From The Blogs: Monday, June 19, 2006

3 comments

1 PC Higgins { 06.20.06 at 1:30 pm }

Mr. Vince,

I found your wonderful site by accident, but like my dear wife Lucy who volunteered, I plan to hang around alot and link to you.

This is like a one-stop emporium for everything in the brain-sick world of Texas politics. I like Juanita and Gregsopinion, but you are the bomb, I must say! Impressive.

The blogs today are interesting, although I paid more attention to the rain and Juneteenth. I did find this story noteworthy on the AP:

“Texas legislators appear to be in poor compliance with a law they passed requiring public disclosure of the occupations of major campaign donors, a report released Tuesday shows.

Democrats and Republicans alike failed in some cases to report donor occupations or employers of those who gave $500 or more. Democrats had the worst overall record in making the information public, according to a review by the nonprofit Texans for Public Justice.”

Obviously Dems want to hide contributions from trial lawyers, pornographers, intellectuals, and abortionists while Republicans receive money with pride from developers, oilmen, insurance lobbies, and evangelical christians. Makes me want to re-read my H.I. Hiakowa with a big bottle of wiskey, (nothing unusual about the wiskey).

Warmest regards,

LD

2 anyone but c4n3p { 06.20.06 at 1:32 pm }

Toll roads aren’t the only issue which induces a bad case of the flip flops in Carole “4names3parties” Strayhorn (or c4n3p for short).

Consider Strayhorn’s other flip flops as reported by the Abilene Reporter News:

School Vouchers - Got a loan of almost $1 million from voucher supporter James Leininger in her 1998 comptroller campaign. But earlier this year, Strayhorn vowed to “veto any type of legislation that puts a single dollar into any voucher program.”

Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) - Called for cutting CHIP spending in 2003, by requiring registration every six instead of 12 months. But in 2004, she blamed Perry’s tight-fistedness for a large drop in enrollment. “It’s time to put children first,” Strayhorn said. “It’s unconscionable that we’re dead last in percent of children on health insurance.”

Tuition Deregulation - Strayhorn called for it in 2003, but nine months later said a student’s tuition rate should be frozen at what they paid as a freshman.

TAKS Test - She endorsed grade advancement based on testing in 1998. But a few weeks ago, she said she would “scale back the importance of the state’s standardized TAKS test.”

While Strayhorn flip flops on some issues, on other issues she won’t even give you a straight answer to a fair question. Consider Strayhorn’s comments (and refusal to comment) when asked about her views on women’s reproductive rights by the Dallas Morning News:

DMN: Should Roe vs. Wade be overturned?

Strayhorn: I believe in the sanctity of life.

DMN: Are Texas laws too restrictive for adult women? Would you favor adding new restrictions or repealing current ones?

Strayhorn: Declined to answer.

DMN: Should abortion be legal in cases of rape, incest and to protect the life of the woman?

Strayhorn: I know there are those extraordinarily tough circumstances where heartbreaking choices have to be made.

DMN: Should pharmacists be allowed to refuse to dispense the “morning-after” pill?

Strayhorn: Declined to answer.

DMN: Should schools limit discussion of pregnancy prevention to abstinence-only?

Strayhorn: Declined to answer.

If you want to know where Strayhorn stands, you have to do your own research because she won’t tell you. But check out her pro-corporation anti-populist agenda as set out in her own words in her “Select Proposals from Challenging the Status Quo”:

“The General Land Office (GLO) should be … required to target at least 5 percent of all underused lands for sale each year….”

“Less confrontational methods of … enforcing environmental laws often can be more effective than traditional, punitive approaches. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission should aggressively market its Regulatory Flexibility Program to reduce onerous restrictions on businesses….”

“Create a Bill of Rights for business. Every business has the right to expect state agencies to provide … a commitment to streamlining regulations….”

Or consider Strayhorn’s abuse of office to promote her bigotry against the Unitarian Universalist church.

Among the seven principles that guide Unitarian Universalists is the belief that we must all respect the interdependent nature of all existence. This belief demands an attitude of tolerance. Never had any state or governmental agency questioned the Unitarians tax-exempt religious status because of this religious philosophy UNTIL Strayhorn became angered by the fact that he Unitarian Universalist church stepped out of line from the common practice of Texas churches endorsing right-wing agendas.

Defying the church’s long history, Strayhorn claimed that the church wasn’t really a religion so she could use that argument as the basis to yank the church’s tax empt status because, in Strayhorn’s words, the Texas Unitarian church “does not have one system of belief.” Of course, even conservative legal and religious scholars were shocked. Conservative University of Texas law professor Douglas Laycock, who specializes in religious liberty issues, was quick to point out that Texas has not always barred similarly inclusive religions from tax exempt status. Previously, even the Republican Texas Supreme Court had and other Texas courts had rejected this tactic, holding that such a bigoted practice “fails to include the whole range of belief systems that may, in our diverse and pluralistic society, merit the First Amendment protection.”

Strayhorn vowed to fight the Unitarian Universalist church to the U.S. Supreme Court, comparing the church to a “wannabe cult” with members who “dress up and parades down Sixth Street on Halloween.” Just a week after this bigoted statement, Strayhorn reversed her biased decision and gave up her persecution.

If this was not enough to convince anyone that Strayhorn is no sane alternative, remember that as a member of the Legislative Redistricting Board, Strayhorn cast the deciding vote to gerrymander Texas House districts to reward Republicans and punish Democrats.

As Strayhorn’s views on these issues become better known, she will hold no appeal for Democrats and she will fade away because she cannot beat Perry among Republicans.

Moreover, Strayhorn can’t win.

Here’s the analysis of the Lone Star Project:

“The unusual multi-candidate gubernatorial field in Texas has created an environment that may defy current conventional wisdom. Particularly, early observers may be overestimating the ability of Carole Strayhorn to garner a plurality of support in a potential four candidate field without the base of support that a party nomination provides. Conversely, although Chris Bell has raised relatively little money to date, he won the Democratic primary easily and has a voting record and political history virtually all Democrats, and some true independents, can embrace.

An analysis of the four-candidate field, based on projected voter turnout in 2006, shows that in order to compete and win, Strayhorn would have to run a campaign that simultaneously cuts deeply into the expected Republican vote that would otherwise go to Rick Perry AND cut significantly into the expected Democratic vote that would otherwise go to Bell. Gaining a little from both won’t work, and cutting deeply into one, but not the other, falls short as well. … Strayhorn has to win a difficult game of “playing both sides against the middle.” She has no natural base, so she has to carve one from a very large number of regular Republican voters. However, she must build this Republican base while establishing voter appeal to Democrats, with whom she has no natural affinity….

Strayhorn, interestingly, appears to face the most difficult task of all – she must concentrate heavily on voters who typically vote Republican in a two party race for at least two reasons.
1. Splitting or even winning a majority of Democratic voters does not get Strayhorn to a plurality. She must capture a major portion of votes that would otherwise go to Perry.
2. Carole is a Republican. She identified herself as a Republican. She became and ran as a Republican before Rick Perry. (Source: The Associated Press, 11/2/1986 and Associated Press, 5/11/1989) Prior to 2006, she had voted in every single Republican primary since at least 1990. (Source: Travis County Elections Administration) She has close political and family ties to the Bush White House. In 2002, she endorsed, ran with, and campaigned for the entire Texas Republican ticket, including Rick Perry.”

This excellent analysis is confirmed by Mike Baselice, a pollster who was interviewed in the Texas Monthly article:

“In 2002 the most accurate pollster—by far—was Mike Baselice, who works for Perry and correctly predicted the outcomes of the state’s major races within fractions of a percentage point. Baselice believes that the race can be understood in terms of the built-in votes that Perry and Bell are likely to get as major-party nominees. “The lowest Republican vote this decade was David Dewhurst’s 51.8 percent in the 2002 lieutenant governor’s race against John Sharp,” he says. “So 52 percent is the base. The Democrats went as low as 32 percent, when Marty Akins got stomped for comptroller by Strayhorn. Let’s be generous and say the Republican base is only 50, the Democratic base is as much as 35, and the ticket splitters are the remaining 15.”

But how much of those base percentages can realistically be expected to hold? “Perry got 92 percent of the Republican vote in 2002,” says Baselice. “If he only gets 80 percent of his base, that puts him at 40 percent right away. But then you have to remember that he also got 15 percent of the Democratic vote against Sanchez.” Of the roughly 50 percent Republican vote, Baselice sees 80 percent going to Perry, 10 percent to Strayhorn, 5 percent to Bell, and 5 percent to Friedman. Of the Democrats’ 35 percent, he sees 75 percent going to Bell, 10 percent to Perry, 10 percent to Strayhorn, and 5 percent to Friedman. He assumes that the 15 percent independent vote will be split 30-30-30 among Perry, Strayhorn, and Bell, followed by Friedman with 10. The net result: Perry wins with 48 percent, followed by Bell at 33.25 percent, Strayhorn at 13 percent, and Friedman at 5.75 percent.”

Finally, this is the same conclusion of analyst Chuck McDonald for the Austin Fox news affiliate.

3 PC Higgins { 06.20.06 at 8:31 pm }

I wonder how long the Republican base has been at 50% as purported by Rick Perry’s polster? I don’t recall Ann Richards having a ticket-splitter in her first race, so unless 30% of disenchanted Republican voters crossed over to vote for Richards, this estimated base must have started with Gov. Bush’s ascencion in ‘96 or later. Ten years or less of political primacy is probably not a great predictor with a slag economy in an off-year election with Bush polling at >49% for his too-handsome legacy candidate, (and two spoilers). No matter what Fox News’ in-house pol says.

You must log in to post a comment.