officer (in this case a very dedicated and highly regarded lady named Michelle Abio) who was basically assigned full time to protect the campuses and also work with the students so they understand that police are there to help, etc., etc.

Anyway, last year, when our police chief was unceremoniously demoted to dispatcher by the new far-radical, right-wing Republican City Manager, Charles Fenner, the new "public safety director," who now serves essentially as fire and police chief, decided the department couldn't afford to have the school resource officer. Keep in mind also that, for a town of 3,500, Canton has a fairly sizeable police department because of the fact that once a month, anywhere from 100,000 to 300,000 people come here for First Monday Trade Days.

Well, when Officer Abio was being removed from the school, she was asked, at a school board meeting, what the school could do to prevent it from happening. As I recall, she basically told them they would have to make their voices heard to the city. Now, everyone can plainly see that the officer was exercising her right to free speech, so the city couldn't fire her for that. Instead, the pulled up a stupid, trumped-up "charge" up from the past that the old chief had already taken care of, and fired the officer for that. So, the school is without a resource officer.

Though our local rag, the Canton Herald, won't dare report such a controversial thing, a lot of people in the city believe the shooting would have never happened if Officer Abio (or at least another SRO) was on the scene at the high school. If you've read the news accounts of the shooting and the shooter, you can see why they may believe that. Personally, I believe if someone's dead-set to causing violence like that, they're going to find a way to do so--officer or no officer. But, there are evidently a lot of people in the city who feel otherwise, and who feel their children were placed in danger because the SRO was taken away.

For the last week, I've heard what I'll call "rumblings and rumors" that a fairly large delegation of parents would be descending upon the Canton City Council meeting next Tuesday to speak during the public comments portion of the meeting to make their opinions known. I wasn't sure it would happen until last night. Rather late last night, I recieved a call from a person I knew from my tenure at the local newspapers (back when they reported the news) who told me that, in fact, a number of parents of school-aged children are trying to make this happen and who asked if I knew anyone else in town who wasn't a parent who might join them and also speak on their behalf. Unfortunatly, I didn't, and this is one fight I plan to stay away from for a number of reasons. But, while it may happen absent the watchful eye of the Associated Press and other news agencies, I firmly believe the Canton City Council will have an interesting "Come to Jesus," meeting with some of its constituents Tuesday.

As for how this will affect the local elections, I believe that both the two-term mayor and opposed incumbents on the council will be defeated. I believe the mayor will be defeated by a fairly large margin and that one council member will be defeated by a small margin. After all, these are the folks that hired the new city manager (who was elected to the council before being named city manager and is a protegee of RPT Executive Director Jeff Fisher, former VZC Judge) who got rid of the old police chief who in turn screwed up the police department. All of this has, by the way, resulted in several lawsuits against the city.

One of the most interesting suits charges that the city couldn't hire either a city manager or a public safety director because it doesn't have ordinances in place to do so, if I remember correctly. This would make the city manager's decisions null and void (supposedly) since the Local Government Code delegates specific powers to the mayor and council unless an ordinance is adopted otherwise.

Anyway, that is what is going on in Canton right now. I just thought some of BOR's readers may find the "small town politics" angle interesting.

You broke the circle of trust

By Jim Dallas

According to Greg, Tom DeLay is no longer Bush's friend. Sort of like "Kenny boy" Lay circa 2002.

Congressman, this one's for you.

Why do Senator Hutchison's staffers love Marxist terrorism?

By Jim Dallas

The Mujahedin-el Khalq (MEK) are, to put it bluntly, not nice people. The State Department describes them as a foreign terrorist organization:

The MEK philosophy mixes Marxism and Islam. Formed in the 1960s, the organization was expelled from Iran after the Islamic Revolution in 1979, and its primary support came from the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein since the late 1980s. The MEK’s history is filled with anti-Western attacks as well as terrorist attacks on the interests of the clerical regime in Iran and abroad...

Nonetheless, that didn't stop some of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison's aides from attending a MEK get-together in Washington yesterday, according to Nick Hoover at The Agonist.

(more below)

To be sure, the group invited dozens of senators and representatives, but only a few decided to show. Why? Consider:

Former members and friends of members of the group describe the organization, which insists its members be celibate, as a cult. "They take your individuality and beliefs and tell you that all the love you have must go to the leadership," Sametipour says. "That's how they make terrorists."

Ronak Dashti, 20, who was also introduced to a reporter by the Iranian government, said she was abducted in Turkey by MEK members who took her to Iraq. There, she says, she had to sign documents saying she had no right to contact her family and should not think about marriage. She and three other defectors described communal living, hours of menial work and nightly self-criticism sessions.

(USA Today, Thursday)

In 1991, MEK fighters were on the front lines of Saddam's brutal counterinsurgency campaigns in the Shiite south and Kurdish north. "Up until the fall of the regime, they were part and parcel of the Iraqi military. And they were heavily involved in suppressing the Kurdish uprising of 1991," the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan representative in Washington, Qubad Talabani, said yesterday.

...

Some congressmen shared Ms. Rajavi's position on the terrorist designation. Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Republican of Colorado, compared those gathered yesterday to America's Founding Fathers. Not all members of the Iranian opposition, however, have such fond words for the MEK. The organization has been left out of the nascent movement inside the country to press for a constitutional referendum.

An Iranian activist in Los Angeles, Roxanne Ganji, told The New York Sun yesterday, "They are definitely a cult, and that is a dangerous thing. If anyone goes to Iran and takes the pulse of the people, though, 90% would never allow them to go back. That does not mean the information they gave America was not good. But they are a terrorist organization. If the United States wants information, then they can get it from viable groups and not terrorists."

(New York Sun, "Iranian Group Asks State To Lift Terror Designation", pg. 8, this morning)

Contrary to what some may say, there are many opposition groups in Iran which refuse to work with the MEK on principle. So why would any thinking person support them?

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend," said terrorism expert Neil Livingstone at a news conference in Washington in February where he and several retired U.S. diplomats and military men unveiled a new organization, the Iran Policy Committee, whose goal is to overthrow the Iranian government by supporting Iranian opposition groups.

(USA Today, Thursday)

In 2003, the Washington Post reported that some senior administration figures would like to use the MEK as a proxy force in Iran, in the same manner that the Northern Alliance was employed against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

("Oil and The Coming War with Iran", Wednesday)

I am inclined to remind Senator Hutchison that this lovely theory worked out real well the last time we employed terrorists for geo-strategic purposes. And the time before that.

Vote No On the Smoking Ban

By Andrew Dobbs

This is under Burnt Orange Endorsements not because it is the sentiment of this blog as a whole, but of one of its contributors- your's truly. In the name of full disclosure, I'll come out with it- I am a smoker. It is a nasty, regrettable habit, but it is a choice that I made. Interestingly enough, I really didn't smoke much before college, but now I am a confirmed addict. Yet before that time, I still thought that smoking bans were a bad idea, and this one in particular is idiotic beyond all understanding.

To begin, let's get one thing straight. Smoking is already banned across most of Austin. You can't smoke in any public building, only 7 of the several hundred restaurants allow smoking (and I only know where one of them is- the Baby Acapulco's down the street from my apartment), and 2/3 of the bars in Austin are non-smoking. This ordinance will ban smoking in the minority of bars that still allow smoking, everywhere else is already smoke free.

Having noted this, one of my pet peeves is that every supporter of this referendum throws one line into their speech- "this is a public health issue." But the more you think about it, the less sense that the statement makes. If city government is going to lay down the law in regards to bars in the name of promoting public health, the only sensible thing to do would be to close them all down. Nobody goes to a bar to be healthy- you go there to drink, smoke, fuck and fight. All of those things are bad for you (not to mention listening to very loud music, which can damage your hearing). So either shut down the bars, or leave them alone.

But no. Sanctimonious anti-smokers have to legislate behavior for the rest of us. They talk about how bad smoking is for you, how bad second hand smoke is. What they never seem to mention is who has ever had a gun to their head forcing them to go to Sixth Street. They have also never talked about who in particular is ignorant of the fact that most (though not all) of the bars there allow smoking. In the end, if one wishes to avoid smoke, it is as easy as going to one of the 400 bars in Austin that are completely smoke free as opposed to Maggie Mae's, Bigsby's, the Ritz or Room 710. The sad fact for the anti-smoking crowd is that the vast majority of bar business goes to smoking venues, because the vast majority of people who like to get drunk and find some unsavory type to go home with also like to smoke during the process. Realizing that the whole letting adults make their own decisions thing hasn't worked out in their favor, they have decided that they will make the decision for them.

Perhaps this is a public health issue, but nothing is ever just one type of issue. It is a business issue, it is a rights issue and it is a cultural issue. Businesses will be hurt by the ban. Period. Sure, Hard Rock Cafe will do fine and I'm sure Spiros will still rake in a bunch of 18 year olds, but the smaller bars that are the heart and soul of Austin's live music scene will die. Many of these bars are not profitable, or barely eke out an existence. They are simply the passions of individual owners, few of them rich, who want to be in the bar business. They cater to crowds that tend to smoke- rednecks, punk rockers, hippies, trendsters and metalheads. Take away smoking and these people will go to San Marcos, Round Rock, go to private parties or just stay home, and businesses will close their doors- period.

This may not seem like a big deal, until you realize what kind of town Austin really is. Austin is my home. I love this place. I grew up in a cookie-cutter suburban hell-hole north of Dallas and got out of there as fast as I could. Austin is unique not only in Texas, but really across the South. A liberal town with good race relations (a majority White town, it still manages to elect a Black sheriff, city councilmember and judge, as well as a Latino city council member, State Senator and County Attorney), it has three distinct communities that make it what it is. The first are the academics at the University. The second are state employees. The third are artists. As Austin becomes more than just a government and college town with the tech boom and explosive growth, it is largely the artistic community that "keeps Austin weird." They are drawn here from all over the country because they know they can make a life out of their art here, a life they can make because there are a million opportunities for up-and-coming artists to get gigs, build a fanbase and attract real attention. The math is simple- fewer clubs means fewer gigs, fewer gigs mean fewer opportunities, fewer opportunities mean fewer artists, fewer artists mean Austin is just another Dallas or Houston with a better landscaping job. Smaller audiences (because the fans of marginal music trends will stop going out) also mean less of a chance to build a fan base, and the cycle is repeated. Austin will be fundamentally changed if this ordinance passes.

But finally, this is an issue about business. Austin wants to have a strong business environment because it means more jobs, more revenue, better services and a more livable city. When businesses have an unstable and patently untrustworthy regulatory environment, it discourages investment. Why would you want to risk a lot of money in a place where tomorrow the government could make an unforeseen regulation that will kill your business? Bars and clubs are one of the biggest industries in Austin- this is a service industry kind of town. Houston wouldn't want to constantly jerk the chain of the oil industry, Dallas wouldn't want to slap around the financiers, Pittsburgh wouldn't keep the steel guys guessing all the time, Detroit wouldn't screw with the auto makers' heads. But now Austin wants to move the goalposts yet again after the ink on the compromise ordinance hasn't even dried. It is a shocking display of bad faith on the part of the anti-smoking people, who shook hands on the compromise just before turning around and undermining it. Why anyone would want to do business with a bunch of dishonest con artists is beyond me. Austin is kicking around its bread and butter, and the city will regret it if this ordinance passes.

Austin will become a much less cool place to live if this passes. The gentrification of downtown will be sped along, the death of our live music scene will commence, the artistic community will fall apart, our economy will suffer and one of the things that make this the best damn city in the world- our bar and club scene- will be fundamentally changed. The people behind this effort are dishonest, uninformed, contemptuous fuddy-duddies more interested in legislating my morality than they are checking their own hypocrisy at the door. Please, if you don't vote on anything else in the city elections (Election Day is May 7, early voting starts next week on April 20), vote NO on the smoking ban.

Tom DeLay Watch 04-14-05

By Byron LaMasters

Tom DeLay's House website lists four Great Documents of our Time. Which one does not belong here?

The Magna Carta
The Declaration of Independence
The United States Bill of Rights
The Contract with America

Via the LA Times and the Daily DeLay.

In other Tom DeLay news today, Tom DeLay has joined John Cornyn in making a sort-of-apology-but-not-really for his remarks that the federal judges who failed to reinsert Terri Schiavo's feeding tube would "answer for their behavior". Now, Tom DeLay is stepping a baby step back:

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay apologized Wednesday for threatening retaliation against federal judges involved in the Terri Schiavo case, though he didn't rule out the possibility of seeking their impeachment if that's what the House Judiciary Committee recommends.

"I said something in an inartful way and I shouldn't have said it that way, and I apologize for saying it that way," Mr. DeLay told reporters. But he said that shouldn't preclude Congress from exercising oversight authority when it comes to the courts.

"I believe in an independent judiciary," he said. "We set up the courts. We can unseat the courts. We have the power of the purse."

After Ms. Schiavo died, Mr. DeLay called the federal judges who failed to reinstate her feeding tube "arrogant, out-of-control, unaccountable," and said "the time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior."

Inartful. I think I have a new favorite word.

Update: Meanwhile, Kos catches DeLay admitting corruption in his interview with the Washington Times.

Chronicle Endorsements

By Byron LaMasters

Newspaper endorsements usually don't mean much, but I always follow the Austin Chronicle endorsements in Democratic primaries and city elections with interest. I think that a lot of people, especially in South and Central Austin see the Chronicle as their local paper, and take their opinions, especially their editorial page seriously. With that, check out their endorsements:

Austin City Council Place 1: Lee Leffingwell
Austin City Council Place 3: Margot Clarke and Mandy Dealey
Austin City Council Place 4: Betty Dunkerly
Smoking Ban: YES and NO
ACC Expansion: YES

No major surprises in places 1 and 4. Leffingwell and Dunkerly are pretty much foregone conclusions, although I'm glad that the Chronicle had some kind words for Andrew Bucknall. Every progressive and practically everyone who supports education will vote to expand ACC. The waffling on the smoking ban is a cop-out, but I understand their wishy-washiness. I've been back and forth on the issue myself.

Finally, their dual endorsement in Place 3 is a bit of a surprise. The Chronicle endorsed Margot Clarke in her first run for city council, so I'm surprised that they strayed from her a little bit, and forced her to share an endorsement with Mandy Dealey. Needless to say, this is great news for Dealey. Her campaign got off to a slow start, but she has gained much momentum in the past weeks.

Harold Meyerson on Mexico

By Jim Dallas

From the Washington Post:

Democracy may be all well and good, but Lopez Obrador is just not Bush's kind of guy. As mayor of Mexico City, he's increased public pensions to the elderly and spent heavily on public works and the accompanying job creation. He's criticized the North American Free Trade Agreement as a boon for the corporate sector and a bust for Mexican workers. (As economist Jeff Faux has documented, while productivity in Mexican manufacturing rose 54 percent in the eight years after NAFTA's enactment, real wages actually declined.) He's opposed to Fox's plan to privatize Mexico's state-owned oil and gas industry -- a stance that probably doesn't endear him to the Texas oilmen currently employed as president and vice president of the United States.

Worse yet, Lopez Obrador's populist politics and smarts have made him the most popular political leader in Mexico today. The much touted "free-market" economics of President Fox have done nothing to improve the lives of ordinary Mexicans. Lopez Obrador's victory in next year's election would mark a decisive repudiation of that neo-liberal model. Coming after the elections of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in Brazil, Nestor Kirchner in Argentina and Hugo Chavez (repeatedly) in Venezuela, it would be one more indication, a huge one, that Latin America has rejected an economics of corporate autonomy, public austerity and no worker rights.

So, democracy in Ukraine? We'll be there. Lebanon? Count on us. Kyrgyzstan? With bells on. Mexico? Where's that? Maybe they should move to Central Asia, change their name to Mexistan and promise to privatize the oil. That's the kind of democracy the Bush guys really like.

America-bashing is not exactly a road to salvation, and there are plenty of folks who think Lula is doing a good job of accomodating global capitalism in Brazil (and frankly, I doubt Lopez Obrador would be a much of a real left-winger if he is elected, either). At any rate, regardless of whether or not you buy into Meyerson's cynical theory of U.S. - Mexican relations, we've claimed to be the indispensable democracy-promoting nation. It stands to reasont that watching a legal lynching in Mexico without comment is not exactly a bold, principled thing to do.

Judicial Scales are Tipped

By Katie Naranjo

A frightening article entitled “Conservatives Near Lock on US Courts” landed on my doorstep this morning. Democrats are beginning to prepare for more filibusters as Republicans try to maneuver appointments for control of the judicial branch. With the legislative, executive, and judicial branches the count is Republicans 3 – Democrats 0, pending the potential for more trouble during this weeks appointments. Here are some fun facts:

Republican appointees now constitute a majority of judges on 10 of the nation's 13 federal appeals courts. As few as three more lifetime appointments on key courts would tip the balance in favor of GOP appointees on all but one appeals court - the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

The confrontation over judges heats up Thursday with the Senate Judiciary Committee expected to send a second appeals court candidate to the full Senate for a possible vote. The process is being closely watched because if either nomination triggers a filibuster, it could provide the vehicle for Republican senators to launch the so-called nuclear option, which would squelch filibusters

For more http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0414/p01s02-uspo.html

Lets wish the Democratic Senators well as they get ready to RUMBLE!!!! (Jim Dallas Reference)

Texas Lege Group Blog

By Byron LaMasters

Aaron Pena is turning our Democratic legislators into legislator-bloggers. Check out the Lone Star Rising. It currently has posts from Rep. Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas), Rep. Veronica Gonzales (D-McAllen) and Rep. Joe Deshotel (D-Beaumont).

Via Grits for Breakfast.

Endorsements, Resolutions From Dallas

By Byron LaMasters

I would say that the Stonewall (GLBT) Democrats and the Dallas County Young Democrats are the two most active Democratic clubs in Dallas County. Both clubs have made endorsements in the Dallas City Elections in the past weeks. You can read of the Dallas Stonewall Democrats endorsements in their newsletter (PDF file). The Dallas County Young Democrats made their endorsements on Tuesday night and passed several resolutions as well.

The Dallas County Young Democrats made the following endorsements and resolutions at their Tuesday meeting:

NO on the Strong Mayor Proposal
A Resolution Calling for the Resignation of Tom DeLay
A Resolution Regarding Senator John Cornyn
A Resolution Opposing HJR 6 (gay marriage amendment)

Also, DCYD's endorsed in several city council and county school board races. I do not have the full list, but I know that they voted to endose Pauline Medrano in Place 2, Candy Marcum in Place 14, and Anne Hubener and Pauline Dixon for Dallas County School Board. I did not attend the meeting, but I also support those four candidates.

I attended the Dallas Stonewall Democrats meeting a few weeks ago. I have attended Stonewall meetings regularly when I am in Dallas for the past two years, and I finally joined as a member, because I wanted to be able to vote to support two great Democrats at their endorsement meeting - Pauline Medrano and Candy Marcum.

The two city council districts that take in the majority of the gay community in Dallas are District 2 and 14. Distict 2 is represented by the openly-gay and term limited mayor pro tem, John Loza. I've known Loza since I was in high school, when I got my first campaign job experience with his 2001 re-election campaign. Running to replace him is longtime Democratic activist Pauline Medrano and restuarant owner Monica Barros-Greene. Greene is a member of the GLBT community as a transgendered woman, and all things being equal, that would weigh positively into my decision on the race. However, Medrano's activism and service to the Democratic party seal the deal for me.

In district 14, there are two good candidates - Angela Hunt and Candy Marcum for the open seat of term-limited Veletta Lill . Both are good Democrats and would represent Dallas well on the city council. However, Marcum would add another GLBT voice to the council, and that is the tiebreaker for me. Marcum's professional and personal experience also make her a phenominal candidate.

The Dallas Stonewall Democrats endorsed the following:

Dallas City Council District 2: Pauline Medrano
Dallas City Council District 3: Ed Oakley
Dallas City Council District 6: Linus Spiller
Dallas City Council District 14: Candy Marcum
Strong Mayor Proposal: NO
Dallas County School Board Precinct 4: Anne Hubener

Medrano was endorsed by a 16-13 vote. I think that former Dallas County Chair Bill Howell, and author of Stout Dem Blog made the difference. Various charges against Pauline Medrano were made in discussion, and a Dallas Morning News article was cited. The Dallas Morning News has endorsed Monica Barros-Greene. Howell then noted that the Dallas Morning News has actively opposed the Medrano family for many years because of the Medrano family's work in organizing unions, notably for newspaper workers. The Dallas Morning News opposed their work in this regard, and have questioned the reputation of many in the Medrano family for years. I followed up by remarking that great Democrats and great friends of the GLBT community such as former State Rep. Harryette Ehrhardt (D-Dallas) and State Rep. Terri Hodge (D-Dallas) were supporting Medrano and that she deserved the support of the organization. After debate, the motion to endorse Medrano passed by a 16-13 margin.

In district 3, Stonewall endorsed the openly gay incumbent Ed Oakley. Oakley had a tough first race in 2001, and another tough race after redistricting as he was paired with another incumbent in 2003. This time, Oakley should have no trouble winning re-election.

Linus Spiller was endorsed over Steve Salazar in place 6 because of Salazar's role in denying representation of many Stonewall members at the Senate District 23 caucus at the 2004 Democratic convention in Houston. Salazar will likely win re-election, but Stonewall made the point that they feel that they needed to make.

In district 14, a motion for a dual endorsement of Angela Hunt and Candy Marcum failed, and the motion to endorse Marcum passed. Both are good candidates, but Marcum is the best candidate.

The strong mayor proposal was opposed overwhelmingly. I must give plugs to Beth Ann Blackwood for speaking at the meeting in a hostile environment, but the proposal was seen as too far-reaching by the organization. The organization also had serious problems with the fact that several individuals with a history of supporting anti-gay causes were major donors of the strong mayor proposal.

The Hubener family have been friends of the GLBT community for a long time, and Stonewall was pleased to support Anne Hubener in her race for Dallas County School Board.

The battle is joined

By Jim Dallas

Noam Scheiber (via Amy Sullivan) - Democratic libertarianism bad!:

Far more interesting--and politically more consequential--is an emerging Democratic split between social libertarians, who emphasize privacy, and what I'll call communitarians, for lack of a better word. Like social conservatives, the communitarians believe the government has a role to play in Schiavo-like dilemmas. If they prevail, it could help the Democratic Party reclaim its popular majority.

William Galston - Democratic libertarianism good!:

Undermining the conservative vision of freedom is the essential first step for a liberal recovery. But no movement ever built a governing majority just by criticizing its adversaries. To regain the initiative, liberals must return to their historic mission of modernizing and promoting freedom.

To be sure, Scheiber and Galston are taking this from slightly different angles, and there's probably much they can agree on. That said, are you ready to RUMBLE!?!?

... and silly me, I forget to reference Greg's Opinion.

Hit me baby one more time

By Jim Dallas

The Associated Press reports on the House debate over the revenue-capping bill, and I think puts things a little too optimistically for it. In part because, while the AP mentions that HJR 35 (the revenue-capping constitutional amendment resolution) needed a 100-vote supermajority to pass - and failed to get 100 votes - the story neglects to mention that Rep. Bohac didn't even get a majority when push came to shove. In that sense I think the AP is moving the goal posts, so to speak. Moreover, today's story doesn't mention that the Senate ain't all that crazy about the legislation, either. I am predisposed to think that the revenue-cappers are probably going to go down in defeat. Again. It would be nice if the AP gave a little more perspective one way or the other.

Meanwhile, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill permanently repealing the estate tax, in their usual fashion.

DeLay Makes Trip to Senate to Slow the Bleeding

By Byron LaMasters

After two Senators with tough re-elections next cycle, Rick Santorum and Lincoln Chafee made statements critical of Tom DeLay, DeLay spoke to the GOP Senate caucus the other day:

With a handful of fellow Republicans breaking ranks, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay crossed the Capitol on Tuesday to shore up Senate support. [...]

Mr. DeLay, admonished three times last year by the House ethics committee, has been fending off allegations about overseas trips apparently paid for by foreigners in violation of House rules, and for paying his wife and daughter $500,000 in the last five years for campaign work.

He has denied wrongdoing and said he'd like to go before the House ethics committee to clear his name. But the committee has been paralyzed for months. House leaders ousted the chairman and two others who voted against Mr. DeLay and changed rules to require bipartisan support to open any new investigations. Democrats refuse to operate under new GOP rules.

The panel meets today, though neither side is willing to budge.

Only the House can decide Mr. DeLay's fate, but recent comments by GOP senators have stepped up the pressure. Conservative Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a top Republican in the Senate, said Mr. DeLay should publicly explain his actions. And moderate Sen. Lincoln Chafee, R-R.I., called him "a shadow over the party."

So, DeLay is having trouble in Washington, and back home in Pearland, his supporter, City Councilman Kevin Cole is getting a little bit hysterical. Andrew has more below.

Update: Earlier today, I read Councilman Cole's website. Now it seems to have been taken down. Interesting.

Pearland Council Member Kevin Cole a Real Jerk

By Andrew Dobbs

If you haven't seen Drop the Hammer, you really should. Judd Legum is doing a helluva job taking on Tom DeLay and he has some really great info there. Unfortunately some of the pro-DeLay forces have started slithering their way into his email box. One in particular was pretty entertaining, and he emailed it around to some of us:

Hey ass hole [sic]. Tom Delay happens to be my congresman [sic] and I am happy with the job he does for me and my district[sic]. Why don't you get the F@&* out of our district and leave us alone. Better yet, come speak to me personally and I will show you what I think of you.

Kevin Cole
Pealrand [sic], TX
[Cell Phone # Redacted]

Kevin Cole is a real jackass it seems- barely literate and just a little too big a fan of the most corrupt politician in America today. He also happens to sit on the City Council of Pearland, a city whose name he is unable to spell. He is also a deacon in his church, which might have issues with his threatening violence, using profanity and sticking up for a well-known criminal.

I just thought that "Hon." Kevin Cole's constituents might get a kick out of knowing that they elected an illiterate bottom feeder to their illustrious city council. Stick up for DeLay, and we'll show you no quarter round these parts.

A Pause for Giggles

By Andrea Meyer

Okay, it's ten minutes to 4 AM (AZ time), and as I am a notorious insomniac/night owl, I thought I'd provide everyone with a bit of humor, at Tom DeLay's expense, courtesy of The Onion. Onions make me tear up, but this one from laughter.

Grab a hankie...

Burnt Orange Report from the Floor

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Live, from the basement of the SSB, it's Burnt Orange Report from the Floor! Updates rolling on this exciting Student Government coverage in the extended entry as always... Tim Allen is liveblogging as well.

Oh, and if anyone wants to bring me food down here, leave me a comment or IM me at howarddean13.

The mood in the room is a bit chipper today, though it's still a bit empty as many of the appointments havn't been made yet for the Agency and Committee side of the room.

As Tim has already mentioned, Deputy to the President: Dr. Charles Roeckle is here, meaning it's a good time to take a nap, considering I had 2 hours of sleep last night. And by the way, he is soooo going over his 2 minute speaking limit for Open Forum if I remember correctly. (ed. 10 min now, thanks for reminding me Tim) BORFTF continues to wait for Vice President Elizabeth Brummett to entertain a motion to extend his speaking time.

7:30- Now Daily Texan Editor Ben Heath *swoon* is up to give an update about the propsal to remove Texan Editor Elections. I wish there was more to report at this point, but I think the big show would be the actual TSM board meeting where this would be discussed/voted on. Though it's interesting that no one in the Assembly really had questions, issues, stances on this that they want to question Ben about, beyond Director Chris Kennedy.

7:42- VP Brummett-"I'm entertaining and you can motion." You bet you're entertaining Ms. Brummett! You can entertain my motions at any time. Suspend the rules! Move appointments to the next Agenda item! Suspend the rules again! Move AB 1 to the next item! AB 1 is "In Support of Free and Open Source Software Awards" which was written by someone outside of the Assembly, Vlad Codrea, and is totally awesome! How often do you here "Mozilla Firefox Web-browser" in an SG meeting? So in that spirit, go download it (and Thunderbird for an e-mail client).

Just read the bill, it's awesome.

Whereas the use of Free and Open Source Software has already saved money for individuals, private businesses, and governmental agencies such as the cities of Munich, Germany and Bergen, Norway.

Whereas the governments of several third world countries including Brazil are switching from costly Non-Free Proprietary systems to Free and Open Source systems in order to provide disadvantaged children and low-income families with wider access to computers.

Approved by acclamation.

7:51- Henna Tayyeb, last's week's nominee for Internal Financial Director, is back up for a second time aften being rejected last week. Omar's looking on from the Exec table nodding as she notes "so long as Omar keeps bringing me back for appointment...because I know I can do this job". She had a largely pre-written speech answering point by point the charges leveled against her last week. I seriously hope that Reps continue to question her this week, as I personally don't know how much has changed.

Henna Money quote in response to Rep. Jack Waite's question..."No, I personally havn't taken any accounting classes, ...but I love Excel!"

I sense blood in the water though, which should make the actual debate period interesting in my opinion. Whoops, it seems that there will be no debate. Ok, that was really sad, voice vote. (Though Mr. President was certainly smiling.) Well, this should be a fun year. I'll hope for the bet, but I'm already missing the old Exec.

8:11- More appointments. Here is the list, if there is anything exciting, I'll mention it.

Alumni Relations Director – Jennifer McCook
Community Messages – Clayton Falls, Elgene Hernandez

8:20- VP Brummett is being snarky with her speaking power.

Student Forum Agency – John Norton, Amanda Johnson

8:25- John says, "Getting it done, snap, snap, snap." This has to be one of the more entertaining candidates. And Amanda Johnson is of course just awesome. *should be in the Assembly, cough, cough*

Underrepresented Recruitment and Retention Agency – Devin Fletcher, Yvette Garza

8:30- I find it a bit ironic that these people were not here, I daresay, they were 'underrepresented'.

Member Coordination Agency – George Hinchey, Nancy Almanza

8:34- Love Fest time! Approved.

Campus Safety – Elliott Reep, Bethany Huddleston

8:44- Rep. Grant Stannis attempted to amaze us with his Parlimentary skills (or by proxy prove how much larger a penis he has than the rest of the Assembly). He accomplished one of them, he did prove that he was a being a big dick. =) Love ya, Grant.

Bethany was being all "Oh I love Student Government, I'm so excited" like. I give that about two meetings before her soul is crushed.

Oh, the Underrepresented Appointees have now arrived (as has more snarkier commentary on my behalf).

Historical Research – Danny MacDonald

-not here

On and Off Campus Housing Agency – Madhavi Kasbekar, Colton Brugger

8:55- BORFTF Awards tonight for best hairdo/outerwear acessorizing go to Madhavi and Colton.

It should be noted at this time that I have completed my salad and am still quite hungry. I feel that I need more food...

Students with Disabilities – Lee Bagan
Student Services Agency – Steven Hargis, Amanda Surman
Student Services Fee Committee – Grant Stanis

9:27- Now we get to debate Stanis being on the SSFC. If I was president (which I'm very much not) I would not consider appointing conservatives to the most powerful committee in regards to student funds. *sigh* There is a lot of questioning, and it just reminds me how awful a Stanis Presidency would be in SG. I would totally resign.

Thanks to Director Kennedy and Former Arch. Rep. Mary Donaldson for asking Grant about his waltz-out last month, which didn't square with other comments he made. I personally worry that Stanis is going to represent himself, maybe the business school, and not really the rest of the student body when it comes to funding. It's a thing we always worry about in the Hill Country for local office, "personal agendas".

Oooo, it looks like we might move back out into debate after getting "this" close to voting. After some people learned this appointment only needed majority approval, not 2/3, they may have thought it was possibly to kill it. *Thanks to whomever was thinking that*

Grant attempted to appeal the ruling of the VP to send him out of the room during debate of his appointment. It failed. Now he's giving a very long winded speech. Sidenote, why do we seem to keep awarding people who walked out of the Assembly, with appointments? Two of them are on Exec, one of them (Grant) is now up for SSFC.

Time for debate!

11:07- And boy was there debate, there is a very good chance that the Assembly could knock this down. But after a short recess, Grant motioned to move to the next appointment, to allow some of his friends from Business Council to come. So we did, and moved back to allow them to speak. Unfortunatly the first speaker made some very true statements, that also brought up some of the very point why people would vote against Grant, i.e. representing the Business Council sooo well, and is always there for the Business School, and is against Flat rate tuition, and etc. The issue many people have is that as an appointment to a body where he would be representing the entire student body, he would still be only representing himself or the Business Council.

I must say this, I'm a bit startled by, and proud of, the Assembly's willingness to bite into some of these appointments (because we havn't gotten to bills yet so this is all I have to go on). Real debate is a nice change, though I am beginning to miss some of the personalities of the old Assembly. But I think that would happen next year as well.

And the Assembly passed it 19-14-1. I think I may be going home soon. I don't really have much of a reason to stay. I'm not sure if it will be worth it to try to hang out for the Reform Bills for discussion.

Survey Research Agency – Regina Dombkowski
Transportation Agency – Jim Kachelmeyer
External Appointments Director – Lauren Gilstrap
Freshman Leadership Organization – Seth Hayes
Transfer Student Agency – Taryn Dusek, Weston Carls
Outreach Agency – Christie Mechler, Carina Sahni
Faculty Council – Clare Richardson
Texas Student Media Board – Brandon Chicotsky
International Education Fee Scholarship – Lindsay Fitzpatrick
Medical Services Fee Advisory Committee – Sapan Shukla, Nicole Capriles
Student Health Center Advisory Committee – Clay Barnett, Saranya Chinnappan
Study Abroad Committee – Katy Castleberry, Charrisa Grubbs
UTSEES- Katherine Fillmore
VSLC Liaison – Alexandra Baer

A Book I'll Have to Read

By Andrew Dobbs

The New York Times has a wonderful review of Sen. Bob Dole's new memoirs, entitled One Soldier's Story. The book covers Dole's childhood in Kansas, his service in World War II and his recovery from the brutal injuries he received while over there. It sounds like a great book about one of America's most prominent leaders.

The shame is that today's kids grow up without knowing the names of past leaders unless they were president. As a history major and someone who loves the study of America's past, I deplore the state of history education in our public schools today. Too often it is just a string of presidents and wars, with little discussion of what happened in between and the important leaders on other levels. I don't remember ever hearing the names Sam Rayburn, Richard Russell, Cactus Jack Garner, Marcus Hanna or many of the other giants of our nation's history that never rose to the office of president in my public education. Bob Dole desperately wanted to be president, but because he never was he'll be forgotten in a generation.

This is a shame. I am a Democrat and he is a Republican, and I would not have voted for him. But he was a far different kind of Republican from the kind we see today. I am struck by the memory from the 1996 campaign of President Clinton and Senator Dole walking side by side, cordially talking to one another during budget negotiations while they were running against one another for president. He had class, and for every boneheaded partisan blast he put forth (1976's "Democrat wars" statement comes to mind), he also said some very classy things (such as when he refused to talk about Clinton's personal life in 1996, though it would have helped his campaign). He wanted to get things done for the people of this country, and was willing to work with Democrats to do that. He is someone I can respect.

So I'll get his new book and give it a read. His service to his country in the House and Senate and as the leader of his party was second only to his service in the Second World War, where he lost the use of his right arm, most of the feeling in his left arm and spent 39 months in hospitals learning how to walk again. An excerpt from the review shows what a hero sounds like:

When he was a teenage soda jerk in Russell, Kan., Bob Dole liked to give his customers at Dawson's Drugstore "the flip." A star athlete at the local high school, he would toss a scoop of ice cream in the air, where it turned a few somersaults, and then catch it in a cup before putting the finishing touches on a sundae or a milkshake. Norman Rockwell should have been there.

After the war, Mr. Dole returned to Dawson's. Badly wounded under heavy fire in the hills of northern Italy, he had spent 39 months in military hospitals. Step by agonizing step, his right arm strapped to a heavy triangular brace, he walked from his house to Main Street and made his way to the soda fountain. "Bob, you're a real hero," a customer told him. Mr. Dole shrugged him off, saying, "The heroes are still over there."

Even though he's from a different party, and even though I would disagree with him on many important issues, I'll tell my children about Bob Dole- in the hopes that even if they don't share his politics, they'll share his character. With Tom DeLay and Rick Santorum and a host of other crooked, autocratic, ignorant leaders in that party today, the GOP took a big dive when Bob Dole retired. Let's hope we have more like him in both parties-- our country deserves it.

State House Targeting - 2006

By Byron LaMasters

Kuff and Tejano Politico are looking at target lists for 2006 already. It's never too early to start talking, and recruiting candidates. Politico's List is a bit ambitious, however, and also leaves off some races that should be targeted. Politico says that this should be the Dem target list:

State Rep. Joe Nixon, State Rep. Kent Grusendorf, State Rep. David Swinford, State Rep. Geanie Morrison, State Rep. Robert Talton, State Rep. Ray Allen, State Rep. Warren Chisum, State Rep. Tony Goolsby, State Rep. Gene Seaman, State Rep. Todd Baxter, State Rep. Martha Wong, State Rep. Bill Zedler, State Rep. Roy Blake Jr.

Some of these folks such as Allen, Baxter, Nixon, Seaman and Wong ought to be at the top of any Democratic target list in 2006, but others such as Grusendorf, Morrison, Chisum and Swinford are unlikely to have a serious challenge anytime soon.

Kuff elaborates on three GOP targets in Harris County for 2006 - Nixon, Talton and Wong. Nixon and Wong ought to be top priorities, whereas I think that Talton is more likely to be a multiple cycle project. Obviously, defending Hubert Vo's seat and Scott Hochberg's seat (to a lesser extent) should be Harris County Democrats priorities as well.

Moving on, Travis County has Todd Baxter to go after, and Mark Strama to defend. I've always wanted to see Terry Keel challenged in a serious way, but that never seems to happen despite the fact that both Kirk Watson and John Sharp won District 47 in 2002. Travis County Democrats followed that up by defeating not one, but two Keel's last November - Patrick Keel who Rick Perry appointed judge and Thornton Keel who lost a constable race (a Democratic pick-up).

In Dallas County, five seats ought to be targeted. District 102 where Harriet Miller gave Tony Goolsby a surprisingly close race in 2002 will likely see another close race in 2006. I believe that Miller is running again. District 101 is a low 40s DPI district in Mesquite that has not been challenged in several years, but I think a well-funded challenger could give Elvira Reyna a scare.

District 105 out in Irving has similar Democratic performance, and it would be good to see a well funded challenge to Linda Harper-Brown. The most Democratic district in Dallas County held by a Republican is clearly HD 106 held by the ethically challenged Ray Allen. Katy Hubener received 47.4% of the vote against Allen in 2004. I think that there is no doubt that Allen will have another well-funded challenger in 2006.

Finally, there is HD 107, an east Dallas district where Bill Keffer is the incumbent. Theresa Daniel ran a competitive race there in 2002, but Keffer was given a pass in 2004. However, I've looked at the numbers in the district, and the DPI of the district increased from 38 to 43 between 2002 and 2004. It's an uphill battle, but a well-funded Democrat could certainly make a good run in the district. I know that one candidate has announced, and there are others currently looking at the race.

Over in Tarrant County, Toby Goodman and Bill Zedler are the two districts that Democrats would probably have the best luck targeting. Elsewhere, Scott Campbell's personal problems give Democrats a chance in an otherwise hopeless district and near-misses of the past couple cycles such as Roy Blake Jr., Mike "Tuffy" Hamilton and John Otto should have challenges as well. As for Gene Seaman, he had a close call in 2002, but got a pass in 2004. Andrew wrote several months ago, however, that Democrats are working to recruit a candidate to run in 2006.

On the other hand, there are a good number of districts, especially in east Texas where we'll have to play defense - Stephen Frost, Mark Homer, Chuck Hopson, Jim McReynolds, and Robby Cook in addition to David Farabee, Hubert Vo, David Leibowitz and Mark Strama.

Again, this is only a very early look at the 2006 cycle. Democrats will have a good opportunity to make gains in the state house, but candidates need to be recruited now, and especially in these competitive districts which I have named above.

Late Night Posting

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

I'm a bit scared right now. Because every time I tilt my head to the side, I notice John Kerry looking at me as he leans up against my wall. Thank goodness he's just made of cardboard. And yes, he's so spending the night, considering I've already grinded with him on the dancefloor at this weekend's UDems party.

He's coming to campus this Saturday you know, and there is a place to signup (admission not guaranteed) here.

Oh, and I must have forgotten to link to this great picture of me looking like I'm about to punch myself in front of UDems endorsed City Council candidate Mandy Dealey.

Filibuster Veterans for Truth

By Jim Dallas

The filibuster debate continues onward, with Mark Schmitt and Nathan Newman representing the pro- and anti- filibuster viewpoints in the blogosphee.

Meanwhile, the Alliance for Justice Action has launched a Schoolhouse Rock-style flash campaign to "Save Phil" (as in, Phil A. Buster). While public education on this topic is a great idea, I'm not sure the tone of the campaign is serious enough; it almost seems like a South Park-style parody.

Of course, one silly campaign deserves another (and note, this is my best crack at designing the most offensive attack ad possible, not at expressing my true feelings).

Hate Affairs Committee votes on HJR 6

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Thanks to the people/person over at PinkDome, we have some info on HJR 6, the Constitutional Ban on All Things Un-Holy (Gay Unions), which was voted out of the Hate Affairs Committee today 6-1 (with 2 Democrats wandering around not knowing where or when to vote I guess).

As this PinkDome entry notes, Rep. Martha Wong (R-Houston Gay District) voted for it as well as Rep. Keffer (R- Gay Son that Testified in Committee).

As to why and where the others were, this PinkDome entry may shed some light. But it is nice to see that Rep. Villareal (D- Missed the Committee Vote) is going to gather Demo opposition to this on the House Floor. We'd need 51 votes to kill it in the House, and even though we have what, 63 Democrats, most capitol sources will tell you that there aren't enough votes to kill it in the House, leaving the Senate (where people have been Re-Redistricted into electoral security on both sides) to be the main battleground.

A Personal Message from Alison Bell

By Alison Ayres Bell

[Ed. Note: This is a guest post by Alison Ayres Bell, the wife of Chris Bell. She asked to share her personal story and thoughts on the stem cell research issue with our viewers. -Byron]

Today I wanted to tell you about something that means a great deal to Chris and me. Today the Texas House is considering legislation that would ban stem cell research in our state. This shocks me, not least because Chris and I strongly support research that can lead to groundbreaking cures for diseases. But I have a deeply personal stake in this fight as well.

Last November, I was diagnosed with breast cancer.

My doctors tell us that my prognosis is excellent, but any cancer patient will tell you that a good prognosis doesn’t make chemotherapy any less grueling. Surviving this disease is exhausting, painful, and terrifying, but most of all it is revealing because it reveals what you and those around you are really made of.

It’s funny that they call it “standing up” for something, because when I think of Chris’ commitment to helping me beat cancer, I think of him sitting down. Sitting down in the waiting room, holding my hand. Sitting down in the exam room, telling me bad jokes as we wait for the doctor. Sitting next to me in church as we pray for remission. Sitting next to me at the dinner table as we put up a brave front for the boys. And sitting with me in bed when I feel too weak to get up.

We believe there is a life after cancer, and we are trying to live our lives not just one day at a time, but in the hopes that we will have many more days and years after this one. Today, with his love and support, I am going to win this battle. Tomorrow, with Chris as Governor, we are going to win this war by supporting stem cell research that can lead to a cure for cancer and other diseases.

This is why I am supporting Chris as he explores the race for Governor. There is nothing more important in our lives than beating cancer, and there should be nothing more important to our state government than finding ways to ease suffering. Stem cell research should be part of that plan.

Here's what I want you to do. Call the House State Affairs Committee and tell them that Chris and Alison think stem cell research is a good idea. And if they ask “Who are Chris and Alison?” tell them they’re two Texans who are working hand in hand to make the future better.

Sincerely,
Alison Ayres Bell

Shays Calls for DeLay to Step Down

By Byron LaMasters

Not a huge surprise here, because Chris Shays represents one of the most Democratic districts held by a Republican in Congress, but now that one Republican has called for DeLay to step down, it puts preasure on others to say the same. The Houston Chronicle has the story.

Update: Interestingly, last October Shays said that DeLay was a "great majority leader".

More at the Daily DeLay.

A bit belated

By Jim Dallas

Chris Bell wrote a wonderful op-ed this last weekend on one of my hobby-horses, reforming the redistricting process.

John Kerry Visits UT Democrats

By Katie Naranjo

This Saturday, April 16th, John Kerry will be speaking with students from the University of Texas Democrats at the Recreational Sports Gym on 21st Street. All are welcome but space is limited. The town hall meeting will begin at 10:30 a.m. and end at 11:30a.m. Senator Kerry will speak on his children’s insurance proposal the Kids Come First Act. Contact one of the University Democrats officers at www.udems.org to get ticket information.

SG Expanding?

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

A very interesting post over at the West Campus Insider, the blog run by James Burnham, (Daily Texan columnist, Union Board Representative from the Connect Ticket). Seems that the SG president needs an assistant. My own side question is whether this will be a paid spot or not? Let's hope there aren't any blue dresses around as well.

Rumor has it that new SG President Omar Ochoa has created the new position of "personal assistant." Apparently, there has never before been a need for the SG president to have his own personal assistant until this year, sort of a curious manuever. Perhaps I underestimate the tremendous workload of the student body president but it seems that a personal assistant is a tad excessive.

Also sort of amusing, the few people I know who have been approached about filling this (undoubtedly vital) role are all pretty attractive girls. I guess SG president has perks beyond getting to hobnob with UT bigwigs and being the biggest dog at the SSB.

Extreme Makeover, War Profiteering Edition

By Jim Dallas

I am not in current possession of a television (really), so I don't watch many TV ads. But at the HCYD happy hour last night, a fellow student expressed frustration with Halliburton's campaign to rehabilitate its image.

I'm sure this will help a whole bunch (from the L.A. Times):

The State Department has ordered a major reevaluation of the troubled $18.4-billion Iraq reconstruction effort, blaming problems on early decisions to hire U.S. firms for major infrastructure projects.

In a report to Congress this week, the department says rebuilding officials will cancel several planned water and electricity plants and shift $832 million to focus on immediate job creation and training for Iraqis.

...

The report, along with an earlier draft obtained by the Los Angeles Times, offers the most sweeping analysis to date of the failures in the reconstruction process and presents the most detailed road map yet for the future of the program.

The adjustment, the third such funding change in nine months, is the latest sign of disarray in the effort to help quell the insurgency by improving living standards and providing jobs for Iraqis.

The report lists problems with the performance of some firms, including Houston-based Halliburton Co. The report reveals that the U.S. issued a warning to KBR, a Halliburton subsidiary, in January, threatening possible termination on its $1.2-billion oil industry reconstruction contract.

Again, as Kuff once asked, who'da thunk?

City Council Finances

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

In the realm of not all that interesting blog posts, I bring you info from the Gregg Knaupe campaign 30 finance report! (Of course, if you are like my father back home and are self-financing a much smaller city council race then there is nothing to file but anyways...)

from the Knaupe blog which is back up again...

The campaign filed it’s 30 day out campaign finance report yesterday. The campaign raised $50,685 for this reporting period, giving us a grand total of $60,733 raised from the beginning of the campaign to the present report. The campaign spent $27,870, the smallest amount of any of the campaigns.

The total cash on hand right now is $46,963, which is more than all the other place three candidates combined.

Oh, and I noticed today that the Margot Clarke campaign has changed their quote from me on their main page sidebar, from the "Margot has the momentum back post" to some of my comments about vision, when I wrote about each of the candidates a while back. But that was on April 1, not March 28 as her site says, though it's not really an issue, just something that probably wasn't updated from the other quote.

Smoking Ban

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

A little birdie told me that polling on the Smoking Ban Proposal on the Austin Ballot May 7 shows that the group of people most in favor of the ban, are those that attend live music venues.

That's got to throw a bit of a wrench into the anti-ban crowd's arguements...

Public Dis-Service Announcement

By Jim Dallas

Amy Sullivan reminds us that in order to blame, the people need to know who to blame.

Repeat after me...

"The Republican politicians in Washington."

Ron Kirk, Laura Miller Debate Dallas Strong Mayor

By Byron LaMasters

They're both Democrats, but the two never agree on anything, and strong mayor is no exception. Miller supports it, Kirk opposes it. The Dallas Morning News reports:

On Thursday, they renewed their storied rivalry, jousting over the merits of a May 7 referendum that would give the mayor more power, while joking about their feud that changed the city's political landscape.

Mr. Kirk, the former Dallas mayor, described the proposal by Dallas lawyer Beth Ann Blackwood as a divisive, almost diabolical plan that would push the city over a cliff.

Ms. Miller, who served on the City Council before succeeding Mr. Kirk as mayor, said the Blackwood proposal was the tonic needed to pull the city out of its doldrums.
Also Online

The lively debate before the Metro Tex Association of Realtors, moderated by University of North Texas Chancellor Lee Jackson, gave a glimpse of how both sides of the strong-mayor debate will frame their arguments.

Ms. Miller frequently criticized City Hall and its workers – past and present.

"No accountability, no one in charge, no one to blame," she said. "It's been like this for years at Dallas City Hall, and that's what this is all about."

She then invoked memories of ousted Police Chief Terrell Bolton and former City Manager Ted Benavides, both of whom she fought hard to vanquish.

Speaking at times in an aggressive, tense tone, she even insulted Mr. Bolton, the city's first black chief, who was unpopular in parts of Dallas.

"I spent the first two years as mayor trying, trying to get a better city manager, and no one on the council supported me," Ms. Miller said. "And that manager hired an idiot to be a police chief without even interviewing anybody."

Near the end of the debate, Mr. Kirk accused Ms. Miller of using Mr. Bolton as a boogeyman.

"Bolton was a failure as police chief," he said. "But this has nothing to do with Terrell Bolton."

Mr. Kirk, who is a member of the Dallas Citizens Council, said the Blackwood proposal would confirm the fears of minority residents who say the plan would diminish their clout at City Hall.

"We would return to the days when a handful of people get into a room and make the decisions for the rest of us," he said, explaining that the proposal was developed by a small number of people.

"If Blackwood passes, they [minorities] would be right. ... I want us to go for a strong-mayor form of government, but I want us all to go together."

Ms. Miller and Mr. Kirk agree that the mayor should have more power, and both were rebuffed when they asked their respective councils to produce a plan that would allow the mayor to hire and fire the city manager.

Several Consider TX-22 Run

By Byron LaMasters

Fresh after Richard Morrison's 2004 campaign success in forcing Tom DeLay to actually run a campaign, and amid Tom DeLay's many troubles nowadays, there's renewed interested in taking on Tom DeLay.

Richard Morrison has stated flat out that he is running again, and today, the Houston Chronicle notes that Houston City Councilman Gordan Quan, Former Congressman Nick Lampson and State Rep. Rick Noriega also might be interested in running.

I tend to agree with Greg. Morrison is the only candidate that actually lives in the district. I think that makes a big difference. Also, Morrison doesn't have a legislative record that can be attacked. This race should be about Tom DeLay. If our nominee is someone with a record that DeLay can go after, then Tom DeLay will do his best to make the race about someone else.

If it ain't fili-busted, don't fili-fix it.

By Jim Dallas

There seems to be some dissent in the blogosphere about Democrats vowing mutually-assured destruction as the Republicans mull going "nuclear" on the filibuster. Some ask, is the filibuster even worth fighting for?

The fili-doves includes Matt Yglesias and Nathan Newman; the hawk-ibusters include the sagacious Mark Schmitt. Kevin "Switzerland" Drum is sitting on the fence.

As for me, I suppose it's true that one could argue that the filibuster is anti-democratic; but then again, any body that is Constitutionally required to give Wyoming the same number as votes as California is not exactly a democratic institution. On the contrary, the Senate was expressly designed largely to impede progress and trample the will of the people (err, well, state legislatures elected by white property-owning men). When the powers that be decide to deal with bigger obstructions to democracy, such as the electoral college and gerrymandering, maybe then we can talk about nuking the filibuster under such pretenses.

Promised Update

By Andrea Meyer

Earlier, I posted a story regarding today's shooting of Gary Joe Kinne, a high school football coach. Kinne was shot with an assault rifle by a school parent. The suspect, Jeffery Doyle Robertson, has been taken to a hospital. He is in critical condition due to self-inflicted wounds.
Here is the rest of the story.

Thanks to Cody for mentioning the link in my earlier post. That post has also been corrected regarding the location of the shooting.

Why did I choose to include this story on BOR? We need to have a debate in this country regarding guns. Too often, the debate only involves groups on polar opposite sides of the issue, such as the NRA and militant supporters vs the take-all-the-guns-away camp. While I choose not to have a gun around for safety reasons, I respect that some people may own a hunting rifle or a handgun. My grandfather lived on a farm, and owned a variety of rifles for hunting and attending to dangerous livestock. My other grandfather was a WWII vet, and kept his handgun, which was locked up, unloaded, and never used.

The wording of the Second Amendment leaves the meaning open to debate.
But what place does an assault rifle have in our homes and in society in general? Who, besides active military personnel, needs one? And what is it about American society that leads to over 11,000 deaths by firearms per year? I want to open a discussion because again, I think that we need a debate, and to hear different perspectives. All I ask is that those who choose to respond and debate the issue please respect each other.

Learn about the Dallas County Chair Candidates

By Byron LaMasters

You can read about the three announced candidates for Dallas County Chair on the Dallas County Democratic Party website. The three announced candidates are Darlene Ewing, Walter Hofheintz and Bruce Rothstein.

You can have the chance to meet the candidates at the DCDP Burger Bash on Wednesday, April 13:

Next Wednesday, April 13, the Dallas County Democratic Party will be having its third annual Burger Bash in honor of taxpaying working Americans. Once again it will be at the party office, 4209 Parry at Fletcher in Dallas, starting at 6 PM. For a symbolically correct $10.40 you'll get burgers, chips, cookies, and good fellowship with other Democrats. And all three candidates for County Chair have been invited to meet folks there as well. Come meet them and other sane and fun people in this county that we are beginning to turn around, as last year's elections showed. If you want a veggie burger instead of meat, please email so we'll have a count, or call the office at 214-821-8331 during our expanded hours from 9 to 6. Look for more details soon on the party website.

School Shooting in Texas

By Andrea Meyer

Here is a link to a story on the school shooting today in Tyler. CJ Buchanan mentioned this in a comment, and I decided to run with it.

The father of a football player at Canton High School allegedly shot the football coach in the chest with an AK-47 and fled the scene. He reportedly has a vehicle "loaded with weapons" and a hitlist.
This story is still developing, and I'll post an update later today. Let's hope that the suspect is apprehended before anyone else is wounded or killed. The suspect said he "won't be taken alive". Hopefully, it will not come to that.

Update: I have edited this post, as the intial notification stated that the shooting took place in Tyler. The story stated Canton, but I thought that was in the vicinity. My apologies to whomever I may have confused.

Correction / Apology

By Byron LaMasters

In recent weeks I've been interviewed twice - once by the Waco Tribune-Herald and once for a senior thesis - with questions relating to how blogs are accountable, and how inaccuracies are corrected. I've stated before that blogs have a self-correcting nature to them, as corrections can be posted in comments, or are often received via email.

With that in mind, it came to my attention via email that there was an inaccuracy in my characterization of State Rep. Jim Keffer (R-Eastland)'s vote on the 2001 James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act. Keffer did vote to table the bill (as the YCT voting record suggests), but ultimately voted for final passage of the act as can be seen in the official record. It's something of a flip-flop, but Keffer voted the right way on final passage. You will note that I have revised my original post on this significantly.

I tend to separate the James Byrd Hate Crimes Act and same-sex marriage equality in the way that I view things. The Hate Crimes Act sent a strong message that crimes of hate - crimes directed at one particular race, ethnicity, religion or sexual "preference" will not be tolerated in the state of Texas, and such crimes should receive certain recognition and increased penalties. I would find it inexcusable for someone with a gay son or daughter to vote against such a bill.

As for same-sex marriage equality, it is my opinion that the GLBT community must do a lot more work before we can expect politicians to embrace the issue. It would be disappointing if State Rep. Jim Keffer votes against allowing his son to have the same marriage rights that he or any other straight person has, but regardless, it is obvious that he loves his son, and I apologize for giving the impression that I was questioning that.

Hill Country Democrats

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

This is a message for Hill Country area Democrats. Other counties may also be affected.

You might receive a letter with the return address of Gillespie County Area Democratic Party Annual Fund Drive (or maybe your county name instead of Gillespie).

The enclosure also says something similar. THIS IS NOT FROM GILLESPIE COUTNY or YOUR COUNTY and HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LOCAL DEMOCRATS. I am embarrassed that someone in our own party is trying to con us.

Take the time to call your county chair for their input. If you are a Gillespie County Democrat, my advice is to ignore this solicitation. Keep your donations at home for the time being. Nothing from this fund raising promotion comes to our local level so you would not have any control on how it is spent.

Give me a call if you have any questions.
(830) 792-4232
George Keller
Gillespie County Chair

Civil Unions Ban Stripped from HJR 6

By Byron LaMasters

This is a little bit of good news. I guess the 12+ hours of testimony on Monday made a difference with some folks.

Joe Trippi Joins the Chris Bell Campaign

By Byron LaMasters

I had heard that this would be coming, but now it's official. Via Kuff and Quorum Report.

The rest of the campaign team announced today in QR:

Media/Research Operative - Jason Stanford.
Fundraising - Heidi Kirkpatrick
Internet - Joe Trippi
General Consultant - Bob Doyle
Media - Neil Kammeron of Fenn Communications
Mail - Duane Baughman

I'm looking forward to hearing Chris Bell again at our Young Democrats convention fundraiser on April 15th.

Cornyn on Tape

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Think Progress has the video of Sen. Cornyn's Violence Against Judges remarks on the Senate Floor.

Live Webcam!

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Well, for the next hour or so I'll be out here at the UDems Shack-A-Thon. You can see me on LIVE NUDE GIRLS our temporary webcam here, an idea that we may expand to meetings and beyond! If you want to converse with my on AIM, I'm howarddean13. Or leave a comment.

Response about Chairs

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

This is for all of you freaks worried about City Council meetings turning into Springer Style Chair Throwing episodes if Margot Clarke gets elected to the city council. Thanks to Sharon for writing in.

Dear Karl -

It has been brought to my attention that a comment was made on the Burnt Orange website that "Margot Clarke had been fired from Planned Parenthood" and "threw a chair". Both statements are totally false!

I was Margot's supervisor for the majority of the time she was employed at Planned Parenthood of the Texas Capital Region. She resigned her position as Director of Public Affairs to pursue other opportunities, and never threw a chair while an employee. In fact, Margot is one of the most loyal, dependable, hardworking people I've had ever known.

Margot is very qualified to represent Austin citizens on the City Council. She has a long history of fighting for the issues important to us as a community and will make an outstanding member of the City Council, if elected.

Thank you for posting a correction as appropriate to the false comments that were made about Margot.

Sincerely,

Sharon Bettis
12140 Tunnel Trail
Manchaca, Texas 78652
512-292-1341

Delay's Travel Under Scrutiny

By Andrea Meyer

Tom DeLay is quite the world traveler...

DeLay's trip to Moscow in 1997 is currently under investigation as new statements, implicating lobbyists and a Bahamian-based corporation, contradict DeLay's earlier claims that his expense-paid trip was funded by a non-profit organization. DeLay has stated that the National Center for Public Policy Research underwrote his trip. I know, I'm as shocked as you all are that Tom DeLay is caught in a potential scandal.

Summarily, it seems to this blogger that the logistics for this trip were legal Swiss cheese--full of loopholes.

Read the article and share your opinions.

Cornyn in the Times

By Andrea Meyer

This is a quick entry--I want to add to what Andrew said regarding the Republican "leadership" condoning violence against judges by posting a link to an editorial in today's NY Times.

Here is the editorial.

The words of Tom Delay and John Cornyn are unforgivably reckless, and the worst kind of hate mongering. One has to wonder what is next from them. Are they going to advocate and excuse violence towards everyone who disagrees with them or refuses to tow their extremist party line? Should moderate senators and members of congress hire additional security detail? Their apparent support of violence will undoubtedly put many in danger, from liberal college professors and abortion doctors to conservative judges who break away from their party's ideaology to follow the law. This is not a partisan issue, however. People have a right to dissent and do their jobs without having to worry about violent crime against them that is sanctioned by those who are *supposed* to uphold the law.

Senator Cornyn and Congressman DeLay have set a viperous, irresponsible example, and should rectify this by resigning.

But I'm not holding my breath.

Gas Prices, Fossil Fuels, and ANWR (Artic National Wildlife Refuge)

By Katie Naranjo

The continuing increase of oil prices will soon leave vehicle owners broke at the pump. Currently the price of oil is $58 a barrel, with steep price escalation in sight. Congress discussed the potential for a super spike period, where barrels of oil cost over $100. The alternatives discussed by Congress today included drilling in the Alaskan wilderness and continuing conservation efforts.

Why the cause for the recent price hikes? Fingers were pointed to the billions of dollars spent on the continued U.S. military presence in Iraq and the potential for disruptions in the area. One recommendation for the fossil fuel dilemma is to take drastic measures and wean America off the imported oil it so heavily depends on. An investment in green energy as the new resource heavily depended upon provides hope for refineries and constituents. Solar, wind, and hydroelectric are just a couple of the possibilities Congress could decide to invest in.

The movement is brave and needed, I applaud the U.S. House for the efforts made in the new energy package. The phase out of MTBE, the high-octane additive that stops the "knocking of your car’s engine," could be a positive move for health concerns. I hope to see the Senate continue the momentum toward renewable fuels and the elimination of MTBE pollution. There needs to be another resource for humans to rely on that is less harmful and less costly.

Democrats 'Finding God' (Yes, I'm Back!)

By Vince Leibowitz

[Writer's Note: After a way, way too long sabbatical from blogging (caused in part by a severely damaged computer (dropping computers while moving them is bad...very bad), massive amounts of work, and a change in ISPs), I'm back. I don't think I've been away from blogging this much since the campaign last year when I stopped blogging to, well...run a campaign. Aside from all that, I'm glad to be back in the saddle, and hope you'll find my first entry in a while to your liking.--VL]

I'm always amused when I hear someone talking about religion and noting, proudly, "I found Jesus!" or "I've finally found the Lord!" Perhaps it is because, taken literally, these are among the funniest statements in the English language. Seriously: if I say, "I found my keys," you'd ask me "Where?" This is exactly what I want to do everytime I hear someone say this, except I'd probably follow it up with something clever like, "Oh. I didn't know Jesus was missing."

Well, evidently Democrats in the Texas Legislature have found Jesus, too. Maybe he was hiding from Ronnie Earle in fear of being connected to Tom Craddick or Tom DeLay or something. Maybe he was just lost in the Capitol somewhere. Those corridors behind the Senate Chamber are tough to navigate. At any rate, this interesting article from the Dallas Morning News the other day tells us all about our party's effort to find the Lord (so to speak).

In the article, we are told that the House Democratic Caucus has produced weekly morality and Bible lessons and brought clergymen to talk about God and politics. Interesting. In the lead of the story, DMN political corespondent Gromer Jeffers manages to make the Texas Democrats sound like an alcoholic on a 10-year binge who finally made it to an AA meeting:

After a decade of losing power, Texas Democrats have bottomed out, holding no statewide office and being handily outnumbered by Republicans in both houses of the Legislature. So they have sought to reframe the debate over issues.

In the House, which Democrats have hoped to use as a building block for electoral success, regular caucus meetings have taken on a decidedly more religious tone.

Led by Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer of San Antonio, a former Catholic altar boy, the House Democratic Caucus has produced weekly morality and Bible lessons and brought in clergymen to talk about God and politics.

Why is my stomach turning over as I read this?

No, it's not because I'm an unchurched heathen (I'm a lapsed United Methodist, thank you very much) who doesn't "believe" (I do believe), but rather because I can see the road that this is taking us down as a party and I don't really like it one bit.

Yes, the Republicans were able to take religion and morality and wrap themselves in it like the shroud of Turin. It worked very, very well for them--at least when it came to getting them elected. Clearly, though, as evidenced by the shape of the state of Texas and the shape of our country, it's a mantra that sucks when it comes to governing.

Why does it suck when it comes to governing? How can I count the ways...? First of all, remember when GWB got (illigitimately) elected--the first time? Remember when he was Texas governor? Now, I disgagreed with almost everything he did but I will say two things: he was more "moderate" than he is now and he was more willing to compromise with a legislative body than he is now. There is no doubt that he was a whore for the Religious Right while he was in Texas. He just didn't necessarily do every drop of their bidding. Now, because they got him his job, his every move is beholden to them.

As Democrats, I always thought our party was above this type of pandering. Yes, it's nice that people in the House are having a Bible study. God knows the Texas House could use some guidance from the Almighty from time to time. But why publicize it like this? Just to be able to tell the so-called swing voters, "Hey, we've found Jesus over here, too!"?? Furthermore, by doing this, aren't we setting ourselves up for the same thing that's happened to moderate Republicans over the years? They've become beholden to the ideals of the Religious Right because they are forced to to stay in their party. Sure, we may be trying to attract "progressive denominations," as the article notes, but do we want to be beholden to "progressive denominations," or any other denomination or group? Democrats, it seems to me, have always been the party beholden to the people, and not the "special interests," which to me would include any denomination of church or religious sect (Christian, Muslim, Jewish--whatever).

Though I'm not quoting from quite as much of the DMN article as I would like (please do read it if you haven't already), I do want to point out some other things.

The article notes:

Dean Grodzins, a history professor at Medville Lombard Theology School in Chicago, said Democrats could look to history for guidance, including the role played by black churches during the civil rights movement.

Since then, he said, "Democrats have not talked about values as much as issues. ... People want to vote their values, and there is a huge realm of religion that's been neglected."

Democrats said they were not concerned about alienating their secular base.

"Religion is a personal issue, and our party believes strongly in the separation of church and state," Mr. Coleman said.

The Rev. Albert Pennybacker, head of the Clergy and Laity Network, said religion didn't have to dominate a party's platform or be used as a wedge.

"It's trivialized if it's limited to single-issue politics," he said. "But it's inevitable that religious persons are going to have expressions in the public debate."

Ms. Benkiser said Democrats send mixed messages about morality.

"They called Bill Clinton's affair a personal issue, and then they want to talk about family values," she said.

But Rep. Jim Dunnam of Waco, chairman of the Democratic Caucus, said the discussions about religion and morality are teaching his members how to express themselves better to people of faith.

"No one party has a monopoly on morality," he said.

I've never understood the oft-uttered phrase, "Democrats have not talked about values as much as issues." Whatever. I don't know about you, but I believe 150,000 kids without health insurance is one Hell of a "family value," issue. I think that making sure our teachers are paid a fair and decent wage shows where our values lie. I think our party's record speaks for itself. You do not have to come out and say, "these are my values," to be talking about values.

I have no objection to Democrats, "express[ing] themselves better to people of faith." Heck, I wish I could express myself better to people of faith. What I do have an objection to is any segment of our party trying to adopt its own, internal, faith-based initiative (for lack of a better turn of phrase) when what we should really be doing is not moving farther to the center or farther to the right but back to the left.

As a party, we've got to return to the values that put is in office in the first place: equal opportunity, good jobs and good wages, quality public education, preservation of separation of church and state to preserve the freedom to pursue our beliefs. If that sounds familiar to you (or at least the last part of it does), it's because it's taken from those little cards the state party used to hand out: "What It Means To Be A Democrat."

This whole "Democrats Finding Jesus" thing sounds nice on paper, but just gives the Republicans one more thing to attack. Instead of doing things that put us on the defensive (and believe me, you can bet money on it that the Texas GOP or some religious group will issue a smart-ass press release on this article if they haven't already), we should be constantly on the offensive--demanding equal rights for all people, demanding a quality education for all children, demanding a fair tax system.

UDems Webcam

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

This University Democrats have built a shack on campus for the Habitat for Humanity Shack-a-Thon and it survived tonight's rainstorm (since it's made of plastic campaign signs and wood. They also have a webcam out there so you can see what is happening, a project that we may expand to meetings and beyond.

View Webcam here.

More on Ray Allen

By Byron LaMasters

You didn't hear this from me.

Burnt Orange Report from the Floor

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Picture of me kayaking on Town Lake after the UDems Endorsement Meeting. Now, on to the report....

It's the first meeting of the new Assembly. After a short open forum, it's appointment time. (Updates continuous, keep refreshing the extended entry). Tim Allen, SG fly on the wall, is also liveblogging here. It's his birthday!)

First up is Executive Director: Nominee is Dan Pascal, the External Financial Director on the last Exec. The Reps seem fairly quiet (timid) as far as wanting to ask questions or ask many real questions. Let's not kid ourselves here, Dan was the major campaign manager for Connect and this appointment to me smells a bit like a political favor. Props to 2 year at large Rep. Matt Ross (one of the primary proponents of the Election Reform bill) for asking some real questions. It's as if everyone here knows what people are trying to ask but no one wants to do that. Approved by acclamation.

2 Year at Large (Omar's now open seat): Danielle Rugoff! The queen of the at large reps on Ignite, she represents to me why the electoral system at UT is broken. She belonged in SG to begin with, and it's sad that this is the route she ended up having to go to be seated. Approved by acclamation.

Internal Financial Director: Henna Tayheb, one of the current 2 year at large reps. This will open up another Rep seat. Question from Rep. Hart on whether this position lets students down that voted for her last year as a 2 year Rep. Rumor had it that she was asked not to run on Connect in exchange for an Exec spot... surprise, surprise, look who's up for approval !!! And as an Agency whose budget is controlled by her, I'm going to keep the following statement in mind: "I don't think we should cut funding from Committee & Agency budgets at all..." At least the questioning is getting a bit more aggressive. Hart is asking that since she was a Rep last year, why didn't she get involved with the appropriations process when the last IFD put out the call.

More below the fold, continual updates.

Ooo! We are actually going to debate this one, there is a line of people on the No side, Rep. Hart, grad Rep. Pekker, 2 year at large Rep. Ross, 2 year Rep. Rodrigo Interiano. On the yes side was Director Chris Kennedy, and amazingly, Omar Ochoa (plus others). We now have members of the Assembly asking the outgoing Internal Financial Director how much experience plays into a successful term as the manager of all monies for Student Government; Jessica Rice doesn't answer directly, but intimates that she had taken all steps possible to gain the experience necessary to carry out her task. She also answers in the negative when asked whether or not the applicant ever contacted her or asked to meet with her to discuss the position and the responsibilities it entails.

(Elliott Reep Reporting: People from the floor begin to ask who else applied for the position, without a response. Representatives Heart and Ross state that this will significantly influence their vote. One new rep speaks from the floor to the affect that if anyone has a doubt that Henna is not the best person at this University for the job, then they should not vote for her. Advocates counter with examples of Henna's exemplary service in the MIC, her sorority, and other organizations. However, these still do not counter the arguments that when it come to experience for THIS position (which controls roughly 80,000 dollars for next years SG, plus all of the Committee and Agency money) Henna has not demonstrated in the past the same enthusiasm for this position that she claims to at this time. Henna is a wonderful person, but she does not seem to be as well prepared for the position of Internal Financial Director as the current holder of that office was when she applied a year ago. There seems to be a significant concern among a least a small portion of the assembly to this effect.)

Personally, I love the fact that this is being debated. The sooner the Assembly starts thinking for itself, the better for SG. A 3 minute recess was called and we reconvened for roll call. 2/3 majority needed (29 votes).

FAILED! 21-14-1 (Yes, No, Abstain). This is the first time I've ever seen the Assembly vote down a nomination (though there have been no votes cast before in the case of Brian Ferguson's appointment last year to TSP Board). I find it interesting that a lot of the no votes were holdovers from the last assembly, 2 year at larges, or the 9 member of the Ignite ticket. And Jessica Hart and Courtney Livingston (one of the Ticket Splitters) have gained a few points in my book for having the chutzpah to question appointments.

Moved out of business to talk about AR 1. It's voted on next week. Back into the flow to talk about appointment for Secretary which is Stephanie Weaver, an outsider to SG who's on top of her game according to Rep. Livingston. Secretary doesn't need to be close to SG (like IFD should be). Approved by acclamation.

Clayton Stewart, former Liberal Arts Rep. (and Ticket Splitter) is up for External Financial Director. I missed some of the discussion; it seems to be about Ring Sales and whether he knew the people in charge (i.e. Wes Carpenter who is in the room). Although there are some questions here, I'm not all that sure there will be any opposition for this. (Clayton reminds me of Dan in style, think southern drawl and a cowboy hat, if that was SG dress code...)

But wait, Rep. Matt Ross asked the hard question about him leaving last week, which presented a bit of discussion from the other people that walked out. But everyone voted to approve him anyways.

Communications Director: Nominee Stacey Torres, from the Multicultural Information Center. My first gut reaction, political payoff to the MIC/Latino community which basically elected President Ochoa's ticket. Of course, she seems qualified as well so I don't have a problem with it. But the Exec board, like in any year, is usually made up of political appointees, part of my personal complaints of the Ticket system. I'm going to ask her a question about her thoughts on an SG blog.

And I'm happy with her answer. Better online communication is my big issue with any Comm. Director and I hope that we can work to integrate that into the SG website. Approved.

Matt Stolhandske just came in and officially submitted his resignation from International Student Affairs. Matt's tried to work for reform in SG and I think is tired of being beaten back. I am proud to call him a friend and will be sad to see him leave.

University Policy Director: Jennifer Harris. Hasn't missed a single SG meeting in the last 2 years. Rep. Stanis brought up the question of whether we can just make up this office out of thin air and appoint someone to it without adding it to the SG bylaws yet. It's ok apparently. (but let's not forget to add it in later people). Approved.

Associate Communication Director: Jamie Baker. If talking a long time was a qualification, he should be the Director, not the Associate. Oh, he just mentioned the GLBTAAA! Approved.

Legislative Relations Agency Co-Directors: Daniel Becka and Sam Laine. Folks, I'm getting to the point where I don't have much to write about the nominees, so if I can't think of anything, I might just write who they are, pardon me. Approved.

Election Supervisory Board: Danforth Dougherty, a friend of mine from Liberal Arts Honors, and a current member of the Board (as well as a member of Tejas, which has lots of people in SG, including the past ESB chair and President Chaney, though that is a discussion for a different time.) Publicly against abolishing Tickets, and so called "impartiality" may be one reason he was selected before Ali Puente, who was the legal representative for Ignite to the ESB. Approved.

Campus Fusion: Bradforth Howard, Alyson Parchman. Approved.

Judicial Commission: Ali Puente. I'm so proud of her. Approved without objection! Sweet justice. Sweeter if it had been ESB Chair, but nonetheless, sweet.

Points of Interest: 15 Senators on board for the Student on the Board of Regents bill. I've heard that Tax Free textbooks is more of a dud issue now that the fiscal note on that increased by about $10 million.

Props for VP Brummet for running a really good meeting. The return of smooth parlimentary procedure makes me happy.

New Comm Director says the Assembly should go to Players afterwards. A University Democrats tradition for the last year or two, (going to Players) so I rose to make a comment about it, as well as say they cold join the "save players" facebook group, as it has been said that it will be knocked down to make way for the new UT Alumni Hotel.

Left-Wing Academics, etc.

By Jim Dallas

There's been much fuss about the supposed left-wing takeover of academia, which would be slightly amusing if it wasn't such a threat to academic freedom.

As I understand it, there's two premises which critics have. The first is that "the left" has taken over college campuses. The second is that this is somehow bad because it warps young minds.

For decades, college graduates have, in fact, been atleast as conservative than the general population for decades (which is a simple fact which has been shown over and over again, and not just for those baccalaurates who have grown up and "learned about the real world," although the effect gets amplified the older people get), which ought to disprove both points. Moreover, the liberality of post-grad degree holders has held statistically steady for decades, and possibly fallen. Both facts, I think, disprove at least one if not both of these premises. Crosstabs below the fold.

Ratio of Liberals to Conservatives among Young People
(18-30 year olds)

Source: General Social Survey. Cross-tabulation of POLVIEWS and DEGREE, controlled for black oversamples, selection filters are AGE(18-30) and YEAR([decade]), except for all, which is just a cross of POLVIEWS. Ratio is number of respondants slightly to extremely liberal over the number of respondants slightly to extremely conservative.

N is number of persons. The share of self-described moderates (2002,1992,1982) was 0.26,.21, 0.23 for post-grads; .21, .28, .28 for college grads, and .39, .40, and .38 for all 18-30 year olds. Incidentally, I do not find it a coincidence that college grads and graduate students are more ideologically polarized than their peers; ideological awareness and rigidity positively correlates with education. Consistently, about 5 percent of those with a high school diploma didn't know where they fit on a seven point scale. Only about 1 percent of college graduates could not do so. (Again, something we all knew already, I am sure.)

As I noted a few weeks ago, the overall population has not drifted towards conservatism, but it's clear that 18-30 year olds did - in a big way - in the 1980s, and hasn't really shifted back.

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em

By Jim Dallas

For the last week we've heard the word that right-wingers think that the polls that showed that Americans disapproved of the moralistic totalitarianism of the "save Terri" caucus were meaningless push polls, even though, frankly, they weren't.

Failing to convince anyone, LifeNews proceded to... commission Zogby to do their own poll, using loaded questions only tangentially related to the matter at hand, apparently designed to produce pre-determined results. Of course, Michelle Malkin says its "honest."

I'm sorry, but I'll change my opinion only when Zogby publishes, oh, the sample size and demographics (which as far as I can tell, they haven't). And stops using loaded language.

Moreover, Zogby just put out another poll:

On the Schiavo issue, DeLay consistently has stated that his constituents backed his decision to lead Congress into the dispute over whether to continue nourishment to the severely brain-damaged Florida woman.

But nearly 69 percent of people in the poll, including substantial majorities of Democrats and Republicans, said they opposed the government's intervention in the long-standing family battle.

Respondents in the Chronicle survey also were critical of DeLay's individual role. Nearly 58 percent disapproved of his decision to get Congress involved.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't believe Tom DeLay's Sugarlanders are any more "pro-death" than the average American constituency. Then again, they did elect Tom DeLay to Congress. But I digress; the more important point is, Zogby knows how to appease his clients, and this whole episode makes me skeptical of any poll results his firm puts out.

Date Set for DCDP Meeting to Elect New Chair

By Byron LaMasters

A date was set earlier today by the Secretary of the Dallas County Democratic Party, David Wilkins for an election to fill the vacancy of chair. Theresa Daniel was elected on Saturday to serve as interim chair. Daniel will chair the meeting, although she is not running for permanent chair. Announced candidates include Darlene Ewing, Walter Hofheintz and Bruce Rothstein thus far. The meeting will be held:

When: Monday, May 9 at 6:30 PM.
Where: Communications Workers of America (CWA) Hall - 1408 N. Washington, Dallas, TX.
Purpose: Election of to fill the vacancy of Party Chair

The official notice as posted is available here in PDF format.

Update: Stout Dem Blog has the info up as well.

Show Cornyn How You Really Feel

By Andrew Dobbs

In case you didn't see it yesterday, Byron put up a rather frightening post about John Cornyn's defense of recent violence against judges. These attacks weren't terrorism in the literal sense of the term- neither of the killers were politically motivated- but it seems that had they been John Cornyn would have some sympathy for them. When I heard this it made my blood boil, and the guy needs to pay for this.

So the Texas Democratic Party is having a contribution drive in order to raise money to fight right-wing extremism and to demonstrate support against John Cornyn. If you think that John Cornyn's statements were despicable and that he should be punished either by his colleagues or by the voters of Texas, please add a $1 to the end of your donation- $11, $101, $51, etc. I'll let you know what happens.

Let's send a message to John Cornyn and the Republicans in Washington- the more you attack the institutions that keep us free, the harder we'll fight!

State Rep. Jim Keffer's Gay Son Testifies Against HJR 6

By Byron LaMasters

[This post has been edited from the original post to correct an inaccuracy that was brought to my attention.]

It is interesting how some of the most conservative legislators and elected officials have gay children. Dick Cheney and Alan Keyes are examples of conservative politicians with vocal and out gay children.

Another incident of a conservative Republican's son or daughter speaking out can was seen here in Texas yesterday. At hr:min 8:13 of the state affairs committee meeting (available in ram format here), the son of State Rep. Jim Keffer (R-Eastland), Rob Keffer stated that he was the gay son of state rep. Jim Keffer and the gay nephew of State Rep. Bill Keffer (R-Dallas) in the hearing on HJR 6.

State Rep. Jim Keffer (R-Eastland) voted against to table the 2001 James Byrd Hate Crimes Act (PDF format) before ultimately voting for the bill. Keffer has certainly been more moderate on GLBT interests than other politicians and ought to be commended for that. However, I wonder if he will decide to vote for or against the human and civil rights of marriage equality for his son that he has himself?

Counter-Cultural Ninjas

By Jim Dallas

Commenter Scoop Jackson Democrat on Gregsopinion wrote recently, in a colloquy:

Indeed, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I am so troubled by MYDD, DAILY KOS, the Kossacks, the Deaniacs, ACT, MOVE.ORG and Michael Moore precisely because they remind me of the "Get Clean for Gene McCarthy" crowd in 1968, McGovern's Army in 1972 and the people that a man I used to despise named Spiro T. Agnew called the "Rad-Libs." He went even farther than that. Agnew, a true hate monger and a crook convicted of taking kick backs, called the Rad-Libs "nattering nabobs of negativism," a phrase that I believe that the frequently sneering and supercilious William Safire coined for him.

I've been reflecting on this for a few days, and I think I've realized a few things.

First, I think if you did a poll of people who volunteered for Howard Dean, and similarly, Kossacks, I think you'd find enough differences between our clique and the 60's "Rad Libs". To be sure, you'd also find similarities, and, particularly among the younger supporters, some genuine respect for post-civil rights radicalism. But, like myself, I think you'd find a lot of the younger bunch that didn't actually remember the 1960s may very well have a lot to learn. Nonetheless, this is a different bunch. The real hippies, after all, were for Kucinich. Moreover, the new-new left is a lot more pragmatic and classicly-minded than a lot of people give credit for.

I posted a couple of weeks ago about "protest culture", and about a week ago the American Prospect ran a critical essay on the "spirit of '68." Quoting that essay:

The idea’s salience arises from its respectable lineage in American political thought, which stretches back to Thomas Jefferson and John Dewey. Dewey believed democracy required a home in the local neighborhood where discussion and association took place. When members of Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) gathered in Michigan in 1962 to write the famous “Port Huron Statement,” they outlined the demands of participatory democracy and invoked Dewey’s ideals. But they also invoked a jargon of authenticity taken from existentialist philosophy. While embracing “a democracy of individual participation,” they hoped to find “a meaning in life that is personally authentic.”

But there’s a problem with proclaiming both of those as goals: Authenticity of the self and actually living in a democratic community with other citizens who hold varying opinions are two very different -- if not, in fact, irreconcilable -- demands. In Chicago, the two ideals clashed, and authenticity won out. Protesters pitted themselves against the inauthentic masses -- the police, those who believed in the Vietnam War, the “pigs.” When this occurred, participatory democracy no longer supplemented representative democracy but replaced it; authenticity displaced the challenge of deliberating with other citizens who might disagree. To be authentic meant to give direct expression to desire rather than to work through a longer process of changing representative institutions. It focused on what George Cotkin, the historian of American existentialism, called “catharsis.”

The Washington Monthly article I linked to in my original post did not get as philosophical, but hit on the same point: that protest became symbolic and expressive rather than pragmatic and effective.

Which brings me back to the Dean campaign. To what extent did support, particularly towards the end, become more about making a personal statement (and from the campaign's view, about mass numbers) rather than about actually winning the election? To an extent, I think for a lot of us the means became the ends.

This phenomenon was not limited just to Perfect Stormers. The entire Democratic effort seems to have been focused on the wrong things. Rather than adopt a business-like attitude, as the GOP machine did, we focused so much on being authentic that critical gaps in the campaign emerged, which, ironically, resulted in the grassroots getting detached from their own communities, and in mobilization rather than persuasion.

The new-new left (or the counter-counter-counter-culture, since the Deanies and Kossacks and MoveOn are as much a response to the centrist politics and distancing-from-the-nutters of the Clinton-era as they are a continuation of the original counter-culture) is faced with the choices which the "Rad Libs" were faced with 40 years ago. How do we walk that thin line of being pragmatic and effective while at the same time not perceiving that we are "selling out"? Needless to say, the Rad Libs flunked that test pretty badly.

I don't know. But I encourage you all to think about this problem. As well as brush up on philosophy (do we need a new grand unified theory of everything? probably. is it possible? perhaps not.)

The end of one season, the beginning of another

By Jim Dallas

Congratulations to the Tar Heels.

And now that basketball Madness is over, I can sit back and try to enjoy baseball:

The first official day of work for the 2005 Astros will unfold before a sold-out crowd that could rival the 43,351 who attended last year's season opener.

Activities begin with an 11 a.m. street festival, pep rally and blood drive outside the ballpark. Gates open at 3 p.m, and pregame ceremonies begin at 5:15 p.m.

From there ... well, we'll see. The only certainty is that it will require more faith, on opening day, to be an Astros fan than was required in 2004, when Houston took the field with prodigal pitchers Roger Clemens and Andy Pettitte and an unprecedented burst of confidence from the assembled faithful.

This year, with four new starters in the opening-day lineup and outfielder Lance Berkman on the disabled list, the Astros are popular whipping boys for baseball's chattering classes, who on paper see doom and gloom for 2005.

"I don't know that if I might not have agreed with (critics) before I watched these guys play every day in spring training," said Astros manager Phil Garner. "I think if (critics) saw them play every day, they might have a different opinion.

Time to stop talking and start playing, I guess.

Cornyn Makes Excuses for Terrorists

By Byron LaMasters

Via America Blog is our senator making excuses for terrorism against judges:

SENATOR JOHN CORNYN: "I don't know if there is a cause-and-effect connection but we have seen some recent episodes of courthouse violence in this country. Certainly nothing new, but we seem to have run through a spate of courthouse violence recently that's been on the news and I wonder whether there may be some connection between the perception in some quarters on some occasions where judges are making political decisions yet are unaccountable to the public, that it builds up and builds up and builds up to the point where some people engage in - engage in violence." [Senate Floor, 4/4/05]

It would seem as if John Cornyn is attempting to use the recent violence and threats of violence against our judiciary for political gain. That is utterly shameless. Is this really the best arguement that Republicans can make in favor of ending the filibuster?

I will say this to John Cornyn. The next time a judge is murdered, you have blood on your hands.

Via Supreme Irony.

Update: It's over on Kuff as well now.

HJR 6 Hearing Still in Progress

By Byron LaMasters

It's 12:38 AM and the HJR 6 hearing is still in session. Check out the liveblog of it on PinkDome. Also at the LGRL Blog. More relating to Martha Wong in the Houston Voice.

Update: The hearing lasted until around 2:30 AM

Fight HJR 6

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Want to know what you can do to fight the first proposed Texas Constitutional Gay Marriage Ban Bill, HJR 6? It had a committee hearing today starting around 2 pm. Full details located over here.

Ray Allen Investigated for Illegal Use of Staff

By Byron LaMasters

State Rep. Ray Allen (R-Grand Prairie) is currently being investigated by Travis County prosecutors for using state-paid employees and property for personal profit. The Dallas Morning News reports:

Mindy Montford McCracken, an assistant district attorney for the public integrity unit, said her office received a complaint shortly after an August newspaper report that Mr. Allen and his staff engaged in private and campaign business in his taxpayer-funded Capitol office.

Ms. McCracken declined to say who complained. She said prosecutors are waiting for documents they need before going further.

"Based on the story, we felt there was enough to explore further," Ms. McCracken said.

Ms. McCracken said the investigation is "very much in the initial stages," and declined to say what type of charges, if any, prosecutors might pursue. The penal code contains an offense called "abuse of official capacity," which forbids the misuse of government property. Based on the value of the property, it can range from a Class C misdemeanor to a first-degree felony.

Shortly after the report appeared in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram , Mr. Allen acknowledged that the practice of employing his state aides to work for his business and campaign – even while using private computers and phone lines – looked bad.

He has since moved his business and personal records to an office at his apartment in Austin, he said. [...]

Mr. Allen said he lobbies for the National Correctional Industries Association only in Washington. The association promotes programs that allow private companies to use inmate labor.

Mr. Allen ran Service House, his lobby practice, with his former chief of staff, Scott Gilmore. Mr. Gilmore quit working for Mr. Allen in December and has formed his own lobbying practice in Austin. [...]

Mr. Gilmore said Mr. Allen's employees were aware they could not mix public affairs with private business.

"The policy was, you don't use state computers," he said.

On one occasion, however, an aide stored a letter involving his lobbying client on her state computer. That aide also sent an e-mail on the state computer network that described a "to-do" list, mostly devoted to Service House business, the Star-Telegram story said.

Mr. Gilmore said the aide sent that e-mail in error and said it was not a common practice.

While not illegal in of itself, it's just not smart for an elected official to hire his/her government employed staffers for their personal business. The tendency towards mistakes at best, and the temptation of illegal and unethical behavior at worst is much too great. Whether the case is the former or the latter, the public official - in this case, State Rep. Ray Allen (R-Grand Praire) has betrayed the trust of the public. As is the case, Allen should resign. I hope that the Travis County prosecutors get to the bottom of this.

Three Candidates Announce For Dallas County Chair

By Byron LaMasters

Three candidates have announced for Dallas County Democratic Party Chair in the past days.

Former Judge and precinct chair Darlene Ewing of Mesquite announced over the weekend. Ewing was appointed judge by Ann Richards, but lost election to a full term in 1994.

Former congressional candidate Walter Hofheinz also announced his candidacy. Hofheinz lost to Pauline Dixon in the 2002 CD 32 primary for the right to take on Pete Sessions.

Today, Bruce Rothstein announced his intent to run for chair as well. Rothstein was an early Kerry supporter and led Dallas for Kerry during the primary and general election. Rothstein was also elected out of the 16th Senate District to serve as a delegate to the 2004 Democratic convention.

I know that others are considering a run for chair, and I'm sure that there will be more announcements and horsetrading in the coming days and weeks.

Update: Hofheinz website here.

Another Update: Former Dallas County Chair Bill Howell has more on the executive committee meeting yesterday at his blog, Stout Dem Blog.

Fredericksburg City Council Update

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

I did a little analysis of the past few Election Cycles for city Council in Fredericksburg, where my father is running. I ran some numbers on how many people in each election cast just 1 vote (even though they are allotted 2). This assumes that there are few to no ballots cast with 0 votes on them, which would otherwise put in a margin of error. I've cut and pasted the interesting trends here, but if anyone wants the original file, leave a comment.

Year 1999
Voters 663
% 1 Vote 16.89%

Year 2000
Voters 1202
% 1 Vote 22.21%

Year 2001
Voters 715
% 1 Vote 19.58%

Year 2003
Voters 470
% 1 Vote 24.47%

Year 2004
Voters 819
% 1 Vote 40.17%

My analysis is that I believe traditionally Fredericksburg CC Elections have 20% of the electorate that votes for one candidate out of strategy in any given year. I believe that bump up in 2003 to about 25% is due to the entrance of Melodi who was a Tax Protest candidate.

Her run in 2004 may also help count for the high 40% rate but I now believe (contrary to before) that the high 2004 level is not due to simply Melodi's Anit-Tax forces, but also MacWithey's entrance into the race which changed the dynamic of City Council elections. As someone outside of the usual base of voters, he probably brought in a whole new cross-section of voters, many who didn't know the 'traditional' candidates or were encouraged to cast one vote for MacWithey, since his electoral strategy didn't depend so much upon the old formula.

I would say, with Francis out of the race, two 'traditional' candidates, and the fact that Tom Musselman knows many of the traditional voters (as well as many new ones) would make it seem like the 1 Vote group wouldn't be as high this year, but at the same time, I believe that the Musselman campaign has/will have contacted more people than in past year, due to the existence of an actual campaign structure, advertising, outreach, and the upcoming GOTV efforts. I feel an increase in voters helps Musselman and will be more likely to increase the 1 Vote Cast share.

NOTES: Fredericksburg City Council races have not run above 13% turnout in recent years, with some years being as low at 7% (there are about 7000 registered voters). In addition, all seats are at large, and there are no run-offs... the top two vote getters are elected. This is why the 1 Vote strategy can be beneficial because if there are three candidates, with the top one being a high voter getter, anyone casting dual votes for the 2nd and 3rd place candidates are not actually helping the 3rd place candidate, since they move up in tandem but still always the same number of votes below the 2nd place candidate. Therefore, core supporters of any candidate should be encouraged to cast 1 vote to have the greatest effect.

DeLay'd reaction

By Jim Dallas

The Houston Chronicle does a poll of the angry 22nd district.

Kuff, , Daily DeLay and the D-Trippers have more. And Hunter blogs on editorial reaction.

Meanwhile, those kooky anonymous GOP aides are once again cryptically foretelling more doom and gloom for the Bugman. The LA Times reports:

Until now, one House Republican leadership aide said, DeLay's problems have not been serious enough to distract the caucus from its efforts to push forward President Bush's legislative agenda.

"But it could very possibly become a distraction" in the coming week, said the aide, who also spoke on condition of anonymity.

Eagle to gray squirrel, eagle to gray squirrel...

Houtopia catches DeLay trying to mooch off of Bill White's popularity. That can't possibly be a good for either of them (ATTN: Mayor White, Don't DeLay, Run Away!).

What housing bubble?

By Jim Dallas

The econo-nerds have been going on about a housing bubble for quite a while now. But it's very selective -- indeed, almost all of the Texas home market is significantly undervalued (with San Antonio being at about par). Indeed, home prices in Beaumont are depressed as much as prices in New York City are inflated.

Granted, any hard-landing would be bad for all Americans. I'm curious, though, whether it will send prices here up, or down further.

(As someone who would like to be in the home-buying market in the next decade, this is starting to worry me. Will I be priced-out? or will I miss a chance to snatch up "once in a lifetime" property when it hits rock bottom?)

Peace Breaks Out in the Dallas County Democratic Party

By Byron LaMasters

The Dallas County Democratic Executive Committee met today at 2 PM at the Hall of State in Fair Park to continue the recessed meeting of February 28. The meeting was conducted in an orderly manner and most business was passed unanimously. The meeting was called to order by Precinct Chair Shannon Bailey shortly after 2 PM with a quorum present. Following the call to order current and former SDEC (State Democratic Executive Committee) members and former Party officers were invited to join the presiding officers in unison on the stage.

The first order of business was to appoint a temporary chair to chair the meeting. Precinct Chair Michael Moon was nominated and seconded, and was appointed unanimously as temporary chair to preside over the rest of the meeting. Finally, there was the opportunity to elect precinct chairs to many of the vacant seats and approximately sixty vacancies were filled. What many thought might be a controversial topic, a resolution to correct the congressional record passed unanimously. The executive committee asked that a letter be sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee to reflect that Susan Hays’s endorsement of a Republican Judge, Michael Schneider was hers alone and not authorized by the Dallas County Democratic Party Executive Committee.

There was some debate over when to elect a permanent chair (to serve the remainder of Susan Hays’s unexpired term), but it was decided to call a meeting within 45 days to allow time for candidates to campaign for the position. At this time, SDEC 16 member Theresa Daniel (and 2002 HD 107 nominee) was elected to serve as interim chair until a permanent chair was elected. Daniel also announced that she was not a candidate for permanent chair.

Also at the meeting, several elected officials had the opportunity to speak. State Sen. Royce West (D-Dallas) stressed the importance of the 2006 elections and urged party unity. State Rep. Terri Hodge (D-Dallas) thanked the members of the committee who recognized that there was a problem and for acting upon that problem, and looked forward to moving towards 2006 working together as “one, big, happy, dysfunctional family”. At the end of her speech, Hodge asked the entire committee to join her in supporting the party financially. Hodge personally wrote a check for $120, many others joined her, and by the end of the afternoon approximately $9000 was raised at the meeting for the Dallas County Democratic Party.

[Ed. Note. I did not attend this meeting. This account was compiled after speaking with numerous people who attended the meeting.]

SG Special Session: A Bust

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

In yet another abdication of duty, a number of Student Government Voting Representatives did not show up for today's special session to discuss the three remaining bills that were on the Table for this Assembly to deal with. 17 Reps did show, though 26 were needed for a quorum.

Tim has a mini-liveblog record of the event here.

Your President-Elect Omar Ochoa waltzed in after the meeting was over, and I have yet to hear if VP-elect Elizabeth Brummet showed at all. Both are also current Reps. Grant Stannis, lead quorum buster, wasn't there either. Luckily, Rep. Laura Gladney-Lemon asked for a roll call of those that were there, so as soon as I have my hands on that I can do a better post. It's sad, because this means that election reform is most likely dead. The next assembly isn't interested as far as I know. I can't wait to read Monday's Daily Texan which should have a nice piece on this with a twist, since the new Assembly is seating on Tuesday (and sworn in tomorrow if I'm correct).

UDs / CAD Endorse

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

Well today's 4 hour long endorsement meeting was fun. I'll cut to the chase and let you know the results.

Both the Univerisity Democrats and Central Austin Democrats endorsed Lee Leffingwell in Place 1, Betty Dunkerly in Place 4, and YES votes on the proposed Smoking Ban and ACC District Annexation.

CAD went to a run-off in Place 3 between Margot Clarke and Gregg Knaupe and endorsed Margot Clarke, though that wasn't a big suprise. UDems went to a run-off between Margot Clarke and Mandy Dealey and endorsed Mandy Dealey. A lot of people's votes shifted very late in UDems, for a variety of reasons, towards Dealey, and the runoff was not one decided by just a couple votes or anything.

Of course, I'm not allowed to release the vote totals of any of the balloting because UDems has this informal agreement of not allowing it, which is no where in the constitution and when push comes to shove, I'm sure could be a FOIA issue or something that probably is a tad illegal if anyone really cared. I might draw up some language to clarify it in the constitution to all the numbers to be public later on since it's always bugged me.

APC Endorsements

By Byron LaMasters

I liveblogged the meeting earlier today, but I shut off my computer shortly before voting took place. Here are the endorsements made today by the two organization:

University Democrats:
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Mandy Dealey
Place 4, Betty Dunkerly
Smoking Ban, YES
ACC Expansion, YES

Central Austin Democrats:
Place 1, Lee Leffingwell
Place 3, Margot Clarke
Place 4, Betty Dunkerly
Smoking Ban, YES
ACC Expansion, YES

All candidates and ballot initiatives except the Place 3 endorsees are also endorsed by the Austin Progressive Coalition, so if you live in Central Austin, you'll be getting your yellow doorhanger in the coming weeks.

The Place 3 race went into a run-off with both clubs. CAD had a run-off between Margot Clarke and Gregg Knaupe, which Clarke won easily. UD's had a run-off between Margot Clarke and Mandy Dealey, which Dealey won as many Clarke supporters only voted in Place 3 and left the meeting early.

Mexican Democracy Watch

By Jim Dallas

In about a year, Mexico will have its first post-PRI presidential election. Lindsay at Majikthise brings our attention to what may be a less-than-spectacular turn of events: the upcoming impeachment trial of Mexico City Mayor Andres Miguel Lopez Obrador.

The PRI and PAN both would benefit greatly if the PRD were wounded by scandal. While Mexico is now a two-and-a-half party system, with the PRI contesting the PAN in the north and the PRD in the south, my gut tells me this is ultimately an unstable arrangement, and the likely result is probably a two-party system. Which two parties, though, is a big question.

Vicente Fox, of course, is barred from re-election by Mexico's constitution.

Texas Democrats: A Statistical Profile

By Jim Dallas

Using the recently-released Edison/Mitofsky 2004 exit poll data (back-up | code-book | my Excel spreadsheet), a few interesting statistics about Texas Democrats can be constructed.

Exit polls are, of course, polls, so take with a grain of salt. I sure wish those urging that exit poll discrepancies prove voter fraud would take a chill-pill.

UPDATE: Some errors in the age tabs were fixed. The under 30 share of the Democratic vote is 20 percent, not 8 percent (8 percent is the 18-24 share).

The entire Texas electorate is summarized on the CNN web site, and my weighted numbers essentially match theirs (adjusting for rounding).

Numbers may not add up to 100 due to missing data, etc.

Democratic Voters (32.1% of total electorate, MoE 2.4%)

Presidential Vote:

Ideology/Philosophy (self-reported)

Gender:

Race/Ethnicity

Age

Size of Place

N: 577, Approx Margin of Error 4.2%

I'm not going to reproduce the Kerry and Liberal voter cross-tabs here, though I will note an odd quirk - 32 percent of self-identified "liberal" voters reported voting for Bush (approximate margin of error 6.5%).

The exit poll data contains a number of other interesting variables (region, religion, income, urban/rural, etc.) but I am busy working on a paper this weekend, and don't have the time to crunch those numbers.

Pope John Paul II Dies at 84

By Andrea Meyer

Well, it's official. The Pope has passed. Karol Jozef "Lolek" Wojtya has been an enigma as pope--contradictory, a man of changing views, but nonetheless a strong religious leader. For his unwavering faith, for the life he has lived, for the questions he has raised, I admire him.

I want to pick up with what Katie wrote the other day. I was raised Roman Catholic, and have spent just about my whole life with this pope. Before I begin, this is a rare topic for me to discuss--religion. I may discuss a couple of my beliefs, which I try never to do on a public forum. But I believe that an event of this magnitude warrants a break and discussion.

Although I have had my disagreements with the Catholic Church and this Pope, I admired this man, despite my misgivings on the social issues. He was an intellectual and was guided by unwavering faith and sincerity. His stances were taken because of personal conviction and a deep belief in what he believed was right, rather than political demagoguery and personal gain. I have often said that the Church needs to take the great leap put of the Middle Ages, and I believe this pope set that in motion. Hopefully, his successor will pick up where Pope John Paul II left off.

Pope John Paul II's passing is not merely the death of a pope. It is the end of an era of change and a search for truth. He was a truly unique leader in how he led our church. In this extended entry, I'll quote sources regarding this "Millenial Pope" who embraced our modern times and technology to reach out to people around the world and of other faiths. I can only write so much--I encourage all of you to read about Karol Wojtyla's Poland, because that is really the only way to understand the man himself.

Here is an excellent link, from which I have quoted.

What has made this Pope in particular so extraordinary? Perhaps a summary from Frontline will help put in perspective the enigma that was Pope John Paul II:

On the surface, John Paul II's faith seems contradictory:

He is a man of fierce Catholic emotion and sensibility: passionately devoted to the Virgin Mary and the saints, attentive to--and accepting of --the miraculous and the inexplicable. At the same time, he is a professional modern philosopher, defending the capacity of the human intelligence and profoundly respectful of the scientific quest for truth.
He believes in absolute truth and absolute moral values, and yet he has devoted his entire efforts as a moral philosopher to the modern notions of experience and subjectivity.

He passionately defends the rights of the individual and just as passionately defends ancient dogmas that seem to restrict that freedom.

His birthday should have been a sign--May 18th, 1920, in Wadowice, Poland-- a day called The Polish Miracle, a day of Polish military victory, which briefly restored Poland's independence. A bit of irony, as the Pope would eventually speak out against war.

His notable relationship with the Jewish community is complicated, and worth writing about. Growing up, his best friend was Jewish. He never exhibited anti-Semitic behavior, although his hometown did have some feelings to that regard prior to the Nazi invasion. He witnessed the murders of Jews in public, and noticed the deafening silence of the Catholic Church. He helped Jews as an individual, but was not part of any underground movement. He was present at the Vatican II Council, and was the voice of reason in that debate--that Jews did not kill Christ, therefore the church should try to repair the relationship between the two religions. His own feelings were projected outside of Poland until he was Pope--perhaps his fear of retribution led to silence, as anti-Semitism was alive and well in Poland for decades following the war.

He was the first pope to visit a mosque and synagogue. He was politically involved, and supported the workers on strike in Gdansk in 1980. His opposition to Poland's martial law was made clear via radio broadcast in 1981. He played a strong role in ending the cold war. Although he championed free speech and church political activism in Poland, he was tough on those members of the Church in Latin America who took part in politics. However, he later brokered peace in Latin America, and helped destroy right-wing dictatorships.Here is a link regarding Latin America.

His views changed constantly, however, as his trip to Cuba would prove. A strident anti-Communist, he praised Cubans for retaining their faith, yet had kind words for some tenets of Socialism. He spoke out against the death penalty and the War in Iraq, but is against abortion and women in the priesthood. While embracing politics championed by liberals, he also has a conservative outlook on gender politics.

In short, although the Pope had his shortcomings, in my opinion (regarding his views on choice, birth control and condom use, women's issues, and the virtual silence from the Vatican regarding the child molestation scandal in the U.S.), he raised questions and issues that warrant further discussion as the Church evolves. He used mass media tools to reach out to the masses, and had a profound respect for science. This pope was a complicated man, and although I wish I could touch upon every aspect of his life and times, that is impossible at the moment. He was a modern pope, as far as the Church is concerned, yet held tightly onto old beliefs and dogma. So, I will leave as I began, with a quote from Frontline:

If the contradictions in his life and faith are due to something that he has failed to grasp, Pope John Paul II has been a tragic figure indeed. But if they are due to something we fail to grasp, then the inability to understand him has been our tragedy.

Liveblogging the APC/UD/CAD Endorsement Meeting

By Byron LaMasters

I'm liveblogging the joint city council endorsement meeting of the Austin Progressive Coalition, University Democrats and Central Austin Democrats. Andrew is sitting next to me, so he'll be adding some thoughts later as well. Also liveblogged at Alert The Inter.net.

10:55 AM: The forum started with the place 1 candidates.

Andrew Bucknall spoke first and was well received. He emphasized his work as President of the Huston-Tullitson University Democrats and with the Martin Luther King neighborhood association. Bucknall said that he was the “grassroots progressive” choice for place 1 and served in various other capacity.

Next Lee Leffingwell spoke about his background also as a lifelong Democrat, his military experience, and his passion for environmental protection. Leffingwell also spoke of the need for greater mass transit with an emphasis on light rail and bike lanes. He also noted the need to better fund city services. Finally, Leffingwell noted that every city Democratic club except for the H-T young Democrats had endorsed him.

Casey Walker spoke as a lifelong Austin resident, and spoke much on student issues. Walker noted his endorsement of toll road opponents and Independent Texans.

11:14: First question for Walker. Says that he is a registered Indepdent (ed. Note, there is no party registration in Texas). However, he noted that he voted for John Kerry

Question two for Leffingwell on his involvement with the ACLU’s project on banned books. Leffingwell worked with the ACLU to issue a report on banned books in public schools in Texas and says that it has been a great experience.

Smoking ban. Leffingwell opposes the idea, but says he is taking no public position. Bucknall and Walker oppose the ban as well.

Last question on what issues are most critical to students. Tuition and public education and mentioned as the major issues by all candidates.

11:35: Margot Clarke spoke first. Speaks of Austin background and experience with non-profit advocacy. She stresses her involvement with Planned Parenthood, League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra club. States her Democratic credentials and of her canvassing in Ohio for John Kerry in the 2004 election. Speaks of investing in the future of the city, cleaner air and water, etc. States her endorsements notably Democratic one.

Mandy Dealey starts off with a laugh that she’s the first candidate here that was not a native Austinite, but that she got here as quickly as she could. Mandy is also wearing burnt orange and said that she hoped that it would send a subliminable message – to quote our president. Dealey speaks of how welcoming Austin was for her and her son many years ago. Dealey was proud of her involvement with the local and national boards of Planned Parenthood. Dealey also spoke of work with the mental health association. She long-range planning, problem solving, consensus building and developing a budget.

Jennifer Kim spoke next. She spoke of her work on environmental protection for state sen. Judith Zafferini (D-Laredo). She stated that this work in poor minority communities around the boarder was extremely rewarding. Also mentions her work on affordable housing. She mentions her work in former East Germany in the U.S. state department as part of her diverse level of experience. She wants more affordable housing for Austin. Mentions the aquifer as an important reason for the need to have an important relationship with the legislature.

Gregg Knaupe spoke last. Said that he came to Austin in 1987 and fell in love with the city. Mentions his work for State Rep. Barry Telford and his work on the 1990 Ann Richards as evidence that he is a lifelong Democrats. Stresses the importance of dealing with Austin’s growth in order to prevent people from being left out or left behind – strategic land use planning. Mentions that he works for the Texas Hospital Association as a lawyer. Notes his emphasis on health care work. Mentions his federal, statewide and local experience on various issues in addition to health care, notably affordable housing.

Question for Gregg Knaupe for his support of Prop 12 in 2003 on tort reform. Knaupe stated that he voted against Prop 12, and has problems with it, but the Hospital District had it on their agenda. Another question for Knaupe regarding Austin Police Department allegedly funneling money through the Real Estate Council spending money in his campaign. Knaupe said that he was unaware of what activities APD would be engaged in, and told the questioner that he would have to ask APD.

Next question was on the smoking ban. Kim is voting for the smoking ban. Dealey supports smoking ban as does Clarke. Knaupe doesn’t really answer the question. Says that he’ll support the will of the people.

Andrew asked if any candidates were supported by the Austin Toll Party which is seeking to recall elected Democratic officials. Dealey, Knaupe and Kim state that they have not been supported by the Austin Toll Party. Clake says that she opposes the recall efforts, but opposes toll roads and is proud to stand up against it.

12:17 PM: I started to drift off as the q&a continued on for awhile. Place 3 is completed, Place 4 is starting now with Betty Dunkerly, Jennifer Gale and John Wickham.

Dunkerly speaks first. She is running for re-election. States her background in city governments in Beaumont and Austin. She said that her experience prepared her to make the tough decisions during the recent economic downturn by cutting the budget and keeping the tax rate the lowest of any major city in Texas.

Jennifer Gale spoke next wearing a yellow shirt with Martin Luther King on it. She attacked David Butts and the Chamber of Commerce for supporting Betty Dunkerly. She attacked Wes Benedict (who was not even present) for working for the Libertarian Party. She attacks Butts again and the light rail system. Jennifer Gale certainly adds comic relief to these type of things. Once again, today, she has not disappointed. At the end she also attacked the GLBT community for supporting candidates that do not support them. I’ll be asking a question in that regard.

John Whickham spoke next. If someone was listening, post it in comments.

It was asked if the candidates were Democrats. Dunkerly stated that she supported many Democrats and Democratic causes but is an Independent. Gale mentioned that she ran for Congress as a Democrats. Wickham said that she was a swing voter.

I told Jennifer Gale that I was a board member of the Austin Gay and Lesbian Political Caucus, an organization that has endorsed Dunkerly. I asked if she was aware that candidates were required to fill out a questionnaire in order to speak before the organization. She attacked the organization as mean-spirited and urged candidates in the future not to attend their meetings.

Next question was on the smoking ban. Dunkerly will vote for the ban. Gale mentioned that smoking kills, but sought compromise. She complained that no one listened to her.

12:33 PM: Next was the debate on the smoking ban. David Butts spoke against the ban. Butts said the human costs of covering uninsured people of lung cancer was much higher than the amount of fees that could potentially be collected by fees. Next a small business owner with a punk rock club spoke against the ban. He stated that he didn’t smoke, but that the vast majority of his customers did. Next was a question regarding second hand smoke. The business owner stated that second hand smoke did not necessarily cause lung cancer – the same argument made by decades by cigarette manufacturers.

The Pope's Last Days

By Katie Naranjo

First, thank you for the lovely picture KT. I love you dearly.

No matter what religion you are, or if you are not religious, everyone can appreciate another's religious leader. Pope John Paul II, has been announced to be in the final stages of his life. Vatican officials made statements today that the Pope is deteriorating very fast and has grown very week. Although I am not Catholic, I have seen many great decisions fulfilled by this Pope. In the upcoming weeks, if the Pope does leave this Earth the process of selecting the new Pope will begin. The Vatican officials have warned the cardinals that a conclave might occur sooner then they expected. So key yours eyes peeled, for the next Pope and think about the current Pope too.

For more: http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/01/pope1/index.html

Gene Seaman's Priorities

By Byron LaMasters

State Rep. Gene Seaman (R-Corpus Christi) certainly has his priorities in the state house. Are they yours? Watch the ad here (warning, probably not the best thing to open up at work). Practice What you Preach issued a press release today:

Today Practice What You Preach, a mainstream PAC organized around the notion that putting an existing ban on same-sex marriage into the Texas Constitution would be a hypocritical diversion from the clear and present dangers to the institution of marriage, today released ³Tool,² a web ad that shows a Republican state representative who voted to ban gay marriage imitating an erection on the House floor.

³I refuse to take marriage lessons from anyone who thinks it is a good idea to imitate an erection on the floor of the legislature,² said Jason Stanford, president of the Practice What You Preach PAC. ³Changing the constitution so that something that is now illegal won¹t happen will do as much to protect marriage as imitating erections does to reform insurance, taxing cookies does to make us all skinny, or taxing lap dances does to fund public schools.²

Texas Republicans have either done or attempted to do all of those things in the last couple of years.

On Monday, the House State Affairs Committee will hear testimony on HJR 6, a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage, something state law already does.

Practice What You Preach envisions offering other ads on other representatives if the Republican leadership pushes for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

³The Republican leadership has to decide how many of their seats they are willing to lose over this,² said Stanford, a married father of two sons. ³It¹s time to make the Republicans pay a political price for using marriage as a wedge issue.²

Practice What You Preach is soliciting contributions to air ³Tool² in Corpus Christi (Gene Seaman¹s district). Saturating the media market would cost $22,000 at $22 a point, meaning the PAC has to raise at least $220 to get it on the air once.

City Council Update

By Karl-Thomas Musselman

First, here is a semi-live blog post about Wednesday's Place 3 City Council Forum thanks to Tim.

As far as the forum went. It changed minds. For a race that has has 4 great candidates, it is certainly hard to set them apart. But the forum certainly rearragned my own choices, though I have some commentary about all the candidates. (btw, 25 members joined last night and voting membership is now locked thanks to our little Constitutional Amendment that was passed for this endorsement.)

Commentary below the fold!!!

Margot Clarke- If there is any candidate in this race that provides what I can call a "vision" it's Margot. It's not too hard to tell that when it comes down to it, Community and the Austin flavor are at the heart of any decision that she might make. It's comforting to know as easily as it is with Margot where her heart it, so even if I don't know how she might vote on any specific proposal, and have a sense of where she is coming from. Granted, that shouldn't be a reason to vote for a candidate by itself (see the case with Republicans and Bush), but it's nice to see in a Democrat for once. Margot has been a friend of University Democrats for a long time and certainly has support there. The big question this week is how much of the membership are naturally Margot supporters or how many Margot supporters are now suddenly part of the membership...

Mandy Dealey- If anyone was a winner of last night's forum, it was Dealey. For someone who made horrible first impressions with UDems (in her frantic, hair ruffling, my car might get towed speech) last night she connected with and audience of students (even though she's the senior candidate in the race) and came across as quite motherly. Her responses showed her depth of knowledge of the issue, as well as how she might go about solving particular problems. Her clear statement that the Smoking Ban was a public health issue, plain and simple was a total plus for me as well as her concept of a Commission of Students from area Universities to work, dialouge, and interface with the Council was awesome, and if that was an on the spot idea, even more so. All semester long I didn't think I would ever be tempted by the Dealey campaign, but that changed last night as she swayed more than one officer's vote and a number of the members.

Jennifer Kim- From the very beginning I have been a supporter of Ms. Kim. I'm not one to turn away from candidates just because they are new, young, or it's "not their time". I can tell that she's doing this for the right reasons and no matter what happens, I hope to see her name on the ballot somewhere once again. But I was a bit disappointed last night, because what I saw as youth, fresh ideas, and enthusiasm, gave way to unpreparedness and a bit of nervousness on the understanding of some issues. I would have appreciated an "I don't have enough information on that issue to give an appropriate response" to some questions than what I heard, though that goes for a couple candidates at various times. People have been challenging me all semester as to having a good reason to vote Kim over others. I have been waiting for that reason, and I do not believe I was given one last night.

Gregg Knaupe- I've been a bit hard on the Knaupe campaign here on BOR. Gregg came off well at the forum, though he has a John Kerry-esqe ability for loooong answers, running over his time limit on almost every question. It wouldn't be so bad if it also weren't for the policy wonkish density of his answers, which would be great in front of the business crowd, but not a UDems Forum. Though his (and Kim's) respecting the choice of the voters on the smoking ban is a cop-out (and likely signal that they are opposed to it) it fits with his pro-business campaign.

But it still feels like the Knaupe campaign is just another Brewster McCracken/Will Wynn white male business guy snoozefest that is attempting to attract support from Liberal organizations to balance his otherwise more moderate background. Come on, he worked for the Texas Hospital Association (compared to a more progressive groups like Planned Parenthood, Sierra Club, etc. like Margot or Dealey). He didn't lose any support last night, but I don't think he gained any either.