Slashdot Mirror

This bill is in the Business & Commerce committee in the Senate, which has been referred 252 bills this committee, of which 221 are still in committee. Of these, approx. 14 are bills that were passed by the House and are waiting the Senate's vote. The next few scheduled meetings of the Senate Business & Committee are just to consider Senate bills, so it could be weeks before this bill is even consider in committee, if it ever is.

The bill would have to pass committee intact, then be referred back to the general body of the Senate, placed on the calendar for a vote, and then voted on. A suprising number of bills are killed by being passed by committee but never placed on the calendar - it's a way for the Senate to kill bills without actually killing them, so they can try to keep their campaign contributors AND their voters happy.

So, this is far from a done deal. Until the bill is out of the Senate Business & Commerce committee, I'd strongly urge you, especially if you're a Texas resident, to contact the members of the Business & Commerce committee.

The Senate Business & Commerce committee consists of:

Chair: Senator Troy Fraser (R-Abilene)
Vice-Chair: Senator Kip Averitt (R-Granbury)

Members:
Senator Kenneth Armbrister (D-Victoria)
Senator Kim Brimer (R-Ft. Worth)
Senator John Carona (R-Dallas)
Senator Kevin Eltife (R-Longview)
Senator Craig Estes (R-Denton)
Senator Eddie Lucio, Jr. (D-Brownsville)
Senator Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio)

Each link goes to that senators homepage at the Texas State Senate website. Most, if not all, of the senators have a web form on their site to allow you to easily email them your comments. They also list addresses, phone numbers and fax numbers - remember, letters and faxes are given much more weight than emails, so if you are really concerned about this, drop them a letter. Let them know that you are contacting them about a bill that has been referred to their committee from the House, HB 789 .

I've dealt with a few of the senators in this bunch, and of the ones I know, it's a real assortment - there's a true hardcore old-style Texas politician or two in the group, but there's also a few more progressive, modern politicians that will listen to what their constiutents have to say, even over the constant drone of lobbyists in Austin.

This bill is in the Business & Commerce committee in the Senate, which has been referred 252 bills this committee, of which 221 are still in committee. Of these, approx. 14 are bills that were passed by the House and are waiting the Senate's vote. The next few scheduled meetings of the Senate Business & Committee are just to consider Senate bills, so it could be weeks before this bill is even consider in committee, if it ever is.

The bill would have to pass committee intact, then be referred back to the general body of the Senate, placed on the calendar for a vote, and then voted on. A suprising number of bills are killed by being passed by committee but never placed on the calendar - it's a way for the Senate to kill bills without actually killing them, so they can try to keep their campaign contributors AND their voters happy.

So, this is far from a done deal. Until the bill is out of the Senate Business & Commerce committee, I'd strongly urge you, especially if you're a Texas resident, to contact the members of the Business & Commerce committee.

The Senate Business & Commerce committee consists of:

Chair: Senator Troy Fraser (R-Abilene)
Vice-Chair: Senator Kip Averitt (R-Granbury)

Members:
Senator Kenneth Armbrister (D-Victoria)
Senator Kim Brimer (R-Ft. Worth)
Senator John Carona (R-Dallas)
Senator Kevin Eltife (R-Longview)
Senator Craig Estes (R-Denton)
Senator Eddie Lucio, Jr. (D-Brownsville)
Senator Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio)

Each link goes to that senators homepage at the Texas State Senate website. Most, if not all, of the senators have a web form on their site to allow you to easily email them your comments. They also list addresses, phone numbers and fax numbers - remember, letters and faxes are given much more weight than emails, so if you are really concerned about this, drop them a letter. Let them know that you are contacting them about a bill that has been referred to their committee from the House, HB 789 .

I've dealt with a few of the senators in this bunch, and of the ones I know, it's a real assortment - there's a true hardcore old-style Texas politician or two in the group, but there's also a few more progressive, modern politicians that will listen to what their constiutents have to say, even over the constant drone of lobbyists in Austin.

Soapboxes are great but useful info is better

Follow this link to FIND your representative:
http://www.texasonline.state.tx.us/category.jsp?la nguage=eng&categoryId=6.10

I live in Houston, one of your reps is John Culberson, he is a republican, so most likely you will be wasting your time with him.
But here is the site of the texas state senate with its list of state senators searchable by zip code.

Personally I think for your opinion to make any real difference down here you have to be a rich 'good ole boy', or a right wing religious fanatic.

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/fyi/fyi.htm

find your senator, phone the office. ask to speak to the page in charge of this bill (or in technology in general). let him/her know you're a constituent of whoever your official is and you oppose this bill, and want your official to vote against it. provide brief reasoning and thank them.

phone calls work the best. it means you actually got the brain cycles of _someone_ and you had the most attention you could get.

handwritten letters are the next best. then faxes (can be automated)

emails can be automated to where you'll get like 10,000 of the same one. these have the smallest weight.

it really helps to have a list prepared ahead of times of your state and federal representatives, so you can phone with not much notice. sometimes on tech news sites you'll hear about bills that will be voted on that day or tomorrow - not much time in those cases :(

anyway, i hope this helps. your reps actually DO listen, you just have to learn the ropes. heck - even find out if they voted the way you liked, and let them know when they did good. it's been known to happen.

What is really funny is that the Capitol building provides free wireless access. Info here

The bill history for HB789 is interesting. Notably, it shows how quickly (and without a recorded vote so those of us who live in Texas can't even accuse our representatives of actually supporting this legislation) the bill passed.

Austin Wireless and Austin Wireless City both have coverage of what it means to Austin. The Save Muni Wireless group was put together in response to challenges like this; they include much better commentary on why HB789 is a bad idea than would be worth repeating here. If you really want to understand the issue, check some of these sites.

Even the High Tech Broadband Coalition (a group of telecom, hardware, and software companies) was against HB789.

Several local news stories:

• News8 Austin on "end of free Wi-Fi" - News8 Austin is the local Time Warner cable news channel.
• Austin Business Journal on "Free Wi-Fi Faces Challenges"

For those in Texas who want this law changed, it's probably a good time to call or write your state Senator today before this bill sails through committee and a floor non-vote.

The state law has alot to it, but the part that is brough up in theses cases basiclly allows the hospital's ethics board to sign an approval saying that nothing else can be done to the patient, this then allows the hospital to go through a procedure to stop care. There are numerious other safe guards that any family member can do to stop this.
This law that Bush pushed through had the backing of various right to life groups and medical ethic groups. Before this law hospitals would of just pulled the plug with not much the family could do about it, and Governor Bush actually had previous vetoed a law making this the state policy.
While it is a sad story, what killed this kid was that she was born with a fatal form of dwarfism. The liberal are beneath contempt for bring up this red herring in thier continue bush bashing.
Funny thing about it was the Governor Bush was heavly criticized by various liberal groups because he allowed religious and right to life group in the meeting to help get the language for the bill.

A copy of the public notice about the meeting is online at: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlo/schedule/2005/C 4702005040508001.HTM

To summarize - the meeting is Tuesday and it starts at 8AM. It's in E2.012. There are 20 other bills on the agenda for the day, so there's no way to know for sure when this specific bill will be discussed. I'd recommend you get there at or before 8AM and ask if you can testify on HB2893, and if so, what you need to do to register a written opinion on the bill or to register your desire to give your opinion in public testimony during the hearing.

Any Texas residents or anyone that will be in Austin on Tuesday - according to the bill status at http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/db2www/tlo/ billhist/actions.d2w/report?LEG=79&SESS=R&CHAMBER= H&BILLTYPE=B&BILLSUFFIX=02893, the bill is scheduled for public hearing before the House Transportation Committee on 04/05/2005. Anyone may attend these hearings and register their support or opposition to the bill, and generally will also be allowed to give brief testimony. The hearing will be held at the state capitol in Austin - any of the DPS officers or volunteers should be able to point you to the right room.

Also, if you read the bill itself, the purpose of the transponder is to enforce the requirement of a minimum level of automotive liability insurance.

The transponder would rely a unique ID as well as the make, model and VIN of the vehicle it is attached to. This is all information that anyone within range of the RFID tag, including the traffic monitoring cameras, could already determine.

No matter which side you are on on this issue, show up at the hearing - this bill is very new - this is the first time it is going to be discussed, and this seems to be the first session it has been introduced in, so it's doubtful it goes very far this time. However, it's important that people show up and voice the privacy concerns inherent in this bill.

If you cannot attend the hearing, the author of the bill is Representative Phillips. His contact information is:

District 62
Capitol Office: EXT E2.720
Capitol Address: P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78711
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0297

District Address: 421 North Crockett
Sherman, TX 75090
District Phone: (903) 891-7297

He serves as the vice-chair of the transportation committee, which this bill has been referred to.

The chair of the transportation committee is:
Rep. Mike Krusee
District 52
Capitol Office: CAP GW.18
Capitol Address: P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78711
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0670

If you are a Texas resident but cannot attend the hearing in Austin on Tuesday, I'd recommend calling and requesting their fax number and faxing a letter detailing your concerns, or mailing one, but mailing it quickly.

You can also email either of these representatives via their website, although faxed or mailed letters generally get more attention.

Representative Phillips: http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist62/philli ps.htm
Representative Krusee:
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist52/krusee .htm

Any Texas residents or anyone that will be in Austin on Tuesday - according to the bill status at http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/db2www/tlo/ billhist/actions.d2w/report?LEG=79&SESS=R&CHAMBER= H&BILLTYPE=B&BILLSUFFIX=02893, the bill is scheduled for public hearing before the House Transportation Committee on 04/05/2005. Anyone may attend these hearings and register their support or opposition to the bill, and generally will also be allowed to give brief testimony. The hearing will be held at the state capitol in Austin - any of the DPS officers or volunteers should be able to point you to the right room.

Also, if you read the bill itself, the purpose of the transponder is to enforce the requirement of a minimum level of automotive liability insurance.

The transponder would rely a unique ID as well as the make, model and VIN of the vehicle it is attached to. This is all information that anyone within range of the RFID tag, including the traffic monitoring cameras, could already determine.

No matter which side you are on on this issue, show up at the hearing - this bill is very new - this is the first time it is going to be discussed, and this seems to be the first session it has been introduced in, so it's doubtful it goes very far this time. However, it's important that people show up and voice the privacy concerns inherent in this bill.

If you cannot attend the hearing, the author of the bill is Representative Phillips. His contact information is:

District 62
Capitol Office: EXT E2.720
Capitol Address: P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78711
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0297

District Address: 421 North Crockett
Sherman, TX 75090
District Phone: (903) 891-7297

He serves as the vice-chair of the transportation committee, which this bill has been referred to.

The chair of the transportation committee is:
Rep. Mike Krusee
District 52
Capitol Office: CAP GW.18
Capitol Address: P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78711
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0670

If you are a Texas resident but cannot attend the hearing in Austin on Tuesday, I'd recommend calling and requesting their fax number and faxing a letter detailing your concerns, or mailing one, but mailing it quickly.

You can also email either of these representatives via their website, although faxed or mailed letters generally get more attention.

Representative Phillips: http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist62/philli ps.htm
Representative Krusee:
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist52/krusee .htm

Any Texas residents or anyone that will be in Austin on Tuesday - according to the bill status at http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/cgi-bin/db2www/tlo/ billhist/actions.d2w/report?LEG=79&SESS=R&CHAMBER= H&BILLTYPE=B&BILLSUFFIX=02893, the bill is scheduled for public hearing before the House Transportation Committee on 04/05/2005. Anyone may attend these hearings and register their support or opposition to the bill, and generally will also be allowed to give brief testimony. The hearing will be held at the state capitol in Austin - any of the DPS officers or volunteers should be able to point you to the right room.

Also, if you read the bill itself, the purpose of the transponder is to enforce the requirement of a minimum level of automotive liability insurance.

The transponder would rely a unique ID as well as the make, model and VIN of the vehicle it is attached to. This is all information that anyone within range of the RFID tag, including the traffic monitoring cameras, could already determine.

No matter which side you are on on this issue, show up at the hearing - this bill is very new - this is the first time it is going to be discussed, and this seems to be the first session it has been introduced in, so it's doubtful it goes very far this time. However, it's important that people show up and voice the privacy concerns inherent in this bill.

If you cannot attend the hearing, the author of the bill is Representative Phillips. His contact information is:

District 62
Capitol Office: EXT E2.720
Capitol Address: P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78711
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0297

District Address: 421 North Crockett
Sherman, TX 75090
District Phone: (903) 891-7297

He serves as the vice-chair of the transportation committee, which this bill has been referred to.

The chair of the transportation committee is:
Rep. Mike Krusee
District 52
Capitol Office: CAP GW.18
Capitol Address: P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78711
Capitol Phone: (512) 463-0670

If you are a Texas resident but cannot attend the hearing in Austin on Tuesday, I'd recommend calling and requesting their fax number and faxing a letter detailing your concerns, or mailing one, but mailing it quickly.

You can also email either of these representatives via their website, although faxed or mailed letters generally get more attention.

Representative Phillips: http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist62/philli ps.htm
Representative Krusee:
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist52/krusee .htm

Haha no doubt. People used to stick the police numbers on their phone, or program them into speed dial. Those numbers still exist! Why can't people learn to use them again? Also, I just checked out the website where I saw the "Vonage Brochure With No 911 Access Information". Yes, its a BROSCHURE. It doesn't have every little bit of information about the company on it. It also says at the bottom in BIG LETTERS to phone and talk to a specialist about ALL the Vonage features. I bet they would tell you about 911 if you asked about it. If you didn't then its your fault. It's not like they say that have 911 service identical to landlines in their broschure either, so maybe they could just use that line of reasoning and win. This is simply a case of "Well I bought something without doing any research and product X didn't work the way I thought (read: imagined in my mind with no educated reasoning), so I should sue them or something." I really don't have a soft spot for people who go out and spend money on products that they haven't researched.

" People executed in the US are disproportinately black.

Demonstrably false. More whites are executed in the US than blacks. Count 'em yourself: here's Texas' list. Since Jan 1, 2000, Texas has executed 73 whites, 52 blacks, and 17 hispanics. The irony is that you began your post with:"

Many consider it acceptable to be prejudiced against gays.

When he said "acceptable," he meant by the mainstream public in general. The fact that you can come up with an example of a bigotry that a small pocket of people "accept" does not mean that it is "acceptable." It's moot anyway, as both of you are wrong. There are many prejudices that remain acceptable by the general public. For example, prejudice against smokers, fat people, and white males are all still widely accepted in today's society. Your feeble, twisted logic would conclude that even blatant racism is "acceptable," since the KKK exists somewhere.

In many nations, women are repressed. Even in the US they often have to overcome rediculous and antiquated notions.

Gender equality is virtually universal in North America. There are no longer "rediculous [sic]" obstacles to them achieving equal rights and priveleges.

People executed in the US are disproportinately black.

Demonstrably false. More whites are executed in the US than blacks. Count 'em yourself: here's Texas' list. Since Jan 1, 2000, Texas has executed 73 whites, 52 blacks, and 17 hispanics. The irony is that you began your post with:

Whoa, buddy. You just spouted some grade-A bullshit.

I humbly suggest that you've done the same.

Arab-Americans are more likely to be stopped at airports.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim, or are you just pulling wild accusations out of your ass, like you did with the "more blacks are executed than whites" baloney?

Sec. 54.202. PROHIBITED MUNICIPAL SERVICES.
[(a)] A municipality or municipally owned utility may not, directly or indirectly, on its own or with another entity, offer [for sale] to the public:
(1) a service for which a certificate [of convenience and necessity, a certificate of operating authority, or a service provider certificate of operating authority] is required; [or]
(2) a service as a network provider; or
(3) [(2) a nonswitched] any telecommunications or information service, without regard to the technology platform used to [connect a customer's premises with:] provide the service.

...then get in contact with the representative that sponsored the bill in the first place. http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/email.php?dis t=61&rep=phil.king/

California Sponsor: Asm. Fran Pavley (assemblymember.pavley@assembly.ca.gov)
Michigan Sponsor: Rep. Jim Howell (jhowell@house.mi.gov)
Texas Sponsor: Sen. John Corona (john.carona@senate.state.tx.us)
Virginia Sponsor: Rep. Joe T. May (Del_May@house.state.va.us)

Let your voices be heard!

Texas schools are middle of the pack. They rank slightly ahead of the US average in mathematics and slightly behind in reading.

BTW, fuck you and here's a different former governor you can have.

Texas HB789 is the actual legislation.

It's a broad deregulation bill, intended to deregulate Texas telephone companies. The "no municipal telecommunications services" section is at 54.202, "PROHIBITED MUNICIPAL SERVICES". But there is much more in there. Basically, Texas telcos would be offered the opportunity to opt out of being public utilities. They then get to do anything they want to do - raise rates, put additional confusing surcharges on bills, provide lousy service, etc. The "free market" is supposed to fix this.

It's amusing to see what regulations remain. Texas elected officials must be listed in the front of phone books. The state of Texas cannot be charged fees for late payment.

Looks like TxDOT is providing wireless Internet access at highway rest stops. Someone from the legislature better get a handle on those progressives over at the Highway Department! http://www.txdot.state.tx.us/txdotnews/026-2004.ht m

This bill would, if implemented to full effect, prevent cities from putting up access points in City Hall, public parks, or the public libraries. If you live in Texas, please call your legislator and ensure that, if nothing else, such exceptions are delineated. You can find them by using this form. This could be one of the stupider bills to pass this year.

I'll be putting in a call to Eddie Rodriquez and Gonzalo Barrientos later. Hopefully Gonzalo will be sober for a change.

Before you jump to conclusions why not try reading it first?

clicky

Actually, almost a third of the people on death row are white. I can't say anything about their financial status, though.

Sounds just like the TIERS Texas Integrated Eligibility Redesign System software my agency has been trying develop. The Texas Department of Human Services, now the Texas Health and Human Services Commission, has contracted to Deloitte to develop a web based system similar to what is described in the article. $3 million a month (according to some) has been spent on this for a couple of years now and it is a HORRIBLE excuse of a system. I know case workers that are being forced to test the software that say it takes at LEAST twice as long to work a case now than it did with the old system that was developed in the 80's. This has been a boondoggle in the worst sense and any Texas taxpayer should be pissed off about it.
It gets to be depressing working for the government because you see so many contracts like this awarded simply because some higher up gets his palm greased. Another example of this is the fact that I had to pay Banctec (the company that has our hardware support contract) the standard fee of $340 to replace a CPU FAN in an old machine the other day. So sad.

P.S. - I'm having to post this anonymously because anyone that has even begun to criticize the TIERS software, even internally, has been officially reprimanded or worse.

Here's a link for you. Keep in mind these are only recommendations, not legal requirements.

Here's a LinuxJournal link that also might be of interest.

And for the rest of Texas, the Texas Natural Resources Information System makes various GIS data available for download.

I don't know if you're entirely correct about consent. Consent isn't an absolute absolution of any legal requirements. You can't consent to being murdered, for instance. (Well, you can, but it's no defense to the person who does it.) But I do concede that it's probably closer than the limited exceptions I was trying to get at.

In any case, consent isn't at play in the particular example of shining a LASER at someone.

Assault is a crime of intent. With no intent, there is no assault. Criminal Negligence, perhaps.

This isn't true. Read the laws in New York (it's the first one listed, 120.00, then 120.05 and 120.10; all three degrees of assault have provisions that don't require intent), Pennsylvania (again, both simple and aggrivated assult have provisions for at least reckless injury under some conditions), Texas, North Dakota (PDF file; simple assault has negligent assault), and New Jersey. I can't link to NJ's because it's in a subscription service (Westlaw), but the relevant portions are the same as PA.

There are jurisdictions where this isn't true (California and Georga (warning: very large and slow-loading version of the entire penal code), the latter of which doesn't even have a crime called assault), but since the Model Penal Code and subsequent revisions of most states' criminal law, they are a minority.

There was a press release about this in May of 2004.

The article doesn't mention it, but the parks are: Choke Canyon State Park (Calliham) near Three Rivers, Blanco State Park near Blanco, Balmorhea State Park near Toyahvale, Goose Island State Park near Rockport, and Ray Roberts Lake State Park (Isle du Bois) near Pilot Point. Reference: http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/news/news/041220b.phtm l

For that matter, some Caterpillars have fake eyes to make them look bigger and scare off predators. Some frogs self-inflate for (presumably) the same reason. Surely it should be easier for the predator to evolve the ability to recognize an inflated frog than for the frog to evolve to inflate itself? But apparently not.

1. I'm all for open source software, to the point of administering a sourceforge project. But. But I cannot think open source is anything to get rich with. Can you run a bussiness ? Sure. Can you make money with it ? Sure. But can you make a lot of money with it ? Hardly. ...

   ... The money will quietly remain in the companies using OSS. They should refocus their strategy and perhaps invest in those companies (the ones heavily using OSS).

I mostly agree, with a slight change in perspective.

Propriatory rates can't be charged most of the time for a commodity. The problem for the Oracle's of the world is that they can't charge as high of a propriatory rate anymore...since software+hardware are commodites. OSS has knocked the mystique out of most brands, though not entirely.

Try this on for size;

1. How much money do you think is spent on
2. Sport fishing each year?

That's in the US only. For 1 year. Now, much of that goes into boats (think big projects), though there are plenty of other businesses linked to sport fishing (stores/guides/rental/camping/restaurants/... think smaller projects/contracts) that unless you go looking for evidence of sport fishing making anyone money, it's largely invisible.

OSS is also largely invisible...yet, IBM alone has both spent and earned billions on it. Large amounts of money is already being made and we are in the mid to early stages of large scale adoption.

A single piece of OSS swimming by itself is admirable, though in isolation not very useful. Like the fish in fishing, OSS is both about software and not about the software.

Why don't you compare and contrast for us the merits of the hydrogen fuel station 50 yards away from the school with what's likely the natural gas line and furnace that likely runs driectly to and resides inside the school?

What standards are you using for power?
Economic, as that underlies all else. Gross National Product and Gross Domestic Product. If you're unfamiliar, GNP measures total money value of products and services produced by a nation in a year; GDP is similar but limits to production done within the country.

As of the most recent measures (2003) not only did the United States have the largest GNP, but Texas by itself ranked #8, right behind China.
http://www.window.state.tx.us/news/303148theconomy .html

For GDP, the United States again tops the list easily.
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/ranko rder/2001rank.html

Most successful eh?
See Conductor's response; I'm not going to point out the error of your social state panacea, but again, I submit the above. Perhaps it can be argued we're not as our GDP per capita is 2nd behind Luxembourg. But I would argue Luxembourg cannot scale to match the U.S.
http://www.worldfactsandfigures.com/gdp_country_de sc.php ..all of those countries...
What is your measure of power & success? You mention diplomatic power. Do you have a metric by which to judge this? Are you aware that the coalition of countries that the US put together for the Iraq war was larger than that for the Korean War, and this was done without the UN's backing? After the invasion, the UN then gave its permission for the continued occupation of Iraq, after initally opposing it. For that matter, who funds the UN? Or that the US was able to hold the first democratic election in Afghanistan just recently? I think the US has far more diplomatic power than you speculate.

Please submit 1 country who you believe is more successful and powerful, and what measurements you use to determine such. Take into consideration whether that country could have accomplished even one of those items I just listed.

Finally...your knee jerk reaction of "military power" tells volumes about how you perceive both power and those on the other side of the political spectrum from you.

Answers to questions on election law and procedures may be obtained by telephoning the Elections Division toll-free at 1.800.252.VOTE (8683) or direct at 512.463.5650.

In person - Call your County Clerk or Elections Administrator for early voting dates, hours and places.
By mail - If you will be: (1) out of the county during early voting and on Election Day; (2) age 65 or older; (3) sick or disabled; or (4) confined to jail, call the Elections Administrator in charge of the particular election and ask him to send you an application for a ballot by mail. Or, you may request one from the Secretary of State's Office at 1.800.252.VOTE (8683), or on-line

This pamphlet is available in Spanish, large print, audiotape, or computer disc upon request.

(Este folleto está disponible en Español, tipo de imprenta más grande, cinta magnética para audio, o disco para computadora. Para conseguir una de estas versiones por favor llame sin cargo a la oficina del Secretario de Estado al 1.800.252.VOTE (8683)).

SECRETARY OF STATE
Elections Division
P.O. Box 12060
Austin, Texas 78711-2060
512.463.5650 or
1.800.252.VOTE (8683)
Fax 512.475.2811
TTY 7.1.1
www.sos.state.tx.us

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
999 E Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20463
1.800.424.9530
www.fec.gov

TEXAS REPUBLICAN PARTY
900 Congress Avenue, Suite 300
Austin, Texas 78701
512.477.9821
www.texasgop.org

TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY
701 Rio Grande
Austin, Texas 78701
512.478.9800
www.txdemocrats.org

LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF TEXAS
P.O. Box 56426
Houston, Texas 77256-6426
1.800.422.1776
www.tx.lp.org

GREEN PARTY OF TEXAS
818 W. 31st Street
Houston, Texas 77018
713.866.6285
www.hcgp.org

"So the map was drawn by a nonpartisan panel of federal judges, based on the 2000 Census figures"

That is not totally true, and quite misleading. First of all, two of the Judges on the 3 judge panel were Democrat appointments.

Second, the judge's drew up their own House map, but accepted the Senate map.

Third, They approved the new map that the BBC is reporting on.

Fourth, even though Texas voted more then 60% Republican in 2000, 17 out of our 32 seats went to Democrats.( Before U.S. Rep. Ralph Hall of Rockwall switched to the Republican Party.)

"As a Texan, I have to say that is a totally false and highly partisan mischaracterization of the situation prior to the Republican's abusive redistricting."

Ok, then how do you reconcile the fact that a majority of Texans voted Republican, yet a majority of the US Reps. were Democrat? Last time I checked, the 53% majority enjoyed by the Democrats was a hell of a lot farther from the 39.1% they received in the Presidential campaign then the 65% majority the Republicans would receive from the best case scenario as a result of the redistricting is from their 60%. (All stats in that last statement have been referenced somewhere else in my post, find them.)
Who's being partisan now? Oh, and by the way, I'm not a Republican. I plan on voting for Badnarik.

If anyone doubted /.'s slant, this parent is proof of it.

I know your message was in jest, but I can't not respond.

The two large land acquisitions to which you refer are the Louisiana Purchase and Seward's Folly (the purchase of Alaska, in 1867). France sold the Louisiana Territories to the US in order to finance its war with England. Russia then did the same thing with Alaska (and also to reduce its need to fortify the Peninsula, which they were never really able to maintain to begin with).

The only thing that surprises me is that Russia didn't try to sell Alaska fifty years earlier, when the money would've helped in their war against Napolean.

The two other major land acquisitions in the 19th century were Texas (which, incidentally, the northern states didn't even want to admit to the union, and wouldn't have happened at all if the Texans hadn't asked to be annexed-- although it's not like the US didn't play some pretty high-stakes political games to make that happen), and the Spanish American War.

For those interested in more historical detail than I can possibly remember, try reading The Personal Memoirs of US Grant and/or Old Arlington: The Story of the Lee Mansion National Memorial (Shameless plug: I helped edit the latter)

Trying to add a little bit of sanity to this line...

Producing the data are expensive. Often, as well, the aerial imagery companies will retain ownership of the images (often not photos anymore) or ramp the costs of the service and imagery 'way up beyond what the city or state can afford. There's historical precedent to this, back when most of us didn't care or want those data...

He's asking for the whole database. Likely, if it's a reasonably designed GIS database, there's data of a tax/ownership nature that shouldn't be released electronically... if at all. There are some things about my taxes I don't see a reason for you to know, and if they're included therein (and they might be in a "reasonable" but not necessarily in a "good" design) then request was out of line.

In Texas, all GIS data derived with public funds but not restricted by contractual obligations are released as public data, or available from the various agencies upon request. (http://www.tnris.state.tx.us/)

This may change with restrictions and recommendations from the Feds bout reducing access to critical infrastructure data. For a variety of reasons, I can go either way on this. although I'm currently the "data wants to be free" guy in that duscussion.

That said, some of the GIS data we have in Texas on critial infrastructure and critical industries DOES come pretty close to qualifying for "due diligence" on the part of a terrorist. They'd get all the needed to mine the bridge, or do maximum damage to the chemical plant. Should we make it easy?

Finally, on the costs associated with requesting "free" data from state agencies: I've seen the numbers and have gotten the patient explanations on why they're so high. Let's say a CD-RW disk is $.25. Then you have to have a GIS analyst retrieve the data and place it in the burn directory. If it were something like, "Send me the whole database" this is relatively easy. Then you have to have someone burn the CD. Or CDs. The agency, at least in Texas, is required by State law to recover costs using a formula that incorporates the direct and indirect costs of the individuals doing the work, on a per-hour basis, shipping, and a depreciation allowance for the equipment, again prorated. A little bit here, a little bit there, eventually the CD costs $75, which was what TNRIS charged last time I went there rather than downloading the data directly...

There will be a quiz next hour.

Ben Barnes, then Lt. Governor of Texas, admitted he got Bush into the National Guard

Ummm, except Bush joined the National Guard in May 1968, and Barnes wasn't Lt. Governor until 1969. Perhaps the fact that Barnes is a disgraced Democratic politician and major Kerry fundraiser has something to do with his confusion about dates?

ahajokes.com? I would hardly consider a joke site a credible source about the law :P

I did a quick search of Texas law and Austin city ordinances and didn't find any such prohibition.

A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property: when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary: to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and he reasonably believes that: the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

So, if you're commiting a crime at night, you're fair game. I feel sorry for thieves and murderers in Texas, whenever they go to work, they're taking their lives in their hands.

They don't just mean my (coverage limit so low premium so high I simply reject it) bodily injury coverage. It includes property damage, collision coverage, and liability coverage.

I've seen the clause enforced as well.

<grouse>

Amen.

Every ./ user should be using bugmenot by now. And every person who whines about subscription required should be using and promoting bugmenot! I don't think there's anything wrong with the NYTimes asking for registration. I think it's wrong that you slackers are complaining about it, rather than showing them the futility of trying to gather information this way.

It's similar to people who protests against copyright laws, but aren't actively distributing copyrighted material. The only way to beat the system is to BREAK it. If you aren't being civily disobediant, you are supporting the law.

</grouse>

Finally, as regards the article itself:

But the politics surrounding open-source software do not always fit neatly into party categories. The people who work on software like the Linux operating system, the Apache Web server and others are an eclectic bunch of technologists. "You'll find gun nuts along with total lefties," Linus Torvalds, the creator of Linux, said in an e-mail message.

So the real point here is that support of open source has nothing to do with political ideology?

"It may be that the populist-versus-establishment dynamic plays out as Democrat versus Republican in this election," Mr. Weitzner said. "But the open-source movement is a populist phenomenon, enabled by the Internet, and not a partisan force in any traditional sense of politics."

So, the article says CLEARLY that open source is not a stricly republican or democrat favorite.

Eric Raymond, a leading open-source advocate, writing in his online "Jargon File," described the politics of the archetypal open-source programmer, whom he calls J. Random Hacker, as "vaguely liberal-moderate, except for the strong libertarian contingent, which rejects conventional left-right politics entirely."

And of course Libertarians are further right on the political line graph than republicans, and they are big supporters of OSS. So OSS views actually have NOTHING to do with your political party?

This story is pure and simple propoganda. The headline and opening paragraphs make it seem like republicans are against open source. It would be like saying Democrats are against gay marriage just because John Kerry is The reality is that politics, like OSS decisions are all about choice. In this case, one person chose their platform of choice. For example, This Repbulican introduced legislation in Texas which seeks to ensure that free/open-source software is given a level playing field when competing with proprietary products in state agencies There was a /. article about it a year ago, but damned if I can find it now.

That doesn't mean all republicans are pro OSS either. It just means that

OSS is prefered by everyone who gets to know it

the NYTimes is pro-Kerry

if you must read the Times, read the whole article.

Sometimes (pun intended) the reporting is good, but the headlines are rarely written by the reporters who know the story. Editors write headlines, and they write the headline that will get the most people to buy the paper. They slant them as per their personal choice and perception as to wh

Then who are these people? And why are they talking about equipping the safety rest stops with wifi?

Then who are these people? And why are they talking about equipping the safety rest stops with wifi?

Then you'd better report this website to the appropriate authorities as they must be impersonating a state agency. Strangely enough, this WiFi story is the first item on the page.

I'm sure it could have been more cost-effective, yes. But this isn't like an $85,000 flat tire.

I'm sure it could have been more cost-effective, yes. But this isn't like an $85,000 flat tire.

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/hcr/main.htm

The detailed info is just text though.