Yes or No to Proposition 2?

On the Austin American-Statesman website is an editorial entitled 'Just say no to Proposition 2' which is about why Proposition 2 ought to be turned down. Proposition 2 would change the city charter that was put in place about five years ago, and the city will no longer be allowed to offer financial aid to businesses involving retail. The author's main points for being against Proposition 2 is that costly lawsuits would occur and the city would be restrained on new businesses flourishing. In addition, the amendment would make the city "break its promise" and a contract would be violated. Brian Rodgers is a business owner in support of this proposition but throughout this article he is made to sound like he is just holding a grudge from years ago.
This article is aimed toward all Austin voters who have not yet voted and plan to. The author is obviously against Proposition 2 and plays off the reader's fears in order to make a point. For example, saying that there WOULD be lawsuits isn't an accurate statement since the author is only assuming there would be. Personally, I am torn on the topic of Proposition 2 because I've heard the term so often and yet knew so little about what it actually entails. Even when researching it to try and find out more, it's difficult to try and weed through the opinions of everyone and get down to the facts. I would think that if Proposition 2 were passed, then taxpayers would know where their tax dollars are going to. Honestly, there are still a lot of questions that were left unanswered for me after reading this article....

Sticking With Incumbents?

Browsing the Austin American-Statesman, I came across an opinion-based article entitled 'Texas House of Representatives: Stick with incumbents for Austin House seats'. This article's main point is made clear through the title: don't vote in new house representatives and stick with what we've already got. The author outlines Districts 47, 48, and 50 which make up parts of Travis County. Based on the evidence given throughout the article, the author has an obvious bias toward the current district representatives who happen to all be Democratic. If you look closely at this piece of writing, the author provides weak details concerning their reasoning for the incumbents that they favor. One example is Democratic incumbent Valinda Bolton in District 47 up against the Republican Donna Keel. The only argument the author makes against Keel is that she is undecided about “supporting House Speaker Tom Craddick” when apparently they have “close ties”. In my opinion this shouldn't be a breaking factor for a candidate, and the reader ought to stop and see this sort of reasoning as something to weed out. In the separate section concerning District 48, Donna Howard who is the current Democratic incumbent is vaguely described in one paragraph and portrayed as what I would see as too perfect. Republican Pam Waggoner has one brief sentence mentioning her as owning an insurance company but that it “may not be her year.” Overall, this article includes some elements of facts about the representatives, but is highly altered to appear as make or break factors in who the readers should consider. The author makes it very clear that they favor the Democratic incumbents and even states that we should “stay with the incumbents.” I'd say this article is supposed to appeal first off to other Democrats who may be uninformed on the House incumbents and are planning on voting. It could possibly be directed toward Republicans also but if so, there definitely should have been more factual information and less personal opinions. I respect the author's decision to express their opinions through the statesman, however I don't agree with the reasoning and the points seemed very close-minded. Overall, if his or her goal was to persuade the general audience, it didn't work for me.


"Texas House of Representatives: Stick with incumbents for Austin House seats." 18 Oct 2008 21 Oct 2008

Maldonado vs. Daniel

Searching through local news pages, I came across an article entitled "Williamson County state house race could shift political power" under KVUE's news section. This shift mentioned would be from the usually Republican Williamson County to possibly turning Democratic. The Democrats need to take five more seats around the state in order for this to be accomplished. Diana Maldonado represents the Democratic party, with Republican Bryan Daniel running against her in order to replace Rep. Mike Krusee in the Texas House. Both have completely different priorities on important issues: Maldonado sees public education as number one, Daniel is worried about property taxes. If basing the race on the financial reports, one might think that Maldonado has full advantage over Daniel seeing as he's approximately $259,000 behind the Democratic campaign. However, the reports aren't necessary indicative of upcoming outcomes seeing as House District 52 has been known for choosing Republican candidates. The article quotes Maldonado as saying that "Democrats in Williamson County do remain the underdogs" but the volunteers at the Williamson County Democratic Headquarters are dedicated in gaining support and helping other democrats and undecided voters. I found this article very informative because I learned more about the seats of the Texas House and what steps must be made for a political change to possibly occur within our community. Moreover, the information found in the writing is very easy to understand and straightforward which was enjoyable! Definitely worth a look in my opinion.


Hu, Elise. "Williamson County state house race could shift political power." 10 Oct 2008 10 Oct 2008