Friday, August 28, 2009

Mayoral Tidbits

Huntley and Morales
Houston mayoral candidate TJ Huntley has "joined forces" with another mayoral candidate--Roy Morales. The two are the only conservatives in the race, and as Huntley explained (via the KTRK political blog):
We all know that this race isn't about me nor any one particular person. To many of us, it is about restoring the morals back into Houston and about having a Godly leadership that promotes Godly morals and principles. Houston is a city that has an abundance of liberal morals and liberal spending. Having two conservatives running in the same race gets very crowded and often when this happens, the two will split the vote when it's time for the elections. ... With this strategic merging of Republican forces, we have a strong army of voters that can take this city back. All the conservatives and Republicans are now combined onto one ticket along with the Christian and the young voters...
Other than Morales' call for the recently enacted sign ordinance to be repealed, neither has offered many specifics on any issue. Overtly injecting religion into the campaign isn't going to play well with voters, but Republicans seem to have a difficult time learning that lesson. I had considered supporting Morales (I was even invited to the opening of his campaign headquarters last weekend) but I am going to have an extremely difficult time doing so not that he has "joined forces" with the crusading Christian.

Gene Locke
The Houston Association of Realtors (HAR) has joined the Houston Apartment Association Better Government Fund PAC and the Greater Houston Builders Association in endorsing Gene Locke for mayor. HAR's announcement stated (via the KTRK political blog):
Gene had the best vision for where the City of Houston is headed and fully recognized the importance that real estate and homeownership play in the overall economic health of the City.
And what is Locke's vision for real estate? His web site states:
Gene... will also protect neighborhoods from unwanted development and work to ensure that any new development is in harmony with current residents’ desires.
Locke is no different from his two main competitors--Brown and Parker. All want to "protect" neighborhoods and appease noisy neighborhood civic groups. And HAR thinks that this will somehow be good for real estate.

Peter Brown
The "Funk Meister" is now claiming that:
Citizens are investors in Houston and we can make government invest taxpayer money wisely by:
  • Exercising fiscal restraint
  • Establishing a Department of Neighborhoods
  • Making city services and government more accessible online
  • Reforming METRO
The last time that I checked, an investor has a choice as to where he invests his money. The city of Houston does not give me an option--I am forced to "invest" my money in whatever boondoggle the city government can concoct. The only honest context in which Brown can call my tax money an investment is if he is running a Ponzi scheme.

Annise Parker
Parker has unveiled her plan to improve the Bureau of Animal Regulation and Care (cleverly known as BARC):
If elected mayor, I will do everything within my power to make sure BARC becomes a humane and adequately funded no-kill shelter.
BARC is hardly the most pressing issue facing the city. Nor is it even a proper function of the government. Since Parker also wants to spend our money more efficiently (I've yet to hear a candidate want to waste more taxpayer money), she could begin by closing down BARC. That would save taxpayers money--which I would consider quite humane--and give her more time to actually run the city instead of worrying about abandoned pets.

As the mayoral election approaches, I get more and more disgusted with the candidates. We are less than three months away from the election, and they continue to offer us little more than vague generalities about "protecting" neighborhoods, increasing government efficiencies, and similar butt kissing. It's too bad that there isn't a viable candidate who actually supports individual liberty.


Mr. Moderate said...

I would prefer the new mayor to spend time on BARC than on other items of no concern to city government, like immigration, foreign policy, etc. Tehre is at least some public health reason to have efficient animal control. I don't really care if BARC is a no kill shelter or not, as long as strays are removed from the streets in a reasonably efficient, and minimal cost, manner.

Brian Phillips said...

BARC is an inappropriate government function and a complete waste of money. The government's only legitimate purpose is the protection of our rights.

If strays are a legitimate threat to our rights--such as a pack of wild dogs--then government's only role is to eliminate that threat promptly.