Is This Really Anyone’s Business?

Before I begin I would like to tip my hat to Mr. Anderson for his courage to stand up for and make his voice heard on a topic that he feels very strongly about.

An article posted on the Democrat Stuck In The Middle of Redland blog, written by author R. James Anderson entitled It’s time to really stir the pot…..I’m pro gay marriage. Here’s why:, voices his views on pro-marriage, regardless of gender, in the State of Texas.

Focusing specifically on the right to engage in a same-sex marriage, Mr. Anderson brings to light many logical concerns under his ultimate question of “Why should America continue to deny rights to portions of our population that others enjoy?”

In response to the author’s question, I would first like to say that I feel that the legalization of same-sex marriage should not be something that the people or the government should be able to decide. It should be a born right. It is not anyone’s business but the interested parties involved in the courtship.  Not only is it a violation of freedom for same sex couples not to be able to marry but it absolutely screams discrimination. Additionally, not only is it unfair but it also denies a couple marriage associated rights as stated by Mr. Anderson in his article.

Secondly, Mr. Anderson brings up a very valid point stating that “homosexuality is not a choice a person makes, rather it is biological.” Studies have found this to be more and more factual as stated in the AllPsych Journal posting entitled Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture written by Ryan D. Johnson.

To love and be loved is the most important unwritten right a person has regardless of who you are. Why would anyone want to take this away? There is so much hate in the world today that for someone to find another person to love and spend their life with should be all that matters, regardless.

Mr. Anderson, in my past readings I had come across a comment stated by Michael Josephson that I would like to direct to you as I could not have said it better, “I boldly and unequivocally support the legal rights and full extension of not merely tolerance but true acceptance of and support for every son and daughter, brother and sister, friend and colleague, and complete stranger who loves and is committed to someone of the same gender. I have the privilege of knowing, admiring and loving a number of extraordinarily kind, talented and highly ethical gay men and lesbian women, and I am distressed that they must bear insults, prejudice, condemnation, and legal discrimination. It’s more than an issue of civil rights; it’s a matter of respect and caring; it’s a matter of human compassion.”

My kudos to Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York,  the District of Columbia and also to California for not taking the right away to already married same-sex couples while the battles are an issue in the courts.

Finally, even though Governor Perry has stated numerous times that he is against same-sex marriage was he truthful when he said “the State of New York was just in granting gays the right to marry” or was he just campaigning again?

Weathering Texas’ Rainy Day Fund

AUSTIN  -  I just don’t understand what all the hoopla is about using the Rainy Day Fund to help Texas get out of its budget shortfall dilemma. The Rainy Day Fund is a savings fund that allows the state to set aside excess revenue for use in times of unexpected revenue shortfall. It can plug holes in the budget and defend against an economic disaster. If the economy went belly up after the Legislature wrote its budget, the fund would offer an escape from deficit. The money comes from several sources, but natural gas and oil tax revenues have been the driving factor in the fund’s growth and the state could rely on it to fill in budget holes. The fund can replenish money needed for education, healthcare, correctional facilities, etc. With that said, I say to myself, “I must be missing something here? Wouldn’t this help alleviate some of the problem?”

Even though using the fund isn’t particularly easy, that is, if the comptroller says that revenue will decrease between legislative sessions or if a budget deficit unexpectedly develops, it requires a vote to transfer money away from the fund. The fact is the Lege already had decided that it wanted to tap into the fund and had the votes to do so but Gov. Perry initially insisted that he would veto any use of the fund, totally against using the fund at all. For some reason, he has and still believes that Texas’ economy is not at all as bad as it seems. He later agreed with House leaders to use about $3.2 billion of the $12.6 billion dollar fund to address a deficit in the 2011 fiscal year but is still adamant about not using any of the remaining fund for the expected shortfalls in 2012 and 2013. “Governor, look around.  What do you see? It’s not pretty!” Again I ask myself, “What am I missing here?”

It has been asked, “What's Perry waiting for? Armageddon? The Dallas Cowboys to make the Super Bowl? What else is he fixing to do with the money? Pile it up in the Rotunda and take a picture of it for his Christmas card?”

Governor, it’s time to be the peoples' Governor and look out for them. Set aside special and personal interests during this crisis.

I just hope that Gov. Perry’s opposition to using the Rainy Day Fund was not in retaliation for the lack of precipitation in the state.

Written by John   Commentary for GOVT 2306 – 025   August 01, 2011

Honestly. Why Wait Any Longer?

An article posted on the Democrat Stuck In The Middle of Redland blog, written by author R. James Anderson entitled My thoughts on voter ID, voices his views on why the Voter ID bill took precedence over other important issues, stating that “other issues should have been taken care of before this bill was even debated.  Issues such as the huge budget shortfall which will affect education, social services and other areas of the state government should have taken priority.”

First of all, just a bit of information that should be known. The Voter ID issue was such a hot topic for the Lege that ten voter ID bills were originally introduced requiring voters to show a photo ID to vote.

Although Mr. Anderson stated that he did not necessarily disagree with the bill, let’s try to address his concerns of why this bill was in such a high demand to pass.

The author stated that “The Voter ID Bill was given emergency status by Gov. Perry due to the fact he had tried unsuccessfully for 6 years to get the bill passed, but this year both houses were under GOP control thus he was able to ram the bill through.” This statement is true but to say that this was not as important as the other issues previously mentioned, not so true. For example, Mr. Anderson stated that “Since there have been very few instances of voter fraud, why even make this such a big issue?”  An article in The Monitor informs us that this is actually not the case and voter fraud is on the rise, especially in South Texas.  Not only has this been rampant amongst actual voters but candidates as well.

More states are moving to ensure the integrity of our voting process by requiring photo IDs, not as part of a devious plot to discourage voting, but because voter fraud is a real problem. And it’s a problem that voters want solved.

Photo IDs have become ubiquitous and unavoidable. You can’t cash a check, board a plane or drive without one. That is why it’s not unreasonable to require picture identification to protect our most important privilege of citizenship.  They are a reasonable way to secure our elections. Why wait to put it in force?

As we know, this bill had been a long time in the making. Why prolong the inevitable any longer? It’s been way too long as it is.

Mr. Anderson, even though I love the great State of Texas, as I am sure you and many others do, sometimes things just don’t move as fast as they should, almost at a snail’s pace and definitely not as quick as an Armadillo. Maybe it’s just the heat.

Texas Mental Health Services: Safe for Now?

AUSTIN  -  Now that we've been told that the Texas Legislature has decided not to drastically cut, if any reductions at all, funding for mental health services for the 2012 - 2013 biennium let’s look back and see what could have happened if funding was indeed significantly decreased.

A question you may have asked yourself, “In Austin alone, what would have been done to help the over 16,800 individuals, 1400 of them children, approx. 1 out of every 5 people, receiving assistance through state and local health services and the astounding number of people actually still on a waiting list to receive services? Well, let me give you some insight to your curiosity.

Texas currently ranks as one of the lowest states in the nation in spending on mental health care. If drastic reductions would have taken place, as originally proposed, the mental health services would have undermined the foundation of the public mental health system. The belief that cuts to community mental health services equate to savings would have been deceptive, as the costs of serving people with serious mental illnesses is merely shifted to local communities and to other sectors of the state budget.

Cuts to these services would have resonated through the public health, public safety and social service systems. As a result, without access to state funded community‐based treatment, untreated Texans with serious mental illness would get caught in an expensive revolving door of crisis, emergency rooms, hospitalization, and involvement in the criminal justice system and this burden will almost definitely be shifted back to the taxpayers. When compared against the cost of these settings, state funded community‐based services are clearly the more cost effective approach.

The next time the Lege kicks around the idea of cutting funding for mental health services they should first be invited to an all-expense paid, fun filled day at the Capital Area Mental Health Center, The Department of Health and Human Services or the Del Valle Correctional Center. Of course, the choice is ultimately theirs.

Written by John   Commentary for GOVT 2306 – 025   July 24, 2011

Anti-groping bill makes a comeback

Zahira Torres’ June 20, 2011 blog posting “Anti-groping bill makes a comeback” on the Texas Capitol Report blog discusses the procession of legislation to ban the controversial invasive airport pat downs. The author writes about Texas politics and government from the Austin Bureau of the El Paso Times. Her views are directed towards the flying public and anyone who has witnessed or have been involved with the current airport screening procedures.

As presented, “Gov. Rick Perry added the measure to the list of items that can be taken up during the special session, which ends later this month. The legislation was derailed in the Senate during the regular 140-day session, leading to a face-off between state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, who is one of the bill's authors, and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst.

The bill, which had passed the House unanimously, would ban agents with the Transportation Security Administration from performing searches on certain parts of a person's body with their hands without probable cause.

If the bill becomes law, agents who touch travelers in a manner that a "reasonable person" would find offensive or who touch the "anus, sexual organ, buttocks, or breast" of a traveler would be subject to up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $4,000.”

In Zahira’s post, she brings up a very valid point, “Can the state impose such a law to regulate federal employees?” Many state lawmakers say they can whereas the Federal Government says they cannot. Not only does the Federal Government rebuttal the state’s claim but they have used somewhat of a scare tactic stating that it would "cancel any flight or series of flights for which it could not ensure the safety of passengers and crew." This statement has increased frustration throughout the airline industry.

I work in the airline industry and see the security processes and procedures implemented on a daily basis some of which can be questionable. There have been times when many flights have been delayed and/or cancelled due to the timely processing of passengers at the airport security checkpoints. Not only does this create frustration amongst the flying public it is very costly for the airlines.

It is understandable that the Federal Government wants to make sure that everyone, regardless if they are passengers or employees, remains safe but, in my opinion, invasive pat downs are not the answer.

Something, but I don't not really knowing what that something is, definitely has to be done to better this process and give the public a better sense of security and feel about our airports.

Let’s stop the blame game and move on. As Zahira has stated, “I'm confident that we can pass legislation that addresses these threats, while protecting innocent passengers and preserving our state's rights."
Governor Perry needs to set aside some time to get this right because we have more important issues to contend with.

Uresti: Cutting big government means failing education

We the people should really scrutinize the actions and reactions of our State Legislature.

Why is it that whenever there is a budget crisis education seems to be on the top of the list of major cuts? 

According to State Senator Carlos Uresti’s, D-San Antonio, commentary in the San Antonio Express News, he states that "Now that it’s behind us, the 82nd Texas Legislature will be remembered most for its least accomplishment — a budget that fails to adequately provide for education.” And how true this will be. The only major accomplishment of this legislative session, according to Uresti, was that “the rainy day fund, even if it swells above $6.5 billion as predicted by the comptroller, will be left untouched paving the way for thousands of teachers to lose their jobs and cuts to school districts that will ripple through local economies.”

Once again I ask the million dollar question, “Why is it that whenever there is a budget crisis education seems to be on the top of the list of major cuts?” The answer, in my opinion, is that the Texas Legislature has forgotten the importance of an education foundation for our children and with a less than adequate education our future is at risk. When you do not have enough educators and special programs to meet the need to supply the demand of an increasing student population it could be devastating. It develops into a no win situation with very real repercussions.

This being said, I firmly support Carlos Uresti’s statements as outlined in his commentary as being a very valid account of the facts. Because the GOP had its chance to ease this crisis by approving the use of the rainy day fund more and more Texans will come to realize that a major failure has occurred and hopefully in the future it will be recognized that when the state budget is debated, education must come first.

Rick Perry for President?

According to the 06/26/2011 article published  in The Texas Observer, “Rick Perry for President ?”, written by Paul Stekler, he conveys that there is continuing talk that Texas’ Governor has much potential appeal to the GOP base and speculation is mounting if he will accept the run for the White House.

The Republicans believe that Perry’s charismatic charm, conservative viewpoints, 10 years of balanced budgets and the ability to weather the recession fairly well has painted the perfect success story. They also like that he has an almost unlimited ability to tap millions of Texas campaign dollars.

Almost from day one of the Obama administration, Governor Perry has declared war on state socialism, government mandates and coddling America's enemies. He does not believe that the Democrat’s approach is in the best interest of America and especially the State of Texas.

Ultimately, if Governor Perry does decide to run for President it will be a challenge. Many people from other states may not be comfortable with his outspokenness and will ask themselves, “Do we really want another President from Texas?”