Local media goes to work reporting on SD-6

A surprisingly good update on the latest here, from Joe Holley:

Three days into early voting, the race to replace the late state Sen. Mario Gallegos continues to heat up, as does the balloting.

The first large batch of mail-in ballots was returned Friday, outpacing voters who visited the polls in person. Since early voting began, 1,561 ballots have been cast, two thirds of them in person. More votes were recorded Friday, 805, than in the two preceding days, 756.

I'll be helping the county clerk count those mail ballots as soon as the early voting period concludes on January 22. Even Mark Jones at Rice has stepped up his game...

Rice University political scientist Mark Jones describes the relatively late date as "a strategic delay" on the part of Gov. Rick Perry and his fellow Republicans, who realize that the likely winner will be one of the Democratic candidates.

"Under the Senate's two-thirds rule, until the new SD-6 senator arrives, the Republicans need to convince only one Democrat to vote with them to pass legislation, whereas once Alvarado or Garcia arrives in Austin, they will need two," he said in an email.

On most legislation the difference is irrelevant, Jones said, but not on such controversial issues as the fetal pain bill, for example.

"With only 30 senators, the Republicans will need to tailor the final legislation to obtain the backing of only one of the handful of pro-life Democrats, not two of them," he said. "The result will, quite possibly, be legislation that is closer to the Republican ideal than would have been the case if the support of both was required."

For their part,  ABC-13 had this.



Reporter Tom Abrahams mentions "six candidates" at yesterday's EECoC luncheon forum, so he just concentrated on the ones who were in the room. I don't know where Susan Delgado was, but I do know where Maria Selva was.

This is stereotypical corporate media coverage. Ignore the Green candidates (unless they get arrested, that is.) All of the local media reported essentially the same thing -- nothing -- when presidential candidate Jill Stein came to Houston last October.

Sadly, this weak effort at journalism by KTRK soundly defeated all of their electronic competition: KHOU, which last covered the race on November 12; KPRC, televising a general overview at the start of early voting, and Fox 26, whose most recent report was a month ago.

This is nothing more than the politicians and the media -- and the corporations and the environment -- that we have earned, by our actions or lack thereof. Unless we are willing to change the way we do things. Which includes how and what we think, of course.

That's going to be a long, hard slog at the rate we're going. Doesn't mean we shouldn't make the effort, though.

Update: Here's the two-hour "Conversations with the Candidates" video interviews conducted by the League of Women Voters (which includes every one except Delgado).

SD-6 candidate boycotts TransCanada-sponsored debate

The press release, this afternoon:

Candidate boycotts debate sponsored by TransCanada

Inappropriate influence by international firm hazardous to Houston


January 11, 2013, Houston, TX

Maria Selva, the Green Party candidate in the special election for TX Senate District 6, will boycott the debate held by the Houston East End Chamber of Commerce today because it was sponsored by TransCanada, the company constructing the Keystone XL pipeline. The controversial pipeline will, upon completion, transport tar sands oil from Canada for refining at Gulf Coast refineries.

"Tar sands refining will increase toxic air pollution along the Houston Ship Channel, negatively impacting the health of the people in District 6. The whole tar sands operation from mining to refining drastically increases carbon dioxide emissions which contribute to global warming and climate change, and is at odds with the push for clean, safe energy that is one of the principal goals of my campaign," Selva said.

"This controversial firm [TransCanada] that Houstonians and Texans have been fighting to keep out of the state should not have inappropriate influence over the candidates by sponsoring a debate among candidates who would make decisions affecting it," said Selva.

"Candidates who seek to represent the citizens of Texas Senate district 6 should not be attending events sponsored by corporations that will poison the air of the people they claim to want to represent. We need to keep money out of politics, and that starts with removing money and inappropriate influence from the decision-making process of citizens."


Maria Selva
TX Senate 6 Candidate

http://MariaSelva4TXSenate.NationBuilder.com
facebook.com/vote4maria
twitter.com/vote4MariaSelva
vote.4.maria.selva@hotmail.com

It's a great place to begin the process, at the local level, of getting the corporations and their money out of our political system. When every evaluation of a political candidate's viability starts and ends with how much money they have raised, you know the system is broken.

The system needs fixing.

More Austin/Washington transit

As is often the case during the first week of the legislative session, there's too much going on for me to cover in any depth, so I'll just dump the links that I've been collecting and let you draw your own conclusions. (Well, mostly.)

Hutchison mentioned for vacant Transportation Secretary position: Ludicrous at face value. Kay Bailey resigned from the Senate in order to return to Texas, be with her children, and earn speaking fees while she decides what to do next. She is NOT going to turn around and go back to DC and work in the Obama administration. FWIW I think that job is likely to go to Jennifer Granholm, who has some time on her hands now that Current has been sold to al-Jazeera.

Ron Kirk is also leaving the Obama administration. I just hope he has a Senate seat -- or perhaps the top job in Austin -- in his 2014 sights.

Greg Abbott is telling donors he's running for governor. This I believe. Even if "run" is the wrong verb to use. Update: Via Kuff, Paul Burka has some deep thoughts on this.

Folks, if we don't stop this guy, he'll wind up in the White House not so many years from now.

Twenty state parks may have to close next year due to funding cuts. Abominable.

Worse than abominable: Rick Perry’s Refusal to Expand Texas’ Medicaid Program Could Result In Thousands of Deaths.

Strong opposition stands in front of Dan Patrick's school vouchers legislative effort: I don't think the opposition is all that strong. The Republicans have the numbers in both chambers. This is probably going to happen. However...

Senate keeps two-thirds rule and eliminates exceptions.

Following a closed-door meeting, senators with little debate agreed 27-0 to leave in place the so-called “two-thirds rule” that allows 11 of the 31 senators to block a bill from coming up for debate. But they voted to remove a provision added four years ago that allows for “special exceptions” — a change made by Republicans that allowed them to debate a voter-identification bill that Democrats had been blocking.

State Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, a leading proponent of dropping the rule, said it “cuts off our ability to have debate” on issues that are important to Texas — sometimes because senators don’t want to have to cast a public vote that some constituents or interest groups might not like.

He suggested that a more robust and open debate of state issues would result from dropping the rule, which has been in effect for decades. Most senators have said privately they believe the rule gives them more clout — that one vote can make a difference in whether a bill can be considered by the full Senate.

Sen. Royce West, D-Dallas, championed the rule as “a long tradition that has served this body well” in requiring consensus-building before bills come up for a vote. “It distinguishes us from other bodies,” he said.

Sen. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler, the author of Wednesday’s resolution and chairman of the Senate Administration Committee, said most senators for months have not supported dropping the rule, even though a behind-the-scenes drumbeat for the change has continued in recent weeks.

“It’s now back to the way it read before 2009. There are no special exceptions,” Eltife said.

Since I mucked up that post with bad math, this development makes me very happy despite the strengthening of Dewhurst's hand, mostly because it weakens Patrick's.

That's why they call it the lesser of two evils.

Update: EOW has a good collection of things I did not mention above, including this.

We might research some cancer treatments while we get rich

The scandal that is CPRIT just gets worse every day.

In an interview this week, Perry said the embattled Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas must regain public trust so it can carry out its dual mission of cure discovery and commercialization.

“The way that the Legislature intended it was to get cures into the public's arena as soon as possible and at the same time create economic avenues (from) which wealth can be created,” Perry said. “Basic research takes a long time and may or may not ever create wealth.”

Perry made the remark in response to questions about the scrutiny CPRIT is facing as a result of two grants, totaling more than $30 million, that were awarded without proper review. The problems, both involving grants to commercialize discoveries, have prompted numerous investigations. 

I just grimaced and moved on when I read this at an early hour this morning, because I am so worn out on Rick Perry that it's just not funny any more. It's his unique blend of insensitivity, piety, and crony capitalism that makes me nauseous at this stage.

Some people understand how crass he is, though.

Legislators and activists contacted Wednesday disagreed with Perry's characterization.

“We're trying to get drugs to the marketplace to help people fight the disease,” said Rep. James Keffer, R-Eastland, who co-authored a 2009 bill establishing the agency after voters authorized it two years earlier. “Our goal is not to make pharmaceutical companies any more wealthy.”

Rep. Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, who questioned the need for commercialization grants at a hearing last month, said “the market should handle the rest” if CPRIT money attracts the best cancer minds to Texas and their research proves promising.

“I believe that the purpose of the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas was to research and develop cures and treatments for cancer, not act as an investment bank or hedge fund to 'create wealth,'” Eiland said. “The state has the Emerging Technology Fund and the Enterprise Fund as business development tools.”  

I can't add anything to what Burka and EOW have already said. How much more of this embarrassment can a state as big as Texas take?