Category Archives: State news

AG’s case takes interesting turn

051216KenPaxtonInCourt2_jpg_800x1000_q100

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s journey through the state’s judicial system has taken another interesting turn.

The 5th Court of Appeals, based in Dallas, has rejected Paxton’s request that the securities fraud case against him be tossed out. According to the appellate court, the case should go to trial and Paxton should have to make the state prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he broke securities law by failing to properly report income he received while providing financial advice to clients.

Paxton has pleaded not guilty to the charges brought by — get this — a Collin County grand jury, which happens to be in Paxton’s home county.

This case ought to be settled by a trial court.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/01/appeals-court-upholds-fraud-charges-against-paxton/

What’s next? Paxton’s legal team is considering whether to take it to the state’s highest criminal appellate court, the Court of Criminal Appeals. The special prosecutor’s office assigned to this case said it is confident the CCA will uphold the lower court ruling against the AG.

I understand fully that Paxton is “innocent until proven guilty.” He has tried all along the way to get the case thrown out. The courts have ruled repeatedly against him, saying the charges against him have merit.

Will the Republican AG prevail if he takes it to the all-GOP Court of Criminal Appeals? That might be his best shot at getting it thrown out.

The Texas Tribune reported: “During a hearing before the court last month, Paxton’s lawyers most prominently argued that the grand jury that indicted him was improperly selected. The court rejected that argument in its ruling Wednesday.

“‘After reviewing the record and, in particular, the process used by the district judge, we conclude the complained-of method of selecting the grand jury is not a complaint that would render the grand jury illegally formed,’ Chief Justice Carolyn Wright wrote.”

The way I look at it, if he’s innocent of the charges brought against him by the grand jury — and by the complaint filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission — then he ought to make the case in court.

Make the state prove its case and let a jury of his peers decide.

 

Governor, comptroller right to end ‘severance pay’

abbott

Why did it take a controversy to get the Texas governor and the state comptroller of public accounts to do the right thing?

Gov. Greg Abbott and Comptroller Glenn Hegar have ordered state agencies to end the practice of granting what’s been called “emergency leave” pay for public employees who left their public-sector jobs.

Let’s call it what it was: severance pay.

Someone leaves public employment voluntarily and then collects pay even though he or she is no longer on the job?

Ridiculous!

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/01/governor-comptroller-orders-agencies-stop-pay-depa/

The issue blew up when Attorney General Ken Paxton — the guy who’s got his own share of legal difficulties with which he must contend — paid two former top assistants after they had left the AG’s office. It turns out that the General Land Office did the same thing.

Abbott and Hegar’s directive stipulates that it will remain in effect until the Legislature decides how to handle it.

Here’s an idea for legislators to heed: Ban it forthwith. Make it illegal to pay these kinds of severance packages to public employees who resign their jobs voluntarily.

I trust we’re clear on that.

 

Texas could be in play — for once

Texas-calendar

Is this the strangest election year you’ve seen since, oh, The Flood?

Consider, then, what just might be coming down the road in Texas, this place where Republicans rule from horizon to horizon and where Democrats seem to have been placed on a witness protection list.

Hillary Rodham Clinton just might — with the help of her probable Republican Party presidential campaign opponent — be able to make this state competitive in the upcoming election.

You can stop laughing now.

Hear me out.

GOP nominee-in-waiting Donald J. Trump appears to be doing everything he can to anger Latino voters. It all started with that hideous campaign launch in which he declared his intention to build a “beautiful wall” along our border with Mexico to keep out the rapists, murderers and drug dealers who, he said, were being sent here by the Mexican government.

Then just the other day he singled out an Indiana-born federal judge who Trump said “hates” him. The judge has a Latino name. Trump called him “a Mexican.” Uhh, no. He’s not. The judge is as American as Trump.

How does this play in Texas? The state’s largest minority group is Latino, who also are the fastest-growing demographic group in the state.

Just suppose the Latino population turns out in massive numbers after hearing the constant barrage of statements that the Republican nominee has made about them. Suppose that Clinton’s campaign team taps into that anger with a concerted effort targeted at reminding that voter bloc of what lies ahead for the country if Trump gets elected president.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/clinton-plans-play/

Granted, history hasn’t been good for Democrats in Texas. The state’s Latino population so far hasn’t turned out to vote in numbers commensurate with its enormous potential impact.

Erica Grieder, writing for Texas Monthly’s Burka Blog, notes: It seems that empirical evidence on campaigning in Texas deserves an asterisk too, because Clinton has now declared her intention to do something no Democrat has attempted recently: compete in a general election in Texas with the goal of winning. Barack Obama didn’t allocate serious time or resources to try to win the state’s electoral votes in 2008 or 2012.

My earlier prediction — such as it was — that Clinton might score an Electoral College sweep this fall is looking less and less possible, given recent polling data showing a tightening race across the nation.

However, consider this: If Clinton does make Texas a competitive state and closes to within spitting distance of Trump, then she’s likely to win those states that now are deemed too close to call.

Therefore, if Texas does flip from R to D, then I suggest we just might see a blowout in the making on Election Day.

And yes, I can hear you laughing now.

Ken Starr packs it in at Baylor

starr

Ken Starr’s resignation as chancellor at Baylor University because of a sex scandal might be the biggest non-surprise since, oh, when he helped engineer the impeachment of President Clinton in a case that also involved a sex scandal.

Yes, the irony is rich.

Starr quit as chancellor after the Baylor regents kicked him out of his job as president of the university. The chancellor’s job is a ceremonial one, with no actual administrative duties. The regents’ decision was based on Starr’s role in the university covering up reports of sexual abuse on its campus involving members of the school’s top-tier football team.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/06/01/ken-starr-says-he-will-resign-baylor-chancellor/

Frankly, Starr ought to resign his other job at Baylor, as a law professor. His presence on the campus taints the school.

Former head football coach Art Briles was fired because of this scandal. Athletic Director Ian McCaw resigned after regents put him on probation because of the same scandal.

Regents kicked Starr out of his presidency because, as the “captain of the good ship Baylor,” he was ultimately responsible for all that occurs on the campus.

Starr professed “ignorance” regarding the many rape charges that have been filed against students at Baylor. Is that a sufficient defense? Of course not.

So, now he’s gone as chancellor, saying in an interview with ESPN, “We need to put this horrible experience behind us. We need to be honest.”

OK, professor, if honesty is what you want, how about just walking away from the campus altogether?

Doing so would enable himself a chance at a new start. Better still, it would give Baylor University a chance at renewal as well.

 

Trump voter offers a reason

donald-trump-speech-promo-getty-491877616

I had a conversation this morning with a friend, who announced to me she’s going to vote for Donald J. Trump this fall for president of the United States.

She is likely among a majority of Texas Panhandle voters who’ll do so. That’s no surprise, given this region’s strong Republican ties and its apparent intense loathing of Democratic nominee-to-be Hillary Rodham Clinton.

OK, so the conversation progressed.

I took a deep breath, looked over my friend’s shoulder at the TV screen in the lobby — which always is turned to the Fox News Channel — and said without offering specifics, “But Trump is not fit for the office.”

“Neither is Hillary,” my friend said.

I could feel my eyebrows lift.

“What has she done” to make her unfit for the presidency? I asked.

“I don’t know,” my friend said. “All I know is that I cannot vote for her.” She said she intends to vote for someone for president, it just won’t be Hillary Clinton.

I mentioned Gary Johnson, the recently nominated former New Mexico governor who’s going to run for the second election in a row as a Libertarian candidate for president.

She was unaware of Johnson’s candidacy. I encouraged her to take a look. She said she would.

We then agreed that we won’t talk politics from this day on … until after the election in November.

We’re still friends. I hope she still considers me a friend.

I took a profound feeling of non-acceptance away from that brief conversation this morning. I don’t get the sense that there’s anything in Trump’s alleged “platform” that appeals to my friend. She’s just not going to vote for Clinton because, I presume, she doesn’t trust her.

As for Trump, he’s tapped into some unknown reservoir of something among voters.

I know that he’s reeled in at least one Texas voter who’ll cast her vote for him.

My sense, though, is that the my friend has revealed more about the general electorate’s mood going into this presidential campaign than perhaps she realized.

There’s a lot negative karma in the air.

Another head rolls at Baylor

mccaw

Another head has been lopped off — proverbially, of course — at Baylor University.

This time it belongs to the athletic director, Ian McCaw, who quit in the wake of the sex scandal that already has cost the school its president and its head football coach.

McCaw clearly had to go. He had been put on probation just as Baylor president Ken Starr was getting demoted and head coach Art Briles was put on “suspension” prior to being fired.

Why the shakeup? Oh, just that scandal involving Baylor’s mishandling of the sexual assault charges — and conviction — of football stars. The scandal has roiled the Waco campus and has caused — one should hope — a tremendous re-examination of the way the school handles such cases. In the cases involved in this scandal, the school seemingly sought to sweep them away, hoping no one would notice.

Baylor’s regents issued the usual statement of regret in announcing McCaw’s resignation: “We understand and accept this difficult decision by Ian McCaw to resign as Athletic Director and are grateful for his service to Baylor University. We also appreciate Ian’s commitment and involvement in bringing a person of integrity such as Jim Grobe to the University before making this decision.” Grobe has been named interim head football coach.

Whatever, the regents are seeking to cushion McCaw’s fall.

I don’t wish ill on the former AD, but this fellow ran an athletic department that includes the conduct of its premier revenue-producing sports activity.

As the saying goes, “The fish rots from the head down.”

Baylor University needs to take care of its business.

Irony in all these lawsuits

Abbott-Obama-Paxton_jpg_800x1000_q100

There’s a certain sort of irony one can find in this story from the Texas Tribune.

Texas’s Republican political leaders have made it a point of pride that they have sued the federal government 40 times since 2009, the year President Barack Obama took office.

The state’s two most recent attorneys general — Greg Abbott and Ken Paxton — have had mixed results from all those suits.

Hey, man, they’re still glad to sue the daylights out of the president and the government over which he presides.

Their cause? The government is overreaching, seeking to usurp authority set aside for the states — allegedly.

The irony? Well, I recall many Republican candidates for public office contending that they wanted to stem the flood of lawsuits. They would argue that many of them are frivolous and that the courts couldn’t afford the escalating costs of litigation. I won’t argue that the suits are “frivolous,” as I am not a legal scholar.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05/26/texas-vs-federal-government/

The link attached to this post itemizes the costs of the suits. Add  them up. They have cost the state — that’s you and me, folks — a good chunk of money over the past eight years.

This is a point of pride with these fellows?

Gohmert enters strange new world

immigration-reform

Louie Gohmert must have a lot of friends in his East Texas congressional district, which might explain how he keeps getting re-elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.

Gohmert, a six-term Republican from Tyler, took to the House floor this week to say that gay people would be unlikely to save humanity if they were to settle in space camps out there … somewhere in outer space.

I saw that earlier today and wondered, yet again, who in the world are we sending to write the laws that affect 300-plus million Americans?

The video of Gohmert’s speech is on the link attached.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/texas-rep-louie-gohmert-argues-gay-space-colonies-article-1.2652661?utm_content=bufferdc934&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Gohmert has a history of making bizarre statements.

One of the more ridiculous assertions he made occurred when he speculated that terrorists were infiltrating the United States using pregnant women who would come here, give birth to their children and raise them to become terrorists.

This guy is in his sixth term as a member of Congress. He votes on laws that affect all of us. Therefore, the strange rantings of one member of Congress becomes every American’s concern.

Before you get too worked up  here and accuse me of bashing only Republicans, I am happy to acknowledge that Democrats have their share of congresspeople capable making loony statements. Alan Grayson of Florida comes to mind immediately.

This grandstander said he’d file a lawsuit if Ted Cruz were nominated for president by the Republicans; his basis was that Cruz isn’t constitutionally eligible to serve as president, as he was born in Canada. Never mind that he acquired U.S. citizenship at birth because Mama Cruz is an American.

So, life goes on inside the walls of the Capitol Building.

With serious issues to ponder — such as funding the government — a member of Congress now is wondering aloud about whether same-sex couples are capable of saving humanity.

As Ricky Ricardo once told Lucy: “I can answer that in five words: Aye, aye, aye … aye, aye!”

 

Severance pay for state employees?

Golden-Parachutes

No doubt you’ve heard it said that “we ought to run government like a business.”

Most of the time, that’s merely a clichĂ© that doesn’t deserve to be taken seriously.

Then again, you get an exception to the rule. Take the case of state agencies paying what amounts to “severance pay” to public employees who resign their public jobs.

As the Texas Tribune reports, the practice in Texas is likely to vanish during the next legislative session … as it should.

https://www.texastribune.org/2016/05/27/analysis-expense-texas-taxpayers-carries-no-explan/

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office has paid such severance to several former staffers. Paxton doesn’t call it “severance.” He calls it “emergency leave” pay.

What the bleep is the difference?

This is outrageous. It ought to stop. It’s a waste of valuable public money that the state keeps harping about that it doesn’t have.

I happen to know a bit about how private business handles these issues. It’s a whole lot less generous — in a case with which I am intimately familiar — than it is in the public sector.

In August 2012 I received some shattering news from a hired gun brought in to manage the “reorganization” of the newspaper where I was working at the time. We were told we could apply for any job we wanted. I chose to apply for the job I’d been doing at the Amarillo Globe-News for nearly 18 years; I thought I was doing a pretty good job.

Not long after being interviewed twice by the management team at the newspaper, the hired gun called me into his office and said:  “There’s no easy way to say this, but we’ve decided to give your job to someone else.” The “someone else” also had applied for the same position, so my employer went with him. I was out.

I chose to resign on the spot rather than apply for another position and face the remote possibility of getting hired for that. I was qualified to do one thing at the newspaper, but I didn’t do it well enough to suit my employer.

During what amounted to an exit interview the next morning with my soon-to-be former boss, I asked about a severance. He all but laughed in my face.

I walked out.

That’s how it’s done in private business. You resign, you don’t get a severance, man. Ross Ramsey, writing for the Texas Tribune, says private businesses do offer such severance deals, but they come with a price. Ramsey writes:

“In the business world, departing employees are sometimes given a golden parachute in exchange for their silence — a ‘thanks for all you’ve done’ along with a ‘keep your trap shut about what happened here.’” I didn’t get that, so I’m free to blab.

But, when someone leaves a government job in Texas, they qualify for “severance” or “emergency leave.”

Give me a break.

End the practice … as soon as possible.

‘Fired’ or ‘suspended’ at Baylor?

briles

I’m still scratching my noggin over this one.

Baylor University head football coach Art Briles has been “suspended” by the university’s board of regents, which eventually will get around to firing him.

Why wait? What’s the holdup?

Briles allegedly looked the other way while players on his team were sexually assaulting women. He did far too little to stop what was happening on the campus.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/15765205/ousted-baylor-bears-coach-art-briles-quotes-foreshadowed-demise

He’s going to be a “former coach” in due course, I reckon.

I always considered a firing for cause to have an immediate impact. If an employee does something wrong — or fails to do something right — then the employer has the right, if not an obligation, to get rid of the offending employee post haste.

What am I missing here?