With a new election cycle coming around, you won't be surprised to find out that the Texas Lock-Step Political Media is reverting to type. Instead of Wendy! we're getting MJ!
The woman you missed while you were paying attention to Beto. Mimi Swartz, New York Times
Clearly, instead of red sneakers, we're going to get the floral arm tattoo. And Military Service! AND a Purple Heart! And she ONLY LOST BY 3 PERCENTAGE POINTS DAMMIT!!!!!!
At this point there's not much else to say except, bring on the funny. I would argue that it's unwise for the TLSPM to continue to try and build these people up to such extremes. Not only does it have the effect of turning off those who are the closest thing we get to "swing" voters in Texas but it also creates an aura of fatigue.
People grow tired of being told, by a media they really don't like or trust, just how WONDERFUL these people are. Don't believe me? How's Wendy!(?) doing these days, or BETO! The latter is probably still sweating obviously, but what he's not doing is wooing the rest of the progressive world in the same manner as he's got the TLSPM in a swoon.
Every new candidate from the Democrats running for statewide office can rely on these high-school crushes, from Swartz (one of the worst examples of the TLSPM) and others (specifically, the Texas Tribune) before they even have to knock on one door.
Then the problem becomes that they have to start campaigning, and trying to square with the voting public that, in many cases, their priorities run counter to what a (dwindling) majority of Texas voters still find desirable.
Yes, Texas is turning more purple, and it's downright blue in its major urban areas. Areas that, not coincidentally, are increasingly finding themselves in fiscal Hell. But, except for the hard-core non-productive, advocacy class, the left of the Lone Star State is still more conservative than the rest of the country.
Yes, you have the InterLeft, what's left of them, who, when they aren't throwing fits, take a look around and decide that what Texas needs is a complete decimation of its economy but, for the most part, a LOT of those in Texas who identify as Democrats still understand that the industries that Texas economy is built on will need to be around for the good of their personal economic health.
That is why BETO the Sweaty, patron saint of privileged Caucasian Youth couldn't beat the most unpopular Senator in Texas History and it is why Hegar, no matter her credentials, is going to have a problem toppling a Senator who is much more favorably viewed.
Not by the TLSPM obviously, but at this point they really don't like anything. And there's mounting evidence that no one is really paying all that much attention to a former Texan who has decided to move to New York City, possibly the only place she would be considered an expert on Texas politics, to explain us rubes to those urbane New Yorkers.
Of course, none of this is evidence that a Hegar campaign is doomed. She could tack to the center-left and in an anti-Trump wave election topple Cornyn, who could, despite his seeming competence, be knocked out by factors beyond his control.
Any bets the TLSPM takes the wrong lesson away from that?
On another, funnier, note. Perennial (Losing) Candidate Chris Bell is contemplating entering this race. One can only hope.
Showing posts with label TXLV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TXLV. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 14, 2019
Thursday, January 31, 2019
TXLV: Texas Craft Beer Industry is screwed
Some of the items in this Texas Tribune story about new Texas House Speaker Dennis Bonnen are amazing.
Despite Beer and Banking ties, New House Speaker Dennis Bonnen sees no need for recusals or new disclosures. Texas Tribune
His wife is the co-owner of a liquor distributor, and he himself is the CEO of a bank, yet he "sees no conflicts of interest".
That statement alone should make you question the political integrity of Texas new Speaker.
He's also got many lobbyists in his corner, invested in his bank to boot, people with whom he does business and their financial success is linked to his financial success and they're lobbying for issues in the very House of Representatives that Bonnen oversees.
Yet he sees "no conflict of interest".
At least Straus had the decency to recuse himself from matters relating to horse racing, it appears Bonnen is going to place no such restrictions on his ability to push laws and regulations that benefit him and his. Outstanding news for the liquor distributors, not so much for Texas craft beer and liquor industry, who have already had efforts at reform go awry in past sessions due, in large part, to the power of the liquor distributor industry.
It gets even funnier later down in the article, where Bonnen tries to assure us that "It's good", he's instructed his staff to remain "neutral" on liquor and banking issues. All we have to do is trust him because, you know, he's got a reputation for being a good guy.
Of course, part of the issues with weak disclosure laws is that it's impossible to tell if someone is a "good guy" or no. If it's not clear who they're doing business with then it's not clear whether or not they're doing them a solid.
This is no different than Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner gifting is former business partner a multi-Million dollar contract and then saying "all is well" because he's his "former" partner and there's no longer a relationship there.
I first saw this story on BlogHouston publisher Kevin Whited's Shaarli feed and I about spat out my coffee.
The corruption in Texas Politics has hit a high point, and the only people who could change this are the politicians themselves, you know, the ones benefiting from our current system.
These leadership vacuums in Houston, Austin and Washington D.C. are going to matter to normal people eventually, I just hope by the time they do it's not too late to do anything about it.
Although I'm afraid it may already be.
Despite Beer and Banking ties, New House Speaker Dennis Bonnen sees no need for recusals or new disclosures. Texas Tribune
Bonnen told The Texas Tribune he sees no conflicts of interest, no reason to take any formal steps to distance himself from beer or banking issues
His wife is the co-owner of a liquor distributor, and he himself is the CEO of a bank, yet he "sees no conflicts of interest".
That statement alone should make you question the political integrity of Texas new Speaker.
He's also got many lobbyists in his corner, invested in his bank to boot, people with whom he does business and their financial success is linked to his financial success and they're lobbying for issues in the very House of Representatives that Bonnen oversees.
Yet he sees "no conflict of interest".
At least Straus had the decency to recuse himself from matters relating to horse racing, it appears Bonnen is going to place no such restrictions on his ability to push laws and regulations that benefit him and his. Outstanding news for the liquor distributors, not so much for Texas craft beer and liquor industry, who have already had efforts at reform go awry in past sessions due, in large part, to the power of the liquor distributor industry.
It gets even funnier later down in the article, where Bonnen tries to assure us that "It's good", he's instructed his staff to remain "neutral" on liquor and banking issues. All we have to do is trust him because, you know, he's got a reputation for being a good guy.
Of course, part of the issues with weak disclosure laws is that it's impossible to tell if someone is a "good guy" or no. If it's not clear who they're doing business with then it's not clear whether or not they're doing them a solid.
This is no different than Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner gifting is former business partner a multi-Million dollar contract and then saying "all is well" because he's his "former" partner and there's no longer a relationship there.
I first saw this story on BlogHouston publisher Kevin Whited's Shaarli feed and I about spat out my coffee.
The corruption in Texas Politics has hit a high point, and the only people who could change this are the politicians themselves, you know, the ones benefiting from our current system.
These leadership vacuums in Houston, Austin and Washington D.C. are going to matter to normal people eventually, I just hope by the time they do it's not too late to do anything about it.
Although I'm afraid it may already be.
Friday, November 09, 2018
Election 2018: Texas New (True?) Blue Suburbs
Are Texas Suburbs Slipping Away From Republicans? Alex Ura, Chris Essig, Darla Cameron, Texas Tribune
There's an interesting bit of political intrigue appearing in Texas right now. As Democrats long chastised the poor and working class for voting Republican against their interests, it seems that many Texas suburbs voted Democratic this election against theirs.
The Democrats, to an official, are an urban party. Since the rise of Al Gore and his investors they've loathed Suburbia. Politicians pass laws against it, comedians make jokes about it, TV shows and movies mock it. Suburbia is the gated last-resort of the White elitist, the last refuge of the conservative scoundrel.
Suburbs are overheating the planet, running mom and pop shops out of business, and generally casting a shadow over the vibrancy of an economy based on home-grown, fair-trade, organic, free range donkey dung crackers sourced locally from a collective farming community.
In Houston, especially, the switch is confusing.
The Harris County Democratic Party currently takes its public policy directly from the mind of David Crossley and his non-productive class band of acolytes. Their solution for Houston?
Empty the suburbs, force everyone to live asshole to elbow inside the Loop and ride the Danger Train everywhere (unless it's raining, then you can ride a bus, IF they go where you want). From so-called "Complete streets" (which are really streets that make it difficult to get anywhere) to speed limits capped at 30, to bemoaning the existence of the single-occupancy vehicle, the Democrats don't like the relatively mundane, relatively sequestered Suburban lifestyle preferring instead the highly segregated, highly controlled, highly taxed urban one.
Not that Democrats won't take their votes, they're not stupid, but to think that a party that's ran primarily on reducing energy consumption and footprint is all of the sudden going to embrace Mrs. Johnston living in a $500K McMansion (their term) and driving around in her Mercedes to a nail salon, or make policy that helps Mr. Johnston load up in his SUV to go golfing and create policy to promote this lifestyle requires the suspension of disbelief.
Yes, there's the problem with modern Republicans, and the short-sighted anti-immigrant stance they are taking. And the Bronzed Ego sitting in the White House doesn't help. But if you turn off the Twitter rage machine, block out the media breathlessly acting like every statement el Bronzo utters is "beyond the pale" you get to a place that has to, even begrudgingly, admit that this administration's actual results have been fairly positive, from a conservative perspective.
And this is the problem with politics today. Too much of it is ran through the Social Media outrage prism before being disseminated to people via what should be a calm, rational media. Not an unbiased media mind you, the media has never been that. If you think differently and are longing for some bygone day that never existed I cannot help you.
The media has always been biased to some degree because it's delivered by people. Reporters, journalists and editorialists (we need fewer of the latter) who are people with ideas, views and positions just like you. To think that some C student can get a bachelor's degree in J-School and suddenly come out as a beacon of neutrality is to ask something of the human condition that is not hard-wired within us.
Am I biased? You bet. I hold moderately Libertarian views that can be summed up thusly: The government is responsible for a few things, they should focus on those few things and leave the rest up to us. Will things be perfect? No, but that's the cost of living in a free society. Things don't always go as you would like.
The difference here is this:
1. I openly admit my bias. Currently the media does not. Because of this the Chron can let publicly slip a pro-light rail manifesto and still claim to be reporting on the issue in a neutral manner. Anderson Cooper can get a "tingle up his leg" when Barack Obama speaks but still claim he can moderate a Presidential debate fairly.
2. I'm not a professional media outlet. This, in case you haven't noticed, is an opinion blog. If you don't LIKE or AGREE with my opinion you can either comment, or start your own, or ignore it. The Chronicle, and other media outlets sell themselves as truth seekers, the last line of defense in the battle for the Republic.
This is a problem because often the reporting that you see doesn't tell the truth. It allows politicians of a certain strip to claim to be for the "working family" despite wanting to raise taxes and fees to levels that will have a real impact on their daily lives. Money taken by the government is NEVER referred to as your money, but as the government's money, as if they have a god-given right to it.
A lot of what people vote on today comes down to plain ignorance. We're mad that the VA Hospital is in shambles, a government program gone awry, yet we're sold that the solution to the problem is.....more government. People get mad at the banks for issuing sub-prime mortgages, forgetting that it was, in some cases, a government diktat that led and allowed them to do so.
Suburbanites in Texas get angry at the government, and vote for a party that's promising more......government.
Many times elections in America are a large temper tantrum. I think this one in Texas can be described as such, the question is how long it will linger, and if the low-information voter can allow the results to hold?
Counties that haven’t voted for a Democrat in decades turned out for Beto O’Rourke in his unsuccessful bid to unseat U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, and he picked up enough support in ruby red Republican counties to force Cruz into single-digit wins.
There's an interesting bit of political intrigue appearing in Texas right now. As Democrats long chastised the poor and working class for voting Republican against their interests, it seems that many Texas suburbs voted Democratic this election against theirs.
The Democrats, to an official, are an urban party. Since the rise of Al Gore and his investors they've loathed Suburbia. Politicians pass laws against it, comedians make jokes about it, TV shows and movies mock it. Suburbia is the gated last-resort of the White elitist, the last refuge of the conservative scoundrel.
Suburbs are overheating the planet, running mom and pop shops out of business, and generally casting a shadow over the vibrancy of an economy based on home-grown, fair-trade, organic, free range donkey dung crackers sourced locally from a collective farming community.
In Houston, especially, the switch is confusing.
The Harris County Democratic Party currently takes its public policy directly from the mind of David Crossley and his non-productive class band of acolytes. Their solution for Houston?
Empty the suburbs, force everyone to live asshole to elbow inside the Loop and ride the Danger Train everywhere (unless it's raining, then you can ride a bus, IF they go where you want). From so-called "Complete streets" (which are really streets that make it difficult to get anywhere) to speed limits capped at 30, to bemoaning the existence of the single-occupancy vehicle, the Democrats don't like the relatively mundane, relatively sequestered Suburban lifestyle preferring instead the highly segregated, highly controlled, highly taxed urban one.
Not that Democrats won't take their votes, they're not stupid, but to think that a party that's ran primarily on reducing energy consumption and footprint is all of the sudden going to embrace Mrs. Johnston living in a $500K McMansion (their term) and driving around in her Mercedes to a nail salon, or make policy that helps Mr. Johnston load up in his SUV to go golfing and create policy to promote this lifestyle requires the suspension of disbelief.
Yes, there's the problem with modern Republicans, and the short-sighted anti-immigrant stance they are taking. And the Bronzed Ego sitting in the White House doesn't help. But if you turn off the Twitter rage machine, block out the media breathlessly acting like every statement el Bronzo utters is "beyond the pale" you get to a place that has to, even begrudgingly, admit that this administration's actual results have been fairly positive, from a conservative perspective.
And this is the problem with politics today. Too much of it is ran through the Social Media outrage prism before being disseminated to people via what should be a calm, rational media. Not an unbiased media mind you, the media has never been that. If you think differently and are longing for some bygone day that never existed I cannot help you.
The media has always been biased to some degree because it's delivered by people. Reporters, journalists and editorialists (we need fewer of the latter) who are people with ideas, views and positions just like you. To think that some C student can get a bachelor's degree in J-School and suddenly come out as a beacon of neutrality is to ask something of the human condition that is not hard-wired within us.
Am I biased? You bet. I hold moderately Libertarian views that can be summed up thusly: The government is responsible for a few things, they should focus on those few things and leave the rest up to us. Will things be perfect? No, but that's the cost of living in a free society. Things don't always go as you would like.
The difference here is this:
1. I openly admit my bias. Currently the media does not. Because of this the Chron can let publicly slip a pro-light rail manifesto and still claim to be reporting on the issue in a neutral manner. Anderson Cooper can get a "tingle up his leg" when Barack Obama speaks but still claim he can moderate a Presidential debate fairly.
2. I'm not a professional media outlet. This, in case you haven't noticed, is an opinion blog. If you don't LIKE or AGREE with my opinion you can either comment, or start your own, or ignore it. The Chronicle, and other media outlets sell themselves as truth seekers, the last line of defense in the battle for the Republic.
This is a problem because often the reporting that you see doesn't tell the truth. It allows politicians of a certain strip to claim to be for the "working family" despite wanting to raise taxes and fees to levels that will have a real impact on their daily lives. Money taken by the government is NEVER referred to as your money, but as the government's money, as if they have a god-given right to it.
A lot of what people vote on today comes down to plain ignorance. We're mad that the VA Hospital is in shambles, a government program gone awry, yet we're sold that the solution to the problem is.....more government. People get mad at the banks for issuing sub-prime mortgages, forgetting that it was, in some cases, a government diktat that led and allowed them to do so.
Suburbanites in Texas get angry at the government, and vote for a party that's promising more......government.
Many times elections in America are a large temper tantrum. I think this one in Texas can be described as such, the question is how long it will linger, and if the low-information voter can allow the results to hold?
Tuesday, November 07, 2017
TLSPM: Still Getting it wrong.
The Houston Chronicle's new "conservative" (read: slightly less liberal but still solidly Democratic) columnist chastises the Democrats for not getting their act together on the ballot, without realizing why they won't win....
Texas Democrats need to try a little harder to put the State in play. Erica Greider, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
Beto O'Rourke is the latest, no name ID, fave-rave of Texas Democrats, whose candidacy is likely to invigorate the TLSPM and the InterLeft but will be destined to lose to incumbent Ted Cruz by double digits. As Greider notes, the slate at the top of the ticket looks grim. It's gotten so bad for Texas Democrats that they're going back to "Draft (insert celebrity name here) mode".
But the real reason Texas Democrats have no chance is in the comments to Ms. Greider's tome. From a leftist with the nom de plume of ROBIN:
Yes, because you're going to win the hearts and minds of voters by insulting them and calling them names. Enjoy the fringes of the political landscape folks, thank you and have a nice night.
The biggest problem that Democrats have right now is that they've become the party of relatively well-off, predominantly Caucasian progressives. Progressives who view themselves as functionally, mentally and otherwise superior to the rest of the rubes in America (and Texas) in every way. Unfortunately, for them, their political ideals are out of step with a majority of Texans and they are, almost to a person, horrible at the whole relatability thing. Mix in the fact that their entire political apparatus appears to be made up of low-functioning idiots with communication and relatability issues and you have a perfect recipe for electoral banishment.
It's gotten so bad for Democrats that they were relegated to choosing a gubernatorial candidate based on her tennis shoes.
The Texas Democratic Party is urban, in a State that's still got a sizable rural population. They still pay lip service to minority groups, while promoting progressive policies that have been disastrous for them. They have no solutions outside of "we're going to tax you until your eyes bleed" and even then they can't seem to agree on how to spread that message. They're bereft of leadership, have no bench strength and if they do eventually win it will be by default.
Because the Texas Republican Party is worse. They just have a ton of candidates with some name ID.
I gave up voting a couple of election cycles ago because I realize that it doesn't matter which set of morons we put in charge of the ship, it's still going to hit the iceberg eventually. It's heading that way because we've allowed our politics to be controlled not by the citizens, but by the politicians. And yes, the media helped get us to this point through hero worship of some pretty horrible people.
I've no doubt that a Texas Democrat will eventually win a State-wide race in Texas, at which point the TLSPM will erupt in euphoric joy. As for the rest of us?
That just means there's a new way for us to get screwed. Hopefully they allow us the luxury of Vasoline.
Texas Democrats need to try a little harder to put the State in play. Erica Greider, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
Most puzzling of all, though, is how little the Democratic Party is doing in Texas. Individual candidates, to be sure, are storming the ramparts; the most notable is Beto O'Rourke, the U.S. representative from El Paso, who is challenging Ted Cruz for a seat in the Senate. And some of the congressional primaries are, frankly, oversubscribed.
Beto O'Rourke is the latest, no name ID, fave-rave of Texas Democrats, whose candidacy is likely to invigorate the TLSPM and the InterLeft but will be destined to lose to incumbent Ted Cruz by double digits. As Greider notes, the slate at the top of the ticket looks grim. It's gotten so bad for Texas Democrats that they're going back to "Draft (insert celebrity name here) mode".
But the real reason Texas Democrats have no chance is in the comments to Ms. Greider's tome. From a leftist with the nom de plume of ROBIN:
Texass is just a few years from turning purple, and then blue.
Yes, because you're going to win the hearts and minds of voters by insulting them and calling them names. Enjoy the fringes of the political landscape folks, thank you and have a nice night.
The biggest problem that Democrats have right now is that they've become the party of relatively well-off, predominantly Caucasian progressives. Progressives who view themselves as functionally, mentally and otherwise superior to the rest of the rubes in America (and Texas) in every way. Unfortunately, for them, their political ideals are out of step with a majority of Texans and they are, almost to a person, horrible at the whole relatability thing. Mix in the fact that their entire political apparatus appears to be made up of low-functioning idiots with communication and relatability issues and you have a perfect recipe for electoral banishment.
It's gotten so bad for Democrats that they were relegated to choosing a gubernatorial candidate based on her tennis shoes.
The Texas Democratic Party is urban, in a State that's still got a sizable rural population. They still pay lip service to minority groups, while promoting progressive policies that have been disastrous for them. They have no solutions outside of "we're going to tax you until your eyes bleed" and even then they can't seem to agree on how to spread that message. They're bereft of leadership, have no bench strength and if they do eventually win it will be by default.
Because the Texas Republican Party is worse. They just have a ton of candidates with some name ID.
I gave up voting a couple of election cycles ago because I realize that it doesn't matter which set of morons we put in charge of the ship, it's still going to hit the iceberg eventually. It's heading that way because we've allowed our politics to be controlled not by the citizens, but by the politicians. And yes, the media helped get us to this point through hero worship of some pretty horrible people.
I've no doubt that a Texas Democrat will eventually win a State-wide race in Texas, at which point the TLSPM will erupt in euphoric joy. As for the rest of us?
That just means there's a new way for us to get screwed. Hopefully they allow us the luxury of Vasoline.
Wednesday, October 18, 2017
BadMedia: Yes, the Texas Tax System is broken.
But the solution is not to replace it with a punitive tax code.
OK then, what is "bad behavior"? And who defines that? What is "conspicuous consumption" and who defines that? And what is "extreme income" and who gets the power of defining that?
My guess is that Tomlinson believes that he is the ideal candidate to become the "Texas Tax Czar" placing punitive taxes on Wal-Mart purchases, the energy industry and anyone making more than he. Because, that is what he's calling for, selectively taxing things that he doesn't like while giving those things he does a pass.
That's not a fair and effective tax system, that's a means of punishing those with differing political views than you.
Ironically, he admits, directly above his prescription for Texas, that his system wouldn't work.
Yet his prescription for Texas is more of the same of what it is currently doing, only at higher rates and more tightly targeted against those whom he feels are bad actors. This is demagoguery at its highest, not a serious attempt to reform Texas taxes.
The best, most equitable tax code is one that is broad, flat, easy to adhere to and free of special interest exemptions. As Mr. Tomlinson points out the current Texas tax code is anything but that. The problem is, his "fix" for the situation is even worse.
He focuses on the so-called Margins Tax, which is awful, but let me give you an under-the-radar way Texas handles tax policy poorly....oil and gas severance taxes.
On it's surface the tax is fairly straight-forward. Unlike some other commodity taxes it's a value based tax on the "Net Taxable Value" derived from the severance of oil and gas from the soil. In short, it's the gross proceeds less allowed expenses times 7.5%, for oil and produced condensate the rate is 4.6%. Easy enough.
But then, you have exemptions. There's the high cost gas exemption (Type 05) which allows for a reduced rate of taxation for up to 10 years or until 50% of the drilling costs are recaptured, whichever comes first. In order to qualify for this there is a lengthy, an unwieldy, application process which involves first dealing with the RRC, and then turning around and repeating the process with the Texas Comptroller. Then you assigned a reduced rate, and can take that new rate until you meet the deadline or threshold whichever comes first.
Of course, by the time the State gets around to approving the rate reduction over a year can go by before approval. This means that you have to go back and retrospectively adjust your accounting, pay royalty owners late for their share of the increased rates they pay, and ask the Texas Comptroller's office for a refund, which is a time-consuming and expensive process, not to mention the time and expense wasted on the re-work.
Think that's bad? There's also the low-producing well exemption (Type 11) which is triggered by both price and volume. Not only that, but the State index price that has to be rolled back to 2005 equivalents, that's right, the Lege forgot to allow for inflation. To add to that, a producer has to calculate a 3-month rolling average of production to ensure the tax criteria is met. If a producer makes an error, or uses a different production factor than the State, then the State will revoke your lower rate and charge interest on the unpaid tax.
For oil there's the Enhanced Oil Recover exemption (Type 05, for oil) which provides a rate decrease of 50% (from 4.6% to 2.3%) on all incremental barrels of production realized from secondary or tertiary recovery. In order to qualify for this then you have to initiate a project, file the appropriate paperwork (with fee) to the RRC, and then wait a year to determine if the project was successful or no. Once it is you have to re-apply with the results to the RRC, and then take their approval over to the Comptroller's office to have them approve the credit, and tell you how long you have to retrospectively fix you accounting on the back periods before you lose the credit. All of the time you are waiting for this money has come into the State on which the are earning interest. Meanwhile, the private royalty owners (who share in the tax expense) are losing out on revenue because a company is charging them full-rate tax (by law) which reduces their income.
All of that for reporting and paying taxes in Texas and I haven't even discussed the Cost to Market deduction yet. A better way to administrate this would be to eliminate all of the exemptions, and lower the tax rates. A flat oil tax of 2% of Net Taxable Value and a gas tax of 4% of Net Taxable value (calculated as they are currently) would be much easier (and cheaper) for companies to administer and would benefit the State as well.
You could extrapolate that to the Federal Income Tax, most business taxes and a host of other taxes as well. Any tax really where special-interest driven loopholes exist.
Unfortunately, this will never happen because both political parties and their courtiers LIKE the system we have. Not only does it wet the beaks of their patrons, but it proffers them the levers of power to punish their political opposites as well. It's always been this way, it's just rare when one of the courtiers is dense enough to put the fact in print.
On that note: Thank you Mr. Tomlinson. Thank you.
I agree with the Chron's Austin-based business columnist in one area: Taxation in the State of Texas is one of the most poorly designed systems I've come across.
Where we disagree is on the fix.
Mr. Tomlinson (From the linked article above):
Texas' tax system is as broken as the federal system and desperately needs an overhaul. We need the Legislature to stop punishing business and investment, and instead tax conspicuous consumption, bad behavior and extreme income.
OK then, what is "bad behavior"? And who defines that? What is "conspicuous consumption" and who defines that? And what is "extreme income" and who gets the power of defining that?
My guess is that Tomlinson believes that he is the ideal candidate to become the "Texas Tax Czar" placing punitive taxes on Wal-Mart purchases, the energy industry and anyone making more than he. Because, that is what he's calling for, selectively taxing things that he doesn't like while giving those things he does a pass.
That's not a fair and effective tax system, that's a means of punishing those with differing political views than you.
Ironically, he admits, directly above his prescription for Texas, that his system wouldn't work.
A smaller tax on more people and businesses is also better than a high tax on only a few.
Yet his prescription for Texas is more of the same of what it is currently doing, only at higher rates and more tightly targeted against those whom he feels are bad actors. This is demagoguery at its highest, not a serious attempt to reform Texas taxes.
The best, most equitable tax code is one that is broad, flat, easy to adhere to and free of special interest exemptions. As Mr. Tomlinson points out the current Texas tax code is anything but that. The problem is, his "fix" for the situation is even worse.
He focuses on the so-called Margins Tax, which is awful, but let me give you an under-the-radar way Texas handles tax policy poorly....oil and gas severance taxes.
On it's surface the tax is fairly straight-forward. Unlike some other commodity taxes it's a value based tax on the "Net Taxable Value" derived from the severance of oil and gas from the soil. In short, it's the gross proceeds less allowed expenses times 7.5%, for oil and produced condensate the rate is 4.6%. Easy enough.
But then, you have exemptions. There's the high cost gas exemption (Type 05) which allows for a reduced rate of taxation for up to 10 years or until 50% of the drilling costs are recaptured, whichever comes first. In order to qualify for this there is a lengthy, an unwieldy, application process which involves first dealing with the RRC, and then turning around and repeating the process with the Texas Comptroller. Then you assigned a reduced rate, and can take that new rate until you meet the deadline or threshold whichever comes first.
Of course, by the time the State gets around to approving the rate reduction over a year can go by before approval. This means that you have to go back and retrospectively adjust your accounting, pay royalty owners late for their share of the increased rates they pay, and ask the Texas Comptroller's office for a refund, which is a time-consuming and expensive process, not to mention the time and expense wasted on the re-work.
Think that's bad? There's also the low-producing well exemption (Type 11) which is triggered by both price and volume. Not only that, but the State index price that has to be rolled back to 2005 equivalents, that's right, the Lege forgot to allow for inflation. To add to that, a producer has to calculate a 3-month rolling average of production to ensure the tax criteria is met. If a producer makes an error, or uses a different production factor than the State, then the State will revoke your lower rate and charge interest on the unpaid tax.
For oil there's the Enhanced Oil Recover exemption (Type 05, for oil) which provides a rate decrease of 50% (from 4.6% to 2.3%) on all incremental barrels of production realized from secondary or tertiary recovery. In order to qualify for this then you have to initiate a project, file the appropriate paperwork (with fee) to the RRC, and then wait a year to determine if the project was successful or no. Once it is you have to re-apply with the results to the RRC, and then take their approval over to the Comptroller's office to have them approve the credit, and tell you how long you have to retrospectively fix you accounting on the back periods before you lose the credit. All of the time you are waiting for this money has come into the State on which the are earning interest. Meanwhile, the private royalty owners (who share in the tax expense) are losing out on revenue because a company is charging them full-rate tax (by law) which reduces their income.
All of that for reporting and paying taxes in Texas and I haven't even discussed the Cost to Market deduction yet. A better way to administrate this would be to eliminate all of the exemptions, and lower the tax rates. A flat oil tax of 2% of Net Taxable Value and a gas tax of 4% of Net Taxable value (calculated as they are currently) would be much easier (and cheaper) for companies to administer and would benefit the State as well.
You could extrapolate that to the Federal Income Tax, most business taxes and a host of other taxes as well. Any tax really where special-interest driven loopholes exist.
Unfortunately, this will never happen because both political parties and their courtiers LIKE the system we have. Not only does it wet the beaks of their patrons, but it proffers them the levers of power to punish their political opposites as well. It's always been this way, it's just rare when one of the courtiers is dense enough to put the fact in print.
On that note: Thank you Mr. Tomlinson. Thank you.
Wednesday, June 07, 2017
TXLV: Odd Responses to Abbott's Call for a Special Session.
So, Greg Abbott has decided that the Texas Legislature needs to come back and try again on some of the many things they didn't get accomplished the first time around....
Abbott Pleases Conservatives with Wide-Ranging Call for Special Session. Mike Ward. HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
The responses to him doing so are...um.....odd.
I don't get that critique at all.
Here you have Abbott, who campaigned for Governor as a conservative-type and who beat the pink tennis shoes off of progressive wunderkind Wendy Davis calling a special session over the Summer that's going to first address some key business, and then address issues important to the GOP base who elected him.
And this is odd to some?
Rep Gene Wu, who's alleged antics were discussed here. Has positioned himself as the Texas Democratic clone of Donald Trump on Twitter. No issue is too small, no take too bad for him to opine on. He has no filter, and to be honest, not much of a clue regarding voter preference in a solidly red State.
"Why do we need a Governor Abbott?" Because he campaigned on a platform that the voters overwhelmingly accepted. That he is now making that platform a priority should not surprise. Nor should it be treated as a "gift to 'ultra-right wing' activists" in Texas. (In reality, issues such as the bathroom bill and abortion restrictions, while infuriating to the left, are not all that controversial on right side of the political aisle.
Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean that it's controversial, the TLSPM would do themselves a favor by remembering that. As a matter of fact, ALL media would do themselves a solid by remembering it.
Think back to the Affordable Care Act. It was passed on a 100% partisan vote and signed into law. Lawsuits were filed against it, many bills were filed to repeal it, yet it was never called a "controversial" act at almost any level of media. That word is only reserved for issues which the progressives and their courtesan class cronies deem 'evil'. The bathroom bill is certainly partisan, and I've no doubt it will pass under partisan pretenses, as will abortion restrictions and, for that matter, property tax reform.
But when the Texas GOP is winning state-wide elections by 60% or more I hardly think the issues they are running on are all that 'controversial'. Whether I personally agree with some of them or not.
On this, and other blogs, I've long bemoaned the horrible state of both the media coverage in Texas, and the lack of ideological depth possessed by the minority opposition party. Sadly, over the 15 plus years that I've been tracking it it's only gotten worse, not better. The Lock-Step media is more homogeneous and smaller in influence, than ever before, and the Democrats have devolved to the point where their ideological North Star is a State Representative from the Houston area whose Tweets more closely resemble "Deep Thoughts with Jack Handy" than they do any coherent political ideology.
How bad are things? It's still considered OK to quote Molly Ivins for Crissakes. One of the most overrated political writers that ever put letters to paper. When your coup de grace is calling George W. Bush "Shrub"? No.
Lastly. There's going to be some talk about the "cost" of this session and hand-wringing and crying from both the TLSPM and the Left. Don't buy it. The same people who are bemoaning this cost will in the next breath try and argue for a full-time legislature that would be almost exponentially more expensive to the State.
The less these idiots are hanging around Austin the better off we all are.
And that should be a bipartisan area of agreement.
Abbott Pleases Conservatives with Wide-Ranging Call for Special Session. Mike Ward. HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
The responses to him doing so are...um.....odd.
House Democrats echoed the sentiment that the governor is trying to appease conservatives who criticized Abbott's performance in the regular session. "I'm not sure why we need a Governor Abbott when we have a Governor Patrick," tweeted state Rep. Gene Wu, D-Houston.
"After providing zero leadership and interest during the regular session, the governor is clearly panicking and trying to shovel as much red meat as he can to his right-wing tea party base," said state Rep. Chris Turner of Grand Prairie, the chairman of the House Democratic Caucus.What the Dems don't make clear here is why it's OK for them to march in some kind of odd ideological lock-step but it's not OK for the Republicans to do so?
I don't get that critique at all.
Here you have Abbott, who campaigned for Governor as a conservative-type and who beat the pink tennis shoes off of progressive wunderkind Wendy Davis calling a special session over the Summer that's going to first address some key business, and then address issues important to the GOP base who elected him.
And this is odd to some?
Rep Gene Wu, who's alleged antics were discussed here. Has positioned himself as the Texas Democratic clone of Donald Trump on Twitter. No issue is too small, no take too bad for him to opine on. He has no filter, and to be honest, not much of a clue regarding voter preference in a solidly red State.
"Why do we need a Governor Abbott?" Because he campaigned on a platform that the voters overwhelmingly accepted. That he is now making that platform a priority should not surprise. Nor should it be treated as a "gift to 'ultra-right wing' activists" in Texas. (In reality, issues such as the bathroom bill and abortion restrictions, while infuriating to the left, are not all that controversial on right side of the political aisle.
Just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean that it's controversial, the TLSPM would do themselves a favor by remembering that. As a matter of fact, ALL media would do themselves a solid by remembering it.
Think back to the Affordable Care Act. It was passed on a 100% partisan vote and signed into law. Lawsuits were filed against it, many bills were filed to repeal it, yet it was never called a "controversial" act at almost any level of media. That word is only reserved for issues which the progressives and their courtesan class cronies deem 'evil'. The bathroom bill is certainly partisan, and I've no doubt it will pass under partisan pretenses, as will abortion restrictions and, for that matter, property tax reform.
But when the Texas GOP is winning state-wide elections by 60% or more I hardly think the issues they are running on are all that 'controversial'. Whether I personally agree with some of them or not.
On this, and other blogs, I've long bemoaned the horrible state of both the media coverage in Texas, and the lack of ideological depth possessed by the minority opposition party. Sadly, over the 15 plus years that I've been tracking it it's only gotten worse, not better. The Lock-Step media is more homogeneous and smaller in influence, than ever before, and the Democrats have devolved to the point where their ideological North Star is a State Representative from the Houston area whose Tweets more closely resemble "Deep Thoughts with Jack Handy" than they do any coherent political ideology.
How bad are things? It's still considered OK to quote Molly Ivins for Crissakes. One of the most overrated political writers that ever put letters to paper. When your coup de grace is calling George W. Bush "Shrub"? No.
Lastly. There's going to be some talk about the "cost" of this session and hand-wringing and crying from both the TLSPM and the Left. Don't buy it. The same people who are bemoaning this cost will in the next breath try and argue for a full-time legislature that would be almost exponentially more expensive to the State.
The less these idiots are hanging around Austin the better off we all are.
And that should be a bipartisan area of agreement.
Wednesday, May 31, 2017
TXLV: The lie of tax cuts and government fiscal restraint.
The Texas Legislature has (finally) reached Sine Die. This means that it's time for the Texas LockStep Political Media and other groups to start spinning their fantasies about what it all means.
Money Grab. The Increasingly Irrelevant Chron Editorial Board. HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
In what is really a love letter to local State Senator Sylvia Garcia (who has been a progressive fave/rave in the area for some time now) the bi-annual unsigned editorial bemoaning Texas relatively low tax system takes a new tack this year. Suggesting that high property tax values are due, in whole, to the lack of other taxes at other levels.
One thing that never changes at the Chron is the desire to have large wads of cash thrown into a catapult and hurled at the problem. Of course, those taxes are best when paid by other people than them. In an attempt to seem bipartisan the Chron lists one "solution" as being a tax proposed by a Republican (Ed Emmett's proposed County Sales Tax) and one from a Democrat (Fort Bend County Chairman Ben Brown's proposal for a State income Tax).
In reality neither of these would put much of a dent in property taxes. The idea that government will enact one tax while lowering, or eliminating another is a false promise placed in front of gullible voters which has historically never come to fruition. Remember when the Texas "Margins" Tax was supposed to lower property taxes? How did that work out for you?
The problem, although it won't be admitted to publicly, is that there are too many organizations with too many hands reaching into the taxpayer pie, each with different agendas. Let us say, for grins, that the County gets a sales tax of .05% and decreases their property tax burden proportionately. OK, but the City of Houston is already pushing to raise their property tax rate due to pension under-funding and the fact that the past three mayors have acted in fiscally imprudent manners, so Houston will raise their share of the takings until resident's eyes bleed. This will lead to more people moving out of the city and into the county, who will then be forced to re-raise property taxes to keep up with infrastructure demand.
So now, especially if you live in the city, you're saddled with higher property taxes that are still increasing due to appraisal creep AND you have to pay more in sales tax and a state income tax to boot.
Even Steve Radack's idea to "expand Medicare" to cover costs is not the bag of free money that's being promised. Medicare is nearing insolvency, and to make up the loss the United State's federal government is going to have to get serious about fixing their tax system soon. Also, there's a 10 year limitation in what's left of ACA for "free" access to those funds. Eventually, the bill comes due and the State has to start covering those costs. There is not now, nor has there ever been, any such thing as a free lunch.
Here's the rub.
Things (stuff, trinkets, etc.) have to be paid for, political legacies have to be enshrined and no one wants to have their name attached to the phrase "tore down the Astrodome". In order to continue to bribe the electorate the government has to figure out a way to increase tax burdens while convincing a majority of the citizenry that they're doing it to "the other guy". People are more likely to accept a small tax increase on themselves if they think those slightly more well off than they (or even better, evil "corporations") are shouldering a much larger share of the version. Politicians, who are rational actors despite being (for the most part) functional idiots, understand this and have done a great job convincing most of academia and the media that this is a swell way to run a country. How else do you explain a man who owns three homes running around suggesting that he's a 'man of the people' and really only wants healthcare and higher education to be "free" not being laughed out of the building?
Even though the ideas are wrong the country still has to run, things need to be purchased, the general security provided for and debt service paid. What this means is that serious, meaningful tax reform has to be broached at every level of government. The goof-balls in Washington D.C. could do a lot worse than simplifying the tax code to the point that the IRS is not really needed while the pugilists in Austin (and other state-houses) should start by figuring out what NEEDS to be done, fund that and then do those "nice to have" things based on remaining money. Counties and Cities just simply need to go on a diet. Public works is a must, of course, as are policing and other emergency services. But after that?
Yes, I get it that you feel you really NEED that $100K per year from the County to hold your civic club's annual garden party but the facts are that you don't. If the business community feels that parks and green space is vital to their ability to attract talent than allow them to underwrite the cost. If nothing else it will save us from having politicians gloating that their legacy is a sidewalk on which dogs pee and poop. (The Bill and Andrea White promenade at Discovery Green in case you're wondering).
A trap that conservatives (including little l libertarians) fall into is the fallacy of "no". You cannot run a government simply by shouting that and hoping for the best. Because things have to be done. The biggest issue for what's left of the conservative movement is not sanctuary cities, or bathroom obsessions, it's making the case for real, meaningful tax reform for all. And doing a better job explaining to the family of four making $45K per year why it's a boon for them.
The alternative is in the link above, an asinine argument that by failing to increase taxes sufficiently the government has failed to cut them.
To be fair, there is one thing on which the Chron and I agree. In order to get nice things from our government we're going to have to elect new, serious people to do the governing. This might come as a shock but I am referring to your elected representative, including the one in your district that you like. They need to go. (as do mine)
Until that happens we're just whistling past the graveyard.
Money Grab. The Increasingly Irrelevant Chron Editorial Board. HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
In what is really a love letter to local State Senator Sylvia Garcia (who has been a progressive fave/rave in the area for some time now) the bi-annual unsigned editorial bemoaning Texas relatively low tax system takes a new tack this year. Suggesting that high property tax values are due, in whole, to the lack of other taxes at other levels.
One thing that never changes at the Chron is the desire to have large wads of cash thrown into a catapult and hurled at the problem. Of course, those taxes are best when paid by other people than them. In an attempt to seem bipartisan the Chron lists one "solution" as being a tax proposed by a Republican (Ed Emmett's proposed County Sales Tax) and one from a Democrat (Fort Bend County Chairman Ben Brown's proposal for a State income Tax).
In reality neither of these would put much of a dent in property taxes. The idea that government will enact one tax while lowering, or eliminating another is a false promise placed in front of gullible voters which has historically never come to fruition. Remember when the Texas "Margins" Tax was supposed to lower property taxes? How did that work out for you?
The problem, although it won't be admitted to publicly, is that there are too many organizations with too many hands reaching into the taxpayer pie, each with different agendas. Let us say, for grins, that the County gets a sales tax of .05% and decreases their property tax burden proportionately. OK, but the City of Houston is already pushing to raise their property tax rate due to pension under-funding and the fact that the past three mayors have acted in fiscally imprudent manners, so Houston will raise their share of the takings until resident's eyes bleed. This will lead to more people moving out of the city and into the county, who will then be forced to re-raise property taxes to keep up with infrastructure demand.
So now, especially if you live in the city, you're saddled with higher property taxes that are still increasing due to appraisal creep AND you have to pay more in sales tax and a state income tax to boot.
Even Steve Radack's idea to "expand Medicare" to cover costs is not the bag of free money that's being promised. Medicare is nearing insolvency, and to make up the loss the United State's federal government is going to have to get serious about fixing their tax system soon. Also, there's a 10 year limitation in what's left of ACA for "free" access to those funds. Eventually, the bill comes due and the State has to start covering those costs. There is not now, nor has there ever been, any such thing as a free lunch.
Here's the rub.
Things (stuff, trinkets, etc.) have to be paid for, political legacies have to be enshrined and no one wants to have their name attached to the phrase "tore down the Astrodome". In order to continue to bribe the electorate the government has to figure out a way to increase tax burdens while convincing a majority of the citizenry that they're doing it to "the other guy". People are more likely to accept a small tax increase on themselves if they think those slightly more well off than they (or even better, evil "corporations") are shouldering a much larger share of the version. Politicians, who are rational actors despite being (for the most part) functional idiots, understand this and have done a great job convincing most of academia and the media that this is a swell way to run a country. How else do you explain a man who owns three homes running around suggesting that he's a 'man of the people' and really only wants healthcare and higher education to be "free" not being laughed out of the building?
Even though the ideas are wrong the country still has to run, things need to be purchased, the general security provided for and debt service paid. What this means is that serious, meaningful tax reform has to be broached at every level of government. The goof-balls in Washington D.C. could do a lot worse than simplifying the tax code to the point that the IRS is not really needed while the pugilists in Austin (and other state-houses) should start by figuring out what NEEDS to be done, fund that and then do those "nice to have" things based on remaining money. Counties and Cities just simply need to go on a diet. Public works is a must, of course, as are policing and other emergency services. But after that?
Yes, I get it that you feel you really NEED that $100K per year from the County to hold your civic club's annual garden party but the facts are that you don't. If the business community feels that parks and green space is vital to their ability to attract talent than allow them to underwrite the cost. If nothing else it will save us from having politicians gloating that their legacy is a sidewalk on which dogs pee and poop. (The Bill and Andrea White promenade at Discovery Green in case you're wondering).
A trap that conservatives (including little l libertarians) fall into is the fallacy of "no". You cannot run a government simply by shouting that and hoping for the best. Because things have to be done. The biggest issue for what's left of the conservative movement is not sanctuary cities, or bathroom obsessions, it's making the case for real, meaningful tax reform for all. And doing a better job explaining to the family of four making $45K per year why it's a boon for them.
The alternative is in the link above, an asinine argument that by failing to increase taxes sufficiently the government has failed to cut them.
To be fair, there is one thing on which the Chron and I agree. In order to get nice things from our government we're going to have to elect new, serious people to do the governing. This might come as a shock but I am referring to your elected representative, including the one in your district that you like. They need to go. (as do mine)
Until that happens we're just whistling past the graveyard.
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
TXLV: You're about to pay more for your beer and liquor, with less choices.
Hold on to your wallets, because the Texas Legislature is at it again....
Craft Brewers call Texas Legislature's passage of bill 'disheartening'. Ronnie Crocker, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
Before we go any further I want you to think about the logistics of this for a minute.
1. Texas Brewery brews beer, wants to sell some from their taproom.
2. If they are above a certain size (175,000 barrels of annual production) they cannot unless....
3. The 'sell' the beer to distributors and then buy it back at a mark-up (sometimes as high as 30%).
4. It is likely the beer in question will never leave the premises.
In other words the Texas Legislature, supposedly one of the most conservative in the country, has just mandated that Texas brewers of a certain size must pay up to a 30% tax on their wares to a private industry for which the industry does not have to offer any services upon return.
Of all the bad liquor laws in the State of Texas, including those that Wal-Mart is challenging in Federal Court and almost anything related to the TABC this undoubtedly takes the gold medal as the worst.
Imagine if you made sandwiches and wanted to sell them at a restaurant, but the Texas Legislature ruled that you could not sell those sandwiches until you paid 30% of their value to Sysco. This would be true even if you purchased your meat from a local butcher, and brought it to your restaurant without their services.
I would imagine you would feel a little bit put out by all of this.
Yet, our august officials in the Texas Legislature (with mostly Republicans voting in the affirmative) have determined that this is a very good thing and an area where government should get involved. I would say that I can't wait to hear Dan (the Man who would be King) Patrick offer up a 'conservative' argument for this but I'd be lying. Lying because I doubt any politician is going to be asked to explain their vote, or offer justification for it. It's unlikely that they'll suffer for it at the ballot box either because, on the whole, Texas citizens don't care.
What they do care about is being able to buy beer, wine and liquor at commodity prices, whether or not the product in question is, in fact, a commodity. While buying liquor in Houston I've, first-hand, heard customers arguing for massive discounts on luxury liquors such as Louis III, Pappy and some high-end Champagnes. They want Dom or Veuve (more of a mid-range product but that's another post) but they want to pay low-end Moet prices. $9.99 per bottle please.
Of course, that $3.00 tap beer will now cost $4.00 despite never having left the facility. A dollar of that cost is going to a company that is doing nothing at all except collect a private tax imposed on the producer by Texas' increasingly un-conservative legislature.
I, for one, hope the breweries sue. Because I think they'll win if they frame this as an unconstitutional taking. The argument for seems pretty strong.
I hate to say it for the small liquor stores but I hope Wal-Mart wins as well. Texas liquor laws need to be blown up, rewritten and the ground needs to be salted where the three-tiered system once stood.
Then what is left of the GOP needs to do some soul-searching and decide whether or not they want to keep their elected officials. Increasingly, it's getting harder and harder to find ones that deserve an affirmative answer to that question. Certainly no-one in leadership.
Craft Brewers call Texas Legislature's passage of bill 'disheartening'. Ronnie Crocker, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
A bill that would force Texas breweries, once they've grown beyond a state-limited size, to sell and buy back their own beer before offering it in their own taprooms has now passed both houses of the state Legislature.
Before we go any further I want you to think about the logistics of this for a minute.
1. Texas Brewery brews beer, wants to sell some from their taproom.
2. If they are above a certain size (175,000 barrels of annual production) they cannot unless....
3. The 'sell' the beer to distributors and then buy it back at a mark-up (sometimes as high as 30%).
4. It is likely the beer in question will never leave the premises.
In other words the Texas Legislature, supposedly one of the most conservative in the country, has just mandated that Texas brewers of a certain size must pay up to a 30% tax on their wares to a private industry for which the industry does not have to offer any services upon return.
Of all the bad liquor laws in the State of Texas, including those that Wal-Mart is challenging in Federal Court and almost anything related to the TABC this undoubtedly takes the gold medal as the worst.
Imagine if you made sandwiches and wanted to sell them at a restaurant, but the Texas Legislature ruled that you could not sell those sandwiches until you paid 30% of their value to Sysco. This would be true even if you purchased your meat from a local butcher, and brought it to your restaurant without their services.
I would imagine you would feel a little bit put out by all of this.
Yet, our august officials in the Texas Legislature (with mostly Republicans voting in the affirmative) have determined that this is a very good thing and an area where government should get involved. I would say that I can't wait to hear Dan (the Man who would be King) Patrick offer up a 'conservative' argument for this but I'd be lying. Lying because I doubt any politician is going to be asked to explain their vote, or offer justification for it. It's unlikely that they'll suffer for it at the ballot box either because, on the whole, Texas citizens don't care.
What they do care about is being able to buy beer, wine and liquor at commodity prices, whether or not the product in question is, in fact, a commodity. While buying liquor in Houston I've, first-hand, heard customers arguing for massive discounts on luxury liquors such as Louis III, Pappy and some high-end Champagnes. They want Dom or Veuve (more of a mid-range product but that's another post) but they want to pay low-end Moet prices. $9.99 per bottle please.
Of course, that $3.00 tap beer will now cost $4.00 despite never having left the facility. A dollar of that cost is going to a company that is doing nothing at all except collect a private tax imposed on the producer by Texas' increasingly un-conservative legislature.
I, for one, hope the breweries sue. Because I think they'll win if they frame this as an unconstitutional taking. The argument for seems pretty strong.
I hate to say it for the small liquor stores but I hope Wal-Mart wins as well. Texas liquor laws need to be blown up, rewritten and the ground needs to be salted where the three-tiered system once stood.
Then what is left of the GOP needs to do some soul-searching and decide whether or not they want to keep their elected officials. Increasingly, it's getting harder and harder to find ones that deserve an affirmative answer to that question. Certainly no-one in leadership.
Wednesday, May 17, 2017
TLSPM: "If I (and my friends) don't like it it must be cronyism" is a tired saw.
I have to admit to chuckling, just a bit, when I read the latest missive from the Houston Chronicle's business-unfriendly business columnist today.
Buddy System still rules in Austin, and those friends don't come cheap. Chris Tomlinson, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
It's the same-old, tired, Texas Lock-Step Political Media saw: "If I don't like the bills that passed, and the things they accomplished I'm just going to bemoan special interests and call it a column." I'm starting to wonder if these are pre-written, or if there is a form column out there somewhere?
Because it's always the same.
That is not to say that crony-capitalism is not alive and well in Texas. Of course it is. In fact, Tomlinson mentions a couple of areas where it's on full display. Namely, auto sales and the construction industry. He left out one of the biggest, the liquor distribution con that upholds the "Texas 3-step" to the benefit of a few and the detriment of many, but he's never seemed to really get behind issues such as this anyway.
Of course he's mad that the Texas Railroad Commission wasn't totally revamped, because his friends in certain special interest groups didn't get their way. An argument could be made however that the voters who elected oil and gas industry-friendly representatives to large majorities in Texas are quite happy with the way things are going at the RRC right now.
The name change to the Texas Energy Commission seems like an expensive waste of time, and the proposals that Sierra Club and others are making are not to protect the environment, they're designed to cripple and industry that is one of the largest employers in the State. People rarely vote to be unemployed. regardless of whether or not their industry makes political donations.
Yes, it would have been nice to see some real tax reform come from the Lege this year, but not of the type Tomlinson is asking for (which involves huge tax increases on everyone in case you're wondering) and it also would have been nice to see something done about roads. Texas is currently solving it's problems via the toll road option, an option for which I'm not entirely opposed.
Education spending is a tougher hill to climb. In large part this is because our schools are doing a horrible job in regards to wise spending. It's tough to cry poor when many districts are still spending hundreds of Millions of dollars on football stadiums, or when it's reported that the administration growth outpaces teacher growth. Also when centralized administrative staff is averaging twice the salary of teachers. In short, we have too many administrative staff on the payroll making too much per year.
Speaking of cronyism, isn't that what happens when the Texas Municipal League advocates against property tax reform? Yet the TLSPM does not treat it as so despite the fact that you have an organization seeking to protect its bottom line at the expense of consumers. The only difference being that Tomlinson and his ilk like to attend cocktail parties with elected officials, they don't get invited to the cocktail parties thrown by CEO's and the like.
Almost every bill is going to have winners and losers, and quite often the winners will donate money to politicians to ensure they stay in the W column. This is not cronyism as much as it is politics today, especially at the State and Local level where the ordinary citizen does not pay much attention to the goings-on.
I would say that it would help if columnists stopped being lazy by using the non-magical version of Rita Skeeter's auto-quote quill, but it wouldn't. Because most people aren't paying attention anyway. Increasingly, they're just tuning out the newspapers and finding other things to do.
It's, partially, the newspaper's fault because they failed to adapt to changing times. It's also partially our fault because we haven't been paying attention. We get the government we deserve.
Blaming cronyism doesn't change that central fact, but it probably makes for quicker column writing, which allows for a writer spending more time in leisure activity.
Buddy System still rules in Austin, and those friends don't come cheap. Chris Tomlinson, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
It's the same-old, tired, Texas Lock-Step Political Media saw: "If I don't like the bills that passed, and the things they accomplished I'm just going to bemoan special interests and call it a column." I'm starting to wonder if these are pre-written, or if there is a form column out there somewhere?
Because it's always the same.
That is not to say that crony-capitalism is not alive and well in Texas. Of course it is. In fact, Tomlinson mentions a couple of areas where it's on full display. Namely, auto sales and the construction industry. He left out one of the biggest, the liquor distribution con that upholds the "Texas 3-step" to the benefit of a few and the detriment of many, but he's never seemed to really get behind issues such as this anyway.
Of course he's mad that the Texas Railroad Commission wasn't totally revamped, because his friends in certain special interest groups didn't get their way. An argument could be made however that the voters who elected oil and gas industry-friendly representatives to large majorities in Texas are quite happy with the way things are going at the RRC right now.
The name change to the Texas Energy Commission seems like an expensive waste of time, and the proposals that Sierra Club and others are making are not to protect the environment, they're designed to cripple and industry that is one of the largest employers in the State. People rarely vote to be unemployed. regardless of whether or not their industry makes political donations.
Yes, it would have been nice to see some real tax reform come from the Lege this year, but not of the type Tomlinson is asking for (which involves huge tax increases on everyone in case you're wondering) and it also would have been nice to see something done about roads. Texas is currently solving it's problems via the toll road option, an option for which I'm not entirely opposed.
Education spending is a tougher hill to climb. In large part this is because our schools are doing a horrible job in regards to wise spending. It's tough to cry poor when many districts are still spending hundreds of Millions of dollars on football stadiums, or when it's reported that the administration growth outpaces teacher growth. Also when centralized administrative staff is averaging twice the salary of teachers. In short, we have too many administrative staff on the payroll making too much per year.
Speaking of cronyism, isn't that what happens when the Texas Municipal League advocates against property tax reform? Yet the TLSPM does not treat it as so despite the fact that you have an organization seeking to protect its bottom line at the expense of consumers. The only difference being that Tomlinson and his ilk like to attend cocktail parties with elected officials, they don't get invited to the cocktail parties thrown by CEO's and the like.
Almost every bill is going to have winners and losers, and quite often the winners will donate money to politicians to ensure they stay in the W column. This is not cronyism as much as it is politics today, especially at the State and Local level where the ordinary citizen does not pay much attention to the goings-on.
I would say that it would help if columnists stopped being lazy by using the non-magical version of Rita Skeeter's auto-quote quill, but it wouldn't. Because most people aren't paying attention anyway. Increasingly, they're just tuning out the newspapers and finding other things to do.
It's, partially, the newspaper's fault because they failed to adapt to changing times. It's also partially our fault because we haven't been paying attention. We get the government we deserve.
Blaming cronyism doesn't change that central fact, but it probably makes for quicker column writing, which allows for a writer spending more time in leisure activity.
Thursday, May 11, 2017
TXLV: Just pass the budget and call it a day.
Apparently, the Texas Legislature is getting close to being hopelessly snarled as the personal pillow fight between Lt. Gov. Dan 'The Man who would be King' Patrick and House Speaker Joe "Special Interest" Straus continues to fester.
Not that this is a bad thing. Because when the Lege gets it going, Texas taxpayers typically take a hit to the pocketbook.
So how about this then: Just pass the budget and walk away.
It's the only thing that the Texas Legislature is required to do by the Texas Constitution, and the only thing they should do in this raucous atmosphere. Pass the budget, leave well enough alone. Ignore those "important" conservative issues and those Democratic plans to increase spending, just pass the budget and walk away.
Yes, there are important issues out there that need to be addressed, tax reform (especially property tax) being the most important, but do you trust this cast of clowns to pass anything meaningful?
I know I don't.
At this point it seems most prudent for lawmakers to just admit that they don't have the skill, creativity or talent to address those issues, pass a budget and fade into the sunset. Let the voters sift through the ashes in the next election cycle.
I'm not suggesting that will change anything, because people will re-elect the same idiots back into the offices they currently hold for the most part, but maybe it will give this cast of D-list public servants two more years to talk to people who actually understand the issues and craft some legislation that makes sense.
Right now it's a clown show, a crisis not only of leadership, but of statesmanship as well.
Hit the reset button folks, pass the budget and go home.
Not that this is a bad thing. Because when the Lege gets it going, Texas taxpayers typically take a hit to the pocketbook.
So how about this then: Just pass the budget and walk away.
It's the only thing that the Texas Legislature is required to do by the Texas Constitution, and the only thing they should do in this raucous atmosphere. Pass the budget, leave well enough alone. Ignore those "important" conservative issues and those Democratic plans to increase spending, just pass the budget and walk away.
Yes, there are important issues out there that need to be addressed, tax reform (especially property tax) being the most important, but do you trust this cast of clowns to pass anything meaningful?
I know I don't.
At this point it seems most prudent for lawmakers to just admit that they don't have the skill, creativity or talent to address those issues, pass a budget and fade into the sunset. Let the voters sift through the ashes in the next election cycle.
I'm not suggesting that will change anything, because people will re-elect the same idiots back into the offices they currently hold for the most part, but maybe it will give this cast of D-list public servants two more years to talk to people who actually understand the issues and craft some legislation that makes sense.
Right now it's a clown show, a crisis not only of leadership, but of statesmanship as well.
Hit the reset button folks, pass the budget and go home.
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
TXLV: Texas is getting the government it deserves. (And it's not pretty)
I've never met a politician that I would like to join at a bar and drink a beer with.
And I've met several of them. This is probably because all politicians are not the "sit down and enjoy a beer while watching the game" type of people. In reality they are the "sit down and enjoy a beer while watching the game only if I can see some benefit to me or my campaign" type of people.
I'm not being rude, that's just reality.
The way our political system currently operates people don't get re-elected by being a decent person, or even all that personable (i.e. Borris Myles) they get re-elected mainly through name-recognition and the fact that the power of the incumbency grants them large campaign chests with which to outspend all but the most wealthy competition.
How do they amass wealth in their campaign funds? By offering gift-basket legislation to large political donors.
Brewers Object to Beer Measure. Ronnie Crocker, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
The wholesaler's logic behind this is laughable. They are only trying to "protect" craft brewers from those big, mean multi-national beer companies. They alone have the ability to do this you see. All they need is a 30% mark-up on beer that never leaves the brewery in order to do so. Never mind that some (not all) of these distributors are part-owned by the very multi-national liquor companies they claim to be so valiantly protecting the little guy against.
The thing is, there's a better than average chance that a bill this odious, so obviously an attempt to redistribute income for no work whatsoever, is going to pass because the distributors spend a LOT of money wooing politicians, throwing "welcoming" galas for them at the beginning of the Legislative session and dumping the maximum amount into their campaign chests.
When a Texas politician sits down to have a beer, it's usually to discuss what the Wholesale lobby is going to do for him/her next. Even the ones that DO sit down with the small, independent brewers are only doing it because someone in their staff told them it's a "good look", good looks being important to those in show business after all.
The point here is that it doesn't matter which party you put in power, the levers are still the same, only the labels change. If you think that a Democratic regime in Texas wouldn't do the same thing you're sadly mistaken. They're the ones that allowed the distributors to gain so much influence and power in the first place. Democratic cows are no less sacred, they're just a different breed of cow.
A lot of people moan and cry over this. Functional idiots such as Elizabeth "High Cheekbones" Warren and Bernie "Three Dachas" Sanders have made a living pushing the "get money out of politics" fallacy after all.
What they all know is this: As long as a significant portion of the American population doesn't pay attention to politics at any level beyond glancing at the occasional headline, or poorly reported story (the media in this country is just as bad as the politicians for the most part) they can go on saying one thing, doing another, and still be held up as the "hero of the little guy" while deciding which vacation home they should visit next.
The story in Texas is just the same, only the casual dress is different. While the pols in DC prefer Cardigan sweaters the 'everyman' politician in Texas likes to be seen hunting and wearing camouflage. On dressy occasions its boots and a cowboy hat, the latter of which they frequently wear indoors.
Something no gentleman or lady would ever do.
Something to think about.
And I've met several of them. This is probably because all politicians are not the "sit down and enjoy a beer while watching the game" type of people. In reality they are the "sit down and enjoy a beer while watching the game only if I can see some benefit to me or my campaign" type of people.
I'm not being rude, that's just reality.
The way our political system currently operates people don't get re-elected by being a decent person, or even all that personable (i.e. Borris Myles) they get re-elected mainly through name-recognition and the fact that the power of the incumbency grants them large campaign chests with which to outspend all but the most wealthy competition.
How do they amass wealth in their campaign funds? By offering gift-basket legislation to large political donors.
Brewers Object to Beer Measure. Ronnie Crocker, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
The bill originally would have forced Karbach and the others to shutter their taprooms. A revised version allowed them to continue operating them, but it would require breweries above the limit to first sell their beer to a distributor and buy it back - at a markup of around 30 percent - before selling it on site.
The wholesaler's logic behind this is laughable. They are only trying to "protect" craft brewers from those big, mean multi-national beer companies. They alone have the ability to do this you see. All they need is a 30% mark-up on beer that never leaves the brewery in order to do so. Never mind that some (not all) of these distributors are part-owned by the very multi-national liquor companies they claim to be so valiantly protecting the little guy against.
The thing is, there's a better than average chance that a bill this odious, so obviously an attempt to redistribute income for no work whatsoever, is going to pass because the distributors spend a LOT of money wooing politicians, throwing "welcoming" galas for them at the beginning of the Legislative session and dumping the maximum amount into their campaign chests.
When a Texas politician sits down to have a beer, it's usually to discuss what the Wholesale lobby is going to do for him/her next. Even the ones that DO sit down with the small, independent brewers are only doing it because someone in their staff told them it's a "good look", good looks being important to those in show business after all.
The point here is that it doesn't matter which party you put in power, the levers are still the same, only the labels change. If you think that a Democratic regime in Texas wouldn't do the same thing you're sadly mistaken. They're the ones that allowed the distributors to gain so much influence and power in the first place. Democratic cows are no less sacred, they're just a different breed of cow.
A lot of people moan and cry over this. Functional idiots such as Elizabeth "High Cheekbones" Warren and Bernie "Three Dachas" Sanders have made a living pushing the "get money out of politics" fallacy after all.
What they all know is this: As long as a significant portion of the American population doesn't pay attention to politics at any level beyond glancing at the occasional headline, or poorly reported story (the media in this country is just as bad as the politicians for the most part) they can go on saying one thing, doing another, and still be held up as the "hero of the little guy" while deciding which vacation home they should visit next.
The story in Texas is just the same, only the casual dress is different. While the pols in DC prefer Cardigan sweaters the 'everyman' politician in Texas likes to be seen hunting and wearing camouflage. On dressy occasions its boots and a cowboy hat, the latter of which they frequently wear indoors.
Something no gentleman or lady would ever do.
Something to think about.
Thursday, January 12, 2017
Texas Leadership Vacuum: Patrick's Potty Principles are dominating all other issues.
At this rate, the 140-day Texas Legislature Session can't be over soon enough....
Lawmakers spend Day 2 sparring over Capitol rules. Mike Ward and Bobby Cervantes, HoustonChronicle.com
This is just outstanding.
And it's only going to get worse as a certain wing of a certain party seems bound and determined to make this entire session about Patrick's Potty Principles, playing right into the hands of lefty bloggers and politicians who are obsessed with the matter and see this (wrongly in my opinion) as the opening toward their path back to majorities in the Statehouse.
The fact of the matter is that, even IF these laws are passed (and I don't think they will be), the impact on the work-a-day lives of the average Texan is going to be immaterial. There are a lot of ways in which State government can truly affect your lives for the worse, but these bathroom bills aren't one of them.
This is par for the course with politics today, given the recent allegations that President-Elect Donald Trump is a fan of the pee as well, and we're all going to be worse off for it.
Because every minute spent on this is a minute not spent addressing the real issues facing the State in terms of transportation, other general infrastructure etc. You know, things the government should really be concerned about.
I never thought I'd say this, but save us Speaker Straus. Either that or Texas Government is going to devolve into a small-time parody of the Federal Government.
If we're not there already.
Lawmakers spend Day 2 sparring over Capitol rules. Mike Ward and Bobby Cervantes, HoustonChronicle.com
The House spat began when Rep. Matt Schaefer, R-Tyler, offered an amendment to a general "housekeeping" resolution that House lawmakers take up at the start of every session to establish their operating rules. The proposal would have allowed restrooms on the House side of the Capitol to be used only by "a person based on the person's biological sex," the one on their birth certificate.
....
House Administration Committee Chairman Charlie Geren, a Fort Worth Republican who authored the rules resolution that typically passes without issue, immediately objected. He insisted that the amendment had nothing to with House operations and noted that policies governing statehouse restrooms are controlled by the State Preservation Board, of which he is a member.
So the entire argument, which took over half an hour, was really involving something that shouldn't have been an argument in the first place.
This is just outstanding.
And it's only going to get worse as a certain wing of a certain party seems bound and determined to make this entire session about Patrick's Potty Principles, playing right into the hands of lefty bloggers and politicians who are obsessed with the matter and see this (wrongly in my opinion) as the opening toward their path back to majorities in the Statehouse.
The fact of the matter is that, even IF these laws are passed (and I don't think they will be), the impact on the work-a-day lives of the average Texan is going to be immaterial. There are a lot of ways in which State government can truly affect your lives for the worse, but these bathroom bills aren't one of them.
This is par for the course with politics today, given the recent allegations that President-Elect Donald Trump is a fan of the pee as well, and we're all going to be worse off for it.
Because every minute spent on this is a minute not spent addressing the real issues facing the State in terms of transportation, other general infrastructure etc. You know, things the government should really be concerned about.
I never thought I'd say this, but save us Speaker Straus. Either that or Texas Government is going to devolve into a small-time parody of the Federal Government.
If we're not there already.
Tuesday, January 10, 2017
The Texas Leadership Vacuum: Patrick's Potty Principles.
The Texas Legislature begins it's bi-annual session today, and our august elected officials are going to be tasked with trying to resolve a host of issues. Of course, there's the usual, the ONE duty that they are Constitutionally REQUIRED to perform: The passing of a budget, and then there's the usual hodge-podge of other issues for which "Something! must be done."
Education funding is always a hot topic, with the Teacher's unions and school administrators associations always promising that Texas is "just around the corner" from being "world class" if ONLY the Lege could find it in their hearts to take several more Billion from the taxpayers and place it in their care. Roads need to be funded, bridges need to be repaired, all things we are firmly assured CAN be done with just a few Billion more of your dollars.
But Lt. Governor Dan Patrick has a different set of priorities. Call them Patrick's Potty Principles if you will they involve ensuring that all Texans use the restroom that God intended them to, and that there be no shuck about what is, or is not proper.
My feeling is that we don't need a law. That private businesses should be allowed to set up whatever potty arrangement they choose, that a bakery in Cleveland could have "Men's and Women's restrooms" while a restaurant in the Montrose neighborhood of Houston might opt for the gender neutral option. To each their own place to pee and all of that.
But peeing in a stall, or at a urinal with dividers etc., is a far different matter than community showers, troughs etc. Society struggles with what to do there, especially in a public school setting. Because while we can all agree that the idea of gender neutral public showers in a High School might not be the best of ideas, it's a little harder to determine what the transgender student should do should they wish to clean themselves off after a Summer's hour of physical education. (side thought: do they even require Phys Ed any longer? Or did getting rid of sodas and bake sales in schools solve our child obesity problem?)
Is it better to force a transgendered female, who FWIW might be attracted to boys, be shoe-horned in with the male population because their birth certificate shows a certain chromosome pattern? When framed in that manner this morality play is somewhat different isn't it? So while there's certain to be plenty of talk about "privacy" and "perverts" it's probably better that this whole ordeal be left unaddressed right now until we really understand the reasoning behind the special accommodations we're proposing in the first place. This bill seems to be an attempt to use a hammer to remove a splinter. Perhaps an option allowing limited individual showers and restrooms would do? I'm not sure, but right now we're only being given a choice between the two extremes. Either you allow people to enter wherever they want, or you restrict them to the room that the Christian Lord intended. That's less a choice than it is a 5 year old's debating style.
Another cost? Most of our (needed) political discussion is going to be dominated by who tinkles, and where. This is not a good thing because, and let's face the facts here, so little of Texas' political conversation is carried out among adults (hence the 5-year old's choice). Children obsess over potties, as well as social-conservatives and progressives obviously, and I can't see where any of this is going to do us any bit of good. Did it do Houston any good when then-Mayor Annise Parker pursued her folly to the bitter, acrimonious, divisive end?
Of course, the urban-centric progressives in Texas see this as an opportunity. They feel that business, pretty much standing against this law, is looking for an alternative and, by-golly, it should be them. What they fail to realize is that business doesn't WANT the party of Wendy(?!?) Davis in charge, anymore than they want Dan "Potty Principles" Patrick Republicans running the joint. They want the party of Texas Speaker of the House Joe Straus, the (currently) Republican party of Straus. Because the Democratic party of Texas long ago purged itself of most of it's moderate wing, which has made their fair-trade, organic, munchy-crunchy, soak-the-wealthy and businesses brand of politics untenable except when identity politics are in play.
There's an old saying in Texas politics that, when the Texas Legislature is in session, Texans would be wise to "hold on to their wallets". That's changed in recent years, for the worse.
When the Texas Legislature's in session most Texans would be wise to keep one hand on their wallets, and the other on their private parts. Because increasingly both parties seem way too interested in either telling them what to do with them or flat-out trying to punch them there.
Meanwhile, there's likely to be less money to waste this time around which would seem, to me, to be a bigger issue than Patrick's Potty Principles.
Education funding is always a hot topic, with the Teacher's unions and school administrators associations always promising that Texas is "just around the corner" from being "world class" if ONLY the Lege could find it in their hearts to take several more Billion from the taxpayers and place it in their care. Roads need to be funded, bridges need to be repaired, all things we are firmly assured CAN be done with just a few Billion more of your dollars.
But Lt. Governor Dan Patrick has a different set of priorities. Call them Patrick's Potty Principles if you will they involve ensuring that all Texans use the restroom that God intended them to, and that there be no shuck about what is, or is not proper.
My feeling is that we don't need a law. That private businesses should be allowed to set up whatever potty arrangement they choose, that a bakery in Cleveland could have "Men's and Women's restrooms" while a restaurant in the Montrose neighborhood of Houston might opt for the gender neutral option. To each their own place to pee and all of that.
But peeing in a stall, or at a urinal with dividers etc., is a far different matter than community showers, troughs etc. Society struggles with what to do there, especially in a public school setting. Because while we can all agree that the idea of gender neutral public showers in a High School might not be the best of ideas, it's a little harder to determine what the transgender student should do should they wish to clean themselves off after a Summer's hour of physical education. (side thought: do they even require Phys Ed any longer? Or did getting rid of sodas and bake sales in schools solve our child obesity problem?)
Is it better to force a transgendered female, who FWIW might be attracted to boys, be shoe-horned in with the male population because their birth certificate shows a certain chromosome pattern? When framed in that manner this morality play is somewhat different isn't it? So while there's certain to be plenty of talk about "privacy" and "perverts" it's probably better that this whole ordeal be left unaddressed right now until we really understand the reasoning behind the special accommodations we're proposing in the first place. This bill seems to be an attempt to use a hammer to remove a splinter. Perhaps an option allowing limited individual showers and restrooms would do? I'm not sure, but right now we're only being given a choice between the two extremes. Either you allow people to enter wherever they want, or you restrict them to the room that the Christian Lord intended. That's less a choice than it is a 5 year old's debating style.
Another cost? Most of our (needed) political discussion is going to be dominated by who tinkles, and where. This is not a good thing because, and let's face the facts here, so little of Texas' political conversation is carried out among adults (hence the 5-year old's choice). Children obsess over potties, as well as social-conservatives and progressives obviously, and I can't see where any of this is going to do us any bit of good. Did it do Houston any good when then-Mayor Annise Parker pursued her folly to the bitter, acrimonious, divisive end?
Of course, the urban-centric progressives in Texas see this as an opportunity. They feel that business, pretty much standing against this law, is looking for an alternative and, by-golly, it should be them. What they fail to realize is that business doesn't WANT the party of Wendy(?!?) Davis in charge, anymore than they want Dan "Potty Principles" Patrick Republicans running the joint. They want the party of Texas Speaker of the House Joe Straus, the (currently) Republican party of Straus. Because the Democratic party of Texas long ago purged itself of most of it's moderate wing, which has made their fair-trade, organic, munchy-crunchy, soak-the-wealthy and businesses brand of politics untenable except when identity politics are in play.
There's an old saying in Texas politics that, when the Texas Legislature is in session, Texans would be wise to "hold on to their wallets". That's changed in recent years, for the worse.
When the Texas Legislature's in session most Texans would be wise to keep one hand on their wallets, and the other on their private parts. Because increasingly both parties seem way too interested in either telling them what to do with them or flat-out trying to punch them there.
Meanwhile, there's likely to be less money to waste this time around which would seem, to me, to be a bigger issue than Patrick's Potty Principles.
Wednesday, December 28, 2016
Without further ado: Looking back on 2016
Well, we made it, barely, through 2016. And while my prediction that the former President of Metro Garcia would be mayor by famously riding the wave of Adrian Garcia's name ID proved to be incorrect, my prediction that Houston was in for a rough fiscal time of it proved telling. Also accurate was my tongue-in-cheek prediction that an angry Annise would burn hot, and then fade away.
Of course, the reality in 2016 was almost weirder than the fiction I created. We elected a lifetime back-bencher as Mayor of the City, who immediately did what back-benchers do: Kick the can down the road on important issues and talk, a lot. In short, for 2017 I see more of the same. Houston will continue down her spiral of trinket governance and irresponsible spending. Progressives will do their level best to chase "world-classiness" while continuing to try and keep the poor just above water, while enjoying their "white-linen nights" in the Heights and telling us how good they have it.
But, and let's face facts here, 2016 was foul.
Not just bad, but historically bad. Not only were we forcibly exposed to an election campaign that felt like the political equivalent of Ebola, but we had to sit through three Presidential debates where an ape in a suit and the worst political candidate in the history of ever dressed up like the Emperor Palpatine in a pant-suit and then wondered why she wasn't "connecting with the people."
It was Sally Fields who famously gushed "You like me! You Really Really like me!" We really didn't (although the Hollywood establishment did) which is kind-of the same dynamic that Hillary has going for her.
2016 saw Katy Perry cry, Kanye West meltdown and a host of Hollywood stars welsh on their promise to leave for Canada should Trump win. The Bastards.
Nationwide the Democrats took a political beating, their power now confined to some failing metropolitan areas, the West Coast, and pockets of New England. As the Country continues to geographically sort itself out along political ideological lines a stunning realization has hit the Left. They are currently so concentrated that they've messed up the electoral math for themselves. Plus, 1/2 of the country simply can't stand them.
This has led to some amusing temper tantrums from the dimmer of the dim lights in the Dim party. Markos Moulitsas responded to the election results with an f-bomb laced tirade against pretty much everyone, Ezra Klein has pushed Vox into La La Land with wild theories and stories of fantasy and whimsy, and has just realized that "Star Wars" is *gasp* about......war. Greg Sargent is ranting to everyone his little Washington Post blog reaches that something is amiss, and the king of clowns Paul Krugman seems perpetually stuck in the anger stage of coping.
In fact, a LOT of people are ending 2016 firmly planted in the Anger stage. Celebrities from what's-her-name to Lena Dunham have had a good public cry, shaken their fist at 'white people' (think about that) and have pretty much declared the election of the ape in a suit to be the worst thing in America since ever.
Locally however Harris County Democrats are doing fairly freaking spiffy. They had a complete sweep in the down-ballot elections taking every contested county office, judgeship, most of the Constables and contested legislative races at the State and Federal level. In fact, it's pretty safe to say that, except for Commissioner's Court, Harris County and Houston are in total Democrat control.
What this means is for another post. For the look-ahead to 2017. But if the City of Houston is any predictor the County is in for a bumpy ride.
Because Houston did NOT have a good 2016. Financially the city is struggling, Annise Parker tore us apart trying everything she could to provide the transgender community with a special accommodation, and the oil and gas industry has gotten shellacked due to a glut of supply, relatively weak global demand, and some fairly short-sighted business leadership.
But Houston keeps spending money like a terminal cancer patient on a last, blow-out-the-pension smash-up in Las Vegas. Turner continues to take junkets like his frequent-flyer miles will expire if he doesn't, plans are in place to spend Millions on bike paths, Millions on concert venues, and Billions on as yet to be determined flood-control project whose parent funding mechanism, the rain tax, was declared null-and-void in a court of law. In short, Houston has stolen the taxpayers credit card, has maxed it out, and is now openly kiting checks from their stolen check-book.
All in the name of trinkets.
Which means that, in many respects, 2016 was not all that much different than the years that preceded it. Just a little bit worse.
Amazingly, this is better than the 2016 that the media in Houston had. That was like prior years but a LOT worse. As meaningful reporting in Houston has gone the way of the DoDo and is being replaced with info-tainment and fake news.
2016 was supposed to be much, much better than 2015. Or so we hoped. What we ended up with was a turd of a year floating around in the pool of time.
Thank goodness it's coming to a close.
Of course, the reality in 2016 was almost weirder than the fiction I created. We elected a lifetime back-bencher as Mayor of the City, who immediately did what back-benchers do: Kick the can down the road on important issues and talk, a lot. In short, for 2017 I see more of the same. Houston will continue down her spiral of trinket governance and irresponsible spending. Progressives will do their level best to chase "world-classiness" while continuing to try and keep the poor just above water, while enjoying their "white-linen nights" in the Heights and telling us how good they have it.
But, and let's face facts here, 2016 was foul.
Not just bad, but historically bad. Not only were we forcibly exposed to an election campaign that felt like the political equivalent of Ebola, but we had to sit through three Presidential debates where an ape in a suit and the worst political candidate in the history of ever dressed up like the Emperor Palpatine in a pant-suit and then wondered why she wasn't "connecting with the people."
It was Sally Fields who famously gushed "You like me! You Really Really like me!" We really didn't (although the Hollywood establishment did) which is kind-of the same dynamic that Hillary has going for her.
2016 saw Katy Perry cry, Kanye West meltdown and a host of Hollywood stars welsh on their promise to leave for Canada should Trump win. The Bastards.
Nationwide the Democrats took a political beating, their power now confined to some failing metropolitan areas, the West Coast, and pockets of New England. As the Country continues to geographically sort itself out along political ideological lines a stunning realization has hit the Left. They are currently so concentrated that they've messed up the electoral math for themselves. Plus, 1/2 of the country simply can't stand them.
This has led to some amusing temper tantrums from the dimmer of the dim lights in the Dim party. Markos Moulitsas responded to the election results with an f-bomb laced tirade against pretty much everyone, Ezra Klein has pushed Vox into La La Land with wild theories and stories of fantasy and whimsy, and has just realized that "Star Wars" is *gasp* about......war. Greg Sargent is ranting to everyone his little Washington Post blog reaches that something is amiss, and the king of clowns Paul Krugman seems perpetually stuck in the anger stage of coping.
In fact, a LOT of people are ending 2016 firmly planted in the Anger stage. Celebrities from what's-her-name to Lena Dunham have had a good public cry, shaken their fist at 'white people' (think about that) and have pretty much declared the election of the ape in a suit to be the worst thing in America since ever.
Locally however Harris County Democrats are doing fairly freaking spiffy. They had a complete sweep in the down-ballot elections taking every contested county office, judgeship, most of the Constables and contested legislative races at the State and Federal level. In fact, it's pretty safe to say that, except for Commissioner's Court, Harris County and Houston are in total Democrat control.
What this means is for another post. For the look-ahead to 2017. But if the City of Houston is any predictor the County is in for a bumpy ride.
Because Houston did NOT have a good 2016. Financially the city is struggling, Annise Parker tore us apart trying everything she could to provide the transgender community with a special accommodation, and the oil and gas industry has gotten shellacked due to a glut of supply, relatively weak global demand, and some fairly short-sighted business leadership.
But Houston keeps spending money like a terminal cancer patient on a last, blow-out-the-pension smash-up in Las Vegas. Turner continues to take junkets like his frequent-flyer miles will expire if he doesn't, plans are in place to spend Millions on bike paths, Millions on concert venues, and Billions on as yet to be determined flood-control project whose parent funding mechanism, the rain tax, was declared null-and-void in a court of law. In short, Houston has stolen the taxpayers credit card, has maxed it out, and is now openly kiting checks from their stolen check-book.
All in the name of trinkets.
Which means that, in many respects, 2016 was not all that much different than the years that preceded it. Just a little bit worse.
Amazingly, this is better than the 2016 that the media in Houston had. That was like prior years but a LOT worse. As meaningful reporting in Houston has gone the way of the DoDo and is being replaced with info-tainment and fake news.
2016 was supposed to be much, much better than 2015. Or so we hoped. What we ended up with was a turd of a year floating around in the pool of time.
Thank goodness it's coming to a close.
Monday, July 25, 2016
HALV: This is GOOD News for Houston.
It seems that the NCAA is deciding that cities providing a special accommodation to transgenders in regards to bathroom access is going to be a key component in their decision making for location evaluation.
NCAA to survey potential host cities on discrimination laws. Morganton News-Herald.
The good news for Houston, and Texas (for now), is that they haven't passed any laws or ordinances that are "discriminatory" in nature. Yes, the State leaders are vowing to pass a silly "gender bathroom" law which strips the rights of individual businesses to make the determination themselves regarding who can use bathrooms within their (private) establishments but, as of now, no other laws exist.
While it's true that Houstonians, wisely, refused to provide transgender people with a special accommodation regarding bathroom access that other's don't enjoy (and, in the process, refused to establish the urinal tribunals that former-Mayor Annise Parker envisioned) there's nothing in the law that prevents private businesses from implementing so-called "gender neutral" restrooms should they so desire.
Of course, we'll now be on the receiving end of numerous articles in the increasingly irrelevant middling-regional daily and fainting couch, think pieces from it's editorial blog (Gray Matters) telling us that Houston is doomed, DOOMED mind you, because they didn't pass and heartily endorse Parker's Folly but it's just not true.
In fact, I would argue that Houston's relatively open regulatory structure regarding the same is a feature, not a bug in the way we handle the delicate matter of who potties where.
A city, and State, possessed of real leadership would be able to make this case to the NCAA strongly, loudly and confidently.
Unfortunately Houston and Texas are ran by an incompetent group whose main goal is to pander to the increasingly under-informed masses and protect their patronage.
And the NCAA is allowing Baylor to continue operations.
Which tells you pretty much all you need to know about their commitment to providing a "safe environment" versus their pandering to the media as a bastion of modern-progressive thinking.
NCAA to survey potential host cities on discrimination laws. Morganton News-Herald.
The board in April adopted a requirement for host sites to demonstrate "how they will provide an environment that is safe, healthy and free of discrimination and also safeguards the dignity of everyone involved in the event." The questionnaire is intended to bolster that requirement.
The good news for Houston, and Texas (for now), is that they haven't passed any laws or ordinances that are "discriminatory" in nature. Yes, the State leaders are vowing to pass a silly "gender bathroom" law which strips the rights of individual businesses to make the determination themselves regarding who can use bathrooms within their (private) establishments but, as of now, no other laws exist.
While it's true that Houstonians, wisely, refused to provide transgender people with a special accommodation regarding bathroom access that other's don't enjoy (and, in the process, refused to establish the urinal tribunals that former-Mayor Annise Parker envisioned) there's nothing in the law that prevents private businesses from implementing so-called "gender neutral" restrooms should they so desire.
Of course, we'll now be on the receiving end of numerous articles in the increasingly irrelevant middling-regional daily and fainting couch, think pieces from it's editorial blog (Gray Matters) telling us that Houston is doomed, DOOMED mind you, because they didn't pass and heartily endorse Parker's Folly but it's just not true.
In fact, I would argue that Houston's relatively open regulatory structure regarding the same is a feature, not a bug in the way we handle the delicate matter of who potties where.
A city, and State, possessed of real leadership would be able to make this case to the NCAA strongly, loudly and confidently.
Unfortunately Houston and Texas are ran by an incompetent group whose main goal is to pander to the increasingly under-informed masses and protect their patronage.
And the NCAA is allowing Baylor to continue operations.
Which tells you pretty much all you need to know about their commitment to providing a "safe environment" versus their pandering to the media as a bastion of modern-progressive thinking.
Friday, June 03, 2016
Texas Leadership Vacuum: About that Abbott/Trump U mess. #TLSPM
Five years ago (5), then Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott declined to push a case against Trump U, who agreed to leave the State. Shortly after that Trump made some donations totaling $35K to the Abbott campaign, one of the only Republicans he donated to in that cycle.
We know this, because the AP had a paragraph mentioning it in a broader story about the failed real estate training program.
Trump University Model: Sell Hard, Demand to see a warrant. Jeff Horwitz and Michael Biesecker, AP.com
It is important to note that we did not hear about this due to the diligent reporting of the Texas Lock-Step Political Media. Oh sure, NOW they're reporting it (frequently classifying it as "BREAKING!" news hilariously) but during the time, and even in the run-up to the last election, it apparently wasn't a priority for the TLSPM. Now however, all over it. Like. A. Rash.
This shouldn't surprise you much, because the story and, more importantly, the manner in which it's been reported, says as much about the TLSPM than it does about Abbott himself.
For one, the idea that there is a group of reporters in Austin furiously beating the bushes in Austin, looking to uncover nefarious dealings under the Pink Dome is both a romanticized myth, and a lie. In fact, you have a small (and getting smaller) group of cub reporters whose main job is attending press conferences and speaking with Democratic Opposition Research teams, and advocacy groups, in order to be fed stories.
What this story really suggests is that the Oppo research team for then-Democratic Superwoman Wendy(?!?) Davis was not necessarily all that robust. Neither were the teams for Abbott's primary opponents. (To be fair however, the field did pretty much clear out of him) Despite this, you would have thought that some Republican with aspirations to be Governor might have uncovered what is basically a public record events and "connected the dots" as reporters like to say.
Secondly this rolls back the classic lie that "reading a daily newspaper is the only way to be informed". No, it's really not. In fact, given the rather miserable state of news-gathering organizations these days I'd say reading a newspaper has fallen in importance to reading a gossip rag. Today most, if not all, stories are force fed to a group of reporters who have become lazy and over-reliant on institutional sources. If you're not getting your news from a variety of sources, you're really missing out.
Third, it's high-time we all come to the conclusion that all politicians, even the ones that we choose to like, are at their core political animals who would strongly consider sub-letting their children for a six figure donation, IF they thought the public wouldn't find out about it that is. In the corporate world "office politics" is a bad thing. In politics they are the rules of the game. We put people in a position where we hold them up to be experts on everything, and then act surprised when they sub-let their expertise to people who are willing to give them money to listen to it.
I for one am shocked, SHOCKED! to discover that there is gambling at this establishment. But we shouldn't be, and we shouldn't be surprised that the TLSPM IS shocked because it's pretty clear that they've been taking part in it for a while now.
We know this, because the AP had a paragraph mentioning it in a broader story about the failed real estate training program.
Trump University Model: Sell Hard, Demand to see a warrant. Jeff Horwitz and Michael Biesecker, AP.com
Besides the probe that led to Attorney General Schneiderman's suit in New York, the office of then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, a Republican, opened a civil investigation of "possibly deceptive trade practices." Abbott's probe was quietly dropped in 2010 when Trump University agreed to end its operations in Texas. Trump subsequently donated $35,000 to Abbott's successful gubernatorial campaign, according to records.
It is important to note that we did not hear about this due to the diligent reporting of the Texas Lock-Step Political Media. Oh sure, NOW they're reporting it (frequently classifying it as "BREAKING!" news hilariously) but during the time, and even in the run-up to the last election, it apparently wasn't a priority for the TLSPM. Now however, all over it. Like. A. Rash.
This shouldn't surprise you much, because the story and, more importantly, the manner in which it's been reported, says as much about the TLSPM than it does about Abbott himself.
For one, the idea that there is a group of reporters in Austin furiously beating the bushes in Austin, looking to uncover nefarious dealings under the Pink Dome is both a romanticized myth, and a lie. In fact, you have a small (and getting smaller) group of cub reporters whose main job is attending press conferences and speaking with Democratic Opposition Research teams, and advocacy groups, in order to be fed stories.
What this story really suggests is that the Oppo research team for then-Democratic Superwoman Wendy(?!?) Davis was not necessarily all that robust. Neither were the teams for Abbott's primary opponents. (To be fair however, the field did pretty much clear out of him) Despite this, you would have thought that some Republican with aspirations to be Governor might have uncovered what is basically a public record events and "connected the dots" as reporters like to say.
Secondly this rolls back the classic lie that "reading a daily newspaper is the only way to be informed". No, it's really not. In fact, given the rather miserable state of news-gathering organizations these days I'd say reading a newspaper has fallen in importance to reading a gossip rag. Today most, if not all, stories are force fed to a group of reporters who have become lazy and over-reliant on institutional sources. If you're not getting your news from a variety of sources, you're really missing out.
Third, it's high-time we all come to the conclusion that all politicians, even the ones that we choose to like, are at their core political animals who would strongly consider sub-letting their children for a six figure donation, IF they thought the public wouldn't find out about it that is. In the corporate world "office politics" is a bad thing. In politics they are the rules of the game. We put people in a position where we hold them up to be experts on everything, and then act surprised when they sub-let their expertise to people who are willing to give them money to listen to it.
I for one am shocked, SHOCKED! to discover that there is gambling at this establishment. But we shouldn't be, and we shouldn't be surprised that the TLSPM IS shocked because it's pretty clear that they've been taking part in it for a while now.
Thursday, May 19, 2016
TXLV: How did this group ever come to dominate State politics? #PostGOP
I haven't written much about Governor Greg Abbott's Texas Plan for a couple of reasons. First, I think it has a snowball's chance in West Texas chance of going anywhere and second, I honestly thought it was one of those things that would be brought up, and then fade away into the dustbin of political history. I, wrongly, considered it to be the Gardisil of Texas political movements.
Imagine my surprise then when, almost half a year later, and people are still writing and talking about it.
Article V Convention is the Wrong Way to Address our Constitutional Crisis. Tom Pauken, TexasGOPVotes.com
True. But, to go one step further, I'm certain that the root-cause of our current problems is not the Constitution itself. That old document seems to have held up fairly well over time.
Our problem is that we haven't listened to it.
The solution to this problem is not to amend the damn thing, or just scream loudly (as Pauken does here) that Congress has the so-called 'power of the purse' (they really don't if you understand vetoes and how they are overridden). The solution lied in the GOP offering up strong, constitutional candidates for voter consideration and not jumping into the hog trough that is the government patronage system whenever the voters decided it was their time to be in charge. The Republicans failed at that badly. In fact, they made more sophisticated the blunt instrument that was Democratic Machine Politics. That's saying something.
The question, in Texas, is this: How in the world did this collection of low-functioning idiots ever get into power? Because if you can't beat the following, what does that say about your party Democrats?
Greg Abbott: He was the Attorney General of Texas, demanded to be called, and signed his communications with, 'General'. During his time in office he filed a bunch of lawsuits against the Obama administration and issued press releases about them.
Dan Patrick: Oddly enough, he is possibly the most professional of the current group in charge in Austin. But he's no conservative in the classical sense and he has a worrying tendency to demagogue the hell out of an issue.
Glenn Hegar: A politician's politician. Largely irrelevant in State politics until he won the Republican Primary with Tea Party backing. Qualifications to be the highest financial officer in Texas? *crickets* Learned all he knows about the office from Susan Combs, who continually exhibited both a proclivity for misstating revenue projections, creating new taxes and spilling data everywhere.
Ken Paxton: The new attorney general who is probably guilty of securities fraud.
George P. Bush: The latest in a long-line of carpetbagging members of the Bush family (Based in Maine) who have decided to use Texas to burnish their conservative credentials in an attempt to rise up the political ladder. He's the epitome of a 'kissing hands and shaking babies' politician.
Sid Miller: He of the 'Jesus Shot', cupcake amnesty and huge bonuses to staffers. Either an idiot savant or the most calculating political operative in Texas. (Honestly, it's hard to tell which)
Of course, it's well known that the Democrats have given us Chris Bell (perennial candidate), Bill White (perennial bore) and Wendy(?!?) Davis (perennial laughingstock) as fodder in the governor's race, but they haven't offered up much in the other races either. Leticia Van de Putte? Meh. Sam Houston (gimmick), Barbara Ann Radnofsky? Pffft.
In fact, it's gotten so bad that the most high-profile elected official in Texas is currently Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner, he of the Sheila Jackson Lee Regional Political Machine and professional tosser of word salad. Turner isn't so much about implementing policy as he is making fuzzy calls for "Something! to be done (although he never says specifically what) and appointing commissions (blue ribbon we are sure) to study the issue.
It's gotten so bad for Democrats that some of the dimmer members of the TLSPM have resorted to running around with their hair on fire and begging forgiveness from the same idiots that elected Bill de Blasio. The next thing you know they'll be crying to the folks who thought putting Rahm Emmanuel and Jerry Brown in office was a good thing. When y'all are done on the fainting couch, would you mind blow-drying away the tears?
There are a lot of reasons why Democrats are so bad in Texas. Most of it has to do with the fact that they've been in the political wilderness for so long they've forgotten what it means to actually run things. They have a bench that's thinner than the Steinbrenner-era Yankees farm system and currently have a platform that's out of sync with the needs of Texas voters. It's hard to win an election in a State where your policies would damage most of the voters financially. It's even harder when you double up on that by continually insulting them.
But the biggest problem right now in Texas is the Republicans. Facing a fairly serious funding threat in Texas Education, a deteriorating infrastructure and little money to pay for it, and an economy that's sputtering but not regressing the biggest items on our leader's agenda is going to be who takes a shit in which public restroom and sanctuary cities. And a Texas Plan in search of a problem that doesn't exist. The Constitution is not broken, amending it in a way that provides the State with more power is not the solution. The State's already have plenty of powers, the issue is getting Congress to understand that and act accordingly.
It also would have helped to nominate a strong Presidential contender to run against one of the worst nominees in recent history but that ship has sailed.
What's needed now is something resembling real leadership, a plan to simplify and broaden the Texas tax code while making it shallower would be nice (i.e. eliminating so-called 'exemptions' and lowering the overall rate) as would taking a wrench to education funding, road construction and even ERCOT, which is a rickety old thing in need of some work and attention.
Sadly, none of those issues are anywhere on the radar. Nor will it be in the near future.
It takes true leadership to do these things, and Texas currently has none.
Imagine my surprise then when, almost half a year later, and people are still writing and talking about it.
Article V Convention is the Wrong Way to Address our Constitutional Crisis. Tom Pauken, TexasGOPVotes.com
The latest politician to jump on the bandwagon and call for an Article V Constitutional Convention is the Governor of Texas, Greg Abbott. He proposes to invoke a never previously used provision of the U.S. Constitution, Article V, in order to call a convention of the states and pass a series of constitutional amendments to restore states’ rights.This would require 34 states to agree to such a convention; and (even more difficult to imagine) convince those states to endorse the 9 specific amendments to the Constitution proposed by Abbott. Then three-fourths of the states would have to ratify those amendments.As a friend of mine has observed: You have a better chance of winning the lottery than seeing all that happen in our lifetime.
True. But, to go one step further, I'm certain that the root-cause of our current problems is not the Constitution itself. That old document seems to have held up fairly well over time.
Our problem is that we haven't listened to it.
The solution to this problem is not to amend the damn thing, or just scream loudly (as Pauken does here) that Congress has the so-called 'power of the purse' (they really don't if you understand vetoes and how they are overridden). The solution lied in the GOP offering up strong, constitutional candidates for voter consideration and not jumping into the hog trough that is the government patronage system whenever the voters decided it was their time to be in charge. The Republicans failed at that badly. In fact, they made more sophisticated the blunt instrument that was Democratic Machine Politics. That's saying something.
The question, in Texas, is this: How in the world did this collection of low-functioning idiots ever get into power? Because if you can't beat the following, what does that say about your party Democrats?
Greg Abbott: He was the Attorney General of Texas, demanded to be called, and signed his communications with, 'General'. During his time in office he filed a bunch of lawsuits against the Obama administration and issued press releases about them.
Dan Patrick: Oddly enough, he is possibly the most professional of the current group in charge in Austin. But he's no conservative in the classical sense and he has a worrying tendency to demagogue the hell out of an issue.
Glenn Hegar: A politician's politician. Largely irrelevant in State politics until he won the Republican Primary with Tea Party backing. Qualifications to be the highest financial officer in Texas? *crickets* Learned all he knows about the office from Susan Combs, who continually exhibited both a proclivity for misstating revenue projections, creating new taxes and spilling data everywhere.
Ken Paxton: The new attorney general who is probably guilty of securities fraud.
George P. Bush: The latest in a long-line of carpetbagging members of the Bush family (Based in Maine) who have decided to use Texas to burnish their conservative credentials in an attempt to rise up the political ladder. He's the epitome of a 'kissing hands and shaking babies' politician.
Sid Miller: He of the 'Jesus Shot', cupcake amnesty and huge bonuses to staffers. Either an idiot savant or the most calculating political operative in Texas. (Honestly, it's hard to tell which)
Of course, it's well known that the Democrats have given us Chris Bell (perennial candidate), Bill White (perennial bore) and Wendy(?!?) Davis (perennial laughingstock) as fodder in the governor's race, but they haven't offered up much in the other races either. Leticia Van de Putte? Meh. Sam Houston (gimmick), Barbara Ann Radnofsky? Pffft.
In fact, it's gotten so bad that the most high-profile elected official in Texas is currently Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner, he of the Sheila Jackson Lee Regional Political Machine and professional tosser of word salad. Turner isn't so much about implementing policy as he is making fuzzy calls for "Something! to be done (although he never says specifically what) and appointing commissions (blue ribbon we are sure) to study the issue.
It's gotten so bad for Democrats that some of the dimmer members of the TLSPM have resorted to running around with their hair on fire and begging forgiveness from the same idiots that elected Bill de Blasio. The next thing you know they'll be crying to the folks who thought putting Rahm Emmanuel and Jerry Brown in office was a good thing. When y'all are done on the fainting couch, would you mind blow-drying away the tears?
There are a lot of reasons why Democrats are so bad in Texas. Most of it has to do with the fact that they've been in the political wilderness for so long they've forgotten what it means to actually run things. They have a bench that's thinner than the Steinbrenner-era Yankees farm system and currently have a platform that's out of sync with the needs of Texas voters. It's hard to win an election in a State where your policies would damage most of the voters financially. It's even harder when you double up on that by continually insulting them.
But the biggest problem right now in Texas is the Republicans. Facing a fairly serious funding threat in Texas Education, a deteriorating infrastructure and little money to pay for it, and an economy that's sputtering but not regressing the biggest items on our leader's agenda is going to be who takes a shit in which public restroom and sanctuary cities. And a Texas Plan in search of a problem that doesn't exist. The Constitution is not broken, amending it in a way that provides the State with more power is not the solution. The State's already have plenty of powers, the issue is getting Congress to understand that and act accordingly.
It also would have helped to nominate a strong Presidential contender to run against one of the worst nominees in recent history but that ship has sailed.
What's needed now is something resembling real leadership, a plan to simplify and broaden the Texas tax code while making it shallower would be nice (i.e. eliminating so-called 'exemptions' and lowering the overall rate) as would taking a wrench to education funding, road construction and even ERCOT, which is a rickety old thing in need of some work and attention.
Sadly, none of those issues are anywhere on the radar. Nor will it be in the near future.
It takes true leadership to do these things, and Texas currently has none.
Tuesday, May 03, 2016
TXLV: The Road To Hell.
...is NOT, as you've been told, paved with good intentions. It's paved by politicians falling back on "common sense"
Nanny State: Is Austin's 10-1 City Council overdoing it with the regulations? Casey Claiborne, Fox7Austin.com
When you hear, or read, a politicians say "common sense rules" you should be wary. Because what they really mean by 'common sense' is two-fold.
1. In the interest of whomever is providing them patronage. (In this case, the taxicab companies who have been fighting Uber and Lyft's intrusion into their monopoly)
2. Regulation to the standard of the most dense in society.
Politicians either consider themselves to be the smartest people in the room, or they're getting paid. Not always illegally mind you (although that certainly can happen) but in the form of patronage and campaign donations and in the form of post-public service positions and "consulting" jobs (see former Mayor Lee Leffingwell whose working for Uber).
All of this is perfectly legal, just as it's legal for Houston-area Legislator Boris Miles to have an ownership stake in businesses doing business with the State. Until just recently insider trading did not run afoul of U.S. Congressional rules. Although, as a private citizen, you can be thrown into federal prison for it.
Even the media doesn't break out in the vapours about it any longer. It's just the way things are you see? And if start-up businesses are thwarted, if economic innovation is stifled, you can't make an omelette after all without breaking some eggs. It's OK however, because these same media outlets support expanding Welfare and Medicare (and raising taxes on those making just slightly more than they think they will earn) in an effort to help those poor souls who might otherwise find gainful employment but for government interference.
It's intrusion of the worst sort and it's applauded, and supported, by both Statist progressives and so-called "Constitutional" conservatives. Support dependent on whose ox is being gored.
Here's the issue. There's thin line between an benevolent authoritarian and an oppressive one. Typically that line lies between whether or not they're going after something that you like. And, trust me on this, they will ALWAYS eventually try to take away something that you like.
It's only a matter of time.
Nanny State: Is Austin's 10-1 City Council overdoing it with the regulations? Casey Claiborne, Fox7Austin.com
Council Member Ann Kitchenwho has spear-headed the added safety measures doesn't think its over-regulation.
"You're talking about very, very basic common sense rules. Requiring fingerprinting, requiring you identify the car and requiring that you not stop in the middle of the travel lane, you can't get much simpler than those 3 things," Kitchen said.
When you hear, or read, a politicians say "common sense rules" you should be wary. Because what they really mean by 'common sense' is two-fold.
1. In the interest of whomever is providing them patronage. (In this case, the taxicab companies who have been fighting Uber and Lyft's intrusion into their monopoly)
2. Regulation to the standard of the most dense in society.
Politicians either consider themselves to be the smartest people in the room, or they're getting paid. Not always illegally mind you (although that certainly can happen) but in the form of patronage and campaign donations and in the form of post-public service positions and "consulting" jobs (see former Mayor Lee Leffingwell whose working for Uber).
All of this is perfectly legal, just as it's legal for Houston-area Legislator Boris Miles to have an ownership stake in businesses doing business with the State. Until just recently insider trading did not run afoul of U.S. Congressional rules. Although, as a private citizen, you can be thrown into federal prison for it.
Even the media doesn't break out in the vapours about it any longer. It's just the way things are you see? And if start-up businesses are thwarted, if economic innovation is stifled, you can't make an omelette after all without breaking some eggs. It's OK however, because these same media outlets support expanding Welfare and Medicare (and raising taxes on those making just slightly more than they think they will earn) in an effort to help those poor souls who might otherwise find gainful employment but for government interference.
It's intrusion of the worst sort and it's applauded, and supported, by both Statist progressives and so-called "Constitutional" conservatives. Support dependent on whose ox is being gored.
Here's the issue. There's thin line between an benevolent authoritarian and an oppressive one. Typically that line lies between whether or not they're going after something that you like. And, trust me on this, they will ALWAYS eventually try to take away something that you like.
It's only a matter of time.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
TXLV: "There ought to be a law" (Bathroom Edition)
As is typical, another controversial social issue has supposed "conservative" politicians running toward the light of a big, sweeping, government solution....
Patrick says he would support a statewide bathroom bill. Mike Ward, HoustonChronicle (not behind the paywall [for now])
No, No, No, No, No.
One more time: No.
It's a far different thing to allow for sincerely held Religious objections (which, incidentally, are why I think so-called "equal rights ordinances" are silly) and another thing altogether to try and dictate to everyone the rights that YOU feel are important.
I was opposed to Parker's Folly because it was a diktat, backed by the power of the State, that everyone, everywhere act and believe in a manner that was currently backed by the prevailing minority. I am opposed to Patrick's Folly for the same reason but substitute "prevailing minority" with "current majority".
And let's be very clear. Neither of the proposed bills protect rights. What they both do (or did, or attempt to do) are apply a special accommodation to groups favored by the bill's authors. Parker's folly attempted to grant upon the Transgender population a right not afforded to any other group, the right to pick and choose, in a fluid manner, how they wished to be identified. Patrick's bill offers to Christians the special accommodation of having to never be offended, or threatened, by the sexual identity of others.
A statewide "ban" on transgender restroom choice is a horrible idea, as is a requirement that all bathrooms be gender neutral.
While there has to be reasonable accommodation in public places (and yes, if you serve the public your private business is a public place) for all groups there also has to be a respect for the beliefs of others. Bills REQUIRING restroom usage (one way or the other) ignore the fact that there are a wide range of beliefs on this, not all of them transphobic.
It is not transphobic to believe that there are material differences between the genders, and that segregation of the two when nature calls is something to be desired. Neither, for that matter, is such an idea inherently sexist. It should also be noted that many of the reservations people have regarding the expansion of gender neutral restrooms don't really center around fears regarding the transgendered, but fears surrounding bad-actors (pedophiles) who would potentially take advantage of the law.
In other words, while the one side is screaming and crying about how the other "lied" in their arguments against, they would need to admit that they, themselves are arguing from a point of dishonesty.
Unfortunately, this will never really happen because there is currently no debate being conducted. All we have right now are two sides, led by demagogues, screaming over each other. In the matter of Parker vs. Patrick, we're all of us losers.
I, for one, would like to see some flexibility, in the same manner as we have it in the matter of open carry. You may scoff at this comparison but I don't think it's all that far out of line. Both issues invoke strong feelings on either side, and both issues produce a not insignificant amount of fear in everyone at some level.
In the debate over open carry a private business has the right to ban weapons from their property, they also have the right to allow them. Some businesses have made the decision to ban while some have openly encouraged guns to be worn.
It should be the same in regards to restrooms. Some businesses might feel that it is in their best interest to allow unfettered access to all restrooms based on gender identification while others may not. Private citizens, not being ruled but governed, will then have the right to choose to frequent said establishments or not, with no undue accommodation being given by the government to any one group.
A Statewide law confirming a men's restroom as being for people born as biological males ONLY and the female bathroom being for people born as biological females ONLY makes as little sense as does requiring everyone open up their potties to all comers. It's a broadsword of a fix to a problem that requires some room for nuance and personal belief.
Put another way, it's just as morally wrong to require a Christian-based business to accommodate the transgendered in a manner contrary to their religious beliefs as it is to require a GLBTQ nightclub to police their bathroom usage under the norms of Judeo-Christian beliefs. The Government, whose only God is increased power and control, need not apply.
I realize, of course, that such a solution will never work because the goal of both sides is to always be right, all of the time and that the only feasible solution is to have the other side ground into the dirt with their belief system in tatters. We tried to cover up racism in the past in the same manner. All we accomplished is to drive racism underground which has led us to the increasingly ugly spot in which we find ourselves today. I worry that we're heading down the same road in our attitudes toward the GLBTQ community and we're doing it at the pleasure of politicians who are looking not to ensure equality, but a future constituency.
Most importantly, we need to remember that it's OK if everyone doesn't agree with you or accept you. As a matter of fact, if I ever get to the point on an issue where everyone does that's when I start to really worry that I'm missing something. That being said, I have no plans to boycott Target for their pro-GLBTQ stance than I do to boycott Chick-Fil-A for their pro-Judeo Christian stance.
Neither should you.
Patrick says he would support a statewide bathroom bill. Mike Ward, HoustonChronicle (not behind the paywall [for now])
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, weighing into a national controversy over transgender restrooms, said Tuesday he supports keeping men out of women's restrooms, even if it takes legislation to do so.Since the issue erupted into controversy nationally, some Texas lawmakers have said they will support a state law for single-sex restrooms, and the endorsement of that position by Senate-leader Patrick is likely to give that movement momentum.
No, No, No, No, No.
One more time: No.
It's a far different thing to allow for sincerely held Religious objections (which, incidentally, are why I think so-called "equal rights ordinances" are silly) and another thing altogether to try and dictate to everyone the rights that YOU feel are important.
I was opposed to Parker's Folly because it was a diktat, backed by the power of the State, that everyone, everywhere act and believe in a manner that was currently backed by the prevailing minority. I am opposed to Patrick's Folly for the same reason but substitute "prevailing minority" with "current majority".
And let's be very clear. Neither of the proposed bills protect rights. What they both do (or did, or attempt to do) are apply a special accommodation to groups favored by the bill's authors. Parker's folly attempted to grant upon the Transgender population a right not afforded to any other group, the right to pick and choose, in a fluid manner, how they wished to be identified. Patrick's bill offers to Christians the special accommodation of having to never be offended, or threatened, by the sexual identity of others.
A statewide "ban" on transgender restroom choice is a horrible idea, as is a requirement that all bathrooms be gender neutral.
While there has to be reasonable accommodation in public places (and yes, if you serve the public your private business is a public place) for all groups there also has to be a respect for the beliefs of others. Bills REQUIRING restroom usage (one way or the other) ignore the fact that there are a wide range of beliefs on this, not all of them transphobic.
It is not transphobic to believe that there are material differences between the genders, and that segregation of the two when nature calls is something to be desired. Neither, for that matter, is such an idea inherently sexist. It should also be noted that many of the reservations people have regarding the expansion of gender neutral restrooms don't really center around fears regarding the transgendered, but fears surrounding bad-actors (pedophiles) who would potentially take advantage of the law.
In other words, while the one side is screaming and crying about how the other "lied" in their arguments against, they would need to admit that they, themselves are arguing from a point of dishonesty.
Unfortunately, this will never really happen because there is currently no debate being conducted. All we have right now are two sides, led by demagogues, screaming over each other. In the matter of Parker vs. Patrick, we're all of us losers.
I, for one, would like to see some flexibility, in the same manner as we have it in the matter of open carry. You may scoff at this comparison but I don't think it's all that far out of line. Both issues invoke strong feelings on either side, and both issues produce a not insignificant amount of fear in everyone at some level.
In the debate over open carry a private business has the right to ban weapons from their property, they also have the right to allow them. Some businesses have made the decision to ban while some have openly encouraged guns to be worn.
It should be the same in regards to restrooms. Some businesses might feel that it is in their best interest to allow unfettered access to all restrooms based on gender identification while others may not. Private citizens, not being ruled but governed, will then have the right to choose to frequent said establishments or not, with no undue accommodation being given by the government to any one group.
A Statewide law confirming a men's restroom as being for people born as biological males ONLY and the female bathroom being for people born as biological females ONLY makes as little sense as does requiring everyone open up their potties to all comers. It's a broadsword of a fix to a problem that requires some room for nuance and personal belief.
Put another way, it's just as morally wrong to require a Christian-based business to accommodate the transgendered in a manner contrary to their religious beliefs as it is to require a GLBTQ nightclub to police their bathroom usage under the norms of Judeo-Christian beliefs. The Government, whose only God is increased power and control, need not apply.
I realize, of course, that such a solution will never work because the goal of both sides is to always be right, all of the time and that the only feasible solution is to have the other side ground into the dirt with their belief system in tatters. We tried to cover up racism in the past in the same manner. All we accomplished is to drive racism underground which has led us to the increasingly ugly spot in which we find ourselves today. I worry that we're heading down the same road in our attitudes toward the GLBTQ community and we're doing it at the pleasure of politicians who are looking not to ensure equality, but a future constituency.
Most importantly, we need to remember that it's OK if everyone doesn't agree with you or accept you. As a matter of fact, if I ever get to the point on an issue where everyone does that's when I start to really worry that I'm missing something. That being said, I have no plans to boycott Target for their pro-GLBTQ stance than I do to boycott Chick-Fil-A for their pro-Judeo Christian stance.
Neither should you.
Wednesday, April 06, 2016
BadPolitics: The Justice Department is making an argument against its own Administration. #TXLV
Today the Justice Department filed an anti-trust lawsuit against the merger of Halliburton and Baker-Hughes, two large oil field services companies. In a twist of irony, their reasons for filing the suit are to prevent the exact stated goals of Obama's clean energy scheme.
Justice Department files antitrust suit to block Halliburton/Baker Hughes Merger. Collin Eaton, Chron.com
Instead, they focus on unreliable green sources such as wind, solar and geothermal, in other words, industries that have made both large financial donations to Democratic candidates/groups and who Al Gore and his green investors have large stakes in. If you think the green movement is about saving Gaia or "weening America off it's addiction to oil" you are mistaken. It's about power, control and financial gain for the "correct" group of people. Period.
In fact, probably the surest wager in the world would be betting that all of the scare over anthropogenic climate change would cease immediately if the domestic oil and gas companies were nationalized.
Unfortunately, the current GOP has lost its credibility on this issue under a flood of corporate welfare to oil and gas producers in the form of tax subsidies for production. Texas is the worst, with both the biggest tax incentives and the most unwieldy to implement, but other States are guilty as well. Not only do these provide incentives for companies to over-produce into a saturated market (Most tax incentives go into effect when the price falls lower) they skew good market judgement by bad management within corporate structures who step over dollars to pick up dimes in the form of tax incentives that sometimes only equal 1-3%.
That said, companies are stupid to not take advantage of these savings if they are offered, and they have a vested interest in trying to obtain legal interpretations that are as broad as possible to allow for the biggest tax break. The recent case surrounding application of the high-cost gas tax illustrates both this, and the law of unintended consequences that typically stem from these matters.
All these tax incentives do is open the door for crazy to come in in the form of so-called "pollution taxes" against targeted (read: politically unpopular) corporations who will not pay them anyway. If you understand the concept of corporate taxes (and few do) then you understand that the costs of these taxes are always, without exception, passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. There is no market mechanism to prevent this and, if there were, then you can bet that the resulting wave of lawsuits would swamp the court system and threaten to irreparably damage the American economy altogether.
When writing about taxes before, I mentioned that the solution I would like to see is a fairer, flatter, lower and broader tax code with very few incentives or loopholes included. And while I consider sales taxes to be a much fairer means of taxing oil and gas production than I do severance taxes (and, less intrusive, requiring less data management and, ultimately, less reporting) I also understand that it would be hard to totally overhaul the system away from the current oil and gas severance system. Still, the overall rates should be lower and the incentives few and far between.
Not only would this ensure that the State's tax takings from oil and gas were consistent (and easier to forecast, based solely on commodity price) it would also allow companies to make wiser investment decisions, based on incremental volumes rather than some minute amount of tax decision. This would also reduce costs for both the State and the corporation by alleviating the need for constant audits, and the costly legal battles that are inevitably the result of them. It would also make payment, calculation and revenue processing much more simple, which increases accuracy and the potential for incorrect royalty payments to private royalty owners.
In Texas, where I live, tax and energy policy are a mess, and desperately in need of a total overhaul. At the Federal level things are even worse, and most other States are staring at glaring budget holes as well. At some point there will have to be discussions about fixing these messes that evolve beyond "raise taxes!" or "cut and watch the economy grow!" because neither plan will work.
Unfortunately, it's becoming very clear that the leadership at the Federal level, and (most importantly) at the State level is nowhere near competent enough to be up to the task. President Obama is currently more interested in legacy hunting than putting the Country's needs first, and Governor's such as Greg Abbott are pandering to the alt-right base by saying his top issue (the MOST important issue facing Texas mind you) is passing a ban on sanctuary cities.
Whatever follows the GOP should be paying attention to this. The alternative is a Democratic Party that's going to increase tax takings to unsustainable levels in the name of sustainability. (Of the ruling class)
Justice Department files antitrust suit to block Halliburton/Baker Hughes Merger. Collin Eaton, Chron.com
“The proposed deal between Halliburton and Baker Hughes would eliminate vital competition, skew energy markets and harm American consumers,” U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch said in a written statement.Given that Obama's plan for so-called "green" energy would cause energy prices to necessarily skyrocket and, by extension, skew energy markets and harm American consumers, (A claim that caused so-called 'fact check' media organizations to ramp up the spin machine in order to make it seem less damaging) this is laughable. In fact, even IN full context Obama's intent is clear. Cheap, plentiful energy is not now, nor has it ever been, a goal of the ecomental movement. If it were then they would embrace relatively cheap, safe, nuclear power as the nation's primary energy source.
Instead, they focus on unreliable green sources such as wind, solar and geothermal, in other words, industries that have made both large financial donations to Democratic candidates/groups and who Al Gore and his green investors have large stakes in. If you think the green movement is about saving Gaia or "weening America off it's addiction to oil" you are mistaken. It's about power, control and financial gain for the "correct" group of people. Period.
In fact, probably the surest wager in the world would be betting that all of the scare over anthropogenic climate change would cease immediately if the domestic oil and gas companies were nationalized.
Unfortunately, the current GOP has lost its credibility on this issue under a flood of corporate welfare to oil and gas producers in the form of tax subsidies for production. Texas is the worst, with both the biggest tax incentives and the most unwieldy to implement, but other States are guilty as well. Not only do these provide incentives for companies to over-produce into a saturated market (Most tax incentives go into effect when the price falls lower) they skew good market judgement by bad management within corporate structures who step over dollars to pick up dimes in the form of tax incentives that sometimes only equal 1-3%.
That said, companies are stupid to not take advantage of these savings if they are offered, and they have a vested interest in trying to obtain legal interpretations that are as broad as possible to allow for the biggest tax break. The recent case surrounding application of the high-cost gas tax illustrates both this, and the law of unintended consequences that typically stem from these matters.
All these tax incentives do is open the door for crazy to come in in the form of so-called "pollution taxes" against targeted (read: politically unpopular) corporations who will not pay them anyway. If you understand the concept of corporate taxes (and few do) then you understand that the costs of these taxes are always, without exception, passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. There is no market mechanism to prevent this and, if there were, then you can bet that the resulting wave of lawsuits would swamp the court system and threaten to irreparably damage the American economy altogether.
When writing about taxes before, I mentioned that the solution I would like to see is a fairer, flatter, lower and broader tax code with very few incentives or loopholes included. And while I consider sales taxes to be a much fairer means of taxing oil and gas production than I do severance taxes (and, less intrusive, requiring less data management and, ultimately, less reporting) I also understand that it would be hard to totally overhaul the system away from the current oil and gas severance system. Still, the overall rates should be lower and the incentives few and far between.
Not only would this ensure that the State's tax takings from oil and gas were consistent (and easier to forecast, based solely on commodity price) it would also allow companies to make wiser investment decisions, based on incremental volumes rather than some minute amount of tax decision. This would also reduce costs for both the State and the corporation by alleviating the need for constant audits, and the costly legal battles that are inevitably the result of them. It would also make payment, calculation and revenue processing much more simple, which increases accuracy and the potential for incorrect royalty payments to private royalty owners.
In Texas, where I live, tax and energy policy are a mess, and desperately in need of a total overhaul. At the Federal level things are even worse, and most other States are staring at glaring budget holes as well. At some point there will have to be discussions about fixing these messes that evolve beyond "raise taxes!" or "cut and watch the economy grow!" because neither plan will work.
Unfortunately, it's becoming very clear that the leadership at the Federal level, and (most importantly) at the State level is nowhere near competent enough to be up to the task. President Obama is currently more interested in legacy hunting than putting the Country's needs first, and Governor's such as Greg Abbott are pandering to the alt-right base by saying his top issue (the MOST important issue facing Texas mind you) is passing a ban on sanctuary cities.
Whatever follows the GOP should be paying attention to this. The alternative is a Democratic Party that's going to increase tax takings to unsustainable levels in the name of sustainability. (Of the ruling class)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)