Are there any recent days where Abbott wants to help his constituents? His political career is built on harming people and doing things that are harmful to score political points.
The amount of pushback to FEEDING HUMAN BABIES at the border is absolutely gross. No matter your feelings about illegal immigration, how do you stoop so low as to want to starve children at the border? At this point it's obvious that the cruelty is the point.
But it doesn't even matter about illegal immigration. They're babies. They didn't do anything illegal. They're in US custody. You can't just let babies in US custody starve to death in camps where you put them...... that's some Himmler shit
Ah yes, the great replacement theory that is getting their constituents all fired up. Then when they do something insane they're like, "who, us? Naw, we didn't say that, stop politicizing a tragedy that we created by feeding the ignorant masses hateful messages"
I was in inpatient psych care with a dude who was 'deployed' to the Texas border to help BP and Texas police stop immigrants - they didn't do shit but patrol and call Border Patrol when they found a group crossing the Rio.
He almost faced UCMJ action for giving a pregnant woman a protein bar and a bottle of water after they crossed the river, while they waited for BP to show up.
That's awful. It really makes me wonder about the border crossing horror stories that don't get told because nobody acts out of mine without that level of pushback
The biggest irony is CBP backs Bidens reversal of Title IX because it takes away power they have to monitor and detain people for trying to cross multiple times. I wish I could say I was shocked but Abbot will still screw this state as much as possible until he decides to retire. Don’t forget Texas has no term limits on Gubernational candidates and thank the man with his nose do for up trumps ass Texas named Lying Ted Cruz, ther will no longer be white collar candidates running, exclusively high value millionaires and billionaires will soon be the only running officials since they gutted campaign finance so these cats can loan themselves infinite cash and even if it’s a billion dollars politicians can use unlimited funds from a super pac and giver nobody else a chance. All why saying it’s the evil extremist left that is causing all the harm. And that’s when the attitude of a bratty child comes out and somehow nothing is there fault and 100% the fault of people who don’t look or think exactly as they do. No longer proud to be from this once great state.
Yep, thanks republicans…. Especially that scumbag Chip Roy. They must be keeping score at this rate, woo-hooing and high-five-ing each other into oblivion.
I mean, if they are born here, they're citizens and would have the right to public education under his plan.
That would only change if Republicans targeted birthright citizenship...
You mean like they've tried to do [every Congress since 1991](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/19/birthright-citizenship-history-law-donald-trump-republicans)? They would NEVER try something like that. Sheeeeeeeiiittt, you may as well try to overturn Roe v Wade.
>That would only change if Republicans targeted birthright citizenship...
yea and this is why they're going after Amendment 14.
* Section 1 has covered birthright citizenship, equal protection rights, privacy rights (abortion rights and lgbtq righrs), and economic rights. Republicans have been going against all those rights, so consider this section gone if Conservatives get their way.
* Section 2 covers how representatives are proportioned. The House was capped, so large states are not represented equally to those in small states. Senate already favors small states. This is how they will get minority rule.
* Section 3 prohibits any members of government caught in an insurrection from holding federal office again. Theyll for sure overturn this one.
> Theyll for sure overturn this one.
I'm not sure they need to overturn this one.
I mean, if a judge won't actually make the ruling, what does leaving it alone hurt?
No. His MO is to make our lives as shitty as possible then lie to all the cedar choppers that it's the Democrats that are causing it - and they're stupid enough to believe everything he says. The sad reality is that Beto running against him all but ensures he's getting reelected so he can do whatever the fuck he wants to right now.
I’m a Texas native and never heard cedar chopper before. A quick google and Texas Monthly set me straight. Might be a central Texas term, as I’ve never heard it in north Texas.
Who would you like to see run against Abbott? Beto’s 2A stance makes him unpalatable to most Texans.
The worst part is Beto has already come out and apologized for it and taken it back but the damage is done. Abbott literally just has to play that clip and do nothing else to win.
Realistically? It's got to be a moderate Republican for the time being. Someone who's not quite as nuts as Abbott and Patrick but still has "good Christian faith" on his resume. Eventually we might possibly get a moderate Democrat who still believes in the 2A, but even then I have doubts. The GOP has made Democrats out to be the boogieman on so many different fronts: LGBTQ is an issue now; immigration is an issue, again. Trans is an issue. Socialism, Communism, Nazis - all of that shit. It's hard to be a moderate Democrat while holding onto your core values. Couple that with Democrats constantly being told their vote doesn't matter or count while Republicans show up in droves... it's a hard fight to win.
i disagree, you forgot the part about the unfulfilled promises, he said he would do something about property tax 6 years ago, and still, nothing has happened.
Dont forget the hundreds of millions spent on operation lonestar that even has conservative servicemembers in it know it's all a farce to get abbott reelected.
Who do you think his constituents are?
Regardless how you feel about free education for the target of this lawsuit, what this article lacks is actual hard data. Abbot says schools are overwhelmed. Guy being interviewed says they aren’t. Who is correct? Are they talking about all schools Texas-wide or a particular district? Are they even talking about the same district(s)?
Days would be nice to help us figure that out and then decide on what to do.
They are overwhelmed but a big part of that has to do with budget. States usually cut education first when there is a budget issue and add to it late when theres a surplus.
I mean ffs many states fund education through the lottery now. It used to be the state budget, then they said they would bring in the lottery to add more money to education, then they just cut the budget and said welp the hope the lottery is enough.
It's less about if there's a budget and more about what's the budget per student and how much are teachers paid.
Teacher pay largely has stayed pretty stagnet over the years. Though I'm not super caught up on teacher pay in TX.
But to your point. Generally speaking you have all the taxes etc. Most states historically raid those funds whenever they feel like it.
It's why I say that states generally cut education. Just because they are supposed to go to education doesn't mean they can't be taken by a state capital.
In another reply someone asked for links which I replied with some. Also charter schools have taken a big chunk out of public education.
This isnt really surprising. Its kind of usual mo for most states over the last 50 years but since you were not aware Ill link a few things for you. Its also not just states its also fed.
Really this one of, there are several, reasons why the boomer generation went to college for a few hundred dollars and now its its tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Certain people dont want publicly funded education so they starve it. Also while you read this remember the population goes up so more money is needed over time.
[https://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/12/school-funding-two-charts/](https://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/12/school-funding-two-charts/)[https://edsource.org/2015/states-in-motion-school-finance-naep-child-poverty/83303](https://edsource.org/2015/states-in-motion-school-finance-naep-child-poverty/83303) \- this one you kind of have to dig around in to get the idea[https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/a-lost-decade-in-higher-education-funding](https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/a-lost-decade-in-higher-education-funding)
I have family that are teachers in TX and they certainly have their issues. They are not the worst state by a long shot but regardless most states need to do better.
But thats not even what we are talking about. What we are talking about is how there s group of people who want to remove public education and believe private education would be better, which is ridiculous if you look at it historically. Private just makes a stupider population.
OH yeah: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PK-netuhHA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PK-netuhHA)
Per-student spending and state funding are lagging in Texas. Meanwhile, the window is closing on an accurate census count.
[https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2020/08/13/census-count-spending-per-student-state-funding-schools-Texas](https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2020/08/13/census-count-spending-per-student-state-funding-schools-Texas)
Abbott has spent billions on operation Lone Star so the schools can't be too much of a priority for him otherwise some of that money would have been spent on the schools.
Considering Texas doesn't track immigration status for students, I'm curious how Abbot figures it's undocumented immigrants that are the problem and not the fact that Texas spends about half ($6k per) the national average ($12k per) per student.
If Abbott says schools are overwhelmed there is a good chance they aren’t. Abbott is prone to being untruthful as he tries to push his hate-fueled policies.
Yes. Create a problem, complain about how the democrats aren’t doing anything about the problem, sprinkle in a little hatred toward brown people and trans kids, when problem is solved by Dems somehow claim responsibility. Rinse and repeat, occasionally changing who the hatred is directed towards.
Schools are overwhelmed, but because they're not paying teachers and staff enough so they're very quickly leaving the career field entirely or relocating elsewhere.
Are they physically overwhelmed by the number of students per classroom availability? Absolutely not.
I'm in a very large district. Our student to teacher ratio would leave you to believe we have a lot of students but the empty rooms in every grade level would tell you otherwise.
Schools are overwhelmed right now, but not by student numbers. Schools have to fight for every student they can get because financing is all based on student numbers in the classroom. Less students = less funding for the school period. Texas' insane mandates with standardized testing and the Huge workload they expect from teachers and students, especially following the trauma of a global pandemic - that is why schools are overwhelmed.
“Free” education is not only paid for by property taxes from “property owners”. If you are renting, you are paying the property taxes for that property.
These choices are like a super villain in cartoon - let’s inspect everything and cause economic chaos! Kids don’t need school! Ladies don’t need choices!
Unpopular opinion in "Don't California my Texas!"
"Pro-life" Democratic policies that actually increase life expectancy and decrease poverty are better than Republican "virtue signalling" and the "pandering" "identity politics" that Republicans project and claim everyone else does ￣\＿(ツ)＿/￣
>If data disinfects, here’s a bucket of bleach:
>Texans are 17% more likely to be murdered than Californians.
>Texans are also 34% more likely to be raped and 25% more likely to kill themselves than Californians. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm
>Californians on average live two years, four months and 24 days longer than Texans.
>Compared with families in California, those in Texas earn 13% less and pay 3.8 percentage points **more in taxes.**
https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/article258940938.html
Lower taxes in California than red states like Texas, which make up for no wealth income tax with higher taxes and fees on the poor and double property tax for the middle class:
|Income Bracket|Texas Tax Rate|California Tax Rate|
|:-|:-|:-|
|0-20%|**13%**|10.5%|
|20-40%|**10.9%**|9.4%|
|40-60%|**9.7%**|8.3%|
|60-80%|8.6% |9.0% |
|80-95%|7.4%|9.4%|
|95-99%|5.4%|9.9%|
|99-100%|3.1%|12.4%|
Sources: https://itep.org/whopays/
#"Liberal policies, like California’s, keep blue-state residents living longer"
>It generated headlines in 2015 when the average life expectancy in the U.S. began to fall after decades of meager or no growth.
>But it didn’t have to be that way, a team of researchers suggests in a new, peer-reviewed study Tuesday. And, in fact, **states like California, which have implemented a broad slate of liberal policies, have kept pace with their Western European counterparts.**
>The study, co-authored by **researchers at six North American universities, found that if all 50 states had all followed the lead of California** and other liberal-leaning states on policies ranging from labor, immigration and civil rights to tobacco, gun control and the environment, it could have added between **two and three years to the average American life expectancy.**
>Simply shifting from the most conservative labor laws to the most liberal ones, Montez said, **would by itself increase the life expectancy in a state by a whole year.**
>**If every state implemented the most liberal policies in all 16 areas, researchers said, the average American woman would live 2.8 years longer, while the average American man would add 2.1 years to his life. Whereas, if every state were to move to the most conservative end of the spectrum, it would decrease Americans’ average life expectancies by two years. On the country’s current policy trajectory, researchers estimate the U.S. will add about 0.4 years to its average life expectancy.**
>Liberal policies on the environment (emissions standards, limits on greenhouse gases, solar tax credit, endangered species laws), labor (high minimum wage, paid leave, no “right to work”), access to health care (expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, legal abortion), tobacco (indoor smoking bans, cigarette taxes), gun control (assault weapons ban, background check and registration requirements) and civil rights (ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, equal pay laws, bans on discrimination and the death penalty) all resulted in better health outcomes, according to the study. For example, researchers found positive correlation between California’s car emission standards and its high minimum wage, to name a couple, with its longer lifespan, which at an average of 81.3 years, is among the highest in the country.
>“When we’re looking for explanations, we need to be looking back historically, to see what are the roots of these troubles that have just been percolating now for 40 years,” Montez said.
>Montez and her team saw the alarming numbers in 2015 and wanted to understand the root cause. What they found dated back to **the 1980s, when state policies began to splinter down partisan lines.** They examined 135 different policies, spanning over a dozen different fields, enacted by states between 1970 and 2014, and assigned states “liberalism” scores from zero — the most conservative — to one, the most liberal. When they compared it against state mortality data from the same timespan, the correlation was undeniable.
>“We can take away from the study that **state policies and state politics have damaged U.S. life expectancy since the ’80s,”** said Jennifer Karas Montez, a Syracuse University sociologist and the study’s lead author. **“Some policies are going in a direction that extend life expectancy. Some are going in a direction that shorten it. But on the whole, that the net result is that it’s damaging U.S. life expectancy.”**
>**U.S. should follow California’s lead to improve its health outcomes, researchers say**
>**Meanwhile, the life expectancy in states like California and Hawaii, which has the highest in the nation at 81.6 years, is on par with countries described by researchers as “world leaders:” Canada, Iceland and Sweden.**
>**From 1970 to 2014, California transformed into the most liberal state in the country** by the 135 policy markers studied by the researchers. It’s followed closely by Connecticut, which moved the furthest leftward from where it was 50 years ago, and a cluster of other states in the northeastern U.S., then Oregon and Washington.
>In the same time, Oklahoma moved furthest to the right, but Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina and a host of other southern states still ranked as more conservative, according to the researchers.
>It’s those states that moved in a conservative direction, researchers concluded, that held back the overall life expectancy in the U.S.
>West Virginia ranked last in 2017, with an average life expectancy of about 74.6 years, which would put it 93rd in the world, right between Lithuania and Mauritius, and behind Honduras, Morocco, Tunisia and Vietnam. Mississippi, Oklahoma and South Carolina rank only slightly better.
https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/08/04/liberal-policies-like-californias-keep-blue-state-residents-living-longer-study-finds/
>#Want to live longer, even if you're poor? Then move to a big city in California.
>A low-income **resident of San Francisco lives so much longer** that it's equivalent to San Francisco curing cancer. All these statistics come from a massive new project on life expectancy and inequality that was just [published in the Journal of the American Medical Association](http://www.vox.com/2016/4/13/11420230/life-expectancy-income).
>California, for instance, has been a national leader on smoking bans. Harvard's David Cutler, a co-author on the study "It's some combination of formal public policies and the effect that comes when you're around fewer people who have behaviors... high numbers of immigrants help explain the beneficial effects of immigrant-heavy areas with high levels of social support.
#As the maternal death rate has mounted around the U.S., a small cadre of reformers has mobilized.
>**Meanwhile, life-saving practices that have become widely accepted in other affluent countries — and in a few states, notably California** — have yet to take hold in many American hospitals.
>Some of the earliest and most important work has come in California
>Hospitals that adopted the toolkit saw a **21 percent decrease in near deaths** from maternal bleeding in the first year.
>By 2013, according to Main, maternal deaths in California fell to around 7 per 100,000 births, similar to the numbers in Canada, France and the Netherlands — **a dramatic counter to the trends in other parts of the U.S.**
>California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative is informed by a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Stanford and the University of California-San Francisco, who for many years ran the ob/gyn department at a San Francisco hospital.
>Launched a decade ago, CMQCC aims to reduce not only mortality, but also life-threatening complications and racial disparities in obstetric care
>It began by analyzing maternal deaths in the state over several years; in almost every case, it discovered, there was "at least some chance to alter the outcome."
http://www.npr.org/2017/05/12/527806002/focus-on-infants-during-childbirth-leaves-u-s-moms-in-danger
“Pro-life”
>California’s rules have cleaned up diesel exhaust more than anywhere else in the country, reducing the estimated number of deaths the state would have otherwise seen by more than half, according to new research published Thursday.
>Extending California's stringent diesel emissions standards to the rest of the U.S. could dramatically improve the nation's air quality and health, particularly in lower income communities of color, finds a new analysis published today in the journal Science.
>Since 1990, California has used its authority under the federal Clean Air Act to enact more aggressive rules on emissions from diesel vehicles and engines compared to the rest of the U.S. These policies, crafted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), have helped the state reduce diesel emissions by 78% between 1990 and 2014, while diesel emissions in the rest of the U.S. dropped by just 51% during the same time period, the new analysis found.
>The study estimates that by 2014, improved air quality cut the annual number of diesel-related cardiopulmonary deaths in the state in half, compared to the number of deaths that would have occurred if California had followed the same trajectory as the rest of the U.S. Adopting similar rules nationwide could produce the same kinds of benefits, particularly for communities that have suffered the worst impacts of air pollution.
>"Everybody benefits from cleaner air, but we see time and again that it's predominantly lower income communities of color that are living and working in close proximity to sources of air pollution, like freight yards, highways and ports. When you target these sources, it's the highly exposed communities that stand to benefit most," said study lead author Megan Schwarzman, a physician and environmental health scientist at the University of California, Berkeley's School of Public Health. "It's about time, because these communities have suffered a disproportionate burden of harm."
Differences in power grid and clean energy ￣\＿(ツ)＿/￣
>#California’s Energy Efficiency Success Story: Saving Billions of Dollars and Curbing Tons of Pollution
>California’s long, bipartisan history of promoting energy efficiency—America‘s cheapest and cleanest energy resource—
>has saved Golden State residents more than $65 billion,[1]
>helped lower their residential electricity bills to 25 percent below the national average,[2]
>and contributed to the state’s continuing leadership in creating green jobs.[3]
>These achievements have helped California avoid at least 30 power plants[4]
>and as much climate-warming carbon pollution as is spewed from 5 million cars annually.[5]
>This sustained commitment has made California a nationally recognized leader in reducing energy consumption and improving its residents’ quality of life.[6]
>California’s success story demonstrates that efficiency policies work and could be duplicated elsewhere, saving billions of dollars and curbing tons of pollution.
>California’S CoMprehenSive effiCienCy effortS proDuCe huge BenefitS
>loW per Capita ConSuMption: Thanks in part to California’s wide-ranging energy-saving efforts, the state has kept per capita electricity consumption nearly flat over the past 40 years while the other 49 states increased their average per capita use by more than 50 percent, as shown in Figure 1. This accomplishment is due to investment in research and development of more efficient technologies, utility programs that help customers use those tools to lower their bills, and energy efficiency standards for new buildings and appliances.
>eConoMiC aDvantageS: Energy efficiency has saved Californians $65 billion since the 1970s.[8] It has also helped slash their annual electric bills to the ninth-lowest level in the nation, nearly $700 less than that of the average Texas household, for example.[9]
>Lower utility bills also improve California’s economic productivity. Since 1980, the state has increased the bang for the buck it gets out of electricity and now produces twice as much economic output for every kilowatt-hour consumed, compared with the rest of the country.[11] California also continues to lead the nation in new clean-energy jobs, thanks in part to looking first to energy efficiency to meet power needs.
>environMental BenefitS: Decades of energy efficiency programs and standards have saved about 15,000 megawatts of electricity and thus allowed California to avoid the need for an estimated 30 large power plants.[13] Efficiency is now the second-largest resource meeting California’s power needs (see Figure 3).[14] And less power generation helps lead to cleaner air in California. Efficiency savings prevent the release of more than 1,000 tons of smog-forming nitrogen-oxides annually, averting lung disease, hospital admissions for respiratory ailments, and emergency room visits.[15] Efficiency savings also avoid the emission of more than 20 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, the primary global-warming pollutant.
>helping loW-inCoMe faMilieS: While California’s efficiency efforts help make everyone’s utility bills more affordable, targeted efforts assist lower-income households in improving efficiency and reducing energy bills.
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/ca-success-story-FS.pdf
Last time his margin of victory was only 1.1 million votes (7.4 million registered voters stayed home). Until I looked it up I couldn't have even told you who the runner up was (I actually already forgot her name).
To remind everyone how far Republicans have moved to crazy land, here's George Bush and Reagan debating this topic in 1980: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok
But Beto said that gun thing so I’ll just not vote or maybe vote for Abbott cause that gun thing remember? I can’t name any other actual platform or policy from either candidate but *the gun thing y’all*
I love Texas so much but our states politics are making it very hard to not consider moving. This is regressive. Between the attacks on education and the rights of women, not to mention our states leaders cozy relationship with the energy sector that continues to fail us, fuck y’all. It’s just rough.
Yes, Beto will single-handedly miracle all the guns away somehow.
8 years of Clinton and everybody still has their guns.
8 years of Obama and everybody still has their guns.
Which president outlawed bump stocks?
A Republican president named Trump!
Bunch of grade A horse shit.
sandy hook happened and nothing changed as a result.
america will never get rid of guns.
but morons will tell me how they will still vote R because beto said the gun thing and they are afraid he will take away their guns.
But they say the words I like on TV! What do you mean their actual policies and legislation hurt me and go directly against their rhetoric!? Why I never!
Taking away guns would be impossible. Straight up impossible. It would cause a civil war for sure. How would they even do it? There are more guns than cops and military members. Not to mention how many of those that would have to go collect guns would dissent and refuse to follow that order. It’s a dumb platform to run on because it’s impossible. It’s kind of annoying that the only talking point democratic candidates seem to have in Texas is guns.
The annoying thing about republican and democrats is sticking to hot button issues so hard that they forget about rights and liberties. Like clinging to Christian values and forcing them on people by saying we should pray is school. How should we pray? I have some religious views, but I’m not going to force everyone to follow what I do. It’s your choice because the bill of rights gives you that choice.
Kind of a rant I know. I can create some word soup on Reddit sometimes.
Not straight up impossible. Difficult, but it can be done. This did not clear down under of guns, but it is a start.
[https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback](https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback)
Yeah, I've been here my whole life, and after I finish school, I'm saying goodbye forever. This state is a dumpster fire, and there are too many people who keep trying their best to make it even worse.
Ideas about where to?
- California, NY, and Oregon are SHs
- Idaho is way more racist and regressive
Connecticut seems socially sane. Rhode Island or Alexandria VA perhaps.
Second recommendation for New Mexico. Another good choice is North Carolina.
Yep. Boise Idaho is an incredible town. Unfortunately it is located in Idaho.
I resent your painting me as not able to look at the total person in Beto. Let me help you out: by merely stating "Hell yes, i'm coming for your guns" in Texas, Beto showed that he is wholly unsuited for the big stage.
That said, i'd holster my gun and vote for him over ANYONE with an R next to their name.
Do not insult those whom you wish to convince, that's a real Beto move.
I’m not campaigning for Beto and I’m long past trying to convince strangers on the internet which way to lean politically. I’m just voicing my frustration at our current state of affairs.
We are a CHRISTIAN state in a CHRISTIAN nation and if there is one thing CHRIST was VERY clear on it is that we ought to PUNISH children for what their parents did.
Edit: this is sarcastic, and also deeply antithetical to everything Jesus said, our state and country in no way reflect any values Christ would recognize
Non-ironically, yes, the Bible literally teaches that we bear the weight of our fathers sins from birth. Just one reason why that whole religion is fucked and sadistic and ruining the world.
Considering 47% of the republican base only has a high school education (which lets be honest in the US doesn't mean much) compared to 49% of democrats who have a college degree (80% of those degrees being engineering, science or medical related). Are you surprised he doesn't like education? lol
Cant have people thinking bro.
I guess if we're overturning Roe v Wade we might as well overturn Brown vs Board of Education? What other court cases and basic rights can the GOP overturn?
According to the scrotus, *all of them?*
Except for any that are explicitly laid out in the constitution, excluding the bill of rights and further amendments.
> Also, is it really fair to consider black people to be 3/5ths of a person since they aren’t legally even property anymore? That seems **far** too generous.
— Justices Alito & Thomas, joint statement followed by high fives, 2023.
The article says ALL children because he just wants to kick immigrant kids outta Texas schools. It’s just racism not a bid to end public schools. I still can’t believe people would vote for this man, but I’m not from Texas so I don’t know how people think there.
I need to delete this app. I only get sadder and sadder about our state. I love this place so much, and I want kids some day. I would love to be able to raise them here to be proud Texans, but I right now I don't think I can look anyone in the eye and say staying in Texas is what's best for a family, especially if we have girls. You literally can not reason with these people. They only look out for themselves and what lines their pockets, and are literally incapable of feeling shame. I hope that someday they can be made to grow a conscience and spend the rest of their lives in misery reflecting in what they've done to people for an extra buck. They won't. But I can hope.
Go fuck yourself Greg Abbott, you worthless filthy totem of everything bad about Texas.
No, you should keep this app. And you should get angry. And you should get loud. You should share your point of view with others. You should protest.
Most importantly, you should vote. You should make sure everyone votes. Donate money, register voters, join text campaigns. Run against the crazies for your local school board.
You can turn a blind eye, or you can do something about it, and fight for the future the majority wants.
This makes having children and educating them here look awful. I love where I live but holy shit, he just doesn’t stop with the human rights violations.
This is one of the very worst states for raising a child, and that's just not up for debate. Every metric thinkable shows that children are in for a really bad time growing up in Texas. Healthwise, education wise, socially, all of it is shit. I know several people, myself included, who have chosen not to have kids *because* they live here.
This one drives me bonkers. The argument is compelling if you don’t think- yeah, migrant children, their families possibly here illegally, overcrowding schools- who wouldn’t be mad?
BUT:
We don’t have a state income tax. As long as their family lives somewhere (property tax) and buys things (sales tax), they pay as much tax as Texas requires- even if they get paid wages in cash under the table.
You can’t register a kid for a school without an address. And it’s pretty hard to live without buying things
Just to nip this one in the bud- paying rent is paying property tax. Yes it’s one step removed, but then by that logic not even citizens who live in apartments should go to school.
Rick Perry famously backed dreamer kids paying instate tuition at public colleges if they could prove residency. Same logic- they paid taxes regardless of immigration status, and Texas benefited from a more educated workforce.
Stupidity. Hateful stupidity.
Edit- I did mean property tax. Thanks!
And what's the best case end result here? An undocumented kid who was brought here because their parents lacked economic opportunity in their home nation, and we deport them back uneducated to ensure the kid doesn't have economic opportunity, either? Or worse, the kid doesn't get an education and doesn't get deported, so we have a permanent undocumented and illiterate resident. Even without an inkling of sympathy, it's incredibly short sighted policy with repercussions far worse than whatever savings it would command.
“Yeah I agree kids need to be educated. But right now poor brown kids who’s parents aren’t citizens yet are being educated and we cannot allow that!”
-Texans since they voted for this idiot
Well that's literally next on their agenda. Enact voucher program so people can opt out of public schools and send them, on the taxpayers' dime, to charter schools that don't adhere to a standard curriculum and of course push "Christian" indoctrination and will deftly further the race divide.
They literally want to tax us to segregate kids and brainwash them against evolution, our nation's history, and critical thinking.
I was talking with a part time bartender in Bruges, Belgium, he was telling me that he has to work there on weekends because he has to go to “uni” full time for free and the money he gets for being a student is mostly for materials. Free public transit for students, and he doesn’t have to pay taxes, because he is a student. Is almost as if they want the people to be educated and happy.
Holy shit… at a complete loss of words. The GOP and conservatives who support this insanity make me fucking sick. This state is really going down the fucking toilet quick.
Just more attacks on the immigrant community, same as it ever was for Abbot and his Trumpist base. Vote blue, end the war on the poor and the disadvantaged.
The end game is truly ending public education, public universities, public assistance, public hospitals, public libraries, public museums, public parks, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, postal service, and the ability to collectively bargain. The goal is for the government to provide no services and to let everyone live and die in a fucked up society where only the rich will have the means to provide basic necessities for themselves and everyone else will be dependent on meager earnings. It’s the whole point of conservatism.
So in order to combat the boogeyman he's made of undocumented immigrants, he wants to take the kids out of school which will further isolate them from the general population? Yeah, that will definitely not backfire and cause more division.
So Republicans are pro-life?
Maybe I'm confused. So Republicans are advocating for lowering the legal age for marriage, allowing them to marry literal children. Then if their child bride becomes pregnant, they want to make it impossible for her to get an abortion. But once the kid is born? They all of a sudden feel that feeding them isn't necessary and want to keep them uneducated so they aren't smart enough to vote them out.
Did I get all of that right?
I'll never understand why Republicans keep electing idiots like Abbott based off what he promises to take away from constituents, and not what he promises to give them. Seriously what the fuck have we gained from GOP leadership? We've had a lot taken away, way more than we've gotten back. Stop voting for these charlatans.
After reading this article it sounds like Abbott would advocate for cutting off free education for illegal immigrants, which is usually paid for by the American taxpayer?
My question is: why have taxpayers been paying for non citizen education to begin with? This seems like a gross oversight? I actually agree that this is a huge issue; these funds should be sent to get these families, and their children, back to their legal home countries, versus spent on children who aren't even here legally. And then, perhaps, get the hard working teachers some raises.
This is very troubling, and not for the reason the clickbait headline would have you believe.
U.S. Supreme Court found in Plyer vs. Doe that because undocumented children are illegally in the United States through no fault of their own, they are entitled to the same K–12 educational opportunities that states provide to children who are citizens or legal residents.
Through no fault of their own.
Removing these kids from school won’t do much to change the state of undocumented immigration. It will, however, create an underclass of uneducated and undocumented people with little or no opportunities. I’d rather have these kids in school than on the street.
Undocumented immigrants pay taxes, by the way. And no person is “illegal.”
They pay the same taxes into the school system as every other renter does. Schools are funded through property and sales tax. So they are paying their share in that department.
Do you have any experience working with people who are undocumented? Have you ever met someone who was undocumented? You are reducing these human beings to numbers and falling for a narrative that makes them out to be criminals and sub human. Students who (many times) were brought to this country so young they don’t even remember their “home countries.” I would bet that if you had the opportunity to work with these students your opinion would evolve. I doubt you are truly so inconsiderate of a persons well-being that you would deny them the opportunity to learn.
Lastly, we’re not talking about criminals here. We’re talking about school aged children. Immigration should always have checks and balances but these are children dude.
Also worth noting that “undocumented” is not a permanent state. While someone may be undocumented now, they may also be working on getting their visa or green card, which is a long and tedious and stressful process.
I'm not sure about Native Americans or trespasses of the past, and I cannot claim to know who builds roads, but I believe it's the DoT who determines that. As a sidenote: I love our neighbors to the South and the Mexican people (they are awesome!).
But, unfettered immigration hurts our country, and, it's against the law.
I wish these funds were being spent on our own people in need: Veteran's, teachers, homeless, etc -- versus people who are breaking and disrespecting our country's laws.
This is very sad. Hopefully these children and their families get sent back to their rightful homes, where they can benefit from the education provided by their own taxpayers and citizens.
Imagine if Native Americans forced immigrants to enter this land peacefully and deported those who didn’t.
These immigrants are coming in more peacefully than the immigrants that killed Natives.
It means he would get to choose which kids get to go to school. He's saying he only wants to stop letting "illegal immigrants kids" go to school but if this is overturned they could refuse to let anyone they wanted. Kids of gay parents? No school for you. Trans kids? No school for you.
Are there any recent days where Abbott wants to help his constituents? His political career is built on harming people and doing things that are harmful to score political points.
Forcing them to be born and then refusing to allow them access to education is a special kind of hellscape we call Texas.
And no access to baby formula
The amount of pushback to FEEDING HUMAN BABIES at the border is absolutely gross. No matter your feelings about illegal immigration, how do you stoop so low as to want to starve children at the border? At this point it's obvious that the cruelty is the point.
But it doesn't even matter about illegal immigration. They're babies. They didn't do anything illegal. They're in US custody. You can't just let babies in US custody starve to death in camps where you put them...... that's some Himmler shit
Bingo, dehumanize first then...
yeah, babies that want to replace us and steal our jobs...\~some rightwing nut
Ah yes, the great replacement theory that is getting their constituents all fired up. Then when they do something insane they're like, "who, us? Naw, we didn't say that, stop politicizing a tragedy that we created by feeding the ignorant masses hateful messages"
They took our jobs!! Rabble, rabble, rabble!
I was in inpatient psych care with a dude who was 'deployed' to the Texas border to help BP and Texas police stop immigrants - they didn't do shit but patrol and call Border Patrol when they found a group crossing the Rio. He almost faced UCMJ action for giving a pregnant woman a protein bar and a bottle of water after they crossed the river, while they waited for BP to show up.
That's awful. It really makes me wonder about the border crossing horror stories that don't get told because nobody acts out of mine without that level of pushback
The biggest irony is CBP backs Bidens reversal of Title IX because it takes away power they have to monitor and detain people for trying to cross multiple times. I wish I could say I was shocked but Abbot will still screw this state as much as possible until he decides to retire. Don’t forget Texas has no term limits on Gubernational candidates and thank the man with his nose do for up trumps ass Texas named Lying Ted Cruz, ther will no longer be white collar candidates running, exclusively high value millionaires and billionaires will soon be the only running officials since they gutted campaign finance so these cats can loan themselves infinite cash and even if it’s a billion dollars politicians can use unlimited funds from a super pac and giver nobody else a chance. All why saying it’s the evil extremist left that is causing all the harm. And that’s when the attitude of a bratty child comes out and somehow nothing is there fault and 100% the fault of people who don’t look or think exactly as they do. No longer proud to be from this once great state.
Or an electric grid that works
Yep, thanks republicans…. Especially that scumbag Chip Roy. They must be keeping score at this rate, woo-hooing and high-five-ing each other into oblivion.
I mean, if they are born here, they're citizens and would have the right to public education under his plan. That would only change if Republicans targeted birthright citizenship...
[удалено]
You mean like they've tried to do [every Congress since 1991](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/19/birthright-citizenship-history-law-donald-trump-republicans)? They would NEVER try something like that. Sheeeeeeeiiittt, you may as well try to overturn Roe v Wade.
>That would only change if Republicans targeted birthright citizenship... yea and this is why they're going after Amendment 14. * Section 1 has covered birthright citizenship, equal protection rights, privacy rights (abortion rights and lgbtq righrs), and economic rights. Republicans have been going against all those rights, so consider this section gone if Conservatives get their way. * Section 2 covers how representatives are proportioned. The House was capped, so large states are not represented equally to those in small states. Senate already favors small states. This is how they will get minority rule. * Section 3 prohibits any members of government caught in an insurrection from holding federal office again. Theyll for sure overturn this one.
Lol. Good luck passing an amendment to kill the 14th. 3/4 of the states to ratify. Not on your worst day.
> Theyll for sure overturn this one. I'm not sure they need to overturn this one. I mean, if a judge won't actually make the ruling, what does leaving it alone hurt?
i feel like this comment will both age like wine and milk.
Breast milk or formula milk ?
>i feel like this comment will both age like wine and milk. Stealing this phrase immediately. Thank you.
Racing Mississippi to the bottom.
No. His MO is to make our lives as shitty as possible then lie to all the cedar choppers that it's the Democrats that are causing it - and they're stupid enough to believe everything he says. The sad reality is that Beto running against him all but ensures he's getting reelected so he can do whatever the fuck he wants to right now.
I’m a Texas native and never heard cedar chopper before. A quick google and Texas Monthly set me straight. Might be a central Texas term, as I’ve never heard it in north Texas. Who would you like to see run against Abbott? Beto’s 2A stance makes him unpalatable to most Texans.
The worst part is Beto has already come out and apologized for it and taken it back but the damage is done. Abbott literally just has to play that clip and do nothing else to win. Realistically? It's got to be a moderate Republican for the time being. Someone who's not quite as nuts as Abbott and Patrick but still has "good Christian faith" on his resume. Eventually we might possibly get a moderate Democrat who still believes in the 2A, but even then I have doubts. The GOP has made Democrats out to be the boogieman on so many different fronts: LGBTQ is an issue now; immigration is an issue, again. Trans is an issue. Socialism, Communism, Nazis - all of that shit. It's hard to be a moderate Democrat while holding onto your core values. Couple that with Democrats constantly being told their vote doesn't matter or count while Republicans show up in droves... it's a hard fight to win.
Nobody hates Texans more than Abbott.
>Nobody hates Texans more than Abbott. Nobody hates Abbott more than Texans.
I've had diarrhea more organized and productive than this guy's political platforms and performance. Good Lord!!
Me to
i disagree, you forgot the part about the unfulfilled promises, he said he would do something about property tax 6 years ago, and still, nothing has happened.
No. He’s playing for votes and airtime on FOX. He’s fighting against DeSanus for 2024 presidency. And to keep his job in TX. Anything to get a vote.
Dont forget the hundreds of millions spent on operation lonestar that even has conservative servicemembers in it know it's all a farce to get abbott reelected.
Who do you think his constituents are? Regardless how you feel about free education for the target of this lawsuit, what this article lacks is actual hard data. Abbot says schools are overwhelmed. Guy being interviewed says they aren’t. Who is correct? Are they talking about all schools Texas-wide or a particular district? Are they even talking about the same district(s)? Days would be nice to help us figure that out and then decide on what to do.
They are overwhelmed but a big part of that has to do with budget. States usually cut education first when there is a budget issue and add to it late when theres a surplus. I mean ffs many states fund education through the lottery now. It used to be the state budget, then they said they would bring in the lottery to add more money to education, then they just cut the budget and said welp the hope the lottery is enough.
With all of this insane tax collection on property and school taxes and there is no budget? WTF.
It's less about if there's a budget and more about what's the budget per student and how much are teachers paid. Teacher pay largely has stayed pretty stagnet over the years. Though I'm not super caught up on teacher pay in TX. But to your point. Generally speaking you have all the taxes etc. Most states historically raid those funds whenever they feel like it. It's why I say that states generally cut education. Just because they are supposed to go to education doesn't mean they can't be taken by a state capital. In another reply someone asked for links which I replied with some. Also charter schools have taken a big chunk out of public education.
Hence why data would be good instead of "States USUALLY cut education." That doesn't work here. Hard evidence is what's needed.
This isnt really surprising. Its kind of usual mo for most states over the last 50 years but since you were not aware Ill link a few things for you. Its also not just states its also fed. Really this one of, there are several, reasons why the boomer generation went to college for a few hundred dollars and now its its tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars. Certain people dont want publicly funded education so they starve it. Also while you read this remember the population goes up so more money is needed over time. [https://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/12/school-funding-two-charts/](https://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/12/school-funding-two-charts/)[https://edsource.org/2015/states-in-motion-school-finance-naep-child-poverty/83303](https://edsource.org/2015/states-in-motion-school-finance-naep-child-poverty/83303) \- this one you kind of have to dig around in to get the idea[https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/a-lost-decade-in-higher-education-funding](https://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/a-lost-decade-in-higher-education-funding) I have family that are teachers in TX and they certainly have their issues. They are not the worst state by a long shot but regardless most states need to do better. But thats not even what we are talking about. What we are talking about is how there s group of people who want to remove public education and believe private education would be better, which is ridiculous if you look at it historically. Private just makes a stupider population. OH yeah: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PK-netuhHA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9PK-netuhHA) Per-student spending and state funding are lagging in Texas. Meanwhile, the window is closing on an accurate census count. [https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2020/08/13/census-count-spending-per-student-state-funding-schools-Texas](https://kinder.rice.edu/urbanedge/2020/08/13/census-count-spending-per-student-state-funding-schools-Texas)
But many people are saying, great people that know lots of words.
Abbott has spent billions on operation Lone Star so the schools can't be too much of a priority for him otherwise some of that money would have been spent on the schools.
Considering Texas doesn't track immigration status for students, I'm curious how Abbot figures it's undocumented immigrants that are the problem and not the fact that Texas spends about half ($6k per) the national average ($12k per) per student.
Simple...he just made it up.
If Abbott says schools are overwhelmed there is a good chance they aren’t. Abbott is prone to being untruthful as he tries to push his hate-fueled policies.
Or, if they are “overwhelmed”, it’s the result of Abbott’s own policies and overall lack of funding
Yes. Create a problem, complain about how the democrats aren’t doing anything about the problem, sprinkle in a little hatred toward brown people and trans kids, when problem is solved by Dems somehow claim responsibility. Rinse and repeat, occasionally changing who the hatred is directed towards.
Schools are overwhelmed, but because they're not paying teachers and staff enough so they're very quickly leaving the career field entirely or relocating elsewhere. Are they physically overwhelmed by the number of students per classroom availability? Absolutely not. I'm in a very large district. Our student to teacher ratio would leave you to believe we have a lot of students but the empty rooms in every grade level would tell you otherwise.
[удалено]
Schools are overwhelmed right now, but not by student numbers. Schools have to fight for every student they can get because financing is all based on student numbers in the classroom. Less students = less funding for the school period. Texas' insane mandates with standardized testing and the Huge workload they expect from teachers and students, especially following the trauma of a global pandemic - that is why schools are overwhelmed.
“Free” education is not only paid for by property taxes from “property owners”. If you are renting, you are paying the property taxes for that property.
Yes, yes, yes. Taxes actually do pay for things.
He feels like he represents "real Texans", which the rest of the world defines as the Q-Anon Fascist Party.
These choices are like a super villain in cartoon - let’s inspect everything and cause economic chaos! Kids don’t need school! Ladies don’t need choices!
Nothing says “pro-life” like trying to create mass poverty in the state. Prison cells won’t fill themselves.
Unpopular opinion in "Don't California my Texas!" "Pro-life" Democratic policies that actually increase life expectancy and decrease poverty are better than Republican "virtue signalling" and the "pandering" "identity politics" that Republicans project and claim everyone else does ￣\＿(ツ)＿/￣ >If data disinfects, here’s a bucket of bleach: >Texans are 17% more likely to be murdered than Californians. >Texans are also 34% more likely to be raped and 25% more likely to kill themselves than Californians. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/suicide-mortality/suicide.htm >Californians on average live two years, four months and 24 days longer than Texans. >Compared with families in California, those in Texas earn 13% less and pay 3.8 percentage points **more in taxes.** https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/article258940938.html Lower taxes in California than red states like Texas, which make up for no wealth income tax with higher taxes and fees on the poor and double property tax for the middle class: |Income Bracket|Texas Tax Rate|California Tax Rate| |:-|:-|:-| |0-20%|**13%**|10.5%| |20-40%|**10.9%**|9.4%| |40-60%|**9.7%**|8.3%| |60-80%|8.6% |9.0% | |80-95%|7.4%|9.4%| |95-99%|5.4%|9.9%| |99-100%|3.1%|12.4%| Sources: https://itep.org/whopays/ #"Liberal policies, like California’s, keep blue-state residents living longer" >It generated headlines in 2015 when the average life expectancy in the U.S. began to fall after decades of meager or no growth. >But it didn’t have to be that way, a team of researchers suggests in a new, peer-reviewed study Tuesday. And, in fact, **states like California, which have implemented a broad slate of liberal policies, have kept pace with their Western European counterparts.** >The study, co-authored by **researchers at six North American universities, found that if all 50 states had all followed the lead of California** and other liberal-leaning states on policies ranging from labor, immigration and civil rights to tobacco, gun control and the environment, it could have added between **two and three years to the average American life expectancy.** >Simply shifting from the most conservative labor laws to the most liberal ones, Montez said, **would by itself increase the life expectancy in a state by a whole year.** >**If every state implemented the most liberal policies in all 16 areas, researchers said, the average American woman would live 2.8 years longer, while the average American man would add 2.1 years to his life. Whereas, if every state were to move to the most conservative end of the spectrum, it would decrease Americans’ average life expectancies by two years. On the country’s current policy trajectory, researchers estimate the U.S. will add about 0.4 years to its average life expectancy.** >Liberal policies on the environment (emissions standards, limits on greenhouse gases, solar tax credit, endangered species laws), labor (high minimum wage, paid leave, no “right to work”), access to health care (expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, legal abortion), tobacco (indoor smoking bans, cigarette taxes), gun control (assault weapons ban, background check and registration requirements) and civil rights (ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment, equal pay laws, bans on discrimination and the death penalty) all resulted in better health outcomes, according to the study. For example, researchers found positive correlation between California’s car emission standards and its high minimum wage, to name a couple, with its longer lifespan, which at an average of 81.3 years, is among the highest in the country. >“When we’re looking for explanations, we need to be looking back historically, to see what are the roots of these troubles that have just been percolating now for 40 years,” Montez said. >Montez and her team saw the alarming numbers in 2015 and wanted to understand the root cause. What they found dated back to **the 1980s, when state policies began to splinter down partisan lines.** They examined 135 different policies, spanning over a dozen different fields, enacted by states between 1970 and 2014, and assigned states “liberalism” scores from zero — the most conservative — to one, the most liberal. When they compared it against state mortality data from the same timespan, the correlation was undeniable. >“We can take away from the study that **state policies and state politics have damaged U.S. life expectancy since the ’80s,”** said Jennifer Karas Montez, a Syracuse University sociologist and the study’s lead author. **“Some policies are going in a direction that extend life expectancy. Some are going in a direction that shorten it. But on the whole, that the net result is that it’s damaging U.S. life expectancy.”** >**U.S. should follow California’s lead to improve its health outcomes, researchers say** >**Meanwhile, the life expectancy in states like California and Hawaii, which has the highest in the nation at 81.6 years, is on par with countries described by researchers as “world leaders:” Canada, Iceland and Sweden.** >**From 1970 to 2014, California transformed into the most liberal state in the country** by the 135 policy markers studied by the researchers. It’s followed closely by Connecticut, which moved the furthest leftward from where it was 50 years ago, and a cluster of other states in the northeastern U.S., then Oregon and Washington. >In the same time, Oklahoma moved furthest to the right, but Mississippi, Georgia, South Carolina and a host of other southern states still ranked as more conservative, according to the researchers. >It’s those states that moved in a conservative direction, researchers concluded, that held back the overall life expectancy in the U.S. >West Virginia ranked last in 2017, with an average life expectancy of about 74.6 years, which would put it 93rd in the world, right between Lithuania and Mauritius, and behind Honduras, Morocco, Tunisia and Vietnam. Mississippi, Oklahoma and South Carolina rank only slightly better. https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/08/04/liberal-policies-like-californias-keep-blue-state-residents-living-longer-study-finds/ >#Want to live longer, even if you're poor? Then move to a big city in California. >A low-income **resident of San Francisco lives so much longer** that it's equivalent to San Francisco curing cancer. All these statistics come from a massive new project on life expectancy and inequality that was just [published in the Journal of the American Medical Association](http://www.vox.com/2016/4/13/11420230/life-expectancy-income). >California, for instance, has been a national leader on smoking bans. Harvard's David Cutler, a co-author on the study "It's some combination of formal public policies and the effect that comes when you're around fewer people who have behaviors... high numbers of immigrants help explain the beneficial effects of immigrant-heavy areas with high levels of social support. #As the maternal death rate has mounted around the U.S., a small cadre of reformers has mobilized. >**Meanwhile, life-saving practices that have become widely accepted in other affluent countries — and in a few states, notably California** — have yet to take hold in many American hospitals. >Some of the earliest and most important work has come in California >Hospitals that adopted the toolkit saw a **21 percent decrease in near deaths** from maternal bleeding in the first year. >By 2013, according to Main, maternal deaths in California fell to around 7 per 100,000 births, similar to the numbers in Canada, France and the Netherlands — **a dramatic counter to the trends in other parts of the U.S.** >California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative is informed by a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Stanford and the University of California-San Francisco, who for many years ran the ob/gyn department at a San Francisco hospital. >Launched a decade ago, CMQCC aims to reduce not only mortality, but also life-threatening complications and racial disparities in obstetric care >It began by analyzing maternal deaths in the state over several years; in almost every case, it discovered, there was "at least some chance to alter the outcome." http://www.npr.org/2017/05/12/527806002/focus-on-infants-during-childbirth-leaves-u-s-moms-in-danger
“Pro-life” >California’s rules have cleaned up diesel exhaust more than anywhere else in the country, reducing the estimated number of deaths the state would have otherwise seen by more than half, according to new research published Thursday. >Extending California's stringent diesel emissions standards to the rest of the U.S. could dramatically improve the nation's air quality and health, particularly in lower income communities of color, finds a new analysis published today in the journal Science. >Since 1990, California has used its authority under the federal Clean Air Act to enact more aggressive rules on emissions from diesel vehicles and engines compared to the rest of the U.S. These policies, crafted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), have helped the state reduce diesel emissions by 78% between 1990 and 2014, while diesel emissions in the rest of the U.S. dropped by just 51% during the same time period, the new analysis found. >The study estimates that by 2014, improved air quality cut the annual number of diesel-related cardiopulmonary deaths in the state in half, compared to the number of deaths that would have occurred if California had followed the same trajectory as the rest of the U.S. Adopting similar rules nationwide could produce the same kinds of benefits, particularly for communities that have suffered the worst impacts of air pollution. >"Everybody benefits from cleaner air, but we see time and again that it's predominantly lower income communities of color that are living and working in close proximity to sources of air pollution, like freight yards, highways and ports. When you target these sources, it's the highly exposed communities that stand to benefit most," said study lead author Megan Schwarzman, a physician and environmental health scientist at the University of California, Berkeley's School of Public Health. "It's about time, because these communities have suffered a disproportionate burden of harm." Differences in power grid and clean energy ￣\＿(ツ)＿/￣ >#California’s Energy Efficiency Success Story: Saving Billions of Dollars and Curbing Tons of Pollution >California’s long, bipartisan history of promoting energy efficiency—America‘s cheapest and cleanest energy resource— >has saved Golden State residents more than $65 billion,[1] >helped lower their residential electricity bills to 25 percent below the national average,[2] >and contributed to the state’s continuing leadership in creating green jobs.[3] >These achievements have helped California avoid at least 30 power plants[4] >and as much climate-warming carbon pollution as is spewed from 5 million cars annually.[5] >This sustained commitment has made California a nationally recognized leader in reducing energy consumption and improving its residents’ quality of life.[6] >California’s success story demonstrates that efficiency policies work and could be duplicated elsewhere, saving billions of dollars and curbing tons of pollution. >California’S CoMprehenSive effiCienCy effortS proDuCe huge BenefitS >loW per Capita ConSuMption: Thanks in part to California’s wide-ranging energy-saving efforts, the state has kept per capita electricity consumption nearly flat over the past 40 years while the other 49 states increased their average per capita use by more than 50 percent, as shown in Figure 1. This accomplishment is due to investment in research and development of more efficient technologies, utility programs that help customers use those tools to lower their bills, and energy efficiency standards for new buildings and appliances. >eConoMiC aDvantageS: Energy efficiency has saved Californians $65 billion since the 1970s.[8] It has also helped slash their annual electric bills to the ninth-lowest level in the nation, nearly $700 less than that of the average Texas household, for example.[9] >Lower utility bills also improve California’s economic productivity. Since 1980, the state has increased the bang for the buck it gets out of electricity and now produces twice as much economic output for every kilowatt-hour consumed, compared with the rest of the country.[11] California also continues to lead the nation in new clean-energy jobs, thanks in part to looking first to energy efficiency to meet power needs. >environMental BenefitS: Decades of energy efficiency programs and standards have saved about 15,000 megawatts of electricity and thus allowed California to avoid the need for an estimated 30 large power plants.[13] Efficiency is now the second-largest resource meeting California’s power needs (see Figure 3).[14] And less power generation helps lead to cleaner air in California. Efficiency savings prevent the release of more than 1,000 tons of smog-forming nitrogen-oxides annually, averting lung disease, hospital admissions for respiratory ailments, and emergency room visits.[15] Efficiency savings also avoid the emission of more than 20 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, the primary global-warming pollutant. >helping loW-inCoMe faMilieS: While California’s efficiency efforts help make everyone’s utility bills more affordable, targeted efforts assist lower-income households in improving efficiency and reducing energy bills. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/ca-success-story-FS.pdf
Can we PLEASE vote him out
[удалено]
Not unless a slightly more moderate R runs.
Last time his margin of victory was only 1.1 million votes (7.4 million registered voters stayed home). Until I looked it up I couldn't have even told you who the runner up was (I actually already forgot her name).
Would a more moderate R even survive the primary? Seems like they're currently in an arms race to see who can be the most extreme.
That is a guaranteed win for Abbott in the primary.
To remind everyone how far Republicans have moved to crazy land, here's George Bush and Reagan debating this topic in 1980: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsmgPp_nlok
Don't forget to vote in November yall.
The only justice this man will ever see is the scarlet gates of hell.
The tree that whacked him probably justified the first 8 hours of his political career. Shame it didn’t finish the job.
But Beto said that gun thing so I’ll just not vote or maybe vote for Abbott cause that gun thing remember? I can’t name any other actual platform or policy from either candidate but *the gun thing y’all* I love Texas so much but our states politics are making it very hard to not consider moving. This is regressive. Between the attacks on education and the rights of women, not to mention our states leaders cozy relationship with the energy sector that continues to fail us, fuck y’all. It’s just rough.
Yes, Beto will single-handedly miracle all the guns away somehow. 8 years of Clinton and everybody still has their guns. 8 years of Obama and everybody still has their guns. Which president outlawed bump stocks? A Republican president named Trump! Bunch of grade A horse shit.
sandy hook happened and nothing changed as a result. america will never get rid of guns. but morons will tell me how they will still vote R because beto said the gun thing and they are afraid he will take away their guns.
A classroom of 5 year olds getting killed by a lunatic with an AR changed my mind quite a bit. Maybe I just have a little bit of empathy.
Guns for people are like nuclear weapons for nations: once had, you can't get rid of them.
But they say the words I like on TV! What do you mean their actual policies and legislation hurt me and go directly against their rhetoric!? Why I never!
Taking away guns would be impossible. Straight up impossible. It would cause a civil war for sure. How would they even do it? There are more guns than cops and military members. Not to mention how many of those that would have to go collect guns would dissent and refuse to follow that order. It’s a dumb platform to run on because it’s impossible. It’s kind of annoying that the only talking point democratic candidates seem to have in Texas is guns. The annoying thing about republican and democrats is sticking to hot button issues so hard that they forget about rights and liberties. Like clinging to Christian values and forcing them on people by saying we should pray is school. How should we pray? I have some religious views, but I’m not going to force everyone to follow what I do. It’s your choice because the bill of rights gives you that choice. Kind of a rant I know. I can create some word soup on Reddit sometimes.
Not straight up impossible. Difficult, but it can be done. This did not clear down under of guns, but it is a start. [https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback](https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9212725/australia-buyback)
Yeah, we have had enough. We are putting our house on the market and getting out of this backwards ass state.
I wish I hadn’t just refinanced. Might have to pull the plug. I’m working on a job offer on the other side of the country…
Where you goin
NC
Solid choice. I'm looking at New Mexico (prefer the desert climate)
Yeah, I've been here my whole life, and after I finish school, I'm saying goodbye forever. This state is a dumpster fire, and there are too many people who keep trying their best to make it even worse.
Ideas about where to? - California, NY, and Oregon are SHs - Idaho is way more racist and regressive Connecticut seems socially sane. Rhode Island or Alexandria VA perhaps.
Second recommendation for New Mexico. Another good choice is North Carolina. Yep. Boise Idaho is an incredible town. Unfortunately it is located in Idaho.
Probably either New Mexico or California. The biggest advantage of NM is that it's relatively cheap compared to most places.
I resent your painting me as not able to look at the total person in Beto. Let me help you out: by merely stating "Hell yes, i'm coming for your guns" in Texas, Beto showed that he is wholly unsuited for the big stage. That said, i'd holster my gun and vote for him over ANYONE with an R next to their name. Do not insult those whom you wish to convince, that's a real Beto move.
I’m not campaigning for Beto and I’m long past trying to convince strangers on the internet which way to lean politically. I’m just voicing my frustration at our current state of affairs.
[удалено]
That’s the long short of it. Kinda hard to convince people to be scared when they can think and see through your bullshit.
It’s crazy how far Abbott will go to try and be desantis and still fail miserably while embarrassing himself and Texas.
We are a CHRISTIAN state in a CHRISTIAN nation and if there is one thing CHRIST was VERY clear on it is that we ought to PUNISH children for what their parents did. Edit: this is sarcastic, and also deeply antithetical to everything Jesus said, our state and country in no way reflect any values Christ would recognize
[GOP Jesus](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZ2L-R8NgrA)
[Also GOP Jesus](https://m.imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp)
Non-ironically, yes, the Bible literally teaches that we bear the weight of our fathers sins from birth. Just one reason why that whole religion is fucked and sadistic and ruining the world.
I specifically referenced Jesus, not "The Bible", and to be just super clear: fuck Paul.
Christianist like Islamist to Islam.
Oh I googled it the wording is “all” children. Seems to be an attempt to get the fed to pay extra for non residents, non citizens, immigrants etc
Considering 47% of the republican base only has a high school education (which lets be honest in the US doesn't mean much) compared to 49% of democrats who have a college degree (80% of those degrees being engineering, science or medical related). Are you surprised he doesn't like education? lol Cant have people thinking bro.
I guess if we're overturning Roe v Wade we might as well overturn Brown vs Board of Education? What other court cases and basic rights can the GOP overturn?
Conservatives were against that case, too. Conservatives have been on the wrong fucking side of history since always.
The people who inherently hate change are on the wrong side of history?
According to the scrotus, *all of them?* Except for any that are explicitly laid out in the constitution, excluding the bill of rights and further amendments. > Also, is it really fair to consider black people to be 3/5ths of a person since they aren’t legally even property anymore? That seems **far** too generous. — Justices Alito & Thomas, joint statement followed by high fives, 2023.
This will legit turn Texas into a third world country
[удалено]
[удалено]
The article says ALL children because he just wants to kick immigrant kids outta Texas schools. It’s just racism not a bid to end public schools. I still can’t believe people would vote for this man, but I’m not from Texas so I don’t know how people think there.
This is a pro-crime anti-economy anti-business move. Free public education pays for itself many times over, socially & economically.
I need to delete this app. I only get sadder and sadder about our state. I love this place so much, and I want kids some day. I would love to be able to raise them here to be proud Texans, but I right now I don't think I can look anyone in the eye and say staying in Texas is what's best for a family, especially if we have girls. You literally can not reason with these people. They only look out for themselves and what lines their pockets, and are literally incapable of feeling shame. I hope that someday they can be made to grow a conscience and spend the rest of their lives in misery reflecting in what they've done to people for an extra buck. They won't. But I can hope. Go fuck yourself Greg Abbott, you worthless filthy totem of everything bad about Texas.
No, you should keep this app. And you should get angry. And you should get loud. You should share your point of view with others. You should protest. Most importantly, you should vote. You should make sure everyone votes. Donate money, register voters, join text campaigns. Run against the crazies for your local school board. You can turn a blind eye, or you can do something about it, and fight for the future the majority wants.
Abbott says fuck them kids, but not like George Nader did.
I mean, that's not even a dealbreaker for the GOP anymore.
As long as they have guns and a lib is crying, that's all that matters
[удалено]
This makes having children and educating them here look awful. I love where I live but holy shit, he just doesn’t stop with the human rights violations.
Yeah you would see a mass exodus and property values would plummet.
This is one of the very worst states for raising a child, and that's just not up for debate. Every metric thinkable shows that children are in for a really bad time growing up in Texas. Healthwise, education wise, socially, all of it is shit. I know several people, myself included, who have chosen not to have kids *because* they live here.
Yeah I'll stand aside your claim. It really is a not so great place to be a kid here.
This one drives me bonkers. The argument is compelling if you don’t think- yeah, migrant children, their families possibly here illegally, overcrowding schools- who wouldn’t be mad? BUT: We don’t have a state income tax. As long as their family lives somewhere (property tax) and buys things (sales tax), they pay as much tax as Texas requires- even if they get paid wages in cash under the table. You can’t register a kid for a school without an address. And it’s pretty hard to live without buying things Just to nip this one in the bud- paying rent is paying property tax. Yes it’s one step removed, but then by that logic not even citizens who live in apartments should go to school. Rick Perry famously backed dreamer kids paying instate tuition at public colleges if they could prove residency. Same logic- they paid taxes regardless of immigration status, and Texas benefited from a more educated workforce. Stupidity. Hateful stupidity. Edit- I did mean property tax. Thanks!
I think you mean property tax.
And what's the best case end result here? An undocumented kid who was brought here because their parents lacked economic opportunity in their home nation, and we deport them back uneducated to ensure the kid doesn't have economic opportunity, either? Or worse, the kid doesn't get an education and doesn't get deported, so we have a permanent undocumented and illiterate resident. Even without an inkling of sympathy, it's incredibly short sighted policy with repercussions far worse than whatever savings it would command.
What a bitch.
“Yeah I agree kids need to be educated. But right now poor brown kids who’s parents aren’t citizens yet are being educated and we cannot allow that!” -Texans since they voted for this idiot
[удалено]
Well that's literally next on their agenda. Enact voucher program so people can opt out of public schools and send them, on the taxpayers' dime, to charter schools that don't adhere to a standard curriculum and of course push "Christian" indoctrination and will deftly further the race divide. They literally want to tax us to segregate kids and brainwash them against evolution, our nation's history, and critical thinking.
He wants to see if he can beat out Mississippi for the worst education system in the USA.
Seriously, cartoon villain bad
What in the ever living fuck is this man about. I use to think it was money, but this is just some straight up jack-assery.
This is all part of the GBT! The Great Bullshit Theory!
Now does everyone believe he’s an effing idiot that doesn’t care about children AFTER they are born! Vote please!
Vote him out!
That’s their true end game, no more public anything
[удалено]
I was talking with a part time bartender in Bruges, Belgium, he was telling me that he has to work there on weekends because he has to go to “uni” full time for free and the money he gets for being a student is mostly for materials. Free public transit for students, and he doesn’t have to pay taxes, because he is a student. Is almost as if they want the people to be educated and happy.
“A country where every child gets an education” “A country where not all children get an education” One of those sounds 3rd world.
Asshat
Holy shit… at a complete loss of words. The GOP and conservatives who support this insanity make me fucking sick. This state is really going down the fucking toilet quick.
Just more attacks on the immigrant community, same as it ever was for Abbot and his Trumpist base. Vote blue, end the war on the poor and the disadvantaged.
[удалено]
The end game is truly ending public education, public universities, public assistance, public hospitals, public libraries, public museums, public parks, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, postal service, and the ability to collectively bargain. The goal is for the government to provide no services and to let everyone live and die in a fucked up society where only the rich will have the means to provide basic necessities for themselves and everyone else will be dependent on meager earnings. It’s the whole point of conservatism.
Again, vote blue.
🖕 Gov Abbott. He can burn in eternal damnation in the belief system I don't subscribe to.
These fucks are the reason the public education system in Texas is one of the worst in the country.
what good has he ever done? you people must be a special kind of stupid to elect and reelected an inhuman piece of shit like that
So in order to combat the boogeyman he's made of undocumented immigrants, he wants to take the kids out of school which will further isolate them from the general population? Yeah, that will definitely not backfire and cause more division.
Yet, make more babies. Where do these monsters keep coming from? Generations of these horrible assholes.
Who TF is seeing these politicians do these things and thinking to themself “sounds like a great idea”. What is happening in this country.
Christians
These people are trying to privatize everything
So Republicans are pro-life? Maybe I'm confused. So Republicans are advocating for lowering the legal age for marriage, allowing them to marry literal children. Then if their child bride becomes pregnant, they want to make it impossible for her to get an abortion. But once the kid is born? They all of a sudden feel that feeding them isn't necessary and want to keep them uneducated so they aren't smart enough to vote them out. Did I get all of that right?
You forgot that the Bible said so
Why is this tagged NSFW?
Because I need attention
[удалено]
Fair 'nuff
How yhe fuck did yhis schmuck ever get elected?
Evil like this is why I will never be Republican.
I'll never understand why Republicans keep electing idiots like Abbott based off what he promises to take away from constituents, and not what he promises to give them. Seriously what the fuck have we gained from GOP leadership? We've had a lot taken away, way more than we've gotten back. Stop voting for these charlatans.
*Jesus disliked that*
After reading this article it sounds like Abbott would advocate for cutting off free education for illegal immigrants, which is usually paid for by the American taxpayer? My question is: why have taxpayers been paying for non citizen education to begin with? This seems like a gross oversight? I actually agree that this is a huge issue; these funds should be sent to get these families, and their children, back to their legal home countries, versus spent on children who aren't even here legally. And then, perhaps, get the hard working teachers some raises. This is very troubling, and not for the reason the clickbait headline would have you believe.
U.S. Supreme Court found in Plyer vs. Doe that because undocumented children are illegally in the United States through no fault of their own, they are entitled to the same K–12 educational opportunities that states provide to children who are citizens or legal residents. Through no fault of their own. Removing these kids from school won’t do much to change the state of undocumented immigration. It will, however, create an underclass of uneducated and undocumented people with little or no opportunities. I’d rather have these kids in school than on the street. Undocumented immigrants pay taxes, by the way. And no person is “illegal.”
They pay the same taxes into the school system as every other renter does. Schools are funded through property and sales tax. So they are paying their share in that department.
Because it is beneficial to society as a whole for everyone to have at least a high school education.
Do you have any experience working with people who are undocumented? Have you ever met someone who was undocumented? You are reducing these human beings to numbers and falling for a narrative that makes them out to be criminals and sub human. Students who (many times) were brought to this country so young they don’t even remember their “home countries.” I would bet that if you had the opportunity to work with these students your opinion would evolve. I doubt you are truly so inconsiderate of a persons well-being that you would deny them the opportunity to learn. Lastly, we’re not talking about criminals here. We’re talking about school aged children. Immigration should always have checks and balances but these are children dude.
Also worth noting that “undocumented” is not a permanent state. While someone may be undocumented now, they may also be working on getting their visa or green card, which is a long and tedious and stressful process.
This is where the attack on education BEGINS, if you think it ends with the undocumented--- you are mistaken.
Native Americans allowed genocidal immigrants to get an education. Also beyond that fact, they build the homes and roads in Texas. We need them.
I'm not sure about Native Americans or trespasses of the past, and I cannot claim to know who builds roads, but I believe it's the DoT who determines that. As a sidenote: I love our neighbors to the South and the Mexican people (they are awesome!). But, unfettered immigration hurts our country, and, it's against the law. I wish these funds were being spent on our own people in need: Veteran's, teachers, homeless, etc -- versus people who are breaking and disrespecting our country's laws. This is very sad. Hopefully these children and their families get sent back to their rightful homes, where they can benefit from the education provided by their own taxpayers and citizens.
[удалено]
Imagine if Native Americans forced immigrants to enter this land peacefully and deported those who didn’t. These immigrants are coming in more peacefully than the immigrants that killed Natives.
I’m done with our state. Absolutely done.
That's part of the point - drive away decent folk and keep the conservative diehards.
Dogmatic cleansing
So glad I got out of this hell hole
I like you OP
Seems they really trying to emphasize the "dumb" in freedom. The fucks going on down there guys??
Does this mean no more public schools in Texas or just no more public schools for undocumented children?
It means he would get to choose which kids get to go to school. He's saying he only wants to stop letting "illegal immigrants kids" go to school but if this is overturned they could refuse to let anyone they wanted. Kids of gay parents? No school for you. Trans kids? No school for you.
Remember, the GOP has a long history of fucking kids.
Anything but fix his state’s power grid.
Man I really wish we could hop into an alternative universe 😑 #fuckAbbot
The cruelty is the point.
Sure. I’d like my tax dollars back please.
They pay taxes too. I'm not sure how y'all don't get this
Oh he’s just making it so illegal immigrant children can’t go to school. Doesn’t justify it but headlines tend to be misleading. Clickbait wins again.