They Can't Help Themselves

"For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money,"
Titus 1:7

A couple days ago, the chair of the Bexar county GOP made some Looney Tunes statements about the George Floyd murder.  This was followed shortly thereafter by the discovery that other county chairs had made similar comments.  This was a genuine problem that needs to be addressed.

Indeed, we intended to address that problem today.

Then we saw this:

New: We've found seven more Texas GOP county chairs who have shared anti-Semitic conspiracy theories or racist posts on Facebook. #txlege https://t.co/uIYFn2WIZB

— Texas Tribune (@TexasTribune) June 6, 2020

Looks bad, doesn't it?!?

It does...until you read the article.

 

As it turns out, most of these new allegedly "racist" social media posts are speculating about George Soros' involvement in recent events.  A couple reference 1992's Reginald Denny tragedy.  These posts may or may not be accurate, but they're pretty specious grounds to lobby an accusation of "racism."

Which is a shame, because the original impetus for this story is problematic (highly so).

But nobody's gonna listen anymore.

Bottom Line:  Diluting the point undermines what was originally a valid inquiry.

George P. Bush cries "Rasicm" to misdirect from Dunderheaded Mismanagement of Alamo

"Good and upright is the Lord;
Therefore He teaches sinners in the way."
Psalm 25:8

What a dork:

THREAD: One must ask themselves, why am I being accused of honoring the murderous dictator Santa Anna? Is it because my mother (now a naturalized citizen) is from Mexico? I was born in Houston, my wife is from San Angelo, and my boys were born-you guessed it- here in Texas. (1/3) pic.twitter.com/Tjn7Ek2jjB

— George P. Bush (@georgepbush) December 11, 2019

The idea that I would EVER place a statue of Santa Anna at the Alamo is patently false. Enough is enough. This is an outright lie, and is quite frankly, flat out racist. (3/3)

— George P. Bush (@georgepbush) December 11, 2019

YCT Chairman Saurabh Sharma then addressed P.:

I’m not a native Texan but I love this state. The specific story you’re citing is fake news & should discredit anyone spreading it.

But let’s not pretend it hasn’t been your failure to competently restore the Alamo that has led to the opposition to you. It’s not racism. #txlege https://t.co/L5aJnNgbrx

— Saurabh Sharma (@ssharmaTX) December 12, 2019

To which J.R. Hernandez (remember him) replied:

Now this is a take.

In which @YCT chairman justifies the spread of lies with racist undertones claiming its George P. Bush’s own fault for not “competently restoring Alamo.” https://t.co/Z1V5yWVE8Y

— J.R. (@JRHDZV) December 12, 2019

Saurabh again:

Do you know how to read or does your lucrative taxpayer-funded salary not require that?

I explicitly said that the story is fake & discredits anyone spreading it.

But any effort to paint all opposition to Commissioner Bush as racism is a lie designed to avoid true criticism. https://t.co/gHsl02sPi2

— Saurabh Sharma (@ssharmaTX) December 12, 2019

For those who don’t know JR is Commissioner Bush’s in-house campaign flack whose job it is to plant the asinine “George P. For Lieutenant Governor” boomlet we see every few months. @cahnman did the digging on this last time.https://t.co/GIt2khHRKn

— Saurabh Sharma (@ssharmaTX) December 12, 2019

Thank you Saurabh.

Now, look: George P. Bush probably isn't some globalist with a secret agenda to erase history. George P. Bush isn't that smart.  But George P. Bush can still grease the skids for a shady "redevelopment" deal even if he's not receiving direct orders from the Trilateral commission.

For several years, George P. Bush has been talking out of both sides of his mouth about the Alamo.  Given his own behavior, it's not surprising that a rumor took hold.  Watch for yourself and decide whether or not you trust him:



Bottom Line: If George P. Bush wants to know why people are angry at him over the Alamo, he should look in the mirror, rather than grasping at this pathetic straw(man argument).

#TXLEGE: Latest Crisis Subsides, Toxic Culture Remains

"Whoever has no rule over his own spirit
Is like a city broken down, without walls."
Proverbs 25:28

Sigh:

State Rep. Rick Miller, R-Sugar Land, is no longer running for reelection after he sparked a firestorm for saying he was facing primary challengers because they are Asian.

“During a recent interview with the Houston Chronicle I made some statements that were insensitive and inexcusable,” Miller said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “In trying to make a point about the campaign I used a poor choice of words that are not indicative of my character or heart.

“I do not want to be a distraction for my party or my constituents, and therefore I have decided not to seek re-election,” he continued.

Obviously, this was the least bad solution.  Had Miller not withdrawn from the race, this would have become a slow drip.  So one cheer.

We guess.

But does anyone feel good about this?!?

 After Bonnen left, we wrote:

[I]s anyone confident a new scandal won't soon emerge?!?

Cuz' we ain't.

Barely six weeks later...another frickin' scandal!!!

We've seen this movie:


From October:

This specific scandal is the completely predictable result of the toxic culture in the Texas capitol that has prevailed for a long time.

The GOP, meanwhile, has been running the place for a quarter century.

This is the same Republican majority that:

• Five years ago, was running college admissions scandals before it was cool.
• With all due respect to Aunt Becky, she ain't got nothin' on Jim Pitts.

• Two years ago, put a man who had been in a sexual relationship with a lobbyist for over a decade in charge of writing its sexual harassment policy.

• Just elected as vice chair a guy who was taking $56,000 a month from an entity under the jurisdiction of the committee he chaired.

The pattern is obvious...to anyone not under the influence of afore mentioned Egyptian rivers.

It can't be defended, and it shouldn't.

Yet, here we are.  Again.  Rick Miller, Dennis Bonnen, and Jim Pitts might be gone.  But Charlie Geren and Jim Murphy are still there.

Is anyone confident about that?!?

Cuz' we (still) ain't.

Bottom Line: Over/under six weeks before the next self-inflicted scandal?!?

#TXLEGE: SCOTUS ruling means only be 5 or 6 redistricting lawsuits after 2020 (not 15 or 20)

"Do not remove the ancient landmark
Which your fathers have set."
Proverbs 22:28

Reasonably decent news:

The Supreme Court’s conservatives decided Thursday that federal courts do not have a role to play in deciding whether partisan gerrymandering goes too far.

The 5-to-4 decision was written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who was joined by the court’s other conservatives.

“We conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts,” Roberts wrote. “Federal judges have no license to reallocate political power between the two major political parties, with no plausible grant of authority in the Constitution, and no legal standards to limit and direct their decisions.”

All things considered, this is probably a good thing.

Obviously, the Democrats will file their usual lawsuits claiming the map is "racist."  But, had SCOTUS ruled differently, Democrats would have had grounds to sue in every close district.  That would have been a nightmare from which we would have never emerged.

Bottom Line: The status quo might not be great, but it's a heckuva lot better than would could have happened today.

#TXLEGE: Sham Bill Nevertheless Accomplishes Political Purposes

"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
Matthew 18:6

[Note: Van Halen's "Runnin' with the Devil" literally came on in the background as we sat down to write this blog post.]

Fascinating write up in the Texas Observer over last week's passage of the 'born-alive' act:

As the Texas House voted on the first anti-abortion bill to make it to the floor this session, advocates rolled down a banner above the board displaying lawmakers’ votes: “STOP TURNING LIES INTO LAWS.”

The House gave initial passage to the bill, titled the “Texas Born-Alive Infant Protection Act,” after a brief but tense floor debate Tuesday evening, and gave it a final stamp of approval on Wednesday. The measure, House Bill 16, is Texas’ version of a national proposal that failed in the U.S. Senate earlier this year. HB 16 would penalize doctors who don’t give full medical treatment to babies born alive after abortion. Practically speaking, the bill does very little: There have been zero cases reported by the state since it started tracking them in 2013. Even if it did occur, federal law already requires infants born alive at any stage in development be given equal protection. But abortion-rights advocates say the measure is dangerous political propaganda that aims to paint abortions later in pregnancy as extreme and target the doctors who provide them.

[Note: Emphasis added.]

Money quote from Donna Howard:

“We refuse to waste the limited time we have here to take care of the people’s business by entertaining malicious and purely political attacks against women and doctors,” Howard said. “We refuse to ignore the expertise of medical professionals and allow them to be targeted and harassed. We refuse to use the power entrusted in us by our constituents and the voters of Texas for political theater, or to be party to turning lies into law.”

Here's the thing: Donna Howard is correct.  This 'born-alive' bill is political theater.  But (like all Democrats) she misunderstands the intended target of the theatrics.  In her misunderstanding, she led Democrats right into the trap.

Allow this guy to explain:

The Democrats' refusal to support children born alive will haunt them in the upcoming elections. Republicans are on the right side of life. There's only a tiny constituency who favors killing kids born alive. #txlege https://t.co/sBUtJQnFOS

— Greg Abbott (@GregAbbott_TX) April 21, 2019

-----

As we explained about six weeks ago:

There's nothing inherently wrong with this bill.  Obviously, babies still alive after an abortion deserve medical care.  But, notice that phrase: After an abortion.

A month ago, following Democrats' stunt at the committee hearing:

This bill doesn't stop a single abortion.  This bill only goes into effect after the baby is 100% outside the birth canal.  That's why we've been unenthusiastic about it.  But Holy Toledo Democrats....

There will be plenty of time to discuss the proper response, but it's worth taking a second to reflect on the insanity of this position: Texas Democrats want to Deny Medical Care to Infants who are 100% outside the birth canal.

Again, The Texas Observer article linked above is correct. This bill doesn't stop a single abortion.  That's not its purpose.

The purpose of the 'born-alive' bill is to find an obvious, common sense, issue with almost zero practical impact.  Then get the Democrats to vote against it.  Which most of them just did (more on that below).

------

This issue polls well with suburban women.

-------

Here's what's crazier: In a session in which 'bi-partisanship' (hashtagNewDay, hashtagTexasPlan, hashtagTheTimeisNow) is all the rage, the Democrats could have used this to neutralize abortion as a campaign issue.

Had the Democrats gone along with this farce, they could have taken a vote for political cover without stopping a single abortion.

They could have made it all about 'bi-partisanship.'  They could have spun it as being 'magnanimous.'  They could have appeared to have made a concession (without conceding anything in reality).  Heck, they probably could have traded their support for several Billion dollars of additional spending.

Instead, they took the vote they took.....

-------

Democrat State Reps elected in 2018 who voted against 'born-alive' act:

• Michelle Beckley

• Rhetta Bowers

• John Bucy

• Gina Calanni

• Art Fierro

• Vicki Goodwin

• Julie Johnson

• Ray Lopez

• Terry Meza

• Lina Ortega

• Ana-Maria Ramos

• John Rosenthal

• Carl Sherman -- Note: Apparently, this guy's a Pastor.

• James Talarico

• Erin Zweiner

Obviously, a few of those are safe seats where one Democrat took over for another.  But most of those are districts the D's picked up last fall.  Good luck defending that vote.

Furthermore, most of those Democrats are white, a point upon which we will elaborate below.

-------

Let's return to the Texas Observer article that was the original reason for this blog post:

The bill passed, 93-1-50; Republicans were joined by 12 Democrats to support it, while state Representative Harold Dutton, D-Houston cast the sole “no” vote and 50 lawmakers registered “present, not voting.”

Sssssssssay what?!?  12 Democrats voted for the 'born-alive' act?!?  While there are a handful of D's that vote for pro-life bills, 12 is really high.

Which ones?!?

[Note: Joe Moody later made a journal statement for the bill.]

The overwhelming majority of those members are Black or Hispanic; all of those members, except one, represent majority-minority districts.

That's a racial dynamic Republicans should exploit.

Especially when white Democrats are taking the votes referenced above.

-------

Bottom Line: We'd rather prevent abortions, but we'll take the campaign issue....

#TXLEGE: The stupidest possible way one could attack Dennis Bonnen

"All things are lawful for me, but not all things are helpful; all things are lawful for me, but not all things edify."
1 Corinthians 10:23

Some left-wing group in the Trib:

Since President Trump was elected, the immigrant community in Texas has been living a worsening nightmare: an emboldened Republican Texas Legislature banned sanctuary cities with Senate Bill 4, the president tried to kill Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and Temporary Protected Status for immigrants unable to safely return to their home countries and separated migrant children from their families in detention camps across the state. And now the latest blow, more than 30 Texas Democrats have signed on to support Rep. Dennis Bonnen as the next speaker of the Texas House.

This is a man who has filed bills to kill protections for immigrants and wants English-only laws, who is against in-state tuition for undocumented youth and LGBTQIA rights.

On November 6, 2018, the electorate sent a mandate. Texas Democrats who support Bonnen have lost sight of what the immigrant community and people of color who supported them need and want. Across Texas and the nation, voters made it clear — we are against Trump’s racist agenda and any politician who would support it. We need politicians who will not apologize for our existence, who will stand with our values.

Seriously?!?  Dennis Bonnen hasn't even been officially elected as speaker and you're already making specious accusations of racism?!?  Good luck with that.

Allow us to explain something we've learned over the years about Dennis Bonnen's personality.

Dennis Bonnen despises bad faith political attacks.  We've seen that play out against conservatives.  We've also seen it play out against taxpayer-funded lobbyists.  Either way, bad-faith political attacks repel Dennis Bonnen.

From a conservative perspective, this is why we're taking a wait-and-see approch with Bonnen.  If bad behavior from the speaker's office continues, there will be an appropriate time to address it.  In the meantime, it doesn't take a genius to imagine a scenario where Dennis Bonnen loses patience with being constantly attacked as a racist.  If that highly plausible scenario materializes, AND the conservative grassroots has spent the previous weeks building a productive relationship, see the previous paragraph.

One more thing: This could be an early sign that Bonnen will split the D caucus in the same way that Straus split the R caucus.

Bottom Line:  This was an unforced error that could haunt the left....

#TXLEGE, #atxcouncil: "Equity Office" DEBACLE illustrates need for municipal Revenue/Spending Caps

"The people of the land have used oppressions, committed robbery, and mistreated the poor and needy; and they wrongfully oppress the stranger."
Ezekiel 22:29

We assume you've heard:

The Equity Office is recommending the city remove or change the names of streets, parks and markers in Austin that honor the Confederate States of America and slavery.

The office also suggests eschewing the name “Austin” altogether, as Stephen F. Austin fought to defend slavery in the Texas Revolution and supported the institution after the state gained its independence from Mexico.

There's a lot we could say, but it reflects one reality: This is what happens when the government has too much money.

The name change aspect of this current controversy attracted national attention, but obscure government bureaucracies do nonsense like this all the time.  The only difference is that this specific example was easily mockable.  But this is what obscure bureaucracies do.

To purge these bureaucracies, force their parent body to set financial priorities.  We've sat through enough C of A budget discussions to know that a spending/revenue cap with teeth will kill many birds with a single stone.  That remains the case.

Furthermore, this author is old enough that we actually remember when the city created the so-called "Equity office."  That happened all the way back in an ancient era known as...2016.  Back then, the department was supposed to:

[Identify] gaps and disparities in services and programs in the city, as well as help create ways for city departments to address those needs. The position will also help community groups work with the city to ensure equal access to city programs and services.

Notice it doesn't say anything about renaming streets (or, good grief, the entire city).  So we're less than two years into the life of the so-called "Equity office" and we're already seeing mission creep.  Once again, this is what the government does when it has too much money.

There have been numerous proposals in recent years to provide greater supervision of local fiscal policy.  Some have focused on the spending side, some have focused on the tax side.  In this context, anything the legislature passes that forces municipal governments to set financial priorities is welcome.

Bottom Line:  If you want to change behavior, cut off the money.

Humphrey's comments fine so long as conservative Student-Athletes are granted similar courtesy

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord,
But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

Last week, Longhorn Wide Receiver Lil'Jordan Humphrey posted a poem to twitter that ignited some controversy:

A Lil piece of my mind pic.twitter.com/khNhvryK2f

— Lil'Jordan Humphrey (@LJ_Humphrey23) July 13, 2018

>
We're sympathetic to some of the points he makes. We disagree with others. But mostly we think he's entitled to his opinion and that it's none of our business.

Chris Del Conte expresses a similar sentiment:

"I was proud of him," Del Conte said exclusively to Horns247. "He did a class project where he was asked to write a poem about what he's going through."

....

"Music always depicts what's happening in society. Whether you're looking at the Mamas and the Papas, Jim Croce and what was going on in the seventies, the Allman Brothers, CCR, or even to NWA in the eighties when I was growing up, you always have something that's going to depict what's in society," Del Conte told Horns247. "Here's a kid writing a poem for class about what he's feeling, so I looked at it and thought, 'You know what, I'm proud of what he's talking about.' Sports always manifest things that are going on in society, and here's a kid just talking about what he feels like, and I can understand that.

"In today's society, it's polarizing. We're in a time that has not been that way in forever, we've been around for 250 years, we're founded by immigrants, we all mold together to become this great country called America, and yet today, we're more divisive than we've ever been. I felt like his poem was about what he's feeling, and you have to accept that and understand that."

Likewise Tom Herman:

“I was proud of him,” Herman said during a break-out session. “I was proud of him for expressing his feelings. I spoke to him... He wrote it and felt like he wanted to post and share it. I support him. That’s the beauty of social media.”

And that's fine.

However...this street better run both ways.

This author knows of several conservative student-athletes, across multiple sports, at the University of Texas.  If they choose to express their views. they had better receive the same treatment.  A free and open exchange of ideas means a free and open exchange of ideas.

Ultimately, everybody's goal is to win the Big XII; if we can do so in an environment of robust political dialogue, that could be a really cool model for the country.

Bottom Line: The standard has been set; we'll see where it goes from here....

Texas' Congressional Delegation doing NOTHING as Holder plots next round of redistricting lawsuits

"And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."
Matthew 10:28

While we were making this point yesterday...guess who was in Dallas doing what:

Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder met Tuesday with Latino grassroots organization leaders in North Texas to offer political and financial support for their efforts to mobilize Latino voters in the coming years.

Holder stopped in Dallas to attend a roundtable discussion and offer the backing of the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a group formed in January 2017 that raised more than $10 million during its first six months of active fundraising.

The committee's focus around the country is on breaking the Republican Party's control on how congressional district maps are drawn.

Translation: Holder's helping all of the usual suspect groups, who call every redistricting map Texas ever passes racist, raise more money than ever heading into the 2020 census.  This means more (and more ridiculous) redistricting lawsuits than ever.  That's the present trajectory.

But it's completely preventable.  Congress has jurisdiction to shut this down.  Unfortunately, the Texas Republican delegation is silent.  Likewise the candidates.

Bottom Line:  This is an obvious and predicable mess.  It's completely preventable.  Unfortunately, Texas' Republican Congressional delegation doesn't have the will to prevent it.

#atxcouncil: Casar's so-called "Freedom City" plan isn't a big deal (Republican hysteria notwithstanding)

"He who passes by and meddles in a quarrel not his own
Is like one who takes a dog by the ears."
Proverbs 26:17

Last week, while we were at convention, council passed a largely symbolic measure:

Amid the controversy over sanctuary cities, Austin this month took its fight against strict immigration law enforcement a step further by declaring itself to be the first “freedom city” in Texas. City Council members unanimously passed two resolutions last week that will restrict police attempts to question immigrants about their status and curtail arrests for nonviolent crimes.

One of the new city resolutions requires officers who question immigrants about status to also say that their questions about immigration need not be answered. The other resolution directs police to avoid arrests for misdemeanors, including those for smoking marijuana, having drug paraphernalia, and taking part in petty theft — crimes that city data shows frequently end in arrests of black and Latino residents.

....

“Poor people of color in our city are over-punished and over-incarcerated,” said Greg Casar, an Austin City Councilman who pushed for the resolutions. “If people are being arrested less, we can also prevent people from being put in the deportation pipeline.”

“We found that black and Latino residents comprised 75% of discretionary arrests for driving with licenses invalid in the city even though they are 45% of the population of the city,” Casar said. “Black residents are seven times more likely to be arrested for low-level marijuana violations despite having comparable rates of usage of marijuana to white residents.”

Casar said the new rules could prevent up to 1,000 low-level arrests each year. Austin police arrest around 30,000 people a year.

The new policy has two parts: An immigration component and a marijuana component.

-------

On immigration: The new policy stays well within the legal constraints of SB 4.  All the policy requires is that, if an APD officer wants to pursue a line of questioning related to federal immigration issues, the officer has to inform the suspect that the suspect has the right to remain silent.  That's it.

Guess what?!?  Under the 1966 U.S. Supreme Court ruling Miranda v. Arizona, EVERY.  SINGLE.  PERSON. arrested in the United States is already informed of their right to remain silent.  All the City of Austin's new policy states is that, if an APD officer wants to pursue immigration related questioning, the suspect must be "Miranadized" twice.

That's it.

[Confession: As someone who locks wits with Greg Casar on a fairly regular basis, we're impressed with how he's trolling the intent SB 4 while staying well within SB 4's letter.]

-------

On marijuana: The new policy does nothing but discourage arrests for low level possession offenses (aka. decriminalization).

Well...guess who just endorsed marijuana decriminalization?!?

From the 2018 Platform of the Republican Party of Texas, Plank 107:

Civil Penalty: We support a change in the law to make it a civil, and not a criminal, offense for legal adults only to possess one ounce or less of marijuana for personal use, punishable by a fine of up to $100, but without jail time.

Soo...the City of Austin just adopted a policy that's consistent with the platform the Republican Party of Texas adopted last week.

-------

Nevertheless, hysteria:



You're joking, right?!?

The city's new policy may or may not be wise, but the notion that it's a threat to public safety is silly.

Austin Texas is one of the safest cities in the country.  Despite having the fifth largest population in Texas, we're #17 in crime.  The notion that "double-mirandizing" immigration suspects and de-prioritizing marijuana arrests will change that reality is, once again, silly.

But what do we know?!?  We only live in a 70% Hispanic neighborhood in East Austin....

Don't get us started on the ridiculous e-mails we've received.

-------

It's also worth pointing out that we vetted this proposal two weeks ago.  We didn't see anything (major) wrong with it then, and none of the silliness we've seen since then changes our mind.  But nice of the rest of y'all to belatedly figure out this was happening.

-------

Then there's the fact that, by reducing the number of arrests, the new policy might actually save money.

-------

Bottom Line: Priorities people.... 

Cruz's ASTONISHINGLY Good Numbers with African Americans and Hispanics

"Now when He had said these things, He cried with a loud voice, “Lazarus, come forth!”
John 11:43

Late last week, a poll came out in the U.S. Senate race that confirmed what everyone who isn't a national media reporter or a resident of East Austin already knows: Ted Cruz will beat Beto by a comfortable margin.

That's such an obvious conclusion that we didn't give the poll much thought until we belatedly saw this analysis from National Review:

Poll: Cruz Leads Beto O’Rourke among Hispanic Voters in Texas Senate Race

From the article:

The poll, which found that Cruz leads O’Rourke 46 to 44 percent among Hispanics, is a troubling sign for O’Rourke, who has tailored his campaign around his advocacy for racial minorities.

 That's pretty impressive, but what we saw next made our jaw drop:

O’Rourke, who currently represents El Paso as a member of the House, does however maintain a significant advantage among black voters, leading Cruz 70 percent to 15 percent.

[Note: Emphasis added.]

Keep in mind: Republicans typically get about 7% of the African-American vote; Cruz has doubled that here.

Obviously, all the usual caveats about "it's just one poll" apply, but it's nevertheless interesting.

If Republicans could get 20% of the African-American vote, it blows up the Democrat coalition in a way that makes it impossible for them to ever win again; this poll suggests Cruz might be getting close.

Bottom Line: It's too soon to draw conclusions, but if this trend continues it would be a monumental development....

TCEQ (once again) Talking Out of Both Sides of it's Mouth in South Texas

"I brought you into a bountiful country,
To eat its fruit and its goodness.
But when you entered, you defiled My land
And made My heritage an abomination."
Jeremiah 2:7

A couple of years ago, we discussed how a landfill project in South Texas didn't sit right.  It seemed like TCEQ was telling local residents one thing and telling something different to the developers.  We furthermore remarked that one of those afore mentioned project developers seemed to be playing an environmental smoke and mirrors game.

In late March, TCEQ announced another hearing on the topic. We have a source who's been following the issue with whom we've been corresponding by e-mail since the hearing was announced. We're reprinting the relevant sections with permission.

"Red Panda" to us, 4/5/2018:

That Laredo landfill issue is still brewing… The TCEQ has set a public meeting for May 1 in Laredo.  The TCEQ has also extended the public comment period for 30 days beyond the date of the public meeting date.

It appears that TCEQ staff violated agency rules and their own legislative testimony by approving the landfill to be built in a 100-year floodplain just days after promising lawmakers that, “the standard is you still can’t develop [landfills] in a 100-year floodplain.” 

The 953-acre Laredo floodplain landfill complex has never received the required county floodplain development authorization, never addressed underground oil and gas pipelines, and never resolved property ownership conflicts or otherwise complied with TCEQ’s own requirements specifically imposed in Notice of Deficiency issued by the agency on October 11, 2016.

The public will have a chance to weigh in on this on May 1 at 7PM at Texas A & M International University, Student Center 2nd Floor Ballroom, Room 203 5201 University Boulevard 

Laredo, Texas 78041-1900 

TCEQ's testimony related to 100-year flood plains occurred at an interim hearing of the house Environmental Regulation committee in January; Webb County's letter outlining the violations in this specific instance can be viewed here.

"Red Panda" on 4/11/2018:

The residents still appear to be worried. And speaking of TCEQ, they’ve set a public meeting for about two weeks from now, on May 1 in Laredo. The public comment period will also be extended by TCEQ for 30 days beyond that May 1 public meeting.

The meeting is probably going to be pretty heated. Opponents of the landfill are pointing to TCEQ staff apparently having violated agency rules and gone counter to their own legislative testimony by approving the landfill being built in a 100-year floodplain. In testimony to lawmakers, Earl Lott, of TCEQ’s Permit Waste Division, appears to have stated that TCEQ currently bars construction within the 100 year floodplain, and that TCEQ is “required to coordinate with FEMA to assure the facilities was (sic) not located within the 100 year flood plain.”

Opponents also point to Webb County’s Planning Department having denied the landowner a floodplain development permit, which is needed to move forward. So there are more than a few things here that do not look quite right on spec.

Anyway, if you’re in Laredo and you’re looking to watch a big public fight go down—or you want in on it—the TCEQ meeting will be on May 1 at 7PM at Texas A & M International University, Student Center, 2nd Floor Ballroom, Room 203, 5201 University Boulevard, Laredo, Texas 78041-1900.

Bottom Line: At a minimum, TCEQ should be saying the same thing to local residents and the developers.  They should also follow their own rules.  For whatever reason, that's not currently happening....

Abbott's Higher Ed Mendacity, Senate's Passivity, Produce Predictably Poisonous Fruits....

"Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them."
Matthew 7:20

Did you know that, two days ago, a group of leftist students took over a building at a public university in Texas?!?  Neither did we.  But apparently it started on Wednesday at Texas State.

According to Texas State sources, the alleged transgression stems from the refusal of several incumbent members of the student government  refusing to participate in a Nicholai Yezhov style inquisition designed to grease the skids for their impeachment.

KVUE has details:



At issue were two allegedly "racist" posts the outgoing student body president made on Instagram.  The social media posts gave the usual left-wing suspects a pretext to pursue the president's impeachment.  The impeachment drive was political retaliation for outgoing president's support for basic sanity during an incident last fall.

Unfortunately for the "woke" crowd at Texas State, the president survived the impeachment attempt.  But who needs the rule of law when the bureaucrats are on your side?!?  That's where Dean of Students Margarita Arellano [Note: Making $169,576] enters the picture.

Despite the dismissal of the impeachment attempt, Arellano unilaterally overruled the proscribed authorities.  Out of thin air, Arellano invented a justification for the impeachment to continue.  The show trial was scheduled for this past Wednesday.

On Wednesday, several members of the Texas State student government refused to dignify the inquisition.  By refusing to show up, they denied the event a quorum.  The impeachment failed.

Following the failure of the impeachment, the building takeover began; you can follow events in real time on Twitter here.

-------

There's a lot we can say, but it boils down to this: WHERE THE HELL IS THE BOARD OF REGENTS?!?

You have a Dean at a Public University (making $169k) lawlessly inventing standards for student governance.  You then have lawless trespassing on public property.  Yet the senior leadership of the afore mentioned PUBLIC university appeases the mob.

At this point, it's time for the Board of Regents to step in and restore sanity.

Also, wouldn't it be nice if the Governor who appoints the Board of Regents would weigh in?!?

-------

Wouldn't it also be nice if the Texas Senate would stop passively rubber-stamping University Regent nominations?!?

------

Bottom Line: Imagine a world in which the allegedly "conservative" Governor of an allegedly "conservative" state actually held his appointees to public university Boards accountable for situations like the ongoing mess in San Marcos....

UT (once again) in deep legal doo-doo over Sexual matters in TWO lawsuits....

"He who covers his sins will not prosper,
But whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy."
Proverbs 28:13

Great weekend for UT Athletics.

Not so much on the legal front.

On Friday, we saw the second Title IX lawsuit in six months:

An unnamed student accused of sexual assault is suing UT ahead of a Title IX hearing set for next week. The hearing will decide if he should be punished with a potential two-year suspension.

The student, referred to in the lawsuit as John Doe, is accused of assaulting a female student, referred to as Jane Roe, at a party that took place on April 28, 2017. Doe is being represented by Brian Roark. Roark represented another male student accused of sexual assault in a lawsuit against UT President Gregory Fenves that was settled last November.

The students in the current case were both drinking at the party and left together around 2 a.m. and had sex afterward at Roe’s apartment, according to the lawsuit. The following day, Roe told her friends she blacked out and did not remember anything until “moments just before she and John finished having sex.”

The lawsuit states Doe will not be treated justly in the Feb. 7 hearing because UT amended the Title IX case report three different times after receiving notice of an impending lawsuit. The report was allegedly amended by replacing the word “incapacitation” with “intoxication” in a sentence that originally said a witness observed that Roe was showing signs of incapacitation by acting less “socially inhibited” that she would normally.

Later pages of the report however were not amended to replace the “incapacitation” with “intoxication,” according to the lawsuit.

“If UT can’t get their story straight on what the definition of incapacitation is after months of contemplation and a recent Federal Court suit and public admonitions on the same topic from (a) Federal Judge, how in the world are a couple of hormone filled college students supposed to do it after a night of drinking?” the lawsuit said.

The lawsuit also said the University’s “bumbling” attempts to amend the use of incapacitation with intoxication in only one instance of the word’s use in the report show its desire to equate the two. If this is the case, and the standard for intoxication is simply “diminished social inhibitions,” then the hearing is “merely a facade for a predetermined conclusion,” according to the lawsuit.

This is awful.  If you don't have a credible system for dealing with this nonsense, you hurt actual survivors of sexual assault.  This enables predators.

But, if that wasn't enough, speaking of the athletic department:

A lawsuit filed by the former women’s track and field coach of the University of Texas could cause widespread embarrassment for current and former university officials.

Former coach Bev Kearney filed the lawsuit four years ago, claiming that the university had discriminated against her by firing her over a decade-old relationship with one of her athletes, while condoning an affair that football coach Major Applewhite had with a student trainer.

Then the case stalled on appeal, but the state Supreme Court ruled last year that Kearney’s discrimination lawsuit could proceed, and her attorneys have been vigorously pursuing potentially embarrassing depositions since then, as the Associated Press reported Monday.

Kearney’s legal claim fires warning shots all over the place, claiming that “other University employees (all of whom are white males) have been involved in relationships with students or direct subordinates and have not been subjected to termination, let alone any meaningful disciplinary actions. These University employees include Major Applewhite (current Co-Offensive Coordinator for the football team) (sic), other coaches within the University’s Athletic Department, current and former law school professors, current and former professors within the University’s undergraduate school, and a department chairperson.”

The reference to the former law school professor is likely an allusion to then-university President Bill Powers, who met his wife of more than three decades when she was a law student of his in the late ’70s, at a time he was married to another woman.

Applewhite has gained an even higher profile since the lawsuit was filed, as he was hired this offseason as the new head coach at the University of Houston. One of his first hires was an assistant coach tarnished by the sexual assault scandal at Baylor University.

Kearney’s court papers claim there are other coaches and officials who either have married former athletes or conducted affairs with employees they supervise. While university policy explicitly permits consensual relationships between an “employee with direct teaching, supervisory, advisory, or evaluative responsibility over other employees, students, and/or student employees,” Kearney claims she was “singled out” as “an African American female” and regarded as different based on a nearly 10 year old relationship.”

In the last two months, Kearney’s attorneys have filed records with the court regarding the depositions of former President Bill Powers, former football coach Mack Brown, and former athletic director DeLoss Dodds.

The university has persuaded the court to seal the depositions themselves for now, but even the brief deposition certification forms hint at more trouble, with Brown revising his interview to make clear that “no arrest or issues brought to me (sic).”

This could get interesting.  We've long suspected, just as a hunch based on their arrogance and entitlement, that there was a lot of this nonsense in the senior levels of the UT leadership.  In the current climate, this could get them in a lot of trouble.

But what's even more mind-blowing is that they're simultaneously being sued for discrimination both against, and in favor of, white men.  For these two cases to be occurring alongside each other is a textbook example of how making up arbitrary standards out of thin air always comes back to haunt you.  If UT had clear and consistent standards as it relates to these matters, neither of these lawsuits would be occurring.

Bottom Line: Yes, they really are this incompetent.

#TXLEGE: Senate Free Speech hearing correctly identifies problem (solutions = anyone's guess)....

"When they heard this, they were furious and plotted to kill them."
Acts 5:33

We attended today's Senate State Affairs committee hearing about free speech on college campuses.  They did a good job asking questions.  Whether they promote good answers remains to be seen.

The hearing began with two hours of invited testimony from bureaucrats representing the various public university systems around the state.  They predictably filibustered and gave Senators the runaround in denying the had a problem.  Honestly, they didn't say anything interesting.

During the third and fourth invited panels, various speakers from across the political spectrum described their experience navigating the morass related to free speech on Texas' campuses.  Contrary to the rosy picture painted by the bureaucrats, Tony McDonald of Empower Texans described his experiences during his college/law school days with YCT.  McDonald proposed eliminating "free speech zones", not charging "security fees" to student organizations, and eliminating requirements for "mandatory faculty advisors" for student groups.  Glenn Maxey of the Texas Democrat Party largely echoed McDonald's testimony but, citing some of his own experiences as an LGBT activist in the 1980's, stressed the need for protections to apply equally to groups on the left as groups on the right.

During the fourth invited panel, Senator Birdwell (finally!) identified the real solution: the Regents need to do their job!!!  Birdwell specifically bemoaned that the university bureaucracies deliberately keep Regents in the dark about the extent of the problem.  Of course, Birdwell neglected to mention that the various Boards of Regents already have the authority they need to eliminate the bureaucracies in question and...well...they haven't.

We built upon Senator Birdwell's comments in our testimony.  We testified that the real responsibility for protecting free speech on campus lies with the Boards of Regents.  We pointed out, furthermore, that at this time last year we told the Texas Senate (and Senator Birdwell in particular) that if they confirmed the last round of UT regent nominees, political correctness (including this free speech stuff) would get worse.  Every Senator on that panel then voted to confirm the Regents in question.  One year later, here we are.   We also pointed out that, among elected officials, it's the Governor (who appoints the regents) who's primarily responsible for public university governance.  It's worth pointing out that, in four panels and four hours of invited testimony, not a single currently serving Regent from any university system was asked to speak.

During public testimony, several left leaning students voiced concerns about the backlash to a student newspaper columnist who publised a highly imflammatory essay about race last fall.  Specifically, they described death threats and doxxing experienced by the author of said essay.  On the other hand, several of those same left leaning students talked about how racist flyers posted around both the UT-Austin and Texas State campuses last year created an "unsafe" enviroment.  Let's clarify: death threats and doxxing aren't cool...but when you lump flyers (no matter how distasteful) with those sorts of physical threats, you undermine your own credibility.

Bottom Line: We'll know if the Senate is serious about this issue when it takes up regent confirmations next year....

7 Reasons for YOU to VOTE AGAINST the Austin ISD tax increase!!!

"The horse is prepared for the day of battle,
But deliverance is of the Lord."
Proverbs 21:31

• From TPPF:
  
  In the bond summary, AISD indicates urgently needed repairs in schools across the district. Such repairs include roofing system replacement, HVAC improvements, plumbing and drainage improvements, and electrical system improvements. These are all items that could justify a bond asking for taxpayer money.
  
  However, funding to correct these “Critical Facility Deficiencies” makes up only 19% of the entire bond package. The district is not simply asking for the $196,116,000 needed to make these critical improvements.
  
  The bond also includes items such as $6 million to improve the press box, concessions, and restrooms at House Park; $23 million for new athletic spaces (and some academic renovation) at a single school (Austin High—the new elementary schools in the bond cost $31-36 million each); and $5 million for “undesignated furniture improvements.” While such upgrades may be desirable, the wisdom of going into hundreds of millions of additional debt to finance these kinds of improvement is debatable.
  
  ....
  
  There are schools that are overcrowded, such as Maplewood Elementary, operating at 141% capacity. Inversely, only one mile away is Campbell Elementary, which is severely under-enrolled, operating at only 37% capacity. This is a trend found at elementary, middle, and high school levels across the district. The issue facing the district is not a lack of seats. In fact, there are 1,456 elementary, 910 middle, and 2,479 high school seats currently vacant. If the school board were to redraw attendance boundaries in an effort to distribute students more equitably, it could potentially save taxpayers up to $600 million by avoiding the construction of new facilities.
  
  ....
  
  AISD claims that the “$1.05 billion bond would not raise property tax rates.” Their carefully selected wording is correct, but it attempts to obscure the truth. Former Travis County Judge Bill Aleshire recently noted, “No one in their right mind should believe AISD can borrow $1 billion plus interest and not have a property tax increase as a result." In Austin’s current property market, stable property tax rates mean steady increases in property tax bills year over year. In fact, the AISD website confirms that they are assuming “anticipated increases in taxable assessed values,” in their bond planning and taxpayers should not expect their bills to remain the same.
  
  ....
  
  As these kinds of tax increases occur not only within the school district but also in city, county, and special district taxes, it is no wonder that Austinites can no longer afford their homes.
  
  In sum, the number that most impacts taxpayer’s pocketbooks is not the tax rate, but the tax bill. Rising tax bills, however, are a poor slogan; they do not soothe taxpayers into voting for a bond trying to appear revenue-neutral.
  
  Furthermore, AISD cannot guarantee that tax rates will not be raised. This bond is a proposal, not a contract. The ballot language states that “the board [shall] be authorized to levy, pledge, assess and collect, annual ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the district sufficient, without limit as to rate or amount, to pay the principal of and interest on the bonds, and the costs of any credit agreements.” Even if the bond passes, Austin ISD still has the option to raise tax rates in the future. AISD does not have to keep any of its campaign promises, but taxpayers are beholden to the $1.05 billion in debt.

• From Forbes Magazine:
  
  "The Austin Independent School District (AISD) in Central Texas serves a city that has consistently been one of America's fastest growing large metropolitan areas for a decade. Yet, in spite of being in the heart of this thriving city that has grown by more than 100,000 people in the past five years, AISD has lost 5 percent of its student enrollment since 2012, shrinking by some 4,200 children.
  
  AISD has taken steps recently to reverse declining student enrollment. One would hope the effort would focus on improving academic excellence, increasing educational options and opportunity, and stretching taxpayer dollars to make the budget leaner and more efficient.
  
  Sadly, no. Instead, officials felt they just needed better PR.
  
  So to stem the loss of students, AISD spent $850,000 on advertising and public relations consultants, in addition to the $1.5 million on in-house communications staff.

• From Texas Monitor:
  
  Poor planning and a hurried decision by Austin Independent School District Superintendent Paul Cruz has potentially saddled taxpayers with an additional $30 million in bond payments, records obtained by The Texas Monitor show.
  
  District emails show that school officials had options of rehabbing Austin’s T.A. Brown Elementary, which Cruz shuttered in November 2016.
  
  Those options for fixing Brown, which opened in 1957, were not explored until after the superintendent declared the building closed forever.
  
  And now it’s too late for any fixes. Demolition of the building has already begun.
  
  The trouble centered on cracks in a crawl space at Brown, indicating wear and tear had given way to a serious weakening of floors throughout the building.
  
  In the days after the building was declared closed forever, a team of consultants hammered out possible fixes for the defects and came forward with possibly cheaper remedies at Brown.
  
  Officials now say Brown Elementary was a neighborhood school rife with engineering problems. Decrepit flooring showed structural defects that endangered anyone in the school, they said.

• From this website:
  
  2015, 2016, and 2017.

• From Save East Austin Schools:
  
  A group of district volunteers, parents and Latino community leaders fighting against possible closures of East Austin schools are creating a political action committee and threatening to oppose the Austin school district’s $1.1 billion bond package that will go before voters in November.
  
  About 30 plan to rally at 6:30 p.m. tonight outside of the Austin school board meeting at district headquarters, 1111 W. 6th St. and announce the formation of Save East Austin Schools political action committee.
  
  Group members have called on the school board to make changes to a 25-year comprehensive facilities master plan, as well as the bond projects. The concerns also include displacing Eastside Memorial High School from its current facility to a $70 million facility and moving the nationally-ranked Liberal Arts and Science Academy to the current Eastside campus.
  
  ....
  
  Group organizers said current Eastside students won’t benefit from the move and new facility, which is years away, and want LASA students to co-locate with Eastside students on the current campus. They also said more resources in the facilities master plan and the bond need to be allocated to the district’s east side campuses, which historically have been underserved.

• Austin ISD is the largest landowner in Central Texas.  Late last year, Austin ISD formally proposed selling a number of their properties, including multiple prime lots downtown.  This would be both a win for taxpayers AND it would help with housing supply.
  
  Passing this bond can only slow that process down.
  
  Also, in the event this bond does fail, reviving this proposal should be the next step.

• From KXAN last April:
  
  The Austin Independent School District chief of police says his department mishandled a possible sexual assault case of a Boone Elementary School Pre-K student.
  
  The case was first opened on Feb. 7 when attorney Paul Guinn says the parents of the 4-year-old girl noticed traumatic injuries on her body after she came home from school.
  
  “Something very bad seems to have happened to this young girl and we are without answers,” said Guinn.
  
  According to Guinn, the child’s mother dressed her daughter and took her to school that morning at 8 a.m. and then picked her up from school three hours later.
  
  Once they got home, the mother says she heard the child screaming while using the bathroom, and found blood and horrible bruising on her body.
  
  “The daughter’s father came home from work and took a look and said ‘we need to go to the hospital with this — this looks very serious,'” said Guinn.
  
  He says a trauma surgeon at Dell Children’s Medical Center had to operate on the lacerations, and diagnosed the injuries as sexual assault by bodily force.
  
  The attorney says AISD police were at the hospital and met with her parents, the doctors and interviewed the student. The girl’s teacher was placed on administrative leave. Two weeks later, on Feb. 22, AISD police decided to close the case and said the allegations were unfounded.
  
  It turns out, the detective never got a copy of the child’s medical records. “Frankly, I am mystified at how this diagnosis of a sexual assault was missed by the AISD PD,” said Guinn.

Bottom Line: If we had unlimited time, we could list 25 reasons why this monstrosity deserves to go down in flames; whatever your reason, get out and VOTE AGAINST the Austin ISD bond proposal.

Austin ISD bond: Polling locations tipping scales AGAINST East Side?!?

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord,
But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

From the Travis County Taxpayers Union:

East Austin Voter Suppression in AISD Bond Election

23 October 2017

Austin, TX -- The Travis County Taxpayers Union (TCTU) has analyzed the Austin ISD polling locations for the AISD bond election and discovered some startling disparity regarding poll accessibility and hours of operation in comparing East and West Austin. 

In total, West Austin has 2551 hours of available in-district polls, whereas East Austin has only 794 hours of available in-district polls, making West Austin at least three times more accessible than East Austin. 

West of I-35: 

2551 poll hours (76% of total)

East of I-35: 

794 poll hours (24% of total)

"This is just another example of troubling behavior by the school district to mislead the public, and now they're engaging in voter suppression of East Austin residents," says Roger Falk of TCTU. "East Austin voters ought to be outraged."

The trend holds true when analyzing Early Voting polls, mobile polls, Election Day polls, or an aggregate of all three types. 

Mobile polling locations are the most unfair of the three types, with nearly eight times more hours available in West Austin than East Austin (199 hours and 26 hours, respectively). Most East Austin mobile polling locations are only open for a mere two hours per day, whereas West Austin mobile polling locations are open for a much longer daily average timeframe. 

"It's already more difficult for middle and working class voters in East Austin to access polls and cast their votes. We should be giving more time for democratic participation in East Austin - not less."