Texas exhibits a progressive streak

Texas has been singled out for something other than its loudmouth politicians, its barbecue and the tendency among some of us to brag with a just a bit too much gusto.

Seems that Texas is a leader in something quite unexpected: incarceration reform and the state’s crime rate.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/best-state-in-america-texas-where-both-crime-and-incarceration-rates-are-falling/2014/12/05/e0a0f4a8-7b07-11e4-84d4-7c896b90abdc_story.html

Incarceration rates are declining in Texas. The result has been — are you ready for this? — a reduction in crime, according to a Washington Post writer.

According to blogger Reid Wilson: “In the 1990s and 2000s, states pursued the expensive goal of being tough on crime. Now, with budgets strained near breaking points, those states are trying to cut costs by being smart on crime. Reducing crime rates, recidivism and prison populations isn’t just good for society, after all, it’s good for a state’s bottom line.

“And despite Texas’s reputation as the home of draconian crime policies, no other state has adopted more alternatives to traditional incarceration — or reduced by as many the number of prisoners it must pay to house.”

Indeed, the prison-building boom began during the administration of the late Gov. Ann Richards, thought by conservatives to be a squishy soft-on-crime liberal Democrat. Amarillo got two prison units out of it: a maximum-security lockup named after another former governor, William P. Clements, and a medium-security unit named after local educator Nathaniel Neal.

Two legislators, Democratic state Sen. John Whitmire and Republican state Rep. Jerry Madden, introduced a program that provided treatment for criminals rather than a prison bed.

The state’s prison population has decreased by about 5,000 individuals since 2010, according to Wilson’s piece. “The state still executes more people than any other — 10 so far this year — but crime rates have fallen markedly. Recidivism is down from 28 percent to 22.6 percent,” Wilson writes.

This is an interesting development for a state known as a kill ’em quickly kind of place.

I guess it goes to show that a little progressive thought can go a long way.

 

Cosby once was the face of Temple U.

This is how far Bill Cosby’s star has fallen.

The comedy icon has resigned as a Temple University trustee. Why? Because of the outpouring of accusations that Cosby has sexually assaulted women — for decades!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/at-temple-university-students-hope-to-put-famous-alum-cosby-behind-them/ar-BBgr1JB

Good heavens!

Cosby has done stand-up routines about his days as a student at Temple, not to mention recorded comedy albums. He’s given the school added fame and acclaim. He has earned his degrees from the Philadelphia school.

And he has served on the board of trustees, giving the board the heft of his once-good name and reputation.

Cosby is fighting back against at least one of his accusers. He calls the allegations all kinds of names, such as “baseless” and “ridiculous.”

I’m still waiting him for Dr. Cosby to say the magic words: “I did not do these things.”

Watching this man’s reputation unravel before our eyes remains a painful experience for us spectators. I only can imagine what this is doing to the man’s family.

 

 

Cruz becomes movement leader

It used to be said in Washington that the “most dangerous place in the world” was the space between U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm and a television camera.

Gramm has left public life and the owner of that title now happens to be another fiery Texas Republican, freshman Sen. Ted Cruz.

According to the San Antonio Express-News headline atop a blog post, the young senator has a movement that carries his name. Call it “Cruz conservatives.”

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2014/12/cruz-conservatives-abandon-gop-leaders-on-anti-obama-vote/

His ability to muscle his way past more senior Senate Republicans to the center of the political stage in less than two years is utterly astounding. The Cruz Missile exploded on the scene with his GOP primary upset in 2012 of Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, after which it became a foregone conclusion he’d be elected to the Senate from such a heavily Republican state.

These days, if you want some “good copy,” turn to Ted; the glib gab machine is loaded with it. If you want to know what the TEA party wing of the GOP is thinking, ask the junior senator from Texas.

Whatever became of the GOP’s senior pols, such as Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Chuck Grassley of Iowa? Sure, the party has its share of media hounds, such as Sen. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Marco Rubio of Florida (I’ll throw Rubio into that mix, even though he’s been in the Senate only two years longer than Cruz).

To be fair, the Senate Democrats have their share of TV hogs. Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Claire McCaskill of Missouri come immediately to mind.

No one else — in either party — can match Ted the Canadian’s panache.

It used to be said that it took at least half of their first six-year term for senators to figure out the ropes, to earn their spurs and to find their way to the men’s room.

Not so with Ted. The young man is a force of nature — which makes me, at least, want to head to the storm shelter.

 

We're fighting a 'third world war'

Jordanian King Abdullah II is an educated man. He speaks English like an American and as the monarch of a nation friendly to the United States, his words carry some weight around, oh, the White House.

The king told President Obama that we’re engaging in a “third world war” against the Islamic State.

http://news.yahoo.com/jordan-king-warns-fight-third-world-war-204843708.html

Is it the kind of world war fought in the 20th century twice? No. In King Abdullah’s mind, the world war is of a different — still to be defined — nature.

I agree with him to a point.

World wars may not be fought the way we’ve known them before. Nations won’t line up against other nations, as was the case from 1914 to 1918 and again from 1939 to 1945. Indeed, it well might be said that the latest world war commenced the day those jets flew into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon — and when President Bush told the crowd at Ground Zero that “the people who knocked these building down will hear all of us soon.”

The world war cannot be defined as World War III. But it appears to be a world war, with civilized nation banding together to take on the ISIL monsters who’ve vowed to carry their fight against the West to our doorstep.

The king told CBS News:

“We really have to have a pan-regional approach to this issue. This is a Muslim problem. We need to take ownership of this. It’s clearly a fight between good and evil. I think this is a third world war by other means.”

Other means? Yes.

We’re hunting down terrorist leaders wherever they are hiding. It might be in the Middle East. It could be in South America. Or in Southeast Asia. On the Indian subcontinent.

It could be in the United States of America.

Wherever they hide and plot their next dastardly deed, they become targets.

Is that a world war, as stated by the Jordanian monarch? Looks like it to me.

 

Big story takes bigger hit

Rolling Stone isn’t known as a publication that makes stories up.

Thus, the magazine editors’ announcement that they were retracting a story about an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia is a very big deal.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/12/05/rolling-stone-retracts-uva-story/19954293/

It’s the retraction that makes the story so interesting, to me at least.

A woman named “Jackie” reported that she had been raped by several men at a fraternity house party at the UVa campus in Charlottesville. Then her credibility came into question.

Her story didn’t add up. There was no party the night she said one occurred, the magazine found out.

Then came the announcement that the magazine was taking back what it reported.

A retraction is a very big deal in journalism.

Publications issue “corrections” all the time when they get facts wrong. They issue “clarifications” when the facts aren’t printed as clearly as they should be printed. A retraction? Well, that means the publication no longer stands by the story or the reporter who wrote it … or even the line editors who edited the story, looking for holes in it or places that need to be fleshed out.

Meanwhile, a university’s reputation has been tarnished. Students stood before the nation and apologized for what they described as a “culture of rape” at UVa.

Well, it now turns out that one student at the university has exhibited a “culture of lying.”

 

Governor's new digs need some fixin' up

Greg Abbott’s new residence awaits him and his family.

It’s a nice place, rather old, but quite elegant. It needs a little fixing up.

Abbott takes office in January as Texas’s next governor and the 134-year-old house into which he and his family will live never has had resident quite like the governor-elect. He’s been confined to a wheelchair ever since he was paralyzed in a freak accident in Houston; a tree fell on him while he was jogging, breaking his back.

http://www.texastribune.org/2014/12/05/governors-mansion-tweaked-abbott/

The Governor’s Mansion was updated after an arsonist torched the place in 2008 with a Molotov cocktail. More work needs to be done, as there need to be upgrades to the governor’s office in the Capitol Building across the street from the residence.

There’s a certain slight touch of irony, of course, in the expense the state is incurring to accommodate the governor.

The state must comply with a federal law that requires accessibility for people with disabilities. The Americans with Disabilities Act was enacted in 1991 during the George H.W. Bush administration. It’s a wonderful piece of legislation that recognizes the needs of those who are confined to wheelchairs, or who have difficulty accessing public facilities.

Why the touch of irony? Texas is angry at the federal government these days. Outgoing Gov. Rick Perry has made quite a lot of noise railing, ranting and raving about federal “overreach.” The new governor has just filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration over its handling of immigration policy.

The ADA doesn’t fall into the category of laws that Texas officials want to challenge. It’s there for a good reason: to help disabled Americans gain the access they deserve to public buildings.

Good luck with the repairs, Gov. Abbott.

 

Thrill will be gone soon from Texas Senate

Texas lawmakers of both political parties have told me over the years how much “fun” they had serving in the state Legislature. Both chambers comprised members who had pals on the other side.

They were chums. They shared an adult beverage after hours. They would talk about common interests. They would seek each other’s advice.

I remember meeting the late state Sen. Teel Bivins for the first time. The Republican knew I came to Amarillo from Beaumont and he shared in our first meeting his respect for a Democratic adversary from Southeast Texas, Sen. Carl Parker, who used to refer to Bivins and others of his stripe as “silk-stocking Republicans.” Bivins never took it personally and he actually admired Parker’s debating skill, which he would employ on the floor of the Senate.

My trick knee is telling me those days are about to end.

Dan Patrick will become the next lieutenant governor in January. Patrick has made it known his desire to abandon a couple of Senate traditions: one is the two-thirds rule that requires 21 Senate votes to bring any bill to a vote of the entire of body; the other is the practice of appointing senators of the other party as committee chairs.

Patrick, a Republican, said earlier this year that given Texas’s strong conservative leaning and the fact that Republicans stand like a colossus over the landscape, then — by golly — he would prefer to have an all-GOP lineup among the Senate leadership.

Crank up the steamroller, folks.

What does this mean for what’s left of the party’s more moderate element, which must include Sen. Kel Seliger of Amarillo, who wants to lead the Education Committee?

A friend of mine and I were talking Friday about the next Legislature. He’s been observing Texas politics for decades and he wonders how the state will function when it is run by the TEA party wing of the GOP. He mentioned former Lt. Gov. Bill Ratliff, a wise man and moderate Republican, and lamented that Ratliff no longer is in public life. “Who would have thought that Kel Seliger would be considered a ‘liberal’ within the Republican Party?” he asked … rhetorically.

There once was a time when serving in the Legislature could be considered “fun.” Hey, it doesn’t pay very much so you look for fun whenever and wherever you can find it.

The tone and tenor of the upper chamber is about to change. For my taste — and perhaps the taste of others around the state — it won’t be for the better.

 

 

Calling it the TEA party from now on

Readers of this blog know that I refer often to the insurgent wing of the Republican Party, the one that gives the so-called “establishment wing” fits.

I am now going to refer to it as the TEA party, not the “tea party.”

TEA is an acronym, meaning “Taxed Enough Already.”

It’s meant to recall the Boston Tea Party, where colonials tossed tea into Boston Harbor to protest the tax they were being forced to pay for it.

The TEA party’s original mission seemed honorable enough. It has morphed into something else. TEA party officials have taken to opposing just about any kind of progressive legislation. Immigration reform? Forget about it. Health care reform? Pfftt!

I’ll simply remind the TEA party loyalists of their original intent in forming this wing of the Republican Party.

To paraphrase an earlier slogan: It’s the taxes, stupid.

 

Thrill returns at rocket launch

A curious feeling came over me this morning as I watched the television screen.

A rocket took off from a launch pad at Cape Canaveral, Fla. It was carrying — on its maiden flight — the Orion spacecraft. The Delta rocket roared to life, spewing flame and roaring like a thousand freight trains, and then it lifted off slowwwwly into the sky.

I began muttering under my breath: Come on, come one, come on.

Then I realized something. I was smiling broadly, ear to ear. I was feeling a thrill similar to what I had watching astronauts blasting into space aboard their Mercury, Gemini, Apollo, Skylab and space shuttle craft.

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/orion-clears-first-hurdle-in-getting-to-mars/

Hey, this was a big launch today.

Orion is being developed as the United States’s long-range vehicle that eventually will carry astronauts into deep space. I’m talking about Mars. Or perhaps to one of Jupiter’s moons. Or maybe to an asteroid.

It flew two orbits around Earth this morning, then splashed safely and on target into the Pacific Ocean.

Mission accomplished.

I’ll admit to being a sap when it comes to space flight. I’ve wept at the sight of rockets launching and at the sight of spacecraft re-entering the atmosphere. Heck, I’ve watched the film “Apollo 13” about, oh, 20 or 30 times and I still get misty when Jim Lovell tells NASA ground controllers that the spacecraft is coming home safely after that harrowing rescue mission in April 1970.

Orion’s first manned flight is years away. Its maiden voyage to the great beyond is even farther into the future.

I hope to be around to watch it take humans into our solar system. Yes, I’ll be crying.

 

Court to ponder Rebel Yell

The First Amendment allows free political speech.

That might include hate speech. Does it include subversive speech? I doubt it strongly.

So … the U.S. Supreme Court is going to hear sometime next spring an appeal to allow Texas license plates to carry a symbol of the Civil War and what many millions of Americans consider a symbol of hate. Oh, and the Civil War? That was an act of sedition by the Confederate States of America that declared war against the United States of America.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/05/supreme-court-confederate-flag_n_6277460.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000013

Texas had rejected a proposed to have its license plates featuring the Confederate battle flag. A Texas chapter of the Sons of Confederate appealed, saying the ban violated the group’s freedom to make a political statement.

Now it goes the highest court in the land.

Part of me understands the First Amendment argument. A bigger part of me, however, is grossly offended by the battle flag.

I do not have any Confederate heritage in my background. However, I’ve witnessed the battle flag symbol waved proudly by Ku Klux Klan members demonstrating against the rights of African-Americans. If there ever was a more profound symbol of hate, I haven’t yet seen it.

Does this state — or any state in 21st century America — really want to sanction a display of this symbol with public money provided by Texans who have reason to be grossly offended by its presence on automobile license plates?

Texas said “no” once already.

Will the Supreme Court uphold the state’s refusal?

I am hoping it does.