The demonization campaign is in full swing in Texas.
Location: View southbound from Interstate Hwy 35 just north of exit 315, town of Bruceville, TX
Question: How is the Earned Income Tax credit (EITC) pioneered by Richard Nixon, Treasury Secretary Connally (a Texan), and Economist Milton Freedman less "socialist" than Obama's stimulus plan that simply routes money to "shovel ready projects" in the states to reduce the "pro-cyclical" impact of reduced state government spending? The EITC is a shameless form of wealth transfer, almost like the "Negative Income Tax" (NIT) Freedman advocated along with his flat tax. Yet, there is an effort to demonize Obama for a stimulus plan less shamelessly "Socialist" than the Nixon-Connally-Freedman program?
The Texas Attorney General is suing against "Obamacare" in order to protect "States Rights" to control health insurance companies doing business in Texas! But, maybe there's a thing called Abbottcare (or, Perrycare) that Texans should examine more closely.
Once, Abbot was in favor of mandates, now he's not. It's not just the hypocrisy "I was for it, now I'm against it." It is also the hypocrisy of the entire "States Rights" argument being used to cover up over a decade of Republican neglect of Texas health care reform by Texas' 100% statewide Republican elected officials.
On Dallas KRLD talk radio 1080 early this afternoon, I heard Dallas County Republican Chairman, Jonathan Neerman, assert that all Republicans support the end to the pre-existing conditions exclusion for health insurance.
This surprised me.
For one thing, when I called Congressman Lamar Smith's office back in November to inquire about any Republican proposal to end pre-existing conditions, I was told there was a proposal and if I would wait on hold the staff person would find it. The staff person never returned to the line. So, I concluded there was no Republican plan to end pre-existing conditions that Congressman Smith was willing to endorse.
So, when Jonathan Neerman, the Dallas County Republican Chairman, asserted as a fact that "all Republicans" are against the practice of excluding pre-existing conditions, I was just wondering how Lamar Smith missed that, and how Republicans might propose ending the practice.
I would have thought that if all Republicans support this "limited and incremental" reform, and if all Republicans believe in "States Rights", then all Republicans would have pressured the State Insurance Board to require that insurance companies doing business in Texas abandon the pre-existing conditions exclusion in policies of insurance companies under the jurisdiction of the people of Texas.
Jonathan Neerman was responding to a KRLD talk show host (Scott) about the baby (Houston Tracy) born March 15th in Crowley, Texas, who had a pre-existing heart condition. Coverage was denied by his father's health insurance as soon as the condition was known. (See, http://bit.ly/9w4b0U) Neerman claimed that Republicans were universally opposed to pre-existing condition exclusions" and would have taken care of that problem if the Democrats hadn't shut them out of the Health Care Reform debate.
In my opinion, Democrats should make this a cause celebre in Texas leading up to the election in November.
Just as Republicans sat on their hands for the 12 years they controlled Congress, Governor Perry and Atty Gen. Abbott have sat on their hands for over a decade while the State Insurance Board was allowing insurance companies to get away with denying coverage based on "pre-existing" conditions. Now, baby Houston is paying the price for the malfeasance and hypocrisy of Gov. Perry, Atty. Gen Abbott, and the entire statewide Republican leadership.
If Farouk is such a red hot "CEO" already, what does he need with being Governor?
If he has 100,000 private sector jobs in his back pocket, why will the title "Governor" get those jobs filled faster?
Does Farouk plan to have Texas taxpayers subsidize his commercial ventures? If not, then what is he waiting for? JUST DO IT, Farouk, if you can.
Farouk knows how to market low tech hair dryers to vain ladies in a niche market. Does that mean he knows how to put everyone to work making solar panels?
Are we to believe that Farouk alone holds the keys to the mysteries of the "Green Economy?"
The Texas Democratic Party doesn't stand for anything. To win, our candidates must offer a compelling vision of change.
It is not enough to have an excellent field staff, to have a good media campaign, to have a great yard sign campaign, to have attractive/experienced/qualified candidates. It is also necessary to make a strong case for change.
The election of 2008 could be a replay of the Texas election of 2002.
In Texas in 2002, it had been 8 years since the defeat of Ann Richards by George Bush. The state was in a recession. The recession had caused a decrease in sales tax receipts. Important social programs were being cut right and left. It was a midterm election following a Republican Presidential victory. There was every reason to believe that it would be a good year for Democrats.
In response, Democrats put up a "dream ticket" in Texas in 2002. At the top of the ticket were Tony Sanchez, a wealthy Laredo banker running for Governor, and, for U.S. Senate, the charismatic Afro-American former mayor of Dallas, Ron Kirk. Other statewide democratic candidates included Marty Akin, who had been the quarterback of a national champion University of Texas football team, who was running for Comptroller. Running statewide for Texas Attorney General was Kirk Watson, whose 15 seconds of fame years later caused him to look a fool on nationwide TV; as he was unable to cite a single accomplishment for his candidate Obama. Another well known statewide candidate was John Sharp who was running for Lt. Governor (essentially a "Prime Minister" in Texas).
In November of 2002, after the dust had cleared in Texas, there was not a single successful statewide Democratic candidate. All statewide offices had been lost. And, the legislature had gone over to the Republicans for the first time since Reconstruction.
