Drug violence....

What should the United States do about the cartel violence that threatens both the security of the United States and the Stability of Mexico?  The drugs are being sold in the U.S. with the profits going into Mexico.  We are responsible so what should our actions be?  Something would be preferable to nothing, which is all we seem to get now.

Calderon: U.S. help in drug war is 'insufficient'

Mexican President Felipe Calderon says U.S. cooperation in the fight against drug cartels has been "insufficient."
Calderon says the United States should help by reducing drug use and stemming the flow of automatic rifles to Mexican drug cartels.
Calderon tells the Mexican newspaper 'El Universal' that relations with the United States were strained when secret U.S. diplomatic cables criticizing Mexico's anti-drug strategy were leaked to the public.
Calderon said in the interview published Tuesday that some of the leaked cables show U.S. diplomats' ignorance about Mexico's security situation, and that that's why some reports distort or exaggerate.
More than 35,000 people have been killed since Calderon launched a crackdown against drug gangs in December 2006.
The statements came on the same day that family members buried slain U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent Jaime Zapata.
The Brownsville native was killed in the line of duty in the State of San Luis Potosi where another ICE agent was also wounded in the attack.
No suspects have been officially identified or arrested in the attack.

ARTICLE LINK

Save Texas Schools

SAVE TEXAS SCHOOLS

Cartel Violence

The Mexican drug cartels have shown that they can reach and kill almost anyone.  The DOD/State Department has declared Mexico to be threatened as a nation. The DOD is concerned that the legitimate government of Mexico will fall because of the rise of the cartels.  The cartels are running many parts of the country.  What can be done about it?  What is the response of both Washington and Austin?  The threat is very real.  Texas as a border state is threatened but it is not limited to Texas. The drug cartels have member and influence throughout the United States.  There have been major busts in Georgia to California.  The threat is real... this cannot be stated enough.


The majority of the cartels profits are marijuana so when marijuana does kill!!!! This one fact changes the whole decriminalize argument about marijuana.

Statement from ICE on death of agent Jaime Zapata

WASHINGTON - U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent Jaime Zapata was shot and killed in the line of duty Tuesday afternoon after he was attacked by unknown assailants while driving between Monterrey, Mexico, and Mexico City.
During the attack, a second ICE special agent was shot twice in the leg. He has been transported back to the United States and is in stable condition. Both special agents were assigned to ICE's attaché office in Mexico City.
"Our thoughts and prayers are with the Zapata family for their tragic loss," said ICE Director John Morton. "May the work we continue to do as an agency be worthy of a sacrifice as great as the one made by Special Agent Zapata."
Special Agent Zapata joined ICE in 2006. He was assigned to the Office of the Deputy Special Agent in Charge in Laredo, Texas, where he served on the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Unit as well as the Border Enforcement Security Task Force.
He most recently was detailed to ICE's attaché office at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City.
Special Agent Zapata began his federal law enforcement career with the Department of Homeland Security as a member of the U.S. Border Patrol in Yuma, Arizona.
A native of Brownsville, Texas, Special Agent Zapata graduated from the University of Texas at Brownsville in 2005 with a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice.
U.S. law enforcement agencies continue to work closely with Mexican authorities who are investigating the shooting to ensure the perpetrators of this unconscionable crime are captured as quickly as possible. The full resources of the Department of Homeland Security are at the disposal of our Mexican partners in this investigation.

 ARTICLE LINK

23 cartel members dead, 31 arrested, Mexican military says

REYNOSA, MEXICO — Twenty-three alleged cartel members were killed this past week, while 31 others were arrested, according to a news release from the Mexican military.
Officials from the military’s 8th zone, which includes Reynosa, did not specify how or where the alleged criminals were killed. They simply noted the deaths and listed items collected during a seven-day span from Feb. 5 to Feb. 12. The names of the dead were not released.
Soldiers seized more than 11,000 pounds of marijuana, more than 2,24 pounds of cocaine and a small amount of crack cocaine, according to the release. They also recovered 76 “long guns,” 10 handguns, 11 grenades, three grenade launchers and one grenade launcher attachment.
More than $75,000 in both U.S. and Mexican currency was seized, along with 42 vehicles, two of which were armored, officials added.
Soldiers also obtained two tractors, two bullet-proof vests, four cell phones and nine radios.
No other information was provided.

ARTICLE LINK

Both Ways?

I guess the gov. wants to be the leader in non-business regulation while at the same time imposing hefty taxes on Amazon.  He needs to decide which way he wants it. Is he for no regulation or is it only because of the budget crunch?

Amazon closing Texas center over sales tax fight

AUSTIN (AP) — Online retail giant Amazon.com will close its suburban Dallas distribution center after a dispute with the state over millions in state sales taxes.

The Associated Press obtained an e-mail Thursday sent to Amazon employees by the company's vice president of operations. Amazon's Dave Clark writes that the center will close April 12 due to Texas' "the unfavorable regulatory climate." It was not immediately clear how many employees work at the facility.
Last year the Texas comptroller's office demanded $269 million in uncollected sales taxes. Amazon subsequently filed a lawsuit against the state, demanding it produce the audit that generated the figure.
The state contends that Amazon.com is responsible for sales taxes not collected on online sales in Texas.
The company has been the target of numerous lawsuits filed by states seeking sales taxes on online purchases.


ARTICLE LINK

Perry moves to restake his ground on eminent domain Governor proposes constitutional amendment after having vetoed 2007 legislation.

Gov. Rick Perry moved Thursday to quiet grumblings that he isn't protecting private property rights, suggesting that the state constitution forbid the acquisition of land for nonpublic uses through condemnation proceedings.
His support of the amendment lets Perry play offense on the issue of eminent domain, but for some, it doesn't go far enough. The constitutional amendment would not address key tenets of 2007 eminent-domain legislation that Perry vetoed over the objections of the Texas Farm Bureau and some others who have previously supported him.

Harry Cabluck/ASSOCIATED PRESS (enlarge photo) Gov. Rick Perry, with ally Sen. Robert Duncan, wants to prohibit condemnation proceedings to acquire land for nonpublic purposes. Harry Cabluck/ASSOCIATED PRESS (enlarge photo) Susette Kelo, lead plaintiff in a case in which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld taking private property for economic development uses, backs Gov. Rick Perry's eminent domain proposal.

Property rights were already a touchy issue for Perry because many rural Texans see his ambitious transportation plan — once dubbed the Trans-Texas Corridor — as a threat to their land. The 2007 veto widened an opening for U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is likely to challenge Perry in the 2010 Republican primary, to criticize him. "Our state government ignores private property rights," she said in a recent fundraising appeal.
The constitutional amendment would seek to strengthen a bill that lawmakers passed overwhelmingly in 2005 to bar the acquisition of land for private use. The legislation was a response to a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that year that a government can transfer land from one private owner to another for economic development purposes.
"Unless we take action on these protections, private property rights in Texas will begin to erode and undermine the very character of our state," Perry said.
But the 2007 bill that he vetoed — House Bill 2006 — dealt with other issues related to condemnation proceedings, including the question of "diminished access," which has been a point of disagreement between Perry and some of his historic allies.
State law says that a property owner can be compensated for diminished access if condemnation proceedings substantially decrease the owner's access to roadways. The legislation that Perry vetoed would have made compensation possible for "any diminished access," and Perry said it could result in taxpayers paying large sums to landowners who still had most of their access intact.
For the Farm Bureau, diminished access is crucial. Though Kenneth Dierschke, the group's president, cheered Perry for supporting a constitutional amendment, he said, "any eminent domain reform must also address fair compensation and consider all factors between a willing buyer and seller — especially diminished access."
The Farm Bureau, which represents 422,000 Texas agricultural families, could provide a critical endorsement in the 2010 primary.
Perry spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger said Perry does not think lawmakers should revisit the issue of diminished access. "He thinks that many elements of the original HB 2006 should be addressed again this session and looks forward to working with legislators on getting those passed," Cesinger said.
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said Thursday that he'll work for an eminent domain bill that is similar to the one that Perry vetoed.
"I do know that the governor would like to reach a consensus on the bill, and I for one stand ready to play shuttle diplomacy," Dewhurst said.
As for the constitutional amendment, it would provide a clear definition of public use and balance out the Legislature's historic tendency to freely grant eminent-domain authority, said Sen. Robert Duncan, a Lubbock Republican who is working on it.
"The purpose of a constitutional amendment is to require the Legislature to provide more scrutiny in its grants of eminent domain authority and also allow property owners the ability to defend their property," Duncan said.
Duncan said he expects a robust debate about the definition of public use.
Part of that debate could center on how highway construction is defined when private companies are heavily involved in the roads' financing — a key pillar of Perry's transportation plans.
"In Texas we understand the concept of having as a last resort the process of eminent domain to build our schools, to build our roads, to make sure we have electrical power to drive our economy," Perry said.
jembry@statesman.com; 445-3572

ARTICLE LINK

We can't afford to cut education

No one envies our governor and state legislators as they set to the daunting task of trying to figure out how to close the state's biennial budget gap that some estimate is as high as $27 billion.

For the good of our state and our future, I urge them to do everything they can to protect our students.

However, not all the challenges facing our schools are about shrinking budgets. The education of our children is a partnership — a partnership among the schools, the parents, businesses, churches and the rest of the community.

Right now that partnership is failing. Our schools are in crises:

•  We rank 36th in the nation in high school graduation rates. An estimated 3.8 million Texans do not have a high school diploma.

•  We rank 49th in verbal SAT scores, 47th in literacy and 46th in average math SAT scores.

•  We rank 33rd in the nation on teacher salaries.

•  Despite our outstanding universities and colleges, we also lag behind in several critical higher education criteria. For example, California has nine nationally recognized research institutions, New York has seven and Pennsylvania has four. With the University of Houston's recent designation by the Carnegie Foundation as a top research institution, Texas, the second largest state, has four.

In light of these statistics, can we afford to cut the number of teachers, increase class sizes, eliminate scholarships for underprivileged students and close several community colleges?

At a time when the United Way estimates that the price tag for dropouts to Texas taxpayers is $9.6 billion every year, can we really afford to cut state funding for our students?

The answer is a resounding "no."

Yet, everyone understands that Texas must and will live within its means. Nobody is going to get all that they want. Which is why it is imperative that all of us take steps right now to help our schools address their immediate and long-term needs. We cannot afford to sit and wait for Austin to figure this out. They cannot do this alone.

Let's start with the parents.

Some parents forget they are their children's first teachers, and the home is the first school. When our kids come home from school, do they read a book, or do they sit glued to the television or the Internet? Do they see us reading? Do we eat together, or does everybody "grab a bite" and dash out the door? Do we talk and listen? Do we help with homework? Are we active in the PTA? Do we make sure we attend all parent-teacher conferences, or do we use work as an excuse to skip out occasionally? It's easier to be a lazy parent than a good parent, but with parenthood comes responsibility and accountability.

Many parents face daunting challenges - health and financial issues, single parenthood, or a poor educational background. They need our help.

There are wonderful programs such as Big Brothers and Big Sisters that try to make sure every student who needs one has a mentor. I know several business and government leaders who donate one lunch hour a week to tutor a student, and others who give time to after-school programs. But the need is always greater.

That is why business and church leaders, parents and grandparents, friends and neighbors all must become partners in the education of our children. The best place to start: The school you likely drive by every single day on your way to work or the grocery store or the golf course. My guess is the people inside could use your help.

I wish each of you - every elected official, parent, educator, businessmen and women - would see the documentary Waiting for Superman. That film explains in vivid, powerful terms what is at stake for our nation's schools, including Texas.

There is cause for hope. A reform movement under way in the country is gaining momentum. We must find the courage in Texas to not only join that reform movement, but lead it. There really is no other choice.

We Texans are no strangers to hard times, and yet there is more can-do spirit here than in any other state. We think big, live big, dream big. We wake up every day believing there is no problem that cannot be solved.

Working together, we can and must solve this one.

Bush is a former first lady of the United States.

ARTICLE LINK

Electricity debacle bearing down on Texas unless ... Legislature must empower PUC to protect consumers

It's time to admit "the emperor has no clothes." Electricity deregulation has failed to lower utility bills, as was originally advertised. The Texas Legislature should immediately give our Public Utility Commission more power to protect Texas' economy and consumers. Without improved regulatory authority, we risk the type of instability that devastated California.
TXU's actions highlight the need for more accountability to independent, expert regulators. Texas' biggest utility raced to obtain permits for 11 coal-burning power plants, which would emit tons of mercury and other pollutants into Texas' air. After the company claimed "fast track" approval was needed to avoid blackouts, TXU changed its course, announcing sale of the firm to private investors, with large stock options given to the president.
Texans depend on reliable, affordable services such as water, transportation and electricity to plan budgets and create a strong and stable business climate. That is why Texans across the political spectrum supported public ownership or strict regulation of these services for a century.
With the benefit of hindsight, the basic factual assumptions behind deregulation have long proved to be wrong, as most industry experts at least privately acknowledge.
Firms, led by Enron, claimed deregulation would lower prices because: (1) new natural gas-fueled power plants could generate clean electricity at substantially lower costs than the average price of the older plants; and (2) consumers would shop around. Regulated utility monopolies feared and fought deregulation based in part on the same assumptions.
The 1999 deregulation legislation "split the baby," with old utilities getting paid extra by consumers for their older plants, and the PUC losing all authority over retail prices in January 2007.
However, since 1999 the economic reality changed completely. Higher costs for gas turbines and natural gas have made clean new power plants much more expensive to build and operate than the older plants. In addition, consumers — particularly lower-income families and seniors struggling to get by — have stuck with their old suppliers even at higher prices, partly because of fear of change. So, many who can least afford it now pay the most.
These changes altered completely the impact of deregulation. As any first-year economics student knows, market pricing will be lower than prices based on average costs when the cost of incremental supply is less than the average costs. In contrast, prices based on "what the market will bear" will be higher if the cost of the incremental supply is higher than the average historical cost of all supply.
Guess what's happening. As with the case of some of its accounting, Enron's idea sounded good, if it weren't for the reality.
Wall Street investors know how to profit from Texas' deregulation scheme. The largest plants serving the Houston region have already been both bought and sold twice, at enormous gain. Now, electricity consumers throughout the state have been forced to pay billions of dollars to the old utilities for those power plants based on the false assumption that deregulation would make them less valuable. (We have been fighting this absurd payment in court.) And consumers of municipally owned utilities in cities such as Austin and San Antonio, which were exempt from deregulation, get fairer and more accountable rates.
Texas must learn from California's mistakes. Consider what we found when I served on an expert commission that warned of the California power fiasco in 2001. Like Texas, California had previously regulated power prices based on the average cost on investments. This historical regulation also incentivized spare capacity and energy efficiency as insurance against blackouts or extraordinary spikes in the prices. But after deregulation in California, as now in Texas, no one had the authority and responsibility for ensuring that retailers secured enough supply in advance. So those outside California and the municipally owned utility in Los Angeles locked up the power in the region, and the state found itself more than 10 percent short going into the summer of 2001, and facing either massive blackouts or "take it or leave it" prices. The transmission companies went bankrupt and, to avoid blackouts, the state had to borrow tens of billions of dollars, destroying its credit for a generation.
Of course, we can't put the market back to where it was before 1999, where old power plants have been sold to new owners at higher costs, and competition can have some benefits. But our Legislature should give the Public Utility Commission the authority to:
•Determine the adequacy of base and peak power supplies that have been contractually obligated at predictable prices to those selling power to consumers, and provide regulatory incentives as needed to secure standby capacity to meet peak summer power requirements.
•If necessary, provide cost-based incentives to obtain clean power, an authority which was used successfully several years ago when Reliant and others invested heavily to reduce smog-related emissions from their facilities.
•Establish maximum levels of debt acceptable for transmission and distribution companies, those maintaining the wired "grid," so that they make needed investments to make power delivery efficient and reliable.
•Set rates for transmission and distribution to ensure adequate cash flows available to make needed investments, regardless of weather or the volume of power usage.
•In the absence of an adequate fund to ease the burden on low-income consumers, which was originally promised, establish regulations to ensure that retail rates actually paid by low-income consumers do not exceed the average rates paid by all others.
•Review and approve any corporate reorganizations, with rules to reduce long-term risks to public interests, such as avoiding excessive debt on retail or transmission providers or concentrating ownership of power supplies in too few hands. The rules need not dictate who owns utilities.
•Report back to the next Legislature on any other changes that should occur in the regulatory structure to allow Texas businesses and consumers to have affordable, clean, reliable power.
The Legislature can outline required objectives and give our independent regulators the responsibility to fine-tune, using its access to expert staff and procedures for open public hearings and appeals. The Legislature is in session. Utility rates are pressing Texas' families and businesses. California showed the risks. Our state must define the conditions for the TXU acquisition. The time to act is now.

ARTICLE LINK

Grenade explosion reported near B&M bridge

Officials are on alert following reports of a grenade explosion near a popular hotel near the B&M International Bridge in Matamoros.
Residents reported a grenade explosion reportedly near Best Western’s Hotel Residencial off Alvaro Obregon Boulevard around 8 p.m. Monday.
Mexican authorities told Action 4 News that they were sent to the area to investigate.
A person at the hotel, whose identity if being withheld, said he heard a noise nearby but did not believe the hotel was attacked.
Brownsville residents in a neighborhood near the B&M bridge reported hearing explosion followed by a Mexican helicopter flying the sky.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) spokesman Eddie Perez said American officials received a report about an incident in Matamoros.
Customs officers are on alert but Perez said all three of the international bridges between Matamoros and Brownsville are open in both directions.
Perez said customs officers in constant communication with their counterparts in Mexico and are waiting for more information.

ARTICLE LINK