Tag Archives: Noah M. Horwitz

Screw the DMN: Vote For Wendy!

For years now, the Dallas Morning News has been a trusted source for news coverage analysis across the state of Texas. The work of their staff reporters is often praised for sound knowledge and journalistic integrity.

The editorial board on the other hand? Well, let’s just say they seem to be suffering from a momentary lapse in judgement. Much to this reader’s surprise, the Dallas Morning News has endorsed Greg Abbott for Governor of Texas.

Or wait a minute, let me be perfectly clear… The Dallas Morning News has endorsed their hope of a “new” Greg Abbott, because the guy they talk about in this piece doesn’t actually exist. And instead of actually comparing the real records of either candidate, they appear to have sided with Abbott because they are afraid of what a Davis win would do to the state’s political climate…

Texas Republicans’ hard-right swing in recent years is troubling. Too many Texans feel alienated by a ruling party that seems indifferent, for example, to the plight of the working poor, the uninsured or youths caught through no fault of their own in immigration limbo.

As governor, Abbott must be a moderating influence and guide a realignment of his party. He has outlined plans that could advance that effort. Where Davis would be likely to encounter ideological battles at every turn, Abbott has the best chance to inspire legislative progress.

Davis has fought valiantly. But for all her progressive promise, and alignment with this newspaper on many issues, Texas cannot afford to provoke the kind of partisan stalemate her victory would probably bring, much like the gridlock that has paralyzed Washington. As much as Texas needs to counterbalance its GOP hard-liners, we fear Davis would only invigorate them.

Interesting argument against Davis there, but they’ve forgotten to mention one thing.  Greg Abbott is FAR from the center of his party on any ideological scale.  While he may have a warm demeanor, envious hairline and camera-friendly smile, he hasn’t shown any indication that he would do the things DMN hopes for.  Given that this endorsement shows that the editorial board is in serious need of some education, who better to accomplish that than Texpatriate blogger and actual University of Texas student Noah M. Horwitz.  Here is an excerpt from his opinion article in The Daily Texan

Attorney General Greg Abbott, the Republican candidate for governor, has demonstrated time and again that he is not ready for primetime. He has failed at his current job, prioritizing political grandstanding over the real work necessary to be an effective steward of the state. He maintains illogical and extreme political positions on a plethora of issues, namely those of special importance to students. Most importantly, despite feel-good ads and insincere debate performances, Abbott truly shows no signs of moving back toward the middle if elected. Make no mistake: An Abbott administration would be a dream come true for right-wingers. For all these reasons, I simply cannot recommend a vote for the Republican in good faith.

For the past 12 years, Abbott has served as attorney general of Texas. Historically a low-key post, it has been best known in recent years as serving as the main vehicle for going after deadbeat parents delinquent on their child support, as well as representing the state in lawsuits. These suits historically have been unifying exercises where the attorney general seeks justice on behalf of Texans. A major example was when a former officeholder, Dan Morales, secured more than $17 billion in a settlement against big tobacco companies. But ever since the creation of the tea party five years ago, Abbott has appeared content with using the office as his personal soapbox. Filing frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit, Abbott brags about his wasteful litigiousness in office, saying his typical day consists of waking up, suing the president and going home.

Unfortunately, Abbott shows no signs of reforming this lacking governing strategy if elected. Stump speeches, TV ads and debate performances show Abbott’s almost pathological obsession with harping on the perceived failures of President Barack Obama rather than focusing on why people should elect Abbott and not his opponent.

On the issues, Abbott does no better. He opposes a woman’s constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy,even in cases of rape and incest. He continues to harmfully defend the state’s ban on same-sex marriage and civil unions, even after it has been ruled unconstitutional. Recently, he even made the absurd claim that banning same-sex marriage could reduce the number of children born out of wedlock. Such outdated political positions fly in the face of shifting public opinion and should not be supported.

(Check out the full article here, and be sure to also visit Horwitz’s work at Texpatriate)

 

Nor can the DMN editorial board be bothered, apparently, to read their own paper. Had they scrolled back through a few recent articles from their staff, they could a learn lot about Greg Abbott’s actual record of governance. Maybe they would have caught the piece where James Drew exposed Abbott’s merciless crusade in search of non-existent voter fraud, which resulted in an armed police raid of innocent Houstonians… guns, bullet-proof vests, unlawful destruction of property and all… only to drop the charges after decimating the organization’s ability to operate.  Using the police to bully and scare innocent citizens?? I guess that’s inspiring legislative progress, if you’re a mob boss.

And then there are all of the positions where we simply don’t know how far Greg “Boss” Abbott is willing to go.  When he says he is Pro-Life, does that mean that he would try to ban all forms of contraception?  Given his incredibly vague statements on the matter, that is a very open question.   Do Texans really want to elect a Governor that wants to ban all forms of birth control, and severely limit women’s healthcare??

But thankfully in this election, there is a real choice.  Texans don’t need an insider mob boss leading our state… we need a fighter.  And that fighter is Wendy Davis.  Though she may be best known for her 2013 filibuster to protect women’s healthcare, she also filibustered the horrendous 2011 budget cuts to state educational institutions.  At that time, Wendy said real teachers would lose their jobs, real classrooms would be over-burdened and real students would lose valuable time, resources and programs… all of this was proven to be true.

Wendy is also fighting for Texas families across the state with no access to healthcare because state leaders, including Boss Abbott, have refused any form federal healthcare expansion funds. As a result, Texas is losing out on $136 billion dollars that would not only give millions of Texans access to vital healthcare options and help lower the current cost burdens on our hospitals, but fuel.  By sending our federal tax dollars to Washington and refusing to act, we’re funding better healthcare for other states.  Davis knows that  there is a bi-partisan coalition forming in the state that supports doing what is best for all Texans.    As Governor, this is something that she can achieve.

I’m sure that the Dallas Morning News editorial board means well with this endorsement.  But instead of looking at the Greg Abbott that they hope to create, they need to see Greg Abbott for who he really is.  And then they, like you, need to vote for Wendy Davis.  Make no mistake Texas… it’s all on the line for 2014.

Articles like this one today are an important reminder that sometimes just your vote is not enough.  On this Blog Action Day, Texas Leftist is proud to endorse Senator Wendy Davis for Governor of Texas.  If you needed any more convincing, just take another look at the information above.

Wendy really can win this election, but she needs your help to get it done.  Give to the campaign and help elect Wendy Davis as the next Governor of Texas.  Now is the time when your donation dollars and volunteer hours make the most difference for 2014.  Please share this post on social media and help spread the word with the hashtag #GiveToWendy.  To make a donation, click the image below.

Give To Wendy

Houston City Council Passes Vehicles-For-Hire Amendments

After a long and heated battle, Uber and Lyft can finally operate legally in Houston.  Here’s the story from Doug Begley of the Houston Chronicle

It took 16 months, but Houston officials Wednesday finally found acceptable regulations to corral the changing paid ride industry.

By a 10-5 vote, with two council members absent, City Council approved new paid ride rules, amending the existing Chapter 46 that covers everything from taxis and limos to jitneys and airport shuttles. The changes open up Houston, legally, to new entrants like Uber and Lyft that use smartphone apps to connect willing drivers with interested riders, using the driver’s personal car.

This was a very public, brutal battle waged on both sides, and as such for the “losing side” in Council chambers, emotions were high.  After the vote, one cab driver even took his operator license, threw it on the floor and stomped on it right over the city seal.  Clearly many in the taxi industry are upset and fearful of how to make their living in the city’s new transport landscape.  But there were some silver linings.

Noah M. Horwitz, public relations consultant for Yellow Cab, released this statement on the newly- amended Chapter 46…

“We’re pleased with the comprehensive reforms that passed today at City Hall. While we did not get all that we wanted, neither did our opponents. And most of the new reforms, such as strenuous insurance and drug testing requirements, benefit the consumer most of all.

Furthermore, the biggest barrier to competition between the cab companies and Uber/Lyft has been removed. Now that taxis can variably price in a similar manner to Uber/Lyft, we can effectively compete with them on financial grounds while still providing a superior service.”

With fares now on an equal playing field, all TNCs can compete for Houston business fairly. At the end of the day, this point is a compromise that should be acceptable to all.

Council admitted that there are still many issues to work out regarding rides for people with disabilities. But rather than delay legislation any further, They chose to create a Disability Task Force set to report and discuss problems as they arise. The group will meet within a year, compile any concerns and bring them back before Council. In the mean time, all TNCs are required to diversify their fleet so that a larger share of vehicles will be available to disabled riders. This is a large step forward for all Houstonians because it increases choice and competition for affected persons, while lessening the burden of services like METRO Lift and Harris County Transit.

Like any major change, there are going to be hurt feelings and uncertainty while new regulations get implemented. But Houston has never been a city driven by fear and complacency. With a new, modernized Chapter 46 in hand, the Bayou City is finally read to hit the road again.

RE TribTalk: Houston Vehicles for Hire

This post is in response to a recent Texas Tribune article by Noah M. Horwitz.  Please read his post on the Trib site for background.  In summation, his editorial is arguing against the proposed changes to Houston’s Chapter 46, the rules governing Vehicles for Hire, if those rules are not evenly applied among existing taxi companies and newer model companies like Uber and Lyft.  Horwitz presents a sound argument for equal treatment under the laws that govern vehicles for hire. But the argument still deserves further examination.

As a Houstonian that has used taxi service and often been dissatisfied with it, I cannot call my personal opinion “an outright lie”. That opinion was formulated by challenging experiences with taxi service in Houston. A specific instance being when I requested a cab in Downtown to take me to Montrose, and the driver arrived to pick me up. Before he allowed me into the vehicle, he asked me “are you going to Bush airport?”, and when I replied with my location, he sped off. Many other residents have had similar experiences with discrimination from taxi drivers. Of course it’s somewhat unfair to judge the actions of one individual against the whole, but if these are indeed multiplied, then it can become a real problem.

I also have to question the central point of equality in regards to a preferred client base. It is true that Uber and Lyft shift their pricing with more frequency than taxis, but it’s also true that patrons have other options like public transit. By the same measures which say that Uber and Lyft discriminate against seniors and the disabled, does that also mean that services like MetroLift and Harris County Transit discriminate against everyone but seniors and the disabled?  While no one is arguing that all have a right to fair and equal transportation options, one could argue that it’s not necessarily Uber or Lyft’s place to provide those services.

To the specific comment “Uber and Lyft reserve the right to not pick up everyone, effectively disenfranchising those in poor neighborhoods”, it’s important to draw a distinction here between the two companies. Lyft vehicles are currently operating in most areas of the city, and give drivers no such preferential information, at least not officially. As their business model dictates and more drivers have come online, the Lyft service area has expanded. At its infancy in Houston, Lyft only operated inside the loop, but within a month drivers began working at the airport, and now cover many additional areas  inside the Beltway.  I wouldn’t suppose to define just which areas of the city are “poor”, but by reports from customers, Lyft drivers have been seen regularly in neighborhoods from Pleasantville and Montrose to River Oaks and Acres Homes.  While Houston area taxi companies have an established service area that has developed over decades, it stands to reason that newer business models be given a provisional period to figure out what works best for them.

Also unlike Uber corporate, Lyft has not openly defied city regulations by going ahead and charging for rides, but still operates on a “suggested donation” basis.

After yet another delay by City Council today, it’s become quite clear that this is a contentious battle.  But as technology adapts to a rapidly changing society, law needs to catch up and confront the business activities that are already going forward.  Houstonians have invested billions of dollars to expand the city’s public transit options.  While the massive gaps in things like insurance coverage and fair access need to be discussed, that is not necessarily a reason to halt operations of Uber and Lyft.  These businesses deserve a chance in Houston, and if demand is any indication, that is what they will get from City Council.

(Photo credit:  Texas Tribune)