Texas Lock-Step Political Media: Opining (wrongly) on the proposed Texas Religious Freedom Act.

Whether or not you're for or against the wave of so-called "Religious Freedom Acts" that are popping up in state-houses (and the news) with much frequently lately, it's important to realize that some of the arguments both for, and against, are just not based in reality.

Unsurprisingly, the Texas Lock-Step is leading the charge in our fair state in getting this 100% wrong.

Hammond is one not like the others. R.G. Ratcliffe, Texas Monthly

With companies such as AT&T, American Airlines, Apple, Dell, Chevron, BP, and Shell now offering same-sex partner benefits, it is easy to see why Hammond and the Texas Association of Business oppose the religious freedom law and other perceived anti-gay measures. “These amendments are bad for business. They’re bad for Texas. They would devastate economic development, tourism and the convention business,” Hammond said. “Major corporations across the board oppose this legislation. They would not want to come to Texas or expand in Texas. Conventions, the Super Bowl, the Final Four, all those things would be at risk in Texas if this was to become part of the constitution.”

The biggest problem with this argument?

For one, there's nothing in the law that compels a company to NOT offer same-sex partner benefits. In fact, I would think that, if these companies believe these policies are "good for business" they would view it as a competitive advantage that other companies are able to 'opt-out' on religious grounds.

As a market mechanism for drawing the best talent then, this should be a boon to  American Airlines, Apple, Dell etc.  To suggest that companies be forced through coercion to offer these benefits flies in the face of the very market principles that Ratcliffe is suggesting Hammond champions.

There are many reasons that I would never consider starting a business, in Texas, that serves the public directly. Groups like the Texas Association of Businesses are one of those, high-minded moral crusaders are another. What the TAB really wants to do is tilt the cost structure to favor  their lager members. Almost every policy position that they espouse would add burdensome costs to small and medium-sized businesses.  They are also not genuine in their reasoning for opposition to the sanctuary city bill (they like the below-market cheap labor) but that's a different story for a different post.

In theory I'm opposed to acts like the RFA*. I believe that, as a business owner serving the public, you have an obligation to do so fairly. I worry that people will use these to object to a variety of things outside of what the scope intended.(Yes, I realize that's a slippery-slope objection, guilty as charged)  In practice, I'm opposed to the opposition to these bills. I don't see anything good resulting from a long-term program of coercion that forces people to accept the GLBTPC lifestyle if they feel it stands in direct conflict with their religious beliefs.  I find the opposition tactics to be disingenuous and, at times, downright untrue. Perhaps I would be more sympathetic to them if they also stood in opposition to Muslim's who wouldn't cater to a Bar Mitzvah, or a GLBTPC baker who refuses to bake a cake for a Defense of Marriage rally.

And that's my biggest problem with all of this. It's not really about religious freedom or the right to believe as one chooses is the best fit. It's really all about providing protection to the groups the political sides have decided to allow most favored nation status. In the end, this is for-votes, what can you give me to make me feel good politics, on both sides.

The fact is this, Texas Democrats are trying to cater to two groups, upper-middle class to wealthy Caucasian progressives who currently form the back-bone of their party financing structure, and the GLBTPC groups who currently are among their most vociferous supporters and who they use to attack Republicans without getting their hands dirty.  Republicans are also pandering to the evangelical right (NOT, it should be noted the "evangelical tea party" which doesn't exist, another of Ratcliffe's many erroneous assumptions in the piece.). Republicans have always pandered to the so-called moral-majority for votes.

The two parties are shouting over one another while the TLSPM has decided that they are going to insert their framing of the issue to further muddy the waters and, they hope, drive outrage and (most importantly) page-views. If anything Ratcliffe's piece suffers from two main faults.  First, he clearly displays a fundamental lack of understanding of the underlying issues. More egregiously, he falsely applies the Great Man Theory to Hammond in all areas.  Not only is Hammond "right" on the issues but Ratcliffe asserts that he is "right" in his motivations as well, subtly implying that anyone in opposition to Hammond and his fellow travelers is not. This is wrong-headed thinking at best, intellectual dishonesty at it's worst.

The biggest problem with the TLSPM is that they ALL think this way.  Hence the term "lock-step". The second biggest problem is that, on most issues, they get it factually wrong.





































































*Before the session started I opined that the Texas Legislature should just pass a solid budget (the only thing they are required to do by the Texas Constitution) and call it a day. When the Lege starts believing the key to Texas' problems lies in their legislative actions? That's when the problems start and the TLSPM rushes blindly forth.

Texas Leadership Vacuum: A National Beer Day Shotgun

Shot: The Distributors speak out on Houston Matters

Chaser: The Craft Brew Lobby Answers Back.

As someone who's been watching this go on for a while now it's no secret that I'm sympathetic to the craft brewers.  When you consider that some (although not all) distributors are subsidized in part by the big brewing companies you have what basically amounts to a rigged market. The "deal" that passed in 2013 was both a win and loss for craft brewers.  Yes, they won the ability to sell a small amount of product out of their tasting rooms but they also lost the financial rights to their local distribution.

I'm not going to quote too heavy from either argument but I will close with this from the Craft Brew Lobby.....

In addition, The Beer Alliance's characterization of the changes in 2013 being something they 'allowed to happen' borders on ludicrous. Senators Eltife and Carona and Rep. Wayne Smith were the architects of the 2013 compromise that resulted in the package of bills including SB 639. In addition, Open The Taps and the Texas Craft Brewers Guild played large roles in helping to advocate and advance the benefits of those same bills. The very idea that the distributors feel they have the power to 'allow' or 'deny' things to happen in Austin IS THE PROBLEM - for too long they have been the only voice heard in Austin, and have a misguided sense that they make the rules, they are the gatekeepers, and that progress only comes from back room deals held outside of the public eye.

Yup.

Happy National Beer Day.  I'm going to go enjoy one of the craft variety.

Houston Leadership Vacuum: Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! This Editorial Board has got to go!

For what is really a fairly decent City, Houston really suffers when it comes to media, especially political opinion on State and Local matters.

For the most part I'm not including our TV news media here, they're not set up for that type of analysis. But when you take a look at the rest of the media landscape you're more likely to get a firm slice of political opinion from a passer-by on the street than you are one of Houston's new media outlets.

You shouldn't expect much from entertainment outlets such as CultureMap: Houston, The Houston Press or Houstonia. After all, these outlets are basically entertainment/food/fashion/lifestyle sites/publications who dabble in news from time to time. In the grand scheme of things, they're blogs with a budget.

You should expect solid political opinion from the Editorial Board of the Houston Chronicle however, as they still occasionally try to do 'news' and make comments regarding the same.

How are they doing?

Well......

Ups and Downs. The New Mrs. White, ChronBlog

1.  City Council moved fast to unanimously approve the awe-inspiring master plan for Memorial Park drafted by philosopher/visionary landscape architect Thomas Woltz. It isn't going to be inexpensive and the Uptown TIRZ is opaque regarding funding. But we're ready for a land bridge and a new jogging track now.

So, it's going to cost a LOT and it's not quite clear how it's going to be funded. Plus, it's being backed by a TIRZ which (from time to time) the New Mrs. White claims to have issues with.  But hey, there's a land bridge and jogging track so damn the traditional job of the media to hold government fiscally accountable and let's go forward whole-hog!  What's a few Billion dollars (if you include the money they want you to spend on the Astrodome) amongst friends?

2.  When you have a part-time Legislature, stupid things happen. The House of Representatives pulled an all-nighter Tuesday into Wednesday to pass its version of the budget. We shouldn't have to bring our blankie and a pillow to the Capitol to watch elected officials do business. And it is impossible for the elected ones and their staffs to do their due diligence on no sleep. Why not schedule the debate over two days?

For their next act the New Mrs. White reveal to us that they believe that the Texas Legislature is 100% there to react to their timeline.  I'm sure it's tough, writing fluff material for Gray Matters and then being expected to stay up late to watch the Legislature work.  This is no doubt very taxing and tough for one to swallow.  We all feel for you I'm sure.

State Budget Disorder. The New Mrs. White, ChronBlog

There's nothing inherently wrong with a low tax, low services governmental philosophy as long as Texas is able to meet all of our baseline needs while balancing a budget. However, over the past several legislative sessions, our elected officials have failed to make the key investments necessary to foster a top-quality workforce and business-friendly environment. That's why Gov. Greg Abbott used his State of the State address to focus on the meat and potatoes of governance: transportation, pre-K and higher education. But the recently passed state House budget fails to adequately address these concerns.

For example, the budget contributes nothing to the Texas Tomorrow pre-paid college tuition contracts, which face a $594 million unfunded liability. That's a promise made to Texas families that politicians must keep. The budget also falls $502 million short of fully funding the Hazlewood Act, which requires Texas' public universities to provide tuition breaks for veterans and their families. 

 

Even when they might be on track the cognitive dissonance of Mrs. White manages to get it wrong. It's impossible to take the State to task (rightly) for their underfunding of these programs if you refuse to call the City of Houston to the carpet (rightly) for their underfunding of the municipal pension programs.  Sure, Mrs. White has paid lip-service to the problem over the years but she was strangely silent when former Mayor Lee P. Brown created the mess in the first place, she's been complicit in the kicking the can down the road that happened during the White administration and she seems more interested in providing political cover for friendly city politicians now.

This is not to say that the current State of Texas proposed budget doesn't have problems (it does) but one needs to show some consistency in one's criticism if you want to be taken seriously.  Mrs. White is nothing on these issues if not inconsistent.

Slideshows galore. The New Mrs. White, ChronBlog.

Texas voters last spring rejected two candidates, one Democrat and one Republican, who had impressive agriculture and administrative credentials. Miller had neither, and yet he's the man who has the job. He has said that his top priorities are water and rural health care. Both issues are important. Our hope is that he'll cease with the distracting sideshows and focus on what's important for this state. 

If there is one thing for which the Chron should never criticize anyone, it's for having too many distracting slideshows.

From time to time I feel it's time to repeat the call:  Shutter the Ed Board Chronicle, redeploy the resources to hard news reporting. There's no opinion coming from you in-house columnists, rapidly deteriorating editorial cartoonists and joke of an editorial board that is not being more well-written by outside sources.  In fact, in most cases, the "other voices" and guest editorials make much-more compelling, sensible arguments than do that generated by Chron staffers.

The New Mrs. White long lost her credibility when the infamous rail memo was accidentally leaked online. In the years since, if anything, they've regressed even further to the point now that they're just embarrassing themselves.

There are some good reporters still working at the Chronicle, it's long past time to give them the resources and staffing they need to cover Houston.

Houston Media PSA: Unless you're in Seattle, Starbucks is NOT a tourist draw.

I mean, c'mon......

Houston to get a monster-sized new Starbucks with special evening service perks: A tourist draw? Eric Sandler, Culture Map Houston.

Geez.

I need a car: The Mercedes CLA 250 (Part 4 in a series)

Note: What follows are my thoughts on cars that I have driven in my search for a new vehicle. I'm hoping to focus on how cars would react in real, Houston conditions. Not whether they have "tech" or how sporty they are or what their 0-60 time may be (although I will discuss those things). I hope that you come away from this with a better idea how a car would be in everyday conditions, not around a test track.  What follows is my opinion, and my opinion only. I have not received any compensation or influence in writing this other than my own impressions on each vehicle. Your mileage may (and will) vary.  Finally, the following should not be considered either an offer, or advice, on whether YOU should buy a particular car or not. Go out and make your own decisions.

Part 1: The KIA Optima

Part 2: The Dodge Dart

Part 3: The Toyota Camry



For those of you who know me you also know that I consider Mercedes Benz to be the best car-maker on the planet not named Ferrari. Some of the best cars I have ever driven have been rear-drive Mercs including my current favorite car on the road, the AMG CLS 63.


Of course, with a starting price of right around $106,000 (But you're going to spend much more than that to get it well equipped) it is more of a "dream car" and not one that I would seriously consider buying. I could never, in good conscience, pay more for a car than a large portion of the country pays for their house. So, while it's a beautiful thing to look at and admire, I would never seriously consider it even if I could afford to purchase one.

That led me to take a peek at the Mercedes Benz CLA 250, the front-drive little nephew to the CLS.

Picture courtesy of Mercedes Benz

First off, it's a pretty thing. Styled to mimic the CLS, but at a much cheaper price point, Car and Driver Magazine described it as looking like an arrow that has just left the bowstring. This is not a bad thing. While some people like the interior I found it to be a bit "blah".

Picture again courtesy of Mercedes Benz

Performance-wise it has an inline 4 cyl engine that generates 208 horsepower. This provides what I consider to be class leading acceleration but it also hampers the car with poor gas mileage. They say the car will average 30 MPG but any test that I've seen has not come close to those numbers.

The car that I drove retailed for $34,750 and came fairly nicely equipped with leather seats, an electronic nanny (drive assist), power driver and passenger seats with a memory feature, comfort suspension, dual-zone climate control, rain-sensing intermittent wipers (which never work) Bluetooth and a keyless start system.

The first problem here?  You can get all of that technology, and then some, on either a Kia Optima or a Hyundai Sonata for around $5- $7 thousand dollars less.  In short, to purchase this car you would have to be enamored with the Mercedes Benz badge.

If you've ever driven either a Mercedes E or S class then you understand that the appeal of Mercedes cars are their refinement.  They are like driving a cloud that will go wherever you want it to without much effort on your part. The biggest problem that I found with the CLA is that it was (to quote Douglas Addams) almost entirely unlike any other Mercedes that I've ever driven.  How can I put this?  The ride of the CLA was what is only known as "hard". Especially when traveling over Houston's moonscape roads.  I hit one bump and honestly thought that the car left the road for a minute. The steering is also disconnected, not as bad as the KIA Optima, where I felt you needed to give the car some advance warning before making a turn, but oddly sluggish, nothing like I've experienced in previous Mercedes that I've driven.

It also had a cheap feel to it. Most Mercedes feel like they've been constructed to the limit of our current technical knowledge of auto-building.  The CLA feels like the folks in the factory just said "well, that's good enough" and went out to watch their favorite soccer team.

To me, this is the biggest problem with the CLA, it's a good 4-door sedan but you don't get the sense that it's much better in construction or handling as are other, much cheaper, cars in the class. This is not to insinuate that the CLA is a bad car. In fact, it's a very good car. The engineers have done a good job taming the torque steer that plagues most FWD cars, especially ones with this amount of horse power, and the inside, while dreary, was clearly well thought out. The 7-speed automatic transmission is smooth, and seemed to work very well, even at slower speeds which is something other carmakers need to figure out.

To my way of thinking the biggest problem with the CLA is one of price. And I just cannot justify paying a premium for this car over several other in the class, not with the inherent flaws which include the ride and my suspicions about the build quality.

In Summary: I've said it before and it bears repeating. The CLA 250 is a nice car. It has touches that remind you that you're driving a Mercedes, including a very well thought-out (if a little bland) interior and some intriguing options.  That said, the price of the car is just too high. It has a ride that is too harsh for a family sedan, especially one that carries a luxury badge. I can't see living with this car on Houston's roads. It does have a great transmission and good power, but I worry that you're not going to see anywhere near the fuel efficiency Mercedes is advertising. There is a 4WD version of this car available, but the prices come in at around $45K. There is no way you're going to find a version of this car that's under $33K in America, due to the lack of options it would possess.  Also, I've said this before, I have dogs, and leather seats, while important to some, are not something I'm all that interested in having. It's not a big thing but it is a thing.

Why you might want to buy one: You want a good family sedan and are willing to pay the upcharge for the Mercedes badge. I think you have to make several trade-offs to have that badge with this car however, and I just don't see the value in buying one like I did in the old C-Class. To me the CLA requires you to make too many concessions to get the price point down, and I still have a sneaking suspicion that the reliability is not going to compare with the other trim models. That said, if badge prestige is your thing, then this is an option for you.

Rating: 7.1 out of 10. The car gets points for styling and the transmission, but loses points for price, build quality, fuel economy and (most importantly) the hard ride.

The Central Texas Railway: A Case study in why entrepreneurism is dying.

"Misinformation".

Misinformation circles proposed Houston to Dallas High Speed Rail Line. Dug Begley, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

Normally, I'm not impressed by the transportation "reporting" that Mr. Begley produces. He's a fan of institutional sources and often seems to be doing little more than parroting the company line, with the company being either Houston Metro or local public transportation advocates such as Houston Tomorrow or other groups.

In the linked story above Mr. Begley refuses to acknowledge the elephant in the room.  Much of the opposition surrounding the Texas Central Railway project is focused on Government control. The biggest complaints of the municipalities, counties and other government groups is not that their constituents would be "disturbed for the benefit of the few" but is instead focused on the fact that they won't have a big enough influence over how the pie is sliced.

For all of the gripes about "foreign investment" what the local officials are really suggesting is that they can't use the procurement process as they wish.  And this is a big issue in massive construction projects as the rail is sure to be. Billions of dollars in contracts are going to be rewarded and there are many in the ruling class who will naturally resent that they are not positioned to have influence over that.

The administrative red tape in this is going to be unbelievably complex. And this in a state that often likes to beat it's chest about how "business friendly" it currently is.  The fact is Texas is only business friendly if you're willing to play ball with politicians.  For all of the chatter about "not picking winners and losers" the Governor's Economic Development funds have done this for years. It's one of the main reasons this blog has called repeatedly for their elimination.

Administratively, the State of Texas is broken, and the reason for this is not because Texas needs to "spend more money" which is the siren call of the Left.  The major reason for this is because Texas one-party domination of the political system has led to Texas Republicans getting lazy and Texas electing officials to positions of administrative authority for which they are ill-qualified. Jerry Patterson was more interested in his failed run for Governor than he was in being the Land Commissioner. We are seeing the same thing currently with George P. Bush.  In the cities it's not much better. Houston Mayor Annise Parker is more interested in establishing her progressive street cred for a future political office than she is in fixing pot-holes and City Controller Ronald Green might as well not even be present judged on the amount of fiscal watchdog work his office has produced.  Our City Councils have decided that the best way to solve problems is to pass an ordinance, often creating new laws and new regulatory hurdles for prospective business to navigate.

Want to start a restaurant in Texas?  Good luck.  Because once you clear the Byzantine Maze that are the state regulations you also have to comply with all municipal regulations (which, as we've noted, are likely to change on a whim) and we haven't even gotten to all of the Federal regulations which doesn't even begin to address the impacts of the ACA and other payroll withholding obligations.

And that's just for a mom and pop restaurant in one city. The Texas Central Railway is trying to build something that travels across several municipalities and counties and will be subject to that patchwork quilt of negotiation as well. Either they're certain that they can make money or they're masochists. I'm not sure which.

For all of the talk of "streamlining government" from the right and "better government" from the left what no politicians seriously addresses is the mostly broken system of regulation.  This is not just a Texas thing (spend a day dealing with a Federal regulator and you'll see what I mean) but it is growing slowly worse in a State whose economy seems to be thriving despite this.

I worry however that our well-meaning politicians are going to price small businesses out of the market, much the way the unproductive class has effectively priced the poor out of Houston's central core. More so than education the ability to open and run a small business is a stepping stone for the poor into the upper class. If you have a marketable skill, and can make money off of it, the government should not exist to prevent you from making that dream a reality. This is not to suggest that food safety standards should go away (although some will read this and suggest that's what I'm claiming) only that the permitting and regulatory framework for operating and running a business should be greatly streamlined and the permitting process be simpler, and cheaper.

Again, the cities, counties and State governments mainly object to this because they operate under the believe that they are entitled to their 'fair share' of any businesses profits. They feel this way despite the fact that they invested no money, took no risk, and did nothing to contribute to the businesses success.  Obama's "you didn't build that" quote was emblematic of this line of thinking.

It's as wrong-headed as the idea that profit is evil or that the game is rigged by evil multi-national corporations against the little guy.  If anyone is rigging the game, it's the government and over-regulation. Even in a supposedly limited government state like Texas.

The Unproductive Class: We don't like what you're paying for!

There are in Houston, a group of people who specialize in running around criticizing those who do.  This group of people are what Kevin Whited of BlogHouston calls "The Unproductive Class".  For the most part, they contribute nothing to society (working for NewUrban "think tanks" or quasi-government agencies that speak an awful lot about how others should spend and invest money) but always seemingly have a better idea than those who are doing things for how things should be done.

Take today's "other voices" editorial from a member of the First Ward Civic Council:

High Speed Rail only a good idea if done right. Evan Michaelides , Chron.com

Most crucial, there's nothing public about it - it will be operated and funded privately. While touted as a benefit, skeptics worry that if the finances tank, the burden may fall on taxpayers. More important, it will do nothing for the vast majority of Houstonians.

In the rest of his piece Mr. Michaelides goes on to instruct Texas Central Railway (The public company considering making the investment in a Dallas-Houston high-speed rail system) on exactly how he thinks they should spend their own money.

Note that nowhere in this piece does Mr. Michaelides talk about investing his OWN money, or taking any risks, or working to raise funds to build the type of rail that HE desires be built. His only goal is to try and build public support to finance something (at other people's expense) that HE wants to see built.

You see a lot of this same behavior from other groups such as Houston Tomorrow.  Their goal is never to implement and build something, only to coerce and badger public and private entities into spending money in their preferred manner.

Now, granted, we all do this to some degree. And there's nothing inherently wrong with having opinions or advocating for such. As a blogger with a political point of view I do so all the time. That said, I would never be so presumptuous as to try and tell people what risk they should take with their capital investments. I might think that they are making a dumb investment (Metro and the currently designed light rail) and I might point this out, but that's just about the end of it.

Any private concern should be allowed to conduct business in the way it chooses provided there is no harm or malfeasance involved beyond basic opportunity cost. If a Mid-Town restaurant wishes to file for a set-back exemption and exist without parking for automobiles then that is their right. As someone who lives in the Houston exburbs this might preclude me from ever dining at their establishment but that doesn't give me the right to advocate that they be barred from doing so. My preference (need, in Houston) for driving to and from does not outweigh their preferred business model, nor am I seriously harmed by it when you consider that there are plenty of other dining options in the area.

If Texas Central Railway wants to build a high-speed rail system, at private expense, to try and provide a service to a group off whom they believe they can make a profit, so be it. While the restaurant example above is not an apples and oranges comparison, I would remind the unproductive class that there is nothing stopping them from raising their own funds and trying to build a competing service that provides the type of service to the segments of population that they find desirable.

Until then, you really have no say in the game.  Money talks after all. Your own money, not the money of other people with whom you have no affiliation.