Immigration....whoa...

I liked your comments on the population problem in the state of Texas. I also like that you are a realist in the growing problem of immigration. It has been a problem that has been long overdue for discussion. Instead of pointing the finger to better protection of our borders, we must first figure out what we have to do with the people here and resolve the issue that way. I like to see that someone cares about these people instead of strongly stating that they need to leave. Your closing statement was simply the best because we must remember that our welcome mat is out and we do need to say hello to the new neighbors and new faces that make up our growing population.

TYC at it again....

TYC is a very interesting topic to say the least. I was a tour guide at the Capitol this passed legislative session and this was one of the most discussed topics maybe of the entire spring season. Not only has their spending been outrageous but there have been also a lot of misgivings about their care of the children. It is always interesting to find where Texas really does spend its money. What is even more interesting is how an organization is given so much from the state and where it is put to use. If you haven’t looked at the many pieces of press coverage about this particular organization and this article interested you, look further, what you will find will disgust and amaze you.

Retirees Rising Costs

An article was released recently about an interesting fact that everyone can relate to. Texas has estimated the cost or rather bill of state funded retiree program which currently amounts to almost thirty seven million dollars in unfunded liabilities. An unfunded liability is incurred when a government entity promises to pay benefits but hasn't set aside money to fund all or part of the promised payments. The reason the amount is so large is the outstanding size of the state work force here in Texas and the ever increasing number of retirees. This leads to numerous assumptions among current state employees about whether or not there will be a retirement fund all together in the near or even distant future. According to Texas law these rights for retirement or even basic health benefits are not required constitutionally and may be trimmed or eliminated by lawmakers at the capitol. Texas, like most states, handles benefits as a payment plan of sorts paying what is needed as time progresses. The best way to fix this problem currently in the state would be to set money aside in a trust specifically for the purpose of preventing further debt in this part of the budget. It could then be used to pay bills while gaining interest though a definitely a more costly option than charging employees further percentages of their pay. Currently legislators such as Texas Speaker of The House Tom Craddick have said that options will be explored to correct the problem before the 2009 session but if these problems continue we may find a large issue or hot button topic that will draw a great deal of attention on the third floor of the Capitol.

The Sway of A Party

A fellow Austenite had a very interesting take on the impending primaries of the much anticipated 2008 election. Austin based lawyer Bill Crocker has presented a plan that would allow states to begin the rotation in presidential primaries throughout the nation. The interesting take on this new proposal is the main source and his history. Crocker is not new to the political merry-go-round. He is one of the three Texans currently holding court on the Republican National Committee. His plan goes as follows. States would be divided into four regions. These four regions then lead off the presidential nominating for the next four years and starting in 2020, Texas and ten other states would have their time in the caucus spotlight. This is an interesting a probably needed modification to the current system. Unfortunately once again I am leery of the reason behind the changes. Interestingly enough the woman in charge, Kathy Haigler, of these plans belongs to yet another Republican run committee. Her reasoning for the change is to allow more majorly conservative voting states around the nation to have a better chance of having their voice heard. While I do believe this is a matter of freedom of speech and everyone’s right to vote, I feel that once again the conservative majority have found a way to make themselves believe they are the voting minority and with the turnouts of the previous two presidential elections, haven’t we found that the word of right is alive and well among these fifty states and should things be swung to a party that has had their chance or possibly to favor any party at all?