Quid Pro Quo by Any Other Name

Around 43 years ago I was introduced to the phrase "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" in Shakepeare’s Romeo and Juliet by Isaac Musselwhite, my high school English teacher. Mr. Musselwhite often reminded us that being able to quote Shakespeare was an indicator of refinement and sophistication; he claimed it would impress girls.

I can’t say that I was an especially good student and I’m still unsure that even if I had been it would have improved my chances for a date. What I can say is that Donald Trump apparently never read Romeo and Juliet and I’ll bet he can quote even less Shakespeare than I can. I’m certain of it because while he has professed “no quid pro quo” since he released the readout of his conversation with Ukraine’s President Zelensky each new document and testimony proves that he was demanding a corruption investigation into Joe and Hunter Biden and withholding previously approved and promised military assistance until he got it. Trump’s demands smell just as sweet as “quid pro quo” no matter what he names it.

First there were rumors of a whistleblower report, then rumors of its contents. Next Trump released the readout of the call with Zelensky which he called perfect but anyone actually reading it saw as strong tactics or extortion and yes, quid pro quo. National Security Advisor John Bolton suddenly resigned. Then came further evidence in the form of text messages between Ambassador Gordon Sondland and Special Envoy Kurt Volker confirming the details of a larger, coordinated effort, dare I call it a conspiracy, that also involved Rudy Guiliani and Attorney General William Barr. Next congress heard testimony from former National Security Council member Dr. Fiona Hill who said Bolton warned her that he would not get caught up in what he referred to as a "drug deal" being cooked up on Ukraine by US Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland and White House acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney. Out of the blue news broke that two of Rudy Guiliani’s Russian cronies had been arrested on campaign finance violations involving channeling Russian money to Republican candidates and are also implicated in the effort to pressure Ukraine into providing dirt on Biden. Then there were rumors that our former governor, now Secretary of Energy Rick Perry was involved and within days he suddenly announced his resignation.

On Tuesday the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, William Taylor, testified in closed door hearings. Taylor’s fourteen page opening statement has been released to the public. I’ve read it and if there was ever the slightest doubt that Trump and his cronies were engaged in a conspiracy to extort political dirt on Joe Biden from Ukraine’s president in return for military assistance and a meeting with Trump that doubt has been removed. Taylor provides a very specific timeline and first person testimony regarding many conversations, verbal and written, with various members of the conspiracy. Media reports indicate that committee members and staff at the hearing gasped several times during Taylor’s testimony. I find it hard to imagine what could be more damning that Taylor’s opening statement.

Trump’s demands by any other name still smell like “qui pro quo” and since they involve him accepting a thing of value, dirt on an election rival, from a foreign nation those demands violate both the Emoluments clause of the U.S. constitution and federal campaign finance law. Attorney General William Barr’s efforts to stifle the investigation into the whistleblower complaint constitute a coverup.

It is past time for the House to impeach Trump.

Published in the Seguin Gazette - October 25, 2019

Constitutional Amendments

In theory the election this November is non-partisan, we’ll have mayors, city council and special utility districts seats on the ballot as well as ten constitutional amendments. Most of the candidates will avoid using partisan labels as is appropriate for these races. The amendments proposed for the Texas constitution are non-partisan in as much as they passed the legislature with the votes at least a large fraction of each party.

The League of Women Voters and others publish non-partisan guides to the constitutional amendments, you can find them and the candidates on your ballot at Vote411.org. Our own state representative, John Kuempel, included the amendments and the state legislature’s approved pros and cons on the last page of the missive he mailed to voters a week or so ago.

I can only support Amendment 2 and 10. Amendment 2 provides for the Texas Water Board to issuing bonds to provide financial assistance in developing water projects in economically depressed areas that would otherwise be unable to provide adequate resources for their citizens. Amendment 10 would allow law enforcement animal handlers to take ownership of their service animals when those animals are retired leaving them in the hands of people they have come to know, love, and trust rather than the current process of auctioning the animal to the highest bidder. The auctions only generate a few thousand dollars a year and it seems unnecessary and inhumane to take the animal away from the only family it has known for many years in the last years of its life.

Amendment 3 is designed to allow yet another property tax exemption, this time for property damaged in hurricanes and similar instances. As it stands now if the property is that badly damaged its assessed value will be decreased and therefore the taxes lowered anyway.

Amendment 4 is a big no. The stated purpose is to prohibit the imposition of a state income tax. First state law already does that, as it requires a vote of the citizens to start taxing “natural persons”. The real kicker and reason to vote no is that passage of this proposition changes the language of state law to prohibit an income tax on “individuals”. To most of us such a difference of phrasing seems innocuous but in the legal world, that change is very significant as corporations are treated as “individuals” which means that Amendment 4 prohibits an income tax on corporations whereas current law does not. That’s why state law provides for what is known as the Franchise Tax which Republicans have been trying to kill by increments since the day it passed.

This week I received a mailer on Amendment 5 pushing to dedicate sales tax revenue from the sale of sporting goods to the state parks system. I’m fundamentally opposed to dedicated taxes as it hamstrings legislators and prevents them from addressing budget problems, particularly when the economy suddenly drops like it did in 2011 when the state cut 6% from the education budget. Amendment 5 would just make that situation worse.

Amendment 9 authorizes another tax exemption, this time for the wealthy and big businesses that stock significant amounts of precious metals, gold and silver among others. Right now those precious metals are eligible for property taxes so if they were to be exempted your community may find the need to increase your property taxes in order to make up the difference.

There’s not enough space to cover the rest, all I can say is that in my opinion you would be best served by voting no to all but 2 and 10.

Published in the Seguin Gazette - October 18, 2019

Kuempel's Smoke and Mirrors

Once again our state representative, John Kuempel, has mailed one of his puff pieces to residents in Guadalupe and Wilson counties. As usual he touts purported accomplishments which are often as not failures.

His missive spends half a page on state funding for public education and without background it sounds pretty good until you realize that the state still hasn’t restored all the funding it took away in 2011. Instead of fully restoring funding our legislature with Kuempel’s vote in favor chose to forcibly reduce property tax rates school districts around the state had used to make up for the state cuts. So he’s cheering about a solution to a problem he helped cause in the first place. In the SCUC ISD where I live my property taxes will go down a whopping $12 a month. That’s not enough to buy a half tank of gas and I’m not going to notice it in my monthly budget. Had our district been allowed to keep some or all of those funds we wouldn’t have to again request a waiver on the maximum number of students per teacher in K-3 classes. K-3 is the age where children learn the most quickly and need to most attention and our district like many others still can’t cover the cost to properly educate them.

It isn’t just that Kuempel and his Republican cronies haven’t fully restored funding of public education they also restricted how the additional funding they did provide can be spent. It never ceases to amaze me that the politicians who talk the most about local control and not forcing one size fits all solutions on the public are the very ones most likely to do the exact opposite. I think we’d all have been better served if the state had left the choice to maintain or reduce property taxes up to the various districts.

Kuempel goes on to tout what he calls increased transparency in property taxes but in reality it’s just a requirement to hold elections to increase property tax rates. If he really believed in transparency he’d work for passage of legislation that requires purchase price of every transfer or real property to be reported to the local appraisal district. Right now wealthy folks who purchase multi-million dollar homes often use the option to not report so that the home can’t be properly appraised and therefore save thousands and tens of thousands on their taxes all while you and I pay the full share. Our former Republican state senator, Jeff Wentworth, tried for a decade to pass such a bill. If Kuempel is going to talk about transparency he should have the integrity to stop protecting the rich folks behind the curtain.

Another area where Kuempel obfuscates is his claim the legislature provided funding to cover shortfalls in Medicaid and state hospitals. Had he and his Republican colleagues voted to accept Medicaid expansion as offered under the Affordable Care Act the federal government would have provided an additional $100 million to Texas every year. That funding would have assured that many if not all of the rural hospitals that have closed and will close of the next few years were funded without costing Texas taxpayers a dime.

The general theme here is that Kuempel is taking credit for half measures designed to smooth over problems he and his fellow Republicans created in the first place. This time next year we may have a chance to replace him. I hope voters will see through the fog of Republican claims and elect someone who believes in solutions not bandaids.

Published in the Seguin Gazette - October 11, 2019

Surprise Conviction Shouldn't Be

I was both heartened and saddened when I saw the news that former Dallas police officer Amber Guyger was convicted of murder in the shooting death of Botham Jean. Last year Guyger walked into Jean’s apartment thinking it was her own and shot him to death on the spot. She used the scary big black man defense claiming that she was in fear for her life even though it was she who invaded someone else’s home and was carrying a deadly weapon. Given the recent history of white police officers shooting unarmed black men and not even being prosecuted let alone convicted the verdict came as surprise, welcome though it was.

It’s truly sad that the black community in this country has been so abused that a conviction for such an obvious murder is cause for surprise. Tulsa police officer Betty Shelby was acquitted after standing trial for fatally shooting unarmed 40-year-old Terence Crutcher in 2016. Crutcher was just trying to deal with his stalled vehicle.

New York City policeman Daniel Pantaleo faced no criminal liability for the 2014 killing of an unarmed black man, Eric Garner, using a prohibited chokehold. Pantaleo, a white police officer, used a chokehold as he attempted to arrest Garner on suspicion of selling loose, untaxed cigarettes on a sidewalk.

Officer Jeronimo Yanez shot 32-year-old black man, Philando Castile, five times during a 2016 traffic stop in  Minnesota. Castile notificed the officer he was carrying a firearm and after Yanez demand his identification Castile reached for his wallet and Yanez shot him. Yanez was acquitted of manslaughter in 2017 having testified he was in fear for his life.

Often even a conviction yields minimal time in prison for officers killing unarmed black men. In Oakland California in 2009 Police Officer Johannes Mehserle, leaned over Oscar Grant who was face down on the ground, pulled his gun and shot Grant in the back from about one foot away. Mehserle served eleven months in county jail.

Guyger is sentenced to ten years in prison but don’t feel too confident yet that she’ll be in prison nearly that long. Oklahoma reserve officer, Bob Bates killed unarmed Eric Harris in 2015 and got a four year sentence though he only served a year and four months before being released.

The Black Lives Matter movement demands justice, accountability, and most of all equal treatment. Some of my white neighbors have countered with “all lives matter” and dismiss any attempt to get them to recognize that Black Lives Matter isn’t about demanding special treatment just equal treatment. It’s more than frustrating that my white neighbors refuse to accept that our collective failure to demand justice for all as our pledge of allegiance claims insures that police and even people like George Zimmerman, the out of control neighborhood watch volunteer who killed 17 year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida, can act with impunity as long as the victim is black.

The conviction of such a clearly guilty person as Amber Guyger shouldn’t come as a surprise. It’s going to take Black Lives Matter and other activists to insure that someday such a conviction is the justice we all expect, but today is not that day.

Published in the Seguin Gazette - October 4, 2019