Texas Drought

Building Permanent Debt is a blog on EmpowerTexans by Michael Quinn Sullivan. The audience of the blog are all Texans, mainly the ones who are concerned about what is being done to help the drought situation. In this blog Sullivan talks about the “proposition 2” which was brought up by the legislature to get through the drought. This proposition includes a PERMANENT debt of $6 billion which Sullivan clearly disagrees with. Sullivan is not against the loan itself but the fact that this permanent debt will be passed on through generations, and that is something that should concern every Texan. Sullivan says, “let’s have that debate, issue the bonds, do the work and pay them off. Future needs, and future debt to address them, are best handled at future times.” Sullivan supports his standing point by mentioning that the Texas Public Policy Foundation is also against the terms of the “proposition 2.” He also brings up the opinion of a fiscal policy expert, Talmadge Heflin who said that taxpayers can and need to limit how long government keeps them in debt.

Over all I think this was a good blog, but it could use a little more support and links to information sources. I strongly agree with the argument and the side Sullivan takes on this issue. The intentions are good, but what’s the point of fixing one problem by creating a bigger one that will forever.

Debit Card Fees

The author of this commentary is Goudge, a chairman of the board and CEO of Broadway Bank in San Antonio. The audience of this article would be anyone who has a debit card and is concerned with the resent fees that have been added to the use of the cards for purchases. A lot of people including President Barack Obama are in complete disagreement with these monthly fees that are being applied. Goudge argues that banks have a good reason behind charging those fees. He says that “21 cents plus up to an additional 5 cents per transaction does not cover the high costs financial institutions pay to provide secure systems for their customers, including implementing fraud prevention measures, absorbing fraud losses and operating the vast debit card system.” If you don’t agree with the fees there’s always the option of moving you money to a smaller bank or credit union, but according to Goudge that will not be a long term solution. A recent fee survey shows that 91 percent of the credit unions will increase their fees due to the negative impact of regulation. Goudge’s conclusion is that the government is the one responsible for the fees and not the banks. In my opinion Goudge’s article is valid, the fact that he’s CEO of a bank support that he knows what he’s talking about and increases the credibility. On the other hand because of his position people could also think that he’s taking the banks side and is trying to deflect the anger of the customers. I personally disagree with the fees no matter whom or where they’re coming from, but I think Goudge did a good job trying to get his point across.

Disabled Texans face budget cut

The article in the Texas Tribune tells the testimony of one of the many people who will be affected by these cuts. Simple things like music, speech, massages, and physical therapies can be vital to physical and social development of disabled people. NOT only do these services provide  a chance to have a better way of life for the disable. In most cases prevents patients end up in nursing homes or institutions. There are about 48,000 people who benefit from these services and starting Dec. 1, 2011 "the department estimates that the new service caps could affect up to 12,000 people". Budget cuts are something that is inevitable. The question is what can the state do to stay within the budget without affecting so many people?