Proposal to Sink I-35

    The "Cut and Cap" plan to sink I-35 underground is one of three ideas the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is currently considering to help ease traffic congestion on the freeway.  The ambitious plan would, in the words of its architect Sinclair Black, "lower the main lanes of this one mile stretch of I-35 (MLK to Lady Bird Lake), cover that mile with a continuous cap, and place a city boulevard on top".  While the enormous socioeconomic implications of providing a "boulevard" connection to the east and west sides of Austin give hope to many people, some are afraid this plan is too costly and does not address the original issue of relieving congestion on the busy highway.
    In my opinion, this plan is a brilliant one.  Although Architect Sinclair Black estimates the cost of his plan to be $550 million, the resulting tax revenue has been estimated between $1-4 billion dollars.  Not too mention the increase in jobs and residents the newly freed 30 acres would provide.  The lower cost alternatives call for reconstruction of I-35 by adding an additional lane in each direction or by elevation over existing surface streets.  Either way, the city will spend a great deal of money on this renovation.  Why not invest in a long term solution that not only reduces congestion, but also generates the most revenue for the city?
    Other concerns have been raised that simply lowering I-35 will do nothing to lower traffic blockages.  However, TxDOT has confirmed that they will indeed add two extra lanes to the subterranean freeway.  Also, Black's proposal would include a restored grid to boulevard area allowing slower moving traffic an alternate route.  Aside from tax revenue and quicker transit, I still believe the most promising solution of this proposal is the community aspect.  Restoring a land connection between east and west Austin will break down barriers that have negatively affected our city socioeconomically.  Austinites will now be able to commute safely to areas on both sides of the highway and connect with each other on the space in between.  Parking opportunities would also be increased, which is something I feel we can all be excited about.
    Although there are sure to be cons to the "Cut and Cap" plan to lower I-35 underground, I believe the pros will heavily outweigh them.  At the very least, as Austin City Council members agreed on June 20th earlier this year, this plan deserves more "looking into" financially and economically.   Any urban development with positive impacts on transport AND community is something all Austinites should give the proper consideration their city deserves.

Colleague Commentary

  My colleague, Larredondo, recently published a commentary on health care in Texas.  She addressed her classmates and fellow Austinites urging that our city and state are in need of better suited medical care.  She then presented the case for Travis County Central Health Proposition 1 as a solution to this problem.  With her experience in the health care industry as a nurse she spoke of current overcrowding in our ER's and the statistic that ranks Texas last in the country for quality of health care.  She supported her argument by stating that a resulting new medical center from Prop 1 would help to relieve congestion and financial burden on ER's by giving the public an alternate and more appropriate setting for certain treatments and necessary medical care.
   While I agree with Larredondo's stance on health care reform and the funding of a new medical center in our state, I do not support this particular proposition as it would increase citizen's property taxes an additional 5 cents per every $100 of property value.  I do not believe select tax payer's should be responsible for funding services given to the entire population of the county.  I am definitely biased because I am currently in the process of buying my own house and with property taxes already so high, this is something I cannot support morally or financially.  Many of us are struggling to achieve our own pursuits and I believe that something as important as health care should be exclusively funded by local, state and federal government's current revenue or an alternate source of income that does not increase taxes on a select few who are trying to build a life for themselves in the city they love.

Governor Perry Vetoes Equal Pay Bill

   A little over a month ago on June 14th, Texas Governor, Rick Perry, vetoed a bill that aimed to further prevent wage discrimination against women.  Averages estimate that women in Texas currently make 82 cents of every dollar paid to men. In his veto statement, Perry objected to the bill suggesting it could hurt job creation and then claiming that it "duplicates federal law, which already allows employees who feel they have been discriminated against through compensation to file a claim with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission."  Texas would have been the 43rd state to adopt such a law.
    Governor Perry believes that the Texas Equal Pay Act was a duplication of the federal Lily Ledbetter  Act.  However, supporters of the new legislation explained why the bill was not only supplementary but necessary to strengthen the federal law and women's abilities to seek legal action.  The state bill would have given consistency to state and federal laws in order to strengthen the effectiveness and clarity of anti-discrimination laws relating to employment.  It also would have allowed women to proceed in nearby state courts rather than a federal court.  Not only is this a possible financial benefit if the federal courts are far away, it also would have been more convenient for those with familial responsibilities.  Finally, this state legislation would have extended the time for gender-based pay discrimination suits to 180 days after discriminatory compensation.  
    By vetoing the Equal Pay Act for the state of Texas, Governor Rick Perry not only showed an ignorance of the additional measures outlined in the legislation, he also showed a lack of concern for one of the issues most important to those women employed in his state.  Passing this bill was not just about strengthening pre-existing laws, it was also about taking a firm stand against sex-based pay discrimination in an attempt to prevent further injustice.  Regardless, the continuation of this problem is unacceptable and if this bill was just a reiteration of currently enforced legislation, I'd like to see some major efforts in seeking an alternate solution from our Governor.

Conservative Blogger's Accusation of "Liberal" Newspaper

    In this blog submission from self-affirmed conservative political blogger, Robbie Cooper of UrbanGrounds.com, Cooper accuses mainstream media source, the Texas Tribune, of starting a liberal-serving smear campaign against Republican gubernatorial hopeful, Greg Abbott.  I am immediately wary of Cooper's accusation in that he is unabashedly conservative and aside from past military service and a degree in Professional Writing, has little credibility as a political journalist.   I also take into account that most of his intended audience are likely to also be Republican and for the most part fans of his opinions.  However, after reviewing the evidence he presents and logic of his argument, I have come to partially agree with what he is saying.

    In Robbie Cooper's claim that the Texas Tribune has begun a smear campaign against Greg Abott, Cooper sites the speculation and lack of evidence used by the newspaper as reasons to believe that this is part of liberal media's attempt to discredit any Republican running for Governor of Texas by disguising editorial opinion as front page news.  This is where I agree with Cooper.  After reading the Tribune article in question, it was obvious to me that editorial opinions were inappropriately present on the front page of a newspaper that claims to be nonpartisan. 

   If I were looking at this misplacement as the sole reason and justification for Cooper's argument, I would have to agree with him.  However, the blogger goes on to use quotes from the Tribune article as evidence that the paper is spreading unsubstantiated rumors and lies about Attorney General Greg Abott.  For example, Cooper suggested the Tribune's claim that "the adversity that Abbott has faced has become the symbolic centerpiece of his recently launched gubernatorial campaign, which he announced on Sunday — the 29th anniversary of his accident” was invalid and made-up by the paper.  While "centerpiece" might not be the best way to describe the role of adversity in Abott's campaign, one needs only to google search "Greg Abott Campaign" to find evidence that the Texas Tribune is not the first let alone only news source to question the role his disability plays in his campaign.  It also seems as though the announcement of his run for Governor on the anniversary of the tragic accident that left him paralyzed from the waist down was something that Abott did purposefully.  Regardless, the coordination of dates is something most media and select readers (myself included) did not ignore.  

Cooper again accused the Tribune of a lack of evidentiary support regarding their statement that Abott's personal story "has also exposed Abbott to criticism from those who say that he has battered the legal protections he has benefited from for political gain", asking the paper to "name who these those are that (they) are referring to".  Contradictorily, they did exactly that later in the article citing a direct quote from the director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, Jim Harrington, on the subject.  

While I believe the Texas Tribune definitely infused some left-leaning sentiment into their article about Greg Abott, I also believe that they were quite reasonable in their portrayal of the campaign he has recently launched.  The newspaper provided quotes and convincing logic to back up their assertions.  So although Bobbie Cooper may have been right to question the type of piece they had written, I don't agree with his questions of the information and evidence they provided. 

AAS on Military Justice

     This editorial from the Austin American-Statesman weighs in on the military issue of sexual assault cases and the current failure of justice in the hands of unit commanders.  As it common knowledge that Austin, the intended audience, is a generally liberal city of Texas, the Statesman has subsequently been known to lean to the left.  Taking this into account along with the fact that this editorial was written by the reasonable credible Senior Editorial Staff, I expected some liberal bias along with some semblance of objectivity that most mainstream newspapers strive for.
      The staff's argument was one in favor of backing legislation by Sen. Gillibrand of New York to "take away the power of unit commanders to decide whether to prosecute sexual assault cases and give it to experienced military lawyers ranked colonel or higher", unless the commanders are able to prove their effectiveness in reducing sexual assaults within a set period of time.  The writers' claim that giving the power of determining the judicial fate of assault victims to their bosses makes them reluctant to come forward and report the crimes.  This makes sense to me in a very broad way and I agree with them.  Especially as a female, I can imagine how this measure would be ineffective.

     The Austin American-Statesman (AAS) then went on to provide statistics of increased sexual assault reports.  In 2012, the number of reported assaults jumped from 3,192 in 2011 to 3,374.  Similarly, the Pentagon estimated a 37 percent increase in assaults in 2012 from the reported 19,000 in 2010, based on similar confidential surveys conducted each year.  

     The logic of the AAS claim, in my opinion, only added to the evidence they provided.  Republican Texas Senator, Ted Cruz, came to support Gillibrand's proposed legislation claiming to have been "persuaded by (her) exceptionally passionate and able advocacy" and the facts she presented in proposing the change.  A picture of logic that is bipartisan is a powerful picture to me in particular.  Along with highlighting support across party lines, the writers' refuted the argument of senate opposition and military leaders that removing power from commanders would "weaken officers' ability to maintain order and discipline and respect" by reminding the reader that Gillibrand's proposal does not interfere with military hierarchy in any other areas.  The AAS then reiterated their conditional support for passing this bill only if the unit commanders remain unable to stop the spread of sexual assaults plaguing the military.

     Putting aside any partisan bias I identified in this editorial, I agree with the argument its writers made.   I can't pretend to understand the importance of military commander's control over their units.  However, if handing over the power to prosecute sexual assault cases to military lawyers is the solution to this problem, it's a risk I believe is worth taking.

Funding Wendy Davis

    This article from the Texas Tribune describes Democratic State Senator, Wendy Davis' fundraising for the latest reporting period.  According to her campaign, Davis was able to raise $933,000 in the last two weeks of the reporting period.  Compared to Gregg Abbott, the current front runner for the 2014 Texas Governor election, who raised $4.8 million in the same two week period, it doesn't seem like much.  However, when one sees that her total contributions for the entire period add up to a total of $1 million, it becomes quite an amazing rally.  93% of contributions to Senator Davis came in the last two weeks of reporting.  Not only that, the article shows out of a total of 15,290 separate donations, most were under $250, and more than 13,000 of them were less than $50.  To me this is an incredible feat.  It shows that instead of garnering the support of the big-name donors' who usually choose our candidates for us, Wendy has reached out to the common, everyday people of this nation.  Most likely due to the enormous popularity she received while filibustering a restrictive abortion bill in pink tennis shoes, it would seem she has effectively communicated her commitment to the citizens of Texas and her passion for the issues affecting them most.  When Senator Davis then admitted, “I didn’t have the opportunity to pick up the phone and make a single fundraising call, which I typically would have spent some pretty intense time doing between the re-opening of that window and the filing deadline.”, her accomplishment seemed that much more inspiring to me.  She was too busy actually representing us to campaign for herself.  Maybe I am naive, but the explosion of support for this politician gives me hope.  I don't consider myself a Republican or a Democrat.  I try to only be swayed by the candidates themselves and I must say that Senator Wendy Davis has earned my support.  Yes, it's partly the issue she was standing for, but the bigger factor for me is her commitment to action rather than campaign and talk.  I wanted to share this article to help gain support for her.  Seeing so many small donations is refreshing and I only hope this publicity might earn her a few more.