Perry pulls a 180 on immigration

Once upon a time Gov. Rick Perry had a sensible position on immigration. He knew, as did most Texans, that Texas has a unique relationship with Mexico and that it was the influx of immigrant labor that kept the cost of living lower in Texas than in other states.

Of course that raises the issue of whether or not immigrant labor was used by employers as a tool to keep down wages and deter union membership.

Immigrants who crossed the border without the permission of the US government took jobs that no one else wanted. They paid taxes (remember, there is no income tax in Texas) whenever they bought something or paid their rent (part of the rental income a landlord receives goes to pay property tax).

Gov. Goodhair even realized that efforts to raise tuition rates for the children of undocumented workers only served to discourage them from attending college because of the cost. He understood that making a college education more attainable benefited everyone in the state.

But then the Fair-Haired One decided he wanted to follow W to the White House. The national Republican Party was virulently opposed to immigration because the less white the country becomes, the less pull Republicans will have. They are fighting to preserve a vision of America that never really existed.

Now, fearful of pissing off the money lords of the GOP, Gov. Perry has flipped his views on immigration. Now he is opposed to any easing of restrictions. His latest move is to activate some 1,000 members of the Texas National Guard to patrol the border to prevent more children from Central America making it to Texas.

These children who are flooding detention centers in the Rio Grande Valley aren't criminals. They are coming here in search of a parent or they are being sent by their families to get them away from the violence and poverty of their home countries.

We don't need to militarize the border. We don't need to expedite hearings so we can deport children. What we need to do is sit down and figure out a rational immigration policy - one that takes reality into account. For far too long our policy consisted of allowing in anyone from a country whose government we disagreed with and slamming the door shut for immigrants from countries with friendly governments.

Many of these children are refugees and should be afforded the same protections as any other refugee from any other part of the world. We will be judged on the basis of how we treat the most vulnerable people in this country. Right now I don't think the verdict would be favorable.

The times they are a-changing

I could start off with a rant about why taxpayers in Texas are being asked to pay for a security detail for Gov. Rick Perry while he rubs shoulders with the rich and powerful and the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. But I'm in a good mood so I won't sweat the Guv hanging out at the uber-wealthy's version of Woodstock.

And, speaking of Woodstock, Gov. Goodhair sprung an interesting surprise on reporters when asked about his views on the legalization of marijuana. While emphasizing his opposition to legalizing the weed, Gov. Perry did express his support for decriminalizing grass.

The Fair-Haired One has embraced the use of specialty drug courts as opposed to regular courts. Now I have made my opposition to drug courts well known and I'll repeat it here -- courts are for resolving legal issues, not for doling out medical treatment. Addiction is a public health issue, not a criminal issue; and until we treat it as such, we will continue to tread water.

Aside from his support of drug courts, for once I'm on board with Gov. Perry. There are far too many folks arrested and dragged into court for possession of small amounts of marijuana. Even worse are the far-ranging consequences for a conviction -- public housing residents can be evicted and college students will be deemed ineligible for federally-backed student loans.

Currently possession of less than 2 ounces of marijuana is a Class B misdemeanor carrying a maximum punishment of six months in jail. If Gov. Perry is serious about decriminalizing marijuana then we need to knock possession of less than 2 ounces to a Class C misdemeanor (the equivalent of a traffic ticket) which is a fine-only offense that doesn't appear on one's criminal record. Then we need to knock down each level of offense one step. In fact, we should seriously consider doing that on every drug possession offense right now.

Gov. Perry understands the economic cost of carrying out a draconian drug war. He sees that county jails are filling up with non-violent minor drug offenders. Now it's time to see if the rest of Perry's Republican posse is willing to fall in line and amend the drug laws in the next legislative session.

Now contrast Gov. Perry's position with that of Devon Anderson, the unelected Harris County District Attorney whose blowhard response to President Obama's comments about marijuana sounds a lot like the nonsense in Reefer Madness.

"Marijuana is creating deadly situations right here in Harris County. I welcome the President to come to Houston to review the same capital murder cases I did just last week that were the result of marijuana drug deals. Maybe then he will see that the most effective way to keep our law-abiding citizens safe is to obey all laws that our legislators put on the books at our state capitol. 

“I am acutely aware of the high price society pays for the misuse of alcohol. This is not a debate about whether alcohol or marijuana is more dangerous. The President’s comments notwithstanding, marijuana is illegal under the Texas penal code, and we vigorously prosecute drug possession and alcohol-related offenses in Harris County.”

But what else should we expect from Ms. Anderson? The budget for her office depends on the number of cases being filed. She has no time to worry about the consequences of prosecuting folks for possession of minor amounts of marijuana while she's out trying to convince folks to vote for her this fall.

After all, it's much easier to demagogue than make well-reasoned arguments.

Limited means what I say it means - or something to that effect

Sometimes it's easy to forget that Gov. Rick Perry and his wingnut disciples claim to believe in limited government. As I've pointed out in the past, when Gov. Perry talks about limited government he's referring to government assistance and regulation for anyone who isn't a corporation or wealthy individual.

From the same folks who believe that deciding who can and who cannot get married, and from the same folks who believe that the state should have the power to decide who lives and dies comes the latest misadventure in limited government.

Leonard Pitts, Jr., of the Houston Chronicle, brings us up to date on the tragic circumstances enveloping Marlise Munoz and her family.

Marlise Muñoz was 33 when she died. 

She was at home when she collapsed from an apparent blood clot in her lungs. It was an hour or more before her husband, Erick, found her. He says doctors pronounced her brain dead, though John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth, citing privacy concerns, has declined to confirm that diagnosis. 

It is, at any rate, nearly a month and a half since this happened, yet Marlise remains hooked up to life support. Her mother wants her removed. Her father wants her removed. Her husband wants her removed. He says his wife - like him, a paramedic - specifically said she never wanted to be kept alive by artificial means.

The hospital, however, ignored the family's wishes and has continued to keep Ms. Munoz on life support. Why, might you ask? It's because of a Texas law that prevents hospitals from taking a pregnant woman off life support. It turns out that Ms. Munoz was 14 weeks pregnant at the time.

Now I don't pretend to be an expert in medicine, but I know enough to understand that a 14-week old fetus cannot survive outside the womb.

There is no greater purpose served by keeping Ms. Munoz on life support and subjecting her family to torture of watching their loved one lie in a bed unresponsive with no prospect of ever living without being hooked up to a machine. The doctors know this. The hospital administrators know this. But no one is willing to do the right thing.

Let's think about this for a second. We, as a state, have told a family that we are going to keep their dead family member "alive" for the sole purpose of extracting a fetus from her at an undetermined time. Once that fetus is removed from her body the machines will be disconnected and she will finally be allowed to die. And the family will have to relive her death a second time. They must also cope with the fact that their loved one is being used so we can attempt to harvest a child from her body.

What is the fate of this child? How long will we continue to torture the family? Who will foot the bill if the fetus has suffered birth defects as a result of the mother's trauma?

I'm sorry, but we don't have a stake in this situation. The only person whose voice needs to be heard is Ms. Munoz' husband. He's the one who will have to raise the child after this is all over. The state, while requiring his dead wife to be hooked up to life support machines, will wash its hands of the matter once the baby is delivered. Any complications or birth defects will be the sole responsibility of the family -- even though they have already said they don't want this outcome.

Rick Perry wants limited government if we're talking about taxes or regulation or the ability of folks to carry weapons around with them at all times; but, when it comes to matters that affect a family - well, we can't go limiting the power of the state, can we?

Judge strikes portions of Texas anti-abortion law

On Monday a federal judge sitting in Austin declared parts of Texas' new stringent anti-abortion law to be unconstitutional. In particular, Judge Lee Yeakel declared that the provision requiring doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of the clinic would place an undue burden on women seeking to terminate their pregnancies.

On the other hand, Judge Yeakel let stand a provision requiring doctors to follow an 18-year-old FDA protocol for performing drug-induced abortions. He did point out, however, that doctors must still be allowed to adjust the protocol to protect the health of the woman.

The protocol does not allow doctors to use medications for so-called off-label purposes. In other words, doctors would not be permitted to use a drug to induce an abortion if that was not the intended use of the drug.

Ironically enough, such a prohibition on off-label usage of medications does not apply to the state's use of pentobarbital to murder inmates. Wouldn't it seem logical that if you're going to restrict a doctor's ability to use a drug for an off-label purpose when it's medically necessary that you would also restrict the practice when the use has no medical benefit?

Gov. Rick Perry and his merry band of wingnuts continue to bandy about the trope that they are out there doing their best to protect the sanctity of life. Yet they have absolutely no problem strapping down an inmate and pumping a lethal dose of pentobarbital into their veins. Likewise, they have no problem supporting a policy in which unmanned drones fire missiles into crowds killing scores of innocent men, women and children halfway around the world.

The state, of course, is appealing.

See also:

"Renewed showdown over Texas anti-choice law highlights state-by-state battle for abortion access," Democracy Now! (Oct. 30, 2013)

"Oklahoma Supreme Court rules medication abortion ban unconstitutional, sends case back to SCOTUS," RH Reality Check (Oct. 29, 2013)

A new installment of Travel with Rick Perry

Rick Perry, he of the good hair and a love for limited government, is over in merry ol' London as you read this and is headed to Israel this weekend.

The purpose of the trips is (supposedly) to wrangle up new business opportunities for Texas. But the question I have is why is the governor of Texas making the trips. Mr. Perry's responsibilities are to the people of Texas. We are but one state out of fifty. Neither the governor nor the legislature has the authority to enter into treaties with foreign states.

According to this item in The Houston Chronicle, Mr. Perry will be speaking at a water conference in Israel and announcing some sort of partnership between Texas A & M and a school in Israel. The governor describes the trip as an "economic development mission." He says he will be traveling as a guest of Americans for Economic Freedom - which just happens to be headed up by a political consultant who works with Mr. Perry.

Of course Gov. Goodhair proclaims that no public money will be used for transportation, lodging or entertainment. And, while that is technically true, the taxpayers will pick up the tab (yet again) for his security detail.

The tab for Mr. Perry's security detail totaled over $35,000 for the three months ending on August 31. That runs the cost of his security detail since he launched his failed presidential campaign to nearly $2.7 million. That, my friends, is a lot of money for out-of-state trips for a governor.

At the very least the cost of his security detail while running for president should have been paid out of his campaign coffers or by his big dollar contributors. There is something very wrong with the taxpayers being forced to foot the bills for trips having absolutely nothing to do with his official duties.

Once again I feel compelled to point out that Gov. Perry pounds the lectern about his love for limited government and how he will cut spending that benefits the poor and disenfranchised. Yet, he has no compunction about billing the taxpayers for dragging along state troopers as bodyguards whenever he decides to travel out of the state.

You're more likely to die at work...

On Patriots' Day in Boston two bombs exploded near the finish line of the Boston Marathon killing three people and injuring well over 100 others. After the suspected bomber was arrested he was subject to interrogation without the presence of counsel because of a supposed ongoing emergency. In the aftermath the government is ramping up its information harvesting and profiling that it instituted after the 9/11 attacks.

Near the finish line of the BP 150 bike ride the following weekend, there were police snipers atop buildings in downtown Austin. There have been calls for enhanced security measures at races as well. No word on how this was supposed to stop any would-be terrorists from wreaking havoc near the finish (also, no word on why any would-be terrorist would pick a bike race in Texas to make their strike).

Out in West, Texas, a fertilizer plant that was allowed to operate in the city exploded killing 14, injuring hundreds more and damaging scores of houses and buildings. There was a nursing home near the plant as well as two schools. The source of the explosion was ammonium nitrate although no one has determined just how the chemical ignited.

In the aftermath of the explosion Gov. Rick Perry has repeatedly touted loose business regulation as a prime benefit for companies to move their operations to Texas. There have been no calls for more vigorous regulation of fertilizer plants. There have been no calls to restrict the locations of fertilizer plants. And, following the disclosure that the plant only one $1 million in insurance, there has been no outcry from our elected leaders in Austin about the business being underinsured.

Nationwide there are an average of 13 workplace deaths a day. There were just under 4700 workers killed on the job in 2011 - that's more than died in the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 and in Boston combined. Not surprisingly, Texas led the nation with 433 workplace deaths in 2011. That makes 2011 the 17th consecutive year that more than 400 people have died as a result of workplace accidents in Texas.

So where is the call for improved safety regulations in the workplace? Where are the calls to determine who is responsible for workplace deaths? Where are the questions about how corporate executives rake in astronomical salaries but little is spent on preventing workplace deaths and injuries?

How many more workers must die on the job before we give a damn?

Rick Perry's love of (un)limited government largesse

In a continuation of a story that just never seems to get old, Governor Rick Perry has handed in another bill for the security detail that accompanies him whenever he sees fit to travel. The latest bill is for more than $140,000 - a large chunk of which was for a trip he and the missus took to Italy during the fall of 2012.

In rejecting calls that he reimburse the taxpayers of the state for the expenses, Mr. Perry claims that he has no say in whether the DPS sends security with him when he leaves the state. After all, he's still the governor.

And that raises a very interesting point. Mr. Perry's job as governor is to serve as the head of state for Texas. As governors go, he has very little power - the most powerful statewide office is that of Lieutenant Governor since he appoints committee chairs, presides over the State Senate and gets to break tie votes. Of course he's only paid the same as any other legislator and doesn't get to travel to exotic locales and bill the taxpayers for the security detail.

Mr. Perry's job, on the other hand, only seems to entail denying requests for stays of execution and traveling.

Mr. Perry claims his trip to Italy was official state business. But that seems a bit fanciful - being that Italy is a whole other country and that this thing we call the Constitution tells us that the federal government gets to handle foreign diplomacy.

And that trip to the Ferrari factory and the Formula 1 Grand Prix at Monza? Well, since Austin was hosting the latest iteration of the United States Grand Prix (and getting a chunk of taxpayer money to do so) that was  business.

If the taxpayers are expected to pony up for the cost of Mr. Perry's security details, then the least we can demand is that we are only billed for security provided on official state business. It's not the taxpayer's job to pay to stoke Mr. Perry's ego while running a pathetic campaign for the White House or while he's traveling around Italy looking at Ferraris.

But then that wouldn't comport with Mr. Perry's view of limited government, would it? As I've stated before, Mr. Perry believes that the role of government in regulating business and protecting the environment should be limited. He believes the ability of the government to fund public education and to provide assistance for those in need should be limited. But he sure as hell doesn't think his ability to dip his grimy little paws into the state treasury should be limited.

And now Gov. Goodhair is heading out to California to prostitute himself in an attempt to attract businesses to relocate to Texas. We should be getting the bill for that one soon. I heard that little tidbit on KUHF (the local NPR station) yesterday. Of course, since the mission of the KUHF "news" department is not to offend anyone, no one bothered questioning whether the trip had anything to do with his duties as governor. Pretty much par for the course for the boys and girls on Cullen Boulevard.

Rick Perry's praying for you

“As a free people, let us choose what kind of people we will be. Laws, the only redoubt of secularism, will not suffice. Let us all return to our places of worship and pray for help. Above all, let us pray for our children.” -- Texas Gov. Rick Perry

Gov. Rick Perry is upset. He's mighty upset that President Obama has proposed restrictions on the ability of anyone to buy a gun.

According to Mr. Perry, the actions announced by the White House the other day are a direct assault on the Second Amendment. And we certainly can't have that now, can we.

“In fact, the piling on by the political left, and their cohorts in the media, to use the massacre of little children to advance a pre-existing political agenda that would not have saved those children, disgusts me, personally,” the governor said. “The Second Amendment to the Constitution is a basic right of free people and cannot be nor will it be abridged by the executive power of this or any other president.”

But where is out great defender of the Bill of Rights when it comes to shredding the Fourth Amendment? Where was Rick Perry when local jurisdictions decided to impose "No Refusal Weekends" on the driving public? Where was Rick Perry when motorists were threatened with forcible blood draws if they refused to blow into the breath test machine? Where was he when judges began accepting officers' sworn statements over the phone?

It's quite ironic that the gun lobby screams to the high heavens that any restriction on the ability of anyone to buy any weapon is a direct assault on the Second Amendment, but no on bats an eye as the courts and the legislature continue to eviscerate our protection against unreasonable search and seizure. Restrictions on gun sales or mandatory background checks won't affect all of us but weakening the Fourth Amendment makes it harder for us to exercise our right to be left alone.

Rick Perry is a buffoon. Anyone who witnessed his performance during his aborted Presidential run knows that. The idea that we're going to solve our addiction to violence by getting down on our knees and praying is absurd. Doesn't Rick Perry know that more people have been killed in the name of religion than for any other reason?

But then it's easier to exhort folks to prayer and to throw firebombs at political adversaries than it is to come up with a proposed solution of your own. Now I'm not naive. The measures proposed by President Obama won't prevent another massacre from happening. Enforcing the gun laws we already have on the books won't  do it either. Even with stricter gun laws, there will be guns available for those who want them.

The answer to the problem of too many guns on the streets is not to put more guns out on the streets. That will only lead to more bloodshed, more death and more grieving families.

In the meantime more politicians will grandstand about how they will refuse to allow the White House to destroy the Second Amendment by restricting gun sales but very few will stand up to defend the Fourth Amendment.

And without the Fourth Amendment, your right to keep and bear arms will be nothing but an empty promise.

The biggest loser

14,278.

That's the number of votes Republican judicial hopeful Brad Hart lost to incumbent Judge Maria Jackson this past November.

The voters of Harris County spoke and they rejected Mr. Hart's effort to move up to the 14th floor at 1201 Franklin from the 4th floor.

I've had a couple of cases over the years with Mr. Hart. He was always very reasonable to work with. He seemed to be the model of a career prosecutor (and I don't mean that in a bad way). His trademark was cutting to the chase. He didn't waste your time with a bunch of bullshit.

But then something funny happened. Judge Belinda Hill announced to the world that she was taking a top job with the DA's office. Even though her new job opportunity made her sitting on the bench the very definition of the appearance of a conflict of interest, there she sat because she couldn't step down until Gov. Goodhair appointed a new judge.

Well, actually she could announce her resignation from the bench but that resignation couldn't take effect until a new judge was appointed. Jacqueline Smith in the civil courthouse found that out the hard way when she tried to quit during the middle of her term to take a job with a white shoe firm downtown but was told that she had to listen to lawyers arguing until someone got around to finding someone else to take her place.

But I digress.

The other day Rick Perry appointed a new judge for the 230th Judicial District Court. Brad Hart.

So, while my colleague Murray is nursing his man-crush of the latest prosecutor cum judge, it's up to me to point out what's wrong with the appointment.

Gov. Perry pretty much told the voters of Harris County to go screw themselves by appointing a person who lost in November to ascend to the bench. Perry's move is a slap in the face to this little thing we call democracy. This also makes it painfully obvious that those who propose that we change our system of selecting judges from popular vote to appointments and retention elections haven't the slightest clue as to what they're talking about.

This is just the thing that the authors of the 1876 Texas Constitution did their best to prevent. As a result of Reconstruction, that document designed a decentralized government with most of the power resting with the citizenry. But what Gov. Perry has done is subvert the will of the people.

And before y'all jump up and scream that down ballot races are largely determined by straight ticket voting at the top, the fact remains that that is the system we have and that's the system we used last November. A good many Republican candidates for judge were banking on voters in the suburbs turning out in large numbers to vote for Mitt Romney. Unfortunately for them, the turnout in the city was enough to overcome the GOP votes in the county and they did not sweep into office.

But Rick Perry and his minions don't care about elections. They don't care about anything other than advancing their right wing philosophy which includes packing the courts with as many Republicans and conservatives as possible.

If we did away with popular elections whoever the governor appointed would sit on the bench until they got tired of doing so because retention elections have become the next best thing to lifetime appointments. All retention elections do is encourage large law firms to pump more and more money into judicial races creating nothing but conflicts of interest in the courthouse.

And, with the pending appointment of a judge to replace Joan Campbell in the 248th, I suppose we could just browse the names of Republican candidates who were rejected by the voters to determine who Gov. Goodhair will select.

Because the will of the people means nothing to him.

On hypocrisy and handouts

Some things just never get old.

There are few things more ironic than politicians who accuse the poor of mooching off the state who have no problem dipping their hands into the taxpayer's pockets to pay for their jet-setting ways.

Gov. Rick Perry doesn't want to spend money on the poor. He doesn't want to expand Medicaid coverage. He doesn't want to increase education funding.

But, when it comes to out-of-state junkets, he is more than happy to bill the taxpayers for his security detail. Since his re-election in November 2010, the Fair-haired One has racked up $2.3 million in security charges for his travels. In the last quarter alone, after he shut down his disastrous presidential campaign, the taxpayers have forked out over $100,000 for his security detail in such places as Aspen, Boston and San Diego.

Of course I'm still waiting to see how any of those trips were necessary to his carrying out his duties as the chief executive of the Lone Star State.

Gov. Goodhair defends the expenses arguing that the world is a dangerous place and he must be under constant surveillance by state troopers. The only problem, Rick, is that most folks outside Texas wouldn't know you from Adam (just take a look at your numbers from the primaries). Furthermore, I doubt many terrorists have Perry in their sights in their quest for world domination.

What the Guv seems to have forgotten is that Texas has a weak governor system dating back to the end of Reconstruction and the desire of Texans to be out from under the thumb of the federal government. The real power broker in Austin is the lieutenant governor. He is the one who appoints committee chairs and breaks tie votes in the senate. The governor is reduced to signing or vetoing legislation and calling special sessions of the state legislature.

Not much to see there. If the terrorists really wanted to disrupt operations in Austin, they'd be better off targeting the lieutenant governor. But, since the legislature only meets for 140 days every other year, there isn't much to disrupt.

So, for the next two years, Gov. Perry will continue to reach into our back pockets to pay for his jaunts across the country while simultaneously collecting both his salary as Governor and his state pension. Quite the gig he's got there, huh?

Update: One is the loneliest number

So Rick Perry proved once again that he's man enough to preside over the murder of an inmate. This is the same man who has presided over drastic cuts to state education budgets, mental health budgets and is opposed to anything that might allow the working poor to acquire health insurance coverage. But damn, he certainly is proud of the $25 million the state spent to restore the Governor's mansion and the $10,000 or so a month he received so he could live in a mansion in Austin. And, of course, let's not forget the massive bill he presented to taxpayers to help fund his abortive presidential campaign.

So the state was having a hard time acquiring sodium thiopental because the makers of the drug didn't want bloodthirsty politicians in the States using it to kill people. You know, something about that oath that begins "Do no harm." Then Texas decided to substitute pentobarbital for the first drug of the lethal cocktail pumped into the veins of the condemned man strapped to the gurney.

But then some other problems began popping up and Gov. Perry and his lackeys decided they needed to rethink the lethal cocktail before someone else up and decided that they didn't want their drug known as the killer drug.

Someone over at TDCJ (Texas Department of Criminal Justice) then decided it was time to simplify matters and just use one drug - pentobarbital. Nevermind that no one has conducted tests on the drug to ensure it doesn't have any side effects (besides death). Nope. It's cheaper and we've still got some of it in the medicine cabinet so let's just use the damn stuff.

And so Yokamon Hearn got to be the guinea pig. They strapped him to a gurney and pumped him full of a lethal dose of pentobarbital. He died of a drug overdose. But because the drug is a sedative, we will never know what Mr. Hearn felt as the drug circulated through his body.

Of course most people probably don't care if he experienced any pain or discomfort. He was a bad man, after all. He killed a young man who was minding his own business. A black teenager with developmental issues killed a young, white stockbroker in the Dallas suburbs. His attorneys never even bothered to put on mitigation evidence during the punishment phase of his trial.

Mr. Hearn's actions hurt a lot of people. A family lost one of their members. A friend was lost. There's no denying that what Mr. Hearn did that night had a negative impact on many people.

But the victim isn't all of a sudden back among the living. His family isn't once again whole. His friends don't have him back.

Killing Mr. Hearn didn't undo what happened back in 1998. Killing Mr. Hearn didn't heal the hurt and sorrow. Killing Mr. Hearn only served to satisfy some folks' need for revenge and gives Gov. Perry another notch in his belt.

More limited government, Perry-style

That champion of limited government, Rick Perry (he of limited intellect), racked up more than $1.7 million in travel expenses related to his inept presidential campaign. That tab, to be paid by Mr. Perry's campaign chest, includes air fare, lodging, food, rental cars and baggage.

In addition to his travel expenses (most of which were completely unrelated to his job as governor), Mr. Perry ran up a bill of $2.1 million for his security detail between August 2011 and February 2012. We, on the other, hand are on the hook for the security detail. The bill is to be paid by the state's highway fund which is replenished through the state's gas tax and car registration fees.

So, the next time you fill up at the pump and cringe as the sales amount spins toward infinity, you can thank Gov. Goodhair.

On a similar vein, Gov. Perry "retired" in January but will continue to serve as governor and collect a yearly pension of roughly $92,000 to go along with his salary of $150,000. Of course the fair-haired one justifies his double-dipping on the grounds that his years of military service and public service plus his age qualify him to receive a pension. I guess we can forget about that pesky little fact that he's still working.

Gov. Perry is the typical conservative politician who will preach about personal responsibility and limited government out on the campaign trail but, when behind closed doors, will stick his fingers into every cookie jar he can find. Mr. Perry's disastrous presidential campaign had nothing to do with governing the State of Texas but we're all being taxed to fund his Quixotic quest while school districts are laying off teachers across the state due to cuts in education funding. He and his buddies in Austin seek to cut funding for any program that offers benefits to the poor and yet Mr. Perry double-dips so he can pocket an extra $92,000 a year.

The medicine cabinet is almost bare

What is a bloodthirsty governor supposed to do when he runs out of one of the drugs in the lethal cocktail used to murder inmates in his state?

What can he do if the only manufacturer of the drug has announced that it will not sell the drug to anyone who plans to use it to kill people?

If he wishes to fuel his next run at the White House with the state's killing machine, Rick Perry is going to have to come up with a new way to kill. According to the Guardian newspaper, Texas only has enough pentobarbital for six more executions.

If Texas is able to find a drug - that it can obtain legally - to replace pentobarbital in the lethal cocktail, will that lead to a constitutional challenge to the state's execution protocol? Would the state be required to provide documented evidence that the new drug renders the prisoner unconscious and oblivious to the pain of the drug that stops his heart?

But the bigger question is where would Texas, or any other state exercising its blood lust, get their hands on such a drug? Is there a manufacturer somewhere that won't mind the publicity they'd receive over being the execution drug of choice?

And if Texas finds someone willing to provide the drugs, would anyone face and consequences for violating the licensing agreements with the manufacturers?

And what of Mr. Perry's mantra of limited government? Exactly how does Mr. Perry square that with supporting the power of the state to take a life? Of course intellectual consistency has never been something Mr. Perry was ever accused of possessing.

The death penalty is cruel and barbaric. Most of the world gets it. Unfortunately, we don't.

Killing an inmate has never brought the dead person back to life. Killing an inmate has never eliminated the pain of anyone who has lost a loved one.

Maybe now the end is in sight.

H/T Grits for Breakfast

Limited government? What's that?

So, Mr. Limited Government, what should we do about the budget shortfall in Texas?

Cut funding for public education, you say. Really? Is that the best option we can come up with? You want to lay off teachers and ease up on class sizes? What kind of message does that send out?

How about reducing the amount the taxpayers spend on security details for the governor when he's not conducting state business? You know, set an example.

In September 2011, Gov. Rick Perry spent almost $400,000 on security details traveling around the country sticking his foot in his mouth and coming in below "Other" in the polls. Since his reelection in 2010, Gov. Goodhair has racked up more than $750,000 in security expenses for his travels outside the Lone Star State.

If Gov. Perry is willing to be so hypocritical when it comes to spending your money, just what the hell do you think you're in store for if he makes it to the White House? He is more than happy to spend your money chasing a pipe dream but he can't be bothered to find money to restore funding to public schools.

So, Gov. Perry, why don't you take a few minutes and explain to us your vision for limited government?

P.S. I understand how you might need to wait for your speechwriters and press people to stop by and drop off your talking points because God knows it's hard work making George W. look like a genius.

Defending the indefensible

The other night (at yet another televised "debate") three GOP presidential hopefuls, Herman Cain, Michele Bachmann and our own Rick Perry, voiced their support for torture. Mr. Perry even went so far as to say waterboarding was an "enhanced interrogation technique."

Arizona Senator John McCain had the courage to say what few in the GOP (aside from Ron Paul) are willing to:

"Waterboarding is an affront to all of the standards that we believe in and adhere to of humane treatment of people who are human beings, and of course I am disappointed in the statements that were made," said McCain on CNN's "John King USA" Monday.  

McCain argued that waterboarding is illegal, harms the United States’s moral standing in the world and doesn't help gather reliable intelligence. 

Of course no one likes terrorists and who really gives a shit if you torture them to extract information? They're not even human, right?

At least that's the way in which the question is framed. But I don't care how you frame the question. Torture is wrong. It's demeaning, both to the person being tortured and to the person carrying out the torture.

The use of torture is an example of what Jeff Gamso would call "the Law of Rule." It is a fundamental affront to our notion of justice. If it's okay to torture alleged terrorists, how much of a reach is it to justify torture with someone accused of kidnapping a little child?

The use of torture is a violation of a suspect's Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. It violates the Geneva Convention. Members of the German and Japanese hierarchy were hung after World War II for their use of torture during the war.

From the mind of Gene Roddenberry, here is a transcript from the Star Trek: Next Generation episode entitled "Chain of Command, Part 2" that aired in December 1992. In this episode, Capt. Picard was taken prisoner by the Cardassians and taken to a secret location for interrogation by Gul Madred.

MADRED: Oh, you're awake. Have something to eat. I insist. Boiled taspar egg. It's a delicacy I'm happy to share with you.  

(Madred gives Picard a knife to slice the top off the very large egg, but this one isn't boiled. The contents are still alive and moving. Picard downs it in one)  

MADRED: Wonderful. Wonderful. I like you, human. Most people become ill at the sight of live taspar. I remember the first time I ate a live taspar. I was six years old and living on the streets of Lakat. There was a band of children, four, five, six years old, some even smaller, desperately trying to survive. We were thin, scrawny little animals, constantly hungry, always cold. We slept together in doorways, like packs of wild gettles, for warmth. Once, I found a nest. Taspars had mated and built a nest in the eave of a burnt-out building and I found three eggs in it. It was like finding treasure. I cracked one open on the spot and ate it, very much as you just did. I planned to save the other two. They would keep me alive for another week. But of course, an older boy saw them and wanted them, and he got them. But he had to break my arm to do it.  

PICARD: Must be rewarding to you to repay others for all those years of misery.  

MADRED: What do you mean?  

PICARD: Torture has never been a reliable means of extracting information. It is ultimately self-defeating as a means of control. One wonders that it's still practiced.  

MADRED: I fail to see where this analysis is leading.  

PICARD: Whenever I look at you now, I won't see a powerful Cardassian warrior. I will see a six year old boy who is powerless to protect himself.  

MADRED: Be quiet.  

PICARD: In spite of all you've done to me, I find you a pitiable man.  

MADRED: Picard, stop it, or I will turn this on and leave you here in agony all night.  

PICARD: Ah! You called me Picard.  

MADRED: What are the Federation's defence plans for Minos Korva?  

PICARD: There are four lights. (Madred uses the agoniser.)  

MADRED: There are five lights. How many do you see now?  

PICARD: (in agony) You are six years old. Weak and helpless. You cannot hurt me.  

MADRED: How many?  

PICARD: Sur le pont d'Avignon, on y danse

Fear has never been an effective tool of control. In order for it work, the level of fear must be ramped up constantly. In regimes across the Middle East and Africa, those dictators who held onto power through their use of fear have either been force out or are hanging on by their fingertips. All the use of fear did was fuel dissent - and once that dissent reached a critical mass, the game was up.

We're better than torture. Those who defend it are appealing to the lowest common denominator in our electorate. In the race to the bottom, Cain, Bachmann and Perry have the inside track.

New members appointed to Texas forensic science panel

It's out with the old and in with the new on the Texas Forensic Science Commission as the Fair-haired One appointed three new members and reappointed an existing member.

The new members are Tarrant County ADA Richard Alpert who replaces the governor's bagman, Williamson County DA John Bradley; Dr. Vincent DiMaio, former Bexar County medical examiner who replaces Dr. Norma Farley, chief forensic pathologist in Cameron and Hidalgo counties; and Mr. Bobby Lerma, a criminal defense attorney from Brownsville (and former president of the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association) replacing Tarrant County defense attorney Lance Evans. Tarrant County medical examiner Dr. Nizam Peerwani was reappointed and will serve as the commission's chairman.

It's a damn shame, as Grits for Breakfast points out, that the commission has been emasculated by the governor in his quest to prevent any public proclamations that the State of Texas murdered an innocent man when Cameron Willingham was put to death.

Unless the commission is allowed to reopen old cases to determine whether proper safeguards were taken to prevent people from being convicted on the basis of junk science, there is little purpose for the body. I understand Gov. Perry's reluctance to allow the commission to look into old cases because news of another innocent man sent to his death as a result of bad science would be the final blow to his sinking presidential campaign.

There is no doubt that there are men and women behind bars who were convicted on the basis of junk science that should never have seen the inside of a courtroom. That is something that should never be allowed to happen again. There are too many "experts" in pseudo-scientific pursuits who are allowed to sit in the witness chair and tell a jury why they should convict the person sitting next to the defense attorney. This needs to stop now.

A properly functioning commission can educate judges on what distinguishes good science from bad science.  But, in order to do so, the commission must be allowed to investigate old cases and non-accredited disciplines - after all, most of the junk science issues involve such "sciences" as bullet material analysis and tire track analysis.

Welfare: Rick Perry-style

It would appear that our local leader of the limited government movement, Gov. Rick Perry, has a bit of 'splaining to do over the travel and security bills taxpayers have been asked to pick up.

At the same time Rick Perry and his minions slashed state spending on education, forcing local districts to lay off teachers, the fair-haired one has racked up over a quarter million dollars in travel expenses. We have paid for security for Perry and his family while on vacation in the Bahamas. We have paid for security for his wife's trips to Amsterdam, Madrid and New York - what official business the wife of the governor can have overseas is beyond me as the Constitution forbids states from entering into treaties with other countries.

We've also paid for security so that Rick Perry could promote his book in New York, California, Las Vegas and Washington. Excuse me, but wasn't that book written on the state's time? If we're paying for the promotional tour, shouldn't the state reap the revenue the book generates?

And how ironic is it that his book, Fed Up!, is an anti-Washington diatribe while Mr. Perry stumps the country begging for votes and greenbacks to become the next president?

There is not another candidate that can top Rick Perry for hypocrisy in the election preseason. First he suggests that Texas should secede from the United States -- then he announces he's running for the White House. Then, at the same time he's telling the citizens of Texas they must be prepared to make sacrifices, he orders the DPS to provide security for family vacations and trips having nothing to do with the running of the state.

Of the course the tea-baggers and wingnuts don't care. Intellectual consistency has never been a problem with either group. They will blindly raise the flag without a care as to what's going on behind the curtain.

Hey, if at first you don't secede, try running for president.

Cheering on the state death machine

That's right. You heard the audience cheer when Brian Williams stated how many inmates have been murdered by the State of Texas. You heard a group of right wing Republicans preaching the virtues of limited government cheer because the state carried out 234 murders under Rick Perry's "watch."

Limited government means the citizenry has the right to be left alone. What could possibly violate the principle more than arming the state with the tools to kill its own citizens?

And, even more to the point, Rick Perry knows he sat and allowed an innocent man to be killed by the apparatus of the state when he refused to halt the murder of Cameron Willingham. Rick Perry knows he allowed an innocent man to be killed in the name of Texas and his appointment of Williamson County D.A. John Bradley to emasculate the state forensic science committee is evidence of his guilty mind.

Rick Perry calls himself a Christian yet he gladly boasts about the number of people killed by the state while he's been in Austin. And the sickest part is that folks in the audience cheered him for doing it.

Rick Perry isn't in favor of limited government. Rick Perry wishes to extend the power of the state to meddle in our lives. Rick Perry wants to give the state more authority to intrude upon our right to be left alone.

On statistics and the death penalty

Doug Berman over at Sentencing Law and Policy presents us a new statistic to measure the efficiency of state death machines - "Executions per Death Sentence" or EPDS as the sabermetricians would say.

The Death Penalty Information Center calculated the number of death sentences handed down by state and the number of inmates each state murdered since the death penalty was reinstituted in 1976. Contrary to what you might think, Texas and Ohio do not head the list.

The old commonwealth, Virginia, heads up the list with an EPDS of .725, meaning that for every 100 death sentences handed down, 72.5 executions are carried out. Texas does pop up at number two on the list with an EPDS of .498, however. The national rate, by the way, is .150.

At the bottom of the list of states that have murdered at least one inmate since 1976 are Pennsylvania (.008), California (.015) and Idaho (.025).

If we look at the murder rates by state in 2009 we find that Virginia had a murder rate of 4.4 homicides per 100,000 people while Texas had a murder rate of 5.4 homicides per 100,000 people. Pennsylvania's murder rate was 5.2 homicides per 100,000, California's was 5.3 and Idaho had a rate of 1.4.

Since 1976, New York, New Jersey, New Hampshire and Kansas are alone in not murdering inmates. New York's murder rate was 4.0. New Jersey's was 3.7. Kansas rate was 4.2 and New Hampshire brought up the rear with a murder rate of .08.

So, based on the data at hand, there would appear to be little or no correlation between the number of executions carried out and the homicide rate in any given state. But, of course, having a reputation as a killer works wonders for the candidates on the right running for the White House.

Just ask George W. Bush or Governor Goodhair.

Taxpayers subsidizing Perry's White House bid

So Rick Perry is running for president.

How long had he been contemplating his navel running for the White House? How many of those out of state trips he's taken this year were to build up support for his campaign? How much money have we spent so that Gov. Goodhair can travel around the country looking for suckers voters who will support him? How many bodyguards are we paying for to accompany him? (And just keep in mind that they are from the same agency that couldn't even prevent the governor's mansion from getting torched.)

Rick Perry already has a job. He's the governor. He's paid by us to be the governor. He's not being paid to fly around the country pimping himself out for votes. With the number of teachers that Mr. Perry threw out of work this year by cutting the amount of money the state spends on education, the last thing we need is for our tax dollars to kickstart his presidential campaign.

Now that Mr. Perry has tossed his hat in the ring for the GOP nomination, it's time for him to do the honorable thing (there is, after all, a first time for everything). It's time for Perry to resign as governor and turn the keys over to someone who is going to look out for the best interests of Texas, not the best interests of a presidential candidate.

Of course, I'm not holding my breath on this. Despite his claim of supporting limited government, Mr. Perry doesn't seem to have any problem with the taxpayers of Texas subsidizing his flights of fancy. He'd much rather steal from the taxpayers and abdicate his responsibilities in this state so he can hoodwink try to convince voters across the country to support his campaign.