Stage Eight: Comment on a Colleague's Blog

In my classmate’s article titled “Mopac: Toll or No Toll?” the author raises questions about the financial impact it would have on regular commuters using the toll road. She further opines “that (this project) could definitely improve the traffic congestion that happens daily through central Austin.” Additionally, she asks about the length of time it would take to complete this project and how the access would change for drivers using the MoPac expressway. In my research on this subject, I found views from both sides of the issue that state reasonable objections and support for it.

An opposing viewpoint from the article, “Would You Like toKeep MoPac Toll Free?” states several reasons for their objections. Neighborhoods on either side of MoPac have had to tolerate noise pollution since its inception because sound walls were never built, as promised, to deflect the traffic noise. This group also questions why a toll road is not being considered along Interstate 35 instead of making MoPac the major thoroughfare to navigate through Austin. They further argue that traffic lights at the northern and southern end of MoPac have created a bottleneck issue that Texas Department of Transportation sees its solution by creating a toll way to ease the traffic congestion. By their estimates, toll road users will spend about $500 a year commuting five miles, two ways for 200 days a year and this can create a negative financial effect on someone’s yearly budget. Their final argument stems from the private ownership, sometimes by foreign countries, which can eventually operate and control the toll road as they wish.

According to the TexasTollways website by the Texas Department of Transportation, our highway system has not kept up with a rapidly increasing population. Building new roads costs more money than the gas tax brings in and there is an immediate need to solve traffic congestion. The solution is building toll roads at a much faster rate than regular road construction could achieve when gas tax revenue generates the necessary funding. This system of toll roads provides drivers with an alternative to reach their destinations faster and less time on the road results in less vehicle emissions by improving our air quality. Another reason cited is that drivers who decide to use toll roads will pay for its cost. Those who don’t use the toll road will not pay because there will always be an alternative route to not using the toll road.

The $250 million project construction is estimated to begin in 2014 and completed by 2016 for public usage. Flyovers will connect the toll lanes to Cesar Chavez Street and new lanes from the river to RM2222 would be reduced in width from the existing lanes to create those new lanes. Alternate routes during the construction phase will likely add to MoPac drivers’ time and increase congestion. This project is ready for final approval this fall when an environmental study will be completed. In my opinion, a major construction undertaking of this type should have been presented for voter approval since it impacts the lives of many people living alongside MoPac expressway and may not be the wishes of other Austinites. Nevertheless, the decision has been made to move forward with this project and it will probably alleviate congestion initially, but it may not have as much usage later, as is the case with the present 183A toll way verses the congestion commuters face on Highway 183 during peak traffic times.

Stage Seven: How Fair are Texas Judges Being Judged?

In a recent Austin American Statesman article titled, “Texas judges' misdeeds often kept secret by oversight commission,” the writer has brought attention to the biased and secretive disciplinary action received by some Texas judges whose cases have been heard by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct (SCJC). This state agency was created by the Texas legislature to oversee approximately 3900 judges who are investigated for judicial misconduct and to take appropriate action to punish a judge’s alleged misconduct. Of the approximately 1200 complaints heard yearly by SCJC, arguments against the agency are that very few judges are disciplined, most of the reprimands are kept private, and punishment varies when similar cases are presented to the agency. With an unpaid staff of six judges, two attorneys, and five citizens, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct is a small agency managing a large caseload which acts as a quasi-court for judges’ misconduct. The agency strives to maintain the integrity of the judiciary and promote public confidence in the conduct of judges.

Justifying their duties, the State Commission on Judicial Conduct states many of the cases are dismissed because they have no merit, there is insufficient evidence, or they are unrelated to the agency's oversight. Additionally, other factors cited include a shortage of staff, working long hours investigating the caseloads, and having a limited travel budget to properly interview witnesses, which are problematic issues for thoroughly assessing an investigation and reaching an appropriate reprimand or punishment.

While the article states that most reprimands are kept private in accordance with the Texas Constitution to prohibit public retaliation, advocates say these are necessary protections to guard judges. However, there must be equal division between the public’s knowledge on which judges have received sanctions and a voter’s right to make an informed decision whether or not to elect that judge again. In my opinion, the Public Information Act, which makes all government information available to the public with certain exceptions, should be extended to include the State Commission on Judicial Conduct since it is a governmental body enacted by the Texas Legislature. Additionally, the Sunset Advisory Commission is mandated by the legislature to determine if SCJC is performing its intended function. After a recent audit of proposed recommendations to SCJC in March of this year, this agency will now allow Sunset Advisory Commission to sit in the judicial misconduct hearings to fully evaluate whether it is performing their duties impartially.

Due to the private rules held by the State Commission on Judicial Conduct, there have been numerous instances of unfairly sanctioning judges with similar offenses. The decision to reprimand or punish judges has been largely applied on a case-by-case basis which varies because the thirteen-member commission changes commissioners every six years and this may account for some of their inconsistent judgments. This agency seems to be loosely regulated and has unique protection by the Texas Constitution which created its existence, yet it is unable to be restrained by the legislature to be fully accountable in its decision-making process.

Stage Six: Comment on a Colleague's Work

In the article, titled “Let the Pandering Begin…” the author expresses her disapproval of the recent ruling by the U.S. Department of Justice which blocked Texas from requiring government-issued photo identification to vote because it would unfairly target Hispanics. When President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, its purpose was to protect minorities from being disenfranchised, especially in southern states where state officials were particularly resistant to enforcing the 15^th Amendment which states that the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Jurisdictions covered by the special provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 could not implement any change affecting voting until the Attorney General or the U.S. District Court determined that the change did not have a discriminatory purpose and effect. I believe Texas Republicans have challenged this ruling and continue in their efforts to undermine the Hispanic population’s voting potential through this law to retain their majority rule in the House and Senate.

While the writer’s cited examples of opening a bank account or boarding a plane require photo identification are valid, there are several reasons that merit examination for another perspective on the opposing side of the topic. For example, students could be unfairly targeted from voting if they do not have a driver’s license and can only provide school-issued photo identification. Also, due to the large and ever-increasing Hispanic population in Texas, the voter identification requirement could certainly encumber this group of voters and other minorities from participating in elections. In many rural communities of Texas, people have to travel a farther distance to obtain a driver’s license and in these economic times, a government-issued identification may pose a financial hardship when it is not an otherwise justifiable necessity for some people in order to vote.

According to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law’s study entitled the Truth About Fraud, there is little evidence to substantiate that voter fraud exists at a prevalent level to sway elections one way or another. In fact, only a minute amount of illegal voting can be authenticated and most of these allegations of fraud have been found to be conjecture or decisively invalidated. Some of these “mistakes” include clerical or typographical errors, incorrect registration records, dual registrations, or incorrectly being identified as voting twice for the same election, to name some instances. As mentioned in this study, voter fraud is usually an excuse by a losing candidate to claim a skewed election and in this case, another attempt by Texas legislators who want to add voter fraud in addition to redistricting Texas maps favorably for the Republican Party. It does not appear from this report that requiring photo identification can help control and keep corruption in check when there is no solid evidence to support a widespread problem with voter fraud.

There is nothing wrong with having a proper form of identification to vote. However, without investigating the reasoning to enforce such a law, it could negate the efforts by minorities to maintain their voting privileges which have been so hard fought throughout the history of our country. Moreover, in light of the low voter turnout in Texas with few exceptions, people who go to the voting polls have taken the time to exercise their right to vote and made a decision on their choice of candidates purposely. It seems unlikely that a large percentage of these people are making a concentrated effort to defraud the election process. In addition, federal voter fraud is punishable by five years in prison, a $10,000 fine and applicable state penalties which should deter someone from casting a single vote that probably will not make a difference in the election.

Finally, making a choice to go on a trip which requires a passport is a decision the writer has made for a planned event to enter another country and not a freedom entitled as a United States citizen. The fee, gasoline and waiting period to receive the passport are responsibilities to obtain the passport. It is not in the same category as the free right that eligible, registered voters would have with a required government-issued photo identification fee associated to cast a ballot and is essentially a modern day poll tax to disenfranchise legitimate voters.

Stage Five: Texas' Rainy Day Fund

The Rainy Day Fund is a savings account that Texas can use to cover a budget deficit, an unexpected revenue shortfall, or a natural catastrophe. Under Governor Rick Perry, this fund has been staunchly protected from being utilized during these tough economic times. One event was the Bastrop County wildfires of 2011. The Rainy Day Fund was also considered to fill budget gaps in public school education and Medicaid, particularly gaps affecting the elderly, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and providers of those services. Since Texas is sitting on a hefty nest egg of approximately six billion dollars, is there any reason why it should not be utilized for such emergencies as it was intended to cover?

The probability of natural disasters such as wildfires occurring during a drought season calls for urgent measures to pay for it through available revenue. Perry has repeatedly stated he is protecting the fund because it is an insurance policy in case of a major natural catastrophe. If the wildfires are not a major unforeseen act of nature in the same category as hurricanes and floods, what kind of event are they classified under? The Bastrop County wildfires alone have cost the Texas Forest Service over a million dollars while this agency has seen dramatic budget cuts as it battles blazes in the middle of its wildfire season.

Another issue affecting many Texas students is the quality education they deserve through the public school system and the means to provide it with an appropriately funded budget. How can legislators justify slashing school budgets more when they are already operating on a shoestring budget? This is an inequality to Texas schoolchildren and presents a quandary for public school administrators.  Faced with substantial expected staff layoffs, these cuts will have an adverse effect on the education students receive.

Additionally, Medicaid recipients and providers cannot continually withstand reduced benefits which they were forced to accept under the mandate of Governor Perry in order to balance the state’s budget deficit. Medicaid’s reduced benefits are felt on a vulnerable population – the elderly and children. Slashing aid on someone with a serious ailment could be detrimental to the quality of their life and a costly financial burden to sustain. Decreasing CHIP funds unfavorably affects children and pregnant women mostly in rural communities where many Texans are financially needy. Physicians are unable to offset their costs and forced to turn away Medicaid patients. Hospitals, which are paid additional disproportionate share funds for Medicaid patients, will see their revenue repayment decline in the proposed budget cuts.

While public school education and Medicaid are controversial and important issues affecting many Texans, these entities have a continual need for increased revenue funding as their growth expands. Public schools can find different approaches to raise revenue by property tax increases, trimming administrative costs, or possibly closing schools failing to meet academic achievement standards. Medicaid should be categorized as a national problem, serving the needs of the economically disadvantaged whose eligibility and population growth will continue to rise. Its reform must take place at the national government level due to the complexity of the many healthcare areas it encompasses. Public school education and Medicaid simply cannot be fixed with increased spending or budget cuts alone and requires much more careful deliberation with their respective interested parties.

Stage Four: The Keystone XL Pipeline Project Controversy in Texas

Author Dave Montgomery has written an article titled, Texas becomes a battleground in Keystone XL pipeline controversy in the Lone Star Strong blog dated February 21, 2012. The article is written from a conservative blog that leans toward the Republican Party’s affiliation. Montgomery explains several issues dominating the proposition to move forward with a crude oil pipeline extending from Canada through several states including Texas. Arguments in opposition include complaints from landowners and environmentalists, concerns over water safety, and eminent domain. These issues make the proposition a controversial and political topic of dispute for Texans who are directly impacted by the Keystone XL Pipeline project encroaching upon their properties.

 In my opinion, the author offers equal perspectives from both sides of the issue by pointing out the apprehensions of several Texas residents and businesses whose lives could be positively or negatively impacted by the project. For instance, in opposition, Montgomery cites Julia Trigg Crawford, whose farm is in the pathway of the pipeline and her fear over the land she oversees as well as possible water contamination for the Bois d’Arc Creek. Additionally, the author notes businesswoman, Debra Medina’s stance against TransCanada, XL Pipeline’s company bullying tactics used in coercing property owners to sell their land. He further writes about a small town mayor, Harlan Crawford, whose complaint also echoes that of Ms. Crawford about possible water contamination while Texas is already in a drought condition. Another grievance highlighted in the article is eminent domain. TransCanada has received almost all of the necessary easements needed to build the Texas pipeline. As with any eminent domain controversy, money to successfully win a lawsuit against a company such as TransCanada can be an intimidating and daunting task for many people to fight and win. As a result, many residents have given in to the demands for property acquisition through eminent domain on this East Texas project.

Conversely, the author presents a case for the overall healthy economic future Texans can enjoy as he cites support from Republicans Governor Rick Perry, Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn. There is no question that a project of this magnitude would bring thousands of jobs and an economic boom to Texas, especially as it faces budget shortfalls in areas such as education and Medicaid and these leaders are eager to point this out to their constituents, especially during reelection campaigns. If this project was to fail, Republicans can claim that Texas would have been in a much better financial situation had Keystone XL Pipeline been allowed to proceed as planned. Furthermore, Montgomery quotes Bill McCoy, president of the Greater Port Arthur Chamber of Commerce as stating, "There is not a politician in Texas in their right mind -- I don't care if you're a Democrat or Republican -- that doesn't know the importance of this to all of Texas." The political implications of the Keystone XL Pipeline project can be summed up in the Republican Party’s ability to influence Texans to accept a project without fully understanding the critical environmental concerns it faces. This issue was addressed when President Barak Obama initially rejected TransCanada’s application over a region in Nebraska’s Sandhills. Texans can continue to form grassroots organizations and exhibit their strength through lobbying, peaceful demonstrations and writing their legislators to express their concerns on a project that could potentially have a hazardous effect on the environment and the communities in its area.

Stage Three: Is Utility Deregulation the Answer to Austin Energy?

In a February 9, 2012 commentary from the Austin American Statesman written by Carla Penny, titled “Don’t buy into utility deregulation,” the contributor states her opinion in opposition to deregulating the city’s electric utility, currently supplied by Austin Energy. Penny’s argument asserts that deregulation will only drive costs upward for Austin electric consumers, especially the elderly, who typically use less energy. Another argument against deregulation includes a report from Texas Coalition for Affordable Power which found that Texas deregulated electric utility consumers pay higher electric utility rates than those in regulated electric utility areas. Lastly, the contributor claims that contracts from deregulated electric companies may include hidden excess charges in the contractual agreement, much like the cell phone monopoly, in trying to initially attract customers. She cites penalty examples such as not using a minimum amount of electrical usage, not maintaining a contractual agreement for a certain period of time and the solvency of a company to prevent it from going bankrupt. The author principally uses her reference to the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power report and her association with AARP, an organization devoted to the special interests of people 50 and over, to gain confidence from readers who are mindful of increasing electric rates and how it would affect their pocketbooks.

Conversely, a supporter of deregulating Austin’s electric utility is The Texas Conservative Coalition. Penny cites their one direct comment in opposition to deregulation. According to John Colyandro and Tom Aldred from this organization, it notes that "Providers in competitive parts of the state continually respond to market pressure." Her response to this comment is the assumption that publicly owned utilities have a greater responsibility to their local government in meeting the demands of its clientele for reasonable rates. If this were truly an unbiased commentary, I believe the author should have devoted an equal representation of facts and figures to substantiate her case for keeping Austin’s electric utility regulated. However, as a volunteer of the AARP Texas Executive Council, the author uses her skillful writing persuasion to convey the injustices that would be brought to Austin electric utility consumers if deregulation were agreed to. Furthermore, a thorough analysis and debate to weigh the strengths and weaknesses in deregulating the electric utility can only be done through careful process. Deregulation, as Penny points out, would negatively impact the targeted AARP group and intended audience of people on fixed incomes she represents.

Penny uses the fallacy of diversion by arguing against deregulation instead of bringing readers attention to the rate hike proposition by Austin Energy. Initially, Penny’s stance that deregulation is not the answer for Austinites seemed reasonable. However, the real issue of managing escalating electric rates is what needs to be addressed. Whether it can gather enough support from those in favor of deregulating and bring fair prices through market competition, will be contested vigorously on both sides of the issue and either solution will certainly not please everyone. Austin City Council will take a position on the issue of deregulation versus the rate increases recommended by Austin Energy. However, councilmembers may ultimately pay the price of reelection depending on which side they choose to take and how Austinites decide what is best for them.

Stage Two: Medicaid Enrollment on the Rise

On February 1, 2012, The Texas Tribune published an article titled Interactive: Enrollment in Texas' Health Care Programs Increasing.

Medicaid is a health care program that covers over three and a half million uninsured Texans on a limited income who are otherwise left without a safety net to receive proper medical care.

Health and Human Services Commission, which operates the program, is asking the legislature for billions more to cover its costs in the 2012-2013 legislative session. The agency has made budget cuts in services, expanded its managed care plans, analyzed and implemented ways to slash unnecessary expenditures after being mandated by lawmakers in the last session. However, lawmakers did not accurately project a substantial increased enrollment which is one reason why HHSC is now asking for these billions of dollars to cover its costs.

While the federal government pays the greater proportion of costs to HHSC, Medicaid accounts for approximately one-third of the state’s budget. With such a large share of its budget going toward Medicaid, this program is both a federal and state problem which must implement strategic measures to survive and help its needy clientele while not draining the Texas budget and overtaxing its citizens.