In the interminable crawl to next year's presidential elections, the tiniest of events can become fascinating, (even if it's just to break the tedium.) There's few events tinier than non-binding straw polls, and both Texas Dems and Republicans have had theirs now.

First off, the Republicans had their "pay to vote" straw poll in Houston on Sept. 1, which handed Californian US congressman Duncan Hunter what may be his only victory of the campaign. Meanwhile, on Monday morning, the Democrats announced the results of their wholly unbinding, unscientific and fairly worthless ePrimary, an online exercise in wild surveys. The winner was not as wildly unexpected as in the Republicans: John Edwards, often regarded as the Dem dark horse, won with 37%.

However, the Dems – and especially the Edwards camp – played it smart. The winner's wife, Elizabeth Edwards, turned up for the photo-op. So instead of it being a "remember, folks, this is just for fun" event, it became a stump speech that all the Austin-based print and broadcast media turned up for (and then scratched their heads over how they would turn this into a news item.) By turning this into a bragging rights affair, Edwards may have made the Texas straw poll more useful in their race for the White House than the actual primary may be.

It was Gov. Rick Perry vs Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this past weekend, and the prize seems to be the future of the Republican party.

Perry had been invited to attend the California Republican Party Convention in Indian Springs, CA last Friday. The major thrust was supposed to be Arnie warning the party faithful that yelling for God, Guns and Small Government strips votes away and alienate independents.

So what does Perry do? Play to the base. In a rip-roaring, moderate-bashing speech, he said that the only true Republicans were conservative Republicans, and evoked the spirit of Ronald Reagan. He went after all the traditional targets – global warming, a nuclear middle east, and the specter of a second Clinton administration. He even went after his host, muttering darkly about Republicans that vote and act like Democrats, saying "It’s a sad, sad state of affairs when liberals campaign like Republicans to get elected, and Republicans govern like liberals to be loved. We need to hold the line on what it means to be a Republican which is, of course: being conservative."

So here we are – about to start adoption of the final Fiscal Year 2007-08 Budget for the City of Austin. But, despite there being three days scheduled to do so, odds are your boy won't be typing that long. (I hope not!) The previous couple years were short, sweet and literally scripted; each council member taking turns to announce funds for their pet project, it was like some awesome Christmas morning the kept going.

However, that was then. This budget's been far more politically charged, with council members bucking against the City Manager's preparation. Plus, as she budgeted most of the discretionary spending already under the auspice of "council priorities," there's far fewer scraps to fight over – a move more Machiavellian readers might ascribe to a divide-and-conquer ideology on Futrell's part.

More in a moment.

Sitting behind the AV control-table, I see iTunes running, raising the frightening prospect of a theme song. Last year, when the budget was adopted, the PA started blaring – no shit – "My Future's So Bright (I Gotta Wear Shades)." Guess "My Future's So Bright (I Got no Choice but to go with the Highest Property Tax to Close a $27 Million Gap") was unavailiable.

Kate Alexander suggests the Star Trek theme, bringing this whole endeavor full circle.

Whole gang is finally on the dais. Should start any moment now …

Wynn has called the meeting to order, describing the process. "Lots of input, lots of analysis … Big and complicated."

Items 1 and 2 pertain to the search for a new City Manger - authorizing up to $40,000 for a search to find Futrell's replacement. And it passes …

Read the continuing coverage inside …

Medical insurers can no longer say that some sorts of unpaid insurance claims are the Federal government’s responsibility. On August 31, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that five Texas hospitals can sue health care benefits provider Aetna Inc. directly without having to go through a complicated appeals process.

The hospitals - Christus Health Gulf Coast, Christus Health Southeast Texas, Gulf Coast Division Inc., Memorial Hermann Hospital System, and Baptist Hospitals of Southeast Texas – claimed Aetna had attempted to avoid being sued under state law by using the Federal Medicare Act as a shield. The hospitals did not have a contract with Aetna, but with North American Medical Management of Texas. However, Aetna’s wholly-owned subsidiary NYLCare paid NAMM to provide healthcare under the Medicare+Choice program.

When NAMM was placed into supervision conservatorship by the Texas Department of Insurance in August 2000, they were alleged to have underpaid on 6,000 individual claims for a total of $14 million. The five hospitals sued Aetna in Harris County, arguing that, under the Texas Insurance Code, Aetna was liable for NAMM’s underpayment. Aetna argued that the hospitals would have to appeal each claim fully through the federal administrative system. Initially, the Harris trial court and the Court of Appeals both dismissed the lawsuit, finding they had no jurisdiction. Describing those judgments as turning the Medicare administrative system into a “de facto claims administrator”, the Supreme Court overturned them and returned the case to the trial court.

So while you're stuck in your car, pumping out fumes, keep listening to the radio for the latest campaign against the state's biggest friend to polluters. Eco-lobby group Environmental Defense is to launch a series of radio and billboard ads against Rep. Dennis Bonnen, R-Angleton. He's chair of the House Environmental Regulation Committee, which made more than a few eyes roll when that appointment was announced.

Nicknamed Dennis the Menace, Bonnen is notoriously charmless, bullying and dismissive of any contrary viewpoint in committee (Chronic once saw him lay into Austin City Assistant Manager Rudy Garza for no good reason, and it was ugly.) More importantly, he's got a solid rep for killing in his committee any bill that might put a bigger burden on polluters. As Environmental Defense points out on their website, last lege session 15 bills that would have improved air quality never got past his tender ministries. Meanwhile, Bonnen sponsored a bunch of bills that would have made life easier for polluters, like House Bill 2875, which if passed (which, fortunately, it didn't) would have made "I didn't know it was polluted when I dumped it" a decent defense against litigation.

To catch the ads, go to StopDennisTheMenace.com.

Gov. Rick Perry and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst were doing the rounds of schools in Austin, Houston and San Antonio today to ceremonially sign (i.e. photo-op) Senate Bill 7, the defibrillators in school bill.

SB 7 requires all schools to carry an automated external defibrillator, and have one available at all sporting events. According to House Research Organization stats, 15 Texas students have died of heart attacks in the last 10 years. The fiscal note expects the state will have to buy an extra 11,200 defibrillators: at $1,500 a pop, that’s over $20 million just to buy, never mind maintain and replace. There will be a training program, which is a good thing, because studies published in journals Resuscitation and Academic Emergency Medicine both say even short exposure to an AED increases the ability to use it correctly. The bill also ensures that staff will not be liable in court if they use the paddles.

There would seem to be even less doubt about the medical benefits if the other half of this bill, which introduces heart health examinations for school kids, at a cost of roughly $58 per child. There is to be a pilot program under which six-year-olds will receive a free electrocardiogram and echocardiogram, to look for any possible cardiovascular problems. But there may be a downside. If every child in Texas is being screened for heart conditions, doesn’t this give medical insurers a fantastic opportunity to say, “oops, sorry, pre-existing condition, can’t cover you”?

The House Research Organization put out a list of all 16 constitutional amendments that will be appearing on the November 6 ballot papers. Before you get all excited about the possibility of some new rights (pants back on, nude hitch-hiker advocates of Texas) most of them are basically house-keeping and book-keeping.

First, there’s the money money money, and there’s a lot of bond issues on the table. All bonds have to be approved, and this year there’s a total of $9.75 billion waiting to be released. $500 million of that goes for student loans, so doesn’t actually count towards the state debt limit. Over half the rest – $5 billion – goes on road repairs; $3 billion for cancer research; $1 billion for state agency construction and repair projects; and a teeny-tiny-but-we’d-still-take-it $250 million for water and sewer services for economically distressed areas.
But while bonds may be going out, property taxes may, well, at least go up less. Prop. 3 would limit ad valorem tax hikes to 10% per annum, while Prop. 5 gives cities with less than 10,000 people the power to freeze taxes if they’re applying for certain development grants. Best of all is Prop. 10, which finally brings Texas’ rules on tax breaks for disabled veterans into line with Veteran’s Administration recommendations.

But for anyone looking for a change in the rules of governance, there’s always Prop. 11, written by Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas. This would automatically enter into the journal which way all reps and senators went on a record vote on a bill. This would replace the current system whereby it takes three legislators requesting it be recorded. Keeping track of how the lege votes? Now that’s crazy talk.

Likely looking to cut off controversy before it began, Jennifer Kim started off last week's City Council meeting by pulling an item concerning a new anti-panhandling ordinance off the agenda. Citing a "need to come together and think about this a little more," she deep-sixed the item setting a September 27 public hearing and possible adoption of new, broader rules against solicitation; instead, she asked city staff to instead prepare a presentation for that day, describing "where we are" with respect to current panhandling laws. (Solicitation is currently outlawed in the central business district, encompassing Downtown up to the campus area; also, state laws prohibit panhandling on roadways.) Brewster McCracken, the item's co-sponsor, characterized it as settling old business; after "aggressive" panhandling was criminalized Downtown, he said the ordinance was due to be expanded citywide after the city's second day labor site was opened – presumably after any potential overlap was resolved (i.e., peep the Home Depot parking lot). "Now it's time to move forward," said McCracken.

Six Texas school districts will get a total of just more than $618,000 from the U.S. Dept. of Education to establish random student drug testing programs during the 2007-2008 school year, according to the DOE. And that’s a good thing, White House Office of the National Drug Control Policy drug czar Director John Walters said on Aug. 31 – in fact, the czar was quite “pleased” to share the news. “By providing students with a reason to say ‘no,’ we empower them to resist negative peer pressure and make healthy decisions about drug use,” he said. While encouraging kids to resist peer pressure is always an admirable goal, there is little evidence that tossing federal funds toward the establishment of random student drug testing is actually a means of achieving it. In fact, a January 2003 study on the effectiveness of random testing programs, funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, found no link between testing and decreased drug use. The truth is this: adolescent drug use rises and falls like the ocean – and whether an individual uses drugs appears impacted more by the influence of parents, peers, and mentors than by the ONDCP and its various programs, including the much-derided anti-drug media campaign and the much-hyped drug testing program. The RWJF study data, for example, suggested that, “drug testing, as practiced in recent years in American secondary schools, does not prevent or inhibit student drug use.” Surprise, surprise!