Voice in the Wilderness

TAB Derring Do or Statesman Fishing Trip?
Today's Austin American Statesman continues flogging its longstanding investigation of the Texas Association of Business (TAB) and its connection to the 2002 election, when the Republican Party made huge gains in the Texas Legislature.

In a series of at least 23 stories going back to January 17, 2003, the Statesman has been pushing a narrative that the TAB broke Texas law with issue ads and mailers it ran in 2002. (Curiously, it has been nearly a year since the last story according to the Statesman website. Why wait so long to give us an update?)

While these stories have the unintended effect of showing the futility of "campaign finance reform" laws, they also seem relentlessly spun against the Republicans. For example:

• There is no indication that the Statesman has cast the same investigative zeal on possible infractions by Democrats. Surely not all Dems are savvy or honest enough to avoid running afoul complex campaign finance laws
• There is little attention paid to the fact that one of the chief protagonists in this story line, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, is himself a Democrat nor any inquiry into the DA's interaction with outside parties on this case
• There is little exposition of the statutes and case law in effect at the time of the alleged infractions. Statements like "State law prevents using corporate money for political activity" and that the players "worked together" are proferred and the reader is left to connect the dots. A clearer explanation of what constitutes "political activity" under the law in effect at the time of the incident would be useful and make me less suspicious that the Statesman is trying to spin the story using semantic vagaries.
• While today's headline insinuates that TAB funneled corporate money to activities supporting specific candidates, the article later admits that TAB President Bill Hammond voided a check that would have paid for Republican GOTV efforts. Maybe it was bad judgment to send the check in the first place, but the story admits no money was sent and offers no evidence of other TAB transactions. If money was not transacted, precisely how did TAB break the law?

I am not an expert in election law and, perhaps, TAB is guilty as charged. In which case, they should be tried and punished as prescribed by law. Yet, it is not clear from today's story exactly how TAB's actions were illegal because of the reasons mentioned above.

Therefore, as a service to Austin's mainstream media, here are some questions the Statesman might want to pursue to avoid the appearance of being partisan handmaidens:

• Did any corporations, like Planned Parenthood or Progressive Insurance, contribute to groups coordinating campaign activities that might appear to endorse specific Democratic candidates?
• What applicable statutes and case law were in effect at the time of the alleged infractions and how did how did TAB's actions violate them?
• Has Travis County District Attorney, Democrat Ronnie Earle, coordinated any of his investigation with any external parties? If so, who are they, what information have they provided, and who funds them? An open records request should help shed light on these issues.

Local Blogs on SOTUA
Several local and state bloggers have already posted responses to President Bush's State of the Union Address (SOTUA).

Texas Bug posted a great pic of "The Freedom Hug" and generally concurs with me about the moving symbolism of that moment.

Fire Ant Gazette noticed the presidentialness of President Bush and concurs with the money shot of the night.

I've posted my reaction at TexasTommy.org, a companion site to "Voice in the Wilderness. I loved "The Freedom Hug" and contrast it against the attitude of President Bush's opponents.

More later.....

Evening update
Grits for Breakfast is doubtful about the DNA testing/defense attorney training portions of the SOTUA. I couldn't find any mention of the Freedom Hug.

The Longhorn Mafia opines on W's new found love of Connecticut Senators and Shelia Jackson Lee's shameless love of cameras.

Local Blog Round up
Here are a couple recent items from up-and-coming Austin and Texas blogs of note:

Texas Bug raises the specter of centuries old religious antagonisms taking insidious forms via 21st Century media. She chronicles how the net was used in the Armanious family (Egyptian Christians) murder at the hands of radical Muslims.

The Statesman recently brought to light an interesting new application of internet technology: real time hunting via the internet, using a web cam linked to a loaded rifle at a canned hunt feeding station. The imagination runs wild with potential applications.

Keath Milligan recently posted an integrated media piece on the last CAMPO meeting that resulted in the William Cannon bridge being removed from the Austin toll plan. KeathMilligan.net is an example of the integrated and interactive media that is the future of news and entertainment. I suggest you blogroll and/or hotlist his URL and check it often!

I'm off to blog the SOTUA in my PJ's!

Toll Weevils:
Austin mobility plan burrowing deep into Travis County pocketbooks?
Sal Costello was on hand to help educate the Austin Townhall Meetup group on Tuesday, Feb. 1 about the perils of the Austin toll road plan. Costello, the driving force (sorry, bad pun, I'm tired) behind the Austin Toll Party, a grassroots organization that is striving to educate the Weird City about what the toll road plan is all about.

Apparently, his efforts are getting noticed. This morning's Statesman documented the investigation the Travis County DA's office has launched into the dealings of the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority board. While the specifics of the investigation are not known,

"...people who have been interviewed by Earle's office said the inquiry involves potential conflicts by board members related to land holdings near U.S. 183-A, a toll road the authority is preparing to build and operate near Cedar Park and Leander."

In other words, CTRMA board members may be controlling mobility decisions that could have the serendipitous side benefit of increasing the value of their land near the new road. Meanwhile, the exact destination of money generated by tolls on roads that have already been paid for is not entirely clear.

Costello is quick to mention that he's not against toll roads in principle, but this current plan brings local highways that have already been paid for under dark specter of toll booths without any evidence that the plan will reduce congestion.

But there is evidence Costello's efforts have paid off. In addition to the aforementioned investigation, PET PAC's (that's People for Efficient Transportation PAC, not People for the Ethical Treatment of PAC's) recall petition drive of Austin Mayor Will Wynn has reportedly forced the CAMPO/CTRMA/TX DOT acronym alliance to back off the William Cannon/Mopac bridge toll.

The next CAMPO meeting is set for Monday, February 14 from 6:00-8:00 pm. Judging from the previous fireworks at toll-related hearings and ATP's hard won successes, this meeting should make for great blogging! Stay tuned....

Those who can't, lobby
Today's Statesman chronicled the large number of public school teachers at the Texas Capitol today. Some lawmakers chafed at this turnout. Said Republican Sen. Florence Shapiro:

"I think it's great that they have concerns and want to talk to us, but they could do that at our district offices or they can send us a message. In my opinion, it doesn't look professional to have this many teachers all up here at once like this."

True, lack of professionalism is a concern for lawmakers, though a larger beef is that the teachers unions are a formidable lobby in Austin and are a large part of why school choice and other constructive reforms are routinely stalled. Republican lawmakers "think it's great" that teachers want to talk to them the same way you think it's great that telemarketers want to talk to you right in the middle of dinner.

Statesman reporter Mike Ward's story was surprisingly circumspect of the teachers' activities and repeatedly raised the issue of how so many teachers could take time off:

"I'm appalled anyone would suggest I'm here for myself," said one teacher, who, like several others, refused to give her name after a reporter questioned who was tending to their classrooms. "I'm here for better public education. I'm here for the students. Better schools make Texas better for everyone."

"I'm here for the students"? Shouldn't they be "there" for the students?