The Week in Review
This post has been revised since its initial publication.
1. The Tom Schieffer candidacy.
Patricia Kilday Hart and I interviewed Tom Schieffer about his race for the Democratic nomination governor. Interestingly, Schieffer asked to go off the record before the interview to discuss the events that led to his being named one of the Ten Worst legislators in 1975. That was my first year to participate in the writing of the story, along with my then-colleague, Griffin Smith. The writeup was one of the toughest that we have ever written. It was full of anonymous quotes, which we seldom use today. Nowadays, the writeups are largely based on the public record. Schieffer was involved in one of the session’s biggest fights, an effort to authorize Texas’s first presidential primary in order to aid U.S. Senator Lloyd Bentsen’s bid for the Democratic nomination for president in 1976. The Texas Democratic party in that era was split into liberal and conservative wings, and Schieffer was a conservative Democrat. The liberals were fighting him hard all the way, including my former mentor, Babe Schwartz, and I am sure that that influenced the writeup. The ink was hardly dry on the issue before I began to have second thoughts about whether Schieffer really deserved being on the Worst list. The bill did pass, and Texas did have its first primary–not that it helped Bentsen, who was overwhelmed in his home state by Jimmy Carter.
Schieffer has gone on to have a successful career as an oil and gas operator, as president of the Texas Rangers baseball team, and as ambassador to Australia and Japan in the George W. Bush administration. He should be considered a legitimate candidate for governor. The Ten Worst article was 34 years ago. There are lot of obstacles in the path of a Schieffer candidacy, but that article shouldn’t be one of them. The main obstacles, of course, are Schieffer’s association with Bush and his well motivated, but ultimately self-defeating, unwillingness to distance himself from his friend and former Rangers’ business partner; his reluctance as a candidate, including the question of whether he will put his own money into the campaign; and–how do I put this?–a question of whether he has a feel for contemporary Texas politics. I had the feeling, talking to him, that he has one foot in the present and one foot in the seventies, when conservative Democrats ran the state. He still talks about Lloyd Bentsen and John Connally. Connally and Bentsen and Hobby were giants in their day, and they ran things a heck of a lot better than the Republicans have, but Schieffer so far seems like he is just putting his toes in the water. He needs to jump in.
2. The transportation stimulus package.
Transportation is one area where the stimulus package can produce real jobs and have real economic benefits. So why is the amount so small–just $2.5 billion overall, and $1.2 billion in the first installment? One of the reasons is that Obama wants to invest in high-speed rail rather than roads. I think this is a mistake.
I’d like to see more of the money go to highways and less to high-speed rail. High-speed rail requires total grade separation. For rural Texas, it will make the Trans-Texas Corridor battle look like a walk in the park. I ran some numbers back in the early nineties, when the idea of a bullet train was first floated, and to break even on the project’s then $6 billion cost, trains had to run 97% full between Houston and Dallas 24 hours a day. Like it or not, the most efficient method of getting people from point A to point B is one lane of freeway. In an hour, it carries six times the number of people as rail, and the cost is approximately the same.
Politically, the most important aspect of the transportation funding battle was the continuing hostility between TxDOT and the Legislature. TxDOT froze lawmakers out of the discussion of which projects should be funded, with the result that 70% of the money will go to toll roads. Legislators did not cover themselves with glory either, as some took the opportunity to lobby for projects in their districts. The level of mistrust of TxDOT is as high as it has ever been–thanks to Commissioner Ted Houghton, who decided to do a little bomb-throwing of his own at the March 5 meeting of the Texas Highway Commission, calling one of the witnesses and the organization he represents “idiots.” Senator Hegar fired off a letter to Houghton, which included the following observations:
* I am … compelled to strongly denounce your comments to Mr. Hank Gilbert at the … meeting as completely out of line and wholly unacceptable.
* Regardless of the criticism you may have received over the last few years in your duties as a commissioner and regardless of your thoughts about Mr. Gilbert or the group he represents, he is a Texas taxpayer, and it is extremely inconsiderate for you to dismiss him and the organization he represents as “idiots.” Anyone who holds the prestigious position of Texas transportation commissioner must take both the good and the bad that comes with that position and treat our fellow citrizens with respect; the same respect that he paid you in politely expressing his thoughts and opinions.
* [I]ncidents like this one only underscore the problems of the past and retard future progress. They certainly do nothing to change the perception of many of my legislative colleagues that TxDOT remains arrogant and unresponsive to the people it serves….
Lots of fodder here for the coming battle over TxDOT sunset.
3. Republicans mobilize for the Voter I.D. bill.
Rosemary Edwards, chair of the Travis County Republican party, sent an e-mail to Central Texas Republicans urging a show of strength to pack the Senate gallery on Tuesday to demonstrate their support for the Voter I.D. bill. In an exhortation reminiscent of Mack Brown’s “Come early. Be Loud. Wear orange,” Edwards urges her fellow Republicans: “Show up on the south side of the Capitol at 7:45am on Tuesday. Wear RED!!”
The College Republicans posted Edwards’ e-mail on their Web site and added this commentary:
By supporting this bill, we can finally put an end to the days of dirty Democratic politics that stretches from the days of LBJ all the way to audacious activities of ACORN. We now have a legitimate opportunity to make sure that our most sacred of rights is preserved only for our citizens.
“Only for our citizens.” Do they really think that illegal aliens are voting? That people who are in this country illegally would risk deportation (not to mention jail time) for voter fraud? They don’t want anything to do with official government functions. This is why Voter I.D. is a solution in search of a problem.
4. The Texas Public Policy Foundation release aimed at Dewhurst and Straus.
Here is the gist of the release from March 6:
The Texas Public Policy Foundation asked Texas Lt. Governor David Dewhurst and Texas House Speaker Joe Straus to stop further consideration of tax increases that could weaken an already shaky state economy.
“With Texas businesses and families facing such economic stress, our state government needs to send a clear message that it understands their plight and will not add to their financial burdens,” wrote Justin Keener, the Foundation’s Vice President of Policy and Communications, in the attached letter to the two leaders. “We must not send any signal to the markets, businesses, or public that Texas is even thinking about raising taxes.”
Keener cited the local option transportation tax proposals – specifically SB 855 by Sen. John Carona (R-Dallas), which Carona told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram on February 25th would soon be heard in his Transportation and Homeland Security committee – as prime examples of negative signals that could hinder Texas’ economic recovery.
I agree with TPPF that a general tax increase would not be wise in this economic climate. But the Carona bill is not a general tax increase that would be foisted on the people of Texas. It is a proposal for a local option gasoline tax of 10 cents a gallon in the Dallas-Fort Worth region that would have to be approved by the public, and would be for the sole purpose of constructing transportation projects that would include rail and roadways. Because mobility is an important condition for economic growth, the tax would have a corresponding economic benefit that would offset the effects of a gasoline tax increase. I don’t agree with everything in the bill, by a long shot. A $60 fee for registering vehicles brought into the region from another state or country seems onerous to me, and a “new resident roadway impact fee” of $250 sounds downright un-American to me. Nevertheless, I see nothing wrong with giving the Metroplex the ability to chart their own future. As I have written above, I don’t think that heavy rail projects make sense–they just don’t move enough people to justify the cost– but if Metroplex voters are willing to pay for them, I don’t see why it is any of TPPF’s business.
I do have concerns that the TPPF letter, addressed as it is to Dewhurst and Straus, appears to be an effort to enforce an ideological opposition to new taxes generally, even those that are local option and arguably have a net positive longterm impact on the regional economy. It’s one thing for the Foundation to make its points, which it does very well; it’s quite another to call upon Dewhurst and Straus to oppose a specific piece of legislation.
5. Museums ad Nauseum
Abby Rapoport, our intrepid intern, filed this report on the House Appropriations subcommittee on Education:
Gone are the days of Tom Craddick and special items doled out as gifts, at least if Education Subcommittee chair Scott Hochberg has his way. As representatives from university after university paraded in front of the subcommittee on Thursday, each was asked which of the existing special items they would you swap out for new requests?
Hochberg ran the committee with a mixture of humor and frankness about economic realities. “There are few bad ideas in the Appropriations bill, but
it’s our job to prioritize,” he said. “There’s only so much cash.”
The committee commended those schools with fewer special items while questioning those with large requests. Texas A&M International requested startup funds for a Ph.D program that was already up and running. Texas Tech also heard a bit of an earful when Hochberg saw its 2 million dollar museum request. “They have so many museums that they don’t even itemize them!” Hochberg burst out. Senator Robert Duncan has been a busy man. In addition to a central museum, Tech maintains a ranching heritage center, a Lubbock lake landmark site, an International Cultural Center, and a Vietnam Research Center and archives. Oh, and a Center for Financial Responsibility, with semester credit hours offered for a course in how students can manage their money.
Hochberg gave a verbal “gold star” to the nursing program at Texas State University-San Marcos, for using startup money to actually start the program and not asking for more startup funding.
Museums quickly became a running joke on the committee as one school after another requested them as special items. Hochberg was eager to explain, “This subcommittee is second to none in its love of museums,” he said. But don’t expect it to fund them.
* * * *
Hmm. Abby’s report really captures the flavor of the hearing. But I bet a few special items find their way into the Appropriations bill somehow. They always do — pb
Tagged: john corona, robert duncan, scott hochberg, ted houghton, Texas governor, texas public policy foundation, Tom Schieffer, trans-texas corridor, txdot, voter ID.
For the Record says:
The debate over Voter I.D. legislation will set the tone in the Texas Senate for the rest of the session. Put your mask on. The partisan poison is about to be released.
Reply »
Emptyk says:
I am a dittohead for you Pablo,except one comment about the high speed rail thing. High Speed Rail is a real possibility in locations that are more densely populated and have effective local mass transit. Texas is getting shorted for what our needs are, which might include expanded commuter rail service. High Speed Rail is a novelty in Texas, not a useful alternative.
Tom Schieffer answered questions decently enough in his announcement but his statement managed to avoid talking about issues that are important to Democrats in any meaningful way. I suspect that Schieffer is one of those decent men who want a responsible and efficient government. Unfortunately he expresses that in a way that conveys that he wants to party like its 1973 all over again.
Voter ID will be its own reward to Republican legislators. Observe this week how happily the Republican Senators step up to their partisan obligations. So far they have approached this issue with all the joy and enthusiasm of 10 year olds lining up for a flu shot.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
“This is why Voter I.D. is a solution in search of a problem.”
A clever retort, but a weak rationale for opposing Voter ID. The problem of voting irregularities is nothing new. As mentioned in the post above, Texas has not been immune to such problems in the past, especially when the political bosses in the Valley rounded up tainted votes for LBJ during his era. We know that such shenanigans have commonly occured in other states in this country. You think that it will never happen here? We should get ahead of this now before real damage is done .
Reply »
Floozikins Reply:
March 8th, 2009 at 7:48 pm
Another Republican laments about voter irregularities yet conveniently forgets to mention how they stole the election in 2000. By the way, real damage has already been done, numb nuts.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 8:04 am
Republicans did not steal the 2000 election. It wasn’t the Republicans who asked for a recount in just three Florida counties instead of a statewide recount. It was the Gore campaign. Furthermore, the media count of the ballots, a year after the election, showed Bush won by some 500+ votes.
Reply »
Floozikins Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 8:15 am
We are all aware of where the Gore campaign went wrong, starting with their VP pick.
VisitDallas!HomeofAmerica'sWorstPresident Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 8:20 am
That was the way the Florida election law was setup, recounts were requested by county. Geez! how do you get this job. Competence seems small in the amalgam.
Buck says:
Deft phrasing about Schieffer’s time-warp approach.
He has yet to show minority support, although I imagine the Arlington Democrats who carried the city for Obama would help him a lot.
Reply »
Colonel Fannin says:
Of course illegal aliens and non-citizens vote in American elections diluting the votes of citizens and this was in large part the intention of the democrats who were behind motor voter laws. I agree that illegals are unlikely to vote on their own but groups like ACORN routinely regrester non-citizens and then drive them to the polls telling them it is their duty and responsibility to vote.
A number of years ago, I recall being in line at a DMV in the days when DMVs routinely provided drivers licenses to non-citizens. I was working in Washington DC at the time and was registering a car at the very DMV in Virginia that subsequently provided fake driver’s licenses to four of the 9-11 terrorists. A gentleman in front of me in line offered his Mexican passport as identification to the officer at the check-in counter. The officer gave him the paperwork for his license and then also directed him to the voter registration counter as well. I asked the officer why he had directed a man who was obviously a Mexican national to the voter registration desk and he responded that it was not his role to make that determination.
I watched the gentleman register to vote and later asked him if he was a US citizen and if not, did he realize it was illegal for him to vote. He responded that he wasn’t sure what he was supposed to do but had been directed to the desk by the officer and thought he was required to register to vote. Now I can’t be sure he subsequently voted in an election but he was very obviously illegally registered and at the direction of a uniformed officer. You can’t make this stuff up.
Reply »
Floozikins Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 6:50 am
Democrats have a bottom-up approach to stealing elections while Republicans exercise top-down approach to rigging them.
Reply »
VisitDallas!HomeOfAmericasWorstPresident says:
High speed rail a boondoggle? Is that the same opinion bucket you found your forceful proselytizing for W? How that’d work out for America?
Yea, I thought so. Your only talent seems to be getting people to pay you to put out opinions that are – um – um – I’m thinking – um – oh yea, immiserating to the rest of us.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 12:38 am
I don’t respond to people who think that “immiserating” is a word.
Reply »
VisitDallas!HomeofAmerica'sWorstPresident Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 8:21 am
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/immiserating
Need other references? But by all means, take your non response one step further up the chain. Please, for the sake of the children.
Reply »
VisitDallas!HomeofAmerica'sWorstPresident Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Here are some other folks who are confused:
Not surprisingly, the ETC Group’s worries in this connection are chiefly egalitarian, specifically that nanotechnology will increase the power of corporations and governments while further immiserating the poor.
The smaller the better: the limitless promise of nanotechnology–and … by Bailey, Ronald / Reason
6) Karl Marx, calling Henry Carey “the only important North American economist,” condemned him for criticizing the destruction of the Indian textile industry by Britain (Marx thought the annihilation of national industries and the formation of a single global market, by immiserating workers everywhere, would hasten the worldwide socialist revolution).
The Op-Ed history of America by Lind, Michael / The National Interest
How does his pledge to end “welfare as we know it” depart from the cheap-shot rhetoric of every small-town pol who wants to shave taxes by further immiserating the poor?
Unappreciative by Knoll, Erwin / The Progressive
Reply »
El Kabong says:
Thinking about Houghton’s comments:
1. I heard what he said on the radio, and it wasn’t “idiot.”
2. Did Sen. Hegar ask Leo Berman write a scathing letter to Leo Berman for his comments? And if so, did he cc the press corps?
Reply »
Lee Nichols Reply:
March 8th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
Yes, I was pretty sure he called Gilbert and his group “bigots.” The exchange dealt with foreign-owned toll roads, and Houghton threw in somethng else about “our friends across the Rio Grande.”
Reply »
Susan Garry Reply:
March 8th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Here is the link to all of Hank’s testimony. Sounds like “bigot” to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8HtyJXsNcY
Reply »
Lee Nichols Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 8:24 am
Actually, that video makes it much clearer than my recording of it – he clearly said “bigots.”
Harry Doghiney says:
You think that it will never happen here? We should get ahead of this now before real damage is done.
Voter ID is about extending Republican dominance at the Texas ballot box for another two or four years. That’s all it will ever be about. The rest is noise.
Reply »
jim says:
First things first: Please do us the small favor (and it pains me to have to even ask this of your highness) of citing your source for this assertion: “In an hour, it carries six times the number of people as rail, and the cost is approximately the same.”
On another point: you’re saying that there’s not enough money for new roads BECAUSE there’s money in the stimulus for rail? I don’t necessarily see the connection nor do I see a contradiction between funding new roads and new high-speed rail, something sorely needed in parts of the U.S. outside of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic.
I don’t think you understand how the rail allocations work either. The Sec. of Transportation has been given the authority to disperse the funds to regions with designated high-speed rail corridors.
From the conference report: “The conferees have provided the Secretary flexibility in allocating resources between the programs to advance the goal of deploying intercity high speed rail systems in the United States.”
You’re kind of a dinosaur aren’t you? You’ve got some back-of-the-envelope calculations you did back in the 90s, no doubt in consultation with the same tired road warriors who are bitching and moaning about funding mass transit today. That’s, sadly, your sole evidence that HSR would be a “boondoggle.”
Or are you just channeling Bobby Jindal and the other retrograde GOPers? Jindal kicked this whole anti-HSR rail thing off with his speech a couple weeks back when he lied about that rail line between Disneyland and Las Vegas.
The U.S. – and needless to say, Texas – is way behind in figuring out ways to rapidly move people from city to city efficiently that doesn’t involve our pitiful airline industry. Japan and Europe are decades ahead of us in building very high-speed trains that have proven cost-effective, efficient, and popular. What you want is just more of the same: more cars, more highways, more congestion, more smog, more greenhouse gasses, more sprawl.
Reply »
pollabear says:
i just saw Tom Scheiffer at a Democratic reception and he mentioned the “failed policies of the last 8 years”. He didn’t elaborate or mention Bush, mostly CHIPs and Perry.
Reply »
Floozikins Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 6:51 am
CHIP.
Reply »
nacholibre says:
Paul,
You asked if illegals would risk deportation on the issue of voting.
The emphasis is illegals. They are already doing something illegal, so adding voting to their list isn’t a big deal. And they stand to gain so much for voting because the D’s now depend on their votes and in return pass laws to aide and protect them. I mean, a cop, whose job is to arrest people that dont follow the law, can’t even ask them if they are here legally — something the D’s worked out to gain illegal votes.
And the illegals are out voting themselves money from the treasury, benefits and protection. So it’s not like there is really nothing in it for them.
To wrap up, the illegals know we don’t really deport. It’s rare. In fact, we let them march down our streets across the US two years ago and no one did a thing. This country is screwed.
Reply »
Floozikins Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 6:52 am
We should return the money we make off them from state and local taxes.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
“Another Republican laments about voter irregularities yet conveniently forgets to mention how they stole the election in 2000.”
Looks like the state hospital let someone out a little too early.
“Voter ID is about extending Republican dominance at the Texas ballot box for another two or four years. That’s all it will ever be about. The rest is noise.”
I see. It might be noise, but it’s constitutional, common sense noise. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled constitutional laws designed to ensure that everyone who votes is an eligible voter.
Reply »
Floozikins Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 6:56 am
Is that the same U.S. Supreme Court that ruled to stop the vote recount in Florida? I think so. Numb nuts.
Reply »
John says:
Whether Tom Schieffer emerges as a serious contender for the Democratic nomination remains to be seen. Much of it depends on whether he can attract the traditional party base, much of depends on his retail political skills, much of depends on his ability to adapt to 21st century campaigning and much of depends on whether another credible candidate emerges.
But the notion that the seriousness of his candidacy depends on his willingness to commit his own money to the race is nuts. Ann Richards staked none of her own dough. Neither did George W. Bush. Neither did Rick Perry. Tony Sanchez did, to disasterous results. David Dewhurst did to better results, but in a down-ballot race when all eyes were focused elsewhere.
Reply »
Roger Baker says:
I was at the TxDOT hearing on the stimulus package and got to see the well-organized road lobby, like the AGC, at work as usual.
Here are some points I made toward the end of the meeting, when ordinary citizens opposed to the TxDOT proposals finally got to speak:
We’re in the midst of severe global economic crisis. Detroit is going broke which means many parts suppliers, which are not getting bailed out like GM, are going broke. Which means the cost of driving will no doubt increase sharply, no matter what.
Moreover, world oil production has probably peaked forever, meaning that TxDOT’s fuel revenue has likely peaked too, unless we tax it a lot more. The era of private vehicle domination is passing due to deteriorating economics.
These factors will tend to decrease toll road revenues, making them super-risky long term investments. If we want to spend money on smart stuff, lets spend it on transit inside Texas cities. Overall travel on Texas roads is now stagnant, according to the FHWA data, whereas transit use is growing rapidly. Lots of urban Texans would love to break their car addiction in order to save money in times like these if they had the choice.
Speculative suburban toll roads should rank up there with sub-prime loans as risky investments, almost certain to default on their long range (40 year) bond debt. Much like Tony Sanchez’s Camino Columbia toll road defaulted and had to be bailed out by TxDOT back when Bush was Governor.
The 290 E/183 toll road interchange in Austin is a good example of a risky toll road that TxDOT wants to fund with the stimulus funds. TxDOT can use stimulus money to get one end of this toll road started, but nobody knows how get the money to finish it.
In fact, travel demand on the existing 290 E highway has been flat for several years. With current economic trends, demand is as likely as not to keep on shrinking. The CTRMA refuses to make the traffic and revenue studies on 290 E road public. Why?
We do know that the 290 E bonds are considered too costly to insure by the CTRMA, so the road lobby is trying to tie the 290E finances onto another toll road, 183-A. But in fact,183-A may be in trouble too. I have written about the politics and economics of the latter 183-A toll road on The Rag Blog:
http://theragblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/roger-baker-toll-road-183-the-economics.html
Reply »
Anonymous says:
(Ah, yes, the peak oil argument…. the new favorite of conspiracy theorists.)
Bottom line, the Legislature shouldn’t pick the stimulus projects, just like they didn’t pick the projects funded from the mobility fund, Prop 14 and Fund 6. When legislators start picking projects, we start building projects like the Bridge to Nowhere.
Reply »
Spiro Eagleton says:
What was the deal with a dumb goofy Tweety/Twitter bird walking all over the capitol on Friday afternoon? It cracked me up. Did any of you see it? Here’s the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvJVbQ-tnYo
Reply »
BeatTheChip says:
For the record, the federal Real ID is NOT voter ID or immigration. Although recently, the two ideas have been used to confuse those at the legislature. If Texas can’t figure out how to handle both immigration & their own elections without federal hand holding, we can just put a ring in our nose now and forget about civil liberty. Why? Because DHS wants to slip surveillance technologies in your licenses. Afterward not much in your life, that your currently take for granted, will be the same.
Reply »
Don Gladden's Ghost says:
Paul – Tom Schieffer supported a redistricting plan for Tarrant County that diluted minority voting rights and opposed the winning effort that paved the way for minority representation in Tarrant County. Schieffer’s opposition to the Gladden Plan for Tarrant County makes his Ten Worst designation richly deserved. It is something fellow Dmeocrats should hold him accountable for.
As far as your question about non-citizens voting in Texas elections, I urge you to travel to El Paso. The senior housing complexes on the East side (especially the senior high rise) are brimming with non-english speaking residents who are registered to vote and regularly cast ballots in Texas elections. They will tell you quite candidly they are from Juarez or other parts of Mexico.
Some are here legally, some are not. But they are not U.S. Citizens and they vote in our elections. I have canvassed them and talked to them. I am not blaming them or condemning them -most are very or and/or are illiterate and have no idea that what they are doing is illegal. They have been manipulated by those seeking local office.
It in naive to think this is not occurring. Democrats who will not admit this are either lying to themselves or to the public.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 10:18 am
Both the federal and state governments have mounted major efforts to prosecute voter fraud. The feds spent three years and prosecuted a handful of cases nationwide. Abbott has prosecuted 22 cases. Many of these were hypertechnical violations (the failure to put a return name and address on an envelope).
I am not surprised that senior housing complexes have people who vote illegally. This probably occurs not by people who vote in person but through mail-in ballots. This is a common type of voter fraud. There is no statistical evidence that illegal in-person voting — the practice that Voter I.D. seeks to prevent — is a widespread practice anywhere.
Reply »
Jeff Crosby says:
Republicans will rue the day they jammed through this Voter Denial bill.
They think they’re merely knocking down the Hispanic and African-American vote. In fact, they’re going to prevent a lot elderly, Anglo women — who don’t have driver’s licenses — from voting.
Wrath will rain down on the R’s, especially in rural areas.
Reply »
Tim says:
Yeah, one lane of highway is most efficient. Especially once gas hits $10/gallon. We’ll only need one lane.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Oh Jeff please, that’s the trouble with you Democrats.
Once again this shows you the scare tactics that the Democrat Hacks will go to. Republicans have said they will have no trouble exempting the eldererly from this bill.
But Crfosby and oterh Democrat hacks have this vision of rural elderly women being like Ma Joad from the Grapes of Wrath – or Ma Kettle.
The fact is that rural white elderly women DO have drivers licenses or state issued ID’s and they DO support this law. They have little fear of getting an ID card if they don’t have one.
This is why rural residents have left the Democratic Party in droves – and just this decade. In rural County after rural county, Gore in 2000 outperformed Obama in 2008, often by 10 to 15 points. This is amazing considering all the baggage McCain carried. And in most of these counties, turnout was up, not down.
The media loves to talk about the Republican ‘minority problem’ but fails to acknowledge the Democrat Party’s rural anglo problem.
Wrath? You Democrats are already experiencing it in rural Texas.
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
That’s because Obama is black. And the GOP/RPT made sure that their more marginal & non-traditional voters didn’t forget it. We’ve all seen the mail.
You won’t have a black man with an African name on top of the ballot in 2010. We’ll see how well your turnout machine works then.
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 2:15 pm
And as we all saw, you can touting your rural margins looks pretty silly when the top of your ballot lost 50,000 from 2004, and downballot statewides were down to only about 4 million votes – a 9% drop from McCain’s numbers. While Obama added ~700,000 to Kerry’s total, and his numbers held up quite nicely at the state Supreme Court level.
Tell us again, who gained and who lost?
Reply »
Lil Rounds Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
why don’t you just come out and say it: you think rural Texans are a bunch of racists.
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
March 10th, 2009 at 10:18 am
no, I think the uptick the GOP had in rural areas was due in part to racist, non-traditional voters showing up just to cast against Obama and whoever else the RPT’s direct mail targeted. Some of these people may have even switched to some Democrats downballot.
The numbers speak for themselves. Or do you have some other explantion for the fact that Jim Jordan got 96%of Obama’s total, while Wallace Jefferson got only 91% of McCain’s? GOP midballot candidates were hemorrhaging ~half a million votes from the top of the ticket; Dems (even J.R. Molina, fer chrissakes) were losing only around 0-140K.
And again, vs. 2004, Dems + 700K; GOP -50K.
So I ask again, who has gained and who has lost support?
Jeff Crosby says:
Scare tactics?
* 18% of Americans 65 and older do not have a photo I.D.
* 37% of Texans 80 and older do not have a driver’s license.
* Per the US Census Bureau, women are twice as likely as men to not have a driver’s license.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
More Crosby half-truths.
That 18% of Americans does not mean 18% of Texans.
37% of Texans 80 and older don’t have a drivers license? Good reason: many fail the driving test. That doesn’t mean they don’thave a photo ID issued by TxDPS, have a passport, etc.
Woemn twice as likely…again no stat regarding rural Texas, just a national average.
And again, Republican are willing to exempt Seniors.
More hack Democrat BS.
Reply »
Jeff Crosby Reply:
March 9th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
Yes, no doubt, Texas is not America, so national numbers have absolutely no bearing.
Still, think about the percentage of 65+ residents in the following Senate Districts and how that compares to the statewide average of 9.9%:
SD 1 15.1% (+5.2)
SD 2 14.6% (+4.7)
SD 3 14% (+4.1%)
SD 18 12.5% (+2.6)
SD 22 11.9% (+2)
SD 28 13.9% (+4)
SD 31 12% (+2.1)
And, as I am sure you know (because you know all), 65+ voters make up a far highr percentage — sometimes almost half — of the actual voters in these districts.
Yeah, these Senators have nothing to worry about.
Reply »
Ida says:
RE: Don Gladden’s Ghost -
I assume you reported this and prosecutions ensued. Can you tell us about the outcome of your first hand experience? How many prosecutions and convictions ensued?
Reply »
mcneelrm says:
Will mail-in balloting, which benefits Republicans, be subject to the same level of Voter ID scrutiny?
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Jeff, are those “Americans” as measured by the census (including illegal aliens) or actual American citizens?
Reply »