Republicans win key runoff races

Some good election news for the Republicans on the heels of the Chambliss runoff win this Tuesday in Georgia. Republicans won two upsets in Louisiana Congressional races. Results here:

LA-2 , Orleans, Jefferson Parish: In a huge upset win, little known Republican attorney Anh "Joseph" Cao beat nine term and criminally indicted William Jefferson(D). Jefferson had been expected to easily win. Cao becomes the first Vietnamese member of U.S. Congress. LA-4, Shreveport-Bossier City, Sabine Parish, et. al., Western LA, TX/AR border: Republican Dr. John Fleming wins. Fleming was trailing by about 3% early in the election results but came on strong in the end to beat Carmouche(D) by 356 votes.

This win gives huge impetus to the proposition that we should "run every race":

As I noted yesterday and reiterate tonight, there could be no more vivid example of why we need to run Republican candidates in every district than Louisiana's 2nd. Cao won his seat more solidly than Fleming did in an R+7 seat. Starting with Obama CoS Rahm Emanuel, Democrats started to understand that Congressional races can be very nonpartisan under the right circumstances and that poor performance or other personal shortcomings by the incumbent can render even a hefty party ID deficit meaningless.

Here in Texas, we have the state Senate district 17 runoff between Huffman (R) and Bell (D). I am going to go out on a limb and predict Huffman pulls out a victory next week. In these other runoffs, the large African American turnout that came out for Obama and helped downballot in November didn't return in the runoffs. Those are the voters Bell would need to win. Would they bother voting for a perennially-losing bland white shill for the plaintiff's lawyers?

Key Legislative Contests

A mere 25 votes stands between Republicans and a Democrat takeover of the Texas House as Rep. Linda Harper-Brown squeaks by in a victory. Provisional ballots are still being counted, so that may change.

The Democrats netted three seats, and the House sits at a 76-74 split.

(More...)

Post-Election Huddle - What Happened

This election drubbing for Republicans is a learning experience in the best and worst sense of the word. The losses that the Republicans had down the ballot for the most part started from the top, so it's wise to focus on the McCain/Palin v Obama/Biden race. To put it another way, Obama had coattails. Here's how the popular vote shifted from 2004 to 2008 (preliminary 2008 numbers, they may shift):

Preliminary 2004-2008 vote comparisons:

Year	Total	Republicans	Democrats
2008	118,226,000	55,543000	62,683,000
2004	121,068,000	62,040,000	59,028,000
Totals	-2,842,000	-6,497,000	3,655,000

The GOP lost 6 million votes from 2004, the Democrats gained 3 million to 62 million.

As part of the "What happened and why" we have to consider these factors:

1. The Bush legacy. How Bush performed in office - the war against terror, the economy, etc., and how it was perceived. Bush was in the past year not very popular, in a large part due to his own base having a disappointed view of him, and that translating into a drag on the ticket. It's genesis was from Katrina, Harriet Miers, Iraq war fatigue, immigration, conservative issues with spending, etc. Note to next GOP President (whenever that comes): Dont screw up a war; Dont spend like drunken sailor; Dont PO your base; Dont let a financial crisis hit 6 weeks before an election on your watch.
2. How the Republicans in power have met or not met their stated agenda items. Did we have 'agenda exhaustion' or are there agenda items left undone? A lot is tied to #1, and the view from conservatives' perspective is that Republicans didn't govern as conservatively as they promised. The faultlines are particularly sharp on elites-vs-populists items like immigration, .
   
3. John McCain - the candidate and the campaign, and Sarah Palin. I commented on a forum to this effect - "I dont think critiquing McCain would help. Given his money disadvantage and the media bias, he ran as good a campaign as you could expect. OTOH, there were serious technology deficiencies on MCCain side and advantages on Obama side that need to be corrected." I got this reply:
   "McCain ran a terrible campaign. I can personally attest to that having been a volunteer for his campaign in VA makiing telephone calls and handing out sample ballots. The Obama campaign was much more organized and prepared. I can't tell you how many times this campaign resembled the Keystone cops. We didn't have poll watchers or a presence in many places. And there was no cohesive message. Again, Obama, his experience and his associations, should have been the issue and focus from day one. In many respects, the issues were tangential. And because McCain was the candidate we couldn't go after Obama on immigration issues such as amnesty, drivers licenses, etc. and global warming. Immigration was, and continues to be a big issue in NoVA. Coal is big in SW VA. And McCain has a difficult time in debating. He is not quick on his feet." In the end, the lack of a clear message - here's why you need to vote for me and run screaming away from the other guy - doomed McCain. "Country First" was a great slogan, but it somehow got lost in the muddle of the focus on the economy, and meanwhile, Obama stuck to his "Me=change, McCain=Bush" simplistic but consistent message.
   
4. The strengths and weaknesses of Obama and the Democrat lineup. $600 million dollars and a friendly media covers up many sins. Obama was able to take advantage of his unique background (that made him a 'celeb' candidate that few first term Senators could achieve) and suffer few if any negative consequences for having radical associations. This is partly due to McCain's reticence to press the Rev Wright issue home. But a more important lacking element was Obama's left-liberal views on social issues - not put on the table.
   

One factor stands out: The financial crisis factor. Prior to the financial meltdown in the wake of the Lehman bankruptcy on September 15th, McCain was leading Obama slightly. Once that happened, polls turned to Obama, and McCain never was ahead since. It was an election gift to Obama, that made the economy the #1 issue and made it easy for him to run against the status quo. (Never mind that to me, Obama is a greater threat to my 401k than anyone else out there.) But McCain's decision to support the bailout bill, as did Obama, muted differences in approach on the crisis. What might have been:

"With all due respect to Sen. McCain for his service above and beyond the call of duty to his country, he represents the GOP's past. He is well known for standing up for what he believes is right, but sometimes what he believes is best turns out to be wrong. He missed a golden opportunity of his own when he reacted to the financial storm that hit this county. Had he stood up against the taxpayer-funded bailout of the same financial houses which were part and parcel of the problem, he would have demonstrated that he really is the maverick he never failed to tell us he was. But he didn't. He opted instead for an unprecedented intrusion by the federal government into the private sector. That may well have cost him the election. John McCain, God bless him, is the Republican Party's failed past. Young Turks such as Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin and LtC. Allen West aret its future." - Josh Painter, RedState

Now that the election is done, I'd like to analyze the challenges that we face on four levels:

1. The nuts-and-bolts election-level. What did the Democrats do better in candidates, campaigns, technology, outreach, organization, GOTV, messaging etc. in appealing to voters and getting them to the polls? What should we emulate or not?
   
2. The challenge in the immediate political future of how to leverage what little influence the conservative and Republican side has, and how to defeat the threats they will pose to freedom. How to "Stop Obama's Socialism", and stopping the "Fairness Doctrine".
   
3. The challenge of rebuilding the Republican party, improving the brand, and getting ready for the next election cycles. How do we fix what's wrong with the party?
   
4. The challenge to the conservative movement and to conservatives in the grassroots, in the media, in the think tanks. We will have to rethink - what part of the agenda is still viable? We even have contenders for redefining what consevatism is, as well as the Reagan stalwarts who want the tried and true formula.

I separate the challenges into these four categories because I see too much analysis that mixes up the four distinct challenges. I will address them in followup posts in coming days.

Let's Count the Ways Local Taxes Increased Yesterday

1.  The $300 million Round Rock ISD bond package passed yesterday, increasing property taxes in Round Rock ISD.

2. The Austin ISD Prop 1 passed yesterday, giving us higher taxes to pay for increased teacher pay. Instead of budgeting for a cost-of-living adjustment, AISD put teacher pay increases on the ballot, knowing that the taxpayers would fund it so the school district can increase spending on other frivolous ventures within the existing budget.

3. Gerald Daugherty lost his re-election bid for County Commissioner in Travis County. Gerald is the only County Commissioner who consistently voted for tax and budget cuts in Travis County. We will miss him dearly.

4. Proposition 2 passed in Travis County. $65 million of our tax money will be given to a developer instead of going to pay for our city services. The City of Austin is faced with a $27 million "short-fall" this fiscal year. That $65 million check that taxpayers will give to Simon Malls really could have made a difference in keeping our city financially solvent without having to borrow more money through another bond package.

I'm sure there are more, but I'm going to stop there. I do not want to hear Austinites complain about high taxes...they keep voting to increase them!

Not Every Liberal is Optimistic

I got to talking to a co-worker of mine yesterday when we were on a short job trip together. He is a 22-year old college student, a self-described liberal, and lives in a rural area outside of Austin and commutes into town daily because the cost of living is cheaper outside of Austin. I'm going to keep his name anonymous.

My co-worker was one of the most excited people I met for Senator Obama in the primary. He was feeling the hope and optimism and was wearing it on his sleeve everyday. At some point over the last two months, he began to really read into what Senator Obama believes and who he associates with and it made him scared.

My co-worker refuses to vote for McCain as he sees him as an angry old man who just runs negative campaign ads. My co-worker also refuses to vote for Obama now because of the message of socialism that Obama is preaching to the world.

In talking to my co-worker, he listed out his main issue as paying too much for tuition and paying too much in property taxes. To that end, I convinced him to at least vote against his local school bond election (his local tax increase) and to support Tim Kleinschmidt who has pledge to work to lower property taxes and appraisal creep.

I consider my co-worker a fairly mainstream voter. He's intelligent and independent-minded and he gives me a great reality check most days. Senator Obama is counting on the 18-35 year old demographic to swing the election his way. The more I talk to people of that age bracket (I am in there, too), the more I realize that either that age bracket will not vote or is not as enthralled with Senator Obama as the campaign thinks, at least in Texas.

Not every liberal is optimistic and not every liberal believes in the change that Senator Obama preaches.

What/who Obama should fear this Halloween

BOO!
Are you scare Barack?
You should be.

LA Times Holds Back Video of Obama at a Khalidi Reception

This is from the Gateway Pundit's blog. This report, if true, is disturbing. I would like to think of Senator Obama as being open-minded and level-headed, just with an opposing viewpoint than me. But, the more I read and research on him, the less I think of him as a person and as a political figure.

I Support Congressman McCaul

I first met Michael McCaul during the 2004 Republican Party Primary election cycle. This was right after redistricting created an oblong-shaped district that ran from Pflugerville to Katy. There were at least eight candidates vying to become our Congressman then, including Michael McCaul, John Devine, Ben Struesand, and Dave Phillips, among others. I had the privelege to meet all of these candidates then while I was working with Young Conservatives of Texas on their endorsement process.

After interviewing all of the candidates in January and February of 2004, I came to the conclusion that Michael McCaul was the best choice for representation in Congress and recommended Young Conservatives of Texas to endorse him then. I have the same conclusions now as I did in 2004.

(More...)

Perils of Straight-ticket voting

Apparently some people can't figure out how to use the electronic voting machines:

A widely circulated Internet message telling people to vote straight party and to vote again for their choice for president needs to be ignored, Travis County Clerk Dana DeBeauvoir said. ... If Travis County voters mistakenly vote that way, a message will appear on the screen saying that they have changed their choice, she said.
The electronic ballot allows voters to reselect that candidate, which means that their selection will be counted, she said. The process is still confusing, said Buck Wood, an attorney representing the Texas Democratic Party. A lawsuit that the party filed last year against the Texas secretary of state alleges that the electronic voting machines used in Travis and 101 other Texas counties disenfranchise voters who make the same mistake that DeBeauvoir discussed. The lawsuit is on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Seems like nonsense to me. It was fairly easy to vote this morning, going straight party first, then checking and correcting. Anyone who can't handle it probably shouldn't be deciding on who runs the country.

Down Ballot Spotlight: Constable Bob Vann

Constable Bob Vann has served Travis County Precinct 2 with honor and dignity for twelve years now. Every person that I have met who knows Bob Vann recognizes him as a man of integrity, respect, and determination. He has served the residents of Travis County very well over the last decade.

The Constable's Office has the responsibility for serving civil process issued through the Justice of the Peace Courts, County Courts and District Courts. The Civil Process Division is responsible for Citations, Writs of Possession, Writs of Reentry, Writs of Sequestration, Writs of Execution, evictions against non-paying tenants, and levying on property/equipment as ordered by the courts. The Constable's Office also handles civil orders from the Attorney General's Office.

Under Bob Vann's tenure, the Travis County Constable's Office has collected on a record number of warrants and civil fines that have increased the revenue to Travis County. Bob Vann has also been an advocate of using the Constable's office to provide contract peace officer work for school districts, to ensure the safety of our students and children in public schools.

Travis County Precinct 2 covers Pflugerville and the majority of North Central Austin. Constable Bob Vann deserves our continued support to uphold the office of County Constable with dignity and integrity. He has proven to get results in running an efficient local government.

Down Ballot Spotlight: Reasons I Support Jerry Mikus

I have had the privilege of getting to know Jerry Mikus over the past couple of months during this year’s campaign. Jerry is a candidate for State Representative in District 50, which covers north and northwest Travis County. When Jerry talks to people, he speaks from his heart, which is the main reason that I support him. Jerry is not the mouth-piece for a consultant or for a special interest group. Jerry’s special interest is the people of north Austin in the Texas Legislature.

I recently asked Jerry some questions that will philosophically define him as a common sense conservative. These are questions that I, as a taxpayer and citizen of Texas, am concerned about. These are questions that help to define the future direction of our country on a local, state, and federal level. Jerry agrees with me on a number of these issues, which is why I support him.

I urge every voter in Texas House District 50 to support Jerry Mikus in his bid to become our representative. His common sense conservative views are shared by the majority of the people in our district.

(More...)

Presidential Stock Market Returns, A critique

This in-the-tank-for-Obama New York Times chart purports to show how the Democrats are better than Republicans as President, by reaching back to the Hoover days.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/14/opinion/20081014_OPCHART.html

The chart is dumb for many reasons:

1. It's hand selected to start with the worst performing stock market president ever, when starting at the top of a stock market bubble is the most distortive place to start a chart. But The idea that we should rate today's Republicans based on a President who presided before our parents were born is a real stretch. And btw, if you include Hoover, why not Harding, Coolidge, and Wilson?? We know why - it would make Republicans look better. Coolidge had the highest stock market returns of any President in history (and just happens to be the President before the cutoff in this chart): The stock market rose by almost 3 times over 5 years, about a 23% average return.

See this critique - the difference shrinks to almost nothing ($217,000 for Democrats, $156,000 for Republicans) by extending back further.

http://blog.wolfram.com/2008/10/16/stock-market-returns-by-presidential-...

It gets really interesting if you extend the timeline back and make your initial investment in 1897. Now we see that the crash of 1929 was really the bursting of a bubble: the 12 Republican years of Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover were a wild ride, but more or less a wash in the end. (The Dow’s peak in 1929 would not be seen again until 1954! Imagine, 25 years including the worst depression and the greatest war the world has ever seen, and in all that time the stock market never reached the level it had for a few giddy months in 1929. Will it be 25 years before we match the Dow’s high of 2008?)

The wild ride is another way of saying the late 1920s stock market bubble and bursting was at work, and measuring only half of that distorts the numbers.

2. Looking at Presidents only ignores the Congressional effect. If you go by the congress, you will find that Gingrich Congress was quite successful, so was the Republican Congress from 2003 to 2007. But since 2007, the Democrats in Congress have presided over a significant drop in the stock market. A mutual fund "The Congressional effect" notes that

Likewise, it is not surprising that the stock market did well under Truman, as the conservative post-WWII Congress did a lot to "free up the economy" from the ravages of the New Deal. Note that FDR had the best baseline to work from ever, a stock market that dropped 90% 4 years prior, yet still had a mediocre return. The reason is simple: The New Deal was actually economic snake oil, it did no good and the economy sputtered along, making a recession into a 'great depression'.

3. YOU CANNOT IGNORE INFLATION. Historically, Democrats create more inflation. That boosts dollar denomiated returns artificially. It's just been their thing, either due to the Fed boards they've appointed or other mis-management factors. The #1 example was Jimmy Carter. In after-inflation real terms, Jimmy carter had the most negative stock market returns since Herbert Hoover. As a result, the REAL stock market returns favor the Republicans.

Furthermore, if you go back to Taft, you will see negative returns under Wilson as well, and a Republican advantage of $50,000 versus $25,000 in the after inflation return.

4. Lastly, we have to return to the fact of policies not party labels deciding stock market returns. It's not the party label its the actions they took that matter. Hoover and GHW Bush raised taxes. Hoover raised tarriffs. Nixon imposed wage and price controls. Once Gingrich took control of the Congress in 1994, we had a Government that was shrinking as a %age of GDP for the first time in decades! We see clear trends:

0) Harding and Coolidge policies of lower taxes after Wilson's failed economic policies created a boom

1) The failed Hoover administration and New Deal of high taxes, tariffs and intervention kept returns sub-par from 1930 to 1945.

2) Post WWII relaxation of Govt control of economy, from the Republican Congress of late 1940s right through to the Kennedy tax cuts, were good for the stock market. Free trade helped.

3) Johnson's Great Society and Nixon's wage and price controls and Jimmy carter's inept monetary policies hurt the economy and markets.

4) Reaganomics worked. Reagan's tax cuts and the deregulation of 1980s and 1990s put the economy on a big upswing. Clinton's policies, once he was paired with conservative Gingrich, followed the Reagan path more than deviated.

5) Under GWBush we have had tax cuts, but also increased regulation (Sarbanes-Oxley) and a govt-induced housing meltdown (due to CRA and subprime lending) that was fueled by Govt meddling and lax monetary policy.

The recipe for a good real return in the stock market is clear: Low tax rates, smaller Government, hard money monetary policies, and less regulation. It doesnt matter which party implements those policies or does not. that's the recipe that works.

Obama's economics are Hoovernomics: Higher tax rates - his tax plan, a bogus govt giveaway marketed as a 'tax cut', will actually raise marginal tax rates on the middle class; he promises more regulation, higher spending, less free trade, and with more bailouts, a poor fiscal and monetary position. There is very little reason to hang hopes for a good stock market return under obama, unless we get a Republican Congress along to hem Obama in.

Obama and Alinsky

Friends,
I read a book by Saul Alinsky, knowing that Barak Obama admires Alinsky and takes his philosophy to heart. The book is dedicated to Lucifer. I was so disturbed by the book that I was compelled to organize some of the other materials that I had been "collecting." I had enough information to write another book, but I have made an effort to cut to the bare minimums--just enough to show a pattern.
Most of you have probably heard of much of this information, because you "keep up." But you may know others who need help seeing the truth about Obama. Feel free to use this letter any way it might be helpful. Send it to your pastor. Even if a pastor does not usually speak out on political topics, he should feel free to speak out against a book dedicated to Lucifer! Send the letter to friends who live in other cities--because they know people you don't know.
Most of all, pray that if this era in our history is not the "end times" of prophesy, that God will have mercy on us and allow us to continue to have the greatest nation the world has ever had. If "the time has come" may we remain faithful to our Lord, and comfort one another with knowing how things turn out eventually!

Faithfully,

Peggy Moore Bower

-----------------------------------------------------
Note by Carl:
Peggy's article is most informative but it is four pages long -- a bit long for the blog.
Please let me know if you would like a copy and I will email it to you. (carlsch@io.com)
Seems unbelievable but Peggy has it right! Here is a quote from an article:
“Saul Alinksy’s book ‘Rules for Radicals’ -- a book dedicated to Lucifer, whom he called the ‘first radical’. It was Alinsky for whom ‘change’ was his mantra. And by ‘change’, he meant a Marxist revolution achieved by slow, incremental, Machiavellian means which turned society inside out.” See http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/2073071/revolution-you-can-believe-in.thtml

Round Rock ISD Seeks to Raise Taxes

The Round Rock ISD Board of Trustees voted over the summer to put nearly $300,000,000 in bond proposals on the November ballot. These bonds, if passed, will raise the total amount of public debt on Round Rock ISD citizens to nearly $1 billion since 1993.

Honest, hardworking Americans have to balance their family budgets and tighten their belts right now because of the crunch in the economy. It is only reasonable that these same hardworking Americans ask our local, state and federal governments to also tighten their belts instead of raising taxes. Taxpayers should not continue to extend bad loans to the government through bonds and tax increases.

Round Rock ISD, according to their website, has 41,468 total students enrolled in all of their campuses from Kindergarten to High School. Americans for Prosperity shows that Round Rock ISD currently has $629,625,025 of total debt from bonds. This amount comes to $15,183 of debt per student for the 2008 fiscal year. If the $293.9 million bond proposal passes in November, the total debt for Round Rock ISD will come to $923,525,025. This comes to $22,270 of debt per student for the 2008 fiscal year.

By contrast, Round Rock ISD, according to the Texas Education Agency, only puts $4,081 per student into the classroom (see line 82 of the link). What does this really mean? Round Rock ISD has 3.75 times more debt per student than classroom funding per student in 2008. This bond proposal, if passed, will increase the ratio to 5.5 times more debt per student than classroom funding per student!

Taxpayers have always been asked to come to the rescue of bureaucracies for their irresponsible spending practices. From 1980 to 2005, local government debt in Texas has increased 158%. The grand total of all the debt in Williamson County is $1.6 billion.

Local governments and school boards will use the same old "for the children" line to encourage citizens to pass the bond proposals. The real question to ask is how much of this money goes to the children and how much goes to increase bureaucratic red tape in our public education system. There is no link between money and quality education. Many times, the highest funded schools are in fact the lowest performing schools.

This November 4, Round Rock ISD residents are given the opportunity to vote down the local government bailout program. I encourage Round Rock voters to vote "NO" on the Propositions 1 & 2, which will only serve to raise our taxes.

GOUGED (Groups Opposed to Unsustainable Government Education Debt), Taxpayers Oppose Increased Taxes – Voting NO on RRISD Bonds.

Contact: Kristin Jones, (949) 230-2965, Don Zimmerman, (512) 577-8842

Statements / Press Conference:
Wednesday, Oct 22nd, 2008 12:00 PM – 1:00 PM

Round Rock ISD central compound, 1311 Round Rock (Round Rock, TX, 78681)

AUSTIN – Groups of parents and property taxpayers and activists are meeting on Wednesday, Oct 22nd, 12:00 noon at the Round Rock ISD central compound to express opposition to November 4th ballot issues which would authorize unlimited tax increases and school debt by over 30%. The Round Rock ISD Bond seeks to add almost $300 million to an existing debt of about $680 million. Round Rock ISD taxpayers were hit with about $250 million of new debt just 2 years ago. The ballot language permits UNLIMITED TAXES to be assessed, at any interest rate, to repay the bond debt: "...and the levying of a tax in payment of the bonds and to pay the costs
of any credit agreements executed or authorized in anticipation of, in relation to or in connection with the bonds."

Says Michele Samuelson of Wells Branch Watchdogs, “"Round Rock ISD already owes taxpayers $600,000,000, 1/3 of this is in the form of interest payments from previous bonds. At this rate, the only thing we will pass on to our children is not an education, but a huge pile of local debt that our children and grandchildren will be saddled with. Our children's future depends on responsible spending policies that do not incur additional public debts."

Liz Elleson, former Round Rock ISD trustee and opponent of the failed $350M Bond issue of March, 2005, has filed an open records request for numerous documents, including for payments to Superintendent Chavez and salaried administrative (non-teaching) employees for 2007 – 2009, and for large expenditures approved on a “consent” agenda without full disclosure or debate. Liz will present facts on wasteful spending.

John Gordon, former GOP candidate for State Rep in Williamson County and opponent of the 2005 Bond, will present facts supporting the bad timing and overpricing of the Bond.

Says Craig Wilkerson, of the Williamson County Campaign for Liberty, “Most WilCo residents send their children to public school, but a growing number of parents prefer homeschooling or private schooling. It is against the principles of Liberty to force any WilCo residents to subsidize an educational system they do not utilize and philosophically reject.”

Says Pat Dixon, Libertarian Party state chairman, "As a member of city council in Lago Vista I have always worked to reduce spending and lower tax rates. … In a time when voters are threatened by federal, state, and local politicians with greater intrusion into their wallets, voters need to speak up and protect themselves."
Says Wes Benedict, Exec. Dir of LP of Texas, who had a role in defeating the March, 2005 Bond, “Taxes are already too high and we should not throw more money into government schools.”

Don Zimmerman, Republican candidate for Travis County anti-tax assessor-collector, a Round Rock ISD parent & taxpayer, adds, “The public school monopoly has given us what other government monopolies like the post office give us – marginal service at high cost. We need more school choices, not more debt and taxes.”

GOUGED includes Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, and independent voters and taxpayers working to save their homes from confiscatory property taxes.
www.gouged.info
# # #

Michael Williams Unveils Campaign Tour Bus

Austin, TX--

This morning in Austin, TX, Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams unveiled his new campaign bus and launched a 21-day campaign tour of Texas. The bus runs on clean-burning natural gas produced in Texas!

Michael Williams has been a major proponent of energy independence and using renewable energy resources such as clean coal, nuclear power, natural gas, and wind for the ten years that he has served Texas in his position as Railroad Commissioner.

Under Michael Williams guidance, the Texas Railroad Commission promoted energy independence and promoted the use of Texas energy resources, all while maintaining a balanced budget and exploring free market solutions to our energy needs. The Railroad Commission, despite its title, is actually the regulatory board for energy resources in Texas. Williams said the focus for his office in the upcoming 81st Legislative Session will be finding ways to utilize our renewable energy resources through free market incentives instead of tax increases.

Williams launched his tour today from the Travis County Republican Party Headquarters while serving dozens of his supporters breakfast. Also in attendance were Jerry Mikus and Pam Waggoner who are both running for State Representative seats in Travis County.

Truth about Taxes

Every election year, we hear candidates make promises about taxes. Candidates banter back and forth about who will cut taxes the most and who will give taxpayers more disposable income through tax breaks.

This will surprise the average voter. The tax code, whether it be a local tax code, the state tax code, or the federal tax code, is not written to generate revenue for the government. The tax code is written to influence lifestyles that the party in power choses to promote. The tax code is written to manipulate the average American into doing what the government wants you to do. Every economist and policy maker knows that tax incentives encourage capital investment and production in a specific area of the economy.

This fact has been known amoung policy insiders for many years. Why do you think there are subsidies for certain forms of alternative energy and not others? It is because the environmentalists want to promote their agenda through using the tax code.

Why do you think The Domain in Austin receives tax subsidies in the form of a refund of sales taxes? It is because the Austin City Council wants to focus business in certain areas of town so that other areas of town can be redevoloped as part of the "Smart Growth" plan and dreamed up by Kirk Watson.

Why do you think Republicans give larger income tax breaks for married couples? It is because Republicans are trying to use the income tax code to encourage healthy marriages.

When the average voter and average American starts reading between the lines and asking why, many answers become clear. This year, we see the same old Democrat line bobbing its head again, the creation of class warfare in the manipulation of the tax code.

Barack Obama is charging that John McCain's tax plan ignores 101 million American by not giving the poorest Americans tax breaks. In reality, those 101 million Americans already do not pay federal income taxes. These Americans receive more money back in taxes than they pay in. There is no need for McCain to address these people in his tax plan.

Obama pledges to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans and on capital investments. When you put this in layman's terms, the Democrat philosophy is to remove economic incentives to create and expand businesses. The Democrat philosophy is to drive all but the largest corporations out of business and then create public-private partnerships with these businesses. By doing this, the Democrats will ensure they have control over the economy and the voters.

The same can be true at local levels in politics, too. Tax and spend bureaucrats always support the myth of "local control." In other words, local officials do not want to give up control of their strangle-hold on property taxes and appraisals. The taxpayer-funded lobbying from groups like TASB and TAC is one of the main reasons that property taxes are not reduced, the appraisal process is not reformed, and government spending caps are not put into place. Local governments want the revenue stream so they can maintain their wasteful spending practices.

I encourage Americans to ask the why question when you hear talk about taxes. Until the federal tax code is overthrown and replaced with the fair tax and until there are true spending restrictions placed on government spending, we should all be skeptical of why certain companies get special consideration in the tax code and others do not. One thing is ture, the "Joe Taxpayer" is being manipulated to vote against their own best interests every election year when it comes to taxes.

Obama Served on Anti-Second Amendment Foundation

Protein Wisdom has details from a David Hardy article on how Obama was part of the Joyce Foundation and their attempt to gut the second Amendment:

During Obama’s tenure, the Joyce Foundation board planned and implemented a program targeting the Supreme Court. The work began five years into Obama’s directorship, when the Foundation had experience in turning its millions into anti-gun “grassroots” organizations, but none at converting cash into legal scholarship.

The plan’s objective was bold: the judicial obliteration of the Second Amendment.

Joyce’s directors found a vulnerable point. When judges cannot rely upon past decisions, they sometimes turn to law review articles. Law reviews are impartial, and famed for meticulous cite-checking. They are also produced on a shoestring. Authors of articles receive no compensation; editors are law students who work for a tiny stipend.

In 1999, midway through Obama’s tenure, the Joyce board voted [.pdf available at link] to grant the Chicago-Kent Law Review $84,000, a staggering sum by law review standards. The Review promptly published an issue in which all articles attacked the individual right view of the Second Amendment.

The details of how scholarship was "bought" via payoffs for law review articles are appalling. If a drug company bought research like this for their drug study results, it would be a Federal offense; for a lawyer like Obama to tolerate this shows a willingness to bend ethics drastically for 'the cause'. The foundation did more:

The Joyce Foundation board (which still included Obama) responded by expanding its attack on the Second Amendment. Its next move came when Ohio State University announced it was establishing the “Second Amendment Research Center” as a thinktank headed by anti-individual-right historian Saul Cornell. Joyce put up no less than $400,000 to bankroll its creation. The grant was awarded at the board’s December 2002 meeting, Obama’s last function as a Joyce director.

Obama was involved in a wealthy foundation’s attempt to manipulate the Supreme Court, buy legal scholarship, and obliterate the individual right to arms. And now, the products of that foundation are engaging in ads for Obama, as noted by a comment at Protein Wisdom:

The American Hunters and Shooters Association, an astroturf PR effort funded by the Joyce Foundation as a faux alternative to the NRA, has been running saturation radio ads in SW Virginia trying to convince gun owners that Obama is no threat. Of course, they give no specifics on Obama’s views on the Second Amendment and rapidly devolve into a diatribe on economic policy. Yet somehow this is supposed to an independent ad, not coordinated with the Obama campaign.

Republican Party Offers Hope for the Future

We have all heard about the “hope” that Barack Obama professes to bring to mainstream Americans during this election cycle. The Democrat nominee for President is not the only person offering hope for Americans. The Republican Party offers just as much hope, if not more, for tackling the issues facing our country today.

As delegates returned home from the Republican National Convention this year, there was a sense of pride in our platform, our country, and our candidates. While we do not all agree on every issue, the Republican Party Platform gave many Republicans hope for future generations. Holly Hansen, a Republican National Delegate from Round Rock, TX, said,

“The portions of the Republican Party Platform that give me the most hope for future generations of Americans include those on reforming government and developing energy independence.

“The new platform calls for constraining the ‘federal government to its legitimate constitutional functions,’ and not pretending that ‘government is a substitute for family or community.’ It also outlines a plan for controlling spending AND for a stop to earmarks. Furthermore, the platform relies on tax relief to grow the economy by calling for greater exemptions for dependents, banning internet access taxes, ending the death tax, and repealing the alternative minimum tax (AMT).”

(More...)

Texas Conservative Coalition Releases "Pledge with Texans"

On another note, the Texas Conservative Coalition released their "Pledge for Texans" today. Here is the letter that will be sent out to candidates for Texas Legislative offices. We need our Legislature to stand up for our principles and our issues. The down-ballot races in Texas are heating up!

Courageous Conservatism:
A Renewed Pledge with Texans
Our Reform Agenda for the 81st Legislature

Conservative legislators have worked hard to deliver on a few basic things that matter: meeting the needs of a growing population by lowering taxes, improving our schools, strengthening the economy, protecting families and children, and reforming our health care system. However, the work of conservatives in the Legislature is far from complete. Property taxes are too high, border security remains a challenge, families need more affordable health insurance, and elections must be free of fraud. Expanded government is not the answer for a people as smart and industrious as Texans, and we need to continue to promote the values of faith, family, and hard work. We have a lot of work ahead of us and our “Renewed Pledge with Texans” serves as a foundation for our long-term goals for Texas.

We Pledge to:

•Cut Property Taxes until they are eliminated.
Texas is 45th in the nation in home ownership and our high property taxes are a severe impediment to home ownership. In fact, 17% of the average mortgage payment is for property tax and 70% of that is for school taxes. Therefore, elimination of school district property taxes while fully funding our schools by adopting a fairer system must be the long-term goal. In the near-term, substantive relief measures are imperative. These measures include continued devotion of surplus state tax revenues to property tax relief; bringing accountability to the appraisal system; ensuring that all relief and reform measures are applied to both homeowners and businesses; and, freezing property taxes for military families.

•Protect the right to Vote by requiring photo ID and verifying citizenship
As required by the Texas Constitution, the state’s chief elections officer should verify the citizenship status of every person who registers to vote, and require all voters to present photo ID at the polling place as authorized by the U.S. Supreme Court.

•Secure the Texas Border
Combat illegal immigration and stop the Mexican drug cartels by training local law enforcement in federal immigration law and increase funding for border and homeland security, including more resources for local law enforcement to stop the traffic of drugs, weapons, and cash across the border. We must also penalize sanctuary cities; prohibit state and local government agencies from accepting the Matricula Consular as a form of ID; and, make tax credits available to employers who verify that their employees are legal.

•Stop the Trans-Texas Corridor and other eminent domain abuses
A booming population and economy require a modern and versatile transportation infrastructure to move people and goods, but private property rights must be protected from abuses like the Trans-Texas Corridor. Eminent domain must be employed only when it is absolutely necessary to take property for a clearly defined traditional and essential public use. When land is taken by eminent domain, property owners must be compensated with full current market value.

•Cut, Simplify and Reform business taxes
The gross margins tax is adversely impacting small businesses, is unnecessarily complex, and has high compliance costs. To keep Texas the nation’s leader in job growth, we must cut the rates of the margins tax; protect businesses from future increases by requiring a two-thirds majority of the Legislature to raise the tax rate; and, exempt more small businesses from paying the margins tax.

•Lower electric rates and Clean the environment
Texans can have more affordable and cleaner electric power by expanding nuclear, clean coal, wind, and biomass capacity. Texas must improve and expand its transmission infrastructure; fast-track permitting of new power facilities; and, invest in technology that utilizes Texas’ natural resources to clean the environment. To improve energy efficiency and reduce electric bills, we must ensure that System Benefit Fund revenues are dedicated to help families with their electric bills and used to make energy efficiency technologies such as smart meters more affordable.

•Make Texas a Leader in Public Education
World-class colleges and universities and a better educated population are critical for the future prosperity of our state. Texas should double the number of its nationally-recognized research universities; strengthen academic programs at community colleges so that more community college credits are transferable to universities; and, encourage adult education and promote other postsecondary educational opportunities at career colleges and schools for those who want to seek gainful employment.

•Make Health Care more affordable for families
Help Texas families access affordable health insurance by reducing costs through investment in electronic health records; requiring health plans, physicians, and hospitals to make cost and quality information available to the public; increasing the availability of low-cost, mandate-free insurance; and, offering optional health savings accounts to all public employees and high-deductible low-cost health plans to college students.

•Limit the growth of government
Impose strict constitutional spending restraints to further slow the growth of state government; ensure that dedicated funds are spent for their intended purpose or return the money to taxpayers; return to a true zero-based budgeting process to force agencies to justify all spending requests each legislative session; close loopholes in welfare programs; increase resources for child support collection to reduce reliance on government programs; and, end double taxation on phone bills by eliminating the sales tax on telecommunications fees and surcharges.