Speaker Straus Unwilling to Forget Voter ID and Focus On Real Problems

by: Michael Hurta

Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 09:54 AM CST

The following is the third charge given to the House Committee on Elections:

Examine the prevalence of fraud in Texas elections. Study new laws in other states regarding voter identification and recommend statutory changes necessary to ensure that only eligible voters can vote in Texas elections.

Wasn't it already concluded that voter impersonation happens infrequently?  Changes, clearly, aren't necessary no matter which way you slice it.

I am upset mainly, though, because Speaker Straus saw how a push for voter suppression derailed plenty of good laws last session.  It was his one colossal failure as a first-term speaker, and he wants another go.  

Wow.  What happened to learning from one's mistakes?  The only way I can see this as something other than a repeat of an error is if he feels his position is in danger from the Craddick-Right.  Even still, Voter Suppression should be a non-starter with any leader, especially one that fell flat in its wake once already.

HB 1937 Now Effective; Cities Should Adopt Solar Panel Financing Pronto

by: Michael Hurta

Thu Sep 03, 2009 at 09:40 AM CDT

For those who don't know what property tax financing is, HB 1937 allows cities to do this:

Two years ago, however, the city of Berkeley figured out an easy financing trick to get around this problem-the city itself just issues a bond to pay for the upfront costs of installing the panels, and the homeowner then repays the government over the course of 20 years via a small line item on the property-tax bill. (This way, if the home is sold, the costs of the panels get passed on to the new owner getting the benefits.)

Solar Panels on the roofs of houses make for more renewable energy and more energy efficiency.  That combination represents exactly what we need to avoid a massive climate crisis.  So, Texas cities should make like Berkeley and give homebuilders and homebuyers an affordable option for solar energy.

Austin, the "blue center" of the state with many activists dedicated to renewable energy, would be a perfect testing ground for this policy in Texas.  If I were buying a home, and I could add solar panels to my house simply by paying more property tax, I would jump on the idea in less than a second.  I'm sure others would, too.  Is there a chance, then, that we could see property tax financing for solar energy soon?

Republican FBISD Board President Criticizes State Legislature

by: Michael Hurta

Wed Aug 12, 2009 at 08:12 AM CDT

I read the following out of Fort Bend, today:

Before hearing details for a proposed deficit budget on Monday, Fort Bend Independent School District Board President Bob Broxson slammed the Texas Legislature for putting school districts in a fiscal hole.

"This year, in a move that I can see as having very little logic or justification, the legislature has put us and other school districts between a rock and a hard place with regard to funding," Broxson said, in a statement he read at the beginning of a Monday afternoon FBISD budget workshop.

Later in that workshop, FBISD Chief Financial Officer Tracy Hoke presented a proposed 2009-2010 budget including a deficit nearly twice as big as last year's - $18.7 million.

"Districts in our area are considering drastic measures just to break even. One district had been considering the repeal of its homestead exemption in order to avoid a massive budget deficit," Broxson said.

"This year the state of Texas is requiring Fort Bend ISD to give teachers, counselors, nurses, librarians and speech pathologists a raise that will be approximately $1,000," he added. "There was no consideration given to other employees that make up more than 50% of FBISD's employees. This raise is not funded by the state, but is mandated to be taken out of the 'funding formula' approved by the legislature."

Democrats were probably not great on this matter, either -- as far as fiscal responsibility goes...  That said, Texas Republican leaders continue to time and again tout their "records" of fiscal responsibility, yet we continue to see cracks in their painted picture.  They are not as fiscally conservative as they would like us to think.

Perry: "There WILL be a special session." (via @elisewho)

by: Michael Hurta

Tue Jun 09, 2009 at 02:12 PM CDT

"There WILL be a special session," Gov Perry says. He says he's in the process of deciding when.

More law making, woo!!  It should be noted that Governor Perry has not yet had a special session that has benefited him politically, so he is probably planning this one with extra scrutiny due to his upcoming primary challenge.  For him, his personal goals are probably to minimize political damage while simply ensuring that we allow for the Texas Department of Insurance and the Texas Department of Transportation to stay alive.

Update:: While the speculation is that the special session is necessary because the necessary funds have not been appropriated to allow TDI and TxDOT to completely operate the next two years, @KXAN_News has specifically noted that the governor would not give the details on the session's agenda beyond "unfinished legislation."

Will Top Ten Percent Reforms Happen This Year?

by: Michael Hurta

Wed May 20, 2009 at 00:39 PM CDT

Once again, Top Ten Percent Reform, in SB 175, has passed the Senate.  Today it comes up in the House.

Democrats are pretty divided on this issue.  The conflicting interests are accessibility (for Texans) and a higher national competitiveness for our Tier 1 universities.  The Top Ten Percent Rule has been great for accessibility in that the best students at less privileged inner city schools and rural schools have more easily gotten into the University of Texas (and even Texas A&M).  

The University of Texas and fellow proponents of reform have pointed out that the Top Ten Percent Rule has now left UT with much less choice as to who to admit, and the circumstances leave out smart high school students who simply were more dedicated to goals other than their grades.  This might not be a problem, either, if UT has not tried to lower the amount of students on campus.  The only problem is, the Legislature does not want to fund the University of Texas, so it was hard to keep so many students.  Instead, the Lege has decided to work on kinks like this rule to help out.

Unfortunately, as the economy is worse, the current Top Ten Percent Rule will burden UT immensely, and such exclusivity to Texans that would come of it would lessen UT's reputation nationally.  Attending this school, and seeing the professors that come here, I know this is one of the very top universities in the country, but not every ranking will show you that.  Unfortunately, some students that rank, say, in the 8th percentile of their high school classes while doing little else with their lives come to UT instead of many people in the 12th percentile who are active in their communities.  That is why some Democrats and I are on the side of reform.  We are all for accessibility, but we want our schools to compete on the highest of levels.

Interestingly, the House Committee Substitute on SB 175 is more lenient to the Universities than the original SB 175 out of the Senate.  I presume we will find out later today whether that is more reflective of the House moving towards reform than two years ago (as they were in the 78th and 79th sessions) or if it is more reflective of Higher Education Chair Dan Branch's strong relationship with UT President Bill Powers.  I'd bet the latter, but we'll see where amendments go.  And we'll see where the final vote ends up.

I imagine if the Committee Substitute from the House Committee on Higher Education passes the House, then a compromise will definitely be reached in the Senate.  The Senate passed Top Ten Percent Reform easily for the second year in a row, and I doubt many Senators in a conference committee will have trouble working with a version more lenient to UT and A&M.  On the other hand, do not be surprised if amendments in the House change SB 175 to be less lenient to UT and A&M than the Senate version.  If a less lenient version passes the House, proponents of SB 175 will still have to lobby hard to get this passed.  As we saw in 2007, it's the type of issue that can die quite easily.

In the Senate, everyone who voted against SB 175 was a Democrat.  I imagine the same won't be true in the House.  Since House districts are smaller, there are many more Republicans who represent entirely rural districts.  And the Top Ten Percent rule helps out the rural districts more than urban districts.  I think we will learn today a lot about the fate of Top Ten Percent reform, though.  We will see how strongly the argument of accessibility for every TYPE of Texan does today.  

Senate Passes Another Renewable Energy Bill

by: Michael Hurta

Mon May 11, 2009 at 09:02 PM CDT

Last month, the Senate passed SB 545 (Fraser) to create a statewide rebate program for solar power. While that bill is best set up to fund solar on rooftops, Sen. Watson's bill is best set up to fund utility-scale solar, biomass and geothermal projects. By providing energy at peak demand during the day (solar) or round the clock (biomass and geothermal), these projects would complement wind energy, which generally maximizes capacity at night. Texas is already investing $5 billion on new transmission lines for wind projects, so these projects could be co-located underneath wind farms, doubling the return on our investment.

According to ERCOT  and the PUC, by displacing use of high-cost natural gas, renewable energy can significantly lower electric costs. With federal action expected on  global warming  and renewable energy , technologies like solar will become even more cost competitive.  An analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund found that SB 541 will provide a net savings of over $3 billion to Texas consumers by 2020 and reduce CO2 emissions by 20 million tons a year by 2020. According to a new poll commissioned by the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation, 61%  of Texans favor requiring a certain amount of electricity be generated from solar power.

Both SB 541 and SB 545 could propel Texas to be a world leader in the development of solar, geothermal and biomass technologies, benefitting businesses across the state. In Pasadena, Texas, MEMC is the world's largest supplier of solar-grade  silicon. In Austin, Applied Materials (the world's largest manufacturer of the equipment that makes solar panels) has a facility that could be retooled for solar production. In Brownwood, Barr Fabrications produced steel braces for the nation's largest solar thermal power plant in Nevada.

Both these bills are clear policy wins for Democrats, or at least they will be if the House passes them and the governor signs them.  And although one of the two bills was authored by a Republican, we can call these clear Democratic wins because each bill received a handful of "Nay" votes; all from Republicans.

Hopefully the House will pick up these two bills and pass each of them.  Speaker Straus has shown sympathy to the causes of renewable energy, but the Republicans can only show their dedication to the cause if they pass the bills entirely.

Democrats will win on this, whether in the legislature now or in the elections in 2010.  The issue of renewable energy is an economic issue as well as an environmental one -- providing for more renewable energy will create jobs that will last generations.  And it's pretty obvious that job creation resonates with voters.

Concealed Guns Restricted in Lege Galleries

by: Michael Hurta

Tue Apr 21, 2009 at 00:15 PM CDT

Signs citing a section of the Texas Penal Code dealing with concealed handgun licenses were posted recently next to the metal detectors around the entrance to the House and Senate galleries. Though guns are currently banned from the galleries of the House and Senate, the House Committee on Public Safety recently passed a bill that would allow citizens to carry concealed handguns on college campuses.

State troopers outside the galleries stop people with concealed weapons from entering. Tela Mange, a spokeswoman for the Department of Public Safety, said the signs were posted at the request of the House and Senate, but she was unsure how long ago they were placed there.

Why would these signs be posted?  Quite frankly, someone must know what can happen if a constituent with a gun becomes angry at his least favorite legislator, who could give disagreeable speeches.  Usually, Texans will respect each others' safety.  But what about that one guy?  Things can get dangerous.

Hopefully, the legislators realize that the same problem can exist in even the best schools of Texas.  If HB 1893 passes and concealed guns are allowed on campuses, a hypocrisy will be revealed that will put light upon legislators that worry more about their own safety than those of this state's students.  

SB 769: First Law of the 81st Session!

by: Michael Hurta

Thu Apr 16, 2009 at 06:06 PM CDT

The bill does not edit any parts of the state's different legal codes, but instead adds a Subchapter I to Chapter 36 of the Utilities Code.  Since someone else already did a good job of summing up the bill, here is the "Background and Purpose" of SB 769, according to the Bill Analysis (.pdf) that was given to the House Committee on State Affairs.  Just note that when the analysis says "current law," you can interpret it as "the law before today," since SB 769 is now the law.

Under current law, except for extraordinary costs incurred to restore the electric system of a utility due to Hurricane Rita, an electric utility is required to file a general rate case to recover the costs of restoring its electric system and service following a hurricane or other major weather-related event. The process of dealing with such costs can be inefficient.

S.B 769 authorizes the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) to permit an electric utility to obtain timely recovery of its system restoration costs without having to file a general rate case and to use securitization financing for that recovery. The bill also authorizes the PUC to require a utility to file for a securitization financing order to create benefits to ratepayers.

Fixing Texan Democracy?

by: Michael Hurta

Wed Mar 18, 2009 at 07:45 AM CDT

So here we see members of the legislature arguing for countless hours in defense of America's greatest ideal.  At least our representatives exude patriotism for state and country.  The Republican leaders insist we make this change, however, as if Texan democracy needs a fix.  Last I checked; really?  The legislature only stands in session for five months, so if we want to hijack that important time for one issue, it should be an issue of extreme urgency.

But I do not perceive any crucial problems with Texan democracy.  A simple observation of elected officials will tell you that.  In a Republican-majority state, every statewide office holder has a GOP membership.  Not discounting the growing presence of Democrats, though; the House of Representatives is almost split down the middle, and almost every major city has a Democrat majority in their respective city councils.  The only argument you can make in favor of the sickness of our democracy is the lack of high profile Hispanic politicians, but I have not heard one Republican contend that SB 362 alleviates that worry.

Todd Smith, David Dewhurst, etc. might maintain that the voters want Voter ID requirements.  I guess that's true, but did the Founding Fathers listen to the people when determining how best government should listen to the people?  That just doesn't make any sense.  It makes even less sense when over 40% of Texan voters misstated the current rules on Voter ID, suggesting they are not informed enough to have a fully evolved opinion.  This is why, of course, we listen to the experts: a technique in which Representative Smith, at least, finds difficult.

Even if the UT poll found 90 percent support for Voter IDs, though, the poll found more important numbers (.pdf).   The poll's 21st question asked the open-ended query, "What would you say is the most important problem facing the state of Texas today?"  Nowhere in the document, however, do I see a response along the lines of "Integrity of Voting."  Even if every "Miscellaneous" response related to Voter ID (and that obviously is not the case), three other issue would be more important by more Texans by wide margins.  For this reason, it would make more sense for Republicans to champion racist immigration laws than racist voting laws.

Instead, our state's leadership is completely wasting our time.  According to the poll numbers, Texans would definitely prefer they tackle the problems or education, immigration, and the economy.  They probably would also easily prefer work on the energy industry, health care, and Texas' lack of true political leadership.  Texans as a whole are apparently more in touch with the health of our democracy than the Republicans are - they realize there is no problem!  And when the experts are against the Republican Party's stance on this, too, one has to wonder what the hell they are thinking.  The current session only has two and a half months left before saying goodbye for another year and a half.  Instead of squandering their hours spent in the capitol, can our state's leaders instead try to control the rising cost of my tuition, distribute the federal stimulus money productively, and become less addicted to oil?  

There were reasons epitomized by the governance of Tom Craddick that Democrats made electoral gains.  Mr. Craddick no longer sits on that pedestal of power, but those reasons are still there.  Republicans still seem to screw up our government.

Tom Craddick Speaker Files were Deleted

by: Michael Hurta

Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 06:16 PM CST

Before the House voted Speaker Tom Craddick out of his powerful job, state officials wiped his computers clean and deleted scores of electronic files, raising concerns that important public records may have been destroyed.

Files on one shared computer network drive were saved, but unless Craddick specifically requested them, computer hard drives and electronic records associated with individual employees were deleted, officials said.

Craddick left the speaker's office on Jan. 13, returning to the state House as a rank-and-file member without a vast staff and without the sweeping power the presiding officer wields.

The computers were removed from the speaker's office to be wiped clean at 5 p.m. on Jan. 12, said Anne Billingsley, spokeswoman for the Texas Legislative Council. Rep. Joe Straus, R-San Antonio, was sworn in as speaker at noon the following day.

But before he gave up the gavel to Straus, the council, which oversees computer issues for the Legislature, let Craddick take what he wanted and deleted everything else, officials told The Associated Press. Billingsley said the computers from Craddick's office were recycled and that Straus got his own computer systems that did not have the old files on them.

Government watchdogs who complain would argue that files on a government computer belong to the state of Texas, and therefore should not be wiped.  

Deleting files from individual employees in the legislature is standard procedure, but the rules on the files of the representatives themselves seems more fuzzy.  Not only was Tom Craddick just a member, but he was the speaker of the entire House presiding over multiple contentious terms.  So, this could be a story to watch.