In the Blog Erebus Idea, my fellow student wrote “ Over Our Heads During A Drought ”, about the “Water Plant #4” controversy and advocated against the project.
I will be presenting an alternate viewpoint.
As an environmentalist, it interested me that the S.O.S. coalition and Sierra Club both came out against this project when such a large portion of the costs was due to addressing the environmental concerns of running the pipelines and there should be little or no effect on groundwater recharge. The lakes all around us do not exist naturally but were specifically made to address the water needs of the area way into the future. The amount of groundwater recharge as the result of the creation of the lakes pales in comparison to what seeped down when there was only a river there and we shouldn’t gripe when someone tries to use them for their intended purpose.
That aside, the point made in the blog being reviewed was that the building of the plant was poor management. I take the opposite viewpoint and feel that the plant is an example of the Water Utility doing what it should be doing, ensuring they have the capacity to address the areas water needs. The article raised the question ”The one glaring issue that is being overlooked is how is this plant going to save us water?”. Well, it won’t save us a drop. A treatment plant “Provides water”, Conservation is done on the consumption end. Conservation reduces demand but does not completely eliminate the need for the resource; the remaining demand must still be met. What the plant will conserve is energy. As a consumer of electricity, the plant will be approximately 7% more efficient, thus, reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The energy saved will be enough to supply 2000 homes. About WTP4
Although this is being called “Water Plant #4”, currently the city of Austin only has 2 other plants, The Davis (Built in 1954) and Ulrich (Built in 1969) plants. The Green Plant was decommissioned in 2008. Now, I do think that was not bright, but it was in the name of “Development” and we have all seen how “Development” gets priority. What is done is done, and we must address what we have to work with now.
Now, to explain why this plant is needed, I am actually getting my facts from a site opposing the plant as it is more simply laid out and readable than official sources. FACTS About Austin's Water Supply and Usage Also used the City site that explained the rationale for the plant.
Now, reading through here, “Austin currently has 285 MG per day (MGD) water treatment capacity and 167 MG of storage capacity. Treatment and storage must combine to meet “peak” demands on a reliable basis.” Check! (Note: Storage makes up the difference between demand and treatment in extreme circumstances, too much demand over treatment several days in a row will deplete storage.
“In 2007 Austin completed a 67 MGD capacity expansion to its Ullrich water treatment plant, for a total of 167 MGD at the Ullrich plant. Austin’s “Davis” plant can treat 118 MGD.” Check!
“In the drought summer of 2009 Austin water use peaked at 228 million gallons (MG), the day before the one-day per weak drought water restrictions were to begin. In 2010, a relatively wet year, Austin water use peaked at 193 MG on a single day” Check!... er... wait! Lets look at this. Even in a “WET” year, peak usage exceeded the treatment capacity of any one plant, and now we have only 2 of them. In the dry year of 2009, Austin was using 80% of it’s full capacity.
Now, the Austin area grew 37% from 2000 to 2010. Austin area population increases by nearly half million, 2010 census data show What happens if we have a repeat performance in the next decade, or even grow only 20%. Get the math? What would happen if we lost just one of those plants? Subtract the daily usage from the remaining capacity and divide the deficit into the 167 MGD storage. It does not last very long.
Even with water conservation increasing, the population growth will offset the gains and water usage will eventually continue to rise. The water plant they are building is intended to tap into a water reservoir that was specifically made to supply the area with water. Additionally, the two existing plants both draw water from Lake Austin and WTP4 will draw from Lake Travis. Should some form of contamination occur to the Lake Austin water, this provides a secondary source that does not currently exist. If a theoretical contamination did occur, current “storage” would last one, maybe 2 days.
The high cost is due to the fact that the water must be piped to the City’s water distribution head, and, going through an environmentally sensitive area, they must bore the pipeline under it instead of digging ditches through it. To do it any other way would require re-running a zillion major water mains and would make the 500 million look like pocket change. Water Treatment Plant 4 plans move forward
I actually view this as the city doing it’s supposed to do. Provide a reliable source of drinking water with failsafe capacity and capacity to accommodate growth. It can take a decade to plan and built a plant and these people are water professionals, not politicians. They are looking decades ahead. The two existing plants will eventually be beyond obsolete and the utility must look to the future. Although the initial capacity will be 50 MGD, the facility will be able to eventually draw 300 MGD. ENR features AECOM’s Austin's Water Treatment Plant No. 4 project
Yes, it will be expensive, but at 500 Million dollars divided between the 800,000 residents, that averages out to $625 per person. The cost to drill a private well is around $7500. I think you’re getting a darn good deal. If you want clean, reliable water now and in the future, it’s time to pay for it. The cost will be spread out over time and by tying it to utility rates, those that use the water will pay for the water.
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Monday, July 25, 2011
Pushmi-Pullyu
One question that has come up in both US and Texas government classes is whether a politician can properly represent a constituency that is different than they are. Watching the new “Tea Party” inspired Republican party, I almost have to rephrase the question to; How can a politician represent a constituency that they hate.
Well, the word “Hate” may be a little extreme, but not by much in many cases. Watching many of the political debates and speeches lately, I have to wonder who Republicans do like. They seem to have slowly evolved from simply a party advocating small government to the party of intolerance. Beginning in the 80’s and 90s when they embraced the evangelical Christian and moral majority for support, they have slowly inched along to where now almost anyone “not exactly like them” is treated like the scourge of the earth.
I also have to wonder how long this political party will be able to retain influence if they continue to assault the very people who have to vote them into office. How long will it be before they are hated back so strongly that they inspire the non-politically inclined people to register to defend themselves.
Lets go down the list and look at a few…
Of course, they hate Democrats and Liberals. I don’t think this one need much evidence, They regard these two words to be at a comparable level to pedophiles, murderers and communists. You can see the look on their face when they say them, like they accidently bought sour candy at the movie theatre. In Texas the Republican/Democrat Split is around 60/40, but I will say 70/30 just to be safe. That is the first 30% they hate.
But let’s see who else they are alienating… I am doing this looking primarily at Texas
The poor: With the divide between the have and have-nots continuing to grow and unemployment remaining a problem, this is one of the fasted growing groups in America, The middle class is becoming lower class and the lower middle class in slipping into poverty. As the one Republican said when he was asked about the unemployed (as he was getting into an elevator during the unemployment compensation extensions debate), “F*ck Them”. People remember things like this. O.K… Unemployment hovering around 10%, Another several percentage points permanently out of the workforce or long term unemployed. Since unemployment is a little better in Texas, I will combine these groups and call them both 10% and add them to the 15% living in poverty Poverty rates for the United States and for Texas. 25% for the poor folks.
Hispanics: The recent debate on sanctuary cities in Texas left a pretty bad taste in the mouth of the Hispanic population. I reviewed a good article on this for my last Blog entry. "Will ‘Sanctuary Cities‘ Galvanize Texas Latinos?" Texas is now 38% Hispanic and growing.
Gays: Even if they do not “Hate” gays, the Republican Party for sure does not support their agenda. With bills like The Defense of Marriage Act” and opposing the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, It is clear that this is one group they want to stay in the closet. Estimates vary on how high the occurrence rate of Homosexuality is since a large portion of their population is an “underground” social group, They average around 10-15% though. Per Wiki "Homosexuality"
Women: Well, not all women, but definitely the ones that won’t let middle aged white men make their reproductive decisions. The recent sonogram law stands a good chance of politicizing many women who previously were on the sidelines. The U.S. Population is currently split 50-50 on this issue and women are approximately 50% of the population so this makes 25%.
Potheads: Well, any debate about “entitlements” always results in cries of “piss test” er… excuse me, “Urinalysis”. Florida just passed a law requiring a drug test before receiving state welfare benefit. You can spend it on gambling, hookers or alcohol… but by god, you better not buy any pot! Even a bust for a small amount can cause you to lose many Federal benefits as well as student financial aid. Another percentage that is hard to lock down due to the underground nature of the culture, this one averages about 20% to 40%. With 750,000 Americans charged every year just for posession, it is not a small percentage; those are just the ones getting caught. We will split the difference and say 30%
Islam: One of the actual Republican Presidential debate questions was if the candidate would have an Islamic cabinet member with many responding strongly to the negative. John Stewart had a field day with this one. Although, they are an easy target and estimated at only about 0.5% of the US population. It does make you wonder if these folks have read about freedom of religion. They wave the constitution but have they read it? 0.5% for the Muslims and probably a few more percentage points for those alarmed by the intolerance. Imagine the uproar if you replaced Muslim with Jew. Sound like anything familiar from 20th century history? 2.5%
Now, Lets have a look at the numbers
Democrats: 30%
Poor: 25%
Gay: 15%
Hispanic: 38%
Women: 25%
Potheads: 30%
Muslim and sympathisers: 2.5
Total: 165.5%
So, there you have it by the numbers, for every 100 people they Represent, Republicans Hate 165.5 of them.
Now,, there is some cross over between the groups, and this commentary is a bit satirical for those of you who have not picked up on the fact yet. But if you look at all the groups who the Republicans support some piece of legislation to repress, it makes you wonder how long they will remain a viable party. They have even started feeding on their own, going after established incumbent candidates who are not "conservative enough". You push people far enough and they will eventually push back.
With the diversity of America increasing and society coming to accept more and more personal liberty for diverse groups, how much longer will it be before the influence of these groups overpower the aging support base for Radical Conservatism? By rejecting them, the Republican Party is pushing them to support the opposition party regardless of their political ideology and losing a say as to how these previously disenfranchised groups are incorporated into the mainstream.
Well, the word “Hate” may be a little extreme, but not by much in many cases. Watching many of the political debates and speeches lately, I have to wonder who Republicans do like. They seem to have slowly evolved from simply a party advocating small government to the party of intolerance. Beginning in the 80’s and 90s when they embraced the evangelical Christian and moral majority for support, they have slowly inched along to where now almost anyone “not exactly like them” is treated like the scourge of the earth.
I also have to wonder how long this political party will be able to retain influence if they continue to assault the very people who have to vote them into office. How long will it be before they are hated back so strongly that they inspire the non-politically inclined people to register to defend themselves.
Lets go down the list and look at a few…
Of course, they hate Democrats and Liberals. I don’t think this one need much evidence, They regard these two words to be at a comparable level to pedophiles, murderers and communists. You can see the look on their face when they say them, like they accidently bought sour candy at the movie theatre. In Texas the Republican/Democrat Split is around 60/40, but I will say 70/30 just to be safe. That is the first 30% they hate.
But let’s see who else they are alienating… I am doing this looking primarily at Texas
The poor: With the divide between the have and have-nots continuing to grow and unemployment remaining a problem, this is one of the fasted growing groups in America, The middle class is becoming lower class and the lower middle class in slipping into poverty. As the one Republican said when he was asked about the unemployed (as he was getting into an elevator during the unemployment compensation extensions debate), “F*ck Them”. People remember things like this. O.K… Unemployment hovering around 10%, Another several percentage points permanently out of the workforce or long term unemployed. Since unemployment is a little better in Texas, I will combine these groups and call them both 10% and add them to the 15% living in poverty Poverty rates for the United States and for Texas. 25% for the poor folks.
Hispanics: The recent debate on sanctuary cities in Texas left a pretty bad taste in the mouth of the Hispanic population. I reviewed a good article on this for my last Blog entry. "Will ‘Sanctuary Cities‘ Galvanize Texas Latinos?" Texas is now 38% Hispanic and growing.
Gays: Even if they do not “Hate” gays, the Republican Party for sure does not support their agenda. With bills like The Defense of Marriage Act” and opposing the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, It is clear that this is one group they want to stay in the closet. Estimates vary on how high the occurrence rate of Homosexuality is since a large portion of their population is an “underground” social group, They average around 10-15% though. Per Wiki "Homosexuality"
Women: Well, not all women, but definitely the ones that won’t let middle aged white men make their reproductive decisions. The recent sonogram law stands a good chance of politicizing many women who previously were on the sidelines. The U.S. Population is currently split 50-50 on this issue and women are approximately 50% of the population so this makes 25%.
Potheads: Well, any debate about “entitlements” always results in cries of “piss test” er… excuse me, “Urinalysis”. Florida just passed a law requiring a drug test before receiving state welfare benefit. You can spend it on gambling, hookers or alcohol… but by god, you better not buy any pot! Even a bust for a small amount can cause you to lose many Federal benefits as well as student financial aid. Another percentage that is hard to lock down due to the underground nature of the culture, this one averages about 20% to 40%. With 750,000 Americans charged every year just for posession, it is not a small percentage; those are just the ones getting caught. We will split the difference and say 30%
Islam: One of the actual Republican Presidential debate questions was if the candidate would have an Islamic cabinet member with many responding strongly to the negative. John Stewart had a field day with this one. Although, they are an easy target and estimated at only about 0.5% of the US population. It does make you wonder if these folks have read about freedom of religion. They wave the constitution but have they read it? 0.5% for the Muslims and probably a few more percentage points for those alarmed by the intolerance. Imagine the uproar if you replaced Muslim with Jew. Sound like anything familiar from 20th century history? 2.5%
Now, Lets have a look at the numbers
Democrats: 30%
Poor: 25%
Gay: 15%
Hispanic: 38%
Women: 25%
Potheads: 30%
Muslim and sympathisers: 2.5
Total: 165.5%
So, there you have it by the numbers, for every 100 people they Represent, Republicans Hate 165.5 of them.
Now,, there is some cross over between the groups, and this commentary is a bit satirical for those of you who have not picked up on the fact yet. But if you look at all the groups who the Republicans support some piece of legislation to repress, it makes you wonder how long they will remain a viable party. They have even started feeding on their own, going after established incumbent candidates who are not "conservative enough". You push people far enough and they will eventually push back.
With the diversity of America increasing and society coming to accept more and more personal liberty for diverse groups, how much longer will it be before the influence of these groups overpower the aging support base for Radical Conservatism? By rejecting them, the Republican Party is pushing them to support the opposition party regardless of their political ideology and losing a say as to how these previously disenfranchised groups are incorporated into the mainstream.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Adios Republicanos
I originally was going to review an article I found in the Austin American Statesman concerning how the Texas representatives run around on the floor using the electronic voting machines to enter votes for non present members, and even signing the absent lawmakers as present when in fact they are not. A practice referred to as “Ghost Voting”. "Specter of Voting Practice Present"
In my opinion this amounts to outright fraud, as citizens we would be fired if another employee clocked us in at work and we would be expelled for dishonesty if another student signed us in on a class roll. However, the Texas legislature seems to feel they are exempt from even their own rules on this matter.
That is about all I really have to say on the subject though… not a very interesting review. I do feel that it is something that deserves to be mentioned so I posted the link above for you to read at your leisure.
__________________________________________________
Now, moving on, since our Discussion Question 2 was concerning an Arizona style immigration law, I thought I would expand on the subject and review "Will ‘Sanctuary Cities‘ Galvanize Texas Latinos?" written by Julian Aguilar in " The Texas Tribune "
In the article, Mr. Aguilar discusses how the recent attempt to pass a conservative leaning “Sanctuary City” bill in the recent Texas legislative session might act as a catalyst for bringing more Hispanics into the political process and cost the Republican party their support. Mr. Aguilar writes mostly articles that reflect issues relative to the Hispanic community and relations with Mexico. Although writing for a specialized niche, he maintains a high degree of journalistic integrity. His writing is emotionally neutral and he refrains from the use of extremist nomenclature and incitement. He neutrally includes various sources and opinions to paint a broad and informed picture for the audience from which they can then base their own opinions. I really wish we would see this more in the "mainstream" media.
I actually found the article very interesting. I am not Hispanic myself and, although Texas is now around 38% Hispanic, I have to admit that I actually have very little exposure to the Hispanic community on a daily basis living in western Round Rock. This article gives an insight to political elements within the Hispanic community and how the same issues are viewed through different lenses. In addition It also presented a historic parallel from California in which an attempt to pass similar legislation contributed to the virtual demise of the Republican party in that state and helped turn California solidly blue.
Rather than just being a typical “Democrats bash Republicans” article, it draws a lot of its commentary from Hispanic Republicans themselves and their concerns that the anti-immigration stance of the conservatives is hurting support for the Republicans within their demographic.
It also provides the viewpoint of a Hispanic Republican that left the party to become an Independent and their dissatisfaction with how both parties have treated the immigration issue. Representing the Right Wing, Comments from a member of the Texas Tea Party indicate they will be out in force as well to retaliate against the Republican lawmakers who failed to pass the bill.
It will be interesting to see how all the elements discussed play out in 2012. If the Democrats can capitalize on the Hispanic vote and the Republicans continue their attacks on moderates within their own party, it could make some closely challenged races and independents shifting back to the left… but I will save the rest of that idea for my next entry.
In my opinion this amounts to outright fraud, as citizens we would be fired if another employee clocked us in at work and we would be expelled for dishonesty if another student signed us in on a class roll. However, the Texas legislature seems to feel they are exempt from even their own rules on this matter.
That is about all I really have to say on the subject though… not a very interesting review. I do feel that it is something that deserves to be mentioned so I posted the link above for you to read at your leisure.
__________________________________________________
Now, moving on, since our Discussion Question 2 was concerning an Arizona style immigration law, I thought I would expand on the subject and review "Will ‘Sanctuary Cities‘ Galvanize Texas Latinos?" written by Julian Aguilar in " The Texas Tribune "
In the article, Mr. Aguilar discusses how the recent attempt to pass a conservative leaning “Sanctuary City” bill in the recent Texas legislative session might act as a catalyst for bringing more Hispanics into the political process and cost the Republican party their support. Mr. Aguilar writes mostly articles that reflect issues relative to the Hispanic community and relations with Mexico. Although writing for a specialized niche, he maintains a high degree of journalistic integrity. His writing is emotionally neutral and he refrains from the use of extremist nomenclature and incitement. He neutrally includes various sources and opinions to paint a broad and informed picture for the audience from which they can then base their own opinions. I really wish we would see this more in the "mainstream" media.
I actually found the article very interesting. I am not Hispanic myself and, although Texas is now around 38% Hispanic, I have to admit that I actually have very little exposure to the Hispanic community on a daily basis living in western Round Rock. This article gives an insight to political elements within the Hispanic community and how the same issues are viewed through different lenses. In addition It also presented a historic parallel from California in which an attempt to pass similar legislation contributed to the virtual demise of the Republican party in that state and helped turn California solidly blue.
Rather than just being a typical “Democrats bash Republicans” article, it draws a lot of its commentary from Hispanic Republicans themselves and their concerns that the anti-immigration stance of the conservatives is hurting support for the Republicans within their demographic.
It also provides the viewpoint of a Hispanic Republican that left the party to become an Independent and their dissatisfaction with how both parties have treated the immigration issue. Representing the Right Wing, Comments from a member of the Texas Tea Party indicate they will be out in force as well to retaliate against the Republican lawmakers who failed to pass the bill.
It will be interesting to see how all the elements discussed play out in 2012. If the Democrats can capitalize on the Hispanic vote and the Republicans continue their attacks on moderates within their own party, it could make some closely challenged races and independents shifting back to the left… but I will save the rest of that idea for my next entry.
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Are ya hungry there partner?
It was actually really hard for me to find something local to write about this time. I should have taken this the last session when I would have had plenty to flame on about. But with the legislature adjourned and the damage done, things are pretty calm as everyone rests from the long battles. Most of the opinion editorials are now either revolving around the federal deficit fight or some local news issue not really involving politics. Finally, I struck upon and article that ties nicely into how the fight in Washington could directly affect us here at home.
In the article Food program cuts would strain local hunger assistance printed in the Austin American Statesman, the author, Kathy Golson, discusses the impact that some proposed cuts would have right here in Austin. The intent of the article is to mobilize the socially conscience or humanistic audience as well as to inform and possibly influence the “fence sitters”. The delivery is very professional, delivering facts, statistics and predictions while refraining from name calling and other polarizing tactics.
Golson starts out discussing the USDA commodities program that buys surplus products from farmers and distributes them to recipients and food banks. According to the article, currently proposed reduction could slash commodity donations by up to 50% from the current figure of 6.9 million pounds distributed last year. Cuts like this are a “double whammy” as they hurt both the agricultural sector and our poor.
A second element of concern she outlined was the proposal to turn SNAP into a block grant. Right now Texas gets SNAP funds based on the current need. Under this block grant scenario, the State would simply get a fixed amount of money. The author estimates that this would result in a rough average of $53 less per family for food benefits. What the author fails to also mention is that should the number of recipients go up; this would mean even less per family. They do however point out that unlike the current system, the state would be able to spend the money on other programs as it chooses. I know you’re thinking that our state government would never take money away from the hungry for other programs, but they did exactly that to an education grant just a few years ago. Money that was supposed to go toward educating our children was instead placed in the general revenue fund.
She does not provide the source for her statistics, but I was able to verify enough from the Capital Area Food Bank website to believe those figures and the detail of the article leads me to believe they most likely came from direct collaboration with the food bank. The SNAP figures were available on the Texas Health and Human Services Commision website and, to be honest, are quite chilling.
During this research, I had found an article on how Texas was so deficient in handling SNAP that they were fined just over 3 Million dollars by the federal government. The actual article was about how they had since corrected these deficiencies but one statistic presented there was that only about half the eligible SNAP recipients actually sign up for the program. The Turning Tides for Texas SNAP Participation
Now, Lets play Yahtzee…. Put all these dice into a cup, shake it up, and let’s see what comes out.
• 1 in 7 Texans are receiving food assistance from SNAP. That makes 2 in 7 eligible.. almost 1/3 our population.
Now, to turn that into real numbers I reference the SNAP statistics directly from THHS.
• Travis County: 114,724 Recipients, which would make 229,448 eligible recipients.
• Williamson County: 31,746 Recipients, which would make 63,492 eligible recipients.
• State Total: 3,563,970 Recipients, which would make 7,127,940 eligible recipients.
58% of these are children and 6% are over 65
Now, next time you drive around, or go shopping… look around you. Almost a quarter million people in Austin alone, 1 in every 3.5 people you see are either on food assistance or do not make enough to buy adequate food. Many will be hungry as you stare at them.
It is easy to think of cuts when you call these people “Entitlements”, is it so easy after you look at their faces?
As Austin has prospered, those with upper level jobs have prospered along with it, but many of the rank and file have been left out of this prosperity, and I am not just talking the “uneducated”. As businesses roll in, and more people roll in, real estate and rental prices go up, it increases demand for everything. This is on top of the normal inflationary pressure. Average “worker bees” make $10-15 an hour and housing they can afford is slowing being redeveloped into much less affordable projects. When was the last time you saw new 2 bedroom homes or a low rent apartment being built? Healthcare is increasing and health insurance alone for a family can consume more than a third of a worker’s paycheck if it is even offered. I challenge anyone to sit down with a classified section and spreadsheet to devise a realistic budget for someone with children and a $15 an hour job. How is someone supposed to work themselves up in life if they can’t even feed themselves and their family working full time?
Pro business is fine but without some “pro people” mixed in, eventually the system will develop into such a state of imbalance that it will no longer be sustainable.
Off Topic but related:
As a side note to this commentary, I offer a real life example. The home I lived in here in the early 1970’s when I was growing up was just off 34th and Jefferson. My dad was a carpenter and my mom stayed at home. The neighbor behind us I remember was a janitor. It was a neighborhood of 2 bedroom, 1 bath houses between 1200 and 1500 Sq. Ft. built around 1940. We were a family of 6 so we closed in the back porch for another bedroom. We were able to afford the house on a single working class income and feed/clothe 6 people, have a car etc.
Flash to today… exact same 2 bedroom houses… $250,000.00 and up, average rent in excess of $2000
Average monthly take home at $15 an Hour… $2000
WTF?
Yes, there is more affordable housing elsewhere in Austin but this goes to show how once affordable areas are slowly disappearing.
E-Austin residents must leave complex
Renters feel squeeze as market explodes
And the problem isn’t limited to just Austin:
Some trampled in housing-vouchers rush
What good is a Texas that most Texans can’t afford to live in?
In the article Food program cuts would strain local hunger assistance printed in the Austin American Statesman, the author, Kathy Golson, discusses the impact that some proposed cuts would have right here in Austin. The intent of the article is to mobilize the socially conscience or humanistic audience as well as to inform and possibly influence the “fence sitters”. The delivery is very professional, delivering facts, statistics and predictions while refraining from name calling and other polarizing tactics.
Golson starts out discussing the USDA commodities program that buys surplus products from farmers and distributes them to recipients and food banks. According to the article, currently proposed reduction could slash commodity donations by up to 50% from the current figure of 6.9 million pounds distributed last year. Cuts like this are a “double whammy” as they hurt both the agricultural sector and our poor.
A second element of concern she outlined was the proposal to turn SNAP into a block grant. Right now Texas gets SNAP funds based on the current need. Under this block grant scenario, the State would simply get a fixed amount of money. The author estimates that this would result in a rough average of $53 less per family for food benefits. What the author fails to also mention is that should the number of recipients go up; this would mean even less per family. They do however point out that unlike the current system, the state would be able to spend the money on other programs as it chooses. I know you’re thinking that our state government would never take money away from the hungry for other programs, but they did exactly that to an education grant just a few years ago. Money that was supposed to go toward educating our children was instead placed in the general revenue fund.
She does not provide the source for her statistics, but I was able to verify enough from the Capital Area Food Bank website to believe those figures and the detail of the article leads me to believe they most likely came from direct collaboration with the food bank. The SNAP figures were available on the Texas Health and Human Services Commision website and, to be honest, are quite chilling.
During this research, I had found an article on how Texas was so deficient in handling SNAP that they were fined just over 3 Million dollars by the federal government. The actual article was about how they had since corrected these deficiencies but one statistic presented there was that only about half the eligible SNAP recipients actually sign up for the program. The Turning Tides for Texas SNAP Participation
Now, Lets play Yahtzee…. Put all these dice into a cup, shake it up, and let’s see what comes out.
• 1 in 7 Texans are receiving food assistance from SNAP. That makes 2 in 7 eligible.. almost 1/3 our population.
Now, to turn that into real numbers I reference the SNAP statistics directly from THHS.
• Travis County: 114,724 Recipients, which would make 229,448 eligible recipients.
• Williamson County: 31,746 Recipients, which would make 63,492 eligible recipients.
• State Total: 3,563,970 Recipients, which would make 7,127,940 eligible recipients.
58% of these are children and 6% are over 65
Now, next time you drive around, or go shopping… look around you. Almost a quarter million people in Austin alone, 1 in every 3.5 people you see are either on food assistance or do not make enough to buy adequate food. Many will be hungry as you stare at them.
It is easy to think of cuts when you call these people “Entitlements”, is it so easy after you look at their faces?
As Austin has prospered, those with upper level jobs have prospered along with it, but many of the rank and file have been left out of this prosperity, and I am not just talking the “uneducated”. As businesses roll in, and more people roll in, real estate and rental prices go up, it increases demand for everything. This is on top of the normal inflationary pressure. Average “worker bees” make $10-15 an hour and housing they can afford is slowing being redeveloped into much less affordable projects. When was the last time you saw new 2 bedroom homes or a low rent apartment being built? Healthcare is increasing and health insurance alone for a family can consume more than a third of a worker’s paycheck if it is even offered. I challenge anyone to sit down with a classified section and spreadsheet to devise a realistic budget for someone with children and a $15 an hour job. How is someone supposed to work themselves up in life if they can’t even feed themselves and their family working full time?
Pro business is fine but without some “pro people” mixed in, eventually the system will develop into such a state of imbalance that it will no longer be sustainable.
Off Topic but related:
As a side note to this commentary, I offer a real life example. The home I lived in here in the early 1970’s when I was growing up was just off 34th and Jefferson. My dad was a carpenter and my mom stayed at home. The neighbor behind us I remember was a janitor. It was a neighborhood of 2 bedroom, 1 bath houses between 1200 and 1500 Sq. Ft. built around 1940. We were a family of 6 so we closed in the back porch for another bedroom. We were able to afford the house on a single working class income and feed/clothe 6 people, have a car etc.
Flash to today… exact same 2 bedroom houses… $250,000.00 and up, average rent in excess of $2000
Average monthly take home at $15 an Hour… $2000
WTF?
Yes, there is more affordable housing elsewhere in Austin but this goes to show how once affordable areas are slowly disappearing.
E-Austin residents must leave complex
Renters feel squeeze as market explodes
And the problem isn’t limited to just Austin:
Some trampled in housing-vouchers rush
What good is a Texas that most Texans can’t afford to live in?
Monday, July 11, 2011
The One-Party State of Texas?
For my first article I chose “ Contemporary Party Politics: The One-Party State of Texas?”
Well, this article is not exactly a new story or commentary, but rather it is a political webpage from UT that talks about many aspects of Texas politics. I chose this particular section of it because it does discuss something that has happened in Texas in my lifetime. Believe it or not, Texas has not always been a Red State.
I am one of the 5th generation in my family raised “Texan” (Dad’s side), we trace can trace our families entry into Texas to the 1840’s or 1850’s and now have 7 generations. Unfortunately, my mom was in New York when I decided to come along so I don’t have the birth certificate but I have still been raised here. My upbringing was split between here in Austin and a small town a few hours up the road.
When I was growing up, Texas was more about agricultural and oil. This was old school rural Texas where you didn’t trust a banker as far as you could throw them and they thought about the same of businessmen. It was solid Democrats but still conservative. There is nothing as independent as a farmer but you also would not find anyone quicker to lend a helping hand when someone needed one.
Since this time I have seen the state taken over by the wave of Republicans. Big ranches that used to be working ranches got bought by people from “up north” who didn’t have a clue how to actually work them. Developments sprung up all over, suburbs grew, businesses moved in. Now, that is just the way progress works, but some of the changes that happened along with it really disturb me.
Along with the businesses came Republican businessmen. Not to say they are any less patriotic, but they don’t share many of the values I remember being “Texan”. Being somewhat isolated and surviving in this state before all the damns and lakes were built, there was a lot of helping each other and sharing. And also, even though there was a lot of pride in being Texan, everyone was also proud to be an American and patriotic.
This being said, it really pains me to have witnessed the last several years and especially to have watched the last session of the legislature. We saw our children’s education and care for the poor take a back seat to “business” and that is just not right. If a business model is sound, it should not need any help. If it will make money, somebody will do it, which is the way free enterprise works. Why do we need to give millions to someone who already has millions and then cut their taxes to boot? I’m sorry, that’s not taking care of your own, that is throwing them to the gutter.
The other disturbing thing that has been happening is the Republicans in office using Texas as a platform to agitate the Federal Government just because Obama is in office. They are setting us up for several lengthy and possibly expensive legal fights on the environment, education and many other areas. Yes, we are the State of Texas but we are also one of the United States of America.
As this blog progresses you will see some more ranting by me, and hopefully this article and a lot of the other information on the other pages will help give you a point of reference for where I am coming from.
Well, this article is not exactly a new story or commentary, but rather it is a political webpage from UT that talks about many aspects of Texas politics. I chose this particular section of it because it does discuss something that has happened in Texas in my lifetime. Believe it or not, Texas has not always been a Red State.
I am one of the 5th generation in my family raised “Texan” (Dad’s side), we trace can trace our families entry into Texas to the 1840’s or 1850’s and now have 7 generations. Unfortunately, my mom was in New York when I decided to come along so I don’t have the birth certificate but I have still been raised here. My upbringing was split between here in Austin and a small town a few hours up the road.
When I was growing up, Texas was more about agricultural and oil. This was old school rural Texas where you didn’t trust a banker as far as you could throw them and they thought about the same of businessmen. It was solid Democrats but still conservative. There is nothing as independent as a farmer but you also would not find anyone quicker to lend a helping hand when someone needed one.
Since this time I have seen the state taken over by the wave of Republicans. Big ranches that used to be working ranches got bought by people from “up north” who didn’t have a clue how to actually work them. Developments sprung up all over, suburbs grew, businesses moved in. Now, that is just the way progress works, but some of the changes that happened along with it really disturb me.
Along with the businesses came Republican businessmen. Not to say they are any less patriotic, but they don’t share many of the values I remember being “Texan”. Being somewhat isolated and surviving in this state before all the damns and lakes were built, there was a lot of helping each other and sharing. And also, even though there was a lot of pride in being Texan, everyone was also proud to be an American and patriotic.
This being said, it really pains me to have witnessed the last several years and especially to have watched the last session of the legislature. We saw our children’s education and care for the poor take a back seat to “business” and that is just not right. If a business model is sound, it should not need any help. If it will make money, somebody will do it, which is the way free enterprise works. Why do we need to give millions to someone who already has millions and then cut their taxes to boot? I’m sorry, that’s not taking care of your own, that is throwing them to the gutter.
The other disturbing thing that has been happening is the Republicans in office using Texas as a platform to agitate the Federal Government just because Obama is in office. They are setting us up for several lengthy and possibly expensive legal fights on the environment, education and many other areas. Yes, we are the State of Texas but we are also one of the United States of America.
As this blog progresses you will see some more ranting by me, and hopefully this article and a lot of the other information on the other pages will help give you a point of reference for where I am coming from.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
Introduction
I am rather long winded so this article will serve as a substitute for my profile...
I am a 43 year old Environmental Science student at Austin Community College. I am taking this Government class because it is required of course. This is not to say that I have no interest in government as environmentalism is heavily interconnected with many government agencies. If I learn one thing in this class I didn’t already know it might be the one thing that helps me in the future.
I consider myself a Moderate Libertarian and the Political Ideology test labeled me as “Disaffected” but I don’t agree with that, I am simply concerned over several important issues. I keep abreast of what is happening in the news and scored a 93.94 on the Civics Quiz for GOVT 2305 and got 11 out of 12 on the current events quiz which placed me in the 99th percentile.
I vote in most every major election. Being a Libertarian, it is very seldom a member of my party has a realistic chance to win an election so I don’t vote straight party but try to look at the individual candidates.
I voted for Bush his first term even though Gore was more in line with many of my philosophies because Gore just did not seem to be showing the “gonads” of a leader during the campaign and I was concerned Lieberman would have a negative impact on relations with the Middle Eastern countries. Bush gave the false impression of being a moderate centrist leader which is what we needed. Bush was a big disappointment to me and my ranting on the subject of his presidency would fill a blog in and of itself.
The next election was a choice between the worse of two evils. I was very Anti-Bush at that point and Kerry and Edwards at least seemed competent but gave me the impression of being more used car salesmen than leaders. Since I definately disliked both Republicans and was only "concerned" about the Democrats, I went Democrat on that ticket.
The next election was the exact opposite. I liked the positive progressive energy behind Obama and I had (and still have) a ton of respect for McCain. Obama showed good judgment in choosing a seasoned politician for VP to counter his inexperience moving 3 of the candidates into my “like” category… however, Mr. McCain, Why did you pick Sara Palin???? At McCain’s age, and considering the distinct possibility that he wouldn’t complete his first term, there was no way I could have supported that ticket. If he had found an intelligent, moderate republican to run with I’m not sure how I would have voted.
So far I think Obama has been a pretty good president and is doing a great job considering the partisan atmosphere in Washington. However, until both parties stop catering to their extreme wings and focus on real solutions, I am going to continue to be extremely concerned over our future.
When it comes to Texas I am even more concerned. The imbalance of power has allowed almost any Republican to run and win despite their intelligence or qualifications. This has left us with an overabundance of extreemists in office that tow the party line and play politics rather than realisticly deal with the problems Texas is facing. Those that are intelligent, moderate and capable find themselves mowed over completely or at least pushed to the sidelines. The letters I get from Senator John Cornyn just pretty much literally make me want to puke and do nothing to inform me about anything that is going on in Washington.
This is my second blog... my first was for GOVT 2305. Those that read my first blog might be surprised by this blog as, being that there is such an imbalance of power, I will be targeting the Right Wing almost exclusively rather than trying to balance my assaults. This does not make me a Left Wing or a Democrat, it is just a well deserved rebuke for the Texas Republicans. If you have read this far and are interested, my first blog can be found here: “Caught in the Middle”
I am a 43 year old Environmental Science student at Austin Community College. I am taking this Government class because it is required of course. This is not to say that I have no interest in government as environmentalism is heavily interconnected with many government agencies. If I learn one thing in this class I didn’t already know it might be the one thing that helps me in the future.
I consider myself a Moderate Libertarian and the Political Ideology test labeled me as “Disaffected” but I don’t agree with that, I am simply concerned over several important issues. I keep abreast of what is happening in the news and scored a 93.94 on the Civics Quiz for GOVT 2305 and got 11 out of 12 on the current events quiz which placed me in the 99th percentile.
I vote in most every major election. Being a Libertarian, it is very seldom a member of my party has a realistic chance to win an election so I don’t vote straight party but try to look at the individual candidates.
I voted for Bush his first term even though Gore was more in line with many of my philosophies because Gore just did not seem to be showing the “gonads” of a leader during the campaign and I was concerned Lieberman would have a negative impact on relations with the Middle Eastern countries. Bush gave the false impression of being a moderate centrist leader which is what we needed. Bush was a big disappointment to me and my ranting on the subject of his presidency would fill a blog in and of itself.
The next election was a choice between the worse of two evils. I was very Anti-Bush at that point and Kerry and Edwards at least seemed competent but gave me the impression of being more used car salesmen than leaders. Since I definately disliked both Republicans and was only "concerned" about the Democrats, I went Democrat on that ticket.
The next election was the exact opposite. I liked the positive progressive energy behind Obama and I had (and still have) a ton of respect for McCain. Obama showed good judgment in choosing a seasoned politician for VP to counter his inexperience moving 3 of the candidates into my “like” category… however, Mr. McCain, Why did you pick Sara Palin???? At McCain’s age, and considering the distinct possibility that he wouldn’t complete his first term, there was no way I could have supported that ticket. If he had found an intelligent, moderate republican to run with I’m not sure how I would have voted.
So far I think Obama has been a pretty good president and is doing a great job considering the partisan atmosphere in Washington. However, until both parties stop catering to their extreme wings and focus on real solutions, I am going to continue to be extremely concerned over our future.
When it comes to Texas I am even more concerned. The imbalance of power has allowed almost any Republican to run and win despite their intelligence or qualifications. This has left us with an overabundance of extreemists in office that tow the party line and play politics rather than realisticly deal with the problems Texas is facing. Those that are intelligent, moderate and capable find themselves mowed over completely or at least pushed to the sidelines. The letters I get from Senator John Cornyn just pretty much literally make me want to puke and do nothing to inform me about anything that is going on in Washington.
This is my second blog... my first was for GOVT 2305. Those that read my first blog might be surprised by this blog as, being that there is such an imbalance of power, I will be targeting the Right Wing almost exclusively rather than trying to balance my assaults. This does not make me a Left Wing or a Democrat, it is just a well deserved rebuke for the Texas Republicans. If you have read this far and are interested, my first blog can be found here: “Caught in the Middle”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)