Could Texas Farm Bureau face Perry payback?

Since our rural Coupland area did not go for Perry, I have been wondering if there will be Perry payback against such rural interests as the Texas Farm Bureau. The TFB had endorsed Perry previously, but went for Kay this time. Perry is known for getting revenge against those who go for his opponent, once he wins.


Peggy Fikacs explores this question in her article "Farm Bureau unworred about Perry payback."

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/columnists/peggy_fikac/Farm_Bureau_unworried_about_Perry_payback.html

Fikacs mentions the Texas Medical Association's former chief lobbyist Kim Ross, who believes Perry was responsible for his ouster after the TMA backed Tony Sanchez instead of Perry in 2002. I myself am aware of another similar situation from the Perry/Sanchez campaign.

However, Fikacs reports that the TFB "neither regrets its support for U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison nor worries about reprisals from Gov. Rick Perry." TFB spokesman Gene Hall comments, “Our most recent endorsement of him was followed by the veto of the eminent domain reform bill, which is the most important property rights legislation in the last 20 years. Supporting him and not supporting him seems to be very similar.”

According to Fikacs, "Hall stressed the group has not closed the door on a Perry relationship. He's also not concerned about the Hutchison endorsement affecting his job security, though Perry is credited with a long memory toward those deemed political enemies."

Fikacs asked Perry spokesman Mark Miner if the TFB "might face payback." Miner responded, “We're focused on the general election and looking forward to receiving the support of numerous organizations as we did in the primary.”

Fikacs adds, "He didn't say, 'Or else.'"

Coupland area does NOT go for Perry in the primary

Here we are, past the primary, and Gov. 39% has become primary winner 51%. I hope that if his victory in the Republican primary leads to another term, Perry's "vision" of the Trans-Texas Corridor is too far gone for him to resurrect it, at least through the Highway 95/Coupland area. The Corridor is still in statute--TxDOT still has the authority to create it. But TTC-35, the route paralleling IH-35 from the Oklahoma border to the Mexican border, is no longer on the drawing board, since its Final Environmental Impact Statement ended with a finding of "no action" or "no build." If Perry decides to come back and pursue TTC-35, the environmental process will have to start over, with years of work and more millions of dollars.

At least, we can see that in the Coupland area, the two precincts around Coupland did not follow the state-wide voting trend. Pct. 433, including Coupland and east of Coupland voted:

Perry 37%
Hutchison 37%
Medina 26%

Pct. 413, beginning just west of Coupland, voted:

Perry 32%
Hutchison 35%
Medina 34%

(percentages rounded)

Fred Barnes cites Trans-Texas Corridor as Perry defeat, cronyism

In the Feb. 22 Weekly Standard, Fred Barnes has an article on the Texas gubernatorial race--"Texas Deathmatch."

https://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/texas-deathmatch

Barnes notes about Perry, "But he has suffered two significant defeats as governor, and accusations of cronyism and slipshod ethics have grown in recent months.
He proposed building the Trans-Texas Corridor. . . . The plan, which would have included seizing large amounts of private land, was killed [although we know it's not totally killed] by the Republican-led legislature. So was his proposed mandate to vaccinate every sixth-grade girl against a virus that causes cervical cancer. On both issues, former Perry aides were lobbyists for the private companies poised to benefit the most."

In a televised debate sponsored by the Dallas Morning News, [Hutchison] said: “You might ask why did we have a plan for the Trans-Texas Corridor? Why did the governor mandate vaccines for our young daughters? It was because there were lobbyists that were first, not the people of Texas.” Perry, who has defended both proposals, didn’t respond.

Kay Bailey Hutchison specific anti-Corridor ad

Succinct anti-Corridor statement from KBH.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8D2fiO9GPg

A special version will run during the game tomorrow night. A special ending has been tailored just for this purpose. I can't find it to post here, so you'll just have to watch for it.

Gov. 39%--NOT so proud of the Corridor anymore

The Dallas Morning News covers the Trans-Texas Corridor being taken off Perry’s website in a political blog entry, “Rick Perry’s bio: Now you see it, now you don’t.”
http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/12/somethings-missing-from-the-te.html#comments
Wayne Slater reports, “Something's missing from the Texas governor's official state website. Gone from Rick Perry's biography is any mention of the Trans-Texas Corridor, the beleaguered toll-road project the governor once touted as a crowning jewel accomplishment of his tenure in office. . . . The changes on the official state website come as Perry is stepping up his reelection campaign against rival Kay Bailey Hutchison.”

“Hutchison has been critical of Perry's Trans-Texas Corridor idea. Although popular with construction interests, the project ran afoul of landowners espousing property rights and other opponents of toll roads.”

Presumably, Perry’s team thinks “out-of-sight, out-of-mind”-- that rural residents and their allies will forget all about Perry’s attempt to pull off the largest land grab in Texas history for the benefit of his “construction interest” pals. I guess we’ll see in the Republican primary results if what was a core part of Perry’s base will forgive and forget or if enough of them will have a memory like an elephant and forsake Gov. 39%.

Texas Farm Bureau switches from Perry to KBH

KBH has just received the important endorsement of the Texas Farm Bureau. In the past, the TFB has endorsed Perry, even as it has issued strong statements against the Trans-Texas Corridor and in favor of stronger protections against eminent domain. Now, the TFB sees a viable alternative to Perry in KBH and has made the switch. Excerpts from their endorsement release:

When it comes to selecting the next governor of Texas, the choice boils down to one question for farm and ranch families in the Lone Star State: Which candidate can you trust?

"Time and again U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison has earned both our trust and respect by listening to our concerns and acting on issues that matter," said Kenneth Dierschke, president of the Texas Farm Bureau.

Dierschke cited many examples of her support for Texas agriculture. Among them: her record in dealing with the Endangered Species Act, property rights issues, health care reform, the Farm Bill, the Clean Water Act and various trade issues.

On farm issues in particular, the senior senator from Texas has stood strong for farmers and ranchers from the Lone Star State, Dierschke added.

Hutchison denounces the Corridor in her kick-off speech

The Trans-Texas Corridor was denounced by Kay Bailey Hutchison in her campaign kick-off speech today.

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/politics/entries/2009/08/17/hutchison_hits_perry_hard_in_k.html

She criticized TxDOT, calling it:

“'the most arrogant, unaccountable state agency in the history of Texas,' saying she wants to expand it to represent more regions of the state. A proposal to do just that died in the Legislature this year."

She said that she would kill the Corridor:

“Then there’s the Trans-Texas Corridor. The biggest land grab in the history of Texas. And the governor wanted to turn it over to a foreign company to build toll roads. Well, they can call it the Trans-Texas Corridor. Or they can call it something different. But here’s what I will call it when I take the oath of office: dead, buried, history.”

Hutchison makes Trans-Texas Corridor an issue in gubernatorial race

Thanks to Martha Estes for alerting us to the Trans-Texas Corridor popping up in the Perry-Hutchison race. As explained in the Dallas Morning News transportation blog


http://transportationblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/08/hutchison-jabs-perry-again-ove.html


KBH has started a Corridor clock running on one of her websites.

http://texans.forkay.com/pages/clock

"Hutchison's campaign team is betting that it [the TTC] will be an issue. They've been sending out messages in the past couple days highlighting what they say is Perry's stubborn support for his Trans Texas Corridor idea.

"Apparently, the Governor hasn't sufficiently disavowed the program. . . .
Still, the Legislature left town this year without extending the state's authority to make private contracts for toll roads. Without the ability to partner with private companies to build and operate toll roads, the TTC -- whatever it is called -- is as worthless as last year's bets on the Derby. Right?

"Where Hutchison's team is on firmer footing is in questioning whether Perry has ever truly disavowed the TTC. He never has. He bowed to the political reality that it wouldn't fly, but he has never apologized or retreated from his position that it was a good idea.

"What he has done . . . is say that he and TxDOT made mistakes in the way they presented the idea, essentially scaring the holy business out of farmers and ranchers who saw on the early corridor maps huge expanses of lands subject to eminent domain.

"[I]t is exactly those folks -- the landowners, and not so much the toll road opponents -- that team Hutchison is attempting to reach with its latest barrage of thrusts at Perry and the Trans Texas Corridor.

"Will transportation play a big role in your vote for governor next year? If so, are you sufficiently mad about tolls to hold Perry accountable?

"[H]ere is the gist of the Hutchison attack on Perry, from campaign spokesman Jeff Sadosky:
'Texans deserve a straight yes or no from Rick Perry on whether he still supports his controversial Trans-Texas Corridor plan to confiscate nearly 600,000 acres of land. His refusal to say is just another attempt by Rick Perry to cover-up his record of doing what's right for himself but wrong for Texas.'"

Gov. 39% not the brightest bulb . . uh, the brightest political future

Yesterday, the National Journal asked their group of Republican insiders "Who among your party's current crop of governors has the brightest political future?"

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/ip_20090516_8934.php


Winning with 21 % was Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, followed by:

Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour 20 percent
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty 17 percent
Florida Gov. Charlie Crist 13 percent
South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford 8 percent
Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. 6 percent


National Journal noted, "Also receiving votes: Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels and Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, 5 percent each; no one, 2 percent; California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and "Pawlenty and Sanford," 1 percent each.


Rick Perry received no mention whatsoever.

Perry has been busy with more important things


. . . like having his spokesman criticize Kay Bailey Hutchison's bumper sticker contest. As reported by the Houston Chronicle


http://blogs.chron.com/texaspolitics/archives/2009/05/no_detail_too_s.html


"You might think the winners of U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison's bumper sticker contest would be of little interest to Gov. Rick Perry's camp as the legislative session enters its final days with major issues still up in the air.
You'd be wrong on that."


Mark Miner, a Perry spokesman, found fault with the contest and the winners. He is quoted as saying, "They should apologize to the three other people who may have participated in this questionable contest."

For the Hutchison campaign, Hans Klinger asked: "Why is Rick Perry's taxpayer funded mouthpiece more concerned about bumper sticker contests than he is the work of the legislature?"


It seems to me that people on the Governor's staff should be working on the business of the people of Texas, not officially commenting on Hutchison's contest that was solely a function of her campaign and that did not make any mention of Perry whatsoever that might have necessitated a response from his office.


Meanwhile, the Governor was busy writing his op-ed


First, I'll never believe that Rick Perry actually writes anything. Let us say that one or several ghostwriters came up with the piece that is in today's Statesman:

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/editorial/stories/insight/05/17/0517perry_edit.html

I think it's interesting that this explanation appears so long after the fact. Does he write very slowly? As a work by committee, did it take this long for it to go through several drafts and approvals?

Given Perry's attempt since the creation of the Trans-Texas Corridor in 2003 to disempower the rural landowners of Texas, he has a nerve talking about the powers reserved to the people.

He criticizes the federal government for "passing trillion-dollar bailouts [think $183.5 billion for the TTC, according to Corridor Watch], bullying states [think bullying of Texans by Perry's TxDOT], and even taking control of private companies [think taking the land of Texans FOR Cintra, a private company].

Then he praises "the concept of limited government," and he claims that "citizens and taxpayers should be outraged" by what the federal government is doing.

Do you think that he still doesn't know what we are outraged about? It is Perry and his friends, the big government/large private corporation partnerships that are working against the landowning citizens of Texas, the small businesses, the farm and ranch families, the people who are the backbone of the state. Perry has tried to institute a corporative state where large private concerns are able to take over and use the power of government to oppress the individual and take his private property.

With his op-ed, Perry is not going to win over the voters who know his true colors, and he's lost some of the folks who thought he WAS speaking favorably about secession and agreed with him. Now, as far as they're concerned, he's "gone wobbly" on the issue. As Peter Stern comments, "Confucius once stated, 'Beware of the man who blows hot and cold with one breath.' He must have been speaking with Gov. Rick Perry in mind."

Could Specter switch affect Texas governor's race? To whose benefit?

Today, Pa. Sen. Arlen Specter changed from the Republican to the Democratic Party, in order to avoid a possible loss to Pat Toomey in the Republican primary and improve his chances for retaining his Senate seat by winning as a Dem. in the general.

If Dem. Al Franken is declared the winner in the Minn. senate race, the switch by Specter will give the Democrats the 60 seats for a filibuster-proof majority. Minn. Republican Norm Coleman is appealing his case to the state Supreme Court; arguments may be heard in about a month.

Experts think that Franken will eventually prevail, making it imperative that Kay Bailey Hutchison stay in her seat to prevent the 60 seat majority, in case a Dem. might win in a special election for her Texas senate seat--given the situation before the Specter switch.

Gov. 39% would blame KBH for the 60-seat Dem. advantage in the gubernatorial campaign, if she resigned to concentrate on the governor's race and the Dems took the seat. However, if Franken is declared the winner, and with Specter switching, the Dems will already have their 60, thus placing this beyond the control of KBH. Not her fault!

If the experts are wrong, and Coleman wins the Minn. seat, or if no winner is declared for several months, the pressure stays on KBH to remain and not take the chance of losing that seat. With Perry's recent publicity-hound antics, she may be hoping to get to Texas soon to make more of a presence here herself. On the other hand, she may think that when your opponent is making a fool of himself, the best strategy is to get out of the way and let him do it.

The Dallas Morning News has taken away one of Perry's big issues--that KBH is part of the culture of DC, reporting, "Perry regularly rails against Washington, D.C., but when it comes to campaign cash, he has raised far more than rival Kay Bailey Hutchison from the nation's capital. Perry has collected $2.7 million from Washington since becoming governor — four times more than Hutchison's $670,000 from Washington during the same period, a Morning News analysis found."

Perry funnels money outside of proper channels

This morning's Statesman legislative blog reports that the back and forth about the Perry's unorthodox funneling of funds to A&M is not cooling off. In fact, the headline is Battle Between Perry and Pitts Heats Up. Jim Pitts is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, and over the last few days, he has been questioning Perry's action.

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/firstreading/entries/2009/03/27/battle_between_perry_and_pitts.html

The Statesman says, "fireworks could come in the afternoon."

Below is a brief recap of the brouhaha. Follow the link "revelations" to read more background.

"Committee Chairman Jim Pitts wants to ask more questions about a $50 million Emerging Technology Fund grant to the Texas A&M University System, particularly in light of revelations Thursday that the fund’s 17-member panel did not review the grant, as is its custom. Pitts said he had been led to believe by the governor’s office that the panel did review it.

"The governor’s press shop used the panel’s approval earlier in the week to shield Perry from criticism about the grant. Spokeswoman Allison Castle, who volunteered Thursday that the panel had in fact not reviewed the grant, said she got bad information from someone else in the governor’s office."

If Pitts's pummeling continues, could this bad publicity through the legislative session weaken Gov. 39% further, working to benefit KBH? Perry had hoped that his being on-site, hands-on during the high-profile session while KBH necessarily was mainly in DC would help him, but it won't if he further angers legislators, resulting in continuing negative coverage.

UT KBH/Gov. 39% poll--redux redux

For those who are keeping score, Burka has responded to the UT internet poll response to his second response to his first response, etc. Comments include more responses by the poll's authors.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/

As I said previously, this could go on for a long time--apparently forever. But with some interesting explanations and insights, for those of us following this "mother of all gubernatorial races" in its nascent stages.

Authors of latest gubernatorial poll respond to Burka

Yet another interesting update on the recent KBH/Gov. 39% poll analyzed by Paul Burka.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/

On March 21, Burka was re-thinking his first response to the UT poll in this post.

Perry camp touts UT poll results to national GOP activists, media–but is the methodology accurate?

Now a response from the pollsters, posted by Eileen Smith on the burkablog.

Texas Politics Project Responds

The blog includes a detailed explanation by Jim Henson and Daron Shaw of UT, plus some more interesting comments by readers, giving a lot of back and forth on desirable polling procedures and what the results may show. This could go on for a long time with little agreement in views on polling. Suffice it to say that all this polling in the gubernatorial race has started early, and we will be following it with great interest up to the 2010 primary.

Burka rethinks his analysis of the latest KBH/Perry poll

Very interesting analysis of the latest KBH/Gov. 39% poll by Paul Burka.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=3230

The UT poll showed the race seeming to tighten, and in a previous post, Burka called it bad news for the Hutchison campaign. However, he has done more research into the methodology and concludes:

"When I first wrote about the poll, I said that it was good news for Perry, bad news for Hutchison. I’m not comfortable enough with the poll’s methodology to let that comment stand."

Also look at the very interesting reader comments on the post. I especially like the reference to the PBMT:

"Wow! Didn’t take PBMT (”Perry Blog Management Team”) long, did it? Methinks thou protesteth a bit much."

KBH STILL ahead of Perry--latest poll

The latest poll on the gubernatorial race continues the trend of Kay Bailey Hutchison running well ahead of Gov. 39% among Republican primary voters.

W. Gardner Selby has the report at the Statesman:

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/politics/entries/2009/03/16/poll_confirms_that_hutchison_l.html

He notes, “A wide-ranging poll . . . suggests afresh that GOP Gov. Rick Perry would trail U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison if their March 2010 primary were held at this time.”

The poll is from the UT Government Department and surveyed 800 residents state-wide between February 24 and March 6.

All poll results are here:
http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/shared-blogs/austin/politics/upload/2009/03/utpoll/200903-summary.pdf

The pertinent question is 28, which asked only registered GOP primary voters, “If the 2010 Republican Primary election for governor were held today, would you vote for [rotate names] Rick Perry, Kay Bailey Hutchison, someone else, or haven’t you thought about it enough to have an opinion?”
1. Perry 29%
2. Hutchison 37%
3. Someone else 10%
4. Undecided 24%

This poll lowers him from Gov. 39% to Gov. 29%.

WOAI Poll--Hutchison 52.7%, Perry 16.5%

WOAI has comments on the early sparring between Gov. 39% and KBH.

http://www.woai.com/content/news/beamer/story/POLL-Rick-and-Kay-get-personal-but-not-Kinky-Who/ZINmrxpmvUS61iW7yXkT_Q.cspx

Beamer says the race hit a “new level with its first real insult.” Guess who threw that insult, saying that KBH “can’t even do the [job] that we’ve hired you to do.”

The site is running a poll focused on the two Republicans. You can add your vote to the results, which are:

Who do you support in the 2010 governor’s race?

Kay Bailey Hutchison (52.7%)
Rick Perry (16.5%)
Another Republican (2.7%)
A Democrat (22.0%)
An Independent (6.0%)

Can I now start calling him Gov. 16.5%? Just kidding. I know that online polls aren't official, but it does look encouraging for us anti-Corridor folks.

Not playing nice

Sharp words already flying--earlier than you'd think for a 2010 race.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/6254723.html

Regarding the "ambush" in the Senate Finance Committee of UTIMCO's Rowling, orchestrated by Perry and Dewhurst, the Houston Chronicle reports the back-and-forth between Perry and Hutchison. Hutchison accused Perry "of playing politics to embarrass one of her supporters," and Perry responded that she should be in Washington instead of Austin.

KBH: “I think the letter that was written the night before the hearing was not well thought out and it might have spurred some insensitive remarks that were made. It was kind of a set-up. And I think it was wrong."

Perry: "I think it's pretty hard to explain to Texans that you want to come to Texas and do another job when you can't even do the one that we've hired you to do."

I think that for this campaign, we can definitely say that chivalry is already dead.

No final votes were taken on the stimulus package while KBH was in Texas. She voted against Senate passage, as did all Republican senators except Collins, Snow, and Specter.

Gov. 39% helping Hutchison's campaign?

Texas Monthly’s Paul Burka has some explanation on his blog that hasn’t appeared elsewhere about the resignation of Rowling, the chairman of UT’s investment organization, UTIMCO.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/

UTIMCO’s executive officer Zimmerman received bonus pay last year that was related to his contract based on the performance of UT’s fund in relation to other similar funds. The Senate Finance Committee members sharply questioned the fund’s employee bonuses. The questioning reached a point where Rowling considered that the committee was unjustly attacking Zimmerman. Rowling, whose position as chair was a volunteer one, abruptly resigned during his testimony to the committee and walked out.

After a presentation of some figures from former UT regent Charles Miller, defending UTIMCO’s performance, Burka concludes:

“Another way to look at this is that for every dollar paid out in bonuses, UTIMCO earned $133 million. Even the most ranting, raving populist can hardly complain about this rate of return—much less the governor and lieutenant governor.”

The possible beginning of this whole brouhaha was a letter to the Finance Committee from Gov. 39% and Dewhurst, pointing out the bonuses. New House Speaker Straus was not involved. It is speculated that Perry and Dewhurst wanted to put Rowling in a position to be attacked because he had switched his allegiance in the gubernatorial race FROM Perry TO Hutchison.

Burka observes about Perry and Dewhurst having “their fun at Mr. Rowling’s expense,” they will find out that “It isn’t smart to ambush billionaires.” He points out that Rowling was a volunteer contributing time and money on behalf of UT.

Burka’s conclusion about how this incident affects the balance in the upcoming 2010 contest:
“I think that Rick Perry will have a harder time raising money in certain circles–say, the Dallas and Houston ultra wealthy–and I think that he will lose stature. . . . Perry appointees who switched to Hutchison will redouble their efforts to see that she is elected. As for Dewhurst, who played his part in laying this ambush, he doesn’t have a lot of friends among the big donor crowd, and Rowling was one. Was. . . . Sure, he’s cozying up to Perry in the hope that Perry will appoint him to the Senate vacancy. Here’s what I think: There isn’t going to be any Senate vacancy. . . . She will resign her Senate seat effective at the ‘So help me God’ of the oath of office. And she’s not going to appoint anybody who endorsed Rick Perry against her, ever.”

If not dead, at least Corridor is wounded

Yesterday, from the Texas Transportation Forum, the Statesman’s Ben Wear report is headlined “Trans-Texas Corridor R.I.P.” To read the whole thing, go to

http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/traffic/index.html

“The Trans-Texas Corridor, as a name and as a guiding concept of the state’s transportation future, is dead, TxDOT executive director Amadeo Saenz told an audience of more than a thousand this morning at an Austin hotel.”

Showing that the issue will still be an issue in the 2010 governor’s race, “A spokesman for . . . U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, said that in fact the name isn’t the problem but rather the cross-state tollways associated with it and the rural land that would be needed to build them.”

As we reported at the time, “Outgoing Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick had created a stir a few months ago by declaring in an election forum that the Trans-Texas Corridor was dead. TxDOT officials at the time said, well, no, not exactly.”

“Saenz, at the Texas Transportation Forum at the Hilton Hotel, confirmed that the corridor’s death — or at least the death of its name — had in fact not been exaggerated.”

As described by TxDOT, the original Trans-Texas Corridor “vision,” or “nightmare” as residents called it, will not be pushed anymore. What TxDOT will do is “a series of smaller projects.” Included as one of these smaller projects will be SH 130, which is completed through Williamson County. This announcement seems to confirm what some have already been saying—that 130, and only 130, with no more land taken for any more Corridor development, will be the route of TTC-35 through Williamson County.

Replacing Perry’s 2002 plan, called “Crossroads of the Americas,” which called for 4,000 miles of 1,200-foot wide corridors criss-crossing the state, is a new document called “Innovative Connectivity in Texas/Vision 2009. You can see it at

http://www.keeptexasmoving.com/var/files/File/Vision_2009_Brochure.pdf

The “Innovative Connectivity” brochure is not a white flag on TxDOT’s part, but does mark a recognition that its grandiose schemes were unrealistic pipe dreams. One encouraging point is the statement on page 3 that the right of way for new projects would rarely exceed 600 feet (the approximate width of a freeway with access roads, e.g. SH 130 at Pecan Street east of Pflugerville), rather than the quarter of a mile envisioned by TTC planners. On pages 8-9, TxDOT commits to using existing ROW whenever possible, before “breaking new ground,” a concept at odds with the TTC vision. When the TTC was first being introduced in 2003 to a small Austin gathering, unpublicized and attended by very few members of the public, TxDOT rolled out the TTC as a “green fields project.”

Corridor Watch’s David Stall says,"We think that today is a huge leap forward in getting control over transportation projects and seeing that they serve a transportation need and not just a revenue-generating role . . .The reality is the move that's been made today turns it from a statewide massive corridor project into a much more reasonable transportation project, which they should have been from the beginning.”

He continues,"We still need to particularly be wary of public-private partnerships which are to line the pockets of Wall Street financiers more than provide transportation for ordinary Texans.”
He calls today’s announcement “a major victory for farmers and ranchers.”

Burka comments on Hutchison poll

At Texas Monthly, Paul Burka comments on the poll showing KBH ahead of Perry by 24% among Republican primary voters.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=2162#comments

Among other things, he notes:

"What is surprising — according to the Hutchison camp — is that his support among Republican primary voters is down 10% since his 2006 race. . . . When you’re down by 24 points, you can’t just run on your record. Perry is going to have to engage in a big-time negative campaign."

A commenter to Burka's post believes:

"Any credible Democrat would beat Perry in the next general election. He has virtually no independent support and is damaged goods within the GOP. . . . The state is not working. Perry cannot win reelection. KBH is the best hope of keeping the seat in GOP hands."

And it's still 2008. We seem to have entered the land of the perpetual campaign. Shaping up to be good entertainment, in the manner of the soap opera.