Seven Reasons That Gov. Abbott Should Retire

 

De-Funding the Police? Gov. Abbott, not Beto, Has Taken Funds from Law Enforcement

The recent Dallas Morning News-UT Tyler Texas poll just revealed that Gov. Abbott now has a 9-point lead over Beto O’Rourke -- likely a result of a heavy barrage of campaign advertising that the Abbott campaign has launched using their large treasure chest of campaign funds.[1] The political edge that Gov. Abbott is enjoying, however, stems from deceptive messages that continue to mislead Texas voters. 

For example, in an earlier post I discussed how one of his campaign messages that focused on the challenges that he faced in overcoming his physical disability may have won him praise but overlooked the fact that he was awarded up to $9 million from a personal injury lawsuit.  In his effort to become the Texas governor, Abbott supported legislation to limit personal injury awards in Texas to $250,000 – thus denying other Texans who suffered personal injuries access to medical equipment and other necessities that would help them adapt their lifestyles to their disabilities.[2] 

In more recent political advertisements, the Abbott campaign focuses attention on a past statement by Beto O’Rourke that appeared to explain his support for Black Lives Matter and their efforts to de-fund the police. Interestingly, several public policy decisions in Texas related to law enforcement and public safety suggest that it is Gov. Abbott who has been “de-funding” public safety for Texas residents. For example:

·         To support Operation Lone Star, a border security project that deployed thousands of state troopers and National Guard soldiers at the border, Gov. Abbott took approximately $160 million from the Texas Department of Public Safety, while tens of millions of dollars were also taken from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and the Juvenile Justice Department. Despite the absence of any evidence that Operation Lone Star achieved its objectives, Gov. Abbott decided that his pet project was more important than the public safety of Texas residents. [3]    

·         Of the 283 killings resulting from mass shootings since 1966, 58 percent of these killings (or 163) occurred since Gov. Abbott took office in 2015.  Many of the mass shootings involved AR-15 assault weapons.  The figure below illustrates that the number of killings in mass shootings have been accelerating since 2015, a likely consequence of gun friendly legislation more recently adopted under Gov. Abbott’s leadership. Killings for 2022 reflect only the first five months of the year and likely to exceed all previous years  assuming that no future changes are made in Texas law related to gun control. [4]

 

 

·         Despite protests from Texas law enforcement officials, Texas has adopted gun-friendly legislation – promoted by Gov. Abbott and Republican legislators – that has allowed residents to   purchase and carry weapons in public without required training.  The fact that mass shooters are often 18 years old has not prompted Gov. Abbott to add an age restriction that restricts access to assault-style weapons. Gov. Abbott has also made no secret of his endorsement of the NRA.

  

Texas voters should look past the deceptive advertising that is being promoted by the Abbott campaign and focus on his past record of de-funding law enforcement programs and endangering the public safety of Texas residents with gun-friendly legislation.

 

Reference Notes

---

[1] Garrett, R. T. (September 2022).  Texas Gov. Greg Abbott widens lead on Beto O’Rourke in new poll. Dallas Morning News, accessed at:

     https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/texas-gov-greg-abbott-widens-lead-on-beto-o-e2-80-99rourke-in-new-poll/ar-AA120gWd

[2]   Rincon, E.T. (September 2022). Disability Messaging by Gov. Abbott Misleads Texas Voters, accessed at:

       https://thecultureofresearch.blogspot.com/2022/09/disability-messaging-by-gov-abbott.html

[3] Beeferman, J.  (April 2022).  Gov. Gregg Abbott redirects $500 million from other agencies to fund border security mission through end of fiscal year.  Texas Tribune.  Accessed at:  https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/29/greg-abbott-texas-border-mission-funding/

[4]   Rincon, E.T. (May 2022). Uvalde School Massacre: Another Mass Shooting Under Gov. Abbott’s Gun Friendly Leadership.  Culture of Research Blogpost, accessed at: https://thecultureofresearch.blogspot.com/2022/05/uvalde-school-massacre-another-mass.html 

Disability Messaging by Gov. Abbott Misleads Texas Voters

The most recent polling numbers regarding the Texas gubernatorial race is rightfully giving Gov. Abbott severe indigestion with Beto O’Rourke trailing by only 7 points.  In an effort to increase his standing among Texas voters, Gov. Abbott’s campaign recently launched political advertising that surprisingly focuses on the challenges that he has experienced and overcome with a physical disability that confined him to a wheel chair for the remainder of his life.  Although well executed, the ad was likely launched as a tactic to distract public attention away from the series of blunders that have occurred under the administration of Gov. Abbott.  Let’s first evaluate Abbott’s  current campaign using the disability messaging tactic, then refresh your memory about the various blunders that he would like Texas voters to forget.

Why the Disability Message is Ill-Conceived:  First, a bit of history about Gov. Abbott’s disability.  When Abbott was 26 years old, he was injured by a falling tree that fell on him while jogging. At that time, Texas did not have a cap on personal injury lawsuits and Abbott was able to win a settlement up to $9 million over his lifetime. In 2003, Texas capped pain and suffering awards in medical malpractice lawsuits at $250,000 – legislation that was strongly supported by Abbott, attorney general at that time, who was eagerly seeking political support for his gubernatorial campaign. Critics, however, have questioned how a man who received a multi-million dollar settlement after a falling tree left him paralyzed and wheelchair bound could support caps on medical malpractice awards.  Gov. Abbott justifies his position by pointing out that his settlement was not based on medical malpractice and there is still no cap on non-medical injuries. Some legal scholars, however, have a different point of view: [1]

“Charles M. Silver, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law, said changes in personal injury law and a pro-defendant posture in the judicial branch would still make such a large financial award today substantially less likely.” 

Like Gov. Abbott, there are many Texans that have suffered personal injuries and forced to endure considerable pain and suffering throughout their lives. However, there is no sound reason to limit the settlement awards that these individuals deserve to help pay for medical bills and sustain their families. As another legal expert explained:

“The ‘innocent victim’ Greg Abbott continues to enjoy the benefits of an $11 million settlement while ‘politician’ Greg Abbott fights against the rights of other victims by denying them the same rights afforded him.”   [2]

Gun Violence:  Under Gov. Abbott’s administration, 19 mass shootings have occurred in Texas since 1966, including the recent massacre of 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas.  Allowing the sales of AR-15 assault rifles has unleashed the anger of so-called patriots and Rambos who seem to delight in mass killings of Texas residents. As shown by the following figure, the number of killings from mass shootings have been accelerating since 2015, a likely consequence of gun friendly legislation more recently adopted under Gov. Abbott’s leadership.  Killings for 2022 reflect only the first five months of the year and likely to exceed all previous years assuming that no future changes are made in Texas law related to gun control.  Rather than advocate for gun control legislation, Gov. Abbott has chosen to focus expanding access to mental health services and encouraging teachers to arm themselves – both options that are controversial and soundly rejected by law enforcement and safety experts.

 

Treatment of Immigrants:  Gov. Abbott and his cronies have yet to appreciate the economic contribution that immigrants have made to the Texas economy and continue to find ways to reduce their presence in Texas – despite the fact that many of them are seeking asylum from dangerous conditions in their home countries.  In 2016, the Texas State Comptroller’s Office conducted an analysis of the economic contributions of undocumented immigrants and concluded that the absence of the estimated 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas in fiscal 2005 would have been a loss to Texas’ Gross State Product of $17.7 billion.  [3]  In 2019, Texas had the second largest immigrant population in the country with more than 4.9 million immigrants calling Texas home.  The growth in the immigrant population has strengthened the Texas labor force and represented 21.9 percent of the state’s workforce in 2019.  [4]  The U.S. Patent and Trade Office also reported in 2020 that more than half of U.S. patents (53%) were issued to immigrants. [5]  And experts have dispelled the commonly held notion that crime rises with increasing numbers of immigrants.  As reported recently by the Cato Institute:  [6]

“In 2018, the illegal immigrant criminal conviction rate was 782 per 100,000 illegal immigrants, 535 per 100,000 legal immigrants, and 1,422 per 100,000 native‐​born Americans. The illegal immigrant criminal conviction rate was 45 percent below that of native‐​born Americans in Texas.”

 To demonstrate to the Biden administration that the federal government was failing to control “rampant” immigration at the Texas border, Gov. Abbott initiated a busing program to transport hundreds of immigrant border crossers to cities like New York and Arizona – a program that has cost Texas taxpayers an estimated $12 million and still continuing.  Two other failed efforts initiated by Gov. Abbott included the added inspection of trucks crossing the Texas border, which resulted in significant delays and millions in losses in spoiled food; and millions of taxpayer dollars that were re-allocated from the Dept. of Public Safety to pay for a border wall that never achieved its stated objectives. Given their economic contributions to the state and the high demand for workers, Gov. Abbott’s unfriendly immigrant policies do not make much sense.

Inaction in Regulating the Power Grid:  Despite the millions in damage to Texas homes and over 200 lives lost, energy experts state that Texas has not made significant upgrades to the Texas power grid and remains vulnerable to additional catastrophic events. Gov. Abbott has apparently not learned any lessons from the recent power grid failure and appears reluctant to lose favor with energy industry executives.

Restricting Women’s Reproductive Rights:  Perhaps the most significant public policy to stain Gov. Abbott’s administration relates to the restrictive abortion policies that severely restrict the reproductive rights of Texas women. The zealous efforts by conservatives to save the lives of the unborn flies in complete contradiction to their support of fewer restrictions on guns that leads to the termination of life. Indeed, is it possible to be pro-life and pro-death at the same time?  Republicans running for office in different primaries are learning the hard way that this will be a show stopper for many women voters.  

Thus, the disability message initiated by Gov. Abbott’s campaign is misleading and intended to convince Texas voters that he is somehow deserving of their support by overcoming his physical disability – a distraction that overlooks the multi-million dollar settlement that he obtained but has conveniently denied to other Texans who may suffer catastrophic injuries.  “It is not the challenges of life that are important, but rather how you handle those challenges” – a message that Abbott has repeated in his campaigns.  It is clear that Abbott indeed handled his life challenges: he sued and obtained a multi-million dollar settlement, then closed the door on other Texans by endorsing a limit on personal injury settlements.

Gov. Abbott has abandoned Texas residents in pursuit of misguided public policies.  It is time for Gov. Abbott to move on and allow another candidate the opportunity to improve the quality of life for Texas residents by supporting more reasonable tort reform for victims of personal injuries, gun control legislation that protects our children, women’s reproductive rights, welcoming immigrants to help maintain the Texas economy, and taking decisive action on improvements to the power grid.

References

---

[1] Oginski, G.  Politician who fought to cap medical malpractice awards received huge personal injury settlement 30 years ago.  Accessed at:  https://www.oginski-law.com/library/politician-who-fought-to-cap-medical-malpractice-awards-received-huge-personal-injury-settlement.cfm#:~:text=The%20insurance%20companies%20for%20the,to%20the%20cap%20Abbott%20supported.

[2] Bello, M.M. (August 2013).  Greg Abbott: Tort reform hypocrite.  Lawsuit Funding News. Accessed at:  https://lawsuitfinancial.legalexaminer.com/uncategorized/greg-abbott-tort-reform-hypocrite/

[3] Keaton, C. (December 2016). Special Report by Texas Comptroller.  Undocumented immigrants in Texas: A financial analysis of the impact to the state budget and economy.

[4] American Immigration Council (July 2022).  The economic contributions of immigrants in Texas. Accessed at:    https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/economic-contributions-immigrants-texas

[5] U.S. Patent Statistics Chart Calendar Years 1963 – 2020. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Technology Monitoring Team.   Accessed at: https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/us_stat.htm

[6] Nowrasteh, A. (October 2020). New research on illegal immigration and crime. CATO Institute. Accessed at: https://www.cato.org/blog/new-research-illegal-immigration-crime-0#:~:text=In%202018%2C%20the%20illegal%20immigrant,%E2%80%8Bborn%20Americans%20in%20Texas. 

Uvalde School Massacre: Another Mass Shooting Under Gov. Abbott’s Gun Friendly Leadership

 

Texas has made national news headlines again for the horrific mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas that ended the lives of 19 elementary school students and two teachers. The pictures of the children and teachers who lost their lives from this senseless act that has saddened and angered all of us.  It is no secret that Texas has become a fertile ground for mass shootings in recent years, facilitated in large part by gun-friendly laws supported by Gov. Abbott and Republican lawmakers. As illustrated by Figure 1 below, there have been 19 mass shootings throughout the state since 1966. [i] Robb Elementary, where the recent mass shooting took place, is a predominantly Hispanic school in South Texas (shown as ID =1 on the map).

Figure 1: Mass Shootings in Texas by Counties

As shown by the following accompanying table which is keyed to the map by ID, of the 283 killings resulting from mass shootings since 1966, 58 percent of these killings (or 163) occurred since Gov. Abbott took office in 2015.  This information excludes mass shootings at Fort Hood since military law more directly influences the behavior of soldiers than state policies. 

Figure 2 below further illustrates that the number of killings in mass shootings have been accelerating since 2015, a likely consequence of gun friendly legislation more recently adopted under Gov. Abbott’s leadership. Killings for 2022 reflect only the first five months of the year and likely to exceed all previous years assuming that no future changes are made in Texas law related to gun control.

Figure 2:  Number of Killings of Texas Shootings During Gov. Abbott’s Leadership

According to unfolding news reports, the gunman gained access through an open door in the rear part of the school that was supposedly left open by a school teacher.  Contradictory statements were made about the presence of an armed resource officer although it was later confirmed that a resource officer was not present during this time.  Armed with two AR-15 semi-automatic rifles and nearly 1,700 rounds of ammunition, the gunman shot his victims – some who were unidentifiable due to significant amount of missing tissue.  These were mostly fourth grade children who had also made repeated calls to 911 while they were in the classroom pleading for police to intervene, while numerous parents had gathered outside of the school attempting to enter the school to rescue their children.  These parents became more enraged when police restrained them from entering the school, using tasers and other restraints – when it became obvious that the armed police were delaying a forceful entry into the classroom to neutralize the shooter.  An interview with a Dept. of Public Safety officer by CNN (5-28-22) pointed to the likelihood that some officers were actually afraid to engage the shooter for fear of being shot or killed themselves.  

The Chief of Public Safety for the Uvalde school district explained that he mistakenly classified the shooting as a barricaded situation instead of an active shooter situation and decided to wait for a better prepared tactical team to arrive. Admitting later that this decision was a mistake, the delay of nearly one hour allowed the shooter sufficient time to murder 19 children and two teachers and wound various others.  Experts on mass shooting protocols explained that there should not have been any delay in neutralizing the threat, and that the intervention should have been made to eliminate the threat even if only one officer was present. [i]  As explained by Chief of Houston Police Art Acevedo:

“We don’t have all of the particulars right now, but when gunfire is ringing out with, police are trained, expected, and required to engage, engage, engage. This is a moral and ethical obligation.”

Considerable concern is being raised by parents and law enforcement experts about the decision to wait one hour for a tactical team to arrive. A relevant question: why was the decision by the Chief of Police for the school district not challenged by any of the other 19 officers waiting in the school hallway?  Presumably, all had received previous training on protocols for mass shooter situations which required immediate action to eliminate a shooter.

The Mental Health Theory: An especially troubling aspect of the Uvalde mass shooting is the extent to which Gov. Abbott tried to explain the probable cause of the mass shooting in a recent press conference.  At the press conference, Gov. Abbott attempted to show his grief and despair at the loss of so many lives, which he explained was a consequence of the shooter’s “mental health challenge” and that the state needed to “do a better job with mental health.” [ii]   However, several mental health experts challenged this statement by explaining that mass shooters are usually rationale and plan their shootings over time. Although the shooter did not show any documented history of mental illness or criminal behavior, there were several signs that were missed in social media postings -- instances of animal abuse, threats to classmates and plans for a school shooting. As one expert explained, the bigger problem is that “Texas and many other states are awash in weapons and have more guns per capita than any other state. Despite attributions to mental health as the underlying cause of the Uvalde mass shooting, it is notable that Gov. Abbott recently slashed $211 million from the department that oversees mental health for the state. [iii]    Thus, Gov. Abbott’s “mental Health” explanation for the mass shooting lacks merit and is being used by Republican lawmakers to distract attention from the need for sensible gun safety legislation.

What We Know About Guns and Mass Shootings

It is helpful to understand the large presence of guns in America and the violence that guns create.  As summarized by recent analysis: [iv]

1. In 2020, firearms were the leading cause of death for American children;
2. America has six times the number of school shootings than 26 major countries combined;
3. There are more gun deaths in states where gun safety is weaker; and
4. America has nearly 20 times more guns per person than the rest of the world.

Clearly, our nation is paying a heavy price for gun ownership, especially as the guns and AR-15s are employed as a method to express hate and anger towards selected subgroups.  Those who are most at risk are schools and churches whose lack of security makes them more attractive targets to mass shooters.

Recent actions by Texas lawmakers have made it easier for mass shootings and other types of gun violence to take place in our state. Consider the following:

Gun Control:  Recent legislation allows Texas residents to purchase a gun without a permit or gun safety training. The open carry law allows gun owners to display their weapons in public, and one can buy an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle and ammunition at 18 years of age. The Uvalde shooter, in fact, had just turned 18 years when he purchased the two AR-15 weapons and nearly 1,700 rounds of ammunition. Arms manufacturers like Daniel Defense [v] have experienced significant sales of the AR-15 semi-automatic weapon since the Sandy Hook massacre. In 2020, Daniel Defense sold 53,000 AR-15 rifles using controversial marketing practices targeted to young adults. As the owner explained it, customers are living under an increased state of anxiety about their personal safety and feel the need to increase their level of protection.  Daniel Defense is a strong supporter of the NRA and often makes financial contributions to Republican lawmakers. Daniel Defense is facing potential lawsuits for their marketing practices of assault weapons. [vi]

School Safety Is Not a Funding Priority in Texas:  News reports tell us that about 40 percent of the school’s budget was dedicated to security, suggesting that the school district had adequate funding to secure Robb Elementary. However, a series of security blunders were partly responsible for the school shooting, including:  (a) the absence of a security resource officer at the time of the shooting, (b) an unlocked back door to the building where the shooter entered, (3) the failure to implement the school’s lock-down procedure, and (4) incompetence shown by the Chief of Police for the school district when he ordered 19 officers to wait up to one hour for a better prepared tactical team to neutralize the shooter. Clearly, the school resource officers were totally unprepared, perhaps not well trained on mass shooter protocols, and violated mass shooter protocols that required them to eliminate a shooter without hesitation to save lives. The District’s school resource officers appeared overly concerned with their own personal safety once the shooter was initially confronted and allowed the shooter sufficient time to murder the children and teachers.  There is clearly a need to consider replacing the current school district security team as well as their leadership. More funding is clearly needed as well which needs to be better focused on compliance with mass shooter protocols and perhaps using improved technology to alert law enforcement authorities about such events at the moment that the threat is identified.

Rather than invest in improved school safety, however, Gov. Abbott has been more concerned recently about securing the Texas border from the surge of immigrants. He has authorized the spending of millions of dollars to fund Operation Lone Star, his politically inspired program to “secure the border” using federal funds that were previously allocated to pandemic-related programs. By several news accounts, Operation Lone Star has been a complete failure and has contributed little to further Gov. Abbott’s gubernatorial campaign.

Disturbing and Misleading Messaging: In recent media interviews, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has been advocating specific messages about gun violence:  “Can’t stop bad people from doing bad things,” and that “Good people with guns is the solution to bad people with guns.”  [vii] Okay, Mr. Paxton, but why make it easier for mass shooters to take the lives of innocent children?  There is significant evidence that gun violence has been dramatically reduced in communities that have adopted stricter gun control laws.  Paxton firmly believes that a better alternative to school safety is to encourage teachers and the public to carry weapons to defend themselves when necessary.  As evidence is unfolding in Uvalde, even armed and resource officers failed to engage the shooter and waited instead for one hour for the tactical team to engage and kill the shooter. It should be obvious that untrained or poorly trained individuals are not adequate substitutes for experienced and trained security personnel. Even at the critical moment of need, it appears that even armed school resource officers were thinking twice about risking their own personal safety.  The Paxton clichés are disturbing and contribute nothing to solving gun violence in schools.  

Cozy Relationship with the NRA:  Texas lawmakers make no pretense about their support for the values represented by the National Rifle Association, and reinforced their position by hosting the NRA convention in Houston, Texas.  Out of respect for the loss of lives in Uvalde, however, most of the musicians scheduled to perform at the convention cancelled their performance.  Several Texas lawmakers, including Gov. Abbott, Senator John Cornyn, and Senator Ted Cruz, were also scheduled to present at the conference. Recent news, however, revealed that Gov. Abbott had cancelled his presentation at the NRA and opted instead to visit the Uvalde community on that day – a decision that resulted from criticism of his presence at the conference. [viii]

Texas lawmakers have had another very important reason to continue their support of the NRA.  As shown by Figure 2, Texas congressmen have received substantial funding from the NRA, assuring an unbreakable bond that will continue to undermine progress towards sensible gun safety laws. One wonders how long their opposition to gun control legislation would last if the money dried up from the gun lobby.  Whatever happened to representing the needs of the voters who consistently voice their support in opinion polls for the need to control gun violence?  Indeed, how is it possible to be pro-life in opposing abortion rights but simultaneously be pro-death by supporting legislation that threatens the lives of school children?  How do these politicians explain this contradiction to their own children and families?

Figure 2: Congress Members in Texas with the Most Contributions from Gun Rights Groups

The NRA funding must give these congressmen extra comfort in knowing that their political careers are more financially secure as long as their support for NRA’s position on gun control remains unchanged and they embrace the explanation that the tragic loss of lives was a consequence of failed mental health. Ironically, one can make a stronger argument that the distorted reasoning of these NRA financed lawmakers requires a check of their mental health since it poses a continuing threat to public health.  It is unfortunate that many Texas Republicans have chosen to become passive spectators regarding the history of mass shootings in Texas – taking comfort in the financial support received from the gun lobby, using the unsupported theory that mental health illness is the primary cause for mass shootings, and knowing that their constituencies are gullible enough to believe even incredible lies about the lost Trump election.   

Next Steps

Beto O’Rourke was correct to interrupt the recent press conference by Gov. Abbott to remind those present that the Uvalde massacre was predictable and that Gov. Abbott was doing nothing to prevent a repeat of this disturbing pattern in Texas. There is also some indication that Uvalde residents agree with Beto.  Gov. Abbott and President Biden both made personal visits to Uvalde this past weekend to offer the support and comfort to the aggrieved community members and received quite different receptions.  President Biden was received warmly by the community leaders and Uvalde parents that were present; however, news reports revealed that Gov. Abbott was booed during this visit by several persons attending his visitation.  [1]

This disturbing pattern of mass shootings in Texas is not likely to change course without dramatic action.  Perhaps now is the time to encourage Texas voters to re-evaluate their support for lawmakers who continue efforts to block gun control and safety legislation.

Public protest for sensible gun safety laws following the Uvalde massacre has already begun by students, sports teams, non-profits, celebrities and various other groups. Some deliberations are taking place with bipartisan lawmakers regarding gun control although the likelihood of compromise is not great based on past history.

Following is some food for thought to get the momentum going for gun safety laws and improving school safety:

·        Let’s target lawmakers that remain opposed to sensible gun control legislation by removing some of the benefits that they currently enjoy. You may recall that various efforts were made over the past year to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations because of the threat to public health by unvaccinated persons.  Perhaps lawmakers could be “encouraged” to support gun safety legislation by having sports teams deny them admission to their games or moving national conventions to more supportive states or cities. Supportive lawmakers and the districts that they represent could be rewarded by private corporations, sports teams, and others by providing additional benefits for their support. In a CNN interview today, Gabe Kapler, Manager of the San Francisco Giants baseball team, announced his decision to protest the national anthem during games until more progress is made on gun reform. [2]  Sports teams and celebrities can be strong advocates when their collective voice is heard throughout these heavily publicized and attended venues.

·        Large retailers should be encouraged to stop selling firearms and ammunition and rewarded by public agencies and consumers when such policies are adopted.

·         Programs to buy back firearms should be initiated or expanded, a program that was supported by Beto O’Rourke.

·        Demands should be made to allocate funds to expand and improve security in schools.  It was quite obvious that a series of security blunders contributed to the Uvalde massacre.  This profound negligence likely resulted from poor training, inexperience and poor judgement --- all factors that can be addressed through professional training and perhaps replacement of existing personnel that fail to meet strict standards.

·        Red flag laws could have alerted police departments about the purchases of the weapons and ammunition by the Uvalde shooter.  While this does not address the availability of these semi-automatic weapons or the minimum age of 18 years to buy these weapons, it would at least alert the appropriate authorities about the potential for violence.

·        Social media networks should be required to develop alert systems that can detect postings that point to a threat to public safety and health.

·        Gov. Abbott stated recently that he was “livid” about being misled regarding the police response to the massacre. Perhaps Gov. Abbott should also be “livid” about the gun friendly legislation that made it easier for the shooter to access the AR-15 semi-automatic weapons to end the lives of the Uvalde children and teachers.

The failure of Republican lawmakers to support sensible gun safety legislation must change since it poses a public health threat similar to contagious diseases or environmental disasters.  Our nation would never tolerate public agencies being passive spectators to such catastrophic events, and it makes even less sense to allow the gun lobby and Republican lawmakers dictate the health and safety of our children.  It is clearly time to act boldly to diminish the influence of the powerful gun lobby and its legion of lawmakers who have chosen to prioritize their political careers and profits over the lives of our children.

Reference Notes

---

[1] Wikipedia (2022 May 5). List of school shootings in Texas. Accessed at:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shootings_in_Texas

[2] Fechter, J. and Oxner, R. (2022 May 26).  Authorities took an hour to stop Uvalde gunman, raising questions about law enforcement response  at: https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/26/uvalde-school-shooting-police-response/

[3]  Aguilar, J.  (2022 May 25).  In Uvalde, Abbott focuses on mental health, Dan Patrick says Americans should turn to God. KERA News, Accessed at:  https://www.keranews.org/texas-news/2022-05-25/in-uvalde-abbott-focuses-on-mental-health-while-dan-patrick-says-americans-should-turn-to-god

[4] Hixenbaugh, M. and Siemasko. C. (2022 May 25).  Abbott calls Texas school shooting a mental health issue but cut state spending for it. NBCNews.com, accessed at:   https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/abbott-calls-texas-school-shooting-mental-health-issue-cut-state-spend-rcna30557

[5] Dunford, D., Rao, G., Borrett, A.  (2022 May 26). Texas school shooting: Every US state affected – maps reveal scale of gun violence in America.  Sky News. Accessed at:  https://news.sky.com/story/texas-school-shooting-the-six-maps-and-charts-which-show-the-state-of-mass-gun-violence-in-the-us-12621141

[6] Yaffe-Bellany, D. and Silver-Greenberg, J. (2022 May 28). New York Times, Accessed at:   https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/28/business/daniel-defense-rifle-texas-shooting-gun.html

[7]  Penzenstadler, N. (2022 May 25). AR rifle maker tied to Texas school shooting facing scrutiny, possible future lawsuits. USA Today.com, Accessed at: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2022/05/25/guns-used-uvalde-shooting-prompt-outcry-could-lead-lawsuits/9929998002/

[8] Strauss, V.  (2022 May 25).  Texas official wants to arm more teachers. Bad idea. Washington Post.  Accessed at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/05/25/bad-idea-texas-arm-teachers/

[9] Zhang, A. (2022 May 26).  Greg Abbott, Dan Patrick cancel in-person NRA convention appearances in wake of Uvalde mass shooting.  Accessed at:  https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/26/greg-abbott-nra-uvalde/

[10] Stanton, A. (2022 May 29). Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Booed Upon Arriving at Uvalde School Shooting Site. Newsweek.com,  Accessed at: https://www.newsweek.com/texas-gov-greg-abbott-booed-upon-arriving-uvalde-school-shooting-site-1711227

[11] Dotson, K. (2022 May 27).    San Francisco Giants manager: ‘I don’t plan on coming out for the anthem going forward until I feel better about the direction of our country’.  CNN.com, Accessed at:  https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/27/sport/gabe-kapler-uvalde-national-anthem/index.html

---

[i] Wikipedia (2022 May 5). List of school shootings in Texas. Accessed at:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shootings_in_Texas

Infographic: Supermarket Redlining Consequences and Choices

 Click here to download pdf copy

Click here to download pdf copy

Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation Internet Research Event Was Informative and Disappointing

 

Access to the Internet is an important topic these days, especially as it influences the education and general quality of life for families that have limited access to the Internet.  About 30 interested people, including myself, were eager to learn about the results of a recent study of Internet access among families in the Dallas Independent School District.  The research symposium, sponsored by the non-partisan Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation (TXHPF), was informative and revealed four key findings:

·        Hispanic families, especially the Spanish speaking segment, struggle with accessing broadband access to the Internet in their homes.

·        The primary reason for this lack of access is that broadband access was too expensive.

·        Also problematic is that families, especially Spanish speakers, lacked awareness of discounted packages to obtain broadband access in their homes.

·        Recommendations were made for broadband providers to launch Spanish-language campaigns to raise awareness of their discounted broadband plans among Hispanic families.

 

The research was conducted under the direction of Dr. Doug Jones, a recognized expert in Latin American studies who did an excellent job of presenting the study results.  A discussion of the study methodology was summarized by one slide at the end of the presentation.  Questions from the audience were then requested by TXHPF Director Jason Villalba.

Aside from interest in the research topic, research professionals such as myself are accustomed to asking questions about the study methodology. In the research courses that I teach, I usually advise students to resist embracing the results of any research study before understanding its methodology and the study limitations – especially in studies of multicultural audiences which often includes various sources of bias. Unfortunately, when it was my turn to ask some questions, Mr. Villalba abruptly interrupted me as I was beginning to introduce myself and praising their efforts by asking:  “Is there a question somewhere here?”  I was surprised by this interruption and offered to postpone my questions and allow other audience members to ask their questions.  Interestingly, Mr. Villalba did not interrupt the questions from other audience members.  I decided to raise my hand again to make a few observations and Mr. Villalba politely listened this time without interruption.

It was an especially disappointing experience to observe such a deliberate effort to mute criticism of such an important study. Indeed, I may have been the only recognized expert in the audience with decades of experience in conducting studies of Latino, Black and Asian audiences and continue to teach such related courses at area universities. Researchers ordinarily welcome feedback from research colleagues and often use the feedback to improve the design of research studies.  Following are some of the methodological concerns and observations that I was attempting to share about the study:

·        Reported levels of broadband access do not necessarily mean that families to not have access to the Internet.  Many obtain Internet access through their wireless devices alone.

·        Access to the Internet, whether through broadband or cell phones, is not the only or most important barrier.  Other research confirms that Hispanics experience navigational issues, anxieties and fears about sharing personal information on the Internet.  

·        It is not surprising that Hispanic response rates were strong to text-oriented efforts to complete a survey.  Pew Research has confirmed the value of cell phones in much of the research that they have conducted in past years.  Our research experience in Texas has shown a similar trend.

·        Telephone interviews, while involving more costs than other modes, is second only to personal interviews in being the most effective mode to obtain in-depth, reliable information from Hispanic and Black persons.  Responses to Census surveys confirms this trend.  Telephone interviews are not prohibitively expensive and lead to higher response rates when coupled with incentives and other modes.

·        Launching a Spanish-language campaign to increase broadband access among Hispanic families is premature and not supported by the research findings.  Hispanics who speak Spanish are not necessarily literate – that is, immigrants have limited education and often cannot read or write in Spanish despite having a speaking ability.  Consequently, different modes of advertisement may be needed.  Also, research did not address the issue of advertising effectiveness – that is, which aspects of the discounted programs offered by the broadband providers were considered undesirable by Hispanic families?

 

These are just a few of the observations that I made from the scant details provided about the study methodology at the event.  I would encourage Mr. Villalba, Director of the Texas Hispanic Policy Foundation, to be more transparent about the methodology of their sponsored research and to encourage, not discourage, questions about all aspects of these studies.  I would also encourage the public to not embrace the results of any research study until they understand the methodology that was used to collect the information --- especially when the target audience includes Blacks, Latinos or Asians.