Texas Supreme Court Modifies Open Beaches Act

So when Hurricane Rita hit the beaches in Galveston, tearing them up one side and down the other, eroding the coastline to the extent that beach front private property became public lands according to the Open Beaches Act, people got distraught. They even tried to plant salt grass on the beaches to reclaim their property.

Grass that promptly died because they were too close to the ocean.

So they filed suit to regain their property, this despite the fact that it is right in there on their deeds that there could be no guarantee that the property that they bought would remain in their hands. It seems that there are rules you follow, and rules that you can ignore.

It’s Texas, after all.

So today the Texas State Supreme Court – nine Republican justices, ruled that these unfortunate property owners were perfectly correct in objecting to the loss of property, and awarded them their original property lines, lines that now extend onto public beaches.

The thing is this: the barrier island system on the Gulf Coast is slowly receding. Has been since the end of the Ice Age 10 thousand years ago. As sea level has risen, as it continues to do courtesy of the man-made greenhouse effect, the beaches on our barrier island system have receded. Soon, these property owners will come to realize that there are two definitions to the concept of a house being “under water.”

In short, what the Supreme Court just did was to codify into law the habit of selling land to people sight unseen as they did in the 1920’s in the Florida land boom. Land that was literally, under water.

Pragmatic Politician Sharp: No Unions, No Women, No Hispanics

According to Judge Jim Sharp as quoted here (with video, to boot), Texas Democrats made one huge mistake in nominating Linda Chavez-Thompson as the Democratic candidate for Lieutenant Governor.

Not because she is a union labor leader – the highest ranking woman ever elected to her position in the union movement.

Not because she is a woman.

Not because she is Hispanic.

Not for any of those reasons, but for all three of them.

Texas, Sharp says, is too racist to elect an Hispanic to statewide office. Texas, Sharp says is to anti-feminine to elect a woman to statewide office. And finally, Texas is too anti-union to elect a “union boss” to statewide office.

Maybe so. Maybe he’s right. I don’t really have a whole lot of regard for the world view of the average Texan, I really don’t. But then again, had I maintained my opinion of the world view of your average American in 2008, I never would have supported Barack Obama for the presidential nomination.

But mainly, what is simply wrong with Sharp’s rather candid remarks concerning Linda Chavez-Thompson’s candidacy, as well as Bill White’s candidacy, is that this isn’t supposed to be the time to give persuadable centrists a reason not to vote for the Democratic candidates at the top of the ticket. They can come up with their own reasons, but why help them out? Why give them a pass?

And why badmouth the top of the ticket, especially when those at the bottom of the ticket are sure to benefit from voters coming out to vote for Bill White? It makes no sense at all.

And why, I ask, decry the union movement in Texas? Sharp says that union members “are my people.” I should hope so.

I should hope, for instance that Jim Sharp appreciates the support of the Texas AFL-CIO, especially after receiving a $1000 contribution from them on February 9, 2010.

I should hope, for instance that Jim Sharp appreciates the support of the Communication Workers, especially after receiving a $5000 contribution from them on March 2, 2010.

One thing you don’t want to do is to take a contribution check with one hand and then give labor unions the back of your hand with the other.

The other thing that you don’t want to do is inflame the base: the leftwing of the Democratic Party, with anti-union remarks. Not unless, that is, you have a plan to attract Republicans to your cause, because, oh yeah, the plan is that Republicans are going to be on the lookout for Jim Sharp’s name there near the bottom of the ballot and cross right over because he slammed the unions because their people are unelectable in Texas.

Now I vote a straight Democratic ticket, something that I think Jim Sharp depends on to some degree. But I am already on the lookout for Kesha Rogers’ name to deselect before I cast my straight Democratic ballot. She doesn’t deserve to be elected dog catcher.

I wonder, now, who else’s name I will be looking for when I do that?

The Green Party Needs a New Logo

Don’t you think?

I mean, after all, I didn’t really know what the logo of the Green Party actually was until today when I looked it up.

Here is their logo at the left.

See? It’s not an animal like the D’s and R’s. Obviously, if you are going to name your party after a color, a color whose wavelength is in the range of about 510 nanometers, your logo might want to be in the arena of vegetables, not animals.

But here’s the problem. The logo looks strikingly like that of British Petroleum, doesn’t it? They had another logo, a “BP” inside a green shield but they changed it awhile back.

I didn’t notice when they did that.

So The Green Party and British Petroleum have very similar logos and I think the Green Party might want to reconsider theirs now that BP has committed one of the greatest ecological disasters in all of history (I still think that when the Russians killed the Aral Sea, that was worse).

I have a modest suggestion. Now that the Green Party has become a subset of the Republican Party in that it was through the cash provided by Republican operatives that the Greens of Texas are able to get certified on the November ballot, a deal that was sanctioned today by the nine Republican justices on the Texas Supreme Court, they need a logo that now better reflects their party and their values.

Long green.

Another Democrat Announces Candidacy for Texas Supreme Court

2008 is going to be a great year to be a Democrat on the downballot. They will benefit from the growing number of straight ticket voters who will turn out in droves to put Republican officeholders of all levels in the unemployment lines.

Texas attorney Sam Houston, not the Hero of San Jacinto, mind you, but the successful medical malpractice attorney, is filing treasurer papers today to run for Justice on the Texas Supreme Court. He will be running as a Democrat against Republican Supreme Court Justice Dale Wainwright.

Earlier this year, Judge Susan Criss announced her candidacy in the Place 8 race for Texas Supreme Court. Criss has a primary opponent, but when she wins the primary, she will face Justice Phil Johnson in November.

Houston’s opponent, Justice Wainwright, was fast tracked to the Supreme Court. He was first appointed to a judicial bench, the 334th Civil District Court in Harris County by then Governor Dubya. Three years later he ran for his present job.

Houston will announce a list of his supporters very soon, but the short list is a list of heavy hitter attorneys: John Beckworth, Curry Cooksey, Sam Cruse, Craig Lewis, Nancy J. Locke, Dave Matthiesen, Steve McConnico, Enrique Moreno, and Michael Solar,
Also supporting Houston (so far) are State Senator Kirk Watson (D-Austin) and attorney Hartley Hampson.

There is no website up yet, but it’s early.