From the Fiscal Times: $1.7 Trillion in Unfunded State Pensions Is Squeezing Vital Public Programs

A key issue on the state and local level.

- Click here for the article.

Governments across the country are facing down at least $1.7 trillion in unpaid pension costs for public workers. As these growing commitments squeeze local budgets and crowd out essential services, taxpayers are being asked to cover a larger bill—and get less in return.

Public education is the largest and potentially the most important sector to be affected by pension crowd-out. Almost every state increased teachers’ retirement benefits in the booming 1990’s, but those increases were not accompanied by responsible funding plans. By 2003 teachers’ plans were short by $235 billion, and by 2009, pension debt had more than doubled to $584 billion.

Market growth since the Great Recession has barely put a dent in the shortfall, which still totals around $500 billion. Carrying such a sizable debt is expensive and has resulted in large cost increases.

These costs inevitably cut into education spending. Between 2000 and 2013, pension contributions per pupil increased at a rate five times higher than total education expenditures. This did little to halt the growth in debt: Pension debt per pupil increased by $9,588 over this period, more than nine times larger than the increase in total annual education expenditures per pupil.

From the TSHA: On this day in history: The Jaybird-Woodpecker War heats up

This is from this past Sunday, but its a good early look at parties in the state of Texas, in addition to race relations.

- Click here for detail about the war.

On this day in 1888, white members of a political association known as the Jaybirds held a mass meeting in Richmond, Texas, and ordered Charles Ferguson and several other black political leaders to leave Fort Bend County within ten hours. The so-called Jaybird-Woodpecker War was a feud between two political factions for the control of Fort Bend County. The Jaybirds, representing most of the white population, were the regular Democrats who sought to rid the county of the Republican government that had gained control during Reconstruction. The Woodpeckers, numbering about forty persons and also claiming to be Democrats, were the officials and former officials who held office as a result of the black vote for the Republican ticket. Former friends, neighbors, and relatives became bitter enemies as a result of the feud. The election of 1888 engendered much bitterness. After one Jaybird leader was killed and another wounded, the party met in Richmond and expelled a number of Woodpecker leaders. The Woodpeckers won the election in spite of this, and the violence continued. After the riot known as the "Battle of Richmond" in 1889, the Woodpeckers were driven from office. In October a further series of meetings in Richmond established the Jaybird Democratic Organization of Fort Bend County. The whites-only organization dominated Fort Bend County politics for the next seventy years.

From the Texas Monthly: Widespread Political Corruption May Be Just A Pen Stroke Away

For 2306 students - I'll have a written assignment on this in a couple weeks.

The 84th legislative session passed a bill which changes how ethical violations - code or corruption charges - are prosecuted in the state. They will no longer be conducted in the Travis County's DA office, but rather in the home town of the accused. The bill was signed by the governor but needs to be ratified by the general population since it requires amending the Texas Constitution.

The author argues this will facilitate political corruption.

- Click here for the article.

From Super Houston: A Garden for Houston? Or a Community Bamboozled?

A local blogger provides a fascinating - and depressing - look at the local decision-making process.

- Click here for the story.

A local community was effectively shut out of the process for determining whether a local golf course would be allowed to develop into a botanical garden. She call this a failed public process, and provides a useful reminder of who runs Houston.

The more I learn, the more frustrated and infuriated I become. My frustration is not related to whether we should have a Botanic Garden, though I remain ambivalent on this topic, it is more because of the absolute absence of a public process. Frankly, even calling it a public process is misleading, as there was nothing public about it. Increasingly decisions at the city level, and in fact at all levels of government, are made for many of the wrong reasons and without a public vetting process. In our city government agencies cater to tourists and visitors instead of supporting Houstonians; and instead of building our neighborhoods, the City gives away millions to Wal-mart and budgets a $75 million slush fund for private developers to build luxury living downtown. How did we get here? And what does it have to do with the proposed Houston Botanic Garden?

From Atlantic Cities: America's Most Sprawling Cities Are Also the Most Republican

Something to add to our material on ideology, partisanship and political behavior:

- Click here for the article.

With the help of my Martin Prosperity Institute colleague Charlotta Mellander, I compared Smart Growth America's new rankings of sprawling and compact development to voting patterns, as well as other significant economic and demographic variables.Their Sprawl Index takes into account four key factors: density, mix of uses, presence of "activity centers," and accessibility of street network. A higher ranking on the Sprawl Index means a metro is more compact and less sprawling. Positive correlations identify a relationship to more compact development, while negative ones suggest a connection to greater sprawl. As usual, I note that our analysis points only to associations among variables and does not indicate causality.

The connection between sprawl and conservatism comes through loud and clear in our analysis of more than 200 of America's metro areas. Our correlations suggest that sprawled America is Red America, while Blue America takes on a much more compact geography. The Sprawl Index was negatively associated with the share of voters in a metro who voted for Mitt Romney in 2012 (with a correlation of -.44); and it was positively associated with the percentage who voted for Barack Obama (.43). These were among the strongest correlations in our analysis.

This is in line with other research that connects sprawl or density and political affiliation. Researchers have identified a tipping point of roughly 800 people per square mile where counties shift from Red to Blue, as I noted in the weeks following Barack Obama's reelection. Princeton historian Kevin Kruse similarly explained this spatial link between a spread-out landscape and Republican political positions to the New Republic. “There are certain things in which the physical nature of a city, the fact the people are piled on top of each other, requires some notion of the public good,” he said. “Conservative ideology works beautifully in the suburbs, because it makes sense spatially.”

More on the battle over control of the Harris County Republican Party

This pick up from a story below on local party organization.

- Click here for the story.

Previously, Republicans had "something of a luxury in that their opponent was not especially well organized," said Rice University political scientist Mark Jones.

That has changed in a big way with the arrival last year of Battleground Texas, a Democratic campaign that has pledged to spend tens of millions of dollars identifying and communicating directly with persuadable voters, particularly in the Houston area.

"For Republicans there's a concern, I think, that if they don't get their ground game into high gear, then they risk losing the county altogether," Jones said.

Simpson and his supporters paint the race as a battle over management style, accusing Woodfill of weak fundraising and outreach at a time when the county is growing and diversifying - and, by many measures, becoming more Democratic. They also have suggested that Woodfill has focused too much on divisive social issues, such as same-sex marriage.

At a Houston Chronicle editorial board meeting last month, Emmett complained that the local party is "driving young people away," that hundreds of Republican precinct chair positions are vacant and at least 80 percent of the party's money comes from its own candidates.

"The party is supposed to be supporting candidates," he said. "Right now, the party is living off a few candidates that can raise money. I look at it and I say, 'Look, we need a county party that understands it's about winning elections, it's not about giving speeches.' "

Republican political consultant Jim McGrath said "a lot of people have been looking for a viable alternative to Jared just because he's not getting the job done, and we need to hold him accountable for a lack of results."

Three stories on Harris County Courts

A small variety for our past look at county government in 2306 and upcoming look at the judiciary:

1 - Third complaint lodged against family court Judge Denise Pratt.

With just days before early voting begins in the GOP primary, Webster family lawyer Greg Enos has filed a third criminal complaint against embattled family court Judge Denise Pratt with the Harris County District Attorney's office.

The complaint, which details one of the 631 cases Pratt dismissed on Dec. 30 and Dec. 31, accuses the freshman Republican judge — who is seeking a second term this year — of backdating an order in open court. It includes sworn affidavits from a couple who say Pratt informed them that she was "backdating this order" and screenshots indicating Pratt signed the order at an April 25 hearing, but dated it March 5.

Enos' second criminal complaint, filed last month, alleges that Pratt broke the law by purging hundreds of cases last month without giving prior notice to lawyers or their clients. His first complaint against the district court judge, filed in October, accuses her of backdating orders in two unrelated cases. That complaint led to the resignation of Pratt's lead clerk and sparked an investigation by the DA's office and a grand jury, which ultimately no-billed her.

Pratt, through her lawyer, blamed the backdating on her court clerks. Enos says it's "totally different" this time.

3 - Why is Harris County just now getting a CPS court?

On Monday, we published a story about a new, but temporary specialty court opening in Harris County in the coming weeks that will hear only Child Protective Services cases, likely those involving children who have been living in foster care for more than a year.
As Texas Department of Family and Protective Services Commissioner John Specia noted in Monday’s story, it takes longer for foster children to find permanent homes in Harris County than any other county in Texas.

At the end of 2012, 40 percent of the more than 4,800 foster children in the CPS system in the county had been there for at least two years, compared to 25 percent statewide.
There is a wide body of evidence indicating that specialty CPS courts help foster children find permanent homes more quickly. Many other Texas counties have created them. But this one — funded only through 2015 — is Harris County’s first. Why?

Interviews with judges and other local officials indicate there exists a variety of conflicting opinions about how, and whether, the structure of the court system in here needs to change — either to address the backlog of CPS cases or the larger backlog problem in the family district courts.

State Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, said she initially approached local judges last year about permanently converting a civil district court into a CPS court, but the idea met with fierce resistance.

“I basically told them they needed to address this issue, that we needed to start doing something and I was quite adamant about it, and they just pushed back about creating this court,” said Huffman, a former district judge. “They didn’t like the idea of Austin, the state, telling them at a local level … how they were going to run their courts.”

3 - New CPS court aims to help kids in system the longest

Kristopher Sharp spent nearly half his life in foster care, shuffled from home to home - 28 in all - before aging out of the system in Harris County at 18. In eight years in Child Protective Services, he recalls seeing a judge only twice: once on the way in, and once on the way out.

Sharp's experience helps define much of what ails CPS in Harris County, where 40 percent of the more than 4,800 foster children in the system in 2012 had been there for at least two years, compared to 25 percent statewide.


Sharp and others who have languished in the system have helped provide the impetus for change in Harris County with the creation, at least temporarily, of a court dedicated to Child Protective Services cases. Advocates say the special court will help reduce a serious backlog of CPS cases and find permanent homes for children much more quickly, in part because the judge will have more time to spend on each case.

"There was a time, I say often, where everybody believed that it was OK that when you put a kid in foster care, it was OK if we just kept them safe, warm and dry," said John Specia, head of the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services and a former San Antonio family court judge. "But now, the focus out of the federal government and out of all the various advocacy organizations is well-being and permanency. The difference between children doing well in foster care and not doing well is that permanent attachment, that permanent forever family."

Weekly Written Assignment #4

For GOVT 2305:

This week we will discuss federalism and civil liberties. Our discussion of civil liberties will include a detailed look at the two ways freedom of religion is covered in the First Amendment. The first prevents government from establishing a national church, the second prevents it from restricting the free exercise of religious belief.

As we will see as we dig into this subject more deeply, the Supreme Court regularly hears cases that allow for exceptions. Some things done to exercise religious belief can create harms that government might have the right to prevent - cases of parents who refuse to take their children to hospitals for religious reasons for example.

The court ruled - controversially - in 1990 that members of an American Indian tribe who used peyote in a religious ceremony were not protected by the First Amendment if they were fired for testing positive for the drug.

- see Employment Division v Smith.

In response, Congress passed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which attempted to enhance free exercise protections, but the court also ruled - partially - against the bill.

- see RFRA.
- see City of Bourne v Flores.

The court has generally ruled that a law that is neutral towards religion - and seeks to impose a public benefit - then the freedom of religious exercise is not violated when the law is implemented.

Now the court has an opportunity to revisit this issue. The Affordable Care Act - among other things -  makes it mandatory that contraception coverage be included in insurance plan, though some exceptions are made for religious institutions. Hobby Lobby, among other stores, have filed suit arguing that the religious views of the company's ownership is violated by the requirement that they provide contraceptive coverage to their employees. They argue that RFRA protects this right, but the Justice Department - following the argument in Employment Division v. Smith argues that they must provide coverage, and that this case is similar in spirit to the Smith case.

- see Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby.

I want you to outline the arguments made on either side and predict how the court might rule on this dispute. As with other assignments, you will be evaluated on how well you can objectively analyze the competing sides of the argument. Personal opinions on this case are easy - but unhelpful. The point is trying to determine how the Supreme Court might rule on this case.

For GOVT 2306:

In a post just below this one I link to Houston First - a small single purpose governing organization that collects hotel occupancy tax revenues and uses them to make Houston a more attractive destination.

- click here for the post.

Since we are starting to look more closely at the nature of local governments, it might be useful to look at this group as indicative of what groups in Houston are especially influential in setting public policy for the city.

Houston is very pro growth and has an aggressive strategy to achieve it, which includes getting Super Bowls and making the changes that attract the best and brightest to move here.

In this exercise I want you to look at the backgrounds of the people who are members of Houston First's Board of Directors and try figure out which groups have a stake in pushing Houston's pro growth strategy.

- click here for the list.

Let's assume these people indicate what the nature of Houston's power structure is. What can we tell about the city based on this list?

This is an open ended assignment, so take it wherever you'd like to take it.

Cities v Walmart

A battle in DC over how much Walmart must pay its workers in order to open stores in the city led this author to look at similar conflicts between Walmart and other cities. Who has leverage? The retailer or the cities?

- Click here for detail on the controversy.

Walmart has done a good job getting subsidies - public money - from cities to build. Walmart Subsidy Watch has background on all of it.

They report 29 deals in Texas which provided $90.8 million in funding.

Who sets transportation policy?

Free Press Houston looks at the politics behind Segment E of the Grand Parkway - the world's longest "ring road," which will eventually have a segment near our campus.

The story involves the ability of supporters of the road to build over wetlands and an archaeological site.

From Larry McMurthy: Horsemen, Goodbye

In Texas Monthly's current issue on Texas cities - which I'll be pulling material from for a while - has thoughts from Texas author Larry McMurthy on changes he's noted in the major cities on Texas. It seems that Texans have grown more urban since the 1960s. The frontier mentality common then has waned.

My point, much reiterated, was that Texans in the main were not yet able to handle the pressures of urban life. I saw this demonstrated on a hot summer day on the Houston beltway, where traffic neither moved nor offered the slightest prospects of movement, when the two cars in front of me bumped fenders; their drivers, both wearing ties and pinstripes, got out and flung themselves at one another. Soon they were rolling around on the burning pavement, in the traffic. Several drivers, including myself, tried to reason with them, and eventually it took, up to a point. Neither car was hurt at all, but the two men got up, exchanged insurance info, shook hands, and got back in their cars. Twenty minutes or so later the traffic moved normally again. Terrible traffic is the price Houstonians pay for living in a real city.

When I published my essays with the Wittliffs, they had no interest in curbing my wordage; they wanted as much book as they could get. Not so the Monthly: it serves a readership whose attention span is far from limitless. More than forty years have passed since I took that first look at the cities of Texas. Now many of its citizens have shaken off the frontier ethic and become mature urbanites. In response to this change, most of the cities have gone to the trouble to provide their better-informed residents some of the trappings of high culture. There are several excellent museums and an opera house or two. In addition, these cities have produced a number of locally grown artists who are good in various spheres. This is no small thing

He does not speculate on what has lead this change, but a massive influx of residents from around the nation and world undoubtedly helps, in addition to the simple fact that many of us - though not all - are one or two additional generations separated from the farm. Are we growing more comfortable being in close proximity with others and in allowing courts to mediate our disputes? There comes a point where we may no longer be fit to be called Texans.

I wonder whether Texans' increased fixation with guns is related to a decline in the frontier. The decreased reality of the frontier leads to it becoming more prominent in our imagination. Just a thought.

Here's coincidental trivia: McMurthy is a three time winner of the Jesse H. Jones Award from the Texas Institute of Letters. Ny 2306s are readign up on Jones this semester.

The Texans are the most political team in the NFL

From the Chronicle (and old story I just stumbled across), by way of OpenSecrets:

The reason for the Texans’ supremacy in the political arena is owner Robert McNair, an energy executive who is a liberal donor to conservative causes. The study finds that McNair has donated $215,200 of his estimated $1.4 billion net worth to political causes since January 2009, “almost strictly to Republicans.”

Overall, Texans’ players, executives and coaches have totaled $293,100 in political contributions — far ahead of runner-up San Diego. Chargers personnel gave $171,500 to federal politicians and committees since January 2009. The Spanos family, which owns the team, has been tied to Texas Gov. Rick Perry‘s 2012 presidential campaign.

So we can add to our list of items that divide people politically, sports teams.

Overall, the teams that favored Republicans most with their campaign cash included the Houston Texans, Arizona Cardinals, Dallas Cowboys, Denver Broncos, Carolina Panthers, Kansas City Chiefs, Washington Redskins, Detroit Lions, New York Jets, San Diego Chargers and the Baltimore Ravens, all of which donated at least 70 percent of their contributions to the GOP.

Meanwhile, the teams that favored Democrats most with their political donations included the Seattle Seahawks, St. Louis Rams, San Francisco 49ers, Oakland Raiders, Philadelphia Eagles, New York Giants, New England Patriots and New Orleans Saints, all of which donated at least 70 percent of their political contributions to Democrats.