Paul Burka has an interesting post asking if Gov. Perry will flip-flop on the Trans-Texas Corridor.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=11103
Burka writes, "Like gay marriage and parental rights, the taking of private property by government is a huge issue with Republican voters. As originally conceived by Ric Williamson, and enthusiastically supported by Perry, the Corridor was a series of toll roads, each with a footprint a quarter of a mile wide, condemning millions of acres of pristine countryside, that would be built and controlled by Cintra, a foreign corporation. The right-of-way would include power lines, pipelines, and high-speed rail lines."
He also notes that some elements of the Corridor are being built individually. "[H]e goofed when he bought into Williamson’s vision of a giant network of toll roads (many of which are being built as I write.)"
See Burka's post and the comments for an update of the Corridor that never quite goes away.
Showing posts with label Rick Perry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rick Perry. Show all posts
Monday, August 15, 2011
Monday, March 8, 2010
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.'"
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.'"
Friday, March 5, 2010
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)
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)
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
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.
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.
Friday, December 18, 2009
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%.
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%.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Corridor--especially TTC-35--continues to be killed
MORE BLOWS AGAINST THE CORRIDOR
This week, more of the building blocks enabling the Trans-Texas Corridor, specifically TTC-35, have been destroyed. Previously, in the special session, legislators killed the funding mechanism for the Corridor—the Comprehensive Development Agreements (CDA) with private companies. Also earlier this year, TxDOT announced it would not proceed with the overall Corridor plan and would consider it segment by segment. Now, TTC-35 has been terminated in two different ways.
CINTRA/ZACHRY CONTRACT CANCELED
First, TxDOT has canceled the contract with Cintra, the Spanish corporation, and its partner Zachry to build TTC-35. Cintra/Zachry had a CDA with TxDOT to plan and build TTC-35. In the special session, the overall CDA process was done away with, and now Cintra’s specific CDA has been canceled. Cintra has produced a plan, has been paid millions for planning, and may be paid more millions for the state to extricate itself from the complicated contracts negotiated by Giuliani Bracewell (the law firm of Perry pal Rudy Giuliani). However, Cintra will not do any building on TTC-35 except for the two southern segments of SH 130 that are underway and which will now be considered SH 130, not part of TTC-35.
NO-BUILD OPTION/NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Secondly, the environmental process on TTC-35 ends with a recommendation by TxDOT to the Federal Highway Administration to do nothing—called the “no-build option” or the “no action alternative.”
TxDOT, using taxpayer funds, spent years of time and energy and millions of dollars on TTC-35, reportedly $131 million for planning and environmental work. In addition to all of this wasted effort and money on the part of TxDOT, there are the untold volunteer hours, contributions, and worry on the part of residents in the threatened areas and supporters around the state.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the 4,000-page document showing a general TTC-35 route, was released in 2006, and the Final EIS was scheduled to be released in 2007. TxDOT officials said that the decision not to build TTC-35 was in response to comments from citizens received during the environmental process. Of course, during the entire TTC-35 ordeal, TxDOT has not cared at all about citizens’ opinions.
WHAT REALLY KILLED TTC-35--
COMMUNITY AND POLITICAL PRESSURE IN THE LEGISLATURE
Even though citizen comments per se did not affect TxDOT, it was important that tens of thousands of residents attended the various levels of meetings and hearings, spoke against TTC-35, signed petitions, and submitted written comments. This effort formed the foundation of community organizations working against the Corridor and the process of influencing legislators and electing new legislators.
This, in turn, resulted in the legislature gradually turning against the Corridor and eliminating the Comprehensive Development Agreement tool.
EASTERN CENTRAL TEXAS SUB-REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION (ECTSRPC)
The reason that TxDOT and the Federal Highway Administration finally had no way to continue with the TTC-35 EIS was the action of the ECTSRPC in Bell and Milam counties. Five small towns and their associated school districts formed their Sub-Regional Planning Commission, and by state law, TxDOT was compelled to “coordinate” with their Commission. This meant that TxDOT had to take into account what the ECTSRPC citizens wanted and cover all required issues in the EIS process. TxDOT had not done this, meaning that the EIS was not legal and could not be recognized as legal by the Federal Highway Administration.
The ECTSRPC announced: “Selecting that option [no build] was exactly what the Eastern Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (ECTSRPC) forced TxDOT into choosing. . . . The planning commission began a series of what is called coordination meetings in the fall of 2007, by utilizing a little known state statute that forced the behemoth agency to come to Holland, Texas. . . . TxDOT came to Holland on three different occasions where they were asked to explain why they were going to destroy five towns and their school districts with a 1,200 foot-wide, 146 acre per mile toll road.
“‘Through coordination, we forced them to our table and then we used the federal NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) statute to box them in a legal corner out of which they could not escape,’ stated Ralph Snyder, a local Holland businessman and board member of the ECTSRPC. ‘That's what forced TxDOT to recommend 'No Build' to the Federal Highway Administration because we had shown how TxDOT, as the agent of the federal government, had violated the federal statute in at least 29 ways,’ Snyder continued.
“Fred Grant, president of American Stewards of Liberty, is the originator of the coordination strategy that brought TxDOT to their knees.”
FUTURE OF TTC-35 AND THE CORRIDOR CONCEPT
Some more time and paperwork is required to complete the TTC-35 EIS process, at the end of which the Federal Highway Administration will issue its Record of Decision approving the “No Action Alternative.” This is what so many of us asked in our comments, never thinking it would actually happen--it hardly ever happens--but now it is the final result!
Even though the Legislature has gradually turned against the Corridor concept, the legislation enabling it is still on the books. In addition, the Trans-Texas Corridor began as Gov. Perry’s “vision,” and he has never renounced it. We have to remain vigilant as long as the Corridor statute has not been repealed, and as long as Perry or anyone else who supports the concept is in the governor’s office.
This week, more of the building blocks enabling the Trans-Texas Corridor, specifically TTC-35, have been destroyed. Previously, in the special session, legislators killed the funding mechanism for the Corridor—the Comprehensive Development Agreements (CDA) with private companies. Also earlier this year, TxDOT announced it would not proceed with the overall Corridor plan and would consider it segment by segment. Now, TTC-35 has been terminated in two different ways.
CINTRA/ZACHRY CONTRACT CANCELED
First, TxDOT has canceled the contract with Cintra, the Spanish corporation, and its partner Zachry to build TTC-35. Cintra/Zachry had a CDA with TxDOT to plan and build TTC-35. In the special session, the overall CDA process was done away with, and now Cintra’s specific CDA has been canceled. Cintra has produced a plan, has been paid millions for planning, and may be paid more millions for the state to extricate itself from the complicated contracts negotiated by Giuliani Bracewell (the law firm of Perry pal Rudy Giuliani). However, Cintra will not do any building on TTC-35 except for the two southern segments of SH 130 that are underway and which will now be considered SH 130, not part of TTC-35.
NO-BUILD OPTION/NO ACTION ALTERNATIVE
Secondly, the environmental process on TTC-35 ends with a recommendation by TxDOT to the Federal Highway Administration to do nothing—called the “no-build option” or the “no action alternative.”
TxDOT, using taxpayer funds, spent years of time and energy and millions of dollars on TTC-35, reportedly $131 million for planning and environmental work. In addition to all of this wasted effort and money on the part of TxDOT, there are the untold volunteer hours, contributions, and worry on the part of residents in the threatened areas and supporters around the state.
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the 4,000-page document showing a general TTC-35 route, was released in 2006, and the Final EIS was scheduled to be released in 2007. TxDOT officials said that the decision not to build TTC-35 was in response to comments from citizens received during the environmental process. Of course, during the entire TTC-35 ordeal, TxDOT has not cared at all about citizens’ opinions.
WHAT REALLY KILLED TTC-35--
COMMUNITY AND POLITICAL PRESSURE IN THE LEGISLATURE
Even though citizen comments per se did not affect TxDOT, it was important that tens of thousands of residents attended the various levels of meetings and hearings, spoke against TTC-35, signed petitions, and submitted written comments. This effort formed the foundation of community organizations working against the Corridor and the process of influencing legislators and electing new legislators.
This, in turn, resulted in the legislature gradually turning against the Corridor and eliminating the Comprehensive Development Agreement tool.
EASTERN CENTRAL TEXAS SUB-REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION (ECTSRPC)
The reason that TxDOT and the Federal Highway Administration finally had no way to continue with the TTC-35 EIS was the action of the ECTSRPC in Bell and Milam counties. Five small towns and their associated school districts formed their Sub-Regional Planning Commission, and by state law, TxDOT was compelled to “coordinate” with their Commission. This meant that TxDOT had to take into account what the ECTSRPC citizens wanted and cover all required issues in the EIS process. TxDOT had not done this, meaning that the EIS was not legal and could not be recognized as legal by the Federal Highway Administration.
The ECTSRPC announced: “Selecting that option [no build] was exactly what the Eastern Central Texas Sub-Regional Planning Commission (ECTSRPC) forced TxDOT into choosing. . . . The planning commission began a series of what is called coordination meetings in the fall of 2007, by utilizing a little known state statute that forced the behemoth agency to come to Holland, Texas. . . . TxDOT came to Holland on three different occasions where they were asked to explain why they were going to destroy five towns and their school districts with a 1,200 foot-wide, 146 acre per mile toll road.
“‘Through coordination, we forced them to our table and then we used the federal NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) statute to box them in a legal corner out of which they could not escape,’ stated Ralph Snyder, a local Holland businessman and board member of the ECTSRPC. ‘That's what forced TxDOT to recommend 'No Build' to the Federal Highway Administration because we had shown how TxDOT, as the agent of the federal government, had violated the federal statute in at least 29 ways,’ Snyder continued.
“Fred Grant, president of American Stewards of Liberty, is the originator of the coordination strategy that brought TxDOT to their knees.”
FUTURE OF TTC-35 AND THE CORRIDOR CONCEPT
Some more time and paperwork is required to complete the TTC-35 EIS process, at the end of which the Federal Highway Administration will issue its Record of Decision approving the “No Action Alternative.” This is what so many of us asked in our comments, never thinking it would actually happen--it hardly ever happens--but now it is the final result!
Even though the Legislature has gradually turned against the Corridor concept, the legislation enabling it is still on the books. In addition, the Trans-Texas Corridor began as Gov. Perry’s “vision,” and he has never renounced it. We have to remain vigilant as long as the Corridor statute has not been repealed, and as long as Perry or anyone else who supports the concept is in the governor’s office.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Burka analyzes WSJ "Perry Puff Piece"
Texas Monthly's Paul Burka comments on the WSJ interview with Perry that was the subject of our previous post.
http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=4502
Burka's is a lengthy post, and there are sure to be many interesting comments eventually. It was just posted at 8:25 p.m. Regarding the quote under discussion in our previous post, Burka says:
"Hmmm. In 1976 Perry was a Democrat. Maybe he was motivated by Reagan, but Reagan wasn’t really Reagan yet. This seems pretty self-serving to me."
http://www.texasmonthly.com/blogs/burkablog/?p=4502
Burka's is a lengthy post, and there are sure to be many interesting comments eventually. It was just posted at 8:25 p.m. Regarding the quote under discussion in our previous post, Burka says:
"Hmmm. In 1976 Perry was a Democrat. Maybe he was motivated by Reagan, but Reagan wasn’t really Reagan yet. This seems pretty self-serving to me."
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Perry lies about being at '76 Republican convention, if WSJ quote is accurate
Thanks to Martha Estes for pointing out the info from the Hutchison campaign.
" . . .in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Rick Perry talked about the 1976 Republican convention and Ronald Reagan. Perry said that people at the convention "were looking around and saying 'we nominated the wrong dude.'" The problem is that Rick Perry was a Democrat in 1976, he voted for Jimmy Carter that year, and he remained a Democrat until 1989. Not only would he not have voted for Reagan in 1976 had he been the nominee, but Rick Perry remained a Democrat throughout the Reagan years."
If it's not lying from Perry about "looking around" at the Republican convention and "we" nominating the wrong dude, it is at least a huge misrepresentation. Paraphrasing the old commercial, "It's not nice to fool with the Wall Street Journal."
Can he get away with this? Does it make enough people mad enough to deprive Perry of enough votes to get re-elected? We'll see.
" . . .in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Rick Perry talked about the 1976 Republican convention and Ronald Reagan. Perry said that people at the convention "were looking around and saying 'we nominated the wrong dude.'" The problem is that Rick Perry was a Democrat in 1976, he voted for Jimmy Carter that year, and he remained a Democrat until 1989. Not only would he not have voted for Reagan in 1976 had he been the nominee, but Rick Perry remained a Democrat throughout the Reagan years."
If it's not lying from Perry about "looking around" at the Republican convention and "we" nominating the wrong dude, it is at least a huge misrepresentation. Paraphrasing the old commercial, "It's not nice to fool with the Wall Street Journal."
Can he get away with this? Does it make enough people mad enough to deprive Perry of enough votes to get re-elected? We'll see.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
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.'"
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.'"
Thursday, July 2, 2009
CDA Corridor funding mechanism killed by the Lege
Today the mechanism that would have funded the Trans-Texas Corridor was not renewed by the Legislature. Gov. Perry had asked legislators to pass three things during the special session: (1) continuing the existence of a few state agencies including TxDOT until the 2011 session; (2) allowing the state to issue $2 billion in transportation bonds; and (3) extending the ability to fund toll roads through comprehensive development agreements (CDA’s) by public-private partnerships (PPP’s).
CDA’s to die on August 31
The House and Senate passed the bill to keep TxDOT alive until they can consider reforms in the 2011 session, and they allowed the $2 billion in transportation bonds. They did NOT extend the CDA’s, and the authority to do CDA’s will expire August 31.
TURF says, “Taxpayers want Perry’s controversial and virtually universally detested road privatization schemes to die a natural death August 31 as scheduled, which will also KILL the mechanism to build the Trans-Texas Corridor.”
Why did Perry try for CDA’s in the special session?
Texas Monthly’s Paul Burka says, “The governor’s fight for more toll roads and more Comprehensive Development Agreements makes no sense politically. It puts the spotlight directly on his most controversial policy.”
Since renewing the CDA’s was in trouble from the beginning in the Legislature, why did Perry include CDA’s as part of the call for the special session? What was in it for him to put CDA’s up to the legislators, only to be swatted down? Was it to show his major construction contributors that he was doing his best for them, and he couldn’t help it if the recalcitrant legislators wouldn’t go along?
Is Krusee STILL TALKING?
The Statesman’s Ben Wear says, “For supporters of such contracts, which were touted earlier this decade as a way to bring in large upfront payments to TxDOT from private companies, the issue is not so much the next two years. Rather, if the existing authority in state law expires, reviving it may be politically impossible.”
He quotes our erstwhile representative Mike Krusee: "It means the potential loss of billions of dollars for road construction." It was Krusee’s legislation in the 2003 session that made the CDA’s legal, among other things,that started off the entire Trans-Texas Corridor fiasco, causing so many people to spend so much time and energy trying to save rural Texas from being paved over. Thanks, Mike! Can you stop talking now that the Corridor funding method is dead?
CDA’s to die on August 31
The House and Senate passed the bill to keep TxDOT alive until they can consider reforms in the 2011 session, and they allowed the $2 billion in transportation bonds. They did NOT extend the CDA’s, and the authority to do CDA’s will expire August 31.
TURF says, “Taxpayers want Perry’s controversial and virtually universally detested road privatization schemes to die a natural death August 31 as scheduled, which will also KILL the mechanism to build the Trans-Texas Corridor.”
Why did Perry try for CDA’s in the special session?
Texas Monthly’s Paul Burka says, “The governor’s fight for more toll roads and more Comprehensive Development Agreements makes no sense politically. It puts the spotlight directly on his most controversial policy.”
Since renewing the CDA’s was in trouble from the beginning in the Legislature, why did Perry include CDA’s as part of the call for the special session? What was in it for him to put CDA’s up to the legislators, only to be swatted down? Was it to show his major construction contributors that he was doing his best for them, and he couldn’t help it if the recalcitrant legislators wouldn’t go along?
Is Krusee STILL TALKING?
The Statesman’s Ben Wear says, “For supporters of such contracts, which were touted earlier this decade as a way to bring in large upfront payments to TxDOT from private companies, the issue is not so much the next two years. Rather, if the existing authority in state law expires, reviving it may be politically impossible.”
He quotes our erstwhile representative Mike Krusee: "It means the potential loss of billions of dollars for road construction." It was Krusee’s legislation in the 2003 session that made the CDA’s legal, among other things,that started off the entire Trans-Texas Corridor fiasco, causing so many people to spend so much time and energy trying to save rural Texas from being paved over. Thanks, Mike! Can you stop talking now that the Corridor funding method is dead?
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
More between-session news--eminent domain; Perry signs non-existent document
As the end of the session approached, there were two pieces of eminent domain legislation that had a chance of getting through—SB 18 and HJR 14.
SB 18 WITH SEVERAL EMINENT DOMAIN PROTECTIONS DIED
SB 18 was the bill desired by organizations like the Texas Farm Bureau. It called for more transparency in the condemnation process, compensation for diminished access, and the right for the owner to buy back property at its selling price if it was not used for the stated purpose within a certain time period.
SB 18 passed the Senate, passed out of committee to the full House, and was caught in the last-minute logjam caused by the delaying tactics on the House floor to avoid bringing up the voter ID bill.
HJR 14 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROHIBIT PRIVATE-TO-PRIVATE PROPERTY TAKINGS WILL BE ON THE BALLOT
Even though SB 18 died, HJR 14 calling for a constitutional amendment passed the House and the Senate and will appear on the November ballot. If approved by voters, it would prevent in Texas the situation that happened in the Kelo case, where the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the process of taking property from one private owner and giving it to another private owner. HJR limits the taking of private property to a public taking.
GROUPS CALL FOR EMINENT DOMAIN TO BE IN SPECIAL SESSION
Some, including Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples, Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers, and the Texas Farm Bureau, are calling for stronger eminent domain protections to be addressed in a special session. Farm Bureau President Kenneth Dierschke said, “We have to guard against the possibility that some may declare the job done on eminent domain reform. If there is a special session, we hope Governor Perry will add it to the call. If there is not, this has to be a top priority for the next regular session.”
PERRY ALAMO SIGNING A SHAM
There have been several news accounts of Gov. 39% signing the authorization in front of the Alamo for HJR 14 to be on the ballot this November. The only account I saw that explains that the whole ceremony was a sham is from Ken Herman in the Statesman.
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/06/06/16/0616herman_edit.html
“Who amongst us does not enjoy political theater? . . . The only thing better than political theater is the subcategory of political theater/fiction. This would be when a politician performs in a little show that is fully make-believe. . . .
“A real trouper, Gov. Rick Perry showed up at the Alamo, right arm in sling from a recent bike wreck, and used his left hand to sign House Joint Resolution 14, a proposed constitutional amendment concerning eminent domain. . . .
“Beautiful. Perfect. Inspiring. And as phony as they come.
“Here's why: Texas governors have nothing to do with proposed constitutional amendments. When a proposed amendment gets the necessary two-thirds vote in each chamber — as HJR 14 did this year — it goes to the secretary of state, who puts it on the statewide ballot. Unlike proposed laws, proposed constitutional amendments are not routed through the governor's office.
“No vetoes allowed. No signature required. No signing ceremony needed. . . . It's all about re-establishing Perry as a private property-rights kind of guy, a credential he covets as he heads toward a 2010 renomination battle against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. . . .
“Exactly two years ago Monday, Perry invited questions about his dedication to private property rights by vetoing a bill dealing with the concept of ‘diminished access.’ . . . the veto did not sit well with some, including the Texas Farm Bureau, holder of a potentially pivotal endorsement in the 2010 GOP gubernatorial primary.
“The 2007 veto came on the heels of Perry's ill-fated Trans-Texas Corridor highway project, one that also attracted the ire of folks who fear government taking of private property.
“Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, stood with Perry on Monday. After the ‘signing’ ceremony, the 21-year legislative veteran could not immediately recall previously attending a ceremony where a governor signed something a governor has no business signing.”
Since there is no provision for such a signing, I wonder what Perry actually signed. Did his office make up an official-looking document that would be a fake with no significance? Then what happened to the signed fake document? Maybe it will become a collector’s item.
SB 18 WITH SEVERAL EMINENT DOMAIN PROTECTIONS DIED
SB 18 was the bill desired by organizations like the Texas Farm Bureau. It called for more transparency in the condemnation process, compensation for diminished access, and the right for the owner to buy back property at its selling price if it was not used for the stated purpose within a certain time period.
SB 18 passed the Senate, passed out of committee to the full House, and was caught in the last-minute logjam caused by the delaying tactics on the House floor to avoid bringing up the voter ID bill.
HJR 14 CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PROHIBIT PRIVATE-TO-PRIVATE PROPERTY TAKINGS WILL BE ON THE BALLOT
Even though SB 18 died, HJR 14 calling for a constitutional amendment passed the House and the Senate and will appear on the November ballot. If approved by voters, it would prevent in Texas the situation that happened in the Kelo case, where the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the process of taking property from one private owner and giving it to another private owner. HJR limits the taking of private property to a public taking.
GROUPS CALL FOR EMINENT DOMAIN TO BE IN SPECIAL SESSION
Some, including Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples, Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers, and the Texas Farm Bureau, are calling for stronger eminent domain protections to be addressed in a special session. Farm Bureau President Kenneth Dierschke said, “We have to guard against the possibility that some may declare the job done on eminent domain reform. If there is a special session, we hope Governor Perry will add it to the call. If there is not, this has to be a top priority for the next regular session.”
PERRY ALAMO SIGNING A SHAM
There have been several news accounts of Gov. 39% signing the authorization in front of the Alamo for HJR 14 to be on the ballot this November. The only account I saw that explains that the whole ceremony was a sham is from Ken Herman in the Statesman.
http://www.statesman.com/opinion/content/editorial/stories/2009/06/06/16/0616herman_edit.html
“Who amongst us does not enjoy political theater? . . . The only thing better than political theater is the subcategory of political theater/fiction. This would be when a politician performs in a little show that is fully make-believe. . . .
“A real trouper, Gov. Rick Perry showed up at the Alamo, right arm in sling from a recent bike wreck, and used his left hand to sign House Joint Resolution 14, a proposed constitutional amendment concerning eminent domain. . . .
“Beautiful. Perfect. Inspiring. And as phony as they come.
“Here's why: Texas governors have nothing to do with proposed constitutional amendments. When a proposed amendment gets the necessary two-thirds vote in each chamber — as HJR 14 did this year — it goes to the secretary of state, who puts it on the statewide ballot. Unlike proposed laws, proposed constitutional amendments are not routed through the governor's office.
“No vetoes allowed. No signature required. No signing ceremony needed. . . . It's all about re-establishing Perry as a private property-rights kind of guy, a credential he covets as he heads toward a 2010 renomination battle against Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. . . .
“Exactly two years ago Monday, Perry invited questions about his dedication to private property rights by vetoing a bill dealing with the concept of ‘diminished access.’ . . . the veto did not sit well with some, including the Texas Farm Bureau, holder of a potentially pivotal endorsement in the 2010 GOP gubernatorial primary.
“The 2007 veto came on the heels of Perry's ill-fated Trans-Texas Corridor highway project, one that also attracted the ire of folks who fear government taking of private property.
“Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, stood with Perry on Monday. After the ‘signing’ ceremony, the 21-year legislative veteran could not immediately recall previously attending a ceremony where a governor signed something a governor has no business signing.”
Since there is no provision for such a signing, I wonder what Perry actually signed. Did his office make up an official-looking document that would be a fake with no significance? Then what happened to the signed fake document? Maybe it will become a collector’s item.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Has time run out for eminent domain protection and veto override?
Last night, time may have run out on two important bills.
First, the Statesman’s Jason Embry reports on eminent domain legislation. SB 18 was passed by the Senate and was before the House when it shut down at midnight with many bills left on the calendar.
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/firstreading/entries/2009/05/27/can_this_session_be_saved.html
Embry says, “Many thought the chubbing might ease up enough Tuesday for some big non-voter ID bills to pass, such as the bill authorizing the state to get federal stimulus dollars for unemployment insurance and the eminent-domain legislation. But Rep. Richard Raymond, D-Laredo, had other ideas, launching his own talk-a-thon that ate up most of the day . . .
“So there are six days left in the session and some major Senate bills are (at best) in serious jeopardy because they did not pass the House: . . . eminent domain . . . If any of this is going to be salvaged, there is going to have to be major triage in the Senate . . . "
Let’s hope some “major triage” can save SB 18--stronger protection against eminent domain for landowners.
The second good bill in danger is HJR 29 that would allow the Legislature to come back after the regular session to override a governor’s veto. As reported by Christy Hoppe, Dallas Morning News, Sen. Jeff Wentworth says that Gov. Perry and Lt. Gov. Dewhurst “are conspiring to kill” this constitutional amendment.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/legislature/stories/DN-vetofight_27tex.ART.State.Edition1.511dd6a.html
From Hoppe’s article: “Sen. Jeff Wentworth, speaking with unusual candor against powerhouses in the Capitol, said Dewhurst betrayed a trust as the Senate's presiding officer to deal fairly and address bills that have the support of two-thirds of the 31-member Senate. Wentworth, R-San Antonio, said he had collected the signatures of 26 Senate supporters for the constitutional proposal, but Dewhurst told him that at the behest of the governor, he would not call up the bill for debate."
Wentworth said, "[Dewhurst] made a deal with the governor and gave his word he'd kill the bill. He told me that the governor has talked to him 20 times about it." The veto override passed the House easily and has been sitting in the Senate since May 15—more than enough time for it to be debated and passed by the 26 Senators that have signed up for it.
To allow Texans to vote on this amendment is overwhelmingly favored by their representatives in the House and the Senate. It is being killed by Perry and Dewhurst. What does this tell us about the need for this amendment?
First, the Statesman’s Jason Embry reports on eminent domain legislation. SB 18 was passed by the Senate and was before the House when it shut down at midnight with many bills left on the calendar.
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/firstreading/entries/2009/05/27/can_this_session_be_saved.html
Embry says, “Many thought the chubbing might ease up enough Tuesday for some big non-voter ID bills to pass, such as the bill authorizing the state to get federal stimulus dollars for unemployment insurance and the eminent-domain legislation. But Rep. Richard Raymond, D-Laredo, had other ideas, launching his own talk-a-thon that ate up most of the day . . .
“So there are six days left in the session and some major Senate bills are (at best) in serious jeopardy because they did not pass the House: . . . eminent domain . . . If any of this is going to be salvaged, there is going to have to be major triage in the Senate . . . "
Let’s hope some “major triage” can save SB 18--stronger protection against eminent domain for landowners.
The second good bill in danger is HJR 29 that would allow the Legislature to come back after the regular session to override a governor’s veto. As reported by Christy Hoppe, Dallas Morning News, Sen. Jeff Wentworth says that Gov. Perry and Lt. Gov. Dewhurst “are conspiring to kill” this constitutional amendment.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/legislature/stories/DN-vetofight_27tex.ART.State.Edition1.511dd6a.html
From Hoppe’s article: “Sen. Jeff Wentworth, speaking with unusual candor against powerhouses in the Capitol, said Dewhurst betrayed a trust as the Senate's presiding officer to deal fairly and address bills that have the support of two-thirds of the 31-member Senate. Wentworth, R-San Antonio, said he had collected the signatures of 26 Senate supporters for the constitutional proposal, but Dewhurst told him that at the behest of the governor, he would not call up the bill for debate."
Wentworth said, "[Dewhurst] made a deal with the governor and gave his word he'd kill the bill. He told me that the governor has talked to him 20 times about it." The veto override passed the House easily and has been sitting in the Senate since May 15—more than enough time for it to be debated and passed by the 26 Senators that have signed up for it.
To allow Texans to vote on this amendment is overwhelmingly favored by their representatives in the House and the Senate. It is being killed by Perry and Dewhurst. What does this tell us about the need for this amendment?
Sunday, May 17, 2009
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."
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."
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
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."
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."
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
BILL to KILL the TTC gets hearing
A landmark event occurred yesterday. Rep. Leibowitz’s (D-San Antonio) HB 11 to totally kill the Trans-Texas Corridor was heard in the House Transportation Committee. HB 11 may not make it past this point this session, but after fighting the Corridor for years, it is very encouraging to me, and an important symbol of how far we have come, to witness this bill given a hearing and to hear every single witness testify in favor of this bill, with no one who cared or dared to publicly oppose the Corridor-killing bill.
Corridor must be wiped from the books
As we know, the pronouncements during the last few months that the Corridor is dead may reflect the reality that the Corridor is very sick, that the people of Texas don’t want it, and that it has become more and more politically risky. However, Gov. 39% declared that the name might have changed, but that his “vision” of the almost quarter-mile wide, multi-modal network criss-crossing Texas would continue by segments. The name was changed to protect the guilty, but the essence of the project would continue piece by piece.
Rep. Leibowitz said, “Rural land will still be taken by cross-state tollways if we don’t repeal the authority to create the TTC. [with the passage of HB 11] If the state leadership wants to come up with a new multi-modal transportation corridor, they will need to start from scratch.”
Krusee creates Corridor, Maldonado tries to kill it
An ironic twist--we must observe that our previous HD 52 representative Mike Krusee was the author and prime mover behind HB 3588 that created the Corridor in the 2003 session. Our current Representative Diana Maldonado is a coauthor of HB 11 to destroy the Corridor.
Testimony in favor of HB 11
The hearing room was almost full, and Chairman Pickett announced that overflow capacity was available in another room. Many testified in favor of HB 11 and many more handed in testimony forms supporting HB 11. Staffers kept running out of witness forms and had to go out to get more.
Leading off the testimony was the president of the Texas Farm Bureau, Kenneth Dierschke, who, representing 425,000 member families, testified in favor of HB 11.
Representing other groups around the state were Terri Hall of TURF; Hank Gilbert of TURF and former Democratic nominee for Ag Commissioner; Beki Halpin, Fix 290; Margaret Green, Blackland Coalition; Bruce Burton, Texans Against Tolls; and citizens representing themselves and their families. Mary Anderson. Texans Against Tolls, did not speak publicly, but was all around the hearing room, supplying information and helping others get their witness forms. Citizens from all over the state testified to the committee and handed in witness forms.
About his HB 11 to kill the Corridor and HB 13 to prohibit the conversion of free lanes to tolled lanes, Rep. Leibowitz observed, “Nobody testified against them.” He said that HB 11 “takes TTC off the books. TTC is sucking the very life blood out of the heart and soul of Texas. We need to drive a stake through its heart—if it has a heart.”
Status of HB 11
Chairman Pickett left HB 11 and HB 13 pending. This means that the Transportation Committee may or may not vote these bills out to go to the full House. We will try to get an idea of what is going on with HB 11 in the committee and see if the anti-Corridor groups need to mount a campaign to communicate with the legislators to get HB 11 out of committee and to the House floor.
Filming the proceedings
Making a complete record of the proceedings was Bill Molina of Storm Productions. Bill has produced two award-winning documentaries against the Corridor—the “Truth Be Tolled” films. When history decides to go back and look at all the meetings and hearings around the state and at the Capitol on the Corridor, the entire record will be there in the work of Bill Molina. The Coupland Civic Organization hosted a showing of his first Corridor film two years ago—just one of the community groups around the state that have done so. Both of Bill’s films can be seen for free now on YouTube. Go to truthbetolled.com and click on YouTube on the top line.
Corridor must be wiped from the books
As we know, the pronouncements during the last few months that the Corridor is dead may reflect the reality that the Corridor is very sick, that the people of Texas don’t want it, and that it has become more and more politically risky. However, Gov. 39% declared that the name might have changed, but that his “vision” of the almost quarter-mile wide, multi-modal network criss-crossing Texas would continue by segments. The name was changed to protect the guilty, but the essence of the project would continue piece by piece.
Rep. Leibowitz said, “Rural land will still be taken by cross-state tollways if we don’t repeal the authority to create the TTC. [with the passage of HB 11] If the state leadership wants to come up with a new multi-modal transportation corridor, they will need to start from scratch.”
Krusee creates Corridor, Maldonado tries to kill it
An ironic twist--we must observe that our previous HD 52 representative Mike Krusee was the author and prime mover behind HB 3588 that created the Corridor in the 2003 session. Our current Representative Diana Maldonado is a coauthor of HB 11 to destroy the Corridor.
Testimony in favor of HB 11
The hearing room was almost full, and Chairman Pickett announced that overflow capacity was available in another room. Many testified in favor of HB 11 and many more handed in testimony forms supporting HB 11. Staffers kept running out of witness forms and had to go out to get more.
Leading off the testimony was the president of the Texas Farm Bureau, Kenneth Dierschke, who, representing 425,000 member families, testified in favor of HB 11.
Representing other groups around the state were Terri Hall of TURF; Hank Gilbert of TURF and former Democratic nominee for Ag Commissioner; Beki Halpin, Fix 290; Margaret Green, Blackland Coalition; Bruce Burton, Texans Against Tolls; and citizens representing themselves and their families. Mary Anderson. Texans Against Tolls, did not speak publicly, but was all around the hearing room, supplying information and helping others get their witness forms. Citizens from all over the state testified to the committee and handed in witness forms.
About his HB 11 to kill the Corridor and HB 13 to prohibit the conversion of free lanes to tolled lanes, Rep. Leibowitz observed, “Nobody testified against them.” He said that HB 11 “takes TTC off the books. TTC is sucking the very life blood out of the heart and soul of Texas. We need to drive a stake through its heart—if it has a heart.”
Status of HB 11
Chairman Pickett left HB 11 and HB 13 pending. This means that the Transportation Committee may or may not vote these bills out to go to the full House. We will try to get an idea of what is going on with HB 11 in the committee and see if the anti-Corridor groups need to mount a campaign to communicate with the legislators to get HB 11 out of committee and to the House floor.
Filming the proceedings
Making a complete record of the proceedings was Bill Molina of Storm Productions. Bill has produced two award-winning documentaries against the Corridor—the “Truth Be Tolled” films. When history decides to go back and look at all the meetings and hearings around the state and at the Capitol on the Corridor, the entire record will be there in the work of Bill Molina. The Coupland Civic Organization hosted a showing of his first Corridor film two years ago—just one of the community groups around the state that have done so. Both of Bill’s films can be seen for free now on YouTube. Go to truthbetolled.com and click on YouTube on the top line.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
More on Perry's funds transfer--House takes money away
According to the Quorum Report, at the end of the House passing its budget, an amendment from Yvonne Davis was added that would take away the funds from Perry's enterprise fund. This is the fund that earlier this session was in the news when Perry gave $50 million that had come at least indirectly from unemployment insurance funds to A&M for a medical research building. The project might have been worthy, but legislators objected to Perry bestowing the money unilaterally instead of going through the usual procedure.
The House seems to be telling Perry directly that it has ultimate budgetary control by passing this amendment that, as the Quorum Report says, "would zero out the budget's funding for the Guv's enterprise fund." The amount that legislators transferred out of the enterprise fund to the job skills development fund is $136 million.
The House seems to be telling Perry directly that it has ultimate budgetary control by passing this amendment that, as the Quorum Report says, "would zero out the budget's funding for the Guv's enterprise fund." The amount that legislators transferred out of the enterprise fund to the job skills development fund is $136 million.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Rick Perry talks secession--national media goes gaga
Gov. 39% is NOT for the citizen against big government--he's on big government's side
Hard to know whether to laugh or cry, seeing all the coverage that Gov. 39% has gotten as being a small-government conservative (whether or not this is viewed favorably) because of his remarks at April 15 Tea Parties, resulting in appearances on national radio and TV and favorable comments on widely read blogs. He has been a major story, “Rick Perry: Tea party darling,” with a picture, no less, on politico.com.
Texans know that mentioning “secession”—in jest or seriously--is not that rare in the Lone Star State, given our unique journey from sovereign nation to statehood and the discussion over the rights given to Texas in exchange for becoming a state—whether Texas can just up and leave or can divide into several states.
However, the rest of the country evidently has never heard about this, so Perry really got their attention by mentioning the “s” word. Unfortunately, the rest of the country has not paid that much attention to the details of Perry’s governance, so took him at his word when he said things like, “shrink the government; reread the Constitution.”
They have never heard of Perry’s “vision” as he says, and “nightmare” as residents say, of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC), a network of quarter-mile wide road lanes, rail lines, and utility-pipeline zones. The TTC would wrest 600,000 acres from Texas landowners through eminent domain and turn their private property over to Cintra, a Spanish corporation. Perry rammed his TTC authorization through the Legislature in 2003 before legislators had time to read it.
When Perry says, ungrammatically, “But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot,” and when he decries government “intrusion into the lives of our citizens,” the rest of the country doesn’t know that HE has been the enemy of Texas landowners—trying to take over citizens’ land unnecessarily to benefit the road lobby and foreign corporations. HE hasn’t been fighting for Texans; Texans have been fighting HIM.
In fact, the TTC/toll issue has become a defining difference in the 2010 gubernatorial race between Perry and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who has asked, “Are you concerned that our state government ignores private property rights and property owners in a quest to cover our state with massive toll roads?” Up until now, KBH has led Perry in most polls. This is at least one reason that Perry tried to perform the old trick—and apparently somewhat successfully—of seeing the Tea Party parade starting and running around to get in front of it.
Additionally, this became another opportunity for Perry to test the national waters, as he has done from time to time. His camp probably realizes that the country is not ready yet for another president from Texas, but they may think that if he starts rising now through the ranks of possible presidential candidates, he may be prominent in 2012 and be positioned for 2016.
When I hear Gov. 39%, I hear arrogance (“Why don't you let us get on down the road,” “Mofo,” etc.) and phoniness. Will the rest of the country hear that?
Perry is not an advocate for the small businesses, the farm and ranch families—the people who are the backbone of the nation. He is an advocate for the 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. Will the rest of the country realize that?
Hard to know whether to laugh or cry, seeing all the coverage that Gov. 39% has gotten as being a small-government conservative (whether or not this is viewed favorably) because of his remarks at April 15 Tea Parties, resulting in appearances on national radio and TV and favorable comments on widely read blogs. He has been a major story, “Rick Perry: Tea party darling,” with a picture, no less, on politico.com.
Texans know that mentioning “secession”—in jest or seriously--is not that rare in the Lone Star State, given our unique journey from sovereign nation to statehood and the discussion over the rights given to Texas in exchange for becoming a state—whether Texas can just up and leave or can divide into several states.
However, the rest of the country evidently has never heard about this, so Perry really got their attention by mentioning the “s” word. Unfortunately, the rest of the country has not paid that much attention to the details of Perry’s governance, so took him at his word when he said things like, “shrink the government; reread the Constitution.”
They have never heard of Perry’s “vision” as he says, and “nightmare” as residents say, of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC), a network of quarter-mile wide road lanes, rail lines, and utility-pipeline zones. The TTC would wrest 600,000 acres from Texas landowners through eminent domain and turn their private property over to Cintra, a Spanish corporation. Perry rammed his TTC authorization through the Legislature in 2003 before legislators had time to read it.
When Perry says, ungrammatically, “But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot,” and when he decries government “intrusion into the lives of our citizens,” the rest of the country doesn’t know that HE has been the enemy of Texas landowners—trying to take over citizens’ land unnecessarily to benefit the road lobby and foreign corporations. HE hasn’t been fighting for Texans; Texans have been fighting HIM.
In fact, the TTC/toll issue has become a defining difference in the 2010 gubernatorial race between Perry and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who has asked, “Are you concerned that our state government ignores private property rights and property owners in a quest to cover our state with massive toll roads?” Up until now, KBH has led Perry in most polls. This is at least one reason that Perry tried to perform the old trick—and apparently somewhat successfully—of seeing the Tea Party parade starting and running around to get in front of it.
Additionally, this became another opportunity for Perry to test the national waters, as he has done from time to time. His camp probably realizes that the country is not ready yet for another president from Texas, but they may think that if he starts rising now through the ranks of possible presidential candidates, he may be prominent in 2012 and be positioned for 2016.
When I hear Gov. 39%, I hear arrogance (“Why don't you let us get on down the road,” “Mofo,” etc.) and phoniness. Will the rest of the country hear that?
Perry is not an advocate for the small businesses, the farm and ranch families—the people who are the backbone of the nation. He is an advocate for the 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. Will the rest of the country realize that?
Monday, April 6, 2009
Perry wants your ideas--really! And 39% is a great victory!
The Statesman's W. Gardner Selby has reported that Perry wants help from YOU to launch his 2010 gubernatorial campaign.
To see this version of the old gambit to make the hoi polloi think that the governor cares what they think, go to
http://www.rickperry.org/campaign-kickoff
Help Governor Perry Kickoff His Campaign This Summer with Your Ideas
Sure--that's why he's paying gazillions to consultants, so he can use free ideas from you the people.
It's going to be hard to beat the slogan from last time: "I'm proud of Texas. How 'bout you?"
Here's one: "Help Gov. 39% get to 40."
In the Statesman today, Jason Embry has some entertaining excerpts on the legislative blog from depositions in Chris Bell's case against Perry's campaign from 2006. In "Perry tried to prop up Bell,"
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/firstreading/index.html
If you have time, read the whole thing to get some behind-the-scenes goings on. For instance, Perry consultant Dave Carney says,
"So the theory would be that if Kinky collapsed, all that vote would go to Carole, and it’s very difficult to stop an independent candidate, you know, in that her resources to money was pretty significant as being the comptroller and some of her deep-pocket supporters. So we had a strategy to pump up Bell."
As a volunteer who gathered petition signatures to help Strayhorn get on the ballot, I thought at the time that she was the one with the best chance to raise enough money to challenge Perry in advertising and other communication, as opposed to Bell and Kinky. Evidently, Perry's campaign saw this too, and took steps to change the equation, as much as they could.
The Statesman article (for which his blog entry is extra background) is "Governor's race lawsuit back in court,"
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/04/06/0406perryrga.html
I do question one of its statements:
"Rick Perry eventually got $1 million from the governors on his way to a rather easy re-election win. A year later, Bell sued Perry and the association, alleging that the governor kept the public from fully knowing the source of the money."
I guess you could call it a "rather easy re-election win," but you can also call him Gov. 39%.
To see this version of the old gambit to make the hoi polloi think that the governor cares what they think, go to
http://www.rickperry.org/campaign-kickoff
Help Governor Perry Kickoff His Campaign This Summer with Your Ideas
Sure--that's why he's paying gazillions to consultants, so he can use free ideas from you the people.
It's going to be hard to beat the slogan from last time: "I'm proud of Texas. How 'bout you?"
Here's one: "Help Gov. 39% get to 40."
In the Statesman today, Jason Embry has some entertaining excerpts on the legislative blog from depositions in Chris Bell's case against Perry's campaign from 2006. In "Perry tried to prop up Bell,"
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/firstreading/index.html
If you have time, read the whole thing to get some behind-the-scenes goings on. For instance, Perry consultant Dave Carney says,
"So the theory would be that if Kinky collapsed, all that vote would go to Carole, and it’s very difficult to stop an independent candidate, you know, in that her resources to money was pretty significant as being the comptroller and some of her deep-pocket supporters. So we had a strategy to pump up Bell."
As a volunteer who gathered petition signatures to help Strayhorn get on the ballot, I thought at the time that she was the one with the best chance to raise enough money to challenge Perry in advertising and other communication, as opposed to Bell and Kinky. Evidently, Perry's campaign saw this too, and took steps to change the equation, as much as they could.
The Statesman article (for which his blog entry is extra background) is "Governor's race lawsuit back in court,"
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/04/06/0406perryrga.html
I do question one of its statements:
"Rick Perry eventually got $1 million from the governors on his way to a rather easy re-election win. A year later, Bell sued Perry and the association, alleging that the governor kept the public from fully knowing the source of the money."
I guess you could call it a "rather easy re-election win," but you can also call him Gov. 39%.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Perry's transfer of funds draws more negative coverage
Continuing to follow Perry taking money from unemployment insurance and giving it to A&M:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/31/0331grant.html
With the headline "How biotech plan turned into political storm."
Jason Embry reports of the $50 million transfer by Gov. 39% "that quiet transaction has spurred an onslaught of questions about the Emerging Technology Fund, one of Gov. Rick Perry's signature programs."
A major critic of Perry's funds transfer is Chairman of House Appropriations Committee Jim Pitts. The Committee is placing riders in legislation to prevent such a unilateral move in the future.
Perry had not planned on announcing the funding yet; investigation by legislators made the transfer public. Pitts is also questioning why the A&M center seems to be working with financially strapped pharmaceutical firms on the project.
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/region/legislature/stories/03/31/0331grant.html
With the headline "How biotech plan turned into political storm."
Jason Embry reports of the $50 million transfer by Gov. 39% "that quiet transaction has spurred an onslaught of questions about the Emerging Technology Fund, one of Gov. Rick Perry's signature programs."
A major critic of Perry's funds transfer is Chairman of House Appropriations Committee Jim Pitts. The Committee is placing riders in legislation to prevent such a unilateral move in the future.
Perry had not planned on announcing the funding yet; investigation by legislators made the transfer public. Pitts is also questioning why the A&M center seems to be working with financially strapped pharmaceutical firms on the project.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Perry routes funds from Unemployment Insurance to alma mater
The Quorum Report covers what happened yesterday afternoon in the dust-up between Gov. 39% and House Appropriations Chair Pitts over Perry's possibly improper allocation of $50 million to A&M.
http://www.quorumreport.com/
It appears that not only were the funds sent to A&M outside of the usual process, but also the money came at least indirectly from the Unemployment Insurance Fund. Pitts expressed concern about the way the money was acquired and routed and proposed "riders that will rein in
Governor's discretion to transfer monies between trustee programs."
In the introduction to their special report (the entire report is available to their subscribers only), Quorum traces the route the money took: " The connection is indirect but at the same time fairly evident. Statute requires the Texas Workforce Commission to transfer $120 million from the unemployment insurance fund to the Employment and Training Investment Assessment fund. The money is then divvied between a skills development program and the Texas Enterprise Fund. As has been reported, $50 million was transferred from the enterprise fund to the Emerging Technology Fund, which awarded the money to A&M."
As this story continues to unfold--and as reporters continue to cover it--it means negative publicity for Perry continues.
http://www.quorumreport.com/
It appears that not only were the funds sent to A&M outside of the usual process, but also the money came at least indirectly from the Unemployment Insurance Fund. Pitts expressed concern about the way the money was acquired and routed and proposed "riders that will rein in
Governor's discretion to transfer monies between trustee programs."
In the introduction to their special report (the entire report is available to their subscribers only), Quorum traces the route the money took: " The connection is indirect but at the same time fairly evident. Statute requires the Texas Workforce Commission to transfer $120 million from the unemployment insurance fund to the Employment and Training Investment Assessment fund. The money is then divvied between a skills development program and the Texas Enterprise Fund. As has been reported, $50 million was transferred from the enterprise fund to the Emerging Technology Fund, which awarded the money to A&M."
As this story continues to unfold--and as reporters continue to cover it--it means negative publicity for Perry continues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
