Big Jolly Politics

politics in Harris County and Texas

Commissioner’s Court to Discuss Circumventing the Heartbeat Law

by

 

In September 2020 there were 4,313 abortions in Texas.  In September 2021 that number dropped to 2,164.  This is because of the Heartbeat law.  Later today Commissioner’s Court is set to take up ways to circumvent the Heartbeat law, courtesy of a request, “responding to the County Judge’s request to investigate opportunities to support individuals impacted by (SB8) or otherwise mitigate the law’s negative effects.”  Judge Hidalgo appears to be paving the way to use our tax dollars to pay to transport women who want an abortion out of state so they can have the abortion.

The “opportunity” not only says pay for transportation, but also for childcare and lodging for those seeking an abortion.

The timing of this action is especially puzzling if it is truly an attempt to combat the Heartbeat law.  Outside of the Supreme Court decision upholding the law as a matter of federal Constitutional law an attack against the enforcement mechanism is being waged in the state courts.  This attack is based on the Texas Constitution, and it recently had some success in Travis County.  The state constitution Article I, Section 13, in pertinent part, reads:

every person for an injury done him, in his lands, goods, person or reputation, shall have remedy by due course of law.

This argument was enough to have a court in Travis County find that parties could not petition the courts for enforcement since they did not have injury.  While the Texas Supreme Court is unlikely to agree the matter will still have to wind its way through the Third Court of Appeals, which will doubtless uphold the judge’s decision.  Even if ultimately unsuccessful, the ruling sets the pattern for judges across the state to temporarily halt the enforcement mechanism until the United States Supreme Court releases the Dobbs decision which will give clarity as to the future of abortion battles.

Judge Hidalgo’s request seems to be laying the framework to support abortion in a post Roe world should Dobbs go against the abortion providers.  This is especially concerning in light of the recent tax rate cut that has impacted the county health initiatives.  Indigent health care in Harris County is above average for the state, but it’s still woefully inadequate.  Every year I have clients die waiting on disability hearings that would be alive if better health care was available.  Rather than spend county resources to help those in need with healthcare Judge Hidalgo wants to spend tax dollars to pay for transportation, lodging, and childcare for those who want an abortion.

In a post Roe world, abortion doesn’t end.  Overturning Roe simply creates a logistical barrier to abortion since many states will still allow abortion.  The only inhibiting factor is how does the mother get to a state that allows abortions.  Judge Hidalgo wants to make sure that our tax dollars are used to overcome this logistical barrier.

The County Party is on the Verge of Becoming Irrelevant

by

I’ve often written about the need to take the high road, focus on winning the person rather than the argument, adhere to the big tent philosophy, or other in general play nice types of articles. See here, here, here, here, here and here.  These posts and ones recognizing good done by others regardless of political affiliation such as Edward Pollard’s food distribution are done for times such as this – to establish the proposition that we are stronger when we work together.  All the chatter of real conservatives, RINO, real republicans, etc is to our detriment.

Right now the party is in the midst of outright disintegration as a cohesive entity, and it any major outside shock would lead us to virtual collapse since we have no leader who can address any major shock involving the party apparatus itself. We are our own worst enemy.  The Democratic Party doesn’t need to push on any big issues locally since they can simply sit back and let us destroy ourselves.  Why subject their candidates to scrutiny on positions when they can sit back and let us dig our own grave?

Chris Bell and Rodney Ellis likely don’t like each other, but you don’t see the dirty laundry aired in public.  That’s reminiscent of when we were winning at the county wide level.  All of our dirty laundry was kept behind closed doors. We, as a party, have to stop this very public fighting if we want to try and salvage any potential of taking back Commissioner’s Court next cycle.

Ramsey winning the seat for Commissioner’s Court is the biggest local race we face this cycle.  If he loses it doesn’t matter if we can find a candidate to unseat Judge Hidalgo next cycle – the democrats will have three of the four Commissioner Court precincts and have control for the foreseeable future.  This needs to be priority number one for the local party, otherwise all is lost countywide.

We have too many factions within HCRP to try and list.  With no effective leader it’s going to take the factions themselves regulating their members to try and bring some sense of cohesion to the party.  We have forgotten we agree on more than we disagree.  Covid and masks will not last forever, but the damage to the local party might.  That’s a touch hyperbolic, but the public warfare will lead to long lasting damage.  There’s the very real possibility that the damage occurring now is going to impact Ramsey’s race.  It also may create enough damage that we can’t come together in 2022 when vulnerable judges are up for reelection.

We have to stop the infighting, and stop now, lest we become an afterthought countywide.  If you think the county is poorly governed on the whole now, just wait until there’s no threat to democratic control on the Commissioner’s Court.  If Ramsey loses the fear of Commissioner’s Court possibly flipping next cycle is lost, and there’s no restraint to the flights of fancy they can push through.

It’s time to call a truce and come together for our own good. If we don’t we are regulated to an afterthought for the foreseeable future.

Are Covid Emergency Orders and Riot Curfews the same?

by

With much of the nation engulfed in race rioting curfews are in place in numerous locations.  One theme the keeps reappearing is that conservatives are inconsistent with their values in that they oppose the Covid emergency orders, but support the curfews in response to the rioting.  While the argument is superficially appealing a closer examination shows there are some distinct differences between the governmental actions.  At the outset, I’ll acknowledge this is comparing somewhat different legal frameworks. To answer the argument I am using riot related criteria: a time, place, and manner limitation, and is the governmental action narrowly tailored to achieve the governmental interest. To narrow the focus I am using Houston as the example since the local officials did a relatively good job controlling the riots.

Rioting

There’s no doubt the government has some authority to restrict assembly. But the rules for restriction are clear. With the riots doubtless some people who are attempting to peaceably assemble had their rights to assemble restricted. Given the sheer scale of the rioting it’s not possible to separate the honest protest individuals from rioters. We have a recent history, too, of BLM suddenly turning from peaceable to not. During the last significant protest they blocked 288, and when someone tried to get through to have an asthma attack treated they were assaulted.  In the current rioting Ashton Woods threw the first punch in a street right. There’s videos of mob activity damaging random vehicles.

While people like to talk in terms of clear and present danger the test is actually imminent lawlessness. Given the recent history of blocking the streets, the current attempts to block the streets, Ashton Woods initiating a street fight, and the ongoing damage coupled with the inability to tell who is peaceable and who is not the imminent lawlessness test would seem to be met and restrictions are appropriate.

With the test met how does the government narrowly tailor the restrictions to meet their concerns? If a riot/peaceable meter were over everyone’s head it would be easy. Set the objective level and restrict. No such meter exists though; so rules of general applicability issue. Although the governmental action was not wholly successful to be fair the failures have not been widespread. This largely successful riot control doesn’t help the poor victims who have had their property damaged, especially since insurance coverage does not cover riots, but from an absolute instance standpoint the amount of lawlessness has been relatively contained. It’s also easy to adjust greater or lesser restrictions so the current restrictions are pretty much on point.  While some degree of lawlessness and damage was tolerated; by and large the situation was contained by a limited governmental response.  This narrow tailoring to the threat posed by the rioters seems justified.

Covid

Now compare that with the Covid restrictions. Is there a governmental interest? To a point. We don’t want the hospitals to be overrun, but we also don’twant to prevent all virus transmission. The stated government purpose was flatten the curve. That’s a misnomer; the goal is to keep the hospitals from being overrun.  In light of the horrors in New York City some form of restrictions are appropriate. The whole it’s my right to go out criticisms fail because, despite complaints to the contrary, there is a governmental interest at stake.

Once a governmental interest is established – and one has been – the question is are the restrictions narrowly tailored to meet the government’s interest. Here’s where the legitimate criticism arises. The hospital capacity is not threatened, and the county spent millions to create unneeded extra capacity. The medical center has been publishing hospital utilization information for the Covid crisis. Three charts tell the tale of the threat posed to the local community.

Texas Medical Center ICU Capacity June 3, 2020

Hospital ICU capacity is not threatened.  On June 3, 2020 ICU occupancy stood at 219 Covid cases and 964 other cases, with 279 remaining unoccupied beds at base levels of capacity.  On top of base capacity the hospitals have a plan for another 1,187 beds if necessary.  We don’t want to see those additional beds become necessary, but at the same time the number of Covid related ICU occupancy could double and the baseline capacity would be able to handle the case load.  With baseline ICU capacity not threatened it’s difficult to justify strict stay at home orders and mandatory masks.

June 3, 2020 is a single snapshot.  What do the historical numbers tell us?  The medical center has been publishing that information also.  The data there is both comforting and concerning at the same time.

Texas Medical Center Covid Hospitalizations June 3, 2020

This graph shows daily hospitalizations with a 7 day moving average.  The graph also notes the Phase I and Phase II openings.  Unfortunately, the graph does  not show data from the initial executive order implementing the stay at home restrictions.  The graph starts with the order extending the stay at home order.  With that order there was a generally quick rising daily hospital admission count at first that was quickly followed by a steadily falling admission count.  Presumably, this is what lead to the phased reopening plan, and is the point where Governor Abbott and Judge Hidalgo’s paths separated.

Hospital admissions are not the only consideration.  ICU utilization is a more important marker to look at since it is where the threat of death occurs.  The medical center has published information regarding this matter.  As you can see in the chart below, the ICU utilization data closely follows hospitalization data allowing for the same conclusions as with hospitalizations.

Texas Medical Center Covid ICU Occupancy June 3, 2020

It’s noteworthy that the current ICU utilization is at similar levels as the high point following the March 31 order Governor Abbott issued.  With the baseline capacity never threatened, and staggering economic harm arising from the restrictions it’s difficult to say the restrictions were narrowly tailored to meet the government’s interest. This is especially highlighted by the fact that the phased relaxing of restrictions has not caused a hospital capacity crisis. The local digging in on we can’t open up yet only magnifies the belief that the degree of restrictions are too broad.

Governor Abbott Should Not Have Implemented Phase III

Just because the data shows that Phase I did not have a detrimental impact on the hospitals it doesn’t mean we can simply say that the need for restrictions are over.  The hospitalization and ICU utilization data both show a slow, but steady, increase in cases since phase II was implemented.  We can’t extrapolate since the utilization is near or at the high point of when the initial stay at home order started dropping. Although the ICU utilization isn’t stressed we also do not see a Phase II rise end.   Prudence says stay the course rather than loosen up.

Sadly, will not be able to have meaningful data for the effect of the Phase III implementation.  Many tens of thousands of people were out in close quarters in the streets over the past week, doubtless including Covid carriers.  A rise in hospitalization and ICU utilization cannot be attributed to either Phase III or the protesting.  The time period and sheer number of individuals in close proximity prevents contact tracing.  We simply can’t know what the etiology of the soon to appear increases.

Conclusion

So, to answer the argument.  Are conservatives being inconsistent in saying Covid restrictions are a violation of rights, but supporting curfews in response to rioting? Yes, superficially, in the sense that some degree of governmental restriction appeared to be needed to respond to a governmental interest. However, that’s a straw man argument those critical of conservatives are raising.  If we raise the steel man version of the argument that the implemented Covid governmental response is not narrowly tailored to meet the governmental interest someone can easily support the curfew and not support the local Covid restrictions that Judge Hidalgo is calling for.

Constructive Criticism of Covid Restrictions Leads to Less Harm

by

In time of crisis we want our political leaders to follow the advice given by the experts. Outside of the stray instance of a politician being a subject matter expert we are better off when impartial advisor’s opinions are followed. However, that doesn’t mean blindly accepting the governmental decisions. A quote from the Philippines succinctly states what we should be doing. (The quote is truncated after the pertinent part is displayed.)

Partial quote on how to properly interact with government officials regarding covid measures.

The sentiment holds true regardless of if the leader is President Trump, Governor Abbott, Judge Hidalgo or Mayor Turner. We need to wish them and their team success; but we also should be vigilant, critique, and make suggestions as appropriate. We are now well into the crisis and enough time has passed to form judgments on how the governmental response is progressing. Also, locally, since Covid testing for asymptomatic individuals is now available the management tools to combat the crisis are different. Now is the time to make suggestions on how to proceed and hope that our elected leaders are inclined to listen and consider well-meaning advice.

I previously posted about my son and pointed out that Judge Hidalgo appears to care more about criminals than her constituents who are hurting. Things are grim. While he has done better than expected he twice had blood pressure crash in the past twenty four hours, including receiving a crying call from Rochelle to get to the hospital at 1:30 AM. This is in the context of the policy in place excluding both parents.  While part of the sentiment criticizing Judge Hidalgo was driven by the situation another part was driven by the fact that, contrary to opinion of many here, she is very smart. She can act to remedy the stressor of parents, not just me but all parents, not allowed to see their hospitalized children.

Governor Abbott’s order restricted the following:

In accordance with the Guidelines from the President and the CDC, people shall not visit nursing homes, state supported living centers, assisted living facilities, or long-term care facilities unless to provide critical assistance as determined through guidance from the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.

And limits and empowers local officials as follows:

This executive order shall supersede any conflicting order issued by local officials in response to the COVD-19 disaster, but only to the extent that such a local order restricts essential services allowed by this executive order or allows gatherings prohibited by this executive order. I hereby suspend Sections 418.1015(b) and 418.108 of the Texas Government Code, Chapter 81, Subchapter E of the Texas Health and Safety Code, and any other relevant statutes, to the extent necessary to ensure that local officials do not impose restrictions inconsistent with this executive order, provided that local officials may enforce this executive order as well as local restrictions that are consistent with this executive order.

The order applies to long term care facilities, but both Texas Children’s Hospital and Children’s Memorial are acute care facilities so don’t fall under the prohibition of the Governor’s order. The local elected officials have the authority to impose local restrictions consistent with the order and can impose what Covid restrictions are in place at the two children hospitals in the medical center.

Judge Hidalgo’s advocacy for releasing criminals was a good legal argument. Bad facts make bad law and that iteration of her decree failed, but the legal underpinnings were solid. She’s getting good guidance about what she can and cannot do. A different iteration of the reasoning can be used to end the fear parents face of not being able to see their children.

Now that Covid testing is available for asymptomatic individuals it’s time for one of our elected leaders to step up and use the power they have to end parental exclusion. Reserve some of the tests that are going to go to asymptomatic individuals and test the parents excluded from hospitals. When they test negative they do not pose a threat to the health of the hospital workers and accordingly do not threaten the integrity of available care. That achieves both the necessary goal of protecting the finite healthcare resources available to treat the Covid crisis as well as serves to ensure that sick children get the best care and suffering parents have their burdens lessened.

We want our leaders to follow the expert’s advice, but also need to take steps to mitigate the suffering imposed by the restrictions. No one can understand all aspects of the crisis; that’s why vigilance, critique, and making suggestions are important. Judge Hidalgo (and also Mayor Turner since the hospitals are in Houston city limits) has the power to continue to preserve hospital resources while easing the burdens parents of sick children are facing.  It’s time to step up and improve the order to achieve the same protective effects while limiting the harm resulting from the order.

Kenshin’s Last Smile

by

Yesterday alarms sound and my wife gives a bloodcurdling wail “Gringo he’s dead come to the hospital!” My son has been in the hospital and I was on the phone with the doctor getting a status update when this happened.  Heart rate zero.  There’s no way to adequately describe the feeling.  Adrenaline surges.  Chest pain.  Cold sweaty hands.  Then nothing.  Absolutely nothing.  Then a wave of utter helplessness.  The closest feeling was in college 20 years ago with a half mile wide tornado bearing down on the dorm and seeing the wind whip 90 degrees and the crushing stillness and silence as the tornado bounced over the dorm.  You want to scream, but while your mouth moves nothing comes out. This is a trillion times worse.  I still feel the adrenaline and have cold sweat dripping down me describing hearing her wail.  It will haunt me until I die.

Right now my son lies in ICU on life support.  But it is almost certain he will die – his brain is swollen, reflexes are absent, brainwaves are slowing, multiple organs have damage. The doctors are cautioning us he may not survive, and absent a miracle that is where we are headed.  Memories of just a couple of weeks ago when he is learning to feed himself, and a year ago of him smiling in delight as I walk to the bassinet to pick him up keep welling up.  With the knowledge that I’ll never see that smile again.  And that his death was preventable.  Because of the Covid scare the hospitals are only allowing one parent present.

She called me concerned that  had developed a fever, his heart rate was increasing, and was showing signs of distress.  I told her go get the nurse and tell them to get the doctor.  That was one in a series of ever increasing desperate calls that I received.  Eight hours later I get a call that he is getting worse and that the doctor has not come to evaluate him.  It turns out that Klebsiella bacteria had escaped from his intestine and into the bloodstream.  Appropriate antibiotic coverage at the onset would have made a difference in the bacteria’s progression.  But the doctor didn’t come in the eight hour span.  Had I been allowed in the hospital the eight hours would never have elapsed without him being evaluated.  Treatment would have begun that night.  Appropriate treatment would have prevented a more concerned call the next night that his fever was increasing.  It would have prevented the 4:00 AM call yesterday that they had to take him to ICU since he was continuing to decline.  It would have prevented the 3:00 PM call when he suddenly had heart rate 0.

All the moments of love will soon be over.  Yes, their shadow will remain as memories, but it’s not the same.  The unknown fear will linger for the next seven months.  Rochelle is pregnant and due in November.  How is this stress impacting the baby she is carrying?  Then there will be the final indignity.  No proper dignified burial.  With the restrictions on gathering and travel it will be just the Priest, Rochelle, and I at the grave.  This is the cost of Covid restrictions.  This is what happens when you have a County Judge that cares more about criminals than the harm occurring from the Covid restrictions.

It’s not from a want of reaching out.  Even suggestions that are aligned with with the emergency order – such as decree that homeowners associations restrictions against working from home are unenforceable – are met with silence.  Not even an bot generated form reply thank you for contacting my office all suggestions will be reviewed and considered.  Silence.  Criminals and power are more important.  Some restrictions are appropriate, but the same results could be achieved with a less restrictive response.  Collaboration, rather than dictating, would achieve Covid containment with less cost.  But that takes someone who is willing to engage and work toward the common good rather than be politically oriented and motivated in this time of Covid crisis.

April 8, 2020.  Happy 44th birthday to me.  My heart races and chest aches as I write this post, and I’ve shed countless tears inserting the pictures.  Every damn one is one more than the tears Judge Hidalgo sheds about the cost of her actions.  If you aren’t a criminal she isn’t concerned.  Elections have consequences.  We are living, and in my son’s case dying, with those consequences.

 

Edit to add: some have suggested that the post is criticizing Rochelle’s actions. That is not the intent. I in no way believe she did anything wrong.