Blogging doesn't pay the bills....

So blogging will be on the back burner for the next few while I'm out on a three day training assignment for my evil Big Oil employer.

Blogging will be sporadic in the intirim.

Beer Prices to Increase...

NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!...

(From Shannon Dininny of the AP via the Chron)

Fans of Snipes Mountain Brewery's cloudy Hefeweizen relish the subtle wheat flavor of the bright, summery brew, and like beer drinkers everywhere, they know when their favorite brew tastes a little too hoppy or bitter.

Connoisseurs could be in for a surprise this year, and they may not be alone.

Small brewers from Australia to Oregon face the daunting prospect of tweaking their recipes or experimenting less with new brews thanks to a worldwide shortage of one key beer ingredient and rising prices for others.

Oh, and one other thing: Beer prices are likely to climb. How high is anybody's guess. Craft brewers don't have the means to hedge against rising prices, like their industrial rivals.

"I'm guessing, at a minimum, at least a 10 percent jump in beer prices for the average consumer before the end of the year," said Terry Butler, brewmaster at central Washington's Snipes Mountain.

Sales have been relatively flat in recent years among the country's big three brewers — Anheuser-Busch Cos., Molson Coors Brewing Co. and SABMiller PLC. unit Miller Brewing Co — while small, independent brewers have experienced tremendous growth. The craft brewing industry experienced a 12 percent increase by volume in 2006, with 6.7 million barrels of beer. Sales among microbreweries, which produce less than 15,000 barrels per year, grew 16 percent in 2006.

Now the bright spot in the brewing industry is facing mounting costs on nearly every front. Fuel, aluminum and glass prices have been going up quickly over a period of several years. Barley and wheat prices have skyrocketed as more farmers plant corn to meet increasing demand for ethanol, while others plant feed crops to replace acres lost to corn.

A decade-long oversupply of hops that had forced farmers to abandon the crop is finally gone and harvests were down this year. In the United States, where one-fourth of the world's hopes are grown, acreage fell 30 percent between 1995 and 2006.

If ever there was a need for an emergency session of Congress this is it. Victory Gin is supposed to be cheap and readily available dangit!!!

This calls for an emergency BTC meeting post haste.

Here's a question for Rick Noriega

(forgive me this one *rare* political post on a Friday)

How do you feel about this issue....

(from Gary Martin of the San Antonio Express News)

Legislation was filed Thursday that would permanently extend the temporary federal sales tax exemption for residents of eight states, including Texas, that do not levy an income tax.
Lawmakers approved the exemption for one year in 2005 and extended it two more years in 2006, saying it was a matter of fairness.

"It is essential that in our country we have the same treatment for people of every state regardless of how they pay their state taxes," said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.

Hutchison, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and senators from Tennessee filed the bill, which could be attached to one of several spending bills under consideration in the Senate.

Besides Texas, the states that do not levy an income tax are Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Tennessee, Washington and Wyoming.

Cornyn said supporters of the bill to make the deduction permanent need 60 votes in the Senate and, under budget rules, must provide corresponding cuts to offset the loss of revenue.

Those obstacles have thwarted passage of the bill in the past.

It's no secret that I'm not a fan of John Cornyn. I have my reasons to not cast a vote for him no matter what. I'm unsure of Rick Noriega, mainly becuase right now he's playing to the progressive crowd almost exclusively.

So my question for Rick is this: Do you support this measure (and why) or do you oppose it (and why)?


I'm sure someone from the InterLeft will see this so if you do, please forward the question to Mr. Noriega. I'm sure there are several who would be curious to know his stance.

When a "loss" can be a win.

Habitat for Humanity may have lost the battle but they could be one step closer to winning the war:

(From Barrett Goldsmith of the Baytown Sun)

A Harris County judge has ruled that a piece of land donated to Habitat for Humanity actually belongs to the donor’s daughter, but the daughter must pay Habitat $85,000 for the value of a home built on the land for a Baytown family.

Edna Salinas and her children remain at the home on Ontario Street, and an attorney for Habitat for Humanity said the family would stay unless Carol Young is able to pay the $85,000. Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod in the 190th Civil Court ruled Oct. 17 that Young legally owned the land, but that Habitat for Humanity acted “in good faith” in its efforts to build the home for the family.

“Our No. 1 priority has been providing for this family,” said attorney Allen Russell, who is also on the board of the Baytown chapter of Habitat for Humanity. “Either we’ll able to get this property back, or we can use the money to buy another home. There could be appeals, other steps. But he two points that are good news is that Habitat acted in good faith, and the outcome will allow us to provide for the family who was an innocent victim of this circumstance.”

The dispute arose after Jean Lammers, a Baytown woman known for her philanthropy, donated the property to Habitat in 2003 before she died. But she had already given the property to Young, her daughter, in 1992. Habitat paid taxes on the property from 2003 to 2005. Habitat checked with a title company, who verified using those tax rolls, and checked a deed from Lammers’ husband.

It was only when Habitat and Salinas attempted to close on the property last summer that they discovered the conflicting deeds. Habitat attempted to pay Young $8,000 for the property – the Harris County Appraisal District listed it at about $7,100 – but Young refused, wishing to receive the full value of the property with the house.

When an agreement with Young could not be reached, Habitat filed a suit against Young, who then countersued and mailed an eviction notice to Salinas.

I'll leave unspoken my opinions on the moral quality of Ms. Young. Needless to say I'm glad she's having to pay for the improvements that were made to a piece of land she was obviously going to do nothing with. She tried to cash in on the backs of a charity group that does good work across the Country. Her contention that she was entitled to the value of the improved land (that she had no part in improving) was laughable. Now, instead of taking $8,000 and just walking away she's on the hook for $85,000 if she wants to keep the property.

It's OK if you read that last bit and smile a little bit. I know that I did.

Some progress on the West Galveston development.

It appears as if there's a working agreement in place...

(from Leigh Jones of the Galveston County Daily News)

Marquette Land Investments presented its development agreement to the city council on Thursday, promising the largest master-planned community in the island’s history would look as good in reality as it did on paper.

The agreement is an attempt to soothe concerns that a zoning change Marquette developers requested — to recreation zoning — would result in something other than a residential community being built on the 1,058 acres.

The city council agreed to negotiate the terms of the agreement earlier this year, even though it has not given Marquette the permission it needs to move forward. Marquette reimbursed the city for all legal fees it incurred developing the agreement.

If approved, The Preserve at West Beach will have a 15-story resort hotel, 18-hole golf course, marina, five mid-rise condominium towers and 4,000 residential units.

Marquette plans to set aside 361 acres, 34 percent of the development, for a contiguous nature preserve.

The entire project will stretch between 8 Mile and 11 Mile roads, from beach to bay in some places.

The proposed agreement binds Marquette and any future owners of the land to the preliminary plat the Planning Commission approved in July.

There are still several vocal groups against this, but I'm guessing this deal allows it to move forward.

I want to be a climate "expert"

You get paid for stating the obvious...

(from Eric Berger of the Chron)

A top climate scientist warned Wednesday that Texas faces a dual threat from floods and drought if global warming is left unchecked.

James Hansen, in Houston to speak before the Progressive Forum on Wednesday night, said predictions made two decades ago about the effects of a warming world are now beginning to come true.

"Texas is in the line of fire for double-barreled climate impacts," said Hansen, who heads the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies. "What we said in the 1980s, and is beginning to come true now, is that both ends of the hydrological cycle get intensified by global warming."

A warmer climate increases evaporation, he said. It both sucks moisture from the ground, intensifying drought, and increases atmospheric humidity, which causes more rain to fall during extreme events.

Hansen gained attention in the 1980s by testifying to congressional committees about the perils of global warming and again in 2005 and 2006 by claiming that NASA administrators sought to influence his public statements about the causes of climate change. Because of this, he is arguably the world's most well-known climate researcher.

In related news: The sun will come up in the East tomorrow if Global warming remains unchecked. Maybe, and if I'm wrong I can cite "factors unknown at the time of my prediction" as the reason why.

That wasn't the real reason for his visit with the Progressive Forum however, the REAL reason he was there was to stir up the faithful...

On Wednesday, Hansen again spoke out on a political issue. He expressed concerns about an Associated Press report that the White House had significantly edited a draft of testimony prepared for a Senate hearing on the impact of climate change.

The White House denied that it had "watered down" the congressional testimony that Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, had given Tuesday to the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

"The whole idea of democracy that our Founding Fathers had was that the public is educated, and that they are informed honestly," Hansen said.

He said the White House review of statements by government scientists testifying to Congress does no good, adding that the unneeded oversight exists elsewhere in government as well.

"The public affairs offices have become offices of propaganda," he said. "They should be under professional civil servants, not political appointees who change each time a new election occurs"

The last portion of the excerpt (which I bolded for emphesis) is one area where the good Climatologist and I agree. The entirety of the "Global Warming Debate" should be based on information that's provided in a non-partisan manner. Non-partisan meaning that the White House shouldn't have "edited" the report, and a climatologist shouldn't make inflammatory statements to a partisan group and then whine about partisanship.

The data that we receive on this issue should be neutral. Free from the influence of energy and oil companies and Al Gore's carbon credits companies, both of which stand to make substantial gains or losses from whatever plan is implemented.

Neither side on this is ideologically pure, although both would like to make you think that they are. Neither side has been proven "right" either, despite the claims of opinion makers in the MSM and in the blogosphere on both sides. There's some compelling data out there that tells us that the temperature of the Earth's crust is gradually rising. There's also compelling evidence out there that tells us this has happened before and is part of the natural cycle of things. There's conflicting evidence as to whether or not this change is being accelerated or magnified by the actions of men.

What's not in dispute is that we all like to breathe clean air and should take every reasonable step possible to ensure we keep doing so.

Gutting our economy is not reasonable, nor is passing punitive laws to force people into inefficient, expensive technology just because it makes us feel good. (see: Ethanol).

Of course, if I'm wrong on this then its due to circumstances that were unknown at the time of this post. (Man, I wish I could use that at my day job).

Kick a man while he's down (and officially out)

I guess Rick Casey couldn't help himself...

I often tell my lawyer friends I know they'll never lie to me.

They'll always tell me half the truth.

It's a lawyer's job to present the half that benefits his or her client. Or his or her own self.

It's somebody else's job to tell the other half.

So I believe Mikal Watts when he tells us he quit his quest to replace U.S. Sen. John Cornyn, after sinking millions of his own money into the campaign, because he wants to spend more time with his family.

But I also wonder if it has anything to do with Mauricio Celis, a guy who six weeks ago, wearing only a bathrobe, chased a naked woman into a Corpus Christi convenience store at 4 a.m.

Celis also flashed (get your mind out of the gutter) a badge, telling officers on the scene he was taking the woman into custody.

(snip)

But Celis wasn't, as the badge indicated, a deputy sheriff from nearby Duval County. He had been a Duval reserve deputy, but lost his commission in 2003 for not keeping up with required training.

Then again, Celis isn't an attorney either

In case you missed it, Watts dropped out of the race for Texas Senator the day before this article ran. Much to the rejoicing of the InterLeft, who had crucified the man every since Rick Noriega convinced them to "draft" him into throwing his hat in the ring.

All's well and good between Watts and the InterLeft now. Casey? Not so much.


I'm guessing this was his big "get" for the upcoming election season and now the rug has been ripped out from underneath him.

Shucks.

You gonna govern? Or fight?

Sadly the Federal Government has chosen the latter option...

(From Andrew Taylor of the AP via the Chron)

Senate Democrats on Tuesday reversed President Bush's cuts to education, health research and grants to local communities as they gird for Bush's first-ever veto of a regular appropriations bill.

By a 75-19 vote, the Senate gave bipartisan approval to a huge health and education spending bill that will likely be the first of the fiscal 2008 spending bills Democrats will ship to the White House to start a veto battle involving the budget for almost every domestic agency.

It promises to be a protracted battle, and Bush has a decided advantage, but Democrats have seized on the massive health and education measure as the best measure with which to challenge Bush and his GOP allies in Congress.

The measure totals over $600 billion and reverses a raft of cuts sought by Bush to health research, special education and funding for grants to community groups that help the poor, among others.

The confrontation with Bush over domestic programs — many of which are also popular with Republicans, as demonstrated by the margin of passage — will come on the heels of the bruising veto battle over a children's health insurance bill.

Programs funded by the health and education bill affect schoolchildren, workers, the poor and disabled, the unemployed and those with special needs or drug and alcohol problems, among others.

"In passing this bill, Democrats in Congress will say that the president doesn't care about children or education or health research," said White House press secretary Dana Perino. "We've all heard these tired old lines before. The facts demonstrate the president's strong and consistent commitment to children, education and health research — and the American people are smart enough to know that there is no such thing as a free lunch."

(snip)

"We are arguing about whether or not to invest further moneys in education, health care, (anti-crime grants), border security, port security, environmental protection," said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. "The President has asked for $196.4 billion of supplemental funding this year for Iraq and Afghanistan ... while he argues as to whether or not we ought to increase ... cancer research, diabetes research, heart/lung research for our citizens."

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., countered, "The spending hike they are asking for in this one bill, if allowed to continue at the same rate, will cost the American taxpayer $120 billion over the next ten years."

Those three quotes tell you everything that you need to know about our (almost hopelessly broken) Federal Government.

Sure, you'll see Op/Ed pieces, soundbytes and blog postings from partisan types telling you how "earnest" one side is over the other to "fiscal responsibility", "caring for the least fortunate among us" etc. etc. but what this entire thing boils down to is this:

The 2008 Elections.


If it TRULY was about children and education and the poor then you'd see both sides come together and hash out compromise legislation. But when the Democrats fire this shot across the President's bow, and he counterstrikes, then you know that this is just so much posturing. Both sides will claim victory, and then turn around and ask their bases for more campaign dollars. Money that would be better spent on charity to help said poor, the children and others that need help by the way.

Take that Veto and shove it!

Leaders restore Perry vetoed College funding.

(from Peggy Fikac of the Chron)

Texas community colleges will get $154 million in vetoed money after all under a deal struck by top state leaders including Gov. Rick Perry, who had deleted the money from the state budget in a funding dispute with the schools.

The GOP leaders — Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Tom Craddick — called on the colleges in light of Tuesday's agreement to rescind any approved or planned tuition, fee or tax increases tied to the veto.

Dewhurst, calling community colleges the "backbone" of higher education, said it was crucial "that we restore the vetoed funds and ensure higher education in Texas remains affordable and accessible to anyone who wants it, without putting any extra financial burden on students or taxpayers."

It's a stop-gap fix at best. And the whole education funding structure in Texas still needs a major overhaul, but cutting funds to Community Colleges was not one of Perry's brighter moves. This deal sheds him of this baggage should Guliani come calling for 2008.

State steroid testing on hold?

It appears that way...

(From Gary Scharrar of the Chron)

A desire to give parents, coaches and students ample time to respond to steroid testing of high school athletes could delay the project's launch until after this high school football season.

With football playoffs beginning in just three weeks, officials who support the mammoth testing program said Tuesday that it's more important to get it right than to rush into it.

University Interscholastic League officials have not yet awarded a contract among 14 companies that bid on the steroid testing program. Nor have they opened a public comment period allowing people to ask questions or to highlight undetected problems.

"We're strongly behind the proposition that we want to do this right, so it's probably not going to happen by football season. But we want to do it right — not fast," said Jeff Kloster, associate commissioner for health and safety at the Texas Education Agency.

(snip)

"We don't want to start testing and find that we have overlooked a major legal issue or anything that would violate any (federal health privacy) laws," UIL spokeswoman Kim Rogers said.

(snip)

Anabolic steroid use can cause severe physical and emotional consequences, including stunted growth, high blood pressure, liver tumors, and mood swings ranging from uncontrolled anger and aggressiveness to clinical depression when people stop using steroids.

(emphasis mine)

Most of those "medical side effects" have been proven FWIW. There's some ancedotal evidence that steroid abuse among teens can cause mood swings, and their are some blod pressure concerns, but mainly the medical facts regarding steroid use are that they are relatively safe for use in healthy adult males. Any observed side-effects are easily reversible. (HBP, cholesterol etc.)

The key in that last statement being HEALTHY ADULT MALES so don't go running off all quoting me out of context saying that I'm "pro High School steroid use". Because that would be an outright lie.

The fact is I'm very ANTI-steroid in most cases. I don't use them myself in my own supplementation routine, and I definately don't want High School or College athletes using them. I'm a little bit more ambivelent regarding their use among professional athletes, except in leagues where they are prohibited by rule.

Should steroid use be restricted? Well, of course. Because there's a limited sub-set of the population that receives any benefit from them. Should they be treated like cocaine? No. The threat is just not there.

Should Texas implement a testing program for High School athletes? Based on what I've seen its a waste of $3 Million dollars per year. Most of the steroid experts I've spoken with know a dozen (undetectable) ways to beat a test and the prevailing wisdom in the industry is that the only people who fail steroid tests are those who don't know what their doing.

A better path, to my way of thinking, would be to allow Dr's to prescribe them and then produce the science that backs up the claims you are making regarding the harm they can potentially do. Most of the High School problem can be handled through education. It'd be a lot better use of $3 Million than having every Texas athlete pee in a cup.

Debt Texas

How Long can Texas keep spending more than it brings in?

(from Jennifer Radcliffe of the Chron)

A state program that allows school districts to sell bonds at lower interest rates could be tapped out if voters approve the slew of school bonds on the Nov. 6 ballot — meaning districts may need to spend millions more to finance construction.

The Texas Education Agency's bond guarantee program, which can accommodate roughly $53 billion in bonds, was only $4.7 billion shy of capacity as of Aug. 31. While that's a substantial amount, two of the state's heavy hitters, the Cypress-Fairbanks and Houston school districts, will be asking voters for a total of more than a billion and a half dollars in next month's election.

All told, about 60 Texas districts are seeking $7.6 billion, which would bust the cap by nearly $3 billion.

Unless Texas can get the Internal Revenue Service to raise the cap, districts will be left scrambling, officials say.

At some point, schools and Government are going to have to examine cost control as a partner to spending. They get a "public perception pass" because its "for the children", the problem with that being that it's the "children" that are going to be saddled with unteneble amounts of debt service racked up by the previous generations.

*Turn away conservatives*
What this is going to eventually mean is that Texas is going to have to seriously consider tax increases. That and restructuring Texas' antiquidated tax systemt to better reflect the economy of the 21st century. This includes re-writing the tax code to include a State Income Tax, and also blowing up the old system and placing a tax on businesses that actually has some teeth.
*OK, conservatives can continue reading*

*Turn away progressives*
What this also means is that schools are going to have to go on a diet. I would imagine that administration would need something along the lines of a 10% reduction across the board, stadium and athletic facility construction would need to grind to a halt, and low density schools (even those with long standing neighborhood ties) would need to be consolidated to save money.
*OK, welcome back progressives*

All kidding aside, it's probably going to take a mixture of the two initiatives above to really solve the funding mess that Texas has dug for itself. It's real nice for certain politicians, bloggers, and editorial boards to cast dispersions toward the other side's way of doing things, but in the end its the tunnel vision of both sides that have gotten us into this mess. Progressives want increased education funding with little or no reform, Conservatives have done their best to choke the system with tax cuts of dubious value. Between the two you have a mess of mis-management that's not educating children.

I've stated often on this blog that I believe the State should do a few things and do them very well. Those things are to educate, transport and protect. Educate the children effectively and efficiently. Build infrastructure that enhances the transportation of goods and people across the State in an efficient and cost effective manner. Protect the safety and well being of law-abiding citizens in a humane and cost effective manner. Then, with any extra money, you prioritize your spending.

Government shouldn't be a marketing agency for private business, they shouldn't be in the real estate speculation business, they shouldn't assist with the development of commercial buildings. All of these things are "extras" that candidates throw out there to buy votes. It's legalized bribery and its bankrupting the State.


And I don't care which ideological aire you claim to be looking down on the other party from, you're ideology is responsible for the mess we're in. As are some of the candidates that I've backed in the past. It's time we demanded better, before we go broke.

How much is that doggy......

whoops, nevermind

(by Greg Barr of the Houston Business Journal)

The Houston Zoo is set to unleash its three newest residents: A trio of African wild dogs named Blaze, Aries and Mikita.

The zoo on Wednesday opened its wild dog exhibit, which includes a pool and a 12-by-12-foot cabana area to shade the animals.

Wild dogs are noted for their oversized, rounded ears and dappled coat of black, brown and white. They never have white on their faces and their tails are typically tri-colored. Adults weigh between 55 pounds and 80 pounds. The animals prefer tightly bonded social groups or packs.

Their top running speed is 40 miles per hour, to keep up with their preferred prey -- antelopes.

Just in time for the Zoo Boo as well.

Welcome to Houston Blaze, Aries and Mikita!

Unrelated stories

At first glance, the President's $550 Million dollar request for drug policing in South America and the $1.2 Billion dollar Iraqi police expenditure mess don't seem all that related.

If you look closer however you can see some parallels:

(From Pauline Jalinek of the AP via the Chron)

The State Department so badly managed a $1.2 billion contract for Iraqi police training that it can't tell what it got for the money spent, a new report says.

Because of disarray in invoices and records on the project — and because the government is trying to recoup money paid inappropriately to contractor DynCorp International, LLC — auditors have temporarily suspended their effort to review the contract's implementation, said Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction Stuart W. Bowen Jr.

Bowen had been trying to review a February 2004 contract to DynCorp awarded by the State Department's Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL). The company was to provide housing, food, security, facilities, training support, law enforcement staff with various specialties as well as weapons and armor for personnel assigned to the program.

"I guess it's a familiar theme," Bowen said Monday, in that problems have previously been documented with both DynCorp and the agency overseeing the contract.

And, the President's request:

(By Patty Reinhart and Dudley Althus of the Chron)

President Bush asked Congress today for $550 million to help Mexico and Central America fight drug trafficking amid escalating violence, particularly on the Texas-Mexico border.

The funding request, part of a two- to three-year package that would total about $1.4 billion, is included in a $46 billion proposal for additional funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"It delivers vital assistance for our partners in Mexico and Central America who are working to break up drug cartels, and fight organized crime, and stop human trafficking," Bush said at the White House, shortly after calling Mexican President Felipe Calderon.

Mexico would receive the lion's share of the aid package, $500 million, and Central America would get $50 million, officials said.

The aid package for Mexico, which officials have been negotiating since Bush met with Calderon in Merida, Mexico, last March, would include funds for additional Mexican military helicopters and other surveillance aircraft, drug-sniffing dogs and telecommunications equipment.

It would also pay for training Mexican police and troops involved in intercepting drug shipments en route to the United States.

Funnelling American taxpayer money to Nations without the infrastructure and rule of law to effectively control their populations is a situation rife with the potential for fraud. As was the case in the Iraqi police force mess.

Five years from now will America have anything to "show" for investing $550 Million into the Mexican system? Or will this be another example of the insane continually performing the same actions while expecting differing results?


OTHER EYES:

Grits for breakfast wonders if the Government is going to use the same contractor?

Have beach, will travel

They're rebuilding the beaches in Galveston...

(From Harvey Rice and Richard Stewart of the Chron)

Cars may once again be able to drive off the end of the seawall and onto 200-foot wide beaches once a $13.5 million beach restoration project to be announced today is completed.

The plan to widen three miles of eroded beaches west of the seawall with more than 1 million cubic feet of sand is the largest ever undertaken by Texas General Land Office, spokesman Jim Suydam said Monday.

A similar $5.75 million project will restore erosion-ravaged beaches in nearby Surfside, Brazoria County, Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson will announce here today during a three-day meeting of the American Shore & Beach Preservation Association.

The list of restoration projects will include Sylvan Beach in La Porte on Galveston Bay and South Padre Island.

The beaches are so important to Galveston's tourism economy that the city is scrambling for additional money to expand the project and restore seashore in front of the seawall where the waves have wiped away all traces of beach, City Manager Steve LeBlanc said.

The project, scheduled to be begin in fall 2008, is an effort to retard the steady erosion of beaches that in some places is eating away the sand at a rate 10 feet per year and threatening to gobble up seaside homes.

Suydam said it was unclear how long the project would take to complete.

LeBlanc recalled that drivers could once exit Texas 3005 on a ramp at the end of the seawall and drive onto the beach. Those beaches eroded decades ago, and the ramp has been barricaded.

Dibs on the second beach umbrella to the left.


Now, when they find a way to get rid of the brown water? Then we're onto something.

The Lose an Eye guide to the Nov. 6 elections.

It's early voting time!

Let's get down to brass tacks:

Houston Mayor - If you're a fan of Mayor White, vote for him. If you're not a big fan? Then don't vote. Seriously. The undervote here will be more telling than the election "percentages" that partisan cheerleaders will point to after the fact.

Houston City Council - You might have more success picking a good candidate by closing your eyes and throwing a dart at the ballot. If you have personal ties to a candidate, then vote for them, otherwise.....just be glad that Houston is a strong Mayor form of Government.

Texas Constitutional Amendments:

Proposition 4 - I'm suggesting a "no" vote on this one. Click on the link and read all of the background information against that Grits for Breakfast has to offer. Remember: building more prisons means more demand for prisoners which means more laws to break to create more prisoners and increasingly tougher sentences for things that probably shouldn't result in prison time.

Plus, we don't have the guards to staff them.

Proposition 15: I'm recommending a yes vote. This is the only bond package I'm providing support to.

The rest of the Propositions - Honestly I've not got strong leanings one way or the other on these. I'll probably be voting "no" on 4 and 12 and yes for the others, unless I see some compelling argument to change my mind.

The Bonds:

Here's a sample ballot and I urge you to make up your own mind on all of the bond proposals. Just remember that, eventually, the piper is going to be paid with all of these bonds so make sure that what you're voting for gives an adequate benefit to justify the cost.


And finally: Bring sufficient ID, check your voting location and vote accordingly. The "right" to vote is a privilige that most citizens of the World do not enjoy, when Americans start to take it for granted or when it is given away due to laziness or partisan greed, then things are pretty bad. Educate yourself and make an informed vote. That's all anyone can ask.

How's your Sunday Calendar Looking?

After this?

The Texans wasted an opportunity to make Sunday's game a defining moment in franchise history.

If the Texans had been able to stop the Tennessee Titans on their last series in a 38-36 defeat at Reliant Stadium, Choke City could have been Comeback City for Houston fans who have grown accustomed to their NFL team inventing ways to lose.

Sunday was the perfect example.

The Texans trailed 32-7 early in the fourth quarter. They already had committed five of their six turnovers.

Behind quarterback Sage Rosenfels, who had replaced the injured Matt Schaub, the Texans took the lead with a heaven-sent rally.

Rosenfels bounced back from his three interceptions and lost fumble to throw four touchdown passes in the fourth quarter, the last one a 53-yarder to André Davis that gave the Texans a 36-35 lead with 57 seconds left.

After that, the Texans needed a big defensive play against quarterback Kerry Collins, who started in place of the injured Vince Young. Instead, Collins completed a 46-yard pass to Roydell Williams on third-and-10.

Williams beat cornerback Dunta Robinson on the long pass down the left sideline to set up the winning 29-yard field goal by Rob Bironas with no time remaining.

No offense to the players, but for two years now I've had a lot better things to do with my Sunday afternoons than sit around and watch the franchise play lip-service to winning while putting a below-average product on the field. I wonder if the mass exodus in the second quarter (when the Texans were down 32-7) is any indication that the "hard core" fans are doing the same?

The team is now 3-4 and on a 2 game losing streak. In those two games they only showed a spark in one, and that after coming out flat (yes, flat) to Tennessee. This leaves the fan base with a question: If the team doesn't care, why should we?

Now, granted, I don't live or die with the Texans. I pull for them because they are the home town team, but my allegiances are with the 49ers. (who are also stinking up the joint to be fair) Because of this I've got little patience for bad football.

Sunday I didn't even turn on the TV until the Cowboys game and worked around the house all day. I don't see that changing next week either. If the Texans lose the next two (against San Diego and Oakland) and enter the bye week at 3-6 (which COULD happen btw) will the Saints fans outnumber the Texans fans at their next home game?

Reliant is a nice stadium but, when its not full, it can come across as a cavern.


The Texans had better hope they don't become an afterthought. Especially with the Rockets looking like they might make some noise this year.

The "next" big public policy question for Houston

Barring the expected court battles Rail is now a settled issue in Houston. Zoning is an issue that comes and goes, but doesn't have the "lasting appeal" of big Government dollar expenditures to really whet the appetite of true policy wonks. The same goes for crime control and other public policy areas.

Enter, flood control, and the potential for a multi-Billion dollar program for Houston. An expenditure program that's sure to be rife with special interest dollars, a group that will surely oppose any and all action, and a local group that will wish to fritter away the program on status symbols with little or no flood abatement impact.

To date, the Chron has only paid passing attention to what I'm predicting will become the next big policy debate in Houston. There's been more space provided to Discovery Green than discussion about how to keep it above water when the next rounds of dousing rain hit Houston. We now have pundits all a-twitter over a Light Rail system that's rendered useless by 2 inches of rain. (Houston has received Less than 20 inches of rain per year only once). It's for this reason that flood abatement and drainage issues will now be thrust to the forefront of the conciousness of the City. As additional billions are going to have to be spent to protect the interests of the previous Billions that were spent on poorly planned projects.

The problem here? No one has a plan.

Sure, you get the usual chatter and empty campaign rhetoric from candidates about flood control, but no one really has an idea how to actuall accomplish the goal. Now we find out that some group wants to build a tunnel under I-45 because, you know, it looks good. Oh, and don't forget that "Visionary World-class" cities such as New York, Munich and Madrid have tunnels as well. They don't reguarly have 20 inches of rain, tropical weather events and coastal topography as does Houston, but they have tunnels.

And therein lies the problem with public planning in Houston. It's not about working around the existing limitations to make Houston unique, but all about trying to make Houston into (insert supposed "World Class" city here). With flood control looming on the horizon as the next major public policy debate, real thought needs to be given as to how to make it work for Houston, instead of trying to copy something really cool from somewhere else.

Unfortunately what works is not always what's "sexy" from a political standpoint. The question will be whether or not local leaders have the strength of will to stand up to those who clamor for form over substance. They won the transit debate and look what we have: A system that averages 25 MPH and is designed to make it harder for the majority to get around rather than to enhance transportation.


Can you imagine if we get the same type of results for flood control?

All White, all the time.

Matt Stiles provides us a feature story, Roy Reynolds provides us with a contrarian view, and Mrs. White pens a love letter to her man...

That's a lot of news and editorial space dedicated to what is basically an uncontested election is it not?


Other Eyes:

BlogHouston: Reflecting on White, Brown. This is of note:

Of course, the Chronicle endorsed Lee Brown repeatedly for mayor, which just goes to show what those sorts of endorsements are worth.

The Chron would have endorsed Nero as the fires burned.

Main-Richmond-Cummins-Westpark

(from Miya)

2:35 Adopted! Going West: Richmond, Cummins, Westpark to Hillcroft Transit Center. Going East: Wheeler, along Ennis, North to Scott, along Elgin, and ending at the Eastwood Transit Center.

Is this the "best" route? I guess that depends on who you ask. If you're a developer looking to build along Richmond then yeah, this is great. If you live in the suburbs and are looking to commute to work? This has no effect on you unless you work downtown or in the Med Center (and a lot of you don't). If you don't like rail at all then the answer is no.

For my part I'd prefer it if Houston didn't have another "at-grade" mess on our hands but that's what you get when the development Transit Agency only *seriously* considers its predetermined option. Since Metro has decided that bad technology is the only option, I guess this was the "best" we could expect.


Ah well.

The growing case against Ethanol

I chuckled when General Motors and some progressives bought into the Ethanol hype.

The evidence keeps mounting that my skepticism was well placed.

(from the Wall Street Journal)

If the Senate's new "renewable fuels" mandate becomes law, get ready for a giant slurping sound as Midwest water supplies are siphoned off to slake Big Ethanol. House and Senate negotiators are preparing for an energy-bill conference, and if the Senate's language prevails, America's economy will be forced to consume more than five times current ethanol production.

Heavily subsidized and absurdly inefficient, corn-based ethanol has already driven up food prices. But the Senate's plan to increase production to 36 billion gallons by 2022, from less than seven billion today, will place even greater pressure on farm-belt aquifers.

Ethanol plants consume roughly four gallons of water to produce each gallon of fuel, but that's only a fraction of ethanol's total water habit. Cornell ecology professor David Pimentel says that when you count the water needed to grow the corn, one gallon of ethanol requires a staggering 1,700 gallons of H2O. Backers of the Senate bill say that less-thirsty technologies are just around the corner, which is what we've been hearing for years.

Some corn-producing regions are already scrapping over dwindling supply. The Journal's Joe Barrett recently reported that Kansas is threatening to sue neighboring Nebraska for consuming more than its share of the Republican River. The Grand Forks Herald reports local opposition to a proposed ethanol plant in Erskine, Minnesota, with anti-refinery yard signs sprouting up and residents concerned about well water. Backers of a proposed plant in Jamestown, North Dakota, recently withdrew their application when it became clear that the plant's million-gallon-a-day appetite would drain too much from a local aquifer. In Wisconsin, new ethanol plants are encountering opposition in Sparta and Milton.

The inefficiencies of ethanol are very real, as are the water needs for the product. While there is a certain inefficiency to oil & gas production, if we're going to be burning a bio-fuel I'd much rather it be natural gas. Much more efficient, cheap and easier to transport.

It also doesn't need the subsidies that every farmer in America is dreaming of....

It's on the Internet it HAS to be true!!!

From commenter "kim" over at Miya's place...

come on houstonians wake up it is 2007 this has to be the only large city in the country that has more peole that ride horses than public transportation. get with it the the change is gonna come eventually the more people that move here from other cities the more thier influence will be changing houston sorry cowboys.

The sad thing is...I think she was serious.

The U-Line: Get ready for the histrionics

Metro's announcing which streets its going to tear up today, and also provides us with a primer for where the next rash of train/car/pedestrian collisions will be.

(from Rad Sallee of the Chron)

The Metropolitan Transit Authority board is scheduled to vote today on a route for its controversial University light rail line, despite efforts this week to stall the plan.

Metro officials have said they were leaning toward routes on Richmond and Wheeler avenues that have drawn sharp opposition and enthusiastic support.

Today's planned vote, in a 9 a.m. meeting at 1900 Main, follows a request Tuesday by U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, asking the board to postpone the vote and consider other options.

Earlier this week, opponents released a 2006 study by a city of Houston consultant that warned against building rail over a 66-inch water line that runs beneath Richmond and Wheeler for several miles.

Culberson's letter suggested Metro take another look at an elevated rail route on the north side of the Southwest Freeway, crossing over to Westpark at Kirby.

Museum District residents have objected to that idea. An analysis by Metro consultants and staff shows the freeway option as the most costly and least likely to attract riders among the three options on the transit agency's short list.

Metro's response, from board chair David Wolff, said Metro already considered several Southwest Freeway options "at considerable time, effort and expense — because of your specific request that we do so."

Actually, whether or not you agree with Rep. Culberson on this issue or not, that last little blurb by Wolff should kind of give you a moments pause.

You see, they should have considered several options just because its the smart thing to do, not because Culberson asked them to. Which is where my beef with Metro lies. They don't take the time to consider how what they are doing meshes with the commute patterns of Houstonians. Whether you support Richmond rail or not you have to admit that the current Metro transit map is just wrong. Even Metro's unpaid PR staff over at CTC have stated such.

That's not really the point here, but it is germaine to the discussion.

Once Metro announces the route there's going to be histrionics on both sides. Kuff is already sounding the "no BRT alarms" and once Metro announces the debate is going to devolve into nothing more than a glorified shouting match among people who don't want to get out of the BMW's. Oh, sure. There are some people who rely on the public transportation system in Houston, unfortunately their bus routes were probably eliminated during on of Metro's recent batches of "service improvements".

Richmond may, or may not, be the "best" option for Houston's transit needs. The Wheeler option might (or might not) provide the best service on the other portion of the line, who knows? When the decision is made beforehand all of the squabbling and "Draft Environmental Impact" surveys are really just more of the consultant dance.

In five to ten years this transit build is going to be critical to the future of Houston. If it fails, then mobility in Houston will be hampered for the foreseeable future. That debate deserves better than the rhetoric that we've seen to date.


Ah well, just stay off Richmond for the next 75 years or so and you'll be fine.


UPDATE: Miya Shay is live-blogging the Metro meeting a little bit.

I'd lay odds on the outcome of the vote but I'm not really into sucker bets.

"Best of" only lighter, with less originality and flair....

Today is Ultimate Houston Day" at the Chron. The day they release their "Ultimate Houston" rip-off of the Houston Press' Best Of series and then try to convince us that its even better. You know, "ultimate" or something along those lines.


Yeah...and the second Woodstock with the mud people was superior to the original Woodstock with the brown acid right?

Let's take a taste:

Best Breakfast Tacos

The Chron:

Guadalajara Bakery
It’s hard to order just two tacos when the flour tortillas are as soft and plush as these. The drill at Guadalajara Bakery is simple: You stand in line, tell the lady how many tacos you want, and she goes to the kitchen to make them fresh. They’re worth the wait, stuffed with your choice of fillings. The melt-in-your-mouth barbacoa is dusky and fulfilling, and the spicy pork with scrambled eggs is what Mexican tacos are all about: satisfaction.

The Press:

El Ultimo Taco Truck
Look for a shiny taco truck parked in front of a do-it-yourself car wash. The big fat breakfast tacos are $1 a piece and you get your choice of scrambled eggs with bacon, ham, potatoes, nopalitos, machacado (shredded beef), chorizo or roasted peppers on a corn or flour tortilla. The flour tortillas are handmade, and the chorizo is truly exceptional. The thick green salsa is tart and hot. There's no coffee, but there are fresh-fruit aguas frescas available. Check out the advertising illustrations painted on the sides of the truck — they are among the most interesting examples of taco truck art in the city. And if you're worried about the sanitary standards, it might comfort you to know that everybody behind the counter wears hair nets.

Still don't believe me?

Best Actor

The Chron:

Dennis Quaid
• www.imdb.com.

- Seriously, that's the entry.

The Press:

Luther Chakurian of Masquerade Theatre
Intense and passionate, Luther Chakurian, a mainstay of Masquerade Theatre for nearly a decade, embodies this multitalented musical company with highly stylized, brooding performances that grab you by the throat and take your breath away. Starring in three of the group's most intriguing recent shows, Jane Eyre, Sweeney Todd and Parade, he emitted dark sexiness as troubled Victorian Rochester, scared the bejesus out of us as avenging demon barber Todd and personified the terrified, yet innocent, accused child molester Leo Franks. Chakurian has a softer side, too. Witness this year's dance-happy Cornelius in Hello, Dolly and his knuckle-dragging, gnat-picking Wickersham Brother in Seussical. Blessed with a most idiosyncratic singing voice, edgy and coarse as if his tonsils have been dipped in sulfuric acid, he soars in the contemporary pop anthems that the current crop of composers is so fond of (like Wildhorn's Jekyll and Hyde). Yet, he also brings a refreshingly different, masculine sound to romantic ballads. Chakurian's superb Sweeney, vengeful, full of wrath, as focused as a heat-seeking ICBM, was Houston's most distinctive portrayal of 2007 — beautifully sung, impeccably acted, wicked as hell.

Game, set and match.


Still good reading if you want the "all over the beaten path" mainstream view of Houston however.

Sowing the seeds.

Have you seen Mayor White's newest campaign commercials yet?

If not, here's a quick primer:

Jobs are up
Crime is (trending) down
Traffic is (sorta) moving.
The property tax rate has been cut (although the taxes you pay are probably increasing due to appraisal creep)

And all is generally spiffy in the City under the watchful (slow jazzy) eye of Mayor White.

So, if all is well, and there is no serious opposition to Mayor White in his re-election bid, why waste $500K in the first place?

In order to understand that you have to realize that (for Mayor White) this race isn't about winning a last term, its about (legally) stuffing the ballot box to mark his place in the 2010 Gubernatorial election. That's right, this election is more about 90 percent than it is about White worrying about winning. It's about minimizing the under vote, and maximizing his take of all votes cast. Understand that with all of the negative publicity that he's had to weather this year, it would be a huge feather in Mayor White's cap if he could still demonstrate broad support, even in what is basically an uncontested election.

I would argue that Mayor White needs 85-90% of the vote margin with less than a 10% undervote (or, those not bothering to cast a vote in the Mayoral race who vote in other elections) in order for him to convince the Democratic party that he's the man to lead the party back to the Governor's mansion. Like it or not, there is going to be plenty of ammunition for opponents to use:

Crime - No one likes to admit it, but the Houston crime problem is not going away soon. It can be tackled but there are severe staffing shortages in the HPD (not entirely the fault of Mayor White) and the HPD crime lab fiasco (and the Mayor's reaction to it) are going to be election albatross' that White will have to deal with. Houstonians know the story, so scare ads won't work there, but it doesn't take much imagination to see a Statewide ad campaign having some effect.

Sweetheart deals - Not only do the Airport conession and Southamption High Rise deals raise questions, but they're the type of allegations during an election that are difficult to fight off. Especially since back room deals (if any existed) happen in the back room.

The Center Serving Persons with Mental Retardation - This has been spun into the ground as a positive by White supporters, but I still contend that the attack ads that spring from it will resonate with people across the State. There are other charitable organizations who have been shaken to the core by this fight, and there are still rumors that many in the charitable community are none to happy with what went down.


I point all of this out to say this: When you watch these ads you have to see them for what they are.....

The opening salvos for the 2010 Gubernatorial race.

Oh...By the way (just sayin')

Drive times increase despite SafeCLEAR promises

KHOU's Jeremy Rogalski takes a look at Commute times since the inception of the SafeCLEAR program...

(from KHOU.com)

“Traffic will move a lot faster.”

“Move the traffic along”

“Move the traffic on the freeways.”

Those comments came from Houston Mayor Bill White while he was launching the City’s Safe Clear wrecker program in 2005.

Top ranking officials in the Mayor’s Office of Mobility even went a step further:

“You will see a tremendous difference in the flow of traffic,” said Joe Breshears, Director of the Office of Mobility in December, 2004.

And David Saperstein, the program’s chairman pledged “a huge difference for people getting to work on time” in March, 2004. Six months later, Saperstein added that Houstonians would see “a dramatic uptick in the reduction of drive times.”

So, the 11 News Defenders wanted to know, has the city lived up to its promise?

We analyzed peak drive times for every major freeway into downtown: Gulf, North, Northwest, East, Eastex, South and Southwest. The Katy Freeway was not included due to construction.

The analysis covered the morning peak hours of 6:30a.m. to 9:30 a.m., and the afternoon peak hours between 4 p.m. and 7 p.m. 11 News compared average drive times along those segments in 2003 to 2006, which is two years before Safe Clear, and two years after the program was launched.

The bottom line -- 86 percent of those routes saw not a reduction but an increase in average drive times

Now, granted, its not fair to look at these numbers and blame the entire mess on the SafeCLEAR program. Most of the increase is due to additional demand and TxDOT's seeming desire to tear up every road at the same time.

But Mayor White's "head in the sand" approach isn't doing much to inspire confidence....

The Defenders provided its findings to Frank Michel, Communication Director for the Office of the Mayor, one week prior to an interview with Bill White.

But White told 11 News: “I haven’t seen your analysis.”

Still, the mayor claimed mobility is improving, saying Safe Clear has resulted in a 20 percent reduction in accidents. He added that you have to factor in the increase in the number of vehicles on the road.

“Everybody knows we’re the fastest growing economy in the nation,” White said.

White also said the Safe Clear program has the support of traffic engineers, like Tim Lomax, with the Texas Transportation Institute.

“Travel times are longer, no doubt, but they are not as long as they would be otherwise,” Lomax said.

The article goes on to mention the cost of the SafeCLEAR Program ($3 Million per year) but doesn't mention that it was sold to the public as a revenue generator, before being gutted by the court system. This data has led one City Council Member to question if the expense justifies the means.

“It’s costing us money and it isn’t working,” Wiseman said, adding that the price tag is coming out of the taxpayers’ pocket.

“I’m not comfortable spending three million dollars a year that we could be spending on something else,” Wiseman said

Something like additional police officers, or a host of other core services that Houston doesn't "have the money for" right?

But, of course, that wouldn't sync-up with Mayor White's new Gubernatorial preperatory Mayroal campaign commercials now would it?

The anatomy of a story: (MetroRail version)

At around 12:30 today the Chron's Rad Sallee posted a story regarding the claims by some that MetroRail stray current could damage a Richmond water main...

The headline screamed out:
"Rail foes: stray current may harm water line".

Here's the gist of the story by Rad Sallee:

Richmond rail opponents claimed today that an August 2006 study by a consultant for the city warns that stray electrical current from the planned University light rail line could cause "catastrophic failures" in a 66-inch water line runs underneath the street.

The news conference in front of McClain Gallery on Richmond near Kirby was timely, since the Metro's board meets at 9 a.m. Thursday to vote on a route for the line. The item is on the agenda as "Adoption of the Locally Preferred Alternatives (LPA) for METROSolutions."

Gallery owner Robert McClain and other opponents of rail on Richmond, including Afton Oaks resident Chris Seger, noted that the study by Lockwood Andrews & Newnam (LAN) said "relocation of the existing transmission line away from the new rail system is warranted."

The study also estimated it would cost more than $25 million and cause disruption in the neighborhood to relocate the line.

Seger also cited a 1986 document from the American Society for Testing and Materials, that describes failure of pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe as "spectacular bursts scattering shards of concrete and resulting in a hole reminiscent of a bomb crater."

At the time there was a "blurb" that Metro hadn't responded.

Well...I'm guessing they responded.

The headline now reads:
"Metro disuptes rail foes' stray current claims"

and the text has changed to read as follows:

Richmond rail opponents claimed today that an August 2006 study by a consultant for the city warns that stray electrical current from the planned University light rail line could cause "catastrophic failures" in a 66-inch water line runs underneath the street.

Metro spokeswoman Raequel Roberts and city Public Works Director Mike Marcotte said the line, if built on Richmond, would be protected against damage from current leaking into the ground from the rail line.

Roberts called the opponent's statements "scare tactics" and Marcotte said they "very significantly mischaracterize the report."

The news conference in front of McClain Gallery on Richmond near Kirby was timely, since the Metro's board meets at 9 a.m. Thursday to vote on a route for the line. The item is on the agenda as "Adoption of the Locally Preferred Alternatives (LPA) for METROSolutions."

Gallery owner Robert McClain and other opponents of rail on Richmond, including Afton Oaks resident Chris Seger, noted that the study by Lockwood Andrews & Newnam (LAN) said "relocation of the existing transmission line away from the new rail system is warranted."

The study also estimated it would cost more than $25 million and cause disruption in the neighborhood to relocate the line.

Seger also cited a 1986 document from the American Society for Testing and Materials, that describes failure of pre-stressed concrete cylinder pipe as "spectacular bursts scattering shards of concrete and resulting in a hole reminiscent of a bomb crater."

However, a report by a Metro engineering consultant, TCB, said the pipe will be protected from the effects of stray current and that there are "no anticipated adverse effects" from building rails over it.

The opponents said the TCB report was misleading and failed to adequately address the alleged hazard.

However, a "summary of investigations" of the issue from March through December 2006, indicates that several other firms also did not find a hazard.

A letter from LTK Engineering said the water line's current cathodic protection and measures such as rubber "boots" around the rails and steel mats beneath them "will mitigate any stray current issues." The summary said similar conclusions were reached by V&A Consultants, Professional Corrosion Services and Dannenbaum Engineering.

It also mentioned a Nov. 8, 2006, meeting with Metro at which LAN "stood by its report's conclusions and the way it was prepared without Metro's knowledge."

Metro's Roberts said the agency has "built safely around these utilities for years."

"It's done all the time, here and in other cities," she said. "We've known about this water line for a long time. Obviously, we've talked to the city about it."

Is it just me? Or should the original report and Metro's rebuttal be seperate stories? At the bare minimum the original text should be available on-line unaltered. By totally removing the groups claims, and then printing a revised version that treats Metro's explenation as fact its obvious what side the Chron is taking in this dispute.

While I don't necessarily buy the groups claims of a "bomb-like hole" I DO think that there are some legitimate stray current concerns that Metro is trying to downplay.

At the very least an "update" should be posted to the story instead of a total revision of the original piece. That would be intellectually honest. Give the reader both sides (both the coalitions' AND Metro's) and then let them decide who they want to believe. By erasing the first story and replacing it with this story (which allows Metro to pick and choose their responses, but doesn't allow the anti-rail group a rebuttal) the debate is muddled and one-sided.

Not that the Chron has an agenda in regards to MetroRail or anything. I'm sorry, but past actions have shown them to be incapable of being granted the public trust on this issue. Further censuring of the side with which they are opposed only further abuses the trust they are given.


EDITED TO ADD: I should point out that this post should in no way be taken as a slap to the journalism chops of Rad Sallee. I firmly believe that he (along with Matt Stiles) are doing some of the better reporting at the Chron today. My beef is with the editorial decisions and NOT with the story itself.

Pranks gone wrong....

I'm not sure if this will work, or if everyone can view this .gif, but if you can enjoy a cautionary tale that goes out to all of my practical joke friends everywhere.

(Note: If you double-click on the image the animation works.)

Just for the record.

Rick Noriega on blogs in the San Antonio Express-News 09/08/2007:

(courtesy of R.G. Ratcliffe)

But then Noriega returned home and told the Texas Broadcasters Association that the blogs are as destructive a force in democracy as talk radio.

"We've seen talk radio become an organizing tool for the die-hard right, while liberals are credited with turning the blogosphere into a political weapon. Each of those media has a targeted demographic group and works them into an ideological lather," Noriega said.

"This, I believe, is damaging to the political culture in this country."

Kay Bailey Hutchinson on blogs 10/12/2007:

(Courtesy of Evan Smith from Texas Monthly)

The mood of the country right now is pretty frustrated. People don't like the partisanship -- there's kind of a toxic atmosphere about politics -- I think the blogs, interestingly, feed on that. The intemperate nature of blogs, and the lack of accountability, have had an overall toxic influence on our elections. These blogs are cynical and mean -- on all sides. I don't think that's good. Even if you disagree with the mainstream media, there's a sense of integrity and honesty and standards. There are journalistic standards, which blogs don't have.

Oh, both candidates have "qualifications" to their points:

Noriega: (from the same story)

Noriega spokesman James Aldrete said Noriega was not criticizing all politically active blogs, just those that engage in the "politics of division." Aldrete said Noriega believes talk radio and some bloggers would rather keep the country divided than find solutions to problems.

This went over well with the InterLeft because it was read as a direct assault on the Bloggers O' the Right. You know, the ONLY group that's spreading hate and division.....*snicker*



Sen. Hutchinson: (again, from the same source)

KBH's office called and emailed this morning (Saturday) to say that she was talking about "anonymous" bloggers only.

This is NOT going over well with many bloggers. Not because its any less reasonable than the spin provided by Rick Noriega's team, but because KBH has an (R) behind her name and most Texas political bloggers have a (D) behind theirs.

My favorite comeback:

(from the Pink Lady)

Re: Senator Hutchison hates blogs. Tell her I said, "The feeling is mutual, Senator."

Ah the educated sound of reasoned political discourse.....

The Longest game....

That's how it felt last Saturday at the Battle of the Bucket as UH and Rice combined for around 1,200 yards and neither defense decided to take the field in a game that felt like it was 12 hours long.

It was exciting. The Cougars offense is fun to watch as speedy skill players run up and down the field and receivers catch anything thrown in their general direction. Rice's Jarret Dillard and Chase Clement are amazing offensive talents. If Rice would have had a little more to add to them the results could have been different.

The Cougar's defense played just well enough to NOT lose the game. The finally stiffened in the 4th quarter after letting Rice (yes, Rice) shred them all game long. The sad thing is, winning games like this probably does MORE to hurt UH long-term because people will ignore just how bad this defense is.

How bad is the defense?

As bad as the Cougar offense is good.

After seeing them first hand I think I'm safe in saying that the issue is a combination of sub-par talent and poor coaching. The defensive line can't get sustained pressure on the QB, and the defensive backfield seems confused on their coverage assignments from time to time. The linebackers might as well not even be on the field at times, they are too undersized and lack the speed and strength to make up for bad decision making. The Defense also isn't good enough to overcome the mistakes and turnovers that are generated by Briles' undisciplined offense.

You add all of that up against Rice, and it makes for a close, long, albeit exciting game. You take that mix against competative D-1 College football teams and you get the .500 result that the Cougars have now.

It was a fun game to watch but, were I a devoted UH fan I'd wake up this morning pretty frustrated by the trends I'm seeing.

The Port of Houston Delivers the Goods

Provided YOU deliver the funding...

(from Bill Murphy of the Chron)

The Port of Houston Authority will ask voters next month to approve $250 million in tax-supported bonds to build new docks and enhance security.

But, first, port officials may have to explain why the authority, which frequently touts its success in bringing container traffic and jobs through the Houston Ship Channel, should not pay for the improvements itself.

The proposed bond package could face another hurdle: The Nov. 6 ballot includes more than $11 billion in state and local bonds, a scenario that has some voters nervous about future tax bills.

"The port is such a success," Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt said last week. "I don't think they need a property tax subsidy. It would be great if they could get off this dole."

Authority officials say the bonds are needed to ensure Houston can continue to compete as a major national port.

Chairman Jim Edmonds said two more docks are needed at the agency's new Bayport facility because container traffic is growing rapidly.

"We have to have good facilities and good tariffs," he said. "We compete with Savannah (Ga.), Charleston (S.C.) and Long Beach (Calif.)."

It will be interesting to see if the same forces that are coalescing to oppose subsidies on a National level to Corporations fall into line behind this, which is really just a glorified subsidy of private business.

Yes, there is a public element to it (and I disagree with Bruce Hotze that their shouldn't be) but there are also, according to the port itself, strong revenues that could go to support this expansion, or leverage privately funded debt at reduced rates.

As with most bond issues that don't get a lot of public scrutiny however, I predict this one will pass with about 55-60% of the vote. Why worry when the next couple of generations can pay the piper?

A post of obligation.

I've just been notified that I'm obligated to blog about Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize (what does stumping for your business venture have to do with peace?)

(By Dan Balz and Juliet Eilperin of the AP)

Former Vice President Al Gore, who wrapped up a year of honors Friday by sharing the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with a U.N. scientific panel, said he will use the award to heighten awareness of "a true planetary emergency" from global warming and press the world's nations to combat its threats.

That the "Prize" has ceased to have any real meaning is up for debate. For some the prize is still legitimate, and for others its a total sham. I lead toward the sham side of the equation, but that's just me.

Al Gore has staked his financial future on establishing businesses that exchange in carbon credits. He's used his political affiliations to attempt to drive public policy to increase the exchange of said credits, which stands to provide him with a financial windfall. His marketing push was so successful that he received an award for it.

This is neither proof of case nor is it the nail in the Nobel coffin. The Nobel Prize for Peace will still be given artificial credence by the political kindred of the winners, and will be derided by the political opposites of the same.


Was this a funky winner? Yeah, but its not unexpected because the European countries of the Nobel commission have a LOT of economic gain to experience if America were to adopt the policies that Gore recommends.

In the end the Nobel is all about money. Go figure.

Over promise, under deliver

So much for that...

(From the Chron *strangely untitled*)

In the beginning, black activist Quanell X pledged a protest like those in the civil rights era.

He would bus students from Key Middle School to the tony, tree-lined neighborhood of Houston Superintendent Abelardo Saavedra, and they would demand an equal education.

Instead, on Friday afternoon, the activist offered free food and a visit from a "surprise platinum hip-hop artist" to persuade about 50 students to board a chartered bus pointed toward Montrose.

But the bus never moved. And the artist never showed.

Quannell X is yesterday's news. I'm just very surprised that the writer of the Chron article didn't by-line it?

Crossing the line?

Is protesting at someones private residence crossing the line? Quannel X doesn't seem to think so....

(by Erika Mellon of the Chron)

Students from Key Middle School and their parents plan to protest after school Friday outside the home of Houston ISD Superintendent Abelardo Saavedra — demanding that he improve their educational environment.

Community activist Quanell X had called for a student walkout today but canceled the plan Wednesday after district officials threatened that those who skipped class would be charged with truancy and face fines up to $200.

"We want to say to Saavedra that you think you scared us," Quanell X said after police greeted students who were handing out fliers about the walkout. "But on Friday, after school, we want to send a message to your rusty, raggedy behind, Saavedra."

The message, parents say, is that their children are not getting a quality education since Saavedra relocated the Key students and staff to nearby Fleming Middle School because of potential health hazards at Key.

At Fleming, some classrooms are packed with too many students, not enough desks and too few textbooks, according to parents and students.

So, instead of protesting at the administration building, they plan to lead an angry crowd to a man's home? How exactly does Dr. Saavedra's private life have any bearing on the Key Elementary situation again? I'm not real clear on that.

In the comments of the Chron story, district spokesperson Terry Abbott voices his rebuttal to the story:

Correcting the record:
This story is very substantially unfair to Dr. Saavedra and to the school district.

The reporter writes: "Saavedra initially angered teachers and parents when he insisted for weeks that Key was safe — despite complaints from numerous employees that mold or some other air quality problem there was making them sick. Employees reported allergic-like reactions, such as watery eyes, nausea, difficulty breathing and skin rashes."

The truth is outside, independent EXPERTS in air quality repeatedly pronounced the building safe for occupancy when test after test showed no unusual air quality problems at the building. The city of Houston health department and the fire department's haz mat team also came out and reported no unsusual problems that could cause someone to get sick and did not recommend closing down the building. It is grossly unfair to the superintendent, and frankly the district as a whole and all the work the district did to try to find any issues at Key, for the Chronicle to simply report that Saavedra insisted for weeks that Key was safe.

The story is unfair in another respect as well. The Chronicle reports: "Most of the students at Key are poor minorities, and parents and politicians have charged that district officials would be more responsive to their concerns if they lived in wealthier, whiter communities."

The story should have allowed us to strongly rebut that argument, which we have done repeatedly. HISD is about 90 percent minority and 82 percent poor district wide. It's unfair to report that Key is poor and minority and suggest the school is being neglected for that reason and not report that the entire district is poor and minority, and not allow us to rebut the charge. That charge doesn't even make sense.

The last point is this. The story quotes ever-present activist Quanell X saying "we want to send a message to your rusty, raggedy behind, Saavedra."

It's inappropriate for the paper of record to allow that kind of silly name-calling in the story. It's hard to imagine the Chronicle allowing a political opponent to use the same language about Mayor White, for example. The comment seems inappropriate.


Terry Abbott
Press Secretary
Houston Independent School District

I do agree that the "rusty, raggedy behind" quote is stretching the bounds of good taste. Not that Q-X had much taste or decorum to begin with. The man is a blunt object. His only tool is sensationalism and the laziness of local reporters allows him to stay in the public eye disproportionate to his actual influence in the community.

HPD should consider shutting this rally down before it gets started. It serves no purpose other than to keep Q-X in the public eye and will do nothing to improve the quality of education that the displaced Key Elementary students will receive.


As a community its time for us to come to a consensus as to what is acceptable political discourse and what ranges outside the civic debate and should be discouraged.

Stadiums or infrastructure?

The debate is heating up...

(from Jesse J. Holland of the AP via the Chron)

Cities and states are offering billions in financial incentives to build stadiums to keep professional sports teams while neglecting bridges, roads and schools, advocates charged Wednesday.

Congress should end the "economic war" among the states, said Arthur J. Rolnick, senior vice president and director of research for the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.

Advocates pointed to the collapsed Interstate 35W bridge in that city as they argued for a ban on the use of tax-exempt financing for sports facilities.

"The Minnesota Twins got public funding approved for a new stadium just the year before the I-35W bridge collapsed," said Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and a Democratic presidential candidate.

The Interstate 35W bridge collapsed Aug. 1, killing 13 people and injuring about 100.

Professional football, baseball, basketball and hockey estimate that the total public subsidy for stadiums opened from 1990-2006 is around $12 billion, Harvard University professor Judith Grant Long said. But when she added costs for public subsidies for land, infrastructure, capital improvements, municipal taxes and forgone property taxes, Long came up with a figure of $18.5 billion.

"There is absolutely no evidence that $18.5 billion in public benefits have been generated since 1990 to compensate," she said.

Altogether, the public has spent $27 billion on building, land and infrastructure for 167 major league sports facilities between 1950-2006, she said.

(snip)

The Bush administration has no position on this issue, said Eric Solomon, the Treasury Department's assistant secretary of tax policy. And the Treasury Department does not have the regulatory power to prohibit the use of government bonds to finance stadiums.

However, "Congress could consider banning tax-exempt bond financing altogether," said Solomon, who pointed out that the late Sen. Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., introduced legislation to do that in 1996.

This debate echoes the position that I've long held that public funding of professional sports stadiums is a bad idea.

Houston is a prime example of this. Yes, we now have Reliant Stadium, Minute Maid Park and the Toyota Center, all of which add wealth to the pockets of three team owners. There is also still the Astrodome sitting next to Reliant rotting away and costing tax-payers over $1 Million per year to maintain. Add to this the excessive expenses ran up by the Houston Sports Authority which vigorously fights to stay alive despite the fact that its mission has been fulfilled and you have a situation where monies that could be spent on flood repair, infrastructure, education and a host of other projects are funnelled down an ever expanding black hole. Now the movement is to publically fund a soccer-specific stadium for the Dynamo.

The irony in the arena debate is that many of the most vocal supporters of public funding of stadiums (in order to make Houston "world class" you understand) are also the first in line to protest many corporate subsidies that actually contribute to society. It's that kind of cognative dissonance that keeps the world spinning I suppose.

That's some investigation!

METRO is pretty good at covering themselves...

(From Mike Glenn of the Chron)

A sports utility vehicle struck a Metro bus in downtown Houston today, sending almost a dozen people to the hospital with minor injuries, officials said.

The accident happened about 12:45 p.m. when the driver of a Chevrolet Suburban pulled in front of the bus while making a right turn onto Louisiana from Lamar, Metro officials said.

Eleven passengers sustained minor bumps and bruises when the Suburban scraped against the side of the bus, officials said.

The driver of the sports utility vehicle was not injured. He was issued a ticket at the scene, officials said.

"He made a right turn from the wrong lane," said Metro police officer Marjorie Hart.

The bus is operated by First Transit, a Metro contract company.

The accident remains under investigation, officials said.

So...the driver of the SUV gets a ticket, Officer Hart of the Metro Police states that the driver made a turn from an incorrect lane and the accident is still under "investigation"?


Maybe they're trying to figure out how to blame the SUV driver for this...?

KTRK-13 reports (on air, no link yet) tonight that a METRO bus hit a pedestrian tonight. METRO admitted its driver was at fault. However, that must be mistaken, as defenders of METRO insist the organization is never at fault for anything, ever. :)

Hmmmm.....

Hyperbole

Scare tactics and immigration reform go hand in hand...

(from James Pinkerton of the Chron)

A Rice university economist and a Mexican energy consultant on Tuesday proposed a ''humane and rational" immigration overhaul, requiring the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants to return home but allowing them to first work legally for up to six years.

The plan requires the immigrants to register in order to work legally for two to six years on work permits distributed by lottery.

The workers would also receive a portion of taxes they paid on wages before they return home. Immigrants who don't register would be deported.

The proposal by Rice economist Dagobert L. Brito and Mexico City energy consultant and Rice graduate Hector Olea calls for an orderly repatriation of illegal immigrants that would not disrupt the U.S. work force.

Forced deportation of millions of people would be a ''humanitarian nightmare" akin to the Holocaust and cost an estimated $92 billion, said Brito, a scholar with the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice.

''It'd be like Nazi Germany — putting people in cattle cars and moving them out of the country," he said.

Legalizing the workers could take place later if there is an increased demand for labor, according to the plan.

Kinda like the Holocaust except for, you know, gas chambers, mass executions, medical torture, genetic manipulation, attempted genocide.

All of the things that made the Holocaust the Holocaust.


I'm one who thinks that a mass deportation would do more harm than good, but there's no reason to go all nutty on us Dr. Brito. In a political debate that's been as charged as this one, truth is often the first casualty.

Left hand, meet right hand.

Oh...wow...you do stuff too?

Five years after local government and business leaders embraced a plan to transform Buffalo Bayou into a vital public attraction, city and county officials are preparing to build a massive new jail on the bayou's north bank.

The $245 million, 2,500-bed jail and inmate processing center would be next to the existing county jail on Baker Street. Leaders of the nonprofit Buffalo Bayou Partnership said that until recently, county officials had told them the new facility would be on a site farther from the bayou.

A new jail on the bayou, they said, would hurt efforts to follow the success of cities that are revitalizing their urban waterfronts.

"All other cities glorify their waterfront as opposed to secreting it away from their citizens," Mike Garver, the partnership's board chairman, told the Harris County Commissioners Court on Tuesday.

Garver said the new jail's "footprint" appears to encompass land that would have to be excavated to widen the channel, a step recommended in the Buffalo Bayou Master Plan as a way of reducing downtown's flood risk. The plan was developed in the aftermath of devastating floods triggered by Tropical Storm Allison in June 2001.

In addition, Garver said, the building would limit access to the bayou and might leave a gap in the trail system the partnership hopes to complete on the north side of the bayou.

The master plan calls for continuous trails along both sides of the waterway from Shepherd to Lockwood. Some of these trails have been built, and the partnership and city government are seeking funds and land for others.

"Mommy, why is that guy in the stiped suit running away from the men in blue?"

"Just eat your sandwich dear."


Knowing Mayor White's PR style they'll market this as "free entertainment".

Just don't feed the inmates will 'ya?

$1.5 Billion dollars (cue Dr. Evil)

That's how much the State has 'left over' from FY 2007.

(from the AP via the Chron)

When Texas accountants closed the books on the 2007 budget period, the state had an unexpected $1.5 billion in unspent money, Comptroller Susan Combs told lawmakers Tuesday.

The ending balance for the 2007 fiscal year, which closed Aug. 31, was $8.5 billion, up from the $7 billion expected when Combs earlier this year set her biennial revenue estimate.

Most of the money can't be spent until lawmakers meet again and adopt spending legislation.

1. Fully fund CHIP.
2. Education, education, education.

You know this won't happen and there will be calls for a "refund" that would be politically popular but logistically impossible. I'm betting MOST of this extra revenue came from sales tax collections. So unless you keep every receipt and itemize, any refund would be a "Socialist-style" redistribution of wealth.

This was laughable:

"The increase was brought about by greater revenues, attributable to strong state economic growth, and lower expenditures, attributable to legislative and agency spending restraint," Combs said.

Uh-huh.


The increase was brought about by increased revenue. Legislative spending restraint is an oxymoron.

Proposition 15

Lance Armstrong supports it...

(by Alexis Grant of the Chron)

World cycling champion Lance Armstrong on Tuesday urged voters to allow the state to borrow $3 billion for cancer research and prevention, saying Texas is the right place to head up the fight against the disease.

"I think it's the most logical state with the medical institutions in Texas," Armstrong, a testicular cancer survivor and seven-time Tour de France winner, told the Houston Chronicle's editorial board. "I view it as an investment in the future lives of all Texans."

Under the proposal, called Proposition 15, the state could issue up to $300 million a year in bonds over the next decade. The money would be distributed to universities and biotechnology research companies through a competitive grant process administered by a state cancer research center.

The Legislature approved the measure in May, and Gov. Rick Perry signed it in June. But the plan won't go forward unless it's approved by voters on Nov. 6.

And for what its worth so do I. (Full disclosure, my sister is in remission from Leukemia so I do have a dog in the fight)

There will be opposition to this, but I doubt it will find a majority:

But opponents say the state shouldn't borrow money to pursue a project that lacks guaranteed results.

While some lawmakers cited a possible cure for cancer to justify their support for the measure, Armstrong said that's probably not in the cards. A more realistic expectation, he said, is to lengthen lives through better prevention and treatment, while research targets one type of cancer at a time.

"I don't think anybody is going to come along and get the silver bullet that kills cancer," Armstrong said. His yellow Livestrong wristband, the popular symbol of his Lance Armstrong Foundation, was visible under his suit.

I guess my point on this is that there are places where Gov't should cut funds, and places where I don't have a problem seeing my tax dollars spent. Right now almost all of the cancer research is being driven by drug companies. Companies that are making money hand over fist treating the symptoms, not curing the cause. With the "world-class" medical facilities that Texas possesses, what better place to jump-start the search for a cure?

If you want to trim Government spending cut out the Governor's "enterprise fund" and tax subsidies for business relocations, cut the Texas Lottery (and the resulting "marketing" programs), and other things that help the few on the backs of the many.

Almost all of us have been, are being, or will be touched by Cancer at some point in our lives. Either because of us or one of our loved ones.

Yes to Prop 15.

The wealthy wheel gets the grease (part 3)

As noted by blogHouston...

Mrs. White stands up for her man...

Led and influenced by wealthy developers, many of whom reside in zoned communities, Houstonians have repeatedly rejected all but the most rudimentary regulations on land use. Given the city's history, perhaps residents shouldn't be surprised or alarmed when inappropriate projects encroach on their neighborhoods.

But sometimes they are taken by surprise and become alarmed, and with good reason.

The most recent cause célèbre is a proposal to erect a 23-story mixed use building on the corner of Bissonnet and Ashby, near Rice University. The outsized project would literally tower over the houses that make up the upscale Southampton and Boulevard Oaks subdivisions.

Showing appropriate leadership, Mayor Bill White supports opponents of the tower. The mayor recognizes the desire of many Houstonians to move closer to their work, which will add density to the central city. However, White said in a statement to concerned parties that he believed the proposed project would impede traffic on two-lane Bissonnet, already congested during rush hours.

(snip)

Influential opponents of the Ashby Tower have won considerable support at City Hall and are represented by prominent litigator Rusty Hardin. Their clout has led some Houstonians to charge favoritism and inequity.

Well, of course. Well-heeled, civically active voters wield more influence than low-income residents who might have less time or inclination to vote and take part in civic affairs. Human nature is not easily repealed, but that's not all bad in a democracy in which politicians are supposed to consider their constituents' concerns.

Chris Amandas, a leader of the neighborhood task force opposing the Ashby Tower, said the project might never be built because of physical limitations. The property is not large enough to accommodate the required construction materials and equipment.

Its on very rare occasions that you find an instance where elitism is not only acknowledged, but openly embraced. Read that bolded statement again, go ahead, I'll wait.....

If you've read that and are not offended by the sentiment contained within then you are probably share the Chron's elitist sensibilities. You'll deny this until you're blue in the face of course, and then you'll write down a denial to speak for you while you come to from asphixiation, but you'll still be a part of the problem.

As blogHouston pointed out, this isn't the first instance of Mayor White pushing through policy that looks remarkebly close to favoritism. At least Mayor White had the political savvy to deny anything unseemly is taking place. Mrs. White doesn't seem to have those misgivings. She's quite content in letting us know that her group of most favored citizens have the "right" plan for Houston.

I wonder, in the interest of full disclosure, if the Chron would let us know if any of their Editorial Board live in or near Southampton?


For a group that contstantly engages in a glorified form of journalistic "gotcha" when it comes to the motivations of those whose opinions are in conflict with theirs, you'd think that Mrs. White wouldn't object to having the microscope focued on herself a little bit.

After all, its all about honesty and integrity right?




Oh....never mind.

Is Clutterbuck in trouble?

The Chronicle spotlights the City Council, District C race today with a piece that raises some very interesting questions...

(from Robert Crowe of the Chron)

In the race for City Council District C, the two challengers to incumbent Anne Clutterbuck say the city must do more to regulate developers, plan for urban density and invest in neighborhoods.

"Special interests and developers are in the front of the line at City Hall at the expense of citizens," said Robert Glaser, a Southampton Democrat who owns an engineering company.

"Houston is the living embodiment of capitalism with all the destruction that goes with it," said Alfred Molison, a Social Security Administration employee who co-chairs the Harris County Green Party. "I want something that is also more sustainable."

Clutterbuck, a full-time councilwoman with a law degree, said she has served her diverse constituents well by implementing crime-fighting strategies and working on ordinances to regulate development and industry.

"There is more to be done on these issues, so I am running for re-election," said Clutterbuck, 46, a Southampton Republican.

(snip)

Glaser, 46, said he wants the city to develop a comprehensive plan that would encourage cooperation with other entities, regulate development and organize mobility as population density increases. He said he would establish a "communication conduit" between neighborhoods and schools to get residents to mentor youth.

All three candidates said opposition to a proposed high-rise at 1717 Bissonnet underscores a need for the city to create a plan to regulate land use.

Clutterbuck said City Hall will have to find alternatives to zoning, which Houston voters have opposed.

"I think there are creative ways to do land planning, and they need to be linked to access to our infrastructure," she said.

Glaser said the city could better regulate land use by creating a comprehensive plan that also addresses transportation.

"We need to take into consideration what type of density we will have and how people plan to get in and out of the city," he said. The city, he said, could encourage businesses to expand car pools and van pools.

Hmmm.....a well-heeled Democratic opponent (from Southampton no less) tagged to take on a sometimes Mayor White critic on City Council?

It's been nice knowing you Ms. Clutterbuck, please grab your parting gifts on the way out the door.

What's good for the goose....

Mrs. White heaps praise on local developer Ed Wulfe for his work on The Kirby re-development project which was hotly contested over the matters of public safety and trees.

The compromise proposal to reconfigure and widen Kirby Drive while protecting most of the live oak trees along the street offers a model for civic cooperation. The Upper Kirby Tax Reinvestment Zone, Trees for Houston and Houston's Public Works Department produced a plan that will make Kirby's traffic lanes safer without doing major damage to the environment.

(snip)

As a result of the compromise, more than 100 trees should be saved without impeding the project's public safety goals. Residents, businesses and customers will be better off because of it.

Should be good for the gander right?


So I'm sure that we'll be hearing how Metro should work with residents along the proposed Metro line to ensure that mature live oaks aren't uprooted and the quality of life in those neighborhoods aren't disrupted or altered very soon right?


Right?

Why politicians don't want reduced appraisal caps....

Summed up nicely in one story by Chron Metro reporter Matt Stiles...

Houston's robust economic growth affords Mayor Bill White two politically attractive opportunities: devoting significant sums for more police officers and, at the same time, proclaiming a cut in the city's property tax rate.

In announcing a strategy last week to hire more than 500 cadets by 2010, White noted that his administration has trimmed the tax rate each year since 2004.

He is able to propose a rate cut and hiring program, now, thanks to an anticipated 10-percent increase in property tax collections this fiscal year, and because voters gave him flexibility around a revenue cap last year for public safety spending.

"Talk about being in the right place at the right time," said John Taylor, a professor and political science chair at the University of St. Thomas. "He's able to pull the money from what is a windfall profit for the city, for lack of a better term, and to address an issue that is at the top of everyone's agenda."

It's a beautiful system really, which allows smart politicians the ability to run as tax-cutters (still popular despite people wanting more and more from the Gov't) AND as someone who is (suddenly) tough on crime.

It also blunts the criticism of his political opponents:

"A dramatic increase like that, it's an insult to the intelligence of the people of this city to say you're giving them a tax cut when, in fact, their taxes are increasing," said City Councilwoman Addie Wiseman. "Bottom line: When (taxpayers) go and write their checks, they won't see a decrease."

Citywide valuations overall rose nearly 12 percent, from $120 billion in 2006 to $134 billion this year. About $3 billion came from new construction, not increased appraisals, according to City Controller Annise Parker's office.

Wiseman's charge, echoed by other critics, is one side of a perennial debate in Houston, where rising appraisals have filled government coffers without forcing political leaders to approve tax-rate increases.

"To me, that's the dichotomy," said Paul Bettencourt, Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector. "You can't say you're cutting taxes when people are seeing a 10-percent tax increase."

Understood, but that's widely been cast as the fault of the State Gov't by Bettencourt's political allies for several years now and suddenly trying to change the focus probably isn't going to work right now.

M.J. Kahn nails it:

"Houstonians will appreciate it much better if crime is down in the city," said Councilman M.J. Khan, a fiscal conservative known to quiz department heads about "zero-based" budgets. "I'm hearing nothing but, 'Do something about crime.' "

The recent spikes in crime have occured because of issues both oustide(Katrina and increased gang activity due largely to illegal immigration) and inside(sub-par police department staffing and bad policy by his Police Chief) Mayor Whites control. The tax rate issue is a happy circumstance (for Mayor White) allowing some much needed political cover for his presumed Gubernatorial campaign to offset the mounting negatives that he's going to face when he makes the run.

This article is a case study as to why there is strong political opposition from groups such as the Texas Municipal League against reduction of the appraisal caps. It's an issue that's neither partisan, nor ideological. It's more about keeping incumbents in office over anything else, allowing them to have their cake (increased revenues) and eat it (small tax-cuts) too.



Congrats as well to Jon Taylor, happy OU Sooner fan and contributor to Lose an Eye friend Proffessor's R Squared for getting some face time (and a yada, yada, yada) in the Chron.

Re-examining Energy Deregulation.

Why isn't it working?
(from Tom Fowler and Janet Elliot of the Chron)

WHEN Texas law-makers agreed to open the state's power markets to competition back in 1999, one promise was on the tip of many tongues — lower prices.

"Competition in the electric industry will benefit Texans by reducing monthly rates and offering consumers more choices about the power they use," then-Gov.
George W. Bush said at the time.

Then-state Sen. David Sibley, who was a key author of the bill, put the promise more bluntly:

''If all consumers don't benefit from this, we will have wasted our time and failed our constituency," he said.

Eight years later, many consumers are calling deregulation just that — a failed waste of time.

From 2000 to June of this year, the average electric rate in Texas rose 56 percent, more than in all but three states, according to the most recent nationwide federal government figures.

"It's like there's a penalty for being a Texan when it comes to your light bill," said Mike Coleman, a Cypress homeowner who also is responsible for the electric bills at an industrial equipment supplier with offices in four states.

Supporters of deregulation say it didn't cause the price increases. They blame the steep hike in the price of natural gas, a key power plant fuel, just as deregulation took effect.

Sibley, a Waco Republican who left the Legislature in 2002 and now lobbies for the electric industry, said deregulation has had successes, including empowering consumers to shop for better rates.

(snip)

Houston residential consumers use an average of 1,130 kilowatt hours a month. Bills for that much power would range from $125.43 to $163.85 based on rates available in Houston at the end of September for a one-year, fixed-rate plan. The average rate available in Houston would produce a monthly bill of $142.95.

The same amount of electricity would cost $97.41 in San Antonio and $105.32 in Austin, both served by municipally owned utilities.

Deregulation supporters say its success should not be judged just on price, and point to the variety of electricity service options available to customers. But they have been slow to take advantage of the choices.

(snip)

"When people complain about prices I ask them, 'Have you shopped around? Have you changed your consumption habits?' " said Steve Madden, senior vice president of supply at StarTex Power, an independent electric retailer.

I wonder if Mr. Madden would mind if I "shopped around" in either San Antonio or Austin?

Yeah, probably so.


The problem with deregulation here is that there's really no consumer option should prices go higher as they are now. You either have power or you don't. You can't go to another option.

We all get the same power from the same wires connected to the same grid. We just are all choosing different middlemen. A voter choice that Houstonians are currently paying a premium for.

Sorry, nothing to see here.

Score one for Paul Bettancourt...

(From Bill Murphy of the Chron)

Acknowledging that it may have misunderstood a new law, the Texas Comptroller's Office signaled Friday that it may back down in a dispute over how the Harris County Appraisal District values commercial properties.

As recently as two weeks ago, Comptroller Susan Combs assailed HCAD for shifting the tax burden away from commercial owners and onto homeowners by under-appraising commercial and apartment property in the Houston Independent School District.

Undervaluing those properties shorted the school district millions of dollars in tax revenue.

"The homeowners are absolutely having to pay the shortfall when commercial properties are undervalued. The tax burden falls disproportionately on the homeowner," Combs said then.

In a statement Friday, Combs said she was looking into whether a state law passed earlier this year could change how her office conducts annual property value studies in school districts statewide. The statement was issued by Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt and HCAD Chief Appraiser Jim Robinson, suggesting Combs may be coming around to their view on how properties are to be appraised.

The initial argument that was being made by the State Comptroller's office never made a whole lot of sense to me anyway. Ms. Combs contention that properties were undervalued unless they increased by almost a 1/4 per year in value just didn't seem right. I realize that property appreciates, but do you really think you could buy a building downtown, and then sell it one year later for 125% of your original investment? You might find a buyer who's not too attached to their money who will go along with you, but odds are you'd sell at somewhere around your buying price.


Which leads us to the idiocy of funding the State on property values in the first place, but I won't go there less I lose ALL of my conservative and liberal friends in one swift stroke.

EU: Creationism a "human rights violation"

I kid you not.....

(from Gilbert Reilhac of the AP via Yahoo! News)

Europe's main human rights body voted on Thursday to urge schools across the continent to firmly oppose the teaching of creationist and "intelligent design" views in their science classes.

The Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly approved a resolution saying attacks on the theory of evolution were rooted "in forms of religious extremism" and amounted to a dangerous assault on science and human rights.

The text said European schools should "resist presentation of creationist ideas in any discipline other than religion." It said the "intelligent design" view defended by some United States conservatives was an updated version of creationism.

Creationism says God made the world in six days as depicted in the Bible. Intelligent design argues some life forms are too complex to have evolved according to Charles Darwin's theory and needed an unnamed higher intelligence to develop as they have.

Anne Brasseur, an Assembly member from Luxembourg who updated an earlier draft resolution, said the report showed how creationists -- most recently a shadowy Turkish Muslim writer Harun Yahya -- were trying to infiltrate European schools.

"The purpose of this report is to warn against the attempt to pass off a belief -- creationism -- as a science and to teach the theses of this belief in science classes," she said. "Its purpose is not to fight any belief."

What about the rights of the people who believe in Creationism? Guess not.

As a Christian I fall more along the old earth creationist path. I believe that God created everything, how he did that however is up for debate. Science, as we understand it, seems to show us that God used the tool of evolution to slowly form the Earth over a period of Trillions of years. As a Christian I have no problem reconciling this with the seeming "Young Earth" account of creation in Genesis. My "out" if you will is the concept of time. We know that time is meaningless to God (although he certainly understands it) so therefore the "days" in Genesis could be either literal or metaphorical. Take your pick.

With that being said I don't think that science teachers have an obligation to discuss the tenets of my religious belief in their science class. All they have to do is point out what science is currently stating as the latest theory, past theories, and how we worked up to what we have now. If, in the course of this process, Creationism is mentioned then I don't see how or why this becomes the great human rights crises of our time. I just cannot walk down that road with the EU.

I've often, on this blog and in other places, been a strong proponent of the separation of Church and State. I believe that its the job of families to educate their children in the ways of Christianity, not the job of the State or the science class.

We're coming to a day however where Christianity (at least in Europe) is going to be outright banned from the public discourse. Any ministry or prostelyzing will be classified as "hate speech" or some other crime along those lines. America may be a lot later getting to the party, but I believe that she will eventually go that way as well, although probably not in my lifetime.

Ironically radical Islamists and fundamentalist Christians, two groups that are in direct opposition from a spiritual standpoint, have shared responsibility for bringing this backlash upon all of us. To some in the World community there is no difference between a Christian Evangialist and a Muslim Imam. Both preach radicalism, both have hatred in their message (albeit for different groups) and both desire to see everyone with the same world view as theirs. It fails to register with that same group that, by classifying all other beliefs as "human rights violations" they are technically guilty of the same thing.

Despite all of this I still think you should be more than a little concerned about this turn of events across the pond. It wasn't right when the Catholic Church carried out the inquisition, and its not right for the EU to begin a crusade to rid the world of Christianity and Islam. Forcing others to believe as you do at the peril of persecution is wrong. While its correct that, given the current amount of scientific information, many believe the evolutionary theory of the creation of the Universe to be true, there's always room for differing views. Those views are neither human rights violations nor are they necessarily wrong.

They're just differing points of view. Any of which could be considered "right" in the future if our understanding of science changes.

Texas Wine Fridays

Recap of the Montgomery Wine and Food Trail...

1. Set-up: First, it was HOT. As such some of the red wines suffered. Kudos to the wineries that figured out its OK to chill your reds on a day where the temperature in the 90's.

2. The wines: First off there were around 14 wineries present pouring their wines. Each winery brought one red, and one white option.

Patrons were given a glass, and ten tasting tickets (we bought more for $1 per ticket) and were sent out to three different locations. At each location you went down the row and sampled the wares of around 4-5 different vinters. You then filled out a ballot and picked your favorite wine and 2nd place at each tent.

3. The pours: Kudos to the organizers for getting the wineries to give you your dollars' worth of wine. You didn't just get a 1 oz tasting pour, you were poured 1/2 a glass for each ticket. That was nice.

4. The winners: Here are some wines that stood out to me when I was tasting.

- Flat Creek Estate Super Texan ($19.95/bottle) This wine had the best pedigree coming in (double gold at the 2005 San Francisco Wine Festival) and it didn't dissapoint here. The "Super Texan" is a Sangiovese that's full, and well-rounded and wonderful. It's indicative of what the wineries of Texas are doing really well right now. Styled after the "Super Tuscans" from Italy, these wines are full and robust in flavor, with very little residual sweetness and strong flavors. This was easily the best wine here.

- Wichita Falls Winery Wichita Red.($11.75/bottle) This wine is a slightly sweet Red blend (Zin, Merlot, Sangiovese) that screams to be chilled and then eaten with barbecue. They made the right move by chilling it at the festival and it was all the better for it. This wine has won several bronze medals at various competitions, and I'm expecting its rating to improve as the vinter works on the blend and brings the acid balance in line. All in all though at less than $12 per bottle this is a great deal.

- Landon Winery Yellow Rose ($11.99/bottle) This wine won the "people's choice" award and was gone by 4:30 in the afternoon. People just kept coming back and tasting it over and over. It was served chilled, is slightly sweet, and was easily the best white wine of the event. The wife LOVED this wine and is currently planning a road trip to the winery to taste (and buy) more.

- Bernhardt Winery Sarah.($15.99/bottle) First off, this is not a Syrah, or a Syrah blend. It's a meritage syle blend (primarily Cabernet grapes and Merlot) with surprising complexity for a Texas wine and a beautiful color in the glass. It didn't have the range that the Super Texan wines have, but I wouldn't be surprised to see this one winning medals in the near future as the winery ramps up production. This winery (close to Houston in Plantersville) also has Sunday live music on the patio and is planning a couple of wine and chocolate events in the near future.


If you've never been to Montgomery its a fun, quirky, historical little town with a lot of interest for the whole family. The Montgomery Wine and Food trail was a great event, and had live music on two small stages, good food and a LOT of good wine and good conversation. There's also the Western Winery which is a unique wine store specializing primarily in Texas wines, including some of the one's not handled by the large distributors.

Salud!

Texas Football Fridays

The Big Story

(from Terrance Harris of the Chron)

Texas A&M athletic director Bill Byrne opened his weekly online column Wednesday with a quote: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

In the days and weeks to come, those words could loom ominous as the school launches an investigation into football coach Dennis Franchione's VIP Connection, an e-mail newsletter that provided insider information to select boosters for a fee of $1,200 annually.

Based on Franchione's contract, which the Chronicle obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, at least two aspects of the agreement could come into question, including one that could void his $2 million-a-year deal without requiring the school to pay an $8 million buyout.

Franchione's distribution of the newsletter and the information provided also could bring secondary NCAA violations, according to two compliance officers not involved or intimately familiar with the Texas A&M probe.

Franchione sometimes provided injury information, discussed specific recruits and accepted outside sports-related income without getting it approved through proper school channels.

That's hardly "Frantastic" now is it?


How does the Chron have no coverage of the biggest game in the Big XII this weekend?

Just one "notebook" story from Duarte...

(from Joseph Duarte of the Chron)

At least for now, little brother Big 12 North is no longer such a pushover.

Fresh off upsets over supposedly superior South teams, Colorado and Kansas State have cleaned up the division's image faster than you can say Lindsay Lohan. In a weekend of upsets, the two teams delivered two of the biggest jolts — Colorado beat third-ranked Oklahoma 27-24, and Kansas State dominated No. 7 Texas 41-21 in Austin. The Longhorns and Sooners had been a combined 29-1 against the North since 2002.

Entering this weekend, there are more North teams (No. 17 Missouri, No. 24 Kansas State and No. 25 Nebraska) than South teams (No. 10 Oklahoma and No. 19 Texas) in the Associated Press Top 25 poll.

"This side has drastically improved over the last two years," first-year Iowa State coach Gene Chizik said. "There's been a great improve-ment in the Big 12 North."

Teams from the South have claimed four of the last five Big 12 championships. The dominance has been most evident during the regular season: The South owns seven straight winning seasons over the North, including a .722 winning percentage (39-15) the past three seasons.

For those of you wondering, the biggest game this week is Kansas State vs. Kansas.

With both teams losing last week the Red River Rivalry will be fought with pop-guns this week.


Way to go Rice....

Or did you not notice that the Owls now have the longest active Conference winning streak? (7 wins in a row)


And, finally.....

Drink up Cougar fans...This one's going to hurt.

UH on the road against Alabama. Ugh.


Picks:

UH 17 Alabama 38
OU 24 UT-Austin 10
aTm 24 OSU 28

National games:

K-State 35 Kansas 24
Florida 7 LSU 42
Ohio St 37 Purdue 10

Enjoy the best football week of the season with 7 games being played where teams in the top 25 square off.

The wealthy wheel gets the grease (part 2)

It's like moving a rock and watching the bugs scramble...

(from Mike Snyder and Nancy Sarnoff)

Two days after Mayor Bill White pledged support for residents fighting a planned high-rise building near Rice University, city officials withdrew their approval of the developers' traffic impact analysis of the project.

This reversal of the city's position, the mayor's personal involvement and the announcement that prominent attorney Rusty Hardin would represent the opponents have reinforced concerns that affluent, politically connected neighborhoods enjoy an advantage over others in Houston's frequent land-use battles.

``There is a terrible inequity here,'' acknowledged City Councilman Peter Brown, who lives a few blocks from the project site and joined at least 300 of his neighbors standing along both sides of Bissonnet on Wednesday afternoon protesting the developers' plans.

White and other city officials denied that the Southampton and Boulevard Oaks neighborhoods near the site at 1717 Bissonnet had received any special treatment. And neighborhood leaders said they hope the attention focused on their struggle will lead to policies that will benefit all of Houston's neighborhoods.

"Sometimes it takes a project affecting folks who can get things done to actually get things done," said James Reeder, a Southampton resident and a partner in the Vinson & Elkins law firm, who said he was surprised and grateful when the mayor returned his recent call to talk about the high-rise. "We are fortunate that we have residents who do have the ear of influential people."

Reeder said he wasn't familiar with the contradictory letters the city's Public Works and Engineering Department had sent to the firm that performed the traffic study for the developers, Kevin Kirton and Matthew Morgan of Houston-based Buckhead Investment Partners.

The first letter, dated Sept. 4, said the city had reviewed the study and found that the 23-story, mixed-use project would have "no adverse traffic impact on the area street system nor the neighborhood. ... I am granting our approval of the traffic impact analysis of 1717 Bissonnet."

A second letter dated Sept. 28 and signed by the same official, Raymond D. Chong, a deputy public works director, said the previous approval of the traffic study was withdrawn. It cited several potential traffic problems the development could cause.

My favorite line in all of this is from Councilman Peter Brown. "There's been a terrible inequity here."

I keep imagining him saying that like the bank presidents in the Capitol One small business commercials say "oooh, look at me I need a loan" waving their hands around and generally chucking it up.

A few months ago there were some questions asked as to whether or not there would be quid pro quo applied to certain groups becuase of all the free legal service the City was getting from certain firms.

I'm not suggesting that this had anything to do with this case, but in politics you have to be on the look out for the appearance of impropriety.

Sometimes it takes a project affecting folks who can get things done to actually get things done," said James Reeder, a Southampton resident and a partner in the Vinson & Elkins law firm, who said he was surprised and grateful when the mayor returned his recent call to talk about the high-rise. "We are fortunate that we have residents who do have the ear of influential people."

Yeah, good thing huh?

Suffer the little children

As expected, Bush vetoes the S-CHIP bill.

(From Jennifer Loven of the AP via the Chron)

President Bush, in a confrontation with Congress, today vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have dramatically expanded children's health insurance.

It was only the fourth veto of Bush's presidency, and one that some Republicans feared could carry steep risks for their party in next year's elections. The Senate approved the bill with enough votes to override the veto, but the margin in the House fell short of the required number.

The White House sought as little attention as possible, with the president wielding his veto behind closed doors without any fanfare or news coverage.

The State Children's Health Insurance Program is a joint state-federal effort that subsidizes health coverage for 6.6 million people, mostly children, from families that earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford their own private coverage.

The Democrats who control Congress, with significant support from Republicans, passed the legislation to add $35 billion over five years to allow an additional 4 million children into the program. It would be funded by raising the federal cigarette tax by 61 cents to $1 per pack.

The president had promised to veto it, saying the Democratic bill was too costly, took the program too far from its original intent of helping the poor, and would entice people now covered in the private sector to switch to government coverage. He wants only a $5 billion increase in funding.

Bush argued that the congressional plan would be a move toward socialized medicine by expanding the program to higher-income families.

Here's a link to a detailed rebuttal to the plan that is sourced from the White House.


There are some Republicans who agree with this rationale and others who don't:

Eighteen Republicans joined Democrats in the Senate, enough to override Bush's veto. But this was not the case in the House, where despite sizable Republican support, supporters of the bill are about two dozen votes short of a successful override.

That this issue is going to be a loser with independents seems (to my mind, as an independent) to be without question. For all of the talk about "socialized medicine" and the fact that some States ARE using this program to subsidize adult insurance, to me the S-CHIP program is still about providing care to children.


I've long been supportive of subsidizing health care to children. I think it should be a national priority and I don't mind seeing my tax dollars spent to ensure kids don't have to go without care.


Now adults? Unless you have a hardship or some legitimate reason you can't get an education and a job (being poor is not, in and of itself, a legitimate reason) then you're on your own.

I don't want to punish your kids however because of your incompetence.


OTHER EYES:

Lone Star Times: Bush (who we've been bashing for weeks now) is RIGHT!!!.

Off the Kuff: Something expected this way comes.

Perry vs. World: White House losing PR war.

Yahoo! News: Democrats MAY attack Republicans over Veto...Ya think?

Paul Burka: Bush vetoes S-CHIP bill.

That's all the linking I'm going to do on this matter. I'm sure that there will be a MILLION and one blog posts from Democrats telling you why this is a bad idea, and a FEW Republican stalwarts who continue to argue that this is about cost. They'll pretty much all be saying the same things as the blogs I linked to here, some of them may just be a little more coarse about it, some of them will outright distort the truth to make their party look good. Check the blog links and decide for your self.

500!!!!

This is the 500th post on Lose an Eye since its inception. As my 5 or so regular readers know its been an uneven and rocky first 500 as I've tried to differentiate this blog from the old blog.

I hope that, in many ways, I've succeeded.


Now that that's out of the way:

Let's Party.


I'll be at the Festa Italiana on Saturday, October 13th stuffing myself with Italian food and wine. This is an unofficial blog-milestone party/BTC event of course.

Salud!

Coffee activism and freedom of choice

I read the story about the "fair trade" coffee dispute at the University of Houston this weekend and was slighty disturbed by some of the rhetoric coming from the "activists".

(from Sarah Viren of the Chron)

As with any college, the University of Houston has had its share of war protests and abortion debates, but few student movements in recent history have stirred up quite as much hubbub as the current one — over coffee.

In the three semesters since graduate student Tim O'Brien got steamed up over the rights of overseas bean farmers, he and a handful of other fair trade activists have papered the campus with inflammatory fliers, held news conferences to air their concerns and accused the administration of "subverting the democratic process."

Last week, they barged into an open faculty meeting carrying a banner that read "Rudley Ignores Student Concerns."

Interim President John Rudley then took out an advertisement in the student newspaper disputing O'Brien's attacks.

It's the kind of ideological outrage more often associated with a California liberal arts school than a commuter college in Texas, but both sides say they are taking the issue seriously.

Coffee, that is.

"I am trying to build an army," said O'Brien, a fast-talking former Baker Botts paralegal. "I've got to show people the injustice and say, 'Get involved, come join my group and then you can help change this.' "

Rudley declined an interview request from the Chronicle, but in response to e-mail questions noted: "I support students' discussions of all issues, but these discussions should not disrupt the academic programs and activities of the university."

(snip)

The fight, in essence, rests on just what java UH students can buy and where.
O'Brien, inspired by a trip to Ethiopia last year, has been pushing for only fair trade brews on campus — that is, coffee made from beans grown by farmers guaranteed a fair wage (currently $1.36 a pound).

Administration officials say they've made concessions — fair trade coffee is now offered everywhere on campus — but they're not ready to mandate social consciousness to the school's 34,500 students, especially when so many are hooked on Starbucks.

The popular chain, with several locations on campus, is not fully fair trade. Contacted this week, a company spokeswoman said, "We certainly encourage direct communication with students and are happy to discuss our business practices with them."

I'm all for fair trade coffee. I think its the right thing to do. Every bean that's in my house right now is fair trade certified and organic. The big difference between my house and the University of Houston is that I made the choice to purchase coffee that is "acceptable" to coffee activist Tim O'Brien.

Since he started his campaign against non-fair trade coffee the University has started to offer fair-trade choices at almost every coffee location on campus. That should be enough, but its not. You see, until all non-fair trade coffee is eradicated from campus, Tim O'Brien will not be happy.

If you're not offended by that last sentence read it again, and then substitue something that you care about.

As much as I hate to admit it, there are people out there who make consumer choices that I would not approve of. I don't eat fast food because I feel its unhealthy. People have the choice to stop at any fast food place they would like, I'm not going to take away their right to do that because I don't like it.

What concerns me the most about this new round of "activism" is that its not considered enough to have your choice available. Everyone has to be FORCED to do things your way. Vegan activists aren't happy being vegans. They won't be happy until EVERYONE is eating the way they like, despite the fact that several studies show the benefits of a well-rounded diet.

Environmentalists aren't content being as green as they can be, they won't be "happy" until everyone is FORCED to purchase goods of which they approve. Nevermind the fact that "living green" is a terrible burden on the poor.

Activism is a good thing when its tempered with a healthy respect for the rights of individuals. When you begin to think that you alone have the exclusive moral high ground then you are no better than the "big evil corporations" that you are often in activism against.

I think fair trade coffee is a great idea.


I also enjoy an occassional Starbucks latte when I'm out and about. I don't want to lose my right to do that to make some guy with an overdeveloped guilt complex happy so that he will shut up and go back to his studies.


You shouldn't want to lose your right either.

Get off my Land!!!

Certain border mayors are taking an interesting tack in preventing construction of a border fence.

(by Juan A. Lozano of the AP via the Chron)

Mayors along the Texas-Mexico border have begun a quiet protest of the federal government's plans to build a fence along the border: Some are refusing access to their land.

Mayors in Brownsville, Del Rio and El Paso have denied or limited access to some parts of their city property to Department of Homeland Security workers assigned to begin surveys or other preliminary work on the fence Congress has authorized to keep out illegal immigrants.

Eagle Pass has denied a request from federal officials to build a portion of the wall within its city limits.

Brownsville Mayor Pat Ahumada said Tuesday that he refused two weeks ago to sign documents granting federal workers permission to begin work if it was to be on city property. Del Rio granted limited access and El Paso allowed workers only on its outskirts, said Monica Weisberg Stewart of the Texas Border Coalition, a group that represents local officials.

"This is exercising our rights. This is our property," Ahumada said. "We are not going to make it easy for them."

In Eagle Pass, Mayor Chad Foster said his city has refused the U.S. Border Patrol's request to build 1 1/4 miles of fencing as part of a project that includes light towers and a new road for border patrols.

But he added that while border communities are at odds with the government, they remain committed to finding solutions to these disagreements.

"All of us are in opposition to physical barriers but we want to work with (the Department of Homeland Security) so everybody walks away happy," said Foster, who is also chairman of the Texas Border Coalition.

It's really just political doublespeak at its finest here. "We're against you, but we'll be willing to work for you provided you see things our way." Anytime you see someone who says they want "everybody" to be happy, you can automatically read that to mean "everyone who agrees with me" in place of everyone. It's a political truism that's as old as time.

That being said, there are legitimate gripes that these communities have, including access to water, transportation, regional issues etc. There are also re-election issues at work, as some of these border Mayors are elected by the very same people the wall is designed to keep out.

Not that I'm for building a wall. I'm for securing the borders however, because (as many have said): A Country without borders is not a Country. I believe in strong border security, but I have trouble accepting the logic behind a wall. Walls can be used to keep people in over time, instead of keeping people out.

As is usual in the border case the argument is broken down into a "false choice" that we are given by our politicians. If you are against illegal immigration then you are a xenophobe, and if you are for it then you support law-breakers. The reality is that there are some who oppose illegal immigration because of cost concerns, some who oppose it because of security concerns, and some that are, in fact, xenophobes. Just as there are some that support open immigration because of humanitarian reasons, some who support it due to financial reasons, and some who feel that Southwestern America was unlawfully "stolen" from Mexico and that they are reclaiming their land.


Until both sides look at the other and realize all of the agendas present, find the common ground and silence the minority fringes, then we'll keep getting stories like this showing that any enforcement of border security is nothing more than a petty excuse to win political points.

More police on the streets: This is a good thing.

It took a while, but Mayor White and Chief Hurtt finally saw the light....

(from Kevin Moran of the Chron)

The city of Houston will spend an extra $24 million on police overtime in the next three years while boosting the number of officers on the streets by more than 500 in that period, Mayor Bill White said today.

The overtime money will finance more than 500,000 hours of police work through the fiscal year that ends in July 2010, White said.

It will immediately put more officers to work, for more hours, in troubled areas of the city such as Acres Homes, where the bodies of seven women have been found in the past two years, White and Police Chief Harold Hurtt said at a City Hall news conference this morning.

The $24 million is in addition to more than $40 million the city has budgeted for overtime in each of the past two years.

The announcement drew praise from rank-and-file officers.

"The bottom line is that this is boots on the ground," said Houston Police Officers Union president Hans Marticiuc, who attended the meeting. "This is welcome news for every Houston police officer."

The money to add three police academy classes to four already scheduled, and put more officers to work on overtime in high-crime areas, comes from increased property taxes that voters exempted from a city budget tax cap, White said.

By that last statement I'm assuming he's referring to monies exempted from Proposition 2 by propositions G & H which I still believe is now fully settled in court. It smacks a little of "I told you so" politics like that practiced by political amatuers, but I guess whatever makes your point.

There are commenters on this story who are already saying that the idea will do nothing for public safety, but will instead just enrich the same group of officers who took advantage of the overtime system last time.

What this does do is increase the number of cadets that will be taking classes and becoming new officers in time. This is the best way to increase the numbers within the ranks and should be a top spending priority for the next Mayor.

Support him or not, Mayor White waited too long during his administration to adequately address the crime issue. He's late to the game and a dollar short, but at this point the results may be felt well after his presumed 2010 Gubernatorial run. It's a political miscalculation from a man whose been making and increasing number of them as his tenure has progressed.


Still, its a positive step ahead for the future, he deserves credit for that.

Who's making the decisions at Comcast?

Stories like this make you wonder...

(from Brad Hem of the Chron)

The Comcast cable television rate increase that took effect Monday adds 6.1 percent to the average bill, according to the company, but as customers open their bills, they may find there's no such thing as average.

The company's before-and-after rate schedule indicates customers with big appetites for top-tier digital services are likely to see larger increases. Those with basic service should be closer to average.

The company declined to comment on the specific changes that showed up in rate sheets sent to customers.

When Comcast cable television customer Ron Shimkus first looked down the list of new prices the Houston cable provider was about to start charging, he thought it was worse than it turned out to be after he got an explanation from the cable company.

While still hefty by Shimkus' standards, the rate increase added $40 to his monthly bill instead of the $100 he first feared.

"It's not as bad as I thought because of the package I have," said Shimkus, whose bill is rising to $160 a month. His service includes all five premium movie channels and three DVRs for his high-definition TVs — hardly the average customer.

Comcast's basic Digital Starter package went down by a penny a month, but other digital packages increased by between $5.01 and $12.01 in Houston. The monthly cost of a la carte movie channel rates for HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, The Movie Channel and Starz went from $10 to $19.95.

The company's most popular package, Digital Classic, increases by $5.01 a month.

They unveil this rate increase at the same time AT&T rolls out their U-Verse televsion service and satellite companies are offing up more and more discounts to entice people to switch over. I decided long ago to switch to U-Verse. Since my first bad experience with the U-verse people I've actually made some headway and have just about brought them around to seeing things my way. Despite the troubles that AT&T is having with the technology and roll-out, most industry observers are still recommending to switch, primarily because of the unrealistic price of cable service.


So, at this time, Comcast decides that a price increase is a good idea?

Of online chest beating and other things...

Lately, certain bloggers of the InterLeft have been imploring (begging?) good Democrats to change the equation in favor of "drafted" Democratic Senate candidate Rick Noriega who's "answering the call to serve." (catchy).

So after three months of daily posting meme's and repeated requests, how much has the equation changed? Not much it seems....

(from R.G. Ratcliffe of the Chron)

Houston state Rep. Rick Noriega said Monday he will report raising $570,000 for his campaign for the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination.

That's far behind the $7.5 million that San Antonio lawyer Mikal Watts has said he is giving or loaning to his campaign. Watts also has reported raising $1.1 million in June.

The primary winner will take on incumbent Republican U.S. Sen. John Cornyn.

(snip)

"Mikal proved his fundraising ability when he raised over a million dollars in the first 30 days of his campaign," Devlin said. "We're very confident we'll have the resources necessary to run an aggressive, modern campaign, and tell the people of Texas about the kind of positive change Mikal Watts will bring to Washington as Texas' next United States senator."

Noriega's totals include $158,860 that was raised online by Democratic activists.

Taking out the $7.5 Million dollars that Watts has "given or loaned to himself" you still have the daunting reality that he outgained Noriega almost two to one in donations. While I agree with many of the InterLeft that money isn't everything when it comes to campaigning, one needn't look too far to see how a lack of it can torpedo a campaign.

Before he bacame a political laughingstock, Orlando Sanchez was considered a serious challenge for Mayor of Houston. Until he ran out of money against Bill White in a run-off and was forced to sit on the sidelines as Mayor White blanketed Houston with ads.

Political footnote Chris Bell ran broke in the 2006 Texas Gubernatorial race. Once stating that "a corpse could run as a Democrat and get 30% of the vote", Chris never had the money to run serious advertisements was relegated to 29.79% of the general vote. Just slightly under what he stated a corpse would recieve. Maybe the corpse was better funded?

As you can see money matters. Don't be too ready to call the race for Watts however, the ghost of Tony Sanchez still looms large in the minds of Texas Democrats, and Watts reminds them a lot of the failed "dream team" ticket that sputtered in 2002.

Maybe the best thing to do with this information is to file it under the "keeping things in perspective" file and move forward. The InterLeft was directly responsible for generating 20% of the financial support for Rick Noriega, that equates to approximately 10% of the funds that Watts has received from outside sources. Those aren't insignificant numbers but the most troubling number is that the money came from around 1000 supporters in an election where the vote totals will be in millions that's really a drop in the bucket. Of course, when you consider that most of Mikal Watts' money came from ONE supporter (himself) the race could be closer than anyone expects until the ad buys start rolling around.


I'm not suggesting that the InterLeft is running on a treadmill here, I'm suggesting that they are climbing a steep hill. They are moving forward however, albeit slowly. What no one's really talking about yet is that, at the end of this mountain, there's a taller mountain in front of them named Cornyn, whose going to have a lot more disposable cash to keep his seat.


Just a litte perspective.

James Campbell stepping down.

The Chron Readers' Rep announced he's leaving on Saturday...

(from James Campbell of the Chron)

Goodbyes are not my thing. I've been married 26 years; my truck has almost 180,000 miles; I own more vinyl records than digital CDs; and my career at the Houston Chronicle has spanned almost 20 years.

Next week will be my last at the Chronicle and as Readers' Representative (so, fire away or forever hold your abuse). I always wondered what this day would be like. In a week or so, I'll be stepping outside of the comfort zone I've known for more than 25 years as a journalist to begin a new career. It has not been easy grasping that.

Since making my decision to leave the Chronicle, my feelings have run an emotional gamut between melancholy (for leaving wonderful friends and dedicated colleagues), exhilaration (over beginning a new career) and utter fear (see previous). But it's time.

There is a lot on which Mr. Campbell and I didn't agree. Without having ever met him personally I think I can comfortably say that he was a good person, who had a very difficult job in which he could never please every one of his customers. So that being said I think the Chronicle will be a little bit poorer now without Mr. Campbell than it was with him at the RR helm. He may not have been able to understand most of the criticism, and much of the criticism he received was probably not even all that valid, but he reported on all of it, the good and the bad and you got the feeling that he at least presented it to the Editorial staff regardless of his personal feelings regarding it. I'm not saying that he didn't discount most of it, but it was at least presented.

That's a pretty big something in the world of journalism right there.


Congrats James and good journey. And stop in from time to time and let us know how things are.

Square peg, round hole.

Maybe not many minorities want to live in College Station?

(from Matthew Tresague of the Chron)

Texas A&M University's high-profile campaign to increase minority representation on campus has stalled after some gains, with the percentage of black and Hispanic students among the freshman class remaining unchanged for the third consecutive year.

Of the 8,078 freshmen enrolled this fall, 14 percent are Hispanic and 3 percent are black, despite a record number of applications and acceptances for the minority groups, according to A&M's preliminary counts.

While applications provide only a loose indication of how many students might enroll, the new numbers raise questions about the effectiveness of efforts by the state's second-largest university to become more racially and ethnically diverse.

"We still face the challenge of convincing minority students who are admitted to actually enroll," interim President Eddie Davis told faculty members recently.

Attracting and enrolling qualified black and Hispanic students is a problem at most selective public universities, whose oft-cited goal is to be a microcosm of their states. But the hurdle may be higher at A&M, partly because the school does not consider race as a factor in admissions.

Many other universities embraced affirmative action after a U.S. Supreme Court decision in 2003, but A&M did not. Since then, the College Station flagship has invested $31 million in programs to increase minority enrollment, such as scholarships for first-generation students and recruitment centers in Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and South Texas.

Campus leaders point to the programs as reasons why more black and Hispanic students are applying and gaining admission to A&M. Still, only 49 percent of Hispanic students and 43 percent of black students who were accepted enrolled this fall — a seven-point drop for both groups from two years ago. Roughly 60 percent of admitted white students enrolled.

As a result, black and Hispanic students make up the same percentage of this fall's new class as in 2005 and 2006. At the University of Texas at Austin, Hispanics account for 20 percent of the freshmen, up from 18 percent two years ago. Black students make up 6 percent, compared with 5 percent in 2005.

"The real problem is that, even with a larger number of applications and larger number of admits, the yield sank," said Alice Reinarz, assistant provost for enrollment at A&M.

This story is not necessarily a bad thing IMO. If aTm is making a concerted effort, and minorities are just choosing different Universities, then that's the market at work and everyone needs to just let it be.

You can't force people to be happy outside of their preferred situation, no matter how right you think your ideas for their happiness are.

Why going to college isn't all its cracked up to be....

At least, not since tuitions were deregulated and went through the roof.


It's HARD to pay for College these days...

(from Marcy Gordon of the AP)

The near doubling in the cost of a college degree the past decade has produced an explosion in high-priced student loans that could haunt the U.S. economy for years.

While scholarship, grant money and government-backed student loans — whose interest rates are capped — have taken up some of the slack, many families and individual students have turned to private loans, which carry fees and interest rates that are often variable and up to 20 percent.

Many in the next generation of workers will be so debt-burdened they will have to delay home purchases, limit vacations and even eat out less to pay loans off on time.

Kristin Cole, 30, who graduated from Michigan State University's law school and lives in Grand Rapids, Mich., owes $150,000 in private and government-backed student loans. Her monthly payment of $660, which consumes a quarter of her take-home pay, is scheduled to jump to $800 in a year or so, confronting her with stark financial choices.

"I could never buy a house. I can't travel; I can't do anything," she said. "I feel like a prisoner."

A legal aid worker, Cole said she may need a job at a law firm "doing something that I'm not real dedicated to, just for the sake of being able to live."

Add to this trend the odd Republican tack kow-towing to the lending industry and you have a situation where the TRUE cost of College is getting closer and closer to outweighing the benefits.

Not that you still don't need a College degree to get a well-paying job, increasingly that's the case. But the problem is now that the cost of the degree is becoming less and less likely to be "made up" by a bump in salary, especially when you consider the cost of the money that it takes to earn a degree. As someone who is currently paying off student loans myself (including one private loan that I had to take out my Senior year) I can vouch for the fact that these loans are not what they used to be. Plus, I was in school during the time that President Bush decided it would be a good idea to bail out the Student Loan Industry on the backs of the students, doubing rates but allowing lenders to keep their high subsidies.

The good thing for me is that I understood what I was getting into and my payment is well within my means. It's still not as low as it should be (or could have been had the rates not doubled) but its manageable. But when you're 18-22 and don't have any experience with loans and financing is it really fair to allow credit companies to come in almost without restriction?

America is currently making the first interest payments on the loans taken out by the "me first" society. We've funded our economic growth through a negative savings rate and spending beyond our means. Yes, we as consumers have blown it to a certain degree, and I'm not suggesting that people should be let off the hook.

But in a world where credit companies are allowed to charge usurous rates, where even those in financial distress receive dozens of offers for more credit every month and where we're allowing finance companies to ignore the rules of good finance, isn't it maybe time to re-evaluate where this is all getting us?


Since College, my household spending policy has ran on the principle of "cash only". If I don't have the money in the bank, then I don't need it. Maybe its time to put some restrictions on the credit industry and force more people to go down that road?