From the Huffington Post: NRA For First Graders?

Click here for a video about proposed legislation in Missouri that would require first graders to take an NRA approved gun safety class. Its part of the NRA's Eddie Eagle program. Critics argue that the purpose is to market guns to kids. Maybe, but I think Nerf does a far better job of that.

Study Break: She's a Witch!

I promised to load this up in my previous class. It helps put Madison's concerns about the impulse and opportunity in context.

and speaking of baring arms....

San Fransisco has banned public nudity - which had been legal. Some are protesting the decision in the obvious way.

- The links are safe. In case you were worried - or hopeful.

The "right to bare arms" is not the same as the "right to bear arms"

Just sayin'

Study Break: If you vote for me, all of your wildest dream will come true.

I guess clips from the movie are protected, but Pedro's brief speech is great. I;ll probably talk it up at some point in class.

Will there be a challenge to the constitutionality of New York's recent assault weapons ban?

I'm finishing up grading week 2's assignment on recent Supreme Court decisions about gun control, and I ran across the following story about possible constitutional claims against the state of New York's recently passed laws banning assault weapons.

Pro-gun-rights groups filed notice with the state Tuesday of their intention to sue over Gov. Cuomo’s new assault weapons ban.

The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association and other groups made the filing with the state Court of Claims, arguing the new gun control law violates the rights guaranteed by the U.S. and state constitutions.

The point of McDonald v Chicago was to expend the reach of Second Amendment protections. Prior the decision, the Second Amendment protected gun owners from the national government, afterwards a gun owner could use the amendment to limit the state and local governments. It is unclear whether this applies to assault rifles and magazine sizes and other such matters, but we may find out soon. I think its appropriate to point out that activities allowed in the McDonald case seem to be underway. 

Change in email policy

Accessing email on blackboard is a huge pain, so if you need an immediate response to a question, please use my ACC account - kjefferies@alvincollege.edu.

You'll see it on the right hand column.

If you have any specific frustrations with the new blackboard, let me know and I'll see if there is anything I can do on my end.

If you can't beat him, impeach him

67% of Texas Republicans want President Obama impeached and removed from office.

The poll was conducted by Public Policy Polling. The Chronicle comments:

Overall, 47 percent of Texans approve of President Obama’s job performance, about 10 percentage points less than the rest of the nation. Public opinion is highly polarized along party lines: 95 percent of Democrats approve of the president’s work, compared to just 10 percent of Republicans. Independents — the only hope for Democrats seeking a Lone Star comeback in 2014 — give the president a 49 percent approval mark.

Republicans don’t just dislike Obama. They want him gone from office.

Two out of three Republicans want Obama impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate for high crimes and misdemeanors. Just one in three independents (32 percent) shares that view. And, oddly enough, one in eight Texas Democrats (12 percent) would go along with impeachment.

The state remains very much racially polarized: Just 32 percent of non-Hispanic whites approve of Obama’s performance, compared to 70 percent of Latinos and 84 percent of African Americans. Whites, older Texans and men are the most likely to disapprove of Obama and to favor impeachment.

The obvious question is what drives this attitude, a belief that he's guilty of a high crime and misdemeanor, or opposition to him based on who he is and what policies he pursues. Republicans in the House impeached Clinton, but were unable to remove him from office. It did not work out well for them, so I doubt saner minds in the party will allow this to actually happen, but they'll have to tell that to Steve Stockman.

For background: Wikipedia: Impeachment in the United States.

Did a reduction in Defense Spending lead to a contraction in the economy?

This might end up being a lesson in the danger of quickly cutting spending. It sounds nice, but it has consequences. By the way - most, ok all, of this was stolen from Wonkblog.

The GDP shrank 0.1 % in the last quarter of 2012 even though the private sector grew.

Here's the breakdown in chart form:



And some commentary:

- Yikes! Economy shrank in fourth quarter for the first time since ’09.
- Economy shrinks as federal spending cuts trump private sector’s growth.
- Government is hurting the economy — by spending too little
- GDP Report Is Less Negative Than It Looks

And one more chart that compares the private and public components of ther economy.

John Kerry confirmed as Secretary of State, no thanks to Texas' Senators

John Kerry was confirmed by the Senate 94-3 after appearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - which he actually chaired at the time. Speculation has held that Obama nominated Kerry because the two became close while Obama was a senator. Kerry became his mentor. This is payback, and also a way to obtain a secretary that will be loyal. That is not always a good thing.

- Click here for his opening statement.
- Click here for video of the hearing.

- The NYT details the process here.

Mr. Kerry, who is a Vietnam veteran, a former presidential nominee and the son of a diplomat, will be inheriting a difficult agenda. The conflict in Syria has killed more than 60,000 people. The international envoy on the Syrian crisis, Lakhdar Brahimi, who reported to the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday, has made no headway. Egypt is in turmoil. By Mr. Kerry’s own account, relations with Russia have deteriorated.

As chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee during Mr. Obama’s first term, Mr. Kerry was a loyal ally of the White House and served as an interlocutor with President Bashar al-Assad of Syria and President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, among others.

During a nearly four-hour confirmation hearing last week, Mr. Kerry demonstrated familiarity with a broad range of issues, but he did not present any new ideas on how to address them.

Our two senators voted against him - along with Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe. The National Journal tries to explain why, while noting that Cornyn is a default "no" vote against all the president's nominees. Elections play a key role: 

Of the three senators to vote on Tuesday against President Obama's nomination of Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., to be the next secretary of state, two are up for re-election in 2014: Sen. John Cornyn, the GOP minority whip from Texas, and Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. The other is Cornyn's fellow Texan, the newly-elected Republican Sen. Ted Cruz.

It's easy to figure out why Inhofe would oppose Kerry, as the two of them are staunch advocates on polar opposites on climate change policy. (Inhofe said as much in a statement explaining his vote). Inhofe also is not in significant danger of a primary challenge or losing the general election if he runs again.

Cornyn, however, does have reason to look over his shoulder, as home state conservatives are vowing to contest his re-election. And voting against Kerry certainly won't hurt Cornyn in Texas.

"Sen. Kerry has a long history of liberal positions that are not consistent with a majority of Texans. After reviewing the nomination hearing, Sen. Cornyn could not support Sen. Kerry's nomination," said Cornyn spokesperson Megan Mitchell in a statement reported by the Dallas Morning News.

Cruz won't have to run again until 2018, but it might be poor form to vote against the interest of the Tea Party since they were responsible for his electoral success. Cornyn's vote - again - points out the influence of the Republican primary voting bloc in the state. One of the commenters pointed out that Cornyn waited to vote until after Cruz. Once Cruz voted no, Cornyn had to.

It also highlights cultural differences between Texas and the nation at large.

The Chronicle highlights this statement from Cruz:

“I was compelled to vote no on Sen. Kerry’s nomination because of his longstanding less-than-vigorous defense of U.S. national security issues and, in particular, his long record of supporting treaties and international tribunals that have undermined U.S. sovereignty. Now that he has been confirmed, I look forward to working with him in the years to come, hopefully, to protect our interests and preserve U.S. sovereignty.”

Nothing to back up the allegations, but that might be worth investigating. Note his use the word sovereignty - which is a touchstone for conservative Texans.

Obama unveils his immigration reform proposals and Texas politicos react

From the whitehouse.gov, bullet points on the principles the President wants the bill to deal with, but no specific proposals from what I see yet: click here to see the principles outlined.

The Texas Tribune details the reaction from Texas.

And some fancy graphs showing how much we spend on immigration and border protection:

From the Huffington Post: New Mexico Bill Would Criminalize Abortions After Rape As 'Tampering With Evidence'

A fellow student called this to my attention. It's worth a discussion.

A Republican lawmaker in New Mexico introduced a bill on Wednesday that would legally require victims of rape to carry their pregnancies to term in order to use the fetus as evidence for a sexual assault trial.

House Bill 206, introduced by state Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R), would charge a rape victim who ended her pregnancy with a third-degree felony for "tampering with evidence."

“Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime," the bill says.

Third-degree felonies in New Mexico carry a sentence of up to three years in prison.

Send me stories you think merit attention.

A great site: A Handsome Atlas

If you like old maps anyway. I do.

All it is really is a site devoted to three versions of the statistical atlas of the United States. The ones published in 1870, 1880, and 1890.

This page describes religious denominations in the states in 1870:

Local judge orders DNA tests for convicted killer on death row

This is Texas and this hardly ever happens.

The motion heard Wednesday was filed recently by the New York-based Innocence Project and sought testing of crime scene evidence to support Swearingen's claims of innocence for the 1999 murder of 19-year-old college student Melissa Trotter.

The motion follows a 2011 Texas law that provides the right to conduct testing on any crime scene that can yield evidence of innocence.

At the time of the request, Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project, said: "The Texas Legislature has made it clear that DNA testing should be allowed when there is a possibility it could help prove innocence, and the testing Mr. Swearingen is seeking could shed light on many unanswered questions in this case."

Swearingen was convicted in 2000 in Trotter's death and since filed three unsuccessful motions for DNA testing.

Texas has been accused of executing innocent people before. Some people don't mind. The Supreme Court has ruled that actual innocence does not guarantee a convicted person a new trial. This is touchy stuff.

Bullet Points on Perry's State of the State proposals

Here's a concise list of the proposals Governor Perry made in his state of the state address yesterday. These are copied from the Austin American Statesman:

State budget- *Pass proposed constitutional amendment allowing tax rebates
- *$1.8 billion in unspecified tax relief
- Pass constitutional amendment to further limit growth in spending
- Make franchise tax exemption permanent for small businesses
- Scrub the budget for waste and duplication
- End practice of using dedicated funds and fees for anything other than their intended use

Human services
- No expansion of Medicaid to cover more Texans under Affordable Care Act
Infrastructure needs
- *Use $3.7 from $12 billion rainy day fund for one-time investment in water and roads
- End diversion of State Highway Fund money, freeing $1.3 billion every two years for road maintenance and construction
-

Education
- Authorize more charter schools
- Offer incoming freshmen a four-year freeze on public university tuition
- Tie at least 10% of state funding for public universities and community colleges to graduation rates
- *Give a South Texas university access to the Permanent University Fund

* Indicates new proposals by the governor

Right to Carry

Thanks to the student who submitted this story about a man who walked through a JCPenney with an assault rifle.




The law allows him to do it, and he didn't shoot it, but would you feel comfortable with people who do similar things? And does your comfort level matter? As far as I can tell, there has been no Supreme Court case clearly stating that the second amendment applies to carrying weapons where you wish. So the right to do so might still be up in the air.

State of the State Address 2013

The Austin American Statesman details the Governor's address before the legislature yesterday.

The Texas Tribune notes that this years' address was more tame than the previous ones and wonders if Perry's recent low poll numbers were a factor. He is still expected to run for governor again in 2014.

Are you a closet liberal?

Take a quiz to find out - nothing will be disclosed - promise.

Why no budget from the Senate in the past few years?

Because Harry Reid is very very smart.



The definitive wikipedia on Sen. Reid.

Study Break

Probably my favorite band - if you were curious about that sort of thing.



"Dangerous and unusual" weapons

We're having fun in some classes trying to figure out what this term means.

Among the gun laws that DC v Heller argues do not violate the Second Amendment are those that restrict "the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons." That seems pretty vague to me, so we're been tossing the idea around.

Its been suggested that all guns are dangerous - in addition to many other objects - but since they used the term, I suppose there is a distinction between guns that are dangerous and those that are. Or perhaps are less dangerous. Might these be the ones with long magazines and armor piercing bullets? Perhaps the gun itself is not so dangerous, but the peripheral equipment that makes it so.

I'm still not sure what to make of "unusual" weapons, not whether the weapons have to be both "dangerous and unusual."

We might want to keep batting this around for a while.

These links might be helpful:
- Dangerous and Unusual Misdirection.
- Dangerous and Unusual Weapons.
- No right to own a machine gun.
- United States v Henry.
- Second Amendment, Heller and Originalist Jurisprudence.

File this under unusual - maybe not dangerous.

I didn't know this was possible

Urban v Rural Interests in the Texas Legislature

In 2306 we discussed some of the material in Texas Monthly's look at cities in Texas and discussed the ongoing conflict between the rural and urban areas in the state, including the emerging influence of urban areas and the efforts rural representatives use to retain as much power as they do.

I need to bulk up the material I have about this conflict, and where the conflict has flared up over time. In that spirit, here's a chunk of text from First Reading that highlights differences between urban and rural representatives on the subject of arming teachers. This helps highlight cultural differences between those in cities and those in the country. It also helps us understand the utility of local options in policy formation, which is a central feature of the Texas Constitution.

A rural/urban split on the wisdom of arming school officials was evident Monday at the first hearing on school safety since the massacre at a Connecticut elementary school in December that has brought the issue of gun violence to the fore of the national debate.

“Rural school officials insisted Monday that their classrooms will be safer if teachers are allowed to carry guns,” reports The Statesman’s Mike Ward , “but urban districts and top law enforcement officials warned the practice could put those educators at `high risk’ of being mistakenly shot by responding officers in the event of a campus shooting.”

“Lawmakers are exploring a variety of options to prevent such a tragedy in Texas: State-paid training for teachers who are authorized to carry guns in classrooms, special voter-approved taxing authority for districts to pay for beefed-up security measures, even changes in state law to allow concealed-handgun licensees to carry firearms in college and university buildings.”

“If there was a common thread in testimony Monday, it was to let local school boards and parents decide the issue of arming teachers.”

“Representatives from teacher and parent groups cautioned against making one policy fit all school districts in the state. Several said while they do not support the across-the-board arming of teachers to protect students, they think those decisions are best made by local school boards, educators and parents.”
Said Barbara Beto, legislative action chair for the Texas PTA, a statewide parent-teacher lobby group,: “No parent wants their child in on an experiment with deadly weapons.”

Public Policy in the 83rd Session

If you have an hour to kill, here's a video put together by the Texas Tribune in early December looking at what's likely to dominate this session of the legislature.

The Bully Pulpit 2013

One of the criticisms lobbed at President Obama from liberals was that he did not forcefully push for the passage of legislation they supported. Laws like the Affordable Care Act ended up looking more like conservative - market oriented - programs rather then the government run programs they preferred.

Whatever the reasoning behind this, it is commonly argued now that Obama will spend more time travelling and giving speeches at rallies to promote his agenda. Here's a story about him taking his gun control agenda public. He is going to do similar things with his immigration proposals soon.

There is precedence for this with other presidents, and we will discuss this in 2305 when we cover the expanding nature of presidential power over time. The term "going public" was developed to refer to the efforts of Ronald Reagan to bypass Congress and take his case directly to the American people. The theory was that if he was more popular than Congress - which he was - he could get the public to onvince the general population to support his proposals and convince their members of Congress to go along. It worked.

When Bill Clinton was president, he never really dismantled his campaign operations, and used it to - try to - rally support for his innitiatives. He was a bit less successful than Reagan - but it got him reelected and saved his from removal from office followig his impeachment. This was called the permanent campaign. Obama seems to have adopted this strategy. We'll see it in action and determine whether it works for him.

A window of opportunity seems to have opened for comprehensive immigration reform

After being stalled for years - and being virulently opposed by some - comprehensive immigration reform seems poised to be quickly passed into law. Here are a variety of stories that try to figure out how this happened, and what the consequences are likely to be:

- The Washington Post describes the "gang of eight," the bipartisan group of Senators who worked out a ill in the Senate. The New York Times covers similar ground.

- They also discuss the more liberal alternative likely to be offered by the President, and the measured reception the Senate plan received in the House.

- Forbes wonders if this will end the alliance between the Tea Party and the Republicans - which makes me wonder if Democrats see this as a wedge issue that could weaken Republicans prior to the 2014 election.

- Speculation exists that the Republican Party has shifted on the issue because of the overwhelming number of Latino voters that voted for Obama in 2012. Many were turned of by the tough talk about immigration. There are indications that the party's positions on social issues might lure Latinos their way.

- But not everyone agrees that that is likely. David Frum does not think the deal will help Republicans gain Latino voters.

More to come as the issue heats up.

No word yet on where Texas stands on this, but we tend to be lenient on immigration matters. We have to.

Relating to an annual football game between The University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University.

A member of the Texas House introduced legislation that would require an annual football game between Texas A&M and UT.

What could be more important?

From the Texas Tribune:

A bill that would require the University of Texas at Austin and Texas A&M University to face each other on the football field every year was filed on Monday by state Rep. Ryan Guillen, D-Rio Grande City.

The two flagship universities had a longstanding football rivalry, playing each other every year from 1914 until this past season. That all came to an end in 2012 following A&M's move to the Southeastern Conference.
"This game is as much a Texas tradition as cowboy boots and barbeque," Guillen, an A&M graduate, said. "The purpose of the bill is to put the eyes of Texas upon our two greatest universities to restore this sacred Texas tradition."

House Bill 778, as filed, does not specify when the game should occur, but it does offer a penalty should it fail to happen: Whichever institution refused to participate in the showdown would suffer restrictions on its athletic scholarships.

Now that women can serve in combat, can they be drafted?

The question came up in one of our classes today.

I ran across this Washington Post piece that discusses it. A 1981 Supreme Court decision - Rostker v. Goldberg - held that women did not have to register for the draft, and that ruling seems to still be in place today.

The Pentagon and the Selective Service, which keeps a roster of prospective male enlistees, say it’s too early to tell.

“Until Congress and the president make a change, we will continue doing what we’re doing,” Richard S. Flahavan, a Selective Service spokesman, said Friday. Namely, that means sticking to registering only male U.S. citizens and permanent residents ages 18 to 25.

It was quite the debate at the time, some men argued that is women could not be registered, then the entire process was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court stated that the fact that women could serve in combat justified their exclusion from the registration:

In a 6 to 3 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that it was acceptable to exclude women. Writing for the majority, Justice William H. Rehnquist determined that “the fact that Congress and the Executive have decided that women should not serve in combat fully justifies Congress in not authorizing their registration.”

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Thurgood Marshall chided the ruling, saying it “places its imprimatur on one of the most potent remaining public expressions of ‘ancient canards about the proper role of women.’ ”

Greg Jacob, the policy director of the Service Women’s Action Network, which advocated for the repeal of the ban on women in combat, said his organization thinks women ought to register with Selective Service.

“Part of equality means women have that shared responsibility,” he said.

Registering for the draft does not means that all women - if drafted - would have to serve in combat I assume, just those physically able. This issue complicates the question of gender equality.

- Women and the Draft in America.

Obama's New Team

I've yet to post much on the new appointees the President is assembling, but I'll begin redressing this soon. Here's a look at the rationale underlying his decisions so far.

Like previous second term presidents he is surrounding himself with many people he became comfortable with in his first term. Some aides have been elevated to cabinet positions. This has advantages (increased comfort level) and disadvantages also (decreased chance of diverse viewpoints).

Also from the Atlantic: Are You Comfortable with 3-Year Prison Terms for Saggy Pants?

A non-profit in Boston seems to think this is a good idea.

From the Atlantic: The Never-Before-Told Story of the World's First Computer Art (It's a Sexy Dame)

An interesting look at the first example of a computer generated image. And we have no idea who did it. This guy took a picture of it (the image is a poor reproduction of a pin-up drawing - make sense in a guys only environment)

What's to happen to community colleges this session?

The Fort Worth Star Telegram tries to find out.

Few lawmakers ever have anything negative to say about us - and like to highlight our ability to assist veteran's and train the work force, but that doesn't always translate into funding. The preliminary budgets cut funding about 5%, despite recent increases in enrollment, but one legislator in the story suggested that funding may eventually be increased.

"What we've been facing is jokingly what I would call the Rodney Dangerfield syndrome," said Bill Holda, president of Kilgore College and board chairman of the Texas Association of Community Colleges.

"We can't get any respect."

Holda said the state's 50 community colleges, with over 725,000 students, constitute more than half the total enrollment in higher education but "have not had the prestige" of better-funded four-year universities, many of which have big budgets and nationally recognized research and athletic programs.

Nevertheless, community colleges have legions of defenders, including many in the Legislature. They say the schools are at the front lines of building an educated, competitive workforce.

Sen. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler, who has more than a half-dozen community college systems in his East Texas district, predicts that community colleges will ultimately escape a cut and may even get an increase.

Rep. Diane Patrick, R-Arlington, a member of the House Higher Education Committee, said: "Community colleges, as far as I'm concerned, are where it's happening. They're a big part of making education more affordable and more accessible for our students."

We'll follow this over the session.

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.

I like how this looks

The subject matter is immaterial to us, but this is very well done. I'd rip the style off if I had the skills.

Study Break

Probably the best one yet.

. . . and more bills . . .

- Two separate bills have been introduced to change how Texas counts prisoners for redistricting. The bills' authors want them counted at their last address rather than the location of the prison. This creates a conflict between urban districts (where prisoners may come from) and rural districts (where the prisons are generally located).

- Bills have also been introduced to add sexual orientation to the list of items that employers cannot use to discriminate against employees.

- Campus Carry legislation has also been introduced, which would prohibit colleges and universities from not allowing students to bring guns on campus. In light of the week 2 written assignment, I'm wondering if the Supreme Court would extend its definition of the scope of 2nd amendment protection to these types of laws. A far as I know, current rulings do not extend to carrying guns, only possessing them in the home.

- And if the Campus Carry Bill passes, there may be more places to carry those guns. The legislature may approve more campus construction.

Might Texas decriminalize marijuana?

We spent time in a couple of classes discussing the consequences of the marijuana legislation passed in a couple states in November and what the national government might do about it since marijuana is still illegal according to national law. I suggested, based on what I've read elsewhere, that Obama might be waiting to see what direction public opinion is moving on the issue, and how quickly, in order to determine whether he should continue to enforce national laws against the states.

There may be a shift underway in attitudes about the law. That will help determine whether the feds should yield to the states, which is the thing to do in a democracy.

On that note, the Texas Tribune reports the Texas Legislature may make a minor move in the direction of liberalizing marijuana policy by allowing a bill that simply allows doctors to discuss marijuana as a possible medicinal option with their patients, and allow that discussion to be taken as a defense if the patient is arrested for possession.

The bill has been introduced previously, but has never made it out of committee. It just might this session. That's a baby step if that's all that happens, but its something.

Bills to follow:

- HB 594
- HB 184

Texans is far less supportive of legalizing marijuana than the country as a whole, unless the respondents are asked if they favor legalizing and taxing it.

Welcome to Big City Texas

This issue makes it worth it for me to renew my subscription.

Texas Monthly's February issue not only has a series of articles on Texas' major cities, the website links you back to all past article about them.

This week's 2306 classes looked at political culture in the state - and to a lesser degree the cities, but we did touch on the differences between the state as a whole and its major urban areas - and the fact that they keep growing. At some point - maybe very soon - this will start to have an impact on state politics.

I'd browse through it if I were you.

From the NYT: Court Rejects Obama Recess Appointments to Labor Board

Some checking and balancing going on, as well some clarity about the extent of the president's power to make recess appointments. The decision was made by the DC Circuit court though, so its not the final word. That will come from the Supreme Court following the inevitable appeal.

We looked at this story about a year back when the controversy first arose.

From the story:

President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate to fill vacancies on a labor relations panel, a federal appeals court panel ruled Friday.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said that Obama did not have the power to make three recess appointments last year to the National Labor Relations Board.

The unanimous decision is an embarrassing setback for the president, who made the appointments after Senate Republicans spent months blocking his choices for an agency they contended was biased in favor of unions.

The ruling also throws into question Obama's recess appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Cordray's appointment, also made under the recess circumstance, has been challenged in a separate case.

Obama claims he acted properly in the case of the NLRB appointments because the Senate was away for the holidays on a 20-day recess. But the three-judge panel ruled that the Senate technically stayed in session when it was gaveled in and out every few days for so-called "pro forma" sessions.

There's a lot to this case that applies to our class. A major point: Even though we have an agency - the National Labor Relations Board - with statutory authority to do something, the agency can be derailed by Senatorial opponents if they make sure that there aren't enough people on the board to act. So just because a bill is passed and an agency is charged with performing a duty it doesn't necessarily mean that there are not ways to limit it anyway.

Also central to this case is the question "when is the Senate in session?" and who gets to make that call? Is a pro-forma session a legitimate session? I guess it is - for now.

Interview with Timothy Geithner

The New Republic has an interview with the outgoing Treasury Secretary.

Worth a quick read to get an inside look at how the financial crash was averted and how the Obama Administration works from the inside.

Wonkblog writes up his farewell to the President and the Treasury Department staff.

Introducing Newsbound

I linked to their slides on the filibuster below, but here's a link to their website, which has a lot more. Like I said below, I wish my slides looked this good - something to work for I suppose.

- Newsbound.com

Is the decline in manufacturing job pay tied into the decline of unions?

Something to think about as we begin discussing factions and their impact on public policy. Union membership is the lowest its been in almost 100 years, and middle class wages have stagnated for 30 years. Some suggest this is no coincidence.

Story in Wonkblog. Nice Graphic below:

Policy Evaluation: Tort Reform

The Texas Tribune has a story on the difficulties a double amputee is having suing the hospital that seems to be responsible for the amputations. As a result of tort reform - passed in 2003 - damages were capped, which means that fewer lawyers are willing to represents clients, and rules regarding expert reports place an increased burden on plaintiffs and make them more likely to have to pick up the legal bills of those they sue (like potentially negligent hospitals).

The story suggests that a constitutional challenge might be on the way: 

Spears said the laws obstructed her ability to find a malpractice lawyer and forced a judge to order her to pay thousands of dollars to cover some defendants’ legal bills. Her lawyers plan to challenge the constitutionality of the laws.

“How can that law be?” Spears asked. “Maybe the law was too loose before, but they went way too far the other way.”

Tort reform proponents say that such restrictions are the only way to curb frivolous lawsuits against health care providers, and that they have drawn more medical professionals to a state with exploding population growth.

“Our purpose had never been to have a procedural hurdle,” said Mike Hull, a lawyer for the pro-tort-reform Texas Alliance for Patient Access. “It had been to have the plaintiffs really get the case reviewed.”

But did the manner in which the state of Texas design tort reform in fact place barriers on the ability of plaintiffs to use the courts? Was the law intended to intimindate people from using the courts to address potential negligence by large organizations that have more lawyers and more money to spend?

A nice source for data on federal spending

There are a few places to go but Andrew Sullivan flags usgovernmentspending.com as the source for this nicely drawn graph - though it would be better if the left hand column went to 100%, but that is a very minor quibble.

As you can tell from the title, this is federal spending on defense as a percentage of GDP. It would be helpful to compare this to spending as a percentage of the entire federal budget as a contrast - but that's another - less minor - quibble.

There's plenty more, so we'll take advantage of it as we proceed.

The military lifts combat ban on women

From the NYT:

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on Thursday formally lifted the military’s ban on women in combat, saying that not every woman would become a combat soldier but that every woman deserved the chance to try.

They said that the new policy was in many ways an affirmation of what was already occurring on the battlefield, where women have found themselves in combat over the past decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that it was essential that the military offer fully equal opportunities to both women and men.

“They’re fighting and dying together, and the time has come for our policies to reflect that reality,” Mr. Panetta said at a packed Pentagon news conference.

The decision follow a lawsuit which argues that women are effectively already i ncombat situations, but cannot take advantage of that fact to advance their military careers.

Senate Democrats set to introduce gun control bill

C-Span has the announcement here, the NYT adds in here.

The bill is titled The Assault Weapons Can of 2013, it was introduced by Dianne Feinstein.

NPR provides a bit of detail on the bill's content. Here's a chunk of text from Feinstein's website:

• All semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: pistol grip; forward grip; folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; barrel shroud; or threaded barrel.
• All semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one military feature: threaded barrel; second pistol grip; barrel shroud; capacity to accept a detachable magazine at some location outside of the pistol grip; or semiautomatic version of an automatic firearm.
• All semiautomatic rifles and handguns that have a fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 10 rounds.
• All semiautomatic shotguns that have a folding, telescoping, or detachable stock; pistol grip; fixed magazine with the capacity to accept more than 5 rounds; ability to accept a detachable magazine; forward grip; grenade launcher or rocket launcher; or shotgun with a revolving cylinder.
• All ammunition feeding devices (magazines, strips, and drums) capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.
• 157 specifically-named firearms (listed at the end of this page)
  

Weekly Assignment #3

By now (2305 and 2306) you've hopefully acquired the book I requested you purchase and build your 1000 word report around.

This week I want you to browse through it - read through the Table of Content, skim parts of it - to get a general idea of the point the book is trying to make and draw a handful of points from the book. You don't need to read the whole thing, but get an idea of the framework of the book. This will help you put the bulk of the information you read in context. Write this up and send it to me.

After this, start reading through the content on your own and be prepared to send me a paper proposal in few more weeks. I'll probably ask you for one around week 6.

2301 and 2302, I want you to do the same for the content I've asked you to look for on your syllabus.

Let me know if this is unclear.

Changes proposed in electoral college

The Virginia House passed a bill that would change how electoral college votes would be allocated in the state - the Pennsylvania legislature attempted a similar change in 2011.

Here's a description from a VA TV station:

The bill would apportion electors by congressional district to the candidate who wins each of the state's 11 districts. The candidate who carries a majority of the districts would also win the two electors not tied to congressional districts.
    
Sen. Charles W. "Bill" Carrico, R-Grayson, said the change is necessary because Virginia's populous, urbanized areas such as the Washington, D.C., suburbs and Hampton Roads can outvote rural regions such as his, rendering their will irrelevant.
    
Last fall, President Barack Obama carried Virginia for the second election in a row, making him the first Democrat since Franklin D. Roosevelt to win Virginia in back-to-back presidential elections. For his victories, he received all 13 of the state's electoral votes.
    
Under Carrico's revision, Obama would have received only four Virginia electoral votes last year while Republican Mitt Romney would have received nine. Romney carried conservative rural areas while Obama dominated Virginia's cities and fast-growing suburbs.
    
Virginia would be only the third state after Maine and Nebraska to apportion electors according to congressional districts, and by far the largest. Maine has only two U.S. House districts, and Nebraska has three.
    
Unlike the other two states, however, Virginia is covered by the 1965 Voting Rights Act, passed during the civil rights era. The act seeks to ensure that states with a history of racial discrimination - mostly in the South - do not dilute the voting power of minorities. That means Carrico's bill would face scrutiny by the Obama's Justice Department should it become law.

So the shift is not unprecedented since the method is used in two states already, but the fact that the district in Virginia are heavily gerrymandered means that the results will be heavily skewed. This has raised concerns in some quarters. The electoral college may become a tool that can be manipulated to achieve whatever outcome a powerful faction may wish to engineer.

Wonkblog has a great overview of the issues involved in this shift.

Has the Republican coalition run its course?

The coalition of social conservatives and business interests that helped the Republican Party may have run its course - and may have actually run it a few years back. But internal factors may make it difficult for the party to quickly shift its course.

Here's an argument that they may have painted themselves in a corner and suffer from the paradox of plenty, and one that suggests that the base may make it difficult for the leadership to make the shifts in policy that will expand its appeal to minorities.

Impressive chart of the day

I'm not sure how useful it is, but it charts our recent budgetary history. Here it is in miniature.

Study Break

Texas School District Security Act

We've been discussing special tax districts in class - 2306 - members of the Texas legislature are working on a bill to allow schools districts the option to create new tax districts to allow for funding school security.

The Chronicle describes the bill:

"I believe this proposal is a Texas solution that will save lives without sacrificing our freedoms," said state Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, who together with Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, and Rep. Dan Huberty, R-Humble, are creators of the measure.

The three say they still are drafting the bill, but offered a few details at a news conference.

As envisioned by the lawmakers, school boards would manage the special districts and the funds raised. Each district would have to hold public hearings and craft a plan with an exact price tag before putting it up to a vote.

For districts where the sales tax already is set at the maximum 8.25 percent, a property tax hike could be considered. If the property tax maximum already has been reached, then a constitutional amendment may be required to give school districts authority to fund this measure.

All three lawmakers stressed that the state is not forcing school districts to do anything. It would be an option to collect additional funds for security only.

Here's more from the Fort Worth Star Telegram and the Dallas Morning News.

Some are pointing out that legislators seem to be resistant about new taxes, unless it involves guns. There's a cultural issue here we can pursue if we wish. Its worth pointing out that the law does not impose a state tax, but allows local districts to adopt the tax if they choose. That seems to follow a recent trend in tax policy - as well as spending policy - in the state over the past few years. Send the decision down to the local level.

Speaking of Transparency

There could be more of it at the Houston Independent School District. Charles Kuffner highlights a Houston Chronicle story on the favors a vendor granted to one of the trustees.

HISD trustee Larry Marshall, fresh off a two-day school board retreat, flew from Houston to Tampa, Fla., on a clear winter day to watch the 2009 Super Bowl in Raymond James Stadium.

Cheap seats for the match-up between the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Arizona Cardinals cost $500 each, but brokers were charging $2,000. The price, however, didn’t matter to Marshall, who paid nothing for his ticket, his airfare or his hotel that weekend.

The school district’s most senior trustee recently disclosed under oath that he accepted the free trip from the owners of Fort Bend Mechanical, a Stafford company that three months earlier had won an HISD construction contract potentially worth millions.

New deposition testimony reveals that the Super Bowl trip was just one example of Marshall’s social interactions with actual or prospective HISD contractors. He also forged relationships over meals at places like the Four Seasons and Fleming’s, with the contractors typically picking up his tab, he said.

Chronicle Staff Shot

Houston gets a C+ . . .

. . . for spending transparency according to the Texas Public Interest Research Group.

KUHF has the story. The 30 largest cities were graded and only Chicago and New York received A's.

For years, TexPIRG has graded entire states on how clearly they lay out their spending habits. This is first time the group has examined cities for how easy it is for the public to find out where their money goes.

Houston earned a grade of C-plus, putting it roughly in the middle of the pack of 30 major cities. TexPIRG's Ryan Pierannunzi says Houston deserves credit for making it easy to download spending information on what he calls the "checkbook level."

"By having checkbook-level spending data, you're able to see exactly the vendor, the recipient of a certain amount of money. And, usually, that's also incorporated by information on what was purchased, or what the city got for that transaction."

Pierannunzi says the websites of many cities do not divulge as much spending detail as Houston does. But he says with a grade of C+, there's always room for improvement.

We'll file this away for now and get back into it when we discuss budgetting at the local level. Try to contain your excitement.

Some sweet slides on the filibuster

A great graphical explanation of the problems posed by the modern use of the filibuster.

I wish my slides were this good looking - if I only had the skills.

Do institutions create perverse incentives for those who work in them?

Something to chew on as we begin to consider the seeming dysfunction of Congress, and consider possible solutions. Do institution create situations where people have to act in ways contrary to their usual tendencies, or even in ways that woudl otherwise be simply wrong?

Here's a suggestion that they do, and the author uses an example we discussed briefly in one of the classes today when we talked about the need to form groups to provide mutual security. I used gangs, including prisons gangs, as an example. But these gangs - while rational in that context - require people to sometimes do things they normally would not:

Unfortunately, prisons are places of perverse incentives—in which the very norms one must follow to avoid becoming a victim lead inescapably toward violence. In most U.S. prisons, for instance, whites, blacks, and Hispanics exist in a state of perpetual war. This young man is not a racist, and would prefer to interact peacefully with everyone he meets, but if he does not join a gang he is likely to be targeted for rape and other abuse by prisoners of all races. To not choose a side is to become the most attractive victim of all. Being white, he likely will have no rational option but to join a white-supremacist gang for protection.

So he joins a gang. In order to remain a member in good standing, however, he must be willing to defend other gang members, no matter how sociopathic their behavior. He also discovers that he must be willing to use violence at the tiniest provocation—returning a verbal insult with a stabbing, for instance—or risk acquiring a reputation as someone who can be assaulted at will. To fail to respond to the first sign of disrespect with overwhelming force, is to run an intolerable risk of further abuse.

And this applies to society at large, including our legislative institutions:

in many other places in our society, we find otherwise normal men and women caught in the same trap and busily making life for everyone much less good than it could be. Elected officials ignore long-term problems because they must pander to the short-term interests of voters. People working for insurance companies rely on technicalities to deny desperately ill patients the care they need. CEOs and investment bankers run extraordinary risks—both for their businesses and for the economy as a whole—because they reap the rewards of success without suffering the penalties of failure. Lawyers continue to prosecute people they know to be innocent (and defend those they know to be guilty) because their careers depend upon winning cases. Our government fights a war on drugs that creates the very problem of black market profits and violence that it pretends to solve….

Somethign to consider while we begin to discuss rationality and its limits.

The Texas Senate determines who gets a two year terms and who gets a four year term

Every ten years - in the election immediately following redistricting - the Texas Senate has to decide which of the 31 senators get to serve a four year term, and which have to serve a two year term, and run again to serve a four year term.

It involves drawing lots.

Its a quirky little thing, but its necessary to both comply with the four year, overlapping term requirement for the Senate. After every redistricting process the senate districts are new, so the constituents in each have the chance to determine who will represent them. But then this process begins so that the Senate is allowed to pull back a bit from the immediate preferences of the population.

The Texas Tribune describes the actual process as it worked its way out in the Senate today. 

One by one, senators walked up to the front of the chamber and picked an envelope, each with a piece of paper inside a capsule. The papers were numbered 1-31. Senators who picked an even number will serve a two-year term. Senators who picked an odd number got a four-year term.

Simple enough.

Catching up with the 113th Congress

Some links regarding recent events on Capitol Hill:

- Checking and Balancing: The Secretary of State testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about the September attacks in Benghazi, Libya. Tomorrow she testifies before the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

- The Power of the Purse: The House votes to "suspend" the debt ceiling for three months. The next vote will likely coincide with sequestration - the automatic cuts that were postponed in the fiscal cliff vote a couple weeks back.

- Filibuster Reform: Democrats in the Senate may not have enough votes to change the rules about filibusters and speed up the legislative process in that chamber.

- Senate Agenda: Majority Leader Harry Reed unveils 10 bills Democrats will prioritize the term.

- The Budget: Senate Democrats promise to actually pass one this year. This will be the first since 2009 if so. The federal government has been run on appropriations bills since then - which is what's its really run on anyway.

Checking on on the Israeli election

Israel is my favorite example of a proportional representational voting system. Click here for a summary of results of yesterday's election. We will discuss when appropriate.

Study Break

I think this poem is about his daughter, so its not as creepy as it might seem at first. I have a hunch some of you can relate to the message. Sounds like my dad.

So how will the Texas Legislature react to this?

Now that we have a local shooting, how will the legislature react? A handful of gun legislation - mostly making guns easier to obtain and carry - have been introduced. The question now is whether this will slow down or expedite these laws.

- Here's a look at the gun legislation that has been introduced so far.

“It is totally conboomerated”

The proposition referred to below did not pass (thanks PR). The vote was roughly 73% no and 27% for. It seems to touch on an old issue unique to cattle country related to open and closed ranges. The reason seems to be that no one was really sure what the proposition proposed (thus the title):

Should stock owners be required to keep their cattle fenced in, or should their neighbors be required to keep the cattle fenced out?

What sounds like a straightforward proposition involves two separate ballot initiatives and more than a small ration of confusion.

. . .The first initiative pertains only to cattle. The ballot language states simply: “Adoption of the Stock Law.”

A “yes” vote will support a closed range, meaning the cattle owner is responsible for keeping his livestock contained. A “no” vote supports open range, meaning landowners are responsible for keeping cattle off their property.

The second initiative pertains to livestock other than cattle. The ballot language states: “Letting horses, mules, jacks, jennets, donkeys, hogs, sheep and goats run at large in Coryell County.” 

On this initiative, a “no” vote supports closed range; a “yes” vote favors open range.

I thought this was a simple issue. I was wrong.

- Open Range counties in Texas.

Texas Self-Sufficiency Act

James White (campaign site), a member of the Texas House has introduced a bill "that would require the state to study the effects of cutting financial ties with the federal government."

The Texas Tribune has details. The bill is HB 568, The Texas Self-Sufficiency Act. Here's the press release.

Rep. James White, R-Hillister, said he filed HB 568 because the state needed to be prepared for the possibility that the federal government could not meet its financial obligations because of "fiscal dysfunction" in Washington, D.C.

Called the "Texas Self-Sufficiency Act," White's bill would create a select committee to look at the consequences of "a possible reduction in or elimination of federal funding" on the state budget, which gets about a third of its revenue from federal funding. The committee would be made up of legislators, budget experts and "citizens from the non-profit sector" appointed by the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker of the house, and state comptroller.

White said he viewed his proposal as an extension of a House interim committee's work to study the effects of sequestration in the state.

"We always talk about Tenth Amendment rights but there are Tenth Amendment responsibilities. If Texas is an independent nation or if we continue to be a part of the United States, which I am for, we still need to have a strong Texas," he said.

The legislation was not, White said, intended as a call for secession.

Even so, survivalists seem to like the idea behind the bill.

Ya gotta roam free

I have no idea if this passed, but I'm betting it did.

From Traces of Texas.

Presidential vocabulary

Andrew Sullivan points out that presidents have invented a good handful of words, and this fits in the tradition of American's creating their own unique language, distinct from the British - who were a bit protective of it. It was a way for us to carve out our own identity. Here'a a quote he offers from a more thorough source:

Noah Webster early on says this is not the king's English, this is not the language of the nobilities; it's the language of the trapper and the farmer and the tradesman. So early on it was almost a patriotic thing. Thomas Jefferson to this day has 114 words credited to him in the Oxford English Dictionary. The most famous, and the one that drove the British nuts, and even up through Fowlers Modern English Usage, which came out in the middle of the 20th century, still bothered by it, was 'belittle.'

It bothered the British deeply that an American could just come up with a word like this. They thought it was their language and we got to use it. We weren't supposed to tinker with it.

And here's one of the more famous (alleged - he apparently never said the word) presidential contributions to the English language:

From the Houston Chronicle: Liberty County grand jurors upset probe was halted early

Judges empanel, then dismantle, a grand jury in Liberty County intended to investigate alleged corruption by county officials. It's a good look at local politics and the networks that can easily develop between local officials which make investigations difficult to conduct. The relationships between the officials is a bit difficult to follow.

From the Chronicle:

Disbanded a month before their term was scheduled to end last year, members of a Liberty County grand jury investigating that county's officials want to know why they were taken off the case, according to the foreman.

"We have heard person after person describe unacceptable practices and questionable activities that reek of fraud, collusion, selective investigation and prosecution, and abuse of office personnel and resources by county officials and employees," James Smith wrote in a letter to several judges in December. "We demand an explanation of what is going on here."

The grand jury that Smith presided over began hearing cases in July and was scheduled to run until Dec. 31. On Nov. 27, Beaumont judge Larry Gist signed an order dismissing the panel after reviewing a sealed motion filed by special prosecutor Larry Eastepp.

Because of grand jury secrecy, Smith would not discuss what evidence the body heard or which witnesses were called, but he confirmed he had written letters obtained by the Houston Chronicle and that other grand jurors agree with him.

Study Break

David Alvin - King of California

From Texas Tribune: Regulators Face Criticism Over Earthquake Monitoring

The Texas Tribune points out that increased earthquake activity has led to investigations in other states, but not in Texas.

StateImpact Texas wonders if this is because regulatory agencies in the state are controlled by the oil and gas industry.

Does inequality hamper economic growth?

More and more economists are looking at the consequences of increased inequality. A recent Nobel Prize winner argues that it hampers economic recovery.

There are four major reasons inequality is squelching our recovery. The most immediate is that our middle class is too weak to support the consumer spending that has historically driven our economic growth. While the top 1 percent of income earners took home 93 percent of the growth in incomes in 2010, the households in the middle — who are most likely to spend their incomes rather than save them and who are, in a sense, the true job creators — have lower household incomes, adjusted for inflation, than they did in 1996. The growth in the decade before the crisis was unsustainable — it was reliant on the bottom 80 percent consuming about 110 percent of their income.

Second, the hollowing out of the middle class since the 1970s, a phenomenon interrupted only briefly in the 1990s, means that they are unable to invest in their future, by educating themselves and their children and by starting or improving businesses.

Third, the weakness of the middle class is holding back tax receipts, especially because those at the top are so adroit in avoiding taxes and in getting Washington to give them tax breaks. The recent modest agreement to restore Clinton-level marginal income-tax rates for individuals making more than $400,000 and households making more than $450,000 did nothing to change this. Returns from Wall Street speculation are taxed at a far lower rate than other forms of income. Low tax receipts mean that the government cannot make the vital investments in infrastructure, education, research and health that are crucial for restoring long-term economic strength.

Fourth, inequality is associated with more frequent and more severe boom-and-bust cycles that make our economy more volatile and vulnerable. Though inequality did not directly cause the crisis, it is no coincidence that the 1920s — the last time inequality of income and wealth in the United States was so high — ended with the Great Crash and the Depression. The International Monetary Fund has noted the systematic relationship between economic instability and economic inequality, but American leaders haven’t absorbed the lesson.

Reactions to the Inauguration Address

Andrew Sullivan - as always - compiles reactions from various points of view. Sullivan thinks Obama is set to be the liberal Reagan.

So what did Texas really look like in the early 19th Century?

This week - in 2306 - we begin to look at federalism, and the role state's play in the federal system. I was hunting for graphics and ran across this:



It's from Constitution Daily, and it contains an unusual depiction of Texas from 1862. You can see it on the bottom row towards the right. Its not the one we usually think of when we have a mental image of the state.

Here's another:



And of course we are familiar with the more expansive map that shows the border following the Rio Grande up through most of New Mexico and that contains bits of what is now Colorado and Wyoming. One thing that is in common with all of them is that they were wishful thinking to some degree. Despite claims to land, Texas and the US had yet to actually settle most of it. This process would not be complete until the Indian Wars were completed in the 1880s.

The point - for our purposes - is that states, along with nations, are political entities and their borders are defined by political means, despite whether they can actually govern all they contain.Cities are different. Cities are economic entities and have to obtain some degree of control over an area before they can lay claim to it. They are far more organic than states.

Something to bear in mind as we begin to explore federalism.

Houston's two MLK Parades

Today is Martin Luther King Day - in addition to being inauguration day.

Houston has had two separate and competing MLK Parades for about two decades. One by the Black Heritage Society, the other by the MLK Parade Foundation.

The Houston Defender explains why there are two parades. It seems to be driven by personality conflicts, but has caused problems for the city in trying to deal with the competing needs of the two groups.

The history of MLK Day itself deserves attention - its been controversial since it was originally proposed following King's assassination.

Getting past the Hastert Rule

I've been sitting on a post that tries to thoroughly look at the Hastert Rule - also called the majority of the majority rule - which ensures that any bill that is not supported by the majority party in the US House will not make it to the floor of the House for a vote, despite the fact that a majority of the entire body might support it.

The rule has been relaxed recently - both the fiscal cliff deal and the Hurricane Sandy relief bill passed despite being opposed by a majority of Republicans - but it is still on the books. Critics argue that this rule prevents majorities in the House from passing legislation and contributes to gridlock.

Here is a suggestion for how to go beyond the rule and allow members of the House to pull a bill out of committee and send it to the floor despite the objections of the leadership. Its called a discharge petition.

- Wanted: 20 House Republicans to save Congress.

- Can the “discharge rule” save Congress?
- Oh 113th Congress Hastert Rule, we hardly knew ye!