Blog #8

Reading over ourgovernment2306.blogspot.com I found that the blog was really well written and gave out some good information about the Austin school disrtict leading the state with the most certified teachers than any other state. According to the National Board for professional Teaching Standards, Texas has 532 National Board certified teachers. More than 35 percent of them are teachers in Austin. Austin ISD encourages and supports it's teachers in the rigorous board certification process. Other school districts around Texas should use this as a benchmark to improve there numbers in certified teachers. Austin ISD hs 189 National Board Certified Teachers as of December 2009. In 2009-2010, two cohort groups, with a total of 56 AISD teachers in a variety of age and teaching fields, are pursuing their candidacy with the support of the Professional Development Department.

Blog #5

Responding to Kalpana blog about the Texas Government increasing the security about the Mexico border. To me it was a well written blog and the information provided was great. I totally agree that not only the Texas Goverment shoud do more to increase the security, but the Government as a whole should help also. It is a hot debate to everyone and a debate that is going to go on for a while. The U.S. government had plans to erect a border fence along the U.S.-Mexico border. The controversial proposal included creating many individuals fences. In between these fences are cameras and sensors, giving the name a "virtual fence". In 2010, the initiative was terminated due to costs. Imagine what the cost would be. Yes I believe the cost would be astounding, but I also believe that it would be worth the cost. The U.S.-Mexico border has the highest number of both legal and illegal crossing of any land border in the world except for the Canada and U.S. border. There are an estimated half a million illegal entries into the U.S. every year. The security has to be increased. People that live along the border fear grows everyday due to the increased violence by the drug cartel and other illegal activities that are going on along the border.

Texas Supremes Ponder "Pole Tax'

On March 25, in a hearing that last just over 45 minutes, the Texas Supreme Court became the lates judges to hear the fight between the adult cabaret industry and the attorney general over the infamous stripper surcharge.
Alternatively nicknamed the "pole tax" and the "titty tax," the $5-per-customer fee on live nude entertainment at venues allowing alcohol consumption was passed by the Texas Legislature in 2007. Sincethen, Texas Enertainment Association and Karpod Inc. have successfully challenged it in two lower courts. In this latest appeal by the state, Solicitor General James Ho has argued that the law served two purposes for the state, both raising revenue and removing "the combustible combination" of nudity and alcohol, which he said contributes to sexual violance. He told the court, "Four decades of precedent support the state's power to impose even greater restrictions on adult businesses under Texas law."
However, Justice Harriet O'Neill quickly interrupted, "That's presuming this is interpreted to be a restriction rather than a tax." She voiced her concerns that the case was "on new ground" by using a tax to regulate content. Justice Paul Green pointed to the questionable logic of distinguishing between live and videotaped nudity, while Justice David Medina called tax "more of punishment" than anything else.
Countering the state's claims of public safety concerns, Texas Enertainment Association attorney Craig Enoch argued, "This is a tax case; make no doubt about it." If the state was serious about policing conduct, he claimed, this law is a failure, since it was like selling people licenses to shout "Fire!" in a crowd theatre. Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson echoed that arguement, saying the state may appear "hypocritical [for] profiting off the very thing it condemns."
Though the hearing lasted less than an hour, don't expect a quick decision. Since this law involves complex questions of both tax code and the First Amendment, it could be years before the Texas Supremes issue a ruling - one that is expected to involve several dissenting and concurring opinions.
Even if a judge is forthcoming, there are potential violations of the Texas Constitution within the law that may take the fight back to a lower court. If it all hangs on the First Amendment, both sides are prepared to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Texas has become a National laughingstock

Texas, once the Lone Star State, first became the Let's Secede State (courtesy of Gov. Rick Perry), and is now the Laughingstock State(thanks to the State Board of Education). Once a two-party state, Texas has become a tea party state.

What does it tell you that Debra Medina was showing close to 30 percent in Republican primary polls and dropped to 19 percent when she said she wasn't sure President George W. Bush bombed on 9/11? And Bush was a Republican president.

Take the most recent episode brought to us by the State Board of Eduacation. Board members went to edit history books by expunging the names of Hispanics who helped Texas become free from Mexico. Lorenzo de Zavala, born in Mexico in 1788, help draft the constitution of the Republic of Texas and was its interim vice president. The Texas Archives building across from the Capitol is named after him

Have the folks who want to edit Texas history to suit their lily-white selves ever heard of him? Apparently not.

Even before the Texas history fiasco, some board members had decided that they were better scientists than Charles Darwin. Seems they're not real happy about evolution.

The board's chief biologist is ex-Chairman Don McLeroy, who will have to conduct his scientific investigations elsewhere next year. He was defeated in the Republican primary by Tom Ratliff. On his compaign Web site, Ratliff explained some differences between himself and McLeroy: "I believe God created the Heavens and Earth millions and millions of years ago. I do not believe, as my opponent does, that the Earth is a mere few thousands old, nor do I believe, as my opponent does, that dinosaurs and mankind lived at the same time."

I'm like the ill-informed gentleman in South Carolina who said, "keep your government hands off my Medicare!" I just want them to keep their hands off of my textbooks.

If we're lucky, the State Board of Education may itself be evolving. The problem is that evolution means change.

Is the theory of evolution itself evolving?

Of course. Noted paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould showed that evolution does not proceed at a steady pace, but in fits and starts. Is physics evolving? You bet.

Newtonian physics describes our everyday world. But when telescopes exposed us to infinite space and time, Albert Einstein developed the theory of relativity. When electronics exposed us to subatomic worlds, Neils Bohr, Paul Dirac, Werner Heisenberg, Max Planck and others developed the field of quantuam mechanics. Do all of those fields of physics fit together neatly? No. Physicists are trying to develop a Grand Unified Theory. They haven't found it yet. Maybe there isn't one.

Is astronomy evolving? At galactic speed.

Ptolemy taught us that the Sun went around the Earth. But then Copemicus and Galileo said, "No, its the other way around."

Astronomers can account for less than 20 percent of the matter necessary to hold the universe together-if we have the laws of gravity and physics right. Dark energy and dark matter, whatever they may be, are needed to balance the equations.

The only fields of study that don't evolve are those not important enough to think about. Central to the theory of evolution is the mutant gene that causes the species to evolve, for better or worse. And the mutant gene that made the GOP evolve from the Eisenhower to the party of Rush Limbaugh and the wackos evolve from Birchers to Birthers is loose in Texas. But help is on the way. Scientists will soon isolate that gene. Then the condition can be treated. In the meantime, those of us who believe the Earth is round, that it goes around the sun and that President Barack Obama wsa born in Hawaii will try to avoid the conservative thought police

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/hobby-texas-has-become-a-national-laughingstock-555318.html

Austin teachers rally for pay raise

About 35 teachers spent their lunch purchedin from of Lanier High School, urging the Austin School Board and district residents to raise taxes to support a 3 percent pay increase in the 2010-2011 school year.

That would be in the be in addition to state-financed increases for educators of about $100 to $600 each. The teachers, led by Louis Malfaro, president of labor group Education Austin, donned yellow T-shirts with the slogan, AISD 49ers - thank goodness for Lubbock." I agree with the story that teachers should do whatever they have do to increase the awareness that need some kind of increase in their salaries. I really think that it should be more that just 3 percent. Teachers should be paid on the level of classes they teach.

The slogan refers to the average base salary of Austin teachers ranking 49th out of Texas 50 major urban school districts. The average in Austin-the fifth largest of those districts is $44,987.

"I've commited myself to the district, but the district has commeted (itself) to me," said Ken Zarifis, an eighth grade language arts teacher at Burnett Middle School. He said Austin has become a training ground for new teachers who leave for neighboring districts that pay better. "we're not asking for too much. We're asking for a cost of living increase." If a person is commeted to what they are working for, the same commentment should be shown back to the person. Why should someone that get good training have to go outside the district of even the area to find a position with a higher salary.

However, didtrict administrators say the 49th ranking doesn't reflect the ditricts total compensation, which includes contributions to health insurance and Social Security. Of Texas districts, only Austin and San Antonio contribute to Social Security. Austin teachers also don't have to pay health premiums for themselves. Tht combined benefits are worth about $5,000 on average, officials said.

When total compensation is factored in, Austin ranks seventh among the 10 biggest districts in the state and first in Central Texas, said Michael Houser, the district's chief human capital officer.

"I would love to see us (raise base salaries) about 4 percent to maintain competitiveness. But in this day and age, I don't think its realistic, Houser said.

The proposed $7.1 million 2010-2011 budget includes a projected $7.1 million gap and is short another $64 million needed to jumpstart academic programs associated with the district's strategic plan. A 1 percent salary increase district wide would cost $4.7 million; a 1 percent raise for teachers only would cost $3.23 million.

Lat year, the state mandated 3 percent raises for all teachers; the district matched that amount for all employees.

The 2010-2011 budget plan includes no money for raises, and officials said there is no plans for a November referendum for a tax increase. A public hearing on the preliminary budget is scheduled for April 26; trustees plan to adopt it Aug 2nd.

http://www.statesman.com/news/local/austin-teachers-rally-for-pay-raise-506132.html?cxtype=ynews_rss

South by Southwest means crowds, entertainment and money for Austin

In past few years the first 10-day event were usually slow getting started. That's a thing of the past. Now days downtown hotels are sold out and badges and messenger bags are blanketing streets and freeways. That is because the interactive portion of the festival has taken off in recent years, say Beth Krauss, media manager for the Austin Convention and Visitors Bureau, which tracks the annual festival. I've heard people argue that South by Southwest is good for the city of Austin and the surrounding towns. I've also heard some people say that it's not good for the city due to traffic delays, and it slows down the city for 10 days. I've heard many other reasons people don't like it, but I love South by Southwest being here in Austin. Talents from all over the country and world navigate there way to Austin to display their talents. It also gives the lesser known talents here in Austin a chance to get some shine.

The interactive conference is drawing an audience that is 40 percent higher that last year. It's growth is being driven by the popularity of social media and the convergence of film and music on the internet, Krauss said.

One of the films that was screened Sunday at the Paramount Theartre is by Austin filmaker Mat Hames. The documentary "When I Rise" recounts the story of opera star Barbara Smith Conrad, a native Texas who as a University of Texas student in 1957 was barred from performing in a lead role because of her skin color. She won the role in the opera "Dido and Aenas" but was removed by UT officials when word got out that she would sing opposite a white male classmate. The movie chronicles Conrad's compelling story as a giflted young singer from East Texas who was among the first wave of African American students admitted to the flagship university after it was legally forced to open its doors to blacks. American-Statesman writer Jeanne Claire van Ryzin reported on the film in Thursdays statesmans edition. Conrad is expecting to attend the premier. This is one of the reasons why I love the fact that South by Southwest is here every year. There's always a feel good story taht needs to be heard or seen and because of the event, this wonderful story can be seen.

Of course the star of SXSW still is the music conference, with it's bands and musical acts from aroud the world on no fewer that 80 stages across down town.

Navigating downtown will be a challenge and forget about parking. But when you're about to lose your patience, calm yourself with the knowledge that the economic impact on Austin is estimated at $95 million with great entertainment all around.

New Hearing for death Row Inmate

According to the www.austinchronicle.com, the Texas Courts of Appeals has sent back to district court the death row case of Charles Dean Hood, opining the Hood is due a new punishment hearing because his original jury was not able to adequately consider mitigating evidence that might have spared his life. Meanwhile, the larger question of whether Hood deserves a brand new trail remains unanswered. I've always opposed the death penalty. I've always believed the God is the creator of life and if it's his will, the ender of life. I've always wondered who gives a person or state the right to end a life.

Hood was convicted and sentenced to death in 1990 for the fatal shooting of Ronald Williamson and Tracie Lynn Wallace, a couple whom he lived in Plano. Hood said that he wasn't responsible for the murder, though evidence connected him to the scene of the crime.

ALthough the CCA had previously denied his requests for a new sentencing hearing, the court ruled on Feb. 24 that the "sentencing scheme" employed by the trail court had "precluded the jury from giving full consideration and effects to Hoods mitigating evidence, Judge Cathy Cochran wrote for the majority. During his trail, argues Cochran, the state put on "significant evidence" that Hood remained a threat to society, fullfilling one of the sentencing criteria leading to a death sentence rather than life in prison. But his defenders, she notes, have argued that he was never allowed to present evidence that might mitigate a death sentence, including that injuries he sustained at 3 years old - when a truck backed over him- led to significant behavior changes, that he had learning and cognitive impairments, and that he was severely beaten as a child(including with a metal pipe) Had the jury been able to consider these elements, Hood has argued, they might have imposed life instead of death. How in the world this evidence not be included in the trail? All of the evidence should have been included to determine if the injuries that he sustained played a part in his behavior and action.

Ultimately the CCA has agreed, though the decision was not with a stiff dissent written by Judge Michael Keasler - and joined by Judges Barbara Hervey and Sharon Keller - arguing that Hood could have raised this claim previously but had not, meaning he was not entitled to have it considered now. Even though the state of the law was still in fluxat the time of a previous appeal, that was no reason that Hood could not have raised the mitigating evidence issue argues Keasler. The question is "whether a claim is colorable(sufficent for appeal) to the degree, "not" whether we currently recognize it as controlling law in Texas, Keasler wrote.

What still remains to be answered is whether Hood should receive a brand new trail in his case - pending in an application before the U.S. Supreme Court. At issue is whether Hood's right to due process was violated by the fact that that the judge sitting over the trail, former CCA Judge Verla Sue Holland, had been engaged in a long time intmate sexual relationship with Hood's prosecutor, Thomas O'Connell Jr. This, Hood's defender allege, is a clear conflict of interest and should require that Hood recieve a new trail. Holland and O'Connell finally admitted the affair after being forced to testify about it when being deposed in 2008. The CCA rejected Hood's request for a new trail, concluding that he had waiting too long to raise the claim - even though Holland and Connell had kept the affair a secret for years, making it difficult, at best, for Hood to get proof he would have needed tp bring the claim to the appeals court. Hood has petitioned the Supreme Court for review; the court has not yet responed. The actions of the Judge and prosecutor to me helps merit that Hood should get a new trail. Even if the affair was going on before the case, their behavior is unacceptable. They are in positions to uphold the law.

Meanwhile, however, 21 former judges and prosecuters (including FBI Director William Sessions and former prosecuter Sam Millsap) and 30 legal ethicists have filed briefs with the Supremes in support of Hood's claim. "While the CCA's recent decision recognized a clear flaw in the punishment phase of Mr. Hood's case, it should not distract the courts or the public from the more troubling issue at the center of this case: that the judge and prosecutor admitted under oath that they had a long-term relationship prior to Hood's trail, and they intentionally kept this affair hidden for 20 years, "said Andrea Keilen, executive director of the Texas Defender Service which represents Hood. "This case requires Supreme Court intervention because the Texas (CCA) to date has ignored the obvious and outrageous constitutional violation. Mr. Hood is entitled to an entirely new trail before an impartial judge and prosecutor. Today's decision granting him a new punishment phase hearing does nothing to address or correct this egregious legal and ethical violation.