Ken Herman is another good political journalist. Bill Hobby was the best Lt. Gov the state has ever had. He was a master of diplomacy, getting things through without forcing them through too harshly. He understood the game is played long term, and you have to get along with the people on the other side of issues. All that is gone is gone now.
Michael Crichton wrote a book called "Rising Sun" (later adapted into a movie with Sean Connery and Wesley Snipes) in which he stated that the reason Japan did so well economically (in the mid 90s) was because they look at the next quarter century where we look at the next fiscal quarter. I think that politics is becoming the same way, with everyone looking at how to get it all NOW instead of figuring out long term strategies.
well...if the Japanese meltdown is a product of that kind of thinking...i think we should stay far away from it!!
The japanese meltdown was due to other reasons, but I think that chasing immediate gratification at the cost of future repercussions is very short sighted. There is a reason that we teach children to delay gratification, as it keeps them from becoming addicted to drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, or anything else. The inability to delay gratification is one thing that is shared by all addicts, apparently it is no different for those addicted to power. I again renew my call for publicly funded elections and term limits.
This is what your Republican Texas Legislature has allowed. This is what comes from refusing to do anything to raise revenue... even raising the "sin taxes", cigarettes and the like, was refused. And they are so proud of their budget. Think about your children and their education and see if you can be proud of this... HoustonChronicle.com -- http://www.HoustonChronicle.com | Section: Local & State Aug. 21, 2003, 4:29PM Teachers sue over retirement rules that cut benefits Associated Press AUSTIN - A Texas teachers group filed a lawsuit today against the state's Teacher Retirement System in protest of a rule that classifies counselors, librarians, nurses and therapists as administrators, and in effect, doubling a legislative cut to their health insurance supplement. The Texas Federation of Teachers is asking a Travis County district court for a declaratory judgment that the TRS rule is invalid. During the regular legislative session, lawmakers faced with a massive budget shortfall cut a $1,000 state health-insurance supplement for school employees according to job classification. Full-time employees saw their supplement cut by $500; part-time employees by $750; and a $1,000 cut to administrators. The TRS Board adopted a rule this summer that classifies about 21,000 professional school employees in Texas who earn more the $50,000 a year as administrators -- a move the Texas Federation of Teachers says is in clear violation of legislative intent. A TRS spokesman did not immediately comment on the lawsuit when called by The Associated Press. "TRS has no legislative authority to use a salary cutoff like this to expand the number of employees who will lose the entire healthcare supplement," said John Cole, TFT president. "Legislative intent couldn't have been clearer. TRS now has no legitimate basis for granting the $500 to all teachers, regardless of their salary level, while using a salary cutoff to exclude others who should be eligible for the supplement." Louis Malfaro, president of Education Austin, said the rule change directly affects a wide range of professionals who are directly linked to students. "What the TRS has done is add insult to injury by seeking to economize and lump in people who are clearly non-administrators into this group that is losing all of their state funded health insurance money," Malfaro said. School employees who earn more than $50,000 have spent years in the system, he said. "These are the people who have spent their lives serving children and this is the reward that the legislature and, in this case TRS, is seeking to give them," he said. Hard to believe it has come to this. And this is just one example.
Another article highlighting Tom DeLay's involvement in redistricting. He attempted to get Republican State Senator and then Republican Lt. Governor Bill Ratliff two years ago to drop the two thirds rule and attempt redistricting. Ratliff refused. Check it out. It's towards the end of this article. GOP seeks federal review of rule change in Senate By Laylan Copelin AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF Wednesday, August 20, 2003 Republican leaders are seeking a quick federal review of Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst's decision to drop a state Senate tradition that killed congressional redistricting once before and could again if reinstated. Democrats on Tuesday accused Republicans of secretly trying to get the U.S. Justice Department to approve the rule change. Democrats contend that the change in Senate procedure hurts minority voting rights; Republicans deny that. "They probably believe the Justice Department will rubber-stamp anything that those partners in crime, (U.S. Majority Leader) Tom DeLay and David Dewhurst, submit," said Gerry Hebert, a lawyer for Texas congressional Dem- ocrats. The request, dated Friday, was written by the secretary of state's office at the request of Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican. To protect minority voting rights, the Justice Department routinely reviews changes in election procedures, but state GOP leaders contend that the federal Voting Rights Act does not cover an internal Senate procedure. That issue is also the subject of a federal lawsuit brought by the Democrats this month. Angela Hale, Abbott's communications director, said the state would benefit from a quick ruling "that federal officials cannot encroach on a state legislature's daily, internal workings and impose procedural rules on state lawmakers that dictate when certain issues can even be debated and voted on." The letter notes that the special session to consider congressional redistricting will end Tuesday and asks for an expedited review. As for not telling the Democrats, Hale said, "What obligation do we have to notify the Democrats about our legal strategy ahead of time?" Traditionally, two-thirds of the senators must agree to debate a bill. That allows 11 senators to block floor debate on any bill. After a dozen senators blocked debate on redistricting, Dewhurst, a Republican, dropped the tradition, saying his Democratic predecessors did not always honor it. Eleven Democratic senators then left the state, claiming that Dewhurst had changed the rules. Their absence denied the Senate a quorum to debate a new political map that would probably hand control of the Texas congressional delegation to the GOP. Democrats now hold 17 of the 32 Texas seats in Congress. The Democratic senators, who have many minority constituents, may go to Washington next week to make their case directly to Justice Department officials. If the Democrats can re-establish the two-thirds tradition either in their federal lawsuit or by talking to Justice officials, then they would have enough votes to stop redistricting again. On Tuesday, Sen. Bill Ratliff, R-Mount Pleasant, disclosed that when he was lieutenant governor two years ago, DeLay asked him to drop the two-thirds tradition for a shot at redistricting in a special session. Ratliff said he refused. He said Dewhurst made a mistake when he didn't do the same thing this year. Republicans have fined the missing Democrats. And Democrats say they are asking prosecutors to consider filing criminal charges of official oppression or abuse of official capacity against their GOP colleagues. Ratliff said the standoff is killing the Senate's tradition of bipartisan cooperation. "The real tragedy is that it was all predictable and avoidable," he said. "But each step that is taken, just by one more step, destroys the Senate I knew." Amazing. www.statesman.com
Another editorial to end the absurdity by the Republican Texas Legislature... Opinion -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted on Thu, Aug. 21, 2003 Everybody go home Star-Telegram These are sad days for the Texas Legislature. What is saddest about them is that there is no end in sight to the problems that have brought that body down. The Senate's work has been halted. Lawmakers are divided along party lines, each side blaming the other for lighting a spreading fire of angry rhetoric, lawsuits and even accusations of racism. The House, only a few steps away across the Capitol but closer than that in terms of related turmoil, recently experienced its own partisan shutdown over the same issue that now bedevils the Senate: congressional redistricting. This must end. Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst have assumed the roles of chief flame-fanners in this conflagration, destroying any trust that they will bring it to an end on their own. Others must step forward to restore order. Individual Republican senators, including the three who represent Tarrant County, should assume that role. Jane Nelson, Kim Brimer and Chris Harris should tell Perry and Dewhurst that the current redistricting-poisoned special legislative session should end immediately. Congressional redistricting must die as an issue, at least until someone can offer up a new map that can compel consensus among a quorum of Senate members. The three Tarrant County senators -- along with Perry, Dewhurst and plenty of other people -- argue that the 11 Democrats who flew to Albuquerque, N.M., to break the quorum to block redistricting had a responsibility to stay in Austin and do their jobs. Dewhurst also argues that the Democrats have no "right" to break a Senate quorum. The Democrats, of course, would argue that he had no "right" to drop the two-thirds rule while this issue was in play. Those arguments have only escalated, not ended, the current problems. The Democrats offer counter-arguments -- and, unfortunately, they offer them and other points of contention in lawsuits that they have filed against their Senate colleagues. The best way to stop this fight is to stop fighting. Quit and go home. Don't come back until you can work together productively. www.startelegram.com This isn't all...
An editorial from the Houston Chronicle... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- HoustonChronicle.com -- http://www.HoustonChronicle.com | Section: Editorial Aug. 20, 2003, 8:34PM LINE IN SAND Ratliff a voice of reason GOP should heed Remember the Alamo and forget about your parking spaces. Those, in essence, are among the politically primed messages the Republican state leadership is sending these dog days of August to the 11 Texas Senate Democrats who fled to New Mexico to deny a quorum in the festering feud over congressional redistricting. If the fugitives won't surrender or submit, they will be sanctioned (including losing their Capitol parking slots), fined and otherwise harangued. The theater of the absurd spirals downward, just as many predicted it would if the needless re-redistricting battle were pressed. On Wednesday, the Democrats amended a federal lawsuit filed in Laredo that claims the GOP leaders violated the federal Voting Rights Act by dropping a Senate tradition that requires two-thirds of the chamber to agree to debate a bill. Amid all the partisan cacophony, at least one reasoned voice rose among the Republican hierarchy this week. Sen. Bill Ratliff, R-Mt. Pleasant, who served as lieutenant governor, fretted over the long-term damage being done to the institution of the state Senate and its traditional collaborative bipartisanship. "I'm distraught about this escalation of hostilities; I'm particularly distraught because it was all so predictable and avoidable," Ratliff told the Dallas Morning News, adding that he told U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay in 2001 that he, then acting as lieutenant governor and presiding over the state Senate, would not suspend the two-thirds rule. Ratliff told the Dallas Morning News that he had even pondered retiring from the Legislature because of the current line-in-the-sand rancor. Ratliff's is another voice of reason DeLay, Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst are bound to ridicule and dismiss. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's not all...
Another opinion piece by Dave McNeely. After reading two editorials saying much the same thing, perhaps his columns should be given a little weight around here... by those who care about what's happening to Texas. And, besides including more about Senator Ratliff, he gives some intriguing insight. Ambitions are fueling this fight Dave McNeely -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thursday, August 21, 2003 Folks wonder why Gov. Rick Perry, and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, are risking political capital on congressional redistricting. Perhaps Republican politics. When Perry switched to the GOP in 1989, his mentor, then-U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm, a party-switcher himself, said a former Democrat had to be more Republican than other Republicans. Perry listened. Yet speculation continues that either U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison or another former Democrat, Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, will challenge Perry in 2006. Dewhurst's presumed game plan is to win another term in 2006 and then run for governor in 2010. Carrying water for the GOP on redistricting helps guard against a potential Republican primary challenger. Are Perry and Dewhurst hoping to curry favor with U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay? That's harder to figure. For House Speaker Tom Craddick, it made sense because DeLay helped Craddick win the post. It's harder to fathom why it might be important to Perry and Dewhurst. Some Democrats opine that DeLay would help Perry stave off competition from Hutchison. Another presumption is that the Bush administration is involved. Bush's top political adviser, Karl Rove, has made calls pushing for a new map to help elect more Republicans. The idea would be to cement Republican power not just for Bush's tenure but for decades. Nicholas Lemann, a former writer for Texas Monthly, recently wrote on Rove for The New Yorker: "The real prize (for Rove) is creating a Republican majority that would be as solid as, say, the Democratic coalition that Franklin Roosevelt created — a majority that would last for a generation . . ." Another thought is that Perry and Dewhurst presumed they could have their way with the newly minority Democrats. But faced with an extraordinary re-redistricting situation, 11 Democratic senators responded with an extraordinary flight to New Mexico to break a quorum. Both sides appear dug in, with no end in sight. It's become a question of whose endurance is longer. Perry, Dewhurst and other Republicans insist there's other important work for senators. But when asked if it's so important they'll pull down redistricting, they always sidestep. In 2001, Perry refused to call a special session on redistricting because legislators couldn't agree upon a plan. He let it go to a three-judge federal court. Had he used the same logic in 2003, when even Republicans can't agree on a map, he might not be out on a limb of hardball pride, dragging Dewhurst along to take bullets for him. There may be no graceful way out. But they could listen to Sen. Bill Ratliff, R-Mount Pleasant, who succeeded Perry and preceded Dewhurst as lieutenant governor: Reinstate the Senate's two-thirds rule to bring up redistricting. The 11 Democrats come home, and either a bill will pass or it won't. It makes so much sense that, in the current white-hot political climate, it probably won't even be considered. Dave McNeely's column appears Thursdays. Contact him at (512) 445-3644 or dmcneely@statesman.com. Wheels within wheels. And they are spinning unknown to most Texans.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/topstory/2068053 Federal judge punts, sends Democrats' suit to 3-judge panel Kazen critical of both sides in redistricting standoff By R.G. RATCLIFFE Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle LAREDO -- A federal judge told lawyers for runaway Democratic senators today that he believes their lawsuit seeking voting rights and free speech protections is all but totally frivolous, but he agreed to leave the final decision to a three-judge panel. U.S. District Judge George P. Kazen said he believes Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst's push for mid-decade congressional redistricting is wrong and a waste of taxpayer money. However, Kazen also criticized the Democratic senators for fleeing to Albuquerque, N.M., to break the Senate's quorum. "We're almost like the Middle East. We've got these two camps over here, and it's total victory or total surrender," Kazen said. Kazen refused to grant the Democrats' request for a restraining order to prevent the Senate sergeant-at-arms from arresting them in case there is another special session. Kazen also urged Perry not to call a session until the three-judge panel hears the Democrats' lawsuit in about two weeks. "Let's chill out for awhile. Let's stop spending the taxpayers money for awhile," Kazen said. The self-exiled Democrats had hoped to find a friendly judge by filing the lawsuit in Laredo. Kazen was appointed by former President Jimmy Carter. But the judge made it clear from the start of today's hearing that the only reason he was not throwing the case out was that federal case law requires voting rights questions to be answered by a three-judge panel unless the lawsuit is wholly frivolous or fictitious. "The agreement we've made is your lawsuit is not wholly frivolous," Kazen told Renea Hicks, a lawyer representing the Democrats. "That's cold comfort, but I accept it," Hicks replied. Hicks asked Kazen for a restraining order against the Senate sergeant-at-arms to prevent the senators' arrests if they returned to Texas. Hicks said he had heard Perry and Dewhurst had planned to arrest the senators if they attended the federal court hearing. Kazen indicated he did not see a problem with that as long as the arrest was legal. He said the three-judge panel might enter a narrow order that would allow the Democratic senators to attend a court hearing without fear of arrest. Several of the senators had planned to attend the hearing but decided against it Tuesday night when rumors circulated that Republican senators had been told to return to Austin for a third special session. Also, it was rumored that the Senate sergeant-at-arms, Carlton Turner, was in Laredo and would arrest the Senators at the courthouse. "I'm not stupid," Sen. Rodney Ellis of Houston said in Albuquerque. "I don't walk into an ambush." "They'll stoop to any level," said Sen. Mario Gallegos of Houston. He added that he would not have gone willingly if the Republicans had tried to trap him in Texas. "They're going to have to take me," he said. David Beckwith, spokesman for Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, said Dewhurst discussed the possibility of arresting the Democrats while they were in Laredo, but added that the discussions went no further. Turner was not available because today is a state holiday observing the death of Lyndon Baines Johnson. The Democrats' lawsuit focuses on a change of Senate procedure that makes it likely that a Republican congressional redistricting plan will pass. They claim that violates their protections under the Voting Rights Act. But Kazen said the Voting Rights Act is meant to protect voters and should not apply to Senate procedures or the process of how a redistricting bill is passed. "If a redistricting bill is passed, it will unquestionably be subject to the Voting Rights Act; it will unquestionably be subject to (U.S. Justice Department) preclearance; and it will unquestionably generate a lawsuit," Kazen said. The lawsuit also said the threat of arrest violates the senators' free speech rights. Kazen said he did not believe anyone has been deprived of the right to speak. Kazen questioned where it would end if he ruled the Democrats "defacto filibuster" was protected speech. He said the Constitution protects a college professor from being fired for his beliefs, "but do you go to the next step and say he can't show up for class all semester?" The 11 Democratic senators took off for Albuquerque on July 28 as the first special session ended and they learned Perry planned to call a second session immediately. Dewhurst already had announced plans to change Senate procedures so the Democrats could not block congressional redistricting in the second session. The change in procedure amounted to dropping what has become known as the "two-thirds rule." So long as the procedure was in place, the 11 Democrats could block redistricting without having to break the Senate's quorum. Under standard Senate procedure, a supermajority of the Senate's 31 members must give permission for a bill to be debated. The vote is required to take legislation out of its regular order on the calendar. But Dewhurst announced that congressional redistricting would be the only thing on the calendar so a simple majority could pass it. Eighteen of the Senate's 19 Republican senators have indicated they will vote for a congressional redistricting bill. Dewhurst said the same change in procedure has been made 17 times in the past by other lieutenant governors, including several times in special sessions on redistricting. But the Democrats argue that the "two-thirds rule" was used in 1971, the year Texas came under the federal Voting Rights Act protections for minorities. They also say that while the procedure has been dropped for legislative redistricting in the past, it has never been changed for congressional redistricting. The U.S. Justice Department's Civil Rights Division on Tuesday told the state that the "two-thirds rule" is an internal Senate procedure and the agency would not consider the change in procedure as something that had to be reviewed under the Voting Rights Act. The Democratic senators in their federal lawsuit had argued that by changing the voting procedure in the Senate, Dewhurst had effectively denied them of protections for minorities under the Voting Rights Act as well as the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. In a request to amend their lawsuit, they also argued that attempts to arrest and penalize them for breaking the Senate quorum violated their constitutional free speech rights. The state's brief to the court argued that the Senate procedure for a supermajority has not been used consistently over the years and is "purely a legislative calendar-management tool." Attorney General Greg Abbott's lawyers said if the Voting Rights Act was applied to Senate procedure in this instance then it would require the lieutenant governor to "cede to federal authorities near-complete control over the daily internal workings of the Senate." Hicks in his brief called the state's position "greatly exaggerated." He said the Voting Rights Act clearly could be applied to Senate rules. "To use an extreme example, if the Texas Senate adopted a rule that said only Anglos in the Senate could vote on redistricting legislation, that too would not be within the scope of the (Voting Rights Act)" if the state was correct, Hicks wrote. Chronicle reporters Armando Villafranca in Austin and Rachel Graves in Albuquerque contributed to this story.
Interesting tidbits: <b><font size=4>Perry's ratings at low point</font></b> <I>By WAYNE SLATER / The Dallas Morning News AUSTIN – Locked in a fractious battle with the Legislature over congressional redistricting, Gov. Rick Perry's job-approval rating among Texans has fallen to its lowest point since he won that office, according to a new independent poll. For the first time since he became governor in December 2000, more Texans disapprove of the how Mr. Perry is doing in office than approve, the survey indicates. According to The Texas Poll taken this month, 44 percent of those questioned give the Republican high marks and 48 percent see his performance as fair or poor. Mr. Perry, whose effort to have the Legislature redraw congressional boundaries has failed during a regular session and two special sessions, dismissed his slide in the poll. "I get up every day and try to do what's right for the people of the state of Texas," he said Tuesday. "I don't wake up and fret about what a particular poll at a particular point in time says." Most Texans – 68 percent – also said they disapprove of the job by the Legislature, where both House and Senate Democrats have left the state to scuttle a GOP-backed redistricting plan. The survey did not ask Texans to rate the legislators by party. The telephone survey of 1,000 Texans selected at random was conducted Aug. 7-21 by the Scripps Data Center. The margin of error was 3 percentage points, which means that the results could vary that much in either direction. Texans were divided over the performance of House Speaker Tom Craddick and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, both Republicans. In the survey, 35 percent gave Mr. Dewhurst the thumbs up, 39 percent disapproved of the job he is doing and the rest had no opinion. As for the House speaker, about a quarter of those surveyed gave Mr. Craddick a good rating, a third gave him poor marks and the rest had no opinion. The most popular top state official in the survey was Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn, a Republican who got a 45 percent positive job approval rating; 23 percent disapproved. Assuming the governor's job after George W. Bush won the presidency, Mr. Perry's high point in The Texas Poll came in fall 2001 after his first legislative session as the state's chief executive. That's when two-thirds of Texans approved of the job he was doing. The latest rating for Mr. Perry was lower than at any point recorded for Democrat Ann Richards during her tenure in office and for all but one period for Mr. Bush – just after his victory over Ms. Richards in the hard-fought 1994 gubernatorial race. </I> http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dallas/politics/state/stories/082703dntexperry.62eee.html
Most Texans – 68 percent – also said they disapprove of the job by the Legislature, where both House and Senate Democrats have left the state to scuttle a GOP-backed redistricting plan. The survey did not ask Texans to rate the legislators by party. Why the hell not. Grrr ... that's where the real value of the poll is.
"The latest rating for Mr. Perry was lower than at any point recorded for Democrat Ann Richards during her tenure in office and for all but one period for Mr. Bush - just after his victory over Ms. Richards in the hard-fought 1994 gubernatorial race." Good heavens... Perry's abysmal performance is finally starting to sink in to the average Texan. I was beginning to wonder if anyone would ever start paying attention. Thank goodness.
Texas Republicans, explain this... look at the difference between what's coming out of the pockets of school teachers and school employees (not to mention state employees... and they weren't), health care and children and compare it to new fees for businesses and professionals. The difference is shocking. If you want to see far more shocking information, go to this link to the Comptroller's website. www.window.state.tx.us. HoustonChronicle.com -- http://www.HoustonChronicle.com | Section: Local & State Aug. 27, 2003, 9:28PM Cost of being a Texan going up Strayhorn ripped for rapping new fees that take effect Monday By POLLY ROSS HUGHES Copyright 2003 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau AUSTIN -- Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn warned Texans on Wednesday to brace for $2.7 billion in new state fees that will reach deeply into thousands of citizens' pockets starting Monday. "While these are not new taxes that are adopted by the Legislature, these dollars are still coming out of hard-working Texans' pockets," she said after calling a news conference. "What I'm telling you today is Texans are going to have to pay more for less." As she cast herself as a "fiscal watchdog," other Republican leaders shot criticism back at the comptroller and some suggested she's already campaigning for a higher office. The fees Strayhorn outlined will hit school teachers, rural and immigrant doctors, mothers tracking down deadbeat dads, private investigators, children needing health insurance and securities dealers, to name just a few. "As the fiscal watchdog for our taxpayers, I want Texans to know who's picking up the tab and how much that tab will be," Strayhorn said. "I don't want anyone being surprised when their out-of-pocket costs for health care increase, when everyone from nurses to plumbers to electricians pay higher professional fees and when granddad has to pay more to go to the lake to fish," she said. Broadly, she broke down the fees, charges and out-of-pocket expenses this way: · Teachers and school employees -- $1.08 billion, including $1,000 cut over two years in cash supplements for teacher health care, which Strayhorn said amounts to a fee. · Health care -- $596 million, including $4.8 million in fees for rural and immigrant doctors. · Children -- $71.5 million, including $57.9 million in new co-pays and premium hikes for enrollees in the Children's Health Insurance Program. · Business and professionals -- $36.4 million, including $3.9 million in new state regulation fees for a wide range of business and industry professionals. "She sounds like a candidate who's running for higher office. My gut on the deal is it's lieutenant governor,"said political consultant and lobbyist Bill Miller, noting "longstanding ill will" between Strayhorn and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. Dewhurst also thinks something's up with Strayhorn, but he suggested she's possibly running for Gov. Rick Perry's job, not his own. "It sounds like the Republican primary started early this year," Dewhurst said about the points Strayhorn raised at her news conference. "I think you're going to have to ask Governor Perry about that," Dewhurst added. Strayhorn has tangled frequently with Perry, Dewhurst and lawmakers over how to balance the state budget to erase a $9.9 billion shortfall. Her clash with Perry almost resulted in a constitutional showdown in June, when Strayhorn refused at first to certify the state's 2004-05 budget. She later reversed herself after a minor adjustment. "Mrs. Strayhorn didn't raise any of these concerns during the session and did not offer any real alternatives for funding trauma centers, cleaner air, greater public safety and better roads," Perry said. Strayhorn contends she did offer several money-saving or revenue-generating ideas to lawmakers. Many were ignored, including a call for a cigarette tax and video lottery at race tracks. "As I recall, this self-styled watchdog for the taxpayer more closely resembled an attack dog when she proposed new gambling initiatives and increased taxes as a way to deal with a drastic revenue shortfall that she failed to predict," said Senate Finance Chairman Sen. Teel Bivins, R-Amarillo. House Appropriations Chairman Rep. Talmadge Heflin, R-Houston, said he has no problem with taxpayers knowing detailed information on fee hikes. "If people want to go and look and see what was increased, that's fine," Heflin said. "If there was an attempt to in some way slam the Legislature, I would be disappointed in that if that's the motivation," he added. "We were faced with putting together a budget without specific tax increases when right after the election she doubled the shortfall." House Speaker Tom Craddick made clear he thinks Strayhorn was not only criticizing fellow Republicans but doing so unfairly. He said her comments "continue a pattern of misguided messages that seem intended more to stir up trouble than to increase public confidence in state government." The truth behind the failure of the Leadership of the Texas Republican Party is being exposed... in this instance, by the Republican Comptroller!
I haven't lived in TX for several years now., didn't this chick's name used to be Carole Keeton Rylander when she was railroad commissioner, or some useless office like that? WTF happened? she divorced Rylander and married Strayhorn? What's up with that?
Something like that. Her father is/was (can't remember, sorry) a famous UT professor and Dean. Thus the "Keeton". She's always kept that. Rylander/Strayhorn is really bucking and seriously ticking off Perry, Dewhurst and Craddick right now. I'm not crazy about her, but she's showing some guts to put the actual information about what has happened to the people of Texas... things that those not directly affected were not paying attention to. Perhaps they will now. I hope so. Sometimes raising revenue in a period of crisis is necessary and not something inherently "evil" like some circles love to portray.
By the by, turns out, this isn't true. The three judge panel that drew the districts consisted of one Republican judge (Ford Appointee) and two Democratic judges (Clinton Appointees). The Governor didn't get to request who from the 5th Circuit Court would be appointed to draw the map. As it turned out, two of the three appointees in that case were appointed by President Clinton. I just thought that was interesting since it is fairly "common knowledge" that it was three Republican judges who drew the current districts. That's what I thought anyway (and what you thought, apparently, too). Doesn't make any difference to me overall, but it does change the shading of the story a little bit.
Are we sure that they're Democrats though. Presidents don't always nominate judges from the same party.
You're correct, mrpaige. The ruling was signed by all 3 judges, however, including Republican Patrick Higginbotham of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Five of the districts have Republican majorities, as you know, and the voters like their representation. Several of the Democratic Representatives have great seniority on important committees. If the Republican Party had run strong candidates in those districts they had every opportunity to win. It certainly wasn't a shortage of money. This is from an article in the Houston Chronicle after the ruling... Houston Chronicle New U.S. House Map Saves All Seats; 2 added districts tilt toward GOP By R.G. Ratcliffe November 15, 2001 A three-judge federal court panel Wednesday ordered a Texas congressional redistricting map for the 2002 elections that protects all the state's incumbents but gives Republicans the state's two new districts. While the ruling can be appealed directly to the U.S. Supreme Court, Democratic and Republican lawyers said they expect the map to be used for next year's elections. After next year's voting the Democrats likely will hold a 17-15 advantage in Texas' delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives. Democrats hold a 17-13 majority in the current delegation. The state gained two seats from the national reapportionment that followed the 2000 Census. One of the new GOP districts, District 31, will stretch from northwestern Harris County across Waller, Austin, Washington, Brazos, Burleson, Lee and Bastrop counties into Williamson County north of Austin. The other new district, 32, is entirely within northwestern Dallas County. Despite the judges' tilt toward incumbent protection, the 11th District of U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, was made more competitive. Based on voting patterns in the newly drawn 11th, Edwards is the Democratic incumbent Republicans would have the best chance of knocking off. That would leave the delegation with a 16-16 split. The plan created no new Hispanic or black districts. The order was signed by all three judges hearing the case -- Republican Patrick Higginbotham of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and Democrats John T. Ward and John Hannah Jr., both U.S. district judges from Tyler.
