If you want see how tough things are getting for the children, parents, teachers and administrators who are all trying to make Texas schools work, I'd like to point you to one thing:
Last Thursday.
Or, more specifically, the schoolnews that bubbled up on Thursday. It was a harrowing day.
The bad news didn’t start last week, of course. It dates back in part to last year’s legislative session, when those in control of the state’s budget decided to slash about $4 billion – I say again, FOUR BILLION DOLLARS – from what local school districts were promised and needed to pay for increasing costs and numbers of students.
Now, $4,000,000,000 is a big number. It’s tough to get your arms around all of those zeros – particularly when legislating is all mixed up with politicking, and when ostensible leaders are running around the state and the country ignoring or denying the damage they’ve caused to our kids and Texas’ future.
The problems are huge, too. Hundreds of Texas school districts have sued the state in an effort to create a better and more fairly funded system. That in itself is extraordinary – those in control of the Capitol have so bungled their responsibilities to our kids that local school boards have been forced to bypass their representatives, senators, Governor and Lieutenant Governor and startasking judges to clean up the mess (more on this later).
Inevitably, the human costs of misplaced priorities were going to surface. A lot of them came up late last week.
Dallas: School closures
Let’s start off in Dallas, where Dallas ISD trustees voted Thursday to shutter 11 schools.
The decision was teed up by the legislature’s budget cut – Dallas ISD had already cut $76 million from the current budget, according to the Dallas Morning News, “largely by offering employees incentives to resign and increasing class sizes.”
But despite that fairly extreme action, the board still had to cut another $38 million for next year. And, as one trustee put it, either the 11 schools had to be closed, or 171 teachers would have had to be fired.
Heck of a choice for anyone who cares about helping kids learn.
You can read more about it in this article (subscription required) or get a blow-by-blow from this blog.
South Texas: No sports
Also on Thursday, the Texas Tribune brought word of the tiny Premont ISD in South Texas, a district of 570 students that was already struggling. Then those in control of the state’s purse strings yanked more than $400,000 out from under the district – which, as the article points out, was already among the most poorly funded districts in Texas.
So, again, faced with a handful of very painful options, the district went for a clearly radical approach that, it hopes, will nevertheless cause the least amount of damage – it put all sports programs on hold for a year.
In the article, some students raise the prospect of fleeing Premont for a district that continues to field teams. Others clearly worry about losing the activity that helped keep them out of trouble.
But most students and parents, it seems, are resigned to the decision. After all, given the circumstances, what else can the district do?
The Houston Chronicle followed up over the weekend with a great column looking at funding inequities among Texas school districts. It showed that districts rated "exemplary" by the state receive over $1,000 more, per student, than those rated "academically unacceptable."
If you're looking at the students thatdistricts are working the hardest to teach – and the costs of meeting those kids' needs – the numbers are even more sobering. Just 17 percent of the kids in exemplary districts qualify for free-and-reduced lunch programs (based on federal poverty guidelines), the column said. In academically unacceptable districts, that figure's around 85 percent.
Keep those numbers in mind if someone – particularly someone who's part of the power structure at the Capitol – tries to lay the blame for these problems on Premont or other victims of the state's school finance system.
Texas: A broken system
That equity issue was the focus of an editorial by James "Kal" Kallison, the president of the Eanes ISD school board, that the Austin American-Statesman published on its website Thursday.
The editorial goes into some detail about the lawsuits I mentioned earlier that school districts are pursuing against the state. You should read the whole thing, which you can find here. This, to me, is the key passage:
“School districts represented in two of the lawsuits believe that ... the finance system still does not produce complete equity among districts. Regardless of the equity issue, most districts do agree that the current amount of revenue ... afforded to all districts in the state is simply not enough to provide for an adequate education of our children, as required by the Texas Constitution and defined in statute.”
Those questions – whether the school finance system is equitable, and whether it’s adequate to educate the children of Texas – are going to be litigated over many months, and it’ll probably be more than a year before the courts finally settle the issue.
But after a day like Thursday – after seeing so many of the issues that our schools have been left to deal with – does anyone believe that the state’s doing right by our schools and our kids?
Austin: The achievement gap
Finally, in Austin, business and civic leaders sat down at a summit on Thursday to talk over the state of early childhood education, particularly pre-kindergarten programs.
Of course, Pre-K has become one of the most important factors that educators look at in gauging how successful students will be. The numbers show that kids who show up to kindergarten with basic language, problem-solving and other skills are far more likely to pass achievement tests in later years – and far less likely to drop out of high school.
So what did those in control of the Capitol do with this inside knowledge about what works in education?
They ignored it. They eliminated a critical grant program and the $200 million it would have contributed tomake Pre-K programs stronger and more accessible across the state.
It was a devastating decision – and that devastation was front-and-center atthe business and civic leader summit Thursday. There, the United Way Capital Area discussed results of a report it produced as part of its "Success by 6"initiative.
The report found that for children as young as 3 – barely older than babies – an achievement gap already can be seen between kids from low-income families and students as a whole.
As the Statesman summarized, “Fifty-two percent of Central Texas children entering kindergarten are ready for school, according to the results. But in Dove Springs, Manor and Quail Creek [three generally low-income neighborhoods that were studied for the project], the proportion considered well-prepared for school ranged from 12 to 15 percent.”
It's a giant problem. All of these stories demonstrate giant problems. And the problems will only grow as this cruel budget and broken finance system settle over the parents, teachers and administrators who are trying to cope with it all.
So the worst thing about Thursday might not even be Thursday. It might be that there'll be more days like it.
(This week's Watson Wire was particularly solid. If you're not getting the Watson Wire, you should be. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
K. R. "Doc" Vanderslice was a true cowboy. He was also my maternal grandpa.
He grew up in Northwest Oklahoma working as a cowboy. When I was a kid, my brother Kyle and I spent time on his place getting to do "cowboy" stuff.
Grandpa was a cattle guy. I don't recall him ever having a goat and am certain he never thought too highly of what my mother called "goat ropers."
Now, most folks know that a "goat rope" refers to a big fiasco and mess. While he never would have allowed his grandsons to participate in a real goat rope, Grandpa did get a kick out of putting us in situations that led to utter chaos, particularly when he was partnering with my dad. Those two loved to make each other laugh, including at the expense of their progeny.
One of my strongest memories is of being 6 or 7 (heck, I might have been all of 8), when Grandpa had picked up a new Shetland pony named Dusty. Somehow, it was decided that I'd be perfect to "break" the horse.
I chased that mean little jackass of a horse around the corral, occasionally caught him without help, and tried to avoid getting bit as I fought to crawl on his back. Every time, over and over, he'd jump and buck and throw me hard to the ground.
All the while, as I'd get up, I'd look to Daddy and Grandpa, two men I loved who were, uh, keeping an eye on me – probably to make sure I didn't get hurt, but certainly to have a little fun, too. They were ceaselessly encouraging (and not just a little teasing), telling me "You almost had him that time," or "I think he's worn out," or "Hang on. You'll get it."
But, no, this was a goat rope, only with a pony. It had all the signs:
It went on forever and seemed to get worse and worse.
There was no end in sight.
Nothing seemed to work.
What I thought I knew one time didn't work the next time.
I couldn't figure out what success was supposed to look like.
It really hurt.
I was covered in filth and it stunk.
A goat rope with, y'know, democracy.
But this Watson Wire isn’t about cowboys or dubious moments of family history. No, this is about redistricting. (If that's the sort of rapid change of subject that makes you feel like you've been bucked from a horse, well, as Doc Vanderslice would say, "Just hang on. You'll get it.”)
Redistricting is the process of redrawing lines for districts represented by state legislators, Congressional reps, and other elected officials. Basically, people move out of one place and into another, so district lines have to shift with the population (legally every 10 years, though you can try doing it more often depending on how little shame you have) to make sure that an elected official represents about as many constituents as his or her colleagues.
If that sounds boring and technical, well, that’s probably how it should be. The problem is that it’s a very political exercise – always has been – that can affect which political party controls a particular legislative delegation or chamber. So things have a way of getting unpleasant and nonsensical really fast.
And that’s before the folks running the redistricting process in the Texas Capitol decided to make this goat rope even more messy.
Take this redistricting. Please!
Last year, the Texas legislature passed maps for state senators and representatives in its regular legislative session, and passed another map for Congressional representatives in a special session.
A number of us argued at the time, over and over, that the maps frequently failed to allow minority voters in some parts of Texas to elect candidates of their choice. Those in control ignored us.
The state, which is required by the federal Voting Rights Act to get preclearance before using the new maps, had a choice to seek approval from either the U.S. Department of Justice or a three-judge federal court in Washington, DC. The state chose to seek this preclearance from the court instead of the Department of Justice.
At the same time, some folks sued the state, claiming – quite persuasively – that some parts of the maps violate the U.S. Voting Rights Act. That case ended up being before a different three-judge federal district court in San Antonio. So the Texas redistricting process was falling apart in two federal courtrooms about 1,500 miles away from each other.
The DC federal court denied the state's request for a quick, summary decision approving the maps. It said that the court needed more time to investigate if there was discriminatory intent or effect, and that there needed to be a full trial to do so.
The court opinion said the state needs to use a more comprehensive definition of what it means for a group of minority voters to have the "ability to elect" the candidate of their choice. The full trial finally started last week. It's still going on and won't wrap up for a while.
Then, last fall, the federal judges in San Antonio – sensing that the legislative maps would not be approved or denied in time for Texas' 2012 primary elections – drew some so-called "interim maps." That shuffled all of the timelines for when candidates have to file for office and even required new election dates.
And last week, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the maps that the San Antonio federal judges drew – yes, the same maps that replaced the not-quite-legal maps that those in control of the legislature drew. The Supreme Court sent the San Antonio judges back to the drawing board.
Good news and bad news
But there was some good news: the Supreme Court ordered the judges to keep Voting Rights Act-related concerns in mind as they work through this. That’s a big deal, because some had worried that the Supreme Court would use this case to throw out vital portions of the Voting Rights Act. That doesn’t seem likely to happen at this point.
The bad news, however, is that almost everything else is up in the air right now, particularly when it comes to this year’s legislative and Congressional elections:
We basically have no maps.
Thus, if you live in Texas, you have no way to know for sure who you’ll be voting on this year to represent you in the legislature or in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The primary elections, which had already been postponed from March until April, now probably can’t be held until sometime after that – unless both of the courts in San Antonio and Washington really hustle.
The whole mess is now split between a court in San Antonio, which is trying to draw interim maps that the Supreme Court will like, and the court in Washington DC, which is evaluating the legislatively drawn maps in the context of the Voting Rights Act and trying to figure out a permanent solution.
I’m missing Daddy, Grandpa and even Dusty right about now.
(Tremendous initiative by State Senator Kirk Watson. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
Earlier today, I delivered a speech declaring that it’s time for a medical school, teaching hospital and research institute in Austin. I also outlined the process I’m proposing to finally get it done after all these years, as well as the group I’ve put together to lead the effort.
Below, you'll see the text of the first part of the speech, along with links to other sections of it (for a full version, go here).
This is going to be a long effort involving a whole lot of people. But the economic and quality-of-life payoff, for Austin and all of Central Texas, would be enormous. I hope you’ll keep an eye on it, help with it, and join this community effort to make this long-sought vision a reality.
(A great piece from Austin's Senator. - promoted by Phillip Martin)
For 140 days, Texas' budget writers leaned on the glue and duct tape of gimmickry and denial, trying to patch up the state's rickety budget and school finance system.
Those in control of the Legislature waited until the last minute to finish their project. And as some of our state's seventh-grade teachers could have warned them, they didn't get it done in time. So now they're back in a special legislative session, trying to keep schools across Texas from shutting down next fall.
But let's be clear: The proposals now before the Legislature don't adequately fund our schools. Any theoretical good was undone by a stubborn refusal to put the priorities of Texas first - or keep the state's promise to fund Texas schools and our children's future.
The legislation attempts to hide a failure that dates back to 2006, when those in control cynically promised Texans a tax cut but refused to do the harder work of cutting spending or replacing the lost revenue. It opened a multibillion-dollar hole in the state's finances - one that we'd all have fallen into two years ago without billions of dollars in federal stimulus money.
But that bailout is long gone, and the state's about $4 billion short of what schools need to cope with more students and escalating costs. It's the first time in known state history that Texas hasn't paid for enrollment growth.
Faced with that $4 billion debt to our schools, those in control have come up with a novel scheme. They refuse to reform the broken funding system. They fail to relieve the pain of cuts, some of which are necessary, by using reserve funds that are set aside for just this sort of situation. They allow tax loopholes for special interests. And they compromise the education for a generation of Texas schoolchildren.
The bills before the special legislative session make the broken system permanent by ignoring promises made to local districts. They unilaterally redefine the state's obligation for funding schools and just call it the new normal. They attempt to cover up the state's unwillingness to meet its responsibility, throwing a rug over the cracked foundation of our state's budget.
So who's on the hook for the $4 billion broken promise? You are. Your kids may be packed into bigger classes, their teachers may be laid off, or your property taxes may go up. Unlike the Legislature, districts can't just push their obligations onto others. They have to be accountable.
Most Texas districts would lose money under that plan. Austin ISD alone (not counting another recent round of federal aid), would lose more than $90 million over the next two years.
The debate is simply over how to spread the pain among our children - choosing which students and schools will suffer more than others, and deciding which communities have to lay off teachers and which ones "only" have to eliminate important educational programs.
But the problems run much deeper than the special session or certain bills. They're products of a budget system that's been tainted for years by debt, diversions and deception. The legislation simply creates another deceptive, 10-figure deficit - even as the Legislature continues to divert around $4.5 billion from its promised purposes to make the books balance, and it blatantly misrepresents things like the state's Medicaid obligations.
Sadly, it's possible the only good thing about the special session is that, unlike the frenzied final week of the regular session, Texans can take a couple of days to see what's in the bills. They can talk with school and business leaders about what the bills would mean in the short term and the long run. They can write letters, testify before committees and make it clear that legislators must not break their promises to our schools, our children and our state's future.
As many of you know, every ten years, states redraw their state and federal legislative districts to reflect new census data. What you may not be as familiar with is our infamous redistricting history in Texas.
The most recent, and probably most egregious, attempt at redistricting happened in 2003. We are still recovering from that battle.
Now, it's time for Texas to redistrict according to the new census numbers. So, even facing a deep budget hole and a typical set of legislative battles, we have to tackle redistricting, too.
Let's Get Into the Details
The Texas House of Representatives has 150 members, while the Texas Senate has 31 members. Each of those members' districts must be drawn with almost exactly the same number of people. According to census information, each Senate district should have around 811,147 people. To put that number in perspective, each Texas Senate district will have more residents than the states of Wyoming, Vermont, or Alaska. Each Texas House District should have 167,637 people after redistricting.
Unlike the number of Congressional Districts (which can increase or decrease based on the rate of population growth in Texas relative to the rest of the country), the number of Texas Senate districts is set at 31. So, as the population of Texas increases, the number of people within each Senate district also increases.
Simply dividing the districts evenly by population, of course, isn't very hard. Doing so in a way that is legal, and that fairly reflects Texas regional and political views as well as its historic communities of interest, is another matter. To get more information on Texas redistricting, visit: www.kirkwatson.com.
I told you last week about a letter I wrote on the budget – and some basic fiscal information that I'm having a surprisingly hard time getting.
Now, this is important stuff. It’s information we absolutely should have so we can get started working on what’s sure to be a tough, tough budget next year.
But, to be honest, it's a little ... well, dry. So I assumed that a lot of folks just wouldn't pay much attention.
Well, a reporter asked the Governor about the letter, and he responded, "It sounds like a Bih-Zaar request."
Bih-Zaar, of course, is the stage name that the Governor's been encouraging me to take. I guess he thinks that if folks equate budget accountability with Top 40 radio, then more people will pay attention to this issue.
I wouldn't have thought it would work, frankly. But, sure enough, after he announced the request came from Bih-Zaar, it was in the newspapers all week. So I guess I owe him one.
Now, some folks were confused and thought he said "bizarre." Easy mistake to make.
But I know better. Because, I mean, he wouldn't have been rapping a straightforward, substantive request for basic budget information in the midst of what he calls "a major financial crisis," right?
He wouldn't be dissing a request that Texas government be open and accountable to the taxpayers, right?
And he surely wouldn't be blowing off the most basic sort of financial information that so many worried Texas families and businesses themselves are poring over right now ...
Right?
The REAL news out of last week
All kidding aside, suffice it to say that I really didn’t expect that letter to make as much news as it did last week. But I’m glad it did – we’ve seen a good, overdue conversation about the budget over the last few days, and it’ll continue as this information I’ve requested starts to surface.
I’ve compiled several of the stories about the letter – and the budget-related news that came out of it – in the newsroom at my web site. Click here to get there.
But more than any of that, let’s all step back and focus on a couple of things that might have gotten lost in the politics, knee-jerk rhetoric, and trash talk that went on last week:
1. The language in the Texas Constitution sure seems plain and pretty easy to understand: supplemental revenue statements “shall be submitted ... at other such times as may be necessary to show probable changes” to the estimate on which our current budget was written – an estimate that was released almost two years ago.
If those in control of our budget and our government believe that, given all we know about Texas’ increasingly troubled finances, this provision doesn’t require the Comptroller (the state's elected Chief Financial Officer) to provide a supplemental revenue estimate, then they owe it to the people of Texas to explain their interpretation of that language.
After all, even with the bobbing, weaving, and dancing around that we're seeing right now, we know these sorts of statements have been issued in the past. In fact, back in 1986, when the bottom fell out of the oil industry and gutted the state’s economy, then-Comptroller Bob Bullock twice revised his revenue estimate so Texans and their elected officials could ALL know what they were facing. So there’s precedent, and it’s a good one to follow.
2. Texans are getting very mixed messages about what we’re facing. On one hand, the Comptroller is still saying she doesn’t plan to provide this update I seek on the state’s fiscal situation.
Yet she already has alerted Wall Street to huge changes in state revenue from what the budget was built on – only she’s done it rather quietly and extremely technically.
That said, the pool of money known as General Revenue – which helps pay for our schools, colleges, and most basic state government services – appears to have closed out the fiscal year at least a couple billion dollars in the red (according to projections given last month to bond rating agencies).
That overdrawn account was most likely covered by balances in funds that were created specifically to clean up our air, improve trauma care, lower utility bills, fix up our parks, and pay for other specific services that are important to taxpayers. We all need to know the true status of these specifically dedicated funds, and whether the money that people think is there for these critical missions actually is there.
Our troubles are snowballing. As I noted in the letter, the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee – who’s in a position to know these things – has said the current 2010-11 budget may end up as much as $4.5 billion in the red. That deficit could require the legislature to pour billions of dollars back into this year’s budget simply to make it through 2011.
And it's now said that the full budget shortfall facing the legislature may be as much as $20 billion ... or even more.
It’s unfathomable to me that the legislature will convene in four months facing this breathtaking problem, which will afflict both the current budget and the next one, and the state won’t be transparent enough – right now – to turn over this most basic information so we can stop trying to guess what the problem is and start really working to try to solve it.
In dodging this issue, the Governor said that we don't need updated numbers when "somebody pokes their head up out of a hole and asks for them." Well, it's a pretty deep hole. And it may be deeper than we think.
(By the way, I'm not sure I'm tall enough to poke my head out of a hole that's $20 billion deep.)
Less talk, more info
We're seeing an aggressive refusal to provide basic budget information.
But here’s the deal: people can say whatever they want in an obvious attempt to demean my request. But that doesn’t answer anything.
It doesn’t provide any information about this disaster we know is coming. It fails to provide any reasonable explanation – one based on good financial or business practices – of why it makes sense to not provide this information.
And it does nothing – nothing at all – to help us solve this problem.
Since I was elected to the Senate, I've been proud to be a strong advocate for demanding budget accountability. This is an issue that unites all taxpayers and all Texans.
It isn't about politics. It's the right thing to do – to do the budget right.
And the only thing that’s “bizarre” about any of this is the reluctance to provide basic information and accountable government at a time when we know we're facing an unstable financial condition.
(More on Rick Perry's state budget mess. - promoted by Phillip Martin)
Somehow, about three months ago, I won a roughly 31-year, um, "discussion" with Liz and bought myself a motorcycle.
I'm not sure precisely how I prevailed. I sort of feel like I'm missing something. She may have secretly bought some extra life insurance on me and sees herself winning either way.
Even though I haven't ridden since high school, I took the required safety course and got my license. In fact, I missed just three on the test – and I believe the state is totally wrong about one that they say I missed.
I'm having lots of fun, and I've learned a lot that I think actually makes me a better car driver. For example, I follow what are called the "two, four and 12 second rules." As in:
-- Always keep at least a two-second following distance between you and the vehicle in front of you.
-- Be sure you have at least four seconds to react in case something unexpected invades your immediate path.
-- And always scan everything in your anticipated path, using a 12-second count, so you know everything you can about the road, weather and traffic.
In other words, don't ride that motorcycle blindly. Evaluate all the information you have so that you are prepared and making good decisions.
(Arguably the most significant rule I've learned, though, is to always either wear a jacket or tuck in my shirt if I'm riding at highway speeds. I recently was on Highway 290 in an untucked shirt. Before I knew it, the wind had caused the shirt to ride up to just below my "pecs," leaving most of my upper torso exposed. I was all out there. Let's just say that I'm not the "Fat Boy" people are supposed to think of when it comes to motorcycles.)
Writing and Riding
Last Wednesday, Sept. 1, was the first day of the state’s Fiscal Year 2011. And since our budgets run two years at a time (September 1 to August 31), we’re now just past halfway through the 2010-11 budget that the legislature approved way back in May 2009.
I celebrated the new year without champagne, although I admit to wanting a drink. Instead, I sent a letter to get some very important information about Texas’ finances and fiscal shape.
Think of it as a search to see whether the state is following basic common sense – the equivalent of two, four and 12-second rules for budget writing. We need to know our budget road conditions.
After all, we're riding (or writing) in the context of a state government enterprise doing more than $90 billion a year in business. Around $182 billion each biennium.
The economy is about as unstable and insecure as any of us have ever seen.
And you can hardly read anything about state government without some expert talking about how tough the next couple of years are going to be on the budget.
In other words, we're facing some dangerous, rough terrain with lots of things coming at us and unexpectedly moving around us.
And we really, really, seriously need to not crash.
Happy Fiscal New Year (except for the "Happy" part)
So I rang in the fiscal new year requesting that the Texas Comptroller (the state’s elected Chief Financial Officer) provide some details about the revenue shortfall we’re likely to face in this current budget and the structural deficit that seems all-but-certain in 2012-13. (You can download my letter by clicking here.)
Specifically, I requested an update on the revenue picture for the current budget. I also noted my belief that it’s the Comptroller’s legal duty to provide this update, given the Texas Constitution’s requirement that updated revenue information “shall be submitted ... at such other times as may be necessary to show probable changes” to the last revenue estimate.
(By the way, the Comptroller hasn’t provided an official revenue estimate like this since ... wait for it ... January of 2009, a few months before the current budget was passed. I mean, a lot has changed since then, hasn’t it? Has your financial picture changed since Eli Manning was a reigning Super Bowl champion?)
I noted in the letter that a lot of information has already been provided to bond rating agencies – and some of this information seems to actually contradict reports to taxpayers and voters about the state of Texas’ finances.
And I recommended that the Comptroller go the extra mile to provide information indicating how bad the budget is likely to be in 2012-13 – which might actually turn some of this speculation about the size of the problem into action in trying to fix it.
Specifically, I requested a straightforward financial forecast, plus basic reports on:
-- Texas’ debt situation,
-- The failure of the legislature’s 2006 tax shift to cover the state’s obligations,
-- The status of what’s known as the Rainy Day Fund (one of the state’s main savings accounts),
-- And the status of the billions of dollars in special funds that are dedicated for specific purposes but instead diverted in ways that allow the legislature to spend more money.
Tell us something we don’t know
The thing is, all of us – legislators and taxpayers – need more information about what's in our anticipated path.
All summer, there have been wildly divergent projections of how big a deficit there will be in the 2012-13 budget – the low end has been around $10 billion or $11 billion, and the high end has been around $18 billion.
(By the way, that roughly $8 billion difference, by itself, would cover nearly all of the huge budget shortfall that Texas faced in 2003, which many have cited as precedent for what the state will face in 2012-13.)
But whichever 11-figure number anyone picks, we all know we’re facing a gigantic potential deficit in the next budget. And it would be a tremendous mistake for those in control of the budget handlebars to put off the issue for yet another four months – and then try to solve this problem in just the same 4-and-a-half month legislative session we always have.
Furthermore, as I noted in the letter, significant budget cuts are already underway across state government. Yet those cuts are being ordered, proposed, and implemented without information showing the state’s current budget and fiscal situation.
That’s what some folks might call “riding blind.”
It’s all about accountability
The truth is that for a long time, I’ve been frustrated about the lack of accountability when it comes to the budget.
Last year, I authored a package of bills designed to make the budget more open and honest.
Also, as I said earlier this year, I simply will not support new or higher taxes, new or higher fees, or a raid on our state’s savings accounts during the next session – because right now, the budget is being balanced through an embarrassing mix of debt, diversions, and delays, and I just don’t think anyone can assure you that your money will pay for what you’ve been told it will.
But one of the most frustrating things I’ve seen yet is the failure, or even refusal, of those in control of our state and its budget to provide information that might help us prepare for this challenge that we all know is coming and that so many folks are deeply concerned about.
The thing is, information is good. People like it. People appreciate it. And particularly on something as fundamental as the budget, the only thing information might damage is someone’s ability to deny the reality we’re facing.
It ain't like me riding a motorcycle with my belly exposed. Exposure, in this case, is good.
Now, I completely expect some well-meaning budget writer to pull me aside at some point, put an arm on my shoulder, and tell me ever-so-patiently that they’re just doing things the way they always have – and that folks like me, who want this kind of basic information, just don’t understand the way the budget gets written in Texas.
Here at the Watson Wire, I try to subscribe to one big rule:
Be interesting.
It's actually more like a goal. If it were really a rule, then I'm guessing I've proved that rules really are made to be broken. But I give being interesting my best shot.
Maybe that means talking sense about border security. Maybe it means regaling you with stories about giant vermin that seem, you know, hard to believe. And maybe it means keeping you posted on one of the best parties in town every year. (Really, go sign up right now. You're gonna hate yourself if you miss this deal.)
But whether it's a hard and fast rule or my hopeful aspirations, it definitely means trying new things. In that spirit, I'll be rolling out a few new features and events here at Watson Central over the next few weeks.
And there's one I'm announcing today that I'm pretty excited about.
UStream and my friend Chris
Between now and Election Day, we'll be doing a series of online, interactive video town hall meetings, via UStream, with folks who are in tightly contested races for re-election to the Texas House of Representatives.
The first of these town hall meetings will be with Representative Chris Turner. It's set for Tuesday, August 31, at 6:30 p.m. You can, and should, RSVP for the event here.
I've known Chris for a long time. In fact, he worked on my first campaign - back when I ran for Austin Mayor. He's a great public servant, and we're lucky to have him in the legislature. He's running for his second term representing the Arlington area in the Metroplex.
We did the first one of these UStream town hall meetings about a month ago, when I sat down with Bill White. We broadcast over UStream for an hour, took questions wherever we could get them - Twitter, Facebook, you name it - and talked a lot about the need for fresh leadership that's committed to taking Texas in a new direction. (You can watch the video here.)
It went really well. And I'm hoping that keeping the ball rolling with some of our House candidates will help people - in these districts and all over Texas - learn about the big issues facing our state and get fired up for Election Day.
And besides, Chris's race - and others like it - represent some of the most important decisions on the ballot this year.
What's at stake
The race for Governor, of course, has gotten most of the attention in 2010. That's good. It's appropriate. It's a critically important contest at the top of the statewide ballot that everyone needs to weigh in on.
But the race for the House of Representatives is, in many ways, just as important. The folks who control either the House or the Senate have an enormous amount of control over which bills come up for a vote, which bills pass, and how Texans' lives will be affected.
For years, the 150-member House has been a place with perhaps the widest range of voices in state government.
And as I keep saying, we simply can't achieve big goals in this century without figuring out new ways to hear voices by using traditional web sites, social media functions such as Facebook, Twitter and UStream, and whatever else someone will think of in a year or two.
These new tools aren't valuable just because they're new, or neat, or fun. They're valuable the same way that campaigning and organizing have always been valuable.
Folks who organize on Facebook have the same goals as folks who go knocking on doors. Twitter feeds serve the same purposes as community newsletters. A candidate's website is really just a more complete and meaningful version of a door hanger.
And UStream town halls are great for the same reasons that regular, traditional town halls are great - they allow real people to ask important questions about where Texas is and where it needs to be heading.
So I invite and encourage you, once again, to sign up for the UStream Town Hall meeting with Representative Chris Turner on August 31 at 6:30 p.m.
Last week, I went to El Paso, wearing my hat as Vice Chair of the Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security. It was an excellent and educational trip.
A key moment of the whole deal may have been at about 9:30 Monday night, as I was getting ready to do what they call a nighttime "ride along" with a Texas Department of Public Safety trooper.
I was introduced to a dude straight out of Central Casting. Big, tall, good-looking guy, wearing the full trooper uniform, including cowboy hat. Extremely polite. I got called "Sir" more times in three minutes than Paul McCartney does in a week.
After the howdy do's, he said, "Sir, I need to show you a few things related to safety." So he walked me over to the car and opened the back door on the driver side. The front door was already open.
He looked down at me, pointed toward the (currently only imaginary) gang that might be out in front of the car at some point that night, and calmly said, "Sir, if we end up in a situation where there are multiple people involved, this is where you will be."
Being a pretty dang quick thinker, particularly at moments when I'm on high-alert, I thought, "Hmm, I suppose it makes sense. In a so-called 'situation' involving multiple bad guys, safety dictates putting the senator at the back of the car behind two open doors, which obviously can be used as shields." I was only slightly insulted that they envisioned me cowering back there in the fetal position during a gangland firefight.
But the Trooper elegantly diffused that silly notion. Before I even had time to practice my crouch-and-duck, he deftly reached down to the back seat, removed a piece of elastic, and released an M4 gun. He pulled it out, held it up, and pointed it at the prospective enemies - doing a mock demonstration of how a guy who stands a foot shorter than him would look emptying the gun.
He said, "This is where I need you." He gave me a quick lesson in how to manipulate my new weapon. And he said, "There's only one rule. . . . Don't shoot the guy in the cowboy hat."
Non-machine gun parts of the trip
An M4 seems to do a lot to help focus the mind. But the whole trip felt intense.
I spent most of it learning about violence on the other side of the border, and the truly important work that people are doing to keep it from spilling into Texas. I also took a helicopter ride along the border so that I could see the fencing - some old and some new - that's intended to slow those trying to get into the country illegally, and also see from the air the various legal entry points.
First of all, Ciudad Juarez, just across the border from El Paso, is every bit as scary as you've heard. It is, for all intents and purposes, a city under the occupation of drug cartels - and those cartels are at nothing less than war.
The level of violence is truly astonishing, and it obviously can't help but affect El Pasoans. For example, a couple of weeks ago, bullets that were fired outside a store in Juarez ended up breaking a window at El Paso City Hall, about a half-mile away.
But here's the thing - El Paso itself is quite safe, one of the safest cities of its size in the nation. That fact, for a place next-door to an almost lawless environment, is an enormous credit to the people living, working and raising families in El Paso, and to the extraordinary men and women at all levels of government who are working to keep it safe.
And they are extraordinary. I was highly impressed with the level of cooperation that you see among federal, state, county and city law enforcement officers there. I learned about a recent, highly successful four-day operation there in which federal officers were in charge for two days and state officials were in charge for the other two days.
To a significant degree, the pros are less focused on politics and more focused on addressing the issues of how to fight the true fight.
First off, get real
There are so many things that Texas can be doing to improve border security. The border needs to be the focus of our homeland security money. And we need to do the things, budgetary and otherwise, to assure that DPS can be a truly 21st Century law enforcement agency.
But perhaps the most important thing, as in so many areas, is that we've got to make sure our eyes are focused where they need to be.
I wrote a while back about immigration and the importance of pulling scare tactics and race-baiting rhetoric out of that debate.
Well, it's just as important that Texans, their leaders, and everyone else stop fusing together the unmitigated horror of a drug war with the enormously complicated immigration issue.
Are there efficiencies to be had? Without question. Government agencies that work side-by-side should look for every opportunity to function as effectively and cheaply as possible.
But the scourge of border violence is criminality so extreme that it's deservedly thought of in military terms. Immigration, on the other hand, is as much an economic matter as it is a legal one. It's a different issue, and it needs to be treated as one.
Taking time and energy away from border safety and security, and directing those resources toward immigration enforcement, will do nothing but weaken us in both areas.
As I saw last week, there's simply too much at stake for us to let that happen.
Most of you have been waiting with bated breath for a report from last week's lacrosse camp.
(By the way, I looked "bated" up in an online dictionary to be sure I had the correct spelling. It turns out that "baited" breath wasn't right. That's when you've been eating fish and haven't brushed your teeth.)
Anyway, I'm pleased to report that Cooper had a great camp. The boys worked out and competed in "three-a-days" in the humidity and heat of, uh, beautiful Gaffney, South Carolina. Coop did very well, but I came close to heat stroke sitting in my chair, reading some, punching out emails and text messages on my phone,and yelling from the sidelines.
Lacrosse camp is tough.
Speaking of Cooper, this coming weekend - on Independence Day - he turns 15. As is customary, he'll celebrate by being in a parade or two with his old man.
I've freely admitted that for the first few years of his life (when I was Austin Mayor), I had him pretty well convinced that the parades and fireworks were things his sweet, somewhat well-connected daddy had put together for him.
The disappointment he experienced upon discovering this wasn't true is going to pale in comparison to his disappointment when he finds out that I have no idea what to get him as a gift this year ... and so he's probably out of luck.
Mark your calendars: July 12
Last weekend, I and a few thousand good Democratic friends gathered in Corpus Christi for the party's 2010 State Convention. The biggest news was the speech Friday night by Bill White, who's running a race for Governor that folks across the country are watching.
If you weren't there (or, heck, even if you were), we're working on another chance for you to see Mayor White that you really shouldn't miss.
On July 12, I'll host an online, interactive, video town hall meeting with Bill. It'll be the first big online event like this of the campaign, and we think it's the first time a Texas sized online town hall meeting has ever been held on a statewide basis.
We'll be taking questions in real time - via Twitter, Facebook and UStream - during the town hall, which will start at 5:30 and go about an hour.
And if you just can't wait that long, you can submit your question now on my Facebook wall or through Twitter.
We're going to try something new, broadcasting the town hall on UStream. The plan is to have several more of these sessions through the summer and fall with various political figures in Texas - including some of the State House of Representatives members we featured in the Monopoly Buster Ballot who are in re-election races this year.
I'm pleased to kick off this new effort with Bill White.
The event is free and open to everyone - just log on to Facebook and go to my page on July 12 from 5:30 to 6:30.
For more information or to sign up, go here. And stay tuned.
Conventional Wisdom
The UStream town hall meeting ties in pretty well with a panel I hosted this weekend in Corpus about new media, social media, and what it all means for politics and making policy.
As I wrote last week, we had an excellent panel of pros walking folks through some of the online tools that are out there and the ways they can help causes and campaigns.
I was happy with the turnout Saturday morning, and the questions were terrific - everything from the most nuts-and-bolts inquiry about blogging to general strategic questions about coordination among candidates. I think the discussion alone might lead to some good innovations as we all get ready for November.
I prepared a two-page handout listing five things you and others can and should do to jumpstart an online or social media campaign. You can download it from my website.
The New Grass Roots
One of the big problems I see with a lot of this technology is that people get wrapped up in the tools themselves - the web site, Facebook page, Twitter feed, and other stuff that's even fresher and flashier.
The bigger key, I think, is to remember that these are really just tools to help us build the same thing we've always been building: campaigns that reach out and respond to people, that get everyday folks involved in the process, that help us express what we stand for and what we're trying to do ... the list goes on.
So anyone who's ever knocked on doors, rounded people up for a political or government meeting, or written a letter to the editor should see social media as a powerful new way to accomplish old goals. In fact, I think we're rapidly approaching a time where there isn't much difference between what campaigns do online and what they do on the ground.
As I've said before, these are the new Grass Roots, increasingly the best way to organize people and try to make a change.
