As we Prepare to Boot 2020 Into the Dustbin of History....It's Prediction Time.

 There is no other way to say this....2020 has been awful. 

From a global pandemic that was utterly mishandled by world governments to a United States response that was ham-fisted, inept in many areas and downright fraudulent in some, it's been a year of missed opportunities, dumb governance and, for too many, lost income and loved ones.

Normally, when I do these "prediction" posts, I try to keep it light and come up with ridiculous items that JUST border on the verge of being possible.  But this year I'm not feeling all that humorous, so I'm going to make some serious predictions at five different levels (National, Texas, Nevada, Houston, Las Vegas). Unlike previous years, these are things that I actually believe are going to happen within the Nation, the City and State where I currently reside, and the City and State that I like to visit frequently,

Since we're all anxious to put 2020 behind us, let's dive right in.

National Predictions:

1. Before the end of 2021, the movement to replace Biden as President will be well underway.

Like Biden or not, there is no doubt that the man is suffering from senility at this point in his life. It's been sad really to watch him get lost, confused, and be unable to answer even the simplest questions without visual (or audio) aids.

2. Regardless of who controls the Senate, the Democrats will be unable to deliver on many of the grand plans they have promised.

For one, they had control of Congress and the White House during Obama's first term, and what they provided the country was the fetid mess that is ObamaCare. Two, and the country are going to discover very quickly that all of the grand plans will not be accomplished through their "soak the rich" tax plans. There's just not enough money in the kitty to fund all that they are proposing.

3. The National response to COVID-19 under a Biden regime will be just as inept as it has been under the Trump Regime.

Grand pronouncements to the contrary, they're not going to be able to pull this off because they are going to rely on the government bureaucracy to pull it off and, as we've seen, that is a recipe for full-on disaster.

Predictions for the State of Nevada.

1. The budget situation is going to be dire. Sisolak will have no clue how to fix it.

The fact that Governor Gene Sisolak is not an effective executive is going to come into full relief, more than it already has, in 2021. He's incapable of suggesting the taxation of sacred cows (i.e. the mining industry), he's a man of no executive creativity and the people are going to see this as budgets get cut and the State sinks further into a fiscal abyss.

2. Nevada WILL get a lottery.

While I'm not entirely sure of the exact mechanizations in Nevada State Law for this (for example, does it require voter approval or no? Not sure) but I do predict that one of the first things attempted to try and bring in new revenue will be attempts to establish both multi-state progressive lotteries and those dreaded scratch-off cards.  Sub-prediction: The revenues gained "for the children" will be far less than projections.

Predictions for the City of Las Vegas:

1. It's going to be a ROUGH 2021

I don't see conventions coming back prior to 2022, and even then, some of these bigger events are in the processing of finding new homes, and cities willing to roll out the red carpet for them. Given the increasing costs of visiting the Strip companies, who are also employing people suffering from tough times, are going to start to look for other options.

2. One big casino operator is going to abandon Las Vegas.

The obvious answer is Sands, who is already exploring it, but I'd keep my eye on the new Caesars. As the Las Vegas Strip continues to remake itself into an overpriced bordello there's going to be less and less value there. The old saying was "gamblers still gonna gamble" but the Strip's problem is that they've abandoned the gambler.

Predictions for Texas:

1. The population bleed from the big cities will continue.

As the progressive, anti-business, ideologies continue to permeate the ruling classes of city governance people are going to continue to choose to move out and drive back in rather than living in an increasingly high-crime environment that boasts higher tax rates and fewer services.

2. No, Virginia, Texas is NOT going to approve sports betting in any form in 2021.

Texas will not expand gambling until the time that the State turns blue. No matter how much sense this one thing makes (casino gambling is a different matter altogether) it will not happen.

3. The newest "Blue Star" for the media is going to be Lina Hidalgo.

Harris County's grad-student County Judge is already receiving glowing profiles from the Texas Lock-Step Political Media, and even some National Media, despite the fact that she's not even really running the County (Rodney Ellis is running the county). She's going to get a hard push to challenge Abbott for Governor, or possibly Dan Patrick for Lt. Governor.

Predictions for Houston:

1. There will be a major flood in 2021.

The City will be 100% unprepared to deal with it.  For all of the talk, post Harvey, about "something, must be done!" The fact is little actually HAS been done. A lot of this is due to Judge Lina Hidalgo deciding to put everything back in the sausage making machine in the name of "social justice" (which is odd, because flood water knows nothing about this).

2. Houston will miss-out on the "tech boom" that's coming to Texas.

Yes, they welcomed HP, but that was outside of the city limits. Austin will receive most of the windfall from this, and Houston will be left behind with the city leadership wondering what the heck happened.

OK, that's where I'm going to leave it for now. I'm hoping that 2021 is the year where we all get the vaccine, it works, and we can get back to something resembling normal and place politics and government back in the background where they belong.

Happy New Year and good luck to all of you.

If Ted Leonsis is Right, Texas Could be at a HUGE Disadvantage.

Ted Leonsis on the future of sports betting. USA Today

The arena where his Washington Capitals and Wizards play opens an hour or so before games and empties out quickly after, but he expects all that will change in years to come as arenas become casinos of a sort — open nearly around the clock to capture a coming mania for legalized sports betting.
“I think you will see buildings like Capital One Arena being reimagined,” Leonsis tells USA TODAY. “So we want people to come into our buildings to have lunch, to have dinner when there’s not a game in the building, watch other games on television, do research, bet, wager — and look at our buildings as really alive, dynamic sports cathedrals.”

Yes, it involves reimagining.  EVERYTHING involves reimagining. It's a buzz word, just ignore it.

IF what Leonsis says turns out to be even 70% true, then Texas could find itself in a competitive disadvantage going forward, since the State does not allow, and is unlikely to allow, any betting other than the Lottery and horse racing, the latter of which the Texas Legislature is trying it's level best to shutter.

Other states, such as Utah, who have an aversion to any betting would also find themselves behind, both monetarily and from a fan-experience stand-point as teams in gambling-progressive states open up vast new streams of revenue for team owners allowing for bigger expenditures, better rosters and better facilities than their poorer brethren have the ability to afford.

This does not mean that Texas, or other states, should open up their borders to casino gaming. In fact, I'm on record suggesting that Texas should not.  I was behind it initially, but the more I thought about it I could foresee Texas getting it wrong, the luxury "resorts" everyone envisioned falling victim to the Texas proclivity for doing everything on the cheap, where people see a Texas Bellagio rising from the prairie I see a bunch of sawdust joints. And if you've never been in a true sawdust joint (also known as grind joints) they are among the most depressing places in the world.

Texas doesn't need that, and they don't need the problems that come with gambling addiction, drug use, prostitution and property crime that accompanies it.  So, no to casino gaming then.

But, and this is a rather big but, Texas COULD benefit from legalizing what tens of thousands of Texans are already partaking in illegally: Sports betting, both physically and on-line.

Illegal sports wagering is a Billion dollar industry. A large portion of that Billion is spent right here in the Lone Star State.  Local sports-talk radio hosts openly talk about getting their action down online. So, it's clear that the State doesn't have much of an appetite for stopping the practice, Texas might as well legalize it, tax it, and decriminalize all of those who are participating.

Will the tax on this "save Texas Schools"?  No, of course not, and gambling proponents who say that are putting their heads in the sand.  Are Louisiana's schools awash in gaming cash?  No. Are Oklahoma's tribes richer than the dreams of Midas?  Of course not. Are Nevada schools built with the finest Italian marble?  No, in fact, each of those states has some of the lowest education scores in America.  Granted, most of that is due to bad political leadership, but the idea that you can just throw money at a government problem and make it go away seems to be discredited in every area of life except for the Government.

We are governed by idiots, elected by us and then treated as experts in the field.  But, if they're idiots, what in the hell does that make us?

A quick thought on the purpling of Texas.

Texas, as we all know, is just a small demographic tweak away from turning blue.  Listening to the State's Democrats all they have to do is sit around and wait until Texas rising minority populations hit critical mass and then they'll be free to spend all of the money in the rainy-day fund, increase taxes, get rid of the spending cap and spend even more. 

Add to that the joy surrounding the arrival of Battleground Texas and certain political consultants of a progressive lean are already giddily making home improvement and expansion plans in anticipation of the increased revenues they are expecting during 2014.  Even the progressive blogosphere is weighing in, although some of them are taking a longer view. All of this is well and good, and the images on Twitter of Caucasian progressives working phone banks for Battleground Texas are firing up the base despite being unintentionally humorous. None of the discussion addresses the biggest problem.  Namely, there's no one actually running as of yet.

While I don't believe that demographic change necessarily has to equate to the purpling of Texas (there is fertile ground to plow for Republicans with the State's rising Hispanic population if they would ever perform a rectal/cranial extraction on immigration for instance) I do believe that Democrats are going to have to do more than just sit around and wait things out.

To my thinking, the first step is quality candidates and on that front they are lacking.

It's very easy for political consultants (hoping to make money) and political bloggers with no real skin in the game to promote a "run everywhere" philosophy, to actually do so means offering up a strong slate of candidates who actually have a chance of winning.  The long-term damaging potential of a slate full of Chris Bell and David Van Os type candidates is very real.  The political humor of "a Moon-shot for Texas education" and "Big Oil, I'm coming after you" has lasting, damaging effects. In order to win you need voters to take you seriously, and you need candidates with a vision the majority of Texans can get behind.

Currently Texas Republicans are having it easy.  The State Democrats due, in part, to a vacuum of leadership, haven't put up viable candidates in many races.  The result of this is that several Republicans who probably shouldn't be in elected office (See: Susan Combs) are getting elected.  They are winning because the alternative is much, much worse than electing a fringe candidate from the majority party who's perceived impact is going to be more benign. Add to this the fact that Republicans no longer need to campaign to the majority, due to Texas Democrats basically surrendering, and you have a situation where the entire State is damaged due to no electoral accountability. 

Yes, a lot of this is do to how the electoral maps are drawn, with the creation of "safe" districts leading to the de-facto unchallenged re-election of many bad candidates (on both sides of the aisle) but there's an argument to be made that some (not all) of these "safe" districts would not be so had one side not thrown in the towel before the election even started.

All of that said, politics is a pendulum.  And there will come a day when Texas Democrats find themselves back holding the reins of Texas political power.  If they continue to do so while running marginal candidates just to fill ballot holes then it won't just be Republicans who suffer, it will be all of Texas.

Only if you believe good government = more government does this make sense.

The Texas Tribune, continuing their drive to get Texans to pay Carol Alvarado a living wage, raises a question today:

Do Over votes in Texas Legislature raise questions. Aman Batheja, Texas Tribune

The Texas Legislature took three high-profile mulligans last month. Twice in the House and once in the Senate, a majority of lawmakers voted one way on a bill or amendment, only to quickly turn around and vote the other way.

The incidents raise a troubling question: Are lawmakers regularly voting on legislation they don't understand?

The underlying theme is that, due to the Lege's part-time status, our elected representatives are running around willy-nilly casting votes on bills they haven't read, nor do they fully understand.  The obvious answer to this is to greatly expand the Texas government, pay them a competitive salary obviously, and expand them to full-time status.

All of the arguments for expansion (ethics, uninformed votes etc.) lose water when you realize that the US Congress IS full time and they are often worse than the part-time Texas congress in all of these areas.

Sure, it's tough for a news-ish political site to fill the required inches of column space given that the lege is only in session for 3-4 months every two years, but their desire to have more to opine on is a terrible reason to increase Texas government spending by Billions.

More from the Comb's follies

For someone who is marketing herself as the "State's CFO" it's becoming increasingly clear that Susan Combs knows very little about finance.....

Shale Boom has major impact on State's budget. Kate Galbraith, Texas Tribune

But the most significant effect from the boom may be seen in the state’s coffers. Taxes on oil and gas production have soared past estimates from the state’s comptroller’s office for fiscal 2012. And with production expected to continue to rise over the next several years, the economic benefits will continue.

The inability by the State Comptroller to provide meaningful and accurate revenue estimate is severely hampering the State Budgeting process.  And this is an elected official who wants to be trusted with an even more meaninful role in the future?

Tirelessly advocating for the children while voting to give taxpayer dollars to Billionaires.

(Or, why those great progressive/conservative hopes aren't all they're cracked up to be.)

It seems that every legislative cycle there are new (and sometimes old) 'stars' that emerge on either side as legislative champions for those of a ideological stripe who are instantly moved to the front of the class any time a higher office is mentioned in passing.  In the current, eighty-third, Legislature the wunderkind of the Left is Texas Sen. Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth). On her legislative website, she includes such glowing quotes about herself as follows:

Wendy Davis has been called "courageous," "articulate and gutsy" and "inspiring" by the Fort Worth Star Telegram, which also described her as a legislator who "will stand up and fight."

Wendy has been taking on tough fights her entire life.

She's also been cast as a "tireless advocate" for children's issues which means, as near as I can tell, that she occasionally pens some letters (sternly worded however) and gets in verbal arguments with her political opposites over the issue. Sen. Wendy Davis is in the sweet spot of journalistic accolades, where the misuse of the word brave is right up there with the watering down of the words "hero", "tireless" and "fight".

On the opposite end of the Spectrum is Texas Sen. Dan Patrick (R-Houston) whose website bio describes him as such:

Dan Patrick is a strong fiscal and social conservative who has led the charge on important legislation like small business tax cuts and the sonogram bill. Since arriving in the Senate in 2007 he has learned to build coalitions to pass over 100 pieces of legislation and has become a key ally to others. In his three sessions, Dan has not missed one day on the Senate floor and has only missed 6 of more than 13,000 votes.

Patrick also characterizes himself as the "Senate's leading conservative" apparently standing on the thin line between Senatorial restraint and fiscal insanity.  Unlike Davis, Sen. Dan does has not traditionally received Hosannas from Texas Lockstep Political Media. However, given his new found penchant for spending money, this tune is changing.

I was amused then that a bill overlooked by most of TLSPM, which involved the potential spending of Millions of dollars got so little attention that no one thought to question the two rising stars about their votes on it, votes that could, in theory, shuttle large amounts of Texas' taxpayer money to Jerry Jones in return for a football game.

Texas House OKs bill advancing Cowboys Stadium’s bid for first college football playoff title game. Robert T. Garrett, Dallas Morning News

The Texas House on Thursday tentatively approved a bill that would advance Cowboys Stadium’s bid to host college football’s first playoff title game after the 2014 season.

The measure, passed on a voice vote, already has passed the Senate unanimously.

Now, in case you've forgotten, the monies from this will draw from the State's major events fund.  This is the same fund that State Comptroller Susan Combs raided to pay for Bernie Eccelstone's F1 event in Austin.  It's also the fund that many conservatives believe is not necessary.  Given that Sen. Davis is a leading advocate of auditing the Texas Enterprise Fund (administered by Republican Rick Perry) you'd think she might have some reservations about sending money that could be dedicated "to the children" to a Billionaire why she's in opposition to doing the same thing to bring businesses to the State.  Sen. Dan is, on his radio station anyway, supposedly a impregnable firewall against runaway government spending.  Yet, here, without much fanfare or debate, two of Texas' top firebrands, tireless advocates dripping with political bravery and courage, went along to get along on expenditures that will neither benefit the State economy all that much, nor will they create meaningful, long-term jobs.

Think about this vote, this under publicized vote, the next time you hear about how wonderful each of these legislative points of light are in the tireless fight to protect your money. Especially, think about it come election time. Because you're going to be inundated with campaign ads from politicians telling you how great they are and that, without them, you might as well be prepared for Texas to slouch toward third world status.  This is the same kind of thinking that keeps Susan Combs in politics, despite the fact that she seemingly has difficulty with the basic functions of her job.  Even sadder, the Comptroller is now chastising Obama for his budget and she is going to run as a conservative despite the fact that she was ready to give away the taxpayer farm to F1 and was directly responsible for the Amazon sales tax in Texas.

I'm unsure what's led to the dumbing down of our political leadership in America, but when you pay attention you notice that it is a very real and disturbing thing.

Burka wants to despise the "bias" of others while keeping his intact

This is more than just a little disingenuous by the "Dean" of Texas Lock Step Political Media.

Area 51. Paul Burka (the clown), Texas Monthly

The debate was a victory for Democrats and pro-school Republicans, but it could easily have turned into a catastrophe for the anti-vouchers forces.

My quibble is not with his conclusion.  Yes, the passage of the Herrero amendment was a victory for Democrats and some Republicans.  The problem lies with Burka's revelation of a bias-slip.  Being pro-voucher does not necessarily make one "anti-school" when you consider the vouchers (as conceived) would still send children to schools, just schools outside of the Texas public school system.  Nor is it clear that a voucher program would "decimate" the public school system, so saying voucher supporters are "anti-education" isn't really correct either.  If anything, the anti-vouchers team is pro-public school above anything else.  In many cases they truly feel that public schools offer the best education, and in some cases (I'll leave it to you to decide which) it's pretty clear that the Representatives are working to preserve a voting base.  The pro-voucher team is similarly split, with many believing that providing students in struggling districts an "out" is a good way to improve education, and some who are just knee-jerk against government anything and are using this view to damage a constituency of the other side.  Again, I'll let you decide who's who.

The problem, well OK one of the problems, is that there are currently two ideas for "fixing schools" neither of which addresses the issue in its entirety.  Vouchers should be a piece of the puzzle, but it should accompany solid plans to reform the education system to make it more responsive to the needs of individual students, and streamline operations, cut waste and put a lid on schools crying poor while spending Millions of dollars on athletics, trinkets and other items.  I have yet to see anyone come up with something other than "Vouchers!" or "Throw more money at it!"  Neither strategy is going to work.

Further down the Burka laugher is this statement:

I would say the TPPF's biases are showing.

Well, OF COURSE they're showing.  That's because TPPF doesn't pretend to be a "down the middle" journalist without an agenda.  Later on down the line he states that "no legitimate think tank would state such obvious bias."  This is just wrong.

Consider two groups.  Texas Public Policy Foundation and Center for Public Policy Priorities.  Both are think tanks, both espouse a certain political agenda, and both openly advocate for that agenda to be adopted politically.  Guess which one Burka (the so-called unbiased political journalist) takes issue with?  If you guessed the one arguing for market-driven, conservative solutions then you would be correct.

Why is he doing this?  Because Burka is a Statist.  It's clear from his writings that he believes in a large government with a very active regulatory hand.  This doesn't mean that he's Democratic or Republican, but it does mean that he is incapable of honestly reporting on one (very large) side of every issue due to his political (not party, some STILL confuse the two) bias.  This would be OK, would he admit it.  Instead he's writing and acting as if he has no agenda, no public policy preference and is only pointing out the flaws in groups that he views to be noticed by "reasonable people". 

Burka, and the rest of the TLSPM, are very big on reasonable.  They also are fans of preferring "common sense solutions" despite often possessing very little themselves.  The problem is not that TPPF is advocating for vouchers and against Medicare expansion, it's that the entirety of TLSPM is reporting on these issues the exact same way, with a negative spin.

You don't have to believe in TPPF's policy positions to understand why this is wrong, but you probably have to be a blind partisan to think it's the right thing to do.  I've said on here, many times, that I'm not a huge fan of the Tea Party.  I believe that they react too-often on an emotional level and that, on most issues, they haven't thought much further down the road than "I hate Guv'mint" and "no taxes".  They often fail to realize that the government has many (specifically identified) roles to play. I think they're easily led and are too willing to back marginal candidates provided they come wrapped in the flag with tax-cut rhetoric flowing from their mouths.  I think tax cuts work at times, but there are also times where increased funding is needed to pay for things like roads, education, water needs etc.  You know, the basics.

The problem, especially with education and on some other issues, is that it's impossible to tell where the real problem lies.  Much of this is due to the TLSPM's refusal to report on these issues honestly.  If Burka is the "Dean" of the TLSPM then he shares a large portion of the blame. 

When politics becomes show business, we all lose.

Much of the media coverage around what should be serious political issues are devolving into Hollywood-style comedies.  Recently there was the ginned-up drama surrounding whether or not political fringe activist (and actress) Ashley Judd would run for the US Senate in Kentucky shortly followed by the news that comedian Stephen Colbert's sister is running for US Congress. The debate on this candidacy is not surrounding her policy positions, but what role the jester is going to assume in the campaign.  And we're already saddled with comedian Senator Al Franken proving, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the US Senate is truly societies least common denominator.

It only makes sense then that Texas Lock-Step Political Media, in true Texas "me too" fashion, has decided that the Texas Legislature is better covered from a pop-culture angle than via serious policy journalism.  Pop-culture drives page hits (and, hopefully, revenue) while serious policy is often passed over by the low-information voter.

Cue yesterday's appearance before the Texas House Committee on Culture, Recreation & Tourism. What should have been a rather minor tweak to the release date of captive white-tailed deer prior to the hunting season morphed into a rock & roll concert where breathless members of the TLSPM decided to revert to pop-culture references and seemingly everyone focused on the "fever" (cat-scratch, get it?) that permeated the room before Ted Nugent took the microphone.  Lost in any of the reporting was the actual issue at hand, the opinions of either side, and their justification for feeling that way.  What we got was Mr. Nugent comparing himself to the late Jimmy Hendrix and something about the soul of hunting etc.

It would be OK if Mr. Nugent's feelings were included as part of the overall discussion of deer hunting. There is no doubt the man is an expert on the matter.  But the TLSPM became so enthralled by his celebrity that they all seemingly forgot to tell the story behind why he was there.  Yes, there were some back-handed slaps to hunting culture (in what writers are now contractually obligated to call the "increasingly urban" State of Texas) and we all know that everyone who lives in a Texas city is now required to view white-tail deer hunting as shooting Bambi in the face, but there wasn't really any serious discussion allowed in the stories where celebrity was king.

Neither is this an isolated incident.  More and more what passes for political journalism is devolving into catty quips about Freshman hazing, personal rants against Michael Quinn Sullivan (who must be hated by everyone reporting in Austin) and one big Governor Perry gaffe watch.  Whether it's Paul Burka telling us that Perry's career is over one day and then deciding he's going to be "Governor for life" the next, or Wayne Slater carrying on his odd Karl Rove obsession, or Gardner Selby writing glorified opinion pieces on PolitifarceTx our media is taking a look down the hard road of serious analysis...and choosing to slap the reader in the face with a pecan pie.

Never mind that, when we DO actually get something that almost reads like journalism, our young, trendy reporting staff either misses the main point totally, chooses to arbitrarily establish 2009 as the Holy Grail for school funding without an explanation as why, or frames the issue in a way that's so slanted the term Newsish had to be invented to describe what they're churning out. 

In all fairness, it's probably not right to blame all of this on Texas Lock Step Political Media.  A large portion of the blame falls to us, the voting public.  Because it's we who have decided that flashy yard signs and large-group identity are more important than actual know-how.  We've asked-for, and been given, the government we deserve.  Is it any miracle than that the for-profit companies who report on it are giving us the type of media coverage we've asked for as well?

Texas Craft Beer Industry Meets Texas Politics, Hilarity Ensues

Ah the politics of beer. Especially in Texas, where deep pocketed distribution companies control the industry and have been (understandably) very reluctant to give up even 1% of that control. Therefore it came as little surprise to political observers that the group of Texas Senate Bills designed to give small businesses the ability to sell and distribute their product (SB 515, 516, 517 and 518) was quickly companioned with SB 639, authored by distributor ally Sen. John Carona, which clearly shifts the balance of power back to the distributors when a small craft-brewer attempts to transition from self-distribution to working with the large distribution companies. In short, a craft brewer cannot accept any lump-sum for their existing distribution network, but the large distributors can now take what they've received and sell it to another distributor for the same lump sum allowing them a huge advantage given the concept of the current value of money.

Because of this provision, the Kum-bai-yah facade of the craft brewers is rapidly deteriorating as many of the smaller brew houses feel they've been sold down the river by some of Texas' established craft brewers.  Of the dissenters the loudest has been Jester King Brewery in Austin who have all but declared their intent to sue over SB 639 and Deep Ellum Brewing Company which seems to be saying they're ready to vote the entire package down. For their part, The Texas Craft Brewers Guild (the Representative lobby for the craft brewers) is putting on a brave face and saying that this is the best result for all involved.

Whether or not any of this is a good thing probably depends on your point of view.  For consumers, it's undoubtedly a good thing because this means that you will now be able to buy some beer at a brewery when you take a tour of if you are just stopping by.  This is the same deal different from the arrangement at local Texas wineries where you can buy a bottle of wine*.  For beer brewers however this must seem like a start-up disaster and a huge give-away in terms of company value, taken in hand by the distributors who will then be seen as profiting on the backs of small businesses.

In short:  It's a mess.  A mess that can be attributed to Texas, distributor backed, three-tier system which only serves to increase the profits of the middle-man when it comes to alcohol sales at the expense of the consumer and the producer. A mess that has ignited a war of words both from the Texas Craft Brewers Guild, some of the brewing companies, and among the craft-beer enthusiast public.

For anyone who's paid attention to Texas politics for years now none of this should come as any surprise. The "free market" in Texas is somewhat of an oxymoron due to the pay-for-play attitude displayed by politicians from both parties.  You can call it "dirty politics" or "crony capitalism" or whatever you want, it's the way the liquor business is done in Texas.  There was no way the big distribution companies were going to spend all of that money, deploy all of those lobbyists and wine and dine all of those politicians and not get a return on their investment.

Despite all of this I see no reason why these laws should not pass.  There's too much support for them to fail. I do think that there will be some legislation that stems from this, certainly on the legality of banning one company from accepting a lump-sum payment from another in what is a private transaction strikes me as questionable, and I'm sure the distributors are going to weigh in as well, them still not wanting craft brewers to be able to sell from their shops.

Still, these are blue laws, and the courts have a history of treating those separately to other commerce related bills so who knows what is going to happen.













*corrected due to the input by the commenter.  I was under the impression that SB 517 gave breweries the ability to sell beer in bottle and growler form. Upon a read of the Texas Alcohol and Beverage code 64.01(2) I was wrong.  Thanks to the commenter for pointing this out.

Making all the right enemies.

Add Democratic Senator from Missouri Claire McCaskill to the list of pols that don't like Ted Cruz. At last, according to this (badly reported) story by Kevin Robillard writing for Politico.com:

"You’ve got people who are willing to compromise and who understand the beauty of compromise in our democracy and then you have people like Ted Cruz and some of the others that just think that they want to drive as hard as they can off the right edge of the world.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/claire-mccaskill-blasts-ted-cruz-88739.html#ixzz2NKt7kkJU

The Democratic cries for "compromise" ring hollow given their recent history of defining the term as "ultimately seeing things our way or else" so I don't care much about that.  I do think that reporter Kevin Robillard committed journalism malpractice by not once in the story identifying McCaskill as a Democratic Senator but I don't expect much from that shop anyway so I'm not overly surprised.

The bigger point is that Sen. Ted Cruz seems to be making all of the right enemies now.  When progressives like California Dem Senator Barbara Boxer and Sen. McCaskill are against you, you're probably doing something right.  When their stuck making ridiculous claims of McCarthyism and Akinism, despite you having no history of saying anything similar to what either said, then you're really doing something correct because that's a sign they're getting desperate.

What's even funnier is this:  None of the Democrats, including those in Texas, seem to understand that Ted Cruz is doing exactly what he said he would do in the run-up to being elected.  It's these things that helped him cruise (no pun intended) to a double digit win over Paul (outside-the-mainstream) Sadler.  Whether or not the Democrats like it is immaterial, a mainstream portion of Texans do.  As a matter of fact, I would argue that the more Progressives get angry with him, the more secure his re-election becomes.

An Angry Man Attempts to Define Conservatism

I present to you Lord, Sir, Hizzoner Paul Burka representing the Order of the Perpetually Angry.

So angry, in fact, that most times it's kind of hard to figure out what he's getting so worked up about.  Granted, these flare-ups are interspersed between spreading unverified (and questionably sourced) rumor and flip-flopping on the political future of Gov. Perry.  On occasion however Burka gets on a crusade, which is what we've seen over the past few days as he ham-fistedly works out a way to define fiscal conservatism in a manner consistent with his Statist leanings.

Therein lies the real problem with Paul Burka.  Not that he's left-leaning or that he seems to have no grasp of the current political reality in Texas (both true). Or that he's constantly surprised when the State outside of Austin doesn't resemble the friendly confines in which he's spent too much time.  Or that he's not especially that gifted of a scribe.  All of these things are true about Paul Burka, who's the epitome of the 'longevity equals expertise' fallacy that's common amongst the members of Texas LockStep Political Media today.

Burka's main problem is that he doesn't contain the mental alacrity to provide meaningful commentary on his political opposites, nor understand the need to frame arguments in context.  For Paul Burka, politics is something that happens every day, and with every newly released poll, in a vacuum.  Take his thoughts on Rick Perry.  Just a few weeks ago (link above) he declared Rick Perry's governorship over, finito, done.  One (dodgy) online poll later and he's ready to declare Perry "Governor for life".  That's not analysis, that's hackery.  Burka didn't even have the ability to ask basic questions about the poll's methodology which render it almost meaningless.  This is the man who's called the "Dean" of Texas political reporting?  Oh....wait, by "Dean" they mean "guy who's hung around the longest and knows the quickest path to the capital bathroom".

Now it seems that Mr. Burka wants to turn his attention to fiscal conservatism and cast it as doing what is good for the government, which must grow to gigantic proportions in order for the State to thrive.  Except this:  The politicians that Burka is choosing to view as "fiscally conservative" (Perry, Dewhurst, et. al.) are really social conservatives who happen to be fiscal corporatists at heart.  This idea that Perry, Dewhurst and Straus (and before him Craddick) have placed the State on firm financial, conservative footing, is just absurd.

A true fiscal conservative would understand that the Governor's Enterprise Fund and the Emerging Technology Fund were nothing more than thinly veiled corporate welfare and should be eliminated, that CPRIT was a fiscal disaster waiting to happen passed under the guise of good public policy and that giving money to Bernie Ecclestone when the DOT is in debt is not a good idea under any circumstance.

And the list goes on and on.  The margins tax, the Trans-Texas Corridor (or, as Lord Dan keeps calling it "The Texas-Trans Corridor") proposing to pay Merck Millions for Gardasil.  It's all a list of non-fiscally conservative trinkets proffered up to friends and campaign donors which have given insulated reporters such as Paul Burka the idea that this is what true fiscal conservatism is all about.

This is why the Tea Party, for all it's faults and misspelled signs, was such a shock to the system to journalists.  They truly didn't understand true fiscal conservatism when they saw it.  It's also why Michael Quinn Sullivan is often on the receiving end of such angry reactions.  His idea that the way to shrink government is to starve the beast is truly offensive to those who are accustomed to being wined and dined on the public dime.

That's not to say that the Tea Parties and Sullivan are without fault.  In my mind they've swung the pendulum back too far.  They're view is closer to 'no government' rather than 'efficient government' but that perception could just because they're juxtaposed with the 'spend all we have, and then raise taxes and spend all of that and then some' Texas Democrats.  Still, the Department of Transportation, education and water are real problems that need to be addressed.  Healthcare is an issue as well, although I do believe Perry will be proven right on refusing to expand Medicare (especially in three years, when the Federal funds sunset) there appears to be little behind those refusals in way of a replacement.  The Tea Party is a lot about "no" but they don't seem to have thought too far beyond that point.

Because of the lack of ideas Paul Burka has found a definitional hole and is attempting to walk through it. In doing so however he's revealing more about his core idealistic deficiencies than he is about those who he's attempting to belittle.  What Paul Burka is, however, is a sounding board for the rest of TLSPM.  You can be sure that his ideas on what fiscal conservatism is will be reported on ad nauseum by the intellectually lazy trying desperately to meet a deadline.

Will it work?  By leaving open the playing field of ideas the fiscally conservative right is telling us that it already has.

Giving World Class Gondola

I don't know about you, but I found myself severely depressed while reading today's Texas Watchdog story (by Mark Lisheron) outlining Round Rock's idea for building a gondola for public transportation.  Given my image as being starkly anti-public transit you might think my sad feelings spring from what I view as a terrible waste of taxpayer dollars on yet another boondoggle of a transit plan.  This couldn't be further from the truth.  What actually depressed me was that Houston didn't think of this years ago, instead choosing to build 7 miles of toy train as it's terminally poor transit backbone.

We used to live in a city that imagined the Astrodome and made it so, that had a downtown Foley's with such a unique conveyor belt system that it was the wonder of the retailing world. Sadly, that Houston has been replaced by a Brown and White vision so milquetoast that it's one claim to fame is a doggy-poop park where a Sunday farmer's market and Thursday evening viewings of mediocre 80's films are the cultural high point.  It didn't have to be this way, Houston could have been a transit innovator building something that would have been the envy of every city in the flat, snow-less, mountain-less South.

You may think I'm poking fun but I'm being not at all unserious here. While the MetroRail has been given the moniker of "DangerTrain" due to its annoying habit of running over automobiles and pedestrians, it would have been a feature (not a bug) of the gondola system to take cars off the road. Remember former Metro Police Chief (and current Interim Metro top-dog) Tom Lambert's much mocked SWAT team?  Yes they are mostly relegated these days to conducting drills and providing cool back-drop for photo-ops but they could have been placed in prime-position on specially marked gondola cupolas where, with the aid of high-powered sniper rifles, they could take pot-shots at vehicles on Main Street with exhaust problems. This could have served an entertainment function as well.  Make say, one out of every 20 rounds an incendiary round and all of the downtown worker bees could celebrate a carbecue.  During the two-weeks or so that Houston's temperatures turn cold in the winter the homeless population would benefit as well.

Not too long ago ChronBlog was ecstatic that Houston got its own superhero.  Sadly, living in Houston, this knock-off of Spiderman with insecurity issues so deep they could have struck oil (perfect for Houston when you think about it) faces a lifetime of hailing Yellow Cabs and navigating Metro's ridiculous bus route map in order to get to City Hall and thwart the diabolical plans of Bayou Man.  With an elevated gondola system in place Mr. Spider could easily affix his web to the hair of a medical center N.P. while hustling over to the downtown transit center to take a bus to City Hall where he would arrive 30 minutes after the explosion instead of 1 hour using the current system.

Then there's the Houston Live Stock Show and Rodeo.  Instead of piling onto the train and riding through pretty much nothing on the way to Reliant Center, weekend cowboys who drove downtown in their sparkling clean pick-up trucks with shiny chrome trailer hitches festooned with plastic bull testes could take tobacco juice pot-shots at the PeTA protesters who, having met up at Mongoose vs. Cobra, would be marching down Fannin toward Reliant Center before getting lost in a cannabis fog.  I don't know about you, but the idea of a greenist hipster screaming after getting hit in the face by projectile spitting is way more entertaining than watching Billy-Bob Cowboy jump off his horse and wrestle a baby calf to the ground.  As in bull riding, at least the hipster has a fighting chance.

In addition to all of that, the pedestrian mall on Main Street could have remained a street, improving mobility downtown and eliminating the need for the financial black hole that is Houston Pavilions.  Of course, those who enjoy gourmet bowling would be chuffed about that, as would the tens of people who frequent Forever XXI. On the bright side, the House of Blues would be located somewhere accessible.  This would also save the University of Houston-Downtown from the embarrassment of having to constantly accept almost-empty trains every 15 minutes.

Yup, Houston really missed the boat with this one, choosing to build a train that gets shut down by the debilitating force of a spring shower instead of something that would truly be innovative.  This is what happens when you let the chronically dull take the lead in your transportation plans.  I'm looking at you Crossley.

Silence is not always golden.

When we were all children there were times when our parents reminded us that "silence is golden" that we should be "seen and not heard" lest we went home and faced the prospect of their hand on our bottoms.  Of course, spanking one's child now is viewed as something worse than starving them so that threat is out the window but the old mythology lives on. 

Of course, you weren't supposed to stay silent should you say, notice that the roast in the oven is burning or that you accidentally might have let the dogs into the tulips your parents just spent all day planting, but as an overall rule, during social situations when the adults were speaking, we were supposed to stay silent as a mouse and only speak when spoken to.

Amusingly, there are times when the rank & file of our two main political parties wish their elected officials, or prospective elected officials would just shut up and flash back to those times of their youth.  To my way of thinking, this is a horrible idea.  For all of those Republicans aghast that Todd Akin was a vocal idiot who most likely played a (small) role in costing them control of the Senate there were those of us who were happy he piped up, if only to keep someone with his beliefs from having a vote that could, in many ways, have an effect on us.  Yes, Republicans failed to gain the Senate, but we were also able to prevent a six year National embarassment from occuring, limiting the damage to Colorado where everyone is now either stoned or suffering from oxygen deprivation so it doesn't matter anyway.

Gaffes on the Democratic side of the aisle have been just as illuminating. Democratic Rep Joe Salazar thinks women are too batty to own a gun, Democratic Rep Hank Johnson think the US Navy can tip over Guam unfortunately, he also thinks it would be a swell idea to amend the Constitution to restrict free speech. That just goes to show you that some gaffes are funny, some are scary.

Which brings us (finally) to the point of this post and things said by Texans over the past week.

The first is from Democratic Rep Senfronia Thompson, who has a history of mildly humorous grandstanding weighed in this week with the laugher of a suggestion that expanding liquor sales to Sunday is a 'family friendly' item. You know, Scotch Sunday's "for the children."  Of course, I'm not opposed to the repeal of this blue law but it would be anti-family for my family.  As it currently stands the wife has a guaranteed day of the week off from work.  If this passed she would lose that.

The second quote is a little less funny.  It's from Democratic Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings who made the following comments in regards to Texas water regulations:

Texas Lawmakers take-up $2B Water Bill, Chris Tomlinson AP via Fort Worth Star-Telegram)*

Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings called on lawmakers to change the permitting process to make it easier and cheaper to build new water facilities. He cited the experience of Dallas, which tried to build a new reservoir on the Neches River called Lake Fastrill. The city spent millions of dollars on developing the project, filing permits and ultimately on litigation, only to have the U.S. Supreme Court rule against the city, killing the project. "The lengthy permitting process creates a situation where local governments must make a wager on getting water," Rawlings said. "If we don't deal with these water needs, in 2060 it will cost us about half a million jobs in the area and $64 billion in projected income."

What Mayor Rawlings omits is the fact that the land in question where Lake Fastrill was scheduled to be located had already been scheduled as a wildlife refuge by the US Department of Fish & Wildlife  as this wound through the courts it really looked like Dallas trying to impose it's will on other communities without really asking them for much input.  That people were going to lose their residences and property to this project, and that it is difficult for an entity to do that, is the crux of his argument. He also fails to admit that, while he's wanting to make it easier to deprive people of house and home, he's working to make it harder to start a small business in his city due to an influx of 'new urban' regulation.

That's why I remind you today that what we really want is to hear, loud and clear, what our elected representatives are saying and also what they really mean.  Too often however the media decides their job is not to focus on the issues but to bring us the silly while the serious is under reported.  The easy out is to make fun of 'low information voters' and to characterize the other side as a bunch of mouth-breathing simpletons who have to be given phones to ensure their vote.  It's easy but it's misguided.  The real response is to blame those who know better and are supposed to have the public interest at heart.

This assumes that today's modern media are still practicing journalism, and aren't sales persons trying to increase viewership to drive up ad rates.  The first question is: Why are we allowing these private companies such unfettered access into our lives if they're not going to do the jobs they're supposed to do?**  The second is: If they're not going to report the news, why in the hell are we paying attention to them anyway?



































*I should note that I found this piece originally on HoustonChronicle.com, the Chron's paysite.  However, since it was an AP report (which I thought they weren't hiding behind the wall) I went out and found the same story on the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.  Since it was not behind a paywall I feel the small quote here is well within fair use.

**I'm not saying that media should be restricted.  We all know that's a First Amendment right.  Just to clarify. I just mean that, as private citizens, we need to understand what they are and respond in kind.

The very taxing problem of special taxation districts

Whether you know it of not, you might be paying much higher taxes than your neighbors due to the rapid expansion of special tax districts in Texas.  Such is the warning siren that was sounded by none-other than Patricia Kilday-Hart in her behind-the-pay wall column penned for the Houston Chronicle last Sunday.

Kudos to Kilday-Hart for tackling the subject, because it's one that I feel needs wider viewership in Texas politics.  Not only is the percentage of our taxes that are subject to the whims of unelected bureaucrats rising, but we're also failing to watch what it is these groups are doing in the first place.  Most people don't even know what districts they might be included in due to escrow on their houses etc.

Boo to her however for not recognizing the old Texas Watchdog series of reports that focused on this way back in 2011. (h/t Kevin for remembering that)

The common refrain by those of a Tea Party persuasion is "no taxation without representation!" it hearkens back to the days of the Founding Fathers and gives everyone a warm, fuzzy feeling as they feel they've done their part to restrain the leviathan that is the Federal Government.  Yea! for them.  My problem with the Tea Party is that, while they've mis-spelled signs and worn silly hats and generally had a good time walking around in a no-tax echo chamber, they've allowed local and state government to run amok with almost no oversight and very little attention paid.

The idea that those 'greedy Democrats" are looking to increase taxes and destroy the wealth creators is novel, but it ignores the fact that most of these special taxing districts were created by Republicans.  That's not to say that the Democrats don't want to spend all of the money and then tax for more (in Texas, they certainly do, and on a National level as well) but it's also not fair to gloss over the taxation problems of politicians with the letter (R) behind their names.

These are very important matters since the special taxing groups, once their in place, become very hard to eliminate due to some creative districting which often serves to minimize the voting population within.  That's not to say that none are needed, but I'm willing to bet you that many are not, or have outlived their usefulness and are just hanging on as jobs programs for those too lazy to fill out a proper CV.

So good-on Kilday-Hart for bringing this matter to (some) of the public's eye.  Here's hoping she, and other in Texas media, stick with it.

I give you the worst argument in the history of arguments

"But...OTHER States are doing it!!!"

This is the argument being used by arts advocates in asking for an 8 times funding increase for their Texas Commission.  That's right, an increase of funding by $21 Million dollars, all to "stay in the game" one supposes in case Texas somehow drop off the "world class" map when it comes to having dirty toilet paper attached to a canvas described as a hard look at contemporary society and how it treats trees. Or, better yet, murals.  Because what we need are more publicly commissioned murals right?  Hopefully though we can avoid murals with overtly anti-American sentiments.

Above and beyond all of this is the silly argument that "other states are doing it".  Yes, they probably are, and other states are, on average, worse off financially than Texas in most every measurable dynamic. This isn't to suggest that art is worthless, far from it.  I enjoy a good painting, statue, fresco as much as the next average citizen.  It does have a worth, but not to such a value that it should be placed up on the priority list with education, health care, state parks and water supply. It's dandy-fine should Oklahoma want to pay to commission for itself some Native American art to adorn the walls of the latest, and greatest, Indian casino.  Or if Arkansas wants to commission Ode to the corn-cob pipe.  That's them, this is us.

Currently Texas has around Eight Billion Dollars (give or take) in it and lawmakers and special interests are clamoring to drain it as fast as they can.  While I think it would be a fair idea to take out a couple of Billion to pay for water and infrastructure, I can't see even removing one penny for the arts. Just painting a scene of Houston's moisture-related gridlock and titling it "Rainy Day" isn't enough.

The other argument made by the arts inclined is that they have always been publicly funded.  While this is true it also ignores the fact that it was primarily (in the days of the greats) funded by Royal decree.  Back then, if the King needed some money, he trumped up a false charge against one of the lesser nobility, took their lands, bent their daughter over the family crest and gave her the what for in front of her soon-to-be-executed parents.  That's a slightly different revenue model than what exists currently.

Times change, and so do funding priorities. If we can get to a point where the roads are sufficient and paved, where education reform ends the constant carping for more and more money to achieve diminishing results, and when we all have enough water then we can talk about increasing the funding for the arts.

Until then?  I don't care what the other states are doing, Texas should lead in the forum of ideas not follow.

Why Texas Democrats (and the Houston Chronicle) lose.

Back in late 2012 when they announced the creation of HoustonChronicle.com the press release was full of the usual bluster about "deep analysis, enterprise reporting, exclusive photos, and the work of your favorite columnists". It was hailed as being a new frontier in local journalism.  As is often the case with Chronblog, they've botched the execution.  Instead of enterprise reporting they often run wire reports behind the pay wall (which can be had for free online elsewhere) and a host of things that just don't seem to add much value or that would cause a non-dead tree subscriber to part with their hard earned money that came as part of their smaller paychecks in 2013.

Now the Chron has a new problem, what's behind the pay wall ($$$) can, at times, be found for free, on their sister publications.  In short, you can either pay the Chronicle money to read Patricia Kilday-Hart's column on Texas politics or you can jump over to MySA.com and get it for free. Tough choice. (by "tough" I mean "not tough in the slightest")

Of slightly more interest is what's in the column in the first place.  And, because one of my new year's goals was to be nicer to local media, I encourage you to head over and read Ms. Kilday-Hart's report on the rumored Republican goings-on for 2014.

Her column, and other stories focused on the 2014 races are almost exclusively right-handed. You know that there are going to be quite the Republican primary battles for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Comptroller, Attorney-General, Agriculture Commissioner, Land Commissioner etc. but you hear nothing about what Texas Democrats are planning.  They have to be planning something am I right?

Sure, there are rumors of a Draft Castro campaign bubbling up from the Bexar County Democrats, but we've seen how these "draft anyone" campaign's have gone before, and we've also seen how running a progressive mayor in a statewide race against a well-funded Republican conservative has worked as well. *cough*Bill White*cough*.  In fact, it could be that their insistence on 'drafting' and 'fighting' are hurting the Democrats because it leaves voters with the impression their candidates are similar in nature to the virgin sacrifices offered to Dragons in fantasy novels.  Sure, they're running, but it's to be kicking and screaming while tied to the alter rather than charging out with swords drawn and "fighting" to the finish.  Not helping this impression is the fact that Bexar Democratic Party Chairman and instigator of the draft movement, Manuel Medina, owns a polling company...in Panama.  If anything screams "lord of the manor sending out the peasantry" more than that it's probably named George Soros.

The sad thing for Texas Democrats is that not drafting a candidate, and relying on the "Oh why the hell not" candidate often results in embarrassing results.  In 2011/2012 an angry Houston Area progressive seriously floated the idea of drafting actor Tommy Lee Jones to run against Ted Cruz in the US Senate race. Not surprisingly, this fired up other angry, Houston area progressives and a tiny movement was born.  Sadly, those tens of angry, Houston-area progressives couldn't convince Mr. Jones to run and the Democrats were saddled with Paul Sadler. Underfunded and hopelessly out of touch with the Texas electorate his campaign reminded Texas political wonks of the massive campaign failures of Chris Bell (of Ring the Bell! and "Moonshot for Texas Education" fame) and Rick Noriega (You're saying "who???").  At least it wasn't as bad as the quote stealing and "Big Oil, I'm coming for you!!!" amateur-hour campaigning exhibited by David Van Os, who tried to channel Jim Hightower only to remind everyone that Hightower wasn't all that good of a candidate, politician, or particularly funny for that matter.

Now I realize that, if you're a Texas Democrat, you are reading this and are thinking that I'm making fun of you and being unreasonably harsh.  And yes, I am making fun of you in the same vein that I poke fun at Shelley Sekula-Gibbs on the Republican side.  But I don't think that I'm being unreasonably harsh here.  The fact is that you've fallen asleep on the job when it comes to finding and placing qualified candidates on the state wide ballot and I'm a firm believer that the lack of honest competition is bringing down the quality of my side as well.  We're getting to the point in Texas that anyone who can spell their name and put an (R) behind it has a decent chance, if they survive the primary, of scoring a 14 point win over the virgin sacrifices that your leadership is placing on the statewide ballot.  I don't care how you look at it, that's not good for Texas.

We don't like our government, so let's call for more of it.

As the 83rd version of the Texas Legislature sputters to a start it's time for Texas' Lock Step political media to revive the age-old tradition of hating on the Texas system of government while deciding the solution is to call for more of it.  Seemingly even more amazing, is that what they're demanding now echoes the political position of Republican bloviator Dan Patrick.  When you stop to think about it however, this is really not amazing at all.  It all boils down to a matter of self-interest.

For our elected officials the math is simple:  They can make more money working (fighting?) for themselves us if only they were allowed to meet for more than 140 days every other year.  Now, granted, many of them would have to relocate to Austin full-time, and there's a very real chance that this move would take Dan Patrick off the air, for the most part, on his Houston talk-radio show.  While both of these would be personal negatives for Lord Dan, they would be positives for Houston as a whole.  If we're lucky, Dan would sell KSEV and it could turn into another sports talk channel.  Almost anything would be an upgrade from what they have now.  Further thinking (on their part) suggests that, were they paid a living wage, the influence of outside money would be reduced because they'd now have enough to afford that extra condo in Austin while maintaining a sham residence in their districts.  It's a win/win, for them, and despite the fact that it would cost Texas Taxpayers a lot more, it would be presented as a win for us as well.

For Texas' Lock Step political media, it's really nothing more than a matter of scheduling.  I can imagine that it's hard to work a full-time job reporting on part-time employees.  The presumption being that a full-time lege would offer more, better news coverage than what we currently have.  The counter argument to this is the proliferation of list-based and "fact-check" reporting on a National level.  Currently, under the present arrangement, political action occurs at a fast and furious pace when the lege is in session.  Were the Lege expanded to full-time the same amount of "work" would get accomplished but it would take much longer.  Needing to fill space, Texas would be subjected to the same type of "Top 5 things" & "fact-checking the subcommittee on Climate Change" tripe that we're served up daily by the National press.

All of this is not to say that some expansion is a bad idea. Democratic Representative Richard Peña Raymond's bill calling for off-year budget meetings is something that probably should happen. Texas is a huge State, and it's budget for government is also huge.  Thinking that a 2-year budget designed around income projections of questionable accuracy will not need alteration is pie-in-the-sky thinking. As is the assumption that Legislators with financial skins in the game ($$$) are going to not favor bills that are self-serving.  With that said I'm not entirely convinced an expansion of the Texas Lege to full-time status is going to solve the problem either.

The problem, of course, is one of lifestyle and income. The current salary for a non-leadership team member of the US. Senate and Congress is $174,000 per year. Viewing this let's set Texas' pay-rate for a full-time legislator at somewhere around $50-$60 thousand.  There is no way under this, or even a slightly elevated, salary structure that these legislators are going to make near the income to which they are accustomed.  What this means is that they're still going to keep their companies and their jobs, but they're going to be spending more time in the echo-chamber that is Austin, where SXSW is still considered a meaningful cultural event and where 6th street is still viewed as a neat place to hang out.  It also makes the jobs of the special interests easier.  Instead of having to track down representatives in their home-towns for one-on-one discussions (and campaign donations) they're now going to have easier access to many elected officials at the same time.  If you're using the full-time legislature as an argument against special-interest spending then you're requiring that we ignore the example of Washington D.C. and I just don't think that's intellectually honest.

Finally we have the problem that full-time legislatures tend to get bored, and this causes their attention to turn to regulation and the passage of silly laws.  I'm not suggesting here that, under it's current structure, Texas is immune to silliness. But I'd much rather have a Pork-chopper bill than a bill to regulate the volume of television commercials.  There appears to be an inactivity avoidance gene in every elected official that makes bills like these possible, after long-arduous work none the less.  Given that information I'd much rather Texas decide to allow the legislature to meet more often, but only to look at a specific set of important things. I'd feel a lot more comfortable with the knowledge that they're meeting to decide just how wrong Susan Comb's projections were than being afraid that they're going to decide that all Texas cable providers are required to offer the Longhorn Network.

The economy is in shambles, so let us drink.

My favorite political dissident, the ancient Roman poet Juvenal famously termed the efforts of the Roman Emperors to distract the populace from the decline of the Empire as "Bread and Circuses".  In his case, this was literal. Romans were given bread through massive food programs (sharing the "wealth") and were provided cheap tickets to Gladiatorial Games (that era's equivalent of reality TV) and were kept happily distracted as the Muslim armies sacked the outer territories while the Empire crumbled from within under the weight of ruling class largess and depravity. As we reach the declining age of the American "little e" empire (more a financial empire than a military one) we are watching history repeat itself as our politicians offer bread and circuses to the rest of us while the house of cards shatters under the weight of ruling class largess and depravity. 

More recently, a lesser political dissident George Orwell (who is more well known only because many Americans believe history started in 1776) invented Victory Gin as a religion free "opiate for the masses" designed, in part, to keep them mildly intoxicated and under control.

What then, are we to make of this?

Bill would allow liquor stores to open on Sunday. Erin Mulvaney, Chron.com

A state lawmaker from Houston is reviving an effort to revoke a "blue law" that keeps liquor stores closed on Sundays.
Democratic Rep. Senfronia Thompson filed a bill last week that proposed liquor stores be allowed to operate seven days a week

Not that I'm opposed to the law, I'm actually in support of it.  And while I don't believe the pie-in-the-sky estimates of "$7.5 Million in new revenue every other year" I do feel that Texas blue-laws, and the Kafkaesque Texas Alcohol and Beverage Commission are wealth killers rather than wealth creators.

It's telling however that the same legislators who want to increase regulation on major industries such as banking and oil & gas, are taking such a strident anti-regulation position when alcohol comes into play.  And yes, you're going to hear the argument that opening liquor stores on Sunday is the event horizon for the start of the Texas Apocalypse but this just isn't true.  Having stores open on Sundays just means that less people will stock up on Saturday, that's it.  Yes, it's going to suck for workers in liquor stores, but it could also create some part-time positions (again, positions that Democrats like Thompson pay lip service to hating) and it will make things easier for fans of the Astros, Rockets, Texans, Cowboys, Mavericks and Stars when their teams ultimately go tits-up during Sunday games.

Eliminating blue laws isn't going to be a key component of improving Texas, there are many more important issues than this that need to be addressed, but it will make our policy just a little bit more modern in relation to the rest of the country and that's not a bad thing.  The next, logical, step would be to end Texas' insane three tier alcohol distribution system and wrest control of what we drink from the big players who all posses tin palates.

Until then, an inebriated population is a docile population (except in pool bars and in cars obviously) which would allow Texas politicians to keep from focusing on the hard issues like water supply since we could all drink Scotch.

If you can't beat them pay one of them and try again...

Recently, on the Chron's paysite, there was an opposing view series of editorials discussing both the pros (authored by Court Koenning) and cons of tort reform.  Court Koenning you might know, he's been an active player in conservative politics for years and was once the Chief of Staff for State Sen. Dan Patrick before branching out on his own to form Koenning Consulting.

The "anti" tort reform opinion author might ring a bell as well.  He's Mark McCaig, one-time member of the Young Conservatives of Texas (since denounced), identified by ChronBlog as the head of something called Texans for Individual Rights which identifies itself as " a conservative, non-partisan organization dedicated to the protection of personal liberty, individuals’ access to the civil justice system, and private property rights."  In fact, McCaig is employed by Mostyn law-fim and TIR is one of many groups acting as "conservative" groups but who have ties to Democratic trial lawyer Steve Mostyn. 

Mostyn has long been one of the key player's behind the attempt to Implement the Colorado Model by Democratic operative Matt Angle who's plan to "turn Texas blue" was a failure but who's activists have seemingly switched tactics.

Note, before going any further, and before Mostyn and Co. swoop down on this little blog with an army of cease & desist orders and threats of lawsuits, I should point out that I'm not suggesting Mostyn and Co. are doing anything untoward here. As a matter of fact, I think that what they are doing is 100% on the up and up and it falls to Texas Republicans to convince their rank & file that groups such as these are really Democrats in Republican clothing.  As the old saying goes: "When fate shuts the front door, you go in  by the window" and, given the terrible state of the Texas Democratic Party right now this is probably the best path to victory available to Mostyn and his lawyer friends.

It will be interesting to see if their work continues on the campaign finance front.  If they stop donating to progressive Democrats and move their funding to create liberal Republican office holders? For that matter, will today's Republican party even consider a liberal candidate who casts himself as a conservative?  I don't think so because the Mostyn connection seems, to me, to be an automatic disqualifier.

All that said, stranger things have happened and we do live in the age of the low information voter so anything is possible.

We'll fight for you in the legislature providing we can stay in our seats.

Last Monday I wrote about how our elected officials were no longer the adults in the room.  Near the end of that post there was a small history lesson about incivility and how we're much better off in modern times then we were in days past.

Today I'd like to add a couple more bullet points to reinforce that theory.

Clearing Texas Rape-Kit backlog brings hefty price tag. Brandi Grissom, Texas Tribune

In 2011, Texas lawmakers approved a bill by state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, that required law enforcement agencies to audit the number of untested rape kits in their evidence rooms and report that information to the DPS.

(...)

 in May, Davis sent a memo reminding police agencies that they were required to obey the law.

New Women's Health Program launches amid provider concerns. Ben Philpott, Texas Tribune

(State Rep) Howard was worried when she wrote a letter to the Health and Human Services Commission, or HHSC, asking for information about new providers.

Both Sen. Wendy Davis and Rep. Donna Howard are of that new breed of Texas Progressive that promises voters they will go to Austin and fight for them tooth and nail.  That is, provided they can do so while sitting behind their computer screen. (I'm sure they both have staffers who can get up and mail the letters and send the memos for them after all.)

Thankfully, no pistols or canes are involved in their actual "fighting".

All in all I'd say this is a big step UP in civility from where we used to be.  Fight on ladies, fight on.