We Aim for Injustice

"The bedrock of our democracy is the rule of law and that means we have to have an independent judiciary, judges who can make decisions independent of the political winds that are blowing."

-Caroline Kennedy, US Ambassador 

Unless we stick our judges in a soundproof bubble apart from the world, they will never be completely independent of the political winds, but Texas's approach to judicial elections doesn't even aim for such a standard. Texas elects all their judges in partisan elections, allowing candidates to run as Republican or Democrat. The problems with this system are easy to see primarily in the disregard for fairness and easy filler votes.

The judicial need for impartiality is incredibly clear and essential to the assurance of justice. As Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist Paper #74, "The independence of the judges is... requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals." Cases often appear in Texas courts between a Republican and Democrat person or group. To have a judge openly admit their partiality towards those of their party does not assure one of the fairness of the trail. Allowing judges to declare their partisanship declares an abandonment of any attempt at justice. 

A little "(R)" or "(D)" after a potential judge's name is an easy out for many voters. Regardless of a judge's track record, ideology, or ability to judge, a judge can get elected simply because they associate with the majority party. Wallace B. Jefferson, former Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court, wrote,  "My success depended primarily on a straight-ticket partisan vote... Currently, merit matters little in judicial elections. We close our eyes and vote for judges based on party affiliation." Voters choose someone who they know little or nothing about simply because of the letter after their name. This obviously is not a system built to pick the best candidate or even the people's choice. Texas does not encourage voters to research judges. In fact, Texas practically discourages it by allowing partisanship to control the vote. 

Texas has discouraged its judges from striving for impartiality and its voters from educated choices.

Convenient Accuracy

There are approximately 4,889,856 Texans eligible to vote but unregistered. To put that in perspective, 4,727,208 Texans voted in the 2014 gubernatorial election. There are more people unregistered than people who actually vote. In fact, Texas has the lowest voter turnout in the nation and barely scooches by at 42nd in voter registration percentage.

Texas voter registration is not the easiest of processes, but it's not impossible. It still involves a form that has to be printed on paper and snail-mailed - a slow, time-consuming process for our modern world. Often, even after registering, information comes out inaccurate and voters are stopped at the polls and turned away due to a change in address, misspelled name, or wrong birth date. This wastes valuable time at the polls, making voting full of frustratingly long lines. However, what prioritizes this issue is the greater consequence of lost votes and lost voices.

At first glance, the solution seems to be automatic registration. Two states, Oregon and now California, use automatic registration in which citizens are registered to vote as soon as they turn 18. Information the state already has is compiled and any citizen over 18 can simply show up to vote. However, the concern often arises as to the individuals that, while eligible, don't want to be registered to vote for religious or personal reasons. Some argue that automatic registration oversteps the role of government. Such issues cause automatic registration to be a hard vote.

Upon further examination, the answer lies in an already established Texas registration method. In Texas, citizens over 18 are encouraged to register to vote when obtaining a driver's licence or changing address at the DMV where applications are also provided. A simple signature and maybe a piece of missing information is filled in, and with practically no extra time, the citizen is registered to vote with accurate information. Heather K. Gerken takes the next step into solution, "Now imagine every public organization - a state university, the Department of Veterans Affairs, your local Social Security office - providing the same kind of one-stop shopping... It wouldn't be difficult for them to forward that information to election officials." 

There are three advantages besides increased registration: choice, encouragement, and accuracy. Gerken's solution allows a citizen to choose not to be registered while still making it more convenient. The added freedom would make the bill much easier to pass in the very freedom-conscious Texas. Because a citizen is reminded to register at more state institutions, she is simultaneously encouraged to vote. Especially for the thousands of students at state universities, this much needed encouragement and ease of access could potentially increase the dismal millennial turnout. This solution also provides better accuracy. Anytime address is changed or name corrected, voters can quickly make this information match their election registration, preventing long lines and discouraged voters at the polls. 

Despite all these stellar advantages, voter registration may not increase significantly. Americans are an apathetic people and more drastic measures would need to be taken to significantly change the numbers. However, with an often gridlocked government, small steps are the taken steps and anything is worth a shot. 

Providing more opportunities for accurate registration will encourage voter registration and turnout while appealing to Texas's ideal of freedom. 

Clinton's Texas

Deep in the red, red state of Texas, Erica Greider observes Hillary Clinton's Texas popularity and theorizes about Bernie Sander's loss in the Texas democratic primaries. Greider points out three items that lead her to believe Clinton will win the Texas primaries. 1.) Clinton's centrist views, 2.) her Texas nomination in 2008, and 3.) Texas connections.

While the second two are good pointers, Clinton's actual policies are what makes her a Democratic Texan favorite. Especially when set next to ultra-left Bernie Sanders, Clinton is relatively moderate. She voted for the Patriot Act in 2001, has had a pro-war foreign policy, and doesn't actively slam the 1%. Of course, she remains distinctly democrat with left policies such as pro-choice and substantial gun control, but a little right goes a long way. Even the democrats of Texas cannot help but pick up on the overall conservative political culture, causing them to favor the centrist democratic candidates. 

Hillary's moderate views are what led her to Texan victory in the 2008 primaries. Greider sums up her view of the Texan democrat culture in 2008, "Only in Texas did I regularly encounter Democratic voters who were sincerely, spontaneously enthusiastic about Clinton." Those who were enthusiastic for Clinton in 2008 will be voters once again in 2016.

Along with a good Texan track record, Clinton has ties with Texas. She also achieved the highest honor Texans care about - she lived in Texas. In the 1970's, both Clintons lived in San Antonio while working on a campaign, and it has inspired a sort of hometown pride for San Antonio democrats. Her ties get stronger with endorsements from multiple Texas politicians like Leticia Van de Putte and Carlos Uresti. Her best Texas tie is a biggie with Julian Castro, previous mayor of San Antonio, who is assumed to be her potential running mate. 

However, Erica Greider does mention a few doubts to Clinton's coronation. Bernie Sanders held widely attended rallied in Houston and San Antonio in July. Sanders does have substantial Texas support. It's hard to drive through an Austin neighborhood without running into a "Bernie 2016" yard sign or bumper sticker. However, his left-of-left policies seem hard to stomach with the general Texas democrat culture. The other threat to Clinton - in Texas and nationally - is Joe Biden's tauntingly unclear presidential candidacy. Greider admits that should Biden run, he could offset Clinton's overall Texas popularity.

While Sanders or Biden might not be major threats to Clinton, her positive 2008 track record is not as positive as Greider made it out to be.  Clinton won the democratic primaries by approximately 3% - really too small a margin to give as a point to Hillary. 

Doubts considered, Hillary Clinton  is still the more moderate of the democratic front runners and her substantial Texas ties point to a Texas primaries win. 

Tinkering or Honoring?

Jan Reid observed the removal of Jefferson Davis's statue of honor from the University of Texas south mall and angrily declared, "The Absurdity of Tinkering with Texas History." However, "tinkering" is a blatantly inaccurate word.

Filled with a dedicated love for Texas, Jan Reid has established himself as a well-qualified author and journalist with successful novels and contributions to Esquire, New York Times, and other media sources. As with most of his work, his editorial on Davis's statue gears itself towards those enamored with Texas and nostalgic with its history. The University's recent decision to remove the statue honoring Jefferson Davis did not fit with Reid's history nostalgia.

In "The Absurdity of Tinkering with Texas History," Reid summarizes the more positive accomplishments of the four men - Woodrow Wilson, Albert Sidney Johnson, Robert E. Lee, and Jefferson Davis - honored with statues at the UT south mall, along with a few other honored men commemorated on UT campus, then briefly makes the case that removing these statues is, "a surrender to vandals," and an attempt, "to airbrush our state's past."

Jefferson Davis, president of the confederacy, stood at the forefront of the racism of civil war south. He fought for his ideas of, "The inferiority stamped upon that race of men by the Creator." He referred to African Americans as, "This species of property." He not only admitted but was proud of the fact that Caucasians exploited and benefited from racism. As he said it, "White men have an equality resulting from the presence of a lower caste."
Jan Reid describes Davis as, "A Mississippi planter and congressman, he championed Texas' entry into the Union as a slave state." Reid, arguing to preserve the authenticity of history, makes no mention of Davis's passionately racist views.

The statue of Jefferson Davis is not a learning moment in a history class to discuss the political power or public speaking skills of Jefferson Davis. The statue is an honor. Davis's methods to get his cause accomplished were effective and convincing, and maybe we can learn from them. Yet regardless, Davis's cause was the brutal enslavement of human beings no longer recognized as human. "Tinkering with Texas history" would be to take mention of Davis out of history classes. In fact it might even be summarizing his life without a single mention of his idea that "African slavery, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing," exactly as Reid did.

The statue that used to sit in the south mall did not teach history, it honored a man who led the split of our nation and sought to preserve slavery inevitably. Its removal does not in any way tinker with history; it is not a surrender to vandals or an airbrushing of history. It rightly takes away the honor from an evil man. It is listening to the voice of the people and recognizing our state's wrongs. 

I wonder if Jan Reid would like to critique the 2012 removal of all Russian statues of Vladimir Lenin. Maybe he could emphasize how Lenin got a gold medal in school. After all, removing statutes honoring a man who tried to destroy a nation is, of course, tinkering with history. 

Quantity Over Quality

“We don’t need all that other stuff [you’re] trying to do, we just need to house these people." 
That's what Retired Lt. Col. Hope Jackson was told by the El Paso Veteran's Administration in her attempt to get funding for her homeless female veteran shelter. 

Texas has 8,500 female veterans without a home. Jackson contends the number could quadruple if  it included the veterans temporarily crashing at a friend or family member's home. 95% of military sex crimes are committed towards a female, causing complex emotional issues, including chances of PTSD increasing by a factor of nine. 

Overwhelmed by the number of homeless people and especially homeless veterans, Texas has chosen to focus on housing people instead of addressing overall issues. Quantity over quality wins funding, as is evident in Hope Jackson's case. The $137,000 grant from the El Paso Veteran's Administration went to Avalon Correctional Services, which houses more people and does amazing work, but doesn't provide the relational, specialized care that Jackson was hoping to offer. Texas is short on funds and ideas for helping its homelessness problem. 

Citing her faith in God, Lt. Col. Jackson still believes her shelter will open soon. You can donate to her work here. 

Y'all best be greeted now.