Charlie Howard Files Ron Reynolds’ Bill

I hate it when I am so right about something that is so wrong.

When I heard that freshman State Rep Ron Reynolds, whose campaign I have championed here despite the fact that he does not actually represent me by about 5 blocks, filed a bill to require ALL incoming college freshmen to be vaccinated for bacterial meningitis – not just the ones living in the dorms – I derided this exceptionally good idea.

Derided it because I knew that something like this was such a good idea that Republicans would surely vote against it. A very good bill inspired by a Democrat was going to fail as sure as the sky is blue and Texas is red.

So when State Rep Charlie Howard, R- Sugar Land, filed the exact same bill this week, I had to laugh out loud. What a snake. He knows that Ron Reynolds’ bill is a good idea, and also knows what I know, that it is doomed to failure because no Republican will give it his or her attention.

If I were to grade Charlie Howard’s latest effort, I would have to assign a zero grade to his work and write him up for plagiarism. His parents would be duly informed. Charlie Howard is guilty of intellectual piracy. Shame, shame on him.

The only good thing to come out of this is that Ron’s great idea will very probably get passed. The only bad thing to come out of this is that Ron will receive zero credit for it. Charlie Howard has seen to that.

Howard behaves exactly as a teacher’s worst student. Dumb as a stump but able to copy the answers from an excelling student’s exam to the letter.

Future students in Texas can learn from Charlie Howard. This is their future given the fact that they will be shortchanged of anything resembling a good education for the foreseeable future, given the budget cuts we are all expecting combined with imminent teacher layoffs.

You get what you vote for.

Phillip Andrews: Taking Issue With Charlie Howard’s Sleeve

This morning I saw Phillip Andrews - the Democratic challenger in Texas HD 26, who will face Charlie Howard in the fall match up - at a local Democratic club meeting.

We talked briefly.

He asked me whether I had received his email that he sent to me awhile back on Charlie Howard’s “Religion Anti-Discrimination Bill” and I said that I did. I even wrote a piece on it almost three years ago when Howard introduced HB 3678 in the House. A bill that was then signed by Rick Perry in a high school library in Charlie Howard’s district.

Now you have to understand that Phillip Andrews is about the most mild-mannered guy this side of Clark Kent. He exudes “nice guy.” And you have to understand this as well: Andrews once thought that he wanted to become an ordained minister and actually entered the seminary but had to cut that short because of a family crisis.

So think about that while you take a look at Phillip’s campaign website, here and here.

Phillip Andrews is angered that Charlie Howard wears his religion on his sleeve and uses it to his political and financial benefit at any opportunity to promote the very big Republican Red Meat Issue of religious expression in public schools.

Phillip Andrews, once a Republican Precinct Chair, broke with the Republican Party on this issue. Rightwing Republican Evangelicals in the party, he told me, visited their religion hourly, making sure that he was indeed “saved.”

The issue of using his religion as a self-promotion tool by tearing down the wall that exists between Church and State is sure to make secular Republicans irate, he says.

No doubt.

No doubt that moderate Republicans who are sick and tired of Charlie Howard’s antics, and sick and tired of his hypocrisy will see in Phillip Andrews a golden opportunity to finally rid themselves of the disease that is Charlie Howard’s tenure in Austin.

Later on today I recalled something that Bev Carter wrote in her column at the Fort Bend Star on the occasion of Charlie Howard/Rick Perry Comedy Hour when Perry signed HB 3678 into law.

It’s worth repeating:

“…when first elected, he went around to all the land developers in Fort Bend and asked them to give him a “retainer” to represent them in Austin. One admittedly did. Maybe more, but only one would fess up. And because they were honest enough to tell me, I won’t reveal their name.”

“When I confronted Charlie about his retainer and told him I thought we ELECTED him to represent us in Austin and didn’t need additional monetary rewards to do the job he was elected to do, Charlie told me he was greedy and just couldn’t help himself. He said he prayed about it every day because he knew it was a sin.”

Charlie Howard wears his religion on his sleeve for all to see. He even uses religion in his defense when he admits to his failings and personality flaws. I find it refreshing that the flaws of this man will be a mainstream issue in the upcoming election, and that, when Andrews wins in November, HD 26 will finally have someone in Austin who represents them, and not land developers and proselytizing evangelical Christians.

A Texas SD 17 Special Election Before November? Don't Count On It

Now you would think that with State Senator Kyle Janek stepping down before the end of his term we would be having a bunch of candidates coming out of the woodwork to vie in a non-partisan special election to fill the empty seat.

And in that you would not be wrong. Trouble is, the fix is in and I wonder if anyone is going to be giving up their State House seats to gamble on a 3-way or 4-way election in a race against Janek’s “anointed one”: Austen Furse.

Oh, you say you don’t know who Austen Furse is? No matter. According to this piece in the Chron you don’t need to know, because he has been hand-picked by Kyle Janek to be his successor.

Who is Austen Furse? Well, first, the guy has never held political office. He’s a Harris County-based businessman with connections to local politics. As a whippersnapper right out of Yale, Furse served as a director of White House policy planning in the Bush-41 presidency.

All of that and he has another thing going for him: he doesn’t have to give up his current job to run for this seat.

See, while Kyle Janek has known about his impending exit for some time now, he hasn’t actually handed in his resignation to Rick Perry, and won’t. Originally he was going to resign by March 10th, allowing Perry to replace him during the next regularly scheduled election day, on May 10th.

But no.

If that happened the floodgates would have opened and we would have seen a veritable multitude assemble to take the spot. No, because you see, people are starting to wonder whether SD 17 is as rock solid Republican as it has been. According to the Chron:

“Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama received more votes in this year's primary than Janek received in his general election victories in either 2002 or 2006, non-presidential years.”

No, what you want to do, then, to guarantee a Republican win in SD 17 in a special election is to limit the challengers, and what better way to do that than to put off the special election until November, when State Representatives are all running for re-election? At least two State Reps whose district boundaries overlap SD 17’s were looking at this. One is Sugar Land’s Charlie Howard (R – HD 26), the other is Houston’s Scott Hochberg (D- HD 137). State law forbids a person from appearing twice on the same ballot for the same election on the same day. Both Hochberg and Howard would have to give up their seats to run in the special election.

Furse doesn’t have that problem.

So if anyone was wondering about the change-up we saw last February, and what would cause that, now we have our answer.

Now that appears to be the ploy. It makes you wonder, though if this seat coming available is just too good to pass up.

Scott Hochberg, the only Democrat currently rumored to be considering this race is still weighing his options. While the presidential primary numbers impress, Hochberg is more impressed by the recent showing for Democratic Supreme Court candidate Bill Moody:

“Hochberg said that statistic is less convincing to him that the district is trending Democratic than the fact that Texas Supreme Court candidate Bill Moody got 46 percent in the district with no Democratic get-out-the-vote effort.”

Makes you think, doesn’t it? Will Furse get opposition from Charlie Howard? I can think of a few who will absolutely rejoice at that. Will those two fight over the dwindling Republican vote in SD 17 letting Hochberg take the Democratic vote plus independents to win?

Seems like a better plan.

Rick Perry Comes To Sugar Land, Signs Controversial “Religious Freedom” Bill

It was a media circus. Surrounded by young school children, Rick Perry, in the presence of religious rights parents and evangelical neoconservative State Rep Charlie Howard, signed HB 3678, a bill reviewed here earlier this year, that guarantees that school administrators cannot interfere with religious expression of its students.

Of the event, and the bill, Charlie Howard said”

"What it does is create a win-win situation for the schoolchildren, school administrators and the taxpayers of the state of Texas.. Many school districts across the state have been sued by parents after children were prohibited from talking about their faith, saying ‘Merry Christmas’ or handing out religious Valentine's Day cards.”

Actually, what it does is put Texas, again, in the national limelight as the state that will introduce religious doctrine in its public schools. Again, making Texas the laughingstock of the nation.

Way to go, Charlie.

Why choose Clements High School as the venue for this signing? Has the school had any religious rights cases filed against it? No. Is the school known for its religious intolerance? Hardly likely. Is the school within Charlie Howard’s legislative district boundaries? Definitely.

But more to the point, is a public school a viable venue for a political showcase? If so, this should make an interesting precedent. Clements High School Young Democrats, if they exist, need to take note.

A storm is brewing on this issue that will not go away. At FortBendNow, Bob Dunn has revealed the disconnect between what is public law and what is public policy. The Texas Association of School Boards, or TASB, has issued a policy statement on how local school boards should implement the law. That policy, apparently, is at variance with the policy that is written in the bill. However, one needs to ask, as did FBISD Trustee Cynthia Knox last Monday evening, is the legislature empowered to enact policy or to enact laws? Isn’t it the purview of local school boards to formulate and carry out policy and not blindly follow policy enacted in distant Austin? Law is global, but policy should be local. Isn’t that the Texas way?

Much ado over a few bruised egos. Everything in the bill has already been spelled out by Supreme Court decisions. What should have been a 15 minute presentation in every faculty meeting at every campus in Texas has become public law as well as a staring contest between bill sponsors Howard and Wayne Chisum and the school boards across Texas.

Charlie Howard’s HB 3678: Intrusive and Absurd

I really don’t like Texas State Rep. Charlie Howard’s latest abomination. It attempts to codify things in the state’s Education Code that should really be a local issue. Among other things, it demands that districts provide forums for student expression of religious belief. It sets standards for students who speak at graduation ceremonies. It forbids vulgar obscene language. It sets standards on what students may address in introductory remarks. It is, quite frankly, intrusive. Oddly, Howard’s bill finds he and I on non-traditional opposing sides. Howard, the staunch conservative should not be in favor of big government and big government’s intrusion into local issues. I, in this case, defend the local school district’s right to set policy based on community standards and mores.

Rep. Howard, butt out. We don’t need you to tell every school district in Texas how to deal with our students.

But what I really don’t like about Charlie Howard’s HB 3678, which he calls both “Marian’s Law” and the “Religious Viewpoint Anti-Discrimination Act” are these two titles.

First, who the heck is Marian? I Googled “Marian’s Law” and came up with nada. Nothing that has to do with religious expression anyway.

Second. What discrimination? Is Charlie Howard buying into that religious right dogma that Christians are somehow being discriminated against? Is that not just the most ridiculous notion? Discrimination? Absurd! Christians are the oppressed minority? How can that be? In this country, Christians represent 83% of the population. Christians are a colossal majority. They have all the power. They dominate every major facet of American life (except for, perhaps, having an effect on what takes place in synagogues and mosques). But here is Charlie Howard whining that Christians are being discriminated against.

There is no secret progressive policy to suppress the Christian religion. None. Howard is full of it, or perhaps, full of himself. What the problem is, is simply this. Teachers and administrators are woefully uninformed about how to handle religion in public schools. It may have happened on more than one occasion that a student expressed a religious viewpoint in an essay, a speech, or classroom discussion, and the teacher reacted with the false idea that the student may not do this in a public school, and suppressed the student’s expression. I’ve heard of it happening. But that is because the teacher is uninformed.

Here is what a teacher cannot do. A teacher cannot lead a religious discussion, cannot advocate a religion, cannot promote one religion in preference to another. A teacher is in an unique position of authority, and cannot use that position to promote or demote, a religion.

And that’s it.

Nothing is broken. You don’t need to fix this with a bill.

You need a fifteen minute presentation to teachers at a faculty meeting to tell them what the rules are, and what they aren’t.