HB-129 seeks to end blogging as we know it

I'm going to sample a good bit of Vince Leibowitz' research and re-print his Q&A regarding one of the bills pre-filed for the Texas legislative session opening in January:

House Bill 129, filed by State Rep. Vicki Truitt (R-Westlake) for consideration by the 80^th session of the Texas Legislature is legislation that will drastically impact writers for whom the World Wide Web is their primary medium of distribution.

House Bill 129 is legislation that would amend Texas' Civil Practices & Remedies Code by adding Section 73.0045. This section would provide statutory provisions in Texas law under which the authors of websites (including blogs) can be sued for libel, slander and defamation in the same manner as print or broadcast media. It also provides mechanisms that allow courts to order website authors to remove the offending content.

But aren’t websites and blogs already subject to libel and slander law?

Yes. Since the popularity of the Internet began to rise in the mid-1990s, courts across the country have held that website authors can be held to the same or similar standards as newspapers, radio and television stations when it comes to libelous, defamatory or slanderous statements. In Texas, web writers and websites (including blogs) have been sued successfully on a number of occasions.

If the Web is already subject to libel law, then what's the big deal?

Good question! There is a very big difference to the manner in which websites and their authors can be held accountable currently and what would happen if HB 129 became law.

Presently, websites and blogs are subject to the libel and slander provisions of the Civil Practices & Remedies Code because federal and state courts have consistently held that web-based content is similar to other media and must be held to the same standards. And, web writers have no problem with that. Courts have been the ones to make these decisions and determinations because, when the Civil Practices & Remedies Code was originally written, the Internet was not the major force in society that it is now. As is the case with patent law, copyright law, election law and numerous other areas of state and federal law, when the law does not specifically cover a new medium or area that develops as a result of emerging technology courts make determinations about the applicability of that law to new mediums.

The 'big deal' is that, although House Bill 129 codifies the already established fact that websites in Texas can be sued for libel and defamation, it fails to provide web-based writers with the same protections as other mediums are afforded under Chapter 23 of the Civil Practices and Remedies Code.

What are these protections?

Print media is specifically protected by Section 73.002 of the Civil Practices & Remedies Code when it comes to a concept called "privileged matters." House Bill 129, though it codifies that websites may be sued for libel, does not further revise the CP&R to indicate that websites are subject to these protections.

Specifically, the privileged matters clause protects print writers from lawsuits for defamation in certain instances relating to coverage of public events. This is especially important for bloggers, who often function as citizen journalists.

In short, fair, true and impartial accounts of judicial proceedings, legislative or executive proceedings, and other official proceedings and public meetings (like city council meetings and county commissioners court meetings) is protected from libel action. The coverage is considered "privileged" so long is it is fair, true and impartial.

The privileged matters clause also protects commentary (opinion and satire) related to public officials and other matters of public concern so long it is "reasonable and fair."

House Bill 129 fails to amend the CP&R Code to provide the necessary and appropriate protections to bloggers and citizen journalists.

I'm not a blogger, I just have a MySpace page. How does this apply to me?

Whether or you are a blogger, have a MySpace, Xanga, or Facebook site, or a regular website, House Bill 129 poses a significant danger to you.

Because the term "website" is not defined by House Bill 129 and is overly broad, social networking sites are covered. Almost everything on the web could be included in the term "website." Technically, under the changes House Bill 129 would cause, email messages in an archive on sites like Google Groups, Yahoo Groups could result in actionable libel claims.

A comment you leave on a MySpace page, something you write on a friend’s "wall" on Facebook, or a message you send to Google Groups will be wide open to frivolous lawsuits from anyone you happen to offend, and you could find yourself paying thousands of dollars in legal fees just to have a frivolous lawsuit thrown out of court.

I am a blogger, but I'm very careful about what I write. Why should I care?

Whether you blog about your Labrador retriever or Texas politics, House Bill 129 should scare you into action.

As noted previously, those of us writing on web-based mediums have been subject to libel and defamation suits for years. However, once it is codified in Texas law that writers and owners of such sites can be sued, you could find yourself answering for even the most nonchalant blog post in court.

Consider this: A blogger or MySpace goes to a national chain retailer like Wal-Mart and has a bad experience with a rude cashier; the blogger blogs that Wal-Mart has horrible customer service on their blog. Wal-Mart can now sue you for libel. Will they win? It’s doubtful, but under House Bill 129, a major retailer could use your offhand comment about their store as a test case to scare off other web-based writers from making similar statements.

For political bloggers on the "left" and "right", the danger is far worse. Because we don't get the protection of the "privileged matters" clause, we could find ourselves sued every time we write about a politician or political candidate no matter how careful we are. A simple post about staff being fired from a congressional office or a state representative accused of ethical violations or sexual harassment could result in a multi-million dollar lawsuit being served upon you because you have no protection when writing on matters of public concern no matter how unbiased and accurately you report. While your unbiased manner and accuracy may mean a jury might not find you actually libeled someone, it will cost you thousands of dollars in legal fees and you may be bankrupt by the time a verdict is returned in your favor.

You should also care because you could be held accountable for things you didn't even write.

If you are the owner of a blog of website with comment capabilities, you could be held responsible for what others say in the comments section or on the bulletin board section of your website. Because you own the website, and HB 129 codifies the ability of websites to be sued for libel, you bear the ultimate responsibility for every word that goes on your site. You can be sued for comments.

So what do we want?

Since bloggers and web writers have already been successfully sued in Texas, the addition of websites to the Civil Practices & Remedies Code is somewhat moot. Our complaint isn't that reality has been codified. It is that reality has been codified without citizen journalists being given the protections they rightfully deserve.

What we want is either a defeat of HB129 or to see it amended such that web writers, bloggers and citizen journalists are offered the same protections under the "privileged matters" section of Chapter 73 of the Texas Civil Practices & Remedies Code.

What should we do?

Contact your state legislator -- Senator and Representative. Ask them to oppose HB-129.

Demon seed

You just know that poor child is so conservative she'll never be able to smile anything but crooked...

Bail set for striking janitors at $888,888 *UPDATE: Bail reduced

This is the justice you get when all of the law officials in the nation's third most populous county are Republicans.

People arraigned on murder charges have had bail set as low as $30,000, but if you're making $5.00 an hour and sit down in the middle of a Houston intersection, you get intimidated -- at best -- by a mounted Houston Police officer, arrested, charged with a Class B misdemeanor, and thrown into jail with your bail set at "send-a-message" level.

Update (11/19) : "Bond rates were later reduced by a magistrate judge to $1,000 per person."

Houston and Harris County truly feels like the belly of the Neo-Fascist beast today.

More at MyDD, Daily Kos, and The Agonist.

Update (11/19): Matt Stoller stays on the story:

Representatives Sheila Jackson Lee, Henry Waxman, John Lewis, Al Green, Senator Ted Kennedy, Reverend James Lawson, Texas State Senator Rodney Ellis, Texas State House Representative Garnet Coleman, Houston City Council Member Ada Edwards, Reverend James Orange, and Reverend William Lawson have all spoken out.

If I were Chevron, Exxon, and Shell Oil - all of whom make billions and any of whom could end the strike - I would be nervous that Henry Waxman is asking you to intervene. A few million dollars in extra salary and health care benefits for the people cleaning your offices is a really small price to pay to prevent Waxman from really scrutinizing your business practices. He plays hardball, he dislikes corruption, and he's pushing global warming legislation.

HPD gets violent with SEIU protestors

Photos here.

We've seen this sort of hyper-aggressive police action, particularly with mounted officers, previously (at the Halliburton protest last year).

Update: The Washington Post has more, or you may click on the image of Ercilia Sandoval on the right. And Easter Lemming, who shot the video above has even more, including the link to the Justice for Janitors blog.

Moneyshot Quotes of the Week

Reviving this irregular series as a result of the newly target-rich environment:

"Ted and I had a discussion. He said homosexuality is genetic. I said, no it isn't. But I just knew he was covering up. They need to say that."

-- Rev. Louis Sheldon, a Christianist from the Traditional Values Coalition, disclosing that he and 'a lot' of others knew about Haggard's homosexuality 'for awhile ... but weren't sure just how to deal with it'.

Obviously the best way to address the troubling issue of the nation's leading evangelical being gay and a drug abuser was to say and do nothing while continuing to rake in the cash from the gullible fools who buy their lies.

"It cannot be just a matter of friendship. It will have to become almost a confrontational relationship. You've got to confess your sins and you've got to have a group of people around you who will not let you whitewash the issue. From the Christian perspective, we think in terms of prayer, we think in terms of what we call godly counsel, where godly men who are clean themselves insert themselves in the life of the one who is struggling."

-- H.B. London, vice president for church and clergy at Focus on the Family, on the spiritual 'restoration' of Ted Haggard

Did he actually say that a gay evangelical can be cured by other 'clean godly men inserting themselves' into him?

Isn't that how all this trouble began?

"Bob Sherwood's seat (in Pennsylvania) would have been overwhelmingly ours, if his mistress hadn’t whined about being throttled."

-- Grover Norquist, excusing Karl Rove for the GOP's electoral wipeout one Congressional seat at a time

Hear hear, Grover. If those bitches would just keep quiet and take their strangling from their Congressmen, the House of Representatives might've retained another Christian soldier to carry on the fight for God and Dubya.

"Our party does not suffer the affliction of being a boiling mad collection of fringe interests with notions so cockeyed that they ultimately rub each other raw and make average Americans cringe."

-- Rep. Joe Barton (R - Batshit Crazy, TX)

'Rub each other raw', Joe? You're really going to miss Mark Foley's Christmas party, aren't you?

"I still consider Santorum and Allen among the best and most appealing conservatives on the scene. I believe Santorum has national appeal, despite his loss in Pennsylvania. And although Allen's campaign was knocked off stride, nobody will care much."

-- Mark Levin, National Review Online

Don't you need to be the guy running the RNC, Mr. Levin? Are you by any chance gay? That would be an advantage...

And finally, an old photo needs a new caption:

I'll open the bidding:

"Man, last week was really shitty."

"Dude, don't get ME started..."

It's only been a week ...

... and I'm still not as happy as everybody else about the election results in Deep-in-the-Hearta.

I believe the elation some feel comes from their proximity to Dallas County, or Hays County, or how much work they did in Ellen Cohen's or Juan Garcia's or Valinda Bolton's campaign. And to be clear, the following is not at all meant to rain on their victory parade. Those wins are certainly sweet, and those candidates and their campaigns deserves congratulations for their hard work.

But I believe the overabundance of enthusiasm for last Tuesday's election returns in some quarters simply comes from having met an extremely low set of expectations:

"We made a practical decision," said Matt Angle, a Democratic strategist who is helping rebuild the state party. "It was the most efficient way to spread the resources. It wouldn't have been a rational decision to do otherwise."

Mr. Angle said the party focused its resources in 17 House districts, half of those in which Democrats mounted a challenge against Republican opponents.

I just don't recall Matt Angle being elected by anyone to develop and execute the Texas Democratic Party's election strategy. I also don't believe that anybody at the SDEC level of governance approved or even consented to a plan of focusing all of the party resources on just 17 statehouse races.

Furthermore, I have it on good authority that the party officials at the highest level repeatedly assured candidates who were NOT in one of the afore-mentioned 17 contests that the words Matt Angle is quoted above speaking -- about concentrating on just a few selected races -- was absolutely NOT the case; that there would be no narrowly-targeted strategy in 2006.

In other words, somebody lied. And in any event, their deeds spoke louder than their words.

The Texas Democratic Party, such as it is, long ago chose a minimalist strategy for 2006. Big-dog contributors like Walter Umphrey and John Eddie Williams sent six-figure checks early on to Carole Strayhorn, apparently thinking she was the only Democrat capable of defeating Governor MoFo. Potential Democratic candidates stayed away from filing for office in droves. It took a late leap by three members of the Dirty Thirty -- Bob Gammage, Ben Grant, and Fred Head -- to make things interesting. But none of the members of the "Dream Team" from 2002 stepped up to support anyone or anything on the Democratic slate. The only thing John Sharp ultimately did, after having his name published repeatedly as the only Dem with a snowball's chance of being elected Governor, was to join Rick Perry in a bipartisan education funding initiative. Charles Soechting abruptly abandoned the chairmanship in the middle of the campaign season, setting up a protracted fight at the convention between old-guard and new-school factions. The most positive message conveyed to the media all during this time was: well, we're going to have to lower our sights somewhat. And guess what? The media picked up on the defeatist attitude of the bigwigs who call themselves Democrats and ran with it. Over and over.

The state party -- the tattered shards of it, anyway -- was so impotent that it gave up on all of the statewide races long before the party's convention in June of this year. All of the enthusiasm generated by the grassroots in Fort Worth for the slate of populist candidates was wasted on the small band of elitists and insiders pulling the strings and moving the money around, who had long since determined -- and telegraphed to the media -- that there was no hope this year.

They didn't even do a good job of going through the motions. Their overt acts of capitulation contradicted their mealy-mouthed expressions of support. Well, most of the time that was the case, though I frequently heard the following:

"We have limited resources." "We can't concentrate on every race." "This is a rebuilding year." "We need more staff and better databases in order to rebuild our infrastructure so we can be competitive in (pick one: 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014)."

In that respect, the men in charge of the Texas Democratic Party -- that would be Fred Baron and Matt Angle -- did exactly what they said they would do.

Performance met expectations. I suppose congratulations are in order. What do you think, Boyd?

"There's enough credit for everyone involved in the effort," state Democratic Party chairman Boyd Richie said. "But certainly the (Texas Democratic) trust created an atmosphere where we could organize, plan and execute."

Can't wait to see the game plan for 2008, fellas. Here's a question for Freddy Bosshog: do you think John Edwards can carry Texas as the presidential nominee? Can he at least win the Texas primary in March of year-after-next, or will he be an Iowa-only kinda guy (he IS lookin' good in the Hawkeye State, for whatever that's worth)?

Hey Matty All-the-Angles: who are you recruiting to run against Senator Box Turtle? Oh wait; that's Boyd's job -- allegedly. Can Nick Lampson hold that seat in 22, ya think? And who's gonna challenge Ralph Hall, Boyd? Got anybody in mind besides you?

Boy, I'm stoked. *belch* *fart*

Update: Burka says ...

Opportunities like 2006 only come along once in a generation, and Democrats failed to make the most of this one.

Bush's Brain Damaged

"How could one notice," you're thinking. Not referring to the one encased in his skull, in this case:

President Bush had many explanations for what he called the "thumping" his party took on Tuesday, but the most creative was the notion that his chief strategist, Karl Rove, had spent too much time reading books.

"I obviously was working harder on the campaign than he was," the president said at (the Wednesday November 8) East Room news conference. The reporters laughed. The Architect, who had challenged Bush to a reading contest, wore a sheepish grin and stared at his lap.

Newsweek piles on:

Rove's miscalculations began well before election night. The polls and pundits pointed to a Democratic sweep, but Rove dismissed them all. In public, he predicted outright victory, flashing the V sign to reporters flying on Air Force One. He wasn't just trying to psych out the media and the opposition. He believed his "metrics" were far superior to plain old polls. Two weeks before the elections, Rove showed NEWSWEEK his magic numbers: a series of graphs and bar charts that tallied early voting and voter outreach. Both were running far higher than in 2004. In fact, Rove thought the polls were obsolete because they relied on home telephones in an age of do-not-call lists and cell phones. Based on his models, he forecast a loss of 12 to 14 seats in the House -- enough to hang on to the majority. Rove placed so much faith in his figures that, after the elections, he planned to convene a panel of Republican political scientists -- to study just how wrong the polls were.

So a reputation as 'genius', painstakingly constructed over nearly a lifetime, washed away in a single wave.

I built a sandcastle once, too. Only took me a few hours though. And boy was I crushed when the tide came in that afternoon.

I can only imagine how sick Karl must be feeling these days.

Houston's Veterans

From yesterday's parade here:



From Arlington West (in California):



Arlington West is the Veterans for Peace project to acknowledge the loss of life in Bush's Iraq war.

Yesterday in Houston, the Veterans for Peace contingent marching in our parade received a great deal of positive feedback, but there were a few boos and heckles of "peace is cowardly" and so on. (We have the classiest conservatives around here.)

Images above courtesy Houston Chronicle. See also this story about the younger veterans and how they were impacted by their participation in the parade. Be sure also and click on the moving multimedia entitled "Three Generations of War".

Ed Bradley, 1941-2006

Bradley had many nicknames throughout his life, including Big Daddy, when he played defensive end and offensive tackle in the 1960s at Cheyney State College; but his favorite, (Charlayne) Hunter-Gault and (Jimmy) Buffett said, was Teddy Badly, which Buffett bestowed on him onstage the first time Bradley played tambourine at his side.

“Everybody in my opinion needs a little Mardi Gras in their life, and he liked to have a little more than the average person on occasion.”

“He was such a great journalist,” Buffett added, “but he still knew how to have a good time.”

One mo' for Biggio

Biggio, 40, will begin next season just 70 hits shy of becoming the first player in team history and 27th all-time to reach the 3,000-hit total, a feat that will cement his Hall of Fame credentials.

He's the club's all-time leader in games (2,709), hits (2,930), at-bats (10,359), runs (1,776), doubles (637), extra-base hits (970) and total bases (4,514). He's second in homers (281) and RBIs (1,125).

In 1988 I was still a newly-wed and we had just moved to Midland, Texas so that I could become the national advertising manager for the Reporter-Telegram. It was difficult to impossible to get Astros games or news in West Texas at the time -- not much in the way of satellite TV, no Internet quite yet, ESPN was just coming around.

It was 1993 before we moved back to Houston. I had to be in San Diego training for a new assignment during the time allotted for our move and asked my wife to find an apartment as close as possible to the Astrodome, so that I could go see a game whenever I chose. She accommodated me and found us a little loft on Holly Hall where I could walk right down the street to the Dome. From my front door to the box office on the east side: twenty minutes.

I got to see Biggio (and Bagwell) on the field on a regular basis. They're the best ballplayers Houston has ever had. Not counting Hakeem and Earl, of course.

All the best to Biggio as he chases 3,000 next summer.

Update (11/13): HouStoned is a bit harsher on Bidge.

"As far as two-handed push-ups ..."

" ... you can do that all night, and it doesn't make a difference whether she's there or not."

Rest in peace, Jack.

OK. I suppose I'm a little encouraged

by this:

Harris County Democratic and Republican officials have looked at Tuesday's local election results and they agree: The GOP-dominated county government could be recaptured by Democrats as soon as 2008.

"Believe me, it's being discussed," said Republican Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt, a conservative leader. "It's an amazing wake-up call," said Republican County Commissioner Steve Radack.

In an election when many ethnic minority voters didn't vote, Republican judicial candidates on the bottom half of the Harris County ballot won by an average of fewer than four percentage points — 52 percent to 48 percent.

The average margin four years ago was more than nine points.

If minority voters had been energized, as they might be in the 2008 presidential year, it could have been a Democratic sweep, some analysts said. They point to Dallas County, long a GOP stronghold, where Democrats claimed every countywide seat elected Tuesday.

Here's what political analysts and party officials are seeing:

Countywide judicial races are considered a good indicator of party feelings. There are so many of them that voters tend to choose based on party affiliation rather than knowledge of individual candidates or issues. The Houston Chronicle calculated the combined GOP margin of victory for all contested races for state district courts, which are elected countywide.

It was 3.9 percentage points, the smallest since at least 1998.

Some Republicans evaluating Tuesday's results said conservatives didn't get out to vote. Others said the problem might be that fewer Republicans voted straight-party tickets because the governor's race included two independent candidates. Those lost straight-ticket votes might have benefited down-ballot judicial races that voters otherwise didn't bother with, Radack theorized.

Democrats noted that the margin in the judicial races was close even though ethnic minorities who generally vote Democratic skipped the election, which featured few Hispanic or non-Hispanic black candidates in showcase races. In the 11 state House districts within Harris County that have Anglo majorities, voter turnout Tuesday was 36 percent. In the 12 with non-Hispanic black and Hispanic majorities, the turnout was 26 percent. Local Republicans faced a national political current Tuesday that they hope is temporary -- congressional scandals and wide dissatisfaction with the war in Iraq.

But the demographic trends are long-term: The Hispanic population is booming and the Anglo population is not.

"The Republican Party is not attracting minority voters the way it should. I've been saying this for 10 years," Radack said. Former Harris County Democratic Chairwoman Sue Schechter said she regrets the party didn't put more money into the judicial races this time. It might have made a difference, she said. Rice University political science professor Bob Stein said an immediate effect of Tuesday's local and national results could be interest from talented Democrats who realize they have a legitimate chance to be elected next time around.

Radack predicted trial lawyers, stung by lawsuit limitations enacted by Republicans, will pour money into the races.

When state District Judge Katie Kennedy stepped down in 1999, she was the last countywide Democratic officeholder. In the closest Harris County judicial race Tuesday, Democrat Mary Kay Green got 49.4 percent of the votes against Republican incumbent Annette Galik for a family-court bench. The margin of victory was 6,800 votes, but the "under vote" — the number of people who voted in other races on the ballot but not that one — was 51,000. There's no way to tell which candidate would have benefited most had those 51,000 voters made a choice for the 245th District Court.

But the demographic and political trends seem clear.

"Doomsday is coming," said UH political science professor Richard Murray.

Radack said factors such as the independent gubernatorial candidates and national scandals made things worse this year. But the handwriting was on the wall for anyone who cared to read it, he said.

Many of the minority/majority precincts in Harris County (one of which I chair) had, to be kind, an under-representation at the polls on Tuesday. But from a Texas perspective, it also appears that our Democratic base in El Paso and the Valley sat this one out in large measure.

That cost the Democratic Party some judges, county-wide and statewide.

Was it the fault of the candidates? The TDP, and Boyd Richie specifically? The voter registration effort, or the GOTV one? How about the media? Or should the voters themselves take some blame for being blase' ?

Everybody catches a little bit, I suppose, but it may be something we can improve on next go-round.

I must say however that I believe this incremental strategy is bullshit. There was constant repetition from the party machinery in Austin that this was a rebuilding year, that we should only focus on a few select races, that the efforts of fund-raising and spending would be on infrastructure and rebuilding for 2008 and not on candidates and races in 2006, because there was really no hope of achieving anything any grander like capturing a statewide office.

Congratulations, Mr. Richie. Your strategy was executed flawlessly.

A closing thought from my man David:

I must add that despite the results in Texas, I'm ecstatic about the Democratic takeover of the Congress. These midterm results may have saved the country from dictatorship and civil war.

The Bushite arctic freeze is thawing nationally but in Texas we're still iced in. Fight 'em on the ice.