Category: Politics

House Speaker Dennis Hastert had the sense to question spending federal dollars to rebuild New Orleans. Good for him! Congress should debate this.

New Orleans is inherently defective. The land naturally sinks, but the Mississippi used counter this by regularly flooding and depositing silt. Now that the Mississippi is totally leveed off, the silt just flows into the gulf. New Orleans sinks without stopping.

The prospect of shutting down New Orleans is fearsome. Shutting it down could decimate Louisiana’s tax base. But the question must be asked.

American taxpayers deserve a fair hearing on this issue.

Predictably, Louisiana’s marginally competent governor demanded an apology.

Hurricane Katrina has stirred up a lot of emotions and thoughts.

I am profoundly sorry for what the residents of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida went through. It doesn’t make the news as much, but entire Mississippi and Alabama towns and neighborhoods were completely wiped off the map.

I am extremely disappointed with the human filth that is terrorizing those stuck in New Orleans. It’s OK to loot to provide for basic needs when there is no other way. However, it’s felonious to steal luxuries like TVs, used cars, DVDs, drugs, jewelry, designer clothing, and so on, and it’s especially pathetic that New Orleans cops were caught in the act at the Garden District Walmart.

I am glad that many parts of New Orleans were not flooded. Look at this aerial photograph. Where the streets turn black, they are flooded. Much of the best stuff is not flooded: Garden District, Audubon Park, Tulane University, the St. Charles Avenue corridor, the French Quarter, and a lot of downtown.

Before you call me elitist, think of what this means. Billions of dollars are going to pour into that city to rebuild it. What parts will get the most attention? What part needed the most attention in the first place? The parts that got the most flood damage. It is fortunate that the main tourist areas are intact: it keeps a key economic engine alive.

I am disappointed that shutting down most of New Orleans isn’t on the table. Even if it is rebuilt, New Orleans will remain a disaster waiting to happen. Abandoning large swaths of the city should be considered to avert another disaster.

I think the New Orleans mayor is an idiot. He comes across as a dope, and he whines like a spoiled brat when things don’t happen exactly as he demands.

I think the media has done a terrible job. Pictures have been extremely slow getting out. News stories have been rife with bogus information. All major news outlets seem to keep showing the same AP photos again and again and again, and it takes an incredibly long time to get new photos out. There is little excuse for this except for poor preparedness. The New Orleans Times-Picayune is the best news source so far. Drudge Report has been especially obnoxious. Matt Drudge keeps linking day old articles as if they are breaking news.

I am really tired of conspiracy theorists who say that high gas prices are due to some mythical oligarchy jacking up prices. Gas prices were already high because of high demand, political instability, and inadequate refining capacity. Now that a chunk of US refining and production capacity is offline for who knows how long, gas prices are naturally increasing. The oil and gas industry is one of the most transparent industries out there. High school economics fully explains the price situation. There’s no conspiracy!

I am glad we visited New Orleans last June!

Tonight I went to a strong mayor referendum debate at SMU. I’ll tell you what: the two anti-proposition 1 debaters did a horrible job. Councilman Bill Blaydes barely finished a sentence without assassinating its logic. At one point he said that proponents are voting for a “dictatorship.” Is insulting Dallas voters his new strategy?

Bill had some grizzled, sarcastic lawyer buddy with him who used carefully crafted, lawyer-esque fear tactics to sway the audience. At one point, the lawyer claimed that Dallas will spend “billions” defending the proposition against voter rights lawsuits. Billions? Laughable.

The audience was invited to ask questions. Most questioners instead gave commentary. Like the anti-proposition debaters, the anti-proposition audience questioners were unimpressive. One particularly stupid guy, some kind of left-wing redneck with a negative IQ, lectured Miller about—of all things—not returning repeated calls to her office. Seeing his behavior, I am not surprised this fool was ignored. The moderator called him down three times, and the audience laughed at him repeatedly. He whined about how the proposition takes away minority representation and claimed there were no Hispanics and virtually no blacks in the audience. Humorously, two Hispanics and one black, all who leaned in favor of the proposition, quickly followed this redneck fool.

I had to leave about 4 minutes into a boastful Oak Cliff bragger telling us about all his accomplishments. Never heard his question.

The anti-proposition crowd’s tactics didn’t work. The audience largely favored the strong mayor proposition. But maybe this shouldn’t be a surprise? This was a mostly educated, thinking audience who was not in the clutches of the South Dallas “good old boy” system.

A good question was how many accomplishments had Dallas achieved due to the weak mayor system. Humorously, all Bill Blaydes could do is ramble about things that happened in spite of the current system.

If this debate is a representation of the anti-proposition crowd, the proposition is in for smooth sailing.

I am voting for the Dallas strong mayor proposition.

The current system gives the mayor little power, reserving most real powers to 14 city councilmen. Many of these city councilmen have a simple mission: lord over their fiefdoms (districts), obstruct everything but their pet causes, and screw the rest of the city. James Fantroy is a poster child for this kind of selfish idiocy. Examples like Fantroy are why Dallas has lost its way, and their constant obstructionism blocks realistic reforms or real leadership.

Like it or not, as long as we have a weak mayor, Dallas City Council will always be a cesspit of dissent, incapable of leading the city in any comprehensive, productive endeavor.

The only way to get around this is to strip city council and the city manager of many of their powers and give them to an accountable, elected strong mayor. A strong mayor is what we need to lead Dallas out of its mess.

Some people are critical of the strong mayor proposal:

Criticism 1: Provisions contradict state law. That doesn’t matter. When municipal code conflicts with state law, the state law simply overrides. That’s why state-set 60 MPH urban freeway speed limits override the City Council’s attempt to set 55 MPH speed limits back in 1996.

Criticism 2: It concentrates too much power into one position. First, strong mayors reign in most large cities. Sure, sometimes you get corruption. But choose your poison—occasional corruption or constant deadlock. I’ll choose corruption. Corruption is illegal, prosecutable, and stoppable; deadlock isn’t. Second, if necessary, powers of the mayor can be changed by future referendums. Third, look at this list of major changes. Most of the revised “paths to taking an action” still appear to require city council confirmation. These changes hardly make Dallas unusual.

Criticism 3: The strong mayor proposal illegally dilutes minority representation by overturning 14-1. 14-1 remains intact. This logic is flawed; for it to be true, you would have to argue that strong mayor systems have sufficient minority representation unless the system is in north central Texas. Huh?

Criticism 4: The strong mayor system will cost Dallas millions of dollars defending lawsuits. So be it. If a few millions is the only financial hurdle to get the city’s government back on track, I’ll gladly support it.

Criticism 5: The proposal was drafted in secret by a bunch of eeeeeeeevil people who don’t live in Dallas. Even if it’s true, that doesn’t automatically mean it’s a bad thing. The Dallas at the Tipping Point report was drafted in secret by people who don’t live in Dallas. Does that make it worthless or somehow counterproductive? Back in 1995, the measure to repeal federal speed limit controls was drafted outside public scrutiny by people who don’t live in Texas. Does that make it evil? Outsiders can’t enact propositions. Dallas voters must approve this measure.

Dallas needs a strong leader, and it makes sense for this leader to be a strong mayor. Join me in voting “yes” on the strong mayor proposition this May.

At this point, the only thing that will change my vote is if someone can show that this proposition makes Dallas radically different than other vibrant, successful, strong mayor cities. Barring that, I am definitely voting yes on the strong mayor proposition.