Tag Archives: Rick Perry

Rick Perry at Homeland Security? Interesting idea

Reports are surfacing that Energy Secretary Rick Perry is being considered for a major Cabinet shift within the Trump administration.

The Texas Tribune reports that Perry might move to the Homeland Security Department to become the new secretary there, replacing John Kelly, who’s taken the thankless job of White House chief of staff.

That the former Texas governor is under consideration for the Homeland Security job makes plenty of sense to me. I believe he could be a good fit in that post.

He served for 14 years as governor of Texas, which has the longest border with Mexico of all the states along our southern border. He understands the issue of border security as well as any leading politician.

As the Texas Tribune reports, though, a shift of this importance signals a dramatic — some would say unbelievable — evolution in the relationship between Gov. Perry and Donald J. Trump. Perry once campaigned for the presidency against Trump. Perry then called his fellow Republican a “cancer on conservatism.” Trump ridiculed Perry after the former governor started wearing eyeglasses, suggesting Perry did so only to make himself look smarter.

All that changed, though, after Trump’s election. The two men buried the hatchet — and not in each other’s backs. The Energy Department job was Perry’s reward from the man who beat him for the GOP presidential nomination.

Is the former governor the perfect pick for Homeland Security? No, but in one way — to my way of thinking — he actually could be better than the man he would succeed. Perry’s record as Texas governor suggests a more reasonable immigration outlook than the one John Kelly espoused while he ran DHS. Perry’s understanding of border issues, earned by his years as governor of a large and important state, tells me he well could be a stellar choice to lead the Department of Homeland Security.

Cue the music and let’s see whether this latest report puts Rick Perry into the DHS chair.

Republicans become party of diverse thought

I want to offer a good word or three about today’s Republican Party.

Yes, I’ve been beating them up a good bit of late. The GOP has deserved the drubbing. However, I want to speak to something that became evident after Donald John Trump Sr. tweeted out his decision to ban transgender Americans from serving in the armed forces.

The Republican Party has exhibited a profound sense of diverse thought on that issue.

On one side, we have heard some of the more predictable reactions. Former Texas Gov. Rick Perry — who’s now energy secretary in the Trump administration — said he supports the president “totally” in his decision to ban transgender citizens from service in defense of the nation. Fellow Texan, state Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller — a fellow not known for thoughtful rhetoric — said the armed forces are “no place for social experimentation.”

Then came the push back from other notable Republican pols. Many members of Congress expressed disappointment and dismay that Trump would use Twitter to announce such a staggering policy shift.

Then came a highly personal statement from U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, the Utah lawmaker known as one of the Senate’s more conservative members. Transgender individuals do not “choose” to change their sexual identity, Hatch said. “They are born that way,” he added. Sen. Hatch said it is unfair to hold that against them.

The GOP has demonstrated considerable diversity as well in this debate over whether to repeal the Affordable Care Act. The moderate wing of the Republican caucus dislikes many of the provisions contained in the GOP-authored bill; it cuts too much from Medicaid, for example. The TEA Party/conservative wing of the caucus dislikes the overhaul because it doesn’t go far enough in repealing the ACA, the signature legislation authored by Democrats during the Obama administration.

Democrats, meanwhile, speak with a single voice on those and many other issues. It must be Democrats’ universal disdain for Trump and the fact that he managed to win the 2016 presidential election against Hillary Rodham Clinton. Believe me, I understand their anger on that one!

However, the Republican Party has shown itself to be more willing to expose its differences in the months since Trump became president.

For that, I applaud Republicans.

Oh, and yes, the stalling of the Trump “agenda” — whatever it is — has played a key part in earning my praise.

But, Secretary Perry, are transgender warriors less brave?

Rick Perry says he is in total support of Donald John Trump’s decision to bar transgender Americans from serving in the armed forces.

Of course he is. He’s part of the Trump team now. The president forgave Perry for labeling Trump a “cancer on conservativism.” His reward was to appoint him secretary of energy.

Perry, though, weighed in on the president’s tweet that became a major policy reversal. Trump declared: “After consultation with my generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States government will not accept or allow … transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. military,” Trump tweeted. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming … victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption.”

The president, though, didn’t talk to all of the generals. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Joseph Dunford declared that all personnel would be treated with “respect,” and that no policy changes would be enacted until the order came from the defense secretary. It’s that thing called “chain of command” that has given Gen. Dunford pause.

As for Perry’s support of Trump’s decision, he said the government shouldn’t have to pay for surgeries in which personnel change their sexual identity. Reporters reminded him that studies showed the cost of such procedures amounts to about 10 percent of the money the government pays to provide medicine that cures erectile dysfunction.

Perry’s response? “I don’t check out the cost of Viagra.” Yuk, yuk …

Neither the president or his energy secretary, though, have yet to produce any evidence that transgender military personnel are less capable than any other of their comrades in arms. Nor have they have provided proof that they are less patriotic, less loyal or that they don’t love their country as much as anyone.

The president has used Twitter to make a policy pronouncement without considering for a moment what it means. I would have expected better from the secretary of energy — himself an Air Force veteran — if not the know-nothing commander in chief.

Remembering a great Texas Republican

MOUNT PLEASANT, Texas –– Wherever my wife and I travel these days, I cannot help but think of individuals I’ve either met while working in journalism or those about whom I have some knowledge.

We came to this northeast Texas community in search of a grocery store to buy some, um, groceries. I told my wife that this is the hometown of one of the great all-time Texas politicians.

Bill Ratliff was a state senator from Titus County. He was a Republican lawmaker who was held in the highest esteem possible by all 31 of his Senate colleagues. Democrats respected him as much as his fellow Republicans.

Sen. Ratliff was what I have called a “reasonable Republican” who knew how to work across the aisle. Both parties have become so polarized these days that bipartisanship has become a four-letter word.

In 2001, though, the rarest of events occurred in the Texas Senate.

Gov. George W. Bush was elected president in 2000. Because of that vote-counting matter in Florida, Texas Gov. Bush’s election was not a foregone conclusion until a month or so after Election Day. The U.S. Supreme Court stopped the ballot recount in Florida, Bush was leading at the time by 537 votes, Florida’s electoral votes went to Bush — and he was elected president.

Then Bush quit the Texas governorship, elevating Lt. Gov. Rick Perry to the Big Office. That meant the state needed a lieutenant governor to preside over the Texas Senate. To whom did the Senate turn? For the first time in state history, senators elevated Bill Ratliff to the lieutenant governor’s office, a post he held while at the same time serving as state senator during the 2001 Texas Legislature.

He served in that capacity until 2003, when David Dewhurst was elected lieutenant governor.

Ratliff had a nickname among his Senate colleagues, who called him Obi-Wan Kenobi, the wise being from “Star Wars.” Indeed, Ratliff once said of his own Republican views: “I am a Republican because I agree with the Republicans at least 51 percent of the time.”

He was unafraid, therefore, to agree with Democrats when the time — and the cause — was right.

Sen./Lt. Gov. Bill Ratliff is now 80. I wish he was still serving his beloved Texas.

Parties change, politicians don’t

One of the nation’s more well-known Republicans has bolted his party. I’m going to presume for the purposes of this blog post that it’s because the Party of Lincoln has become the Party of Trump and Joe Scarborough no longer is comfortable with that association.

Scarborough — who says he’ll register as an independent — is now host of an MSNBC talk show, “Morning Joe,” which he co-hosts with Mika Brzezinski. They’ve been in the news of late, with Donald J. Trump tweeting some nasty comments about Brzezinski, who happens to be Scarborough’s fiancée. It’s complicated, yes?

But the Scarborough’s departure from the GOP is part of a trend that swings in both directions, involving both major parties. It happens when a particular political party veers into an dramatically different direction. Such is the case with the Republican Party that nominated an inexperienced entertainer as its presidential nominee who then has behaved like someone who is clueless about political decorum, norms and custom.

Oh, and he’s also someone who continues on the same insult and innuendo barrage that got him nominated and then elected.

Scarborough is no Republican In Name Only, although I’m sure the devoted Trumpkins out there will call him a RINO as often as possible. He once voted to impeach President Clinton when he was serving in the House of Representatives from Florida. He fancies himself as a serious conservative thinker and commentator. He joins a few other long time prominent Republicans who have left the party for essentially the same reason. The noted Washington Post columnist George Will is the most notable example.

Here in Texas, we’ve seen a dramatic shift in the other direction over many years as the state shifted from true blue to deep red. Democrats became Republicans because of the shift in Democratic Party ideology. I can think of several individuals: former state Rep. Warren Chisum of Pampa; the late former Gov. John Connally; former Gov. Rick Perry. They all were Democrats when they entered public life. They are far from the only Texas Democrats who would no longer feel comfortable with the party of their political “birth.”

So, now it’s Scarborough who’s bolted the GOP.

My hunch? We’re going to see more political out-migration.

Supply and demand and supply …

Energy Secretary Rick Perry is supposed to know about these things.

He was governor of Texas for a zillion years. Before that he was lieutenant governor. Before that he was the state’s agriculture commissioner.

He’s supposed to know some basic economics, or one should think. Yes? OK. He went to West Virginia today and spoke at a coal-fired power plant. Then the secretary said this: “Here’s a little economics lesson: supply and demand,” Perry said, according to reports. “You put the supply out there, and the demand will follow.”

To borrow a word that Perry himself made famous during the 2012 Republican presidential primary campaign: Oops!

I believe the secretary had it exactly backward. My understanding of economics suggests this: Demand drives supply, not the other way around.

Or, as The Hill reported: “Twitter users were quick to find fault with Perry’s use of the term, which is defined in the dictionary as the law that ‘an increase in supply will lower prices if not accompanied by increased demand, and an increase in demand will raise prices unless accompanied by increased supply.'”

Check out some of those tweets.

This won’t signal the end of the world or anything like that. I just recall how candidate Donald Trump ridiculed his 2016 GOP opponent for donning eyewear to “make himself look smart.” That was a cruel cut, to be sure.

However, if the president is going to surround himself with “the best people,” as he promised, then he needs them to articulate a basic economic tenet about supply and demand.

No-text bill becomes law — finally!

I’ve been quick to criticize Texas Gov. Greg Abbott for this or that pronouncement or action.

I now want to praise him for signing a bill that should have become a state law long ago. Gov. Abbott has put his signature on a bill that bans texting while driving a motor vehicle; it now becomes against state law to perform a foolish and potentially deadly activity.

Well done, Gov. Abbott.

https://www.texastribune.org/2017/06/06/abbott-signs-texting-while-driving-ban/

One of the bill’s prime sponsors, state Rep. (and former Texas House Speaker) Tom Craddick said the governor has saved lives by signing this bill into law. Craddick, a Midland Republican, has been a champion for this cause over the course of several legislative sessions.

Indeed, Abbott’s immediate predecessor as governor, fellow Republican Rick Perry, vetoed a similar bill in 2011, claiming — ridiculously, in my view — the bill constituted a “governmental effort to micromanage the behavior of adults.” Sure thing, Gov. Perry. Then let’s not prohibit drinking while driving, or let’s allow motorists to drive without being strapped in with safety restraints. Isn’t that a form of “micromanagement,” too?

The new law, which takes effect in September, gives continuity across our vast state. It supersedes local ordinances and gives motorists ample warning when they enter the state that they’d better put their texting devices away … or else!

Climate change, Mr. President?

Let’s take a breather from “negative press covfefe” for a moment or two and zero in on something of considerably more significance.

That would be climate change and the future of Planet Earth — and whether the world’s most powerful nation will take part in a worldwide effort to protect the planet.

Reports have surfaced that Donald J. Trump is leaning toward pulling the United States out of the Paris Accord, which was signed by virtually every nation on Earth to battle climate change.

It’s a measure, according to the media, for the president to “put America first.” Good grief!

Two nations didn’t sign the accord: Syria and Nicaragua. The rest of the world signed on. It is meant to signal a global commitment to mitigate the consequences of what the vast majority of pertinent scientific minds have concluded: that humankind’s activity has contributed to the changing climate. Carbon emissions and deforestation are products of industrial development and all of it has taken a devastating toll on the world’s ecosystem.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/335838-climate-change-drama-grips-the-white-house

If the president goes through with this effort to yank the United States out of the agreement, most of us can predict worldwide outrage. A Trump decision to pull out of the Paris Accord would be nothing more than a sop to the Republican Party base that got him elected in 2016.

It also would be a bow to the nationalist wing of his inner circle, led by Stephen Bannon, the former Breitbart editor and spokesman for the far right wing of the Republican Party. Trump pledged to “make American great again.” How in the world does a “great” nation refuse to lead the world in fighting a global crisis?

It’s fascinating in the extreme, though, that other senior Trump administration officials want the United States to adhere to the Paris Accord. They include, and get a load of this list of heavy hitters: Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of ExxonMobil, for crying out loud; Energy Secretary Rick Perry; son-in-law/senior policy adviser Jared Kushner; economic adviser Gary Cohn; and national security adviser H.R. McMaster.

Can there be anything more that the president can do to infuriate our nation’s allies? He seems to be working overtime to find methods of angering our closest allies. Canada, Mexico, Germany, the UK, Australia and France all have felt the sting of Trump barbs; meanwhile, the president remains stunningly silent about Russia and that nation’s effort to meddle in our 2016 presidential election.

Trump says he’ll announce his Paris Accord decision “in a few days.” This ongoing story has tossed yet another crisis element into the stew that’s brewing inside the White House.

Here’s one more plea to the president from Flyover Country: Don’t pull us out of these accords.

Don’t choke on texting-ban bill, Gov. Abbott

Listen to me, Gov. Greg Abbott. Read my lips: Sign House Bill 62 into law, the one that makes texting while driving illegal throughout the state of Texas!

Do it! Don’t waffle because of technicalities. The Texas Tribune reports — which I am sure you’ve read already — that you believe texting while driving a motor vehicle poses a grave danger to Texans.

HB 62 is on your desk, as I also am sure you know. It’s there along with a lot of other bills approved by the Legislature.

Your immediate predecessor as governor, Rick Perry, never should have vetoed a similar bill in 2011. Remember how he called it a “government effort to micromanage the behavior of adults.” I mean, good grief, man. If you follow that logic, then such micromanagement means we shouldn’t have laws prohibiting drinking while driving, either; hey, let’s take down all the speed limit signs and let Texas push their pedals to the metal whenever and wherever they feel like it.

I hear you’re concerned that HB 62 doesn’t do enough to pre-empt local ordinances. Your spokesman, John Wittman, told the Tribune: “One thing Governor Abbott wanted in a texting while driving ban was a pre-emption of the patchwork quilt of local regulations across the state, and he’s looking forward to digging into the details of HB 62.”

OK, I get it.

Indeed, a statewide ban would bring much-needed continuity to Texas’ rules of the road. Visitors to the state need to know that operating a hand-held device while driving a motor vehicle is illegal anywhere within the state’s borders. Post signs at every highway entry point into Texas telling motorists to put their texting devices away as they enter the state. Texas residents might not need reminding; visitors from out of state, though, do need it.

Gov. Abbott, you’ve got a chance to exercise some needed executive authority by signing a necessary bill into law. House Bill 62 does something that should have been done when these texting devices became so damn ubiquitous. They’re everywhere, but there ought to be some limitations on when human beings should be allowed to operate them.

Driving a motor vehicle at high speeds through traffic and among pedestrians is one of those instances.

Sign the bill, Gov. Abbott.

Sign the texting-while-driving-ban bill, Gov. Abbott

OK, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott.

You’ve got a bill that bans texting while driving a motor vehicle on your desk, somewhere. You need to make it the law of the state.

The Texas Legislature has worked out some differences in the bill and it has approved it and sent it to you for your signature. You need to do this. You need to make texting while driving illegal throughout our vast state.

Furthermore, Gov. Abbott, you need to show the guts that your predecessor, Rick Perry, failed to show in 2011 when he vetoed a similar bill that landed on his desk. Gov. Perry said then that the bill was too “intrusive,” that it demonstrated some sort of government overreach into motorists’ lives.

Good grief, man! Is driving too fast an intrusion? How about banning open containers of alcoholic beverages in motor vehicles? We also require motorists to be insured; we demand they have valid driver’s licenses. Are those measures intrusive as well?

I know you really don’t need to hear this from me, but I will say it anyway. A statewide ban lends continuity to laws across the state. It pre-empts local ordinances that ban texting while driving. Indeed, not all communities in Texas have been as proactive as, say, Amarillo has been.

Indeed, the state can post signs at every entry point at state borders warning motorists that state law prohibits them from texting while driving. It’s a dangerous and foolish activity.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2017/05/22/texas-texting-while-driving-ban-governor/

I am particularly proud of our Texas Panhandle legislative delegation that has supported this ban. They belong to the same party as you do, governor.

Listen to them. Follow their lead. Sign the bill and make it law.

A lot of us out here want you to do the right thing.