Why Voting “Straight Ticket” Won’t Save Republicans

After all the losses on the Right in Dallas County, I hear a lot of Republican bemoan the fact that more people didn’t vote straight ticket R. While I think that is extremely important to vote the entire way down the ballot, the endless mantra of “Vote Straight ticket!” isn’t going to foster more votes. If anything its going to tick off some Republicans.

I spent time volunteering and being paid to phonebank for the Dallas County Republican Party this past election. I spent a lot of my time calling during early voting, where the party pushed a “get-out-the-vote” effort. One of the questions we asked identified Republicans was “Do you plan to vote straight ticket?” Over half the respondents I spoke with said no. They said they planned to support most of the Republicans, except for Perry, or Sessions or Tammy Barnes. They planned to vote the entire ballot, but not blindly vote R.

Republicans don’t like being told how to vote. We want to make decisions. We want to be informed about our candidates and then make choices that we think best support our views and values. This is not a downside. Mindless voters are not what we need. I believe whole-heartedly that straight-ticket voting breeds stupid voters. Even many Republicans prefer to check each candidate’s name instead of pulling the “R” lever because it makes each decision more valuable.

We can encourage people to vote all the way down the ballot, but that’s what we need to call it: voting all the way down. This is a messaging issue. Our constituents are turned off by the term straight-ticket. So we need to use language they will more readily accept. Vote all the way down. Vote for your local government. Straight ticket is nonsense, and its a prop we’re using to make ourselves feel better in Dallas County about how bitterly we lost.

Dallas Falls from Conservative Grace

Across the county, Republicans took the midterms by storm, scoring seat after seat in national, state and local elections. But deep in the heart of Bible Belt, the bastion of conservatism, the leader of Red state initiatives, the city of Dallas fell from Grace in no uncertain terms. Texas has led the charge on redefining Republicanism. Other conservative states look to the Big T as a place where those on the Right live safely and even thrive, carrying on our fiscal and moral values in a kind of mini utopia of Republican values.

But that dream is now shattered in Dallas County. Some conservatives in Texas had expressed concerned over the growing Democratic strongholds in the state, as each metropolitan area turned to blue. Big Blue cities is nothing new in the political landscape, and in Texas, these rogue Blue areas were shrugged off by most Republicans. And why not? These cities aren’t the majority. Texas still bleeds red.

However, last night’s dismal results for conservatives in Dallas should send up a warning flag, not just to Texas but to Republicans everywhere. We are no longer safe. We cannot trust that the tide will carry us. We have to fight for our values all the way to the bottom of the ballot or we could lose everything.

It seemed like the perfect set-up for a victory. The political momentum of the entire country pointed to wins for Republicans. Dallas County had a slew of truly great candidates, candidates who had experience, did the work and connected with voters. Volunteers came out of the wood-work, voters showed up angry. How could we lose? But instead of the expected upset, Republicans in Dallas county lost seats. In fact, no wins for new candidates below the State Representative position. We lost judges, a county Commissioner and failed to win the hard-fought District Attorney race.

How did this happen? Voters and officials took a Dallas win for granted. Leadership wasn’t strong enough. Even some voter fraud occurred in South Dallas. Overall: we just weren’t vigilant enough. If we ever want to win again, we need to focus.

There are certainly a few areas that could stand obvious improvement. In the future, we need more interaction between top and bottom candidates. There has to be mutual support. Communication across the board could use some tweaking. And there has to be a new emphasis on reaching independents. Die-hard Republicans will turn out to vote in an angry election like this one, but it’s the newly political and middle of the road voters that need someone to hold their hand. Dallas also needed to emphasize better messaging (including social media), Democrats still managed to push more blogging than we did. Finally, Republicans needed to provide more “reward” for volunteers. It doesn’t need to be monetary, but recognition and a position of authority can go along way for someone giving their free time.

Dallas isn’t totally alone. Other Republican cities show similar symptoms. Right now, while our Party’s in power, we have a chance to change it. But we can’t become arrogant, we can’t overlook the real needs; if we do we will watch other Republican strongholds turn Blue just like Dallas. And if Dallas County doesn’t get a hold of its situation, we could be lost to the liberal agenda and begin a chain reaction in Texas; the kind Republicans have nightmares about.

 

(Also see Denise McNamara, former Texas National Committeewoman’s response to last night’s loses.)

10 Reasons Why This Republican Thinks Perry Should Debate White

Make no mistake, I’m voting for Perry. To me, there’s no other choice for Governor, despite that I did not support him in the primary and would have preferred a different Republican nominee. But when it comes down to my moment in the box I will happily check R for my state.

However, I think that current Governor Rick Perry is making a huge mistake by refusing to debate his Democratic opponent or even speak to the news media. I have expressed my concern over Perry’s media phobia both publicly and directly to his staff and/or supporters. Responses have been everything from shrugs to outright accusations that I have been “duped by the liberal media”. The most rational response has been “Why debate when you’re winning?” So here are my top then conservative reasons for wanting to see Rick Perry debate Bill White.

1. Engage New Voter Blocks: Obama really did create change. With deficit spending, unemployment and healthcare we saw a new breed of conservatives step up and open their mouths. The Tea Party Rallies across the national brought out new blood. But not all these new activist subscribe to the die-hard Republican values. They need their candidates to prove their worth. Even though Perry has a long track record, many of these recently political voters want to hear from Perry’s own mouth what he plans to do to combat the growing fiscal liberalism in our country. While many Texas Republicans will pull the lever for R without even thinking, this new, vocal segment of the voting population (who call themselves moderates, independents or conservatives–but not Republicans) will read newspapers and carefully consider the merits of both candidates before casting their ballot. And who is pandering to those voters? Not Perry.
2. You Know What They Say About Assumptions: While we’re on the subject of new, or at least more active voters, let’s not just assume that Republicans will fall-in behind Perry blindly. Perry’s overall approval is good but some voters, even Republican ones are concerned with a few of his decisions whether they be about tollroads or living quarters. Assuming that without effort he can win Republicans is presumptuous at best. During early voting I asked a number of Republicans if they planned to vote straight ticket. Not all said yes, and many confessed they planned to vote straight Republican except for Perry.
3. Liberal Media is Still Media: I was told by those close to the Perry campaign that he has chosen to shun the media because they would be against him anyhow. I’m not going to argue that generic mainstream media has Perry’s best interests at heart, but they are still press. And right now, they only have one (real) candidate to talk to. So for every article that Bill White gives an opinion on, he’s getting more readership than Perry to the tune of hundreds of thousands. And now, instead of having Perry’s own words to misquote they can literally make things up as they go. I was also told that a debate would be acknowledging White and giving him a national platform for his message. But Perry could also have that platform in a debate. Let’s not forget that White is having publicized debates anyhow against the Green Party candidate, who pretty much exists to showcase White as more conservative. The media in Texas is still more conservative than many states, and some would have endorsed Perry. At this point, all of the large news sources have defaulted to endorsing White. Why? Perry won’t return their calls.
4. White Should be Confronted: A mantra from Perry’s office is that White is a liar. That he and the media make up things about Perry and distort the truth. What better way to confront (and possibly humiliate) White than through a debate. Perry said he would not debate White unless he turned in his tax records. We all know he won’t so publicly call him on it! Be the bigger man. Decide to debate despite his refusal to turn over records. What a slap in the face that would be on national television. Perry could certainly hold his own with his experience. It would be the perfect opportunity to call out White on any number of issues, ones that White would have no follow-up argument for.
5. Combat Liberal Messaging: Perry will win, its only a question of margin. However, White owns the media and has an army of bloggers spreading his liberal message with practically no opposition. Perry has not put together a volunteer network to post in response, or blog, or even create our own conservative message. While White will not win the election, his words and message will continue to exist unaltered on the internet for years to come. Remember those independent, free-thinking voters I mentioned earlier? Those are the people who could possibly be swayed by Democrat rhetoric blog posts. Especially when nothing exists in contrast. While its too late for Perry (despite repeated urgings by yours truly to multiple levels of his staff) to create an online army to combat the liberal message, he can personally take a stand by directly debating his opponent.
6. Republicans should Trump with Transparency: Refusing a debate conjures up all kind of images for people less politically inclined and one of them is, you’re hiding something. What is it that you don’t want to talk about? Debate is a form of government transparency. Republicans should be championing all forms of transparency right now. We have a President who promised transparency and didn’t follow through. We have bills no one can comprehend. And we have spending that is less than available to the public. Republicans should be turning over that information to the public at ever possible opportunity. We have nothing to lose by shining a light on what Democrats spend money on and legislate behind closed doors. Being willing to step up and discuss positions is the first step to making transparency a Republican platform.
7. We’re Past Politics As Usual: Political consultants have told me in my naivety that you never debate when you’re winning in the polls. It can only hurt you if you say something stupid. If you’re losing, however, you should push for debate to hopefully catch your opponent with their guard down. While this makes decent political sense, I feel this is retiring to politics as usual. This election alone should prove that the American population does not want politics as usual. Doing it just because “that’s the way its always been done” just isn’t good enough anymore. The people want their candidates to own up to their positions, not hide behind decent polling numbers.
8. We All Know You’re a Consideration for President…: Despite how much Perry denies wanting to run for President, his name is on the short list, with or without his approval. Refusing to publicly debate his opponent does not bode well for Presidential greatness. Lead by example, Perry, and you are a national leader, like it or not. Obama got serious flack from both sides of the aisle when he refuse a “Douglas-style” debate with McCain. Americans just won’t accept that kind of position from a Presidential candidate. Don’t set the standard so low this election.
9. Debate is Democracy: I truly believe open and honest or (as honest as politics can be) debate is a true tenet of democracy. Perry’s staff reports that he has made numerous public appearance to make up for his refusal to debate or interview. But even those appearances don’t allow everyone in Texas to meet their governor. Even I don’t feel like I got to really know Perry even though I sat next to him at a lunch with less than ten people present. Its just impossible to get all your answers in a photo-opportunity. Debate allows everyone to “meet” a candidate and hear their thoughts on the issues. But let’s not mince words, when you won’t debate you look like a wimp. Which brings me to my last point…
10. Don’t be a Coward: This is Texas, man up and debate. Its the last state of the wild west and we want to see the rodeo. Put on your big boy boots and send that Democrat home with his tail between his legs.

UPDATE: I argued my stance with my (very) Republican father last night. After he disagreed for an hour he finally said: “The thing is, debate is expected. There are still undecided voters out there. That alone is the best reason for debate. Period.”

Dallas City Council Budget Amendments

8 members of Dallas’s City Council have proposed a tax hike to cover funding for city projects that would be slashed by city manager Mary K. Suhm’s 2011 budget.

The tax hike would be $.0491 tax increase to property taxes.

Tax Increase Amendment:

• Expected revenue to be spent from tax increase = $39,479,091
• While fire and police departments put in for salary cuts, the tax hike does not give any money back to the public safety sector.
• Top 5 expenditures:  Street maintenance $15,200,000; Right-of-Way Maintenance $6,528,447; Cultural Programs (undefined) $2,500,000; Park Mowing (Every 7 Days) $2,450,000; Library Staffing $2,112,000
• Some of the most discussed point of the budget in city council was Senior Dental Program ($100,000) and city swimming pools ($400,000)

Thoughts:

• Councilmember Angela Hunt showed a number of graphs during her presentation. It showed an increase in public safety but downward trends for parks, libraries and infrastructure. However, Dallas has shown increased revenue for the past few years. Where has this money gone? (It is supposedly on the website, buried in the previous year budget proposals.)
• Obvious cuts: Park Mowing. A 7 day cycle is not always necessary, increase to 9 or even 10 days would reduce that cost. Also is the City really opening those costs to competitive contracts? Have we made allowances or even looked into alternatives to reduce those costs?
• Couldn’t some of these costs be alleviated by educating and contacting volunteers to fill in gaps?
• The City Manager, Mary Suhm, gave recommendation on where money should go based on tax increase. She provided a spreadsheet for each different increase. The current amendment is 1.1 million higher than any of the city manager’s recommendations.
• The current budget (without amendments) gives Dallas $40 million more in infrastructure than the highest point in the last 5 years
• There is a good point that many of the areas of the city that need the money to finance these parks, recreational centers and libraries are the ones who will not be providing the tax revenue
• Dallas taxes have increased in the last twenty years from 58.83 cents in 1990 to current 74.79 cents. Last increase was 1.87 cents in 2008, directly following a the decrease of 1.25 cents in 2007.
• There is obviously an issue with efficiency in the city of Dallas. What are we doing to find and fix these problems?

Those against the tax hike put forward an alternative to the amendment, with the help of the City Manager.

Balanced Budget Amendment:

• Expected Revenue and Expenditure = $8.91 million
• The majority of information in the balanced budget amendment are revenue SOURCES not extra cuts to the current budget, excluding council office and travel expenses, “Green” energy preiums, and a move to 15 days cycles of median mowing
• Revenue sources include private donation from Oncor, collecting debt from Irving, parking meter revenues, and a sanitation franchise fee
• The balanced amendment deals with the same areas at the proposed tax hike: Parks/Rec, Libraries, Cultural, Streets
• Top 5 expenditures: Increase in Park programming $2,800,000;  Basic park maintenance $2,800,000; Further program increases in parks $1,200,000;  Library funding $740,000; General increase in cultural funding $740,000
• The balanced amendment would cut 3 low attendance/high coverage centers
• The balanced budget would fund 4 additional pools through private partnerships (no cost)

Thoughts:

• The current library funding would provide a 70% increase in materials and would only cut staff not programming (insert need for volunteers)
• Mayor Leppert says he is continuing to seek private donations like the ones from Oncor and has already secured $1 million in private funding to help the city
• There is not the same efficient break down in the balance budget amendment numbers, but it should be noted that every dollar in the balanced budget in an increase in the already balanced budget put forward by the City Manager
• Why is the City funding a Veterans Day Parade? Isn’t that something easily connected with a charity or private foundation?
• Opposition to this amendment stated not enough funds for roads, however many of the roads the opposition wants to see fixed are under the jurisdiction of TXDOT, and should be maintained by the State and not the City

Both of these budgets amendments only show a one page overall summary of costs, which reduces the ability for citizens to truly analyze the funds and if they are being spent properly.

Amendments to Budget Amendment

•Increase the proposed garage sale permit fee from $5 to $15 and use the estimated $100,000 in proceeds for a cultural arts program.

Action: Tabled for discussion on Wednesday

•Reduce the proposed council travel budget by $63,665 to the current level.

Action: Passed

•Reduce the proposed multifamily registration fee from $10 per unit to $6.51.

Action: Passed

•Appropriate $2.15 million for building inspection while a new fee schedule is studied.

Action: Passed

More research will be done for the final 2011 budget proposal.

For more information check out the General fund budget pie chart at Dallas Morning News. (Note: current budget $965,467,785)

Civil War in the City of Dallas

The American Civil War ravaged our county unlike any other conflict the United States has participated in. This one internal war took more than 600,000 American lives. It boiled down to a direct conflict between the Northern and Southern states within the Union. While many factors, including economic, social, and representation can be said to contribute to the reasons for war, the overall the split came down to a difference in the beliefs of constituents; therefore differences in how Government should be run.

Unfortunately, our modern era has not escaped the conflicts of our forefathers. That truth became painfully apparent as I sat in on the Dallas City Council “budget workshop” meeting this morning. More than 40 citizens came into the open microphone session that started at 9am and lasted nearly three hours (which is when the debate between the actual councilmembers began).

The budget amendment on the floor was purposed by 8 of Dallas’s 15 city councilmembers. It purposes a $.0451 tax increase or nearly 5% (the largest single tax increase in the last 20 years). This specific meeting was to allow the average citizens to discuss and voice their views on the tax hike. Those who spoke at the microphone were split relatively evenly, a little over half of the speakers favoring the tax increase while the other half opposed. However, an underlying current of emotion charged the opinions. Each comment revealed that the real debate was between the North and South areas of Dallas; the tax increase debate was merely an offshoot of that core issue.

Multiple voters brought up the under-representation and therefore disenfranchisement of the South (and West) portions of Dallas. By the time the City Councilmembers began their statements on the subject, it became clear that the real issue was the war between the North and South parts of the city. The Southern councilmembers, those who proposed and agreed to the tax hike claimed that the Northern parts of Dallas did not understand the true problems going on in their part of the city. The Northern councilmembers argued back that their constituents would shoulder most of the tax burden while enjoying less of its benefits.

Councilmember Jerry Allen (District 10) claimed that the other side (the left side of the “horseshoe” is where all the southern/western councilmembers sit, Councilmen Allen sits on the right) was using the propaganda of fear to spread their message… fear that libraries would close, parks would sit empty and that our roads would become undrivable without a tax increase. He said this is the same tactic that “snakeoil salesmen” use. Probably not the best choice of words as the “other side” railed against him for being disrespectful, claiming the debate was about a difference of opinion and should not consist of name-calling.

But there was some name calling from their side as well. Councilmember Angela Hunt called both Councilmember Jerry Allen and Mayor Tom Leppert hypocrites. She pointed out that each has voted for tax increases in the past, and that is it “popular to be a fiscal conservative right now.” She seemed to feel that this change in opinion should negate their current stance and comments.

After particularly heated remarks from Councilmember Vonciel Jones Hill comparing those against the tax increase to those against the civil rights movement, she called for a straw vote. The final vote on the tax hike will happen on September 22nd, but the straw vote shows the split on the city council. The call for a vote brought about a number of amendments to the budget amendment itself. Some have been tabled for further discussion (including a reduction of travel expenses for councilmembers). The final numbers for the straw vote were 8 to 7 in favor of the tax increase. (Dallas morning news makes a point that these numbers were almost exclusively down racial lines except for Councilmember Hunt, siding with the minorities for tax increase.)

The 7 to 8 is an interesting ratio, as many news reports have already announced “Tax increase passed in Dallas!!” headlines. This is only a straw vote and not a conclusion. But the final vote in the 7 comes from Councilmember David Neumann. Councilmember Neuman spoke emphatically against both sides of the debate. He claimed that the tax increase was too burdensome on Dallas citizens, but that no tax increase would not keep the budget in check. He offered a compromise of a minimal tax increase which he said he would vote for, even if he was the sole vote. So up until the final votes were cast, Councilmen Neuman looked to be a vote of abstention. Obviously, his mind was changed at some point during the straw vote. It should be interesting to see if he holds to this position in the final vote or not.

This piece is more meant to show what took place during the meeting and to show the strong division between the North and South areas of Dallas. I will post a secondary piece showing the differences between the alternative balanced budget amendment and the tax increase amendment under discussion today. To see live streaming of this event check out my Twitter: @Veribatim.

Turn-of-Phrase

Hope: A word forever changed by the 2008 election. Once used in political rhetoric on occasion, it now brings up images of our current president. A triumphant word symbolizing victory for the Left and a word now forever tarnished and un-usable for the Right.

Its not just the words we say, or the gist of the message its how we string them together. A “turn of phrase” might be the most powerful political tool currently in existence.

I started thinking about this after hearing a very active conservative in a blue district get in a conversation with a voter. The Republican candidate he was volunteering on behalf of has a very liberal opponent has held the same office for upwards of fifteen years. He kept telling voters we need “change” in this district. Even hearing the word “change” in this context made my skin crawl. The word was accurate but still brought to mind the overwhelming campaign message of Barack Obama.

I was convinced at this point that Republican do not know how to market themselves or their message. We are slow on the pick-up, choose to use the same tired phrases instead of creating soundbites that voters can truly get behind.  The liberal blogs create messages faster than we can respond, putting out mindless bite-sized phrases any Democrat can quote. They spread across the internet faster than Hurricane Earl’s windspeed. And by the time conservatives can even react, they’ve already created three-tiers of counter arguments and more slogans than anyone person should bother regurgitating.

Then I had a discussion with a frustrated Progressive. She said, “Republicans own debate because we let them choose the language to frame the discussion.” I balked. Democrats think we coin words that frame social debates? I protested that Democrats ruled the war of words. She began to point out examples: pro-life instead of anti-abortion, illegal immigration instead of undocumented workers, second amendment rights instead of pro-violence (her words) or pro-gun (my words). She said these phrases are created by the conservative think-tanks that Republicans sink their money into. She claimed that Democrats do not fund these kinds of organizations and Republicans tend to have bigger individual backers. I pointed to Soros and she countered that he tends to give money to movements like DKos or MoveOn instead of research-based institutions which I couldn’t argue with. The fact that Republicans and their think-tanks could have an effect not just on policy but on actually political debate was a though I hadn’t entertained before.

Of course, both political sides twist words when creating ad hominem attacks on opponents (both of their own party and the opposing side). These might be the most vicious examples of word selection with a specific desired effect. These are the kinds of phrases like “Well my opponent voted against saving children’s lives” when the bill they voted against also had an unaffordable price tag and unnecessary bureaucracy attached.  The turns-of-phrase tend to discredit and smudge the facts. And both parties are guilty of it.

The mastery of language is the key to great marketing. We are seeing more and more that without great marketing a campaign is doomed. No matter how great the argument or even the candidate, it is words that will win the final war in the hearts and minds of the American voters. And for conservatives to win we must better master the Art of Words. We cannot rely on our think-tanks to make the Democrats nervous, we can’t even rely on the supremacy of our logic, we win on overall messaging and the turn-of-phrase.

How Charity Will Change Because of HealthCare

Last fall, my Young Republican organization decided to participate in the “Memory Walk for Alzheimers” at the Dallas Zoo. We raised money and walked the day of the event. Of course, by participating in the online donation form, I was immediately signed up for the non-profit’s e-newsletter. The day after Obama signed the healthcare bill, I received a disappointing email. This email applauded the work of our President and Congress on the healthcare bill and pointed out the provisions for a growing Alzheimer’s population within the bill. Then the email moved on to its real point, an ACTION ALERT. The email then requested that readers write to their congressmen and ask for congress to:

“pass legislation to significantly increase Alzheimer research funding, improve detection, diagnosis and care planning, and launch an integrated federal campaign to overcome Alzheimer’s disease..”

Note, this email wants legislation to help fund research. But they didn’t ask for donations, they didn’t ask us to spread the word. Instead they asked us to ask congress for funding instead. In essence, instead of asking for our personal money, they asked us to spend other people’s money. This isn’t charity anymore, its just lobbying congress.

I can’t tell you how disappointed I am. I feel very strongly about finding a cure for Alzheimer’s as my grandmother suffers from this terrible disease. And I would be willing to put my time, effort and pay check toward making that happen. I’d even ask my friends and campaign. But they didn’t ask for that, they asked me to lobby. And forcing people to give to a charity sits wrong with me on so many levels.

I suspect every medical charity will start doing this. Soon all charities will follow suit because it will be easier to just guilt congressmen into funding efforts than actually starting a movement. Charities won’t rely on the people but on our government. The problem is, government money isn’t free. It belongs to someone. And by lobbying congress we are in essence saying, “Well I don’t want to pay for it, but someone should.” I would much rather give and mean it, than be taxed or forced and it mean nothing.

As a side note: Many Democrats would respond to this post saying that Republicans are mean, or greedy or are unwilling to give and that the only way to keep charity alive is with government support. This is not true. Republican families on average give thirty percent more than Democrat ones. We also give more time and donate more blood. (Notes from an article in the San Diego Union-Tribune.) We do put our money behind our beliefs, but if the government continues to push forced policies and stimulus, we will have nothing left to donate at the end of the day.

The Young Republicans of Dallas County will continue to do community service acts and charity work in our county. However we will be supporting foundations who believe in reaching the people and not in government handouts. We would like the Memory Walk for Alzheimer’s to reconsider their position and requests so we can continue to support them as well.

Anything but the Economy

Greatest recession since the Great Depression of our grandparents time.  Worst real estate market of the modern age. Unemployment at all time high for our generation. Gas prices soar. Spending stops. Foreclosure. Deficit. Debt. Bankruptcy.

These headlines crowd our newspapers, our blogs, our twitter feeds and our water cooler chats. But one particular group seems to not talk about it at all: our government. The White House continues to crowd out the number one issue in America right now, the economy, with anything else they can grasp at.

In fall 2008 when markets started to crash and the country’s outlook took a dive, Obama first started to talk about Health Care. I remember in late December hearing a speech ending with, “American’s number one concern is the state of heathcare.” And I distinctly recall saying, “Wait—isn’t it the economy?”

It certainly is to the under 40 crowd. No age group suffers more from un-and-underemployment then our recent college grad and young professionals. A recent article at FoxDC says that 37% of Generation Y is unemployed and 23% stopped looking (lots went back to school). And now a third of that generation has moved home because they can no longer afford cost of living.

When Obama came into office he rode on the heavy influence and support of Gen Y. Now he has turned his back on the generation most hurt by the current economic situation. Here’s how the system works. The recession causes job loss. Now Baby Boomers with more experience, more to lose, are out of work. So where do they go? They step down the ladder and take jobs that young college students would normally snatch up right out of school. Now some kids can’t even find employment because their underemployed parents stole those positions. So now you have a generation who either can’t find work or is unwilling to take an job for less than the salary they were told to expect by their college professors. Now there is a gap. Certain segments of Gen Y will suffer more than others, causing a “lost” generation of five or six years. These kids will not get the jobs they were promised out of school and by the time the recession ends younger, fresher college grads will appear to take the positions that finally open up.

But Obama doesn’t talk about Generation Y losing their faith in the job market and even public schools. He doesn’t talk about viable initiatives to safe these kids from falling into the “lost” gap. He spends his efforts on everything else. First it was Healthcare, then the oil spill, then cap and trade. Now its a re-focus on Katrina.

Don’t misunderstand. All these issues matter but poll after poll, survey after survey shows that the number one issue on American hearts and minds is the state of the economy. My guess is that he doesn’t have any real solutions to put forward. The stimulus bill has been an utter failure. He has shut down the few government entities who were providing real jobs (like NASA) and has continued to put regulations on business while refusing to offer relief to what truly drive our economy, small businesses.

Our youth and our future is at stake until DC decides to focus on what really matters, the economy.

Ending the Texas Deficit

You may have heard that the state of Texas has a shortfall in the State budget. The deficit is estimated at $18 Billion. If you hadn’t heard, here is a good summary of the budget deficit and how Texans found out about it. Of course liberals say this proves that Texas’s conservative fiscal policies got them into trouble. Obviously, the cause of the deficit is not conservative policies but the recession. And it will be the conservative policies that save us in the end.

This past week Texas Public Policy Foundation presented their solutions to the House. You can read the actual testimony given to the House Select Committee on Fiscal Stability in this pdf. These ideas are fiscally conservative and also logical. Here are some of the ideas discussed:

• Adopt a zero-based budgeting process (instead of cutting costs, starting blank and then adding the necessary costs, the most radical of all the suggested ideas and one that has proven to be effective)
• Eliminate and consolidate unnecessary agencies/programs
• Prevent tax increases
• Minimal and predictable regulation
• Case Study of Texas v. California
• 10 year economic statistics
• Adopting a sustainable debt policy
• Greater government transparency

Other ideas:

• Greater competition in government contract bidding
• Allowing the Workforce Commission to issue bonds
• Taking advantage of the zero-interest loans provided to states with good credit by the federal government

Despite the shortfall in the budget, Texas still has one of the best economies in the nation. Rhetoric on the left tends to accuse Texas of disproving its own taxation choices (no income tax, refusing to raise property taxes and so on). But Texas still has one of the lowest unemployment rates and best real estate markets comparatively. Also this is our first year with a deficit since 2003, having kept a balanced budget the last seven years, not something most states can boast. So while We have a budget shortfall almost as high as California, we have still managed to stay balanced and effective until the recession, and therefore the reduced spending due to the economy forced us to re-evaluate our state spending.

Democrats have used the budget to push the agenda of gubernatorial candidate Bill White. Perry has promised not to raise taxes to cover the shortfall. He has also suggested ten percent cuts across the board. (White reacted to these cuts less than favorably, calling it Soviet Style budget management.) Some of Perry’s criticism goes far all the way back to his refusal stimulus money. This money, the opposition argues, could have stopped the deficit and provided unemployment assistance to Texans. An article by James Quintero, fiscal analyst at the formerly mentioned Texas Public Policy Foundation, on the Americans for Tax Reform website details what extra demands those federal dollars and details some more fiscally responsibly solutions to the deficit.

While the budget deficit in Texas certainly causes concern, this is not a problem we cannot solve. Using the suggested zero-based budgeting procedures, consolidating and eliminating unnecessary expenditures and allows more competition in state contracts we could easily make the cuts that would keep our budget balanced. Any of all of the solutions bullet-pointed above can make the difference. Government needs regular review, duplications, over-spending and unevaluated programs constantly clog the system. A lean, effective government that does not burden its people is the best hope for recovering in our current economy.

The Trials of Transparency

While I disagree with our president on a lot of things, his championing of transparency is something I got behind. I think that we can all agree, across the board that we need more integrity in politics. We need to get behind anything that forces our politicians to be more honest. So when Obama discussed putting bills online and letting the American people in on the process, I was excited and hoped Republicans would get on board in a bipartisan effort to make our government better.

I think the younger generations seem particularly intent on a more open government. In fact, I think that part of the reason Obama appealed to young voters is because we wanted a president we could trust. And many people felt Obama seemed more trustworthy than older politicians (such as our Republican nominee).

However Obama has not come through on his promises about Transparency. In December the White House released the Open Government Directive. April 7th a number of government agencies were supposed to release their data online. Out of 30 agencies only 18 released any data, and only 89 sets of data (counted by the Sunlight Foundation; more information on their efforts here) were released over all. Which is unfortunate. We’re also not seeing the cameras in back rooms, transparency in local offices or any real effort to make our government more honest from the top down. Blame could be shoved onto lots of people but the point is that there’s not much follow-through action from our President.

However, its still worth signing the bi-partisan Public=Online Transparency Petition. Any effort to alert our government that this issue is important and integral to running an efficient American is positive. So take a moment and sign the online petition and put your votes behind Republican candidates who champion transparency.

Don’t forget. Sign the petition!