Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: All-in (almost) for tax increases in the Mayoral pool.

Another day, another "roundtable" for Houston's Mayoral wannabes. (Excepting Ben Hall) This time opining on the scourge that is the revenue cap and how Houston's problem can, largely, be solved by rolling out Mrs. White's dusty catapult and hurling large amounts of money at the problem.

Mayoral Candidates Talk Budget at Second Forum. Katherine Driessen, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

(Interestingly, the Chron is asking you to pay $3.50/month to see an unfinished product with all of the sub-headers listed as "sudbhddhre".  Nice work editing team)

I would like to point out the one candidate who was an outlier from the "hurl large amounts of money at the problem" school of thought.

Former mayor of Kemah Bill King said the city's budget woes are "not a revenue problem."
He said he would push for more cost-saving partnerships with the county, particularly merging the city's independent crime lab with the county's lab.

Agreed. And while I understand that calls for increasing revenue are both easy and the default setting for most members of the ruling class, they really should try harder. The fact is that, when you both have the power of forced takings (taxes) and are a literal monopoly (there's no other entity competing with the city, forcing them to run efficiently or no shareholders expecting a profit) the lazy way out is to just demand more money and then phrase it in serious terms as if you're concerned about the little people that tend to be used during campaign season, and then tossed aside in real life in lieu of parks, trains, trinkets and potty compromises for the well-to-do.

How ridiculous is all of this?

Chris Bell pretended to have gravitas and was not laughed out of the room.

While it's not clear, as of yet, how the public feels about all of this (Given Houston's recent election history any public polling that comes out will be closer to election time, paid for by the Chronicle and administered by bicyclist and husband of Marty, Bob Stein) it seems that there are two options available depending on where you fall on the political spectrum.

On the Left, you have Sylvester Turner. Whether or not you agree with his politics he's the most serious of all the progressive candidates. Chris Bell is a perennial candidate with no ideas and no reason to take seriously, Adrian Garcia was a failed sheriff who's proclivity to allow things to fall apart under his administration is only challenged by his infatuation with selfies. Ben Hall, well, we've been down that disaster of a road before and Marty McVey seems like a nice guy, but one who just doesn't quite understand the scope of the office for which he's running.

On the Right, you have King, who has desperately tried to position himself as a moderate and is, at least right now, the most likely candidate to face Turner in the inevitable run-off. King has his minuses, but fiscally speaking, he's the only one that seems to be speaking any kind of sense at all in regards to fiscal issues.

I didn't include Councilmember Costello in either of these lists because I consider him separately.  While most certainly on the left side of the political spectrum he seems to me to be more of a Houston Way candidate than anyone else. Because of this I feel he has an outside chance of making the run-off against either Turner or King.  While Turner is the early favorite for the meaningless endorsement of the New Mrs. White should he stumble or veer away from the new-urbanist orthodoxy on important issues I could see Costello getting that nod by default.

So, right now, I've got the race handicapped as follows:  (odds to make the run-off)

Sylvester Turner:  6/5

Bill King:   3-1

Adrian Garcia:   10-1

Stephen Costello:    10-1

Ben Hall:     20-1

Adrian Garcia:     25-1

Chris Bell:     50-1

Marty McVey:       100-1


I'm not happy that Houston's Mayoral election is matching America's Presidential election as far as the presumption that we have a coronation on our hands, but there's a long way to go and things could change drastically by the time election day arrives.

Shutter the Ed Board: The New Mrs. White does her best King Canute impersonation.

Is lack of Federal Funding to Blame for Flooding Along Bray's Bayou? The New Mrs. White, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

(They're going to charge you $3.50/month for this dreck)

The catapult is back, officially.

Back when I was the author of the lightly regarded Lose an Eye, It's a Sport, blog I coined the term "Mrs. White's Catapult" based loosely on the old IBM commercial that poked fun of the ridiculous tendency of business consultants to throw money at a problem to fix it and the tendency of the Chronicle Editorial Board to call for the same.

After the flooding it seems that the Catapult is back, and in a big way.

The idea that man can contain nature is nothing new.  Much to King Canute's dismay, the tide would not stop rising at his command. This story has become something of legend, and is probably not entirely true, but it is recited as a cautionary tale in regards to Man's hubris in the face of nature.

Mrs. White has become a modern day Canute, thinking that by standing and commanding the water to stop, by hurling money from the catapult at the problem, she can have an effect on flood plains that have existed in the region for centuries.

It's this kind of backwards thinking that leads to the only conclusion possible: The Chron Editorial Board should be shuttered and the staff and resources either let go or redeployed to the news room.

The Chronicle needs to stop ignoring the tide of change that is sweeping through newspapers across the country and start making some needed changes to improve the product. One improvement would be less silly opinion from an unaccountable editorial board and more hard news coverage that impacts Houstonians lives.

Of course, by asking the leadership at the Chronicle to realize this I understand that I'm playing my own Canute role as well.  Newspapers are largely in the mess they're in because they steadfastly refuse to change, they are as unflinching in their march toward irrelevance as the tide is in it's march up the beach.

And so it goes.

Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: An Unoriginal and Uninspiring Start to the Mayoral Race.

*YAWN*

Mayoral Candidates Hold First Forum. Rebecca Elliott, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

(It's about to cost you $3.50/month to read stuff like this.)


While I'm sure there are some of a progressive persuasion who would deem arts funding "meat and vegetables" discussions while categorizing infrastructure and pension issues as "junk food", the reality is most, if not all, of the answers provided in the Mayoral Candidates Arts Forum were nothing more than political dodges designed to allow the candidates a way out should conditions change.

The worrisome bit is that this is all Houston has for choice when it comes to who will be the next Mayor.

If this forum tells us anything it's that the current field is remarkably weak and that Houston's Leadership Vacuum is going to continue to exist.

The Law of Unintended Consequences: The view from the Ivory Tower.

The US Government, long known for its accurate, science-based, sensible approach to try and coerce people to eat what the ruling class thinks they should, are obviously not happy that the traditional definition of alcoholism is not providing them with the horrible, problematic numbers that they desire, have now decided to move the goal posts in order to scare us all into never, ever touching a beer or having a glass of wine again....

Problem drinking affects 33 Million, 14% of US Adults. Lindsey Tanner, AP Medical Writer via HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

(That's right kids, the Houston Chronicle is now placing AP copy behind their increasingly expensive firewall. Or, you can get the same article, for free, here)

The revised handbook, the DSM-5, defines problem drinkers or those with the disorder as people with at least two of 11 symptoms, including drinking that harms performance at work, school or home, frequent hangovers and failed attempts to limit drinking. Mild problems involve two to three symptoms; severe involve at least six symptoms. The new handbook combined alcohol abuse and dependence, which had been separate disorders, added craving as one symptom and eliminated alcohol-related legal problems as another.

In other words, if you drink, you're probably going to have 2 of the 11 "symptoms" that they have decided are indicative of a "condition".  Not only is that ridiculous, it's damaging to people who really do suffer from the horrible problems associated with true alcoholism.

These are the unintended consequences that arise when the government tries to shoe-horn into people's private lives and classify normal adult behavior as a 'disorder'.  It's not and it shouldn't be.

Enjoying an adult libation dates back to the ancient Egyptians, overindulging is hardly a new concept, nor is it something that makes one somehow ill, except in the crazy land of government health science.  We're to a point now that almost any behavior outside of that the vegetarian, naturapaths partake in is considered to be diseased behavior at some level or another.

Drink too much?  You have alcohol use disorder.  Eat too much, you have an eating disorder. Eat too much meat? You have a dietary disorder etc. etc.

None of it is true and it's all just a bunch of stuff dreamed up to try and stir up the populace and increase the government's control over our private lives and choices.  And, yes, the conspiracy theorists will say that this is all linked to Obamacare and the government wanting to mandate what you eat and drink going forward.

While I won't go that far, if you've ever dealt with a regulatory agency you realize that they're not smart enough to be able to operate with any degree of foresight, especially the foresight to carry out those plans, I do think that there are those in government who truly believe that they are the only things standing between the average American and a fat, slovenly life of idiocy and ignorance.  We call these people low-to-mid level bureaucrats.

Even worse, I fear that by dumbing down the idea of "problem drinking" this diminishes the personal crisis that people go through in cases of real alcoholism.  In recent years we've seen government reports that try and suggest a large portion of Americans are "addicted" to soda, sugar, salt, fat, steak, alcohol, eggs, processed foods and pretty much anything that is convenient and tastes good.  Doing this does not help the general public (never mind that most of the government's health advice is eventually proven wrong [see links at top of post]) but instead leads to confusion and distrust of the Federal guidelines that actually might hold some water.

What these chicken little proclamations really do is distract resources from those who have addictive personalities and who really need help.

If I could petition the government to consider one thing before releasing junk-science such as this it would be the following:

Is my behavior here hurting me or anyone around me in a material way?

By "material way" I mean is there any imminent risk of harm or death.  Don't tell me that drinking can lead to whatever symptom, so can life.  We're all dying we just don't know how fast yet.

If the answer to this is "no", then please, keep your study to yourself and leave me and mine alone.


Now, if you'll excuse me I believe that it's five o'clock somewhere.  A beer and burger sound like the correct response to this mess.

 

Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: Ken Hoffman makes a good point, buries it, and readers miss it entirely.

Reading through Ken Hoffman's recent piece on HISD Graduation parking fees made me realize something......

NRG Parking Fee and Insult at HISD Graduations. Ken Hoffman, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

(The linked article is behind the Chron's increasingly expensive paywall. My quote here is very selective but please, if you can, go read the entire column)

This was a public-school graduation at a public facility. It wasn't professional entertainment, like a football game or a concert, where you expect to pay for parking.

The quoted piece, above, is the argument against the NRG complex charging the parking fee. Sure, Hoffman goes on to do what we all do, argue that many of the student's families attending the graduation might not be financially well off, but he needn't do that.  The argument against was in the quoted sentence above.

What Hoffman did, by making economic demographics the central figure of his piece is to politicize it needlessly.  Take the following response from the comments:

Well, I think life is too short to complain about a $12 parking and if you can't afford it, then you shouldn't be driving an uninsured car.

This is why, in the incredibly insipid world of anonymous online commentary, bringing a red herring into the argument such as demographics only serves to distort the argument for into something it is not.  By bringing in issues such as income inequality and demographics Hoffman all but ensured that his central point (this was a public event at a public-owned [albeit privately operated] facility) has been lost in a wave of anti-corporate, and anti-immigrant snark.

There are also a lot of commenters blaming NRG for this mess.  In fact, NRG only has the naming rights for the complex and had nothing to do with the decision to charge for parking.

If you want someone to blame, then look at the Harris County Sports Authority who neglected to carve out a 'public use' exception to the parking fee in the contract with the Texans and the Rodeo. Had Harris County the leadership to negotiate in this manner, issues of this type would not exist. Instead, it often feels like the lease to run the complex was nothing more than a giveaway on behalf of the County to Bob McNair*.

Should the Texans have offered parking for free?  Certainly. But, absent a contractual obligation to do so they were well within their rights to charge full-rate, regardless of the nature of the event. If you want to blame anyone, point your ire directly at the Harris County Sports Authority.











































*On another, tangential, note: Has there been another public figure who has fallen so far, so fast in public perception than Bob McNair?  From savior of football in Houston to nothing more than a greedy, conniving, miser who's doddering management style is not only ruining the Texans, but embarrassing and financially damaging the City of Houston as well.

 

Houston Area Leadership Vacuum: Why govern when the former newspaper of record is willing to campaign for you?

Representative Sylvester Turner is gone, long live Mayor Sylvester Turner?

Turner heads home to Houston, and Mayor's Race. Rebecca Elliot, HoustonChronicle.com ($$$)

(In keeping with the Chron's wishes that no-one read their journalism, wishes they've doubled-down on by increasing the on-line subscription price to $3.50 per week, I will only quote selectively here)

With a knack for passionate, sermonizing speeches, Turner began focusing on juvenile justice and criminal justice reform, as well as public health policy and social services, advocating against state budget cuts that would impact welfare.

While the Chron does allow that some of Turner's votes "could" be of detriment to him, and quotes an opponent in the race, it really doesn't offer any unaffiliated criticism of Turner's tenure in the House other than a glowing quote from a political scientist praising Turner for not being a "bomb-thrower".

Overall it's very clear that the Chronicle fully expects Turner to be the next Mayor and is doing it's level best to get on his good side early.  Not that this is unusual for the Chron, which has shown a habit for writing puff pieces and glowing, slobbering stories that reflect their institutional sources in the best light possible.

If anything, the Chron has a weakness for the ruling class. Not just any politician mind you but those of the ilk who believe in rule of the masses by a select group of intellectual betters.  In short: progressives.

And, lest you think this is a Democrat/Republican thing they have been known to slather it on pretty thick when a so-called "conservative" consents to a progressive idea as well.  It's trinket governance that treats a certain type of politician as the trinket.

What this results in is a mass of 'leaders' who are under no pressure to lead. Freed from the burden of actually running the city and producing results today's elected officials choose instead to provide to their supporters, and fellow travelers such as the Chronicle, a series of baubles meant to distract.

This is why progressives are so enthralled with programs like the so-called 'one bin' recycling program. It's why parklets had a brief, inglorious, run for a news cycle and it's why dilapidated infrastructure and an our of balance pension system is considered 'junk-food' by what passes for political thinkers on the left.  Well, that and a fundamental lack of financial knowledge.

Even more damaging than trinket governance is the reality that Houston's elected officials are under little pressure from a watchdog media to keep their campaign promises.  True, some of the TV news stations are trying hard. (Ted Oberg of Channel 13 is one example) but TV news does not have the ability to deep-dive into government issues as does print news.  And, in Houston at least, there is no meaningful watchdog print journalism left in town.

So welcome back Representative Turner, to a city where the coronation appears to be already in progress and where there will be no expectation that you accomplish anything other than getting people a blue bin to put out in their yard.

Nice work if you can get it.

Texas PSA: You are now safe.

sine die.


It is now officially time to sort through the carnage and see what the unintended consequences will be from the bills that ultimately get signed by Gov. Abbott.

Oh, and wait for the inevitable special session on education funding that will be necessary when the judge rules.




*sigh*