Imagine, if you will, a business selling “thingamabobs.”  It has been in business for several generations, owned by the same family.  Recently, a new manager of the business has been selected.  The business produces very reliable and well-made “thingamabobs,” and they sell at a lower rate per “thingamabob” than 90% of their competitors.  The workforce of the business works at an hourly rate at or below the rest of their competitors, and sales are fairly good.  The business then gets its annual report that due to increasing supply costs and lagging sales, in the coming year the company will not have enough money to pay its overhead, utilities, salaries or other necessary expenses to keep the business going.

Even though the business could easily slightly increase the cost of their product  and still remain competitive, the board of directors, under the leadership of its recently appointed manager, decides this is not an option.  No increase under any circumstances of their products.  The board also, under its recent leadership, decides not to use any of the money in an emergency savings account which would take care of at least half of the shortfall of the company’s income.  The board of directors makes a decision to stick with the same old price, no matter what the consequences; and, in order to accommodate the shortfall of income of the company, they layoff half the workforce.

As a shareholder in the above company, you would have the opportunity to vote your shares to retain the current management or seek new leadership, what would you do?

Unfortunately, the above scenario appears to be the course chosen to follow by our governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the House and our board of directors, the Texas Legislature.

We often hear from conservatives that government should be run like a business.  I cannot imagine any owners of a business tolerating such a ridiculous course of action as described above.  Yet, that is exactly what our Legislature, with the influence of the newly elected Tea Party candidates, has chosen to do.

Texas ranks in the bottom five of taxes per capita taken from its citizens.  We rank at the very bottom in expenditures per capita on state government in Texas.  Unfortunately, although we appear to be gaining jobs, they are jobs of the lowest pay in the nation.  

We lead the United States in minimum wage jobs.  

We started this session with over 10 billion dollars in a rainy day fund to be spent in a time of need; and if only our Legislature would look, there are at least 20 billion dollars in unjustified tax breaks and loop holes for rich folks who do not need or deserve them.  

Rather than even explore tax reform or the relative option of seriously damaging the future of this state by cutting educational opportunity, our Legislature appears to want to sacrifice the future of this state on the altar of “no new taxes.”

One could easily argue that by doing little or nothing the owners of this large business known as Texas will have to pay the price for tolerating such inept management.  Unfortunately, that’s not exactly true.  It will be the children and grandchildren of the Texas shareholders who will pay the ultimate price in a future not much better than some third-world countries.

THE SEX LIFE OF A FLY

Ask any freshman state representative and he will assure you being elected makes you much smarter overnight.  I can assure you of this fact because of my personal experience.  As I went to Austin in 1963 freshly elected, there was hardly any problem too knotty for me to solve, or any question I didn’t know the answer to or couldn't quickly find out.  After 32 years in the state Legislature, I felt I got dumber each session.

The above may be somewhat facetious, but I am absolutely convinced of one cogent fact.  The Texas Legislature is a poor place to attempt to run institutions of education.  

The farsightedness of politicians was demonstrated in the early 1900's when several members of Congress proposed the patent office be closed.  They argued everything worth inventing had already been invented, so why spend money keeping the patent office open.  The fact is that since the time these forward-thinking politicians wanted to close the patent office, there have been more things invented than all things invented prior thereto.

Some of this same kind of mind set may be observed with our current governor who continues to meddle with our institutions of higher learning.  Perry has appointed his cronies to all the Boards of Regents, but what is worse, they have been pushed, by the governor, to listen to recommendations of the Texas Policy Foundation which is a right-wing think tank which would exert even more political control over the University of Texas and Texas A&M.  

Unfortunately, too many of Perry’s hand-picked regents have chosen to follow these wrong-headed moves and are rapidly destroying the efforts of the past several years to make higher education institutions in Texas world class.  They carp about educational institutions doing research.  They are proposing faculty members be compensated on the basis of how many students they have in their classes.  They would, if they had their way, be rid of professors who spend more time doing research than actual time spent in the classroom.  

Just how wrong-headed these so-called “know-it-alls” about education can be is demonstrated very poignantly by the story of research concerning the sex life of a fly.  Unless quickly treated and stopped the screw worm flies would literally eat the flesh off of livestock, costing Texas’ farmers and ranchers millions and millions of dollars.  

Through research scientists discovered that during the life span of a screw worm fly, which was relatively short, the female screw worm fly would only breed once during her life span.

As a result of the research which had been the object of politicians’ scorn, a program was created in an old Air Force hangar down in the Valley.  Trays and trays of freshly ground beef were provided, along with screw worm flies who would plant their eggs into the fresh ground meat which would eventually produce thousands of larvae.  As these larvae matured into pupa, they were gathered and radiated which caused them to produce sterile screw worm flies.  

Following this process, millions and millions of sterile screw worm flies were released via airplanes throughout the area of Texas where screw worms existed.  The sterile, male flies bred with the native wild screw worm flies, which caused them to lay their eggs which would never hatch.  The program resulted in complete eradication of screw worm flies in Texas, saving untold millions of dollars for ranchers and livestock producers in Texas.  

Imagine the results from just this one little vignette concerning research thought to be silly by non-visionary politicians.  Imagine what politicians may cost future generations of Texas if we allow them to impose their political will over the scholars and researchers of today. It’s as serious as the sex life of a tiny screw worm fly--and the consequences can be as costly as it gets.

THE RULE OF 100 [OR IS IT A RULE?]

One of the beautiful things about our system of government is that our Constitution was designed not only to limit the power of government and protect the people from runaway government, but it was also designed with checks and balances to protect the minority of the moment against the majority of the moment.  

Unfortunately, all of this can be cancelled and held for naught in the Texas Legislature, at least in the House, by the Rule of 100. This means if you can muster 100 votes in the Texas House you can do anything you want to.

Even though the direction of most bills strongly favored by the majority in a legislative body will pass mostly unscathed, occasionally a little ray of light seeps in and some significant changes can be made as a result of honest debate.  Even though legislation favored by the leadership is much like a freight train on a downhill track, it can be slowed occasionally by the right kind of flag man.  This can only happen if all the members of the Legislature, or a particular body considering the bill, are fully informed and the public is given a chance in open session to listen to the debate.  Even if the minority cannot alter the course of the legislation, the minority ought to have the opportunity to air its frustrations, objections and even perhaps occasionally a better idea.  

A perfect example of a runaway majority occurred recently in the Texas House of Representatives.  Governor Perry declared the Loser-Pay Bill an emergency.  The leadership of the House took its 101 majority, suspended the rules and stifled the debate, allowing no amendments, no real public discussion of the merits or demerits of this measure.  Had the public had the opportunity to listen to a full discussion of this measure, those who cared to pay attention would have learned several things.  

First of all, the title of the bill itself is a lie.  The bill is not a loser-pay bill.  The bill is a provision for a plaintiff to be faced with the requirement of paying outrageous attorneys’ fees whereby the plaintiff who received a large judgment can be required to pay the losing side’s attorneys’ fees along with court costs.  This legislation is not to reduce frivolous suits but to intimidate ordinary citizens into not availing themselves of the American jury system.


With all the talk of nonpartisan approaches and cooperative spirits working best in the legislative process, bipartisanship is out the window. The Republican Texas Senate and Republican House has shown that if the shoe pinches just a little, they will change the rules in midstream to accommodate their ideology.  The Two-third Rule in the Senate has worked well to require collegiality and cooperation among members of the Senate for 70+ years.  When Governor Perry declared "sanctuary" cities, picture ID for voters, tort reform or required medical procedures for women emergencies, the Republican Senate could not wait to dump the traditions of many years to accommodate the Republican agenda.  

In the House, the Speaker, who decried the heavy-handed tactics of Tom DeLay via Tom Craddick, has tossed the rule book in the trash. The democratic process was bypassed because the Republican leadership became frustrated at Democrat’s insistence on following the rules of the House.  On Mother’s Day weekend, House Representatives used the Rule of 100 to pass more “tort reform” which prohibited debate on amendments.

A truly honest loser-pay law would simply require the party against whom the jury found would pay the other side’s legal cost.  What’s wrong with that?  The answer is nothing, except that the rich, fat cat, tort reformers just didn’t want it; and they’re the ones who have given Republicans more money than any other group.

As an ordinary citizen there is little you can do about this situation this time.  There is, however, and will be a time in a November soon to come when you can do something about it.  These folks are counting on you having a short memory and a blind spot about where your interest is as opposed to folks who care mostly about money.  Find out how your representative and senator voted on this.  

Investment Tip

Most of us want a good return on money we invest.  Here is an inside tip.  If you have $100,000 lying around you really don’t know what to do with, or can do no better than 1%-1.5% interest return on a CD, there’s a way you can do better.

Take your $100,000 and contribute it to the next election of Rick Perry, whatever that may be.  Even though Perry has burned up the airways traveling around making every Republican political ‘do’ he vows he is not interested in leaving the wonderful job of Governor of Texas merely to be President of the United States.  

I’ve come to the conclusion that betting on Perry has good odds.  Here’s a guy who managed to end a three-way election with only 39% of the vote and proceeded to act as though he’d been elected by a landslide.  While obsessing over federal involvement, describing Washington DC as the “Devil’s town” and making talk about Texas being better off not a member of the Union, Perry presided over a broken budget, giving little or no attention to the future of Texas, but balancing the budget with that dirty federal money, leaving us to the horrible $25-30 billion dollar deficit we now enjoy.  

Perry gets by with blithely supporting tax breaks for mega-yachts, while teachers are being laid off by the hundreds of thousands and nursing homes fear they will have to close their doors, while senior citizens scratch for some other place to live.  

Perry’s hypocrisy has not seemed to rub off or cause alarm with a majority of Texas’ voters.  He appears to be more “Teflon” than Ronald Reagan and more tough-skinned than “Little” George Bush.  While thousands of protestors swarmed the state Capitol grounds protesting draconian cuts in education, Perry continues to insist we shouldn’t touch the $12-billion or so that we are about to have in our Rainy Day Fund.  

Even more hypocritical and disgusting is the fact our governor has the gall to maintain we should continue the Rick Perry slush fund, better known as the Emerging Technology Fund.   Perry has, without any real oversight, given away $350 to $370 million to “fat cats” in Texas who really don’t need it. Supposedly, it is for the creation of high-tech jobs and does not constitute loans for startup businesses, but out-and-out gifts to multi-millionaires.  

People do not seem to be bothered by the fact that most of the recipients of these tax dollars also gave Perry gifts ranging in the neighborhood of $100,000 each.  At least two of the companies benefiting from Perry’s largesse have gone broke; it is almost impossible to determine whether or not any of the rest of them achieved their goal of promised jobs for Texans.  

Even the Republican Legislature must be getting a little nervous now in that they are recommending better oversight and transparency of the Perry slush fund.  In a state where school children will be without updated school books in the coming school year, it would seem to me to be a better investment to give $300 million to buy new school books rather than give $370 million to multimillionaires who claim they have the “keys to the kingdom” and will create very valuable, profit-making businesses in the future.

It is obvious that an investment in a Rick Perry Campaign can have an extremely high yield.  Many of the $50,000 to $100,000 contributors to this last governor’s race have received several million from the Perry slush funds.  Where else can you make a 100-1 return on your investment?

The next time one of your friends complains about the “welfare Cadillac”; namely, the poor person receiving welfare while driving an expensive car, you should point out to them the “welfare Cadillac” drivers are pikers.  Under the Perry Plan, we are giving welfare --which should be delineated as Lear-jet welfare-- by giving millions to businessmen who don’t need it to begin with.

POWER AND MONEY

For a long time I have maintained that tort reform is more about power and money than reforming anything.  Once again my belief has been affirmed.  

While Republicans claim the recent landslide victory in the Texas Legislature, leaving us with 101 Republicans and 49 Democrats, is a result of the outcry of the people for more conservative government, there may be another factor at work. A closer examination of the results of the last legislative election reveals that tort reform groups furnished at least a half-million dollars in each open legislative race in Texas, proving once again that money matters.

Just to show how much things have changed in the last few generations, in 1962 when I ran for the House of Representatives I spent almost $5,000 total on a primary race, a runoff and a general election.  Since Tom DeLay’s plan has taken effect re-arranging Texas House districts, it is not unusual to see $500,000 or more spent on a House race.

Tort reform groups would have you believe this is strictly about doing away with silly, frivolous lawsuits which cost good business people thousands of dollars.  Recently, the Texans for Lawsuit Reform have weighed in on a new issue. They are now criticizing reapportionment of the House districts.  

Reapportionment, as you know, occurs every 10 years, except when Tom DeLay, alias “The Hammer,” persuaded the Republican leadership of Texas to depart from tradition and re-divide the districts in the middle of a 10-year cycle.  Richard Trabulsi, chief lobbyist for Texans for Lawsuit Reform, is now scurrying around the Legislature asking that the districts be made more conservative.  He is worried that because of certain growth populations, particularly among Hispanic communities,  his conservative strength will be diluted.  

Reform groups have long since done away with any opportunity for civil suit abuses and now it appears they are looking for ways to continue to justify their existence among the business community.  It is also obvious the business community is open to this long-term plan as evidenced by the millions and millions of dollars they continue to pour into the coffers of these groups to let them buy votes in the next election.

There is also more recent evidence that conservatives, including our governor, continue to play fast and loose with the truth. You will certainly recall our governor suggesting that maybe it was time for Texas to secede from the union, and repeatedly make the claim that Texans send more money to Washington than they get back.  A recent revelation by Rachel Maddow, who has a late-night political talk show, revealed research showing that Texans receive more money from the federal government than the amount all Texans pay in taxes.  

Conservative members of the House continue to demonstrate their hypocrisy while attacking the federal government as though it was a foreign power.  They gladly accepted the $13+ billion to balance the budget two years ago, and now are accepting $830+ million which is supposed to be spent on education--but likely will not. At the same time, our governor, who purportedly hates federal funding, is begging for money to fight wildfires in Texas.  

This is a little strange in that the Texas Legislature, under his leadership, in its recent budget, just cut funding to rural fire departments.

On the subject of the budget, look for a showdown between the Senate and House.  The Senate, in a moment of sanity, decided to dip once again into the rainy day fund to the tune of slightly over $3 billion, making the Senate budget on education $5.7 billion higher than the House version. The House is likely to win this battle in that it requires a two-thirds vote of the House in order to spend money from the rainy day fund.  This simply is not likely to happen with the governor’s threatened veto and the new Tea Party-backed Republicans vowing “no new taxes” and “no use of the rainy day fund.”  

It seems our present Legislature is totally dedicated to sacrifice the future of education in Texas on its vowed “no new taxes” even though Texans are taxed less than citizens of 48 other states.

WHY VOTE AGAINST YOUR OWN INTEREST?

In recent elections, according to my memory, Republicans captured two countywide offices for the first time in Jefferson County.  Some attribute the results of the recent election to racism.  Others attribute it to the rise and activity of the Tea Party.  While yet others contend the Democratic Party is out of step with most average, middle-class citizens in America in general, and Jefferson County in particular.

For thousands of years common people have been duped into acting politically against their own interests.  For thousands of years people sold themselves basically into slavery through the belief that God appointed the kings to rule over everyone else.  Eventually, common people realized there were more of them than there were royalty and, thus, democracy as a form of government rose to the forefront.  

Democracy, however, depends on the common folks recognizing their own interests and acting in accordance.  America is rapidly retreating because too many Middle Americans are being duped into voting against their own interests.  The Republican Party has been extremely skilled in shaping political opinion.  

Cases in point are the efforts made to persuade America that the Democratic Party stands for nothing more than homosexual marriage and raising your taxes.  Close examination of either of those theorems will not hold water.  Republicans in Congress are currently urging the defeat of our president’s health care proposals passed by Congress, and every criticism thereof begins with, “The American people want...”  

The new political god in the United States, particularly with the recent Citizens United Supreme Court opinion, is money.  The Supreme Court has decreed corporations can spend whatever amount of money they choose, with or without their shareholders’ permission or desire, on politics.  What’s worse, the voters of this country do not have the right to know where the money’s coming from.  If you belong to the union or are a shareholder at one of these refineries--and Shell Oil, British Petroleum, Chevron or others contribute shareholders’ money to bust unions--you are, therefore, supporting a political position adverse to you and your family.

Another way you can tell whether or not a party is aligned with your interests is to check the source of the money.  The biggest contributor to the Republican Party in Texas is Bob Perry–14 million dollars donated in the last election cycle.  Bob Perry is a big homebuilder who was the originator of the idea of preventing people from being able to sue developers for foisting off substandard or shoddy homes on families and denying them access to the courts.  Aside from cutting taxes at the expense of school children, old folks and teachers, Perry and other Republicans continue their relentless assault on closing the doors of the courthouse to middle-class Texans.

The Republican solution to the mess we had following the hurricanes was simply to deny people the right to sue the insurance company which had messed up and denied folks their just claims for their destroyed homes.

Money obviously has begun to make a tremendous difference from Washington on down.  Since 2001 the amount of money spent on lobbyists has grown by almost three times.  In 2001 the amount spent on lobbyists lobbying Congress was slightly over 1 billion; today it is over 3 billion. The largest chunk of it is spent by insurance companies and health care providers.  Do you really believe either of these entities is looking out for your interest?  

While Republicans tout holding taxes down, they are mainly holding taxes down for the richest 1% of Americans.  In the time of Bill Clinton, the richest Americans were paying approximately 30% of their income in taxes; today, they are paying approximately 16% and some are paying none.  General Electric, the biggest corporation in the United States, paid none last year.  How much did you pay?

We can’t say we were not warned.  There is a cogent quote which goes, “A blind and ignorant resistance to every effort for the reforming of abuses and for the readjustment of society for modern, industrial conditions represents not true conservatism but incitement to the wildest radicalism.”  This statement was made in 1909,  not by some wild-eyed left-wing Democrat but by Theodore Roosevelt.  Similar warnings were issued toward the latter part of their tenure of office as president of the United States by Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, as well as Dwight D. Eisenhower, who warned society to be wary of the industrial military complex in the United States.

Billionaires continue to pay precious little to support the nation which has allowed them to become wealthy, while ordinary homeowners struggle to hang onto the shelter for their families.  A recent comparison which is appropriate--with so many middle-class folks voting for the Republican line against their own interests--is the statement “There are too many mice voting to help the cats in hopes that some day they will become a cat.”

Endangering Our Future

“When the leaders have no vision, the people will perish.”  This quote appears to have connection with the current leadership of Texas.  The seeming lack of vision from our current leaders does not bode well for the future of our state.  Buoyed by right-wing think tanks and the Tea Party, our governor and Legislature seem intent on causing irreparable harm to Texas, education and other social services.

While giving no thought to examining an outmoded and antiquated system of taxation, our leaders would seek to correct our huge deficit on the backs of teachers, children, the ill and aged.  

Often wrong, but seldom in doubt, Governor Rick Perry ignored the warning of former Comptroller Carolyn Keaton-Rylander about three sessions ago and claimed his property tax cut proposal would allow the state to reduce property taxes and at the same time fully fund education.  Rylander, who has spent at least a decade estimating future tax revenues and comparing them to the needs of the state, was ignored by Perry.  She claimed the Perry proposal would leave school funding about 5 billion short each year.  Rylander was right.

In typical Perry fashion, the governor publicly predicted Rylander was simply an “alarmist” and the phenomenal growth he would promote in Texas would more than make up for the shortfall predicted by Rylander.  It didn’t.  Even worse, Perry and others continued to ignore the increasing debt raised by the inadequately funded state budget.  

Hypocritically, our governor took more than a billion from stimulus money appropriated by Congress to help relieve and balance the state budget for 2009 and 2010.  At the same time that federal funds were saving Perry’s and other conservatives’ bacon, Perry had the gall to suggest at a Tea Party rally that perhaps it was time for Texas to secede from the Union.  It appears he didn’t recall that having been tried once before.  

While taking billions from the feds to help cover up a huge deficit in Texas’ funding, at the same time, Perry, has refused to accept slightly over $800-million on the grounds there were too many strings attached to it and that the feds were trying to tell Texas what it had to do.  Strangely enough, the big strings attached to the $800 plus millions was that it had been appropriated by Congress for the purpose of education; and if Texas accepted it, they had to spend it on education.

Even though the wealthy in Texas are among the lowest taxed in America, the Republicans prefer to balance the budget by firing teachers and cutting payments for people who are in nursing homes.  They seem incapable of even taking a look at the possibility of changing the huge corporate giveaways such as the $23-million to the gas industry in the form of reduced taxes–even though the gas industry is turning out record profits.  It also appears the approximate $300-million slush fund available for the governor to give his fat-cat friends in the name of business development is sacred.  A recent attempt by Democrats in the Texas House failed better than 2:1 to take the slush fund of the governor and invest it in education for young people in this state.

Reminiscent of the 50's, right-wing politicians in our state are presuming to tell the universities how to run their business.  In the 50's Texas lost some national scholars and educators on the grounds that some of them only taught 3-4 hours of class work but contributed internationally to tremendous research which proved of benefit to the future of this state.  Know-nothing, brainless conservatives, for example, ridiculed the fact one of our universities was studying the sex life of the screw worm fly.  By discovering the screw worm fly would breed only once during its life span, producing millions of sterile, male flies, screw worms in Texas have virtually been eradicated.  The value of the millions of livestock saved by this ridiculed research can’t even be counted today.  Now, right-wing “policy wonks,” pals of the governor, are suggesting we improve the efficiency of our colleges by curtailing research.  These are closely akin to the know-nothing conservatives of the early 1900's who wanted then to shutdown the United States Patent Office on the grounds that almost everything worthwhile had already been invented.

The future of this state does not lie in giving away millions to fat-cat speculators and business people.  The future of this state lies in developing the potential of great minds; particularly, those of our young people.  We cannot fire enough teachers to replace $29-billion in our budget.  Thousands of younger teachers who will be laid off will eventually find better jobs.  They will be loathe to return to teaching.  Fewer young people, particularly bright young people, will be more and more reluctant to enter teaching when it is not viewed as a job with a secure future.  In a generation or so in the future, I am certain this state will be faced with a huge teacher shortage which will only be solved at a much greater price than keeping the teachers we have or the price of having our children taught by unqualified persons in the classrooms.

The distinguished professors who will be chased from Texas by wrongheaded thinking--that cannot see the value of research and development--will not be replaced or lured back to Texas for generations.  Our colleges will pay the price of having lower standings nationally and internationally and in losing the good reputation we have gained in recent years.  The price we pay today to maintain what quality of education we now possess will pale in comparison to the price of lack of vision for the future.  Without doubt, it is a “pay me now, or pay me more later” situation.

Phony Reformers

Testimony on bills pending in the current Texas legislative session make it abundantly clear once again that tort reform is not about reform of any kind.  It’s about money and power.  Talking heads and fat cat practitioners of shady deals would have you believe they only want to protect the world from frivolous lawsuits.  But, they don’t give a twit about frivolous lawsuits.  It’s the real lawsuits with merit they fear and would like to eradicate.  

We have discussed one of these so-called reforms here in this blog.  This bill would provide that if someone, through their own negligence, killed 2 or more people, or seriously injured 5 or more people, they could stop a lawsuit in its tracks simply by making an offer of settlement.  The bill provides no standard of what an adequate offer of settlement would be and it punishes the would-be claimants by forcing them to pay the insurance company lawyers of the wrongdoers in the event a jury does not award at least as much as the defendants offered.  They call it a provision whereby the loser pays.  

The phony aspect of this is that the loser does not pay. Were the insurance company to offer a pittance and the plaintiff were to get a jury verdict for twice as much, there would be no penalty on the part of the defendant.  A true lose or pay would simply provide that whoever lost the lawsuit had to pay the other side’s attorney.  The so-called reform groups violently oppose such a provision.

During a recent hearing on many of these “reform” bills, an experienced attorney pointed out there are many abuses these groups seem to totally ignore.  He raised the question of whether or not the defendants of a lawsuit could be guilty of abuse.  

He told of a case where two people were seriously injured in an automobile accident.  The defendants had violated several traffic laws, including running a red light and t-boning the defendants, injuring them probably for life.  There were numerous witnesses to the accident and factually there was little or no doubt the defendants were guilty of negligence.  Instead of in good faith admitting their negligence and negotiating and going to trial on the issue of damages, the defendants’ attorneys filed a motion for summary judgment.  Although the defendants’ attorney knew or should have known there was no chance his motion would be granted, it required additional hours of work on the part of the claimants’ attorneys.  

After it was turned down by the court and ruled without merit, there was no penalty on the part of the defendants who filed such a motion.  Eventually, when the case reached the courthouse and was about to go before the jury, the defendants admitted negligence and went to trial only on the issue of damages.  They did so because they knew that if they, in the presence of 12 jurors denied what was obviously a fact, it would look like they were dealing in bad faith, which they were.  

From the reform groups I have named, there is absolutely no effort to curb this type practice in our courthouses.  There is no effort to curtail outlandish legal fees associated with trials charged by defendants.  Usually, they are charged by the huge Houston, Dallas and other metropolitan defense mega-firms.

Other evidence of the hypocrisy of the Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse and Texans for Lawsuit Reform arose in hearings concerning the Texas windstorm claims arising from the recent hurricanes which besieged the Texas coast.  There is ample evidence that the executives of this insurance company-owned entity did not deal with victims of the hurricane in good faith, that in all likelihood kickbacks were made, favoritism was shown, nepotism was employed, incompetent adjusters hired and claims handled in a grossly negligent manner.  

Despite all of this compelling evidence, the lawsuit reform groups do not propose reforming the insurance entity, but instead seek legislation to curtail legal fees of the very lawyers, who through their diligence and efforts, uncovered the unethical and sometime illegal conduct of these people who were depriving Texans oftentimes of their homes.

Once again this shows that these people do the bidding of their fat-cat masters and really care nothing about reforming or improving the court system in Texas.  They are only interested in protecting the potential wrongdoers who are able to bankroll lobbyists and PR people in order to insulate themselves against being held accountable for their own wrongdoing.

Too many Texans seem to forget the tort system was created to bring some measure of relief to victims of negligence and bad conduct, but to deter that conduct by making an example of those who would injure and swindle their fellow citizens.  Oftentimes, the only thing these people will understand is hitting them in the pocketbook in order to deter people from manufacturing shoddy houses or unlawfully taking away the quality of life from others.

Although there is no definitive study on the subject, it appears since the wave of measures being passed through several state legislatures insulating doctors and hospitals from meaningful lawsuits, that there are more and more injuries occurring during medical procedures.  A recent study has pointed out that almost 1 in every 3 persons seeking medical treatment in a hospital is injured as a result of human error.  The rate of infections during hospital stays is growing at an alarming rate as a result of failure to take ordinary care such as washing one’s hands before performing medical procedures.  

Regulatory bodies such as the Board of Medical Examiners or attorney generals have proved effective as a measure to prevent harm due to human negligence.  The best tried and true remedy to deter such conduct is holding the wrongdoers liable before a democratically selected jury of one’s peers.  

It is obvious to some of us that having one’s fate decided in a democratic manner by free citizens sitting as a jury is certainly a scary proposition to some people.

...what emergency?

There are some weird definitions emerging from the 82nd Legislative Session.  But I could be wrong.  I always thought an emergency was an urgent matter needing immediate attention.  Failure to deal with an emergency, I thought, could lead to impending doom.

Either I or Governor Perry have the wrong view of what constitutes an emergency.

As our elected officials have been meeting in Austin to wrestle with knotty state problems, several matters have appeared to me to present themselves as true emergencies.  First, the State’s $27-billion deficit, I believe, should rank at or near the top.  And in the running for a state emergency could be the impending layoffs of tens of thousands of Texas teachers; also it might constitute an emergency that, next school year, Texas students will not have new books.

And at the top of my list are the many Texans who feel that health care for seniors or the shortage of over 650 state police officers also might have merited some early concern as possible emergencies.

Obviously, our governor knows something we don’t.  You can tell by the things he has placed on the state’s agenda by declaring them emergencies and needing immediate action.  Our governor’s number one emergency was directing the Legislature to immediately deal with requiring voters to show a picture id before casting a ballot.  Well, Governor Perry surely has some terribly secret information on this voter fraud emergency because, from all the reports emanating from the Attorney General’s office, only one or two possible voter fraud cases have been filed as a result of a 2-3 year investigation by that office.

Second in rank of importance on our governor’s list was a bill to prevent Houston, and a few other cities, from being a sanctuary to illegal aliens--a law obviously and sorely needed by persons other than the officials of the city of Houston, who were unaware that their city was under attack, and who instead have been humanely furnishing a safe harbor from the warlords killing and pillaging just south of our borders.

Finally, I’m certain most women seeking an abortion did not realize how helpful it would be to have imposed on them the requirement that they watch a sonogram prior to having such a procedure. This is not one of those ‘jelly on the belly’ procedures--in early pregnancy, a sonogram requires a probe inserted in the vagina to take a picture. Surely doctors, not legislators, should be the judge of whether this is an emergency.

Defining frivolous lawsuits also has me confused.  Based on reports from all the groups claiming to be about improving our legal system, frivolous lawsuits clogging our courts, if you can believe it, are at a crisis level and are the focus of trying to streamline the system by ridding us of these merit-less matters being filed in our courts.  The Texas Association of Business, Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse and fellow travelers seem to believe that it is the frivolous lawsuits and their costs that is spiraling this country toward destruction of our entire free enterprise system.

In checking the definition, I discovered in The New College Dictionary that ‘frivolous’ is defined as “a matter characterized as lacking seriousness or sense.”  The second definition is, “lacking any serious purpose.”  These definitions are in part the source of my confusion.  If so-called tort reform is aimed at frivolous lawsuits, I’m having trouble understanding why the so-called tort reform groups are backing bills to require a litigant Plaintiff, or a claimant for serious injuries, to pay the insurance company’s lawyer if they fail to get all the money they claim. And there's a bill by Senator Tommy Williams that would allow a company like British Petroleum, after killing more than two people, or injuring more than five, to simply shutdown a lawsuit and cutoff discovery by a mere offer of settlement.  Also, it would require the family of a worker killed in such a negligently caused explosion to pay the company’s legal costs, if they fail to obtain more than the offer by the company...which is a concept somewhere beyond heinous, to my way of thinking.

This brings to mind the question that thus far has been unanswered:  How can a lawsuit that is filed because more than two people were killed --or more than five were seriously injured-- be frivolous?  The last time I checked, the lawsuit over the death of the breadwinner of a family was a serious matter.  At least it is for the victims of wrongdoing.  

I suppose whether or not a lawsuit is a frivolous lawsuit is determined sort of like the way one might determine whether or not surgery is major or minor.  Clearly, our governor would define minor surgery as that surgery performed on someone else.