AG may keep job, even if he’s convicted? Wow!

The Texas Tribune has published an interesting primer on the complexities of Texas law, its constitution and whether the state’s attorney general can keep his job even if he’s convicted of a felony.

Here’s the link. I encourage you to take a look at it and then try to decide what you think about it.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/04/texplainer-if-convicted-will-paxton-have-leave-off/

Ken Paxton, a Republican, has been indicted in Collin County on three felony counts alleging securities fraud. He just took office as Texas attorney general in January. He vows to plead not guilty. He won’t quit.

I don’t think he needs to resign as AG while the case is being adjudicated. But if he’s convicted? To me, it’s a no-brainer. Hit the road, Ken.

The Tribune reminds us of a curious quirk in the Texas Constitution, which is that judges and other judicial officials do not have to be practicing lawyers when they take office, although they do need good standing as members of the State Bar of Texas.

Some years ago, Potter and Randall County voters elected the late Hal Miner to preside as judge in the 47th District Court. Miner hadn’t practiced law, as such, for more than two decades. He ran a family business, but stayed active in the state bar.

The question that Paxton could face involves whether he’d lose his license to practice law if he’s convicted of a felony. If he does, then he cannot serve as the state’s top legal counselor. But as the Tribune reports, the law license and a possible felony conviction are separate issues.

Bizarre, eh?

I believe a conviction should compel Paxton to quit — if for no other reason than his credibility as the state’s top law enforcer would be blown apart if a jury finds him guilty of, um, breaking the law.

Keep hoping for best in upcoming city MPEV vote debate

A young woman stood before the Amarillo City Council the other evening and began to challenge one of the newly elected council members.

The video of that exchange is attached here:

http://agntv.amarillo.com/news/downtown-debate-heats-vote

It appears quite possible that we might have been seen a precursor to what we can expect as the debate over whether to build a multipurpose event venue downtown gets underway.

The councilman, Randy Burkett, ended up telling the young woman that he didn’t intend to get into a “shouting match with a teenager.” He was more than a tad condescending to the individual, one of his “bosses,” if you will.

It might be that the most curious response to something the young woman asked was that Burkett said it isn’t his job to come up with ideas regarding the planned renovation of downtown Amarillo. He doesn’t like the MPEV and I’d bet real American money he’ll vote “no” on the project when it comes to a vote in November.

But the woman asked him if he had any alternatives to the MPEV. He said, essentially, “It’s not my job.”

Uh, councilman? Yes it is, sir.

Burkett’s job isn’t quite as simple as he seemed to portray it Tuesday evening in that rather peculiar exchange.

***

You’ve heard the saying, I’m sure, that it’s good to “Hope for the best but expect the worst” when important events are about to occur. Amarillo is going to engage in an important community debate in the next few weeks involving the future of its downtown revitalization effort.

A group of young people, calling themselves the Amarillo Millennial Movement, has formed to become engaged in that debate. These young individuals say they support the downtown project and want their voices to be heard. With all the grousing and grumbling we hear from old folks about their concern that younger individuals don’t care about their community, it’s refreshing to watch a group of young Amarillo residents care enough to form a political wing dedicated to improving their city.

So, let’s have that debate.

While we’re at it, let’s respect everyone willing to engage in that debate. Or, as the Millennial Movement said on its Facebook page: “We want to be able to go to City Council meetings without being insulted. We want people to recognize that we are a serious force in Amarillo.”

Believe it: Texas can benefit from clean-air initiative

Let’s be sure to clear the air — pun intended — on President Obama’s latest call to cut carbon emissions.

One is that Texas politicians are sure to condemn the plan, given that this president is proposing it.

Second, the condemnation will come even as Texas stands to benefit greatly over the long term from what the president has put forth.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/03/obama-unveils-climate-rules-texas-wide-implication/

Obama wants to cut carbon emissions by 32 percent by 2030.

As the Texas Tribune reports: “Now final, the unprecedented regulations could significantly affect Texas. As an industrial juggernaut, the Lone Star State generates more electricity and emits far more carbon than any other state. Texas also leads the nation in producing natural gas – a fuel that policymakers could lean on while trying to shift from dirtier coal-fired energy. The state also is already feeling the effects of climate change, including sea level rise, extreme heat and drought, and more frequent flooding, experts say.”

It’s the natural gas element that is going to go largely unnoticed by the chattering class in this state.

We pump a lot of natural gas out here in West Texas. Down yonder, in places such as the Golden Triangle and along the Coastal Bend, we also pump a lot of carbon into the air. The president wants to reduce those emissions — while opening the door for exploration and development of cleaner fuels.

Such as natural gas.

Obama said it plainly and correctly when announcing the new rules. We have “only one planet,” and said “there is no Plan B” for finding a new planet to settle.

So why not do what we can to take care of the planet we have?

Make no mistake, however. The critics out there aren’t going to let an ecological imperative get in the way of blasting a far-sighted initiative designed to help save Planet Earth.

Is that the sound of a ‘Blue Bell’ we’re hearing?

Can it be true? Blue Bell Ice Cream is coming back to our freezers in Texas?

Alabama health officials have cleared the iconic Texas brand of ice cream for production and sale. Can Texas be far behind?

http://www.caller.com/news/state/blue-bell-ok-for-production-and-sales-of-ice-cream-1c92f7b3-4bd0-547a-e053-0100007f90c7-320796511.html

Blue Bell has been missing from shelves since Listeria was discovered. Health and company officials reacted quickly to the alarming news. The ice cream disappeared.

My family and I have lived in Texas for 31 years and during all that time we’ve heard the mantra about the Brenham-based product: Blue Bell is the best ice cream in America, maybe the world.

We bought into it. It’s so very good.

I am awaiting the rest of the good news, that Blue Bell is back.

GOP = Iranian anti-U.S. chants? Please, Mr. President

Just as Adolf Hitler’s name shouldn’t be uttered aloud in discussions about contemporary U.S. policy, how about declaring a similar moratorium on using “death to America” chants by Iranian protesters?

President Obama made a startling comparison this week in a speech at American University in which he said that those who yell “Death to America” have “common cause with Republicans” who oppose the nuclear deal that seeks to block Iran from developing an atomic bomb.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/08/05/obama_iranians_who_yell_death_to_america_have_common_cause_with_republicans.html

I get that the president feels frustrated because the “loyal opposition” keeps resisting all of his policies — both foreign and domestic.

However, the “death to America” chants we hear from street demonstrations in Tehran have no bearing on domestic opposition to the issue at hand. Obama said the Iranians who oppose the nuclear deal are those who utter the frightening chant.

The president drew a lot of laughs from the crowd that heard his crack about GOP kinship with the anti-American demonstrators.

Please, Mr. President, spare us the laugh lines and stay away from the demagoguery.

Quite an evening at City Hall … wouldn’t you agree?

Amarillo City Council — the formerly unified governing board — has voted 3-2 to put a multipurpose event venue project up for a vote this November.

The three newest members of the council — Elisha Demerson, Randy Burkett and Mark Nair — cast the majority votes. Councilman Brian Eades and Mayor Paul Harpole, the two veterans, said “no” to the vote.

I do not believe Harpole and Eades are going to climb aboard the “Vote on MPEV” bandwagon.

The MPEV is a critical part of the city’s effort to remake its downtown district. If it fails at the ballot box, well, we can likely kiss the downtown project package goodbye for at least the foreseeable future.

What’s my takeaway from the events of Tuesday night?

  • For starters, Bill Gilliland and Laura Street — two players in the fundraising effort to pay for the Globe-News Center for the Performing Arts, are taking some hits on social media because they fell a bit short in their fundraising effort. They raised about $30 million from private funds to build the center; the city kicked in about $1.8 million to finish the job. Gilliland and Street sought to delay the vote to give more time to raise money for the MPEV; their request failed.

I’m wondering about the criticism. I look at their prior fundraising effort this way: The city ended up paying a tiny fraction of a $30-plus million entertainment complex. The city’s contribution was minimal and it got a first-class venue in the process for virtually nothing.

  • Second, the City Council once prided itself on its unity. Yes, such single-mindedness has its pluses and minuses. The plus side is evident, in that the council speaks with one voice on important matters. This downtown deal is quite important. But the council now speaks with two competing voices. One side wants the project — the MPEV, downtown hotel and parking garage — to proceed as planned. The other side opposes the MPEV and possibly the hotel and garage.

I’m smelling a serious community conflict brewing.

  • Third, given the opposition that the two sides are planning to mount against each other, it’s fair to caution them about what state law allows and prohibits about how far they can go in stating their case. The law does not allow folks associated with the city to argue for or against a ballot measure using city resources. They are not even allowed to argue their points on city time.

Be verrry careful, gentlemen, about how you state your case.

I will continue to use this forum to state my case that the MPEV is a worthy project and it shouldn’t be defeated by the voters this fall.

I’m looking at this upcoming vote with a bit of cautious optimism. If nothing else, a citywide vote on a major project designed to boost our city’s economic health well could jar the city’s voting public out of its chronic lethargy.

Perry misses out on GOP main debate event

It was just four years ago, but it seems like a dozen lifetimes.

Rick Perry was the high-flying Texas governor seeking the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. He entered the primary field and rocketed to the top of the heap as an early front runner for the chance to run against President Barack Obama.

Then came the “oops” moment when he couldn’t name the third federal agency he’d eliminate if he was elected president.

Perry dropped out.

Four years later, Perry is no longer Texas governor, but he boned up on the issues. He got plenty of rest. His bad back is healed. He’s running for the GOP nomination once again.

Then he gets punched in the gut. Fox News, which is playing host to the first televised GOP debate this Thursday, relegated TEA Party favorite Rick Perry to what’s been called the “kids’ table.” He’ll be one of seven candidates participating in an earlier debate, but he didn’t make the cut for the main event.

The top 10 GOP hopefuls are there, including fellow Texan, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/08/04/perry-doesnt-make-cut-first-gop-presidential-debat/

Fox said only the top candidates in the polls would be on the prime-time event. CNN, which is sponsoring the second debate, laid down the same ground rules.

This is not the way to run a presidential debate series. I’m sure that’s what Perry and his team believe.

I’m still pulling for him to make the grade in subsequent debates.

All he has to do — in this media and political climate — is say something so outrageous that he gets everyone talking about him.

Council puts MPEV to a vote; let’s get ready to rumble

Amarillo MPEV

This just in: The Amarillo City Council has voted to send a multipurpose event venue proposal to the ballot this November.

It’s going to let the city’s voters decide whether to proceed with a project that has become the central issue in the city’s grand plan to renovate and revive its downtown district.

OK. I now will say right up front: I believe this was the wrong decision.

The council voted 3-2 to send the issue to the voters in a non-binding referendum. The “yes” votes came from the Three Amigos, the new guys: Councilman Mark Nair, Randy Burkett and Elisha Demerson. The experienced hands, Mayor Paul Harpole and Councilman Brian Eades, voted “no.”

Does this surprise anyone? Not me.

Harpole and Eades have been working on the nuts and bolts of this project since the beginning. They have a stake in its success. They want it to move forward. Do not expect Harpole and Eades to roll over on this issue.

The new councilmen? Well, they came into office professing to push for change. Well, they’ve made good initially on their pledge. The change they’ve just approved now puts in jeopardy a major element in the city’s effort to move forward with its downtown future.

They believe, I’m going to surmise, that voters don’t want to build the MPEV. They’re hoping the MPEV dies at the hands of voters, whose decision will be allowed to stand because the council wouldn’t dare refuse to ratify whatever result comes from the election. The referendum isn’t legally binding, but it certainly is binding politically.

I do not want to see the MPEV defeated. I want it built. I believe it is going to produce benefit for the downtown district, which will ripple throughout the city. I believe creative marketing strategies can make the MPEV an attractive venue for entertainment and sports activities. I believe the hotel-motel tax revenue is a viable money stream. I believe the city has negotiated this project in good faith.

And I believe the naysayers — led by the three new council members — are making a huge mistake in trying to blow this project up.

Now, let’s debate this project openly, intelligently — and without demagoguery.

GOP voters showing their fickle side

ballcap trump

The average Republican Party voter must be the most fickle human beings imaginable.

Consider this little item, which came tonight from MSNBC talk show host Alex Wagner.

She was wondering aloud how Donald Trump is resonating so loudly with GOP voters while wearing a “trucker’s hat” with the phrase “Make America Great Again.”

Why did she ask that question?

Wagner recalled how first lady Michelle Obama was “excoriated” by the right wing for saying “for the first time” she was “proud of my country.”

Huh?

So, Wagner wondered, the first lady makes a statement about being proud of her country “for the first time” and gets pounded. Meanwhile, Trump says the country has gone to hell, it’s become weak and he vows to restore the nation’s greatness.

But, but, but …

Aren’t we still a great nation? Don’t we still possess the world’s greatest military force? Isn’t our economy still the envy of the world?

How in the world does Donald Trump, Wagner asked, get away with condemning the nation while Michelle Obama gets pounded by her (and her husband’s) foes for declaring her pride in her country?

Yes. I see some fickle behavior out there among Republicans.

Are cameras spying on us … everywhere?

This is one of the weirder stories I’ve heard in more than 20 years living in Amarillo.

The police department has discovered a camera hidden in an aerosol spray dispenser in a business’s restroom.

What the … ?

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/29699788/camera-found-in-public-restroom-causing-concern

Police are investigating to determine who put the camera in the restroom, whether it was an inside job or done by someone who, just for giggles and grins, decided to take pictures of people doing whatever it is folks do in restrooms.

Amarillo Police Sgt. Brent Barbee said the camera apparently didn’t have remote control capability. He said that the contents of whatever — or whoever — was photographed by the device remain in police custody.

I surely hope this doesn’t introduce a whole new realm of spying in our culture. Cell phones with cameras are bad enough, given the ubiquitous nature of the devices and their ever-present prying eyes.

Now this? Oh, brother … as in Big Brother.