I'm a reliable primary voter. Political consultants reviewing voter registration documents can see that I have voted in about 80% of the primaries, both on-cycle and off-cycle. The other thing political consultants will see is that I have only voted in Republican primaries. My mailbox can attest to this. It has been overflowing with Republican TX22 campaign literature. Even GOP candidates for our local state representative seat have been sending me junk mail. Today, though, I received something very unexpected. Barack Obama sent me instructions on his version of the "Texas Two-Step": Vote in the Democratic primary and then attend the Democratic precinct convention.
I think not ... When I vote in the primary, I'll ask for a Republican ballot.
I can't really explain why Barack Obama would send campaign literature to me. Three possible explanations exist:
1. Every voter in the state of Texas got the literature, and I shouldn't read anything into it. That would seem to be prohibitively expensive.
2. Sen. Obama's political consultants know I vote in primaries, but don't know I'm a Republican. I don't think Sen. Obama's political consultants are incompetent.
3. Sen. Obama and his political consultants know I show up for Republican primaries, and they hope I'll cross over to the Democratic primary and vote for Obama.
Honestly, I think explanation #3 is the most plausible. Given that the Houston Chronicle went so far as to publish a story based on anecdotal evidence that Republicans were crossing over to the Democratic primary to vote for Obama, don't you think that the possibility that the Obama campaign is actively courting Republican voters is a story, too?
Rep. Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) is on the receiving end of a whopping 35-count indictment related to a shady land deal that netted him several hundred thousand dollars. Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) calls for Rep. Renzi's resignation:
U.S. House Minority Leader John Boehner urged Rep. Rick Renzi to resign following the Arizona Republican's indictment for fraud, extortion and conspiracy.
"I have made it clear that I will hold our members to the highest standards of ethical conduct," the Ohio Republican said in a statement. "The charges contained in this indictment are completely unacceptable for a member of Congress, and I strongly urge Rep. Renzi to seriously consider whether he can continue to effectively represent his constituents under these circumstances."
The indictment clearly alleges that Rep. Renzi used his position in the House of Representatives to enrich himself. Rep. Renzi used his authority to push for a federal land swap which benefited Renzi's business partner and himself. This is official corruption. You know what I think of that. I'll admit I haven't been following this case very carefully since it isn't Abramoff related, and is therefore outside the scope of this blog. But as I did with Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) and Rep. JD Hayworth (R-Ariz.), let's look how I treated Rep. Renzi in my archives:
April 26, 2007 I said I'd shed "no tears" for Rep. Renzi's predicament.
April 27, 2007 I concluded that there was "probable cause that a crime [had] been committed" in the Renzi scandal. Furthermore, I said that Renzi needed "to go for the good of the Republican Party".
May 11, 2007 I predicted that Rep. Renzi would resign. (He hasn't resigned yet; he has merely announced he won't run for re-election.)
I think that I was much harsher on Rep. Renzi than I was on Sen. Burns or Rep. Hayworth. That's good since only Rep. Renzi got indicted. My readers can decide if I'm fairly representing my archives.
I received a second-hand report from a Carleston parent that Pearland ISD may be reviewing the school zoning patterns that became effective just six months ago. I wrote about the incoherent the 2007-2008 zoning plan was in this post:
I'd like to illustrate how zany the school rezoning decisions were. A hypothetical student living at Rogers Middle School would not attend Rogers Middle School. He would be sent to Jamison Middle School. Strange, huh?
A second hypothetical student living at Jamison Middle School would, after brushing his teeth in the boys bathroom at Jamison, hop on a bus and go to school at Sablatura Middle School.
Rogers Middle School is at the edge of the West Oaks (my) subdivision, yet West Oaks students are not allowed to attend Rogers Middle School. I didn't get too worked up about the rezoning, but some West Oaks parents did.
Now I don't know the source of this information. As with many married couples, Mrs. Anti-Corruption's circle of friends is much larger than mine. The source is a Carleston parent that I wouldn't have thought fit the profile of the rebellious coalition, but apparently by the way she talked, she is a full-fledged member. This parent claims that the rezoning is a result of the small but vociferous minority of Pearland residents that have embraced the IB Program. She can't believe how the school district is willing to move mountains for these people. Mrs. Anti-Corruption said that this parent is considering private school herself, but based on what I've heard, I'm not so sure how serious this parent is. (That's good news for you, Pearland ISD.)
When Pearland ISD articulated the goals of the first rezoning process in 2006, there were four guiding principles (Page 4 of .pdf):
1. Balancing enrollment of campuses 2. Consideration of ethnicity and low SES populations 3. Neighborhood schools 4. Feeder patterns
In the end, Pearland ISD seems to have given weight to only #1 and #4. With respect to the middle school zoning, I had crunched the enrollment figures provided by the school district and came up with a plan that also incorporated balancing ethnicity and SES populations and kept neighborhood schools intact*. I shared my analysis with one of Carleston's rezoning committee members. This committee member said she had came with my identical plan, but that the school district rejected it. Very little weight was given to balancing ethnicity and low SES populations, and absolutely no weight was given to the concept of neighborhood schools. (Remember, a hypothetical student living in Rogers Middle School doesn't even attend Rogers, he is sent to Jamison Middle School. A hypothetical student living in Jamison is sent to Sab.)
Notice that in the original four goals, pandering to the loud IB advocates was not listed as a consideration. If our source is accurate, Pearland ISD has added a key consideration.
If it is true that Pearland ISD is revisiting the zoning issue, this is a perfect opportunity to actually give weight to the concept of neighborhood schools. Kids living near Rogers can be zoned to Rogers. Kids living near Jamison can be zoned to Jamison. Literally no one I've talked to in the Carleston attendance zone wants IB, so I can't imagine that anyone is really attached to Jamison. In fact, I still sense quite a bit of resentment that West Oaks kids have to cross FM 518 when there is a school in our subdivision.
===
* The following zoning plan better balances ethnicity and low SES populations while still observing the goal of neighborhood schools than the plan adopted by PISD
"Melt With You" - Modern English (1982) Gen-X Anthem (True Xers were too old for grunge.)
==
Last week, a reporter contacted me about my blog. She asked me questions about topics I said were outside the mission of this blog. I gave her some tangential quotes and apologized that I couldn't do better. I saw her article come out. It is behind a pay-internet site, so I couldn't see if she mentioned me, but I doubt it. I haven't seen any strange levels of traffic from her city (it is outside of Houston).
Anyway, one of the questions she asked me was trying to figure out my age. She obviously thought I was two decades younger than I am.
For the record, I wear the Generation X label proudly. I even use the word "boomer" as a pejorative!
Since I have enrolled Junior Anti-Corruption in a school with an outstanding academic reputation, I had decided not to write about this subject any more. I wanted to focus on the primary mission of this blog which is to document that all Republicans are not blind to the corruption that infects the party. Strangely, Pearland ISD administrators can't seem to stay away from my blog (though they haven't been using their Pearland ISD computers lately). Additionally, I've picked up some readers who are advocates of implementing the International Baccalaureate Programme in Pearland. These advocates sure are an amusing crowd, giving the silliest reasons to support the IB Program. Since those two groups seem to be asking for more posts on the subject, I'll oblige.
First, I find it absolutely amazing that IB supporters claim that the IB Program is a curriculum. From the January 3, 2008 issue of the Pearland Journal (not available online):
[Name redacted], resident of Lakes of Highland Glen, has a son and daughter who attend Cockrell Elementary School. [Name redacted] first learned of IB when her son, [Name redacted], was identified as a gifted and talented (GT) student.
She felt the IB program would be better suited for his advanced abilities, saying she like how the curriculum taught the kids to think globally.
This parent truly seems to think that the IB Program is a curriculum ... one that teaches her kids to "think globally" whatever that means. Personally, I prefer that my kids learn such things as language arts, arithmetic, science and social studies ... at an advanced rate if appropriate. At least Pearland ISD no longer claims that the PYP is a curriculum. I bet this parent won't care. Curriculum or not, she's got to have it. It seems that some people view the IB Program as some sort of designer label for the school district. To me, that designer label looks suspiciously like the Emperor's New Suit.
There was a parent quoted in the Pearland Journal who liked the IB Program because IB students take field trips to museums. Are you kidding me? Teachers have taken kids on field trips to museums for generations. In small town northern Michigan where I grew up, we went on field trips to museums. Maybe John Hughes was secretly promoting the IB Program in his 1986 Gen-X classic "Ferris Bueller's Day Off". Notice the field trip to the Art Institute of Chicago:
In all seriousness, I think that the IB Program takes credit for what good teachers have done all along. And that includes taking field trips to museums.
The main purpose of this entry is to make some observations about an article that appeared in the weekly Pearland/Alvin/Friendswood section of the Houston Chronicle:
==
Cost
I get e-mail. And my IB Program posts have generated a lot of interest around the country. Several people have told me to try to get an understanding on how much the IB Program costs. Seemingly, this relevant fact about the IB Program is not so easily obtained.
Q: How much will be needed to staff the program districtwide for the 2008-09 school year?
A: We estimate the range for the six positions to be $140,000-$200,000, depending on the levels and years of experience of the applicants who fill the positions.
Q: What are the new positions?
A: Some of the new positions are part-time, and some full-time.
We will hire two primary program coordinators, two Spanish instructors, two middle school coordinators and a secretary position.
The secretary position may be added sooner in order to facilitate program implementation.
There will be more positions as the program grows.
OK, there will be six administrative positions required for the IB Program. In the very next sentence, we're told that there will be "two primary program coordinators, two Spanish instructors, two middle school coordinators and a secretary position". That's seven positions. The easiest explanation for this is that in the first question, the six positions were the professional positions. The paraprofessional secretary was not included. I think I understand that.
Look at the cost for those six professional positions, though. $140,000 to $200,000! Wow! I have a buddy who insists that public education is merely a jobs program. I better not show him this article! I'm sure the cost includes salary and benefits. Teachers at Pearland ISD are not subject to Social Security, so we don't need to include the employer portion of that in our calculations. It is my understanding that the state makes contributions to TRS, not the school district, so we don't have to worry about that. The only major cost of labor outside of salary is health insurance. Pearland ISD has average health insurance at best, and employees contribute several hundred dollars per month toward their own coverage. So let's be generous and say that Pearland ISD pays $1,200 per month for health insurance for each employee. That's $14,400 per year. (If there are better numbers out there, please don't hesitate to let me know.) The conclusion of all this is that the salaries of the IB professionals are roughly $126,600 to $186,600.
According to the article, two of those positions are Spanish instructors. Shouldn't Spanish instructors be paid according to the teacher salary schedule? The salary schedule doesn't even come close to offering $126,000 per year no matter what the education level or amount of experience. Something is very wrong with these facts.
But it doesn't end there. The article informs us that:
Pearland school trustees recently agreed to expand the International Baccalaureate program, putting in place a feeder pattern in the district at a cost of $2.6 million.
My understanding is that the $2.6 million is over five years. That gives us an average of $520,000 per year. Let's look at those administrative salaries again. Let me remind you that we have been told that some of the positions are part time.
$70,000 Half-time primary school coordinator $140,000 Full-time primary school coordinator $100,000 Half-time middle school coordinator $70,000 Half-time middle school coordinator $65,000 Full-time Spanish instructor $65,000 Full-time Spanish instructor $40,000 Full-time secretary position
$550,000 Total
I think I've been quite generous to Pearland ISD here. Three administrators are part-time. Only one administrator earns the high end of the range, the rest earn the bottom of the range. I ignored the range completely regarding the Spanish instructors since I don't believe the range applies to them. (Remember, these costs include $14,400 in health insurance benefits, so the Spanish instructors are earning $50,600 and the secretary is earning $25,600. I am trying to be quite fair in this analysis.)
Despite the fact that I've been quite generous in calculating costs, we are still over budget for the next five years. And this is using the cost figures from Pearland ISD. The big kicker is that these figures only include the *new* employees; existing employees aren't included. We're not including the checks cut to the International Baccalaureate Organization in Geneva; we're not including training costs; we're not including the cost to put a substitute in the classroom when the teacher is attending training. There are a lot of other costs to include, but we've already busted the budget with new employees. I can't even come close to explaining how Pearland ISD gets a $2.6 million price tag for the IB Program. In my opinion, Pearland ISD is grossly underestimating the costs of the IB Program.
(That said, the only good expenditure I see in all this mess is the hiring of two Spanish instructors. Presumably, these instructors will teach grades K-6. I see an opportunity to save a whole lot of money here. Hire the Spanish instructors, teach Spanish to grades K-6, and dump all the other excessive administrative salaries.)
==
Teacher Opposition
Q: Is there any teacher resistance to the plan?
A: There is always resistance to anything new.
We have wonderful teachers with experience and expertise and it is important to consider their feelings and provide them with opportunities to learn more about International Baccalaureate.
We want to honor our experienced teachers and keep them in Pearland.
They will have many opportunities to learn about IB and to transfer to another school if they so choose.
So far, we have found that the more teachers learn about IB, the more interested and excited they get about being part of the program.
Q: What is their main argument?
A: Since IB elementary school classes have the same teacher all day, there is a concern about teachers being responsible for multiple state tests instead of just one.
The advantages to having the same group of students all day are many, and may provide teachers with more opportunities to meet individual student needs.
I don't understand this. All elementary schools in Pearland ISD have the same teacher all day. The status quo is that elementary teachers are responsible for multiple test. (I think this only applies to Grade 4 Grade 3. Grade 4 Grade 3 is the first grade with multiple TAKS tests.)
In my opinion, Pearland ISD is playing fast and loose with the language again. I suspect that Pearland ISD intends to bring self-contained classes into the *middle schools* (Grades 5-6). I don't have a problem with that. In my personal experience, I was in self-contained classes in grades 5-6, although my classes were ability grouped, a policy that Pearland ISD eschews. But if I'm right and the IB Program is leading to self-contained classes in the middle schools, why did this administrator say that applies only to the elementary schools? You know, this very administrator said something to me that indicated there would be material changes to class construction at the middle schools. I asked what changes there would be specifically at Jamison Middle School. I was concerned that ability grouping would be eliminated at Jamison just like it had been eliminated at Carleston Elementary. Dr. Nyla W. specifically told me on October 8, 2007 that there were was "no call" to change the way things were done at the middle school level. It will be interesting to see what is going on here.
It is past midnight now, and I have a plane to catch at IAH tomorrow morning. I'll be traveling all week, but I have more to say on this subject. I'll be out all week, but check this post again for updates.
Drew Cline is the editorial page editor at the Manchester (N.H.) Union-Leader. Mr. Cline also writes a blog. Here are excerpts from an entry he made yesterday:
[Tom] DeLay conceded that he had not ruled out voting for McCain. Hayes writes, “Coming from one who previously said McCain had ‘done more to hurt the Republican party than any elected official I know of,’ that’s progress.”
Right. Part of McCain’s problem is, as DeLay said, his record. Another part is that his record includes not falling in line behind so-called conservatives whose lust for power knew few if any bounds. Tom DeLay was chief among Republicans who destroyed the party in their own quest for the power a “permanent majority” would provide.
Trying to spend and deal themselves into power for the rest of their lives, they destroyed the Republican brand. They turned the party of fiscal responsibility into the party of profligacy. And for no other reason than to buy votes so they could hold onto their power.
Tom DeLay has done more damage to the Republican Party than John McCain ever will. McCain’s path to the presidency is tougher because he has to undo so much damage DeLay, Ted Stevens, Randy Cunningham George W. Bush and other Republicans have done. They and Republicans like them lost the GOP majority that Newt Gingrich and Dick Army [sic] built on Reagan’s model while McCain criticized them to no end for their overspending.
I liked Mr. Cline's points, but I wish he had connected the prolific spending to the corruption. I particularly liked how Mr. Cline acknowledged that Tom DeLay had destroyed the legacy of Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich and Dick Armey. I have long made similar points. Examples are here and here.
Human Events transcribes the opening statements of Sen. Jim DeMint at CPAC. This is what I liked:
Many of us here have paid special attention to the congressional earmarking process this year because we believe that it has been a root cause of our downfall. After all, if Republicans cannot be responsible with the little things like earmarks, how are we going to address the big problems facing the nation?
Over the life of our majorities lawmakers became more and more addicted to pork-barrel spending. This shady practice corrupted us and led to disasters like the Abramoff scandal.
The way I see it, the earmarking game in Washington has completely turned everything upside down. When members of Congress are sworn in to office we take an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States.” We are sent to Washington to represent our local communities, but our solemn oath is to the entire nation.
Over time, I fear that many of us have forgotten that oath and succumbed to what I call a perversion of purpose. Instead of conducting our business in Congress with an eye towards what is best for the whole country, we conduct our business with our eye on what is best for ourselves. This is not how our founders intended this Congress to function.
In particular, this is not how the Republican Party is supposed to function. We are a Party that values limited government and local control of tax dollars. Earmarking, as we have come to know it, is in direct conflict with these values.
From the very beginning at my old place back in early 2006, I made two indictments against Tom DeLay. First I stated that Mr. DeLay was corrupt. Second, I opposed Mr. DeLay's love of earmarks. It was always apparent to me that the two were related. It is good to see Sen. DeMint link earmarks to corruption at CPAC. There certainly were Republican officeholders that sounded the alarm back in 2006. Unfortunately, our party didn't heed those warnings. Consequently, the GOP is now a minority party.
Eleven months into a 30 month sentence, it looks like admitted felon and former Congressman Bob Ney will get out of prison. From the Associated Press:
Former U.S. Rep. Bob Ney has undergone alcohol treatment and his scheduled prison release date has been moved up.
Ney, a six-term Republican from Heath in central Ohio, resigned his office during a congressional corruption probe and last March 1 began serving a 30-month sentence after pleading guilty to conspiracy and making false statements.
Earlier set for release in May 2009, Ney's release date is now listed as Aug. 16, 2008, on the Web site of the Federal Corrections Institution in Morgantown, W.Va...
Ney, 53, will get earlier release under a provision that gives him time off after completing residential drug treatment program, prison spokeswoman Veronica Fernandez said.
Under the nine-month program, inmates attend meetings four hours a day, five days a week, Fernandez said. They must continue aftercare treatment after graduating from the program, which can be done in a residential program, or halfway house.
Obviously I don't know Mr. Ney. His battle with alcohol may be genuine. But even before Mr. Ney went to prison, I observed how completing an alcohol treatment program would allow him to leave prison early.
If Mr. Ney did face addiction to demon alcohol, I hope that the program helps him take one day at a time. If not, congratulations for getting out of jail early, Mr. Ney.
This article in The Hill newspaper made me chuckle:
Some lobbyists believe McCain was overly aggressive in pursuing the Jack Abramoff scandal. That investigation embarrassed the party and further diminished the profession in the eyes of the public.
In related news, I'm trying to verify the story that lawyers and used car salesmen also believe that Sen. McCain is responsible for diminishing their professions.
Unfortunately, there is a little truth to be found in the above quote. Some people truly believe that Sen. McCain embarrassed the Republican Party by exposing Jack Abramoff's crimes. Apparently, in the view of these critics, it would have been better to ignore the federal corruption. I disagree. Sen. McCain did the right thing.
But [Tom DeLay] also sounded less than convinced that his party would win [DeLay's old Congressional] seat back in November.
“It depends. There’s a lot of stuff going on in Harris County. (U.S. Rep.) John Culberson was just telling me, all kinds of corruption stuff and investigations, Republicans are taking it on the chin left and right. That can have an impact on that race, as well as John Culberson’s and Harris County countywide races.”
Look, our district is 60+% Republican. Yes, Tom DeLay only garnered 55% of the vote in 2004, but consider that it was Tom DeLay. A lot of good Republicans simply wouldn't vote for the corrupt guy. In 2008, I get to come home. I'll vote for whoever has the 'R' after his name in TX22. Nick Lampson is a one-term wonder.
Despite the fact that Rep. Lampson will have the advantages of incumbency, I will predict that the Republican candidate in TX22 have the best showing a Republican has had in nearly a decade. The reason is that the Republican in the TX22 race won't be Tom DeLay.
===
Update February 12, 2008
Welcome to the visitors from CD22Watcher!
Most of my readership is DC based. I'm not used to so much local interest. Because of my new local friends, I'll make one more observation that I didn't think would interest my regular readership:
DeLay sounded confident about the crowded field of Republicans running for his old Houston-area seat, which is now held by Democrat Nick Lampson. He said he’s not endorsing in the race because he has too many friends in it.
Oh, please Mr. DeLay, please let us know who your friends are in the TX22 race. I need to know which candidates to avoid. I have a guess as to who one of Tom DeLay's "friends" is. From my point of view, Pete Olson looks and smells like a Tom DeLay clone. That said, even if Pete Olson wins the nomination, I'll vote for him in November. Sure, I'll have to hold my nose to do it. I don't like things that smell like Tom DeLay.
There is one candidate in TX22 who has spoken of the failure of the Republican Party to properly address its corruption problem. That candidate is likely to get my vote. I rather doubt that anyone cares what I think about this race, but I'm curious to know whether anyone else has picked up on the one anti-corruption candidate in the Republican primary.
A month ago, I announced that I am a McCainiac. The reason I support Sen. McCain's presidential aspirations is because I view Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) as the candidate most serious about rooting out official corruption.
Because of my support for Sen. McCain and the reasons behind that support, I found this nugget of information from the Weekly Standard election blog to be rather interesting:
John McCain's speech at CPAC was surprisingly well-received ... Even Tom DeLay, who was standing with his arms crossed throughout most of the speech, applauded when McCain spoke of the importance of nominating conservative judges. (DeLay did not clap, however, when McCain promised to root out corruption and end earmarks. Hmmmm.)
Emphasis added
Sen. McCain said he wants to put those involved in Abramoff corruption in jail. Do you see why our former Congressman doesn't like Sen. John McCain?
I'm not on the Democrats' email list. Fortunately for me, Michelle Malkin is. And she reprints a fundraising message from DNC chair Howard Dean:
[Sen. John McCain] looked the other way as Jack Abramoff bought and paid for the Republican Party and the Culture of Corruption.
There are many examples in this e-mail where Mr. Dean doesn't feel the need to be constrained by the truth, but this claim is absolutely astounding. Now I have already said that I'll vote for John McCain precisely because Sen. McCain has had the integrity and character to pass judgment on the Abramoff corruption. I often credit Sen. McCain and his staff on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee for a lot of what we know about this scandal. I've read many of the reports from the Indian Affairs Committee. And recall that Steven Griles was convicted on obstruction charges directly attributable to Mr. Griles' testimony before Sen. McCain's committee. I have also exchanged e-mails with a witness before Sen. McCain's committee who provided me valuable insight into this scandal.
Needless to say, I am very favorably impressed with Sen. McCain specifically because of his opposition to corruption in general and the Abramoff corruption in particular. Howard Dean's statements are simply incredible.
Hat tip to Matthew Continetti for this story. Mr. Continetti enumerates the instances of Howard Dean's elusive grasp of the truth. Mr. Continetti wrote a book about the Abramoff scandal called K Street Gang. I gave a very brief review of K Street Gang at the old place.
[B]race yourself for a burst of stories about how exactly Bill Clinton has been spending the past eight years. One of the first of those stories hit the front page of The New York Times last week: It described how Bill Clinton helped a Canadian mining promoter to win a uranium concession in Kazakhstan in 2005, after which Clinton collected a US$31-million contribution to his private foundation. There will be more such stories -- lots more.
Recently, money managers within the [Hillary] Clinton campaign have said they were spending money as fast as they could raise it.
And today, it was revealed that there might have been a shortfall in January, but for a loan made by the candidate herself.
Senator Clinton reached into her own pockets to give the campaign a $5 million loan late last month.
She explained Wednesday that the loan was made out of necessity.
"I loaned the campaign $5 million from my money. That's where I got the money." Clinton said. She emphasized the word "my" to make clear that the loan did not involve her husband, the former President.
OK, admittedly there are a couple of broken links in this chain. The $31 million went to Clinton's private foundation, it was not President Clinton's personal funds. But who knows, with tens of millions of dollars churning around, please forgive me if I'm a little suspicious at how these public servants have amassed such personal fortunes.
Secondly, Sen. Clinton (D-Ark. N.Y.) seems to be drawing a distinction between her money and President Clinton's money. I know that New York isn't a community property state, but how many married couples don't commingle their assets? (Granted, the Clinton duo seem like a prime candidate for just such a couple.)
Gentle reader, you may draw your own conclusions. But I just can't help but making another comparison. An energy baron from the former Soviet Union contributes over a million dollars to a charity closely linked to President Clinton. Another energy baron from the former Soviet Union contributed over a million dollars to a non-profit closely linked to former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Fort Bend County). This stuff is just plain ugly.
OK, so this story is over a week old. I've been travelling a lot lately. I even had the first aborted landing in my life. My flight to Palm Springs was diverted to LAX after an attempted landing in a thunderstorm. Yes, a thunderstorm in the desert.
Federal probation officials are recommending that Brent Wilkes, the Poway defense contractor who was convicted of bribing former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, should be sentenced to 60 years in prison, according to court records...
Such a lengthy sentence recommendation, even in an era of increasingly stiff penalties for white collar crimes, is significant, said Shaun Martin, a law professor at the University of San Diego School of Law.
“I'm sure Wilkes' lawyers' jaws dropped to the floor when they read 60 years,” he said. “It's a huge number. Bribing public officials is worse than stealing from shareholders. Both are terrible, but one is worse.”
Sixty years? That seems w-a-y out of line with other sentences we've seen. Rep. Randy Cunningham, the guy that Mr. Wilkes bribed, received 8.3 years. Maybe Rep. Cunningham received a lighter sentence since he pleaded guilty instead of going to trial like Mr. Wilkes.
While we're at it, let's look at some Abramoff-related sentences.
Abramoff received 70 months for his role in the SunCruz matter. Although Abramoff has pleaded guilty to corruption crimes, he has yet to be sentenced for his corruption.
Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) has received a shorter sentence for receiving bribes than former Rep. Cunningham. Rep. Ney is serving a 30 month sentence.
David Safavian is the only Abramoff-linked figure to go to jury trial. He is serving an 18 month sentence. (Mr. Safavian is currently out of prison and appealing his conviction.)
Literally everyone else who has been sentenced is serving less than Safavian's 18 months. While I agree with University of San Diego law professor Shaun Martin when he says that public corruption is worse than shareholder fraud, the sentences don't show that. (Former Enron CFO Andy Fastow is serving 10 years.) Comparing the government's recommendation for Wilkes' sentence to that of Abramoff corruption participants shows that the Wilkes recommendation is out of line. Even comparing it to the Enron case leads me to believe Wilkes' recommended sentence is not in line. That said, I won't shed a tear if Mr. Wilkes effectively gets a life sentence.
More important that Congressional redistricting, today was UIL redistricting for Texas high school sports. My two teams, Pearland and Pasadena Memorial, are paired up in 22-5A.
There is certainly good news for the Pearland Oilers in this new alignment (.pdf). Assuming that both Pearland and Galena Park North Shore both win their districts, the two teams would not meet until the regional championship game. Pearland has had to face North Shore in the second round of the playoffs for the past two years. I haven't seen enrollment numbers, but judging from 2006 enrollment and past football performance, Baytown Lee is the Oilers' most likely first round opponent over the next two year.
I find it curious that the UIL hasn't seemed to have released enrollment figures. As for me, I just wanted to verify that Pearland truly is the largest school in 22-5A. Oh yeah, I also wanted to see what the largest 4A high school is. The running joke in Texas high school athletics is that the UIL looks at the enrollment of Dallas Highland Park and sets the cutoff between 4A and 5A at one student larger than Highland Park's ADM. (In an effort to provide factual accuracy, Highland Park was not the largest 4A school (.pdf) in 2006. Nevertheless, the cutoff between 4A and 5A was only about 20 students above Highland Park's ADM.)
<
