By now you probably know that Chron.columnist Lisa Falkenberg won the 2015 Pulitzer Prize for commentary.
Apparently the Chron celebrated by opening up bottles of Champagne in the news room (given their budgetary problems I'm assuming it wasn't high-end) and all has been hunky-dory over at 801 Texas as we can no longer call the Chronicle the "largest daily newspaper to have never won a Pulitzer".
To be fair, however, this should really be the Chron's 2nd Pulitzer as it was ridiculous that they did not win for their coverage in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike.
Unfortunately for the Chron, in 2009 they didn't have a staffer serving as chair of the jury making the decision.
Granted, I'm not one of Ms. Falkenberg's fans and typically find her opinions on certain issues to lack either significant substance, understanding of the realities of modern Texas society, or very much insight. That all said, the reporting that Ms. Falkenberg did regarding grand juries and the curious case of Alfred Dewayne Brown was solid reporting that was probably deserving of a Pulitzer for commentary regardless of whether or not one's colleague was guiding the decision making process.
And that's what makes this so bad. Because it LOOKS wrong. If anything, in a moment of brilliance, Ms. Falkenberg did turn out a compelling bit of reporting that could have won on its own merits. That Jim Newkirk, Viewpoints Editor of the Houston Chronicle was the chair of the jury panel is unfortunate. It would have been better had he simply recused himself, in which case Ms. Falkenberg's work would have had a good chance of winning anyway.
Instead we're just left with another reason that those who pay attention don't have much faith left in the media. Even when something good happens, there's reason to doubt that it was done in the most forthright way. This does not imply that Mr. Newkirk did anything wrong. To the contrary, it implies that, to the Pulitzer Foundation, the concept of what is right and wrong has been lost to the mists of time.
For all of the reporting and screaming about conflicts of interests by the TLSPM, it's almost comical to see just how big of a problem they have with it themselves.
All that said, congrats to Ms. Falkenberg. She really did do a fine job of writing about this story and is deserving of all the praise (and reward) she gets from it. It would be nice to leave it at that but it really does a disservice to journalism (which it is pretended this blog critiques) to praise the deserving winner while ignoring the holes in the nomination and selection process. This would be like praising the Texas Legislature for the rainy day fund, but ignoring the politicians who operate under the Peter Principle.
In that sense, Ms. Falkenberg's piece stands on its own. It won under the same set of rules and regulations that past winners have, and this fact does not diminish her award at the exception of past winners. Ms. Falkenberg is now, officially, a Pulitzer Prize winner and deserves all of the congratulations she is currently receiving.
Also, as one of her biggest critics, I offer up congratulations to her for winning the award where 114 years of Chron staffers have come up short. That is an impressive feat no matter how you look at it. That said, one can't help but wonder how Ms. Falkenberg is going to work into almost every column that she is (in order) a sixth-generation Texan, a natural red-head, AND a Pulitzer Prize winning columnist?
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
Houston News: Time for the Chornicle to find a new business columnist.
If you work in the oil and gas industry, or know someone who does...... (full disclosure: I am employed by a large oil and gas company)
You understand just how wrong-headed Chris Tomlinson is in his thinking here:
Responsibility and entitlement to public lands debated at CERA this week. Chris Tomlinson, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
It's been clear since his start with the Chronicle that Tomlinson doesn't understand the industries he's covering and, in most cases, takes a hostile view of the people that are working in them.
Then again, there are enough experts in Houston that cover these things that it's probable a 'business columnist' is an archaic position. Like most of the Chron's opinion section, they would be better served cutting the column and hiring another reporter or 3 to cover the energy sector.
I know, this won't happen but I think the Chron would have a better product if it did.
You understand just how wrong-headed Chris Tomlinson is in his thinking here:
Responsibility and entitlement to public lands debated at CERA this week. Chris Tomlinson, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)
It's been clear since his start with the Chronicle that Tomlinson doesn't understand the industries he's covering and, in most cases, takes a hostile view of the people that are working in them.
Then again, there are enough experts in Houston that cover these things that it's probable a 'business columnist' is an archaic position. Like most of the Chron's opinion section, they would be better served cutting the column and hiring another reporter or 3 to cover the energy sector.
I know, this won't happen but I think the Chron would have a better product if it did.
Monday, April 20, 2015
Newsish: The Texas Tribune Blurs the Line (TLSPM)
A funny thing. When you navigate to The Texas Tribune you're greeted by a pop-up advertisement that leads you to Texas Wins a pro-LGBT advocacy group. One assumes they paid for the right to advertise on the site.
Unusually, the top story on Texas Tribune is a very LGBT-friendly piece on so-called 'gay conversion' therapy.
Here's an example of some of the prose:
I say unusually because this is not what I would call a "hot-button" issue when you take into account the bill the article is referring to is still mired in committee and unlikely to get out. Given that this is fairly low on the Lege's radar it's curious that it's receiving much space at all.
Whether or not you're a supporter of reparative therapy (I'm not FWIW) both the tone of this article and the language on the two other articles relating to LGBT issues are decidedly pro-LGBT and anti-the opposition. Also the last linked article appears to refer to a rally in which Texas Wins seems to have participated (or even ran, sponsored and organized) but the doesn't note who the organizers were, OR that Texas Wins, an advocacy group who advertises their membership includes religious leaders, and that they advertise for LBGT rights, anywhere in the story. Regardless of your position on LGBT rights this should concern you as a consumer of media because it appears that the Tribune's coverage on the issue is tainted at best, slanted at worst, diminished in credibility either way.
Even more concerning is that most of the Tribune's advertising appears to be advocacy based including this ad from Parkland Hospital discussing their unpaid medical care while articles about Medicaid expansion have no mention that there are groups actively advocating for expansion who advertise on their site. So this is a systemic problem for the Tribune then, not just something related to a single issue.
All news reporting organizations who wish to remain a going concern basically receive revenue from one of three sources, sales of the product (newspaper, magazine etc.), donations (for non-profits) and advertising revenue. It is a necessity that any donors or advertisers who are related to a particular story be specifically and fully identified in the same way it's key that their product (if for sale*)be labeled with a price. It's OK for a news organization to have an editorial point of view, in fact, overseas it's understood that they do and it's fully disclosed what that point of view is. In America however the media is a true believer in a neutrality that doesn't exist, and the Texas Tribune is one of the biggest apostles of this fallacy.
The thing is, it's very clear, in their wording and who they select as experts to provide quotes, which way the Texas Tribune is leaning on any particular issue. It's no secret then that the web-site is pro LGBT rights, pro-increasing state funding for infrastructure, and pro-Medicare expansion. What's not clear is that these are advocacy positions adopted by Tribune advertisers, featured prominently in banner ads. These advertisers are not disclosed at all in the stories themselves.
Not only does this do a disservice to the readers but it opens up the Tribune to questions of journalistic intent that is not really fair to the reporters and editors. Minus official Tribune disclosure and policy it might seem as if the opinions come from those who wrote the stories or that the advertisers swayed them to write from a certain perspective. Whereas, if the Tribune would properly disclose, within the stories, that groups advocating for "position X" advertise or are donors to the site then it would give the reader a full picture of what is going on, and who might potentially be involved in the editorial process. Again, it's not wrong for the Tribune to be the progressive leaning news of Texas, but it's improper for them to try and do so by omitting information that allows readers to make their own determination.
By failing to disclose key-advertisers who are taking advocacy positions on the stories in which they report the Tribune is failing a basic tenet of good journalism. They could fix this pretty easily but, given their poor history and reactions to calls for the same in regards to donors, I suspect everything will just remain the same over there and Texas' Lock Step Political Media will continue it's downward spiral into irrelevance.
Unusually, the top story on Texas Tribune is a very LGBT-friendly piece on so-called 'gay conversion' therapy.
Here's an example of some of the prose:
The suicide of a 17-year-old Ohio transgender girl whose parents sent her to a therapist to "convert" her has refocused national attention on so-called gay conversion therapy. But despite calls to end it from President Obama, gay rights groups and medical associations, the controversial practice isn't likely to face a statewide ban in Texas.
I say unusually because this is not what I would call a "hot-button" issue when you take into account the bill the article is referring to is still mired in committee and unlikely to get out. Given that this is fairly low on the Lege's radar it's curious that it's receiving much space at all.
Whether or not you're a supporter of reparative therapy (I'm not FWIW) both the tone of this article and the language on the two other articles relating to LGBT issues are decidedly pro-LGBT and anti-the opposition. Also the last linked article appears to refer to a rally in which Texas Wins seems to have participated (or even ran, sponsored and organized) but the doesn't note who the organizers were, OR that Texas Wins, an advocacy group who advertises their membership includes religious leaders, and that they advertise for LBGT rights, anywhere in the story. Regardless of your position on LGBT rights this should concern you as a consumer of media because it appears that the Tribune's coverage on the issue is tainted at best, slanted at worst, diminished in credibility either way.
Even more concerning is that most of the Tribune's advertising appears to be advocacy based including this ad from Parkland Hospital discussing their unpaid medical care while articles about Medicaid expansion have no mention that there are groups actively advocating for expansion who advertise on their site. So this is a systemic problem for the Tribune then, not just something related to a single issue.
All news reporting organizations who wish to remain a going concern basically receive revenue from one of three sources, sales of the product (newspaper, magazine etc.), donations (for non-profits) and advertising revenue. It is a necessity that any donors or advertisers who are related to a particular story be specifically and fully identified in the same way it's key that their product (if for sale*)be labeled with a price. It's OK for a news organization to have an editorial point of view, in fact, overseas it's understood that they do and it's fully disclosed what that point of view is. In America however the media is a true believer in a neutrality that doesn't exist, and the Texas Tribune is one of the biggest apostles of this fallacy.
The thing is, it's very clear, in their wording and who they select as experts to provide quotes, which way the Texas Tribune is leaning on any particular issue. It's no secret then that the web-site is pro LGBT rights, pro-increasing state funding for infrastructure, and pro-Medicare expansion. What's not clear is that these are advocacy positions adopted by Tribune advertisers, featured prominently in banner ads. These advertisers are not disclosed at all in the stories themselves.
Not only does this do a disservice to the readers but it opens up the Tribune to questions of journalistic intent that is not really fair to the reporters and editors. Minus official Tribune disclosure and policy it might seem as if the opinions come from those who wrote the stories or that the advertisers swayed them to write from a certain perspective. Whereas, if the Tribune would properly disclose, within the stories, that groups advocating for "position X" advertise or are donors to the site then it would give the reader a full picture of what is going on, and who might potentially be involved in the editorial process. Again, it's not wrong for the Tribune to be the progressive leaning news of Texas, but it's improper for them to try and do so by omitting information that allows readers to make their own determination.
By failing to disclose key-advertisers who are taking advocacy positions on the stories in which they report the Tribune is failing a basic tenet of good journalism. They could fix this pretty easily but, given their poor history and reactions to calls for the same in regards to donors, I suspect everything will just remain the same over there and Texas' Lock Step Political Media will continue it's downward spiral into irrelevance.
Thursday, April 16, 2015
I need a car: Capsules of Cars that Didn't make the grade. (Part 5 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
Part 4: The Mercedes CLA 250
When searching for a car there are always quite a few that don't make the grade. After all, despite the fact that your intention is to take everything out for a test drive you do eventually get tired of the constant high-pressure and (at times) downright rude treatment by car dealers. Since it's impossible to write full reviews of all the cars, I've decided to do a summary post of some cars there that I felt didn't warrant further consideration after my first look-see. Since I didn't spend any time driving these cars (although I did at least sit in most of them to get a feel for the interior) I don't think it's fair to rate them or say too much about how they drive.
Acura ILX: When Toyota created Lexus they designed the cars under that badge to be among the best engineered and built cars they could possibly make. Acura's have never quite reached that level and feel more like Hondas with just enough baubles to allow them to charge extra. I took a peek at the ILX but didn't feel it was a serious contender for many of the reasons I didn't go with the Mercedes Benz CLA 250. It seems a little pricey for what you get and, if you want the standard options, it becomes fairly expensive. I also worried about build quality and have a latent distrust of any 4-door sedan marketed as "sporty". Although Edmunds.com states the ride is pretty good it also knocked the ILX for a dodgy transmission and cheap feeling interior. If I'm paying a premium price, I don't want to think that the company has designed something on a budget.
Chevrolet Malibu: The car that always has the non-automotive press buzzing but fails to awe the automotive community. The Malibu reminds me of the American Camry, a car that's just kind of there. Add to the fact that I'm not a fan of GM and you have a car that I'm just inclined to ignore. It's also bone ugly. When I buy a car I plan on owning it for a while, I just couldn't see myself happy in a Malibu.
Audi A3 - Starting at $30,000 it's really just a Jetta with 4WD and nicer 'stuff' tacked onto the chassis. When you start to add amenities the price of this can really start to climb. The question for Audi's is always the same (to me): How much more than a similarly equipped Volkswagen are you willing to pay for what is basically badge prestige?
Mercedes C-Class - With the introduction of the CLA it appears that Mercedes has upped the price about $8K but made no improvements to the product. Yes, they put in a bigger base model engine (the C 250 has gone the way of the dodo and the C is now the bottom of the range) but properly equipped this car is going to cost nearly double any non-luxury badged car with similar equipment. There was a time, in the past, that Mercedes purchase made sense because they were head and shoulders above everyone in terms of reliability. That's not so much the case today on the C & CLA.
Nissan Altima - Actually, I was intending to test drive an Altima but when I went to AutoNation Nissan in Katy we walked around the lot for 45 minutes without a dealer in sight. I'd driven one a few years back however and wasn't impressed with the value for money, or the CVT transmission they use.
Mitsubishi Lancer - The only Mitsubishi that I like is the EVO, which they no longer make. That said, if you wanted to get into budget rally racing I would recommend finding a second-hand Outlander to strip down and retrofit allowing you to have a lot of fun for the money.
Infiniti Q40 - First off, it's not an attractive looking car. Secondly, I have difficulty paying this price for what is basically an Altima with nicer stuff added to it. Again, properly equipped this car is going to get pricey.
Lexus IS - Except for the front grill it's a pretty thing. I would also feel constantly like I overpaid for a sporty Toyota Avalon.
BMW 3 Series - Price wise, the base model 3 Series is actually OK. The problem is that when you start trying to equip it in a similar manner as the non-luxury badges it gets very pricey. Behind Mercedes, I've always had a soft spot for Bavarian Motor Works and when I drove a 528i as a rental on a business trip (No, I didn't pay that rate, it was given to me because they were out of intermediate cars) I thought it might be the best road car I've ever driven. The problem with the 3-series is that it won't be near as good as the 5-series that I drove but I'll still be paying a premium.
If you're noticing a trend from me on luxury badged cars you would be correct, especially at the lower end of the range. I said at the beginning of this that I'm not a believer in badge prestige. I also am shopping for what amounts to a commuter car so paying a premium to keep up with the Joneses doesn't make sense to me. This doesn't mean that these are bad cars. In fact, I think the Mercedes C-300, the BMW 3-series and the Audi A3 are very good cars. I think the Lexus IS and the Infiniti Q 40 are good cars as well. I just can't justify the extra expense that would be required to purchase one.
You might feel differently about this and, I should note, I think that is wonderful. If everyone had the same taste in cars as I we would all drive the same thing and that would be boring. I didn't want to purchase any of these cars, but I'm not advocating that you shouldn't have the choice to do so.
After this I'm down to basically 3 cars:
1. Ford Fusion
2. Subaru Legacy
3. Volkswagen Jetta
I did purchase one of these three and you won't be surprised to find out it was the highest rated on my list.
Part 1: The KIA Optima
Part 2: The Dodge Dart
Part 3: The Toyota Camry
Part 4: The Mercedes CLA 250
When searching for a car there are always quite a few that don't make the grade. After all, despite the fact that your intention is to take everything out for a test drive you do eventually get tired of the constant high-pressure and (at times) downright rude treatment by car dealers. Since it's impossible to write full reviews of all the cars, I've decided to do a summary post of some cars there that I felt didn't warrant further consideration after my first look-see. Since I didn't spend any time driving these cars (although I did at least sit in most of them to get a feel for the interior) I don't think it's fair to rate them or say too much about how they drive.
Acura ILX: When Toyota created Lexus they designed the cars under that badge to be among the best engineered and built cars they could possibly make. Acura's have never quite reached that level and feel more like Hondas with just enough baubles to allow them to charge extra. I took a peek at the ILX but didn't feel it was a serious contender for many of the reasons I didn't go with the Mercedes Benz CLA 250. It seems a little pricey for what you get and, if you want the standard options, it becomes fairly expensive. I also worried about build quality and have a latent distrust of any 4-door sedan marketed as "sporty". Although Edmunds.com states the ride is pretty good it also knocked the ILX for a dodgy transmission and cheap feeling interior. If I'm paying a premium price, I don't want to think that the company has designed something on a budget.
Chevrolet Malibu: The car that always has the non-automotive press buzzing but fails to awe the automotive community. The Malibu reminds me of the American Camry, a car that's just kind of there. Add to the fact that I'm not a fan of GM and you have a car that I'm just inclined to ignore. It's also bone ugly. When I buy a car I plan on owning it for a while, I just couldn't see myself happy in a Malibu.
Audi A3 - Starting at $30,000 it's really just a Jetta with 4WD and nicer 'stuff' tacked onto the chassis. When you start to add amenities the price of this can really start to climb. The question for Audi's is always the same (to me): How much more than a similarly equipped Volkswagen are you willing to pay for what is basically badge prestige?
Mercedes C-Class - With the introduction of the CLA it appears that Mercedes has upped the price about $8K but made no improvements to the product. Yes, they put in a bigger base model engine (the C 250 has gone the way of the dodo and the C is now the bottom of the range) but properly equipped this car is going to cost nearly double any non-luxury badged car with similar equipment. There was a time, in the past, that Mercedes purchase made sense because they were head and shoulders above everyone in terms of reliability. That's not so much the case today on the C & CLA.
Nissan Altima - Actually, I was intending to test drive an Altima but when I went to AutoNation Nissan in Katy we walked around the lot for 45 minutes without a dealer in sight. I'd driven one a few years back however and wasn't impressed with the value for money, or the CVT transmission they use.
Mitsubishi Lancer - The only Mitsubishi that I like is the EVO, which they no longer make. That said, if you wanted to get into budget rally racing I would recommend finding a second-hand Outlander to strip down and retrofit allowing you to have a lot of fun for the money.
Infiniti Q40 - First off, it's not an attractive looking car. Secondly, I have difficulty paying this price for what is basically an Altima with nicer stuff added to it. Again, properly equipped this car is going to get pricey.
Lexus IS - Except for the front grill it's a pretty thing. I would also feel constantly like I overpaid for a sporty Toyota Avalon.
BMW 3 Series - Price wise, the base model 3 Series is actually OK. The problem is that when you start trying to equip it in a similar manner as the non-luxury badges it gets very pricey. Behind Mercedes, I've always had a soft spot for Bavarian Motor Works and when I drove a 528i as a rental on a business trip (No, I didn't pay that rate, it was given to me because they were out of intermediate cars) I thought it might be the best road car I've ever driven. The problem with the 3-series is that it won't be near as good as the 5-series that I drove but I'll still be paying a premium.
If you're noticing a trend from me on luxury badged cars you would be correct, especially at the lower end of the range. I said at the beginning of this that I'm not a believer in badge prestige. I also am shopping for what amounts to a commuter car so paying a premium to keep up with the Joneses doesn't make sense to me. This doesn't mean that these are bad cars. In fact, I think the Mercedes C-300, the BMW 3-series and the Audi A3 are very good cars. I think the Lexus IS and the Infiniti Q 40 are good cars as well. I just can't justify the extra expense that would be required to purchase one.
You might feel differently about this and, I should note, I think that is wonderful. If everyone had the same taste in cars as I we would all drive the same thing and that would be boring. I didn't want to purchase any of these cars, but I'm not advocating that you shouldn't have the choice to do so.
After this I'm down to basically 3 cars:
1. Ford Fusion
2. Subaru Legacy
3. Volkswagen Jetta
I did purchase one of these three and you won't be surprised to find out it was the highest rated on my list.
Shutter the Editorial Board: Proof of Case in a single paragraph.
It's not everyday that a group makes the case for their own obsolescence. The New Mrs. White provided just that evidence in an editorial today:
State of the City, Chron.com
Amazingly, before making this statement Mrs. White admitted in the editorial that Mayor Parker had made mistakes and accomplished little on the following:
1. Public works - The editorial board admitted that Mayor Parker waited too long to address infrastructure repairs, and that she seemed disinterested in addressing existing problems now, in lieu of focusing on future items that may, or may not, come to fruition.
2. Pensions - Not only did the editorial board admit that Mayor Parker has made little progress on this, but they also admitted that the much ballyhooed "deal" that Parker made with the Firefighter's union failed to change the financial projections.
3. Public Safety - The Chronicle all but admitted that the HPD clearance rate is unacceptable and that Mayor Parker had little clue of how, or any inclination to, fix the problem.
Forgive me for thinking that this is not the resume of a Mayor that deserves to take a victory lap. Nor should a supposedly watchdog media be "content" to allow her to do so. This is not to say that Mayor Parker's career in city politics has been without success. As a member of City Council she was viewed as a very effective representative for her district. During her time on Council she earned a reputation as a fiscally conscious progressive who paid attention to her constituents needs. She should be applauded for that.
As City Controller however there is no doubt that Ms. Parker was not an effective fiscal watchdog for the City, serving often as a rubber stamp for then Mayor White's many efforts to shuffle the deck of assets and liabilities to cover debt. (To be fair, her successor is even worse) And, as Mayor, Parker's signature issue (The Great Urinal Compromise of 2014) is still languishing in the courts as opponents try and overturn it.
It is ruinous and petty to suggest that Mayor Parker does not deserve the chance to say goodbye on her terms. She won every election in which she ran once being elected to City Council and her departure from City Hall is certainly a personal milestone for her. But to sugarcoat the rough edges of her administration, and to allow her to walk away without a serious review of her record is proof of case that the Houston Chronicle Editorial Board currently serves no practical purpose in the Houston marketplace of ideas.
Repeating: Shutter the Ed Board, redeploy the assets to the local desk. There are plenty of Houstonians who can, and are, doing a better job commenting on local political issues.
State of the City, Chron.com
Mayor Parker's State of the City addresses have been warnings, campaign stumps and celebrations. This one will be valedictory, a capstone speech by an outgoing mayor. It is her victory lap, and after her time as a council member, controller and mayor, we're content to let her take it.
Amazingly, before making this statement Mrs. White admitted in the editorial that Mayor Parker had made mistakes and accomplished little on the following:
1. Public works - The editorial board admitted that Mayor Parker waited too long to address infrastructure repairs, and that she seemed disinterested in addressing existing problems now, in lieu of focusing on future items that may, or may not, come to fruition.
2. Pensions - Not only did the editorial board admit that Mayor Parker has made little progress on this, but they also admitted that the much ballyhooed "deal" that Parker made with the Firefighter's union failed to change the financial projections.
3. Public Safety - The Chronicle all but admitted that the HPD clearance rate is unacceptable and that Mayor Parker had little clue of how, or any inclination to, fix the problem.
Forgive me for thinking that this is not the resume of a Mayor that deserves to take a victory lap. Nor should a supposedly watchdog media be "content" to allow her to do so. This is not to say that Mayor Parker's career in city politics has been without success. As a member of City Council she was viewed as a very effective representative for her district. During her time on Council she earned a reputation as a fiscally conscious progressive who paid attention to her constituents needs. She should be applauded for that.
As City Controller however there is no doubt that Ms. Parker was not an effective fiscal watchdog for the City, serving often as a rubber stamp for then Mayor White's many efforts to shuffle the deck of assets and liabilities to cover debt. (To be fair, her successor is even worse) And, as Mayor, Parker's signature issue (The Great Urinal Compromise of 2014) is still languishing in the courts as opponents try and overturn it.
It is ruinous and petty to suggest that Mayor Parker does not deserve the chance to say goodbye on her terms. She won every election in which she ran once being elected to City Council and her departure from City Hall is certainly a personal milestone for her. But to sugarcoat the rough edges of her administration, and to allow her to walk away without a serious review of her record is proof of case that the Houston Chronicle Editorial Board currently serves no practical purpose in the Houston marketplace of ideas.
Repeating: Shutter the Ed Board, redeploy the assets to the local desk. There are plenty of Houstonians who can, and are, doing a better job commenting on local political issues.
Wednesday, April 15, 2015
Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: The Sorry State of Roads and Infrastructure.
I will be the first to admit to you that, from time to time, I feel a strong urge to just totally dump politics and never blog about them again. As a matter of fact, I think I've penned a post or two suggesting that this is what I would do.
Inevitably however, the silly season (elections) start ramping up and I find myself interested again so I pen a political blog post. I feel that I can do this because a.) I offer no claims of credibility and b.) I'm sure many of the people who would like to call me on this have either stopped reading this blog long ago because of some imagined slight or they just don't remember.
With that said, what follows is a political post.
Not national politics, of course, because I find it too easy to just pen a post saying "Democrats are Stupid!" (many are) or that "Republicans have turned their backs on the voters!" (many have) and then make some snide remark about either Obama golfing while the world burns, or Obamacare being a tax disaster, or Hillary and Chelsea Clinton not grasping the fact that THEY are the .001% of the 1% and their entire campaign being built on a false premise, or Boehner crying or John McCain being an idiot again. While the above is a sure-fire way to get page hits and praise/condemnation from those who believe in the black/white hat theory of partisan politics I find it much more interesting to blog about local politics.
One reason for this is because the hats politicians wear are often different shades of gray. For another, the decisions, obsessions and indifferences of the local pols are more likely to have a direct effect on my daily life. Another reason is simple: In Houston, the coverage of local politics is (mostly) awful. You are either stuck with whatever institutional source material the Chron has decided to regurgitate unquestioningly, hi-ho party bloggers or (worst of all) smartest-guy-in-the-room contrarians who shit allegiances with the tide or, more realistically, toward whatever politician decides to pay attention to them at the moment.
All of this leads us, conveniently, to Harris County traffic.
It's awful, we all know this. I could end this post here but that wouldn't be right considering that there's a LOT of blame to go around.
First: Harris County drivers.
It's easy to look at Houston's dilapidated streets and say that our ruling class is 100% to blame. This is easy but not entirely fair. So before we go any further I think it's right that you, Harris County car driver, are reminded of a few simple rules of the road:
1. Stop cutting in line. If you know your exit is coming then pull into the lane early. Don't wait until the last minute to try and wedge in between an 18-wheeler hauling gasoline and a family of six trying to get the kids to school. Even worse is when you (usually driving a pick-up) forget the fact that your truck-bed is actually attached to your car and it's still sticking out into the lane you are trying to leave blocking those people as well. Have a little foresight and get over earlier. Finally, if you leave the line and then try to get back in line later I believe that the police should have the legal option of shooting out your tires, and immediately towing your vehicle. Especially if you commit the two previous sins listed above.
2. Stop cutting in line. I just felt I needed to say this twice.
3. In addition to speed limit maximums, there are speed limit minimums as well. Not that I'm intentionally picking on pickup trucks here, but they seem to be serial offenders. For some reason your standard pickup driver in Houston is only capable of two speeds: Either a warp level that would make Mr. Scott nervous or glacially slow. There is no in between. How you drive on the open highway is none of my concern. But if you can't stay within the flow of traffic during rush hour then please, take the bus.
4. Please stop talking/texting and trying to make 7-lane changes. At some point, we're going to have driverless cars and you'll be able to sext to your side-piece while in your car, until then, just stop. People who do this like to point out that there's no law banning texting or talking on one's phone while driving in Texas but, in fact, they are wrong. It is illegal to drive while distracted in Texas and it's a law I wish officers would enforce more strongly.
5. If you are going to make a right turn, please stop rushing past someone only to pull into the lane, slam on the breaks and turn right in front of them. Were I King of Texas the penalty for this would be caning. Not only is this dangerous, but it says to everyone around that you either have no depth perception or that you're such a gormless prat that you don't care what happens to anyone around you.
6. Finally, and most importantly, there are others around you. Please be cognizant of that fact. I've often said that Houston drivers are not especially bad, they just lack spatial awareness. Understand that when you attempt to make a 5 lane change to get to the exit you forgot you needed to take there are, in fact, other motorists behind you who don't expect someone to drive like a directionless twit. I understand that checking mirrors and signaling before lane changes is quaint, but it sure would cut down on the accident rate.
Second: Harris County Elected Officials
Thought you were getting off easy didn't you? Well, the truth is you're a big part of the problem as well.
1. Potholes. I realize that the Houston Chronicle has now decided that all is hunky-dory since Mayor Parker issued a call-to-arms (before throwing a tiny amount of money at the problem then immediately leaving for another party-with-others-in-the-ruling-class junket) but the fact is that there are still an awful lot of potholes out there and, in most cases, the 'fix' that Public Works claims to have done does nothing more than turn a tire killing pothole into a suspension killing speed bump. I'm entirely serious here. I've seen fixed potholes that look like scale models of the Matterhorn. Even someone who hasn't completed Jr. High can work a trowel after all. Here's another quaint idea: Do the job correctly and completely the first time.
2. Capacity. I'm not entirely sure what the engineered vehicle count limits are for Houston's infrastructure, but I'm almost positive that we've exceeded them. While the easy solution is to "pour more asphalt" I understand that, in the current political environment, this is both cost-prohibitive as well as sure to bring a round-of cries from Houston's unproductive class (more on them in a minute.) I saw a local Houstonian (and for the life of me I can't find the link, so if it was you, please link your story to the comments and I'll edit) recommend remaking Houston's Interstates into double decker expressways. I like this idea for two reasons: 1. It wouldn't involve troublesome issues of imminent domain and 2. If designed properly (big if) it could allow 18-wheelers easy access in and out of the city while the local commuter was able to actually get to an exit without having to bob and weave like Barry Sanders running behind the Lion's colander of an offensive line.
3. Light sequencing. Note here that I don't say synchronization. The latter would be a horrible idea. The fact is however that in most of Harris County much of the congestion is caused by shoddily sequenced traffic lights. Want to test your patience? Try to drive down West Little York between Hwy 290 and Hwy 6 almost any time of day. As a matter of fact, try to drive down almost any street in Houston at the posted speed without being stopped at almost every light. In many cases, it cannot be done even if you drive above the speed limit (illegal) or creep along slowly (unsafe). There was a story printed at one time (which, again, I can't find online) that Harris County actually had a chance to purchase light-sequencing software for $500K but "it had other priorities". One assumes that power-washing the Astrodome was more important than people being productive and getting to work safely and on-time.
4. Public Transportation. This hurts to say because I love me some public transportation when done right. Unfortunately, Houston Metro is not doing it right so it's time to starve the beast and redeploy the monies to road maintenance and construction. Maybe, once the current regime is gone we can get some people in who understand what the real role of public transportation is (to move people from point to point efficiently) versus what they want it to be (wedding venues for the unproductive class and baubles designed to bring events to town).
Last: The Unproductive Class
For you, I have only two things.
1. Just. Stop. We realize that you have just as much a right to make an argument as the next person. We also acknowledge that, as residents of Houston, you probably paid sales tax on a mixed drink from time to time and have put money in the city and county coffers. However, just because you went to Europe once or twice and rode on a really neat train or streetcar there doesn't mean that the same set-up is going to work well in Houston. Also, your insistence that everyone move inside Loop 610 is impractical. A better use of your time would be to try and figure out how to get people from outside the central core, into job centers.
2. You cannot have your cake and eat it to. This goes out mainly to Critical Mass, the cycling group that violated traffic lights, berated motorists and generally created civic danger situations during their monthly protest rides. I get that you are angry that motorists are parking on the dedicated bicycle lane downtown. For the most part, I'm sure most of this is due to ignorance. But, if the motorists would be doing this as some kind of protest how is this any different than the idiocy that you used to partake in when you blocked intersections illegally, banged on the hoods of cars who tried to pass on a green light, and (according to reports) delayed the access of first responders to get to victims? One of the biggest problems with activism is that the activists typically choose to pick and choose when rules get followed. Were I you I'd focus on lobbying Houston to continue to develop a real, workable bike path system that let's you get where you need to go, and also to ensure that the last 1000 yards that require you to ride on surface streets is safe and efficient. Of course, that's just me, I'm not an activist.
Transportation infrastructure is bad across the State, either through negligence or buffoonery our local and State elected officials have been desperately attempting to provide content for election hand-outs, trying to swap trinkets for votes, or supplying red meat to the laundry-list of political activists who issue voter guides. They also suffer from "Something! Must be done." syndrome which supposes that for every imagined problem, there is either a law, ordinance or regulation that can fix it. Better governance would be to fully handle requirements first, the important things next, and only after everything is fully funded and everything is running at peak efficiency do you start asking questions. Even at that point (and Houston and Texas are nowhere NEAR that point) the default answer should be to leave well enough alone.
First though, let's get things moving. Of course, this might mean that $243 Million for the Astrodome be directed toward better uses, as might the proposed $50 Million for Reliant Park upgrades.
Inevitably however, the silly season (elections) start ramping up and I find myself interested again so I pen a political blog post. I feel that I can do this because a.) I offer no claims of credibility and b.) I'm sure many of the people who would like to call me on this have either stopped reading this blog long ago because of some imagined slight or they just don't remember.
With that said, what follows is a political post.
Not national politics, of course, because I find it too easy to just pen a post saying "Democrats are Stupid!" (many are) or that "Republicans have turned their backs on the voters!" (many have) and then make some snide remark about either Obama golfing while the world burns, or Obamacare being a tax disaster, or Hillary and Chelsea Clinton not grasping the fact that THEY are the .001% of the 1% and their entire campaign being built on a false premise, or Boehner crying or John McCain being an idiot again. While the above is a sure-fire way to get page hits and praise/condemnation from those who believe in the black/white hat theory of partisan politics I find it much more interesting to blog about local politics.
One reason for this is because the hats politicians wear are often different shades of gray. For another, the decisions, obsessions and indifferences of the local pols are more likely to have a direct effect on my daily life. Another reason is simple: In Houston, the coverage of local politics is (mostly) awful. You are either stuck with whatever institutional source material the Chron has decided to regurgitate unquestioningly, hi-ho party bloggers or (worst of all) smartest-guy-in-the-room contrarians who shit allegiances with the tide or, more realistically, toward whatever politician decides to pay attention to them at the moment.
All of this leads us, conveniently, to Harris County traffic.
It's awful, we all know this. I could end this post here but that wouldn't be right considering that there's a LOT of blame to go around.
First: Harris County drivers.
It's easy to look at Houston's dilapidated streets and say that our ruling class is 100% to blame. This is easy but not entirely fair. So before we go any further I think it's right that you, Harris County car driver, are reminded of a few simple rules of the road:
1. Stop cutting in line. If you know your exit is coming then pull into the lane early. Don't wait until the last minute to try and wedge in between an 18-wheeler hauling gasoline and a family of six trying to get the kids to school. Even worse is when you (usually driving a pick-up) forget the fact that your truck-bed is actually attached to your car and it's still sticking out into the lane you are trying to leave blocking those people as well. Have a little foresight and get over earlier. Finally, if you leave the line and then try to get back in line later I believe that the police should have the legal option of shooting out your tires, and immediately towing your vehicle. Especially if you commit the two previous sins listed above.
2. Stop cutting in line. I just felt I needed to say this twice.
3. In addition to speed limit maximums, there are speed limit minimums as well. Not that I'm intentionally picking on pickup trucks here, but they seem to be serial offenders. For some reason your standard pickup driver in Houston is only capable of two speeds: Either a warp level that would make Mr. Scott nervous or glacially slow. There is no in between. How you drive on the open highway is none of my concern. But if you can't stay within the flow of traffic during rush hour then please, take the bus.
4. Please stop talking/texting and trying to make 7-lane changes. At some point, we're going to have driverless cars and you'll be able to sext to your side-piece while in your car, until then, just stop. People who do this like to point out that there's no law banning texting or talking on one's phone while driving in Texas but, in fact, they are wrong. It is illegal to drive while distracted in Texas and it's a law I wish officers would enforce more strongly.
5. If you are going to make a right turn, please stop rushing past someone only to pull into the lane, slam on the breaks and turn right in front of them. Were I King of Texas the penalty for this would be caning. Not only is this dangerous, but it says to everyone around that you either have no depth perception or that you're such a gormless prat that you don't care what happens to anyone around you.
6. Finally, and most importantly, there are others around you. Please be cognizant of that fact. I've often said that Houston drivers are not especially bad, they just lack spatial awareness. Understand that when you attempt to make a 5 lane change to get to the exit you forgot you needed to take there are, in fact, other motorists behind you who don't expect someone to drive like a directionless twit. I understand that checking mirrors and signaling before lane changes is quaint, but it sure would cut down on the accident rate.
Second: Harris County Elected Officials
Thought you were getting off easy didn't you? Well, the truth is you're a big part of the problem as well.
1. Potholes. I realize that the Houston Chronicle has now decided that all is hunky-dory since Mayor Parker issued a call-to-arms (before throwing a tiny amount of money at the problem then immediately leaving for another party-with-others-in-the-ruling-class junket) but the fact is that there are still an awful lot of potholes out there and, in most cases, the 'fix' that Public Works claims to have done does nothing more than turn a tire killing pothole into a suspension killing speed bump. I'm entirely serious here. I've seen fixed potholes that look like scale models of the Matterhorn. Even someone who hasn't completed Jr. High can work a trowel after all. Here's another quaint idea: Do the job correctly and completely the first time.
2. Capacity. I'm not entirely sure what the engineered vehicle count limits are for Houston's infrastructure, but I'm almost positive that we've exceeded them. While the easy solution is to "pour more asphalt" I understand that, in the current political environment, this is both cost-prohibitive as well as sure to bring a round-of cries from Houston's unproductive class (more on them in a minute.) I saw a local Houstonian (and for the life of me I can't find the link, so if it was you, please link your story to the comments and I'll edit) recommend remaking Houston's Interstates into double decker expressways. I like this idea for two reasons: 1. It wouldn't involve troublesome issues of imminent domain and 2. If designed properly (big if) it could allow 18-wheelers easy access in and out of the city while the local commuter was able to actually get to an exit without having to bob and weave like Barry Sanders running behind the Lion's colander of an offensive line.
3. Light sequencing. Note here that I don't say synchronization. The latter would be a horrible idea. The fact is however that in most of Harris County much of the congestion is caused by shoddily sequenced traffic lights. Want to test your patience? Try to drive down West Little York between Hwy 290 and Hwy 6 almost any time of day. As a matter of fact, try to drive down almost any street in Houston at the posted speed without being stopped at almost every light. In many cases, it cannot be done even if you drive above the speed limit (illegal) or creep along slowly (unsafe). There was a story printed at one time (which, again, I can't find online) that Harris County actually had a chance to purchase light-sequencing software for $500K but "it had other priorities". One assumes that power-washing the Astrodome was more important than people being productive and getting to work safely and on-time.
4. Public Transportation. This hurts to say because I love me some public transportation when done right. Unfortunately, Houston Metro is not doing it right so it's time to starve the beast and redeploy the monies to road maintenance and construction. Maybe, once the current regime is gone we can get some people in who understand what the real role of public transportation is (to move people from point to point efficiently) versus what they want it to be (wedding venues for the unproductive class and baubles designed to bring events to town).
Last: The Unproductive Class
For you, I have only two things.
1. Just. Stop. We realize that you have just as much a right to make an argument as the next person. We also acknowledge that, as residents of Houston, you probably paid sales tax on a mixed drink from time to time and have put money in the city and county coffers. However, just because you went to Europe once or twice and rode on a really neat train or streetcar there doesn't mean that the same set-up is going to work well in Houston. Also, your insistence that everyone move inside Loop 610 is impractical. A better use of your time would be to try and figure out how to get people from outside the central core, into job centers.
2. You cannot have your cake and eat it to. This goes out mainly to Critical Mass, the cycling group that violated traffic lights, berated motorists and generally created civic danger situations during their monthly protest rides. I get that you are angry that motorists are parking on the dedicated bicycle lane downtown. For the most part, I'm sure most of this is due to ignorance. But, if the motorists would be doing this as some kind of protest how is this any different than the idiocy that you used to partake in when you blocked intersections illegally, banged on the hoods of cars who tried to pass on a green light, and (according to reports) delayed the access of first responders to get to victims? One of the biggest problems with activism is that the activists typically choose to pick and choose when rules get followed. Were I you I'd focus on lobbying Houston to continue to develop a real, workable bike path system that let's you get where you need to go, and also to ensure that the last 1000 yards that require you to ride on surface streets is safe and efficient. Of course, that's just me, I'm not an activist.
Transportation infrastructure is bad across the State, either through negligence or buffoonery our local and State elected officials have been desperately attempting to provide content for election hand-outs, trying to swap trinkets for votes, or supplying red meat to the laundry-list of political activists who issue voter guides. They also suffer from "Something! Must be done." syndrome which supposes that for every imagined problem, there is either a law, ordinance or regulation that can fix it. Better governance would be to fully handle requirements first, the important things next, and only after everything is fully funded and everything is running at peak efficiency do you start asking questions. Even at that point (and Houston and Texas are nowhere NEAR that point) the default answer should be to leave well enough alone.
First though, let's get things moving. Of course, this might mean that $243 Million for the Astrodome be directed toward better uses, as might the proposed $50 Million for Reliant Park upgrades.
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Selfish Blogging: The Cannondale Giveaway.
I want this bike, and I get more entries if you enter here:
https://thefeed.com/blog/giveaways/cannondale-supersix-evo-giveaway/?lucky=32770
So go ahead, give it a try.
You heard me.
Enter now dangit!
https://thefeed.com/blog/giveaways/cannondale-supersix-evo-giveaway/?lucky=32770
So go ahead, give it a try.
You heard me.
Enter now dangit!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)