Bernie Sanders for President

No coronation, and hopefully no cakewalk for Clinton.  Vermont Public Radio:

VPR News has learned from several sources that Independent U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders will announce his candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination on Thursday.

Sanders will release a short statement on that day and then hold a major campaign kickoff in Vermont in several weeks.

We're about to see the separation of the Democrats from the progressives.  Last month, Bloomberg pointed out the small discrepancy in his message and actually getting elected: he's got to ask for money, and raise a lot of it, to be taken seriously in the media.

Much of Bernie Sanders' career is centered around his disgust for money in politics. He hates the fact of it, hates its effects, and, naturally, he has deep disdain for the process of raising it. The bigger the number, the more contempt he has. “I don’t do these fundraisers for $100,000 apiece or $10,000,” the Vermont senator, a self-described independent socialist, spat in his heavy Brooklyn accent during a recent speech to the National Press Club. “I don’t know anybody who has that kind of money!” His average contribution, he humble-bragged, is $45.

Now he’s thinking about running for president, in what is shaping up to be the most expensive election in history, likely exceeding 2012’s total of $2.6 billion. There is madness in Sanders’ crusade. But the madness itself is part of the method. Sanders aims to be the personification of the small but vocal movement trying to beat back the increasing political influence of millionaires and billionaires. The cornerstones of his stump speech: Wealth inequality is ruining the country. Climate change is real. And big money pollutes politics.

Supporting this mission will take, of course, money. His political advisers think he can be viewed as a legitimate candidate if he raises $50 million ahead of first-round primary contests in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. Victories in any of those states, which he has already started visiting, would give him credibility as a real alternative to likely Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, the thinking goes, and knock loose enough financial support to get his candidacy into the bigger states. Admittedly, a lot has to go right for Sanders—or wrong for Clinton.

Read all of that piece.  Beyond the money conversation -- Socratic Gadfly doesn't like him much for many other reasons -- Sanders is... well, old.  Seventy-three years old (Clinton is 67).  He's also, as everyone knows, well to the left of where the Democratic Party has been since, oh maybe George McGovern or Hubert Humphrey.

In short, there's lots of reasons why he's a longshot.  But I'll support him as far as he goes and as long as he lasts, because his philosophy needs a public hearing, and it gives me an even greater opportunity to figure out just how far right the Democrats are going in 2016.  It's going to expose a lot of people who have been masquerading behind "progressive", misusing the word to advance their very not-progressive interests, and that absolutely needs to happen.

Actual progressives who have abandoned the centrist, corporate, conservative Democratic party might even re-enter the fray.  It could send a little shiver up the spine of a few hedge fund managers, some big CEOs, and more than a few state and local activists.  Get on board with what the Democratic party once stood for, before it veered right in the first Clinton administration... or stay on board with Hillary.

Can't think of party more in need of separating the stooges from the base.  The Republicans have been undergoing this exercise for six years, and it doesn't seem to be hurting them much, after all.

Update: More from Vox.

Update II: The HuffPo poll aggregate has Sanders trailing Clinton by 55 points.  In order, it's Hillary at 61, Warren at 12, Biden with 11, then Sanders at 6, O'Malley at just under 2, Jim Webb with 1, and Brian Schweitzer at 0.0.  No emails from Bold Progressives with the name 'Warren' in the subject line as yet.

Scattershooting the Lege and legal things

-- Kuff wrote the post I intended to write on the opening arguments at the Fifth Circuit on Texas' odious photo ID law.  Everything you need to know -- and the links you need to click on -- is there.  Update: Here's what I wrote last September about Texas and photo ID.

Update (4/29): And Hair Balls and the TexTrib were on the scene for the arguments.

-- People are excited about the SCOTUS hearings on the gay marriage cases, but frankly that's going to be as dramatic as falling down for Christianist doom-and-gloomers.  God would be real mad at them, and not LGBT people who want to get married... if there were actually a God, of course.  Here's six things you need to know about the case, and I've excerpted from the end of #5 and all of #6.

It’s impossible to know how any justice will vote, but here, as in so many areas, it seems highly likely that everything will turn on the vote of Justice Anthony Kennedy. And the plaintiffs have reason to be hopeful here: Justice Kennedy wrote the opinion in Windsor, as well as two important, earlier gay rights decisions -- one in 1996 and one in 2003.

6) When will we learn what the court has decided, and what are the potential decisions? What will the various outcomes actually mean in real terms?

SHAW: I’d guess we’ll know in the very last week of the term, perhaps even the very last day -- at the end of June. This is a hugely important decision, and it’ll come down to the wire.

I would guess Justice Roberts breaks with the conservative Catholic minority (in this case) and joins Kennedy and the liberal majority, making it 6-3.  As a private attorney almost twenty years ago, Roberts worked on a case advocating against discrimination based on sexual orientation.  And that case, Romer v. Evans, prevailed on a 6-3 SCOTUS vote (the dissenters were Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas).

It is all but a done deal.

Update:  A couple of court interpreters at today's arguments dramatically read some ominous tea leaves, but the TXGOP in the Lege is already plotting ways around approval.

-- State Sen. Kirk Watson's bills -- requiring disclosure by lawmakers of their wining and dining expenses by lobbyists -- suddenly woke from their slumber and started to move yesterday.

(Watson) had complained that he was beginning to hear the “death rattle” on Senate Bills 585 and 586 after they sat bottled up for several weeks in the Senate State Affairs Committee.

But he got a public hearing on Monday, and the committee voted the bills out unanimously.

“I’m real gratified,” Watson said. “It continues to move this conversation that needs to happen and is part of the governor’s goals for the session.” Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, has said he wants to "dedicate this session to ethics reform."

We'll see what happens, but when there are so many bills dying in committee at this point of the session, it's nice to see some glimmer of hope for government accountability.  Update: Here's what I blogged previously about lobbyists' food and bar tabs.  Legislators already got a per-diem increase this session.

-- Here's what else is on Dan Patrick's and Joe Straus' priority list: The budget (good comparison chart between Senate and House versions here), state contract reform, education, energy and environment, ethics, guns, healthcare, immigration and border security (some are withering on the vine), tax cuts, transportation, and veterans' affairs.  Go to the first link and find your issue, the bills associated with it, and their status.

It's nut-cutting time with about five weeks to go to Sine Die, on June 1.

"Mercy Killers"

Other performances scheduled in Austin and Fort Worth in May.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance really hopes that Blue Bell can recover as it brings you the blog post roundup from last week.

Off the Kuff cheered on the latest effort by the federal government to force the state of Texas to expand Medicaid already.

Libby Shaw, at Texas Kaos and contributing to Daily Kos wants voters to know that voting for mean and stupid people, or not voting at all, has consequences, because Texas' refusal to expand Medicaid may Result in higher premiums for the insured.

From WCNews at Eye on Williamson: The "big three" had a breakfast brouhaha this week and Dan Patrick got his feelings hurt. Hurt Feelings and Thin Skin - Session's Getting Good.

Socratic Gadfly listed three numbers to remember — 67, 3, $10 — in 2016 elections.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme noticed a few cases of Texas law officers allegedly acting inappropriately here and here. These cases should be rare, not a daily occurrence.

Even the lawyer who argued -- and won -- the Citizens United case at the Supreme Court five years ago thinks our political system is broken.  But his solutions for it involve removing even more of what remains of the tattered restrictions on financial contributions, and if you want to know the specifics, "you'll have to pay him for that".  PDiddie at Brains and Eggs knows that this kind of mercenary political adviser is as large a part of the problem as the money itself.

Neil at All People Have Value says it seems there are more reasons than ever for people and corporations to break and ignore our laws. All People Have Value is part of NeilAquino.com.

Texas Vox points out that the polluter protection bill is headed for a vote in the Texas House. 

Nonsequiteuse wants you to watch the video, or read the transcript, of Rep. Jessica Farrar's declaration that she will not yield while Republicans deny Texans human rights and dignity.

Early voting begins today in Lewisville's municipal elections, reports the Texan-Journal, and Stace at Dos Centavos reports on the Alief bond initiative and the special election for AISD 4.

And jobsanger shoots down ten of the NRA's pro-gun myths.

===============

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

"Mercy Killers", a one-man play about a moving love story and a fearless look at health care in America, comes to Texas this month and next.  Michael Milligan’s blue collar “Joe” is forced to re-examine his red state ideals as he faces wrenching choices in the care of his beloved wife.  The Rag Blog has details on the Austin performance, and there are three shows scheduled in Houston at the end of this week.

Somervell County Salon reminds her former state representative, Ag Commissioner Sid Miller, that not everyone in Texas wants their children to be unhealthy little fatties.

Carol Morgan observes that when the Tea Party's ignorance aligns itself with power in the Texas Lege, you get a session full of gun bills, restrictions on women's health, tax cuts, vouchers, and more tax cuts.

Randy Bear, recently relocated to Arkansas, explains how that state managed to avoid Indiana-ing itself.

The Texas Election Law Blog calls for executive action to mitigate the damage being done to voting rights by the Supreme Court.

Lone Star Q knocks Sen. Donna Campbell for an amazingly hypocritical Facebook status update.

The TSTA Blog says a voucher bill is a voucher bill no matter what its proponents want to call it.

Raise Your Hand Texas presented its testimony against said voucher bill.

Paradise In Hell wonders if the "Texas Miracle" was based on anything other than high oil prices.

Better Texas Blog explains just what the federal government's threat to discontinue the uncompensated care waiver unless Texas expands Medicaid is all about.

Equality Texas urges the city of San Antonio to take seriously the task of enforcing its non-discrimination ordinance.

Diary of a Mad Trial Lawyer asks: are we a Christian nation if it is a crime to help people and pets?

Green Party's Altgelt wins Laredo council at-large seat

George Altgelt was the Texas Green Party's nominee for statewide judicial office in 2014.  Last August, he sponsored a petition to have the sitting Laredo city council at-large 7 representative, Jorge Vera, recalled.  The petition was certified and Vera was removed from office by the voters last November.  (Vera pleaded guilty to charges of drug possession and filing a false police report in February of this year.)

Altgelt and a few others ran for the vacant seat in the special election in March.  He defeated a Latino challenger Hector Patiño yesterday in the runoff, 58-42.  *Update: Altgelt's mother is Latina, so insinuation on my part -- or inference by the reader -- that the contest was a Caucasian versus a Latino is regrettable.

This news is obviously quite remarkable on several levels.  Most interesting to me from a macro perspective is the flourishing of the Green Party in Laredo over the past few years.  There's something going on down there -- what it is ain't exactly clear to me yet -- and portends some nascent (a word I've used a lot lately) hope for progressive change in Texas.

The Texas Green Party holds its 2015 statewide meeting in June, in Tarrant County.

Sunday Funnies, free trade edition

Who's buying and who's selling?

Texas justice strikes again

If it was a teevee show script, it would be laughed out of development.  Not even House of Cards would consider it because it's so ridiculous.  But it is government business as usual in Texas.

... Justice Bob Pemberton has worked for the former governor, representing him in court as his deputy general counsel. After that job, Perry appointed him to the Third Court of Appeals, which is now considering a request from Perry's lawyers to dismiss the abuse-of-power charges against him.

Pemberton also clerked for Tom Phillips, the retired chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court who is now on Perry's defense team. Pemberton's website features a photo of him being sworn in by Phillips — "his friend, supporter, and former boss." 

In addition to once working for Perry, being appointed by Perry and having clerked for one of Perry's current lawyers, Pemberton has been a political supporter of the former governor. Pemberton chipped in $1,000 for Perry's 2002 re-election campaign, according to state records.

No rational mind could come up with a scenario so absurd and call it 'justice'.

Judges are bound to have some connection to Perry, the longest-serving governor in Texas history, but Pemberton's relation is beyond the pale, according to some good-government experts.

"That court has always acted in a partisan manner, but in this case, Justice Pemberton should definitely recuse himself," said Craig McDonald, head of Texans for Public Justice, a liberal-leaning watchdog group responsible for the complaint that led to Perry's indictment. "There should definitely be a recusal." 

According to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, a judge must recuse himself or herself in any proceed in which "the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned."

Pemberton did not respond to return a call and email Friday afternoon, and a court representative said he could not comment on the situation. In an email, Perry attorney Tony Buzbee rejected the need for Pemberton recuse himself. 

"Is it a conflict that our trial judge used to be supervised by the special prosecutor and that the trial judge then appointed the special prosecutor? I do not think it is a conflict or a story," Buzbee said.

Buzbee has, as he continues to reveal, gone way past his ethical expiration date also.

Judge Bert Richardson, who is now on the Court of Criminal Appeals, continues to oversee the Perry case. He was appointed after Travis County judges recused themselves from hearing the case. He appointed Mike McCrum as special prosecutor. McCrum used to supervise Richardson when the two worked at the U.S. attorney's office in San Antonio.

On Wednesday, the parties in the case were notified that three judges had been tapped to hear the appeal: Justices Scott Field, Scott David Puryear and Pemberton.

Where have we heard Puryear's name mentioned previously? Oh yeah, he and Pemberton sat on the three-judge panel that dismissed Tom Delay's money-laundering conviction, telling us that the definition of "campaign funds" does not include checks.

Perry's lawyers are working to persuade the appeals court to dismiss the indictment against the former governor, who was indicted last year on charges he abused his office and coerced a public servant. Perry's attorneys are seeking to reverse a decision in January by Richardson to let the case proceed.

Perry's lawyers have also filed a separate request to Richardson to quash the indictment, which was amended by prosecutors.

The fix is in again, folks.  This is what you get when you vote for people because they have an R behind their name.  And also what you get when you don't bother to vote at all.