Here are the facts. 

Texas has 40 electoral votes, second only to California with 54.  It takes 270 votes to win the presidency.  Texas is solid Republican, but many large states are solid Democrat.  If you add up the electoral votes of liberal states California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Oregon, and Washington, you’re at 135.  If the Democrats could pick up Texas, that’s 175 electoral votes – 5 more than they need to establish one-party control.

Without Texas, conservative ideas like smaller government, balanced budgets and protecting our borders, will be abandoned.

Random Samplings is brought to you by the Texas Public Policy Foundation.

As goes the nation, so goes the world.

Electoral votes are about winning the presidency, but the aforementioned states are all solidly blue, with no indication they’ll ever change.  Texas is solidly Republican red, as is Florida at least for the time being.  That leaves presidential elections up to so-called swing states, which are increasingly blue.  Colorado is a good example of a state that’s not much in play for conservatives.

The Texas State Capitol on June 21, 2023 (Photo by Julie Sullivan for WBDaily)

Texas is the bulwark – the state that keeps the Democrats from electing a left-wing president in perpetuity. 

Florida, Ohio, and a few others can go back and forth and the Republicans still maintain a fighting chance.  But without Texas, that’s over.  I think that partly explains what Joe Biden (whom we shall never refer to as “President”) is trying to accomplish with his open border policy.

Step one, which Biden has done, is to open the border.  Step two is to disseminate illegal aliens across the United States and use their numbers to gain more congressional seats for states like California that are losing some of their seats.  Step three is to legalize the illegals and give them the power to vote.

Texas is at the forefront of the border crisis, and if the influx of illegals that remain here become voters, Biden and his puppet masters envision a time when a Beto O’Rourke or a Colin Allred can beat Sen. Ted Cruz.  If they take Cruz’s seat, they’ll go after Sen. John Cornyn too.  A bluer Texas means they’ll be more likely to take the governor’s mansion and other down-ballot positions in Texas.

Texas will be screwed.  So will the United States of America.  So will the world. 

If Texas is what’s keeping America on a somewhat conservative (logical) track, and Texas is lost, then imagine what will happen to our influence in the world.  Running the country on a permanent basis, Democrats will tax and spend us into insolvency, they’ll keep the borders open and the welfare state humming, inflation and cost-of-goods will continue to skyrocket along with the national debt.

RELATED:  It’s Texas vs. Joe Biden on Control of the Southern Border.  Who’s right?

Little boys and girls will be encouraged to undergo surgical mutilations to supposedly change their sex.  You could go to jail for using the wrong pronouns.  History will be rewritten to politically correct standards, and the Founding Fathers and the Framers of the Constitution might be cancelled – written out of history altogether.  Skin color will be the most important attribute for moving up in society, as merit will be dead.  We will spend trillions on climate change so that we can live without internal combustion engines and air conditioning.  We will return to the Stone Age.  Bullets will be worth more than gold or silver, and paper money will be abolished.

Worst of all, our one-party Democrat government will grow far more bloated than today’s government where there are at least a few fiscal conservatives still around.

If Texas turns blue, what starts here changes the world.

Video:  Joe Biden turned the State of the Union into a left-wing campaign speech.  Here’s another viewpoint from Douglas Macgregor.

We will have wars and rumors of wars.

In just three years of Joe Biden, we’ve seen the disaster of the Afghanistan withdrawal (perhaps the worst military blunder in American history), and new wars in Ukraine and Israel.  Democrats believe in a woke military – not one trained to kill people and break things when it has to.

With no solid red Texas to stop them, Democrats will be free to hug trees and send billions of dollars to our sworn enemies like Iran.  This is what they’ve done with shared power.  We can only speculate what they would do with a permanent majority in both houses and a permanent hold on the White House.

Video:  President Reagan was clear, concise and confident. 

Video:  This is how Ronald Reagan as governor of California, handled the Berkeley riots. 

Where have you gone, Ronaldus Maximus?  Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you!

President Ronald Reagan believed in a small federal government, peace through strength, and making America respected on the world stage.  Now we have Joe Biden who projects weakness to the point that the world’s dictators are in expansionist mode.  Vladimir Putin is close to taking Ukraine.  Xi Jinping is salivating over Taiwan.

Iran and North Korea do not fear Biden, nor do they have any reason to. Biden’s policies are all about changing the demographics of America, spending trillions on climate change, aborting as many babies as possible, and engorging the federal government.

Europe is no better, which is why Great Britain got out of the European Union. 

As Brexit caught on there, Make America Great Again (MAGA) caught on here.  And well it should.  There is no great country in history that has fought so hard to bring its country down to a lower standard of living than us.

Members of the Democratic Party believe in shared misery where our national wealth is pumped into the silly notion of changing average global temperature by a fraction of a degree.  Note that elites like Al Gore get wealthy over this climate change hoax, while the rest of us are told what we can drive and how we can cook our food.

If Democrats get total power, this is how it likely will be.  And only Texas stands in the way.

Lynn Woolley is a Texas-based author, broadcaster, and songwriter.  Follow his podcast at https://www.PlanetLogic.us.  Check out his author’s page at https://www.Amazon.com/author/lynnwoolley.  Order books direct from Lynn at https://PlanetLogicPress.Square.Site.  Email Lynn at lwoolley9189@gmail.com.

If Texas goes blue, this book may be banned. So order it now!

The post As Goes Texas so Goes the Nation (And the World) appeared first on WB Daily.

Gov. Abbott and Hickland at the endorsement (Photo by Lynn Woolley for WBDaily)

Abbott and Shine may see eye to eye on most things – but not school choice. 

Abbott has promised to endorse primary opponents of the 21 House members who voted against school choice – Abbott’s top priority in a just-failed special session.

Here is the governor’s speech, in its entirety, followed by Hickland’s response.

CLICK HERE TO LISTEN.

There was a police presence outside the downtown Main Street restaurant where the event was held.  The crowd was too large for the room, and some were asked to step outside due to occupancy regulations.

While outside they may have seen, and some even clashed with anti-Trump demonstrators, over such things as abortion.  One woman carried a sign that read: “I can smell Donald Trump.”

Local network TV affiliates were on hand for the endorsement along with an overflow crowd. (Photo by Lynn Woolley for WB Daily)

Inside, the crowd for Hillary Hickland was enthusiastic.  She will be facing Shine, Davis Ford and perhaps others in what may become a crowded primary.

Lynn Woolley is a Texas-based author, broadcaster, and songwriter.  Follow his podcast at https://www.PlanetLogic.us.  Check out his author’s page at https://www.Amazon.com/author/lynnwoolley.  Order books direct from Lynn at https://PlanetLogicPress.Square.Site.  Email Lynn at lwoolley9189@gmail.com.

Ghost stories and murder mysteries for Christmas.

The post Governor Abbott endorses Hillary Hickland (Audio) appeared first on WB Daily.

Border security: Keeping families safe

Hickland names “the crisis” at our southern border as the “preeminent threat to our state.”

“Resolving it must be our top priority,” Hickland states. In a release, Hickland further contends:

Lack of border security has given way to a humanitarian crisis that is fueling human trafficking and flooding our state and nation with Fentanyl finding its way into our communities and our schools. The situation at our border leaves Texans in a state of vulnerability and has created an unsustainable burden, without the support of the federal government or cooperation from Mexico. Texas must use every resource available to strengthen border security.

Hickland emphasizes the importance of a properly secured border with efforts that are manned, monitored and maintained. She further acknowledges the tactical successes of physical barriers coupled with technology and fortified with skilled servicemen and women as means by which to achieve such goals.

Education: Empowering parents with education freedom

Calling education “the great equalizer,” Hickland says education must be focused on “the best outcome for each individual child.”

“While our local teachers are the finest in the state, parents must retain the God-given right to choose what is best,” Hickland states. “No one knows and loves their children better than the parents. We must allow parents to be the decision makers when it comes to their children’s future.”

Her statement also notes:

Because she believes that education is not a one-size fits all model, she is a strong supporter of school choice in the form of Education Savings Accounts. Education savings accounts (ESAs) in K-12 education establish for parents a publicly funded, government-authorized savings account with restricted, but multiple uses for educational purposes. Parents may use the funds to pay for expenses including: school tuition, tutoring, online education programs, therapies for students with special needs, textbooks or other instructional materials and sometimes, save for college.

“Too many of our students are falling behind,” Hickland notes. “They need options and ESAs open the door to limitless opportunities that will customize the best possible outcome for each student regardless of their zip code or financial status.”

Cost of living: Easing burdens on taxpayers through fiscal responsibility

As Texans struggle to pay bills, purchase homes or maintain businesses, Hickland lists cutting spending and further reducing property taxes with the aim of eliminating property taxes all together as campaign commitments. She additionally lists seeking to remove regulations that hinder free market enterprise and economic freedom.

In describing her “proven effective advocacy,” Hickland’s release states:

Hickland’s dedication to education is personal and profound. Spurred into action by the discovery of inappropriate books in school libraries, she has been instrumental on the front lines of educational reform. Serving with distinction on the Republican Party of Texas Subcommittee for the Legislative Priority to “Stop Sexualizing Texas Kids,” her leadership was pivotal in the passage of HB900 (The READER Act), purging sexually explicit and age- inappropriate content from our children’s schools and safeguarding their innocence. She also effectively engaged in the legislative process to outlaw gender modification in minors, protect women’s sports and furthering protections for children from sexual performances and online exposure.

In building off “protections established by those who came before us,” the release says Hickland will “take on threats to our family and our state.”

“Texas has always been a beacon for individual liberties that come from God. The people of House District 55 deserve strong, principled leaders who will reflect the values of our district and that’s why I’m running for State Representative,” Hickland concludes. “I would greatly appreciate your vote.”

Click here to learn more about Hillary Hickland or on Facebook or X.

Lou Ann Anderson is a writer, former radio producer and current podcaster at Political Pursuits.  Her tenure as Watchdog Wire–Texas editor involved covering state news and coordinating the site’s citizen journalist network. As a past Policy Analyst with Americans for Prosperity–Texas, Lou Ann wrote and spoke on a variety of issues including the growing issue of probate abuse in which wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney are used to loot assets from intended heirs or beneficiaries.  She holds a degree from the University of North Texas in Denton.

The post Hickland Enters Central Texas House Race appeared first on WB Daily.

Bell County TX Screenshot

Proposition A, the city of Temple’s ballot measure seeking to abolish an additional sales and use tax, was quietly added to the Nov. 7 ballot and despite no pre-election public discussion, Temple Mayor Tim Davis has now released the following statement.

Background and General Information

Texas imposes a 6.25 percent state sales and use tax on all retail sales, leases and rentals of most goods, as well as taxable services. Local taxing jurisdictions (cities, counties, special purpose districts and transit authorities) can also impose up to 2 percent sales and use tax for a maximum combined rate of 8.25 percent. All local sales taxes require voter approval.

There are several different options cities in Texas may select for how a local sales tax will be used, including:

• Sales Tax for Economic Development- Revenues collected under this option must be turned over to a development corporation formed to act on behalf of the city to carry out programs related to industrial development, business infrastructure and the promotion of new and expanded business enterprises that create or retain primary jobs.
• Street Maintenance Sales Tax- The revenue from this tax may be used only to maintain and repair existing city streets and sidewalks.
• Fire Control, Prevention, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Districts- Cities with a population between 25,000 and 550,000 or more than 1.9 million may create an EMS district. The district may include all or any part of a city. The district may finance the operation of a fire control, prevention and EMS program.
• Crime Control and Prevention Districts- Revenues from the sales tax may be used to finance a wide variety of crime control and prevention programs.
• Municipal Sales Tax for Property Tax Relief- Revenues are deposited into a city’s general revenue fund. The initial year this type of sales tax is adopted reduces the “no new revenue” and “voter approval” property tax rates within the city and the additional sales tax revenue is included in the formula to calculate the “no new revenue” and “voter approval” property tax rates each year. Cities may use revenues from this tax as they would use property tax revenues.
• General Sales and Use Tax- Most cities in Texas have this type of sales tax. It may be imposed by any incorporated city. Revenues are deposited into the city’s general revenue fund and may be used for any lawful purpose.

In 1990, Temple voters adopted a 0.5% Municipal Sales Tax for Property Tax Relief, creating a revenue source that is paid by residents and non-residents and used for essential city services, including public safety and quality of life.

As a result of this new sales tax and in accordance with State law, the “no new revenue” and “voter approval” property tax rates (then called the “effective” and “rollback” property tax rates, respectively) were reduced for the City’s fiscal year 1990-1991. The Temple City Council adopted a property tax rate for fiscal year 1990-1991 that was above the newly lowered voter approval (rollback) property tax rate. A petition was filed requiring the City of Temple to conduct a Special Election in January of 1991 on a proposition which would have reduced the property taxes by a like amount of the new sales tax generated by the new 0.5% sales tax. That proposition was defeated by the voters and the property tax rate that the City Council adopted remained in effect.

Current Use of Sales Tax

Today the City of Temple continues to use the additional 0.5% sales tax to pay for services such as police, fire, parks, libraries, animal services, and certain infrastructure improvements that would otherwise be required to be paid for from property tax revenue.

In fiscal year 2023-2024, the property tax rate would have to be 16.51 cents higher than the current property tax rate in order to generate the same revenue for these services if we did not collect the additional 0.5% sales tax. In the fiscal year 2023-2024 Annual Budget, sales tax represents over 33% of the total general fund revenues.

Why Proposition A?

Because the 0.5% additional sales tax was initially adopted under the category of Municipal Sales Tax for Property Tax Relief, each year the revenue from this additional sales tax is included in the formula to calculate the “no new revenue” and “voter approval” property tax rates. This formula is a complex, ten-page, 80-line calculation.

Proposition A would abolish the 0.5% additional sales tax under the category of Municipal Sales Tax for Property Tax Relief and adopt a 0.5% additional sales tax under General Sales and Use Tax. This would not change the total sales tax rate, would not change the current property tax rate, and would not exempt the City from the 3.5% cap on the amount by which the City can raise property taxes each year without requiring voter approval. It would remove the revenue from the additional sales tax from the formula to calculate the “no new revenue” and “voter approval” property tax rates. The City is asking voters to consider this change to simplify and streamline the process for calculating the “no new revenue” and “voter approval” property tax rates and to reduce risk that future legislative changes to the calculation formula for the “no new revenue” and “voter approval” property tax rates could have unintended impacts to the City’s property tax rates and revenues.

For illustrative purposes regarding the impact of Proposition A, using actual fiscal year 2023-2024 data, a vote “For” Proposition A would result in a Voter Approval Rate of 61.33 cents. If the City Council adopted the Voter Approval Rate, the property tax on a home with an assessed value of $200,000 that does not qualify for any homestead or other exemptions would be $1,227.

A vote “Against” Proposition A would result in a Voter Approval Rate of 62.72 cents. If the City Council adopted the Voter Approval Rate, the property tax on a home with an assessed value of $200,000 that does not qualify for any homestead or other exemptions would be $1,254, or $27 and 2% higher than if Proposition A were approved.

Points for consideration 

While Davis presents his case for abolition of the additional sales and use tax, several realities should be understood:

1. The additional sales and use tax serves to offset (i.e., reduce) the property tax dollars collected from Temple property owners.
2. With being a consumption tax collected from both residents and non-residents, the additional sales and use tax further provides tax benefit to Temple taxpayers. Abolition of the tax will shift additional financial burden exclusively to Temple property owners.
3. Elimination of the additional sales and use tax will alter – unfavorably to taxpayers – the way in which the voter-approval tax rate is calculated and will allow the city to raise taxes without voter approval.

Applying “chess” analysis to a “checkers” explanation

In his background information, Davis discusses the 1990 election in which voters approved the “0.5% Municipal Sales Tax for Property Tax Relief, creating a revenue source that is paid by residents and non-residents and used for essential city services, including public safety and quality of life.” (See Point 2)

He goes on to detail the following year in which the city had to conduct a special election to implement a tax rate higher than the newly lower voter-approval tax rate resulting from the property tax relief municipal sales tax. (See Point 3)

Hopefully a compelling case made by the city – opposed to a low-turnout election with a near-unknown ballot measure – was the impetus for voter approval of that higher rate. Davis’ inclusion of this history acknowledges a past in which Temple voters, not strictly city officials, played an active role in tax rate determination. That seems a good thing.

In discussing the sales tax and its current use, Davis notes how fiscal 2023-2024 would require a property tax rate “16.51 cents higher than the current property tax rate in order to generate the same revenue for these services if we did not collect the additional 0.5% sales tax.”

He is correct that a higher rate would be required and it’s unclear how that is a good thing – at least for taxpayers. Also note that with the city-requested abolition of the additional sales and use tax classification, it could be done without voter approval. (See Point 3)

As of today, taxes could only be raised from the current 0.6133 to 0.6272 (the 2023 voter-approval tax rate) or 1.39 cents. Anything above that would require voter approval.

Using numbers from the city of Temple 2023 Tax Rate Calculation Worksheet and the current .6133 tax rate, the increase without voter approval (if the sales and use tax were eliminated) could be up to 17.08 cents.

Remember that all these numbers are per $100 property valuation.

Note the Section 3 header:

Cities, counties and hospital districts may levy a sales tax specifically to reduce property taxes. Local voters by election must approve imposing or abolishing the additional sales tax. If approved, the taxing unit must reduce its NNR and voter-approval tax rates to offset the expected sales tax revenue.

(See Points 1 and 3)

Additional analysis is available at Temple’s Prop A Ballot Measure Offers An Expensive Proposition.

With discussing Proposition A, Davis expresses concern regarding the “complex, ten-page, 80-line calculation” required to calculate no new revenue and voter-approval property tax rates.

These ten pages comprise a total of nine sections. While undoubtedly time and effort are put forward compiling the numbers inserted into the form, it’s also what is commonly considered “the job of the city.” Also noteworthy, numerous sections are non-applicable such that they are lines filled in with zeroes or else left blank. Half of the final page is blank while two two-line sections are at the top (one being a signature section). While unknown if eliminating the eight lines of Section Three (shown above) will “simplify and streamline the process” of tax rate calculations, abolition of the additional sales and use tax will undoubtedly simplify and streamline the process of implementing tax increases. (See Points 1 and 3)

Per Davis, voters should consider abolishing the additional sales and use tax to “reduce risk that future legislative changes to the calculation formula for the ‘no new revenue’ and ‘voter approval’ property tax rates could have unintended impacts to the City’s property tax rates and revenues.” Property tax reform was a major priority of the most recent legislative session. With significant calculation changes not occurring in conjunction with other reforms, the idea of significant future “unintended impacts” seems remote.

Using a theoretical for/against Proposition A tax scenario, Davis uses the example of a home with a $200,000 assessed value and not qualifying for a homestead or other exemption. His are the black numbers listed in the chart, ours are the red.

The current “Voter Approval Rate” is 62.72 cents. The 61.33 cents that Davis lists is the adopted tax rate. In trying to make better sense of this chart and in applying today’s numbers (red) to a world with and without Proposition A, a vote for would yield a Voter Approval Rate of 78.41 cents while a vote against would retain the current 62.72 cents. With those numbers, the $200,000 house in the for scenario would rise to $1568.20 while the against amount is $1,254 – a difference of $314.20 or 25 percent.

For the purposes of Davis’ example, voting against Proposition A stops the city from being able to raise the rate to a voter-approval rate that is not adjusted with the sales tax offset – and to do so without voter approval. In this case, 78.41 cents without voter approval instead of 62.72 cents had the additional sales and use tax remained in place.

The example is based on this year’s rates. But this year is done, statements are out, people are paying their taxes, this one is, so to speak, in the books. The Proposition A election is about the future.

Temple Voters: Don’t Be “October Surprised” mentioned the Texas Municipal League, an organization that advocates on behalf of city governments and describes the benefit of holding “an election to repeal or lower one city sales tax, and raise or adopt a different sales tax, all with one combined ballot proposition.”

TML further states how a city’s ability to “use one combined ballot proposition protects the city’s interest by eliminating the risk that one tax will be voted out by the citizens without the other tax being voted in.”

Stated differently, a vote for Proposition A protects the city’s interest while a vote against the measure yields a far more taxpayer friendly outcome.

The issue sounds complicated – often it seems by design. But in closing, we’ll remind the realities:

1. 1. The additional sales and use tax serves to offset (i.e., reduce) the property tax dollars collected from Temple property owners.
   2. With being a consumption tax collected from both residents and non-residents, the additional sales and use tax further provides tax benefit to Temple taxpayers. Abolition of the tax will shift additional financial burden exclusively to Temple property owners.
   3. Elimination of the additional sales and use tax will alter – unfavorably to taxpayers – the way in which the voter-approval tax rate is calculated and will allow the city to raise taxes without voter approval.

Election Day is Tuesday, Nov. 7, while early voting continues through Friday, Nov. 3. Click here for voting information.

Lou Ann Anderson is a writer, former radio producer and current podcaster at Political Pursuits.  Her tenure as Watchdog Wire–Texas editor involved covering state news and coordinating the site’s citizen journalist network. As a past Policy Analyst with Americans for Prosperity–Texas, Lou Ann wrote and spoke on a variety of issues including the growing issue of probate abuse in which wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney are used to loot assets from intended heirs or beneficiaries.  She holds a degree from the University of North Texas in Denton.

The post Temple Mayor Addresses Sales and Use Tax Ballot Measure appeared first on WB Daily.

With its third Special Session underway, the Texas Legislature is tasked with an agenda seeking “Legislation providing education savings accounts for all Texas schoolchildren.” Not surprisingly, this isn’t sitting well with the state’s 1,000+ public school districts.

Using its taxpayer-funded Communications Department, the Belton ISD recently distributed an email to the “Big Red Community.” The email, released by Superintendent Matt Smith, features a rundown of the current Special Session as it relates to a set of district priorities recently co-issued with the Temple ISD.

It also includes district arguments in favor of the priorities and concludes with a “Make Your Voice Heard” call to action.

The call to action promises future updates and encourages advocacy via contacting lawmakers. Contact information for area legislators is also included.

While suggesting no specific position, Smith’s closing statement implies an expectation of support. It reads:

Thank you for entrusting us with your students and allowing us to partner with you in educating the future of our great state. Let’s make sure our representatives in Austin know how important our schools are to BISD.

The Texas Attorney General’s Office offers this information regarding school electioneering:

Texas school officials should be aware of the following:

1. According to Section 255.003(a) of the Texas Election Code, an officer or employee of a political subdivision may not knowingly spend or authorize the spending of public funds for political advertising.

1. In addition, school district officials may not use public resources to advocate for or against particular political candidates and/or groups of political candidates.

1. Furthermore, the Texas Election Code prohibits the board of trust of a school district from using state or local funds “to electioneer for or against any candidate, measure, or political party. Tex. Educ. Code Sec. 11.169.

If you believe these or any other similar statutes have been violated you may file a complaint (see button below), or you may call the Texas Attorney General’s office at1-844-584-3006, or send us an email at violation@oag.texas.gov.

While we currently have no election directly associated with the Special Session and/or its related issues, we in no way suggest this communication would likely qualify as an actual violation of state code. That said, a case can be made that using district communication systems and manpower in the development and distribution of such pieces can be argued as violating the spirit of the law.

Monkey see, monkey do

And on the “monkey see, monkey do” front, it was ironic to find Texas Scorecard reporting on a similar piece by Eagle Mountain-Saginaw ISD Superintendent Jim F. Chadwell.

Before discussing Chadwell’s piece, it’s important to understand the lack of original, individual thought emanating from schools and other governmental entities.

Ideological overlords like the Texas Municipal League (TML), Texas Association of Counties (TAC), Texas Association of School Boards (TASB) and Texas Association of School Administrators (TASA) are natural partners for many of the radical concepts promoted in today’s institutions, but they also are champions, as needed, of the status quo. And whatever the concepts, programs or other direction/activities presented to their member organizations, members unsurprisingly – remember, monkey see, monkey do — fall in line.

And make no mistake. These are not taxpayer-friendly organizations. Instead, their modus operandi is to lobby and work otherwise on behalf of members to seek and retain larger amounts of governmental control and taxpayer funds. Note, these organizations were also discussed in our recent Temple Voters: Don’t Be “October Surprised column.

These professional organizations’ influence is especially obvious during legislative sessions as representatives of these groups are routinely the most ardent proponents of issues like taxpayer-funded lobbying and rolling polling while opposing taxpayer-friendly efforts seeking bond election transparency, school choice, etc. The current Special Session will undoubtedly offer clear examples of the education industry attempting to achieve maximized influence.

With that, it’s difficult to not believe that an organization like TASA or TASB isn’t directing the activism seen with both Smith and Chadwell’s communications. Don’t be surprised to see similar by other superintendents. Monkey see, monkey do.

From Texas Scorecard:

“This message comes with a sense of urgency on actions in our state legislature of which all Texans should take notice,” reads Chadwell’s email. “The Texas Legislature has begun a special session promoted, in part, as a focus on public education.”

Chadwell then claimed the “focus is not about providing adequate funding or support for public education, but rather how to deconstruct public education in Texas through the implementation of school vouchers/education savings accounts.”

The points are familiar. Like Smith, Chadwell also criticizes the legislators for not addressing public school funding to their satisfaction. Perhaps these pieces were crafted prior to last Thursday when Gov. Greg Abbott announced plans to add other public education funding – including teacher pay raises – to the session agenda once education savings accounts are passed.

Public sentiment

The 2022 Republican Primary ballot contained a proposition asking voters if “Texas parents and guardians should have the right to select schools, whether public or private, for their children, and the funding should follow the student.” Statewide, 87.78 percent voted “yes.” In Bell County, that number rose to 89 percent.

The 2012 Republican Primary ballot featured a similar proposition that “allowed parents the freedom to choose their child’s school.” Statewide, 84.6 percent voted in favor of the proposition. In Bell County, that number was 84.85 percent.

Polling information is tricky based on who is asking the questions, who is being asked and how those questions are asked. That said, even The Texas Tribune reports how a University of Texas at Austin survey recently found a plurality of voters support some version of school choice while a Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation and WFAA poll “shows a majority of Texans want to expand school choice and allow parents to use tax dollars to send their children to private school.”

Don’t be fooled

Many Texas political observers think this Special Session brings a great chance for passage of a good education freedom package. The public education industry appears to concur which is why a “red alert” effort will stay visible over the next weeks.

Much information will be put forward by both sides. While the public school establishment seems advantaged with – and will fully use – its ability to expend taxpayer-funded resources in communicating its position, privately-funded organizations like The Texas Public Policy Foundation are also prominent with counter positions as offered with its Debunking the Scare Tactics against Parent Empowerment post.

Meanwhile, look for more “monkey see, monkey do” actions by the public education industry. Smith and Chadwell may be the first distributing these “maintaining the lackluster status quo” calls to action. They won’t, however, be the last. It’s how they roll. Just too bad it’s at not only taxpayer expense, but also the expense of too many Texas school children’s education.

Lou Ann Anderson is a writer, former radio producer and current podcaster at Political Pursuits.  Her tenure as Watchdog Wire–Texas editor involved covering state news and coordinating the site’s citizen journalist network. As a past Policy Analyst with Americans for Prosperity–Texas, Lou Ann wrote and spoke on a variety of issues including the growing issue of probate abuse in which wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney are used to loot assets from intended heirs or beneficiaries.  She holds a degree from the University of North Texas in Denton.

The post Belton ISD, Education Freedom and “Monkey See, Monkey Do” Public School Culture appeared first on WB Daily.

In Austin, the Republican bickering is over school choice and how some Republican lawmakers are subservient to local school superintendents.

Planet Logic’s Lynn Woolley is joined by Political Pursuits’ Lou Ann Anderson to take a deep dive into Republican intra-party squabbling.

LISTEN HERE

Lynn Woolley is a Texas-based author, broadcaster, and songwriter.  Follow his podcast at https://www.PlanetLogic.us.  Check out his author’s page at https://www.Amazon.com/author/lynnwoolley.  Order books direct from Lynn at https://PlanetLogicPress.Square.Site.  Email Lynn at lwoolley9189@gmail.com.

The new book’s not out yet.  But why squabble?  You can order this one now!

The post Republicans Feud in Washington and Austin (Audio) appeared first on WB Daily.

Public Domain through Wikimedia Commons

Texas Rep. Hugh Shine’s school choice opposition is expanding his media profile both as a Republican routinely siding with Democrats and as a representative seemingly responsive more to public education institutions than to his Bell County electorate.

As we currently move through a third legislative Special Session designated to empower parents by addressing education reforms including school choice, legislators like Shine will be watched.

During the Texas Legislature’s recent regular session, Shine (R-HD 55) voted to “ban state dollars from funding vouchers, Education Savings Accounts and other school choice programs.”

The Center Square describes the action:

They passed an amendment doing so, one of 350 filed and voted on April 6.

After the Texas Senate passed a parental rights and school choice bill, including a state-funded ESA program, the House passed the budget amendment, ensuring no state funds would be used to fund it or any similar programs.

Amendment 45, filed by state Rep. Abel Herrero, D-Robstown, which had six cosponsors, including four Republicans, states, “Money appropriated by this Act may not be used to pay for or support a school voucher, including an education savings account, tax credit scholarship program, or a grant or other similar program through which a child may use state money for nonpublic primary or secondary education.”

The article terms Shine as one of 24 who “voted with Democrats against funding ESAs” and additionally notes Bell County’s other state representative, Brad Buckley (R-HD 54), as voting “present.”

What do voters think?

The 2022 Republican Primary ballot contained a proposition asking voters if “Texas parents and guardians should have the right to select schools, whether public or private, for their children, and the funding should follow the student.” Statewide, 87.78 percent voted “yes.” In Bell County, that number rose to 89 percent.

And this sentiment is not new. The 2012 Republican Primary ballot similarly featured a proposition that “allowed parents the freedom to choose their child’s school.” Statewide, 84.6 percent voted in favor of the proposition. In Bell County, that number was 84.85 percent.   

Polling information is tricky based on who is asking the questions, who is being asked and how those questions are asked. That said, even The Texas Tribune reports how a University of Texas at Austin survey found a plurality of voters support some version of school choice while a Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation and WFAA poll “shows a majority of Texans want to expand school choice and allow parents to use tax dollars to send their children to private school.”

Siding against parental rights

In today’s political media landscape, it could be said that you’ve “arrived” when Libs of TikTok find your record of interest.

Libs of TikTok Screenshot

The article details sexually explicit books found in the public school libraries of Shine’s district. Indeed those books exist as previously detailed in a three-part series (Bell County: What’s in Your Public School Library? Part One, Part Two and Part Three) that included an audit of seven Bell County school districts, at least four of which are in some portion of HD 55.

Think this issue isn’t a catalyst for parents wanting education options?

Libs of TikTok reveal campaign donations from the Charles Butt Public Education Political Action Committee, an organization that “advocates for government-run schooling which is as we all know, indoctrinates kids with CRT, gender ideology and has insane failure rates.”

And for those of us who have followed the school choice issue over many legislative sessions, Butt’s advocacy for government schools over any parental rights movement is well known.

Same can be said for Texas State Teachers Association, another Shine contributor aptly described as “a branch of the super woke NEA” and known here in Texas for its financial contributions to seemingly influenceable House Republicans.

The article notes that while voting against enhanced educational opportunities for his constituents, Shine’s own daughter attended a local private school.

Libs of TikTok concludes:

Why is Representative Shine so against school choice?  Could it be the donations?  The endorsements?  The feeling of power to make decisions and control others?  There isn’t a sensible reason to decline parents’ choice. He is just another state representative who adheres to the rules for thee, not me stigma plaguing this country.

On the radio

Shine’s name also recently came up in an interview with Cardle & Woolley on Austin’s Talk Radio 1370 AM. In discussing the Special Session, Mandy Drogin, an education advocate with Texas Public Policy Foundation, and host Lynn Woolley discussed the influence that school superintendents seem to exercise over many state representatives.

Do these elected officials defer to unelected educrats as a large local employer? Or is it more likely a case of a taxpayer-funded institutionalists versus the public?

NOTE: Drogin/Woolley exchange starts 6:15.

The ripple effect

The regular Legislative session was contentious in that once again, a Republican-controlled House of Representatives failed to pass Republican priorities rendering much of the Senate’s work moot. Speaker Dade Phelan was seen as the major roadblock and that situation remains unresolved for the Special.

The session was additionally complicated when a last-minute, out-of-the-blue impeachment action was taken against Attorney General Ken Paxton. After a hastily convened House proceeding, 60 out of 85 Republicans joined Democrats to vote for Paxton’s impeachment triggering the activity to move to the Texas Senate for a trial. Paxton was ultimately acquitted of all charges.

Interestingly, Paxton has announced he will endorse select challengers to House Republicans having voted for impeachment. Shine was one of those Republicans.

With this backdrop, votes for numerous Special Session bills will also impact the upcoming March 2024 primary. Who runs and who draws challengers are still to be determined and any education votes will be potential triggers for action.

In Primary threats loom over House Republicans as lawmakers again consider school vouchers, The Texas Tribune is already wargaming how things may play out.

The easy way or the hard way.

That’s how Gov. Greg Abbott has described the choice for state lawmakers in his own party as they enter a third special session focused on his yearlong crusade for “school choice.” They could pass a bill that satisfies him and allows state funds to be used for private school options — the easy way — or they could keep gridlocking and face his wrath in the Republican primary — the hard way.

Abbott’s framing has set a stark political overtone for the special session, which begins Monday — about a month before candidate filing opens for the March primary.

Over the years, Shine has consistently opposed school choice efforts. Any change now will be an obvious political calculation, a forced appeasement of an electorate in an attempt to maintain a seat.

And once again, Shine gets a mention with regard to the March primary:

Other Republicans are waiting to see how the special session goes. Among them is Hillary Hickland, an activist mom of four from Belton who is considering a run against Rep. Hugh Shine, R-Belton. She took her three school-aged children out of public schools in recent years and said she wants families who are not as privileged as hers to have the same opportunity.

The Tribune notes how Shine was “among the 24 House Republicans who voted for the anti-voucher budget amendment, despite appearing with Abbott at a school choice event in his district weeks earlier.” Shine also reportedly did not respond to a request for comment.

Regarding the future, Hickland tells The Tribune, “I’m not quite there yet [on running], but his vote is something I’m paying close attention to.”

She won’t be alone in paying close attention.

Lou Ann Anderson is a writer, former radio producer and current podcaster at Political Pursuits.  Her tenure as Watchdog Wire–Texas editor involved covering state news and coordinating the site’s citizen journalist network. As a past Policy Analyst with Americans for Prosperity–Texas, Lou Ann wrote and spoke on a variety of issues including the growing issue of probate abuse in which wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney are used to loot assets from intended heirs or beneficiaries.  She holds a degree from the University of North Texas in Denton.

The post Rep. Hugh Shine’s Media Profile Expanded with School Choice Opposition appeared first on WB Daily.

House Bill 900, also known as the READER (Restricting Explicit and Adult-Designated Educational Resources) Act, was set to take effect Sept. 1 and would have restricted the inclusion by libraries of harmful material and other sexual or patently offensive content as described in the Texas Penal Code. Vendors were to be responsible for rating and appropriately labeling the books.

In response to a recent Temple Daily Telegram article, this letter to the editor was published and while directed toward Bell County residents, it offers insight applicable to a statewide audience.

Your article regarding Belton ISD’s updated book policy failed to mention HB 900, the law intended to protect school children from sexually explicit books, is currently being litigated in federal court. With that, the law’s implementation is on hold prompting a need for independent schoolbook vigilance to continue. And Belton isn’t the only local ISD to watch.

A recent citizen-driven audit of seven Bell County ISD libraries (Academy, Belton, Copperas Cove, Killeen, Salado, Temple and Troy) found sexually oriented books in all. The findings, illustrative though not exhaustive, were detailed in a three-part series at WBDaily.com.

Your article noted Belton parents’ ability to access the district’s library catalog via Destiny. Public school stakeholders (parents, taxpayers, community members) should know six of our seven audited districts provide the same access. Only Temple ISD keeps its catalog password protected.

Though Temple High School Library previously offered “students, teachers, and community members” information access, “community members” was removed in the time since I requested access and was instead told to file a Public Information Act request. Reporting on this additionally illustrative school transparency exercise is also at http://bit.ly/3t2Vx6T.

The three-part series referenced can be found here (Bell County: What’s in Your Public School Library? Part One, Part Two and Part Three).

Temple ISD Highlights Challenges In Library Book Transparency provides additional information for monitoring public school library content.

Parents remain engaged, enraged

Despite the READER Act’s passage, sexually provocative library books remain a hot-button issue as recently seen at a Plano ISD board meeting.

In Parents Blast Plano School Board Over Sexually Explicit Books, Texas Scorecard reports:

PLANO—After waiting five hours for a chance to speak, Plano parents blasted their elected school board trustees for failing to remove dozens of books that the district has acknowledged are sexually explicit but still decided to keep in students’ libraries.

“You are sexualizing our children and you need to stop!” Plano mom Karri Weadon told trustees and Superintendent Theresa Williams.

Speaking after the meeting, Shannon Ayres, a parent and member of Citizens Defending Freedom, reminded of the following:

“Who needs HB900? What we need are leaders who represent the values of the communities they were elected to serve. These board members have always had the power to remove this filth. They’ve chosen not to. We The People must demand better. That’s what we did tonight.”

Click here for the full Texas Scorecard Report.

When issues collide

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has scheduled a special session to start Monday, Oct. 9. This session, designated to empower parents, will address education reforms including school choice and parents having the power to choose where their children receive an education.

School districts that resist transparency or disregard parental concerns over sexually explicit library books help bolster the case for school choice. This is unfortunate on multiple levels.

School choice shouldn’t be an either-or proposition. Parents deserve options for schooling their children, but a functional public school system – one not seemingly committed to sexualizing students – is also paramount.

It is an augmentation to public schools, not a replacement. Rather than spend the next 30 days whining about money, the education industry has an opportunity to truly serve the best interests of students (and taxpayers!) by adopting a willingness to develop attractive, functional academic offerings designed to enhance a larger academic universe.

More and better offerings across the board? If it’s truly for the children, how is that a bad thing?

And one key to helping keep parents at current public schools? Clean up, de-sexualize school libraries! With parents and taxpayers watching, how sad that this wouldn’t be the easiest of school choices.

Lou Ann Anderson is a writer, former radio producer and current podcaster at Political Pursuits.  Her tenure as Watchdog Wire–Texas editor involved covering state news and coordinating the site’s citizen journalist network. As a past Policy Analyst with Americans for Prosperity–Texas, Lou Ann wrote and spoke on a variety of issues including the growing issue of probate abuse in which wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney are used to loot assets from intended heirs or beneficiaries.  She holds a degree from the University of North Texas in Denton.

The post As School Library Book Battles Rage, School Choice Offers Opportunity appeared first on WB Daily.

House Bill 900, also known as the READER (Restricting Explicit and Adult-Designated Educational Resources) Act, was set to take effect Sept. 1 and would have restricted the inclusion by libraries of harmful material and other sexual or patently offensive content as described in the Texas Penal Code. Vendors were to be responsible for rating and appropriately labeling the books.

As culture wars occupy significant space in today’s (by design) conflict laden world, a three-part series (Bell County: What’s in Your Public School Library? Part One, Part Two and Part Three) lays out the general issue of exposing children to sexually provocative materials.

With this, it’s important to understand the explicit book issue and until the current injunction is further litigated, it’s critical that non-education industry individuals remain vigilant regarding content in their local school libraries and classrooms.

Understanding the playing field

In seeking to monitor K-12 schoolbook offerings, understanding the culture of today’s public education industry is key.

Texas Scorecard’s Exposed: The Dark Side of Texas Schools podcast discusses “how school districts react when facing criticism” – or for our purposes, the potential for criticism.

Dr. Kris Kittle, a parent activist with a Ph. D. in higher education, describes how “in talking with school administrators, protecting the school district and their jobs seems more important than protecting students.”

“It would appear to me that the administrators are always going to protect the machine,” she said. “Like the job of the administration is to protect the machine of the district meaning that the district – the entity of the district – is what they want to protect and they will protect that at all costs.”

“I don’t even think that they care about protecting the employees,” she continued. “They just care about protecting the reputation of the district, that’s their number one goal at whatever cost.

“Now is that an intentional goal? I don’t think so. I think it’s just by their actions, that’s what they do.”

Auditing your school

Researching the book collections in your local school can seem a daunting task, but it’s nothing that can’t be overcome with some time and perseverance.

As a resident of Bell County, a project to determine the degree of explicit books in our local school libraries was undertaken. With that, the offerings of seven districts – Academy, Belton, Copperas Cove, Killeen, Salado, Temple and Troy ISDs – were examined in the above-mentioned series.

The exercise provided interesting insight as to the availability of explicit books as well as to the attitudes and cooperation of school officials when seeking this information.

Online resources

Destiny Discover is an helpful resource for a library book review. After entering your state, district and school name, specific book titles can be inserted along with a variety of other searchable options. Of course, the value of any database is always contingent on how well it’s kept current, but the site certainly assisted with the Bell County project.

While specific districts can be password protected, six of the seven sites we searched allowed public access. Temple ISD was our only district with restricted access.

BookLooks.org offers additional information on questionable books. While not connected to school collections, it does rate the graphic and sexually explicit content that specific titles contain.

These two sites are helpful resources for the identification and evaluation of sexually explicit books.

The outlier

Temple ISD was the outlier when it came to library information accessibility. The experience in gaining access to the Temple library catalog, however, offers instructive opportunities for others who may come across similar obstacles.

In a 2021 article entitled Reflecting community: Temple ISD says it chooses books based on ‘conservative values’, Deputy Superintendent of Academics and School Leadership Lisa Adams told the Temple Daily Telegram that books added to the district’s curriculum are “spurred by district staff and not ‘outside entities.’”

“We have a procedure where we utilize a committee approach if a teacher nominates a book or novel to be read in class,” she told the Telegram. “It’s a broad range of folks within our school district … and usually consists of administrators, teachers and instructional coaches.”

The thorough vetting process works, she said, noting the absence of removal requests from the community.

“I haven’t had any parents express that they want us to remove a book. That’s not common for us,” Adams said. “I think we do a really good job of vetting books, and making sure that they’re appropriate and age-level appropriate.”

She further noted how “educators — which serve on the committee on a rotating basis — are tasked with determining whether the text aligns with Temple ISD’s policies and ‘conservative values.’”

In May testimony before the House Public Education Committee, Temple ISD Superintendent Bobby Ott testified for “fully funded” public schools and against education savings accounts that offer parents a wider choice of educational opportunities for their children.

Citing transparency and accountability as key components of parent empowerment, Ott noted:

Parents are the ultimate judge, but when it comes to spending taxpayer money there must be transparency and accountability for all taxpayers, not just parents of school children. There are many citizens that pay taxes and do not have children in school; and they still want to know how their money is spent.

Months later he additionally championed the need for transparency when discussing the district’s participation with other schools in challenging the new Texas public school accountability system:

Although educators are not unfamiliar to the idea of standards changing — as Texas has replaced its statewide assessment several times over the past three decades — Temple ISD Superintendent Bobby Ott stressed how a lack of transparency with educators and a rushed timeline for its implementation has worried him and his peers.

Ott’s comments are especially notable with having being named 2022 Superintendent of the Year by the Texas Association of School Boards, a distinction that positions both him and Temple ISD as models for educational performance.

Transparency and accountability indeed are key. In a dog vs. tail wagging analogy, taxpayers (those funding the schools including parents, community members, property owners and other concerned parties) should be the dog and government entities (school districts receiving said funds) the tail. But as in this case, that theory and reality too often seem at odds.

When opaque is the new transparency

Upon first investigating access the Temple ISD library database in May 2023, the school website issued this invitation:

Through an online submission portal, the following was requested:

As a community member, please let me know next steps for accessing the Temple ISD library catalog.

A response from Destiny Manager for Temple ISD Library Services Kathy Silva promptly informed how “the District only allows current students to access the District’s library databases through that link” and that questions or concerns should be addressed to the District’s public information office.

With that, a public information request seeking “access to Temple ISD’s K-12 current library catalog(s) be it in digital or other updated format” was submitted. Note that the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas offers great public information resources including these useful letter templates.

A response six days later (May 24) from Public Information Officer Jon Wallin informed that “the District needs clarification to respond to your request” and asked would “a scanned pdf of the contents of the library catalog suffice?”

“To answer your question, since the district is electing to deny online access to the library catalog, a scanned pdf of the K-12 current library catalog(s) will evidently have to do,” was the response submitted one day later and on June 5, a 5,313-page PDF of the Temple ISD library catalog was received.

While legitimate clarifications can arise, potential PIO submitters should be aware that school districts and other government entities may consider oversight efforts seeking transparency as actions of “uncivil discourse,” a concept highlighted at txEDCON21, the annual conference of the Texas Association of School Administrators and Texas Association of School Boards.

Actions speaking louder than words

Important takeaways of the TISD interactions include that the district’s PDF provided insight as to the sexually explicit books available at the time of the PDF’s receipt, but preclude any ongoing monitoring. Also, the district has now revised its high school library website:

Note that while the May version espoused delight to assist “students, teachers, and community members,” the text has been revised with “community members” having now been deleted.

But the website’s wording doesn’t really matter. Removing text does not change the incumbency – the duty – of transparency and accountability that any governmental entity has to constituents or any other taxpayer.

It’s fine to champion transparency before legislative hearings and in the media, but the real test is how it’s practiced with regard to constituents. And in this case, scrutiny of library offerings did yield noteworthy titles as detailed in Bell County: What’s in Your Public School Library? Part Three

And remember, this is a school district with leadership acknowledged as exemplary, a model for our 1,200+ districts. With that, this action serves to remind that other Texas school districts may also not embrace community members’ expectations of transparency.

Discrediting public education

It’s a common response as transparency can – not surprisingly – lead to scrutiny. Practically speaking though, cries of “discredit” often occur as realities of a given situation are exposed. And realities are sometimes unflattering, but that doesn’t mean they are untrue.

Additional resources

Parent and pro-family education advocate Christine Bentley is presenting  “How to Audit School Libraries for Sexually Explicit, Pervasively Vulgar, and Educationally Unsuitable Materials.” workshops across the state.

The program features an HB 900 toolkit that includes an informational sheet and a list of more than 400 books that meet the recent legislation’s criteria for removal. It also includes a resolution that can be passed by a local Republican County Party. This resolution provides a directive to local school boards for the immediate removal of sexually explicit, pervasively vulgar and sexually explicit material.

This important resource can further maximize local activists’ time expense and effectiveness.

The READER Act’s passage was indeed a win for Texas parents and other concerned parties, but most importantly, it was a victory that will hopefully help secure a better, healthier future for Texas school children.

This, though, is no time to think “mission accomplished.” As vigilance regarding both current library offerings and a watchful eye of the bill’s new ratings system remains critical, don’t lose sight of the target. This issue continues to need and be worthy of attention.

Lou Ann Anderson is a writer, former radio producer and current podcaster at Political Pursuits.  Her tenure as Watchdog Wire–Texas editor involved covering state news and coordinating the site’s citizen journalist network. As a past Policy Analyst with Americans for Prosperity–Texas, Lou Ann wrote and spoke on a variety of issues including the growing issue of probate abuse in which wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney are used to loot assets from intended heirs or beneficiaries.  She holds a degree from the University of North Texas in Denton.

The post Temple ISD Highlights Challenges in Library Book Transparency appeared first on WB Daily.

The Republican candidate was on the hotseat for accusing Democratic Representative Ayanna Pressley and famed “anti-racist” Ibram X. Kendi of being modern grand wizards of the KKK.  Ramaswamy made his case, but Bash was not satisfied and the attacks kept coming.

Next up was Senator Bernie Sanders who had also made some outlandish comments.

Asked to explain, Sanders lashed into corporations for being greedy while the people suffer.  The obvious comeback ought to have been…but when you tax corporations, they pass it on to consumers and inflation rises.

But no.  Sanders was able to spout Marxism without the slightest challenge.

Random Samplings is a service of the Texas Public Policy Foundation at TexasPolicy.com.

But the Sunday shows are supposed to transcend the daily left-wing ranting on Cable TV.

CNN uses the Sunday show “State of the Union” as its answer to “Face the Nation, “Meet the Press,” “This Week,” and “FOX News Sunday” that air as public affairs broadcasts on the four TV networks.

All five of these shows are supposed to be a cut above the day-to-day political advocacy that we get on regular newscast and shows.  CNN is reliably left-wing; MSNBC is off the charts.  FOX is conservative, but still manages to be establishment.

https://youtu.be/h6y8YsWAbYI?si=8XeOlALCsa1-Pf97

Video: Bash’s confrontational interview with Ramaswamy on “State of the Union,” August 27, 2023.

Bash, though, was eager to show her Democratic Party bona fides by taking Ramaswamy to the woodshed.  Okay, when you use language that you know will make heads explode on the Left, you’d better be ready.

If I were going to attempt to provide cover for Vivek, I could say that the Ku Klux Klan was race-based and so are today’s Democrats.  That’s beyond argument.  I could also say that the KKK killed people they didn’t like, namely blacks.  But today’s Democrats also kill human beings they don’t like, namely children still in the womb.

Vivek can take care of cleaning up his own messes.  My argument is not with him, or with Bash’s aggressiveness in that interview.

My argument is the old soft shoe treatment that Bash gave to her next guest. 

Bernie Sanders (center) and Lynn Woolley (right) holding cellphone and about to ask the question. September 29, 2021. (Photo by Julie Sullivan for WBDaily)

After the spot break, she brought on Sanders, who doesn’t think Joe Biden is left-wing enough.  Sanders carped about universal healthcare, while also bragging that Democrats have brought down inflation.

Government healthcare would provide a lower standard for all but elites, and it would explode the deficit and cause inflation to rise again.  Bash didn’t care.  She let him get away it, without a single challenge.  She also let him get away with his inflation lie.

And when he began attacking corporations, Bash neglected to mention that she works for one (and it pays her a hefty salary) while Sanders has never had a real job.

I asked Sanders the question one time in front of the U.S. Capitol that Bash ought to have asked.

“What if the government levies heavy taxes on corporations and they stop hiring?”

I’ve never heard a left-wing media anchor such as Dana Bash ask this most obvious of questions.  If you’re wondering, Sanders did not answer my question, but responded by asking who invited me to the impromptu interview.  Marxists don’t like to be challenged.

Audio of Bernie Sanders on the Capitol grounds 9/29/21 with Lynn Woolley’s question toward the end.

This is my beef with Texas media as well.

Both the Austin American-Statesman and the Texas Tribune are in the midst of cutbacks.  Part of that is the current era in which we live.  The digital age has not been kind to print media, and the proliferation of news sources (most of which are either right or left of center) has made it hard to maintain the large news staffs of prior days.

But still, the leftist slant of so many of the shrinking newspapers is a contributing factor.  I wrote a column entitled:

 “Disappearing newspapers might try fair and balanced approach.”

So far, I haven’t come across one that has taken that advice.

Both the Statesman and the Texas Tribune are capable of journalism at its highest level, and sometimes, they do excellent work.  In the case of the Tribune, a free online newspaper that claims the mantle of actual journalism, it seems that every story is written with a strong and obvious left-wing bias.

I think all the left-wing Texas dailies in our big cities need to rethink that liberal point-of-view, along with the Tribune. They all have op-ed pages where opinion is welcomed.  I think their circulations would increase if they practiced traditional journalism in their front news section.

CNN might give it a try as well.  Lord knows, CNN could sure use some better ratings.

Lynn Woolley is a Texas-based author, broadcaster, and songwriter.  Follow his podcast at https://www.PlanetLogic.us.  Check out his author’s page at https://www.Amazon.com/author/lynnwoolley.  Order books direct from Lynn at https://PlanetLogicPress.Square.Site.  Email Lynn at lwoolley9189@gmail.com.

This book is fair and balanced.  And quite entertaining.  You could order it, you know!

The post Ramaswamy and Sanders get Unequal Treatment on CNN appeared first on WB Daily.