A Good First Step For Higher Education
Emily Ramshaw, in The Dallas Morning News, reports that the Texas House has passed a measure that creates three funding pools for the seven "emerging research universities" in Texas, including Richardson's own UT-Dallas. The bill now goes to the Senate.
This is a good step, but note that funding for the pools is not yet in the budget. Without funding, good intentions will lead to nothing. Encourage your legislators to fund this effort.
Following the Money in Richardson
There aren't many issues in the current race for Richardson City Council. The candidates have mostly agreed with each other during the five forums for candidates. The one topic that seems to come up everywhere -- in forums, in campaign literature, on blogs -- is transparency in government. It means different things to different people. An online city checkbook and video streaming of council meetings are often called for, and all candidates support these measures.
Full disclosure of each candidate's supporters is sometimes mentioned, with different sides finding fault with each other. Some Richardson voters (and candidates) see a conspiracy behind the Richardson Coalition, a PAC made up of some of Richardson's most prominent business and political leaders. Talk is loud enough to prompt the Richardson Coalition to publish an editorial titled, "Follow the Money" in which it defends itself against charges of funding the campaigns of candidates it supports. The Richardson Coalition lists the funds it has donated to political candidates in 2007-2009. It's $0.
The PAC does not state how much money it has spent on its own promoting specific candidates, for example the flier it mailed to voters in which it endorsed seven of the seventeen candidates for city council. Such expenditures may not be monetary contributions to candidates, but these expenditures do directly benefit the candidates that the PAC backs. According to reports on file with the Texas Ethics Commission, the Richardson Coalition PAC lists over $27,000 in contributions it received in 2007 and 2008.
After defending itself, the Richardson Coalition PAC goes on to criticize other PACs for being involved in Richardson politics. Specifically, it criticizes the Richardson Fire Fighters Association PAC for making contributions to candidates. According to reports on file with the Texas Ethics Commission, the RFFA PAC lists over $17,000 in contributions it received in 2007 and 2008. The Richardson Coalition PAC says they "will be watching this carefully to insure that this organization does not receive any preferential treatment, regardless of who prevails in the election." Perhaps what Richardson really needs is a non-partisan group watching all the PACs, including the Richardson Coalition, to make sure that money does not have an undue influence on election results. Like the Richardson Coalition urges, voters are well advised to follow the money.
P.S. Early voting begins today. Don't forget to vote.
7 comments:
SteveG, thanks for the feedback. If you've read my other comments on this race, you know I'm no fan of the Richardson Coalition's tactics. There have been too many unsourced rumors and innuendos spread against all candidates by partisans on all sides.
I don't care that PACs raise money to spend on candidates (it's legal, after all). I don't care that people who don't live in Richardson are endorsing candidates (although on one candidate's site, none of the first seven people listed lived in Richardson - kinda strange).
What I do care about is the growing coarseness of the public debate. No, not at the forums, where the candidates nearly all get along, but by outsiders who are slinging mud and repeating what even they admit is just raw gossip ("It is said...", "The rumor is...").
Sadly, people in the public space have to put up with bald-faced lies being told about them, and there is virtually nothing they can do about it.
What the public should realize is (1) some people do deliberately lie and slander during campaigns, and (2) if it seems too wild to be true...it's probably not true. Common sense should rule.
I hope it does on election day.
Bill
Interestingly enough, if you go to the Richardson Coalitions site and look up their contributors, you will find one of the contributors is Bob Macy. Bob Macy is running for one of the councilman positions. Isn't it convenient that the Coalition recommends Bob?
When people ask me about the RC, I send them to better voter guides. I hope you don't mind if I post them here as well.
The League of women voters publishes a voter’s guide which can be found here: http://lwvrichardson.org/corvg.html
Printed copies of this guide are available at the Richardson Public Library
The League of Women Voters has their 2009 candidate forum available online and on CITV. You can find it online here: http://lwvrichardson.org/corforum.html
The Dallas Morning News has a guide at : http://www.thevoterguide.org/a-dallas09/
William J. 'Bill' McCalpin, I, too regret the coarseness of the campaign.
Andy, you are correct that Bob Macy is listed as a Richardson Coalition supporter. I think the PAC should have pointed out that connection in its mailer recommending Macy.
Sherri, thanks for posting links to other voter's guides. The LWV guide is truly non-partisan. The DMN does take sides in elections, but its guide is strictly the candidates in their own words. Both guides are better sources of information than the Richardson Coalition PAC's mailer (or the RFFA PAC's mailer, for that matter).
The only unfortunate thing about the LWV guide that I saw online was that the candidates were cut off at 100 words.
I am still simmering over the Coalition mailer. The sheer audacity of their arrogance is astonishing and it draws an immediate visceral reaction from me.
Andy, I think the LWV limit of 100 words was dictated by their plans to distribute a printed edition. The candidates were informed of the limit. Why any chose to ignore it is baffling. Now that many people get their information online, the LWV ought to make accommodations for the candidates to go over 100 words in the online edition of the guide.
I agree that the Richardson Coalition's mailer was heavy-handed. I think maybe people had too high expectations for them, expecting that because of the prominence of some of the names, they would take the high road. But they are a PAC after all. A PAC with money is too often a ticket to the low road.
Post a Comment