Gary Polland's Texas Conservative Review
Current Issue TCR Back Issues What Other Say About TCR We Get Letters About Your Editor

Receive notice when a new issue is online (Enter email):

Volume XIV Number 16 - August 29, 2015     RSS Feed   

A Periodic Newsletter for Committed Texas Conservatives

In This Issue

Careful Words = Attempt To Obscure Facts About Bathroom Ordinance

Bill King Raises Big Question About Houston Mayor Annise Parker's So-Called Anti-Discrimination Ordinance

GOP Base Has Had It With Congressional Leadership

Welcome To The World

Latest Insult: Iran's Self-Inspections

Free College Is Not Free, Hillary By Bruce Bialosky, Contributing Editor

Red, White and Blue
Houston PBS is not a sponsor

TCR Ad

What's Ahead

Hard Hitting
Conservative Commentary
 
Contact TCR

Please feel free to forward this issue to your friends and associates.
Anyone can subscribe for free:
Subscribe

Gary Polland
2211 Norfolk St.,
Suite 920
Houston, TX 77098
(713) 621-6335
Email

 

 

 

 

 

 
Thoughts This Fortnight

Careful Words = Attempt To Obscure Facts
About Bathroom Ordinance

In the Houston Chronicle on August 26, 2015, Richard Carlbom, spokesman for Houston Unites - the Bathroom Ordinance support group, said in regard to the accusation that the ordinance will allow men to use women's restrooms, "Nothing in the equal rights ordinance changes the fact that it is and always will be illegal to enter a restroom to harm or harass other people."

That would be true if a crime is committed, but what is important is what was not said, that under the ordinance men cannot use women's restrooms. Why wasn't it said? ... because they can.

This is nothing less than misinformation intended to mislead voters. The voters will not be fooled. When will the politically correct media tell the truth?

Bill King Raises Big Question About
Houston Mayor Annise Parker's So-Called Anti-Discrimination Ordinance

In the Houston Mayoral race in 2015 there are 7 serious candidates, 13 candidates in all, and an estimated $7 million to be spent. A major factor in this race will be the bathroom ordinance, or as it is otherwise called by its proponents, the "HERO" ordinance, which lets men into women's bathrooms.

At a recent Mayoral Forum for millennial voters at the University of Houston, candidate Bill King raised a significant issue regarding Houston's ordinance: Why is the Houston ordinance six to seven times the size of some other Texas cities'?

GOP Base Has Had It
With Congressional Leadership

For the GOP conservative base, frustration is the word. They are responding to candidates running against Washington like Trump, Cruz, and others.

They are frustrated because after being told by congressional Republicans "give us a majority, and we will deliver victory" and then doing so, all that has been delivered is Obama's expanded trade authority, Planned Parenthood's continued funding, continued funding of Obamacare, and soon a treaty with Iran that, instead of a 2/3rd majority to pass, requires a super majority to override the expected Obama veto.

In essence, we've gotten much of nothing. Maybe that's why there is incumbent fatigue among the GOP. It's time for the get along gang leaders Boehner and McConnell to be replaced with energetic conservative leaders who get things done.

Welcome To The World

Elle Polland - August 1, 2015
Daughter of Lainie and Jonathan Polland

Latest Insult: Iran's Self-Inspections

Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors at the secret Parchin nuclear site under its secret side agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency to do their own inspections of the site, so the country that lied for years about its nuclear weapons program will be trusted to come clean on those lies.

This raises further doubts about a nuclear pact that is already hemorrhaging credibility.

A recent Wall Street Journal editorial stated, "Unfettered access to Parchin is crucial to understanding Iran's past nuclear work. Without understanding how close Iran has come to getting the bomb, it's impossible to know if Iran really is a year or more away from having the bomb."

Free College Is Not Free, Hillary
By Bruce Bialosky, Contributing Editor

I hate to kick a lady when she is down, but once again Hillary has forced me to respond to her. This time it is her recent nonsense which she refers to as "The New College Compact" and the rest of us can refer to as Hillary's "Get Out Of College for Free Card."

There is definitely a problem with the cost of college today. The massive debt is inhibiting recent graduates from buying their own homes and starting their own businesses. That there is a problem is agreed to universally except for all the freeloaders at universities sucking up tuition dollars for the nonsense they provide. There are a few that purport the problem derives from not enough government involvement. Then there are the crazies like myself (see also Heather Mac Donald) who have written about the exploding cost of a college education that the Left has refused to address.

Ms. Clinton's plan addresses issues regarding college finance and almost totally and completely fails to get at the issue of affordability. Let me count the ways the plan fails:

1. The plan starts from the wrong premise. The first thing the plans states as the problem is that "States are slashing education budgets." That is not the first problem. The second thing the proposal asserts is the primary problem, which is the soaring costs of college. The cost of college in the last fifteen years has soared at almost five times the rate of inflation and more than double the increase in one of our worst problems medical costs.

We might actually begin to live with this if we saw some tangible results. But we are not producing enough doctors or nurses to handle our population and we have to import our engineers from India to work for our tech companies. The only profession our schools seem to produce in more than adequate numbers is lawyers.

2. The Clinton plan does little to address the real problem of the soaring costs and nothing about the useless degrees. The only thing she proposes is that new money be spent on instruction and learning. There is no attempt to control the massive payrolls of administrative staff that currently exists.

3. The plan does what all Democrats like to do pick on for-profit colleges that might engage in deceptive marketing or fraud. It does not address the supposedly non-profit colleges (whose presidents often make $1 million salaries) for misleading their students or not providing the classes necessary to graduate in four years or providing a degree which is a road to bartending or retail store clerking.

4. The plan is another destructive force against federalism. It clearly states that the legislation will run roughshod over state schools not performing to the federal standards in multiple areas. The feds already have far too much control over state and private schools through Pell Grants and other forms of funding. This plan flat sticks the federal government in the nose of every school's operating costs. To quote Mrs. Clinton, "They're going to have to think twice about whether they really need a new rec center." Does anyone believe that the bureaucracy created to enforce this plan would not delve into all aspects of operations and effectively turn control over our state college systems to the feds? Ms. Clinton is proposing supervision of loans going forward be in the hands of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau, further concentrating power in the hands of an agency with no Congressional supervision.

5. Ms. Clinton proposes to pay for this by doing what all liberals fall back on as a funding source taxing THE RICH. She has stated she will limit the deductibility of itemized deductions on high-income taxpayers. The definition of a "high-income taxpayer" is in the eye of the beholder. If she were successful in further limiting itemized deductions beyond what they are now (Obamacare instituted a limitation which is layered on top of the Alternative Minimum Tax limitation for many taxpayers), she would have to eliminate almost all the deductions currently used by anyone making above $150,000 (my guess and that is not wealthy) or maybe even less to cover the estimated $35 billion (it will be more) in annual funding. I immediately thought the charitable community will go nuts about this proposal because they get most of their funds from people with those incomes. Sure enough, I received an email from their trade organization the very next day after the proposal was released pleading with Clinton to exempt them from any part of her plan.

6. Let me state there is one part of the proposal that makes sense. Anyone holding a college loan should be able to easily and affordably refinance their loan if there is a more reasonable loan rate. That is just common sense. But that comes at a cost as most of these loans are held by the federal government and we will receive less revenue from these loans. This plan does not account for that lost revenue which could run into the billions of dollars.

This plan is the stepping stone to what the Left wants to be able to do and may include in the eventual legislation whether Ms. Clinton wants it or not: qualify student loans to be included in bankruptcy filings from which they are currently excluded. With the stigma and ramifications of bankruptcy evaporating in our country, we will soon see a flood of bankruptcy filings. Then the destructive cost of a college education that has been shifted from the college elite to the students will be successfully shifted to the population as a whole, 70 percent of whom will never attend college, and presumably earn even less than the ones free of their commitment to pay for their college education. Just throw another $1 trillion on the national debt pile ($115 billion is already in default).

I give Ms. Clinton credit for making a proposal. I just wish it would be a serious proposal. This is nothing more than a way to attempt to secure the Millennials' vote for her. Even the most free-market-oriented students will be hard-pressed to not want $50,000 - $100,000 of college debt off their backs. The thing is this is just smoke and mirrors. The revenue offset will never reach the levels of the ever-soaring benefit provided, and our federal debt will just continue to grow with a new entitlement. That debt will burden these young people for the rest of their lives.


Bruce Bialosky is the founder of the Republican Jewish Coalition of California and a former Presidential appointee. You can contact Bruce at bruce@bialosky.biz.


TCR on the Air

Red, White & Blue featuring TCR Editor Gary Polland and liberal commentator David Jones on Fridays at 7:30 pm on PBS Houston Channel 8.1, replaying Saturdays at 6:30 p.m. on Channel 8.1, Mondays at 11:30 pm on Channel 8.2 and on the web at www.houstonpublicmedia.org.

Upcoming show:
08-28-15 - 2015 Houston Area Survey conducted by Dr. Stephen Klineberg.

The current show as well as past shows are available on YouTube.

About Your Editor

Gary Polland is a long-time conservative and Republican spokesman, fund-raiser, and leader who completed three terms as the Harris County Republican Chairman. During his three terms, Gary was described as the most successful county Chairman in America by Human Events - The National Conservative Weekly. He is in his sixteenth year of editing a newsletter dealing with key conservative and Republican issues. The last fourteen years he has edited Texas Conservative Review. As a public service for the last 12 years, Gary has published election guides for the GOP primary, general elections and city elections, all with the purpose of assisting conservative candidates. Gary is also in his 13th year of co-hosting Red, White and Blue on PBS Houston, longest running political talk show in Texas history. Gary is a practicing attorney and strategic consultant. He can be reached at (713) 621-6335.

© 2015 Texas Conservative Review
The Texas Conservative Review is published as a public service by Gary Polland
Phone: (713) 621-6335 Fax: (713) 622-6334 E-mail: Gary
To subscribe, simply send an email to subscribe
Your thoughts and comments are welcome


Houston PBS is not a sponsor nor responsible for any content contained in the Texas Conservative Review