What Does She Really Mean?

I was looking over my buddy Jaime's blog today and getting caught up on the latest happenings with the city races (the only place to get any analysis on city council races) when I noticed that he has a post containing statements from two local state legislators.  It seems that Naomi Gonzalez and Chente "portly gente" Quintanilla have something to say about H.B. 1.

Thanks to Jaime for turning me onto this - go see him http://thelionstarblog.blogspot.com/.

I'll quote-tab Rep. Gonzalez's words and then answer below them. This is a statement she sent out (not to me directly because nobody wants to poke the pig) in defense of her "no vote" on H.B. 1.  Remember, Naomi is a lawyer by trade, so she speaks/writes in a way that fools you into seeing only one side of the story - she can't help herself.

"Cuts to education and healthcare will be devastating and in the end these cuts affect all of us, not just the young, sick and poor."

Yes, for the vast majority of us who are not young, sick or poor, it means our taxes won't be raised in order to continue funding these failed programs at their previously bloated levels.  So while it's a bummer for some, it's not that bad for others.  You can't solve being young, but sick and poor is something you can fix on your own.

"Our citizens and the economy will suffer."

Are both citizens and the economy not currently suffering?  The reason you don't have the money to spend on the young, sick and poor is because those who are not young, sick and poor are suffering from a bad economy brought on by democrats like yourself who think spending zillions of dollars you don't have on shit you don't need is the best idea since we decided to shit and eat in two different places.

"Texas already ranks 44th out of 50 states in education spending per pupil. Don't our children deserve better? It is economically shortsighted to increase class sizes, fire teachers, and underfund classrooms."

The Yankees spend a lot per player and look where that gets them!  Our children don't deserve "better" when you mean more money for more teachers just looking for benefits and summers off.  The "Greatest Generation" was educated K through 12 for the cost (in today's dollars) of what we send one kid to school for just one year.  They were born before commercial flight and died after putting a man on the moon and inventing the internet. Our kids spell "you're" as "ur" and are too lazy to type "to" and instead type "2."  Money is not the problem.

"Texas already ranks 48th out of 50 states on spending for health and human services. Sick people will get sicker and their care more expensive, increasing not only their burden but that of the rest of the state's."

Every state is "48th out of 50" when someone wants more money for their program.  As far as "sick people getting sicker," I can't see one solitary case where money cured anyone of anything.  And the burden won't be increased for the rest of us - the very point of reducing the spending of my tax dollars on other people's free health care is to reduce the burden on me.  I'm paying for mine and their care - I just want to pay for mine, thank you.  And don't worry - I will never ask you to pay my part.  I'm a nice guy like that.

"Legislators have a moral responsibility to make sure that our most vulnerable, our children, families, and seniors don't have to bear the hardship of the state's multi-billion dollar budget shortfall, but we have failed them so far."

Where is it written that "legislators have a moral responsibility?"  Don't make that claim and then turn around and bash right-wingers for following their moral compass when it comes to gay marriage and abortion. You can't have it both ways.  That's precisely why legislators deal with the law using the law instead of feelings, morals and emotions.  Again, our children aren't bearing any hardship.  They don't work and they don't pay taxes and if schools were closed tomorrow they'd be the happiest people on the face of the planet, so stop spreading that lie.  Besides, the "it's for the children" line gets old when we're looking at higher taxes for the adults.

"Since being elected to office, I have tried to work across party lines, set priorities, and look for creative ways to raise revenue that do not cut the programs that are integral to our children, the poor, and the sick."

 That's where you're wrong - we're not "raising revenue," we're reducing our spending.  You don't have to be a fan of Dave Ramsey to know that the first rule of budgeting is live within your means, not increase your means to match your living.  Please refrain from declaring that you sought to find new ways to tax us - your opponent did that and she lost to... to you. 

"Unfortunately, the budget in its current form is balanced on their backs and I cannot support it. I will continue to work hard to improve this bill when it is returned from the Senate and be honest, up-front, and accountable to the public regarding this and other important decisions as the legislative session continues."

The budget is balanced on the taxpayer's back.  After all, without taxpayers, there would be no budget to balance.  I appreciate you being honest and up-front, but I wished you'd just lie in the future.  Government does not exist to enable the poor and bolster our idiotic education system.  We should de-fund both and make them perform or die. 

Sorry to be so harsh, but that's the truth.  Stay tuned for me ripping those who think money educates people.

Comments

[Ju (my real name)]

If a child or any other indigent with no healthcare coverage goes to the ER, who pays for that? Not the hospital. If private it's passed on as higher costs to insurance co.s who in turn pass it on to you. If a public hospital, it's added to the public cost.

If education is substandard and we have a poorly educated workforce, will companies that pay good wages for highly skilled workers have an incentive to relocate here if no such skillsets are available among the population? Probably not. That means, a lower taxpayer base and a negative impact on our region's economic developments. Basic economic formula, David.

(and yes, I'm sure you'll call me drunk or stupid, but it's my logical reasoning and brainwashing through hours and hours of econ classes, banking work, and reading Noam Chomsky.

[Ju (my real name)]

P.S., cut down the fog index (i.e., reduce the words) in a lawyer's prose by about 2/3 and you'll get the jist1 ;)

[David K]

Ju (not your real name),

Private hospitals bill the public funds that public ones do - insurance companies don't pick up indigent care. You know zero about this subject already, I don't know I'm even taking the time to respond.

Our substandard education her in the state of Texas has done the exact opposite of what you claim - we're attracting new companies faster than any other state in the Union... You basic formula has been proved wrong by the basic facts.

You almost had something there and then you forget to check reality before posting your comment. A little research goes a long way.

I will agree completely that a better educated work force makes for an attractive place to do business. However, a friendly tax environment will top that state every day of the week and twice on sunday. The fastest growing states, business wise, all happen to be states with a terrible education ranking, but no state income tax - go figure. They just import the smart folks because all those brilliant kids from Connecticut can't find a job there.

Besides, what you don't correctly assess is that the state of Texas has thrown mountains of money at the education problem for 25 years now and it has gotten... WORSE! That's why I argue that more money isn't the answer to better education. I guess you missed that theme.

The real deal is not to kill the somewhat pleasant tax environment (what all those companies moving to Texas love so dearly) by trying to pour billions into a broken education model in the name of attracting new employers - something we're already doing and will be defeating by raising taxes to "save education."

Don't worry, I'll be explaining the whole education mess to you soon.

Your Noam Chomsky reading is why you lack a grasp of reality and how the real world works. L. Ron Hubbard creates a not so different fantastic, but make believe world for his readers and followers - and you see where that has gotten them.

And the reason I call you drunk or stupid usually is because you don't make sense. You are put together well here today, even though you're wrong.

[RC]

Well it's nice to see that you notice when "throwing mountains of money" at something only to get negative results should mean changing directions..*ahem*..drug war.

But whats with this animosity for teachers? The popular argument among the conservatives are that teachers are just greedy and lazy with perk benefits and summers off. For 1, teachers aren't paid that well, plus they have to foot the bill for supplies for their classrooms. Sure they get great benefits, but instead of chastising them for that maybe you should be asking, why cant I get that. I mean its like saying "Bill in accounting just got a raise? Well fuck it, I'm gonna go complain and make sure no one else gets raises" instead of fighting for your own raise.

When people complain, why are these CEO's and executives getting such high salaries with great perks, people like you say..well, we need to do that if these companies want to stay competitive and hire the best talent that is available. Then logic would dictate that better salaries and benefits would be needed to attract quality teachers that are directly responsible for the education of all our futures...no?

[david k]

RC,

You're right and you're wrong. I will explain how carrot chasing works in my next post. A real quick take - perform first then get paid, not the other way around.

[RC]

That is unless you play by corporate standards, which is - get a lucrative salary with perks, give a piss poor performance, resign, collect an even more lucrative severance package and join the lecture circuit.

[david k]

RC,

You're talking about literally less than 1000 people in that position. It is not common, it's just well publicized.

[native elpasoan]

It's not necessarily the teachers. It's the curriculum, incompetent school boards that won't allow real discipline (in other words scared to death of parents) and they approve pay packages for superintendents that are way out of line for what they get in return and parents that don't give a damn what their kids learn as long as they are out of their hair 8 hours a day. Throw all the money you want at it - but those 3 things gotta change before any improvement happens.

[RC]

Perhaps less than 1000, but never the less, collectively those frivolous severances could amount to the entire budget of some of the smaller states.

[Tim]

Mr. Margo used the excuse that he had to vote for HB1 in order to get it out of the House and into the Senate for negotiations to take place.
That of course, is total BS. With the supermajority that the GOP has in the House, his one vote in favor of his constituents and against the enormous cuts that continue to favor the business community at the expense of students is contrary to his statements in the EP INC that the El Paso delegation works as a cohesive unit. He works for himself and for his buddies.

I know that the right loves to say stuff like "Throwing money at the problem does not help solve the problem." That is of course, wrong as well. They throw money at businesses in the form of tax incentives all the time.

Apparently throwing money at a SOCIAL issue doesn't solve the problem, but it does when it comes to businesses.

(I suppose if throwing money was also not an issue with Mr. Margo, he would be tooling around town in a Chevy, not that nice Lamborghini.)

It seems to me at least that what is happening in Austin now is simply a case of class warfare.

[business owner]

can someone please enlighten me on exactly what "favors" to business is in the HB1 bill that was passed? I'm still smarting over the ill conceived stupid margins/franchise tax fix from 2007 that we now find out caused a $10B structural deficit in the Texas budget for years to come. So business got screwed on that tax and it hasn't brought in the money they thought which was supposed to fund the difference in the reduction in the M&O rate schools could charge taxpayers. In reality we had a 2007, 2009 and now 2011 legislature (democrats and republicans) that obviously got their math education from a local school district - they can't add.

[James]

Business owner, great response.

Our first mistake politically, is to elect a statist, Naomi G....in my opinion, most of the so-called legislators from El Paso(i.e. mafia members) are statists. Their ambition is not to save taxpayer money, but for control of the private sector and empowering the corrupt, and unconstitutional legislative system. (I may favor Pickett for his hard work on the transportation committee into vastly improving and building the roads and bridges in El Paso...and that's what a legislator is supposed to do in government.)

Thanks David K. for your evaluation of her ridiculous answers over the budget bill. And what about moral responsibility? Congressional members from both parties have shown very little moral responsibility; but the Demoncrits are the worst of showing any moral or responsible character.

In all her statist-marxist ways, Naomi has done something right, she represents those who voted for her very well.

[TIm]

Dear Business Owner,
Apparently you are in the wrong business. Governor Zoolander still has room for his $350,000,000 and counting “Enterprise Fund” which rewards businesses for simply being in Texas. Have you got your cut yet? https://www.texasobserver.org/cover-story/slush-fun Hurry! He’s handing it out to all his good buddies.

Sadly, you made a bad business decision by not choosing to go into gas and oil drilling. If you had made the correct choice then you would have received a big tax break, to the tune of $2.8 BILLION. That is $2.8 billion that the state COULD have used towards the current budget deficit. (http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/03/08/2906572/fort-worth-democrat-pushes-repeal.html) That “temporary” tax break was written into law in 1996 and made permanent in 2009. One can only marvel at the amount of taxes the state will NOT get into Texas, but rather go to such good “Texas” companies as British Petroleum. I am sure they are actively depositing those checks in Texas banks.

As for those “public school” educated politicians that passed the Franchise Tax in 2006 that is now decimating public schools because it didn’t work like it was supposed to, it was devised by the best and brightest Republican minds the state has: Rick Perry and David Dewhurst.The bill was so bad that the Comptroller wrote Perry pleading with him not to sign the bill. Read the letter here. It was written in May 2006.
http://www.window.state.tx.us/news/60515letter.html It is obvious after reading that letter than the current crisis in our budget is not because of the recession but rather Republican politicians who would rather help their buddies than help the people of the state.

[Ju]

Priceless how much time you spend responding to that whom you perceive to be a fool, oh great Einstein.

[Ju]

Excuse me, forget Einstein... Sarah Palin, is that you?

[david k]

Ju,

I'm spending the time to educate you because I figure you're not going away any time soon. I might as well teach you something while you're here. Hell, you might just one day get something right and graduate on to bigger and better things than this pathetic local blog.

Don't worry, I don't charge for this service.

[Ju]

me thinks the lady doth protest too much! Perhaps instead of calling your blog, the "Juice" thing, it would be most appropriate if you renamed, it "Oedipus anus."

[chucky]

that is funny ju. i always thought "ju" was the strelz ?

[david k]

Ju,

Now you're sounding smart! Thanks for bringin g incest to the table. You dumber, more immature with each post... but that's not uncommon.