#tx2020: Huffines offers $5k reward for verifiable information re: Election Fraud

"Do not remove the ancient landmark,
Nor enter the fields of the fatherless;"
Proverbs 23:10

Interesting:

A former Texas state senator is offering $5,000 rewards out of his own pocket for tips on voter fraud that lead to criminal convictions in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

"For me, the foundation of our country is to make sure we have fair and honest elections. ... This is a nonpartisan issue," former state Sen. Don Huffines told Fox News on Tuesday. "The most important thing that really matters in an election is who counts the votes."

Huffines reward applies to individuals who call or email tips to Direct Action Texas, an election integrity organization. Huffines promised to keep all tips in confidence.

His offer is meant to be a "broad sweep" to track down ballot harvesting, noncitizens voting or even software manipulation, Huffines said.

"I’m happy to pay it," Huffines said. "Hopefully I don’t have to, but I am committed to doing what I can."

Bottom Line: We'll never know what happened in Dallas county in 2018, but it's good to see real time efforts this time around.

Speaking of Abbott playing games...let's not overlook James Huffines

"Therefore by their fruits you will know them."
Matthew 7:20

Yesterday, we wrote about Governor Abbott appointing Mike Toomey to his so-called "strike force" to guide re-opening the state.  Considering his history and his lobbying connections to industries receiving preferential treatment, Mike Toomey is a particularly egregious appointment.  That one needed to stand by itself.

But Toomey's hardly the only problematic appointment.

From the same announcement:

Abbott also named a "statewide strike force" devoted to developing reopening procedures. Austin banker James Huffines will chair the task force, while veteran lobbyist Mike Toomey will be its chief operating officer. The group will oversee what Abbott described as a phased reopening.

Now who, pray tell, is James Huffines?!?

You can learn about James Huffines' various activities here.  The TL,DR version is that he has a wide variety of business and philanthropic interests.  For our purposes, however, the relevant detail is that former Texas Senator Don Huffines is his brother.

Why is Don Huffines important?!?

Texas Scorecard (Tuesday):

Austin American Statesman (Wednesday):

DON Huffines has been one of Abbott's more outspoken critics for awhile.  In recent weeks, DON Huffines' criticism has become more pointed.  While not directly relevant to the current crisis, if you have 20 minutes we strongly recommend Huffines' full presentation.

In response, Abbott appoints James Huffines to his "reopen Texas" board.

Which means DON Huffines can't go after Abbott without going after James Huffines.

To be fair, James Huffines isn't an inherently terrible selection.  In isolation, there's not necessarily anything wrong with an elected officials consulting with someone with a wide array of business and philanthropic interests.  FWIW, James Huffines has struck this author as a perfectly capable individual on the couple of occasions when we've met.

(Certainily better than Mike Toomey.)

In context, however, this appointment means one thing: An attempt to shut DON Huffines up by making it socially awkward for him to criticize Abbott.

Only time will tell if it works.

Bottom Line: Kinda brilliant (in a dastardly kind of way).

#TXLEGE: "Behind the Scenes" in the Legislature

"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them."
Ephesians 5:11

Nothing quite like an former officeholder who's now unshackled.

Don Huffines has been speaking about the reality of his experience in the legislature for some time.  He gave similar remarks at Empower Texans gala in December.  His recent appearance at the True Texas Project is, at least to our knowledge, the first time it's been recorded.



Highlights:

• Decided to run for office because the incumbent (John Carona) became a liberal over his time in office.

• Abolished an obscure quasi-educational agency: "A rats nest of crooks."
• "We uncovered the biggest political corruption scandal in the history of the state of Texas."
• "We discovered these people were stealing a lot of money."
• "Over 3000 employees."
• At least 5 employees are currently in prison, with more potentially coming soon.

• "I didn't get a lot of help in Austin."
• "I didn't get any support of the Governor."
• "I got nothing but opposition from the speaker of the house."
• The Lt. Governor wasn't particularly helpful, but didn't actively work against him either.

• First Republican caucus meeting:
• Took the party platform with him.
• Wanted a vote on Constitutional Carry so that voters could hold Senators accountable.
• 3 Senators left..."it was VERY awkward."
• The next morning, he was told to apologize to the other Senators.
• Republican Senators are willing to be held accountable to the media and lobbyists, but not their own voters.

• "I don't know if you know this or not, but they don't like you...As a matter of fact, they hate you."

• "They belittle you, they laugh at you...they ridicule our state party platform."

• "Have you ever seen our Governor talk about our state party platform?!?"
• Likewise the other statewides.

• "They don't believe in what you want."

• "We have never not had a purple session."

• "Democrats ran this state for 125 years, for the past 20 years you've had Democrat party switchers running it."
• Note: This point CANNOT possibly be emphasized enough.  The only difference today is that all the local Good Ol' Boys run in the R primary instead of the D.  Texas has NEVER been a conservative state.  It's been a deeply corrupt, crony "capitalist" state for 150 years.

• "We've never had a conservative session."

• "If we wanted a secure border, that border would be secure."

• "Did you hear a whisper on education freedom?!?"

• Election integrity: "We know we're being cheated.  We know dead people vote."
• We know thousands of non-citizens are voting, could be significantly higher.
• Abbott was Attorney General for 12 years and never did anything about voter fraud.
• Paxton hasn't been much better.
• "When I lost my election in '18, there was evidence presented to me that we might have a problem."
• The biggest issue is software manipulation: "If they can program a computer to count the votes, they can program a computer to change the votes."
• Yet it was the GOP who killed the election integrity bill.
• His attorney quit because he didn't want to be on the outs with the Governor.

• Socialism: "The Democrats want to get there today, the Republicans want to get there next week."

To be fair, Huffines also endorses Collins

"He who walks with wise men will be wise,
But the companion of fools will be destroyed.
Proverbs 13:20

Inbox:

THE HONORABLE DON HUFFINES ENDORSES GENEVIEVE COLLINS FOR CONGRESS

DALLAS, TX - Today, conservative businesswoman and Republican candidate for Congress in Texas’ 32nd district Genevieve Collins announced that she received the endorsement of the Honorable Senator Don Huffines.

Senator Huffines represented Texas’ 16th Senate District from 2015 to 2019. He is most known for authoring legislation that resulted in uncovering the largest government corruption scandal in Texas history, as well as authoring conservative legislation to establish term limits, promote life, and return rights from the government back to Texans. Prior to his time in elected office, he spent over 30 years as a successful businessman.

“I am pleased to endorse fellow businessperson and strong conservative Genevieve Collins for Congress today. During my time in Austin, I was proud to champion our conservative principles of small government and less regulation. I know what it takes to fight for Texas values, and I am confident that Genevieve will fight for them in Washington, D.C.,” said Huffines. “I am convinced she will work for term limits, a secure border, the sanctity of life, and the Second Amendment, just to name a few. Further, I believe she will use her business sense to protect our liberties and freedoms and ensure that power stays with the people, not the government. I look forward to helping in her election effort, and I urge my fellow Texas conservatives to join me in supporting her in the Republican primary on March 3rd.”

“It is my honor to earn Senator Huffines’ endorsement for the 32nd district Republican primary on March 3rd. Like me, he spent his career in business, creating jobs and forecasting growth. Now I am going to take my business acumen to Congress to get to work for the people of the 32nd district,” added Collins. “Early voting starts three weeks from today, and conservatives across the 32nd district are coalescing around our campaign. They know that it is vital we nominate a conservative businesswoman and lifelong Texan who will take the fight to far-left Colin Allred this November.”

We don't have a lot to add...but since we ripped on Collins for the Dan Branch endorsement, we have to acknowledge the Huffines endorsement.

Bottom Line: At this point, it looks like all the ex-politicos in Dallas County are lining up behind her.  Your guess is as good as ours as to what that means.  But there are few people in that neck of the woods more solid than Don Huffines.

#TXLEGE: Huffines' Moscow Trip Doesn't Look Good

"Abstain from all appearance of evil."
1 Thessalonians 5:22 (kjv)

This is...odd:

State Sen. Don Huffines, R-Dallas, met with Russian officials in Moscow on Monday, joining U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, on a trip that The Washington Post described as "a bid to increase engagement with the country."

A spokesman for Huffines confirmed the trip, saying the lawmaker regularly hears from Texans who are concerned about the security of elections and "are alarmed by Russia's efforts to undermine our democratic institutions."

“In meetings with Russian officials, Senator Huffines is having frank discussions, relaying Texans’ concerns, and demanding that Russia stop meddling in our elections," said Brent Connett, chief of staff to Huffines. "Don Huffines believes in the power of face-to-face conversations, even with antagonists.”

Here's the thing: If you actually click the link, and you actually read the story, Huffines' response is pretty reasonable.  But most people only read the headline.  "Huffines meets with Russians" is bad optics.

Then there's the fact that Huffines isn't blockwalking.  Given the nature of Dallas County, ANY elected official running for re-election in this climate needs to be constantly on the ground in the district talking to voters.  Any foreign travel, regardless of the destination, distracts from a more important task.

Bottom Line: This was a stupid, unforced, error in a time and location where we could least afford one....

#atxcouncil's latest act of DIMWITTED TYRANNY illustrates why #TXLEGE MUST GO FURTHER THAN Huffines' Transportation Bill

"Neither do they put new wine into old vessels: for then the vessels would break, and the wine would be spilt, and the vessels would perish: but they put new wine into new vessels, and so are both preserved."
Matthew 9:17

Here we go again:

The Austin City Council early Friday morning gave its regulators a hammer to brandish on electric rental scooters and dockless bikes. What remains to be seen is when the city will use it.

The council, on a unanimous vote, approved an ordinance tweaking several sections of existing city law to make it clear that leaving scooters or bikes on city right of way for rental is illegal in Austin, absent that person or company applying for and receiving a city license to do so. The new ordinance also clarifies that the city may impound such vehicles found in violation of city rules, redeemable by the owners at the cost of $200 for each scooter or bike.

Robert Spillar, director of the Austin Transportation Department, said after the meeting that his office, after sending warning letters to the two companies now operating scooters on the streets — Bird Rides and LimeBike — would begin impounding scooters for the companies operating without a license.

The ordinance says that no person — including customers, not merely representatives of the scooter or bike companies — may “place, store, or park, or allow another person to place, store, or park, a vehicle, machinery, or other item on a street, alley or sidewalk” for the purpose of selling, renting or leasing the item.

Predictably followed by:

AUSTIN -- Two motorized scooter companies have pulled their fleets from the streets of Austin after the city council adopted an emergency ordinance.

Both LimeBike and Bird came under fire after bringing their business to Austin without permits from the City. In fact, a Thursday night council meeting lasted until 3 a.m. Friday in part due to debate over the controversial scooter companies, which allow users to register the scooters for use via smart phone and then leave them in sidewalks or streets for the next user once they are done.

Annnnnd sigh....we've seen this movie before.

Dan Keshet details the potential stakes:

new technology has the potential to change cities in extraordinary ways: dockless scooters as well as their kin, dockless and docked bikes, hoverboards, e-bikes (personal or shared), etc. The post will focus exclusively on dockless scooters, but many of the observations and almost all of the recommendations apply to their cousins.

Why do I see so much potential in these little devices? In part, it’s because dockless bikes have already claimed a huge share of transportation users in places they’ve been deployed at scale, despite only having been around a couple years and despite having some challenges scooters don’t have.

Keshet goes on to discuss various economic and technical reasons why he sees so much potential in various dockless technologies.  You really should read the whole thing.  The short version is that it's a potentially very low cost was for significant numbers of people to get where they're going without adding to traffic.

There's a lot we could say about this topic, but we'll leave it at this: We told the Texas Senate so (sorta, but even we didn't fully understand where technology was headed).

Last year, as the Texas Legislature was cleaning up the Austin (and other cities) City Council's Uber debacle, the Texas Senate heard several bills related to municipal ground transportation regulations.  Most of the bills were limited to TNC-style "ridesharing" services (eg. Uber/Lyft).  But Senator Don Huffines had SB 113, which would have forbidden municipal regulation of passenger transportation services provided through traditional automobiles.

We testified in favor of Senator Huffines' bill specifically because it was the only one we thought could anticipate the next municipal ground transportation debacle.  But even that bill was only limited in scope to services provided though traditional automobiles.  At the time (which was barely over a year ago) dockless scooters et. al. weren't even something we'd imagined.

And that's a textbook example of why we need a permissionless standard when it comes to new technology.

Bottom Line: The cheapest and easiest solution for traffic congestion is to allow new technologies to meet consumer demand.  Unfortunately, the municipal governments want "their" cut.  Thus the legislature really should step in and put an end to these shakedowns once and for all.

How can we, REALISTICALLY, eliminate property taxes?!?

"But the former governors who were before me laid burdens on the people, and took from them bread and wine, besides forty shekels of silver. Yes, even their servants bore rule over the people, but I did not do so, because of the fear of God."
Nehemiah 5:15

Final TPPF Policy Orientation panel of the afternoon: "Should Texas Eliminate Property Taxes?!?"; it's not easy, but it's worth doing.

The most important takeaways is that, for eliminating property taxes to become viable, you need binding restraints on local spending...FIRST.  That's because bonds currently issued by local governments are obligations against property tax revenues.  Thus, you need to bind future spending and debt before you can wind down current obligations.

Furthermore, if you don't curtail spending at the local level, you're likely to (realistically speaking) end up in a situation where property taxes survive but we have higher state sales taxes as well.

Otherwise, some notes:

• Property taxes are a really inefficient mechanism for government to raise money.

• Businesses pay half of property taxes.

• Property tax elimination raises complicated legal questions re: debt obligations of local governments.
• Note: This is probably a surmountable obstacles, but it's potentially fraught with unintended consequences.

• Swapping school district M&O taxes for sales taxes is the most realistic achievable step in the short to medium term.

• Taxing "professional services" could help modernize the sales tax system...but good luck getting the legislature to raise taxes on lawyers.

• Nobody discussed our previous questions about online sales.

Bottom Line: It can be done, but it needs to be done carefully, and nobody should underestimate the potential for unintended consequences.

Where does Texas' sharing economy go from here?!? (Also: #TROXROX)

"And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; or else the new wine bursts the wineskins, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But new wine must be put into new wineskins.”
Mark 2:22

This afternoon, TPPF held a policy orientation panel entitled "Where does Texas' sharing economy go from here?!?"  #atxcouncil member Ellen Troxclair was joined by Senator Don Huffines and representatives from HomeAway and Uber.  The panel touched on past unpleasantness before examining the future for Short term rentals and transportation.

Senator Huffines opened with a discussion of economic liberty, explaining "I believe in the free market."  Senator Huffines decried incumbent industries "legislating away their competition" and pointed out that taxi companies did so "decades ago." Councilmember Troxclair echoed the point and reminded that the legacy taxi industry showed no interest in reducing their own regulatory burden during the discussion in Austin two years ago.  The Uber representative stated that, while their primary goal was regulatory certainty for their business, they'd love to takes a "deregulate the taxis" approach but that the taxi companies were the ones who wouldn't come to the table.

On short-term rentals, the HomeAway rep was optimistic about their chances to pass a bill next session.  Because other cities beyond Austin have begun to abuse their authority, she believed legislators who hadn't previously given the issue much thought were coming around.  She also pointed to Florida and Arizona as states with the best short-term rental laws.  For our part, we pointed out during Q&A that the only reason this bill failed last session was because it was referred (and ultimately killed) to a house committee with a Democrat committee chair who had been a previous president of the Texas Municipal League.

Council member Troxclair called Austin's current STR regulations "completely ineffective."  She pointed out that four properties were responsible for an inordinate amount of the complaints under the old rules.  She also explained that STR regulations weren't actually eliminating short term rentals, but simply driving them underground (which means that the spend-a-holic city government loses a source of revenue).

Other obvserstations:

• Uber "very concerned" about potential sick leave mandate from the City of Austin.

• Uber hoping to deploy early stage aerial vehicles in DFW in 2023; will require significant interface with the FAA.

• Last session, lege passed a bill to pre-empt municipal regulations on autonomous vehicles.

• 96% of auto collisions are driver related; autonomous vehicles eliminate almost all of them.
• Note: This is why autonomous vehicles are way, way, way safer than traditional automobiles.

• Uber began to investigate using their platform for search and rescue purposes after Hurricane Harvey.

• Short Term rentals typically have longer stays, and more repeat business, than traditional hotels; this frequently makes STR guests more respectful of the surrounding neighborhoods than comparable hotel guests.

Bottom Line: For as much as it fell short, last session's Uber bill was nevertheless an important signal to the marketplace.  More work remains to be done, but Texas is already an attractive place to do business.  If we can preempt future municipal debacle like the 2016 era unpleasantness in Austin, some really exciting things are going to happen (especially in transportation) over the next few years.

#TXLEGE: Phillip Huffines and Angela Paxton are BOTH solid conservatives (and their supporters need to stop acting like Children)

"Folly is set in great dignity,
While the rich sit in a lowly place."
Ecclesiastes 10:6

Sometimes, it pays to stay out of a race.

With the release of campaign finance reports, a juvenile slap fight has broken out between supporters of Phillip Huffines and supporters of Angela Paxton over obscure campaign contributions; neither of the contributions in question should remotely concern anyone.

First, Angela Paxton: On her most recent campaign finance report, Angela Paxton reported $17,500 in contributions from liberal Republican former state senator John Carona.  That seems bad, until you remember that DON Huffines beat Carona four years ago.  Clearly, Carona is still miffed over his loss to Don Huffines, and is using Angela Paxton as a mechanism to get back at the Huffines family.

[Note: It's also worth pointing out that Carona served in the Senate with KEN Paxton; Senate collegiality being what it is, it's also not surprising to see a former Senator donating to the wife of a former Senator with whom he served.]

As for Phillip Huffines: In 2006, he made two donations, totaling $1500, to Dallas Democrat Helen Giddings.  This against the backdrop of two decades as a political donor that have seen him give hundreds of thousands to explicitly conservative causes.  We assume Huffines had a business interest in Giddings' district and, well, it's a little hard to stomach watching people belatedly complain about Republican candidates making donations to Democrats to protect their business interests when nobody seemed to have a problem with this guy doing it.

For those who are interested, they can check out all of Philip Huffines' campaign contributions since 2000 below:

Phillip Huffines campaign contribution history by Cahnman on Scribd

Bottom Line: No matter what happens, Senate District 8 is going to be represented by someone with whom the average Conservative Texan agrees at least 98% of the time.  Neither of the respective political donations about which we've learned changes that fact. People need perspective.

What the [REDACTED] is DON Huffines thinking?!?

"Now those who are such we command and exhort through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work in quietness and eat their own bread."
2 Thessalonians 3:12

By now, we assume you've seen this monstrosity; to say that it drips with entitlement would be the understatement of the year:



[Note: We're not going to provide a summary of highlights for this video, it's just too weird.]

Most of the commentary we've seen regarding this video surrounds the open seat race between Phillip Huffines and Angela Paxton.  Suffice to say, this only helps Angela.  That being said, we are confident that whoever represents SD-8 next session will be someone with whom this website agrees over 90% of the time.

But, let's pause, and consider SD-16.

In 2014, Don Huffines beat an incumbent psuedo-Republican in the primary...by 635 votes.  While Huffines has been a good Senator, and light years better than his predecessor, there are still lots of people gunning for him.  Good grief, Dan Branch lives in that district....

Then consider this: In 2016, HILLARY CLINTON WON SD-16; does anyone think the Democrats aren't salivating after watching this video.

SD-16 district ain't a slam dunk.  Holding it through both the primary and the general will be very challenging.  The palpable sense of entitlement this video conveys is kryptonite for that effort.

Bottom Line: However you feel about the open seat race in SD-8, DON Huffines needs to be re-elected in SD-16; this video does not help that effort.

#TXLEGE: Wrapping up our testimonies from the 85th Regular Session....

"And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
John 8:32

[Note: A very big, public, THANK YOU to Buddy Kipp of Empower Texans for pulling the video from the legislature's website.]

We've finally gotten our legislative testimonies from the regular session online; presented in chronological order.

• 1/26/2017 -- UT Regent confirmation hearing (Original post 1, 2)
  
  

• 3/14/2017 -- SB 113: "Relating to the provision of and local regulation of certain for-hire passenger transportation." [Note: This was Don Huffines version of the Uber bill that would have completely deregulated ALL ground transportation.] (Original Post)
  
  

• 3/14/2017 -- SB 451: "Relating to regulation of short-term rentals and short-term rental marketplaces by municipalities and counties."
  
  

• 3/23/2017 -- SB 19: "Relating to performance-based tuition limitations for and a temporary limitation on the amount of tuition and fees charged by certain public institutions of higher education. (Original Post)
  
  

• 3/27/2017 -- SB 445: "Relating to the authorization and reporting of expenditures for lobbying activities by certain political subdivisions and other public entities." (Original Post)
  
  

• 4/4/2017 -- SB 650: "Relating to tax increment financing." (Original Post)
  
  

• 4/11/2017 -- HB 3418: "Relating to municipal zoning affecting places or areas of historical, cultural, or architectural importance and significance." (Original Post)
  
  

• 4/18/2017 -- HB 2551: "Relating to regulation of short-term rentals by municipalities and counties." (Original Post)
  
  

• 4/26/2017 -- SB 1151: "Relating to the protection of expressive activities at public institutions of higher education." (Original Post)
  
  

• 5/11/2017 -- HB 100: "Relating to the regulation of transportation network companies; requiring an occupational permit; authorizing a fee." (Original Post)
  
  

• 5/11/2017 -- CSHB 21: "Relating to the funding of primary and secondary education." (Original Post)
  
  

• 5/15/2017 -- HB 17: "Relating to the establishment of the Texas Higher Education Innovation Accelerator for public institutions of higher education." (Original Post)
  
  

• 5/17/2017 -- SB 822: "Relating to the transfer of certain property from The University of Texas System to the Parks and Wildlife Department." (Original Post)
  
  

• 5/17/2017 -- SB 19: "Relating to performance-based tuition limitations for and a temporary limitation on the amount of tuition and fees charged by certain public institutions of higher education." (Original Post)
  
  

#TXLEGE: Uninspiring Uber bill slogs through Senate....

"The Lord has made all for Himself,
Yes, even the wicked for the day of doom."
Proverbs 16:4

[Note: The hearing can be viewed here.  The section on HB 100 begins just after the one hour mark.  Our testimony is at the 1:28 mark]

The saga of the Uber bill continued into the Senate State affairs committee this morning, where Sen. Schwertner introduced yet another committee substitute...which means conference committee.  To be honest, this bill becomes less appealing with each new iteration.  But, nevertheless, it remains superior to the status quo and we continue to support getting this bill to the Governor.

A good metaphor for the trajectory of this bill is that TPPF switched their testimony from "for" the bill to "on."  TPPF outlined issues with the licensing and fee aspects of the bill that represent a potential barrier to entry for new competitors.  We echo TPPF's concerns and were very close to changing our own testimony...

...when the City of Austin invented yet another objection out of thin air.  Now, they claim to be worried that the bill will threaten "data privacy."  Please.  This is nothing more than an attempt to shift the goalposts.  Likewise, the taxpayer funded lobbyists at the Texas Municipal league said something about "airports."  And therein lies the rub: we need to get this issue out of the hands of disingenuous local officials and their taxpayer funded lobbyists.  We can address the flaws in a future session.

One woman objected to the bill based on the experience of a friend who had been raped by an illegal alien Uber driver in Boston; we addressed her concerns in our testimony.

As stated above, we testified that we shared TPPF's concerns with the bill.  There's a reason why Senator Huffines total dereg. bill was the only one on which we'd testified in favor back in March.  This bill still includes too many regulations, and too many mandates, but nevertheless the state legislation continues to have fewer regulations and mandates than the various local ordinances.  Seeing the City of Austin once again shift their goalposts solidified our position.  But understand that, as technology continues to evolve, we are going to have to revisit this issue in future sessions.

As to the woman who was worried about TNC drivers who have been previously deported: We pointed out that, from the Texas Senate's perspective, SB 4 renders the issue moot.

Bottom Line: This bill sucks. But the status quo sucks even more. Just get this bill to the Governor.

-----

#TXLEGE: House Uber Bill > Status Quo

"The Lord has made all for Himself,
Yes, even the wicked for the day of doom."
Proverbs 16:4

LoneStarVoice peruses the Uber bill set to be voted on in the House tomorrow and finds it lacking:

• Bans cash transactions. Presumably, the state is interested in keeping records of all transactions for taxation purposes.

• Bans large vans and sports cars. All vehicles must have four doors, and a seat capacity of no more than eight.

• Mandates government-run background checks. Rather than allowing the company to run checks on its employees like most companies in America, this bill mandates each employee be submitted to local, state, and federal background checks. Interestingly, some of the same Republicans who oppose universal background checks on gun sales over privacy concerns are supporting this bill.

• Interferes with internal disciplinary measures. If a driver is even accused of driving while intoxicated, the bill mandates that he or she be locked out of the system until an investigation has been completed. But additionally, it requires the investigation records be kept on file for two years after the incident.

• Requires dangerous pick-ups. The bill requires drivers to pick up anyone soliciting a ride, regardless of what part of town they are in. If a driver has reason to avoid certain areas, he or she will have the choice to go there or face a penalty.

• Requires companies to direct riders to competitors. If a rider is physically disabled, and the ride-share company cannot provide a wheelchair accessible vehicle, under this bill, they will be required to find another company that can, and direct the rider to that business.

In addition to the criticisms listed above, LSV also raises concerns about a $5000 fee TNC's will have to pay to the state.  In the abstract, we agree with these criticisms.  There's a reason why SB 113 (Huffines) is the only bill on which we testified in favor.

But we don't live in the abstract...and we see nothing in the bill that's a dealbreaker.

It's the difference between obnoxious regulation (bad but not disqualifying) and something truly awful and unworkable (eg. the Austin ordinance).

Specifically, consider the background check provision:

(2)  conduct, or cause to be conducted, a local, state,
	and national criminal background check for the individual that
	includes the use of:
	(A)  a commercial multistate and
	multijurisdiction criminal records locator or other similar
	commercial nationwide database; and
	(B)  the national sex offender registry database
	maintained by the United States Department of Justice or a
	successor agency; and
	(3)  obtain and review the individual's driving record.

As a point of comparison, we would excerpt the similar provision from the Austin ordinance, but it's three pages.  You can read it for yourself here.  We might not be crazy about either, but there's a significant difference between using one paragraph to set a broad requirement with wide leeway for how to fulfill it compared to three pages micromanaging the entire process.

The fact that the House bill is 3.5 pages, compared to 12 pages for the Austin ordinance, is revealing.

And that's before you consider that TNC trips often cross jurisdictional boundaries, so that standardization is beneficial in and of itself.

It's not a secret that the Texas legislature's commitment to free enterprise is...conditional at best.  It would be nice if that weren't the case, but it is.  Given the underlying reality of who controls the legislature, we fail to see how HB 100 is anything other than a significant step in the right direction.

In terms of letter grades, we'd give the House bill a "C."  While we'd give the Huffines bill an "A," we'd also give these local ordinances an "F."  In a choice between living in a "C" reality or living in an "F" reality, we'll choose the "C" reality.

Bottom Line:  This isn't the bill we would have written, but we see nothing disqualifying.

Thoughts on (#TROXROX) Local Government Accountability Day (#TROXROX) in the Texas Senate (#TROXROX)

"Through wisdom a house is built,
And by understanding it is established;"
Proverbs 24:3

We've been in a holding pattern for several hours as the Senate debates the privacy act; this seems like as good a time as any to post our thoughts on this hearings this morning about property taxes, ridesharing, and short-term rentals in the Texas Senate:

[Author's Note: Points about property taxes will be listed in blue; points about Ridesharing and STR's will be listed in green.]

• We've never seen a day when this many issues related to local government accountability were heard in a day; this is new.

• In terms of obvious storms on the macroeconomic horizion, the property tax system in Texas (alongside local government debt) is the equivalent of the national debt in term of predictable problems on the short to medium term horizon.  Texans currently pay the highest property taxes of any state without an income tax.  This is a high priority mess that needs to be addressed before it bites us in the backside.

• On the TNC issue, Don Huffines' bill (SB 113) is the only bill up today that will pre-empt the next round of regulatory challenges related to ground transportation and new technology.  That's why we testified in favor of it.  Nevertheless, we can count votes and Charles Schwertner's bill represents a significant step forward from the status quo.

• Additionally, the property tax system as it currently exists is the mother's milk that feeds all sorts of other corruption in the legislature.

• As we have previously discussed; Senator Bettencourt confessed to several good reasons why SB 2 (the property tax relief bill) doesn't go nearly far enough.  Under questioning from other Senators, he repeatedly admitted that the bill does not amount to a revenue cap, and he also admits local jurisdictions will still be able to raise taxes close to 10% without an election.  Nevertheless, this is a significant step in the right direction and see our previous comment about counting votes.

• Bettencourt's bill would rename the effective tax rate the "no new taxes" rate; this can only simplify things for the average taxpayer.

• Bettencourt -- Taxpayers in Harris county often pay 10 taxing jurisdictions at a time.

• Bettencourt too frequently talks in policy wonk language and goes over people's heads.

• Actually, Bettencourt straight up talks too much.

• Paul Bettencourt: We love you, and we agree with you, but shut up.

• Ann Kitchen plugs "new" Austin TNC's while ignoring last Saturday's meltdown.

• #TROXROX -- Texas less desirable place to invest because of Austin Ridesharing debacle.
• "Local control is only valuable as a tool to protect individual liberty."
• Mentions what happened Saturday.

• Schwertner: Restricting mobility options is just wrong.

• Kelly Hancock goes full trial lawyer on Ann Kitchen.

• Committee took the black market that emerged in Austin after council kicked out Uber and Lyft to the cleaners.

• Samsung's largest physical plant in the world is located in NE Austin.
• Even with the incentives they receive, Texas' property tax system still isn't competitive.
• Note: That's quite a remarkable statement coming from a big business.
• Whitmire goes full Elizabeth Warren.

• #TROXROX -- Rates should go down as appraisals go up.
• Austin had an additional $50 million to spend last year even at "no new taxes" rate.
• Austin budgets have consistently grown 7 to 10% even without counting 'exemptions.'
• SB 2: "A critical tool that must be adopted."
• First thing to cut would be new vehicles every three years.
• Voted against bailing out library.
• Kel Seliger tried to throw her under the bus and she threw it back.
• No reason you can't hold cities and counties accountable alongside school districts.

• #TROXROX: Several activists from outside the local area who'd never seen Ellen Troxclair in action before spoke positively about the degree to which she refuses to take crap (especially re: the exchange with Seliger).

• They laid out but have yet to take testimony on the short term rental bill, but the short version is as follows: the degree to which the Austin anti-STR ordinance creates new police powers out of thin air is creepy.

Bottom Line: We'll include links to testimony and deeper thoughts at a later time, but the short version is that after decades of atrophy the Texas Senate is beginning to rehab their constitutional muscles as it relates to local government accountability.

-----

About Texas Constitutional Carry...and the NRA: An open letter to Dana Loesch

"Every one of the builders had his sword girded at his side as he built. And the one who sounded the trumpet was beside me.
Nehemiah 4:18

Dana,

First things first, as I was sitting down to write this post literally before I logged into blogger, I saw that New Hampshire passed Constitutional Carry this morning; good for them!!!

But congrats on the new NRA gig.

Let's talk business: The reason I'm writing today is because we both support constitutional carry in Texas; but, absent significant public pressure, it ain't gonna happen.

To complicate matters, the NRA's Texas affiliate has historically been absent on constitutional carry; as Cary Cheshire reported in January:

In a memo to members informing them of what to expect from the Texas Legislature, the Texas State Rifle Association omitted the top legislative priority of the state’s Republican Party and what is likely to be the most contentious gun-related issue of the session: constitutional carry.

Voted as the number one priority of the Republican Party of Texas by delegates at the 2016 GOP Convention in Dallas, “constitutional carry” refers to removing the licensing requirement for Texans to carry a handgun.

Though conservative State Rep. Jonathan Stickland (R–Beford) pre-filed the legislation in November, thus far the Texas GOP has been glaringly silent with Chairman Tom Mechler refusing to endorse the measure publicly or respond to repeated requests for comment.

The TSRA, which claims on its website to support “the fewest restrictions for law-abiding Texas gun owners,” doesn’t mention the legislation at all in a recent letter to members.

In fairness to TSRA, they got on board following Cary's post.   But they've always been re-active instead of proactive.  And that's a charitable interpretation.

But, given that we're nearly a third of the way through the current legislative session, let's leave the past in the past.

Where do things stand now?!?

HB 375 by Jonathan Stickland is the only credible constitutional carry bill to have been filed in either chamber.  While a second toothless House bill was filed last week, that bill is a distraction designed to create the appearance of second amendment activity without meaningful accomplishment.  In the Senate, they have until March 10 to file a companion bill (Don Huffines carried it last session).

So, absent a Senate bill getting filed in the next two weeks, HB 375 is the only path forward.

HB 375 was recently referred to the Homeland Security committee, chaired by Phil King; right now, the bill needs a hearing.

Rep. Phil King: (512) 463-0738

What can we use from the NRA?!?

Thousands of phone calls.

If the NRA did an e-mail blast to their Texas members, that would generate more than enough pressure to get the bill moving; if they did the same thing at every other stage of the process (four stages total), there's a decent chance it passes.

But, absent the sort of numbers only the NRA can bring, it ain't gonna happen.

And, considering your new gig, you're now in a position to help make that happen.

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,
Cahnman
ATX
February 22, 2017

Texas Senate holds Educational Freedom press conference

"Take firm hold of instruction, do not let go;
Keep her, for she is your life."
Proverbs 4:13

[Author's Note: You can view the press conference in it's entirety here.]

Senator Larry Taylor filed SB 3 this morning.  The bill gives parents greater control over funds the socialized education bureaucracy was going to spend no matter what.  We took notes and will refer readers to the linked video above if they want to view the conference in it's entirety.

• Senator Larry Taylor:
• Parents will receive between 60% and 90% of what the state spends per student on a sliding scale based on income.
• Competition from Education Savings Accounts will force the socialized education bureaucracy "to up their game."
• Result of the bill will be more funding per student for school districts.
• 30 other states already have school choice programs.
• Author's Note: And they tend to be wildly popular even in liberal states.
• The worst school districts are the ones that will fight parental choice the hardest.

• Lt. Governor Patrick:
• People are surprised when they learn approximately half the state budget goes to education.
• House needs to give the bill a vote and let the chips fall where they may.
• OVERWHELMING Majority of home-school families support this legislation; while the concerns of those with objections are valid, ultimately we're talking about a voluntary program in which they don't have to participate.
• Author's Note: It's also worth pointing out that homeschoolers are already subject to testing (the SAT's) if they want to attend any college within the system.

• Senator Don Huffines:
• Competition lowers prices and increases quality.

• (Parent) Melissa Bofinger:
• Her local ISD does a good job educating her daughter, but doesn't meet the needs of her autistic son.
• Author's Note: We know Melissa personally, so we know the ISD in question and we'll just leave it at this...if her relatively affluent ISD can't accommodate her son with special needs, imagine what it means in less wealthy parts of the state.

After the press conference, the Lt. Governor released this additional statement:

TPPF released the following statement:

TPPF Statement on Education Savings Account Legislation AUSTIN –Texas Public Policy Foundation President & CEO Brooke Rollins, Executive Vice President Dr. Kevin Roberts, TPPF’s Center for Education Freedom Senior Policy Advisor Stephanie Matthews, and Senior Visiting Fellow Peggy Venable issued the following statements today on legislation that would establish education savings accounts in Texas. The bill, Senate Bill 3, was announced today by Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and introduced by Texas Senator Larry Taylor, Chairman of the Texas Senate Committee on Education.           “Twenty-eight years ago, this Foundation was established with one goal in mind: to achieve education freedom for all Texas students and families” TPPF President and CEO Brooke Rollins said. “The legislation announced by the Lieutenant Governor means this dream may finally become a reality in this legislative session.”           “Education freedom is a top priority for the Foundation, and more importantly, for the future of Texas,” said TPPF Executive Vice President Dr. Kevin Roberts. “Parents deserve the right to choose the best education for their children. This legislation, if the 85th Legislature enacts it, will ensure that every Texas child is given the opportunity to succeed.”           “With over 60 school choice programs operating in 30 states, plus Washington, D.C., Texas is long overdue to expand educational options for desperate families,” said Senior Policy Advisor Stephanie Matthews, of TPPF’s Center for Education Freedom. “We are grateful for the strong leadership and support from the Lt. Governor, and believe this will be the Session to finally pass Education Savings Accounts.”           “Far too many Texas children are assigned to failing schools by virtue of their zip code. Senate Bill 3 embodies the Texas spirit of individual freedom and opportunity,” said Senior Visiting Fellow Peggy Venable. “This important legislation empowers parents to direct their children’s education and provides opportunity for all Texas students to succeed.” The Texas Public Policy Foundation’s work on Education Savings Accounts is available here: http://txpo.li/EduFreedom