The high cost of business incentives (especially in Texas)

This series in the New York Times over the weekend is most searing report ever on how much "doin' bidness" is costing us. From Part I...

A Times investigation has examined and tallied thousands of local incentives granted nationwide and has found that states, counties and cities are giving up more than $80 billion each year to companies. The beneficiaries come from virtually every corner of the corporate world, encompassing oil and coal conglomerates, technology and entertainment companies, banks and big-box retail chains. 

The cost of the awards is certainly far higher. A full accounting, The Times discovered, is not possible because the incentives are granted by thousands of government agencies and officials, and many do not know the value of all their awards. Nor do they know if the money was worth it because they rarely track how many jobs are created. Even where officials do track incentives, they acknowledge that it is impossible to know whether the jobs would have been created without the aid. 

[...]

A portrait arises of mayors and governors who are desperate to create jobs, outmatched by multinational corporations and short on tools to fact-check what companies tell them. Many of the officials said they feared that companies would move jobs overseas if they did not get subsidies in the United States. 

Over the years, corporations have increasingly exploited that fear, creating a high-stakes bazaar where they pit local officials against one another to get the most lucrative packages. States compete with other states, cities compete with surrounding suburbs, and even small towns have entered the race with the goal of defeating their neighbors. 

Which state pays the most incentives and has the least to show for it? Why, Rick Perry's Texas.

Under Mr. Perry, Texas gives out more of the incentives than any other state, around $19 billion a year, an examination by The New York Times has found. Texas justifies its largess by pointing out that it is home to half of all the private sector jobs created over the last decade nationwide. As the invitation to the fund-raiser boasted: “Texas leads the nation in job creation.”

Yet the raw numbers mask a more complicated reality behind the flood of incentives, the examination shows, and raise questions about who benefits more, the businesses or the people of Texas. 

Along with the huge job growth, the state has the third-highest proportion of hourly jobs paying at or below minimum wage. And despite its low level of unemployment, Texas has the 11th-highest poverty rate among states. 

“While economic development is the mantra of most officials, there’s a question of when does economic development end and corporate welfare begin,” said Dale Craymer, the president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, a group supported by business that favors incentives programs.

$19 billion annually. That is more than enough to solve the state's budget woes. 

Eliminating these tax breaks would mean that the Texas legislature would not have to gut education, public health programs like Medicaid, and all the rest. All they would have to do is just ask businesses to pay what they are supposed to pay.

America -- and Texas -- is NOT going broke. We're being robbed.

Update: This diary by Daily Kossack DRo has more.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is making a list and checking it twice as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff discredits the myth that straight ticket voting was the key to judicial races in Harris County.

People who think government doesn't work probably aren't the right people to elect to government posts. WCNews at Eye on Williamson shows what happens when people who hate government are put in charge of it.

Kyle Janek, Rick Perry's recent appointee to head the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, refuses to believe the 2010 census figures that show Texas as having the highest number of uninsured adults in the nation. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs is almost without words about the Reality Derangement Syndrome demonstrated by Republicans (particularly Texas Republicans).  

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme is not surprised that John Boehner picked a Texas dunderhead to lead the House Science and Technology committee: climate change skeptic and all around idiot Lamar Smith.

Neil at Texas Liberal says that 2014 Republican lieutenant governor candidate Jerry Patterson is prepared to shoot... even though Mr. Patterson is not very clear about his intended target.

TX health commissioner doesn't believe census on high number of uninsured

The virulent and nasty strain of Republican Reality Derangement Syndrome, most prevalent in Texas, shows no sign of easing. Reality Check on Kyle Janek:

The new executive commissioner of Texas' Health and Human Services Department—the social services behemoth that's currently in the process of building a whole new Texas Women's Health Program (WHP) so it can exclude Planned Parenthood from providing contraceptives and cancer screenings to low-income Texans—has some interesting views on the condition of public health care in his state. And by "interesting," I mean shocking. I mean shockingly ignorant. Astounding, even.

Dr. Kyle Janek is an anesthesiologist by training, but for the last 18 years has served as a Republican in the Texas Legislature and as a lobbyist for various medical organizations. Governor Rick Perry appointed him as executive commissioner of the Texas HHSC on September 1st. You might expect that in 18 years of being plugged into Texas politics and state health policy, he'd have a decent grasp on the issues facing Texans.

You'd be wrong. Because Kyle Janek doesn't believe—despite credible, widely accepted evidence to the contrary—that one of Texas' most pressing health problems, its high number of uninsured adults, is real. He doesn't believe that more than a quarter of Texans are uninsured, as estimated by the U.S. Census Bureau. He told a Texas Tribune reporter in early October that he believed that number to be "inflated," and then reiterated his point in an extended interview with Tribune editor Evan Smith on October 31st. (Through his press representatives, he refused an interview with RH Reality Check.) Here's his most recent take via the Tribune:

"It's not that I don't believe those numbers. I don't believe the reasoning for those numbers."

Janek used to represent me in the Texas Senate, and at that time was widely reputed to be one of the moderates. So something has obviously changed; either the accuracy of the political reporting or Janek's interpretations, uninfluenced by a desire for re-election. I don't really care which it happens to be, for the record.

Janek's problem: he said the Census Bureau only takes a "snapshot" by asking people if they're uninsured, and doesn't ask them if they had insurance in the past or if they think they have a job lined up with insurance in the future. Janek must not be aware that for nearly 25 years, the Census Bureau's "snapshot" has shown practically the same thing: since 1987, Texas repeatedly has one of the highest, or the very highest, number of uninsured adults in the country. That rate has not been below 1987's 23 percent; it peaked at 26.8 percent in 2009 and is currently estimated at 26.2 percent.

That's a remarkably consistent snapshot of something that Janek seems to believe changes for millions of people by the day. Janek says he isn't sure why Texas "is different" when it comes to health care, but he told the Tribune it could be because the weather here is nice.

"Do we have so many people that are temporarily uninsured? Or is it the general climate of better weather and glorious place to live? Folks come here, and that attracts more folks with health care needs or disabilities?" he wondered during the interview. Surely our high uninsured numbers couldn't be due to the fact that Texas jobs generally don't provide health insurance, that Medicaid in the state is limited, that insurance rates are unregulated or that Texas has a large immigrant population, as the Washington Post reported last year. No, it's probably just the purty weather.

This is just embarrassing. For Janek, for Rick Perry (who appointed him), and for all of the rest of us in Texas.

So there's a lot of different ways we could go with this news.

One would be that even when you think Rick Perry has appointed someone of some repute to a statewide  post, it's bound to turn out to be another epic fail. Keep in mind that just in the past few months, the governor appointed Michael Williams to head the Texas Education Commission and his own chief of staff to the state Supreme Court, clearing a path for yet another toady. (There's a reason why a person is willing to take a pay cut from $312,000 a year to $175,000, and it isn't about the money.) And now the health commissioner, just by opening his yap, looks like the worst of this lot.

Another path -- well-worn -- would take us down Lamentation Alley, where we moan again about the curious conservative belief system and how it is destroying everything that used to be great about Texas. I'll pass on another serving of that.

Let's just consider what this entrenched patronage system is providing us, all the way down the line. The advance, to understand the next excerpt -- that you should read in the first link at the top -- is that Janek believes the solution to the problem (that he doesn't think actually exists) is to fund more medical schools in Texas.

Why does Janek think that Texas legislators, county commissioners and other politicos are suddenly ready to funnel millions, probably billions, of dollars into medical schools? 

Perhaps because he's hired a conservative think-tanker to help make that happen. Her name is Mary Katherine Stout, and for $150,000 per year, the former Perry staffer, Wal-Mart defender and far-right Texas Public Policy Foundation economics "expert" will act as a "special advisor," "involved in a number of policy and planning issues," according to HHSC spokesperson Stephanie Goodman. Goodman told RH Reality Check that Stout will be "looking at ways [Texas HHSC] can work with medical schools to support their efforts to make sure Texas has enough health professionals."

In the past, Stout has particularly focused her efforts on criticizing Medicaid and especially CHIP, the popular children's Medicaid program, which she has said is rife with luxury car-driving freeloaders and should be closed to people who are verily rolling in cash and furs, like "those making as much as $40,000 annually for a family of four." Stout's coldness is unusual even for Texas right-wingers, and her cruel preoccupation with making sure as few Texas children as possible receive needed aid borders on the bizarre. To that end, this was her 2007 proposal for fighting "The Left" in the National Review:

Perhaps we should fight their strategy with our own campaign to tell stories of success, of people working hard and making good decisions for their family, of people who made something out of nothing, or who turned something into more. Yes, send me your stories of success, of personal responsibility, and of government’s depredations on a family trying to make ends meet.

These are the words of a "special advisor" on Texas public health care policy, who'll be whispering in the ear of a man who believes the state has "inflated" uninsured numbers because hey, poor people can always go walk in and get some open heart surgery at a public hospital or amorphous medical school of dubious funding origin.

This is one of those times when I wish Texas really was a whole 'nother country, for entirely different reasons than the secession petition-signers.

Sunday Funnies

Susan Rice and Keystone XL

I have defended Amb. Rice against the scurrilous personal attacks leveled against her by John McCain, Lindsay Graham, et.al., but that's all over now.

The shoulders on which the Keystone XL pipeline decision may fall happens to have a half-million dollar stake in the game. Secretary of State hopeful and current U.S. Ambassador to the UN, Susan E. Rice reportedly owns between $300,000 and $600,000 of TransCanada stock.

It gets worse: she is a massive investor in several of the various Canadian tar sands players.

(Rice) holds significant investments in more than a dozen Canadian oil companies and banks that would stand to benefit from expansion of the North American tar sands industry and construction of the proposed $7 billion Keystone XL pipeline.

[...]

(A)ccording to financial disclosure reports, about a third of Rice’s personal net worth is tied up in oil producers, pipeline operators, and related energy industries north of the 49th parallel -- including companies with poor environmental and safety records on both U.S. and Canadian soil. Rice and her husband own at least $1.25 million worth of stock in four of Canada’s eight leading oil producers, as ranked by Forbes magazine. That includes Enbridge, which spilled more than a million gallons of toxic bitumen into Michigan’s Kalamazoo River in 2010 -- the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history.

Rice also has smaller stakes in several other big Canadian energy firms, as well as the country’s transportation companies and coal-fired utilities. Another 20 percent or so of her personal wealth is derived from investments in five Canadian banks. These are some of the institutions that provide loans and financial backing to TransCanada and its competitors for tar sands extraction and major infrastructure projects, such as Keystone XL and Enbridge’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline, which would stretch 700 miles from Alberta to the Canadian coast.

This is the sort of thing that the SEC usually refers to as 'insider trading', which is illegal. Usually.

Not only does Rice not deserve a promotion, she probably ought to go ahead and resign from her post as UN ambassador and "retire" from politics. My guess is she still has a bright and lucrative future as an oil industry lobbyist.

Greg Abbott: Hurry up with our VRA challenge

Michael Li:

Lawyers for the Justice Department and intervenors in the Texas voter ID case told the court yesterday that the court should put off consideration of Texas’ claim that section 5 of the Voting Rights Act is unconstitutional until the Supreme Court decides the pending Shelby County v. Holder case next year.

That case involves a challenge to the statute by Shelby County, Alabama, contending that Congress acted without sufficient evidence in 2006 in extending section 5 coverage for another 25 years and that the formula for determining what states and sub-divisions are subject to section 5 is outdated.

Money shot:

The State of Texas disagreed and told the court that it should go ahead and decide the constitutional question being raised in the Texas case or otherwise its voter ID law “will be stuck in limbo until the end of the current Supreme Court term.” 

So it would seem to me that the Republicans in the Lege would be working on a revised Voter ID bill for 2013 -- a less onerous one, that comes closer to passing legal muster -- as a Plan B to an adverse ruling, except that the last sentence in the second excerpt suggests that the conservatives have all of their eggs rotting in one basket. Perhaps the timeline for a decision from the court is such that a Plan B could still be pulled out of a drawer in the coming session.

In a response to this question on his FB page, Li states: "there does not seem to be any major move to revisit the law".

This kind of 'all in' gamble by Greg Abbott, considering his track record with the feds, would surprise me... if I weren't already convinced of his stupidity. Then again, maybe it's the GOP legislators who are dumb. And the question becomes moot if we learn in the coming weeks that they are quietly working on something in case they lose in court.

But if Li is correct, and the court either denies Abbott's request or accepts it and rules against the state later, then without some alternative legislation offered in the coming session... Voter ID would be dead until 2015.

That would have to be the most favorable outcome for voting rights and democracy one could hope for. As always when it comes to the judges, the lawyers, the OAG, and the GOP in the Lege, we'll have to wait and see what develops.

Everyone needs someone to look down on

An excerpt from this observation from Joan Walsh.

It troubles me beyond reason that the face of the white GOP backlash is so frequently Irish Catholic: O’Reilly, Hannity, Pat Buchanan. Reading Kelly’s book again reminded me that everything racists say about African Americans was once said about my own people, and in the famine at least, with a deadly outcome.

To justify shutting down aid mid-famine, the London Times editorialized that it was to help the poor Irish themselves. “Alas, the Irish peasant has tasted of famine and found it good…the deity of his faith was the government…it was a religion that holds ‘Man shall not labor by the sweat of his brow.” Sounds like Bill O’Reilly, only more clever. “There are times when harshness is the greatest humanity.” The Times’ “chief proprietor,” John Walter, put it more crudely. The Irish were no more ready for self-government than “the blacks,” he said in Parliament (he was also a Tory MP).  ”The blacks have a proverb,” he explained. “‘If a nigger were not a nigger, the Irishman would be a nigger.’”

I am neither Irish nor Catholic.The contempt of Irish immigrants in the New World was well-played satirically by Daniel Day-Lewis in "Gangs of New York". (He's in another film currently where his character demonstrates a great deal more tolerance toward a different tribe of people.) Walsh's point is that history -- like science and logic and common sense -- is still lost on the right-wing and their bloviators.

We need conservatives to hurry up and begin to understand what's true and what's fiction. And that's about the kindest way that it can be said.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance is rested and ready after the holiday weekend as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff notes that for the second election in a row, the city of Houston voted 61% for President Obama. Keep that in mind the next time someone tries to tell you that Texas is Austin surrounded by a bunch of Republicans.

Success for Democrats in Williamson County has been few and far between in recent years, and has only come through hard work. WCNews at Eye on Williamson points out that little has changed: It won't just happen...(continued).

Barack Obama's re-election to the presidency, just as his first election, is defined in large measure by the pathetic quality of his competition. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs observes that while Republicans have only themselves to blame for their circumstances, maybe it's time for the victors to help them work through their bitterness.  

BossKitty at TruthHugger believes it's time to instruct those we elected to legislate responsible actions and stop polluting America's water: Water – Supply and Demand, Cause and Effect.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme notes that establishment Republicans hate their base. I can understand that.

Neil at Texas Liberal said that the table of self-respect is always set. The question is will people show up?

Sunday Funnies

Walmart's low wages, every day

This comes a little late for those who are already out there busting doors, pepper-spraying their opponents, and otherwise celebrating the corporation's most wonderful time of the year.

A half century ago America’s largest private-sector employer was General Motors, whose full-time workers earned an average hourly wage of around $50, in today’s dollars, including health and pension benefits.

Today, America’s largest employer is Walmart, whose average employee earns $8.81 an hour. A third of Walmart’s employees work less than 28 hours per week and don’t qualify for benefits.

There are many reasons for the difference – including globalization and technological changes that have shrunk employment in American manufacturing while enlarging it in sectors involving personal services, such as retail.

But one reason, closely related to this seismic shift, is the decline of labor unions in the United States. In the 1950s, over a third of private-sector workers belonged to a union. Today fewer than 7 percent do. As a result, the typical American worker no longer has the bargaining clout to get a sizeable share of corporate profits.

It was not surprising to see all of the Khronically Konservative Kommenters blame the bakers' union for the demise of Hostess this past week. After all, a company's primary product being Type II diabetes and a management that awarded itself bonuses every time they put the operation into "a chapter", as Donald Trump once said, cannot possibly be responsible for its own failure.

If we still had a strong labor movement in this nation, I assert that people wouldn't be peeing into cups in order to acquire or even keep their jobs, and thus would not be demanding that poor people do the same in order to secure some meager welfare benefits.

Card-check. "Right-to-work" laws. Reagan -- a former union man himself -- busting the air traffic controllers' union. This triumph of capitalist pigs over common people goes all the way back to the Democratic National Convention of 1944, when the party bosses (like Houston's own Jesse Jones) installed Harry Truman over Henry Wallace as vice-presidential nominee. Watch Oliver Stone's "Untold History of the United States" for the story.

But that's a digression. Later this morning at the new Walmart in Houston's Heights, and all across the nation, people will protest outside the stores, calling attention to the fact that Walmart earns $16 billion in profits annually yet pays its employees starvation wages (which is why so many of them are also on food stamps).

The most effective way to fix this, as the conservatives will attest, is through the free market. Don't buy anything today unless you're buying it from a locally owned business, preferably a mom-and-pop. And for God's sake, if you have to go to Walmart, join the real people outside asking the corporate people inside for a little better way of life.

Less meat, fewer starches, more vegetables

Defined by the quality of the competition

It isn't meant to be mean to say that Barack Obama's legacy as a presidential candidate is tied in no small way to the quality -- more specifically the lack thereof -- of his two rivals, John McCain and Mitt Romney.

They have demonstrated their presidential mettle in recent days, as you are likely aware.

With conservatives still in grief-stricken denial about their loss and the reasons why, it would be merciful -- and simplistic -- to chalk 2012 up to their powerful ignorance and dishonesty. But it would be more accurate to observe that, while Obama's presidential campaigns have been transformative (his presidency, not so much), it is also correct that his two relative mandates to govern have not been met with gracious concession or even professional courtesy on the part of his adversaries.

McCain's slow-motion implosion has been going on for at least five years. His enablers -- like Steve Schmidt and more recently Joe Lieberman, for example -- have gradually excused themselves to a safer distance. Romney's delusional tumble from a perch believed by him and everyone around him to be his birthright has been more clinically fascinating to observe. The photo that surfaced on Reddit this week of the $250 million dollar man in a wrinkled shirt, with disheveled hair, pumping his own gas in La Jolla, reveals the depression brought on by the crushing reality of defeat.

It would be easy to keep on laughing if he didn't look so much like someone who needs to call a suicide hotline. While Mitt needs an intervention, the embittered McCain and the Republicans who are still seething and ranting need some help of their own. Greg in the comments of this post is evidence of this unhealthy anger. (He's sent me additional comments which won't appear. He's in a timeout lasting at least through the end of the year.)

I've had high school friends, others I've known for decades, click the unfriend button on Facebook because they couldn't stand to have finally figured out that I am a "librul". And that was well before November 6. Their moods must be wretched since the election results came in a couple of weeks ago.

I'm going to enjoy my turkey and dressing with several members of my extended family tomorrow, some of whom are as hard-boiled Republican as they come. I hope they can manage the few hours okay. It's got to be awful tough for some of them, still.

Anyway, help a few of these people -- you know who they are in your life -- along in their stages of grief by being a little nicer than you normally would. They might not yet be able to appreciate it, but they deserve it just the same. Their transition to something approaching calm is important for all of us.

Have a Happy Thanksgiving. And don't gloat. The time for mending fences is nigh.

"This Land is Mine"

Lyrics by Pat Boone, sung by Andy Williams, animation by Nina Paley.



As of this morning, Israel and Hamas cannot even agree on whether or not they, in fact, have a ceasefire in place.

I really don't care any more who started it or whose fault the latest contretemps is. These people need to stop fighting with each other.

Thanksgiving Week Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance wishes everyone a happy and peaceful Thanksgiving as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff took a look at how Latinos voted in Texas and how Ted Cruz did in Harris County.  

BossKitty at TruthHugger learned a new word. NATECH describes how toxic materials mix together after disasters, in Hurricane Sandy, The NATECH Disaster.

Rick Perry and the Texas wing nuts are back at it again. WCNews at Eye on Williamson shows us that no matter the economic situation their game plan is the same -- cut government lower taxes on the wealthy, and the rest of us be damned: Perry and the wing nuts getting back to work.

Rick Perry and David Dewhurst are driving right past those red "Wrong Way" signs straight toward another legislative 'emergency' in search of a problem. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs observes that if peeing in a cup is suddenly such a high priority, perhaps the governor and lieutenant governor would like to go first.

Neil at Texas Liberal wrote about when it is best to thaw your Thanksgiving turkey in a post that also included a link to recipes for an all-veggie Thanksgiving.

Sunday Funnies

Wrong Way: drug-testing welfare applicants

Leave it to Texas Republicans to drive right past those red signs, though.

Out of the more than 250 bills filed Monday, the first possible day to file legislation for the 83^rd session, one measure — concerning drug testing for welfare applicants — is already drawing the support of the state’s top lawmakers and the criticism of civil liberties advocates.

Senate Bill 11 would require applicants to the Texas Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to undergo a drug test. If applicants fail the test, they would not be eligible to apply again for a full year, unless they attended a substance abuse treatment program. The bill was written by state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, and several other Republican lawmakers.

“This will help prevent tax dollars from going into the pockets of drug abusers,” Gov. Rick Perry said Tuesday at a news conference. He said that the goal of the bill is to "empower every Texan to reach their potential," because "being on drugs makes it harder to begin the journey to independence.”

More at the link makes for worthwhile reading, but let's present the rebuttal not mentioned by the Trib.

This program was implemented by the state of Florida and has been demonstrated to be cost-ineffective. In fact, the cost of the testing -- not including administrative costs -- far exceeds the savings realized on denial of benefits. Nor does the "threat" of drug testing result in fewer applications for aid, according to the Blog of Rights...

Despite the complete failure of this program to unearth anything other than the fact that there is no overwhelming drug problem amongst welfare applicants, the state of Florida continues to defend this law. And unfortunately, other states have followed Florida's ill-informed lead. Over 25 states introduced welfare drug testing legislation this year. You'd think that the court rulings and high costs might have logically stopped these bills, but they have not.

In these lean budgetary times, do conservatives actually want to implement a new invasive government program that wastes money we don't have?

They need to stop calling themselves fiscal conservatives if they do.

Just in case anyone was wondering, the correct governmental response is decriminalization of certain substances, followed by regulation and taxation. Once again the American people understand what its elected leaders are slow to figure out.

Imagine what effect this would have on the Mexican drug wars, for just one thing.

More from Christy Hoppe at the DMN. The argument against denying children assistance because of their parents' "violations" is laudable, but I just don't think an appeal to empathy is effective with the Republican hive mind.

Update: Grits...

... (S)tate leaders begin to pursue yet another policy likely to reinforce the politically toxic meme that Republicans are at war with women (and in this case their young children). If the Governor and Lt. Governor's goal is to help dissuade TANF recipients from drug use, eliminating their benefits is counterproductive. If they have some other goal, maybe they should just drop it before we have another round of embarrassing court decisions slapping down Texas policy once again. 

And Rep. Joe Deshotel, via The Bayou...

“Senate Bill 11 is both fiscally and morally irresponsible. Its even more egregious that it comes at a time of slow economic recovery and while Texas has almost twice the national average of uninsured children. It would violate personal privacy, ignore the presumption of innocence, and continue the Legislature’s expansion of government into our personal lives.”

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance congratulates President Obama on his re-election as it brings you this week's roundup.

Off the Kuff has his initial analysis of the 2012 election returns.  

WCNews at Eye on Williamson tells us now that the election is over, it's time to get to work: It won't just happen - The Democratic demographic myth in Texas.

BossKitty at TruthHugger is tickled that the corporate takeover failed to win the White House.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wonders why John Cornyn, the rapist enabler, keeps doubling down on bad ideas?

Carol Alvarado and Sylvia Garcia are squaring off to replace Mario Gallegos in the Texas Senate. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs says it will be a clash of the Houston titans (and the elite falling in to support them).

Neil at Texas Liberal took a ride to Galveston for a walk on the beach on the day after the election. The second Obama term will be nothing but lazy days on the beach for the coalition of moochers that elected him for a new term.

Texas House speaker politics begins

Two excerpts; the first is from a source I usually don't read, much less quote.

RedState has uncovered never-before-seen, profanity-laden e-mails between senior staff and legislative lieutenants of Texas’ liberal GOP House Speaker Joe Straus demonstrating disrespect for, and even hostility towards, grassroots activists and conservative lawmakers.

Tea party activists are called “idiots,” allies of U.S. Rep. Joe Barton are called “mother f***ers,” and decorated U.S. Marine and State Rep. Van Taylor is dismissed as “stupid,” by a top Straus political strategist.

The truth is occasionally brutal, and more frequently when the truth concerns the far right extremists in the Texas Legislature. Let's move on with the unbiased accounts of recent developments.

House Speaker Joe Straus' bid for a third term as leader of the 150-member state House may not come as quickly or as easily as he had anticipated.

The San Antonio Republican finds himself caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place: His re-election path is complicated by a challenge from the hard conservative wing of his own GOP, combined with growing unease among some Democratic legislators upset with how Straus handled last year's redistricting and other issues affecting minorities.

Straus faces a challenge from Rep. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, who is drawing support from tea party Republicans, FreedomWorks and some of the chamber's more conservative members.

There's a good bit more at that link if you want to know the players, the agendas, and the portent of future developments.

I'm not going to be into this so much because it's fairly predictable, just like two years ago.

Joe Straus is going to walk the line, before the session opens in January and after, between letting the Tea Freaks run wild a bit and then reigning them in, in order to quell the grumbling from the minority.

Straus is not going to be re-elected without all the votes from the 55-member Democratic minority delegation. The Democrats, for their part, don't have any leverage beyond their bloc. With all the Ds, Straus needs just 21 of the remaining 95 Repubs to earn back the big chair. None of the Blue team are going to vote -- nor should they -- for a reactionary like Bryan Hughes. So Straus will throw a few bones to the Dems (ie committee chairmanships, prioritizing the scheduling of bills and the like) to keep their whining to a minimum, and he'll do the same for the lunatics in his own caucus. He'll guide the session alternating between a fairly loose hand and a fairly firm one, keeping what's left of the moderate coalition of Republican representatives the most happy.

He'll tell both sides what they want to hear. They'll press for more and he'll say he can't because of those weirdos on the other end of the spectrum. Both contingents will complain, privately and publicly, just as they are now.

And Straus will get re-elected speaker. The rest is all kabuki. So when Harvey Kronberg fills up your inbox from now until the middle of January with all of the various machinations, just know that it's all posturing and preening. On both sides.

Once the session opens and the speaker takes the gavel, the conservatives will reassert themsleves in governance. There might be another redistricting sqabble. There will certainly be the same fights over funding, especially for women's health care and public education and so forth. In fact, the item that will be of most interest is the advance -- or lack thereof -- of immigration reform in Texas.

(Rep. Ana) Hernandez Luna is still upset that GOP leaders stopped debate on an immigration-related bill last session before Democrats could present all their amendments. She responded with an emotional personal privilege speech describing her fear as a child that one of her undocumented immigrant parents would not return from a shopping trip because of detection and deportation.

There may yet be some House Republicans that can come to a more sober understanding of tolerance on the issue in the wake of their electoral shellacking nationally. Rick Perry was attacked for being a moderate on immigration by Mitt Romney while he was still a presidential contender, you may recall. David Dewhurst won't have a two-thirds majority in the Senate, and now neither will Straus. So with some prodding from the top, a little temperance of the stridence of the Tea Party may come due (once they concede the speaker's contest, that is).

Then again, perhaps not. This is still Texas, after all.

(FWIW this might be an area in which rank-and-file Democrats can have some sway with their Republican representatives in the statehouse. An e-mail or phone call to their offices about supporting appropriate legislative action on immigration could make the difference between a bill getting passed and one dying in committee at the end of the session next spring. Just two cents' worth of advice to liberal and progressive activists.)

In my opinion, how the topic gets discussed and whether a bill clears the lower chamber will be the most-watched development in next year's legislative session.

Update: Big Jolly agrees, for different reasons.

Sunday Funnies

Hoping for a lot more change this time around, Mr. President.

Sylvia Garcia jumps in

And corrals a few endorsements from state legislators. Folloing via e-mail this morning.

Houston community advocate and longtime public servant Sylvia Garcia announced today she will run in the coming special election to represent Texas Senate District 6.

I'll skip the "why I'm running" blather and get to the hot stuff.

“I have worked with Sylvia to improve the availability of health care in East Harris County,” said Representative Ana Hernandez Luna (Dist. 143). “She understands the issues, has the ability to work with others to achieve the goal, and the passion and energy to stay in the fight until the battle is won.”

"Sylvia has never stopped working for us," said House Democratic Caucus Leader Jessica Farrar. "Serving as a social worker, attorney, city controller and county commissioner has provided her broad experience and solid relationships at all levels of governent. She is well equipped to fight against the special interests in Austin putting people first. Sylvia's priorities of education, healthcare, and jobs are what strengthen families most."

“You can trust Sylvia Garcia to say what she’ll do and do what she says,” said State Representative Armando Walle (Dist. 140). “Throughout her years of public service you have always been able to count on Sylvia’s word.  She has the intellect, honesty, maturity professionalism and integrity we want in our representative in the Texas Senate. Someone our children can be proud of”.

"Make no mistake, Rick Perry and his cronies are not going to give up their disrespectful opposition to our President," said Representative Garnet Coleman (Dist. 147).  “They may have lost the election, but our community knows Perry will keep fighting our President's efforts to improve our schools and health care. We need Sylvia Garcia to stand with us."

The significance of these endorsees is that they are all people who have worked alongside Carol Alvarado in the Texas House. Coleman's endorsement specifically suggests that no high profile African American is likely to get in. (Yes, I'm saying neither Jarvis Johnson nor RW Bray can be considered high-profile.)  Anybody else who enters the fray will be by definition second-tier, with only the hope of making the runoff on the basis of Alvarado and Garcia splitting the 70% the late Mario Gallegos just earned last Tuesday.

Roland Garcia is likewise a high-profile 'get', as he was Mayor Annise Parker's money man going back to her first bid for mayor in 2009. (Her last re-election bid is also on the 2013 calendar; there's plenty of time for Garcia to do both campaigns.)

Political consultant Robert Jara is probably the person running Garcia's campaign. Anybody would be an upgrade over Marc Campos, who is working for Alvarado. Fresh off his latest loss in the SBOE race just concluded, Campos is going to remind us every day about knowing how to win and getting things done... when he's not watching the Astros, that is.

Expect to see the Democratic establishment (i.e. plutocrats) line up behind Garcia. They all owe her, including everybody who had a fundraiser hosted by her in the past cycle. If you like the VIPs picking your next Senator, then there will be plenty of them offering their opinion.

Fortunately the people will be doing the voting. And in a low-turnout special and runoff, I just don't see Garcia's track record -- the only incumbent county commissioner in over a generation to lose -- as a plus with the voters (as opposed to the insiders).

So Garcia had better raise a pot full of money.

Update: The Chron's report lists Alvarado's supporters...

Alvarado's backers include state Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston; Controller Ron Green; former mayors Bill White and Lee Brown and Council members James Rodriguez, C.O. Bradford and Oliver Pennington. 

So the elites are choosing sides and squaring off after all. And this tidbit...

Former state representative and 2008 U.S. Senate candidate Rick Noriega confirmed Friday that he is considering entering the race but that it is too early for anyone to be declaring candidacy. It is too soon after Gallegos's death and unclear when a special election might even occur, he said.

"We have a lifelong interest in what happens in this community, so we're going to keep our powder dry," Noriega said when asked if he is running. "We're going to see how this process unfolds without making any commitment." 

Alvarado ran for and won the seat in 2008 that both Noreigas -- Rick and wife Melissa, term-limited from Houston City Council next year -- held in the Texas House for ten years. Melissa was appointed to the Texas Legislature while Rick served a tour of duty in Afghanistan in 2004 and 5.

Republicans deluded themselves in 2012

It wasn't cocky confidence, or braggadocio or even hubris. It wasn't just Dick Morris. Or Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh. It wasn't only the Khronically Konservative Kommenters predicting a landslide for Mitt Romney, or even the douchey right-wing blogs.

It wasn't Karl Rove by himself, even though he wanted to recreate Election 2000 by forcing Fox to walk back its call of Ohio for Obama, a little after 10 p.m. Tuesday night -- stalling Romney's concession for a couple of hours -- as he remained convinced that "tha math" had the Republican in the White House when reality did not.

It was also Romney himself and his running mate Paul Ryan, their campaign staff, and most curiously of all, their pollsters. They were all convinced they were going to win -- and by as large a margin as they lost.

Romney advisers are telling CBS News that there wasn't one person on the Romney campaign who saw the loss coming, and the GOP presidential candidate was "shellshocked" by the results. Here's what they have to say:

• "We went into the evening confident we had a good path to victory... I don't think there was one person who saw this coming." 

• "There's nothing worse than when you think you're going to win, and you don't... It was like a sucker punch." 

• Romney "was shellshocked." 

The CBS story indicates that the Romney team even bought into the "unskewed polls" theory, believing that the polls dramatically underestimated Republican turnout and overestimated Democratic enthusiasm.

This report comes after other indications that the Romney campaign was disregarding polling data. On election night, the Romney campaign told the press it didn't have a concession speech prepared. Karl Rove went against Fox News and questioned whether Ohio was going to Obama, contradicting overwhelming electoral analysis. And Wednesday, Romney's website briefly displayed a page indicating he had won the presidency before it was taken down. 

Well, that explains why they were campaigning in Pennsylvania on the day before Election Day, anyway.

This is much worse than Fox or Townhall.com or Newsmax or Michelle Malkin telling people Romney was going to win. When even the Republican nominee and their campaign believed the lies... well, this is mental illness territory, folks.

Republicans down to the last man and woman are suffering a self-inflicted information disadvantage, and while I will shed not even a crocodile tear over what it means for the GOP, the truth is (another pesky fact) that their delusional behavior is harming the nation.

And not just because it reveals the entire conservative "logic" trail: that if truth is inconvenient, invent your own. It explains why climate change isn't occurring -- or isn't influenced by our energy policies. It provides a rationale for rape being God's gift to women and that massive voter fraud is happening and tax cuts create jobs and pretty much everything else they believe to be true, which isn't.

Whose stock responses to things that are true that they don't like include "I don't believe it; it must be the liberal media". "These damned liberals are all brainwashed in college and just want free stuff".

How do you work together with a group of people who supply their own fallacies as arguments? Who refuse to accept science, reason and logic? Who become irritated, outraged, aggressively hostile when presented with clinical factual data?

Lithium? Haldol? Thorazine?

I'm completely serious.

We're about to have another one of those discussions about how much taxes are going to be and will government spend it on guns or butter. And the Republicans are already digging in their heels.

And because conservatives are continuing to act so irrationally, is the president going to have to compromise because they won't (sign of weakness and all). Is Obama going to have to agree once more to cuts in Medicare and Social Security in order to wrangle a tax increase out of John Boehner?

Shouldn't mentally challenged people -- particularly people contriving their own mental challenges -- be on their meds before they resume normal activities of daily living?

That's all I'm asking. And I'm not kidding.

Update: Booman with the "stupid or evil" question. He says 'both'. (See? I'm much nicer than him.) And Politico explains the epic fail of the ORCA vote-tracking project.

Update II: Thanks for all the feedback, everyone. David Frum: "Republicans have been fleeced, exploited, and lied to by a conservative entertainment complex"...



Brutally candid assessment, and from a Republican yet. Still, this might be too factual for conservatives to understand.

"Because the followers, the donors and the activists are so mistaken about the nature of the problems the country faces...just a simple question, and I went to Tea Party rallies and asked this question, have taxes gone up or down in recent years? They can't answer this question."

Alvarado declares for SD-6

An aggressive move, probably to deter Sylvia Garcia (or at least make her pause).

The morning after his posthumous victory party, the late state Sen. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston, got his dying wish when his choice to succeed him announced her intention to seek the seat he held since 1994.

State Rep. Carol Alvarado, who was re-elected to her House seat without opposition Tuesday, announced her candidacy for the Senate seat in an email Wednesday.

Gallegos posthumously won re-election against Republican challenger R.W. Bray. His victory means that Gov. Rick Perry will have to call a special election to determine who will represent the voters in Senate District 6.

Here's the link to my prior speculation.

Alvarado's campaign will be managed by Marc Campos, who is -- in a word -- shit. But Alvarado shines like the sun, and so does her future. She can overcome the selection of a lousy campaign operative. Especially if she can successfully claim the mantle of inheritance and inevitability.

Alvarado is expected to formally announce her candidacy at an event with members of Gallegos' family on Monday.

I don't think this move clears the field for Alvarado, but that is certainly their (her and Campos') intention. Garcia has been unemployed so long and is holding so many IOUs that I just don't think she sits it out. I also expect Jarvis Johnson to enter this contest, and there will likely be Green and Libertarian candidates as well, since it is an open primary.

No rest for the wicked.

Update: The African American TeaBagger who lost to the dead guy earlier this week is going to take another shot at the race. Hey, he got about 30 percent, and if Democrats split between two or more candidates, he could make the runoff. That's his story at least, and I'm sure he'll stick to it.

More Good, Bad, and Ugly

Good:

-- Harris County bond proposals all passed with flying colors. In the midst of the caterwauling about being broke, it's heartening to know that some conservative voters understand the need for progress.

-- Barack Obama appears to have carried Harris County by two votes. Out of almost 1.2 million cast. There are still provisionals and a few mailed stragglers to be counted, so the outcome of which party controls elections in two years is still to be determined. We're split right down the middle here, folks.

I suppose somebody might choose to blame their losing on one of the two third parties.

-- Texas House Dems gained seven seats in the Lege, with Craig Eiland holding on to retain his Galveston-area seat. Gene Wu is the brightest star in that freshman class of 2013.

-- County Attorney Vince Ryan turned back Crazy Bob Talton 51.5-48.5. Maybe that stripper donation business cost him. Sheriff Adrian Garcia's race was closer (53-45) than it should have been, and not because of Remington Alessi (2%). Dr. Diane Trautman beat the Republican incumbent to claim a win for Harris County School Trustee.

-- Harris County Democratic incumbent judges Al Bennett, Larry Weiman, Kyle Carter, RK Sandhill, Michael Gomez, Jaclanel McFarland, Mike Engelhart, Robert Schaeffer, Alexandra Smoots-Hogan, Ruben Guerrero, David Mendoza, and Maria Jackson were all returned to the bench. Elaine Palmer, who defeated Judge Steven Kirkland in the May primary, also was elected.

D incumbents Josefina Rendon, Shawna Reagin, Randy Roll, Herb Ritchie, Erica Graham, and Damon Crenshaw and challengers Tracy Good, Donna Roth, Vivian King, and Mack McInnis all fell short.

All of these contests were decided by 3 percentage points or less, mostly on the strength of straight ticket voting. But the undervotes also played a large part in the demise of the Dems who lost. Apparently 60-70,000 voters who did not vote straight party didn't make it down the ballot to their races.

-- The two unopposed (by any Democrat) Greens on the statewide ballot, Josh Wendel running for TRC and Charles Waterbury for SCOTX, earned 10% in Harris County and 8% across Texas. Other Greens in downballot races performed to this level in statehouse races: David Courtney (SD-17, no Dem running) got 9%, Chris Christal (SD-26, against Dem incumbent Leticia Van De Putte) got 6%. Matthew Britt, the only candidate running against the odious Phil King in HD-61, gathered 11%. Herb Gonzales ran against a Dem incumbent in HD-124 and picked up 15%. Closer to home, Art Browning got nearly 10% as the sole challenger to Allen Fletcher. And Henry Cooper ran hard against Jessica Farrar, getting 14%.

These are foundational numbers for the Texas Green Party, and can be built upon in the future.

-- That said, the Libertarian Party of Texas approximately doubled the numbers of the Greens across the state. They have a better idea about how to secure continuous ballot access, running someone everywhere. They pose a greater long-term threat to Texas Republicans than do Texas Democrats, in my humble O.

(This last barely qualifies as good, in case you were wondering.)

Bad:

As mentioned last night, Texas Democrats have at least ten points of ground to make up with the electorate statewide. Keith Hampton's 55-41 defeat to Sharon Keller is particularly bitter. The appeals court wins were concentrated in the San Antonio-based 4th district, and the winners had Latino surnames. The two Harris County CCA, First and Fourteenth, saw Democratic challengers like Nile Copeland and Barbara Gardner lose by 5 to 7 points (53-46). Justice is still red as a baboon's behind in the Lone Star State.

-- Jill Stein got three-tenths of one percent of the Texas electorate. Disappointing to say the least. Gary Johnson got almost four times as much and that's underperforming for him compared to the rest of the country. I'll have more to say about this in the coming days.

-- Ann Harris Bennett lost her race for tax assessor/collector by 2,400 votes out of over 1.1 million total. There were almost 49,000 undervotes in that tilt.

Ugly:

There's some, but I'll hold it until later.

Charles Kuffner's wrap from last night covered a lot of this ground, and South Texas Chisme excerpts the Brownsville Herald's executive summary graf.

More added to this post as responses and analysis trickle out today.

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

The Good:

-- After a contentious couple of hours -- during which Karl Rove attempted to get Fox News to rescind its call of Ohio and the subsequent re-election of President Obama -- Mitt Romney conceded just before midnight, Central time. The electoral college turned almost exactly as I projected two weeks ago. The only exception would be Florida, which is leaning to Obama.

-- In the US Senate: Chris Murphy, (CT), Sherrod Brown (OH), Joe Donnelly (IN), Elizabeth Warren (MA), Claire McCaskill (MO), Angus King (ME), Tim Kaine (VA), Tammy Baldwin (WI), and Martin Heinrich (NM) represent a significant progressive upgrade, and an upper chamber shaping up as 53-47 if Jon Tester in MT hangs on, a net gain of two for the Blue team.

As The Great Orange Satan summarized, over the past two election cycles...

7:32 PM PT: Teabaggers have now cost Republicans Senate seats in Missouri, Indiana, Colorado, Delaware, and Nevada.

Those five seats would've given the GOP the majority.

-- In the US House: Tammy Duckworth (IL), Alan Grayson (FL), Beto O'Rourke (TX-16), Pete Gallego (TX-23), and maybe even the fellow running against Michele Bachmann -- we'll see in the morning -- clean up some trash in the Congress. Update: Nope, but just barely.

-- Wendy Davis prevails in her state Senate race. In the Texas House, Joe Moody (HD-78), Mary Ann Perez (HD-144), Phillip Cortez (HD-117), and Abel Herrero (HD-34) represent Democratic flips.

The Bad:

-- The winning margin in statewide Texas races is still in the neighborhood of 55-41, with Romney and Ted Cruz performing slightly over than that and the Republican statewide judicials slightly under.

-- Ann Johnson came up well short of Sarah Davis in HD-134, 55-45.

The Ugly:

-- Randy Weber over Nick Lampson in CD-14, Steve Stockman over Max Martin in CD-36.

I'll have more tomorrow.

These toons close at 7 p.m. this evening

Obama 303, Romney 235 and last-minute details

-- The only changes from October 23 are giving the two remaining tossups, CO and NH, to the President. Here's what the map will look like later on this evening. This site has it the same. So does this one. Or you can go with Dick Morris' version. If you're on LSD.

-- Senate prognostications are gelling around a pickup of one to three seats for Democrats. Nobody is predicting the House changes hands. Republicans will feel justified in continuing obstruction if the President doesn't win the nationwide popular vote. They will obstruct anyway, naturally.

-- Outside of Harris County, the two Congressional races most worth following are Nick Lampson's and Pete Gallego's. I never mentioned them before because I focused on the county and statewides here, but if there's a small blue wave as in '08, they will be carried into office. Hope that happens; they'll both be outstanding Congressmen as compared with their counterparts.

Here again -- if anyone still needs some progressive bipartisan suggestions -- are the Brainy Endorsements, Part I for federal and statewide races, and Part II for the statehouse and the courthouse. Thanks to Neil Aquino at Texas Liberal for linking to them frequently as well. Update: Charles has a good aggregation of late breaking local news to note, none of which is duplicated here.

Speaking of Harris County... the news gets better. I am not attributing this source for confidentiality, but am excerpting his e-mail.

The numbers (from Harris County VAN data, of EV and mail ballots)  look quite good -- especially if our people voted Straight-D or at least went through the ballot and if VAN correctly scored people as Democrat vs. Republican.  The "hard" and "soft" Democrats accounted for 43.9%, the "hard" and "soft" Republicans accounted for 30.6%, and the "non-partisans" accounted for 25.5% of the early voting/mail-in ballots.  The Democrats outvoted the Republicans by nearly 100,000 and there are not enough Republican voters left in Harris County who haven't voted (~70,000) to make up the difference.

And if this news doesn't soothe you, then -- as the therapist suggested here -- practice your breathing exercises, draw a hot bath, have a Xanax and a glass of wine, and read Nate Silver again. Reality has a pronounced liberal bias.

-- I would like to see Jill Stein get to 3% in Texas and 5% nationally. That last number will qualify the GP's presidential nominee for federal matching funds in 2016, an important and historical milestone. Five percent for any statewide Green earns the party ballot access again in two years, and I think that's assured.

-- Also can't wait to see what effect Libertarians have on a few races locally, in Texas, and across the country. When the GOP melts down after their losses hit them, it could spell the end of the Republican Party as anything except a fringe far-right movement, and the Libertarians stand to benefit the most. Oh well, I suppose some moderate Republicans might become Democrats, too. A consolidation of conservative corporatists in the mushy middle.

The Texas iteration of Republicanism might be poised to exert itself nationally, given its strength here. Lone Star conservatives are under the impression they are doing everything right, and could decide to try to take over. That's a delicious recipe for electoral disaster, as the TeaBaggers -- from Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell in 2010 to Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin in 2012 -- have repeatedly demonstrated. Hope that happens, too.

-- Nick Anderson and Jeff Greenfield speak for me: "Hey undecided voters, how about you just sit this one out":

It’s a plea directed to those of you who are still uncertain about which way to vote. And it’s as simple as it is heartfelt: Stay home.

[...]

The overwhelmingly likely reason (you're still undecided) is this: You have the reasoning power of a baked potato.

OK, I grant that you may be of the small minority of concerned citizens who are genuinely torn and who have not yet evaluated the relative worth of health care reform notions, the vagaries of the tax proposals or the respective approaches to the increasing power of the renminbi.

But I wouldn’t bet a nickel on it.

The odds are you’ve just been too busy obsessing about the misfortunes of the Kardashians, or the quality of your ringtone, to spend any time thinking about who might be the better president.

Well, that’s your right. Unlike the Australians, we don’t compel people to vote, and it would likely be a First Amendment violation if we tried. A refusal to vote can be seen as a statement that the electoral system is rigged, meaningless or so thoroughly corrupt as to deserve contempt. (“I never vote,” one citizen said long ago. “It only encourages them.”)

Kris G, I'm looking at you.

Men and women in my lifetime have died fighting for the right to vote: people like James Chaney, Andrew Goodman and Michael Schwerner, who were murdered while registering black voters in Mississippi in 1964, and Viola Liuzzo, who was murdered by the Ku Klux Klan in 1965 during the Selma march for voting rights. In these days of early voting, we’ve seen people waiting in line for hours to exercise the franchise. Countless others, who have never had to fight for it, have spent real time either trying to decide how to cast their vote or donating their time to persuading others.

So if you’re one of those folks who have stayed utterly disengaged through all of this, do the honorable thing: Honor those for whom the vote really matters by staying home.

You’ll be doing yourself—and the country—a favor.

No shit.