Critique: Should Planned Parenthood Close?

After reading my classmate’s blog post on Texas Government News regarding Planned Parenthood, I was very intrigued by the facts that were shared.  I had not heard about the Government Accountability Office’s investigation into Planned Parenthood’s financial records or the $4.3 million lawsuit that a Texas Planned Parenthood affiliate paid to settle a fraudulent Medicaid billing claim out of court.

After doing some research of my own, I agree with the author that both financial concerns appear to be a clear blemish on the record of Planned Parenthood.  In addition, after looking into the statistic that claims the organization performed 333,964 abortions last year, I agree it does seem like a substantial amount of abortions performed. However, with the current state of the economy people are turning to Planned Parenthood as an affordable resource for abortions.  The rate of 1 abortion every 94 seconds includes all the clinics across the U.S. and thus should be examined from a broader perspective than just Texas.  Actually the author’s claim about Texas not having the capacity to perform abortions at this rate is the exact reason why Planned Parenthood was fighting the recent abortion bill that was passed in Texas.  By closing abortion clinics, women will have less access to affordable family planning and health services.

Ultimately, I believe we need to examine Planned Parenthood from a broader perspective.  It does appear to have some financial concerns, and similar to the Medicaid expansion program, the program is not perfect. However, it is important to understand the valuable services Planned Parenthood provides including: helping prevent unintended pregnancies, administering cancer screenings, administering STD tests and treatments, providing educational programs for youths and adults, and performing abortions.  While many people commonly associate Planned Parenthood with primarily abortions, the statistics show that only 3% of their services are related to abortions.  Their main focus is on prevention of unintended pregnancies with nearly 71% of their clients receiving pregnancy prevention services. Therefore, I believe that rather than saying Planned Parenthood should close based on two financial incidents and one debatable abortion fact, the author should take a more logical approach to examining the program. I will acknowledge that the program has some faults, but the services they provide benefit the health and well-being of millions of Americans and far outweigh the minor problems that draw the media’s attention.  

Overall, I felt that the author presented quality information and choose an interesting topic that was very informative to me as a reader. However, I did have a few minor criticisms. As previously mentioned, I believe that their analysis may have focused too much on the financial records of Planned Parenthood and abortions.  While these are relevant issues, I believe that next time the author should analyze the full spectrum issues before deciding that a government funded program should close their doors. Finally, while I enjoyed the opinionated blog post, I would avoid the overuse of exclamation points in the future unless they are really relevant to provide emphasis.    

Editorial: Sitting on a Gold Mine

After reading about many of the current political issues in the state of Texas, I have realized the importance of increasing revenue for state programs.  The more revenue the state can garner, the more flexibility they have to implement new programs or improve existing ones.  As I was driving past Darrell K. Royal Memorial Stadium last week, it dawned on me that the state is losing a clear opportunity to capitalize on a vacant 100,000 seat stadium that is right here in Austin.  Rather than limiting popular musicians such as Paul McCartney to play two nights at the Frank Erwin Center or having Taylor Swift play two nights at the Austin 360 Amphitheater, why don’t we have them play at the football stadium?  Rather than only utilizing the football stadium for UT home football games, why not try to bring in additional revenue for the city of Austin and the state of Texas?

Another possibility to explore is bringing in an MLS soccer team to Austin.  There would not be any major game conflicts with UT football games because they only play five or six home games per year.  With economic expansion driving Austin’s population growth, there would be a growing fan base for Austin’s only professional sports franchise.  While Dallas and Houston have MLS teams, San Antonio does not.  Therefore, Austin could draw the soccer fans in from San Antonio and further expand their fan base.  Currently Austin has been limited to only having the F1 race track, but I believe that now is the time to create an MLS franchise and capitalize on the positive momentum of the F1 race track.  By bringing a professional soccer team to Austin, the city could utilize corporate sponsorship funding to gain revenue for the state.  Also, the Austin MLS team could follow the lead of many other U.S. soccer teams and schedule exhibition games with teams from Mexico and South America similar to the Houston Dynamo to draw large crowds.

I believe that both the idea of utilizing Darrell K. Royal Stadium to hold concerts and to be the home stadium for an MLS soccer team are two outstanding ideas because the investment risk is so minimal for the state.  They do not need to raise funds to build a venue, its already made and waiting to be used 360 days per year.  In addition, the funds that they would need to contribute to hire staff and security would create jobs that would further bolster both the local Austin economy and the overall Texas economy.  Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems to me that we are sitting on a gold mine by not utilizing the empty Darrell K. Royal Stadium for more events.

Critique: Pulling Your Card, Texas

After reading Courtney Robertson’s post on her blog, Courtney Robertson / TX Justice, I definitely felt more informed about how Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department are working to preserve voting rights. In her post, Courtney provides quality background on several important elements and key stakeholders affected by the initiative.  First, she briefly described how the Justice Department’s initiative will affect Texas by forcing the state to get federal approval before making redistricting changes.  Then, she proceeded to describe Attorney General Holder’s goal for the plan to decrease discriminatory practices such as Texas’ frequent redistricting and gerrymandering.  While this information was helpful, it would have provided better context to include the fact that the initiative hopes to prevent problems such as the 2003 redistricting crisis from occurring in the future.

One key aspect in the beginning of the post that really stood out was the succinct, relevant quotes from both Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott and Governor Rick Perry.  By including their critical views that the Obama Administration is trying to work around the Supreme Court ruling on the Voting Act of 1965, it helped the reader quickly understand the point of contention between the federal government and the Texas government.  Also, I thought that the sentence about the feds pulling Governor Perry’s calling card was a good insertion of humor into the post.  It made the post seem more personal in style, and it provided an interesting way to set up the following analysis.

The analysis portion of the post examined the rationale underlying the federal government’s enforcement of federal preclearance is constitutional.  While Section 4 of the Voting Rights act of 1965 was struck down, Section 5 is still in effect.  Therefore, the federal government is not trying to work around the Supreme Court’s ruling; rather they are instead fulfilling their duty to protect the rights of Texas citizens.  This information demonstrates that Greg Abbott’s “political theater” comment about the Obama Administration was based on political allegiances rather than facts.  Another excellent point Courtney made was that because Texas recently ranked last in voter turnout, it was only a matter of time before their voting practices were examined.  While I believe this a great point, I felt that the statistic of Texas being ranked last in voter turnout may have provided more impact and served as a quality attention-getter if it was placed earlier in the post.  Since Courtney’s conclusion is based around the idea that Texans should not be surprised that voting practices are being regulated, I think it would have provided better flow to introduce this rationale earlier in the post.

Overall, I thought that Courtney’s post was a quality piece of writing and was very informative.  The succinct nature of her writing and factual background information provided excellent context for the topic and made a complicated set of government actions easy to understand.

Wendy Davis: Strategic Democrat Decision

During the past few months, the Texas Abortion Bill has garnered national attention with its heated debates and headline-grabbing protests.  While the Democrats were not able to stop the legislation from being passed a second time, they did have one key underlying victory.  That triumph was the arrival of Texas Senator Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, into the national spotlight.  Her 13 hour filibuster during last month’s special session helped temporarily kill the abortion bill in the Texas Senate.   Following the national news coverage of her filibuster as well as her rags-to-riches inspirational story, speculation is now swirling about her possible run for the Democratic candidacy for Texas Governor.  Based on her strong record, inspirational background, and growing political celebrity, this seems to be a likely path for Davis.  However, after examining the Republican competition for Governor, I believe a run for that office may be a mistake.  The biggest reason why this could be a misstep is that Attorney General Greg Abbott has already been touted by Gov. Perry as his likely successor in 2014.  Based on the Texas track record of using the Attorney General position as a breeding ground for future Governors and the current dominance of the Republican Party within the state, it seems logical that they will maintain control of the Governor’s office.  Therefore, I think Wendy Davis should run for a different office that will allow the Democrats to turn the tides in Texas.  At a recent Washington D.C. fundraiser, Davis discussed how her filibuster was not just a stand for women’s rights but a stand for a more progressive Texas.  I believe that a more progressive Texas is only possible if the Democrats can gain control of some the executive offices.  One potential path for Davis would be to run for Lt. Governor against incumbent David Dewhurst and his fellow Republican candidates.  While this race is also highly contested, Davis stands a better chance because there does not appear to be a clear favorite like Greg Abbott in Governor’s race.  By entering the race for Texas Governor in 2014, I believe Davis and the Democratic Party would be wasting an opportunity to compete for an executive office position.   In addition, I think the Democrats would lose the opportunity to leverage the positive publicity Davis has already captured.   In my opinion, the best strategic move for both Davis and the Democrats is to go against what journalists say and run for another executive office such as Lt. Governor.  

Dewhurst Rocks Downtown Houston Pachyderm Club

David Jennings’ commentary on the Big Jolly Politics blog describes the positive transformation of Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst.  Based on the reputation as a right-leaning, conservative blog, Jennings caters to his intended audience of Texas Republican voters.  This post was extremely intriguing due to the first-hand experience Jennings has to offer based on David Dewhurst’s recent appearance at the Downtown Houston Pachyderm Club.  Jennings provided context of his proximity to the Lt. Governor by including a fantastic photo of David Dewhurst kissing his wife at the beginning of the event.  In addition, Jennings references his previous conversations with Dewhurst about running based on his reputation.  All of these references help build Jennings’ credibility and establish context for his revised view of Dewhurst.

Essentially, Jennings’ argument is that the David Dewhurst he once knew as a stiff, standoffish politician has become a “warm, confident, hand-shaking, back-slapping, fist bumping, relaxed candidate.”  Rather than simply running on his strong record like he did last election, Dewhurst now appears to have the full complement of skills to retain his position in the next election.  Jennings cited the fact that Dewhurst circled the room greeting people and then pushed his way through to embrace his wife Trisha.  Dewhurst’s warmth and confidence in this setting demonstrated the presence he had gained.  When Dewhurst answered a question regarding reaching out to the Latino community, Jennings said that Dewhurst calmly answered the question in fluent Spanish.  Regarding Dewhurst’s poise, Jennings cited Dewhurst’s handling of the recent HB2 legislation dealing with abortion and women’s health. At the event, Dewhurst reiterated that he respected the crowd’s right to protest, but as a leader, he was still going to pass the bill.  Dewhurst also joked about the 250 troopers he brought in for the session, saying that if you ever wanted to speed on the highways of Texas that was the week to do it.  First hand examples such as these help shed light on the composed, personable nature of David Dewhurst that you normally cannot get from news story.  Ultimately, Jennings’ logical conclusion is that with his relaxed demeanor, strong leadership record, and improving appeal to Hispanic voters, David Dewhurst looks to be a strong favorite for reelection.

While the overall quality of David Jennings’ commentary was outstanding, I have two small criticisms.  First, he cited a key campaign quote by David Dewhurst and then proceeded to state that it was not an exact quote but it was close enough.  I understand that it is a blog post, but as a member of the journalist community, I would expect Jennings to clarify a quote that is a key theme to Dewhurst’s future campaign.  Second, Jennings discussed a question asked by a rising Republican leader RW Bray regarding appealing to minorities and youth. While Jennings said that Dewhurst’s unsatisfactory answer was his only stumble of the night, his failure to include Dewhurst’s actual answer hurt the overall context of the criticism.

Editorial Critique: Tuition Revenue Bonds

The editorial in The Dallas Morning News addresses the issue of adding tuition revenue bonds to the special sessions called by Gov. Rick Perry.  It was written to explain that for the state to sustain its powerful economy, it needs well-funded universities that supply talented workers.  The target audience for the article includes Texas residents, universities, legislators, and Gov. Perry who all have a stake in the issue.  The goal of the bonds is to help Texas state universities raise revenues for construction projects by offering bonds backed by the state at reasonable interest rates.  This will allow universities to finance the construction of engineering, medical, and other pertinent facilities.  Another key factor is that the state stands to benefit by issuing the bonds now while interest rates are still low.  All of these factors demonstrate the relevance of the issue; however, the problem is that this issue has been put on hold until other legislation can be decided.  Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, has already worked on the tuition revenue bonds with his recently introduced HB 5 legislation, but in order for the issue to be voted on it needs to be added by Gov. Perry to the special session call.  Gov. Perry has stated that he would consider adding the tuition revenue bonds to the special session, but only after his original list of issues has been resolved. Therefore, with less than two weeks before this current session ends on July 30, time is clearly a limiting factor.  With a $1.4 trillion state economy, Texas is a dominant business leader in the U.S. and abroad.  However, the editorial argument is that the state needs to invest in additional university facilities to continue to foster talented, innovative college graduates.

Overall, this editorial creates a substantiated argument by laying out the logical reasons why tuition revenue bonds are an important issue.  By providing background on the current special sessions called by Gov. Perry and Rep. Dan Branch’s HB 5 legislation, the average Texas resident is able to understand the incentive for passing the legislation.  The problem is that the editorial falls short of grabbing the reader’s attention.  For instance, rather than waiting until the very last paragraph to show how this legislation could affect Gov. Perry’s legacy, I believe the editors should lead with this information.  Then, the factual elements of a looming special session deadline, the interest rate risk, and the impact on the Texas economy become more engaging to the reader.  Also, the article did not specifically address the political viewpoints of both Republicans and Democrats on the issue.  In addition, the only stakeholder offered a clear call to action was Gov. Rick Perry.  Therefore, while I agree with the strong evidence presented, the fact that the editorial failed to grab the reader’s attention, address the partisan views on the issue, and give a well-rounded call to action caused it to fall short for me.   

Republican Victory: Senate Passes Abortion Bill

On Friday, July 12, 2013, the Texas Senate successfully passed a strict new abortion bill.  This marked a key victory for Republicans who failed to pass the bill last month after losing momentum due to a lengthy filibuster and large protests.  This abortion legislation drew national attention when protesters had items such as tampons and food confiscated for fears they would toss them on the Senate floor. San Antonio Express-News writer David Rauf provides strong perspective on the dynamics involved with the bill.  For instance, Democrats tried to use a multitude of amendments to complicate the bill.  Republicans dismissed these proposals including Sen. Carlos Uresti’s proposal that attempted to exempt rape and incest victims from the 20-week ban the bill enforces.  Sen. John Whitmire took particular issue with the Republicans dismissive actions implying that they were letting political ties overshadow creating the best possible legislation.  Now that the bill has passed the Senate, it will go to Gov. Rick Perry who intends to sign it into law.  Overall, I believe this article is worth reading because it provides important perspective on the new abortion bill, and it illustrates the complexities of pushing legislation through the Texas government.