The good people who sign my paychecks have asked me to do radio and television commentary regarding Governor Perry, when news organizations make requests. I have been doing a lot of this recently, including NBC Nightly News and The News Hour. They mainly want to know who Rick Perry is. Here is what I tell them:

1. Perry grew up in difficult circumstances in cotton farming country. His family lived in a frame house that did not have indoor plumbing until his teenage years. He bathed in a number-two washtub. His mother sewed his underwear.

2. He went to Texas A&M when it was a far different university than it is today. Women were admitted, but very few were on campus. It was still very much an all-male military school with a strong and spirited culture. Students who did not buy in were called 2 percenters and were treated with contempt. The saying on campus was, “Highway 6 runs both ways.” In other words, if you don’t like it, hit the road. Life was hard in Paint Creek, where Perry grew up, and at A&M, where amenities were few. Neither culture was an empathetic one, and empathy is not part of Perry’s makeup as a politician.

3. Perry is very different from George W. Bush. Bush portrayed himself, at the start of his climb to the presidency, as “a uniter, not a divider,” and as a “compassionate conservative.” Perry is a divider, not a uniter, as we saw from his Christians-only prayer event.

4. Everyone asks about the Texas jobs numbers and wants to know if they are legitimate. I say that they are, relying on the Dallas Fed’s numbers that Texas has created 37% of the jobs in the U.S. in the past year. I add that Perry has made jobs his #1 priority, that he has gone to California to recruit companies to move to Texas. I point out that the lack of a state income tax in Texas is a big drawing card to corporate executives. It keeps money in their pockets. People who try to debund the job numbers are wasting their time.

5. The follow-up question is whether the jobs that Perry is creating are good jobs. I say that the record is mixed, I mention the Midland call center for Countrywide, the doomed mortgage giant, which was not a success. But I also point out that in a state with the lowest number of adults without a high school diploma, we need jobs for unskilled workers too, that it is a bit elitist to look down upon jobs for the poor. A low-paying job is better than no job at all.

6. Recently, I was asked about Perry’s threats regarding Bernanke, and whether it was typical of Perry. I said that it was, that Perry was an extremely aggressive politician, that when he drew the sword he intended to use it. I described him as tough guy who was determined to get what he wanted and usually gets it, and I pointed out that he had never lost an election.

I have tried to stay balanced in my comments. It is not my intention to be a professional Perry-basher, or a cheerleader. I suspect that this 15 minutes is not going to last much longer, as we get deeper into the campaign. I suspect that about 14 of my 15 minutes are history.

Tagged: paul burka, rick perry

Michael Quinn Sullivan has a bone to pick with me. I am the subject of a blog post by Sullivan published on the Empower Texans web site yesterday under the headline, “Texas Monthly: Disclosure-Free Zone.” Sullivan objects to the fact that in an April column about higher ed reforms, I did not disclose that I have taught at UT from time to time. Here are some pertinent paragraphs:

Paul Burka, the “senior executive editor” at Texas Monthly has taken to defending the higher education status quo – skyrocketing tuition and a lack of transparency. He follows the administrative bureaucracy party line by deriding reformers, disparaging them and calling motivations into question.

Couldn’t be because he has a financial interest in the status quo, could it? Mr. Burka received $10,159 in compensation ($9,295 in salary) for teaching 13 students. (NOTE: the numbers are from UT’s own data, which the institution says may or may not be valid or accurate.)

He hasn’t disclosed in any recent writings supporting the higher-ed establishment that he is a “visiting lecturer” for the University of Texas, teaching a three credit-hour class – ironically titled “Right And Wrong In Politics.”

Mr. Sullivan has a point, though he overplays it to a ridiculous extreme, as is his custom. I should have included a parenthetical statement in that April column saying that I had taught at UT on various occasions in the past (though I was not teaching there or receiving compensation at the time that I wrote the column). But it is far-fetched to suggest that I have any permanent attachment to UT, or a financial motivation to defend the university. I am not an academic, I am a journalist. Over the past twenty years or so, I have been fortunate enough to teach courses at UT (and also at St. Edwards). During that time, I have written several editorial columns about the university. One was supportive of tuition deregulation; one was critical of a watered-down degree program I referred to as “B.A. Lite” (this one, alas, is not yet available online). I have not tried to hide the fact that I teach at UT; in 2001, for example, I wrote about volunteering to evaluate applications for admission to the Plan II honors program, as I was eligible to do as an instructor. I have also written a skeptical column about the athletic department’s efforts to find a home for the Longhorns after the breakup of the Big XII conference. In short, I choose subjects that Texas Monthly believes are important, and I try to call ‘em as I see ‘em. I leave it to readers to judge for themselves whether they believe that my reporting on UT is influenced by what Mr. Sullivan refers to as my “financial interest in the status quo,” or whether it reflects my strongly held personal belief in the importance of allowing state universities to pursue excellence free of political interference. (more…)

Tagged: disclosure, Empower Texans, higher ed, michael quinn sullivan, paul burka, Texans for Fiscal Responsibility, texas monthly, transparency, UT

Ross Ramsey, writing in the Texas Tribune today, has a story that the Hutchison campaign asked that I not be allowed to be a panelist on the gubernatorial debate on the grounds that KERA, the Dallas PBS station that is hosting the debate, and NPR both have policies against opinion writers participating in debates. The story is correct. KERA agreed with the Hutchison campaign and invited Texas Monthly to send another panelist of our choosing. At this point, Texas Monthly withdrew as a co-sponsor of the debate.

I am a writer, and I have opinions, but I do not regard myself as an “opinion writer.” I am primarily a reporter who writes magazine articles for Texas Monthly. Those articles contain opinions. Opinions are not a synonym for “biases.” One such article is a lengthy feature on the governor’s race that I should have completed yesterday. It is a reported story. I have three notebooks and a stack of Internet research to prove it. I also blog. As a blogger, I have opinions. But Burkablog is not RedState.com or Burnt Orange Report–neither of which do I intend to denigrate, except to say that you know before you read them which side they are on. Readers don’t know which side I am going to come down on. It’s like the line from Patton: It’s not important that they know. It’s only important that I know.

I don’t have a lot more to say on this subject, except that I don’t think who is, or who isn’t, on a debate panel is really news. Panelists are bit players. The process is that panelists get together with the moderator and the producer and individually suggest questions. The moderator, with input from the panelists, decides which questions will be asked and in what order, and sometimes who will ask them. The likelihood that a biased question will make the cut is zero, about the same likelihood that a panelist would propose a biased question.

If I have any concern about this episode, it is not about myself; on debate night, I’ll watch the proceedings and blog about them. My concern is about the attempt to differentiate “opinion” journalists from “reporting” journalists. It is a false distinction. Opinion writers report. Reporters have opinions. The lines are increasingly blurred in the digital age. It is silly to have a blanket rule that excludes people who blog. It ignores the direction in which journalism is heading, which is more opinion journalism, not less. Good reporting will never be out of style, but opinions provide readers with a benchmark that, in an interactive world, stimulates their minds and expands their understanding.

P.S. The Tribune posted several examples of my writing that the Hutchison campaign objected to as “snarky.” I wouldn’t change a word.

Tagged: debates, kay bailey hutchison, kera, paul burka

Here are the numbers. Commentary follows.

Approval Ratings
Obama as president
Approve 68% Disapprove 29%

Obama economic policy
Approve 63% Disapprove 34%

Rick Perry
Approve 57% Disapprove 30%

Kay Bailey Hutchison
Approve 65% Disapprove 17%

John Cornyn
Approve 55% Disapprove 19%

Texas Legislature
Approve 58% Disapprove 28%

Democratic Primary (Governor)
Kinky 10%
Schieffer 6%
Van de Putte 3% (withdrawn)

U.S. Senate
White (D) 9%
Dewhurst (R) 4%
Abbott (R) 4%
Ames Jones (R) 3%
R Williams (R) 3%
Sharp (D) 2%
Shapiro (R) 2%
M Williams (R) 2%

* * * *

I don’t think these numbers are good for Perry. Forget the 12-point lead. The number that jumps out is 33%. That’s all? This is a lower percentage than he got in the 2006 general election, when he famously won with 39%. Undecideds represent a plurality. And the respondents supposedly represent Republican primary voters. (I say “supposedly” because the support for gay unions in yesterday’s issues poll was very high — in the upper fifties — considering the overwhelming support for the constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage. Furthermore, according to the poll’s methodology, the sample for Republican primary voters was very small — 267 — and had a MOE of +/- 6.04%.) In the Rasmussen poll earlier this year, around the time of the secession flap, Perry had a 42-38 lead over Hutchison.

Other numbers seem unfavorable for Perry as well. He has based his campaign on making Hutchison the candidate of Washington and positioning himself as the candidate of Texas. He’s been hammering away at “Washington” since September, and at Kay “Bailout” Hutchison, but Obama’s approval rating in Texas is way up there, similar to what it is nationally. Hutchison is in the stratosphere at 65% favorable to 17% unfavorable. That is going to be hard for him to tear down. Perry’s own favorables are the best they have ever been, but he is the incumbent, and the election is going to be about him — unless he can somehow manage to redefine her. It’s hard to redefine someone with a miniscule 17% disapproval rating.

The Democratic gubernatorial primary and the U.S. Senate race are too speculative to comment on. The only number of interest is White’s lead over Sharp, but since everyone is in single digits, and the race won’t exist unless Hutchison resigns her seat, it is hardly worth mentioning.

(more…)

Tagged: kay bailey hutchison, lyceum poll, paul burka, rick perry

I came home last night to find a GOPAC survey in my e-mail queue. I tend to vote in Republican primaries (4 of the 6 elections starting in 1998), since that is the only election that matters for statewide candidates, so I assume that is how they found me. Here are the questions and my answers:

1. Do you support your state Governor’s authority to reject stimulus funds from the federal government?
Yes — I support the governor’s authority. I don’t support the rejection.
No
Undecided

2. The Pennsylvania Republican Party recently passed a unanimous resolution urging their lawmakers to oppose the Employee Free Choice Act that would eliminate an employee’s right to a secret ballot. Do you support efforts like this in your own state to oppose “card check” legislation?
Yes — I live in a right to work state, so this is not likely to be an issue here, but I don’t like the card check law at all. It’s overreaching.
No
Undecided

3. Do you believe our elected officials should continue aggressively fighting the War on Terror?
Yes — But I’m skeptical about Obama’s Afghanistan policy. Afghanistan was important only only because it was a base for bin Laden’s training camps. Those camps are gone. Al Qaeda is in Pakistan. The only reason for sending troops to Afghanistan now is to fight the Taliban. Is that worth sacrificing American lives for? If the Taliban take over again, so what? Bin Laden isn’t coming back. The action is in the border regions of Pakistan. Afghanistan is not strategically important today.
No
Undecided

4. Do you support the decision to close down Guantanamo Bay and bring suspected terrorists to be tried and housed in the Continental United States?
Yes — Gitmo is a symbol for the world of America turning its back on its own values. I think we should get rid of it, try terrorists in the courts, and clap those who are convicted in maximum security prisons.
No
Undecided

5. Are you in favor of off-shore drilling?
Yes — Drill, baby, drill. Especially off California and Florida.
No
Undecided

(more…)

Tagged: gopac, paul burka, republican primary, texas

Dear Paul,

You have covered me throughout my career in public service to Texas so you remember I was a proud Republican even when we could hold our gatherings in a phone booth. Having helped make the GOP the dominant party in Texas in the late 90s, I am committed to helping us get back on track both here in Texas and in the nation. We should rebuild for the right reasons—because we can make Texas better.

While I know you wrote your article tongue in cheek, there is nothing humorous about the setbacks the party has suffered in the past decade under Rick Perry’s tenure. I plan to lead our state as a Republican who brings Texans together to achieve our common goals–better education, better transportation, better access to health care. Rather than narrowing our party, I will expand our party again to those who stand with us for lower taxes, fiscal responsibility, small businesses, and individual freedom. We should then strengthen our majority in the Texas Legislature as well as in local elections, which have eroded and even disappeared over the past 10 years.

My Republican Party is still the party of Lincoln and Reagan, and I want to be the Texas Republican who leads the party and its elected officials back to governing responsibly, respecting the taxpayers and preparing our state for its bright future.

All the best,
Kay Bailey Hutchison

[Sent by Rick Wiley, campaign manager]

Tagged: kay bailey hutchison, paul burka, primary, rick perry

Arlen Specter’s party switch gives new life to the old issue of if and when Hutchison should resign her seat. Now that the Democrats have a filibuster-proof majority, she is no longer under any compulsion to remain in the Senate to prevent the Democrats from passing their agenda. She can resign her seat without political consequences, other than allowing Rick Perry to choose her successor. One of Perry’s biggest advantages in this race is that he has been free to campaign across the state and nationally, while she has had to stay in Washington and cast votes. If she doesn’t stay, and misses votes while she is campaigning in Texas, she can be criticized for that.

If I were advising her–well, I’d have been fired by now for suggesting that she run as a Democrat–I would say that she has two choices. One is to resign soon; one is to stay to the end. The advantage of resigning soon is obvious. She doesn’t have to cast any more votes (and every vote is a risk); and she doesn’t have to waste time commuting to Washington. The advantage of staying in the Senate is that she can continue to raise money in Washington and she gets to keep that luscious title. I don’t think that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. It’s better for her to be here.

Tagged: arlen specter, kay bailey hutchison, paul burka, senate seat

The big winners, of course, were the ABCs. Each of the eleven received a chairmanship. Six are on Calendars.

The chairs:

Pitts/Appropriations: as expected

Cook/Environmental Regulation: A story made the rounds yesterday that he wasn’t happy, but he lives in an area that is affected by coal plants and cement plants, and he has a green majority that can take the committee in a new direction. I think he’ll grow to like it.

Geren/House Administration: as expected

Keffer/Energy Resources: as expected

Kuempel/Licensing and Procedure: very interesting appointment. He’ll have to deal with gambling.

Solomons/State Affairs: This session, Solomons will be at the front mike and Phil King will be at the back mike.

The Craddick D’s did not fare well:

–Dukes is back on Appropriations
–Pena lost his chairmanship but is on Ways & Means
–Dutton lost his chairmanship. He’s on Corrections and Pub Ed
–Edwards wasn’t around last session. He’s on Appropriations
–Flores lost his chairmanship but is on Appropriations
–Giddings lost her chairmanship but is on Appropriations
–Guillen lost his seat on Appropriations (vice-chair) and is on Border & Intergovernmental Affairs and Transportation. Border doesn’t do anything, and Transportation doesn’t matter much when there is only one major highway in Starr County. Big loser.
–T. King lost his chairmanship. He is on Culture, Recreation, and Tourism and Natural Resources. At least these are useful in a rural district.
–McClendon got the San Antonio exemption from Craddick D punishment. She has a chairmanship (Rules and Resolutions) and seats on Appropriations and Transportation.
–Turner is not a happy camper. The former speaker pro-tem used his seniority to get on State Affairs, but he is not on Appropriations. His other committee is Business and Industry. He doesn’t have a portfolio for his pet issues such as CHIP.

Readers will recall that the Craddick D’s worried that the mainstream Democrats would seek retribution against them for their apostasy, despite assurances to the contrary. The fate of the Craddick D’s, above, suggests that they had good reason to worry.

Who else is in the penalty box?

(more…)

Tagged: chairs, house committee assignments, paul burka, speaker joe straus

Burka and Eileen discuss probable Speaker Joe Straus, Craddick’s exit, horse racing, and whether bridge qualifies as gambling.

Honorably mentioned: John Smithee, Burt Solomons, Dan Gattis, Jim Keffer, and playing the ponies.

(And yes, I am wearing a scarf over my turtleneck. My space heater gave out, and I can’t afford coal.)

Tagged: burt solomons, dan gattis, eileen smith, gambling, Joe Straus, john smithee, paul burka, speaker, tom craddick, video

The final video of 2008. (You can thank me later.) Stick a fork in Craddick? Is he really done? Really?

Honorably Mentioned: Gattis, Smithee, Solomons, Kolkhorst, Chisum, Straus, Hamilton, McCall, Dunnam, and just about every other House Member you can think of

And who was that anonymous Republican source?

Tagged: burt solomons, dan gattis, eileen smith, john smithee, paul burka, politics daily, speaker's race