This blog is in response to a blog recently authored by Jared on the Victoria Advocate website. The topic of the blog was blogging. Jared points out some of the benefits to hosting a blog, as well as some inevitable drawbacks. Let me start out by saying I think Jared is truly genuine with what he writes. He has never shied away from a discussion with another, even though the viewpoints may not coincide. Because of this, I have absolutely no problem with his blog. I think Jared is truly interested in expanding the dialogue, even though it may sometimes run counter to his perceptions.
Where I began to have a problem was when Chris Cobler decided to make a few remarks on the blog. According to Peaches,"As we look for a new interactivity editor to replace CJ, we're hoping to find someone who can actively recruit more voices to the community conversation here."
Um....excuse me? The same guy that has been deleting the accounts of anyone who dares to buck the local establishment is now looking for "more voices" in the "community conversation"? That's a joke, right? The same guy who cannot handle any disagreement of any sort? The same guy who looks to silence all opposition to the local government apparatus? The same guy who deletes any comment from anyone who dares to mention the fact that his wife works for UHV? The same guy who deletes accounts of people that post comments that are against the A&M switch, but are completely factual?
This is the guy that now wants more inclusion? What is that smell? Is it excrement from a male bovine?
One of my favorite songs is one from Aaron Tippen, and I quote it often. There is a verse that states "We might've been better off, or owned a bigger house, if Daddy'd done more giving in or a little more backing down. But we always had plenty, just living his advice, 'Whatever you do today, you'll have to sleep with tonight.'"
Another way of putting it is that you don't want to have to do anything that would cause you not to be able to look yourself in the mirror.
Hence, I wonder if Peaches even has a mirror...
Monday, May 23, 2011
Monday, April 25, 2011
Thank you, Dan Branch
Well, it appears as though Morrison's HB 2556 will not be considered by the Texas Legislature this session. Regardless of your stance on the issue, Representative Branch's decision to hold a meeting of all interested parties in Victoria has to please you. I always believe that open discussion is often the best cure for a festering problem. It is far easier to despise someone you don't have to see or talk to. This will be a great opportunity for all parties to express their concerns, and possibly be taken to task for spreading false information.
Since this entire ordeal began, I have repeatedly heard statements that either cannot be proven, or are just outright false. I keep hearing that A&M has an undeniable track record of growing universities in rural areas, which is not true. I keep hearing that A&M is a better "partner" for Victoria than UH, which cannot be proven. I keep hearing words like "destination university" and "accessible education", with no meaning attached to them.
Hopefully this will be a REAL meeting, accompanied by a public hearing section. I want to hear the truth, straight from the horses' mouths. I want to know what A&M plans to do. I want to know what UH has to say. I want to know what both chancellors and the elected officials think of higher education cannibalism, and what sort of precedent they think this could set.
So let's have this meeting, and let's demand that it be for real, instead of some going through the motions spectacle. I can't wait to watch people like Pozzi, Patillo, Fowler, Burns, Polasek, Vivian, and Crew have to explain the propaganda they have been spreading. They should bear in mind that facts are stubborn things.
Since this entire ordeal began, I have repeatedly heard statements that either cannot be proven, or are just outright false. I keep hearing that A&M has an undeniable track record of growing universities in rural areas, which is not true. I keep hearing that A&M is a better "partner" for Victoria than UH, which cannot be proven. I keep hearing words like "destination university" and "accessible education", with no meaning attached to them.
Hopefully this will be a REAL meeting, accompanied by a public hearing section. I want to hear the truth, straight from the horses' mouths. I want to know what A&M plans to do. I want to know what UH has to say. I want to know what both chancellors and the elected officials think of higher education cannibalism, and what sort of precedent they think this could set.
So let's have this meeting, and let's demand that it be for real, instead of some going through the motions spectacle. I can't wait to watch people like Pozzi, Patillo, Fowler, Burns, Polasek, Vivian, and Crew have to explain the propaganda they have been spreading. They should bear in mind that facts are stubborn things.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
A Call From The RPT
Some unfortunate soul drew the task of having to lob me a phone call this evening for the Republican Party of Texas and attempt to solicit funds. Apparently he was looking to renew my membership at a rate of $45, which is funny, because I don't recall ever having secured a membership before. This guy goes into one heck of a diatribe about how terrible Democrats are, and how the only force on this planet that can stop them from the complete destruction of the human species is the Republican Party. Once he had finished, I let him know that I regretted to inform him that I had no intention of cutting a check to any Republican organization any time in the near future, and my purpose was two fold.
First of all, my main focus was going to be on individual local races, which is completely understandable and appreciated by the RPT. The second reason was not quite as welcomed by the young gentleman on the other end of the line. I had to explain to him that I was done with the two party system, and in particular the left/right paradigm.
Here's the deal.
I am sick and tired of being lied to. I am done with believing that Republicans mean what they say, any more than the Democrats do.
Think about some of the big political topics of the last couple of years:
Financial responsibility? You're kidding, right? After George W. Bush? Are you insane?
States rights? Uh, yeah, OK....When is this Republican-heavy State that believes so strongly in States rights going to actually have a State Legislature that can pass a resolution stating such? I sat right there in my Republican County Convention in 2010 and watched Geanie Morrison keep her seat when we voted on that plank of our platform. When is the State of Texas going to kick the BATFE out? Oh, that's right...Obamacare is the ONLY legislation that is unConstitutional. Try that on the idiots that believe it.
Or shall we talk about some old political hot topics that just never seem to go away?
Maybe, oh, I don't know....abortion? OK, that works. The Republicans always claim to be steadfastly opposed to abortion, right? If that is the case, then someone will have to explain to me why, for the six years starting in 2001, they did nothing about it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans have the Presidency, the House, the Senate, and seven of the nine Supreme Court justices? Oh, I must be missing something....I guess only immigration laws can be challenged by States. Silly me.
Family values? Do we really even need to go there?
So basically what I told this poor guy is that the RPT needs to get their collective "you know what" together before they will ever see another dime from me. Call me irrational, but I am tired of being made a fool of.
The analogy I finally left the fellow with was that giving money to one party or another was akin to thanking one neighbor for not stealing near as much from me as another neighbor. They both steal from me, but the one who does it the least deserves my respect and thanks?
No thanks! Feel free to lose my number.
First of all, my main focus was going to be on individual local races, which is completely understandable and appreciated by the RPT. The second reason was not quite as welcomed by the young gentleman on the other end of the line. I had to explain to him that I was done with the two party system, and in particular the left/right paradigm.
Here's the deal.
I am sick and tired of being lied to. I am done with believing that Republicans mean what they say, any more than the Democrats do.
Think about some of the big political topics of the last couple of years:
Financial responsibility? You're kidding, right? After George W. Bush? Are you insane?
States rights? Uh, yeah, OK....When is this Republican-heavy State that believes so strongly in States rights going to actually have a State Legislature that can pass a resolution stating such? I sat right there in my Republican County Convention in 2010 and watched Geanie Morrison keep her seat when we voted on that plank of our platform. When is the State of Texas going to kick the BATFE out? Oh, that's right...Obamacare is the ONLY legislation that is unConstitutional. Try that on the idiots that believe it.
Or shall we talk about some old political hot topics that just never seem to go away?
Maybe, oh, I don't know....abortion? OK, that works. The Republicans always claim to be steadfastly opposed to abortion, right? If that is the case, then someone will have to explain to me why, for the six years starting in 2001, they did nothing about it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Republicans have the Presidency, the House, the Senate, and seven of the nine Supreme Court justices? Oh, I must be missing something....I guess only immigration laws can be challenged by States. Silly me.
Family values? Do we really even need to go there?
So basically what I told this poor guy is that the RPT needs to get their collective "you know what" together before they will ever see another dime from me. Call me irrational, but I am tired of being made a fool of.
The analogy I finally left the fellow with was that giving money to one party or another was akin to thanking one neighbor for not stealing near as much from me as another neighbor. They both steal from me, but the one who does it the least deserves my respect and thanks?
No thanks! Feel free to lose my number.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Government Power is a Bad Thing, ALWAYS!
Several years ago I came to the realization that any time the voters give the government more power, they will eventually end up regretting it. I used to be fooled by the idea that a powerful government was OK, just as long as "my guys" were in charge. Unfortunately, most people are still stuck in that matrix. Most people are still slaves to the left/right paradigm. Sadly, many still believe that Republicans are pro-gun and anti-abortion, and that Democrats are pro-working man and anti-war. Hopefully someday, those lost souls will reach at least a recognizable level of enlightenment and consciousness.
So why do I think that granting government more power is a bad thing? Because government and those who advocate for it will tell you whatever is necessary to gain the power, but will not follow through on any of the promises. Having learned this lesson, a few months back I decided to start asking a few questions and doing a little digging around about the origin of the Victoria Sales Tax Development Corporation.
The first thing I wanted to know was what the voters had in front of them when they made their decision "for" or "against" the 1/2 cent sales tax. Namely, what was on the ballot. Here is how it read:
Creation of Corporation; Texas Small Business Industrial
Development Corporation
Sec. 4. (b) There is hereby created the Texas Small Business Industrial Development Corporation which
shall act on behalf of the state to carry out the public purposes of this Act. The Texas Small
Business Industrial Development Corporation shall be considered to be a corporation within the
meaning of this Act, shall be organized and governed in accordance with the provisions of this
Act, and shall have all of the powers, and shall be subject to all of the limitations, provided for
corporations by this Act, except as otherwise provided by this section. For purposes of this Act,
the state shall be considered to be the unit under whose auspices the Texas Small Business
Industrial Development Corporation is created and the department shall be considered to be the
governing body. To the extent that the provisions of this section are inconsistent with other
provisions of this Act, the provisions of this section shall control as to the existence, powers,
limitations, organization, administration, operation, and affairs of the Texas Small Business Industrial Development Corporation.
Source
Notice how many times the words "small" and "business" appear in succession just in this one section? Do you think this Act would have passed if the truth had been told - that it was a way to make big businesses a lot bigger? Who among us would consider Caterpillar a "small business"? Starting to see how the government lies to get what it wants? But wait, it gets better.
Once the idea was sprung, the City of Victoria had to act as though they were objectively considering the creation of such an entity, rather than licking their chops at the idea of a slush fund that very few would pay attention to. After all, who ever checks the sales tax rates in a given town before they decide to shop?
Once they had all their ducks in a row, the City issued a Statement of Position. I am not going to go over this document point by point, but I recommend reading it several times. With the knowledge of what has transpired over the past 15 years, some statements made in this document should raise your blood pressure just a little bit.
Then the City passed a resolution to place the measure on the ballot. An interesting excerpt from the resolution:
"WHEREAS state law allows cities to hold an election for the purpose of submitting to the voters a measure for adopting up to an additional one half of one percent sales and use tax for the purposes of funding a Development Corporation as authorized by Section 4B Article 5190 6 V T C S as amended the Act with the proceeds thereof to be used and applied to the purposes authorized by the Act including but not limited to public street traffic control drainage parks water and wastewater improvements and the maintenance and operating costs associated with such projects
WHEREAS the City Council finds that funding such projects as authorized by the Act through such a tax will be less costly to the City than deferring maintenance or issuing bonded indebtedness and
WHEREAS the City Council desires to hold any property tax increases to City residents to a minimum;"
Um, yeah, you are reading that correctly. Let it sink in just a moment. you may want to wrap your head with duct tape to keep it from exploding.
But this is not where the story ends. You see, corporations have these pesky little things called Articles of Incorporation. These Articles perform several functions, among them is spelling out the tax status of the corporation, along with any requirements and prohibitions that may affect said tax status.
The Articles of Incorporation for the Victoria Sales Tax Development Corporation say several things, including:
"ARTICLE X
In accordance with the provisions of Section 501 c 3 of the United States Internal Revenue
Code the Corporation a shall not pay dividends and shall not permit any part of the net earnings
of the Corporation to inure to the benefit of any private individual except that reasonable
compensation may be paid for personal services rendered to or for the Corporation in effecting one or more of its purposes b shall not direct any of its activities to attempting to influence legislation
by propaganda or otherwise c shall not participate in or intervene in including the publication or
distribution of statements any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office and
d shall not attempt to influence the outcome of any election for public office or carry on directly
or indirectly any voter registration drives"
That bold part is pretty interesting, considering recent developments, wouldn't you agree?
It goes on to state "No part of the Corporation s income shall inure to the benefit of any private interest. No dividends shall ever be paid by the Corporation and no part of the Corporation s net earnings
remaining after payment of its expenses shall be distributed to or inure to the benefit of the director
or officers or any individual firm corporation or association other than the City of Victoria."
This statement would appear to me to be a prohibition against the expenditure that is transferred every single year to VEDC. VEDC is a corporation, right? And they are not the City of Victoria, right? OK, just wanted to make sure.
Just to recap:
Idea to get more of the public's money - CHECK!
Sell only the most palatable portions of the law - CHECK!
Make people think they will actually be saving money by allowing an additional tax - CHECK!
Make people think that someone else is paying for the additional tax - CHECK!
Annihilate all opposition by calling their concerns and reservations stupid and stone age - CHECK!
Get the local propaganda machine (aka The Victoria Advocate) to sell this beast to the serfs - We will explore that in a later blog...
The moral of this story is that the government is not to be trusted. I was once told by a man that whenever an agent of the government speaks, ask yourself this question - How does the government benefit if I believe what I am being told?
That is good advice, considering it is impossible to un-ring that bell.
So why do I think that granting government more power is a bad thing? Because government and those who advocate for it will tell you whatever is necessary to gain the power, but will not follow through on any of the promises. Having learned this lesson, a few months back I decided to start asking a few questions and doing a little digging around about the origin of the Victoria Sales Tax Development Corporation.
The first thing I wanted to know was what the voters had in front of them when they made their decision "for" or "against" the 1/2 cent sales tax. Namely, what was on the ballot. Here is how it read:
CITY OF VICTORIA
Proposition No. 1
The adoption of an additional sales and use tax within the city at the rate of one half of one percent as authorized by Section 4B, Article 5190.6, V.T.C.S., as amended (the Development Corporation Act of 1979), with the proceeds thereof to be used and applied to the purposes authorized by the Act. La adopción de ventas adicionales y usar el impuesto dentro de la ciudad a razón de una mitad de un por ciento como autorizado por Sección 4B, Artículo 5190.6, V.T.C.S., como enmendó de (la Corporación del desarrollo Actúa de 1979), con los beneficioses que se emplear y aplicar a los propósitos autorizado por el Acto.
Naturally, that leads to two questions...
1. Who in the world actually read Section 4B of the Development Corporation Act of 1979?
2. What does Section 4B say?
Whatever the answer to the first question is, it was definitely not enough. As for the second question, wonder no more:
Development Corporation
Sec. 4. (b) There is hereby created the Texas Small Business Industrial Development Corporation which
shall act on behalf of the state to carry out the public purposes of this Act. The Texas Small
Business Industrial Development Corporation shall be considered to be a corporation within the
meaning of this Act, shall be organized and governed in accordance with the provisions of this
Act, and shall have all of the powers, and shall be subject to all of the limitations, provided for
corporations by this Act, except as otherwise provided by this section. For purposes of this Act,
the state shall be considered to be the unit under whose auspices the Texas Small Business
Industrial Development Corporation is created and the department shall be considered to be the
governing body. To the extent that the provisions of this section are inconsistent with other
provisions of this Act, the provisions of this section shall control as to the existence, powers,
limitations, organization, administration, operation, and affairs of the Texas Small Business Industrial Development Corporation.
Source
Notice how many times the words "small" and "business" appear in succession just in this one section? Do you think this Act would have passed if the truth had been told - that it was a way to make big businesses a lot bigger? Who among us would consider Caterpillar a "small business"? Starting to see how the government lies to get what it wants? But wait, it gets better.
Once the idea was sprung, the City of Victoria had to act as though they were objectively considering the creation of such an entity, rather than licking their chops at the idea of a slush fund that very few would pay attention to. After all, who ever checks the sales tax rates in a given town before they decide to shop?
Once they had all their ducks in a row, the City issued a Statement of Position. I am not going to go over this document point by point, but I recommend reading it several times. With the knowledge of what has transpired over the past 15 years, some statements made in this document should raise your blood pressure just a little bit.
Then the City passed a resolution to place the measure on the ballot. An interesting excerpt from the resolution:
"WHEREAS state law allows cities to hold an election for the purpose of submitting to the voters a measure for adopting up to an additional one half of one percent sales and use tax for the purposes of funding a Development Corporation as authorized by Section 4B Article 5190 6 V T C S as amended the Act with the proceeds thereof to be used and applied to the purposes authorized by the Act including but not limited to public street traffic control drainage parks water and wastewater improvements and the maintenance and operating costs associated with such projects
WHEREAS the City Council finds that funding such projects as authorized by the Act through such a tax will be less costly to the City than deferring maintenance or issuing bonded indebtedness and
WHEREAS the City Council desires to hold any property tax increases to City residents to a minimum;"
Um, yeah, you are reading that correctly. Let it sink in just a moment. you may want to wrap your head with duct tape to keep it from exploding.
But this is not where the story ends. You see, corporations have these pesky little things called Articles of Incorporation. These Articles perform several functions, among them is spelling out the tax status of the corporation, along with any requirements and prohibitions that may affect said tax status.
The Articles of Incorporation for the Victoria Sales Tax Development Corporation say several things, including:
"ARTICLE X
In accordance with the provisions of Section 501 c 3 of the United States Internal Revenue
Code the Corporation a shall not pay dividends and shall not permit any part of the net earnings
of the Corporation to inure to the benefit of any private individual except that reasonable
compensation may be paid for personal services rendered to or for the Corporation in effecting one or more of its purposes b shall not direct any of its activities to attempting to influence legislation
by propaganda or otherwise c shall not participate in or intervene in including the publication or
distribution of statements any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office and
d shall not attempt to influence the outcome of any election for public office or carry on directly
or indirectly any voter registration drives"
That bold part is pretty interesting, considering recent developments, wouldn't you agree?
It goes on to state "No part of the Corporation s income shall inure to the benefit of any private interest. No dividends shall ever be paid by the Corporation and no part of the Corporation s net earnings
remaining after payment of its expenses shall be distributed to or inure to the benefit of the director
or officers or any individual firm corporation or association other than the City of Victoria."
This statement would appear to me to be a prohibition against the expenditure that is transferred every single year to VEDC. VEDC is a corporation, right? And they are not the City of Victoria, right? OK, just wanted to make sure.
Just to recap:
Idea to get more of the public's money - CHECK!
Sell only the most palatable portions of the law - CHECK!
Make people think they will actually be saving money by allowing an additional tax - CHECK!
Make people think that someone else is paying for the additional tax - CHECK!
Annihilate all opposition by calling their concerns and reservations stupid and stone age - CHECK!
Get the local propaganda machine (aka The Victoria Advocate) to sell this beast to the serfs - We will explore that in a later blog...
The moral of this story is that the government is not to be trusted. I was once told by a man that whenever an agent of the government speaks, ask yourself this question - How does the government benefit if I believe what I am being told?
That is good advice, considering it is impossible to un-ring that bell.
Friday, April 1, 2011
VEDC and Chamber of Commerce: We got a man down!
Well, It appears as though the first readings are registering on the Geiger Counter Victoria from Mayor Will's nuclear warfare. In an interesting turn of events, UHV has decided to suspend their memberships in both the Victoria Chamber of Commerce and VEDC. This may not seem like much, but it could turn into something more. I have to hand it Don Smith. He did the right thing, and he did it with grace and integrity.
But as in most things, I tend to want to use this as an opportunity to discuss an aspect of VEDC that has been puzzling me for some time. According to VEDC's website, they have 74 voting members. I was thinking about breaking them down by category, but I think I will save that for a future blog. What I would like to focus on are just a few of their members, namely those that are government agencies. VISD, The Victoria College, and Citizens Medical Center are all voting members of VEDC. My thought is, Why? Why are these entities, two of which have direct taxing authority, helping fund an agency whose purpose it is to attract business? I am sure someone will comment on this blog, explaining how all things are interrelated, the leg bone is connected to the knee bone, synergy, strategic partnership, blah, blah, blah. You can save it. I have heard it all before.
Let me tell you what I think about it. I think it is just another way of taking public dollars and funneling them through a private agency, whose disclosure standards are nowhere near as stringent. I think it is more manipulation by those who believe in an unholy alliance between government and business.
In the past, I have referred to VEDC as the Victoria Economic DESTRUCTION Corporation. While I still think that title is appropriate, not to mention that it is acronymically correct, perhaps a more perfect name would by the Victoria Government Development Corporation.
I will go further into detail in Part 2. Stay tuned.
But as in most things, I tend to want to use this as an opportunity to discuss an aspect of VEDC that has been puzzling me for some time. According to VEDC's website, they have 74 voting members. I was thinking about breaking them down by category, but I think I will save that for a future blog. What I would like to focus on are just a few of their members, namely those that are government agencies. VISD, The Victoria College, and Citizens Medical Center are all voting members of VEDC. My thought is, Why? Why are these entities, two of which have direct taxing authority, helping fund an agency whose purpose it is to attract business? I am sure someone will comment on this blog, explaining how all things are interrelated, the leg bone is connected to the knee bone, synergy, strategic partnership, blah, blah, blah. You can save it. I have heard it all before.
Let me tell you what I think about it. I think it is just another way of taking public dollars and funneling them through a private agency, whose disclosure standards are nowhere near as stringent. I think it is more manipulation by those who believe in an unholy alliance between government and business.
In the past, I have referred to VEDC as the Victoria Economic DESTRUCTION Corporation. While I still think that title is appropriate, not to mention that it is acronymically correct, perhaps a more perfect name would by the Victoria Government Development Corporation.
I will go further into detail in Part 2. Stay tuned.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Just When You Think It Can't Get More Ridiculous...
The latest propaganda piece by Gabe Semenza, A&M VS UH: Universities Compared is really something else. To me, this is a sure indication of the desperation of those attempting to sell the public on this idea of realignment. Honestly, what does comparing A&M and UH have to do with UHV or the possibility of TAMUV? If you answered "nothing" you would be correct.
I am not going to waste all day debunking every single point made in the article, but I will touch on a few. I think most rational adults already see this for what it is anyhow.
TUITION
According to the "article", in-state tuition at UH is higher than at Texas A&M. Again, I almost feel dumb even having to address this. So I did about 36.7 seconds of internet research, and came up with this official A&M System Website and this article. I will let you decide what the numbers say.
NATIONAL FELLOWSHIPS
This is an interesting statistic. According to the "article" since 2000, A&M has had 50 Rhodes and Fullbright Scholars. I wonder how many of those attend classes at Texas A&M International? I'm sure Texas A&M Commerce is chock full of these scholars, right?
NCAA ATTENDANCE
Umm, yeah...because now all those people that drive from Victoria, Edna, Hallettsville, Port Lavaca, Refugio, etc. to College Station to watch games at Kyle Field will just come here to watch the TAMUV (insert nickname) not play football on Saturday mornings? Are you kidding me? I don't think I even have to expand on this one.
ALUMNI DONATIONS
This is an interesting one. I wonder how much of the $53.3 million in donations came from graduates of Prairieview A&M? What about West Texas A&M? Or perhaps Texas A&M Corpus Christi? The REAL Texas A&M (the one in College Station) is an institution. Generations of family members go there. There is a brotherhood amongst the former students. When was the last time someone you knew bought a blue or gold car because they went to A&M Kingsville? When was the last time you were in Beaumont or Odessa or McAllen or Fort Worth, and saw a Texas A&M Texarkana bumper sticker? REAL A&M stickers (that represent the REAL A&M in College Station) can be found in every city in this state. Have I made my point clear enough yet?
For the umpteenth time - Texas A&M College Station is not coming to Victoria. If this deal goes through, we will have Texas A&M Victoria, no more, no less. Even VEDC will not be able to get anyone from A&M to build us a replica of Kyle Field...or Olsen Field...or Reed Arena. Get it? Good.
What I really can't figure out is why Gabe stopped where he did. Why not use murder statistics comparisons between College Station and Houston as a reason we should change University Systems?
Or how about Phi Slamma Jamma as a reason to stay with UH? After all, we are being led to believe that whatever University System we have, we can just superimpose it over the local campus.
You know, traffic is much lighter in College Station than Houston, so I think that is reason enough to make the switch.
But where are all the high and mighty history buffs? Why aren't Gary Dunnam and Sharon Steen demanding that we stay with UH, since Houston has far more history than College Station?
Why don't we just consider the schools equal, since they have the same number of Heisman Trophy winners?
Victoria, plenty of people around the State are now watching. Now is the time to make an impression. As a Victorian, I am embarrassed with the manner in which our community is being represented by a small group of mostly non-elected people. Of course, when the best elected representation they can muster to support this thing are the likes of Pozzi, Burns, and Polasek, what do you expect? While we're at it, why don't we go ahead and ask John Clegg what he thinks.
Just how stupid does the Victoria Advocate and their gang of public coffer snoutbearers think we are?
I am not going to waste all day debunking every single point made in the article, but I will touch on a few. I think most rational adults already see this for what it is anyhow.
TUITION
According to the "article", in-state tuition at UH is higher than at Texas A&M. Again, I almost feel dumb even having to address this. So I did about 36.7 seconds of internet research, and came up with this official A&M System Website and this article. I will let you decide what the numbers say.
NATIONAL FELLOWSHIPS
This is an interesting statistic. According to the "article" since 2000, A&M has had 50 Rhodes and Fullbright Scholars. I wonder how many of those attend classes at Texas A&M International? I'm sure Texas A&M Commerce is chock full of these scholars, right?
NCAA ATTENDANCE
Umm, yeah...because now all those people that drive from Victoria, Edna, Hallettsville, Port Lavaca, Refugio, etc. to College Station to watch games at Kyle Field will just come here to watch the TAMUV (insert nickname) not play football on Saturday mornings? Are you kidding me? I don't think I even have to expand on this one.
ALUMNI DONATIONS
This is an interesting one. I wonder how much of the $53.3 million in donations came from graduates of Prairieview A&M? What about West Texas A&M? Or perhaps Texas A&M Corpus Christi? The REAL Texas A&M (the one in College Station) is an institution. Generations of family members go there. There is a brotherhood amongst the former students. When was the last time someone you knew bought a blue or gold car because they went to A&M Kingsville? When was the last time you were in Beaumont or Odessa or McAllen or Fort Worth, and saw a Texas A&M Texarkana bumper sticker? REAL A&M stickers (that represent the REAL A&M in College Station) can be found in every city in this state. Have I made my point clear enough yet?
For the umpteenth time - Texas A&M College Station is not coming to Victoria. If this deal goes through, we will have Texas A&M Victoria, no more, no less. Even VEDC will not be able to get anyone from A&M to build us a replica of Kyle Field...or Olsen Field...or Reed Arena. Get it? Good.
What I really can't figure out is why Gabe stopped where he did. Why not use murder statistics comparisons between College Station and Houston as a reason we should change University Systems?
Or how about Phi Slamma Jamma as a reason to stay with UH? After all, we are being led to believe that whatever University System we have, we can just superimpose it over the local campus.
You know, traffic is much lighter in College Station than Houston, so I think that is reason enough to make the switch.
But where are all the high and mighty history buffs? Why aren't Gary Dunnam and Sharon Steen demanding that we stay with UH, since Houston has far more history than College Station?
Why don't we just consider the schools equal, since they have the same number of Heisman Trophy winners?
Victoria, plenty of people around the State are now watching. Now is the time to make an impression. As a Victorian, I am embarrassed with the manner in which our community is being represented by a small group of mostly non-elected people. Of course, when the best elected representation they can muster to support this thing are the likes of Pozzi, Burns, and Polasek, what do you expect? While we're at it, why don't we go ahead and ask John Clegg what he thinks.
Just how stupid does the Victoria Advocate and their gang of public coffer snoutbearers think we are?
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Why Can't They Just Tell the Truth?
You know, I often wonder what the government-is-always-right crowd thinks of people like me. Do they think that those of us who have the audacity to question the benevolence of our wonderful elected officials do it just for kicks? Do they think we just woke up one morning and proclaimed, "I'm going to be against anything and everything that local government attempts to do"? Do they ever even consider that maybe...just maybe...we oppose or support things based on a set of principles, or a political philosophy, perhaps? Or maybe we just have BS detectors, that end to go off nearly every time we are being sold a new idea? Nah, that kind of abstract thought doesn't seem to be congruent with the persona of the sheep.
Speaking just for me, what normally gets me motivated to oppose something is when I am told something that is either completely untrue, has had the facts manipulated, or just plain does not make sense. At that point, I feel it is incumbent upon me to do a little research and attempt to present the facts. After all, I do believe in the political process and I fully understand that you win some and you lose some. While I can accept that things won't always be seen by others as I view them, I cannot accept people making decisions without having the facts.
Over the past few weeks, quite a few claims have been made by those supporting the UHV-A&M switch. Some have been made by Dale Fowler, some by the City Council, some by members of VEDC, and some by people posting on the VA website. I don't intend to attribute each comment to its appropriate source, and it isn't even really relevant to do so. From what I have seen thus far, each and every person in favor of the switch to A&M will agree with any statement that showers favor on that endeavor, regardless of the level of veracity.
When this whole ordeal began, I knew virtually nothing about university systems. Of course I knew that several state universities had campuses in other locations, but I was unaware of how pervasive it was. I also was unaware of the switch from Texas State to Texas Tech by Angelo State University. I don't pretend to know everything that transpired prior to that action, but I do know one thing for sure. I know that situation and this one are not identical. Some have attempted to make that point, and it is disingenuous to say the least.
That reflects an increase of roughly 13% in population since 1990. I am sure that number would have exponentially higher with A&M in town. The UH System should be ashamed for holding us down. Will any of this change anyone's mind? Probably not. But at least now a few people will have a few facts with which to formulate an opinion.
Speaking just for me, what normally gets me motivated to oppose something is when I am told something that is either completely untrue, has had the facts manipulated, or just plain does not make sense. At that point, I feel it is incumbent upon me to do a little research and attempt to present the facts. After all, I do believe in the political process and I fully understand that you win some and you lose some. While I can accept that things won't always be seen by others as I view them, I cannot accept people making decisions without having the facts.
Over the past few weeks, quite a few claims have been made by those supporting the UHV-A&M switch. Some have been made by Dale Fowler, some by the City Council, some by members of VEDC, and some by people posting on the VA website. I don't intend to attribute each comment to its appropriate source, and it isn't even really relevant to do so. From what I have seen thus far, each and every person in favor of the switch to A&M will agree with any statement that showers favor on that endeavor, regardless of the level of veracity.
When this whole ordeal began, I knew virtually nothing about university systems. Of course I knew that several state universities had campuses in other locations, but I was unaware of how pervasive it was. I also was unaware of the switch from Texas State to Texas Tech by Angelo State University. I don't pretend to know everything that transpired prior to that action, but I do know one thing for sure. I know that situation and this one are not identical. Some have attempted to make that point, and it is disingenuous to say the least.
As I stated earlier, there have been many claims made by many people. There have been more than a few projections floated, as well as promises made. There is no need to rehash it all, but I would like to focus on a few claims that are easily dispelled with just some rudimentary statistical analysis. I have heard several times that the Texas A&M System has a track record of taking university campuses in rural settings to levels never dreamed of before. Some are making it seem as though A&M can do no wrong and is just the fix for any situation similar to the one here in Victoria. Then there is the claim being made that this will grow Victoria and the economic boost will be so great that none will be able to deny it. We all heard Joe Truman tell us that this would garner a thousand fold return on investment. I think most of us heard Joe then stand behind his statement. So, me being the fact-checker that I am, I decided to take a look at the matter.
Of the current eleven universities in the Texas A&M system, there are only three that I can reasonably compare to UHV. One is A&M Texarkana, but there is not enough history there to have established a true record. So that left me with West Texas A&M and Texas A&M Kingsville. Neither of these universities are 100% comparable either, but it was as close as I could get.
So what numbers did I look at? Well, first of all, I checked to see how long each of the universities had been a part of the A&M System. I also thought it was pertinent to know their year of inception. After all, particularly in higher education, legacy can be a great selling point. Then I wanted to know the historical enrollment figures. Since so many people seem to think that A&M has been wildly successful in growing the student population in each of their System universities, I wanted to verify it. Lastly, I wanted to see the population trends of the communities in question. Since economic impact has been a focal point of much of the dialogue concerning the switch, I felt it was pertinent to analyze the growth or contraction of the respective communities. While population growth is not always indicative of prosperity, I think you would be hard pressed to offer up an example of prosperity without population expansion.
So here is what I found:
TAMU-Kingsville was established in 1925 (under a different name, of course). It joined the TAMU System in 1989. I was unable to locate a complete historical enrollment for TAMU-K, but I was able to find enrollment figures for a few years. They are as follows:
*1971 – 8,096
1989 – 5,783
1992 – 6,415
2000 – 5,949
2004 – 6,166
2008 – 5,698
2010 – 6,595
*Largest enrollment in the history of the institution
So, what do these numbers represent? To me, it is pretty clear that the enrollment at TAMU-K has remained fairly constant, with only a 14% increase in the 21 years it has been in the TAMU System. The Fall 2010 enrollment is also 1,501 shy of the record attendance achieved in 1971.
West Texas A&M was established (again, under another name) in 1910. It joined the TAMU System in 1990. Here are some enrollment figures for West Texas A&M:
*1969 – 7,935
1980 – 6,559
1990 – 6,191
2000 – 6,775
2010 – 7,842
*Largest enrollment in the history of the institution
In the 20 years since West Texas A&M has been in the A&M System, enrollment has increased just under 27%, or by 1,651 students. Again, the Fall 2010 enrollment is below the record enrollment in the history of the University.
Now let’s take a look at the population trends for Kingsville and Canyon, where West Texas A&M is located. The website that I collected the following numbers stopped with the 2006 estimates, but I used it because it was operated by the US Census Bureau.
Kingsville population numbers:
1990 – 25,276
2000 – 25,575
2006 estimate – 24,394
That is a decrease in population since A&M took over the local University in Kingsville.
Canyon population numbers:
1990 – 11,365
2000 – 12,875
2009 estimate – 14,529
So after 19 years of their local University in the A&M System, the population of Canyon, TX has increased by just under 28%. Let’s see how that compares with Victoria, where, according to some, we are in desperate need of the boost that only Texas A&M can provide.
Victoria population numbers:
1990 – 55,076
2000 – 60,603
2006 estimate – 62,169
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)