Your turn! What do you think?

I can’t drive 55

Everyone knows that everything is bigger in Texas, and now we get to say it’s faster in Texas too because we have the only 85 mile per hour section of highway in the country (running along the Highway 130 corridor from Austin to San Antonio). In 1974, the federal government put national limits on speed (setting the maximum speed limit at 55 mph) in response to the Arab oil embargo.  Higher speeds mean greater gas usage, and the federal government used its preemption powers (the ability of the federal government to regulate activities which might otherwise be controlled by the state) to lower the speed limits.  Finally in 1995, the federal government began relaxing those limits and allowing the states to de-regulate speeding (de-regulation is when the government loosens its authority over some private activity).  In the last 15 years in Texas, speed limits have steadily increased, and so have speed-related deaths (increasing seven percent since 2000).  Today, while every other crash fatality category has dropped (including alcohol and seat belt-related fatalities), speed related deaths are one-third of all highway deaths. Undoubtedly, the public’s view is complicated—a 2012 survey shows that 60% of drivers think speeding is dangerous and 90% think aggressive driving is a serious problem—yet about 51% of us admit to speeding.   Guess we are voting on speed limits with our feet and not our heads.

And speaking of voting and driving, there are concerns about the process of registering to vote through the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS).  The National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (also known as the “Motor Voter” law) is an attempt to increase voter turnout. Under the law, the federal government mandated that key state agencies—e.g. where drivers’ licenses are issued—provide voter registration materials.  The Secretary of State last week issued warnings to voter registrars in Texas counties to prepare for voters who come in thinking they are registered, only to find out that their registration had not been properly processed.  After the 2008 election, the Secretary of State had made improvements to registering, but confusion regarding license renewal on the DPS website still exists because persons renewing their license didn’t realize that they had to click on through to the secretary of state website to update voter registration.

Even if you can’t click and vote, you can still text and drive in Texas—which is one of only 11 states that does not have a state law about texting. Texas operates under home rule meaning that local cities or counties have the ability to set up their own set of rules and forms of self-government without state interference.  Increasingly municipalities are relying on their home rule authority to limit texting and even the usage of all mobile devices while driving, especially after one study found traffic fatalities linked to cellphone usage increased 50 percent from 2006-2010.

 

Your turn! What do you think?

Shutting the door

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals slammed Planned Parenthood of Texas this week when it denied an appeal by the nation’s largest abortion provider.  In 2011, the Texas legislature prohibited organizations which provide abortion access from being funded by the state, and the Governor enforced that law by mandating that the Women’s Health Program (Texas’ largest public health program) reject funding for Planned Parenthood because it gives women abortion information.  A federal district court had given an injunction (a cease-and-desist order granted by courts which prevents a party from doing something) to Planned Parenthood to prevent Texas from pulling the money. A Fifth Circuit three-judge panel lifted the injunction in August, but the latest appeal was for an en banc rehearing (an appeal to have the full panel re-hear the case because one party argues that the three-judge panel made “exceptional mistakes”).  The denial of a rehearing means that the case is final pending a U.S. Supreme Court appeal.

The states administer Medicaid (the federal health care insurance program for low-income persons), and Texas is one of several conservative states pushing to end taxpayer support for Planned Parenthood. While federal dollars can’t cover abortions, pro-life supporters argue that if Planned Parenthood isn’t given federal monies for cancer screenings and birth control, then that frees up Planned Parenthood’s funds to provide abortion counseling.   Planned Parenthood has 77 independent local affiliates operating about 800 health centers in the U.S., and in Texas, Planned Parenthood is the Women’s Health Program’s largest provider—servicing 40%-50% of patients annually.  About 3% of all its health services are abortion-related. In Texas, neither the agency nor its affiliates perform the procedure.  What conservative groups are hoping is that cutting off funds will stop abortion counseling.

The state’s decision to close the door on federal funding will cost Texas $36.3 million in the first year and $45.2 million in the second.  Prior to this, the state of Texas paid about $5 million per year into the program.   As of November 1, the Women’s Health Program opens its doors. Under the new rules, doctors may give women information about family planning, but must give information in a non-directive way.  What does that mean?  Doctors may offer women with information about who provides abortions, but the physician cannot make a formal referral.

Guess we’ll have to wait and see what happens when women walk out the door.

And speaking of closed doors, Attorney General Greg Abbott told Secretary of State Hillary Clinton that the Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (OSCE) could not be observers in the November elections here in Texas.  The organization, along with Project Vote—a watchdog group which monitors activities of government—had asked to be election monitors because of the state’s voter ID measure (which is not yet in effect because it is being appealed). Such election monitors (persons who come and observe voting activities to make sure the laws are being followed) are thought to be important, especially in states like Texas, which have a long history of voting rights violations.  Abbott argued, however, that the requests were at odds with the Texas’ Election Code because of concerns that the groups would not be “restrained in their activities.” Out of that concern, Abbott indicated that he will have officials block such groups if they come within 100 feet of a polling place.  Doesn’t sound like they are getting in that door even if they have been since 2002 when President George W. Bush invited the OSCE to watch elections in the U.S.

Your turn! What do you think?

Making ’em pay

Looks like the state of Texas may be getting an “F” for funding on its spending for primary and secondary schools.  Texas was in court defending against a lawsuit comprising two-thirds of state school districts who have sued over $5.4 billion in cuts enacted during the 82^nd biennial cycle. The litigation also challenges the new testing requirements to make standardized tests tougher.  The schools are pushing back and refusing to “do more with less.” Four different coalitions of school districts, along with Texans for Real Efficiency and Equity in Education (TREEE—a group advocating for education reform) have challenged the state.  The schools argue that by cutting spending and increasing test requirements, the state has overburdened public schools to the point where they are  “hopelessly broken”.

The last time this landed in the Texas Supreme Court in 2005 it wasn’t pretty–the court held that Texas schools were not in compliance with state constitutional requirements for education because spending levels were not meeting minimum requirements. The same constitution that mandates the “maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools” under Article 7, also mandates under Article 3 that expenditures cannot exceed revenues.

Therein lies the dilemma.

The “No Child Left Behind” (2001) requires minimum proficiency levels to ensure quality schools.  Schools have largely implemented the NCLB law by using tests to measure student success, and Texas is an example of a system that seems to be failing.   The National Education Association shows Texas falling from 41^st (2011) to 45^th (2012) out of all the states and the District of Columbia with per student spending decreasing from $9,446 to $8,908.   Additionally, the state has enacted new STARR  tests (State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness) which strains precious resources given our need to provide additional monies to support testing for low-income and English language-learning students who tend to score lower on state exams.

What’s a state to do?  Education becomes a political football because it is part of the state’s discretionary spending (funding which does not establish mandatory levels of funding). It seems unlikely Texas will do that unless ordered to take drastic measures by the courts, and that report card still hasn’t come out yet.

Texas Round-up

1) San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro and Bexar County Commissioner Kevin Wolff squared off in a debate about whether the city should make taxpayers pay an additional 1/8^th cent increase to the sales tax to fund pre-kindergarten programs.  Doesn’t sound like much, but it maxes out the sales tax percentage that the state allows cities (8.25% of sales). Castro argues it will improve long-term education quality, and Wolff argues it is an unnecessary tax increase.

2) The Libertarian candidate for U.S. Senate, John Jay Myers, came out with his most expensive ad to date going after Democrat Paul Sadler and Republican Ted Cruz arguing that we need to get government out of people’s lives.  Myers is also mad that he was left out of the U.S. Senate debate sponsored by WFAA-Dallas, and he has filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission.

Your turn! What do you think?

Filling his shoes

It’s not a situation any political party wants to face—figuring out what to do when an incumbent dies unexpectedly right before the election. That’s what Democrats are doing, however, because long-time state Senator Mario Gallegos died Tuesday of complications from a liver transplant he had five years ago. Early voting in Texas begins on Monday, what options does the party have?

Life’s rough for Texas Democrats. They are already the minority party, and most political pundits think the state legislature will be even more conservative after November. Under state law, it’s too late for the Democrats to file for a different candidate—and given that it is a safe seat (one which is considered secure because the district is dominated by approximately 60% or more of one party’s voters), that means there is little possibility that the seat could change hands because of the constituency.

Democrats are concerned, however, because the balance of power in the Senate could tilt giving Republicans dominant status in the 83^rd session come January 2013.  Currently, Republicans control 19 of the 31 seats—just two seats short of a super-majority (a percentage large than a simple majority of 51%).  So while bills require only 51% (simple majority for passage), Senate rules require two-thirds vote to even consider bills for passage.  With a super-majority of 21 senators, Republicans could ignore Democrats completely when putting bills forward.

If Gallegos is re-elected, then Governor Perry call for a special election (one which is not part of the regular election cycle) meaning that it could open up to Republican advantage. Right now it doesn’t look that way given the demographics of the district (Gov. Rick Perry only picked up 31% of the vote in 2010—a small percentage given how well he did in the rest of the state).

Speaking of Perry, there was speculation this week about whether he will run for re-election in 2014. He had said he wouldn’t make a decision until June 2013, but one of the governor’s former advisers started rumors that Perry will run.  Will he or won’t he? More importantly, who would fill his shoes? Watch for Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to get his running shoes on if Perry doesn’t.

Texas Round-up

Democrat Carol Kent is hoping that what might have been considered a safe seat in north Dallas (House District 114) will be hers in the upcoming election against Jason Villalba-a Republican Hispanic who has been moderate on some issues like funding for education. Kent is running after having lost her House District 102 seat in 2010 after redistricting.

Mario Gallegos was much beloved as the first Mexican American elected to the Texas Senate in 1990—so it is no surprise that a Texas blog reports Gallegos had indicated he wanted Carol Alvarado to replace him.  Alvarado is currently running for re-election to the Texas House where she has previously served two terms. Bet on her to fill Gallegos’ shoes—they will be big shoes to fill indeed—he will be missed.

Your turn! What do you think?

The party line

Early voting begins in Texas one week from today, and the races are heating up. While most of us know the high profile elections, what about those elections people know little about?  Such races that are down-ballot—contests  are not high profile like president,  U.S. Senator, etc.–mean voters may not know who the candidates are, nor do they make informed choices, but they vote all the same.  For that reason, both political parties like to see voters chose the straight-ticket option-selecting “Republican” or “Democrat” and all of their votes automatically count toward the party of choice.

Is that a good idea? That depends. We know in races of lesser importance-like local offices and judicial races—such votes can make a difference, but is that what democracy is about?

The importance of straight-ticket voting cannot be overstated—in urban areas, it can sweep one party into office or another party out depending on the political winds.  Some complain it undermines democracy because the voters are taking a short cut, using party as a proxy for their beliefs. Isn’t that better than just relying on name recognition (the idea that you vote for someone based on the familiarity of the name rather than what his or her politics).   At least with straight-ticket you know you are getting someone who identifies with the same party as you.

Will straight ticket voting make a difference in what is considered to be the most hotly contested race in the state—the match-up between Sen. Wendy Davis (D-Ft. Worth) and challenger state Rep. Mark Shelton (R-Fort Worth)? That is anyone’s guess.  They had the second of four debates on Sunday, and they sparred consistent with the ads they have been putting out there. Most controversial has been the ad by Davis accusing Shelton of not supporting legislation for rape victims.

In the end, Texas leaves all options open by allowing us to select the straight-ticket option, but then letting you go through the ballot and vote for individual races on the ballot in specific races. And that can make all the difference in the world when those down ballot races are tight.

Texas Round-up

In the courts again—Former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was back in court again regarding his conviction for money laundering and conspiracy charges related to the 2002 elections.

On the road again—Governor Rick Perry has begun previewing his policy priorities for higher education as he goes around the state. What is at the top of the agenda? Governor Perry is advocating for a tuition-freeze to keep a student’s tuition at the same level over the course of their education.  The governor is also supporting $10,000 degrees (the total cost for your degree), along with in-state tuition for undocumented persons.