Another Alabama swindle

clipped from www.al.com Breland: Not enough Madison cash MADISON - Local developer Louis Breland said Wednesday his attempt to deannex 263 acres of his property from Madison is not an attack on the city but an attempt to find the best opportunity for a new retail development. Breland asked state Sen. Lowell Barron, D-Fyffe, to draft and advertise legislation to deannex his property on Zierdt Road, just south of Interstate 565 from the Madison city limits. Madison city leaders have been upset about the move because of a proposed retail development on the site that will generate millions in sales tax revenue. Madison Mayor Sandy Kirkindall said Wednesday when Breland lets the city know what incentives he wants, officials can look at funding options. One of the options includes implementing a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district - a method used several times in Huntsville to help pay for improvements for big retail projects - to help foot the bill. It does not count against the city's debt limit of $32 million.

Why are we paying Breland to build here? If he wants to build the retail development on land he owns, he should do it. And if he doesn't like the fact that the city won't fork over incentives for him to do something that he already wants to do, then he can leave the land empty or sell it to someone else.

It is pretty shifty business to seek an end-around in the state legislature when the city involved and the surrounding areas tell you to back off. I only wish Alabama had more transparent campaign finance regulations and reporting. You know Breland didn't just ask Lowell Barron to carry this legislation without greasing the wheels a little.

Huntsville Mayor Loretta Spencer should publicly state that the city of Huntsville will not annex this property if it is deannexed from Madison. If Breland gets freed from Madison, but becomes so toxic in the process that no one else will "incentive" his project, then maybe he will get the message.

UPDATE: Alabama's campaign finance rules are spectacularly byzantine. PACs and campaigns can transfer money freely amongst themselves. The transfers are large, multiple, and overlapping, successfully hiding the sources of funds. It's political money laundering at its finest.

However, it is true that Louis Breland donated $5,000 to Tennessee Valley Citizens for Economic Development PAC on February 8, 2007, around the time that the issue was exploding before the Madison City Council. For the uninitiated, The Tennessee Valley PAC is controlled by Steven Raby, head of Direct Communications and right-hand man to Sen. Lowell Barron, D-Fyffe, the man carrying Breland's legislation in the state Senate.

Tennessee Valley PAC has contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to Sen. Barron since the last election cycle. Some of that money directly benefits Barron and his campaign. A lot of the money, however, helps cement his place as a power broker. Barron has turned around and donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to favored candidates in the House and Senate over the last few elections. Winning candidates then join the money laundering train, and are beholden to Barron in the Senate.

Now, if I can just get a printer and an assistant, maybe I can unravel all the PAC ties...

UPDATE 2: Madison Senator Parker Griffith took $1,000 each from Tennessee Valley PAC and Louis Breland in 2006.

Going all the way

Austin American-Statesman:

UT baseball players Randy Boone, left, Clay Van Hook and Todd Gilfillan shaved their heads as a sign of support for Van Hook's mother, Loyce, who is battling cancer. Nearly 20 players have followed suit as the No. 9-ranked Longhorns (22-8, 5-1), who face No. 8 Rice at 6 p.m. Tuesday at UFCU Disch-Falk Field, have come together to show their support for a teammate. 'I think it's been a thing this team has bonded together by, a spiritual thing,' coach Augie Garrido said.

Sorry, guys, that's a haircut, not a sacrifice. Those definitely are not shaved heads. (And for Pete's sake, iron your clothes!)

This is a shaved head:

Ethan at ten months

This is my nephew Ethan C., age ten months. Mom went to Lewisville, Texas, for spring break and had some new photos taken with him.

TX-Sen: The 254-County Strategy

I moved to Austin in 1994, just in time to vote for Ann Richards, and watch her lose to George W. Bush. And from the Blue Island - Travis County - I watched as a reasonably Democratic state was swamped by the red tide and turned Republican in less than a decade. Republican as in 100% of statewide elected offices are Republican Republican. And the Texas Democratic Party deserves its share of the blame for this situation.

In the following dozen years, I watched one Don Quixote after another charge up the hill - Victor Morales and his pickup truck in 1996; Garry Mauro's embarrassingly pathetic one third of the vote against Bush in 1998; the Democratic no-show against Kay Bailey Hutchison in 2000; the failure of the multi-ethnic Dream Ticket in 2002; the Democrats' futile attempts to stop DeLay's redistricting in 2003; Governor Goodhair's reelection in 2006 with 39% of the vote. [I was one of the few people in Texas not running for governor in 2006.]

I watched not only what was happening on the Blue Island, but also how these candidates were faring as they traveled outside the urban areas -- and what has happened to them since.

Here is a sampling of our former standard-bearers:

• Morales drove his truck statewide on a shoestring budget, and has since renounced the Democratic Party for its lack of support.
• Dream Ticket Attorney General candidate Kirk Watson, a former Blue Island mayor, has dropped down the ladder to become a state senator.
• Fellow Dream Ticket Senate candidate Ron Kirk abandoned politics and became one of the top lobbyists for Texas' number one polluter, utility TXU.
• 2002 Democratic gubernatorial nominee Tony Sanchez was Bush's largest donor not named Enron and endorsed GOP turncoat Carole Keeton McClellan Rylander Strayhorn for governor in 2006.

Meanwhile, since 1983, the GOP gained state senators in every session but two, and state house members every session but three.

The DNC has earned much recognition – and some well-earned criticisms – for the 50-state strategy. Our successes in Senate races alone show the merit of such a plan. Locally, the Democratic Party is still relevant in some parts of Texas. However, if the Texas Democratic Party wants to pull off a competitive Senate victory, even against a “vulnerable” candidate like John Cornyn, it will require a 254-county strategy.

For example, the TDP does not have county chairs in six Texas counties right now. Sure, they are counties that went at least two-thirds for Bush in 2004. But there are dozens of county commission, school board, city council, and other publicly elected positions that need contesting. Though these counties make up just over one percent of Texas’ population, we are going to need that one percent some day. Our next great statewide candidate may be putting off a run for county judge in Hansford County because there is no TDP support there. Look, if America’s smallest county, Loving County, can have a county chair for its dozen Democrats (12 votes for president in 2004; 11 votes for Senate in 2006), then the TDP should be able to chair and compete for every county in the state.

In spring 2006, the TDP got a new chairman – Boyd Richie from Young County in north Texas. So how did Democrats fare that fall in Young County? A clean sweep! Yes, Republicans won every state and federal election in Young County, all 22 of them, including 11 that the Democrats couldn’t be bothered to contest.

But wait, there’s more! In 2006, the TDP ran no candidate for District Attorney in 21 of 46 counties; 10 of 23 statewide elected offices; 16 of 31 state senate seats; 30 Courts of Appeals seats; and 99 District Judge seats.

The need for a 254-county strategy is clear. As with the Electoral College, a statewide election can be won by taking a handful of urban counties by strong margins, or by winning dozens and dozens of smaller, rural and agricultural counties. By nature, by definition, and by platform, Texas Democrats are not competing well in the nearly two hundred smaller counties. Logic and demography conclude that the key to victory is in the urban counties. However in 2004, President Bush carried all but five of the twenty largest counties (Travis, El Paso, Hidalgo, Cameron and Galveston); and in 2006, Senator Hutchison lost only three of those counties (Travis, El Paso, Hidalgo), including a 50-48 loss in El Paso County. Texas Democrats cannot concede the rural vote and then fail to win the urban vote by a wide margin.

The problems are numerous – fundraising, netroots, grass roots, developing candidates, voter registration, fielding a competitive message. And Richie says he has an improvement plan:

1) Outreach to community and constituency leaders to develop pragmatic, cost-effective ways to communicate with and motivate the Democratic base and attract new voters to the party;
2) Coordinate efforts with County Chairs and SDEC members to provide them with the resources and tools they need to win;
3) Expand the technology the TDP uses to communicate with activists and voters alike and develop more tools like our recently-launched interactive online voter file;
4) Initiate a strategic communications plan to identify Democratic spokespersons in every media market who can appear on local radio, television and print media both in English and Spanish;
5) Reach out to large and small donors alike to raise the funds needed to keep an experienced, campaign staff and fund these programs.

Still absent from this plan is a county-level strategy.

1) Dozens of county governments and county party groups lack functioning and accurate websites. Further, voter registration drives in every county need to be incorporated here. (Yes, even in Loving County.) You can't like our message if you have never heard it.
2) The resources and tools needed to win vary wildly by county, and I have not seen any evidence yet that the party has the ability to accurately identify those things.
3) This sounds like a rehash of the first step, and it does not address the lack of activists in some counties that are in desperate need of local Democratic leadership.
4) There are some positive points here, as long as this is not limited to major print or television markets. Every county has at least one local publication that needs to be reached by the TDP.
5) The hardest part is the money, because we need money to do the other steps, but we don’t have enough partisans and activists giving enough money yet to make the rest happen. We need cost-effective ways to raise funds in the sea of small counties.

We need regional candidate training academies. We need media outreach in every county. We need locally written editorials appearing in every county, every week. We need to register voters all over the state with monthly goals in mind. We need to expand Young Democrats groups on campuses, including smaller colleges, community colleges, and high schools. We need principled and ethical elected officials to carry the standard in Austin and throughout the state. And we need a lot of money to make all of this happen.

[Cross-posted at DailyKos.com]

The Diet Coke Presidency

It is hard to believe that six years have passed since W. was inaugurated and our country began its descent into Hell. I'll grant you, it was titillating during the Clinton years to wade past Limbo and dabble our toes in the Second Circle (lust). But W. and his entourage have created an express lane to the Eighth Circle and beyond, stacking up a lifetime of sins in only half a dozen years, or roughly the length of a Mel Gibson movie.

But six years is a long time in both the practical and the institutional memory of a country, and it is difficult to think back to the time when there used to be more than one issue on the table; a time when policy and substance were roots for debate, and not partisanship and slander. I'd venture to say even some moderate Republicans yearn for the days when we could actually get things done.

The Hundred Hours notwithstanding, it has been little ado about nothing since 2001, and I think it is easy to see that most of America has been lulled into a sense of comfort with an impotent government - or at least an impotent legislature. We go to bed at night wrapped in a blanket made of faux security, believing that as long as the government talks the hard line, we will be "safe," and all the other issues will take care of themselves. And while the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, but so does a journey of a thousand errors. When a critical mass has failed to stand up and stop the incremental annexation of our rights, we all look up six years later in shock at how many steps into the journey we now are.

With the exception of the War on Terror (tm), little progress has been made on any other front, leaving critical domestic and foreign issues to wither on the vine. And W. has been satisfied to keep it that way. Sex sells, and fear wins. Does the average American (read: non-Kossacks) have any idea of the administration's policy on welfare? Health care reform? Job creation? Trade relations? Diplomacy with non-Middle Eastern nations? Tax code upgrades? Higher education? Labor-management relations? Corporate governance and taxation? Decaying infrastructure - roads and bridges? (Feel free to add your own to the list.)

I miss those days, and I bet most Americans do, too. The problem is in the meaning of the word "miss". I actually remember the days when issues were important, and when we weren't single-minded and double-barreled in pursuit of one issue to the neglect, even exclusion, of all others. Most Americans miss those days in that they cannot recall them so long ago, so they forget there was once a time when great leaders had great debates about great issues; when neither candidate was a bed of roses, nor were they piles of slop; when whether D or R won the election, our country would probably still be in pretty good hands. And those days aren't as long ago as they may seem.

W. made us accustomed to getting less when we thought we were getting so much more, the best of both worlds. He would steer us right on the main issue - national security - and we were free to give up worrying about the other issues, confident that his paternal instinct and constitutional values would lead us to the promised land. Too many abdicated their roles as citizens when it became too hard to fight back. And maybe we walked right into a trap.

Maybe we do not give Those Who Shall Wish Us Harm - the terrorists - nearly enough credit. Our government's imagination was not broad enough to visualize planes crashing into buildings. What if the next terror step is hiding in plain sight? What if the approach is to take advantage of a belligerent yet bereft president and his misplaced values to undermine the entire nation at once? Is it so hard to imagine? Terrorists focus our attention and our money on Iraq and global security; they use the passions of the sitting president to exacerbate the situation to the neglect of all other issues; and our nation slowly dies from internal bleeding.

What has sparked this stroll down Amnesia Lane is the rapid-fire announcements of four candidates for president in the last week - Sens. Obama, Clinton and Brownback, and Gov. Richardson. While each announcement contained boilerplate drivel, each also focused on specific issues, and issues other than Iraq or national security. Without a clear heir to all of W.'s policies, foibles, and fraud, there is a genuine chance for real issues to hit the airwaves again. With the class of much of the Democratic field, there is a prospect of lots of meat and little mud. The orphan issues that have been ignored can receive the love and attention (and money) they so desperately need.

And so in spite of the extreme imbalance of power generated by the administration, for the next two years we are stuck with W. and his Diet Coke Presidency. He pledged to take out all the bad, unhealthy, and inconvenient things, and replace them with just one sweetener that will actually be better for us. In the end, we miss the other ingredients that weren't so bad for us in moderation, we are not that much healthier, and we have this bad taste in our mouths.

One of these days, these boots are gonna walk all over you

My mother doesn't understand why I don't shop at Wal-Mart. She thinks it is an abnormal obsession of mine. She tells me that part of how she raised three children and sent them to college (with my father) was by knowing a bargain when she saw one. But at what price -- is that bargain worth your soul?

I was raised in a union family. My father was president of CWA Local 3905 more than once. I remember seeing him on television during strike years, and the retro purple-and-gold union logo that Dad had on so many things is fresh in my mind. So I cannot understand why Mom doesn't get it.

Wal-Mart will not let its North American employees unionize. In February 2005, Wal-Mart shuttered its store in Jonquiere, Quebec, rather than negotiate with a strong employee union. Wal-Mart says the following regarding unions:

There has never been a need for a Walmart union due to the familiar, special relationship between Wal-Mart associates and their managers.

However, Wal-Mart has allowed Chinese workers to unionize.

Should associates request formation of a union, Wal-Mart China would respect their wishes.

In an even more stunning move, Wal-Mart required that any new union be affiliated with a union federation dominated by the Communist Party.

Wal-Mart has a history of sending corporate union-busters to stores that are threatening to organize. Bentonville has created a Manager’s Toolbox to keep each store union-free. (“Staying union free is a full-time commitment.”) And complaints have been filed against Wal-Mart in a majority of states for violating workers' rights in this area. (Just Google "Wal-Mart" and "union" and watch the results flow in.)

California Rep. George Miller, now the chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, has done an admirable job of chronicling these abuses. His committee investigations have turned up dozens of abuses by Wal-Mart regarding worker rights, overtime rules, child labor, undocumented workers, worker safety, discrimination, and unaffordable or unavailable health care.

Miller released a 2004 report – Everyday Low Wages – alleging that every Wal-Mart store employing 200 full-time employees created a $420,750 tax burden that has to be absorbed by taxpayers. These costs include food stamps and housing assistance for those living on Wal-Mart wages; free and reduced-cost school lunches; other low-income federal tax credits; Title I educational funding; and more.

At 3,287 Wal-Mart discount stores and super centers in the United States as of December 2006, that is an additional tax burden on all Americans of $1.38 billion every year.

I do not believe Wal-Mart is evil, nor do I believe its executives or store employees are bad people. In fact, in some places, Wal-Mart has displaced alternative employment so successfully that many people needing jobs have nowhere else to turn but their local Supercenter. But it is not worth it to me to save dimes and dollars here and there in exchange for the damage that Wal-Mart does in so many areas.

So if you are still willing to sell your soul for a little convenience or pocket change, then consider what $1.38 billion could buy:

• 63 new elementary schools housing 1,124 students each (Wake County, NC);
• 15,975 new police officers, including salary, benefits, and other costs (Burr Ridge, IL);
• 15 new central libraries (Austin, TX);
• 222 miles of new interstate highways (Missouri DOT);
• 174,932 INTERCEPTOR body armor protection systems (globalsecurity.org);
• or almost 11 million mammograms for those who cannot afford them (Minnesota).

Heck, it could even fund four Bridges to Nowhere.

Blogging the BCS - Week 3

It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried. --Sir Winston Churchill

It seems that most college football fans, except for a majority of the 119 I-A college presidents and a few conference commissioners, favor a playoff to settle college football's hash. Just to give you a proper frame of reference, here is how the NCAA determines the 88 other champions that it recognizes in 23 sports across three divisions:

• 30 by regional qualifying, team championships decided by aggregate individual performances: cross-country; fencing; gymnastics; swimming and diving; track and field; wrestling
• 11 by a selection committee, team championships decided by aggregate individual performances: rifle; skiing; golf; rowing
• 47 by selection committee, playoff (single or double-elimination): field hockey; football; soccer; volleyball; water polo; basketball; bowling; ice hockey; baseball; lacrosse; softball; tennis

Notice a general pattern? Sports that have individual competitors and/or individual events, like track and field, or swimming, or skiing, have a point system at their national championships. Individual events and results add up to points, which determine the team national champion on the field. In many cases, the NCAA also recognizes individuals event champions, such as the Men's Division I 100m champion.

In general, sports that are comprised of teams striving towards one goal simultaneously, like the trinity of football, basketball, and baseball, have expert selection committees. These committees monitor the progress of all teams throughout the season, and using many criteria, select a reasonable number of competitors to enter a playoff for each of the 47 national championships. (NCAA tennis does have singles and doubles championships that run separately from the team championships.)

It should come as no surprise that some observers suggest that the BCS drop its middle letter, at least in the interests of truth-in-advertising. And it should also be evident that there is a lot wrong with a championship system that goes against the wisdom of these other three methods of determination. When 65 men's basketball teams are expertly selected from a field of over 300, and then they play a single-elimination tournament to decide a champion, no sane observer will ever be quoted as saying, "Oh, they got it wrong this year."

When has the BCS gotten it wrong, or not as right as it could have? How about 1998 (Kansas State leapfrogged by Ohio State and Florida)? Or 2001 (Nebraska jumps Big XII champ Colorado)? Would you prefer 2003 (split national title)? 2004 (Auburn, Utah, and Boise State undefeated and unloved)? And what about the train wreck that 2006 could present - a close regular season tilt between undefeateds Ohio State and Michigan leaves them one-two in the BCS, shutting out an undefeated Big East team (Louisville or West Virginia or [gasp] Rutgers)?

From 1979 until the BCS, there had only been three shared national titles:

• 1997, when Michigan and Nebraska finished as the only undefeated teams in Division I-A
• 1991, when Washington and Miami finished as the only undefeated teams in Division I-A
• 1990, when six different teams were ranked number 1, Colorado got a fifth down against Missouri, and Georgia Tech won the UPI national title by one poll point over Colorado

Most of the other 88 NCAA championship sports have one or more polls, or an RPI (ratings percentage index) used to gauge team performances throughout the year. All of these are tools that selection committees use to choose teams and seed them. Any argument that supporters of the BCS or opponents of a playoff can make -- a playoff would result in more missed class time; some teams would get left out; a playoff would diminish the importance of the regular season -- would fail in the face of the fact that these objections do not seem to apply to every other championship the NCAA awards.

Why is it acceptable for a collegiate fencer to miss more class time to participate in regional and national championships after the regular season, but not a Division I football player? Why is it acceptable for a Division II or III football player to compete in as many as five postseason games, but this is an unfair burden for a Division I player? And speaking of being left out, why is it acceptable that only 80.5% (269 of 334) of Division I basketball teams are left out of the championship, but 98.3% (117 of 119) of Division I football teams are left out? When logic fails, it must be greed.

Not

Spring break was supposed to be for me to get my career and life in order. However, my desktop computer has been running check disk for the better part of a day (it is actually progressing), and my allergies have returned. (The allergies happened as a result of my spending more than a single day in Austin for the first time this year.)

My job search work is on my desktop, and I also feel agitated when it is out of commission, anyhow. I was supposed to get settled into an exercise routine these two weeks at home that I could take on the road with me for the next five. But being sniffly has snuffed that. And now the engine in the hybrid is acting up, and I have only just crossed 4,000 miles.

I am supposed to go to Dallas this weekend with a friend for the first two rounds of the NCAAs, but I don't feel like it now.

Now I understand how my Austin ennui could get me to go out on the road.

Pizza Hut Italian Bistro

In the last few weeks, I have seen television ads for this new Italian Bistro by Pizza Hut -- a sit-down Italian restaurant with new items, plus traditional Pizza Hut pizzas. I drove past one on my way to my hotel in McAllen, Texas, last night, so I decided to give it a try.
What a mistake.

Everything there tasted like Pizza Hut pizza. The Caesar salad, the bread, the dipping sauce, even the sausage and peppers all tasted of the same seasonings. I was hoping for a diverse menu, and they offered several more selections than I expected. However, the apparently did not add any new ingredients to the kitchen.

Also, the amount of sausage in the sausage and peppers was embarrassingly small. I pointed this out to the manager, and let him know that I think most patrons would be disappointed when seeing how little sausage there was.

All in all, it was an extremely disappointing experience. Don't waste your time.