This is a terrible idea. The ethics commission has a long and undistinguished history of being toothless. The system is set up to fail. The commission grabs headlines by levying huge fines ($100,000 in the case of Court of Criminal Appeals judge Sharon Keller, $29,000 against Supreme Court justice Nathan Hecht), but the dirty little secret is that individuals can stall payment by going to court and engaging in endless appeals, as Keller and Hecht have done. Those fines will never be paid.

The biggest problem with allowing the ethics commission to be the body of last resort in ethics issues is that the governor gets four of the eight appointments to the commission. This is not enough to dilute the governor’s influence–particularly this governor and his penchant for cronyism.

This idea should be buried deep in the file labeled “If it Ain’t Broke, Don’t Fix It.” The Public Integrity Unit has done a solid job of prosecuting offenders. Just ask Kino Flores.

The article, by Chris Gentilviso, says:

Almost a year removed from his 2012 presidential run, Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) is turning his attention to future elections.

Perry said on Monday that he is planning to “make an announcement” about “future political plans” in July 2013, according to a tweet from the Rio Grande Guardian.

Those plans may very well include a run for a fourth term as Texas governor. In late October, Perry’s chief legislative aide, Ken Armbrister, leaked that path, the Texas Tribune reported.

Back in August, Perry told NBC News that he would “absolutely” consider another run for the White House. If a 2016 campaign is in his cards, he’ll have at least one notable face in his corner. Anti-tax champion Grover Norquist expressed support for Perry as president on Wednesday.

Perry’s 2012 chances came to a halt in January after a disappointing finish in the South Carolina primary.

* * * *

Perry has stated that he would reveal his future plans in July 2013, but his timing is terrible. Right now, the whole political world is fixated on the fiscal cliff. Nobody is going to pay much attention to Perry when the real story is taking place in Congress. It still seems very far-fetched.

Why would Grover Norquist, who is in the political fight of his life, suddenly drop everything to endorse Rick Perry for president four years from now? It makes no sense.

Similarly, why would Perry seek out Norquist (or vice-versa) at a time when Perry ought to be thinking about the next legislative session instead of the White House? It can’t help Norquist, and it can’t help Perry.

State representative David Simpson (R-Longview) is a politician who is hard to categorize. He is totally independent and doesn’t care what others think of him. Nor does he shrink from conflict with the likes of TPPF and Michael Quinn Sullivan.

From the Longview News-Journal:

Longview’s state lawmaker said Tuesday that he is not in favor of a voucher system for public schools.

Republican Rep. David Simpson was questioned repeatedly by Longview school board members about his stance on a voucher system that could pull students from public schools and see them in private institutions.

Trustee Troy Simmons was the most pointed in his questioning during Monday night’s meeting.

“Would you and the group (of newly-elected legislators) publicly state that you aren’t in favor of vouchers and privatizing public education?” Simmons asked.

“I’m opposed to vouchers,” Simpson said to the school board for about the third time Monday night. “I’m in favor of public money going to public purposes.”

Vouchers are expected to be a key issue before state legislators during the 83rd legislative session that starts in January.

* * * *

Simpson would be a formidable opponent if a voucher bill were to reach the House floor. He is a tenacious adversary, as Senfronia Thompson learned last session, when he opposed her puppy-mill bill, and he has a following in the House, especially among younger members. Simpson also opposes tax credits for home schoolers, even though Simpson and his wife home school their own children.

Readers will no doubt remember the epic battles last session over Simpson’s bill to halt intrusive searches by TSA personnel at airports. It precipitated a showdown between Simpson and the U.S. attorney in San Antonio, who threatened to shut down air travel in Texas if Simpson tried to pass his bill. I thought the bill was looney, but today’s HuffingtonPost carries an AP story that begins, “The federal government is quietly removing full-body X-ray scanners from seven major airports and replacing them with a different type of machine that produces a cartoon-like outline instead of the naked images that have been compared to a virtual strip search.”

The appointment of Jeffrey S. Boyd is cronyism, pure and simple. Mr. Boyd has one of the skimpiest resumes I have ever seen for a high judicial appointment:

* Senior partner in a prominent law firm (Thompson & Knight)

* Chief of staff for the governor

* General counsel for the governor

* Deputy attorney general for Greg Abbott and John Cornyn

* President of the Robert W. Calvert American Inn of Court (a service organization)

* Member of the State Bar of Texas

* Judicial experience: none

* * * *

Texas has fourteen courts of appeals. These courts have distinguished, experienced judges. Surely Governor Perry could have filled the vacancy on the Supreme Court with a sitting judge who is worthy of elevation to Texas’s highest court.

This is not the first time Perry has put a staffer on the Court. He appointed his former general counsel, David Medina, to the Court, but he was defeated for reelection in the Republican primary. Perry’s appointees do not have a high survival rate.

I just read a review on the Huffington Post of David Frum’s new ebook, titled “Why Romney Lost (And What the GOP Can Do About It.)” A lot of Republicans don’t care for Mr. Frum, who was a speechwriter for George W. Bush, and regard him as an apostate at best. But I have found a lot to like in his previous books, such as “Dead Right,” because I would like to see the Republican party move closer to the center. But I’m not sanguine about the prospect.

One of the most trenchant passages in Frum’s book is in the conclusion, cited by the reviewer:

After observing that the current conservative ideology is completely foreign to the next generation of Americans (and over half of those under 18 are non-white) Frum presents a strong note of caution: “To be a patriot is to love your country as it is. Those who seem to despise half of America will never be trusted to govern any of it. Those who cherish only the country’s past will not be entrusted with its future.”

This is exactly right. But Texas’s leaders will continue to shut their eyes and ears to such warnings.

Tagged: david frum

When the state’s leaders decide to implement drug testing of the state’s poorest and most vulnerable citizens–those who are trying to get by on unemployment and/or welfare benefits–they might as well hang a sign in the rotunda that says “OUT OF IDEAS.” We have so many problems in this state, and this is what Rick Perry and David Dewhurst come up with? Pathetic. It might have occurred to Dewhurst that his costly initiative for steroid testing was a complete flop: 51,635 tests done over the last 2½ years, which resulted in 21 positive tests, 2 unresolved, and 139 not passing for procedure violations, such as unexcused absences. Last spring, all 3,308 tests were clean.

Florida’s experience with drug testing should end the discussion over whether this policy makes sense. From the New York Times:

Ushered in amid promises that it would save taxpayers money and deter drug users, a Florida law requiring drug tests for people who seek welfare benefits resulted in no direct savings, snared few drug users and had no effect on the number of applications, according to recently released state data.

The numbers from Florida: 108 of 4,086 applicants failed the drug test, or 2.6%.

When the same proposal came up in Colorado, according to the Denver Post, an analysis by the non-partisan Colorado legislative council found that when costs and savings were accounted for, the policy change would have added $219,520 to Colorado’s budget, and it would have forced counties to spend $482,600. What did lawmakers in Colorado do? They rejected the proposal.

If the drug-testing proposal becomes law in Texas, it will almost certainly be challenged in court, as it has been in other states, adding to the millions of dollars Texas has spent on litigation. But the biggest problem with drug testing is that the real victims are not the applicants who fail the test, but their children, who will lose the meager benefits the state provides.

PoliticalWire.com reports:

Despite a terrible showing on Election Day, Karl Rove believes that American Crossroads and its more secretive issue-advocacy arm, Crossroads GPS — which allows donors to remain anonymous — are here to stay, the Washington Post reports.

“Rove is pondering new missions for Crossroads to address weaknesses laid bare by the GOP’s back-to-back failures to win the White House and the fact that the party fell short when expected to win back the Senate.”

“Where until now it battled only in general elections and against Democrats, Crossroads is considering whether to start picking sides in Republican primaries. The idea would be to boost the candidate it deems most electable and avoid nominating the kind of flawed and extreme ones who cost the party what should otherwise have been easy Senate wins in Florida, Missouri and Indiana.”

* * * *

Does this mean that Karl is going to take on the tea party? I have two words of advice for him: “David Dewhurst.” If anyone was the “most electable” candidate in a race, it was Dewhurst. Rove can’t change the basic dynamic of his party, which is that the energy in today’s GOP lies with the extremists. The Republican party that elected George W. Bush president twice no longer exists. The establishment doesn’t control the Republican party. Rove should take a long look at the video of himself demanding that Fox News reverse its call that Obama won Ohio and contemplate whether his time as a political genius has passed.

It may turn out to be the passage of the Pre K 4 SA referendum championed by Julian Castro in San Antonio. We may look back on that in future years (and not too future, say 2018) and realize that it was the essential first step for a future governor or senator. Full confession: I wrote that I thought Castro was taking too big a risk too early in his career, but fortune favors the bold in politics.

Democratic legislative candidates lost most of their races on election night, but there were two notable exceptions. One was Wendy Davis’s victory over Mark Shelton in the race for a Tarrant County Senate seat. With 228 of 349 precincts reporting, and only 6 outstanding, Davis had an insurmountable lead. The other bright spot for Democrats was that Galveston state representative Craig Eiland won his reelection race. And that is the extent of the good news.

The results were reminiscent of 2010, when Democrats lost every Texas House race as Republicans claimed a super-majority of the lower House. Still, Davis’s victory should temper Republicans’ enthusiasm at their near-sweep. She is precisely the kind of candidate who mirrors the Obama constituency, someone who can put together a coalition that goes outside the boundaries of race and color and party — the type of candidate, in other words, who represents the changing face of Texas (and America). Her victory propels her to prominence as one of the state’s leading Democrats. She is a rare politician who has crossover appeal to Republicans and independents. She defeated Shelton despite his support from the deep pockets of Texans for Lawsuit Reform.

Davis was not the only election night winner who represents the changing face of Texas. There was also Ted Cruz who is poised to become … what, exactly? That’s the question. Tea party zealot? Or another symbol of that “changing face?” I would also add to this list Pete Gallego, who won a grueling battle to represent Texas’s 23rd congressional district, and Julian and Joaquin Castro. Davis…Cruz…Gallego, the Castro twins: suddenly Rick Perry seems light years away from where America, and Texas, is headed.

One thing that is all but certain to emerge from this night will be a different political status for Texas. If Romney wins, Texans will be going off to Washington to join the government — you know, the one they love to hate. (Already there are rumors of KBH for Secretary of Transportation. Straus might If Obama wins, Texas will be completely isolated. You can forget the XL pipeline. We will get absolutely nothing from the Obama administration. Our politics has gone so far to the right that we may be the most extreme state in the country, rivaling South Carolina and Alabama. How did that happen? We are a big state, a rich state, a cosmopolitan state, and yet our politics is antedeluvial. Our big cities are as sophisticated as California’s. How did Texas politics fall into the hands of folks who see no use to government at all?

It’s 8:30 and the presidency is slipping away from Romney. Florida and Virginia are still up for grabs, but the networks have called Pennsylvania for Obama, Wisconsin for Obama, and Michigan for Obama.

One of the more interesting analyses of the evening made concerning the role in Romney’s problems played, however unwittingly, by our own Rick Perry. The point was made (during a Republican debate) that Romney “had no heart” because he opposed the Dream Act.) Romney reacted by taking a hard right turn on immigration, the key issue for Latinos, a stance he continued to take for the rest of the campaign Perry effectively cut Romney off from one of the biggest constituencies that was up for grabs.  Obama won the Latino vote by 75-25 (something that was mentioned early in the evening).

The most telling comment of the evening was made by MSNBC’s Chuck Todd. He said that the Republicans didn’t respond to the changing face of the American electorate. That has been true in Texas for many years, and it hasn’t made any noticeable difference in the state’s politics. But when you get outside of Texas and have to deal with America, how are Texas politicians like Rick Perry going to be able to craft a message for the increasingly diverse country that is the United States of America. As I said above, Texas is increasingly out of step from the rest of the country, and we will continue to be until the Texas Republican party accepts the demographic reality that is Texas — and America — today. Much as Perry would love to try, you can’t build a wall around Texas.

Romney was unable to consolidate his advantage from the first debate. He had no strategy for getting to 270. The Romney campaign couldn’t make up its mind which states they should contest and which states they should bypass. They went into Michigan and then went out. They went into Pennsylvania and then went out. They even tried Minnesota, which has been a Democratic state since Hubert Humphrey was in diapers. They couldn’t win Wisconsin, the home state of the vice-presidential nominee. Ryan turned out to be a weak choice; picking House members to be a heartbeat away from the presidency is a big risk. (Goldwater did it in 1964.)

Another odd event in this campaign was the tendency of Republicans to believe that the polls were biased against Mitt Romney. In particular, there was a weird Republican  attack on Nate Silver’s 538 column in the New York Times. I was surprised that some of the smartest people I know believed Romney would win; one offered to bet me $100. There is a simple rule about polls: They are almost always right. You can’t make a living, or run a campaign, by being a poll denyer. Polls are not rocket science. You add up the responses and you get a result, and if everything else is kosher, that’s all you need to do. The the Republicans who emailed me about how Romney was going to win talked about enthusiasm, they talked about yard signs, they talked about being in Cleveland to rally for Romney, they talked about everything but the polls that said they were losing in the swing states. You can’t get rich betting against the House, and Nate Silver was the house in this election. The Obama campaign was just plain better, and had a better sense of strategy, than the Romney campaign.