Once again, I am scratching my head over politics. This time it is over the debate going on in Austin on how much, if any, regulation is placed on facilities that store chemicals like the one in West, Texas.

I understand the argument (but don’t buy into it) that the proposed regulations would overburden the facilities with complexities and cost. It’s an age old consideration that is hard to prove either way, but puts everyone on notice that we could damage the economy.

What I don’t buy is Attorney General Greg Abbot’s stance that the exact location and what is stored should not be made public to safeguard against terroristic threats.

Here’s where the disconnect comes in; he says that anyone is free to inquire with chemical companies on what is stored at their premises and receive an answer within 10 days.

Can you imagine parents walking into a storage plant and asking them if their child’s school is in the “blast zone” (and how would you know if the parents were terrorists)? It is also not clear what, if any punishment would be handed out if the company fails to respond within the allotted time.

To no one’s surprise, candidate Abbot has received several healthy contributions from the infamous Koch brothers, which of course leads to people speculating that they are helping to influence the discussion (not that there is anything wrong with that since no party is immune to being bought).

More than a year has passed since fifteen people were killed, more than 160 injured, and more than 150 buildings were damaged or destroyed in West, Texas. I do understand the need to discuss sensible solutions to complex issues, but knocking on the door at my local storage facility to see what kinds of chemcials they keep and how much doesn’t seem to be one of them.

A funny thing happened on the way to the recent run-off election; the “Official” Tea Party of Montgomery County, better known as the Texas Patriot PAC (TPPAC) got hijacked and now they’re madder than the notorious wet hen.

The TPPAC was founded to organize, educate, inform citizens regarding public policy, and to support the election of local, state and national candidates who share their core values. Those values include upholding the constitution, free markets, limited government, fiscal responsibility and political action.

So why are they so angry? Seems that not all conservatives agreed with them and decided they would go out and form their own Tea Party which caused the TPPAC to cry foul. The TPPAC did not like the fact the other “faux” Tea Parties were trying to fool the voters (a la Dave Wilson implying he was black to win election to the HCC board of trustees).

Ultimately, only 1 of the 4 local candidates the TPPAC endorsed won the run-off.

They posted on their website:

A bunch of people who have never had anything to do with any tea party activity decided to call themselves a Tea Party about a month ago and put out a “Voter Guide” to fool the people, claiming they were a legitimate Tea Party.

This begs the question of what is a “legitimate” Tea Party since there is no official vetting and no national organization that can recognize or deny a local group to call themselves a Tea Party.

The TPPAC went on to say that:

We knew we would likely be outspent by multiples of our capacity to raise funds and decided to apply our efforts through “sweat equity.” 

Now we all know that money talks and has always bought influence in government. Did anyone really think Ted Cruz won simply because the Tea Party knocked on doors or because he spent more than $16 million with nearly $1 million coming from lawyers and law firms. What is ironic is that, on the one hand, they promote free markets, but then complain when the free market outspends them. It truly is a have your cake and eat it too mentality.

Brian Crumby, a Montgomery County Tea Party volunteer and board member has posted numerous messages on the Conroe Courier website lamenting “the way I read last night’s elections is the majority of voters in the county believe in the tea party’s conservative message, but it got hijacked again.” Or in other words, tea party voters are not as smart as they think they are.

I have always wondered what the people who hang out at polling locations, promoting their candidate hope to accomplish. I think its fine to do research and yes, see what different groups including the Tea Party(s) say about various candidates, but if a person still doesn’t know who they are voting for when heading to the polls, they should probably turn around and go home.

Maybe the TPPAC become too big and powerful, maybe they stepped on some toes and made some conservatives upset. What upsets me is that State Sen. Dan Patrick of Houston won the Republican nomination for lieutenant governor receiving votes from only 3.5 percent of registered Texas voters. In the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate, David Alameel of Dallas receiving votes from just 1 percent of the people who can vote in Texas. Sounds like a shadowy mandate to me.

It used to be that the United States of America was the land of big ideas. “We choose to go the moon” challenged us as a nation to leave the bounds of earth and set foot on the lunar surface. Today, America has embraced the slogan “just say no” (tip of the hat to the Republican favorite, Ronald Reagan). We don’t want big government, debt or high taxes.

One of our biggest leaps of faith occurred when the U.S. purchased more than 800,000 square miles from the nation of France. The treaty, commonly known as the Louisiana Purchase, more than doubled the size of the US. Many have claimed this was President Jefferson’s great accomplishment (although many Native Americans may disagree).

It may be hard to imagine today, but not everyone was in love with the treaty when it was being ratified. It was argued by some that Jefferson was a hypocrite owing that he was supposedly a strict constructionist in his views on the Constitution, yet looked the other way in conducting the largest real estate deal.

Others worried “foreigners” who came along with the purchase, were unacquainted with democracy and could become citizens, or that the purchase would be a job killer for the people of the northeast. (Makes the old saying “the more things change, the more they stay the same” even more apropos doesn’t it.)

The House called for a vote to deny the request for the purchase, but it failed by two votes, 59–57. The U.S. ended up using $3 million in gold as a down payment, issued bonds for the balance and the rest as they say, is history.

210 years later, it would be difficult to imagine an America that stopped at the Mississippi river. There would have been no California gold rush, Manifest Destiny and no Alamo to remember; which brings us to today.

Just imagine for a moment a country like Mexico or Canada was up for purchase. How would todays Washington handle such an enormous decision?  Would there be screaming matches on cable news outlets about government over-reach?  Blogs expressing fear of tax increases and rising debt?  Tweets about the concerns on what to do with all the people already living there?  Looking back, the Louisiana Purchase seems like a no-brainer, but putting on the glasses of today makes one pause and wonder if America has the mettle to take such a gamble again.

Anthony Walton once said “America’s greatest strength, and its greatest weakness, is our belief in second chances, our belief that we can always start over that things can be made better.” Think about how we love to tear down a celebrity or athlete only to cheer them again when they make a comeback (Morton Downy Jr. or Ray Lewis anyone?). Maybe it is a character fault, but taking chances is what made us who we are in the first place.

At the risk of stealing from Dr. Martin Luther King; “where do we go from here?” Do we continue to say no to big ideas and not look ahead? Granted, looking at some of our elected officials, that could be the best choice when all is said and done.

It has been a week since America lost a little more innocence when 2 bombs were blown up at the finish line of the Boston Marathon.  3 people were killed, scores more injured and a city was left feeling violated.

While the city (and too much extent, the entire nation) is still is trying to process the tremendous amount of grief, anger and disbelief;  politicians and pundits have already begun to use this incident as an argument against immigration reform.   We need to protect our borders is the common theme expressed by many commentators, and while America does need to carefully determine who it lets into the country, it’s interesting that when it comes to the other tragedy that took place just days later, there seems to be no out-cry for reform.

I speak of course about the catastrophe which took place in a town called West, Texas.   14 people were killed, with more missing and injured.  The cause of the explosion which took place at a fertilizer plant is still under investigation, but a story is beginning to emerge of a company that cut corners and failed to file accurate reports.

Why do we not hear the same indignation from politicians?  Are plant inspections not as sexy as immigration reform in the eyes of their constituents?   Could an already fragile economy be hurt by even more government regulation/interference?  Is it because we care more about a large city like Boston, than we do a small Texas town?  More people died in West, Texas than in Boston, yet very little focus is given to how we can prevent such disasters from happening again.   Are we to just chalk this up to “the cost of doing business”?   Yes; what happened in West, Texas was an accident, and what happened in Boston was intentional, but does that make any different in the end?

There was a lot of debate when the Supreme Court ruled corporations should enjoy the same rights as people when it came to campaign donations.  Perhaps it is time we also hold them criminally accountable for crimes committed in the quest for profits.  Issuing large fines does not seem to get their attention.  Maybe a few months behind bars would.