LWV Voters Guide

The Nightly Build

---

Richardson City Council Voters Guide

The League of Women Voters of Richardson has published its Richardson City Council Voters Guide. Like The Dallas Morning News own guide, it gives the candidates the opportunity to answer a series of questions unedited, unfiltered, uncensored. The questions address candidates' qualifications for office, top priorities for the council, proposals to create jobs, policies to encourage young families to move to Richardson, and steps needed to balance the budget.

If you read the News questionnaire, attended either of the two candidate forums held already, or read my previous blog entries on this election, there's not much news in this voters guide. Once more, all of the candidates talk about focusing on the budget during the recession, attracting quality retail and corporate business to Richardson, and renovating our aging public infrastructure, private housing and commercial buildings.

One or two of the challengers make a call for a code of ethics and financial transparency in government. None criticize any of the opponents directly. There's not even much in the way of indirect criticism, either. Credit the candidates for campaigning, at least publicly, by laying out their own positive vision for Richardson, not by driving up the negatives for their opponents. Judging by previous comments on this blog, by flyers circulated at the last candidates' forum, and by unconfirmed reports, there's too much of the latter going on behind the scenes by the candidates' supporters.

There are two candidate forums remaining. Be there!

American Muslim Alliance
Council Candidate Forum
7 p.m., Thursday, April 16
Dallas Central Mosque, Multi-Purpose Hall
840 Abrams Rd.

League of Women Voters of Richardson
and Richardson Chamber of Commerce
Council Candidate Forum
7 p.m., Tuesday, April 21
Richardson Civic Center, Grand Hall
411 W. Arapaho Road

Tier 1 research universities

The Nightly Build

---

UT-Dallas, Engine of Growth

Promoting the growth of UT-Dallas into prominence as a nationally recognized research university is a goal that made a brief appearance in the recent forum for candidates for Richardson's city council. One candidate, Gary Slagel, raised the subject unprompted by any audience question. He identified the Richardson university as being an engine for growth for the whole city. It's an example of an issue the campaign for city council should be focusing on instead of the mean-spirited politics of personal destruction the campaign is descending into instead.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram recognizes the importance of having a local Tier 1 university. The paper calls attention to the fact that DFW is the state's largest metropolitan area and has no Tier 1 research university. UT-Dallas, UT-Arlington and University of North Texas have the potential but need state help to achieve the next level of greatness.

There are some tiny steps being taken in this year's legislative session in Austin. The Senate passed a resolution by Sen. Robert Duncan of Lubbock calling for a source of funding for state research institutions. Unfortunately, it would only apply to universities that have already reached that Tier 1 status, not to aspiring schools like UT-Dallas. Senate Bill 9 submitted by Sen. Judith Zaffirini of Laredo corrects that omission, but has its own drawbacks. According to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:

"It would enable emerging research universities and other schools in Texas to compete for more state funding based on such criteria as their number of graduates in certain critical fields, their growth in research funding from business and government sources, their numbers of graduates each year and their ability to search out private gifts. The problem, of course, is that Zaffirini's bill has no funding."

Paul Burka has identified a potential source of funding, but even he doesn't seem to recognize the need for more Tier 1 research universities.

"The Legislature should abolish the emerging technology fund. The state has no business investing in start-ups. This is just wheeling and dealing with public funds that carries a huge potential for abuse and inside dealing. Lawmakers should take the $250 million appropriation and allocate it to the state's major research universities. Unlike the governor's office, the universities DO know who the world class researchers are, and they can use the money to recruit them from other states that are suffering worse budget crises than we are. As for the Enterprise Fund, used for closing deals, I would cut it in half and give the rest to the research universities."

All well and good, except Texas needs a few more Tier 1 research universities. The sad truth is that the Texas legislature still doesn't have a consensus on that. And, with a few exceptions, the candidates for Richardson city council don't seem to notice. And that's a shame. The city's future economic prosperity could could suffer because of it.

Candidate Brint Ryan

The Nightly Build

---

Innocent Until Proven Guilty

Steve Blow, in The Dallas Morning News Metro blog, criticized Dallas City Council candidate Brint Ryan "for trying to beat his many speeding tickets by using the old request-a-trial-and-hope-the-cop-doesn't-show-up technique." Trey Garrison defended Ryan:

"But a defendant in a criminal case, faced with charges from the state, should be free to use every avenue to defend himself. And we should never forget -- innocent until PROVEN guilty."

Certainly, I agree with Garrison that a defendant has the right to defend himself. That doesn't automatically make it the right thing to do, however. "Innocent until proven guilty" is how the state views a defendant. The defendant himself knows whether or not he’s guilty of, say, speeding. If he's innocent, then he should fight the charge. But, if he’s guilty, he ought to own up and pay his fine. Exploiting the system to escape the consequences is not justice. And all of us ought to be interested in justice, even when we are the ones on the wrong side of the law.

Richardson election recommendations

The Nightly Build

---

The Race at the Halfway Point

The election campaign for Richardson City Council is at the halfway point, with two of four scheduled forums behind the candidates. It's time to review and revise, if necessary, my preliminary recommendations, published on March 10, 2009.

• Place 1: Bob Townsend. This recommendation still looks good. Bill Denton, running as a write-in candidate, doesn't have a good explanation why he's running at all. Townsend might have had reservations about running, but Denton must have, too, as he missed the deadline to be on the ballot. Denton hasn't offered any policy differences with Townsend. Townsend has served Richardson well and deserves another term.
• Place 2: Mark Solomon: This recommendation still looks good. Solomon has the background, knowledge, temperament and priorities to serve the citizens of Richardson well. The other candidates are encouraged to remain active in Richardson politics. With more experience, they all could make fine candidates themselves.
• Place 3: John Murphy: This recommendation still looks good. Murphy has served Richardson well and deserves another term. Sheryl Miller, bless her heart, has a naive notion of government, promising tax cuts for all and improved services to boot. Chris Davis scares me still. She is evasive on her support for DART and on her acknowledgment that illegal immigration is primarily a federal matter. She has an unacknowledged conflict of interest in her employment for Dallas County Commissioner Maurine Dickey.
• Place 4: Gary Slagel: This recommendation still looks good. Slagel has served Richardson well and deserves another term. Diane Wardrup's campaign is based more on driving up Slagel's negatives than on offering a better program for Richardson. Thomas Bache-Wiig doesn't have the background or experience necessary.
• Place 5: Pris Hayes: This recommendation still looks good. Pris Hayes has increased the environmental consciousness of the council and deserves another term. Bob Macy is halting in his answers and does not offer a compelling reason for running or for not re-electing Hayes.
• Place 6: Steve Mitchell: Mitchell is unopposed. He has performed adequately in his first term as mayor and deserves another term.
• Place 7: No recommendation. My preliminary recommendation was Dennis Stewart. Because of his negative campaign against Amir Omar and because he spends more time on platitudes than on spelling out a compelling program for Richardson, I have to withdraw my recommendation. Unfortunately, I can't give it to Amir Omar, either. His proposed property tax freeze for seniors is unwise. His emphasis on it risks ignoring other more important issues.

Richardson candidate forum

The Nightly Build

---

In Public, Mostly Good Behavior

Who knew that Richardson had an automobile museum? A city council candidate forum, sponsored by Richardson Republican Women, was held at the NTX Automotive Museum at 677 W. Campbell Road. No museum signage outside. Inside, a few dozen shiny classic automobiles and fifteen shiny and/or classic candidates vying for the Richardson City Council.

First the good news. Richardson politicians may be divided, but more on personalities, not as much on issues as I feared might be the case this year. Neither of the wedge issues that the Richardson Coalition PAC recently editorialized on, illegal immigration and sexually oriented businesses, were exploited by any of the candidates. Most of the audience-submitted questions evoked no disagreement at all among the candidates.

There were different emphases, but all candidates identified the economic recession and pressure on the city budget as the number one issue facing the next council.

They all support tax abatements to attract business.

They all support a code of ethics for city government (although Sheryl Miller's reasonable question, "then why don't we have one?", was never answered).

They all support the improvement plans for the solid waste transfer station on Lookout Drive (although Sheryl Miller's answer made it sound like she thought the site was a rail station).

None of them wanted to set a fixed maximum on the ratio of apartments to single family homes.

They all support good communication and cooperation with the school districts and had good things to say about RISD (and PISD).

They all thought Richardson should renegotiate our "take or pay" water contract that locks the city into paying for water it doesn't use. Most of the challengers demagogued on this issue. The incumbents rightly pointed out that the city is meeting its primary goal of ensuring the water runs when you turn on the faucet; now we're debating how best to pay for it. Ensuring long-term water supplies requires some commitments to the entities that build the reservoirs and lay the pipes. It's better to have too much water than too little. Getting it just right 10 or 20 years into the future is difficult.

Despite the general consensus on the issues, there were a few sour notes during the evening.

Dennis Stewart was the most negative towards his opponent, pointedly telling voters to ask him about his arrest record, his bankruptcy, and his failure to use his "full legal name" on paperwork he filed to run for office. Observers might take this as a hint at Amir Omar's ethnicity and status as a first-generation American. Curiously, Stewart was the only candidate to close with "God bless America." Amir Omar stayed positive, refusing to respond to personal attack. (In his answer to the questionnaire in The Dallas Morning News voter's guide, Omar did address his arrest.)

Diane Wardrup was obliquely negative towards her opponent, repeatedly emphasizing her interest in a code of ethics, open government and transparency in government. She was more explicit in her answers to the News' questionnaire, there accusing Gary Slagel by name of ethical violations. In the forum, Slagel tried to pre-emptively defuse the expected attacks that never came explicitly, once saying the only property he's ever owned in the city is his house, once saying his business has never profited from his position on the city council.

Chris Davis hinted of a conspiracy, at one point suggesting that there is a "coalition" of people in Richardson who want to "go back to the council of old." If that was a veiled reference to the Richardson Coalition PAC, it was the only time the PAC was mentioned during the forum. Davis also said council members must avoid conflicts of interest. Ironically, she failed to identify her own employment by Dallas County Commissioner Maurine Dickey as a potential conflict of interest.

Out in the parking lot, someone was doing his candidates no good, putting flyers on car windshields. The flyers, not official campaign literature of any candidate, were signed "Ed L Haynes." The sponsors of the debate twice made an announcement during the forum that Richardson code forbids such practice, but the flyers were still there at the close of the evening. The flyers recommended replacing the "remaining dead wood" by electing Davis, Wardrup and Denton. "Politicians, like diapers, need changed often and for the same reason.!!!"

Bill Denton never did satisfactorily explain what he was doing there at all. He is the only official write-in candidate in Dallas County, having failed to file by the deadline to get on the ballot, filing a week later as a write-in candidate. He said he's running because his opponent said he almost didn't file. What? Bob Townsend did file, on the first day. Denton didn't file at all until after the deadline. By what logic does that disqualify Townsend and not Denton himself?

Diane Wardrup, Chris Davis, and Sheryl Miller seemed to think that "time for a change" is reason enough to elect them. There were many references throughout the night to the long tenures of Slagel and Murphy. Maybe that will resonate with voters in general, but the challengers ought to explain why their program for Richardson is better than the incumbents' programs. On this, they mostly failed, as there were consensus answers to most questions, as described above. John Murphy wins the prize for best deflection of this political attack, openly admitting he's attended an estimated 900 council meetings in his career and he thinks his face still looks pretty good.

Bob Macy, who mostly looked hestitant, even confused (something about the city being an airplane with its wings falling off if it gets out of balance - "I'm not saying it's out of balance now"), had his best moment as the only candidate to mention "the jewel of the city", the Richardson Regional Medical Center. Gary Slagel gets credit for most forcefully making the point that UT-Dallas is the engine for future economic growth in Richardson, if we can foster its growth as a tier one research university.

The candidates' programs may not all be wise and their campaign tactics may not all be honorable, but I believe that all the candidates have the best interests of Richardson in mind. All the candidates deserve our thanks for volunteering to serve the city of Richardson in a mostly no-win job. Tomorrow, I'll update my recommendations.

Richardson voter's guide

The Nightly Build

---

What the Candidates Have to Say

The Dallas Morning News' voter's guide is out and offers the many candidates running for Richardson City Council the chance to speak to voters directly. The questions are weighted towards regional issues -- rail, water, illegal immigration -- but there are open-ended questions that allow the candidates to speak to issues unique to Richardson. Noteworthy remarks...

• Place 1
  • Bob Townsend is running unopposed and does not appear in the voter's guide. Bill Denton has filed as a write-in candidate and will not appear on the ballot and does not appear in the voter's guide.
• Place 2
  • Mark Solomon: His resume is long. He is committed to regional efforts on rail, air quality, highway construction, and water planning. He is committed to maintaining leisure and cultural activities in Richardson. He recognizes that immigration is a national issue that cannot be solved by any one city.
  • Jimmy Schnurr: When asked if he favors regional rail, he doesn't give a straight answer. He says pending local option election legislation "may likely create unique and burdensome complications" for Richardson. Schnurr disappoints in his answer. Richardson sits squarely in the corridor between Dallas and the suburbs to the north. Regional rail is critical to Richardson's future development.
  • Thomas Volmer: His resume is thin. He fails to note Richardson's aging population when asked about demographic changes in Richardson. Asked about water planning, he offers sprinkler restrictions as an answer. He identifies lack of open communication and government transparency as issues that divide Richardson.
  • Jennifer Justice: Her resume is thin. She favors regional rail and local option elections to fund it. She identifies Richardson's aging population as a demographic issue, but oddly, talks about providing assisted living facilities and omits attracting young families to Richardson. She recognizes that illegal immigration is a federal matter. When asked about quality of life, she focuses on the environment and not leisure or cultural affairs. She identifies lack of open communication and government transparency as issues that divide Richardson.
• Place 3
  • John Murphy: His resume is impressive. He favors regional rail and local option elections to fund it. He recognizes the need to address the needs of an aging population while attracting younger citizens in Transit Oriented Development areas. Because of actions already taken by the council, he does not see a need to cut services or raise taxes to balance the upcoming budget. When asked what changes in local laws Richardson should adopt to address illegal immigration, he says simply, "None."
  • Chris Davis: Her resume is good. She identifies as her reason for running the fact that the incumbent has served for 18 years. She says she has "fresh ideas." She favors rail only when it pays for itself, considers additional taxes for North Texas rail to be "onerous" and opposes local option elections for voters to decide for themselves. It sounds like pre-DART ideas to this voter.
  • Sheryl Miller: Her resume is thin, featuring some volunteer work and membership in two book clubs. She lists Ebby Halliday as her top contributor. She cites the incumbent's service of "almost two decades" as a reason to elect her. She opposes local option elections to fund regional rail and suggests private enterprise build and operate rail lines as a solution. She identifies "kids on the free luch [sic] program" as a demographic change Richardson faces, without offering any measures to address the issue. She'll address any budget shortfall by cutting "exorbitant salaries, luxury auto allowances" and "pork" in the budget.
• Place 4
  • Gary Slagel: His resume is impressive. He favors regional rail and increased funding through local option elections. He identifies creating a tier-one research university at UT-Dallas as a opportunity for other regional cooperation. He identifies personnel costs, at 70% of the city budget, as the source for spending cuts, if the current economic downturn demands it. He identifies rec center construction and trail development as ways to improve the quality of life. He supports the E-Verify program to ensure the city and its contractors hire only workers eligible to work in the US. He identifies lack of open communication and government transparency as issues that divide Richardson, saying that city leaders must do better at communicating why and when confidentiality is critical and in the best interests of citizens.
  • Diane Wardrup: Her resume is impressive. She wants to make UT-Dallas a tier one research university. She criticizes Gary Slagel for using city supported facilities to operate his personal business without paying proper compensation to the city. She accuses Slagel (and Bache-Wiig) of not supporting open and honest government, financial transparency, or a code of ethics for city council. When asked about regional rail, she says she "agrees with the concept" but doesn't give this voter a sense that she is behind it in fact. She states that illegal immigration must be addressed by changes to federal and state law, not local law. She does not believe there is a single issue that divides Richardson.
  • Thomas Bache-Wiig: His resume is thin. He cites the incumbent's 22 years on the council as a reason for change. His answers are clearly the most verbose of any candidate, so if he draws any distinction between his program for Richardson and the incumbent's, I missed it in the verbiage. He favors regional rail and local option elections to fund it. When asked about demographic changes, he goes back to 1873, then 1925, then 1950 and on and on. Again, if there's something relevant to the current election, I missed it in the verbiage. In a budget shortfall, he won't cut services or raise taxes. He'll attract new business ... if they can stay awake through his sales pitch.
• Place 5
  • Pris Hayes: Her resume is good. She supports regional rail, but does not believe that one approach, such as Transit Oriented Development with rail, can handle all the needs of Richardson. She unenthusiastically supports local option elections to increase funding. She claims Richardson has only minimal budget shortfall at present. She favors addressing some of the negative consequences of illegal immigration by enforcing advanced property code standards and towing uninsured vehicles. She feels that women are underrepresented in city and regional government.
  • Bob Macy: His resume is good. He supports regional rail and local option elections to fund it. When asked about opportunities for regional cooperation, he says he favors a universal smoking ban. He supports refurbishing delapidated housing through a broader housing improvement tax incentive. He would use more tax abatement to recruit new business. In case of a budget shortfall, he would consultants, overtime, and unprofitable festivals. He does not propose any changes to local laws to deal with illegal immigration. He sees no serious divisions in Richardson.
• Place 6
  • Steve Mitchell is running unopposed and does not appear in the voter's guide.
• Place 7
  • Dennis Stewart: His resume is good. When asked what key differences are with his opponent, he says his opponent moved to Richardson and into an apartment a little over a year ago. He says his opponent didn't use his full name on the documents filed for this election. He favors a property tax exemption for senior citizen homeowners. He favors regional rail but opposes local option elections to increase funding. He denies that there have been any significant changes recently to Richardson's demographics. He favors the city's neighborhood revitalization program and broadening its home improvement incentives. He prioritizes increased funding for infrastructure repair - streets, alleys, public buildings. He believes immigration laws are the responsibility of the federal government. He says there are no signicant issues that divide the city.
  • Amir Omar: His resume is good. He admits to once having paid a fine and doing community service for accidentally writing a bad check while running a small business in college. He favors regional rail and its expansion. Regarding greater regional cooperation, he identifies traffic light coordination as an opportunity. He cites increased racial and ethnic diversity as a demographic change Richardson is experiencing. He does not mention an aging population. He does not foresee a need to increase taxes or cut services. He would like to gain its "fair share" of spending by people who work in, but do not live in, Richardson. He does propose any changes to local laws regarding illegal immigration. He identifies a "fairly new rift" in Richardson, but does not specify the issues creating the rift. He says he is not affiliated with either side of the purported right.

I'll give my opinions on all this and my mid-campaign recommendations tomorrow.

DMN cuts; Richardson SOBs; Voter's Guide

The Nightly Build

---

What's Not In The DMN

What's my pet peeve? The Dallas Morning News not covering The Dallas Morning News.

Newspaper publisher James Moroney sent an email to employees this morning announcing that the previously announced company-wide reduction in force was to happen today and tomorrow. Where did I read about this? Not in The Dallas Morning News. Frontburner has the story. And News' employees have their own blog covering the actions.

The employee blog, titled DMNcuts, has the subtitle, "About newsroom staffing cuts at the Dallas Morning News. Because somebody needs to do it." Exactly. Somebody does need to do it. Why The Dallas Morning News doesn't do it themselves is my pet peeve. It explains why The Dallas Morning News is doomed. All the experts know that the survival of newspapers depends on their ability to leverage their lead in local news coverage. Yet, even here, in a case where the news originates inside The Dallas Morning News itself, the DMN is scooped by Frontburner and a blog made up of soon-to-be-ex DMN employees. I hope Moroney assigns one of those writers the job of writing the DMN's own obituary before he lets them all go, because he's going to need it for the DMN's last issue.

I sympathize with the employees who are losing their jobs. The newspaper business is going through wrenching changes. The people running the business are seemingly incapable of adapting fast enough to survive. The people writing the stories pay the price.

---

Sexually Oriented Business Still Restricted

A while back, we commented on the Richardson Coalition PAC's editorial criticizing the Richardson City Council for rejecting as a stated goal the evaluation of further restrictions on Sexually Oriented Business zoning. William "Bill" McCalpin posted his own response on The Richardson Echo, pointing out that, in 2007, the city council adopted zoning changes that restricted such businesses as much as is legally practical under current state and federal laws.

Today, the Richardson Coalition PAC responds, implying that the council isn't doing enough without spelling out what more is needed. The "Webmaster for the Richardson Coalition" (no further identification is offered) claims that the only action the PAC requested was "vigilance," implying that the council has not been vigilant on this issue. Further, the PAC's Webmaster claims the council is reluctant to "consider sensitive and controversial issues." Both of these implications are false. The council did not take its eye off the ball, as the PAC's Webmaster claims. The ball is still in hand and sexually oriented businesses are still restricted. The current zoning laws, adopted in 2007 as a result of this issue, are working. The Richardson Coalition PAC offered no evidence to the contrary before and its Webmaster offers none now. Despite the PAC's efforts to make this into a campaign issue during this city council election, there is no issue here. The council adroitly handled this sensitive issue in 2007 and continues to be sensitive to any changes in the status quo that may arise to make it an issue again.

---

The DMN Voter's Guide Is Out

The Dallas Morning News' voter's guide is out and offers the many candidates running for Richardson City Council to speak to voters directly. The questions are weighted towards regional issues -- rail, water, illegal immigration -- but there are open-ended questions that allow the candidates to speak to issues unique to Richardson. I'll offer my impressions tomorrow.

Ron Kirk; Bando Show

The Nightly Build

---

"It Ain't Undone Yet," Kirk Says

What's former Dallas mayor Ron Kirk been up to lately? I mean other than paying back taxes, kissing up to senators in confirmation hearings and preparing for his Cabinet-level position as US Trade Representative? Well, he's been second-guessing the Army Corps of Engineers.

Todd Gillman, in The Dallas Morning News, interviews Kirk, who says, "I just find it remarkable that you would wait until you've gotten that far along with bridge construction and now raise a concern about the integrity of the levees." Like this is the first time someone's questioned those levees. Katrina should have been a wake-up call to the danger posed by those aging earthen levees protecting downtown Dallas from Trinity River floods. And this spring's floods in Fargo, North Dakota, should serve as a start reminder of the danger of river flooding far from coastal hurricane zones. Kirk pretends that the risks posed by those levees is, in fact, what was behind the Trinity River project all along. "We knew the levees needed strengthening. That was the whole purpose of this program, to restore the structural integrity of the levees."

If you thought those comments would get past Unfair Park's Jim Schutze, you haven't been following Schutze's coverage of the Trinity project. Schutze appreciates that Kirk is an effective lobbyist, but he just doesn't see the public rising up in anger with the Corps, demanding that the Trinity River project go forward, unsafe levees be damned. I'm with Schutze. The Corps aren't the bad guys here. The powers that be that have pushed this ill-conceived plan to build a tollway inside and partially on top of the levees that are all that protect downtown Dallas from ravaging floodwaters are the bad guys. And they haven't had a change of heart yet. "It ain't undone yet," Kirk says.

---

Best Spring Show Yet

The Richardson Berkner High School drill team, the Bandoleras, are putting on their annual spring show. The show, titled "Save the Date," is the best in years. The calendar theme ties the dance numbers and the show as a whole together nicely. The dancing itself is, as usual, superb. The chemistry between the emcees is natural and infectious. The pacing is fast, with welcome appearances by the country dance team, the Ramblers and the Mighty Ram Band's drumline. Lighting and sound were flawless. The comedy troupe's well-rehearsed acts showed creativity and wit. All in all, a great night of live entertainment. There's on more night to catch the show, Saturday at 7:30 pm. Be there.

Pushing toll roads

The Nightly Build

---

Carona to TxDOT: Quit Marketing Toll Roads

Terrence Stutz, in The Dallas Morning News Trailblazers blog, reports that Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, has introduced a bill to forbid the Texas Department of Transportation from spending money on commercials extolling the virtues of toll roads. Apparently, the voters need a little help seeing the benefits and TxDOT has spent $4.5 million in some friendly persuasion.

In general, government should spend it's time and money doing, not selling the public on what it's doing. Government should function bottoms-up. Citizens should recognize a need. Citizens should vote vote for candidates who promise to address that need. Elected officials should deliver on their promises. Tops-down government, where elected officials identify a need and then spend time and money convincing the electorate that those in government know best, is, in general, a dangerous practice.

That said, I support public service announcements, for example informing the public of the dangers of smoking, or urging citizens not to litter, or asking young men and women to enlist in the armed forces. I also support elected officials being leaders and not just carrying out the wishes expressed in polls and focus groups. To lead, you have to first educate the public on the issue to be addressed. I may not be able to say exactly where to draw the line, but I'm convinced that TxDOT spending millions of dollars telling us how wonderful toll roads are, crosses that line into territory where TxDOT ought not to go.

Sobriety checkpoints

The Nightly Build

---

Catching Drunk Drivers Before They Kill

Mike Hashimoto, in The Dallas Morning News Opinion blog, weighs in on the subject of instituting random sobriety checkpoints in Texas. He's against it, natch. So are most of the commenters. Nevertheless, it could become reality if a bill already passed by the Texas Senate becomes law.

The objections are varied. Some complain of inconveniencing sober drivers. Some complain random stops are an invasion of privacy and a violation of the Fourth Amendment prohibition of unreasonable searches. Others argue that sobriety checkpoints are ineffective. Some go so far as to say the whole idea is mainly for show, a way of convincing the public that something is being done. Still others argue that sobriety checkpoints aren't even needed, as the prevalence of drunken driving is exaggerated. The conspiracy-minded see greed behind the idea, that cities look to sobriety checkpoints as a way of raising money from DWI fines.

Nicole Stockdale points out a couple of facts from a 2006 editorial that continue to drive the debate today. First, "In Texas, 1,224 drivers with a blood alcohol level of .08 or greater died in motor vehicle crashes last year." And, second, "Texas is among only 10 states that don't allow law enforcement officials to operate such stops."

That tells me that there is a problem, that it's serious, and that unless someone can devise a solution that protects civil liberties, voters are going to accept proposals that don't. It's happening in other states; it'll happen in Texas, too, regardless of the objections cited above. So, from a practical standpoint, people opposed to sobriety checkpoints should start proposing other ways to stop people who have been drinking too much from getting behind the wheel and putting all of our lives at risk. And then the objectors should get their alternative proposals enacted. The public will no longer accept the status quo.