Vote No on Proposition 2

Underneath the national elections, there are lil’-ol’ Texas’s elections. Some of the things you vote on during the election are about our state; one in particular is Proposition 2; this is described by The City of Austin as: Shall the City Charter be amended to prohibit the City from entering into future agreements to provide financial incentives in connection with the development or redevelopment of property that includes one or more retail uses, and to stop the City from providing financial incentives under certain existing agreements in connection with the development or redevelopment of property that includes one or more retail uses.
Proposition 2 has been confusing for many citizens, and for a while there, that included me. Do you vote yes or no? Don’t we want to “Keep Austin Weird”? But then don’t we want to keep promises we have made as a city? Ugh… There are voters voting that have no clue what the Prop 2 represents.    
If you vote yes, you are voting to cancel a contract we made with big businesses, including The Domain development, for tax incentives to build here.
If you vote no, you are voting to keep that promise and allow these incentives for The Domain and other perspective businesses.
So, the controversy is that a tax incentive for these businesses means more big businesses possibly taking over “ma” and “pa” stores. When I thought about this, Wal-Mart on Anderson Lane came to mind. That situation pissed me off and this is what I thought the proposition was talking about. What’s really happening is if we do vote yes, we are breaking a promise made years ago; that would bring a bad reputation for Austin. The Stop Domain Subsidies group wants you to vote yes to prevent economic development and stop tax rebates for places like The Domain.
Because of these incentives, certain communities are and will be able to have lower mortgages by having retail businesses wanting to develop in their neighborhood; the Mueller Neighborhood is a project and sector that has financial assistance paid to them because of retail development. This subsidy encourages businesses, sales, and people to come that otherwise would not have been drawn there.
Austin Mayor Will Wynn asks us voters to vote NO on PROP 2 and I agree with him and will be voting no.  Now that I have done some research and proposed it to you, I am ready to early vote!  You should be ready soon too...

Money, Money, Money

I read an article from the Burka Blog titled, Why did the GOP cut almost $900,000 from Lampson challenger Pete Olson.
The article is about Texas Congress candidates and the funding they have, or in Pete Olsen’s case, don’t have. Pete Olsen wants to be the U.S. Representative for Texas and take Nick Lampson’s, the democratic incumbent, place. Olsen feels betrayed by the NRCC, National Republican Congressional Committee, because they cut their planned spending of Olsen’s campaign. Olsen expected a little less than $1.5 million dollars. Instead he was cut off at about $600,000 leaving $900,000 out of his campaign.
The author of the article believes they cut the funds for several reasons. One, polls show Pete Olsen ahead of Nick Lampson in the race. So, spending money on him would be a waste if the outcome is pretty much already determined. I agree. The article also says that Olsen was already planning on spending his own money for the homestretch anyway.
The author attended the senatorial debate in Dallas and asked some of Cornyn’s people how things were going. They responded, “it’s within the margin of error”. It is a close race. Another reason, says the author, is that it is cheaper to campaign for incumbents and that keeping incumbents in office is the NRCC’s 1st priority.
These priorities are the races between John Culberson (incumbent R) v Michael Skelly (D) and Michael McCaul (incumbent R) v Larry Joe Doherty (D). Because McCaul won by small numbers in 2006, it seems more money would be spent by the NRCC on him rather than Olsen.
I feel the author is very straightforward and relies on facts and news to write their story. The majority of the article is an insert from another article from a website called RedState. The author uses the information to give sarcastic and small clues about their stance: Democratic. The article is meant for readers to understand the financial issues happening behind the races of Texas.
I like the author, but felt they could have put more insight into the article since it is a blog and not a mainstream way of news. I think some more sarcasm would have pushed that Republicans suck!

Home Sweet Home for Perry?

After reading a commentary in the Austin American Statesman by John Kelso, my feelings about Rick Perry… well, stayed the same. He blatantly calls you stupid in the first paragraph if you don’t agree that supposedly Perry is over reacting about his move while the Galveston victims are moving back. Kelso makes fun of the fact that Perry moved to Lost Creek while his other home, the Governor’s Mansion, was being remodeled; now he has to wait longer for the arson damage to be repaired.

Kelso writes commentaries and has a column named: Kelso’s Cranky Corner, which is pretty hilarious. His short and to the point bio is: “The court jester of South Austin, humor columnist John Kelso, offers these words of ... well, um ... words.” He makes it very clear throughout his commentaries he loves Austin and is writing for “Austinites”. So not much clue about his credibility, but I like him!

Kelso claims that Perry is living in a 4,602-square-foot home and at the house he is in now until his actual house is renovated, has a 1,100-square-foot guesthouse. Kelso wonders why there were so many evacuees sleeping on floors and not in that guesthouse? The columnist uses a lot of sarcasm, something I like: The Perry family also suffered during the hurricane and had to get in “a great big car with air conditioning and power windows and then travel 14 miles from their home southwest of town to get to downtown Austin”. Kelso reports that the state is paying Perry’s $9,900-a-month rent! 

Evacuees, on the other hand, expect “Rodents, raw sewage, a curfew and no electricity. 

When Perry returns home, he faces the possibility of the new carpet not matching the drapes.”