re: Keep Texans Safe

Texas should enact sobriety checkpoints.

In reading Carleen's post, I have to admit that at first I was skeptical. I initially was fretting over whether or not the idea is good. I can only imagine how irritating it would be for sober drivers to go through the random checks, and additionally believe that sobriety checkpoints seem somewhat overbearing in a very "Big Brother" sort of way. Scott Henson couldn't have said it better.

That said, he did. Carleen's blog links to this page. In Henson's review of the issue, he points out some key things about the bill which subsequently reduced my hesitations. Carona's bill essentially states that each security checkpoint:

• must be random
• could not be a repeat location within 12 months
• would be safe from unreasonable search/seizure (NO proof of ID or Insurance would be required unless there were probable cause) ((**I think this gets a little hairy because officers discretion is different**))
• (check on the previous bullet) each encounter must be video recorded for 'quality assurance'

I looked a little bit further at the issue and came upon another interesting safety measure. Sobriety Checkpoints would only be required in

• cities with populations exceeding 500,000
• counties with populations exceeding 250,000

It is a certain truth that it would be cumbersome for all involved, however, its not as bad as it could be. MADD is pushing for even more restrictive legislation. They are pushing for legislation including

• permanent revocation of second time drunk driving offenders
• requirement of an ankle monitor for 60 days for first time offenders

When it gets that bad, I will sadly drink my last beer and move to California where the Grass is Greener.

Counts for Constables

As usual, the news is filled with tales of greed and corruption. This time, however, we're actually seeing something done about it.

According to the Dallas Morning News, Constables Jaime Cortes of Precinct 5 and Derick Evans of Precinct 1 are facing multiple charges each of corruption in office. The allegations against the Constables include

1. Bribery
2. Illegal Use of Campaign Funds/Donations
3. Organized Crime
4. Other Campaign irregularities

As far as the specifics, the public remains out of the loop. We do know, however, that Dallas had to hire a "Special Prosecutor" to handle the case. It seems a little odd, to me, that the elected District Attorney couldn't fulfill his job duties because of a "conflict of interests." If your job is to uphold the law, shouldn't you do so? As for the legitimacy of the claim: I suppose it is best for the DA to step out of sight if he knows that he might be prone to bias.

After quickly jumping to the aforementioned conclusions and opinions, I realized that I hadn't the slightest idea what the duties of a Texas Constable were. I found this quick guide to help impart some information. Essentially, Texas Constables are 'Peace-Officers,' though they are additionally affiliated with the Texas Department of Public Safety. Constables are

• able to exercise all lawful criminal processes where deemed appropriate
• allowed to arrest, if warranted
• required to keep general peace
• required to report any grievances to a local magistrate
• exercise judgment in cases of defiance of penal code as far as the parameters of their area of jurisdiction
• hired as on-road traffic monitors
  

Constables are deemed 'necessary' by Texas as they are (theoretically, at least) more well acquainted with a Precinct and its Constituents than other officers of the law. That said, the Constables offices in Dallas evidently possess a history of seedy participation, marking 13-14 years.
_____________________________________________

More recently, however, we've seen some indictments.

Derrick Evans

1. Four counts Financing Malpractice
2. One count Organized Criminal Activity
3. (Additionally, some members of Evans Precinct are facing charges)

Jaime Cortes

1. Two felony counts Tampering with Government Document

Justice does exist, in small, small doses.

re: Casting Call

Atrocity! I must agree that it is shenaningans like this that lead many to voter apathy. I must confess my agreeance with the sentiment that I don't much care for the local politics, as it seems to me, they are becoming more and more a pocketbook liner. What I mean by this is that our elected officials, particularly at the State level (or at least these are being brought to my attention more so than National issues), are abusing their 'power' as a means to a financial end.

This is another example of the influential grip of power: people assume and acclimate to a certain lifestyle. For example, a politician who has been in power, likely wants to maintain if not expand their power? Is this idea not presented, and even glorified in our Texas History classes (Manifest Destiny: 2010, 'To Spend, or Not to Spend?')? It seems that everyone is willing to make drastic concessions to cushion themselves. It is very sneaky how Barton generated and accepted his own raise. What will they think of next? For me, at least, this kind of behavior is reminiscent of the wacky spending of the Legislators, though I must thank Shay Powell for correcting my misinterpretation of the Legislators spending tax dollars. The taxpayers do pay the salary of their elected officials - Barton chose to lie, poorly at that, about his pay raise. Barton is furthering the disparity between the elite and the bourgeoisie, and refusing to evidence properly his choices. Lying to your constituents is stupid.

As for the "High Noon" meeting. We live in a time of [supposedly] highly civilized political organization. It's a nice guise to return to something so 'invested' as coming to speak to one's constituency. That said, the public seems to represent our modern day Gary Cooper. Barton is Frank Miller in our minimovie. The standoff is between the folks of Kyle and the man who needs to answer to them. The spin is, Barton is the devious one, and must defend his actions against the people rather than defending the citizens against misfortune.

Finally, the "Slush-Fund Accounting:" this was a new term for me, and is definitely a new point of personal interest. I think it's insane, albeit very clever of Barton and his campaign, to inflate an estimate on one project of public interest, only to use the 'saved' funds somewhere else. What better way to kill two birds with one stone, right? Wrong. I am suspicious that this is a devious means of enacting projects and works that his private supporters are vying for.

I leave you with this:
"Knowledge is Power." "Power Corrupts." Is "Ignorance Bliss?" Some voters might think so.

re: Censure of Judge Sharon Keller

Back in 2007, Criminal Appellate Judge Sharon Keller closed the doors of the court at 5 pm, thereby shutting out last-minute appeals for a client on death row. The result of her closure and ignorance of the appeals lead to the "imminent execution" of the inmate.

Now, as the Judiciary is to interpret the law, it seems somewhat amiss that one of the highest ranking justices would deliberately choose to ignore something as weighty as appeals for an individual's life. Following the execution, questions arose about the injustices the Justice called for.

Keller was issued a warning, though no formal punishment was decided upon. Recently, however, the case has moved to a three-judge panel for further review.

The State Commission on Judicial Conduct (SCJC) has been called upon for review of the case. In the Grits For Breakfast article, we learn that the three-panel review process was a disappointment for many. The ruling

• dismissed the Ethics Rebuke to Judge Sharon Keller
• Neglected to formally Censure her, though that is clearly what Texas Law deems is appropriate punishment for something like this
• Publicly tarnishes the image of the SCJC because of their inability (or perhaps deliberate choice not to uphold the law)

Many are appalled to learn of the SCJC's inaction. It is shattering to think about the consequences of her decision: an inmate lost his life because of her refusal to stay an additional hour, something that undoubtedly would help her pocketbook in the long run. Furthermore, as a liberally minded individual, it is astonishing that the government has this much power.

I thought that the Executive was the only one in power to pardon individuals for serious crimes? It is clear, however, that Attorney McKetta, the principal representative of the SCJC, is content with dismissing the case. He has the option to dismiss Keller, an option which would please many Texans. However, rather than dismissal, the SCJC issued an unthinkable sentence: unscathed dismissal of the case.

The author of Grits for Breakfast examines Texas Criminal Justice and sat in on this case. I agree that it is disappointing to see such a blatant disregard for order in a commission intended to preserve just that.

Re: For Todd Staples

Texas, more so than other states, comes from an agricultural background. Our foundations were in farming and agriculture, not industry and mechanics like some of our northern brothers and sisters. Despite our movement away from our traditional means of existence, we do still see a need for the Texas Department of Agriculture. It is no wonder as election day approaches, that people are beginning to wonder about the future of this agency. The Houston Chronicle gives Todd Staples their continued support for Commissioner of the Texas Department of Agriculture. To understand why, however, let's highlight a few key things the Texas Department of Agriculture is responsible for.

The Texas Department of Agriculture:
-is responsible for monitoring fair produce rates at the grocery store
-is responsible for monitoring fair petroleum/gas rates at the pump
-is responsible for regulating pesticides that may be used on produce, or in the home
-is responsible for administering free and reduced breakfast's and lunches to children in Texas public schools
-is responsible for organizing and implementing a program in public schools to help fight childhood obesity
-is responsible for maintaining and building our $105 billion agricultural sector (the Agricultural sector makes up about ten percent of Texas' total economy)

It makes sense for the Houston Chronicle to support Todd Staples based on his previous shining record. Despite his Republican leanings, Staples seems to genuinely fit the gig.

Todd Staples Credentials include (but are not limited to) previous experience with small business as a private nurseryman himself. Additionally, Staples has background in Public Policy due to previous involvement in the Texas Legislature. Finally, he is the incumbent candidate for the position, so if nothing else, he has experience directly in the position.

My Thoughts: While I do agree that Republican Nominee for Commissioner of Texas Department of Agriculture, Todd Staples, does have experience that speaks for itself, I do feel that the Houston Chronicle's support is somewhat unfounded. The article For Todd Staples doesn't really delve into Staples' background with the aforementioned TxDoAg responsibilities. Furthermore, it doesn't introduce any of the potential weaknesses of the Democratic nominee for Commissioner.

Re: The Eighteen Billion Dollar Man

As many of us have come to discover, Texas is in a bit of a budget crisis. This budget cycle Texans will suffer the brunt of an $18 billion dollar shortfall. Texas Monthly's Paul Burka has been following Texas budget since 1985. In his article, The Eighteen Billion Dollar Man, Burka proposes a few sensible budget cuts:

The Railroad Commission of Texas. The Railroad Commission of Texas has been around since the late 1800's. When oil became the primary economic focus of Texans, there became no need for a commission regulating fair freight rates for agricultural distribution. The proposed disposal of The Railroad Commission would free up $129,390,742 of state General Revenue (GR).

The Texas Department of Agriculture. The Texas Department of Agriculture is another obsolete department, Burka argues. Created in 1941, a time of agricultural expansion due to a booming cotton industry, the Dept. of Agriculture was necessary. After Texas urbanization, however, it seems silly to spend an annual $156,236,530 keeping subcommittees like The Food and Fibers Commission alive.

The Public Utility Commission of Texas. The PUC was originally established to regulate electric and telephone rates. When electricity became deregulated, however, the PUC essentially became obsolete, only really functioning to regulate the telephone industry. They PUC's annual expenditures near a soaring $279,434,097 of GR, Burka says. It doesn't seem worth it.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. To keep things simple, the TCEQ will never be able to live up to the Fed's EPA standards. Burka dryly reminds us that "The feds have taken over, so [we should] let them pay the tab." And just to remind us all, the tab is the long haul winner racking up a whopping annual $885,830,681 GR expenditures.

My Thoughts: I'm going to make a generalization here, so pardon me if I offend in saying I believe most of our class is comprised of students still entering the workforce for a long road. I think it is very important to realize the gross amount of tax dollars being frivolously spent on obsolete agencies. Where are those coming from, if not our pockets for the next 20 years? I would remind us all that we are nearing a gubernatorial election and we should each consider the economic policy of all candidates very seriously.

I will acknowledge the other issue. The extinction of such agencies will mean an even deeper hole for the unemployment rate. What is there to do about that? I'm not sure, but I hope to read some suggestions as we near election time.