A third party you can disregard: Americans Elect

I opened a conversation last week about third-party candidates, and lately it seems that everyone else is catching on (and catching up). Today's lesson is that there is one third-party movement to be avoided, and it's Americans Elect. First, some background.

Americans Elect is a collection of Republicans, Democrats and independents who say they are frustrated with the polarization that has caused U.S. politics to seize up and are looking for a unity ticket that would help the political process run more smoothly and responsively.

“It’s going to happen,” said Mark McKinnon, the Austin-based strategist who crafted the George W. Bush message in 2000 and 2004, but backed Barack Obama in 2008. “The system is completely paralyzed, and people have lost confidence in all the institutions of government and the political parties. And things are getting worse.”

McKinnon also is one of the founders of No Labels, a centrist organization that seeks to nurture the “politics of problem solving” and to create space so lawmakers can work with counterparts across the aisle.

No surprise; they want good old Dr. No. (Everybody wants that racist gasbag, except for those Americans of all political persuasions with the slightest remaining sanity).

The name most frequently connected to a third-party presidential effort is no centrist: It’s Ron Paul, the libertarian congressman from Texas.

Paul insists he has no intention of running for president as a third-party candidate. Now seeking the Republican nomination, he was the Libertarian Party candidate in 1988.

Talking to Fox News’ Sean Hannity last week, however, he seemed to leave the door slightly ajar.

“I don’t like absolutes — I don’t like to say: ‘I absolutely will never do such and such’ — so I am just avoiding the absolute,” Paul said.

George Will ain't buyin' it -- and is scared shitless.

So, assume three things. That Obama is weaker in 2012 than he was when winning just 53 percent of the vote in 2008. That Paul could win between 5 percent and 7 percent of the vote nationally (much less than the 18 percent that a recent NBC-Wall Street Journal poll showed were prepared to vote for Paul as an independent). And that at least 80 percent of Paul’s votes would come at the expense of the Republican nominee.

That link is worth reading start to finish; however let's move past this digression to Paul and return to Americans Elect.

What Americans Elect has done is fashion a new twist to the quadrennial quest for a credible third-party contender. Instead of an outside party, it has crafted a parallel nominating process: a nonpartisan online convention. Anyone with a valid ID and an Internet hookup is eligible to become a “delegate,” and candidates can either register by completing a questionnaire or be drafted by popular support. Through a series of online ballots, the slate of contenders will be whittled down to six in April, and then to a single winner in June. In keeping with the group’s shibboleths, the nominee must tap a member of a different party as a running mate, forming a “unity ticket” that will occupy the chasm in the political center.

For a political start-up, Americans Elect has Establishment-grade cash and credentials. Its roster is dotted with veterans of Washington warfare, both Democrats and Republicans, who have grown weary of both parties’ penchant for pandering to their fringes. Schoen recently authored a column that cast Occupy Wall Street as a “radical” uprising that was “dangerously out of touch” with American values. Another adviser, Mark McKinnon, served as George W. Bush’s media strategist but declined to reprise the role in 2008 out of respect for Obama. Also on the group’s board are a battery of business executives; Dennis Blair, Obama’s former Director of National Intelligence; and Christine Todd Whitman, the moderate former Republican governor of New Jersey. A framed column by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, which predicted that the group would do to politics “what Amazon.com did to books,” hangs in the hallway of its airy 10th-floor suite, from which you can glimpse a sliver of the White House three blocks down Pennsylvania Avenue.

And there's the problem with AE: moneyed power brokers are behind the movement. And in the spirit of this cycle's Super PACs and Citizens United, you don't get to know who they are.

The dingbats behind “Americans Elect,” a shadowy centrist third-party effort to get an Internet petition onto actual presidential ballots, refuse to reveal who’s funding their efforts, because their donors are very worried that someone might call them dingbats.

That’s what reporters on an Americans Elect press call learned today, according to Dave Weigel. When Politico’s Ken Vogel began asking difficult questions about why the group hides its donors, a spokesperson said it was because of “fear of retribution.”

Americans Elect COO (and son of the group’s chairman) Elliot Ackerman explained what this “retribution” might look like:

But hang on: What sort of retribution were we talking about? “My father, Peter Ackerman,” offered the group’s COO Elliot Ackerman. “He’s been mischaracterized in the press frequently.”

Sragow wasn’t about to let this suggestion fly — this idea that working with AE wasn’t dangerous. “Don’t suggest that there is no retribution,” he said. “Nobody who’s spent 10 minutes in politics could think that.” He’d been vilified for participating in the group. He’d been attacked and insulted. “Fortunately, in this country, we don’t use molotov cocktails literally,” he said. “We use them figuratively.”

So! Random unknown billionaires will fix our politics by paying an unknown third-party candidate’s way onto our ballots, but we must never know who did this or why, because someone might “mischaracterize” them, with figurative Molotov cocktails. Yes, that makes perfect sense.

As with every other link here: follow it, read the whole thing, and follow the links there.

Now if this does sound like your bag, then just know that besides Ron Paul you'll likely have 'man of the people' choices like Michael Bloomberg and Donald Trump to pick from.

The only way you'd be wasting your vote on a third-party candidate is if you paid any attention at all to whatever Americans Elect comes up with.

Something reeks in the Harris Co. DA's office

And no, it's not the immanent smell of spilled beer and cigarette smoke.

A prosecutor who last week refused to answer questions from a grand jury said Monday she is the target of political forces aligned against her and her boss, Harris County District Attorney Pat Lykos.

"The fix is in," Rachel Palmer said from the witness stand. "It's really clear to anyone who is not already affected by bias."

Palmer asserted in a hastily called recusal hearing that state District Judge Susan Brown, her husband state District Judge Marc Brown and a special prosecutor appointed by the former were working together to unseat Lykos in a plot that has ensnared Palmer.

Parker Palmer appears to be something more than just a victim here IMHO. All of this grinning and smirking seems out of round.

Thursday's hearing was postponed until Monday when Palmer's attorneys moved to have Brown recused from the proceedings.

An administrative judge quickly appointed civil district judge Al Bennett to preside over a hearing on the request that is scheduled to continue early Tuesday.

In the wide-ranging motion, Palmer alleged a far-flung whisper campaign that included St. Martin's political support of one of Lykos's 2008 Republican primary opponents and interactions among Palmer, her politically active husband Don Hooper and the Browns.

"I'm afraid of Judge Brown," Palmer said on the stand.

Though in Palmer's defense, there is almost surely something fishy going on.

The man challenging Lycos in the Republican primary for district attorney happens to be married to the woman who performed the swearing-in of the grand jury forewoman (scroll about halfway down, and note that my style preference is to keep titles like these gender-specific) who wishes to compel Parker Palmer's testimony. And one of the special prosecutors appointed by Judge Brown at the grand jury's request, Stephen St. Martin, was a supporter of Lycos' challenger Kelly Siegler in 2008.

St. Martin donated a healthy $3,000 to Siegler’s campaign when she was fighting Lykos for the Republican nomination. Also, Lykos kicked him out of the Special Crimes Division of the DA’s Office, and then publicly snubbed him when the FBI gave him an award.

Talk about a bad Grisham novel. Sure, it's a stretch even for the conspiracy-inclined but if Big Jolly is scared, then you ought to be too. Unless you're not a Republican, in which case you need to go pop some more corn.

And just think: all this could have been avoided if Democrats had managed a few more votes for C.O. Bradford for DA in 2008.

Update: For those who have inquired... yes, that last was total sarcasm.

Paul Sadler to run for US Senate

Just two days after fellow Democrat Ric Sanchez dropped out of the race, state Rep. Paul Sadler of Henderson has filed to run for U.S. Senate. [...]

Two Democrats have filed: Sean Hubbard and Daniel Boone. But the big name until last week was Sanchez, a retired lieutenant general who once led U.S. forces in Iraq. His campaign never got traction. That and personal troubles — his home burned down over the Thanksgiving holiday — prompted him to get out.

Sadler, in a brief telephone interview, said he has been thinking about the race since Hutchison announced her decision. Sanchez's announcement last week tipped the scales, and he filed with the Texas Democratic Party this afternoon.

Sadler was elected to the House in 1990 and served through 2002, ending his tenure with three terms as chairman of the Public Education committee. While George W. Bush was governor, Sadler chaired the special committee that worked on the tax bill Bush proposed as a remedy for public education problems. He lost a runoff election in 2004 to Republican Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler, in a race for the Texas Senate.

Sadler has a solid background in both business and politics.

Sadler is the Executive Director of The Wind Coalition. The Wind Coalition is a non-profit association formed to encourage the development of the vast wind energy resources of the south central United States. The Wind Coalition is active in two particular regions: ERCOT and SPP. The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) manages the electric transmission grid covering most of Texas. The Southwest Power Pool (SPP) grid covers all or parts of seven unique states: Texas, New Mexico, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, and Louisiana. As the Executive Director, Paul is responsible for the policy and regulatory development concerning wind energy in eight states. [...]

(He) served in the Texas House of Representatives from 1991 - 2003. During his tenure in the Texas House of Representatives, he served on numerous committees including Education, Judiciary, Pensions and Investments, Health and Human Services, Calendars and was one of eight members designated to the Legislative Budget Board. His most significant committee work, however, was in the area of education. Sadler served on the House Public Education Committee from 1993 - 2003 (serving as Chairman of the committee from 1995 - 2003), chairman of the Select Committee on State Revenue and Public School Finance in 1997, and chairman of the Select Committee on Public School Employee Health Insurance in 2001. Paul was the only house member to serve as chair of more than one committee in the same session; he had dual chairmanships in two sessions in 1999 & 2001. His accomplishments include the re-write of the Education Code in 1995 (known as the 'Ratliff-Sadler Act'); enactment of public school employee health insurance for the first time in the history of the state; passage of a $3.8 billion education package, which at the time included the largest property tax cut in the history of the state; provided teacher pay raises for three consecutive sessions for the first time in the history of the state; established critical need programs for pre-kindergarten and kindergarten; the ninth grade initiative targeting students at risk of drop-out; and increased funding for public school facilities.

This part is interesting:

As then-Lieutenant Governor Rick Perry stated, "What the Legislature is all about (is) competing interests coming together and splitting differences. Unless it's education -- then you do everything that Paul wants." Sadler has received numerous awards for his legislative work. He was singled out by Texas Monthly during each of his legislative terms, being named to the Ten Best List in 1995, 1997, 1999 and 2001.

Here's more from Sadler on the prospects of wind energy. And here's more from him on the past legislative session's education woes. And here's what he said about working with George W. Bush when he was governor:

Long before Bush wrote his book (Decision Points), former state Rep. Paul Sadler wondered aloud how his friend would handle the consequential choices to come.

Sadler, an East Texas Democrat who worked with Bush on education, had an early impression of the governor's management style. As governor, Bush was particularly susceptible to a small coterie of advisers around him, what Sadler calls "the voices in the room.''

"He surrounds himself with people who were largely likeminded," Sadler said. "Look for the dominant personality in the room. He will trust that dominant personality." [...]

Sadler believes the decision to invade Iraq was a mistake, driven by a circle of single-minded advocates. And he said Bush, following Rove's hard-nose politics, abandoned his promise to stem the hyper-partisanship of Washington.

"The ultimate responsibility has to rest with him," Sadler said, but he wonders whether history - and the Bush legacy - might have been different had he been less susceptible to the dominant voices in the room.

"I still consider him a personal friend and I hesitate to criticize him," Sadler said. "But those of us who were friends and who are friends, over the years we have said many times, who hijacked our friend? Who hijacked him?"

Can't say I'm thrilled about the part in bold.

Sadler sounds like the perfect TDP establishment candidate: East Texas conservaDem, good record in the Lege (especially if you consider that part about the property tax reduction good), been in the renewable-energy business since losing his last election.

No excuse why he can't raise all the money he needs to win from the Texas Democratic lawyers, unlike Chris Bell and even Bill White. Right?

Update: The Chron has this...

"We have a reputation as a state for business. We have a senator who's good for business. It's time for us to have a senator that's good for the people of this state," Sadler said. "That's what I'm going to be doing."

Update II: From the end of the filing day yesterday comes word that Jason Gibson of the Houston Trial Lawyers Association and Eric Roberson, who ran previously for Congress in the 32nd District (Plano area) in 2008 and aborted a campaign for the statehouse in 2010, have also filed for this race.

Update III: Roberson clarifies that he is actually running for a seat on the Fifth District (Dallas) Court of Appeals, Place 11.

T'was the Week before Christmas Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is all about the wassailing as it brings you this week's blog roundup.

Off the Kuff has a look at candidate filings in Harris County as of what was once the deadline date.

BossKitty at TruthHugger sees the grim side of a corporate-ruled America; the climate change controversy may be a conspiracy and we are the targets.

BlueBloggin notes that special interests are really not very special when they represent the mindless, dangerous attitudes of corporate extremists who don't want to be accountable for their actions. Let Me Sell you A Lie: EPA Consequences of HR 10 aka the REINS Act shows that corporations really do own America's lawmakers.

Bay Area Houston calls Rick Perry one rotten bastard.

Death sentences and the use of the death penalty are at a record low, mostly because of the corruption and injustice in our criminal justice system. It's led WCNews at Eye On Williamson to wonder: is the death penalty dying?

Third-party presidential candidates may make some noise and perhaps even some news in 2012, writes PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

At TexasKaos, Libby Shaw gives us the heads-up on the latest episode of Rick Perry, fraud and hypocrite. Check out Double Dipping Rick the Hypocrite.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme notes Greg Abbott asked the US Supreme Court to poop on Texas' politicians and voters. That's a Republican for you.

Neil at Texas Liberal wrote a post considering the life of the real St. Nicholas. Jolly old St. Nick was a foe of the death penalty who was said to have brought back to life children who had been cut up and were going to be pickled.

McBlogger takes on PolitiFact's pathetic attempt to beat up Congressman Lloyd Doggett.

Refinish69 from Doing My Part For The Left wonders Do They Know It's Christmas in Washington ... or anywhere else in the world.

Sunday Funnies

Your Christmas gift is that there will be no more debates

Gingrich, Romney ready for Iowa sprint:

Given his likely strength in the Jan. 10 New Hampshire primary, Romney may be able to survive a so-so finish in Iowa. It appears more important for Gingrich to win Iowa, or come close, and Thursday's two-hour televised debate in Sioux City probably helped his cause.

It wasn't so much that the former House speaker had a solid second hour after a somewhat shaky start. It's more that Rep. Ron Paul, the libertarian-leaning Texan, expressed his anti-war, anti-interventionist views so vehemently that he may have turned off mainstream Republicans who otherwise might have helped him to a surprising first-place finish.

My favorite line, from Dr. No ...

"Do terrorists go to Switzerland and Sweden to commit terrorism? No, we're bombing them."

He has been stealing this joke from Osama bin Laden for some time now. It's also not factual. Speaking of untruths:

"I balanced the budget for four straight years, paid off $405 billion in debt." -- Newt Gingrich

Gingrich was off on both claims concerning the budget. The budget was indeed balanced for four years, but it’s a stretch for him to take credit for more than two of those years (since he was no longer in Congress). As for paying off $405 billion in debt, the data we found shows the debt actually increased during Gingrich’s four-year tenure as speaker by more than $800 billion.

I think Mitt Romney has to be feeling a lot better about his prospects this morning.

Roundup of some highly readables

With a little extra downtime on my hands as a result of my stepmother's passing Tuesday, and with all arrangements completed and awaiting services and committal Saturday, here is some of what I am reading this morning to share with you.

-- Michael Li has everything you want to know with respect to the latest on the Supreme Court's Texas election clusterfudge. That's a good half-hour's worth alone.

-- Rahm Emanuel is a thug. And like my friend Neil, I hope Occupy takes over his town next May.

-- Seven Occupy the Port of Houston protestors were released yesterday after a judge ruled that an arm tube was insufficient evidence to represent a felony charge of using "anything" in the act of civil disobedience.

There is justice occasionally, and sometimes it is sweeter than a clementine.

-- Plumes of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times worse than carbon dioxide, are streaming into the atmosphere as Arctic permafrost thaws. It's pretty much over for humans (and the rest of most living things) on this planet now. The only question left  is how much longer do we have.

-- Finally, in the context of a) not ending this post on a depressing note, and b) offering a bit of comedic value besides a toon, there is yet another GOP not-so-presidential debate tonight on Fox moderated by something called a Cavuto.

Hilarity should ensue. Seriously.

Update: Oh yeah, one more thing: There is Only One Issue in America, according to Steven Van Zandt. As a disciple, he is of course correct.

Third-party presidential candidate news

Because no one else will ever blog about it.

Glenn Beck, Joe Scarborough tout Ron Paul as third-party candidate:

Some conservative commentators are laying the groundwork for backing Texas congressman Ron Paul as a third party candidate if the Republicans nominate Newt Gingrich to face Democratic President Barack Obama. Even as many on the right warm to the liberty-loving lawmaker, more of the mainstream media is beginning to consider him a factor in the GOP primary battle already underway.

MSNBC host Joe Scarborough, a former Republican congressman and longtime Gingrich critic, today spoke favorably about a possible Paul general election candidacy as a reaction to “big government” conservative Gingrich. The co-host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program invoked the words of conservative radio show host Glenn Beck in welcoming a potential Paul insurgency in the 2012 general election.

“Yesterday, Glenn Beck said something that I guarantee you a lot of small-government conservatives, like me, have thought. And that is, if I have to choose between Barack Obama and Newt Gingrich, a guy that George Will said would have been a ‘marvelous Marxist’ and who is the opposite of being a small-government conservative — if Ron Paul’s running as a third-party candidate, I’m going to give him a long look. Because I can’t vote for the two guys who worship at the altar of big government in their own separate ways. And that’s the problem with a Newt Gingrich candidacy. He’s not a small government conservative.”

Really, it makes perfect sense. But Paul still has a shot at scrambling the GOP race if he wins Iowa. He trails Newt in the latest poll there by a single point.

Over the past week, Gingrich's 9-point lead has shrunk to a single point over the folksy Paul, according to Public Policy Poling.

Gingrich is clinging to a narrow 22% to 21% edge over Paul, with Mitt Romney at 16%, Michele Bachmann at 11%, Rick Perry at 9%, Rick Santorum at 8%, Jon Huntsman at 5%, and Gary Johnson at 1%.

Gingrich has dropped 5 points in the last week and he's also seen a significant decline in his favorability numbers.

Republican-leaning independents are going to need some place to go if Gingrich -- or for that matter, Paul -- should manage to capture the GOP nom.

But all that's hardly actual third-party news.

The Green Party's leading candidates for president, Kent Mesplay and Jill Stein, held a debate in California two weeks ago. Stein will appear at the University of Wisconsin-Madison for a public interview with Matt Rothschild of The Progressive this Friday.

Harry Braun, running initially as a Democratic challenger to President Obama and now as an independent, has a campaign focusing on a democracy constitutional amendment that will in turn enable fossil and nuclear fuels to be replaced with wind and solar-based hydrogen systems "on a war-time speed" basis. He has a weekly radio show where he elaborates on these and other of his issues.

My thoughts on the ineptitude of continuing to support all of the candidates of the leftish member of the two-party duopoly were posted here last week. My argument in favor of third parties is: what have you got to lose? If you're a Republican and the party nominates someone you can't support, your vote for a third party candidate, be it Libertarian or Constitution or some other is a message to the GOP to shape up. Likewise -- and particularly since this is Texas, where your presidential vote isn't going to matter anyway -- you can send a message to the Democrats to get their shit together.

Go ahead and vote for the Republicans and/or Democrats (or Libs or Greens) down the ballot that you prefer. But until we get more choices everywhere, nothing meaningful is going to change.

Update: I wrote this post intending to include this news about Rocky Anderson.

A new political party has entered the fray as an alternative to Democrats and Republicans ahead of the 2012 elections. On Monday, former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson announced he will run for president with the newly formed Justice Party. Although hailing from a solidly red state, Anderson has been known as one of the most progressive mayors of any major U.S. city in recent years. During his two mayoral terms from 2000 to 2008, Anderson was an outspoken champion of LGBT rights, environmental sustainability, and the antiwar movement in opposition to the Iraq War. Vowing to fight the influence of money over politics, Anderson kicked off his campaign on Monday with a pledge to limit individual donations to $100 a person. Anderson and the Justice Party say they hope to build a grassroots movement heading into the November 2012 elections. "We launched the Justice Party because the entire system is so corrupt," Anderson says. "It’s so diseased. We know that the public interest is not being served by anyone in the system right now, particularly the two dominant parties who have sustained this corrupt system and who are sustained by it."

Anti-incumbent fever sweeps out city hall

If voters were happy with (Houston's) mayor and current city council, they certainly didn't show it in runoff elections Saturday.

They threw out two incumbents by large margins and filled two other seats with men who had no government experience.

The results illustrate a continuation of a national trend of anger and frustration toward government during the worst economic stretch since the Great Depression, political observers said.

In short: Voters want change.

"A lot of people are angry at virtually all institutions and the government is high on their list," said Richard Murray, a political science professor at the University of Houston. "And these are the people in a low-turnout election that are most likely to show up because they are angry. They're agitated."

About 57,000 voters participated in the election, 6 percent of the 920,000 people registered to cast ballots in Houston.

Yeah, the 6% want change, all right, and they're turning out in record (low) numbers to elect the very worst people on the ballot. This crew has burned through several labels in the past few years -- angry white males, TeaBaggers -- but suffice it to say that they have more time on their hands than they do good sense.

And the lower the turnout, the more incumbents are endangered. Which is why the King Street/True the Vote vote-suppressing criminals are fully weaponized for 2012.

Councilwoman Jolanda Jones lost At-Large Position 5 by 8 percentage points, and councilwoman Brenda Stardig suffered a 10-point defeat in District A. In races to replace term-limited council members Jarvis Johnson and Sue Lovell, voters chose a restaurateur, Jerry Davis, over one of Johnson's aides, Alvin Byrd, and picked a pastor, Andrew Burks Jr., over a former state legislator, Kristi Thibaut. Davis will represent District B, Burks will take At-Large 2.

The results show clear opposition to the status quo, particularly following a general election in which Mayor Annise Parker and several council members narrowly avoided runoff elections, said Bob Stein, a political science professor at Rice University.

"It's a strong repudiation of this administration -- not just the mayor, but the council," Stein said.

District A, which elected the city's first TeaBagger, has a 57% Hispanic population. Barely any of which can vote, or bothered to. Byrd and Thibaut weren't incumbent office-holders but suffered the same fate as Jones and Stardig because they were perceived by the slight majority of the 6% as such.

Even without a 600,000-vote suppression tool like the TXGOP's Voter/Photo ID bill, 2012 is shaping up as an absolutely brutal year for incumbents of both parties, and that includes candidates who resemble incumbents by virtue of their prior proximity to the corridors of power.

As we wait for the court to give us some extended filing deadlines, that's something else to think about for those considering running for any office ... in any party.

Update: Charles disagrees. At least until he gets his numbers, anyway.

Occupy the Port of Houston today

On Monday, December 12, Occupy Houston will be joining our brothers and sisters in the Occupy movement around the United States in a coordinated action targeting the nation’s ports. This event is an expression of solidarity with the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) and West Coast truck drivers who have come under attack this year, as well as a statement against the multinational conglomerates and their relentless campaign to outsource American jobs and undermine our economy in the pursuit of ever-widening profit margins. We will be joined here in Houston by hundreds of Occupiers and concerned citizens from all over the state, including Austin, San Antonio, Dallas and Fort Worth.

12:00 PM:    Meet up at Tranquility Park

1:00 – 3:00 PM:  Rally at POH Offices. we will be protesting outside the security perimeter where the Port of Houston Authority’s executive  offices are located, 111 East Loop. (77029)

4:00 – 6:00 PM:  Main Street March. From Tranquility Park on down the length of downtown Main Street in a visible display of support for  the West Coast Port Shutdown effort and the American working class.

Here is an approximate breakdown of the day’s lineup:

12:00 PM    Meet up at Tranquility Park to get the caravan ready
12:30 PM    Make our way over to the POH executive offices
(111 E. Loop, map link)
1:00 PM       Gather up at the gate and start protesting
2:30 PM       Start heading back to the cars
3:00 PM      Get back to Tranquility Park
4:00 PM      Head out for “Main Street March” during rush hour
6:00 PM      Wrap up the march in time for dinner and the 7PM General Assembly

Occupy. Magnify. Amplify. Solidify.

Update: 19 20 arrested at Port of Houston

Update II:

"We are here in solidarity with the West Coast port shutdowns, but we're not here to shut down the port," said Amy Price, an Occupy Houston protester. "We don't want the Houston port workers to lose money. We just want to cause enough havoc to draw a spotlight on what's going on with our port. And the way to do that, we think, is civil disobedience."