An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Gov. Rick Perry and the Texas-Sized Gift Horse

cowboy

The Austin American-Statesman reports today that U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is planning to run against Texas governor Rick Perry next year, is making inroads with previous Perry “loyalists” and “chipping” into Perry’s “rich donor base, taking 21 percent of $6.7 million she raised from December through June from 35 percent of Perry’s historically staunchest backers.”

Perry does continue to benefit from high dollar donors; however, these donors include “individuals who have given to Hutchison’s past campaigns and might be expected to consider her over him.”

Sounds ominous? This Texan hopes so.

Because it is high time for Texas to have a governor who does not condone, or even relish in, secession bluster.

Because it is time for Texas to have a governor who sensibly balances his state’s—and his people’s—-needs against his own and his party’s political ambitions.

Because it is time for Texas to have a governor who puts the interests of all the people of Texas ahead of those of a small but vocal hard-right base.

These also happen to be some of the sentiments expressed in an Editorial (”Federal funds help save the state’s hide”) in the Statesman today.

The Editorial starts with a great Texas-size allegory

The old caution about looking gift horses in the mouth doesn’t apply in politics. Gov. Rick Perry, for example, saddles up and rides away after looking in the horse’s mouth and complaining loudly about what he sees there.

It then blasts Perry for his secession talk; for his anti-Washington, anti-stimulus rhetoric; for turning down the $555 million in federal stimulus money meant to help the hard-hit Texas Unemployment Insurance Fund “in the face of rising unemployment claims that were fast draining the funds.”

On the latter, Perry argued at the time that there were “strings attached’ to the stimulus money. Yes, there were strings attached. “Strings” such as having to expand unemployment benefits to more unemployed Texans, such as laid-off part-time employees like single mothers, college students and senior citizens. After refusing the funds, Perry is now asking the same federal government that he so fiercely criticized for a $170 million loan to ensure that unemployment benefits can continue to be paid.

According to Think Progress, “Texas is expected to request $650 million, roughly $100 million more than Perry initially rejected.”

The Statesman Editorial does a good job of painting Perry’s attitude towards Washington:

The governor reminds us of people who complain about an obnoxious table companion whose volume is exceeded only by bad table manners. But what the heck, he picks up the tab.

With respect to Perry’s political tactics and their impact on everyday Texans:

Anyone who can read knows by now that Perry’s derisive use of the word “Washington” is a double shot: one aimed at Democrats in general and U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, in particular. Hutchison has announced that she will challenge Perry in the March 2010 Republican primary.

The party’s hard-right base has been reliable for Perry, and the anti-Washington talk is what they want to hear. It would all be very amusing little political operetta if it weren’t for the fact that real people with real lives are getting chewed up the machinations.

Finally, back to the gift horse:

Don’t expect expressions of gratitude or even an acknowledgement that if it hadn’t been for the stimulus package, Texans would have mighty sore feet because there would be no gift horse to ride.

Great job, Statesman.

Image: Courtesy cwrl.utexas.edu

  • mgardener
    Honestly. I wish Texas would secede. Now. Go.
  • EEllis
    One, are you from Texas? Then it really isn't your business.
    Two, increased unemployment benefits cost the State more money. If they didn't take to $550 mill then they wouldn't of needed the extra $170 mill would they? How the hell are you going to bitch when he asks for money to pay for the project you bitched about him turning down? It wasn't money to "help" it was money to expand and increase the unemployment system in Texas. It also obligated the state to pay increased benefits at increased cost to the State for longer than the recession. This is now a permanent budget increase for Texas.
    Three, I'll let you in on a clue, Perry is not all that popular with the "base" and never has been. Maybe he's seen the light, maybe it's pure political maneuvering, but his is a recent conversion.
  • DdW
    EEllis:

    One, yes I am from Texas, and it is all my business who my governor is.

    Two, that is exactly Perry's lame excuse. In the meantime, thousands of part-time, laid off Texas uneployed are going struggling to make ends meet....those are NOT strings, those are people from your own state, those are unemployed Texans

    Three, let's hope you're right that "Perry is not all that popular wirth the 'base'" Sounds good to me, Thanks for letting me know
  • roro80
    Just because the governor is a jerk shouldn't mean that lots of unemployed Texans should go without the unemployment they've likely been paying into their entire lives for just such an occasion. Because of that, I'm glad Perry did an about face about the stimulus money. He's still a jerk, but at least Texans will be able to get through the recession more easily.

    I'd also like to point out how annoying it is when liberal non-Texans talk about how Texas should secede. I expect a little more thought from this group; it only shows you've thought through the ramifications of Texan secession about as much as the dopes advocating for it in Texas. Besides the huge negative effects it would have on the entire country, let's leave the practice of painting all people from one geographical location as stupid or bad or backwards to the racists.
  • EEllis
    DE You do indeed have a stake in the Gov. My response was because of people from outside seem way to concerned with who we decide to elect, as if they should have some say in our Governor. Just look at the first response to your post for an example.

    As for lame excuse, I understand feeling different, I may very well come down against his choice also, that is different than ignoring the other side are pretending that there is no basis for that position. One only has to look to California to see what expansive social programs can bring. And what is better paying unemployment or trying to provide a business environment that creates jobs. Right now Texas has some of the lowest unemployment rates anywhere. We have yet to really see a recession here in Houston.

    Perry seems to be trying to recreate himself. Were you around for his vaccination debacle? Just be glad that in Texas the Governor is a very limited position and really can't run the state without approval and cooperation of the state legislature.
  • EEllis
    Roro said Just because the governor is a jerk shouldn't mean that lots of unemployed Texans should go without the unemployment they've likely been paying into their entire lives for just such an occasion. Because of that, I'm glad Perry did an about face about the stimulus money. He's still a jerk, but at least Texans will be able to get through the recession more easily.

    But shouldn't Texans be the ones who decide how their money gets spent? What you had was the feds giving you money but requiring you to change your system to fit what they wanted. This would cost Texans more money without input from Texans. Now Perry didn't really about face, the State Legislature said that they wanted the money and would accept it regardless of Perry. That is the representatives of Texas making a choice and giving a voice to the people, but I don't hold that as a negative for Perry. If there weren't enough reps that wanted the cash with strings then Texas shouldn't of accepted it. There were and it did and the system worked.
  • ordinarysparrow
    well. . . you know what some people say about riding up on big horse. . . .
    just thinking as a person raised in Texas with family still there living under Perry's big horse . . .

    and of course in the Native imagery horse stands for power or belief system. . .
  • DdW
    EEllis. Thanks for your comments. I think that I understand where you're coming from.

    However, with respect to "Right now Texas has some of the lowest unemployment rates anywhere." I'd like to point out that according to the U.S.Bureau of Statistics (updated 19 July), there are 16 states with lower (some much lower) unemployment rates than Texas.


    I guess everything is relative.

    Dorian
  • roro80
    EEllis -- Sure, of course it shouldn't be up to, say, me what Texas does with its money. But unemployment is something that Texas lawmakers already agreed to give to its citizens should they lose their job. The people of Texas have had unemployment taken out of their paychecks for as long as they've been working. Shouldn't the Texas governement honor the previous agreements they have made regarding the social safety net?

    As for the Texas unemployment figures, that's awesome you Texans are still doing well on the whole. But I think it's important to separate "on the whole" from the individuals who are losing their jobs, and have their own personal difficulties because of it -- kids, homes, doctor's bills. Those who were laid off, for example, a few years ago would have had no trouble getting the unemployment payments they needed to carry them over to a new job. Why should the people getting laid off now not have that advantage? I mean, we could certainly debate whether the idea of unemployment is a good one, but that's not really the subject here, as it was already agreed to by the Texas government before the current situation.
  • EEllis
    Shouldn't the Texas government honor the previous agreements they have made regarding the social safety net?
    Well you seem to think they should exceed their commitment. Those are two separate things. They were never planing on ending unemployment.
  • EEllis
    Well yes but comparing North Dakota to Texas is...........like a cherry to a watermelon, and June was paticularly hard on Texas employment numbers as normal. If you checked the difference between 2008 to 2009 we do much better.
  • You folks might want to look into Debra Medina's campaign at www.medinafortexas.com.
  • DdW
    "...Well yes but comparing North Dakota to Texas is...........like a cherry to a watermelon,"

    how about Idaho, New Mexico, Arkansas, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Hawaii, even Louisiana...
  • EEllis
    "how about Idaho, New Mexico, Arkansas, Maryland, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Hawaii, even Louisiana..."

    Ummm..........so? I'll just give you that every one of those states has lower unemployment. I'll also bet that 9/10 had lower unemployment before the "recession". I don't think that hurts my belief that Texas is doing pretty good though I will say I wish I phrased that differently then I did.
  • EEllis
    Mind you I'm not really a fan of Perry, I just don't think this is a big issue and/or really an honest one to use against him. Texas really has a very limited executive power compared to most states so most things don't really lay of on the Gov. office. I also could give a flip what other states think and don't believe that non Texan opinions should affect our choices
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice | Site design by Elegant Themes | Site customization, hosting, and security by Enxit Group, LLC