Among the issues that voters are concerned about during the midterm elections, energy may not be a deciding factor in how they cast their votes. However, energy is often considered to be a component of the economy, and the economy will easily be the most important issue during the midterm elections. According to a recent Gallup poll, 30% of those survey said that the “economy in general” is the most important problem facing the country, and 28% said that “unemployment/jobs” are the most important problem. Where do each of the candidates for Congressional District 17 stand on the issue of energy?
According to his campaign web site, Flores believes that America should focus on fossil fuels and develop “more of our own oil, natural gas, oil shale, clean coal, and geothermal resources.” Also, Flores argues that nuclear power should be developed and we should eliminate “barriers to create new nuclear power plants” because “it is proven to be safe, clean for our environment, and a cost effective energy source.” However, Flores does endorse alternative energy and states that “expand incentives to allow more wind, next generation solar, and other energy technologies to emerge.” While Flores states that he supports alternative energy he also is against Cap and Trade and argues that it would “stifle domestic energy development, kill our economy, and cause the export of American jobs.”
Edwards makes the case on his campaign web site that there “is no one silver bullet to ensure more energy independence” and that it “includes more domestic production, research on renewable energy and clean coal technology, robust expansion of America’s nuclear power and sensible conservation.” Also, Edwards supports “tax incentives such as oil depletion and intangible drilling costs” as well as supporting “domestic gas producers to use hydraulic fracturing,” and Edwards also supports “increasing nuclear loan guarantee programs.”
While Edwards and Flores have similar positions on energy the campaigns have disagreed in the press of the issues. The Edwards campaign strongly criticized Flores for remarks he made during an interview about the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, saying that BP had done “a reasonably good job in trying to kill that well under very adverse circumstances.” Flores criticized the Obama Administration for the drilling temporary moratorium on deep-water drilling claiming it would have “a hugely adverse impact on jobs in Texas and Louisiana.” However, the New York Times has reported that the moratorium did to have the drastic effects predicted by the industry, and that “unemployment claims related to the oil industry along the Gulf Coast have been in the hundreds, not the thousands.” According to an article in the Waco Tribune-Herald, Edwards stated that Congressional hearings were “an important way to hold BP accountable and protect the American people,” while an article in the Madisonville Meteor quoted Flores as saying that he didn’t think it would be helpful to “having a bunch of Congressional hearings and trying to make victims out of the companies involved.”
While what the candidates say about the issues is part of how you can judge their positions, who they receive campaign contributions from, is another important indicator of their positions on the issues. According to records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, both Flores and Edwards received significant amounts of campaign contributions from the oil and gas industries. Edwards received $133,630 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry that represents 5.1% of his total campaign contributions, and Flores received $73,452 in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry that represents 4.5% of his total campaign contributions. However, it must be consider that Flores made the majority of his personal wealth in the oil and gas industry, and has contributed $670,867 to self-financing his campaign which represents 42% of his total contributions.
Overall both candidates have similar positions when it comes to energy, and both candidates present problematic positions for ensuring a transition for American to an alternative energy and a green economy. While Flores supports the myth of clean coal, Edwards supports the environmentally catastrophic process of hydraulic fracturing. Both candidates oppose the American Clean Energy and Security Act which would reduce America’s green house gas emissions by 83% by the year 2050. Flores has criticized Edwards not for voting against the legislation but for “silently voted no on Cap and Trade,” even though Edwards criticized the legislation for increasing “gasoline and utility costs for families, farmers and businesses during tough economic times.” Neither candidate presents real policy ideas for how America can move to clean energy and a green economy. However, Congressman Edwards is somewhat more likely than Bill Flores to support policies encourage the development of alternative energy and protect the environment. Either way, it is unlikely that leadership on the environment, clean energy, and climate change will come from Texas Congressional District 17.
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Local News: Texas A&M Faculty and Staff Cuts Become Reality
A&M Gives Notices to Lecturers
By Vimal Patel
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
Walter Daugherity, a 24-year Texas A&M senior lecturer with a Harvard doctorate, knew his job could be cut, but it still was jarring to be called into his boss's office last week.
"I assumed it would be about the budget reduction," he said about the meeting with his department head, "but it was still a bit of a shock to see it in black-and-white like that: Your last day will be...'" -- Aug. 31, 2011.
The budget plan released in July that called for a reduction of $60 million has quietly inched toward reality. Tuesday is the deadline for colleges to give senior lecturers notice that they won't have a job next year.
Though the cuts aren't scheduled to take effect until the next biennium -- the two-year period that starts September 2011 -- a university rule states that some lecturers must be given a year's notice. Officials have said all lecturers who won't be reappointed will get that notice, to give them a chance to plan ahead.
Daugherity, a computer science and engineering instructor, is one of four senior lecturers in his department who has been given notice. The four represent roughly 10 percent of the faculty in the department; however, they teach a quarter of the classes, he said.
"Our senior lecturers are highly qualified professional teachers," he said. "Sure, it would be cheaper to replace them with a new graduate or even an advanced doctoral student, but I think it's safe to say it wouldn't be better for students."
The university-wide plans had called for the elimination of 93 faculty and 117 staff positions -- along with 100 vacant faculty and 175 vacant staff positions -- to help meet a "worst-case" state reduction of $39 million and an internal $21 million reallocation plan to bolster a centrally administered pool to fund strategic priorities.
Across the university, non-tenured faculty have been given notices.
On Monday afternoon, all nine lecturers and senior lecturers in the biology department were set to receive notices of non-renewal.
Joseph Newton, dean of the College of Science -- which oversees the biology department -- confirmed the move when reached after hours. He said he didn't feel comfortable discussing specifics until he had a chance to speak with the department head.
"We will have to make up for the loss in teaching power of the non-tenure track faculty by larger class sizes, and increasing the load on the tenured faculty," Newton said. "It will hurt to some extent the research and service they're expected to do."
University officials also said that some of the lecturers could be asked to come back as part of spending on strategic reallocation. The process for deciding how the reallocation money will be spent should be decided in coming weeks, officials said.
"Now the question will be 'What's the process for reallocation?'" said Bob Bednarz, former Faculty Senate speaker.
Another key factor could impact reduction plans and save jobs. A buyout program that seeks to offer tenured professors a year or two year's pay, depending on the college, is accepting applicants until Sept. 24. Interim Provost Karan Watson has said deans will be allowed to alter their plans once the program's success is known.
By spending "one-time" money up front -- administrators set aside roughly
$16 million for the effort -- the university saves on recurring salary payments. But administrators and deans are anxiously awaiting how many people will sign up. Only tenured faculty -- who are typically paid more than their non-tenured counterparts -- are eligible under the buyout program.
Daugherity is hopeful that his job could be saved if the buyout program -- called the voluntary separation program -- is a success. But he said he won't know until October for sure whether he should look for another job. Either way, he's not ready to retire.
"My Social Security wouldn't cover the mortgage," he said.
Published on Tuesday, August 31, 2010
By Vimal Patel
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
Walter Daugherity, a 24-year Texas A&M senior lecturer with a Harvard doctorate, knew his job could be cut, but it still was jarring to be called into his boss's office last week.
"I assumed it would be about the budget reduction," he said about the meeting with his department head, "but it was still a bit of a shock to see it in black-and-white like that: Your last day will be...'" -- Aug. 31, 2011.
The budget plan released in July that called for a reduction of $60 million has quietly inched toward reality. Tuesday is the deadline for colleges to give senior lecturers notice that they won't have a job next year.
Though the cuts aren't scheduled to take effect until the next biennium -- the two-year period that starts September 2011 -- a university rule states that some lecturers must be given a year's notice. Officials have said all lecturers who won't be reappointed will get that notice, to give them a chance to plan ahead.
Daugherity, a computer science and engineering instructor, is one of four senior lecturers in his department who has been given notice. The four represent roughly 10 percent of the faculty in the department; however, they teach a quarter of the classes, he said.
"Our senior lecturers are highly qualified professional teachers," he said. "Sure, it would be cheaper to replace them with a new graduate or even an advanced doctoral student, but I think it's safe to say it wouldn't be better for students."
The university-wide plans had called for the elimination of 93 faculty and 117 staff positions -- along with 100 vacant faculty and 175 vacant staff positions -- to help meet a "worst-case" state reduction of $39 million and an internal $21 million reallocation plan to bolster a centrally administered pool to fund strategic priorities.
Across the university, non-tenured faculty have been given notices.
On Monday afternoon, all nine lecturers and senior lecturers in the biology department were set to receive notices of non-renewal.
Joseph Newton, dean of the College of Science -- which oversees the biology department -- confirmed the move when reached after hours. He said he didn't feel comfortable discussing specifics until he had a chance to speak with the department head.
"We will have to make up for the loss in teaching power of the non-tenure track faculty by larger class sizes, and increasing the load on the tenured faculty," Newton said. "It will hurt to some extent the research and service they're expected to do."
University officials also said that some of the lecturers could be asked to come back as part of spending on strategic reallocation. The process for deciding how the reallocation money will be spent should be decided in coming weeks, officials said.
"Now the question will be 'What's the process for reallocation?'" said Bob Bednarz, former Faculty Senate speaker.
Another key factor could impact reduction plans and save jobs. A buyout program that seeks to offer tenured professors a year or two year's pay, depending on the college, is accepting applicants until Sept. 24. Interim Provost Karan Watson has said deans will be allowed to alter their plans once the program's success is known.
By spending "one-time" money up front -- administrators set aside roughly
$16 million for the effort -- the university saves on recurring salary payments. But administrators and deans are anxiously awaiting how many people will sign up. Only tenured faculty -- who are typically paid more than their non-tenured counterparts -- are eligible under the buyout program.
Daugherity is hopeful that his job could be saved if the buyout program -- called the voluntary separation program -- is a success. But he said he won't know until October for sure whether he should look for another job. Either way, he's not ready to retire.
"My Social Security wouldn't cover the mortgage," he said.
Published on Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Monday, August 30, 2010
What I'm Reading
Are we all Matrix drones? Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang argues that “there is a reality where things could and should be better…In order to wake people up to that alternative reality, you need to show them that it isn't impossible.” In his new book Chang debunks the myths that people are paid what they are worth, that the "trickle down" effect of increasing wealth among the rich helps the poor, and that education makes countries more prosperous.
Wildfires and drought in Russia are destroying wheat crops, and floods and widespread crop destruction in Pakistan are creating a massive humanitarian crisis that has left more than 1,600 dead and some 16 million homeless and hungry. John Podesta and Jake Caldwell from the Center for American Progress and argue that the United States must commit $3.5 billion to food security assistance to countries such as Niger, Mali, Chad, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, and northern Nigeria, as only $812 million has been allocated since 2009.
There is more scientific evidence that shows that human caused climate change is affecting the world as predicted. A particular variant of the periodic El Niño warmups of the tropical Pacific Ocean is becoming more frequent and stronger as show in a study published by scientist from NASA and NOAA. This provides more evidence that the climate system is being changed by the buildup of greenhouse gases.
While combat troops have left Iraq, the United States has left something behind besides the world’s largest embassy. More than $5 billion was wasted in Iraq on unneeded construction projects. The projects included a $40 million empty prison in the desert north of Baghdad, a $165 million empty and unfinished children's hospital, and a $100 million waste water treatment system in Fallujah where there is still sewage in the streets.
The Empathic Civilization
Wildfires and drought in Russia are destroying wheat crops, and floods and widespread crop destruction in Pakistan are creating a massive humanitarian crisis that has left more than 1,600 dead and some 16 million homeless and hungry. John Podesta and Jake Caldwell from the Center for American Progress and argue that the United States must commit $3.5 billion to food security assistance to countries such as Niger, Mali, Chad, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, and northern Nigeria, as only $812 million has been allocated since 2009.
There is more scientific evidence that shows that human caused climate change is affecting the world as predicted. A particular variant of the periodic El Niño warmups of the tropical Pacific Ocean is becoming more frequent and stronger as show in a study published by scientist from NASA and NOAA. This provides more evidence that the climate system is being changed by the buildup of greenhouse gases.
While combat troops have left Iraq, the United States has left something behind besides the world’s largest embassy. More than $5 billion was wasted in Iraq on unneeded construction projects. The projects included a $40 million empty prison in the desert north of Baghdad, a $165 million empty and unfinished children's hospital, and a $100 million waste water treatment system in Fallujah where there is still sewage in the streets.
The Empathic Civilization
Texas Progressive Alliance Roundup - August 30, 2010
The Texas Progressive Alliance sure hopes that Harris County has a disaster recovery plan for the loss of its voting machines as it brings you this week's blog roundup.
Off the Kuff had three more interviews this week, with State Reps. Armando Walle, Ellen Cohen, and Kristi Thibaut.
Meet Jeff "The Trucker" Evans, an unemployed 49-year-old whose unemployment benefits were restored by Congressional Democrats after a Republican filibuster caused the payments to temporarily cease. Eye On Williamson explains how misdirected Tea Party anger causes Jeff the Trucker to vote against his economic best interest.
John Cornyn, known as a rapist enabler, decides to waffle on 14th amendment to the constitution. CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme is certain that Cornyn doesn't care about civil rights - just his fat a**.
Over at TexasKaos, lightseeker summaries the latest scandals at TYC. The more things change over there, the more they remain the same, sadly.... Check it out : Texas Youth Commission Abuses Make the News Again.
Neil at Texas Liberal attended press conferences held by both Houston Votes and by a local so-called Tea Party group, as a possible pattern of harassment and intimidation against likely Democratic voters in Harris County may be at work. Also, Neil announced that he will now also be blogging at The Daily Hurricane as well as at Texas Liberal. Neil is also a featured politics reader-blogger at the Houston Chronicle.
WhosPlayin reports that the local school district sent a letter to the Attorney General's office requesting exemption from release on the grounds that some personal expenses on district credit cards were too embarrassing to release.
The warehouse where election machines are stored erupted in flames last Friday morning, and PDiddie at Brains and Eggs had the early line on what it means for Houston and the surrounding area, which represent 15% of the statewide vote tally. Coupled with the histrionics of Leo Vasquez vis-a-vis Houston Votes, it's going to be a real lively election season (and that's before a single race gets mentioned).
Friday, August 27, 2010
Week in Headlines
International News
Pakistan Schools Cross Extremism Out Of Textbooks
Foreign Policy
CIA Sees Increased Threat in Yemen
War & Peace
Afghanistan Orders Phaseout of All Private Security Companies
Veterans Issues
Military Suicide Prevention Efforts Inadequate
Economy
New Weekly Jobless Claims Drop 31,000
Poverty
Soaring Teen Unemployment Could Have Lifetime Effects
Health Care
More Than a Quarter of Prescription Takers Cut Corners to Save Money
Education
Neoliberalism and the Academic-Industrial Complex
Environment
Recovery Act Funds Electric Car Batteries, Renewable Energy, Genome Scans
Religion
For Mosques, ‘Anywhere But There’ Echoes Far Beyond Ground Zero
Immigration
Arizona Immigrants Create New Model of Organizing
Human Rights
Hunger-Striking Guantanamo Detainees Force-Fed During Ramadan
Reproductive Rights
Virginia to Impose Tougher Abortion Clinic Oversight
Women’s Issues
UN Knew of Rebels in Area of Congo Rapes
GLBT Issues
Hidden Gay Cadets Put in Spotlight at West Point
Race & Racism
Racial Patterns Are Found in Recent School Budget Elections
From the Blogs
Burnt Orange Report:
Editorials From Across the State Say Rick Perry Should Debate
Eye on Williamson:
Democratic Party Chairman at Odds With Other Party Leaders
Latina Lista:
Is political rhetoric fueling attacks on Latino immigrants?
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Local News: Bryan City Council Fires City Manager
Bryan, City Manager Watkins to Part Ways
By Cassie Smith
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The Bryan City Council voted Wednesday night to work toward a separation agreement with City Manager David Watkins, but council members offered no explanation for their unanimous decision.
Councilman Paul Madison, who has been a supporter of Watkins, was not at the meeting for the vote because of illness.
Watkins, who will leave after four years as the city's top administrator, wasn't at the meeting and heard about the council's vote from an Eagle reporter.
"I serve at the will and pleasure of the council. Whatever they do, I have to abide by that," he said, declining to comment further.
Three council members reached by phone after the meeting declined to explain their vote and referred questions to Mayor Jason Bienski.
The mayor said Watkins wasn't being fired. Once terms of the separation agreement were finalized, he said, the details would be made public, he said.
"We'll be in discussions with David Watkins and his attorney immediately to try and find resolution to this situation," Bienski said.
He said he didn't know how long it would take but hoped it could be finalized by the end of the week.
"We do hope to bring resolution and conclusion to this as soon as possible for the benefit of the city of Bryan," he said.
Deputy City Manager Hugh Walker will serve as acting city manager, and the council will consider appointing an interim city manager when the separation agreement with Watkins is finalized, Bienski said.
"We'll cross one bridge at a time," he said.
Bienski said the city attorney had advised council members not to discuss the matter.
When asked what the problem had been with Watkins, Bienski said, "I didn't say there were problems with David. ... It's hard to say anything until after the thing is negotiated."
Bienski has said for weeks that repeated City Council executive sessions pertaining to the city manager's employment contract did not represent a lack of confidence in Watkins.
The City Council has met in closed session for more than 30 hours in recent weeks, with Watkins' employment contract always on the agenda. Wednesday's executive session from 3 to 5 p.m. did not include discussion of Watkins, Bienski said. A discussion that convened at 8 p.m. and lasted about 40 minutes was entirely about Watkins, he said.
As has been the practice since Bienski became mayor in May, city officials played a radio outside the closed door of the City Hall meeting room to prevent reporters from hearing the conversation. Wednesday night's meeting also included a barrier preventing anyone from coming near the room.
Watkins hasn't been at work since early last week after a closed-door meeting with Bienski. He showed up briefly at City Hall on Tuesday with his attorney and wife, but did not attend any of the council's meetings.
Mayor Pro Tem Ann Horton said Wednesday night that Bienski had been appointed to speak on behalf of the other council members, and she refused further comment.
Councilman Chuck Konderla said essentially the same thing.
"We as a council have asked the mayor to be the spokesperson on this, and I really don't have a comment," Konderla said.
Councilman Richard Cortez said he was not allowed to talk about the issue because Bienski had directed him to refer "anything and everything" to him.
"You'll find out about it next week," Cortez said.
Council members Mike Southerland, Art Hughes and Madison did not return phone calls after the meeting.
Madison and Cortez had recently voiced support of Watkins.
"I would think, and I would hope, that anything that the City Council does would be done in light," Madison said last week.
Hughes said in early August that some things regarding Watkins' contract haven't been done well -- including his annual evaluations.
"I know the reviews haven't been very comprehensive, and so I think that's probably a mistake. Any time we review a city official, I think it needs to be a comprehensive review so he knows precisely where we feel he's lacking and knows what we believe he does well," he said early this month.
Watkins has received "excellent" ratings on his past three performance evaluations. He makes $165,000 a year with an annual $7,800 vehicle allowance.
The eight-page contract signed in 2006 when he was hired calls for him to receive a year's salary and car allowance, accrued vacation and sick leave, insurance premiums for a year and conversion of life insurance to an individual policy if he's terminated -- which Bienski said wasn't the case here.
Some outside the City Council believe that the council's displeasure with Watkins was because of his persistence in obtaining financial information from the city's electric utility.
Until last month, Bryan Texas Utilities had been the only city department not to share its complete budget -- including employee salaries and bonuses -- with the city manager, who said the information was needed to properly draft a city budget proposal.
Discussion of Watkins' employment contract did not show up on executive session council agendas until the dispute with BTU General Manager Dan Wilkerson about the utility's budget information became public.
Bienski has said the repeated executive session discussions involving Watkins had nothing to do with the struggle between the city manager and BTU.
Last week, Bienski said in a WTAW radio interview that his closed-door meeting with Watkins during a recess of an executive session was nothing unusual.
"But I often meet with staff, often meet with our city manager. This was not part of the City Council meeting today. We were actually in recess at that point, wasn't part of the executive session. It was just a meeting between the city manager and the mayor," Bienski said.
Bienski said the two were simply discussing "city business."
After that meeting between the two, a city spokeswoman said Watkins had gone home "to spend some time this evening mulling things over."
Watkins hasn't received a raise in two years due to
city budget constraints. He received a 4 percent raise in 2007 after less than a year on the job. Elected officials at the time touted his personnel expertise and economic development experience.
Watkins is formerly of Auburn, Ala., and was one of more than 200 applicants for the city manager position in 2006. He came to the job with more than 30 years of municipal government experience, including 19 years as manager of Lenexa, Kan. He replaced Mary Kaye Moore, who retired in early 2006.
He formerly was a finalist for assistant city manager posts in College Station, Arlington and McKinney.
Published on Thursday, August 26, 2010
By Cassie Smith
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The Bryan City Council voted Wednesday night to work toward a separation agreement with City Manager David Watkins, but council members offered no explanation for their unanimous decision.
Councilman Paul Madison, who has been a supporter of Watkins, was not at the meeting for the vote because of illness.
Watkins, who will leave after four years as the city's top administrator, wasn't at the meeting and heard about the council's vote from an Eagle reporter.
"I serve at the will and pleasure of the council. Whatever they do, I have to abide by that," he said, declining to comment further.
Three council members reached by phone after the meeting declined to explain their vote and referred questions to Mayor Jason Bienski.
The mayor said Watkins wasn't being fired. Once terms of the separation agreement were finalized, he said, the details would be made public, he said.
"We'll be in discussions with David Watkins and his attorney immediately to try and find resolution to this situation," Bienski said.
He said he didn't know how long it would take but hoped it could be finalized by the end of the week.
"We do hope to bring resolution and conclusion to this as soon as possible for the benefit of the city of Bryan," he said.
Deputy City Manager Hugh Walker will serve as acting city manager, and the council will consider appointing an interim city manager when the separation agreement with Watkins is finalized, Bienski said.
"We'll cross one bridge at a time," he said.
Bienski said the city attorney had advised council members not to discuss the matter.
When asked what the problem had been with Watkins, Bienski said, "I didn't say there were problems with David. ... It's hard to say anything until after the thing is negotiated."
Bienski has said for weeks that repeated City Council executive sessions pertaining to the city manager's employment contract did not represent a lack of confidence in Watkins.
The City Council has met in closed session for more than 30 hours in recent weeks, with Watkins' employment contract always on the agenda. Wednesday's executive session from 3 to 5 p.m. did not include discussion of Watkins, Bienski said. A discussion that convened at 8 p.m. and lasted about 40 minutes was entirely about Watkins, he said.
As has been the practice since Bienski became mayor in May, city officials played a radio outside the closed door of the City Hall meeting room to prevent reporters from hearing the conversation. Wednesday night's meeting also included a barrier preventing anyone from coming near the room.
Watkins hasn't been at work since early last week after a closed-door meeting with Bienski. He showed up briefly at City Hall on Tuesday with his attorney and wife, but did not attend any of the council's meetings.
Mayor Pro Tem Ann Horton said Wednesday night that Bienski had been appointed to speak on behalf of the other council members, and she refused further comment.
Councilman Chuck Konderla said essentially the same thing.
"We as a council have asked the mayor to be the spokesperson on this, and I really don't have a comment," Konderla said.
Councilman Richard Cortez said he was not allowed to talk about the issue because Bienski had directed him to refer "anything and everything" to him.
"You'll find out about it next week," Cortez said.
Council members Mike Southerland, Art Hughes and Madison did not return phone calls after the meeting.
Madison and Cortez had recently voiced support of Watkins.
"I would think, and I would hope, that anything that the City Council does would be done in light," Madison said last week.
Hughes said in early August that some things regarding Watkins' contract haven't been done well -- including his annual evaluations.
"I know the reviews haven't been very comprehensive, and so I think that's probably a mistake. Any time we review a city official, I think it needs to be a comprehensive review so he knows precisely where we feel he's lacking and knows what we believe he does well," he said early this month.
Watkins has received "excellent" ratings on his past three performance evaluations. He makes $165,000 a year with an annual $7,800 vehicle allowance.
The eight-page contract signed in 2006 when he was hired calls for him to receive a year's salary and car allowance, accrued vacation and sick leave, insurance premiums for a year and conversion of life insurance to an individual policy if he's terminated -- which Bienski said wasn't the case here.
Some outside the City Council believe that the council's displeasure with Watkins was because of his persistence in obtaining financial information from the city's electric utility.
Until last month, Bryan Texas Utilities had been the only city department not to share its complete budget -- including employee salaries and bonuses -- with the city manager, who said the information was needed to properly draft a city budget proposal.
Discussion of Watkins' employment contract did not show up on executive session council agendas until the dispute with BTU General Manager Dan Wilkerson about the utility's budget information became public.
Bienski has said the repeated executive session discussions involving Watkins had nothing to do with the struggle between the city manager and BTU.
Last week, Bienski said in a WTAW radio interview that his closed-door meeting with Watkins during a recess of an executive session was nothing unusual.
"But I often meet with staff, often meet with our city manager. This was not part of the City Council meeting today. We were actually in recess at that point, wasn't part of the executive session. It was just a meeting between the city manager and the mayor," Bienski said.
Bienski said the two were simply discussing "city business."
After that meeting between the two, a city spokeswoman said Watkins had gone home "to spend some time this evening mulling things over."
Watkins hasn't received a raise in two years due to
city budget constraints. He received a 4 percent raise in 2007 after less than a year on the job. Elected officials at the time touted his personnel expertise and economic development experience.
Watkins is formerly of Auburn, Ala., and was one of more than 200 applicants for the city manager position in 2006. He came to the job with more than 30 years of municipal government experience, including 19 years as manager of Lenexa, Kan. He replaced Mary Kaye Moore, who retired in early 2006.
He formerly was a finalist for assistant city manager posts in College Station, Arlington and McKinney.
Published on Thursday, August 26, 2010
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tonight on Biased Transmission
This week on Biased Transmission our studio guest is Sheri Allen-Wright, a nurse and prominent local activist. She along with her deceased husband Flynn several founded the local chapter of the Green Party, in addition she is on the board of the Brazos Valley Peace Watch. We'll be discussing the nurse's union, which is spreading in this "Right to Work" state, the Green Party attitude on corporate personhood, and single payer health care.
Listen to Biased Transmission every Wednesday on 89.1FM KEOS College Station-Bryan from 6-7pm, to hear Teddy Wilson, Michael Alvard, Danny Yeager, and Ann Preston. If you have a question or comment you can post it here, or call the KEOS Bell Studios: 979-779-5367.
Biased Transmission on Facebook
Biased Transmission on LiveStream
Biased Transmission Online Archive of Shows
Local News: Council Continues Debate Over Embattled Bryan City Manager
Watkins' Job Still Up in the Air
By Cassie Smith
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The Bryan City Council has spent more than 27 hours -- including 41/2 on Tuesday -- in the past two months behind closed doors discussing the employment of its highest-ranking official: City Manager David Watkins.
Council members recessed their executive session meeting just before 10 p.m. Tuesday without making an announcement and will reconvene at 3 p.m. Wednesday to continue discussing Watkins' employment contract.
Mayor Jason Bienski said the council didn't complete discussions of all the items on the executive session agenda and, after meeting since 1:30 p.m., members were feeling tired.
Tuesday night was the first time in recent months that the duties and responsibilities of the city's internal auditor were included in discussions during the council's executive session.
Bienski said all of the council's five appointees will appear on the executive session over the next few months as the elected officials prepare for their evaluations.
"We hope to be through with the evaluation process of the city manager in the near future, and we'll continue then talking with the city auditor and other appointed directors over the next 60 to 90 days," Bienski said.
Elected officials have said that matters discussed in executive session cannot be revealed to the public unless a vote is made and that matters pertaining to the city manager are personnel-related.
The executive session agenda also included discussions over Bryan Texas Utilities competitive matters, consulting with an attorney regarding nursing homes and personal care facilities, loans, the city contract with the Brazos Animal Shelter and economic development negotiations.
Watkins, who hasn't been at work since early last week after meeting in a closed-door session with Bienski, showed up at City Hall for a few hours Tuesday with his wife and attorney. The three met briefly in Watkins' office behind closed doors. Watkins did not attend the council's workshop or regular meeting.
If the City Council dismisses the city manager as expected, members will not be obligated to give a reason, but Watkins' contract is specific to the benefits he will receive upon termination.
According to the eight-page contract signed in 2006, Watkins will receive one-year salary and car allowance, all accrued vacation and sick leave, insurance premiums for a year and conversion of life insurance to an individual policy.
Watkins makes $165,000 a year and receives an annual $7,800 vehicle allowance.
He hasn't received a raise in two years due to city budget constraints. He received a 4 percent raise in 2007 after serving less than a year when elected officials touted his personnel expertise and economic development negotiations.
The only public disagreement involving Watkins was with Bryan Texas Utilities General Manager Dan Wilkerson and the BTU board of directors over the city-owned utility's financial records.
The City Council eventually sided with Watkins in the dispute and ordered BTU to hand over the documents.
Bienski has said the repeated executive session agenda item involving Watkins has nothing to do with the BTU dispute.
Published Wednesday, August 25, 2010
By Cassie Smith
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The Bryan City Council has spent more than 27 hours -- including 41/2 on Tuesday -- in the past two months behind closed doors discussing the employment of its highest-ranking official: City Manager David Watkins.
Council members recessed their executive session meeting just before 10 p.m. Tuesday without making an announcement and will reconvene at 3 p.m. Wednesday to continue discussing Watkins' employment contract.
Mayor Jason Bienski said the council didn't complete discussions of all the items on the executive session agenda and, after meeting since 1:30 p.m., members were feeling tired.
Tuesday night was the first time in recent months that the duties and responsibilities of the city's internal auditor were included in discussions during the council's executive session.
Bienski said all of the council's five appointees will appear on the executive session over the next few months as the elected officials prepare for their evaluations.
"We hope to be through with the evaluation process of the city manager in the near future, and we'll continue then talking with the city auditor and other appointed directors over the next 60 to 90 days," Bienski said.
Elected officials have said that matters discussed in executive session cannot be revealed to the public unless a vote is made and that matters pertaining to the city manager are personnel-related.
The executive session agenda also included discussions over Bryan Texas Utilities competitive matters, consulting with an attorney regarding nursing homes and personal care facilities, loans, the city contract with the Brazos Animal Shelter and economic development negotiations.
Watkins, who hasn't been at work since early last week after meeting in a closed-door session with Bienski, showed up at City Hall for a few hours Tuesday with his wife and attorney. The three met briefly in Watkins' office behind closed doors. Watkins did not attend the council's workshop or regular meeting.
If the City Council dismisses the city manager as expected, members will not be obligated to give a reason, but Watkins' contract is specific to the benefits he will receive upon termination.
According to the eight-page contract signed in 2006, Watkins will receive one-year salary and car allowance, all accrued vacation and sick leave, insurance premiums for a year and conversion of life insurance to an individual policy.
Watkins makes $165,000 a year and receives an annual $7,800 vehicle allowance.
He hasn't received a raise in two years due to city budget constraints. He received a 4 percent raise in 2007 after serving less than a year when elected officials touted his personnel expertise and economic development negotiations.
The only public disagreement involving Watkins was with Bryan Texas Utilities General Manager Dan Wilkerson and the BTU board of directors over the city-owned utility's financial records.
The City Council eventually sided with Watkins in the dispute and ordered BTU to hand over the documents.
Bienski has said the repeated executive session agenda item involving Watkins has nothing to do with the BTU dispute.
Published Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Campaign for TX-17 Centers Around Politics Not Issues
It’s been a long hot summer in the Brazos Valley, and the air has been heated by the weather and the politics. The campaign for Congressional District 17 has been heated since the primaries ended, and over the course of the summer the two campaigns have traded heated words. However, most of the campaign has been exactly that: hot air. The campaign has centered around politics, and not issues. While the Bill Flores campaign has focused on associating Congressman Chet Edwards with the Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats and the policies they have instituted that are opposed by a significant portion of the predominately conservative Congressional District 17, the Edwards campaign has focused on painting Flores has a Republican insider and who is attempting to use his personal wealth accumulated in the oil industry to buy the election.
In June the Bryan-College Station Eagle reported on the campaigns sparing over federal loan guarantees for a nuclear power plant in the northern part of the district, and over Edward’s congressional voting record and Flores’ election voting record. Recently the campaigns did engage in some debate over policy. According to an article in the Eagle, while touting his support for veterans Edwards criticized Flores support for allowing privatization of the health care system for veterans, while Flores said that his statements where mischaracterized and that he supports giving veterans more choice in their health care.
The campaigns have spent a considerable amount of time disparaging the other campaign through press releases, and few press releases have been dedicated to addressing issues or proposing specific public policy. According to the Flores campaign web site, since the general election campaign has begun the Flores campaign has issued 28 press releases. Those press releases included 14 specific criticisms of Edwards, three criticisms of the Obama Administration, three about endorsements, two about campaign fundraising, two where campaign announcements, two where about national issues, one was about district specific issues, and one was about public opinion polling numbers. According to the Edwards campaign web site, the campaign has issued 12 press releases. Among those press releases six where specific criticisms of Flores, two where specific to issues within the district, two where campaign announcements, one was about campaign fundraising, and one was about endorsements.
Over the course of the next two months Left of College Station is going to breakdown the issues, and drill down into what the positions of the candidates are on all of the major issues. From foreign policy to the domestic policy, from immigration to health care, and from energy to the economy; I will break down where the two candidates stand on all of the issues. Also, I will take a look at voting records, issue group ratings, and campaign finance. Beginning next week I will analyze a new issue every week, and the week of the election I post an overview of the two candidates. While Flores would like to make this election about the Obama Administration, and Edwards would like to make this election about Flores, Left of College Station is going to make this election about the issues.
In June the Bryan-College Station Eagle reported on the campaigns sparing over federal loan guarantees for a nuclear power plant in the northern part of the district, and over Edward’s congressional voting record and Flores’ election voting record. Recently the campaigns did engage in some debate over policy. According to an article in the Eagle, while touting his support for veterans Edwards criticized Flores support for allowing privatization of the health care system for veterans, while Flores said that his statements where mischaracterized and that he supports giving veterans more choice in their health care.
The campaigns have spent a considerable amount of time disparaging the other campaign through press releases, and few press releases have been dedicated to addressing issues or proposing specific public policy. According to the Flores campaign web site, since the general election campaign has begun the Flores campaign has issued 28 press releases. Those press releases included 14 specific criticisms of Edwards, three criticisms of the Obama Administration, three about endorsements, two about campaign fundraising, two where campaign announcements, two where about national issues, one was about district specific issues, and one was about public opinion polling numbers. According to the Edwards campaign web site, the campaign has issued 12 press releases. Among those press releases six where specific criticisms of Flores, two where specific to issues within the district, two where campaign announcements, one was about campaign fundraising, and one was about endorsements.
Over the course of the next two months Left of College Station is going to breakdown the issues, and drill down into what the positions of the candidates are on all of the major issues. From foreign policy to the domestic policy, from immigration to health care, and from energy to the economy; I will break down where the two candidates stand on all of the issues. Also, I will take a look at voting records, issue group ratings, and campaign finance. Beginning next week I will analyze a new issue every week, and the week of the election I post an overview of the two candidates. While Flores would like to make this election about the Obama Administration, and Edwards would like to make this election about Flores, Left of College Station is going to make this election about the issues.
Local News: Congressman Edwards Courts Veterans Support
Edwards Appeals to Vets for Support at Waco Campaign Stop
By Regina Dennis (Tribune-Herald staff writer)
From the Waco Tribune-Herald
U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, appealed Monday for the support of a demographic he is well-acquainted with: Central Texas veterans.
Edwards spoke to nearly 75 veterans and supporters at a “Vets for Chet” rally at his Waco campaign headquarters, touting his record in improving benefits and health care access to veterans.
Edwards, chairman of the House appropriations subcommittee on veterans affairs and military construction, pledged to continue working for the veterans in the district and across the nation if he is re-elected in November.
“I believe we have a moral obligation to keep our promises to those that kept their promises to fight for our country,” Edwards said.
“There is yet so much work to be done. I’m less focused on looking back than looking forward to making sure that our veterans and troops receive the best possible care.”
The hourlong event also featured speeches from former VA Secretary Anthony Principi, former Fort Hood commander retired Army Lt. Gen. Pete Taylor and former Assistant Secretary of Defense Dr. Sam Casscells.
The event marked Principi’s first time back in Waco since reversing the decision to close the Waco VA hospital in 2003.
Edwards and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, have been credited with spearheading local efforts to keep the facility open.
Edwards took the three former officials on a brief tour of the hospital before the campaign event.
“It looks great,” Principi said of the campus. “I love seeing the fences around it because it means there is construction going on to enhance it. They’re utilizing the buildings and getting care to our veterans, and it makes me feel that this was the right decision to make for the facility.”
Casscells praised Edwards for working to secure $3 billion to upgrade or rebuild military hospitals, including funding a new campus for Fort Hood.
“The bar has been raised, and it sets a standard of care that the Obama administration and Congress will have to continue into the future,” Casscells said.
Edwards also used the event to again denounce a proposal by opponent Bill Flores to allow veterans private-sector options for treatment.
Edwards held a press conference last week pouncing on remarks Flores made in a January debate suggesting veterans should be allowed the option to seek treatment in the private health care system with the government footing the bill.
“I’ve never heard of a single worse idea that would decrease the level of health care given to our veterans and troops and cripple the veterans health care system,” Edwards said Monday.
Flores told the Tribune-Herald last week he supported the plan after several veterans approached him with the idea. He added, “Only a career politician like Chet Edwards would think that giving veterans options is a bad thing.”
Flores campaign spokesman Matt Mackowiak said Monday he had no additional comment.
Flores issued a press release Monday morning tying Edwards to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is headlining fundraisers in Dallas and Houston this week to benefit the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
The release, which raises Pelosi’s endorsement of Edwards for vice president during the 2008 election, announces a “Fire Pelosi money bomb” to raise $17,000 for Flores’ campaign by midnight Wednesday.
“Speaker Pelosi has ignored the will of the American people in pushing bailouts, massive government growth, out-of-control spending, a failed $862 billion spending bill and a cap- and-trade bill,” Flores said in the release.
“Today we are launching a money bomb to help us win this campaign by sending Edwards and Pelosi a clear message: You’re fired!”
Edwards dismissed the Flores fundraiser as an attempt to sway conversation away from the discussion on the veterans health care system.
“If I had made a proposal that was so wildly unpopular with veterans and would cripple the veterans health care system, I would want to change the subject too,” Edwards said.
The Waco stop was sandwiched between other events tours in College Station and Burleson. Edwards will return to McLennan County on Wednesday and Friday for stops in West, McGregor and Mart.
While Edwards would not say whether he plans to hold any town hall meetings during the remainder of his break from Congress, he intends to hold various campaign events in the district over the coming weeks.
Edwards also agreed to participate in a publicly broadcast debate Oct. 24 sponsored by the Tribune-Herald and KXXV-Channel 25 at the TV station’s studio.
Mackowiak said the Flores campaign is still reviewing the final rules for the debate but looks forward to participating in the event.
Published on Tuesday, August 24, 2010
By Regina Dennis (Tribune-Herald staff writer)
From the Waco Tribune-Herald
U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards, D-Waco, appealed Monday for the support of a demographic he is well-acquainted with: Central Texas veterans.
Edwards spoke to nearly 75 veterans and supporters at a “Vets for Chet” rally at his Waco campaign headquarters, touting his record in improving benefits and health care access to veterans.
Edwards, chairman of the House appropriations subcommittee on veterans affairs and military construction, pledged to continue working for the veterans in the district and across the nation if he is re-elected in November.
“I believe we have a moral obligation to keep our promises to those that kept their promises to fight for our country,” Edwards said.
“There is yet so much work to be done. I’m less focused on looking back than looking forward to making sure that our veterans and troops receive the best possible care.”
The hourlong event also featured speeches from former VA Secretary Anthony Principi, former Fort Hood commander retired Army Lt. Gen. Pete Taylor and former Assistant Secretary of Defense Dr. Sam Casscells.
The event marked Principi’s first time back in Waco since reversing the decision to close the Waco VA hospital in 2003.
Edwards and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, have been credited with spearheading local efforts to keep the facility open.
Edwards took the three former officials on a brief tour of the hospital before the campaign event.
“It looks great,” Principi said of the campus. “I love seeing the fences around it because it means there is construction going on to enhance it. They’re utilizing the buildings and getting care to our veterans, and it makes me feel that this was the right decision to make for the facility.”
Casscells praised Edwards for working to secure $3 billion to upgrade or rebuild military hospitals, including funding a new campus for Fort Hood.
“The bar has been raised, and it sets a standard of care that the Obama administration and Congress will have to continue into the future,” Casscells said.
Edwards also used the event to again denounce a proposal by opponent Bill Flores to allow veterans private-sector options for treatment.
Edwards held a press conference last week pouncing on remarks Flores made in a January debate suggesting veterans should be allowed the option to seek treatment in the private health care system with the government footing the bill.
“I’ve never heard of a single worse idea that would decrease the level of health care given to our veterans and troops and cripple the veterans health care system,” Edwards said Monday.
Flores told the Tribune-Herald last week he supported the plan after several veterans approached him with the idea. He added, “Only a career politician like Chet Edwards would think that giving veterans options is a bad thing.”
Flores campaign spokesman Matt Mackowiak said Monday he had no additional comment.
Flores issued a press release Monday morning tying Edwards to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who is headlining fundraisers in Dallas and Houston this week to benefit the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
The release, which raises Pelosi’s endorsement of Edwards for vice president during the 2008 election, announces a “Fire Pelosi money bomb” to raise $17,000 for Flores’ campaign by midnight Wednesday.
“Speaker Pelosi has ignored the will of the American people in pushing bailouts, massive government growth, out-of-control spending, a failed $862 billion spending bill and a cap- and-trade bill,” Flores said in the release.
“Today we are launching a money bomb to help us win this campaign by sending Edwards and Pelosi a clear message: You’re fired!”
Edwards dismissed the Flores fundraiser as an attempt to sway conversation away from the discussion on the veterans health care system.
“If I had made a proposal that was so wildly unpopular with veterans and would cripple the veterans health care system, I would want to change the subject too,” Edwards said.
The Waco stop was sandwiched between other events tours in College Station and Burleson. Edwards will return to McLennan County on Wednesday and Friday for stops in West, McGregor and Mart.
While Edwards would not say whether he plans to hold any town hall meetings during the remainder of his break from Congress, he intends to hold various campaign events in the district over the coming weeks.
Edwards also agreed to participate in a publicly broadcast debate Oct. 24 sponsored by the Tribune-Herald and KXXV-Channel 25 at the TV station’s studio.
Mackowiak said the Flores campaign is still reviewing the final rules for the debate but looks forward to participating in the event.
Published on Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
Texas Progressive Alliance Roundup - August 23, 2010
The Texas Progressive Alliance welcomes everyone back to school as it brings you the best of the blogs for the week.
This week, Off the Kuff did three interviews with State House candidates - Joe Montemayor, Rick Molina, and Silvia Mintz.
Bay Area Houston wonders why the Texas Federation of Pecker Heads have have endorsed Rick Perry.
CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme calls out all republicans clamoring for 'small government'. Why do republicans want more tainted food and another BP disaster?
Libby Shaw is fed up with the Party O' No. She gives us chapter and verse as to why in Bereft of Solutions and Ideas, The GOP Gins Up Controversy. Check it out at TexasKaos.
WhosPlayin posted documents obtained by the Hank Gilbert campaign, showing alarming gaps in Texas food safety, and a Department of Agriculture that seems more concerned about appearances than anything else. On the lighter side, local governments are struggling for cash and seeking corporate sponsorships on public facilities. Hopefully someone will pull the plug on this deal.
PDiddie posts about the hysteria and hyperbole surrounding the Manhattan Islamic center in Mosquerade, at Brains and Eggs.
Neil at Texas Liberal offered up a picture of the excellent new wheelchair ramp on the beach in Galveston. This ramp was paid for with our taxpayer dollars and was built by government, for the good of all people of Galveston and for the good of all people who visit Galveston. Without government, we would live like barbarians to an even far greater extent than we do at current.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Texas Progressive Alliance - August 9, 2010
The Texas Progressive Alliance is pretty sure its invitation to President Obama's events in Texas were lost in the mail, and we will keep saying that to ourselves as we bring you this week's blog highlights.
Off the Kuff continued his interview series with Congressional candidate Ted Ankrum and State Representatives Senfronia Thompson and Garnet Coleman.
Staggering levels of formaldehyde in Barnett Shale air and the attempted cover up, breaking news by TXsharon on Bluedaze: DRILLING REFORM FOR TEXAS.
This week on Left of College Station, Teddy reports that the Republican electoral strategy is to conceal their policy agenda, and notes that Congress should do nothing because the Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire. Left of College Station also covers SMUT and the says Texas Dominates the Recession at a price.
CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wonders why republicans like John Cornyn want to take us back to pre-Civil War days when blacks were not full citizens of the United States.
What part time governor is also a real estate genius or maybe instead a sleazy grafter? Read Libby Shaw's take over at TexasKaos in Gov Rick Perry Stuffed His Pockets with $500K from Murky Land Deal.
NatWu at Three Wise Men says that however bad that economic news seems these days, things are actually much worse.
WhosPlayin stepped in it this week by pointing out how the local school district is giving an across-the-board raise to all administrative personnel, many of whom are already highly paid, while some highly-experienced teachers could go without raises this year.
Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has been skewing the child support statistics to his favor, reports PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.
On a day trip to Galveston, Neil at Texas Liberal took a picture of a portion of the Seawall mural that showed workers in hazmat suits cleaning up muck from the sea. While Galveston is a great place to spend a day and spend a few dollars, the folks there are long-acquainted with toxic spills.
Local News: City Manager Once Again Focus of Bryan City Council Meeting
Talks May Focus on Bryan's City Manager
By Cassie Smith
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The Bryan City Council is expected Tuesday to again discuss behind closed doors the city manager's responsibilities and performance, which have been listed on the agendas for each of the last six meetings.
Some council members said a topic's presence on an agenda doesn't always guarantee that they have enough time to talk about it. Even so, such a personnel issue typically comes up just once a year -- during the city manager's annual evaluation, which would be November in the case of David Watkins.
The rareness of continuing to itemize it every other week for debate or consideration has prompted many inside and out of city hall to question what's behind it, whether Watkins' job is at risk and what's taking so long to resolve, especially since it continues to fan rumors.
Some have speculated that the issue is tied directly to Watkins raising red flags about Bryan's city-owned public utility and how he, along with the council, wasn't given access to financial information until he repeatedly pushed for it.
His performance evaluations, obtained by The Eagle through an open records request earlier this year, show that each of the past three years resulted in excellent reviews from the council, which is in charge of overseeing the city manager. The uncommon executive session discussions about Watkins' responsibilities and performance didn't hit the agenda until Watkins started pointing out publicly that BTU General Manager Dan Wilkerson refused to hand over any salary information or budget breakdowns.
At least one councilman said Watkins should have taken his questions about BTU's financials first through the City Council, which oversees the BTU board, and, in turn, supervises Wilkerson. The city charter, however, states that the city manager is the chief financial officer. BTU is the only city department that doesn't routinely share salary and other money matters with the city manager. A council-created ordinance approved more than a decade ago allows for such details to be kept from the public, but doesn't stipulate that the city's CFO couldn't view it. The ordinance was meant to protect BTU from competitive matters because it was expected to opt into a program that allowed residents to pick their utility.
That was 11 years ago and the city never deregulated its utilities, just like the other 72 city-owned utility companies across Texas. That lack of moving forward has prompted local state legislators to say that the salary information needs to be made public for the sake of transparency and the issues related to it need to be re-examined. Even city leaders and BTU officials agree it doesn't make financial sense to deregulate when BTU has a monopoly on local service because residents can only buy from BTU -- they don't have a choice.
A matter of review?
Many of the council members skirted the question as to whether Watkins' job is safe. According to his contract signed in October 2006, if the majority of the council did opt to ask him to leave, they'd have to pay him a lump cash payment equal to one year of his base salary, car allowance, all accrued vacation and sick leave, as well as insurance premiums for a year and conversion of life insurance to an individual policy. The amount totals more than $157,800.
Mayor Jason Bienski said the repeat item on the agenda doesn't represent a "lack of confidence" between elected officials and Watkins; rather, he said it allows them to discuss or educate themselves further as needed. The council can only discuss issues that are listed on an agenda, according to the Texas Public Information Act.
Councilman Art Hughes, who is an ex-officio member of the BTU board, said there are certain items defined in Watkins' contract that haven't been done well -- including his annual evaluations.
"I don't think we've been as forthright as we should have in that review," he said. "I think we've just kind of ran through it. We didn't give David much feedback or have much discussion in council."
Hughes said he wouldn't discuss whether Watkins has been included in the meetings to receive direction.
"I know the reviews haven't been very comprehensive, and so I think that's probably a mistake. Any time we review a city official, I think it needs to be a comprehensive review so he knows precisely where we feel he's lacking and knows what we believe he does well," he said.
It remained unclear why the council wouldn't pick the topic back up at its regular date in November.
Councilman Richard Cortez said he's under the impression that there's a lack of confidence by some other council members about Watkins' abilities, though Cortez said he couldn't explain what those were since it was discussed in executive session.
"I've only been here two months, but I think he's doing a hell of a job," he said, adding that he appreciates the lengths Watkins has gone to in order to secure the financial information regarding BTU.
"They don't understand, that 'B' stands for Bryan. They are working for us," he said in reference to BTU.
BTU officials delivered a packet to city officials July 30 after the City Council sent a letter demanding the department hand over all its financial information. The council's vote came unanimously after almost six hours of consultation behind closed doors.
Cortez said that, during some of the executive session meetings, the council has brought in Watkins, while BTU General Manager Dan Wilkerson also has been called in to discuss the working relationship between the city and its electric utility. But the two officials have never been brought in at the same time, he said.
"I think maybe one of these days in the next couple meetings we'll have them in there together and straighten all this out," he said. "I think we're going to be able to finally fix this thing, hopefully."
Paul Madison said he couldn't discuss matters relating to executive session about Watkins' performance, but the veteran councilman said he believes Watkins is doing "a tremendous job."
Madison said Watkins always is looking out for the best interest of residents based on direction given to him by the City Council.
Mayor Pro Tem Ann Horton said the personnel issue is on the agenda for no other reason than to allow council members to become as educated as possible.
"Everything that we're talking about, especially at this time of year, is vitally important," she said, adding that the council sometimes runs out of time and isn't able to get to every issue.
Big Operation
The council is far from agreeing on who should oversee BTU -- an appointed board with little oversight or the city's chief financial officer.
Bienski said he supports the action Watkins has taken in dealing with BTU.
However, he said, he doesn't believe the BTU board should report directly to Watkins over the council. All advisory boards, committees and boards of directors should report directly to the council, he said.
"When we appoint someone, we would like them to report to us and to meet and communicate with us," he said, adding he didn't see that changing. "We appoint them. We should have communication and direct contact with them."
Horton said she wasn't sure whether BTU should be moved under the city manager's supervision. It is one of the many issues that need to be discussed between the council and the board of directors, she said.
Southerland said he doesn't think BTU should be moved under the city manager's duties because the electric utility company is a "goose with the golden egg" and needs "protection" from competitors.
"The city manager has enough to do running the city," he said, describing BTU's "pretty big and complicated operations."
He said he supports Watkins and what he's doing, but believes certain aspects would have been handed differently.
"What I wish he had done was stayed in the chain of supervision, because the ordinance says that the BTU board is under the City Council and Dan Wilkerson is under the BTU board," he said describing how Watkins should have gone through the City Council.
Southerland described it as a "cumbersome but necessary process."
Konderla said he views the city manager's position as the ultimate boss of every city department, including BTU.
"I think the city manager is the CEO of the city, and he or she should be able to talk to BTU directly," he said, adding Watkins doesn't need to go through the council. "I think the city manager definitely needs to listen to the board's direction, but the city manager at the end of the day should have the ultimate word."
Madison said he thinks the BTU board should be dissolved since deregulation isn't on the horizon. But if that can't happen, he suggested that BTU be moved under the supervision of the city manager.
"I totally agree with the idea that the city manager is doing a tremendous job in trying to ensure BTU is looking out for the citizens of Bryan," he said.
Cortez said he supports Watkins' dealings with BTU; however, the board of directors should continue to report to the City Council.
When asked why, he said: "So we can avoid any type of confrontation between them and the city manager."
Published on Sunday, August 08, 2010
By Cassie Smith
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The Bryan City Council is expected Tuesday to again discuss behind closed doors the city manager's responsibilities and performance, which have been listed on the agendas for each of the last six meetings.
Some council members said a topic's presence on an agenda doesn't always guarantee that they have enough time to talk about it. Even so, such a personnel issue typically comes up just once a year -- during the city manager's annual evaluation, which would be November in the case of David Watkins.
The rareness of continuing to itemize it every other week for debate or consideration has prompted many inside and out of city hall to question what's behind it, whether Watkins' job is at risk and what's taking so long to resolve, especially since it continues to fan rumors.
Some have speculated that the issue is tied directly to Watkins raising red flags about Bryan's city-owned public utility and how he, along with the council, wasn't given access to financial information until he repeatedly pushed for it.
His performance evaluations, obtained by The Eagle through an open records request earlier this year, show that each of the past three years resulted in excellent reviews from the council, which is in charge of overseeing the city manager. The uncommon executive session discussions about Watkins' responsibilities and performance didn't hit the agenda until Watkins started pointing out publicly that BTU General Manager Dan Wilkerson refused to hand over any salary information or budget breakdowns.
At least one councilman said Watkins should have taken his questions about BTU's financials first through the City Council, which oversees the BTU board, and, in turn, supervises Wilkerson. The city charter, however, states that the city manager is the chief financial officer. BTU is the only city department that doesn't routinely share salary and other money matters with the city manager. A council-created ordinance approved more than a decade ago allows for such details to be kept from the public, but doesn't stipulate that the city's CFO couldn't view it. The ordinance was meant to protect BTU from competitive matters because it was expected to opt into a program that allowed residents to pick their utility.
That was 11 years ago and the city never deregulated its utilities, just like the other 72 city-owned utility companies across Texas. That lack of moving forward has prompted local state legislators to say that the salary information needs to be made public for the sake of transparency and the issues related to it need to be re-examined. Even city leaders and BTU officials agree it doesn't make financial sense to deregulate when BTU has a monopoly on local service because residents can only buy from BTU -- they don't have a choice.
A matter of review?
Many of the council members skirted the question as to whether Watkins' job is safe. According to his contract signed in October 2006, if the majority of the council did opt to ask him to leave, they'd have to pay him a lump cash payment equal to one year of his base salary, car allowance, all accrued vacation and sick leave, as well as insurance premiums for a year and conversion of life insurance to an individual policy. The amount totals more than $157,800.
Mayor Jason Bienski said the repeat item on the agenda doesn't represent a "lack of confidence" between elected officials and Watkins; rather, he said it allows them to discuss or educate themselves further as needed. The council can only discuss issues that are listed on an agenda, according to the Texas Public Information Act.
Councilman Art Hughes, who is an ex-officio member of the BTU board, said there are certain items defined in Watkins' contract that haven't been done well -- including his annual evaluations.
"I don't think we've been as forthright as we should have in that review," he said. "I think we've just kind of ran through it. We didn't give David much feedback or have much discussion in council."
Hughes said he wouldn't discuss whether Watkins has been included in the meetings to receive direction.
"I know the reviews haven't been very comprehensive, and so I think that's probably a mistake. Any time we review a city official, I think it needs to be a comprehensive review so he knows precisely where we feel he's lacking and knows what we believe he does well," he said.
It remained unclear why the council wouldn't pick the topic back up at its regular date in November.
Councilman Richard Cortez said he's under the impression that there's a lack of confidence by some other council members about Watkins' abilities, though Cortez said he couldn't explain what those were since it was discussed in executive session.
"I've only been here two months, but I think he's doing a hell of a job," he said, adding that he appreciates the lengths Watkins has gone to in order to secure the financial information regarding BTU.
"They don't understand, that 'B' stands for Bryan. They are working for us," he said in reference to BTU.
BTU officials delivered a packet to city officials July 30 after the City Council sent a letter demanding the department hand over all its financial information. The council's vote came unanimously after almost six hours of consultation behind closed doors.
Cortez said that, during some of the executive session meetings, the council has brought in Watkins, while BTU General Manager Dan Wilkerson also has been called in to discuss the working relationship between the city and its electric utility. But the two officials have never been brought in at the same time, he said.
"I think maybe one of these days in the next couple meetings we'll have them in there together and straighten all this out," he said. "I think we're going to be able to finally fix this thing, hopefully."
Paul Madison said he couldn't discuss matters relating to executive session about Watkins' performance, but the veteran councilman said he believes Watkins is doing "a tremendous job."
Madison said Watkins always is looking out for the best interest of residents based on direction given to him by the City Council.
Mayor Pro Tem Ann Horton said the personnel issue is on the agenda for no other reason than to allow council members to become as educated as possible.
"Everything that we're talking about, especially at this time of year, is vitally important," she said, adding that the council sometimes runs out of time and isn't able to get to every issue.
Big Operation
The council is far from agreeing on who should oversee BTU -- an appointed board with little oversight or the city's chief financial officer.
Bienski said he supports the action Watkins has taken in dealing with BTU.
However, he said, he doesn't believe the BTU board should report directly to Watkins over the council. All advisory boards, committees and boards of directors should report directly to the council, he said.
"When we appoint someone, we would like them to report to us and to meet and communicate with us," he said, adding he didn't see that changing. "We appoint them. We should have communication and direct contact with them."
Horton said she wasn't sure whether BTU should be moved under the city manager's supervision. It is one of the many issues that need to be discussed between the council and the board of directors, she said.
Southerland said he doesn't think BTU should be moved under the city manager's duties because the electric utility company is a "goose with the golden egg" and needs "protection" from competitors.
"The city manager has enough to do running the city," he said, describing BTU's "pretty big and complicated operations."
He said he supports Watkins and what he's doing, but believes certain aspects would have been handed differently.
"What I wish he had done was stayed in the chain of supervision, because the ordinance says that the BTU board is under the City Council and Dan Wilkerson is under the BTU board," he said describing how Watkins should have gone through the City Council.
Southerland described it as a "cumbersome but necessary process."
Konderla said he views the city manager's position as the ultimate boss of every city department, including BTU.
"I think the city manager is the CEO of the city, and he or she should be able to talk to BTU directly," he said, adding Watkins doesn't need to go through the council. "I think the city manager definitely needs to listen to the board's direction, but the city manager at the end of the day should have the ultimate word."
Madison said he thinks the BTU board should be dissolved since deregulation isn't on the horizon. But if that can't happen, he suggested that BTU be moved under the supervision of the city manager.
"I totally agree with the idea that the city manager is doing a tremendous job in trying to ensure BTU is looking out for the citizens of Bryan," he said.
Cortez said he supports Watkins' dealings with BTU; however, the board of directors should continue to report to the City Council.
When asked why, he said: "So we can avoid any type of confrontation between them and the city manager."
Published on Sunday, August 08, 2010
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Thinking in Tanks: State of the Economic Recovery
This week from the think tanks, the narrative was that of an economy under stress, and attempting to recover from the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression. The report this month from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that while employment remained steady at 9.5% the private sector added only 71,000 jobs. While the employment rate is holding steady, the labor market is shrinking as more and more workers drop out of the labor force because they have been unable to find employment. What we can see from the latest reports is that while the government stimulus prevented the economy from falling into a second Great Depression, and according to a report from two leading economists without the stimulus the GDP in 2010 would be about 11.5% lower, and payroll employment would be less by some 8½ million jobs. However, despite this it is clear that the economy needs more economic stimulus and jobs programs to prevent the Great Recession to turn into the Great Depression.
According to a report from the Economic Policy Institute:
According to a report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:
Takeaways
Economic Policy Institute
According to a report from the Economic Policy Institute:
“The primary reason the unemployment rate did not rise in July is that the labor force officially shrank by 181,000 workers. Those that dropped out of labor force were prime-age workers, while the number of young workers and older workers increased. The teen (age 16-19) labor force increased by 70,000, the young adult (age 20-24) labor force increased by 17,000, the prime-age (age 25-54) labor force decreased by 325,000, and older workers (age 55+) increased by 46,000. If the 181,000 workers that made up the decline had instead remained in the labor force and were counted among the unemployed, the unemployment rate in July would have been 9.6%. This points to another ongoing issue in the labor market, the backlog of “missing workers,” that is, workers who dropped out of (or never entered) the labor force during the downturn. In the last three months, the labor force has declined by 1.2 million workers, reversing much of the 1.7 million increase in the labor force in the first four months of the year. This clearly shows how the forward momentum from earlier this year has largely evaporated.”According to a report from the Center for American Progress:
“Slow job gains and lackluster wage growth combined will limit the strength of the economic recovery moving forward. Unemployment remained at 9.5 percent in July, and over the last quarter the annualized rate of wage growth for production and nonsupervisory employees was 2.1 percent, above the annual rate of inflation of 1.1 percent as measured by the Consumer Price Index, Lackluster hiring and slow wage growth create a chicken-and-egg story: The typical U.S. family earning less than $100,000 per year derives 80 percent of their income from employment. Without a robust recovery in employment and earnings, families will be constrained in their spending, especially since due to lower home values most of us can no longer use our homes as ATMs. There appears to be little pressure building in the private sector for strong growth in future hiring. After sharply rising in late 2009, the hiring of temporary help slowed considerably early in 2010 and has been essentially flat for two months now. Average hours of production and nonsupervisory employees rose from 33.4 in June to 33.5 in July, which is where they were in May. While rising hours is encouraging, the level remains about where it was in late 2008.”
According to a report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities:
“Although job losses have bottomed out, the huge jobs losses since the recession began in December of 2007 have left nonfarm payroll employment almost 7 percent (7.7 million jobs) lower in July 2010 than it was then. The jobs deficit from this recession is much larger than those in previous recessions. The economy would have to create an average of over 300,000 jobs a month for two years just to return to the December 2007 level of employment — and even more to restore full employment, since the population and potential labor force are now larger. Most forecasters expect the economy to grow much more slowly than that, especially as the stimulus from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) winds down.”
TakeawaysEconomic Policy Institute
“With a deficit of 10.9 million jobs--a 9.5% unemployment rate--the private sector is not yet able to provide a robust recovery, and it is time for the government to do substantially more to create jobs so the backlog of unemployed workers in this country can have a desperately needed chance to get back to work.”Center for American Progress:
“With much of the employment data beginning to take an "L" shape—not getting worse but also not necessarily improving—there continues to be an important role for policymakers to spur the economy. The state aid package that passed the Senate this week is an important step forward, but Congress should consider additional steps to get people back to work, such as passing the small business bill now stalled in the Senate because of conservative filibuster threats, direct job creation, and ramping up our national service programs.”
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Visual SMUT
Thoughts on SMUT
I left the Stafford Main in Downtown Bryan on Thursday night disappointed. Not because I was disappointed in my experience, but because I was disappointed that my experience had to end. Somewhere between the slam poetry, and the pints of beer, and the talk about robots seeking truth, and the conversations with friends, and the talk about uploading your brain, we all felt connected around a single thought: ideas change everything. For most of us we learn about the world around us through the lens of whatever media we use to get our information. However, what the Subversive Manifesto for Underground Technology does is bring the world of ideas to us unfiltered. It also allows for a two way conversation. In stead of just consuming news and information, we can engage with questions and comments.
It was fitting then that SMUT began simply with spoken words by Buck Ley Hogue, who slammed some poetry to begin the evening. Then Phil Wheat, who works for Microsoft in Austin, took the stage and asked whether or not we actually own our DNA. Interestingly enough, the talk moved towards the idea of privacy in our society. Then after more spoken word from Buck, Dylan Shell, a professor at Texas A&M University, took the stage and talked about robots and the search for truth. An interesting question that was raise during Shell’s talk was whether or not we should ban prostitute robots that look like 10 year olds? After more poetry from Buck, Wheat took the stage again to talk about green technology. During his talk Wheat ask the question of if we shine a light on a road, but no one's on it, does it exist? The answer was that philosophically, maybe no, but it sure surges the power grid. The night ended with a powerful poem by Buck.
For me SMUT was refreshing. Much of my time on the blogosphere and in social media is spent in ideological debate and discussion. Create and destroy. Construct arguments for my positions, and deconstruct the arguments of others. However, during SMUT everyone who was tweeting the event was more interesting in share the ideas, and less in deconstructing the ideas that they disagreed with. While I realize that the deconstruction of ideas is not a bad thing and that healthy debate creates better ideas, it was refreshing to hear those ideas without preconceived notions of who is right and wrong. But that was just my view, and you would have a different one if you experience SMUT. And that’s kind of the point.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Week in Headlines
Media
FCC Ends Talks for Deal on Net Neutrality
Texas News
New School Ratings Erase Failure, Inflate Success
International
Mexican Drug war Deaths Approach 30,000
War & Peace
Global Treaty Banning Cluster Bombs Goes Into Force
Veterans Issues
Forced US Military Extensions to End
Poverty
Record 40 Million Americans Receive Food Stamps
Economy
Stressed States Are Forcing Workers to Retire Later
Environment
Scientists Deeply Concerned About BP Disaster's Long-Term Impact
Climate Change
High Levels of Carbon Dioxide Threaten Oyster Survival
Health Care
Regulators Lack Data on Health Risks of Most Chemicals
Civil Rights
Civil Liberties Groups Win Approval to Sue US Over Terror Target List
Immigration
Senate Approves $600 Million in Emergency Border Security Funds
Women’s Issues
Bill Seeks Action to Curb Brutality Against Women Globally
GLBT Issues
Gay Marriage Ruling Anchored in Factual Findings
Race & Racism
Recession Widened Jobs Gap Between Blacks and Whites
From the Blogs
Dos Centavos:
GOP Finds a Wedge Within the Wedge
Letters From Texas:
From the Speechwriter’s Office
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Local News: Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate Bill White Speaks at Texas A&M
White: A&M Deals Must be Reviewed
By Matthew Watkins
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill White called for an independent audit of partnerships between the Texas A&M University System and biomedical research companies on Wednesday.
He also said he would fill state boards such as the A&M Board of Regents with people who serve the state -- not campaign contributors.
Those comments alluded to recent tension at A&M over perceived meddling by incumbent Gov. Rick Perry, an Aggie graduate. The controversy was a key point of emphasis for White during his half-day visit to Brazos County.
"Our public institutions should be an instrument for public service for all customers, not a political machine serving the interest of one person's re-election goals or one wing of one party," White said, drawing cheers from more than 200 people who packed a room in the College Station Conference Center.
In addition to his stump speech in College Station, he also met for an hour with The Eagle's editorial board. He focused on all levels of education during the half-day visit to Aggieland and said that schools, along with public safety, would be his top priority as governor.
The former Houston mayor said the public deserves an investigation into deals between the state, A&M and private companies to commercialize research and create jobs. In recent years, Perry has directed millions of dollars to such partnerships and has supported the development of a biocorridor adjacent to the Texas A&M Health Science Center campus. The idea has been controversial among the A&M faculty.
White said the companies involved in the deals were in questionable financial shape and he has seen no evidence of any competitive process or due diligence in investigating alternatives. He also said that no buy-in from A&M faculty was sought.
"It looked like the use of the university to reward private companies," White said. "There has got to be an accounting for why these particular firms were chosen. This is the type of things we need to avoid."
Perry spokeswoman Catherine Frazier defended the projects.
"Bill White's accusations are simply an attempt to distract from the fact that he hasn't come up with one substantive policy initiative to keep the state moving forward," she said. "He is tearing down Texas without offering any type of vision moving forward. The economic development incentives are creating jobs and have been a crucial component in keeping Texas as one of the strongest states in the nation during these economic times."
In addition to supporting changes for A&M, White advocated expanding pre-kindergarten programs, improving vocational and technical training and increasing the affordability of a college education.
Frazier said Perry's priorities include giving tax incentives to businesses that allow employees to go back to school, expanding the Texas Virtual School Network to make education more accessible and extending the Texas Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Centers.
White's visit was the first time a candidate for governor has stumped in Bryan-College Station during the 2010 general election. Frazier said Perry expects to make several visits to the area before Election Day.
"College Station is one of his favorite places," she said.
Published Thursday, August 05, 2010
By Matthew Watkins
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill White called for an independent audit of partnerships between the Texas A&M University System and biomedical research companies on Wednesday.
He also said he would fill state boards such as the A&M Board of Regents with people who serve the state -- not campaign contributors.
Those comments alluded to recent tension at A&M over perceived meddling by incumbent Gov. Rick Perry, an Aggie graduate. The controversy was a key point of emphasis for White during his half-day visit to Brazos County.
"Our public institutions should be an instrument for public service for all customers, not a political machine serving the interest of one person's re-election goals or one wing of one party," White said, drawing cheers from more than 200 people who packed a room in the College Station Conference Center.
In addition to his stump speech in College Station, he also met for an hour with The Eagle's editorial board. He focused on all levels of education during the half-day visit to Aggieland and said that schools, along with public safety, would be his top priority as governor.
The former Houston mayor said the public deserves an investigation into deals between the state, A&M and private companies to commercialize research and create jobs. In recent years, Perry has directed millions of dollars to such partnerships and has supported the development of a biocorridor adjacent to the Texas A&M Health Science Center campus. The idea has been controversial among the A&M faculty.
White said the companies involved in the deals were in questionable financial shape and he has seen no evidence of any competitive process or due diligence in investigating alternatives. He also said that no buy-in from A&M faculty was sought.
"It looked like the use of the university to reward private companies," White said. "There has got to be an accounting for why these particular firms were chosen. This is the type of things we need to avoid."
Perry spokeswoman Catherine Frazier defended the projects.
"Bill White's accusations are simply an attempt to distract from the fact that he hasn't come up with one substantive policy initiative to keep the state moving forward," she said. "He is tearing down Texas without offering any type of vision moving forward. The economic development incentives are creating jobs and have been a crucial component in keeping Texas as one of the strongest states in the nation during these economic times."
In addition to supporting changes for A&M, White advocated expanding pre-kindergarten programs, improving vocational and technical training and increasing the affordability of a college education.
Frazier said Perry's priorities include giving tax incentives to businesses that allow employees to go back to school, expanding the Texas Virtual School Network to make education more accessible and extending the Texas Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Centers.
White's visit was the first time a candidate for governor has stumped in Bryan-College Station during the 2010 general election. Frazier said Perry expects to make several visits to the area before Election Day.
"College Station is one of his favorite places," she said.
Published Thursday, August 05, 2010
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Drinks and SMUT
Tomorrow night at the Stafford Main in Downtown Bryan, people will gather to have drinks and watch SMUT. This is not the type of gathering that you might be thinking. SMUT is an acronym for Subversive Manifesto for Underground Technology, and is the brainchild of a few local subversives: Christopher Zebo, Tracy Anne Hammond, and Cody Marx Bailey.SMUT is slam poetry for academics, it is CBGB's / 120 Minutes for ideas, it is alcohol plus intelligence equals creativity. SMUT is famous academics giving you ten minute talks that will alter your perspective on the direction of the universe. Subversive talks bring for dangerous ideas. (Technology is as technology does.) Talks will be interspersed with technology installation pieces, blooper research video reels, and art displays from local artists.
This month’s line up includes: Phil Wheat from Microsoft discussing transhumanism and green technology; Buckley Hogue a slam poet from Texas A&M University; Dr. Dylan Shell from the Department of Computer Science & Engineering at Texas A&M University discussing truth seeking devices; and Brett Moore whose discussion has not been announced.
I did not attend the inaugural SMUT event in June, so I am not exactly sure what to expect. That’s not to say I do not have expectations. Having spent evenings at bars drinking with exceptionally smart individuals has lead to ridiculous and amazing conversations. I tend to imagine SMUT as an inebriated version of TED. There are not enough opportunities as it is to engage with individuals around us and actually use this thing we call social media to be, well, social.
Tomorrow night at seven walk through the doors with five dollars in hand at the Stafford Main in Downtown Bryan, and then have a drink with some interesting people. Around eight the presenters begin their talks, and you never know what you might here. Check out the Facebook event page for any information you might want to know, and RSVP and invite your friend. Remember to Tweet tomorrow night and share your thoughts with the group, and tag your tweets with #ilovesmut. You can always follow me on Twitter at @leftofaggieland.
This Week on Biased Transmission
This week on Biased Transmission our studio guest is Brooke Wyatt, the Sexual Assault Resource Center (SARC) of the Brazos Valley Volunteer and Outreach Coordinator. Our topics of discussion will include the facts and myths about sexual assault, the mission of the SARC, and how you can help victims of sexual assault by becoming an advocate.
Listen to Biased Transmission every Wednesday on 89.1FM KEOS College Station-Bryan from 6-7pm, to hear Teddy Wilson, Michael Alvard, Danny Yeager, and Ann Preston. If you have a question or comment you can post it here, or call the KEOS Bell Studios: 979-779-5367.
Biased Transmission on Facebook
Biased Transmission on LiveStream
Biased Transmission Online Archive of Shows
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Republican Political Strategy: Conceal the Republican Policy Agenda
Saying no only goes so far. The Congressional Republicans obstructionism has been purely a political strategy, but it is a shortsighted political strategy with no long term vision. Perhaps that is because that Republicans have no long term vision, and that their campaign agenda amounts to nothing but clichés and platitudes. Over the course of the primary campaign season we have heard Republican candidates use phrases like “pro-growth,” and “free enterprise,” and “lower taxes,” and “less spending,” and of course “smaller government.” These candidates have spent most of their time informing voters about everything that they’re against, but they haven’t spent much time explaining to voters what they support. Some may argue that Republicans don’t have a coherent narrative for a policy agenda because they do not have one. However, the real reason they don’t have a coherent narrative might be because they do have an agenda, and the policy ideas that Republicans are advocating are to simply double down on the failed economic policies that lead to the Great Recession.
This year Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) introduced the Economic Freedom Act of 2010, which among other things would eliminate the tax on the capital gains of individuals and corporations; reduce the maximum corporate income tax rate to 12.5%; allow a permanent and unlimited expensing allowance for depreciable business assets; and reduce payroll tax rates for employers, employees, and self-employed individuals in 2010, permanently repeals the estate taxes. According to an analysis by the Center for American Progress, what this proposed legislation amounts to is a $10 trillion giveaway to corporations and placing a further burden on working and middle class Americans. For all of the Congressional Republicans talk about budget deficits, this legislation would add $7 trillion in deficits over the next ten years. When you consider Republican support for extending the Bush Administration 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, the Republican economic agenda would add $10 trillion to the deficit. How does the legislation proposed to pay for these policies? By repealing TARP and using the remaining stimulus funds. However, that would only pay for about 5% of the cost of the legislation, which disproportionately benefits the wealthy. The average middle-class taxpayer would receive a tax cut of $467, compared to the average taxpayer in the richest 1% receives a tax cut of $157,500.
Then there is the Roadmap for America's Future Act of 2010, which was introduced this year by Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI). While Congressman Jordan’s legislation would simply disproportionately benefit the wealthiest of Americans and add trillions of dollars to the budget deficits, Congressman Ryan’s legislation would also increase the tax burdens on the work and middle class and make significant cuts to the social safety net. Basically not only does Ryan want to dismantle the policies that kept the Great Recession from turning into the Great Depression, he wants to dismantle the policies that where created because of the Great Depression to protect the most vulnerable of Americans. According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Roadmap would reduce by half the taxes of the richest 1% of Americans and the tax cuts would increase the further up the income ladder you climb. The richest 1/10 of 1% of Americans (whose incomes exceed $2.9 million a year) would receive an average tax cut of $1.7 million a year. How would these massive tax cuts be offset? By taxing working and middle class Americans. A new consumption tax on most goods and services, and this would shift the tax burdens so considerably from the upper class to the middle class that people with incomes over $1 million would face much lower effective tax rates than middle-income families would. When you consider that the Roadmap makes drastic changes to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, discontinue the Children's Health Insurance Program, radically reduce federal spending, the picture becomes clear that Ryan’s plan is a roadmap to the Gilded Age.
There is a Republican public policy agenda. However radical this agenda is, it is also a long term policy agenda. Ezra Kline summarizes Congressman Ryan’s economic agenda:
This year Congressman Jim Jordan (R-OH) introduced the Economic Freedom Act of 2010, which among other things would eliminate the tax on the capital gains of individuals and corporations; reduce the maximum corporate income tax rate to 12.5%; allow a permanent and unlimited expensing allowance for depreciable business assets; and reduce payroll tax rates for employers, employees, and self-employed individuals in 2010, permanently repeals the estate taxes. According to an analysis by the Center for American Progress, what this proposed legislation amounts to is a $10 trillion giveaway to corporations and placing a further burden on working and middle class Americans. For all of the Congressional Republicans talk about budget deficits, this legislation would add $7 trillion in deficits over the next ten years. When you consider Republican support for extending the Bush Administration 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, the Republican economic agenda would add $10 trillion to the deficit. How does the legislation proposed to pay for these policies? By repealing TARP and using the remaining stimulus funds. However, that would only pay for about 5% of the cost of the legislation, which disproportionately benefits the wealthy. The average middle-class taxpayer would receive a tax cut of $467, compared to the average taxpayer in the richest 1% receives a tax cut of $157,500.
Then there is the Roadmap for America's Future Act of 2010, which was introduced this year by Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI). While Congressman Jordan’s legislation would simply disproportionately benefit the wealthiest of Americans and add trillions of dollars to the budget deficits, Congressman Ryan’s legislation would also increase the tax burdens on the work and middle class and make significant cuts to the social safety net. Basically not only does Ryan want to dismantle the policies that kept the Great Recession from turning into the Great Depression, he wants to dismantle the policies that where created because of the Great Depression to protect the most vulnerable of Americans. According to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Roadmap would reduce by half the taxes of the richest 1% of Americans and the tax cuts would increase the further up the income ladder you climb. The richest 1/10 of 1% of Americans (whose incomes exceed $2.9 million a year) would receive an average tax cut of $1.7 million a year. How would these massive tax cuts be offset? By taxing working and middle class Americans. A new consumption tax on most goods and services, and this would shift the tax burdens so considerably from the upper class to the middle class that people with incomes over $1 million would face much lower effective tax rates than middle-income families would. When you consider that the Roadmap makes drastic changes to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, discontinue the Children's Health Insurance Program, radically reduce federal spending, the picture becomes clear that Ryan’s plan is a roadmap to the Gilded Age.
There is a Republican public policy agenda. However radical this agenda is, it is also a long term policy agenda. Ezra Kline summarizes Congressman Ryan’s economic agenda:
“According to [Ryan] businesses are frozen because the bills passed in the past year, such as health-care reform and financial regulation, were bad, and the bills not passed in the past year, like deficit reduction and tax reform, have left businesses confused about what'll happen in the coming years…But [Ryan’s] solutions didn't seem like they would increase certainty very much. He wanted to repeal and replace both the financial regulation and the health-care reform bills…But in practice, repeal would take a long time, building something new would take a long time, passing it would take a long time, and then waiting for the regulators to do whatever they needed to do with it would take a long time. Same goes for deficit reduction and tax reform. You might be able to pass better bills, but you can't pass them quickly, and there are no assurances as to what they'll look like when you're finished. If there's uncertainty when some of the laws are certain, there'll be even more of it when they become uncertain again. Businesses can't plan based on legislation that hasn't passed.”This is then the crux of the policy argument: Republicans have no economic policy ideas for the short term economic problems. No doubt about it Republicans have economic policy ideas, but they are exclusively focused on long term economic problems. The Republican Party is attempting to recapture the success of Newt Gingrich’s Contract with American, while appeasing the Tea Party and their Contract from America, and creative a Roadmap for America’s future that leads to the dismantling of the social safety net. While it is always difficult to get the voters interested in policy, and it is impossible to prove the negative (that Democrat economic policies prevented a second Great Depression), forcing Congressional Republicans to address their policy agenda runs counter to the Republican political strategy. The roadmap to Democrat electoral success runs through the Republican policy agenda.
Local News: Jana McMillan Files for College Station City Council
College Station Resident Files for City Council Seat
Eagle Staff Report
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The first person to file for Place 5 on the College Station City Council submitted paperwork for the post Monday.
Jana McMillan turned in the application for the vacant seat, previously held by Larry Stewart, who passed away in late June.
The special election is scheduled for Nov. 2 and the term will last through the first week of May, when the seat comes up for election.
The filing period ends Aug. 27. Early voting is scheduled from Oct. 18 to 29.
McMillan, 55, said she is running because she's concerned local government has not adequately listened to its constituents.
"I think a majority of our citizens believe in conservative fiscal principles, and the City Council's governance should reflect the desires of the people," she said in a statement.
McMillan, who has lived in College Station for 33 years, is retired from being a paint contractor. She has been married to her husband, Mark, for 35 years and has two children and a grandchild.
She said she's involved in community service, including working with the Society of St. Stephens, the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum, the Women's Club and the Bryan-College Station Hispanic Forum, among others.
Published on Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Eagle Staff Report
From the Bryan-College Station Eagle
The first person to file for Place 5 on the College Station City Council submitted paperwork for the post Monday.
Jana McMillan turned in the application for the vacant seat, previously held by Larry Stewart, who passed away in late June.
The special election is scheduled for Nov. 2 and the term will last through the first week of May, when the seat comes up for election.
The filing period ends Aug. 27. Early voting is scheduled from Oct. 18 to 29.
McMillan, 55, said she is running because she's concerned local government has not adequately listened to its constituents.
"I think a majority of our citizens believe in conservative fiscal principles, and the City Council's governance should reflect the desires of the people," she said in a statement.
McMillan, who has lived in College Station for 33 years, is retired from being a paint contractor. She has been married to her husband, Mark, for 35 years and has two children and a grandchild.
She said she's involved in community service, including working with the Society of St. Stephens, the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum, the Women's Club and the Bryan-College Station Hispanic Forum, among others.
Published on Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Monday, August 2, 2010
Congress Should Do Nothing: Expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts
What should Congress do? Right now, nothing. Why should Congress do nothing? Because if Congress does nothing then the Bush Administration tax cuts for the wealthiest of Americans will expire and this will recover much needed revenue and help reduce the budget deficits. Except for the first time during the course of the Obama Administration Congressional Republicans actually want to do something: extend the Bush Administration tax cuts and some believe they should be made permanent.
If tax legislation is passed all the tax cuts passed under Bush Administration in 2001 and 2003 will expire. The tax rates would then revert at the end of the year, with the top marginal income tax rate rising to 39.6% from 35%, and other corresponding rates for lower income brackets would also increase. There basically have been three different lines of thought on the Bush tax cuts, and that has been to either let them all expire, let some of them expire, and to let none of them expire. Generally speaking liberal Democrats have been making the case to allow the tax cuts to expire, while conservative Democrats have been arguing to allow some to expire but maintain the lower tax rate cuts. Of course Republicans have been arguing that they should all be extended.
Let’s review what the Bush tax cuts actually accomplished, because there has been a lot of pontificating by conservatives, both intellectual and not so intellectual, about the accomplishments of the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts did not have the broad positive effect on the economy that is often claimed. According to an analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, the growth rates of GDP, investment, and other key economic indicators during the Bush era economic expansion were below the average for other post-World War II economic expansions. Although one section of the economy in particular benefited greatly from the Bush tax cuts: corporate profits. Comparatively the Clinton era tax increases preceded far more board economic growth than did the Bush era tax cuts.
Another talking point being used by conservatives is that the expiration of the Bush tax cuts will hurt small business. However, it is not entirely clear if the Bush era tax cuts actually benefited small business. According to an study by the Tax Policy Center, tax cuts created greater federal debt which means higher interest rates that might hurt growth, and high budget deficits can raise interest rates which hurt small businesses in the long term. The Bush tax cuts did not help small business, they helped corporations. A study by Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation found that about 3% of all households that report business income would be affected by expiration of bush tax cuts.
In the middle this discussion is also the idea that tax cuts can pay for themselves. However, the numbers just don’t seem to bear this out. Tax receipts as a percentage of GDP decreased in 2002 and 2003 in response to the tax cuts of 2001. Despite a slight increase in tax receipts after the tax cuts of 2003, the tax cuts never came close to paying for themselves. In fact according to a report by the Center for Budge and Policy Priorities, the Bush era tax cuts are a significant cause of our current budget deficits. According to the Congressional Budget Office, nearly half the cost of all legislation enacted from 2001 to 2007 can be attributed to the tax cuts. However, it wasn’t simply the Bush tax cuts alone. Nothing happens in a vacuum. When you consider huge tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and expansion of Medicare programs, and the cost of fighting an unnecessary war, the Bush era tax cuts where a simply part of a large public policy that increased economic inequality, increased governmental red ink, and contributed to the Great Recession.
Even former chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan has stated that the tax cuts should be allowed to expire and that if they do not they will add to America’s growing debt:
If tax legislation is passed all the tax cuts passed under Bush Administration in 2001 and 2003 will expire. The tax rates would then revert at the end of the year, with the top marginal income tax rate rising to 39.6% from 35%, and other corresponding rates for lower income brackets would also increase. There basically have been three different lines of thought on the Bush tax cuts, and that has been to either let them all expire, let some of them expire, and to let none of them expire. Generally speaking liberal Democrats have been making the case to allow the tax cuts to expire, while conservative Democrats have been arguing to allow some to expire but maintain the lower tax rate cuts. Of course Republicans have been arguing that they should all be extended.
Let’s review what the Bush tax cuts actually accomplished, because there has been a lot of pontificating by conservatives, both intellectual and not so intellectual, about the accomplishments of the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts did not have the broad positive effect on the economy that is often claimed. According to an analysis by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, the growth rates of GDP, investment, and other key economic indicators during the Bush era economic expansion were below the average for other post-World War II economic expansions. Although one section of the economy in particular benefited greatly from the Bush tax cuts: corporate profits. Comparatively the Clinton era tax increases preceded far more board economic growth than did the Bush era tax cuts.
Another talking point being used by conservatives is that the expiration of the Bush tax cuts will hurt small business. However, it is not entirely clear if the Bush era tax cuts actually benefited small business. According to an study by the Tax Policy Center, tax cuts created greater federal debt which means higher interest rates that might hurt growth, and high budget deficits can raise interest rates which hurt small businesses in the long term. The Bush tax cuts did not help small business, they helped corporations. A study by Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation found that about 3% of all households that report business income would be affected by expiration of bush tax cuts.
In the middle this discussion is also the idea that tax cuts can pay for themselves. However, the numbers just don’t seem to bear this out. Tax receipts as a percentage of GDP decreased in 2002 and 2003 in response to the tax cuts of 2001. Despite a slight increase in tax receipts after the tax cuts of 2003, the tax cuts never came close to paying for themselves. In fact according to a report by the Center for Budge and Policy Priorities, the Bush era tax cuts are a significant cause of our current budget deficits. According to the Congressional Budget Office, nearly half the cost of all legislation enacted from 2001 to 2007 can be attributed to the tax cuts. However, it wasn’t simply the Bush tax cuts alone. Nothing happens in a vacuum. When you consider huge tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, and expansion of Medicare programs, and the cost of fighting an unnecessary war, the Bush era tax cuts where a simply part of a large public policy that increased economic inequality, increased governmental red ink, and contributed to the Great Recession.
Even former chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan has stated that the tax cuts should be allowed to expire and that if they do not they will add to America’s growing debt:
"I'm very much in favor of tax cuts but not with borrowed money and the problem that we have gotten into in recent years is spending programs with borrowed money, tax cuts with borrowed money. And at the end of the day that proves disastrous."In the current political environment any policy that the Congressional Republicans can paint as a “tax hike” has a political benefit for them, even though this particular policy would only raise taxes 3% on the wealthiest on American households. In order to counter this argument Democrats must explain what should be done with this extra revenue besides the benefit of simply lowering the deficits. According to analysis from the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, jobs tax credits would create 3 times as much economic growth as extending the Bush tax cuts, and each dollar spent on a jobs tax credit would create four to 6 times as many jobs as a dollar spent on extending the Bush tax cuts. Allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire could also help pay for state fiscal assistance and extensions of unemployment benefits. All of this could be achieved if Congress does what it does best: nothing.
Texas Progressive Alliance Roundup - August 2, 2010
The Texas Progressive Alliance sends its congratulations to Chelsea Clinton and Marc Mezvinsky on the occasion of their wedding as it brings you this week's blog roundup.
This week on Left of College Station, Teddy reports on a Texas size failure that finds that children in Texas are among the nation’s most disadvantaged. Also this week on Left of College Station, why justice is not color blind and the week in headlines.
Off the Kuff kicked off his 2010 candidate interview series by talking to three Democratic SBOE hopefuls: Michael Soto, Rebecca Bell-Metereau, and Judy Jennings.
CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme wonders why the Catholic church is so preoccupied teh gay when people are going hungry and war is all around.
WhosPlayin was out on business all week, but had to update his post on the history and status of gas drilling in Lewisville, since more permits continued to be filed in light of the failed moratorium.
It's rare that anyone on the pages of McBlogger has something nice to say about Sen. Lieberman. So, you should take special noteand check it out when it does happen.
Contrary to everything else you've been hearing, there are at least ten signs that the Republicans will get blown out in the midterm elections. And they're now playing at PDiddie's Brains and Eggs.
Liberaltexan , over at TexasKaos brings us up to date on the plight of Texas children under the Repug administration of Dear Leader Perry , and it ain't pretty. Check it out here: Texas Size Failure: Children in Texas Among the Nation's Most Disadvantaged.
Despite the recent court ruling against some aspects of the Arizona immigration law, Texans can expect that harsh immigration measures will be proposed when the Texas legislature meets again in 2011. Neil at Texas Liberal asks if liberal and progressive forces in Texas will mobilize in advance of this attack.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
