The Road to Denver Starts in Lampasas!

Lampasas County Democrats invite all interested Democrats to attend a “mock” precinct convention on Tuesday, February 26, at 602 South Walnut Street. The "mock" convention will begin at 6:00 p.m.

Texas Secretary of State Phil Wilson expects “significant levels of voter turnout” for the March 4 Texas Primary. Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie says this year's turnout may be more than 200% greater than the 2004 primary. Local Democrats encourage all voters in the Democratic Primary to maximize their participation by attending the precinct conventions following the primary election at the polling places used on March 4.

Betty Lindsey, past-president, of the Democratic Women’s Association of Lampasas, observes that “many voters overlook the precinct caucuses from lack of experience, but almost a third of the delegates to the national convention are selected by the caucus process.” Democrats who hope to get the most delegates for their presidential candidate need to be at the caucuses on March 4.

Keith King, Chairman of the Lampasas County Democratic Party, says “the caucus hasn’t been important in recent presidential elections in Texas because the candidate had been decided before Texas voted. Because of the intensity in this presidential campaign our state party wants to be certain that precinct conventions are fair, orderly, and disciplined ‘in order to promote confidence in the outcome’. To foster this atmosphere we can hold a mock convention without the pressures of the true campaigns so participants will feel comfortable on March 4."

Daniel Melder, Executive Director of the Lampasas County Young Democrats, joined King in encouraging all interested Democratic voters to attend the mock convention on February 26. “The more voters participate in the process the more they’ll support the decision. I haven’t seen interest like this among young people in the last two elections and we want to keep their participation and excitement."

Here's a quick rundown of the details:

WHAT: Lampasas County Democrats "Mock" Precinct Convention

WHEN: Tuesday, February 26, 2008, 6:00 p.m.

WHERE: 602 South Walnut Street, Lampasas

The Young Democrats will follow the "mock" convention with a brief meeting to discuss plans for the upcoming Texas Young Democrats Convention and our new scholarship program. Complete details are available by clicking on the "Calendar" link on the left side of our homepage. We hope to see you there!

Texans Oppose Dirty Coal-Fired Power Plants

SURVEY: FOUR OUT OF FIVE TEXANS OPPOSE GOVERNOR'S "FAST TRACKING" OF DIRTY COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS Dec 6, 2006

Health, Environment/Global Warming Concerns Are Major Roadblocks to Public Support; Three Out of Four Texans Want Stepped-Up Conservation to Reduce Number of Plants.
AUSTIN, TX.///December 6, 2006///An overwhelming majority of Texas residents (81 percent) are not on board with Governor Rick Perry's controversial plan to "fast track" consideration of 12 or more new coal-fired power plants without first addressing the concerns raised by health and environmental experts about the added pollution generated by the new power plants, according to a major new Opinion Research Corporation (ORC) survey conducted for the Austin office of the nonprofit and nonpartisan Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).
The EIP poll made possible with support from the nonprofit Civil Society Institute shows:

* Just 14 percent of Texas adults favor fast-tracking the approval process for new coal-fired power plants, while more than four out of five state residents (81 percent) want the health and environmental concerns associated with any potential new power plants addressed first. Governor Perry's fast-tracking approach is favored by a slim 22 percent of Republicans, 13 percent of Independents and 8 percent of Democrats.

* Two-thirds of Texans oppose the new coal-fired power plants -including roughly half (47 percent) who say they do so "strongly". A weak 28 percent of Texas adults support the construction of more coal-fired power plants that would create new health and environmental problems in the state.

* Roughly three out of four Texas adults (74 percent) would prefer to see major conservation efforts undertaken in the state first in order to offset a major portion of the electricity that would be required from the proposed new coal-fired power plants. Ilan Levin, counsel, Environment Integrity Project, Austin office, said: "The message here could not be any plainer: Fast tracking more dirty coal-fired power plants for Texas is opposed by nearly all Texans. Texans do not want to see the state short change the deliberate review that should take place of what would be very serious environmental and health downsides of these needlessly dirty power sources. To say that Governor Perry has no mandate from the public for his plan to rubber stamp these dirty power plants may be the understatement of the year."
Texas Ratepayers' Organization to Save Energy (Texas ROSE) Executive Director Carol Biedrzycki, said: "Energy efficiency could supplant one-third of Texas' power plants. It's reliable, it's clean and it lowers costs for consumers. For years, TXU and others claimed that electricity prices were too low and there was too much excess capacity to justify greater investments in energy efficiency. Now TXU's electricity prices are among the highest in the country and capacity shortages are possible. The decision to build more coal fired plants is a resource strategy that benefits TXU, not the consumer."

Dr. Lloyd Jeff Dumas, professor of economics and public policy, University of Texas at Dallas (UTD), said: "This survey shows that Texans understand what makes the most sense for the state: We are better off in terms of the economics, the environment and our own health if we explore conservation and alternative energy sources before turning back the technology clock in favor of dirty coal-fired power plants. By embracing the future rather than clinging to one of the worst and most counterproductive technologies of the past, Texas can have more jobs, cleaner air and healthier state residents."

Texas NAACP Environmental Justice Chair Gene Collins said: "In the 1980s and 1990s the environmental justice movement focused on the injustices to minorities and unempowered communities done by industry and government who could, without any remorse, use the 'jobs versus the environment' argument to validate their actions. With the scientific developments of the 21st Century pertaining to global warming and other planetary challenges we face from fossil fuels, the argument of environmental justice has been broadened to reflect 'the health of the masses versus the wealth of the few'. What is happening in Texas with TXU's fast-track plan to expand their coal-fired operations is a flagship example of the two ideologies colliding leaving Earth in the balance."

KEY FINDINGS

Other key survey findings include the following points:

* More than four out of five Texas adults (82 percent) are concerned about the increased health risks associated with pollution from more coal-fired power plants in Texas. Well over half of Texans (55 percent) say that they are "very" concerned. Nearly nine out of 10 women (89 percent) are concerned about the pollution danger to health, compared to 75 percent of men.

* Nearly nine out 10 Texas adults (85 percent) want to see existing power plants in the state cleaned up (including older "grandfathered" plants that are allowed to escape key pollution control requirements) before new coal-fired power plants are constructed in the state. More than three out of five state residents (63 percent) agree strongly with the wisdom of this clean-up-the-old-plants-first approach, compared to fewer than one in 10 (8 percent) who strongly disagree on the need for such a course of action. While Democrats (92 percent) and Independents (85 percent) are overwhelmingly in favor of this approach, Republicans (77 percent) are not far behind. Those who think older power plants should be cleaned up first include 74 percent of those who say they "definitely" live within 100 miles of one of the proposed new coal-fired power plants.

* Though still in a distinct minority, support for the power plants is stronger among Republicans (42 percent) and men (37 percent) than among women (19 percent) and Independents (27 percent). The intensity of the opposition of women to the new power plants may be seen in that over half (53 percent) "strongly" oppose the new power plants.

* Under one in four Texans (23 percent) disagreed with pursuing the "conservation first" approach and, instead, want to move ahead immediately with proposed new power plants. Only about one in four Republicans and Independents (26 percent and 27 percent, respectively) oppose trying conservation as a way to reduce the need for new coal-fired power plants in Texas. The "conservation first" approach is favored on a roughly equal basis by Texans who say they "definitely" are (68 percent) or are not (70 percent) living within 100 miles of one of the proposed new power plants.*Nearly half of Texas adults (47 percent) said they are "not aware at all" of Governor Perry's plans to fast-track consideration of 12 or more new power plants in the state. About four in ten state residents (38 percent) said they were very or somewhat aware of the Perry fast-track plans.

* More than two out of five Texas adults (44 percent) say they definitely (14 percent) or probably/may (30 percent) live within 100 miles of one of the proposed new coal-fired power plants.

Hmm...

So, basically, Americans can't handle real news?

Some catch on slower than others

Pat Robertson Believes in Global Warming

Well... Now it must be true...

Choking on Irony... or is it Hypocrisy?

The two taste so alike?

Kurt Michael, chair of the Augusta County Republican Party, told us on Friday why he was such a fan of U.S. Sen. George Allen, R-Va.

“Character of that level is not found in other people,” he said, referring to Allen, who is running for re-election against Republican-turned-Democrat Jim Webb.

We are troubled, however, that Allen is profiting off a drug that many of his evangelical supporters consider a form of abortion. Allen is staunchly pro-life yet owns stock in Barr Laboratories, makers of Plan B, or the morning-after contraceptive pill, according to his financial disclosure report.

Taken within 72 hours of intercourse, Plan B prevents pregnancy.

It seems hypocritical to oppose a woman’s right to choose while investing in a drug that does just that. Allen should dump his Barr stock.

DeLay Must Stay

Court rules against TXGOP:

CNN Story

KHOU Story

It should prove rather difficult to campaign in a district from which he tried so very hard to "move."

Divine payback, no?

The Birth Tax

Hmm... How many small business and farms are worth over $5 million? oh wait, none...

They want to talk about the death tax, let's talk about the birth tax.

Every child born today will owe $28,211.01. That number will be higher tomorrow. Taxing the inheritance of millionaires will help lower the birth tax for the rest of us (you know, the folks that actually do that whole work thing for a living).

As Mr. Hickenbottom told me in Economics (and he's a UT professor), a tax break now is a tax hike in the future.

Why shouldn't millionaires pay back into the society from which they profiteered? If it weren't for all the hard work of we that have to pay the birth tax, they wouldn't be rich enough to pay the estate tax.

Consider it a present Ms. Hilton, from the proletariat.




Class warfare, you're damn right!

Friendlies!

Another mistake made by Bush

Perhaps people who oppose the stem cell research have never had anyone that has Alzheimer's. Perhaps they have forgotten about President Reagan's family having to deal with this devastating disease. Or Michael Fox's ordeal with MS.
Any ordinary person that has to deal with either of these diseases realizes how much help this research could help their loved ones. The stem cells that would be used are ones that will be destroyed anyway. We have no way of knowing how much this research could increase our medical knowledge, or what other disease it could help.
Have you ever watched a loved one die from cancer? It's possible the research could bring forth a break in cancer treatments. I think our president has made another mistake.

Glenda Dale Funk


Marriage rights for gays
This letter is in response to William Murchison's article regarding marriage rights for gay Americans ("Judicial common sense," July 18 Editorials).

As a gay American, I have much in common with Mr. Murchison. I pay taxes, as he does; work hard, as he does; and exercise my right to vote, as he does. Why then would he be grateful that I am denied the same "rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" that he has?

He makes an interesting statement regarding the language in the New York court decision: "A court should not lightly conclude that everyone who held this belief was irrational, ignorant or bigoted." Tell me, Mr. Murchison, when numerous state supreme courts upheld laws banning interracial marriages was "everyone" correct with this irrational, ignorant and bigoted mindset? At that time, the majority treated black Americans as trash, so was this behavior logical for "everyone" to participate in?

Regarding the statement, "Until a few years ago, it was an accepted truth for almost everyone whoever lived, in any society in which marriage existed, that there could be marriages only between participants of different sex," tell me, Mr. Murchison, was hanging a black man because he dared to look at a white woman an "accepted truth" that doing so was preventing a rape? It has taken years of injustice for Jewish Americans, Chinese Americans, black Americans and Native Americans to receive the level of equal treatment they have today, though it is still far from equal. Did the myths, lies and stereotypes directed at these cultures make sense to you because the majority held them to be "accepted truths"?

Regarding tradition, tell me, Mr. Murchison, does a tradition of injustice give any American the right to deny justice to another? Are you suggesting that tradition-based behaviors are logical for that reason? And if a judge recognizes this continued injustice, does a decision to change it take away your rights because they recognize mine?

I continually hear the statement that if gay Americans are allowed to marry the institution of marriage is threatened; I have yet to hear how. In 1963, I remember this exact same statement being made in our church by a couple who felt interracial marriage would "destroy the sanctity and tradition of marriage as ordained by God." That was the "accepted truth" at that time. Thank God we've at least gotten this far. It gives me hope, and as long as I have hope, I will not bow down to anyone's "accepted truth" that I am less than they are.

This is the bottom line: A whole bunch of people want gay Americans to be labeled as second-class, deviant sexual predators. (I can remember the same statements being made about young black men when I was a child.) But, oops, they can't say it out loud because state and federal data prove that straights, not gays, are the predominate pedophile population in this country. So now the only way to label us as second class is to say we're threatening the institution of marriage.

How does the marriage of two gay Americans threaten a marriage of two heterosexuals? Do you think that if I'm allowed to marry I'll try to prevent heterosexuals from doing so? What's wrong, Mr. Murchison, do you think I would try to copy hate?

Doris E. Bratton
Kempner


Published in the Tuesday edition of the Lampasas Dispatch Record, August 1, 2006

What Jessica Farrar has to say

Knowledge Is Good in the Reality-Based Community
August 01, 2006
Guest post: Jessica Farrar on OfftheKuff

Let me tell you why the recent immigration issue has little to do with the immigration issue and why the anti-immigration rhetoric affects not only Hispanics, but everyone.

To begin with, today's immigrants are to this year's election what gays were to last year's election, and what guns and abortion have been to past elections. This ploy is expected to drive the conservative voter base to the polls and dupe otherwise well meaning voters, much as the gay marriage issue successfully did last year. Given that proven strategy, we should all be concerned. What group is it going to be next year? Could it be African Americans? Or, will it be Asians? Maybe it will be non-Christians. Maybe it will be women since women's health is constantly barraged by so-called morals over science and medicine.

Don't be surprised when it's your group. Conservatives have been extremely successful with wedge issues. Now, they've become emboldened to go directly after individual groups. The immigration issue is really genius because it divides us by turning African Americans and Anglos against Hispanics at worst, or makes them complacent at best because it's not seen as their issue. This tactic alone should enrage everyone.

In last year's elections, conservatives were highly successful with the "gay marriage" issue. Who would have thought that something that was not legal in Texas, was not only made illegal but also written into the state's constitution writing off an entire segment of Texans? Same sex marriage had never been (pardon my pun) proposed. To my knowledge, a bill had never been filed in the State Legislature. Yet, conservatives convinced voters they needed to go to the polls to chisel it into the state constitution. It worked! Conservatives made up the numbers they lack in their voter base with Hispanics and African Americans and many other well intentioned people who don't normally vote for their political party. Conservatives convinced these voters that "gay marriage" was a real threat and had to vote to do something about it. Consequently, more conservative politicians were elected in those elections to the detriment of too many of the issues that actually do affect people's everyday lives, unlike their wedge issues. People have been convinced to vote God, gays, guns, and abortion while their ability to support their families or get ahead in life are being voted away by the politicians they've elected. It's happening again, only this year's wedge issue is immigration.

Another reason everyone needs to be concerned about the immigration issue is conservatives' call to revisit birth citizenship. Our Constitution says that if you're born in this country, you automatically become a citizen of it. But, what happens if this policy is changed? Then, everyone born in this country is affected, Hispanic or not. This tactic is really devious because it brings out the absolute worst bigotry in society. In the psyche of someone made to feel threatened by the diversity of this country, it's the nail in the coffin to those that don't look like them. It's a way of stopping those people who are taking over everything, in their minds. Not only does this question not have any practical solution, the sole purpose of bringing it up is to pour lighter fluid on the flames of racism. I know, racism is a bad word to say. Interestingly, the people who think it is are usually those that don't believe it exists or ever existed. Let's douse those flames with a fire extinguisher not a fire igniter. It's dangerous to allow those fires to spread.

I ask that we not be duped yet once again by the rhetoric of the Right. Don't allow conservatives to continue to bring out the worst in us. Great leaders don't incite fear. Instead, great leaders inspire courage and ask us to be greater than ourselves. Franklin Roosevelt, when Pearl Harbor was bombed, lifted us when he said that we had nothing to fear but fear itself. John F. Kennedy challenged us to ask not what our country can do for us, but what we can do for our country.

Though the qualities of hope, courage, and loving thy neighbor are absent in the political party in power today, create it for yourself on the immigration issue as well as with their future wedge issues. Have your own talking points. Arm yourself with actual answers to conservatives' charges. Combat their myths with reality. Our country can only take so much. There are real life consequences to today's voting patterns. The pendulum may indeed swing back one day, but many of their changes to our laws won't find the political will to be switched back and we may not ever recover from their ravaging of our country's resources and good will. Do what you can today to save our country's future by sealing our borders against further recklessness. Migrate away from their poisonous fertilizer. Don't allow conservatives to continue to use the tactic of divide and conquer. Instead, let us unite and conquer.

Jessica Farrar
State Representative
House District 148

Minimum Wage II

Oh look, they done it.

Just like I predicted... I watch C-SPAN too much.

Fuckers are Afoot

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives voted on Saturday to give some of the lowest-paid American workers their first raise in nearly a decade, while also handing a big tax cut to some of the wealthiest.

The House in the early hours voted 230-180 to raise the $5.15-per-hour minimum wage in three 70-cent steps until it reaches $7.25 in mid-2009.

During a bitter floor debate, Rep. Phil English, a Pennsylvania Republican, said most Democrats' opposition to the bill showed "they've always liked the politics of the minimum wage and cared little for the policy of the minimum wage."

But Democrats shot back that Republicans had staged an election-year stunt to get a minimum wage vote knowing the Senate won't go along because of opposition there to the estate tax cut. And some senators are opposed to any minimum wage hike.

Before this election year, Rep. George Miller (news, bio, voting record), a California Democrat said, "You never raised a finger to help these individuals" getting paid the minimum wage.

Coming shortly before the House was to start a five-week summer break that will give members time to campaign for re-election, the legislation also would cut estate taxes, derided by Republicans as a "death tax," and extend several other popular tax cuts. Its estimated cost was about $310 billion over 10 years.

The package is likely to be debated next week in the Senate, where its fate was unclear. Efforts to roll back estate taxes failed in the Senate in June. Such a cut is a high priority for Republican leaders ahead of the November congressional elections when Democrats hope to make big gains.

REPEATED REJECTION

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada noted the Senate has "rejected fiscally irresponsible estate tax giveaways before and will reject them again."

The estate tax cut is estimated to help less than 1 percent of American families at a time of skyrocketing federal debt.

"Workers at the lowest end of the scale are being held hostage to 7,500 families," said Rep. Steny Hoyer (news, bio, voting record) of Maryland, the second-ranking Democrat in the House, who wanted a minimum wage increase bill without the estate tax cut.

Those 7,500 families are the number of wealthy families that would benefit from the estate tax cut. By contrast, some seven million workers would benefit from the increase in the minimum wage.

Republicans argue cutting estate taxes helps small businesses and farmers.

....The whole story


What small businesses and farmers have estates worth over $5 million? None that I know... What bullshit.

Hmm... seems to me that Karl Rove is at work here. Attach tax-cut amendments to the minimum wage raise so the Democrats will vote against it... Hmm... mighty fishy of the republicans to change their tune so quickly. Headlines will read "Democrats Vote Against Minimum Wage."

What good is it to raise our wage, but give the money back to the CEO's that own us with tax breaks? Raising the minimum wage on the backs of THE PEOPLE THAT WORK FOR MINIMUM WAGE!

We need a living wage. If congress and the CEO's that own it can have annual cost of living adjustments, why can't we?

Sign the petition and send hate mail to this guy. Be sure to remind him what happens to disrespectful yankees.

Celebrate Texas Independence Day

To mark Texas Independence Day, the Lampasas County Young Democrats (LCYD) and the Central Texas College Democrats will host a forum featuring the Democratic candidates for State Representative in District 54. The forum will be on Independence Day, Thursday, March 2, 2006, in the Central Texas College (CTC) Criminal Justice Auditorium. The candidates will discuss why they are proud to be Texans and what they would do in the state legislature to improve the lives of Texans.

Edward Lindsay of Killeen and Jesse Martin of Buchanan Dam are competing for the Democratic Party nomination in the District 54 Representative race. The evening begins with a 6:30 p.m. reception near the statue honoring President Lyndon Baines Johnson. Over a variety of refreshments, voters can meet the candidates and discuss their views. The forum follows promptly at 7:00 p.m. inside the CTC Criminal Justice Auditorium, building 113 on the CTC campus, and signs will mark the location of the events.

The forum should conclude around 8:00 p.m. and will be moderated by Daniel Melder. Melder is a 1999 graduate of Lampasas High School, an award-winning journalist with experience in print and broadcast media across the South, and a longtime Democratic Party activist leader. Melder currently serves as an adviser to the Lampasas County Young Democrats.

Everyone is encouraged to attend, and there is no charge to attend. This is an excellent opportunity for the voters of Bell, Burnet, and Lampasas Counties to meet the candidates before the primary election on Tuesday, March 7, 2006. The winner of the Democratic Primary will take on the Republican candidate in the November general election. “Our theme for the event is the Texas Revolution,” said Casey Norman, Vice President of the Lampasas County Young Democrats, “as Democrats remember the Texas Revolution, and look forward to a new kind of revolution at the ballot box in 2006.”

For more information about the event, please contact LCYD President Jasmine Bruns via telephone at (512) 556-2819 or LCYD Vice President Casey Norman via telephone at (512) 932-2788. More information is also available at www.lampasasyoungdemocrats.org or by e-mailing info@lampasasyoungdemocrats.org.

It's Our Turn

Welcome to the latest liberal blog, the blog of the Lampasas County Young Democrats. It'll be a place to share information for our members and opinion for the entire world. Love us or hate us, you'll certainly know us here.

Stay tuned.