The Innocence Project argued Friday that newly discovered documents undermine the credibility of a key witness against a Texas man executed for the deaths of his three children based in part on arson evidence that has since been deemed faulty.
The New York-based nonprofit said it has discovered a handwritten note that suggests a prosecutor gave a lesser charge to jailhouse informant Johnny Webb, who testified that Cameron Todd Willingham told Webb he killed his daughters in 1991.
That would contradict claims made at trial by Webb and prosecutor John Jackson that Webb did not receive consideration for his testimony.
“It’s astonishing that 10 years after Todd Willingham was executed we are still uncovering evidence showing what a grave injustice this case represents,” Barry Scheck, the Innocence Project’s co-director, said in a statement.
Willingham’s case has been scrutinized by advocates who argue the state may have executed a wrongfully convicted man. Fire science experts already have refuted much of the methodology used in his case.
In a new filing Friday with the state pardon board, The Innocence Project said Jackson worked to have Webb’s charge reduced from an aggravated offense with a deadly weapon to a second-degree felony. Included in the filing is a handwritten note, found in files turned over by current prosecutors, that mentions a second-degree robbery offense “based on coop in Willingham.” The note is not signed or dated.
Cameron Todd Willingham’s stepmother and cousin, along with exoneree Michael Morton, joined the Innocence Project on Friday to call on Gov. Rick Perry to order the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to investigate whether the state should posthumously pardon Willingham, whose was executed in 2004.
“We are forever passionately committed to the mission of clearing Cameron’s name,” said Patricia Cox, Willingham’s cousin.
Willingham was convicted in 1992 of intentionally igniting a blaze that killed his three daughters. Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, said the organization has uncovered new evidence that the prosecutor who tried Willingham paid favors to the jailhouse informant whose testimony — along with arson science that has since been debunked — was a key factor in the young father’s conviction.
“We think it is very important for the governor himself to take a look at this,” Scheck said.
Morton, who was convicted of his wife’s murder in 1987 and spent nearly 25 years in prison before DNA testing led to his exoneration in 2011, appealed to Perry as a Christian to examine whether human errors led to a wrongful execution.
“We’re here for one simple reason,” Morton said. “As believers, we’re asking him to consider this. We’re not asking for promises.”
Josh Havens, a spokesman for Perry, who has previously expressed his belief in Willingham’s guilt, said that the governor’s office had received the letter and was reviewing it.
And this little nugget at the end.
The Innocence Project has worked for years to exonerate Willingham, but Perry has argued that he was guilty.
Scott Henson, author of the criminal justice blog Grits for Breakfast, believes the current effort may be successful when a new governor takes office in 2015, he said.
Henson added, “Perry has made his position on the case pretty clear.”
It’s hard to see Perry, or Abbott budging on this case.
I’m not sure if it’s what Wayne Slater wanted the point of his article to be or not. But this wound up being the point, that everything that’s wrong with Texas is the Texas GOP’s fault, GOP candidates in Texas running against GOP failures.
One of the perils of Republicans campaigning in a Republican state is that they find themselves promising to fix all the problems left by … Republicans.
Take Greg Abbott, who wants to be governor.
At a recent campaign stop in Denton, he took aim at traffic jams. He singled out Interstate 35, telling supporters they probably found themselves in bumper-to-bumper traffic trying to get to his event.
“A guy in a wheelchair can go faster than cars on I-35,” said Abbott, who is a guy in a wheelchair.
Gov. Rick Perry, the man Abbott wants to succeed, had an ambitious plan to help with a network of toll roads, but it didn’t go anywhere.
Abbott’s point was simple and seemed to resonate with voters — state leaders have failed miserably to unclog highways.
In other words, Perry has failed.
[...]
Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, also an attorney general candidate, took on President Barack Obama in his first TV ad — a safe and frequent GOP target. But in doing so, he couldn’t avoid taking an indirect shot at Abbott, the man he wants to replace.
Abbott has trumpeted his record of suing the Obama administration, from environmental issues to health care. The results have been mixed: Abbott has won some, lost some.
Branch, who is hoping to energize conservatives, says in his commercial that “Texas needs an attorney general who can take on Obama — and win.”
In other words, Abbott has failed.
Perry’s always been on-and-on about no one “over suing” in Texas. It’s OK, it would seem, as long as it’s the Texas AG suing Obama.
It’s been over 10 years since the Democrats had any power in Texas (Speaker Pete Laney). But it’s been 20 years, or so, since the Democrats really had power in Texas. And Texas has never really been a left-leaning state, even when the Democrats had all the power. But Slater’s article shows that while Texas has prospered over the last decade much has been left out of the good times. There’s been “growth” in the “bidness” sector, but little if anything has trickled-down. Roads, water, education, health care, justice, just to name a few, have all been neglected.
His first words to the crowd were typical Abbott braggadocio. He touted his thirty lawsuits against the federal government. We’ve heard this before and I’m certain we will hear it again: “I go into the office, I sue the federal government, and then I go home.” And the crowd goes wild…
What I’m wondering is this: Did someone in the crowd ask the question, “How much money did your thirty lawsuits cost the Texas taxpayers?”
Apparently, no one asked, so I’ll answer. According to various reports, the costs of Greg Abbott’s litigations against America are estimated at $2.58 million dollars, and that’s with over half of the lawsuits still pending. Think of what Texas could have accomplished with $2.58 million dollars: More education funding, important infrastructure repair, expanding Medicaid or compensating for the SNAP cuts by the illustrious GOP lawmakers in Congress?
It took $2.58 million to satisfy Abbott’s chest-beating contest with our government with zero dollars benefit for the people of Texas. Because of his continued feud with Washington, Abbott’s been elevated to cult status with the secessationists and the states’ rights fringe.
[...]
Even with the good news, Texas has a laundry list of dishonorable mentions on which Abbott remains silent:
Texas ranks first in executions.
Texas ranks first in the number of uninsured.
Texas ranks first in the amount of carbon dioxide emissions.
Texas ranks first in the amount of toxic chemicals released into water.
Texas ranks second in food insecurity.
Texas ranks fourth in the percentage of children living in poverty.
Texas ranks 47th in tax expenditures that directly benefit Texas citizens.
Texas ranks 48th in the number of people covered by employer-based health insurance.
Texas ranks 49th in the number of poor people covered by Medicaid and per capita Medicaid spending.
Texas ranks 49th in the national average for credit score.
Texas ranks 50th in the percentage of the population which graduates from high school.
Texas ranks 50th in Workers’ compensation coverage.
Texas ranks 50th in the percentage of non-elderly women with health insurance and in the percentage of women receiving prenatal care in the first trimester.
Texas ranks 50th in mental health expenditures.
Texas was labeled by the Annie E. Casey Foundation as “the worst state in America to be a child.”
Far be it from me to rain on Greg Abbott’s lawsuit-pride-parade, but it seems his time would be better spent addressing how he would change these negative statistics, instead of taking credit for things that never happened on his watch.
Again for a state that’s had a good economy for so long it would make sense to address some of these issues during the good times. The one thing that’s in the back of my mind is that the GOP knows the shale bubble is going to burst, and that’s why they’re hoarding the ESF/Rainy Day Fund. Because when the bust for this boom hits, and it will, it will only be harder to fix the issues that are being neglected today.
State and local governments have awarded at least $110 billion in taxpayer subsidies to business, with 3 of every 4 dollars going to fewer than 1,000 big corporations, the most thorough analysis to date of corporate welfare revealed today.
Boeing ranks first, with 137 subsidies totaling $13.2 billion, followed by Alcoa at $5.6 billion, Intel at $3.9 billion, General Motors at $3.5 billion and Ford Motor at $2.5 billion, the new report by the nonprofit research organization Good Jobs First shows.
Dow Chemical had the most subsidies, 410 totaling $1.4 billion, followed by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire-Hathaway holding company, with 310 valued at $1.1 billion.
The figures were compiled from disclosures made by state and local government agencies that subsidize companies in all sorts of ways, including cash giveaways, building and land transfers, tax abatements and steep discounts on electric and water bills.
In fact, the numbers significantly understate the true value of taxpayer subsidies to businesses, for reasons explained below.
[...]
Good Jobs First does not oppose all subsidies. Rather, it favors transparency in the hope, executive director Greg LeRoy said, that any subsidies will be used wisely to expand the economy and not just prop up inefficient enterprises.
The data on welfare paid to companies come from Good Jobs First’s Subsidy Tracker 2.0, an improved Web tool that examines subsidies by linking subsidiaries to parent companies. The older version of the tool obscured the benefits to brand name corporate parents such as Apple, Google, Toyota and Walt Disney.
The size and range of the subsidies the tool has uncovered helps explain the burdens taxpayers must bear because so many major corporations rely on welfare for much or all of their profits rather than earning them.
Such burdens are especially hard on the poor. The bottom fifth of households in all but one state pay a larger share of their income in state and local taxes than the top 1 percent of earners. This means that corporate welfare effectively redistributes from the poor to those rich enough to own corporate stock.[Emphasis added]
Many forms of subsidies to business are excluded from Subsidy Tracker 2.0. For example, Good Jobs First does not count federal subsidies. It also leaves out indirect subsidies like perpetual monopoly rights of way for pipelines as well as rules that limit competition in pharmaceuticals, telecommunications and a host of other industries.
New data from the Census Bureau appear to lend support to Texas’ reputation as a “low tax state,” ranking it 40th nationally in taxes collected as a share of personal income. But focusing on the state’s overall tax revenues has led many observers to overlook the fact that different taxpayers experience Texas’ tax system very differently. In particular, the poorest 20 percent of Texans pay significantly more of their income (12.6 percent) in state and local taxes than any other group in the state. For low-income families, Texas is far from being a low tax state. In fact, only five states tax their poorest residents more heavily than Texas.
Our rigged economic system has carried over to our political system, which is rigged as well. Many no longer see any reason to vote and it’s created a class bias in voting.
But voting is supposed to be the great equalizer – especially in the modern era of one person, one vote. Elected officials may collect campaign contributions from the rich and hear regularly from lobbyists speaking for the privileged, but if they ignore the interests and concerns of middle-income constituents, they supposedly can be replaced on Election Day.
But as nice as it sounds, the research doesn’t show this to be the case. Even when elections are procedurally fair and every vote is counted, some groups of U.S. voters are more likely to vote than others. In particular, voters tend to have higher incomes than the population as a whole. As researchers, we set out to explore differences in turnout between rich and poor voters in various states – and probe the impact of “class bias,” the degree to which the rich are more likely to vote than the poor.
Class bias in voting is getting worse. From 1976 to the onset of the Great Recession, 21 states saw decreases in class biases in voting, but 29 states saw increases – and the increases were much larger than the decreases. And richer voters are generally less supportive of policies that serve to make incomes more equal.
As researchers, we decided to test the hypothesis that the more class bias in voter turnout is skewed toward the rich, the less likely egalitarian policies are to be enacted, resulting in higher income inequality than in states where class bias in voting is less pronounced.
In the states, class bias in voter turnout is associated with increases in income inequality. This is true even when we take into account other factors that could affect economic inequality, such as the age and racial composition of the state population, trends in economic growth and the politics of people in the state.
So what did we find? How does class-skewed voting contribute to rising inequality?
First, states with higher levels of class bias in voting have been less likely to enact minimum wage increases. This increases inequality, since higher minimum wages are known to be associated with reductions in income differences.
Second, as class bias in voter turnout becomes more pronounced, state governments become less liberal generally and less responsive to public opinion when the public moves left to support steps that could reduce inequality. Liberal public opinion tends to favor egalitarian policy interventions, so governments that are not responding when the public moves in that direction are less likely to enact a wide variety of policies that could mitigate economic inequality.
What then can be done by those who disagree with Tom Perkins and wish to reduce income inequality? Our research suggests that encouraging more widespread voter participation is part of the answer.
We used to redistribute money from the wealthy to make our society more equal. Now we redistribute money from everyone else to the wealthy to make our society more unequal. This needs to change. The only way to un-rig our systems is to get more people out to vote, and dilute the vote of the wealthy.
Actually, Davis gained a point from the previous poll, but don’t let that get in the way of a good narrative. One could also note that this is a better result for Davis than the PPP poll that came out a few days after that first UT/TT poll and which showed her down 15. One other difference between this poll and the first one is that the first one was a three-way race between Abbott, Davis, and Libertarian Kathie Glass, who got 5%. This poll was a straight up two-way race, which is informative but not directly comparable. One presumes Abbott would have scored a bit higher on that first poll if Glass had not been included. Again, though, don’t let an annoying fact slay a good story.
[...]
Anyway. The poll summary is here and the methodology is here. One thing I missed originally but was reminded of on Facebook and later by Peggy Fikac is that this poll was conducted between February 7 and 17, which means it all happened before the Nugeaganza and Dan Patrick’s Good Samaritan gone bad saga (the various GOP primaries were also polled). Who knows what effect, however transient, those stories might have had on these results. It also might have been nice for the Trib’s pollsters to at least mention that in passing, given the prevalence and ubiquity of those stories. Be that as it may, I’ll be tracking Texas poll results for 2014 on the sidebar, as I did for the Presidential race in 2012. We’ll see how they stack up when all is said and done. PDiddie has more.
This is a great bounceback from the 30 day report, and means as BOR has noted that Davis has outraised Abbott in two of the three reporting periods, as she topped him in January as well. Sure, he has more cash on hand, but the point is that she can more than keep pace, and she has a much broader network of donors to tap into, not just a handful of zillionaires. There’s a long way to go and a whole lot of work to do, so it’s great to be reassured again that Davis will have the resources she will need to fight this out.
But the best analysis of both of these items comes from James Moore, who continues to pound the Texas Tribune, Remember the Tribune.
The Texas Tribune and the University of Texas made much noise over their statewide political poll released yesterday but failed to point out a few fairly significant factors. The survey, which was conducted in partnership with the University of Texas, (remember, El Paso billionaire Paul Foster gives the Trib $100,000 and then they write about the university, very fairly, we assume), indicates that Republican Greg Abbott would beat Wendy Davis by 47 to 36 percent, if the election were held today. Seventeen percent of voters are undecided. The usual sample of 1200 was asked questions.
There is a decent amount of attention to the poll, which was also published in the Fort Worth Star Telegram. In the Tribune’s copy, a reader has to get to the last paragraph of a long story to discover the most relevant fact about the Trib’s poll: It was conducted between Feb. 7 – 17. In the governor’s race, at least, the findings are irrelevant. Ted Nugent had not yet shat upon the aspirations of Greg Abbott. (For future reference when writing about this relationship, I am thinking of a conflation: Ted Abbott.)
Abbott had barely called South Texas a Third World before the polling began and no one was surveyed after Nugent had traveled the state insulting a sitting president with a Nazi characterization, and having his background referred to by reporters digging up stories about his draft evasion tactics and his sexual proclivities. Although it is only an unfortunate matter of timing, it’s hard to believe the Tribune’s poll has real relevance given a potentially significant impact on sentiments prompted by the tactical failings of the Abbott campaign exhibited by the Nugent invite.
But hey, ya spend a lot of money on a poll, ya gotta promote the hell out of it, even if it is meaningless regarding the most important race in the state. The data on the other races was interesting and appeared to accurately project anticipated outcomes. But the governor’s race is in no manner as wide as 11 points after l’affaire Nugent. Davis need not worry about these figures.
Abbott still has about three times more in the bank (about $30 million) than Democrat Wendy Davis but she continues to raise cash well with a reported $2.85 million last month compared to the attorney general’s $2.45 million. The winner of the race in Texas, with twenty plus media markets, is likely to spend $50 million to become governor, which means $100 million may be expended in this state by two people fighting for a job that is among the most constitutionally weak in the U.S.
And democracy is the best form of government?
Yes, if it didn’t take outrageous amounts of money – and the sucking-up and selling of souls to attain such money, or being uber-wealthy – to win political office in our state and country we would likely have a completely different slate of candidates to being with.
That being said, it certainly frustrates the hell out of the GOP to finally have a candidate at the top of the Democratic ticket that can raise money. It by no means that Davis will win but it will keep her in the game, the activists working and hope alive. Also the media won’t be able to write her off the way the did Chris Bell and Bill White.
The Texas Progressive Alliance thinks Ted Nugent is an appropriate spokesman for the modern Republican Party of Texas as it brings you this week’s roundup.
It’s Ted Nugent’s (Texas Republican) party, and we just have to live with it, noted the Texas Observer — and excerpted by PDiddie at Brains and Eggs. But there were also problemas grandes para Dan Patrick last week.
And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.
Robert Rivard argues that cities and counties are left trying to solve the problems caused by a generation of indifference from Texas’ state leadership.
Lone Star Q provides video of Wendy Davis discussing her support of same sex marriage to the Express News editorial board.
Concerned Citizens warns about the animus hiding behind religious exemptions.
Better Texas explains why a higher minimum wage is good for Texans.
Grits for Breakfast highlights the modern equivalent to the Dallas Buyers Club.
Nonsequiteuse gets to the heart of the Nugent/Abbott affair.
Greg Wythe continues his in depth look at how the voter ID law was enforced in the 2013 election in Harris County.
Burkablog celebrates what would have been Barbara Jordan’s 78th birthday.
Chris Quintero witnessed and videotaped two Austin Police Department officers detain and arrest a female jogger for jaywalking and not immediately identifying herself (see here for more).
And Swamplot makes us all feel old by taking a look at the house from Reality Bites, 20 years later.
StateImpact Texas highlights some of what the report shows.
“Texas’ air monitoring system is so flawed that the state knows almost nothing about the extent of the pollution in the Eagle Ford. Only five permanent air monitors are installed in the 20,000-square-mile region, and all are at the fringes of the shale play, far from the heavy drilling areas where emissions are highest.”
“Thousands of oil and gas facilities, including six of the nine production sites near the Buehrings’ house, are allowed to self-audit their emissions without reporting them to the state. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), which regulates most air emissions, doesn’t even know some of these facilities exist. An internal agency document acknowledges that the rule allowing this practice “[c]annot be proven to be protective.”
“Companies that break the law are rarely fined. Of the 284 oil and gas industry-related complaints filed with the TCEQ by Eagle Ford residents between Jan. 1, 2010, and Nov. 19, 2013, only two resulted in fines despite 164 documented violations. The largest was just $14,250. (Pending enforcement actions could lead to six more fines).”
And the state is not helping.
Also of note are the roadblocks the team faced from state regulators and the oil and gas industry itself. While these obstacles are familiar to anyone who’s ever reported on the fracking boom in Texas, they raise questions about what the state and industry are trying to hide:
“The agency responsible for regulating air emissions—the TCEQ—refused to make any of its commissioners, officials or investigators available for interviews. Instead, we had to submit questions via emails that were routed through agency spokespeople. It’s unclear if the spokespeople passed our questions along to the agency’s experts. We received answers to most of our emails, often in some detail. But some of our questions were ignored or answered with talking points on general topics. The TCEQ employees who dealt with our public records requests were helpful and responsive, however. They discussed the filing process over the phone and answered questions about our requests.”
“When a reporter called TCEQ field inspectors at their homes—a commonly used reporting technique—TCEQ spokeswoman Andrea Morrow left the reporter a message saying, “Under no circumstances are you to call our people and harass them at home.” Morrow also blocked the reporter from approaching the agency’s chairman, Bryan Shaw, at a public meeting in Austin.”
“The agency’s public records pricing system was puzzling. We were charged as little as 20 cents for one document but were asked for more than $10,000 to provide a batch of documents that had been given to another news agency years ago. We withdrew our request.”
“The Texas Railroad Commission, which regulates drilling and all other aspects of the industry, made Commissioner David Porter available for a 10-minute phone interview. The Weather Channel later scheduled an on-camera interview with Porter, but when the producers arrived at the appointed time, they were told Porter was sick and would not be available for the next month. Like the TCEQ, the Railroad Commission spokespeople refused to discuss anything on the phone, including even technical questions about the mapping data we purchased from the agency. Nor would they make Porter or other top officials available for final, pre-publication phone interviews.”
“Industry officials in Texas were as reluctant as regulators to meet face-to-face or go on camera. Most insisted that all queries be submitted in writing. No tours of Eagle Ford operations were allowed, despite several requests. No on-the-ground discussions of air pollution were facilitated. Hunt Oil was the exception. When we asked about a problem at one of its processing plants, the company set up a phone interview with an executive who answered our questions.”
While many are making money on this situation, the state included, many are suffering a human cost. The human cost is not being acknowledged and will have to be paid for in the future. Similar maybe to the cost of asbestos/mesothelioma. I’m guessing very few politicians in Texas, much less the TCEQ, what to discuss something like that any time soon.
The only thing that’s different from when Carter made that statement is the calendar. It’s now an election year and immigration cannot be allowed to, “capture the media cycle”. Economics aside, the immigration issue, is about people, families and most important human dignity. Keeping immigrants in the shadows, because it’s not good politics for the GOP in an election year, shows exactly what the GOP’s priorities are.
House Republican leaders are sending their immigration-weary base a message: We hear you, loud and clear.
After one week of fierce conservative attacks on their pro-reform blueprint, Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) signaled on Thursday that the effort was going nowhere fast in the House and preemptively blamed its demise on President Barack Obama.
Their message: Reform is in peril because we can’t trust him to enforce the law.
[...]
The Speaker went on: “Listen, there’s widespread doubt about whether this administration can be trusted to enforce our laws. It’s going to be difficult to move any immigration legislation until that changes.”
The remarks echo a common conservative argument for ditching immigration reform. It’s is a sign that the right’s demand to jettison the issue of immigration this year is having an effect on Boehner, despite his support for reform and recognition of its importance to his party’s electoral survival in the future.
The Republican Party continues to stall on immigration reform because of politics, not policy. In January, U.S. Rep. John Carter told Roll Call, “I personally think this is the wrong time from our standpoint to go forward on immigration. It’s an election year. I mean Texas is in the middle of primaries right now.”
The Texas Democratic Party launched automated calls into Rep. Carter’s district, contacting a universe of 15,000 constituents. Hundreds of recipients responded to demand Rep. Carter support comprehensive immigration reform now.
Texas Democratic Party Communications Director Emmanuel Garcia issued the following statement:
“Texans know that comprehensive immigration reform is supported by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and would lift 11 million undocumented workers out of the underground economy. Moreover, it will advance wages for every American and generate billions in additional tax revenue. Comprehensive immigration reform is good for Texas’ future and good for America’s economy. It keep families together, and give hope to so many in legal limbo. We urge the entire congressional delegation, to listen to their constituents and put the needs of Texas before election year politics.”
Of course Carter’s Democratic opponent in November, Louie Minor, is for comprehensive immigration reform.
If you read blogs in Texas that are left of center then you likely know how important it is for Democrats to expand the electorate to change Texas. Registering and getting more likely Democratic voters to the polls is key. Which is why what Battleground Texas is doing is so important. And why the wing nuts are so scared of them. The Statesman, along with other state media, continue to cover the attempts of a convicted felon to drag Battleground Texas down.
“Battleground Texas fully complies with the law,” said Ellis Brachman, a spokesman for Battleground Texas.
“Let’s be clear — James O’Keefe is an admitted criminal with a long and well documented record of misleading attacks who is trying to make sure that fewer Texans are able to vote,” said Brachman. “The real story here is that Battleground Texas volunteers are patriotically working to get more Texans involved in our democracy. O’Keefe and his Republican allies in Texas are scared of our success and are doing everything they can to interfere.”
So this allegation rests partly on the word of a proven liar, and partly on a ridiculous reading of state law. Good luck with that. Even Greg Abbott had no comment. All that’s left is the smell of fear.
The biggest threat to GOP dominance of Texas is an active, engaged, and voting public. That’s what the right has been working against forever, and what BGTX is working for. And why they’re such a threat to those currently in power. If the wing nuts are scared then BGTX must be doing something right.
Let’s hope the Gandhi quote holds true, “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, and then you win.”
Ellis Brachman, a spokesman for Battleground Texas, said increasingly strident rhetoric from Republican candidates would torpedo any gains they made behind computer screens. He cited, for example, harsh anti-immigrant talk in the lieutenant governor’s race and Mr. Abbott’s recent appearance with the profanity-spewing rock musician Ted Nugent — who has called Mr. Obama a “subhuman mongrel.”
“It doesn’t matter how you sell your product if people don’t want to buy it,” Mr. Brachman said. “And what we’re seeing with Republicans is a product that frankly, more and more Texans don’t want to buy.”
This Statesman article notes the Round Rock members of The Lege reported to the local business lobby, Local lawmakers address healthcare, education, oil and water. Charles Schwertner reported on health care, Larry Gonzales on education, and Tony Dale on oil, gas and water.
It’s obvious they weren’t talking to the people in their districts because they mostly talked about things that don’t matter in the daily lives of their constituents. Schwertner is taking credit for balancing the budget, cutting taxes and “beg[inning] to address the long-term infrastructure needs of the state of Texas”. It’s a very meager beginning, to start the process of digging out from a decade of GOP neglect. He then talked about the decision not to expand Medicaid, and likely wanting to cut it in the future.
“Medicaid spending is growing at 2.5 times the rate of other aspects of the budget. That is simply unsustainable,” he said. “Eventually you’ll have to make tough decisions as to how to allocate your resources because obviously the needs of education, transportation and criminal justice have to be addressed as well.” [Emphasis added]
When it came to education Larry Gonzales wanted to make it seem like Texas has been prioritizing education.
“Funding our schools and funding our colleges is one of the most important things we do as a state. It all starts with having our students ready to go to work and ready to make a living and ready to be part of that tax structure,” he said. “As long as education remains the No. 1 part of our budget, I’m very happy about that because I think that’s where our priority should be.”
Gee, that all sounds great but I don’t know what state he’s talking about. Funding for schools is the most important thing, where education remains No. 1? That damn sure isn’t Texas. The GOP has always had it out for public eduction, and it shows in Texas. Tax cuts trump everything in importance, every good member of the Texas GOP knows that’s really No. 1 , come on!
He also spoke to the dropout rate.
“The dropout and truancy rates of minority students is absolutely unacceptable, so what can we do to keep these kids in school? What can we do to make sure they’re not dropping out at 15 and 16 and they’re finishing and when they’re finishing at 18 years old that they’re ready to go to work?”
One of the best ways to keep kids in school is to keep their parents involved in their education, and keeping the families out of poverty. To do that making sure the parents aren’t having to work all the time just to put food on the table must be a priority. Which is happening way too much in Texas, Too Many Working Mothers in Texas Trapped in Low-Wage Jobs.
“With too many working mothers facing barriers to career advancement, Texas has the opportunity to embrace proven tools to increase education and incomes for working mothers,” said Don Baylor, Jr., senior policy analyst at the Center for Public Policy Priorities. “In addition to investing more resources, we should embrace strategies we know are successful, like child care for working parents, and other two-generation approaches to move these families up the economic ladder, which would not only improve the bottom line for these families, but also boost the economic and job activity throughout our state.”
[...]
While the report will not come to a surprise for many who understand the very real and desperate health care and financial security needs for Texans that our current state government has not sufficiently provided, it does set a clear trajectory of policy initiatives well within the grasp of Texas policy makers to provide real solutions for low-income working mothers in our state.
Tony Dale was all over the drilling boom in Texas.
“The cycle that we’re in now, the boom in oil is not going to stop anytime soon,” he said. “Forty-eight percent of land rigs in the United States are in Texas and we’re at the highest production in 20 years. I like to say that because of our production we’re actually outproducing Saudi Arabia at this point, so Saudi Arabia is the Texas of the Middle East.”
For Texas’ sake we better hope he’s right. Because if it wasn’t for the boom, who knows what economic shape our state would be in today. It’s good that the state is piling up money in the Economic Stabilization Fund (ESF), aka Rainy Day Fund, from the booming oil and gas drilling. While that money sits there our health, education, and infrastructure needs fester. And it must be realized that there are serious costs associated with the boom that are not being addressed. From Texas Sharon, The Fracking Big Gulp.
The “marriage” of two old technologies, horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, has fueled a new, national drilling boom. But these newlywed technologies, sometimes called unconventional drilling, remain experimental. We lack sufficient science to know how to extract shale oil and gas safely while adequately protecting public health and the environment and minimizing climate impacts. What we do know is that human health, property and well-being and the environment, and the global climate are suffering because of fracking.
Complaints are widespread and have risen in tandem with a veritable gold rush of new natural gas wells – now numbering over 493,000 across 31 states. Fracking is also fueling opposition–even in Texas, a state known for supporting the oil and gas industry–that grows in direct proportion to drilling expansion.
Texans are now having to deal with issues of earthquakes, waste disposal, air pollution, and torn up roads, just to name a few.
There was no discussion of the issues that matter to most people. Affordable higher education, returning funds to public education, raising the minimum wage, inequality, transportation, and immigration reform just to name a few.
It’s no surprise that these incumbent politicians are trying to toot their horns to their donors and base. But it’s also quite striking how their concern for the people are completely missing. That’s due to the fact that so many people who are being left out by these guys decisions don’t show up to vote. In order to fix the problems of the people, the people must show up and vote. If that happens our politicians will have much more concern for the people’s problems.
Early Voting has begun for the March 4th Democratic and Republican Primaries. Click here to see the locations. And click here to look at a sample ballot.
Also here’s a list of local races with Democrats on the ballot.
Senate District 5: Joel Shapiro – Democrat
Charles Schwertner (i) – Republican
Shapiro looks to be another candidate inspired to run by Wendy Davis. Definitely a tough race against a well funded Republican incumbent, in a GOP drawn district.
House District 20:
Steve Wyman – Democrat
Marsha Farney (i) – Republican
Wyman is a perennial candidate. Another uphill struggle in a GOP drawn district.
House District 52: Chris Osborn – Democrat
Irene Johnson – Libertarian
Lillian Simmons – Libertarian
Larry Gonzales (i) – Republican
Osborn is a former member of the Taylor City Council. This was a swing district (Democrat Diana Maldonado won here in 2008), is it still? Also, with a Libertarian in the race they could take 3 – 5% of the vote.
House District 136: John Bucy – Democrat
Tony Dale (i) – Republican
Bucy is a first time candidate, but already seems to be running and working hard. This may be one to watch, 136 is a district where a hard working Democrat could have a chance.
County Judge: Michael Custer – Democrat
Dan A. Gattis (i) – Republican
Custer is a first time candidate. Running against and entrenched establishment Republican is a tall order.
County Commissioner, Precinct 2: Eddie B. Hurst – Democrat
Michael Sorenson – Republican
Cynthia Long (i) – Republican
Hurst has run for Mayor and City Council in Cedar Park previously. Long has a primary challenge.
County Commissioner, Precinct 4: Tom Mowdy – Democrat
Rick Guzman – Republican
Ron Morrison (i) – Republican
Mowdy ran for Taylor City Council in 2013. Morrison is also facing a primary challenge. Many have thought in the past that Precinct 4 is winnable for a Democrat.
Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1: Nick Lealos – Democrat
Dain Johnson (i) – Republican
Lealos is a first time candidate. A local attorney running in what has been a Democratic friendly precinct in the past.
Thanks to all these candidates for stepping up and running for office.
This is a very good list of candidates for Democrats in Williamson County. It’s good to see so many Democratic candidates running for office in these local races. With the new organizing efforts, and these candidates, maybe Democrats can pull some surprises in Williamson County in 2014. Either way, we will get a good idea of how some of these districts have changed in the last several years.
But the only way to pull off some surprises, is with a lot of hard work over the next 20 plus moths. So let’s get to work. Good luck to all the candidates and their campaigns.
