Payday lenders lose

They don't lose much, but at least they got beaten.

It wasn’t even close. Today, the Houston City Council voted 15-2 to join every other major Texas city except one (hello, Fort Worth) in regulating payday loan companies.

Last month, Houston Mayor Annise Parker dropped a compromise plan, saying she wanted “a united front” with other Texas cities.

The lopsided vote surprised some Council observers, who had at least expected a procedural move to delay the vote. Instead, seesawing councilmembers said they felt city action was necessary in light of the Texas Legislature’s failure to do much of anything to rein in the payday loan industry.

The "procedural move" would have been a 'tag' by CM James Rodriguez, who has distinguished himself in the worst possible way with regard to the payday lending ordinance.

One of the ‘nay’ votes came from Councilmember Helena Brown, aka “Helena Handbasket,” who rails against funding for things like AIDS prevention. The other ‘nay’ was Councilmember James Rodriguez, who evidently was unpersuaded by a withering column this morning (“This payday loan column is for you, Councilman Rodriguez”) by the Chronicle‘s Lisa Falkenberg in which she checks out Rodriguez’s claim that his constituents are unconcerned about the issue by, you know, talking to his constituents.

[...]

Rodriguez, who is on his way out of office and is tied to a Cash America lobbyist, has been real cute about his post-council plans, laughingly telling Falkenberg that he’s “keeping all options open” when asked whether he plans to go into the payday loan business.

My friend Neil called it like it is on FB yesterday.

Is it any surprise that Councilman James Rodriguez -- who was a force behind the repulsive anti-food sharing ordinance -- is now leading opposition to City of Houston regulation of the payday lending industry? I've long thought Mr. Rodriguez a lousy public servant. His imminent departure from City Council will benefit Houston. 

To refresh: Rodriguez is a member of the Carol Alvarado/Marc Campos gang, affectionately referred to as "We Know How to Lose and Not Get Things Done", which just lost another city council race last week.  Some serious self-examination is long overdue among that crew.

Update: Rodriguez completely lost his mind on Twitter yesterday evening after the vote, lashing out at Falkenberg, Chron sportswriter Jose de Jesus Ortiz, and Texpatriate's Noah Horwitz. See his Tweets embedded at the end of Texpate's post here.  That's a person who needs to take their medication.

Update II:  You know you've struck a nerve when Marc Campos is calling somebody "chickenshit".

Texas Leftist runs down the changes the ordinance mandates, and Stace gave the instructions this morning that helped predict the outcome.  Here's to more progress like this in the new year.

Affluenza... and Gulliblemia

Well-written here by Ben Sherman at Burnt Orange.

Two weeks ago, Burleson teen Ethan Couch killed four Texans. He got behind the wheel of his car with three times the legal limit of alcohol in his blood, mowed down several pedestrians, and now four families are without their children. One victim is crippled for life. "I'm Ethan Couch, I'll get you out of this," said to one of his friends in the car afterward.

The judge let Ethan off with 10 years probation and prescribed therapy. The defense argued that Ethan has "affluenza," a condition by which rich people don't understand and are thus not responsible for the consequences of their actions. State District Judge Jean Boyd didn't say she agreed with that particular argument, but Americans everywhere have balked that the deaths' circumstances resulted in such a relaxed punishment at all. Wendy Davis spoke out against the decision, calling it a "disgrace". Even Greg Abbott says his office is looking into it.

"Affluenza" is a term popularized in 1997 by a documentary of the same name. It is about the warped worldview of Americans in uppermost echelon of financial holdings -- and the consequences for the rest of us. The documentary was turned into a popular book. What the filmmakers and then authors never intended is for the term to be used, successfully no less, in defense of a killer. John de Graaf, "Affluenza" co-author, wrote an excellent piece for TIME about what this case reveals about the United States:

Liberals and conservatives alike have condemned the Texas decision. But before we cast the first stones, let's admit that Couch's actions do reflect our national "affluenza." After all, we have exalted consumerism above other values. And while we pride ourselves for our "exceptionalism," we have for years been exceptionally irresponsible in our naked pursuit of wealth.

We refuse to increase taxes on millionaires while cutting food stamps for the poor, and advocate cutting social security while ignoring the obscene bonuses of bankers whose speculation caused the 2008 crash. We allow thousands to die each year for lack of health insurance. We strip the mountains of Appalachia and poison our water to continue our addiction to fossil fuels.  We have made war under false premises while our drones kill civilians with impunity. We have supported murderous dictators -- think Pinochet or Rios Montt -- to assure continued profits. We could virtually end world hunger at an annual expense equal to what we give our military every week, but we refuse to do it. And we deny our role in changing the climate in drastic ways. All of these actions flow from affluenza, greed, and refusal to consider consequences. We rage about the Couch decision but ignore our greater responsibility to the world and future generations.

In 1877, the Sioux chief Sitting Bull spoke of the light-skinned people who were overrunning his lands: "They make many laws which the rich may break but the poor may not, and the love of possession is a disease with them."

That's the real "affluenza."

Via this, affluenza has a symbiotic yet diametrically opposed condition known as "gulliblemia".   It causes a person to think and act in ways that are disassociated from their self-interest, thus keeping them in poverty.  The symptoms include:

-- Thinking that higher taxes on the affluenzant will hurt the gulliblemic.

-- Confusing the debt ceiling with a limit on how much the government can spend.

-- Thinking Medicare and Social Security are not government programs or are causing the deficit.

-- Thinking that shutting down the federal government is a good thing.

-- Watching Fox News for some reason besides comedic value.

-- Logic centers of the brain aren't the only ones affected; lobes that control spelling and grammar are also damaged, and the comprehension of irony is nonexistent.

-- There is demonstrable confusion between religious law and federal and state laws. Here's an example of a chronic case...

There are other associated symptoms that are not included in this list, and the good news is that gulliblemia is not contagious and in fact is quite curable. It sometimes requires an intervention, and there are some unpleasant withdrawal symptoms.

But people can -- and are -- being healed every day, and some gulliblemics are capable of making the journey to better health with only a small amount of absorbed ridicule, combined with heavy application of critical thinking.

So the next time you hear someone say "liberalism is a mental disorder", just look at who's doing the talking.

HCRP gets TRO on same-sex benefits

Double your outrage.

Harris County Republicans, led by their chairman, sued the City of Houston Tuesday over Mayor Annise Parker's extension of health and life insurance benefits to all spouses of legally married employees, including same-sex couples in November.

"This is one of the most egregious acts by an elected official I've ever seen," said Jared Woodfill, chairman the Harris County Republican party. Woodfill, is the lead lawyer on the lawsuit. "They just decided to, unilaterally, as a lame duck, thumb their nose at the will of the people and just spit on the U.S. Constitution."

Woodfill said state District Judge Lisa Millard signed a temporary restraining order late Tuesday, putting the new policy on hold until the matter goes before a judge on Jan. 6.

As Noah has pointed out, Harris County Democrats failed to field a challenger to Judge Millard for next year.  We can only guess as to whether her actions would have been different if they had.  And let's disregard the hyperbolic and misrepresentative exaggeration that Barrister Woodfill, like so many of his conservative ilk, employs.

Noah's best point, one that deserves repeating, is that the GOP is still going to lose next year, irrespective (mostly) of what the Democrats do or don't do, because of stunts like this lawsuit.

This predictable action by the Harris County Republican Party is just helping to dig its own grave. The Republicans have very weak competition in this county, as it simply campaigns against a party that -- despite being lead by venerable forces -- is filled with members too incompetent/lazy to fill the ballot. Taking up such a disastrously unpopular position as homophobia does nothing to dispel the notion that Republicans are simply old and bigoted folks; in fact, it actively perpetuates it. If the Democrats win in 2014, it will be because of things like this.

Homophobia is a disease that's on the wane, and it is the growing acceptance and tolerance that all people are equal -- even by many long-time Republican voters -- that is the clearest signal yet that the Republican Party, as currently constituted, is a bunch of dead (straight, white) men walking.  2014 might bring their reign to a close, but my guess is that we'll still have a few soreheads to kick around in 2016.  It's a process that is happening organically, but Democrats would be wise to do what they can to fertlilize the composting.  Maybe squirt some lighter fluid on the immolation.

Just don't get too close to them as they self-destruct.  Those stains are hard to get out.

Update: Jeff Balke at Hair Balls piles on.

This is a classic example of someone (or some group) not knowing when to let go of a particular issue and simply move on. A majority of Americans support same-sex marriage and the Supreme Court has upheld multiple challenges to state laws allowing same-sex couples to tie the knot. It's only a matter of time before states like Texas will have to come to the same conclusion most other states have: if homosexual couples want to marry, they should have every right to do so, and preventing them from obtaining the benefits heterosexual couples have is a violation of the Constitution Woodfill is so hungry to defend.

The other question that keeps running through my head is, "Why do you care?" What difference does it make to Woodfill or any member of the local GOP if people they clearly don't associate with have an opportunity to share in the same rights as they do? Same-sex partner benefits are provided by most American corporations already. For a group that is hell bent on protecting individual rights, it sure seems this flies directly in the face of that ideal.