Category Archives: Texas

Texas Monthly is playing it safe

Posted on by
Reply

The latest issue of Texas Monthly arrived in the mail today:

20130923-160759.jpg

I really can’t blame the magazine for adhering to the “red state” paradigm. Progressives are generally viewed as mythical beings in Texas, except when they are making too much noise to ignore. Besides that, the editors have better things to do than sift through the petabytes of psychotic, barely-literate RWNJ screeds that would follow anything remotely nice about liberals and progressives. A Greg Abbott victory might not actually be inevitable, but an onslaught of keyboard poundings from the mouth-breathing class most certainly is.

Share

More Talk of Secession from Texas Republicans

Posted on by
Reply

KellyP42 from morguefile.comTexas Attorney General candidate Barry Smitherman, when he’s not advocating for pre-birth voting rights, is apparently talking up Texas’ ability to go it alone as an independent nation (h/t Jenn). He apparently said in an interview that Texas is “uniquely situated because we have energy resources, fossil and otherwise, and our own independent electrical grid…. [Texas has] been very strong leading in the charge agains the Obama administration.”

People like this tend to wrap themselves in the American flag when it suits their purposes, then talk about taking their ball and going home when the rest of America doesn’t do exactly what they want. Democracy is messy, America is big and diverse, and affluent white men don’t always get what they want anymore. Sorry, Mr. Smitherman, but it’s life. (Also, no legal authority for secession exists.)

I could not find any specific statements Smitherman has made recently regarding the Pledge of Allegiance, but I do see that he was a guest speaker at a meeting of the Texas Patriots PAC on August 6, 2013, which reportedly opened with an invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance. (The minutes do not mention if it was to the U.S. or the Texas flag. Yes, Texas has its own pledge of allegiance.)

My question for Smitherman is this: Did you recite the pledge to the U.S. flag that day, and say the words “to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible…”? Continue reading →

Share

Fetuses, the 26th Amendment, and Texas Republicans

Posted on by
1
xandert from morguefile.com

Childhood hijinks, or sinister liberal plot?

If fetuses in Texas could vote, they’d probably vote Republican, at least according to one state official:

In a recent speech to an anti-abortion group on the economic impact of terminating pregnancies, Texas Railroad Commissioner Barry Smitherman, a Republican candidate for attorney general, said he believed many unborn babies “would have voted Republican.”

***

Smitherman spokesman Allen Blakemore called the candidate’s statement a matter of statistics.

“Of course he was referring to the ones in Texas,” Blakemore said, “and we know that the majority of Texans vote for Republican candidates.”

I am honestly just too worn out to bother trying to make fun of Smitherman directly, and this comment actually boggles my mind to the point where snark begins to fail me. Instead, I will point out the callous disregard Smitherman shows for children through this comment. Apparently he wants to give the franchise to fetuses, but nothing he said indicates that he would support granting similar voting rights to children between the ages of birth and eighteen. Individuals in that age range do not have the right to vote, per the 26th Amendment to the United States Constitution.

What does Smitherman know about children that would cause him to seek to suppress their voting rights in this manner? What is behind this push for a fetal franchise? Are Texas children far more liberal—and therefore more likely to vote for Democratic candidates—than their amniotic-submerged counterparts? Or is something more sinister at work here?

Or, in the alternative, is Barry Smitherman talking completely out of his ass? History will decide (assuming that we’re still even bothering to teach history in the future).

Photo credit: xandert from morguefile.com.

Share

A Special Prosecutor Will Be Looking at Rick Perry and the Public Integrity Unit

Posted on by
Reply
Via empireonline.com

Via empireonline.com

A senior district judge from San Antonio announced that he will name a special prosecutor to investigate allegations of “abuse of official capacity” and other charges against Texas Governor Rick Perry.

Texans for Public Justice filed a complaint against Perry with the Travis County District Attorney and the Travis County Attorney in June. Perry had threatened to withhold funding for the Public Integrity Unit (PIU), which investigates allegations of official misconduct, unless Travis County DA Rosemary Lehmberg resigned in the wake of her DWI conviction. (Perry may have had other reasons to want the PIU shut down.) Perry eventually vetoed funding for the PIU.

That veto took away about $3.7 million from the PIU. The Travis County Commissioners’ Court voted in early August to use $1.8 million of Travis County (not Texas) taxpayers’ money, plus over $700,000 “from another fund,” to keep the PIU going. This gave Lehmberg the opportunity to “scold” Perry. Continue reading →

Share

About That Whole Adoption Thing

Posted on by
Reply

Adoption is often promoted as an alternative to abortion by people who seem to think that pregnancy and childbirth are no big deal. Okay, maybe that was a loaded statement, but it certainly seems as though the people who promote adoption in this way don’t understand (or don’t care) that people seek abortions for reasons other than not wanting or being able to raise a child. Medical issues making pregnancy risky or difficult come to mind.

Now, Texas State Senator Eddie Lucio, who had the distinction of being the only Democrat in the Senate to vote for HB2, is pushing a new type of abortion restriction. Prior to obtaining an abortion, a person must complete a three-hour adoption course. I think the Feminist Justice League said it best in their open letter to Sen. Lucio:

Requiring this class will place undue burden on people who are geographically marginalized and lack internet access. More importantly, however, it gives the impression you think women are stupid. I certainly hope I’m correct in assuming that’s a false impression.

Whether Sen. Lucio actually thinks people are stupid or not, his proposal is part of a long line of assumptions that people don’t know how pregnancy works or what is inside their uteri. This is the attitude underlying all those mandatory ultrasound laws.

This seemed like a good opportunity to look at how many children are awaiting adoption in the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services’ (DFPS) care. This is the state agency that operates Child Protective Services, or CPS. I spent a couple of years representing parents, and occasionally kids, in CPS cases, so while I’m far from an expert on the subject, I have some understanding of how complicated a subject “adoption” can be. Continue reading →

Share

Oh No You Don’t, Republicans!

Posted on by
Reply

file6461281015948A few Texas Republican representatives apparently don’t feel that HB2 was enough embarrassment and grief for our state, so they’ve decided to expend more taxpayer money to pursue even more egregiously unconstitutional restrictions on abortion rights (h/t Evin).

The text of HB59, introduced today in the Texas House of Representatives, is not yet available online. The bill’s caption is “Relating to a prohibition on abortion after detection of a fetal heartbeat; providing penalties.”

According to the Mayo Clinic, the heart may begin beating as early as six weeks. It is not clear if HB59 would prohibit abortion after a specific number of weeks, or if it would prohibit doctors from performing an abortion if they can detect a heartbeat. Regardless, the law is just a bad idea.

North Dakota’s six-week abortion ban, signed into law in March, is based on the idea of a fetal heartbeat. That law did not give a specific time frame either, but it has been interpreted to ban abortion at around the six-week mark. That law has also been ruled unconstitutional, which of course is the goal for proponents of these bills, who know they’ll be struck down but keep hoping they can get a case before the Supreme Court in order to reverse Roe v. Wade. A Kansas anti-choice advocate admitted as much earlier this year, according to Huffington Post: Continue reading →

Share

The Texas House Makes HB2 Seem More Popular Than It Is by Changing the Page Layout

Posted on by
4
Via Stand With Texas Women/Facebook

Via Stand With Texas Women/Facebook

The Texas House of Representatives’ House Research Organization (HRO) releases a “Daily Floor Report” summarizing the bills and testimony presented before the House or its committees. The House has been in recess since the second special session started, although the State Affairs Committee held a hearing on the resurrected anti-abortion bill, HB2, last Tuesday, July 2. The Daily Floor Report for July 9, 2013 (PDF file) has a summary of that hearing, and it demonstrates a sneaky way of making it appear, at least superficially, that your bill has more support than it actually does (h/t Arthur).

Beginning on page 1 (the first page after the cover sheet), the report lists witnesses testifying “for” the bill, “against” the bill, and “on” the bill. It lists three pages of witnesses supporting the bill and one page of witnesses opposing it. The report also identifies one person who testified “on” the bill, Ellen Cooper of the Department of State Health Services.

Based on that, you might think that far more people testified in support of HB2 than in opposition to it, right? You might be excused, at first glance, for thinking that three times as many people testified for it as against it.

You would be wrong about that.

At the end of the three-page-long list of HB2 supporters, the report states that “about 1,090 others” signed up to testify in support of the bill. Most of them did not get to deliver their testimony to the committee in person, of course, since the hearing might still be going on a week later if they had. Still, three pages of names plus 1,090 more is quite a lot of people.

How many more signed up to testify in addition to the one page of names testifying against HB2? At the end of that much-shorter list, the report states that “about 2,060 others” signed up to testify against HB2.

According to the Texas Tribune, a roughly equal number of people testified for and against the bill. I suspect the HRO is not accustomed to writing such lengthy lists of witnesses, but that still does not explain the different page lengths. The scale of the testimony on Sunday, June 23 does not even come close to last Tuesday, and the Daily Floor Report (PDF file) for that day clearly indicates that more people signed up to testify against that bill than for it.

Wherever you stand on the issue of abortion, this sort of game-playing should not be acceptable.

Maybe Daily Floor Reports are subject to a page number limit. That is about the only honest reason I can think of at the moment for why the report is set up this way, but even that would not explain why the HRO cut off the list of opponents when it could have shortened the list of supporters.

The chair of the steering committee for the House Research Organization is Rep. Bill Callegari (R-Houston). I sent Rep. Callegari the following request for information through his Facebook page:

Dear Rep. Callegari,

I am a resident of Austin, Texas, and I have been researching and writing about the events surrounding HB2, SB9, and the related bills pending in the Legislature. I am not affiliated with any news or media organization. I have a question regarding the Daily Floor Report released today, July 9.

The report summarizes the State Affairs Committee hearing on HB2 that took place last week, and includes lists of people who registered to testify for and against the bill. According to news reports, only about 100 people were able to give live testimony to the committee, with about an equal number of people testifying in support of and in opposition to the bill. Today’s Daily Floor Report lists three pages’ worth of supporters’ names, then adds that about 1,090 more people signed up to testify in support of HB2. It then lists one page of opponents’ names, and adds that about 2,060 more people signed up to testify against the bill.

My question is as follows: why did the report list so many more names of supporters than opponents, when more people signed up to testify against the bill than for it, and roughly equal numbers of people actually testified to the committee on either side of the issue? Your attention to this matter is greatly appreciated.

I’ll update if I hear anything back.

Share

Dear Rep. Laubenberg

Posted on by
Reply
Via Dallas County Democratic Party on Facebook

Via Dallas County Democratic Party on Facebook

The following is reposted with permission from a Facebook post by my friend Andreas, in relation to the HB2 hearings on Tuesday, July 2, 2013 in Austin, Texas:

Dear Rep. Laubenberg,

The truth shouldn’t ever have to fear inquiry. If this was a bill that would actually help increase women’s health and safety you would not have to avoid answering tough questions about its effect on women. You would not have to endure scathing rebuttals from actual health organizations and medical professionals. You would not have to ram this legislature through with a special session. If this was a bill that would help Texas women, you would have garnered broad support for it.

But as we have seen in the last couple of weeks, this is not about women’s health. This is about your personal religious view on women, sex and when life starts. This is about limiting access to abortions and making them so dangerous, expensive or logistically difficult, that you are basically outlawing them.

I might by cynical when it comes to the motivations and loyalties of politicians, and I might be disenchanted by the mockery of the democratic process – but I am not stupid. Don’t insult my intelligence by pretending that you have the health and safety of women on your mind.

You know what would convince me that you actually care about women’s health and safety and that you want to lower the number of abortions?

If you would fund the abortion providers so they can meet the medical requirements that you say are so important.
If you would champion age-appropriate and comprehensive sex education.
If you would fight to make contraceptives easily available and affordable.
If you would listen to what medical professionals have to say about this topic.

But as it stands all you do is using questionable tactics to get around a law that you don’t agree with. Since you can’t attack Roe vs. Wade directly you try to cancel it out by these shamefully disingenuous tactics. The truth shouldn’t ever have to fear inquiry, but there isn’t much truth here, is there?

With the same respect that you show towards women,
AF

Share

The Extent of Anger at Planned Parenthood

Posted on by
Reply

A friend posted this on Facebook after the protests regarding HB2 and SB9 on Monday, July 1, 2013:

Out of all the blues I talked to tonight, MOST of them were just super focused on having their tax dollars NOT go to Planned Parenthood. I mean, I kept trying to ask them “how can we help women have planned (versus unplanned) pregnancies” and they would just go back to Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood Planned Parenthood and how evil it was.

Even the really cool, chill, level-headed people were just so transfixed with the evils of Planned Parenthood.

I almost felt that they would be fine with private abortion clinics as long as they weren’t Planned fucking Parenthood.

Planned Parenthood has really really pissed them off. Their main argument was that women who go in there aren’t given unbiased info about their options – they are pushed towards abortions. And they argued that PP makes their money of abortions and wants abortions. That PP is pro-abortion and is in the “abortion business.”

Also they said that Planned Parenthood gets money for giving mammograms from the government but it’s a fraud because they don’t actually give them.

There was a WHOLE LIST. I didn’t really believe any of it, but I suggest anyone who isn’t super familiar with Planned Parenthood and all that it has to offer and all that it does (and does not do) and how it works to take some real time reading up on Planned Parenthood.

PP isn’t the bad guy – but I found myself without enough thorough knowledge about them (other than the basics) to defend them.

Learning what to research through the other side’s arguments….

I have two thoughts on this:

1. Their information on Planned Parenthood seems incomplete or inaccurate. Here is what they actually do:

© Planned Parenthood/Via washingtonpost.com

© Planned Parenthood/Via washingtonpost.com

2. Remember how, a week earlier, Planned Parenthood funding was considered “not germane” to the issues presented in SB5?

Share

My Video of the Stand With Texas Women Rally, July 1, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

Here’s my video of the Stand With Texas Women Rally at the Texas Capitol this past Monday, July 1, 2013. It was a less-than-seasonably-hot day for Texas, meaning it stayed under 100° F the whole time. The iPhone apparently doesn’t handle heat all that well, so it kept shutting off on me. Here’s the video I was able to get. The initial graphic is by Lindsay Braun.

Share