OPINION

Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper just spoke at the summit about deficit reduction. In my mind, the moderate Democrat is exactly the kind of legislator that Washington needs. He talks about controlling the deficit while at the same time backing that belief up with tough votes.

Cooper has been around the health care debate since the Clinton attempt in 1994. He knows the ins-and-outs of health policy, including the finances of such care.

So, his voice mattered when he just warned members of both parties that if they are planning to finance the overhaul bills through cutting Medicare they must be willing to back that belief up with tough votes.

He then pointed out how seven senators who once backed the Senate's plan to set up a bipartisan deficit commission took a pass when that idea came up recently. He didn't name them, but, sadly, John McCain was one of them. I hope that stung McCain because he knew full well that the deficit and debt are big problems and that a commission is our best -- and perhaps last -- hope for dealing with them.

Bottom line: If Congress is going to pass a health care bill that is largely paid for through Medicare reductions, I hope legislators pass the Cooper test and make the tough votes when it comes to cutting Medicare.

I am a big fan of civility, and I've really enjoyed watching Republican and Democratic leaders get together today and discuss -- yes, discuss -- the pros and cons of health care reform. I had high hopes for at least a few small steps toward a meeting of the minds between the two sides. But at this point, sadly, I have to share the view of Politico that zero progress has been made on that front.

By the lunch break, it was growing clearer that the pre-summit pessimism on both sides - that there was little to no hope of grand bipartisan compromise - was on target. In fact, both sides spent the bulk of the first three hours of the session trying to score tactical points, rarely veering from their scripts to extend a hand to the other side.

Or, as Tennessee Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper just said, "We're all here. We're all dressed up. We're all on our best behavior." And?

Dang, everyone sure is being polite. But what good is this doing if everyone also remains completely dug in to his or her position? I badly want to see this lead to some real horse-trading and at least a little meeting of the minds. I don't think it's going to happen.

Goodbye compromise. Hello reconciliation.

Republican Rep. Paul Ryan just made a very important point in the part of the discussion dealing with deficit reduction. He pointed out that one reason Democrats are saying their bills will reduce the deficit is because they put in a separate piece of legislation the very costly idea of fixing the formula by which Medicare pays doctors and hospitals. If you add that in, this bill would not even be close to deficit neutral.

That was an important point, if you worry that this bill could end up adding to the deficit. Ryan also brought up the point that Democrats are double-counting money from a new long-term care plan.

Here's one more reason to worry about that possibility: the bill relies on various cuts in Medicare, which indeed are needed. But Congress has shown no stomach when it comes to reforming Medicare. Will they do so now?

Sadly, I don't think so. And that's why there is reason to doubt that this bill will pay for itself. And when you read CBO's analysis, its analysts too raise the issue that Congress has not had a good record in trimming Medicare expenses, which Democrats are relying upon to finance about $500 billion of their plans.

Obama dodged this problem, in my book. When Ryan finished, Obama said something like we disagree about the numbers and then went on to talk about Medicare Advantage.

Disclaimer: Rodger Jones is a great guy. I'm fortunate to office next door to him here in the A.H. Belo Command Operations Center. He knows his sports, has an excellent sense of humor and knows more about roads and trains than almost anyone.

Here's the problem: You can't ask him a simple transporation question without him burying you in charts and graphs and press releases. (Despite being from Cleveland, Rodger would have made a fine engineer. If you know an engineer, you know what I mean. "Where do I plug in the power cord?" yields 10 diagrams and 30 minutes on the history of direct current.)

Today's question: "Rodger, did you see that story on the Metro cover today about how messed up I-35E is? Is that a legit study?"

The health care summit is now about to take a break, so here is a look after the first three hours:

First, opening this meeting to C-Span cameras is great. Really. If you want to know what each party thinks about health care, and about other broad subjects like the role of government, you can get it right here. I know most folks don't have the time to sit around and listen, so maybe look for it tonight once C-Span replays it. I mean it, so you won't fall prey to sound bites from either side. The representatives from each party are having an honest debate about concepts and details.

Second, for the most part, the discussion has been civil and without a ton of simple spin. Harry Reid got testy when responding to Lamar Alexander early in the discussion, which only made me wonder again how Democrats ended up with Reid as their majority leader in the Senate. No articulate, cool Barack Obama is he.

1. OLYMPICS - What an inspirational Olympics this has been, despite the tragedy and weather setbacks. We do our best to catch that Olympic spirit by weaving together the most inspirational stories and their impact on us as viewers from around the world. (One of those stories is of Canadian figure skater Joannie Rochette, pictured here, who performed just days after her mother's unexpected death.) Tod writing on behalf of the board.

2. TOYOTA - My, what a mess this once hallowed auto company has created, and seems bent on compounding. We draw contrast to Tylenol's textbook-perfect case of how to handle a disaster like this. We also draw parallels to what sorts of regulatory-oversight failures led to the financial meltdown for some bigger lessons here. This may be the beginning of the end of Toyota's pristine run as an industry leader. Jim writing on behalf of the board.

Feel free to add your thoughts on these two subjects in the comments area below.

Today, in Geneva, more than 1,700 people from around the world are attending the 4th World Congress Against the Death Penalty. Several members of Murder Victims' Families for Human Rights are speaking. The following are drafts of their testimony, as provided to me by Susannah Sheffer.

Read more and comment.

The following is an exchange I have had with a group called Empower Texans. They claim they have made an error in a mailing, that it's not deliberate. They have attributed assertions in a State House race to the Dallas Morning News Editorial Board, have admitted this is not correct, but so far, have refused to correct this. I think it's fairly obvious why they haven't. The comments make it look like we said some very critical things of the candidate we recommended. Read the exchange here. It starts with my original e-mail to the group:

It has come to our attention that a brochure is circulating, paid for by Empower Texans, that appears to fabricate quotes from The Dallas Morning News Editorial Board. Under the heading "Compare the candidates for state representative" with your group's endorsement of Cindy Burkett, a paragraph includes several statements about Greg Noschese. The source line says "Empower Texans interview and 2010 candidate questionnaire, Dallas Morning News Editorial Board 1/20/10, Noschese Campaign Finance Report 1/15/10" First of all, it is unclear which statements in this paragraph are supposedly from The Dallas Morning News Editorial Board on Jan. 20. The use of the word "our" compounds this confusion. Is that deliberate? But more important, no statement in the paragraph comes close to paraphrasing or referencing anything the board wrote in its recommendation of Greg Noschese. (Also, the date appears to be wrong. The editorial was posted online on Jan. 22 and ran in print on Jan. 25. There is nothing online or in print that ran on Jan. 20.) If the statements were derived from individuals during the interview process, then the Editorial Board should not be cited as the source. The only source material the board produced at all is included below. (Not included in this blog post, but available here.) It is the previously mentioned editorial. I ask that you immediately cease and desist in citing The Dallas Morning News Editorial Board as the source for your material on Greg Noschese. I believe after you review the editorial, you'll agree that an error has been made. Please let me know immediately that you plan to correct this situation. Thank you.

Tell the truth: Were you surprised to learn this week that some Dallas high schools in, shall we say, troubled parts of town resort to chaining their doors shut during the school day to either keep kids in or potential criminals out?

Anyone?

Surprise inspections at 31 Dallas public high schools this week revealed that eight were locking exit doors that serve as escape routes during catastrophes, a serious fire code violation.

Fire officials said Wednesday that they issued citations to A. Maceo Smith, Carter, Kimball, Molina, Pinkston, Roosevelt, South Oak Cliff and Skyline high schools.

The citations follow an incident at Samuell High School last week, when students trying to evacuate during a fire ran to an exit door locked with chains because of security problems at the school.

Do states have a right to secede? It's always seemed obvious to me that the answer is no, but recent politics in Texas have taught me there's still much debate on this topic.

So I'll share with you a blog entry I stumbled upon that shares Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's views on the matter. (It's not every day you get to hear a justice's opinion on secession.)

When asked to weigh in by a screenwriter who was researching the topic, Scalia wrote:

I am afraid I cannot be of much help with your problem, principally because I cannot imagine that such a question could ever reach the Supreme Court. To begin with, the answer is clear. If there was any constitutional issue resolved by the Civil War, it is that there is no right to secede. (Hence, in the Pledge of Allegiance, "one Nation, indivisible.") Secondly, I find it difficult to envision who the parties to this lawsuit might be. Is the State suing the United States for a declaratory judgment? But the United States cannot be sued without its consent, and it has not consented to this sort of suit.

I am sure that poetic license can overcome all that -- but you do not need legal advice for that. Good luck with your screenplay.

Every week, we poll the members of the editorial board on a timely and divisive topic. This week, the topic comes from a Washington Post story reporting that Virginia Tech has "joined a growing list of colleges that notify parents every time a student younger than 21 is caught drinking, drunk or in possession of alcohol." And so our question today is:

Should universities notify an underage student's parents every time he's caught drinking?

Here are their responses:

The Rasmussen poll on the Texas gubernatorial primary is out, and the news appears pretty good for Gov. Rick Perry, who has picked up four points to 48 percent since the start of the month (comparing the last two Rasmussen polls).

Kay Bailey Hutchison is down two points, from 29 to 27 percent, but, interestingly, Debra Medina is polling at the same 16 percent as she was before she briefly lost her mind on Glenn Beck's 9/11 truther inquisition.

With early voting underway, Rasmussen asked those who had voted already which way they went. The answer: Perry 49, Hutchison 24, Medina 20.

Perry is very close to avoiding a runoff, which could save his campaign a fair bit of money that it could apply to the general against Bill White. That said, it will be interesting to see if many Democrats take Paul Burka's "suggestion" and cross over to vote for Hutchison (thereby increasing chances of a Perry-weakening runoff).

For Mark Davis' take on the primaries and a couple of out-of-state perspectives, visit our Opinion home page and roll down to the Texas section.

Are you looking to get away from it all? Well, Ultime Réalité has the perfect vacation for you. For just $1,200 the French company will kidnap you during your vacation. They'll also bind and gag you at no extra charge. You can also book a helicopter chase and daring escape package. It's the latest in thrill-seeking tourism.

Reuters reports:

For those searching for the ultimate nightmare, the company is also hoping to branch out beyond kidnappings and is looking into options such as spending a night in a morgue, or attending your own funeral.

The company's founder, Georges Cexus, explains:

Let's say it will really be about bringing to life the client's worst fear, the thing that's lurking in the back of his mind and he's never dared talk about.

Sign me up! Sounds just like what I want from a vacation. Question: does the package include post-abduction therapy?

As crazy as it sounds, Cexus told Reuters customers are lining up. I don't know about you, but I will not be among them. My sense of adventure on vacation ends at deciding which type of drink to order at the beach bar.

Kay Hutchison's independence tour came through Fort Worth today at the Railhead Smokehouse. Events like this are part retail-politics and mostly media-politics.

Hutchison arrived in her bus about 12:30, journalists in tow, including Dan Balz from the Washington Post and some cameras. She worked her way through the crowded restaurant, New Hampshire-style, shaking hands, and working tables across both open eating areas. Then, she took to the podium and spoke to about 50 interested folks. As she did, other patrons kept eating and talking in the background. Someone even pushed a garbage can across the concrete floor.

In some ways, this was like hearing a person address a political convention. They talk mostly to the mikes, while others mill around.

As annoying as the background noise may be to candidates, I love events like this. They keep alive the hand-shaking part of politics. Even in a big state like Texas, you still have to press some flesh.

That said, the candidates know they are talking to thousands more through television. Newspapers, too.

Embattled Collin County Judge Keith Self issued an e-mail to supporters in response to allegations from the John Muns campaign. Here's what he said:

"Are these gutter attacks the "Collin County values" that my opponent says that he will bring to the county? No thank you. These are the same attacks that the same consulting firm made against Commissioner Joe Jaynes two years ago. I want to hear from John Muns - are you hidng behind an out-of-control consulting company or are these gutter attacks your values? I want to know."

We talked to Mr. Self on a regular basis during the 2008 campaign, and of all Corbett's supporters and advisors, his strategic direction was by far the most aggressive.

It's not what first-term Self is for that causes concern about his time in office. Rather, it's what he's been against and how he pursues his agenda. Self doesn't shy away from butting heads with people he disagrees with and, at times, seems to go out of his way for a collision. ... With GOP voters choosing between two fiscally conservative Republicans, they should go with Muns, a leader with experience building coalitions.

In his column in Sunday's New York Times, Tom Friedman quotes an interesting news bulletin from a news station from Tracy, California:

Tracy residents will now have to pay every time they call 911 for a medical emergency. But there are a couple of options. Residents can pay a $48 voluntary fee for the year, which allows them to call 911 as many times as necessary. Or there's the option of not signing up for the annual fee. Instead they will be charged $300 if they make a call for help.

Friedman goes on to say we are entering the "lean years."

Sounds to me more like the U.S. is entering "the European years." We are just becoming more like the Old World, where there is a fee for everything. Aside from health care and education, you pay for everything in Europe. Want ketchup with that burger? How about a glass of water? Then you've got to fork over some cash. Heck, European restaurants don't even give you free bread sticks.

I have long (half-jokingly) maintained that what makes America great is that restaurants have bottomless bowls of tortilla chips. A free and unlimited supply of fried chips - God bless America indeed! It symbolizes America's customer service (keep the customer happy by keeping the salsa and chips comin') and our wealth (a bankrupt restaurant can't afford to give out free chips).

But I fear the U.S. is slowly sliding toward becoming more European. America is showing signs that it is adopting things that used to be European trademarks: can't do culture, high unemployment, higher prices, people are poorer, etc.

The good news is that if Americans would snap out of their current funk we could turn this around. Let's have a frank conversation about slashing spending (kudos to President Obama for establishing the bipartisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform). Let's stop wallowing around having a pity party mourning America's "decline." Let's get the populists and protectionists to put a sock in it. If we act now, we might not only pull out of the "lean years," we might also save our right to free tortilla chips.

I'm really intrigued by the lawsuit case filed against R. Allen Stanford, Texas' version of Bernie Madoff.

The suit seeks to recover more than $1.6 million that Stanford and a top company officer donated to various Democratic and Republican congressional and senatorial committees. And according to legal experts the committees would have to show that Stanford received something in return.

This isn't a new strategy, but I wonder why the committees didn't just return the dollars and wash their hands of Stanford. The committees aren't going to go broke, but a $1 million seems like a small price for a political committee to "resolve" a sticky political mess.

That said, the suit raises an interesting question: How do we know that everything Stanford did was part of a Ponzi scheme, and is it really fair to demand that a church or another organization that unwittingly receives "dirty money" return it. Believe me, I'm not saying that the political parties are naive -- to the contrary. I'm jut wondering where the line are drawn.

According the story, the National Republican Congressional Committee, which Congressman.Pete Sessions, chairs, has no plans to return the money.

We ran a good op-ed today from Andrea Weinstein and Steve Gutow about a new civility pact that the Jewish Council on Public Affairs is promoting. Both Weinstein and Gutow are Dallas natives who are active JCPA leaders, and their aim is to take this new code of civility and work it into the fabric of schools, worksites and congregations.

Along these lines, I was privileged to moderate a panel yesterday at the JCPA annual meeting that Rabbi Gutow appeared on with the Rev. Dr. Michael Kinnamon, the general secretary of the National Council of Churches. The session was devoted to bridging the divide between the Jewish and Protestant worlds, which have been significant at times.

I was struck by both leaders' sincerity and interest in trying to hear each other out on the issue of Israel. Some mainline Protestant churches have taken up the cause of Palestinian Christians more than the cause of Israel, and that has caused some tension.

What I liked about Gutow and Kinnamon's dialogue is that they are very candid about each other's point of views. They didn't flinch about their disagreements, which is the only way we ever are going to have a civil dialogue.

One of the first things I read when I signed on this morning was this comment from JK on my post from yesterday:

Sharon asks "what are they proposing to help people like those quoted in the NYT story?" Here's an idea -- "Nothing ... It's interesting that Liberals believe people should be "put to work". I was raised to "find a job".

Full disclosure: I've excerpted from his comment, but it's this part of the sentiment that I find most troubling. And I'm focusing on it because I'm thinking about a friend of mine ...

She's in her early 50s, she's college-educated in the field in which she's worked her entire life, she was laid off due to downsizing, she's kept a good attitude and done everything possible over the past 18 months or so to find another job -- paid for extensive training to make her skills tippy-top marketable, pounded the pavement, networked and taken any odd job available to make ends meet. She's single, she lives in a small apartment and she's now siphoning off her small retirement nest egg to pay her monthly bills.

1. EXONEREES - We make the most persuasive argument possible about why exonerees deserve to be "made whole" regarding the money paid to them by the state for being wrongfully convicted. It's important that we confirm that the legislation passed last year by lawmakers significantly upping the rate of recompense was intended to get all the money allotted to each exoneree and not be shared with government in the form of taxes. If that's the case, then it seems to us the best solution is a federal one and we're researching to determine which of these two possible federal resolutions makes most sense: Modify the definition of the existing tax exemption for awards of "pain and suffering" to make explicit that somebody wrongly convicted and sent to prison qualifies for the pain-and-suffering exemption OR create another exemption specifically aimed at exonerees. We'll note in the editorial that if neither of these routes works, there are a couple of possible state solutions. Regardless of all of the nuance, the bottom line is that this is an important matter that must be addressed. Very few people qualify for this money but those that do have been egregiously harmed and therefore it's imperative that a fix become a top priority - especially of our Dallas County congressional delegation, since this county leads the nation in exonerations. Tod writing on behalf of the board.

2. TRANSIT - We offer qualified praise for Straus in his opening the door to regional solutions to the state's rail conundrum and we outline why moving forward aggressively on the Cotton Belt's east-west rail line through DFW Airport is important to this region. Rodger writing on behalf of the board.

What do you think? Join the debate in comments below.

Which of the following revenue sources has grown the most since Rick Perry became governor?

A. Sales tax, driven by a strong economy.
B. Natural gas production tax revenue, driven by a strong economy and the Barnett Shale discovery.
C. Federal income.

The answer is C, though you'd never know it from listening to the rhetoric from the governor. Rick Perry is trying hard to capture the anti-Washington mood of voters, and he likes to argue that he is turning away federal dollars because, by golly, we Texans are independent and can solve our own problems. Problem is, the numbers just don't support that assertion.

Compare the 2009 revenue for the state of Texas with the 2000 revenue, and you'll see something you might not expect from a state that is led by someone who is sypathetic to secessionists. Federal income has grown 108.53 percent since 2000, more than double the revenue growth of taxes (50 percent). That means the Texas miracle is producing half as much revenue growth as reliance on federal dollars. As a portion of the state's total revenue, taxes actually decreased by 6 percentage points while federal dollars increased by 7 percentage points.

That means Texas relies more on federal dollars and less on its own taxes than it did when Perry took office. Put another way: Texas is less independent than it was when the governor took office, not more.

To be fair, this isn't all his doing. A lot of it is surely due to rising entitlement program costs, esepcially in health care. He cannot control a lot of what comes to the state through federal income, but he sure likes to create the impression that he can -- and that he has. He ignores the federal dollars he has accepted, and he seems proud of denying dollars for Texas teachers and classrooms based on some sort of principle that Washington is bad.

Take a look at the numbers yourself (source: the link above, the Window on State Govenment Web site produced by the state comptroller). You'll see that what Rick Perry says just doesn't add up. ...

I'm skeptical that we need a new jobs bill, but I do love that Scott Brown voted yesterday to let the measure go to the Senate floor. If we're ever going to get past reflexive partisanship, legislators are going to have to buck their parties. Brown, Massachusetts' new Republican senator, did that on his first really big vote. He went with Democrats and a few other Republicans to stop a filibuster of the bill.

As I said, I'm skeptical of this bill, mainly because we have spent only about 30 percent of last year's stimulus. Why don't we get that into place before deciding whether we need another stimulus?

But the bill is not really the big point in play here. It's the willingness of a freshman legislator to say no to his party right out of the box. Brown was probably under intense pressure not to cast that vote, but he did. That took courage and is a triumph for independent leadership.

Now, when are we going to see more of that from Democratic legislators? Sen. Ben Nelson' s showing some by opposing the jobs bill. Sen. Evan Bayh showed some in pressing his party to rethink its health care approach before he decided to resign. And Blanche Lincoln, another Democratic senator, shows some from time to time. But when are we going to see more Democratic moderates make Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi squirm?

That's one way we will know when predictable partisanship is slowing down. Scott Brown sure made his leaders squirm. I'm proud of him.

For years, I have followed efforts to build a shared arts hall in Collin County. I was disappointed when the McKinney bond election years ago failed at the polls. That left only three cities to participate. Really, the effort never seemed to get on track, though not anyone's fault. It just always seemed that the cities needed a fourth major partner.

Well, they got one last week. The Recession officially became the fourth "owner" of this arts hall, at least Phase 1. It seems that the $19 million, McKinney-shaped hole in the budget has been filled by lower estimates courtesy of a terrible economic downturn. Who'd a thunk it?

That leaves the Arts of Collin County just a few million dollars short of its target to begin building. Arts hall in the midst of a terrible economy, you say? Doesn't that seem wasteful?

No! A thousand times, no. More kids participate in fine arts programs than athletics in Collin County, and building now -- or soon -- will create a legacy that will last through dozens of economic downturns in the future.

Read the whole press release below:

I don't know if readers feel this way, but I often have the sense of playing catchup in terms of what's going on in Washington. The Big Story is replaced by the next Big Story replaced by the next Big Story.

Last week, the Big Story (interesting that the initials for that would be the BS) was the stimulus package's one-year anniversary. Now everyone's rushed on to create -- and report -- sound bites leading up to the health care summit.

But before I move on, I hope to engage my colleagues on what the stimulus did and didn't do.

Amid all the "stimulus didn't create a single job" criticism last week, a number of reports did note that most economic analysts continue to agree that the stimulus preserved or created 1.6 million to 1.8 million jobs and is expected, ultimately, to add a total of roughly 2.5 million (some sources say 3.5 million) by the time the spending ultimately plays out. But, grimly, unemployment is still a crisis and, the NYT reported today on some reasons why that stubborn number likely will remain high and what that means for our country:

We're working on editorials now for tomorrow's page having to do with how Texas can best deal with its looming budget deficit and what seem to be the Obama administration's stepped up emphasis on the virtues of nuclear energy.

(As an aside, a key essay in yesterday's Points section provides a great back drop for our editorial regarding nuclear energy. I'd link to it here, but Foreign Policy magazine doesn't allow us to do so. Check out the essay in the pulp product, back of the Points section: It's worth the effort.)

Read on in the extended section for more detail about these two editorials and which Editorial Board member is crafting each. And please use the comments section to share your thoughts.....