# Texas vs. California



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

why it is better in Texas........

Low-Tax Texas Beats Big-Government California
by Michael Barone

"Stop messing with Texas!" That was the message Gov. Rick Perry bellowed on election night as he celebrated his victory over Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the Republican primary for governor. In his reference to Texas' anti-littering slogan, Perry was making a point applicable to national as well as Texas politics and addressed to Democratic politicians as well as Republicans.

His point was that the big government policies of the Obama administration and Democratic congressional leaders are resented and fiercely opposed not just because of their dire fiscal effects but also as an intrusion on voters' independence and ability to make decisions for themselves.

No one would include Perry on a list of serious presidential candidates, including himself, even in the flush of victory. But in his 10 years as governor, the longest in the state's history, Texas has been teaching some lessons to which the rest of the nation should pay heed.

They are lessons that are particularly vivid when you contrast Texas, the nation's second most populous state, with the most populous, California. Both were once Mexican territory, secured for the United States in the 1840s. Both have grown prodigiously over the past half-century. Both have populations that today are about one-third Hispanic.

But they differ vividly in public policy and in their economic progress -- or lack of it -- over the last decade. California has gone in for big government in a big way. Democrats hold large margins in the legislature largely because affluent voters in Los Angeles and the San Francisco Bay area favor their liberal positions on cultural issues.

Those Democratic majorities have obediently done the bidding of public employee unions to the point that state government faces huge budget deficits. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's attempt to reduce the power of the Democratic-union combine with referenda was defeated in 2005 when public employee unions poured $100 million -- all originally extracted from taxpayers -- into effective TV ads.

Californians have responded by leaving the state. From 2000 to 2009, the Census Bureau estimates, there has been a domestic outflow of 1,509,000 people from California -- almost as many as the number of immigrants coming in. Population growth has not been above the national average and, for the first time in history, it appears that California will gain no House seats or electoral votes from the reapportionment following the 2010 Census.

Texas is a different story. Texas has low taxes -- and no state income taxes -- and a much smaller government. Its legislature meets for only 90 days every two years, compared to California's year-round legislature. Its fiscal condition is sound. Public employee unions are weak or nonexistent.

But Texas seems to be delivering superior services. Its teachers are paid less than California's. But its test scores -- and with a demographically similar school population -- are higher. California's once fabled freeways are crumbling and crowded. Texas has built gleaming new highways in metro Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth.

In the meantime, Texas' economy has been booming. Unemployment rates have been below the national average for more than a decade, as companies small and large generate new jobs.

And Americans have been voting for Texas with their feet. From 2000 to 2009, some 848,000 people moved from other parts of the United States to Texas, about the same number as moved in from abroad. That inflow has continued in 2008-09, in which 143,000 Americans moved into Texas, more than double the number in any other state, at the same time as 98,000 were moving out of California. Texas is on the way to gain four additional House seats and electoral votes in the 2010 reapportionment.

This was not always so. In the two decades after World War II, California, with its pleasant weather, was the Golden State, a promised land, for most Americans, while Texas seemed a provincial rural backwater. Many saw postwar California's expansion of universities, freeways and water systems a model for the nation. Few experts praised Texas' low-tax, low-services government.

Now it is California's ruinously expensive and increasingly incompetent government that seems dysfunctional, while Texas' approach has generated more creativity and opportunity. So it's not surprising that Texas voters preferred Perry over an opponent who has spent 16 years in Washington. What's surprising is that Democrats in Washington are still trying to impose policies like those that have ravaged California rather than those which have proved so successful in Texas.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

No surprise here!


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

Not to minimize all the irritations and complaints about CA, but... As far as public access to state and federal land resources go, according to National Wilderness Institute data http://www.nrcm.org/documents/publiclandownership.pdf; CA has way more public land accessible to individual users for hunting, fishing, and other recreation than TX.

CA: public land (acres) 42,288,380 (% of state total land) 42.4%
TX: public land (acres) 3,216,400 (% of state total land) 1.9%

True, folks are packed in around the coast, but inland areas (where most public lands exist) are quite unpopulated. For the most part, in CA vast public land access is free. In TX it's more likely that one has to pay for a lease.


----------



## ShineRunner (Sep 11, 2002)

API check out my previous post "added below" that may change the usage of a lot of public land if this admins. agenda is emplimented. It has been said before "that can't happen". Don't be fooled it can if the people go to sleep at the wheel. :******: 
It goes back to Plainsman's frog anology. _Put him in cold water and turn on the heat he gets cooked slowly. _

http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=80896


----------



## floortrader (Feb 5, 2009)

See what good all that Ca. open land is when they close it to hunting and fishing. Ca. could solve their problems many ways including oil drilling ( like Texas). They rather save the spotted Owl so when the world forcloses on them let them eat those spotted Owls. :rollin: :rollin: :rollin: :rollin:


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

i would rather live in a solvent state, i can and do go to Kansas for all of my bird hunting, as i refuse to pay for a lease in Texas to run my dogs through rattlesnakes and cactus....small sacrifice to make, plus i get to shoot a lot of pheasants every year.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

ShineRunner said:


> API check out my previous post "added below" that may change the usage of a lot of public land if this admins. agenda is emplimented. It has been said before "that can't happen". Don't be fooled it can if the people go to sleep at the wheel. :ticked:
> It goes back to Plainsman's frog anology. _Put him in cold water and turn on the heat he gets cooked slowly. _
> 
> http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=80896


If (when) changes to public land usage happens (heaven help us), it will happen country-wide. The lesser impact will be in states that have little public land to start with. Rest assured it is being fought tooth and nail in CA just like everywhere else.



> ...They rather save the spotted Owl so when the world forcloses on them let them eat those spotted Owls.


Folks who like to take shots at CA (some are well deserved) sometimes miss the mark in their exuberance...

Spotted Owl habitat ranges from British Columbia to Mexico and eastward to New Mexico and Colorado. The Northern Spotted Owl is in rapid decline with about a 50% annual population loss along the northern edge of its range (northern Washington state and south-western British Columbia). California spotted owl is not considered to be threatened nor endangered by the USFWS. USFWS did decide to designate 8,600,000 acres (34,800 km2) in Arizona, Utah, Colorado and New Mexico as critical habitat for the owl. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotted_Owl

Never-the-less, I have lived my life in OK, AR, TN, VA, and CA. Overall, climate-wise, recreation-wise, hunting/fishing variety-wise, opportunity-wise, and so on, CA is (inspite of all the nay sayers who just watch TV and have never been here) light years ahead of the others.


----------



## floortrader (Feb 5, 2009)

The spotted Owl thing was a joke I don't even know where there are spotted Owls. I do know California is one big joke not all but most prunies are nuts. How all those nuts ended up in one area is beyond me. California land of fruits and nuts. :beer:


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

floortrader said:


> ...California land of fruits and nuts. :beer:


 :lol: 
As opposed To Texas, where ya walk east 'til ya smell it, then walk south until ya step in it. :beer:


----------



## floortrader (Feb 5, 2009)

There are millions of good people in CA, and you are probibly one. But there is no way you can be on this site and stick up for Ca, Nancy Pelosi is a poster child for the state. I'm sorry but it is true. Ca, as a whole is no good for itself and the nation, and that's a fact. Perhaps in a very long while if we don't cut it loose and let it float away it can turn itself around and become a good state. Well anything is possible. Again you can't be on this site and stick up for Ca,


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

floortrader said:


> There are millions of good people in CA, and you are probibly one. But there is no way you can be on this site and stick up for Ca, Nancy Pelosi is a poster child for the state. I'm sorry but it is true. Ca, as a whole is no good for itself and the nation, and that's a fact. Perhaps in a very long while if we don't cut it loose and let it float away it can turn itself around and become a good state. Well anything is possible. Again you can't be on this site and stick up for Ca,


Yer outta yer mind. Pelosi's district is 500 miles from my home and she no more represents folks outside of San Francisco than the man in the moon. Look at a congressional district map and realize just what areas you focus upon. Pelosi, central San Francisco; Henry Waxman, Hollywood-Santa Monica; Maxine Waters, Central LA. My own congressman is Issa who is more conservative than most Texas congress folks. You watch too much TV and see just the liberal weirdos. Actually, it would be good to separate the 13 coastal counties between LA and SF and let the remaining 45 CA counties make their own state. Ya gotta realize that 99% of your heartburn is pointed at a relatively small portion of the state where the dirt bags live. Too many people focus on weirdos that are concentrated in a fairly small area that just happens to be fascinating to the media. But then Texas is the state where they want to replace Thomas Edison in the history books with Famous Amos. :lol:


----------



## floortrader (Feb 5, 2009)

Stop already I'm on your side. I said Ca. as a whole repeat Ca. as a whole. I have heard S Ca was Ok. But as a whole it's a joke.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

floortrader said:


> ...But as a whole it's a joke.


13 of 58 counties are a joke. :beer:


----------



## floortrader (Feb 5, 2009)

(99.9 people on this site are great people I am sure you are part of that. I am also sure you live in a great area, but for my money any state that votes Democrat is No Bueno as a whole and Ca, sure qualifies. Spoke to a guy on an Alaska cruise last year he was from eastor south of San Fran. I mentioned Pelosi he said she was an Embassment. Api more than good luck to you. :beer:


----------



## ShineRunner (Sep 11, 2002)

I have heard about all my life that California is going to slide off into the ocean, maybe it will only be the


> 13 coastal counties between LA and SF


 that API is talking about. :beer:


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

ShineRunner said:


> I have heard about all my life that California is going to slide off into the ocean, maybe it will only be the
> 
> 
> > 13 coastal counties between LA and SF
> ...


That would be just fine. Maybe instead of sliding gradually, they'll go with a big thud. :beer:


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ok.....not to knock on Cali any more than already has.. A friend of mine got back from a trip to AZ. He has the numbers off his check card stolen and people rang up $3000 of charges in 4 days on it. He called the bank and told them. One of the sad things is they asked was....are these Charges in CA. Yes they were. The bank official told him that the bank is thinking of closing down all electronic transmissions with anything in CA because of all the Fraud problems. That would be no credit card transaction, debit card, check card, etc. This is a local bank in the midwest. So that tells you CA is having many problems.

Just thought I would put that out there for people to know so they can keep this in mind if they travel to CA or any state near by. Maybe just use Cash.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

Chuck Smith said:


> ...The bank official told him that the bank is thinking of closing down all electronic transmissions with anything in CA because of all the Fraud problems. That would be no credit card transaction, debit card, check card, etc. This is a local bank in the midwest. So that tells you CA is having many problems.


What's the name of the bank? Electronic transmission fraud is is a nationwide issue. According to 2007 Deposit Account Fraud Survey Report http://www.aba.com/Surveys+and+Statistics/SS_Depositfraud.htm It's way more than a CA problem. It affects every bank in the country big or little (but it appears that the smaller banks are more susceptible to being scammed). And believe it or not, all the scammers don't come from CA. :lol:

1. Survey participants identified signature debit card fraud,customer victimization scams, and fraudulent check deposits as the top three threats against banks' deposit accounts in the next 12 months.

2. Eight in 10 banks (80 percent) incurred check fraud losses in 2006, up from 75 percent in 2003.

3. The total amount of attempted check fraud against banks' deposit accounts reached an estimated $12.2 billion in 2006. Most of the attempts (92 percent) were caught by banks' prevention systems or measures before incurring any financial loss to the bank.

4. On average, 44 percent of a community bank's 2006 check fraud losses could be attributed to organized customer scams. The percentage decreased to 14 percent at the largest banks.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

API.....I know it is a national issue. But this bank pick out CA as where the charges occured. Which out even knowing the account. So what my friend told me is that the numbers get stolen or what ever from the card.....then the main charges are happening in CA. Now that could be a variety of things......the people who stole the numbers could send them to people in CA, people could be buying things off the internet and that place is located in CA, the people who stole the numbers could be in CA, credit card junction points or processing centers could be stationed in CA (people working at these places are stealing the #'s), or CA is so populated that could be the law of averages too.

I just wanted to make the comment so if people are traveling to CA or neighboring states.....watch out and maybe use cash. This is the second time it has happened to my buddy and it is just after he came back from CA or this last time was AZ.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

API.... What ever happened with this.... Did this ever get over turned?

California reels from save-the-minnow ruling

Sep 15, 2007 12:00 PM, By Harry Cline Farm Press Editorial Staff [email protected]

California is shaking again, but earthquakes are not to blame this time for people reeling and rolling.

The shaking is from knocking knees and more recently, forehead slaps of disbelief from the Californians who are responsible for delivering drinking water to 25 million of their fellow countrymen and irrigation water to three million acres of some of the most productive farmland in the world.

Barring unprecedented heavy fall rains, 2007 will go down as one of the driest weather years on record, and was possibly made even drier by a federal district court judge trying to save endangered minnows.

Islands are poking out of half-full reservoirs like creatures from the deep not seen for decades.

Lakes are so low - boat launch ramps are longer than the driveway to Hugh Hefner's Playboy mansion.

Water contractors are as thrilled as a kid in a candy store at the sight of a lone late summer thunderhead over the Sierra Nevada. They close their eyes and wish, as they would on a shooting star, that that thunderstorm is a sign winter will come early - very, very early.

Since January, California has been in an undisputable drought. No significant relief was expected after early spring because as the song line goes - "It never rains in Southern California."

All Californians could do after one of the lowest snow packs in years was wait for fall and winter to see if God would end the one-year drought that followed one of the wettest years on record, 2006. That day of reckoning is at hand, with fall just around the corner and the historical rainy season kickoff day of Thanksgiving less than three months away.

Those knocking knees are now being accompanied by the forehead slaps of disbelief at the ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Oliver Wanger in Fresno, which could restrict water deliveries from the northern to the southern two-thirds of the state - if there is water to deliver - for six months from December until June to save an endangered minnow, the Delta smelt, a species that grows to no more than three inches and never lives longer than a year under ideal conditions.

Wanger ruled pressure from the massive pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (that move water from Northern California to 25 million Californians and three million acres of farmland) endangers the tiny minnow. He has given the state 60 days to come up with a better biological plan to save the smelt than what has been offered so far. In the meantime, there will be no pumping - as the smelt is in danger of being sucked into the two pumping stations operated by the federal and state governments.

Those who want to preserve the smelt say the minnow is a benchmark for the ecological health of the Delta. It apparently has no other benefit to mankind. No one has said it is the only indicator of Delta ecological health.

The judge's ruling stemmed from a lawsuit filed by Natural Resources Defense Council and other so-called environmental organizations which claim the pumps are threatening the endangered species.

Defendants, the State Water Project, the federal Central Valley Project, farmers and others, agree the smelt is endangered. However, they contend the pumps only account for 5 percent to 15 percent of the causes that are affecting the smelt population. Other factors are having greater impacts on the smelt numbers. Defendants contend loss of food supplies and the introduction of foreign plant and fish species into the Delta have dramatically altered the smelt's environment and put it at risk. Criminal toxic chemical dumping into the Delta has killed fish. Defendants also contend sewage is impacting the health of the Delta. In addition, the lack of fish screens on pumps in the Delta is impacting the smelt.

But Judge Wanger did not buy any of those arguments.

In the past, the pumping has been briefly stopped, and water deliveries have also been reduced to protect fish. But the possibility of a longer shutdown is sending ripples of anxiety throughout the state.

Although Wanger's ruling is a one-year deal, it could have a far reaching impact in the wake of the 2007 drought. If there is no significant rain and snowfall this fall, and if that continues into the winter and even early spring, the overall water supply will not be enough to take care of Wanger's minnow and the rest of California.

San Joaquin Valley farmers receiving water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta will see their 2008 supplies cut by as much as 50 percent or a reduction in deliveries by as much as 500,000 acre-feet via Wanger's ruling, according to some experts. This would make Wanger's ruling one of the largest single court-ordered reductions in California water history.

"We knew the judge was going to take away some of our water, but we were holding out hope that he would have given more time to the scientists to continue working toward a science-based solution," said Dan Nelson, executive director of the San Luis and Delta Mendota Water Authority. The authority is a group of 32 water districts that supplies water to farmers covering more than 2 million acres.

"Every farmer in the 3 million acres receiving water through the Delta pumps, and 25 million residents in the Bay and Los Angeles, is at immediate risk resulting from less water flowing to farms, homes and businesses next year," Nelson added.

Reservoirs in the two water systems are dramatically low, most at half of less of capacity now, far below the average for this time of year. The refilling process must begin this fall either from rainfall or releases upstream.

For example, there are less than 500,000 acre feet in the San Luis Reservoir near Los Banos. This is about 150,000 acres feet below the average for this time of year for the reservoir with 2 million acre feet of storage capacity. The story is the same for the other major reservoirs in the system.

"This is the most dramatic cut ever to California water supplies," said Tim Quinn, executive director of the Association of California Water Agencies, which represents more than 400 agencies delivering 90 percent of the state's water. "It is the most significant decision ever made in the implementation of either the state or federal Endangered Species Act. It is the biggest impact anywhere, nationwide."

Jerry Johns, deputy director of the California Department of Water Resources, said the ruling was not as severe as environmentalists wanted, but it was harsh. It will make it difficult to move sold and bought water around the state if the Delta pumps are shut down. Selling and buying water has become far more common in recent years because of a growing population and dwindling water supplies due to weather or changing environmental laws which takes water from people for environmental uses. Much of this water is bought from Northern California, above the Delta pumps.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger called the judge's decision "further proof that our water system is broken, unreliable and in crisis &#8230; a devastating blow to our water system and state economy." He used the decision to once again sell his proposed $5.9 billion comprehensive water plan, which includes $1 billion for Delta restoration and a new system for diverting around the Delta.

Urban water agencies in both the Bay Area and Southern California warned that because of Wanger's ruling that there could be water rationing.

"Even though the judge's ruling applies only to next year, it is still devastating news for our farmers," Nelson said. "Thousands of acres of orchard and vine crops that represent a long-term investment by farmers are in jeopardy. What happens if a farmer is not able to secure a water source to irrigate his crops? It is possible that these crops could dry up and die."

Annual water requirements for permanent crops, including almonds, grapes, pistachios and others in the CVP south of Delta farming region total 500,000 acre-feet or more. The court-mandated reduction in CVP deliveries to farmers means less water for other crops such as lettuce, tomatoes and many other fruit and vegetable crops. Those crops could potentially be fallowed to meet the water needs of permanent crops. A similar scenario would be felt in the entire south of Delta CVP service area.

Nelson explained that the effects of taking water away from the farmers will also be felt in the rural communities throughout the San Joaquin Valley West Side.

"Unemployment will go up if farming is cut back because of a lack of water," he said.

A U.S. Census Bureau study recently listed Fresno, Tulare, Kings, Kern, Merced and Madera as counties with the highest percentage of residents living below the poverty line in California.

"It's ironic and tragic that on the heels of this study that these water cutbacks are taking place," insisted Nelson. "These rural communities rely on their local farms for their financial survival.

"Any cut in the irrigation supply to these farms will continue to damage these communities and they simply can't afford it."

The environmental organizations filing the earlier suit ask for a reduction in 2008 deliveries to as low as zero percent. Other plans submitted by state and federal agencies that oversee the pumping operations had suggested deliveries from 5 percent to 55 percent of contracts.

"In the end, California's rural communities lose, farmers lose and the Delta smelt loses because science pointing to the real problems affecting the smelt populations is being ignored," claimed B.J. Miller, a consulting engineer who has studied the Delta for years.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

Chuck Smith said:


> API.... What ever happened with this.... Did this ever get over turned?
> California reels from save-the-minnow ruling.


This is indeed a serious issue, however, the issue is created by the Federal Endangered Species Act. The fish (delta smelt) just happens to be in CA (it could have been anywhere). In this case the damage to CA farmers is being done by the federal government's (federal court) decision to protect this fish based upon typical federal government bogus science. This is exactly the same sort of issue that folks in Montana and Wyoming have with Timber wolves. CA ain't perfect, but in this case CA is the victim of our buddies in Washington DC.

The battle is still ongoing. Unfortunately, the ultimate solution will be finding a way to work around the federal court since getting cooperation (on any subject) with the federal government is almost impossible. Unless of course one is a knee pad wearing congressman from Ohio... :eyeroll:


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

they just turned the water back on for 2 reps who switched to a yes vote for Obama-care.........that was easy, eh?


----------



## floortrader (Feb 5, 2009)

Its Ca. it's Washinton it's everywhere. It is madness. It is fueled by the majority and those willing to do whatever it takes to foward their agenda. It is the have nots out numbering the rest.


----------



## API (Jul 14, 2009)

hunter9494 said:


> they just turned the water back on for 2 reps who switched to a yes vote for Obama-care.........that was easy, eh?


Yep, there are definitely some whores in congress.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

API said:


> hunter9494 said:
> 
> 
> > they just turned the water back on for 2 reps who switched to a yes vote for Obama-care.........that was easy, eh?
> ...


yup, i laughed my a$$ off watching Dennis "the menace" Kucinich get off AF-1, it looked like the pimp followed by one of his whores!......a little plan ride and some one on one and his vote became yes, but i am sure Odumbo told him Harry Reid was going to press for an amendment for the public option in a couple months.....hang on America, captain Odumbo is taking over the ship and us deck hands will be told what to do like never before.......


----------



## floortrader (Feb 5, 2009)

You say some whores in congress? How about most of them. Congress has left the American people they are off on their own with a new way to get elected. Their new base to get elected is wacko left wingers, barely legal aliens and acorn along with millions wanting a hand out . Yeah it's God damn America bring on something for nothing and pass the Rev Wright.


----------

