The Truth About ALEC

It has often been said the rich man dances while the poor man pays the fiddler.  With the advent of the Supreme Court’s recent “Citizen United Opinion,” money is more influential and important in politics than ever before in the history of America.  A perfect example of how multimillionaires and billionaires are influencing America can easily be found in an organization primarily sponsored by the Koch brothers called the American Legislative Exchange Council, a/k/a ALEC.

The Koch brothers are intent on making the secondary golden rule a reality in the United States--and if not nationally, then state by state. The secondary golden rule is, “Them that has the gold, rules.” ALEC has gained popularity in many conservative states and is the fountainhead of numerous ideological proposals to limit voting, enhance the power of the rich, support regressive tax measures for the middle class while bestowing large favors on such entities as the Kochs, Exxon Mobil, British Petroleum, etc.

Over 50 reactionary measures have had ALEC as their birthplace. These bills have all been introduced in one or more states in the union, and many have become law.  

A prime example of an ALEC created statute is the Voter ID law which has passed in Texas as last session’s number one priority of Republicans. While the argument of  “What does it hurt to present a picture ID to vote?” appeals to some, the measure goes far beyond. Recent studies have shown 3 cogent facts which justify the Justice Department in disapproving such a statute.

   1.  Thousands of people in Texas do not have a Voter ID.

   2.  Many counties in Texas do not have a Department of Public Safety 

        where a Voter ID card can be obtained.

   3.  The premise that Voter ID cards are needed to stamp out voter fraud 

         is simply not true.

After a study of millions of voters in Texas over a three-year period, only 5 instances were found where voter identification could have been involved. Of 20 cases looked into by the Texas Attorney General, most offenses dealt with mail-in ballots, an issue not addressed by a picture ID requirement.

Further evidence of ALEC and the Koch brothers’ effort to deter voting is a statute recently adopted in Florida which puts severe time limits on volunteer voter registration drives. Massive voter registration has long been recognized as one of the ways ordinary folks can combat the power of money at the polls.

Another area influenced by ALEC has been the promotion and growth of the private prison industry. This growth has led to a powerful lobby supporting increased incarceration rather than lower costs and more effective methods of correcting bad behavior in this state. In spite of the fact that Texas leads the nation in per capita incarcerated citizens, we are still near the top in our crime rate.

The controversial “Stand Your Ground” statute adopted in Florida is among the vigilante-type bills promoted and pushed by ALEC and their multibillion dollar sponsors.

Yet another counterproductive area, which in my opinion hurts the public good, is the promotion by ALEC and their fellow travelers of charter schools. Charter schools have taken a big bite out of the education dollars provided by Texas legislators. While there are a few charter schools which have produced extremely good results, the vast majority perform below average and spend more per pupil than the state allows for public school students. Many proprietors of charter schools operate on meager qualifications and charge exorbitant fees. An example within the confines of Southeast Texas is a charter school with less than half the student population of any of the major school districts within the area; and yet, its director/superintendent or principal, whatever the title, receives a salary almost equal to that of the major school districts of Port Arthur, Nederland and Port Neches.  

The average voter in Southeast Texas should take a hard look at the source of legislation passed and praised by our current, conservative majority in the Texas Legislature. It will take little investigation to discover that ALEC sponsored legislation is not in the interest of the average working Southeast Texan.

Abolish the Postal Service--An Anti-Government Idea

The United Postal Service was created by the Continental Congress in 1775 under the leadership and espousal of Benjamin Franklin.  It has existed ever since, furnishing a variety of convenient services to the people of America for well over 200 years.

During the Nixon era, in a frenzy of advocating that government be run like a business, there was an attempt to quasi-privatize the United States Postal Service.  The postal service oversight was removed from Congress and handed to a board of governors appointed by the president.  Unfortunately, under George Bush in 2006, Congress imposed on the postal service a feature unlike any requirement known to any business in the English speaking world.

Through the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, Congress imposed a requirement that health care benefits for not only current employees but also for future retirees be funded in advance.  To my knowledge, no corporation in the world has such an onerous requirement.  The result of this legislation is to force the postal service to undergo a 5.5-billion dollar 'nut' every year.  Without this artificial burden, the U.S. Postal Service would be highly profitable.  A recent report I’ve read showed that the postal service, but for this burden, would have produced a 700-million dollar operational profit in recent years.

There is pressure coming from right-wing forces who desire to strangle any function of government. Currently, their goal is to shutdown the post office, or put it into bankruptcy.  This seems to be a joint effort of folks like the Koch brothers and the owners of Fed-Ex.  We need to consider what shutting down the post office would mean.  

First of all, it would do away with hundreds of thousands of jobs and the closure of 32,000 local post offices throughout the United States.  While the advocates attacking the postal service are not attempting to kill it off in one fell swoop, their plan is to phase it out of business.  Their plan would include the closure of 3,700 post offices, shut down half of the mail processing centers in the country, lay off approximately 100,000 postal workers, and cut mail service on Saturday as well as do away with special delivery of next-day mail.

In the past 20 years, Congress has not appropriated a single penny to keep the postal service running.  On the contrary, Congress has taken it upon itself to raid funds generated by the postal service and sequester them for other purposes.

The postal service was a great idea when Benjamin Franklin proposed it.  I, for one, think it is a good idea to continue it today. 

Privatization has long been an idea for Republicans who maintain they want to shrink government until it is so small it can be “drowned in a bathtub.”  Privatization has not worked in many areas in which it has been tried.

You might recall when George Bush was governor he attempted to privatize much of the human services department.  It resulted in massive layoffs of government workers.  Then, when the private company which tried to operate from the Bahama Islands couldn’t get the job done, they spent about twice as much money luring back the government workers to do the jobs they previously held.

The private prison system is another fiasco in which private companies with big lobby money continue to lobby for outlandish sentences for minor non-violent crimes.  It is keeping our prisons full and is counterproductive.  It serves to benefit no one except the shareholders of the private prison industry.

Abolishing our postal service will benefit no one except the very rich in the company, will harm small business, and will be a tragic blow to commerce of this country at a time when we can least afford it.

Fear of Government?

Of late, in conversations with my conservative leaning friends, I have detected a greater frequency of the use of the term “socialism.”  In detailed conversations, I am somewhat skeptical as to whether or not some of these friends really know the true definition of socialism.  Webster, Wikipedia and others simply describe socialism as a method of government by which the government controls the means of production and distribution of wealth.  As to distribution of wealth, the current tax system--which clearly favors the rich over the middle class--it is clearly a method of distributing wealth.  While conservatives espouse hard work as a great way of life, none seem to be concerned about the fact we tax citizens' labor more than we tax rich folks' investments.

The bugaboo of creeping socialism has been around since “when the mind of man runneth not to the contrary,” as the old saying goes.  Social security, which few--with the exception of Rick Perry--would dare advocate abolishing today, is no doubt a social program.  If submitted to the vote of the people, I would place my money with people voting to retain social security as opposed to those for its abolition.  Medicare is in the same category and has been a true blessing to older folks.  The naysayers at the time social security was established in this country claimed it was “the camel’s head in the tent” and we would soon be relegated to a socialistic or communistic form of government.

It has always been a mystery to me as to why politicians who espouse hatred of government are so anxious to join in and be a part of it.  It’s my belief that too often Americans, having listened too much to the Fox network, have forgotten many of the benefits of government.  Who among us would want to repeal government control of our airwaves by which anyone with enough money could begin broadcasting on any frequency he or she chose to use, thereby abolishing any guarantee that people could receive a clear signal broadcast by the right wing owner of Fox News?  How about airline or private airplane travel?  What if we did away with government rules about when and where you might traverse the skies?  It would certainly make flying more thrilling, but in all probability not nearly as safe.

Too many of my fellow citizens forget they themselves are beneficiaries of social programs established by government.  In a recent conversation with some of my friends, we were discussing the benefits of a college education.  Two of these were associated with spouses who had enjoyed the benefits of having a first-class medical education. Each proceeded to tell me how their spouses had put themselves through college, paid for their education, thereby earning a license issued by the state allowing them to ply their trade on their fellow citizens.  What if there was no licensing of medical professionals?  Is this not government controlling business?  While both of my friends wax very eloquently on the merits of working one’s way through college, both seemed completely oblivious to the fact that working taxpayers, many of whom will never darken the door of a college, let alone a medical school, paid the lion’s share of costs for each student traversing this wonderful process.  At last estimate, medical students in Texas pay about 20% or less of the cost of providing them with such an education.

The current rant about government intrusion is the current right wing battle cry of “repeal Obamacare.”  The part currently pending before the Supreme Court of the United States is whether or not the commerce clause of our constitution allows Congress to mandate that citizens acquire certain kinds of insurance coverage.  I’ve yet to hear any of these advocate doing away with financial responsibility requirements of drivers who use our highways.  The theory with mandatory liability coverage for drivers is that each driver should show responsibility for the havoc he or she might reek on our public byways.  Why is the same not true when it comes to those who, believing themselves to be impervious to sickness or tragic accident, thrust themselves on the taxpayers of the country by lingering in some cases for years in a vegetative state because of serious injuries befalling them when they have made absolutely no provision for such happenstance?

Because of many of my Republican friends’ concern over socialism, I am reminded of the scripture in the Bible which suggests many of us strain gnats and swallow camels.  I’ve yet to hear one of my Republican friends be critical of things such as the so-called Patriot Act which robs many American citizens of freedom from government oversight, control and even possible imprisonment without due process.  It is one of the few areas in which I find myself agreeing with Congressman Ron Paul. 

Why are my property taxes so high?

In the early 1960's, Texas homeowner taxpayers paid lower property taxes on their homes than homeowners in 45 other states.  Today, if you own real property in Texas, your property taxes are as high as the top 5 states.  There are several reasons for this phenomenon.

First of all, the phoney “no new taxes” mantra which has been the by-word of politicians seeking a seat in the Texas Legislature has led to higher and higher taxes on your homestead as well as higher fees for almost everything you can imagine.

In the 1940's when the Legislature made a serious commitment to public education, our state was paying over 65% of the cost of public education.  Today, almost 70% of the cost of public education is borne by local property taxes on your home and business.

While the mantra of “no new taxes” at the state legislative levels is one of the villains in escalating property taxes, it certainly is not the only one.  Another culprit is the increasing number of exemptions.  While admittedly many good arguments can be made for every exemption from property taxes on the books, they do in fact, each and every one, increase the taxes on your home or business. 

One of the larger exemption games is the one played supposedly to attract new businesses to a particular area.  Too often large exemptions from taxation are offered to an industry or business to locate to a particular area.  Not only does such an exemption add an additional tax burden to the local folks who do not have exemptions, but also, in many instances, it is downright unfair to many of the local businesses.  A prime example of this is the huge exemption from taxation given to the giant Cabella’s store in Kyle, Texas, a small town just outside of Austin.  While Cabella’s built a mega-sporting goods store and created some jobs, it certainly did not benefit local mom and pop shops which sold rod and reels or fishing gear.  In fact, it forced the mom and pop shops which sell sporting goods, hunting clothing, archery equipment, etc., to help finance a major competitor which likely will put them out of business. 

The city of Port Arthur granted huge tax breaks for major refining operations in the area.  Theoretically, had the city not done so, refinery expansions would have gone to some other location.  Also, the exemption of charitable or religious organizations adds to the tax burden.  While I realize I’m now treading on sacred ground to even dare suggest the Baptist Church, the VFW, or the American Legion facilities be taxed, just imagine how much we could lower the average homeowner’s tax bill were we willing to tax everything.  As a matter of fact, a good argument could be made that it is unfair for an atheist to help subsidize churches he does not believe in. 

Recently, the state Legislature folded into law what I consider one of the most egregious tax breaks ever enacted.  In the recent session legislation was passed giving tax exemptions on Chamber of Commerce buildings.  The theory presented was that businessmen in a community pay lots of taxes; therefore, a building dedicated to promoting business should not be taxed.  This appears to me to be an extremely dangerous trend.  What’s next?  Should union halls be taxed?  If all lawyers in a community got together and created a Taj Mahal to promote law business in a particular county, should it be taxed? 

If you’re tired of your taxes continuing to go up year after year, maybe it’s time you, as a citizen and homeowner or business owner, begin to ask your elected officials about some of these matters.  Even better, we should all, as citizens, begin to ask our elected official--particularly those in the Legislature--to at least start having open discussions and explore new ideas of fair ways to support the essential services of government.  Currently, the subject of taxation or raising revenue is such a taboo the only political conversation we hear at election time is how we can balance our budget by simply cutting out the waste.  Invariably, what follows is a healthy debate about waste that I would consider being someone else’s necessity.  A good example of this is Texas’ leadership shortchanging our children’s future by cutting education funding and endangering women by abolishing vital services to screen for cancer and other serious illnesses.

ENCOURAGING CITIZENS TO VOTE--OR NOT

Lack of participation at election time is counterproductive to the efficient operation of a democracy.  Theoretically, the more people who vote and participate in the selection of our leaders, the better the result should be.  There are even some fledgling democracies in the world that make it mandatory that their citizens vote.  While I doubt if such a proposition would fly in the United States, our various levels of government should not engage in activity that would discourage or diminish the number of people voting. 

Unfortunately, in the most recent legislative session, one of the top priorities for the Republican majority was passage of a voter ID bill.  In theory it was argued by the majority that the legislation was simply an effort to do away with voter fraud.  As revealed in public hearings on the measure, numerous studies and investigations of voter fraud in Texas turned up an infinitesimal amount of fraud--most of which dealt with absentee ballots (which this bill did not address).  There were no discernible instances of voter fraud wherein a person claimed to be someone that he was not.  The Republican majority, however, pressed on with their high-priority legislation, even sacrificing over 50 years of tradition in the Senate by ignoring the “two-thirds rule”.  Apparently, the Republican Party did little or no homework in support of the legislation.  There is no research showing that such a measure would have an appreciable impact on voter fraud without discriminating against a significant number of voters in our state. 

This week the Republicans’ lack of doing their homework jumped up to bite them.  The Department of Justice, under Section G of the Voters Rights Act, has found the policy enunciated by this legislation to discriminate against Hispanics in Texas and to run contrary to the policies set out by the Voting Rights Act.  The Department of Justice repeatedly asked Texas to document with evidence the assertion that the Voter ID Act would not adversely impact the ability of citizens to vote.  Attorney General Abbott, who was leading the fight on the effort, failed after repeated requests to offer any evidence that the measure would not adversely impact voter participation in Texas.

Apparently, considerable inquiry has been made as to the facts since the passage of the legislation.  It now appears there are approximately 177,000 Hispanic voters in Texas who do not have the type ID required by the bill in order to exercise their citizen's right to vote.  Rejection of the measure apparently means citizens of Texas will be able to vote without paying the price of obtaining a Texas driver’s license or official ID card.

In my opinion, the Department of Justice has done the right thing in striking down this measure which adversely affects citizens of Texas’ right to participate in elections.  The whole matter of forcing citizens to seek some sort of official paper documenting their citizenship is reminiscent of the pre-WWII era when citizens of various totalitarian states such as Germany and Italy were required to have government papers in order to traverse the byways of their country freely or to engage in day-to-day business. 

It seems to me the sponsors of this legislation simply yearn for what they remember as the “good ole days” when Texans were required to pay a tax (poll tax) in order to exercise their right to vote.

Education in Texas

Both a pleasurable and informative experience for me as chairman of the Texas Senate Education Committee was serving as one of Texas’ representatives in the Southern Regional Educational Board.   This board was created several years ago in an effort to try to bring southern states into the 20th Century and catch up with the rest of the United States in educating our children.  There are 16 states, mostly southern, with 2 border states of Maryland and Delaware.  This organization, of all of the organizations I had an opportunity to participate in while a member of the Texas Senate, was the most productive in producing ideas and studies of education.  I had the privilege of chairing the legislative branch of the SREB and, as a result, still receive publications produced by them.

In perusing the most recent publication, I learned some very cogent facts about our state in comparison to many others.  I have often opined we should all appreciate Mississippi because it keeps Texas from being dead last in many statistics, particularly related to education.  The tables presented in the most recent publication of the SREB bear out this unfortunate fact in some respects.  Many of the statistical analyses contained in the report are worth passing on to Texans, particularly, if they are concerned about education.

The most cogent facts presented in the report deal with population change and the status of educational funding and the impact of education on earnings--facts which might be helpful to parents as they are talking to their children about the desirability of getting a college degree.  Statistical analysis by the SREB shows a professional degree on the average is worth $128,600 a year; doctoral degree, $400,000; a master degree, $74,200; a bachelor degree, $58,800; an associate degree, $41,500; and any college degree, $38,600.  High school graduation, on average, is worth $32,800. Less than a high school education is worth approximately $19,000 in earning per year.  This makes a good argument for the value of a good education.  While the chart shows the value to the person receiving the education, there is an equal and corresponding value to the community in which the college graduate lives and works.  The taxes he or she will pay alone for the enhanced annual salary is well worth the investment made by taxpayers in helping that person be educated.

Unfortunately, the bad news in the report is Texas is second from the bottom in the number of its public school students who finish.  Were it not for Mississippi, we would be dead last.  We also are losing the race for students entering college seeking a bachelor or graduate degree.  North Carolina leads with 91% of their students seeking such degrees, while Texas lags behind all other states and beats only Mississippi again by 74%.  

Although Texas is in the middle with increased funding for higher education, the statistical analysis does not divide the amount of taxpayer money put into higher education--rather, it combines appropriated tax money along with increased tuition.

The analysis concerning various populations of White, Black, Hispanic and Other indicates the projection for 2019 that Hispanic students will rise from 54% of the student population to 62% while White students decrease from 42% of the student population to 32%.

I have often said one of the toughest things about being an advocate for quality education is explaining to taxpayers why it is in their best interest to educate someone else’s child.  A review of any statistical analysis comparing all states on the value of education can clearly demonstrate that an educated populace, including an educated workforce, brings great value to the community–not only in taxes paid, but simply social value to the community.  This seems to be a cogent fact forgotten by too many members of our Legislature. 

If Texas is to glean anything from this SREB report, it is that our leaders need to prepare for the contingencies of the future.  Texas already employs more minimum wage workers than any other state in the Union.  If we are to be a growing and vibrant state with a growing and vibrant economy, it is absolutely imperative that we prepare future generations with the skills and knowledge necessary to compete in the modern world.  It is in every Texan’s interest to make it easier, not harder, for young people to get more and more education.  Failure to do so will end up costing Texas in the long run.

We have met the enemy...

One of the most memorable phrases gleaned from the satirical comic strip “Pogo” was, “We have met the enemy and the enemy is us.”  Unfortunately, today it seems too many Americans have taken the saying too seriously.  From clips on TV and statements of leadership, particularly from the Tea Party group, it seems some Americans view our national government as a foreign power which somehow has invaded us.  Those who incessantly attack our national government do major damage to our system.

Only a short history lesson can demonstrate why our government contains greater benefits than pitfalls and greater opportunities than drawbacks to those of us with American citizenship.  Our federal government has been the major catalyst in the greatest surges of prosperity in America.

As we emerged from the first Great Depression of 1929, the government put together the Jobs Program which included the Civil Conservation Corps.  Many of us still wonder at the magnitude and beauty of the national parks throughout the United States. Many of  those parks were built using CCC labor while providing jobs which enabled many families in America to survive the rigors of the Great Depression.

In all probability, one of the greatest advancements for the middle class and America as a whole was the GI Bill.  Fashioned as we emerged from the Great War, Americans invested at a time when our national debt was at an all-time high.  We invested in educating those who had served us and given of their time in the Great War.  While it benefited veterans, it benefited America far more.  It is a prime example of how government investment in a time of need can move us forward as it did in this instance.  It moved us forward in education, innovation, investment, entrepreneurism and prosperity.  America has enjoyed no greater surge forward than we did at the time we invested in making higher education affordable for a huge segment of our society–not just the rich and privileged.

The next gigantic investment in America which holds us in great stead today, without which we would be one of the poorest nations on earth, is the interstate highway system.  Proposed and pushed by General Dwight Eisenhower during his presidency, we invested billions in creating a transportation system which assured the future of much of our commerce, but also it is an example of how government can in fact be the stimulus to create jobs.  What advocate of making America’s national government insignificant would look back and wish for insignificance in our government’s role in creating the interstate highway system which serves us so well today?

Here’s another example:  Back in the ‘60s the anti-science, know-nothing, do-nothing conservatives in America considered our 35th president’s aim of putting a man on the moon to simply be a pipe dream.  However, the vision of John Kennedy and the Space Program, underwritten by our government, has resulted in numerous inventions that serve us in the form of business opportunities, human comfort and entertainment.

The plethora of patents and scientific advancements directly attributable to the quest to put a man on the moon is unmatched in any nation’s history.  Advances in medicine, communication, business technology and on and on would not have been possible without our government’s investment.  Had some of the naysayers in politics today been in control at that time they would have opted for a greater balanced budget and lower taxes instead of our quest to explore space.

Governor Perry, who belittles the effort of government to create jobs, conveniently overlooks the fact that a significant portion of the job growth in Texas, upon which he bases his quest to lead our nation, was fueled by government jobs.

Never in the history of our country is there a greater need for America to do what is necessary to make an investment–yes, even with borrowed money–in our crumbling infrastructure such as buildings, bridges, highways and public school buildings.  We also desperately need to invest in giving the next generation access to a reasonably priced cost of higher education, training them for the kinds of jobs which will make America competitive and return manufacturing back to the United States instead of India and China.  

At a time when we have gone from number one in the training of needed skills to number sixteen in the world, it is absolutely the wrong time to heed the “no tax at any price” voices.  It is the time to invest in order to lift ourselves by our bootstraps out of the doldrums of an economy devastated by two wars on credit and an insane desire to have wealth prevail over the needs of ordinary citizens.  

Whatever Happened to Humans?

I am absolutely convinced two of the main contributors to the unemployment currently plaguing our nation are Republicans and machines.  Whatever happened to pleasant receptionists who used to answer the phone and were able to explain to you whether or not their company, or anyone around, could be of assistance to you?  I particularly dislike the machine which has replaced the receptionist wherein they ask you to spell the name of the person to whom you want to talk.  First of all, you have to know a person.  Second of all, you have to know how to spell his or her name.  

If I’d had all of that information, I would have probably had their number to begin with and wouldn’t have to deal with such a creature who required all this information.  

It seems to me that if machines have a purpose it should be to keep people from having to go to a lot of trouble in the business world when they seek to purchase goods or services from someone.  'Seems to me that more and more machines, particularly answering devices, are doing just the opposite.  Trying to find the proper place for a simple repair is a good example.

Recently, I had need to inquire about a repair to one of my shop tools--a floor model Craftsman drill press.  After finding no local number for repairs or service, I in desperation dialed the 1-800 number. After several rings I received a recording.  “You have reached the Sears store in Port Arthur, Texas. However, if you are calling about automotive, appliances...”  and about ten other choices, push so and so. None of the ten choices exactly fitted my needs, so I pushed zero.  I was greeted by another machine which obviously did not understand plain English.  I repeated my request and was promptly transferred to yet another machine containing a list, none of which fit my problem.  I had yet ten more choices and the final choice on this one was for a service person.  I gleefully pushed that button and was treated to about five minutes of elevator music.  Eventually, some exotic sounding person-- who had neither an American-variety accent nor fluency in English-- answered.  He asked if he could be of service or help, which I understood on the second try, so I informed him I was seeking repairs for a floor model drill press.  He replied, “A grill?”  No, I said, a drill.  He obviously didn’t understand what a drill was.  

I explained to him patiently I was looking for repairs to a machine which sat on the floor and was used to bore holes.  He requested that I wait just a moment, whereupon I was treated to about seven minutes of elevator music.  When he finally came back on the line, he had mastered the task of saying drill press.  I told him yes, that’s what I wanted.  Repairs to my drill press.  He treated me to more music while I held once again.  Finally, the fellow whom I decided was Sinbad the exotic Indian phone voice returned with, “What is your area code?”  I gave it and after about another five minutes of waiting and more music he returned once again with a phone number and address for the Sears service center in Orange, Texas.

Gleefully, I called the new number and was rewarded with an answer from a voice with a decidedly Texas accent.  The Texas accent knew what a drill was right away.  I asked him if they could fix it.  “Nope,” he says, “We’ll have to ship it off.”  “How long will that take?” I asked.

“Two weeks,” he said.  

I send my healthy young runner to pick up my floor model drill press and take it to the service center in Orange only to learn they do not ship off floor model drill presses, only table model drill presses. Nonetheless, I am told we can take it to a service center in Beaumont.

The following day I send my in-need-of-repair floor model drill press to the Sears center in Beaumont only to learn they do not accept items for repair.  They will send a service man out to the location where the drill press is and will repair it there.  “Fine, come on out,” I say.  “Well, you can have an appointment 22 days from now,” he said.  I asked, “Will you let me know somehow?”  He says, “Well, you should call the service center.”  

At first I considered seriously just throwing my hands up and start shopping for a new floor model drill press, but then I think, what sort of adventure awaits me when I start trying to make a phone call concerning a scheduled appointment of a service person to my home?  I can hardly wait to find out!  Perhaps it will provide enough material for another article. Stand by.

The Forgotten Amendment

The Tea Party Movement seems to have forgotten precious guarantees of our United States Constitution or may purposely be ignoring it.  Tea Party members, who claim to be great patriots, are endorsing almost without exception the right-wing Republican candidates who seem to be hell-bent on destroying rights guaranteed to American citizens under the Seventh Amendment.  The Seventh Amendment reads as follows: “In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right to trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”

While much of the dissatisfaction of colonial Americans arose from the unfairness of taxes unilaterally leveled by the king, those onerous taxes were made worse by the fact they would be enforced in a court of admiralty which leveled judgments on citizens without the benefit of a jury.  John Adams rightly and vigorously complained of the practice.  John Adams once said, “We shall confine ourselves, however, chiefly to the act of Parliament, commonly called the Stamp Act, by which a very burdensome, and, in our opinion, unconstitutional tax, is be laid upon us all; and we subjected to numerous and enormous penalties, to be prosecuted, sued for, and recovered, at the option of an informer, in a court of admiralty, without a jury.”

Tea Party candidates continue, seemingly, to embrace right-wingers who, in the name of tort reform, appear dedicated to wiping out or disabling any right to trial by jury in the United States.  The tort reform effort is not based on fairness but simply on money, and in some cases so-called efficiency.  

If one reviews the tort reform program outlined by the various tort reform organizations for the last legislative session, it quickly becomes apparent the bulk of their program is to do away with, avoid, or hamper the jury system in Texas.

Changes in the Worker Compensation Law in Texas have made it almost impossible for an injured worker to be represented by counsel and to obtain a jury finding on the extent or value of his or her injury.  Our Republican Supreme Court and Republican majorities in the House and Senate have embraced arbitration as an inexpensive way to resolve legal disputes.  Arbitration is generally billed as an agreement by which parties agree to resolve their differences with an impartial arbitrator whose decision is final and binding and not appeal able to any court.  The problem is that once one examines arbitration in reality, it is either one of those “small print” items slipped into a consumer’s contract or part of an employment agreement whereby the choice of arbitration is one-sided: Agree to it, or seek employment elsewhere.  Far too many arbitrators are beholden to large corporations and render favorable decisions in their favor or face the prospect of not being used as arbitrators in the future.

Another device tort reformers use to short-circuit being tried by a jury of one’s peers is the so called multi-district litigation provision.  This device allows a hand-picked judge to designate one judge, perhaps far from one’s home, to decide all cases of a similar nature.  This device has been successfully used against victims of asbestosis.  Designating one or two special courts far from one’s home where the trial must be held causes even people at the point of death with this dread disease to have their case disappear into the black hole of legal cases.  Oftentimes it ends up the case is not tried until the original litigant is dead, buried and his will probated.  

I’m certain this is not what our founding fathers had in mind when including the right of trial by jury in our national Constitution.  Adams commented on this type of legal device as well, saying, “So it is also in the trial of causes between party and party.  No man’s property or liberty can be taken from him till twelve men in his neighborhood have said upon oath, that by laws of his own making it ought to be taken away, that is, that the facts are such as to fall within such laws.”

Dressing up in period costumes with three-cornered hats, waving the flag and condemning taxes does not a patriot make.  The devices mentioned above to avoid jury trials were sold to the American people and Texans by selling the notion that ordinary citizens do not have sense enough to judge their peers.  Most tort reform measures represent a basic mistrust of twelve citizens who sit in judgment of the evidence and decide the facts of civil cases.  The mistrust of ordinary citizens is amplified by the fact that the past majority of cases heard by the Texas Supreme Court involving the question of a jury finding have been reversed by the nine Republican members.  

Our nine Supreme Court justices, who never saw or heard a witness in a case, seem to believe their judgment should prevail over the twelve citizens who did.  Out of 30 cases heard by the Supreme Court in recent times involving the question of an adequate jury finding of fact, approximately 22 have been reversed by the Court.  

Obviously, our Supreme Court does not agree with James Madison who once said, “...trial by jury in a civil case is as essential to secure the liberty of the people as any one of the pre-existent rights of nature.”  Nor does it comport well with Thomas Jefferson who said civil jury trials are, “...the only anchor yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”

Remembering

Oscar Mauzy, former state senator and former Supreme Court justice, had a large sign hanging on the wall of his senate office.  It read, “Forgive and Remember.”  Unfortunately, too many voters have not adopted the part about remembering.   It is my belief too many voters do not necessarily forgive--they simply forget.  

The current rush and seeming obsession with trying to reign in deficit spending all of a sudden in America clearly demonstrates that too many Americans who have vivid recollections of the Great Depression are no longer with us.  Or, American leaders have collectively forgotten the lessons we should have learned at that time.

My mother, who is 96 years of age, recalls vividly how hard times were when many Americans literally did not have any idea where their next meal, or that of their families, would come from.  She recalls, with some emotion, the hopelessness of many Americans during that downturn.  

The lessons which apparently have been collectively forgotten by our leadership are that Roosevelt’s New Deal, with massive spending and a dedication to rebuild much of America’s infrastructure, began to pull us from the depths of America’s worst depression. The change in economics of having the government inject money into the economy was working.  Unfortunately, Roosevelt, much like Obama, yielded to the hue and cry from the right-wing to prematurely start dealing with the so-called looming deficit.  When Roosevelt’s focus switched from simply creating jobs by massive infusions of money, the road to recovery took a sharp downturn and led to a measurable setback in the recovery.

Currently, Pulitzer prize-winning economists and other experts on the world economy correctly advise us that cutbacks desired by the Tea Party in Congress are calculated not to create jobs but to create a reversal of a slow recovery from a recession.  There is living proof that these economists are right.  England has already tried austerity to relieve the joblessness situation in and it is apparently not working.  Germany, on the other hand, has pretty much ignored the deficit, continued to invest in public spending and revival of its infrastructure; its economy seems to be leaping forward in the effort to recover for the vast majority of citizens of Germany.  

We continue to be warned by experts that the premature dedication to austerity in America will short circuit our previous efforts to stimulate the economy.  Unfortunately, the folks who uttered not a word while George W. Bush gave tax breaks to oil companies and the mega-rich, and spent like a drunken sailors on two unnecessary wars, are now trying to convince America that the neediest Americans need to double their sacrificial efforts to save the country from future ruin.

Politics in many ways is a game of self-fulfilling prophecies.  Republican leadership in America vowed the election of Barack Obama would bring disaster and ruin to America.  Their entire effort has not been aimed at making America a greater nation but at guaranteeing the Obama administration will be a total failure.

Our state Republican leadership, beginning with Governor Perry, has been employing much of the same tactic to maintain control in our state.  Doesn’t it seem suspicious that in an election year our State Board of Education, controlled by our governor, relaxed the standardized test grading procedures so the vast majority of Texas schools appeared to have surged forward in the field of excellence?  

The Coming Year: Bring on the Politics

After years of watching elections, contested elections and related matters, I am absolutely convinced many of us are born with an extra political gene. We are political junkies and enjoy watching all of the machinations of those seeking public office. The coming year ought to be a real doozie for those of us with this kind of political DNA. Unfortunately, most of the action will be among the Republicans.

The retirement of Kay Bailey Hutchinson from the Senate has produced a virtual rodeo of related candidacy announcements among Republican officeholders, with the biggest hat finally thrown into the ring by Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. Initially, half a dozen Republicans announced they would seek the vacant Senate seat, including a former Secretary of State and two members of the Texas Railroad Commission.  Since that time, a fellow named Ted Cruz also has chimed in and intends to try to parlay the combination of being Hispanic and a very conservative Republican into winning Kay Bailey Hutchinson’s slot. Two of the other candidates, both named Williams, having taken a look at the district congressional seats carved out by the recent Legislature, have decided to seek the same seat just outside Fort Worth.  That should make for an interesting contest with two people of the same name seeking the same job.

 

Now that Dewhurst has announced he's running for the U.S. Senate , the race is on for Lt. Governor. Three statewide incumbents are already casting eyes on that slot. Jerry Patterson, an ex-marine fighter pilot, who occupies the office of Land Commissioner of Texas, has announced for the office already. Patterson is a darling of the gun lobby, very outspoken, has established connections with Veteran groups, and is flamboyant even in his method of transportation. Patterson barnstorms the state campaigning in an antique Steersman aircraft...the kind of aircraft most commonly used for crop dusting. 

Another candidate is Susan Combs, State Comptroller. This is an office well suited for developing business contacts and good connections with big-moneyed folks well known for funding political campaigns.  The State Comptroller makes critical decisions involving millions and millions of dollars every day, and many of these decisions have a direct impact on how well your business runs. Combs is a fairly well-known officeholder having occupied the Agriculture Commissioner seat before the one she now holds.  Combs has the reputation for being a straight shooter and competent in the management of her office.  Combs’ background is in farming and ranching, she is well known as a “no nonsense” person, and en route to the run for Lt Gov she has gone from the Legislature to the Agriculture Commissioner’s office to State Comptroller.


The third is known as a “good ole’ boy” from East Texas.  Todd Staples came to the Senate defeating David Fisher, who appeared to be the favorite at the time--a relative of well known and revered East Texas federal judge, Joe Fisher.  Staples was pretty soon adopted as a darling of conservative Republicans and blessed by some of the state leadership as a future statewide officeholder.  When Combs chose to leave the Agriculture Commission office, Staples won the seat handily.  


At this point there is only speculation about whether or not Rick Perry will in fact launch a campaign for President of the United States, or will be successful in an effort to be drafted as the number two person on the Republican presidential team.  In any event, there is much speculation about what impact his decision will have on overall politics in Texas.


So far the only Democratic contender seriously mentioned for any of the office is former General Ricardo Sanchez of South Texas who made his announcement back in May that he would seek the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senate.


Add up all of the above factors--and then add to it the consideration that President Obama will be seeking re-election--and what you end up with is a political junky’s dream trifecta...the equivalent of prime seats to the Super Bowl, the World Series,  and the World Championship of Soccer. Indeed, let the games begin.