Election 2012

Blogging, Facebook, and Twitter from the Republican National Convention

We’re north of Tampa, with the Texas delegation to the #RNC. My husband is the delegate, and I’m a guest. The locals tell us we have no worries out here from Isaac, even if it becomes a hurricane.
Because I’ll be leaving the laptop in the room, most of my posts will be to Facebook, but will try to check in with news on this page every so often.
Follow Beverly Nuckols on Facebook (it’s open, you don’t have to sign up or “Friend”) and @bnuckols on Twitter.

Women Speak for Themselves Press Release @WomenSpeak2012 #prolife #tcot

By e-mail from Women Speak for Themselves, this morning:

Women Defy “We Are Women” Rally Claims; Say Let Women Speak For Themselves

Washington DC, August 18—As some women gather at the Nation’s Capitol today for the “We Are Women” rally, members of the advocacy group, Women Speak For Themselves (WSFT; womenspeakforthemselves.com) are making their own voices heard. WSFT began with an open letter to the White House, Congress and Secretary Sebelius in February 2012, demanding respect both for religious freedom and for an understanding of woman’s freedom and equality that goes beyond “free contraception.” It now has over 31 thousand signatories from every state.

“It defies reason that a few groups could speak for all women on issues of life, family, sex and religion,” said WSFT founder, Helen Alvaré.

“The 31,000 plus women who have signed onto our open letter will no longer sit silently by while a few political figures and their allies insist that religious freedom has to bow to the theory, the ideology really, that the centerpiece of women’s freedom is sexual expression without commitment,” continued Alvaré.

Catherine, a woman in her twenties living in New York City and a signatory, wrote to WSFT: “Out of respect for themselves and others, many women choose to live a life of sexual integrity…Many of my girlfriends and I have found this approach to our sexuality to be freeing, empowering, and constitutive of a deep sense of happiness.”

“I’m a pro-choice woman who respects the rights of other women to hold different views,” wrote another WSFT member Carol, from Vermont. “More specifically I expect the government, in compliance with the Constitution, to protect every person from being coerced into acting in a manner contrary to his or her conscience. The HHS mandates are a fundamental violation of our rights to free speech and religion.”

Hundreds more women wrote to WSFT to express their strong opposition to the message of the Saturday rally.

“Our women come from diverse political, ideological and religious backgrounds,” Alvaré explained. “But they are united in their opposition to a ‘one size fits all’ version of what women really want, particularly a version contradicted by decades of data and women’s experience in the new sex, dating and marriage markets formed by the idea that contraception, with abortion as the backup, is the sum and substance of women’s equality.“

Jennifer from Indiana, for example, a signatory to the WSFT letter says:
”Women and reproduction are not things that need to be fixed, medicated, sterilized. To equate women’s rights and health to these things is to do an incredible disservice to the rights and health issues that women do face today.”

“An honest ‘We Are Women’ rally would acknowledge the diverse views held by women. It would acknowledge the science about the decline in women’s well-being associated with the world view this rally represents.” Alvaré says. “No one speaks for all women on these issues. Let women speak for themselves.”

Texas Medical Association wants you to pay for elective abortions @texmed @texasallianceforlife #pro-life #tcot

Not all of the members of Texas Medical Association agree with the TMA on this.

The San Antonio Express News published an editorial August 9th, by O. Ricardo Pimentel, entitled, “Texas tries to get between you, your doctor:”

For them, the issue isn’t abortion; it’s about the doctor-patient relationship, patient health and the ability to put everything on the table that needs to be discussed. Even if it’s abortion.

In a recent letter to the state, the Texas Medical Association, joined by other medical groups, said Texas is about to embark on a plan for providing medical care to low-income women that will impose a “gag order” on discussing abortion even on doctors working with patients not in the program.

Other groups, weighing in during the public comment period on proposed state rules, have similar concerns.

It’s a plan, they say, that will ensure not enough doctors for this program willing to provide care, including family planning services. And this, they say, will guarantee more unintended pregnancies, more abortions and more illness that might have been prevented for low-income women.

Among those also commenting on the rules were the Center for Public Policy Priorities, and leaders of Planned Parenthood entities in the state, South Texas groups among them.

Trust me, for everyone who is mentioned above, it’s about abortion. The law doesn’t stop anyone from discussing or even promoting true contraception that doesn’t end the life of our youngest children of tomorrow.

And it is about “elective abortions:” those that are performed on health babies in healthy mothers. We’re not talking about the more controversial abortions in cases of rape and incest, much less in the cases of congenital disorders that are “not compatible with life outside the womb and certainly not in cases where the mother’s life is in danger. Since when do elective abortions “need to be discussed?”

How difficult is it to understand that Texas taxpayers should not pay for “promotion” of abortion? Or that we most certainly do not want our State tax funds to go to doctors who perform elective abortions on healthy babies and healthy mothers?

While I don’t speak for the Society, I am an elected delegate for my County Medical Society to the TMA House of Delegates and I believe that most of our members would agree with me on this. I am very much in favor of restricting payment from our limited State funds to only those doctors and organizations that provide comprehensive and continuing medical care for the whole woman and her whole family. With Texas Family Doctors, Internal Medicine Docs, Pediatricians and OB/Gyns reeling from the lack of increasing fees from Medicare and decreases in Medicaid funding, why not help keep them in business by adding the availability of billing the State for screening tests like pap smears, exams for breast masses, diabetes and high blood pressure?

In fact, that’s what the Legislature decided: that money would be prioritized. First come the comprehensive care docs, hospitals, and county and city clinics. Planned Parenthood is never mentioned, although there is a section of the law that absolutely prohibits the State from contracting with anyone who “promotes” abortion *if there are other qualified providers available.*

Texas DHS has already identified more than enough doctors and clinics that qualify under the law. These doctors can actually treat the diseases for which the Texas Women’s Health Plan screens. Our Texas Legislature made a wise decision when they agreed that it doesn’t make sense to send our few dollars to a clinic that treats a very narrow medical spectrum in an intermittent manner.

And the law has already saved human lives: Austin city and Travis County taxes once paid for 400 elective abortions each year. A year ago, the law achieved what the taxpayers who protested this use of their money couldn’t do: Austin and Travis County health clinics were forced to stop funding those abortions.
If you have a family doctor, consider a polite call to his or her front desk asking them to let the TMA know their views on using Texas’ tax funds to support Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.

You might also consider contacting Texas Alliance for Life and/or you local Crisis Pregnancy Center to let them know that you support their efforts to keep your State (and federal) tax funds from paying for the ending of lives of our Texans of tomorrow.

Action: Women Speak 4 OURSELVES @WomenSpeak2012 #tcot #pro-life

Based on the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of our United States is designed to secure our rights to life, liberty and property for every human being, not just the ones who can speak out. Those of us who can speak, should join in the effort to protect the rights of all, including the unborn children of tomorrow, male and female, and everyone who objects to government-sponsored efforts to end their lives. The recent Obama mandate that infringes on the First Amendment protection of the right of free exercise of religion and their on-going efforts to force Texas to fund Planned Parenthood with State taxes is in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.

I received an email tonight from the group, “Women Speak for Themselves” asking for comments on next Saturday’s Washington, DC rally sponsored by pro-abortion, anti-family and anti-First Amendment rights groups:

This Saturday, on the National Capitol lawn, Think Progress (a George Soros funded group) is hosting a “We Are Women” rally. Soros’ group, along with some of their co-sponsors, the usual—the National Organization of Women, Planned Parenthood, and the National Women’s Political Caucus—along with some more peculiar groups—Rock The Slut Vote, The National Center for Transgender Equality, and the Reformed Whores entertainers, among others—have a specific goal in mind.

“Our mission,” their website reads, “is to bring national attention to the ongoing war on women’s rights…”

Not surprisingly, the language on their website gives the appearance that they’re claiming to speak for all women on matters of healthcare, family, and freedom…which makes this just the type of event at which we need to make our voices heard! And so, here’s where YOU come in.

Prior to the rally, we’ll be releasing a statement to the press, informing them that there are women with alternative views on these matters, should the press wish to include us in the discussion. We’d like to add YOUR voices to that statement.

Send us a brief statement (2-3 sentences), articulating why as a woman you stand for and believe freedom includes protection for life, family, and/or religion. Be sure to include your full name, city and state, and your occupation, if you’d like—along with permission for us to include your information and quote in our press release.

If you’re not sure where to start, feel free to use our two sets of talking points for ideas (though your statement need not be solely focused on the HHS mandate), and try to stay focused on why you’re FOR our view of women’s freedom, as opposed to AGAINST the view of women’s freedom being put forth by Soros and cohorts.

Thanks for your help with this….I look forward to your statements!

My best to you,
Helen

http://womenspeakforthemselves.com/
https://www.facebook.com/WomenSpeakForThemselves
https://twitter.com/womenspeak2012

P.S. I’m told some pro-lifers will be gathering at the North Capitol Lawn on Saturday, to hold a counter protest. The rally starts at 11am, I believe, so feel free to head on over, with signs and pro-life gear, if you’d like to be a joyful example of the alternative.

 

I wish I could attend the counter protest, but I’m committed to a meeting for the Christian Medical and Dental Association that day. If you can attend, please do. Either way, send a message to http://womenspeakforthemselves.com/ or @womenspeak2012!

#RomneyRyan2012 GOP Ticket a Conservative Winner #RR12 #TxGOP

Paul Ryan is an excellent, conservative choice for Mitt Romney’s Vice President running mate. Not lukewarm at all, no pale pastels, here!

For background on Representative Ryan from Wisconsin, read the coverage of his votes and past statements at OnTheIssues.org

My primary issue is the right to life – without security of protection for life, there is no other freedom or right and if a person discriminates between other human beings as “persons,” then I can’t trust them to preserve my life and liberty.

Here’s the notes on “Abortion”  and other life issues on that link above:

Voted YES on banning federal health coverage that includes abortion. (May 2011)
Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Jan 2007)
Voted NO on allowing human embryonic stem cell research. (May 2005)
Voted YES on restricting interstate transport of minors to get abortions. (Apr 2005)
Voted YES on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortion except to save mother’s life. (Oct 2003)
Voted YES on forbidding human cloning for reproduction & medical research. (Feb 2003)
Voted YES on funding for health providers who don’t provide abortion info. (Sep 2002)
Voted YES on banning Family Planning funding in US aid abroad. (May 2001)
Voted YES on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on banning partial-birth abortions. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on barring transporting minors to get an abortion. (Jun 1999)
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-life stance. (Dec 2006)
Prohibit transporting minors across state lines for abortion. (Jan 2008)
Bar funding for abortion under federal Obamacare plans. (Jul 2010)
Prohibit federal funding for abortion. (May 2011)
Congress shall protect life beginning with fertilization. (Jan 2011)
Prohibit federal funding to groups like Planned Parenthood. (Jan 2011)
Grant the pre-born equal protection under 14th Amendment. (Jan 2007)

#TxGOP #TxSen #TxSOS Alert for Volunteer Deputy Registrars (for Voter Registration)

It seems our #TxLege complicated matters – everyone who wants to be a Volunteer Deputy Registrar (VDR) will now have to undergo training approved by their County Tax Assessor/Collector. My local County says that people should expect to spend 45 minutes at their office for the training offered two days a week.

Those of us who work regular business hours – not to mention mothers and volunteers who already have their time crunch – will find it difficult to dedicate a week-day morning on this training.

After the Federal judges wiped out most of the Voter ID and VDR requirements – including the requirement that VDR’s be Texas citizens – this may not be as bad as I first thought. At least the Carpetbaggers (“Acorn-like” groups from out of state) will have to spend some time training through some County office.  But not all Counties are headed by Conservatives. (although we’re working on it).

The Texas Secretary of State’s office has published training on-line, here. I wonder why this couldn’t be used as actual “online” training for past VDR’s or at least for those of us who are residents of the County?

Here’s the 94 page ruling on VDR requirements.

I believe our Legislators need to reconsider the training requirements and some pressure needs to be placed on our SOS and County TAC’s to allow on line training, at least for County residents.

#GOP2012 Platform Ideas #TxGOP #

My idea for “Constitutional Solutions” for health care is up on the site. Take a look and second it, here.

Another place to read is under the Family Values and Faith-based Issues subheadings of Marriage and Family Values and Sanctity of Life. It seems the site is being bombarded by “Republicans” who want to get rid of these planks in our Platform. Please comment on the “ideas” that want to approve same sex marriage and get “pro-life” completely out of our Platform.

I wrote one of my (long) posts in response to “Remove Pro-life from the Party Platform,” here:

This idea can’t be considered by the Republican Party. The major difference between our Party and all others is the basic belief in and defense of the ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence as well as the Constitution. In fact, the Constitution means nothing without the right to life. The freedom from tyranny that the Constitution preserves is nothing without the security “that all men are created equal and endowed by God with *unalienable* rights, …Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” The definition of human being is scientific, it’s not arbitrary or dependent on stage of life or geography. Once we stop assuming that all human individuals are endowed with these rights and allow the government to decide which humans are human enough to have these inalienable rights protected by the force of law, we all become slaves to the majority, whether that majority is in numbers or the power of the biggest guns. We are the only species having this conversation.

Federal Judge gutsTexas voter registration law

Federal judge overturns State law, again:

Costa granted a preliminary injunction on five sections of the law until a trial on whether the entire law violates the plaintiffs’ civil rights and the 1993 National Voter Registration Act.

Key points

Under the ruling, the state may no longer require that deputy voter registrars live in Texas, a law Voting for America said prevented it from organizing voter registration drives.It also may not prevent deputy registrars from registering voters who live outside their county; prevent organizations from firing or promoting employees based on the number of voters registered; prevent organizations from making photocopies of completed voter registration forms for their records; or prevent deputy registrars from mailing completed applications.

via Judge guts vote registration law – Houston Chronicle.

 

County Clerks are responsible for registering voters and maintaining the voter rolls,and they swear in the Deputy Voter registrars, but the judge says that County lines and even State residency don’t matter anymore. Anyone who wants to come in from out of State may grab a handful of voter registration cards and fill them out , copy the  information, and even mail in completed forms.

George Will on the danger of the majority (and @tedcruz) #tcot #TxSen

Update, January 25, 2016 Read about the endorsement from Governor Perry

“I wanted to talk about him, who he was, see if I could get a handle on Ted Cruz the man, not Cruz the caricature I’d seen through the political lens. What I found was a very different person than what I had been led to believe.”

******

Espousing unconstrained majoritarianism, (Theodore Roosevelt) disdained Madison’s belief that the ultimate danger is wherever ultimate power resides, which in a democracy is with the majority.

George Will. Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Will-Forgotten-heroes-of-1912-3758656.php#ixzz22Z0xb3FN (link to bio by me, BBN)

In other words, Conservatives are Constitutionalists not because we desire to limit the rights of others who disagree with us, but because the Constitution rightfully constrains the majority from infringing the rights of the minority.

Reading the Op-Eds and comments in the Houston Chronicle, the Washington Post, and in the Austin American Statesman about Ted Cruz’ victory here in Texas shows that we Conservatives have a lot of educating to do. People still don’t get what we mean when we speak of Constitutionalism.

My concern all along with Mr. Cruz has been his tactic of running against the entire Republican Party in Texas. I believe that his denial that Texas is led by Conservatives, and his focus on a couple of Bills that failed, rather than identifying with and emphasizing the victories of the Texas GOP, has created a distraction from the “Taxed Enough Already” Party agenda, rather than strengthening it.

The left (and even some of the Tea Party members) believe we Conservatives want to end government and taxes, rather than control both in the interest of protecting our inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property. We forget that the Left and the media only see groups, not individuals. They thrive on class warfare and are trying to make Cruz’ victory “White” vs “non-white,” “old” vs. “young,” with a strong dose of “throw the bums out!”

Rapprochement by Mr. Cruz toward our Texas Conservatives in office here in Texas  – making a point that they/we exist and that he is one of us  — will not only help him win an easier victory in November, it will strengthen our Texas Republican Party and advance Conservatism.

Rush Rules, Again! @MittRomney #taxes #tcot

From Rush’s transcript, August 2,  2012,

RUSH:  Now, ladies and gentlemen, Mitt Romney is no tax cheat.  But even if he was, so what?  The Treasury secretary of the United States is an admitted tax cheat, and the Democrats didn’t give a damn about that.  Harry Reid and his fellow Democrats in the Senate voted to confirm Little Timmy Geithner, the tax cheat.  Joe Biden is a plagiarist.  Anybody care about that?  Barack Obama fudged laws in a shady deal to buy his house with the help of a conflicted felon.  His good pal Bill Ayers bombed the Pentagon.  Romney is none of this.  Not even close to it.  We have an admitted tax cheat that is the Treasury secretary of the United States, Timothy Geithner.  Democrats don’t care about it.

My pic in NYT (behind @DavidHDewhurst) #TxSen

That’s me in the lower left corner, adjusting my glasses.

Well, have YOU had your picture in the New York Times?

Is this supposed to look like a beer commercial? #tcot @MittRomney

Just asking…

Donna Campbell receives mandate from SD 25 #TxSen #TxGOP

Texas Senate District 25 is Conservative, Pro-life & Pro-family! Donna Campbell wins 2:1 victory!!

Slate.com on “The Inescapable Logic of Nominating Ted Cruz for US Senate

Have we in the Republican Party really come so low that we only look at charisma and ethnicity?

Slate.com is a long time online and very left leaning news site. Today, the article by David Wiegle,  “The Inescapable Logic of Nominating Ted Cruz for Senate” proves that they don’t think very highly of Republicans, especially Conservative Republicans.

…Only toward the end of the editorial do we get some sound logic for Cruz.

“[A]s the Houston-raised son of a Cuban immigrant, he is proof positive that the American dream is very much alive and well — if in desperate need of defenders within the political system. Mr. Cruz can provide that defense in a way that Mr. Dewhurst simply is not equipped to do.”

Ah, there we go. Cruz is 42 and Hispanic. Dewhurst is 66 and white.

So there you have it: This man believes that a “white man” in his 60’s can’t represent the American Dream, no matter his humble beginnings and his own evidence that the American Dream of success is possible.

I don’t believe the bulk of Conservatives have reached that point, yet. The trouble is that a lot of our Party members are young and/or just got out of their recliners to join in our electoral process. They are vulnerable to the loudest and most brash of our “leaders” who deceive them about the process and possibilities of legislative elective office.

The fact is that inertia is built into the system of Government, both at the State (especially) at the Federal level. Most of the time that’s a good thing!

David Dewhurst knows the ins and outs of government, he can balance budgets, convince men and women to form coalitions and get things done. Most of all, he knows how to move that inertia we call Government to success as in ‘The Texas Miracle.” (The year-round Senate in DC will probably seem too much, too long to him.)
Please consider voting for David Dewhurst for US Senator from the great State of Texas!

@GovernorPerry: One Shot At Electing @DavidHDewhurst #TxSen

Great video!

What’s up with those # and @ signs? #TxSen Candidates and Fans on Twitter

jroger777: So if the #TeaParty fails to show up and the retirees get real excited about voting for Dewhurst then @tedcruz won’t be our next #TXSen   (Twitter comment on a poll showing that people over 65 are more likely to vote for David Dewhurst)

By now, we’ve all heard that there’s a runoff race on for Texas’ U.S. Senator Republican candidate. Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst has received the endorsement of Governor Rick Perry, 18 of 19 Republican State Senators, and the bulk of State-Wide office holders.  Former Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz is backed by many leaders of the “Tea Party,” especially those most interested in controlling illegal immigration. South Carolina’s Senator Jim DeMint recruited former Texas Solicitor Ted Cruz to run  last year and has been campaigning with him this past weekend. We’ve seen the fanfare with Sarah Palin, Glen Beck, and Rick Santorum. A few know that Norman Adams, who masterminded the “Texas Solution” guest worker Plank in the Republican Party of Texas 2012 Platform, endorsed Cruz in the Primary.

But who are the grassroots supporters and what do they say in support of and against the candidates? One way to get an idea is to follow the race, the candidates and their “fans” on the social networking sites. The most popular are Facebook and Twitter. A cadre of supporters of both candidates post on Twitter, gathering together under the “hashtag” (see my “Primer” below) #TxSen, That’s why I’ve been putting the # in the title of most of my posts for the last month or so.

I posted about the news coverage and fallout from one conversation on Twitter back in early June, when Katrina Pierson, founder of Garland, Texas Tea Party and Grassroots Texans Network, and volunteer for Cruz, called former Marine Captain Dan Moran “a deformed disabled vet.”

That was about the time I got wrapped up in Facebook and Twitter – especially Twitter – – okay, addicted to Twitter –  political social networking.  I also started saving a few of the more notable Tweets sent by the Cruz crowd. (Sometimes derogatorily called “Cruzbots.” I wouldn’t do that. I call them the #CruzClan.)

Unfortunately, the conversation above is not that unusual, except that it got some press. The @DavidHDewhurst fans (voters) tend to be polite and rule followers. In contrast, the @tedcruz supporters follow a different drummer.  I’ve argued politics on the Internet for nearly 20 years and have never seen the spite and name calling that comes from the #CruzClan, even when talking to atheists, pro-aborts and RonPaulers.  That last statement reads like an incredible exaggeration, even to me, but just watch #TxSen or my “feed” after this blog is published.

The biggest surprise came in the form of questions indicating that some of the #CruzClan might not agree with their candidate, who says he’s pro-life and believes in laws protecting marriage as “one man and one woman,”  on “social issues,” such as abortion and marriage. Here are a few examples:

KatrinaPierson: @bnuckols Social issues are not constitutional issues. What are his fiscal conservative achievements. #txsen

KatrinaPierson: @bnuckols What page of the constitution is homosexuality on. I must have missed that one. #txsen #tcot

smurfdawginnc: @KatrinaPierson @bnuckols Why would the Constitution discuss a persons private sexual preference?

I had a several-day discussion about the Constitution and abortion with this Cruz supporter:

@Clint_Stutts: @bnuckols You’re still reading into the texts of the DOI and Const what isn’t there. Still have not shown they had unborn in mind #txsen

Even with a limit of 140 characters, the discussion followed the same old pattern that all such conversations do.

Wonder how popular Cruz will  be with his fans in a couple of years, if he’s elected, but proves more or less Conservative – and effective in the designed-to-be-immovable-Senate than they expect him to be?

Short primer on Twitter and Tweeting

If you are reading this on your computer or phone, you have all the skills necessary to be a social networker on Twitter. Join in!

If you want to see – or “follow” –  the real time conversation, you have to sign up for Twitter at Twitter.com. (Hint: Pick the shortest name you can, so you don’t eat up the 140 character limit!)  If you are interested in a topic or person, enter the word or name in the search box at the top. You can save the search to return to it over and over. You may have to pick the most appropriate result, or find your specific interest as a “hashtag” – subjects that appear frequently enough to form a subheading or group of Tweets – in the list of Tweets given. “Top Conservatives on Twitter” is a good place to start, #tcot. Or #TxSen/#txsen, “Texas Senate” will allow you to follow that subject through the election.

You’ll also see a list of people who tweet about your subject. People are contacted and referred to by @TheirName. I’m @bnuckols.

Law Enforcement Associations respond to @TedCruz @ #Cash4Kids #TxSen

I received this in my e-mail, this morning. As a mother, a grandmother and long time advocate against the abuse of children and for smaller government, and fewer laws, with appropriate punishment for REAL crimes, I couldn’t agree more!

To the voters of Texas,

Police and Law enforcement put their lives on the line to protect the public from those who would hurt our most vulnerable, our children.

Ted Cruz chose to defend a man, Robert Mericle, who took part in a judicial kickback scheme the resulted in 4000 children being incarcerated for profit. This scheme was reprehensible and exploited these children so that Cruz’s client and the corrupt judges he bribed could make millions in profits.

Now Ted Cruz’s campaign is sending out a mailer to Texans claiming that this felon and child exploiter helped prosecutors. Ted Cruz should be ashamed of himself for making this claim, when he knows his client is a convicted felon who hurt kids.

Ted Cruz tried to get his client Mericle out of paying his victims, the children, the damages Cruz’s client owed them. And now Cruz is trying to paint this villain as a hero.

To follow the chain of Cruz’s logic–every cornered criminal who cooperates with prosecutors to save their skin would be treated as a hero.

Ted Cruz needs to answer whether he personally approved this mailer his campaign sent out. Does Mr. Cruz really believe his client Robert Mericle is someone who should be applauded for his role in this scandal?

Ted Cruz’s inability to admit that his client was a convicted felon who exploited children raises serious questions about whether he has the judgment and character to represent Texas in any way.

Sincerely,

Charley Wilkison
Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT)

Texas Conservative Leaders Endorse Dewhurst | Dewhurst for Texas

Texas Conservative Leaders Endorse Dewhurst | Dewhurst for Texas.

Todd Staples and Texas Aggriculture Support David Dewhurst #TxSen @DavidHDewhurst

July 29, 2012

http://www.dewhurstfortexas.com press@dewhurstfortexas.com

Texas AG Commissioner Todd Staples & Texas Agriculture Support David Dewhurst

U.S. Senate candidate David Dewhurst was in Waco this afternoon where he held a campaign event with supporters from the agriculture community. Following the event, Texas Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples announced his endorsement of Dewhurst for U.S. Senate. Commissioner Staples said that on issues important to rural Texas and agriculture, Dewhurst has been a “strong and steady advocate.”

“Just like Governor Perry, I’ve worked with David Dewhurst on conservative issues,” said Commissioner Todd Staples. “When I carried the constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman David Dewhurst fought with me to get the votes needed for passage. When I worked to protect the rights of property owners against unfair land grabs, David Dewhurst was a trusted ally. And on issues important to rural Texas and agriculture, David Dewhurst has been a strong and steady advocate. I am confident David Dewhurst is the best choice to fight for our state’s rights, against Washington over reach, and for lower taxes and a balanced budget in the United States Senate.”

“I’m honored to receive the support from Commissioner Staples,” said David Dewhurst. “Agriculture is one of Texas’ most important industries, with one out of every seven Texans working in an agriculture-related job. Texas also leads the nation in the number of farms and ranches, with 247,500 covering 130 million acres. As the next U.S. Senator from Texas, I will continue to be an advocate and a voice for Texas farmers and ranchers.”

The following Texas agriculture groups and organizations, which comprise more than 500,000 members, have endorsed Dewhurst in his bid for U.S. Senate.

• Texas Farm Bureau (AGFUND)
• Texas & Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association PAC
• Texas Cattle Feeders Association (BEFF-PAC)
• Texas Poultry Federation
• Texas Agricultural Aviation Association (TAAA)
• Texas Wildlife Association
• Texas Forestry Association

Texas Business Supports Dewhurst #TxSen @DavidHDewhurst

I received this Press Release from the David Dewhurst Campaign this afternoon. No one should be surprised, since Texas is # 1 for business several years in a row, according to many different measures.

As the wife of a Texas Businessman, as a member of Texas Medical Association and Texas Alliance for Life (the latter two have also endorsed Lt. Governor Dewhurst) and a proud member of the Texas Republican Party,  I’m proud to post it here:

July 28, 2012

http://www.dewhurstfortexas.com press@dewhurstfortexas.com

As a lifelong businessman, David Dewhurst has been a friend and champion for businesses in Texas. He understands that in order to thrive, small businesses and the private sector need a predictable, stable business environment. That’s why over the last nine years, Dewhurst has implemented the lightest regulatory hand to help create the best business climate in the country.

Texas has consistently been rated the best state to do business in the country, most recently by CNBC as the top state for business. In the last three years alone, nearly half of all the jobs created in America were in Texas. Now, Dewhurst wants to bring the Texas economic model of success to Washington.

 

“As a United States Senator, David Dewhurst would help spread the Texas economic miracle to the rest of the country,” said Dewhurst Advisor Mark Miner. “In Texas, David Dewhurst and Governor Rick Perry have removed the red tape and gotten government out of the way to allow small businesses to succeed. Texans know David Dewhurst will create a better business climate in Washington, because he’s already proven he can do it in Texas.”

The following Texas business groups and organizations, which comprise more than two million members, have endorsed Dewhurst in his bid for U.S. Senate.

• Texas Oil & Gas PAC
• Texas Restaurant Association
• Texas Medical Association TEXPAC
• Texas Association of Realtors
• Texas Association of Builders (Home PAC)
• Texas Association of Hospitals (HOSPAC)
• Texas Society of Professional Engineers
• Texas Association of Business (BACPAC)
• Texas Association of Manufacturers
• Texas Apartment Association
• Texas Property Rights Association (STPRA Fed. PAC)
• Texas Civil Justice League

Paid for by Dewhurst for Texas

Steve Hotze endorsed Donna Campbell

And high time, too! Finally, he does something right this election cycle. Oh, well, converts are rarely saintly, but we welcome them into the fold.

I’m Doctor Steve Hotze, President of Conservative Republicans of Texas, an organization dedicated to electing the most conservative, best qualified candidates to public office.

We are proud to endorse and support Dr. Donna Campbell for State Senator. Donna has proven to be a strong, conservative leader who will fight for lower taxes, government accountability, and traditional conservative values. Please take a moment to learn more about the Campbell campaign, and join me in supporting them in the upcoming July 31st Republican run-off.

Thank you.

Steve Hotze, MD
President
Conservative Republicans of Texas

Politifact Texas calls @DonnaCampbellTX tax scare “Pants on Fire!” #TxSen

Dr. Donna Campbell is in the runoff election  for Senate District 25 against pro-abort  “Hairy-legged male,” incumbent Jeffrey Earl Wentworth.

Hairy, uh, Jeff has pulled out some statement about the Fair Tax or Flat Tax that Donna may have made years ago,adds in some testimony about a Texas sales tax that Donna commented on other to say she’d consider it if it lowered taxes,  and claims that Dr. Campbell would back a 35% sales tax. Politifact Texas has evaluated that claim and not only is it “False,” it’s a “Pants on Fire’ lie.

What you might not know about the Texas US Senate Race #TxSen

At Monday night’s debate in Houston between Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and Ted Cruz, Republicans in the runoff for the US Senate race(Twitter #TxSen), I met a couple who said they were still “undecided” about who to vote for. They asked why I was supporting Lt. Governor David Dewhurst over Ted Cruz. They were surprised that I believed his record is so strong and hadn’t even heard about Ted Cruz’ speculation to reporters that Governor Perry wanted to get Lt. Governor Dewhurst elected because he wanted Dewhurst out of Austin. The fact that these two went to the effort to attend a debate on  a Monday night made me believe that they are actually informed voters, but that if these two people don’t know the issues, perhaps many others don’t either.

I’ve covered some of this in other posts on WingRight, including my last Post, “An Open Letter to Texas Voters,”  and you can read about the support David Dewhurst received from 18 of the 19 Republicans in the 31 member Texas Senate, here. Here are more specific reasons why I support pro-life, pro-marriage, small government candidate Lt. Governor David Dewhurst for US Senator from Texas.

As I’m sure you know, Texas has a quirky system, where our Lieutenant Governor is more powerful than our Governor in many respects. If you want to know what Lt. Governor Dewhurst will do in the US Senate, look at just some of the laws he’s helped pass over the last 10 yrs:

• Women’s Right to Know Act, an informed Consent law for abortion with 24 hour waiting period, 2003;
• Prenatal Protection Act which declared the unborn an “individual” – a person in Texas law – “from fertilization until natural death,”  2003,
• Defense of Marriage Act, 2003, with a Second law passed to amend our State Constitution, 2005;
• Parental consent for abortion, 2005;
• Tort reform, 2005;
• Decreased school property tax by 1/3, 2007;
• Jessica’s Law, 2009,
• Loser Pays, 2011;
• De-funded abortionists, including Planned Parenthood, 2011;
• Prohibited illegal aliens from getting driver’s licenses, 2011;
• Photo Voter ID, 2011;
• Blocked the law written specifically to force Texas to follow the Democrat’s call to raise school spending at 2009 stimulus levels, 2011;
• Sonogram Bill, requiring the abortionist to offer the mother a chance to see her child and hear the heartbeat;
• Castle Law 2009 that allows Texans to use deadly force to defend themselves against threats, without having to prove they tried to “retreat”to safety;
• Stronger protection for Concealed Carry Permit holders every session since 2003:
• Balanced our budget every two years, even when there were projected shortfalls in 2003, 2009, 2011;
• Every year since 2005, Texas has spent at least $100Million of our tax dollars to augment border security and that number was doubled in 2011.

Governor Perry, with the help of Lt. Gov. Dewhurst and the Texas Senate, refused to accept those “Stimulus funds” for education and unemployment insurance that would have forced us to change our laws in 2011. Yes, we used some stimulus funds that didn’t require us to change our laws, but, as our former Senator, Phil Gramm said,

“(I)f the Congress had a vote on whether to build a cheese factory on the Moon, I would oppose it based on what I know now, and I cannot imagine the circumstance under which I would support it. But on the other hand, if Congress in its lack of wisdom decided to start a cheese factory on the Moon, I would want a Texas firm to do the engineering, I would want a Texas construction firm to do the construction, I would want the milk to come from Texas cows, and I would want the celestial distribution center to be in Dallas, Texas, or College Station, Texas, or somewhere else in my State.”

These are just the highlights of a career that began the same year that 11 Democrat Senators left Austin on a supporter’s plane in order to hide out in Albuquerque New Mexico for a full month in order to deny the Senate a Quorum and avoid losing the votes on Congressional redistricting.

You might have read that Dewhurst increased taxes, with the misleading statistic that our revenues went up over the last 10 years. Increased revenues do not necessarily mean increased taxes! They also go up with the growth of the economy. Texas’ population went up over 20%  and our State added more jobs than all the other States combined in the same time period. These were good jobs, and they went to legal residents who come into our State at the rate of 1000 people a WEEK! The fact is that even the Club for Growth, who is now backing Mr. Cruz, stated last year that Texas’ spending has actually gone down over the last 10 years, when adjusted for population and inflation.

How did we spend that money? Mr Cruz knows exactly how: he was the lawyer who worked out a deal in Federal Court when he was Solicitor General that bound the State to increase spending on Medicaid. He uses this spending from his agreement against the Lt. governor.

You might also read that Dewhurst supported a “payroll tax,” or even an “income tax.” These accusations are based on words in a press release and an editorial against the Lt Governor, from 2006. These weren’t the words used in the Bill that is bandied about, and that Bill never became law. In the law that was eventually passed, there are three ways to calculate our State business franchise tax. One of those is a tax based on employee pay, minus benefits. But there are two other ways, and the business chooses the best way for them. More telling is that our Attorney General won the case proving that the tax is not an income tax, last November. Cruz knew that his claim was wrong as from the beginning of his ads and web campaign against Dewhurst.

You can find my other posts on the US Senate race here.

Comal County Early Voting Sites and Endorsements

Early voting will start on July 23 and goes  through Friday, July 27. Election day is July 31, the Tuesday following.

During early voting, Comal County residents may vote at any of the following four polling places:

• Main Location – 45 Landa St., New Braunfels, 7 am -7 pm daily;
• Tye Preston Library, Canyon Lake – Monday through Thursday, 10 am-7 pm & Friday 7 am – 5 pm
• Garden Ridge City Hall – Monday & Wednesday 9 am – 7 pm, Tuesday & Thursday 9 am – 4 pm, & Friday 7 am – 3:30 pm; and
• Bulverde/Spring Branch Library – Monday through Thursday 10 am – 7 pm, & Friday, 7am-6pm.

Pleas consider voting for Dr Donna Campbell for our State Senator for District 25, and for Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst for US Senator.

If you’re not from Comal County and still reading this, and for the other races in Comal County, please take a look at the recommendations at Texas Alliance for Life’s Pro-life Voter’s hub. http://www.texasallianceforlife.org/VotersHub.aspx

For other Counties, you can find your early voting places at the Secretary of State’s website, here.

Campbell, Wentworth in dogfight of a runoff for Senate

Just a reminder here about how important it is to vote in the July 31 Texas Primary Runoff, and to vote for Donna Campbell for Texas Senate District 25. Early voting is cool and begins Monday, July 23, going through July 27!

I’m inclined to say only one candidate is acting like a dog in this race. Donna has made it a policy to refrain from the low, personal attacks that went on between Wentworth and Elizabeth Ames Jones in the last 6 months.

But that didn’t stop Wentworth’s campaign from putting out a 28 page dossier on Dr. Campbell and her family, including a note about problems her now husband had 15 years before they married!

State Sen. Jeff Wentworth personally apologized to his GOP re-election opponent, Dr. Donna Campbell, for releasing opposition research regarding her husband that she called trashy, tawdry, sleazy and out of bounds.Wentworth called disclosure of a 1985 DWI conviction before their marriage a “regrettable incident” in the July 31 runoff campaign.But four days later, the same information was disseminated by the Wentworth campaign, a move seen as a desperate attempt to survive a vigorous challenge from tea party-backed Campbell.Welcome to Texas politics.

via Campbell, Wentworth in dogfight of a runoff for Senate – San Antonio Express-News.

Romney, GOP blast Obama for ‘gutting’ welfare reform law – The Hill’s Healthwatch

How does Congress reign in this Administration’s penchant for ignoring the letter and spirit of the law? Some headlines claim the Administration is “bypassing Congress! (and what’s next?)

The idea of allowing States more leeway sounds good until you read that the Obama admin will allow studying for GED to count. There’s not a thing wrong with working while taking classes. Lots of us did it.

Working to qualify for assistance from the Government is a reasonable expectation.

Republicans came out strongly against a quiet policy change by the Obama administration that could change how states administer welfare.

Under the new policy, federal waivers would allow states to test new approaches to improving employment among low-income families. In exchange, states would have to prove that their new methods are effective, or lose the waivers.

Republicans blasted the change as “gutting” work requirements in the landmark 1996 welfare-to-work law known as TANF.

via Romney, GOP blast Obama for ‘gutting’ welfare reform law – The Hill’s Healthwatch.

I believe in assisting people who have bad luck and hard times, although I do believe private charity is preferable.

One reason it’s better than government assistance is that government puts in more rules, and is much more likely to invade privacy of recipients. Then, there’s a difference between taking money from someone by force of law (with the accompanying threats of fines, prison) and freely giving of what you have out of compassion.

There’s also the personal indebtedness that comes from person to person charity and assistance. Taxpayer funded aide doesn’t cause the beneficiary to have reciprocal emotional attachment to the one giving the aide It’s good to see and hopefully understand and mirror the feeling of sacrifice by the giver. And it’s good to feel grateful and indebted. (And it’s more likely to cause the person who receives to be compelled to “pass it on” to someone else when able later on.

And back to that original question: this Administration ignores the law that’s written, so new law won’t help much. What can the rest of us or our Legislators do to keep them from flaunting the law and the Constitution?

Ted Cruz’s legal work for figure in Pennsylvania corruption scandal draws fire

Ted Cruz has campaigned on his record as an attorney and “fighting” for Conservative values.  He has made the cases he argued the basis for his qualification to be Texas’ next US Senator. We should look at all of his record.

When he worked for the State of Texas as Solicitor General, he argued the cases he was assigned by Attorney General Greg Abbott. When he went into private practice as an appellant lawyer, what sort of cases did he choose?

From the Dallas Morning News:

“Ted Cruz chose to represent a convicted felon who masterminded a bribery scheme to fill the beds of his private prison to enrich himself by unlawfully jailing and terrorizing thousands of children,” said Dewhurst spokesman Matt Hirsch. “Ted Cruz should be ashamed.”

Hirsch said Cruz’s acceptance of the work “brings into question [his] integrity and judgment. … Is there anyone Ted Cruz won’t represent if the price is right?”

Dewhurst already has centered much of his campaign’s attack advertising on Cruz’s representation of a trademark-infringing Chinese tire maker.

In briefs for Mericle, Cruz argued that nearly $2.2 million in “finder’s fees” that the businessman and a partner paid to the two judges were an effort to get the judges to close a publicly run facility in Wilkes-Barre, Pa., and let him build two new ones.

The partner, attorney and developer Robert Powell, managed the private facilities and was the one whose acts swayed the judges to harm children, Cruz said.

Cruz argued that the only crime Mericle was guilty of — failing to report tax evasion — hurt only the Internal Revenue Service, not the children imprisoned, meaning that Travelers should have to pay under Mericle’s insurance policy.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court tossed about 4,000 convictions issued by one of the judges between 2003 and 2008, saying he violated the constitutional rights of the juveniles, including the right to legal counsel and the right to intelligently enter a plea.

In one case a 16-year-old girl with no prior record was held in juvenile detention for six months after gesturing with her middle finger at a police officer called during a custody dispute involving her parents and sister, according to The Christian Science Monitor.

Both judges have been sentenced to long prison terms. Mericle, who has testified for prosecutors in other corruption cases, is awaiting sentencing but is expected to serve less than three years.

via Ted Cruz’s legal work for figure in Pennsylvania corruption scandal draws fire | Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas and National Politics and Elections News – News for Dallas, Texas – The Dallas Morning News.

About those attacks on Dewhurst #TxSen

In spite of the Open Letter to Texans from the Senate Republican Caucus, people on Twitter (follow the subject tag #TxSen), Facebook and even RedState.com are still making the accusation that Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst “proposed” or “supported” a personal income tax and/or a “wage” or “payroll” tax for Texas, back in 2006. I’ve touched on the subject before, but thought I’d post a more detailed explanation.

There’s a quote all over the Internet, used to prove that the LG made a statement in favor of the income tax when in fact, the comment is taken out of context. Dewhurst was objecting to adding another burden to small businesses and start ups. Unfortunately, the original Associated Press March 30, 2006 article, “Businesses studying proposed tax structure,” by April Castro, is not available online. (A Screen shot of the first page of one newspaper that carried the article is here in pdf, but there’s no quote from Dewhurst in this part. I haven’t been able to find any online version carrying the supposed quote.) However, here’s a summary from Politifacts debunking of the claim;

A March 30, 2006, AP news article, headlined “Businesses studying proposed tax structure,” indeed quotes Dewhurst as saying: “I think I’d rather see a tax that’s based on income — you earn money, you pay something, you don’t earn money, you don’t pay anything.”

We can see why a critic would single out that comment, though the full AP story indicates that Dewhurst was speaking to the particulars of revamping the business franchise tax rather than advancing his desire to create a personal or business income tax.

The story initially points out that lawmakers had previously stumbled over how to restructure the business tax, which most corporations did not owe. “They worried that proposals would not apply equally to different business structures,” the article says. “And business-friendly Republicans have been hesitant to levy a new tax that could be harmful to job creation and economic growth.”

According to the story, the consensus proposed fix — which was a plan devised by a panel headed by John Sharp, a former Texas state comptroller — would tax businesses on a percentage of their gross receipts, meaning the money a company brought in before expenses, with each company choosing between deductions for cost of goods sold or employee benefits like salary and health care. The story says sole proprietors and general partnerships would be exempt, along with companies that have annual gross receipts of $300,000 or less.

For more than 80 years, the story says, the state’s main business tax had been based on a company’s net assets, though lawmakers changed it in 1991 to make it more like a corporate income tax. Texas companies subsequently had the choice of paying either 0.25 percent of the value of their net assets or 4.5 percent of their net corporate income, whichever was greater, according to a 2003 report on Texas taxes by the nonpartisan House Research Organization.

The LG’s comment was in fact made in opposition of one idea floated during the 2005/2006 update of Texas’ 100 yr old tax business franchise tax, so that all businesses, whether they made a profit or not, had to pay on gross receipts.

In order to lower property taxes and comply with a Federal Court ruling that allowing local school districts to max out the property tax was a de facto State income tax, Governor Perry named an independent Commission in 2005, under the leadership of John Sharp, a fairly conservative Democrat. (Texas has a lot of those as well as left radicals.)

Before, there had been a lot of loopholes and exempted businesses, so that only 6% of businesses paid at all.. When the franchise tax was broadened to include nearly all businesses in Texas, lots of ideas floated around. It took a couple of years, but the final tax ended up with an exemption of the first $150K and then the next session amended that to the first $300K.

Another claim – currently seen in Cruz’ TV ads – is that Dewhurst “actively supported” a “payroll tax” during this process. Cruz cherry picks two words from a  Press Release issued by the Dewhurst staff in 2006. One Senate version of the franchise tax rework praised the Senate for passing a bill that included School finance and the business tax changes. The term is only used once, in paragraph 4 and is not actually in the Bill. There are quotes around the statements by Dewhurst, but no quotes are found in the part that uses the words “payroll tax.” The Press Release notes that businesses had the option to choose between the two ways to calculate that tax, one based on income alone and one adjusted by employees payroll with exemptions, but doesn’t advocate one way over the other. (That version never passed into law.)

Attorney General Abbott successfully defended the tax against a lawsuit claiming that the franchise tax was an income tax on sole proprietorships and small partnerships in August, 2011, and the ruling from the Texas Supreme Court was reported in November, 2011.

Medicaid Expansion Would Cost Everyone

Bravo to Governor Rick Perry for refusing to move ahead on the Medicaid expansion requirements in the misnamed “Affordable Care Act,” AKA “ObamaCare.”

According to the Texas Public Policy Foundation, of the 6.5 million uninsured in Texas, fewer than 10% of Texas’ uninsured would benefit from expanding Medicaid to everyone at 133% of the Federal poverty guidelines. ObamaCare has no requirements other than annual income.  The law won’t allow asset verification or take into account beneficiaries’ willingness and ability to work.

Texas uninsured numbers include Nearly 1/3 that are illegal aliens, about 40% who earn more than $50,000 a year, and about 1/4 who are already eligible under Medicaid and CHIP. None of these people  would be eligible under the expansion. Many are young and healthy, not convinced they need to spend their money on insurance, anyway.

The cost of expanded Medicaid, much less the rest of Obamacare, would require increased taxes, overt and hidden, on everyone. Sure, for two years, the Federal government is supposed to “pay” for the 10% of Texas’ uninsured added to the expanded Medicaid. But it won’t pay for that 25% of uninsured that are already eligible and it won’t cover illegal aliens or “the working poor.” And after 2 years, the Federal money goes away, leaving Texas with the bill.

Even though Washington can print paper money, the government doesn’t have any money that it doesn’t take in taxes. The cost is not just what is collected by the IRS, it comes in the loss of value of the money and assets we earn or already have.  Obamacare, and the Stimulus before it,  are sold by the Left as a classic take-from-the-rich “redistribution of the wealth.”  However, hey also cost non-taxpayers and the working poor and middle class by the harm they do to our economy and the increase in cost of necessities. As well as inevitably rewarding those who are unwilling to fend for themselves, they punish everyone who lives pay check to paycheck as well as the “wealthy.”

Governor Rick Perry tells Obama Admin, “No!” #TxSen @GovernorPerry

Governor Rick Perry has made it official: Texas won’t expand our Medicaid to cover all adults up to 133% of the Federal Poverty level. The ACA Medicaid expansion does not allow any requirements other than income. No need to work, no asset limits, no medical need or other hardship.

Here’s the Press Release from the Governor:

July 9, 2012

Gov. Rick Perry, in a letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, today confirmed that Texas has no intention of implementing a state insurance exchange or expanding Medicaid as part of Obamacare. Any state exchange must be approved by the Obama Administration and operate under specific federally mandated rules, many of which have yet to be established. Expanding Medicaid would mandate the admission of millions of additional Texans into the already unsustainable Medicaid program, at a potential cost of billions to Texas taxpayers.

“If anyone was in doubt, we in Texas have no intention to implement so-called state exchanges or to expand Medicaid under Obamacare,” Gov. Perry said. “I will not be party to socializing healthcare and bankrupting my state in direct contradiction to our Constitution and our founding principles of limited government.

“I stand proudly with the growing chorus of governors who reject the Obamacare power grab. Neither a “state” exchange nor the expansion of Medicaid under this program would result in better “patient protection” or in more “affordable care.” They would only make Texas a mere appendage of the federal government when it comes to health care.”

Gov. Perry has frequently called for the allocation of Medicaid funding in block grants so each state can tailor the program to specifically serve the needs of its unique challenges. As a common sense alternative, Gov. Perry has conveyed a vision to transform Medicaid into a system that reinforces individual responsibility, eliminates fragmentation and duplication, controls costs and focuses on quality health outcomes. This would include establishing reasonable benefits, personal accountability, and limits on services in Medicaid. It would also allow co-pays or cost sharing that apply to all Medicaid eligible groups – not just optional Medicaid populations – and tailor benefits to needs of the individual rather than a blanket entitlement.

Gov. Perry has consistently rejected federal funding when strings are attached that impose long-term financial burdens on Texans, or cede state control of state issues to the federal government. In 2009, Texas rejected Washington funding for the state’s Unemployment Insurance program because it would have required the state to vastly expand the number of workers entitled to draw unemployment benefits, leading to higher UI taxes later.

In 2010, Gov. Perry declined “Race to the Top” dollars, which would have provided some up-front federal education funding if Texas disposed of state standards and adopted national standards and testing.

To view the governor’s letter to Secretary Sebelius, please visithttp://governor.state.tx.us/files/press-office/O-SebeliusKathleen201207090024.pdf.