Texas, our Texas

-- Christy Hoppe broke the story a few days ago of Governor Perry's most recent (to come to light) financial misdealing.

The first independent audit of the Texas Enterprise Fund shows that the governor’s job-creating fund awarded $222 million — almost half the money granted — to entities that never submitted applications or specific promises to create jobs.

The 98-page report by the state auditor, released to lawmakers Thursday, paints a picture of a $500 million fund that, at least in its early years, gave away taxpayer money without a set evaluation process or a consistent criteria.

Early grants were awarded to companies or universities without their submitting formal applications, and some large projects were never required to create a single job — although that is the legislative mandate by which the fund was started.

Numerous contracts showed inconsistent requirements, weak compliance monitoring and led the auditor to state that it cannot verify many of the jobs or investments that were credited to the program.

Of course this also implicates Greg Abbott, whose job was oversight.  He failed.

As has typically been the case with respect to Republican scandals during this election cycle, Texas media that didn't break the story seem a little slow to push the story, and Texans reading and watching the media would rather read and watch something about a 'latte salute'.   Or 'Muslim prayer rugs at the border'.

Update, TexTrib:

While critics were hounding Gov. Rick Perry a decade ago about his job-luring Texas Enterprise Fund, his lawyers went to Attorney General Greg Abbott to block the release of applications that supposedly had been filled out by the entities requesting taxpayer subsidies.

Abbott’s office, tasked with deciding which government records have to be made public, told Perry's lawyers they must keep the applications secret under exemptions to state transparency laws, according to attorney general rulings and news reports.

Now, though, information contained in a blistering state audit shows that at least five of the recipients that were named in Abbott’s 2004 rulings — and which got tens of millions of dollars from the fund — never actually submitted formal applications. And if no applications ever existed, it’s not clear what Abbott was telling Perry he had to keep secret or why the public is just now learning that millions were awarded without them.

-- The criminal investigation into the Republican nominee for Texas attorney general won't begin until after the election.

The Travis County District Attorney has confirmed that any investigation into the criminal felony complaint filed against Republican candidate for attorney general Ken Paxton would take place after the November 4th General Election. It's a clear signal to voters that electing Paxton would subject the Texas AG's office to immediate post-election uncertainty, disruption and dysfunction.

[...]

According to the Houston Chronicle article, “if the district attorney launches criminal proceedings after November, it would mean Paxton could be facing a grand jury in his first few months as a statewide elected official.”

Paxton has already admitted to committing a felony violation of state securities law. In addition to the criminal investigation, Paxton also faces a complaint before the State Bar that could result in his disbarment.

Paxton’s strategy for avoiding publicity and scrutiny of his criminal behavior has been to avoid public events and refuse to speak with media. At an appearance earlier this summer, Paxton’s campaign aide physically blocked a reporter from getting close enough to ask a question.

Paxton is being shunned by other Republican nominees who, like Greg Abbott, rarely mention him by name.

Some Texans -- some who would typically be alarmed by news like this, that is -- just shrug.  It seems to this Texan that in any other campaign season in almost any other state, this development would be enough for sensible people to go to the polls and clean house.  It happened in Texas, once upon a time.  Yet the odds are good that despite the overpowering stench of corruption, the majority of the Texas electorate will goose-step with linked arms to the polling places and re-elect these vermin.

And to be clear: they are most certainly vermin.  Poisonous, disease-riddled rodents that have crawled out of the sewer and into public office on the strength of an (R) behind their name.  All of that "DemocRATS" business is just projection.  Despite the vile smell of it all, there's no bleach strong enough to get rid of them.

Because this is still Texas.  With respect to what Texans might do about it...

-- The Dallas-Fort Worth area has the greatest number of unregistered and eligible-to-vote Texans.  Houston isn't far behind, and San Antonio and Austin are right behind.  The total of those four metros: well over one million potential votes.  A conservative estimate of the Democratic votes among them would be two out of three, or 67%.

This is why Texas isn't changing, and won't until these Texans change their habit.

-- On a brighter note...

The number of uninsured patients treated at hospitals dropped sharply this year, top White House officials said Wednesday  – cutting costs dramatically for states that opted to expand Medicaid.

Texas isn’t one of those states.

Oh well, it's at least nice to know that some folks -- those who did not have insurance before, those taxpayers who were paying for their care before -- are benefiting.

In states other than Texas, that is.

Eric Holder was certainly no Abu Gonzales

Not even Richard Nixon's John Mitchell, for that matter.

Still, there remain any number of good reasons his departure is long overdue.  Way past time that he make like cow chips and hit the dusty trail.  Head on back to where he came from, or perhaps Goldman Sachs or some such.

Holder’s tenure as Attorney General has been a tragic one. Not only has he been engulfed in partisan scandals over an incompetent gun running sting known as “Fast and Furious,” he has been under fire for attacking the First Amendment rights of the media and is widely seen as having given his friends and former clients on Wall Street a complete pass on the criminal conduct that led to the 2008 financial crisis.

Holder’s involvement with the war on whistleblowers, tracking and intimidating reporters, killing Americans without judicial review, and the abysmal failure to enforce the law against criminals in the financial services industry has left America a more divided and unjust society. Not a particularly good legacy to leave behind.

America not only saw a white collar crime wave go unpunished, but saw Holder himself announce a doctrine that has been called Too Big To Jail. Holder claimed in congressional testimony that some Wall Street banks could not be prosecuted because of their size, saying  “If you do prosecute, if you do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy.”

Holder made no corresponding effort to break up the banks so they could become the appropriate size for him to feel comfortable prosecuting them when they broke the law. Instead, the comment signaled to everyone that if you were big and powerful enough the Holder Justice Department was not coming after you in criminal court – which still holds true as there has not been any major prosecutions against the banks or bankers.

I appreciate what Eric Holder has done in standing up for the Voting Rights Act, and more specifically I am grateful for his fight against Greg Abbott over photo IDs for Texas voters.  How that case eventually turns out may well be a star in his crown.  In terms of admiration, it's difficult for me to remember the day, nearly six years ago, that the Senior Box Turtle from Texas stalled Holder's nomination to AG because Cornyn disagreed that waterboarding was torture.

Ah, the memories.  From June of 2008, Eric Holder, speaking to the American Constitution Society.

"I never thought I would see the day when a Justice Department would claim that only the most extreme infliction of pain and physical abuse constitutes torture and that acts that are merely cruel, inhuman and degrading are consistent with United States law and policy, that the Supreme Court would have to order the president of the United States to treat detainees in accordance with the Geneva Convention, never thought that I would see that a president would act in direct defiance of federal law by authorizing warrantless NSA surveillance of American citizens. This disrespect for the rule of law is not only wrong, it is destructive."

And in June a year ago.

Eric Holder did do some good as attorney general of the United States, but his refusal to prosecute so many more crimes and injustices -- to say nothing of the broken promises of transparency -- is a black mark in the history books.  A very easy bottom line: as long as war criminals and Wall Street thieves walk about free while thousands of petty offenders of marijuana laws languish in jail, Holder's grade as the nation's top law enforcement officer is a failing one.

James O'Keefe might be in Houston, and other things

-- There's some folks who think the destroyer of ACORN might be in town to try to catch some voter "fraud"... or something.

Though it probably did take him a couple of weeks to hitchhike up here from the border after his latest stunt, he's still a little too soon for early voting.  So beware all you people getting folks registered between now and the deadline for that.  You don't want to be on Candid Conservative Camera.

Update:

-- Frankly, I don't understand why Republicans are so worried about their election results in Texas.  Maybe they're listening to what Harvey Kronberg (Quorum Report) and Ross Ramsey (Texas Tribune) are saying, and also taking no solace in Politico's assessment of the gubernatorial contest.

-- Ladies and gentlemen: here is your Texas NORML Voter's Guide.

-- Awful DC leftists blast Hillary Clinton in secret e-mails.  The Hill has finally gone TMZ, complete with autoplay video.

The Hill reviewed hundreds of emails from a progressive members only Google group called the “Gamechanger Salon,” a forum where nearly 1,500 activists, strategists and journalists debate issues and craft messaging campaigns.

The group includes prominent Democrats, Sierra Club officials, journalists who work for The Huffington Post and The Nation magazine, senior union representatives, leaders at the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and the president of NARAL.

In the emails spanning over a year — starting in June 2013 through July of this year — frustration with Clinton is evident.

Clinton’s too much of a hawk, too cozy with Wall Street, hasn’t spoken out enough on climate change, and will be subject to personal questions and criticisms, members of the group stated in the emails.

The existence of the group was reported earlier this year by the conservative outlet MediaTrackers.org, but this is the first time the emails have become public.

Will more developments like this convince Bernie Sanders to run as a Democrat in 2016?

-- After almost nine years and more than $79 billion, the F-22 Raptor flew its first combat mission.  "Successfully".

The stealth F-22 has had chances to fight before – during Air Force operations in Iraq and in Afghanistan as well as its role in the no-fly zone over Libya in 2011 – but in each case the Air Force said the high-tech jet was not an “operational requirement.” 

The Pentagon apparently decided the U.S.-led strikes against ISIS in Syria, for which the Syrian government says it was given warning, were different. 

Do you think this fresh new war is going to lift the fortunes of Democrats in November?  After all, Rush Limbaugh and John Bolton and Sean Hannity are all afraid it might.

I would simply observe that Syria became the 7th predominantly Muslim nation to be bombed by the 2009 Nobel Peace laureate.  And that perhaps that's where all these new terrorists might be coming from. As for wars, bombing, 'protecting the Homeland', etc. and so on...

Hogan whines about endorsement of Kendrick

Earlier today, Texpatriate endorsed Kenneth Kendrick for Commissioner of Texas Agriculture.  A fairly significant development, considering that they usually pick mostly Democrats and the occasional Republican.

Junior Samples, who is on Twitter as Internet Jim Hogan, got upset about it.

.@Texpatriates You endorsed @KennethKendrick without even talking to me? Whom next- the @statesman @HoustonChron @dallasnews @BOR ?
— Internet Jim Hogan (@jimhogantx) September 23, 2014

Hogan wants to be interviewed by the blogs now, after refusing interview requests all year?  Hilarious.  Hey Junior: I hate to go all grammar Nazi on you, but learn how and when to use who and whom, please.  *Update: Yes, it could all be a joke, not just Hogan only.  I'm trying to take his candidacy as seriously as I can.

But really you should rest easy, big boy.  If the Houston Chronicle can fumble the endorsement in the county clerk's race, they can sure as hell screw up and endorse you.  And I wouldn't be scared about missing on "The New BOR", either.  They're now calling themselves 'the most progressive blog in Texas', but they're still just the house organ for the TDP.  (Hint: not all that progressive, y'all.  Just like Jim Hogan.)

You'll still get about 35% of the vote because of all the straight-ticket-voting Democrats, who don't know enough about you to know they shouldn't be voting for you.  Congratulations!

Today is National Voter Registration Day

In 2008, 6 million Americans didn't vote because they missed a registration deadline or didn't know how to register. In 2014, we want to make sure no one is left out.

On September 23, 2014, volunteers, celebrities, and organizations from all over the country will "hit the streets" for National Voter Registration Day. This single day of coordinated field, technology and media efforts will create pervasive awareness of voter registration opportunities--allowing us to reach tens of thousands of voters who we could not reach otherwise.

Texas, as we know by now, is one of the worst states of all in this regard.  There are very likely millions of Texans who don't vote as matter of habit, and thus aren't registered to vote, for whatever their personal reasons for not doing so happen to be.  And it's all but impossible, particularly at this stage of the election cycle, to convince someone who is skeptical of their power -- who is on the fence about whether they should participate in our democracy (or representative republic, if you prefer) -- to exercise that power.  As the deadline to register to vote in the midterm elections closes in, the focus will soon shift to get-out-the-vote efforts.  But for about two more weeks, if there's anyone you know who needs to get registered, or who needs to be certain they are qualified (by Texas Republican standards) to vote, then today is the day to do that.

Our local voter registrar, Mike Sullivan, is doing his part.  Here is a map of all the locations in Harris County where you can go and register to vote today.  If you need proper documentation to verify your citizenship in order to register, you'll be told where and how to get that, and how much it might cost, and how long it might take.  That might be the most important thing a person who is not registered to vote can learn today: "what extra things must I do to make sure I can vote?"

So you can spin it either way, left or right: control of the US Senate is at stake, so get registered and then get back to the polls next month (early) or in November (on Election Day).  "The future of Texas hangs in the balance", blahblahblah.

Voter registration efforts -- indeed, solicitations for voting by mail -- should be nonpartisan, but they aren't.

I thought the blossoming coffee stain was a nice artistic touch, don't you?   I'm sure this is all perfectly legal in Texas.  Just like creepshots.

And the Texas Democratic Party appears to be doing something similar, as Charles reports, and if that's the case then everybody's hard at work, even the election law attorneys for both parties making sure everything is above board.  This is separate and apart from today's voter registration push, of course, and falls in line with GOTV efforts by both major parties to increase their turnout.

So the message is: whatever you do and however you do it, get it done. And don't do anything that's against the law when you do.

What happens when only Republicans turn out to vote

You get the highest criminal court in Texas ruling that it's legally okay for pervos to take upskirts.

Confused and frustrated people tore out enough hair to fill a ten-gallon hat when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled that a statute banning “improper photography,” such as taking sketchy shots of children in bathing suits who have no idea they are being photographed, was unconstitutional this week. The WTF reactions went beyond the Lone Star State with national news sites wondering how it was possible that such a blatant personal violation — and one that is a potential harbinger of child pornography — could have no legal ramifications?

Yet, with almost complete unanimity (only one of the nine judges dissented), the highest criminal court in Texas struck down the section of the improper photography law that forbids taking photographs in non-bathroom and non-dressing room spaces (essentially public spaces) under the following conditions:

— without the other person’s consent; and
— with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person

Didn't I just reference something about the egregious, horrid, painfully obnoxious, conservative-extremist-Republican Court of Criminal Appeals less than a week ago?  I wonder if any straight-ticket-voting Republicans will try to blame this on those ACLU socialists at the CCA.

The case they decided involved a nice fellow -- none of his neighbors would have ever guessed he was a weirdo -- who took photos and video of women, and young children, in their swimming attire.  Please note that bastion of Puritans in Massachusetts has specifically banned upskirt photos.  Oh, and the Texas Lege went a little farther.  But they apparently stretched too far -- surprise! -- and the court struck the law down.

It is evident in the ruling that fears of potentially sweeping First Amendment violations drove the ruling, which is painfully ironic considering presiding Judge Sharon Keller’s disregard for other individual rights. Keller earned the nickname “Sharon Killer” for effectively blocking the stay of an execution in 2007 by refusing to let her court remain open past 5 p.m. Apparently, Keller’s rigidly lethal punctuality is tempered by her generous view of freedom of expression.

There remain plenty of defenders of the right to... something.

Creepy? Yeah. Illegal? Not so, the Court of Appeals ruled.

The photos themselves and the act of using a camera are covered by the First Amendment’s protections of freedom of speech, the court said. If the photos aren’t actually obscene, it’s not the government’s job to police how a person reacts to them.

People in public can’t expect total privacy, the court went on. They are, after all, publicly visible to anyone who might pass by. Even someone taking an upskirt photo.

“A person who walks down a public street cannot prevent others from looking at him or her with sexual thoughts in their heads,” the court said.

The original law does accomplish what it aimed to do, criminalize upskirt photos, the court added. But it goes much farther than that, which could lead to the law being misused — which is why they struck it down.

“This statute could easily be applied to an entertainment reporter who takes a photograph of an attractive celebrity on a public street,” the court said.

Bottom line? The invasion of privacy of an upskirt photo is “intolerable, and the legislature ought to ban it, the court said. This just isn’t the law to do it.

The last word.

Protecting someone who appears in public from being the object of sexual thoughts seems to be the sort of ‘paternalistic interest in regulating the defendant’s mind’ that the 1st Amendment was designed to guard against. We also keep in mind the Supreme Court’s admonition that the forms of speech that are exempt from 1st Amendment protection are limited, and we should not be quick to recognize new categories of unprotected expression.

Yup, you read that right — anti-creepshot laws are “paternalistic.” Indeed, Thompson’s attorney echoed this sentiment, in casting the laws as “Orwellian.”

This story should give pause to Texan women everywhere. The Court essentially ruled that women anywhere out in public have no reasonable expectation of privacy, even if an unwanted photographer’s intent is overtly sexual — in practice, it makes visiting a water park for a woman in Texas like signing a release waver to be ogled and snapshotted. This isn’t to say that freedom of expression, photography and videography rules in public places aren’t important — they undoubtedly are, and forcing courts and juries to make judgments about the intent behind random photographs can be a precarious position.

But as the law stands now, especially after this ruling, it’s hard not to feel as though Texas’ women are being failed in the most basic of ways. When the same anti-creepshot law was ruled against in 2013, the Bexar County district attorney’s office put out a press release with a cautionary title, according to The Guardian: “Cover up while we appeal.” For now, at least, that message still rings true — in Texas, it seems, wearing a swimsuit in a public place is giving license to lech.

I'd like to think that Texas women -- and yes, Texas liberals and progressives, the people who are the only ones concerned with the greater good --  could begin to gradually correct some of this legal nonsense by establishing a habit of voting every time there's an election.  And if the tide is turning; if it's happening as this is written, then all the better.  I'd just like to live long enough to see some progress made with regard to the Neanderthals in the Texas judicial system evolving into something that comes closer to being human.  You know, with a soul and/or a conscience.

But I doubt that will ever happen, so they need to be voted out of office.  Click here and scroll to the very bottom.  Up from there -- seven races -- are the candidates on your November ballot for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals... and the Texas Supreme Court as well.  Let's get started by not voting for any of the Republicans.

For the sake of your wives, daughters, and all Texas women.