To the Executive Director of the Brackenridge Park Conservancy

Dear Ms. Powell,

I believe there are much better uses for the south end of Brackenridge Park than a golf course. As I'm sure you appreciate, Brackenridge Park occupies a unique location in the city. It's a shame that over one-third of the park is limited to use by golfers. (113 of the park's 343 total acres are occupied by the golf course per the City's website. I don't know how many acres the driving range takes up, but from looking at Google maps I'd say that's another 20 acres or so limited to golfers.) There is enormous potential for transforming the golf course into space to be enjoyed by many more people. Particularly with the revitalization of the downtown area and the Broadway corridor, it's time to reimagine the Brackenridge golf course.

I should admit I'm not much of a golfer and I've never played the Brackenridge course. I understand the course may have historical value to some folks as it's been around since 1916. I also understand the course was renovated at the cost of about $6 million in 2008 and it's managed by ACGT, which I believe is a private company the City contracted with. I appreciate there may be obstacles to making the most of Brackenridge Park, and it may not be possible to get started tomorrow. But there are plenty of golf courses, both public and private, in and around San Antonio. There's only one Brackenridge Park with the potential to truly transform San Antonio 's urban culture and landscape.

There are all manner of possibilties for the 113 acres of park now occupied by the golf course. Jogging and bike paths that connect to the paths north of the golf course. Fields for soccer games, tossing a football or throwing a frisbee. Maybe some indoor/outdoor cafes. A lake. A stage for outdoor concerts and plays. Playgrounds for kids. The Conservancy's website cites Hyde Park, Central Park and Golden Gate Park as examples of great city parks. Of those, only Golden Gate Park has a golf course - and it's a par 3 9-hole course. I'd suggest if Brackenridge absolutely must have a golf course, that's a more appropriate scale than a 6,815 yard 18 hole course. I believe Brackenridge Park has the potential to be a great urban park. The zoo and Japanese Garden are tremendous assets for our city. The rest of the park has so much unrealized potential, and the key to unlocking that potential includes rethinking the golf course. It's easy to envision a Brackenridge Park that's much more vibrant and utilized by many more people. There's a world of potential that is wasted on a sprawling golf course and driving range.

Last week I sent an email to the Mayor's office about the Brackenridge Park golf course. Mr. Xavier Urrutia (Director of COSA Parks & Rec Dept) responded yesterday, and in his response suggested I join the Brackenridge Park Conservancy. This lead me to contact you. What is the Brackenridge Park Conservancy's position on keeping the golf course and driving range?

Regards,

luridtransom

Lamar Smith to America: F*ck You!

You'll recall our inquiry to Congressman Lamar Smith asking whether he supports several planks of the 2012 Texas GOP platform.  Well, it turns out Mr. Smith refuses to tell us whether he supports or opposes those planks.  Why?  Because he doesn't give a crap about you, America.  Here's the e-mail chain to prove it, which we've painstakingly arranged in a top-to-bottom format for your reading convenience.  We aim to please.

From: luridtransom
To: Lamar Smith’s DC Office
Sent: Thursday, August 9, 2012 6:20 PM
Subject: 2012 GOP platform.

Dear [Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)],

Thanks for returning my call earlier today.  I'd like to know Congressman Smith's position on several planks from the 2012 Texas GOP platform.  I have copied and pasted nine planks verbatim from the platform document. Please let me know whether Congressman Smith supports each of the planks listed. Feel free to explain his support or opposition to the planks - in fact, explanations are welcomed. But be clear as to each plank whether the Congressman supports or opposes it.

I've selected planks I believe are relevant to national issues and the U.S. Congress, as opposed to state or local issues.  Below are the planks, and thanks in advance for your help.

Term Limits - We urge Congress, the Legislature, and the Republican Party to institute Term Limits.

U.S. Department of Education – Since education is not an enumerated power of the federal government, we believe the Department of Education (DOE) should be abolished.

Education Spending – Since data is clear that additional money does not translate into educational achievement, and higher education costs are out of control, we support reducing taxpayer funding to all levels of education institutions.

Capital Gains Tax – We favor abolishing the capital gains tax.

Ethanol – We support the repeal of legislation mandating ethanol as fuel additives and/or primary fuel.

Sound Money – Our founding fathers warned us of the dangers of allowing central bankers to control our currency because inflation equals taxation without representation. We support the return to the time tested precious metal standard for the U.S. dollar.

United Nations – We support the withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations and the removal of U.N. headquarters from U.S. soil.

Foreign Aid – We oppose foreign aid except in cases of national defense or catastrophic disasters, with Congressional approval.

International Organizations – We support U.S. withdrawal from the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization and the World Bank.

If this should be directed at his campaign, please let me know where I should send it.

My blog is luridtransom.  Here's a link:  http://luridtransom.blogspot.com/  I hope you enjoy reading it.

Regards,
luridtransom

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: luridtransom
To: Texans for Lamar Smith
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 10:00 AM
Subject: 2012 Texas GOP platform inquiry.

Dear Sir or Madam:

Last month I sent the inquiry below to [a staffer] in Congressman Smith's office.  I haven't heard back from her despite a couple of follow ups.  Perhaps she is on vacation, I'm not sure.  In any event, she mentioned that she'd look at my questions, which might be more appropriate for the campaign.  So I'm directing my inquiry to the campaign in order to get a substantive response.

Thanks in advance for your response!

Regards,

luridtransom

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: luridtransom
To: Texans for Lamar Smith
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 11:49 AM
Subject: Fw: 2012 Texas GOP platform inquiry.

Lamar Smith Campaign:

Please either respond substantively to my media inquiry or let me know that you REFUSE to respond to my media inquiry.  Thank you.

----- Forwarded Message -----

From: luridtransom
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 11:04 AM
To: Lamar Smith’s DC Office
Subject: Fw: 2012 Texas GOP platform inquiry.

Dear [Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)],

I am STILL trying to get a response to my inquiry below, which I sent you back in August.  Can you kindly answer my request, or forward it to someone that can?  Perhaps Congressman Smith himself would respond.  Thanks for your help.

Regards,

luridtransom

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)
To: luridtransom
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 11:01 AM
Subject: RE: 2012 Texas GOP platform inquiry.

luridtransom,

We do not participate in every interview request that we receive.  Please accept our decision to decline the interview and use the information already provided to you or available on our website.

Thanks,

[Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)]

----- Forwarded Message -----

From: luridtransom
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 12:00 PM
To: Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)
Subject: Re: 2012 Texas GOP platform inquiry.

Dear [Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)],

I've simply asked for the Congressman's position on some planks from the Texas GOP platform.  I mean, he either supports those planks or he doesn't, right?  Why does Congressman Smith refuse to answer my questions?  Thanks.

luridtransom

 ----- Forwarded Message -----

From: Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)
To: luridtransom
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 10:54 AM
Subject: RE: 2012 Texas GOP platform inquiry.

Our office declines to participate in your story.  You can either use the information that was provided to you in a written letter earlier this year, or we have information about Congressman Smith’s views on various issues on our website.

http://lamarsmith.house.gov/congressionalresources/ontheissues.htm

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: luridtransom
To: Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 11:21 AM
Subject: Re: 2012 Texas GOP platform inquiry.

Dear [Staffer for Congressman Lamar Smith (R-Texas)],

I am very disappointed.  We both know you have previously provided zero answers to my questions.  Your website provides zero answers.  I believe America has the right to know Congressman Smith's position on, for example, term limits and withdrawing from the UN.  It's not that Congressman Smith is declining to participate in an interview request.  That's not what my inquiry really is.  Essentially Congressman Smith is saying, "Hey, America.  I have so little respect for you that I won't even tell you my position on a few planks of my own party's platform.  I hold you in contempt, lowly taxpayers and veterans and hard-working American families.  As a successful politician, I have no time for honesty and candor, or even telling you where I stand beyond hollow talking points written by someone else."

I appreciate you letting me know Mr. Smith refuses to address my questions.

Regards,

luridtransom

Listen up, Mr. Bigshot Mayor.

Dear Mayor Castro,

Have you ever thought of Brackenridge golf course as something besides a golf course? I should admit up front I'm not much of a golfer and I've never played golf there. The Brackenridge course occupies a unique location in the city. It's a shame that it's only used by golfers. There's so much potential for turning the golf course into a space to be enjoyed by many more people. Particularly with the downtown area and the Broadway corridor undergoing a revitalization, it's time to reimagine the Brackenridge golf course.

 

There are all manner of possibilties. Jogging and bike paths that connect to the paths in the park north of the golf course. Fields for soccer games, tossing a football or throwing a frisbee. Not league fields or intramural style fields, but I'm thinking of the pick up soccer games you see in parks in cities around the world. Maybe some indoor/outdoor cafes. A lake. A stage for outdoor concerts and plays. I'm just brainstorming ideas here. But the vision I'm trying to communicate is a Brackenridge park that's much more vibrant and utilized by many more people. There's a world of potential that is wasted on a golf course. There are plenty of golf courses, both public and private, in our city. But there's only one Brackenridge Park with the potential to truly transform San Antonio's urban culture and landscape.

I hope you'll give my suggestion serious consideration.

Regards,

luridtransom

Wall Street Journal: Counter Op-Ed

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323894704578113033115035920.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

President Obama can now proudly claim the four largest deficits in modern history. As a share of GDP, the deficit fell to 7% last year, which was still above any single year of the Reagan Presidency, or any other year since Truman worked in the Oval Office.

McCain would have had the four largest deficits too.  Unless you think he'd have responded to the recession by allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire and cutting spending.

Mr. Obama won't want you to know this, but this revenue increase is occurring under the Bush tax rates that he so desperately wants to raise in the name of getting what he says is merely "a little more in taxes."

Why wouldn’t he want you to know this?  Gross revenues are increasing because GDP is growing.  That would be happening this year even if the Bush tax cuts were twice as large.  Do you think I don’t understand basic math, WSJ?  Show me the revenues as percentage of GDP.  That’s where to focus, and compare that to outlays as percent of GDP.  The idea is to narrow that gap, and you need increased revenue to get there.  And not just increased as in last year tax revenue was $100, this year it’s $101.  Increased revenue as percentage of GDP.

Imagine the gusher of revenue the feds could get if government got out of the way and let the economy grow faster.

Ah, yes, just imagine the gusher.  This means nothing.  If you have a proposal, tell me what it is.  But talking about imaginary revenue gushers if only the government would “get out of the way” (whatever that means) is a waste of my time.  Hey, OU sucks.

Now let's look at outlays, which declined a bit in 2012. That small miracle was achieved thanks to a 4% fall in defense spending, a 24% fall in jobless benefits, and an 8.9% decline in Medicaid spending.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.  Outlays declined?  How can that be?  Socialist Obama is a spend-a-holic, right?  So you’re telling me that as the economy improves, the government pays out less in welfare payments like jobless benefits and Medicaid?  (And as we end the Iraqi Adventure military costs drop?)  Wait, so did spending on those welfare programs rise because of the recession, like automatically?  But I thought welfare spending rose because Obama is a socialist and just wants to give handouts to the 47%.  So why is Washington paying out less in food stamps?  Is the Food Stamp President napping on the job and needs to be docked a day's pay?

One way to think about this is that most of the $830 billion stimulus of 2009 has now become part of the federal budget baseline. The "emergency" spending of the stimulus has now become permanent, as we predicted it would.

Yeah, that is one way to think of it, except that it’s not at all accurate.  The stimulus hasn’t become part of the budget baseline.  Luckily, most people don’t look at budgeting baselines or understand what that means.  Go look at the line items from the stimulus and see if they’re being repeated in each successive year, and projected to increase for inflation & demographic trends.  Oh, they’re not?  That’s because the stimulus isn’t part of the federal baseline budget.  You can think about it however you want, though.  It's a free country.

When Beltway politicians claim they want a "balanced" approach to reducing the deficit, what they really mean is raising taxes to finance this new higher spending level.

I don’t know which Beltway politicians you’re talking about, but generally a "balanced" approach refers to a mixture of increased revenue (tax hikes) and spending cuts to stabilize the deficit.  But it has zero to do with the stimulus in the way you’re suggesting.

The reality is that the fastest way to raise revenue is with faster economic growth. To the extent that raising tax rates will reduce the rate of growth, it will slow the flow of tax revenue and increase the deficit.

I see what you’re doing here.  The “to the extent” clause is sneaky, but you’re disingenuously suggesting that a tax increase will actually result in less revenue, which is simply false.  It's like the tax-cuts-pay-for-themselves fantasy, but in reverse.

Even if Mr. Obama were to bludgeon Republicans into giving him all of the tax-rate increases he wants, the Joint Tax Committee estimates this would yield only $82 billion a year in extra revenue.  But if growth is slower as a result of the higher tax rates, then the revenue will be lower too.

Same as above.

So after Mr. Obama has humiliated House Republicans and punished the affluent for the sheer joy of it, he would still have a deficit of $1 trillion.

Because allowing the top bracket to revert back to 39.6% can only be motivated by a desire for public humiliation, malice and class hatred.  Attributing evil motives to the other side is a great way to reinforce a sense of your side's moral superiority, but it is counter-productive to grown-up discourse of fiscal policy.

Most of our readers know all this, but we thought you'd like some new evidence to rebut the kids who voted for your taxes to go up when they return from college for Thanksgiving. Maybe they'll figure it out when they have a job, if they can find one.

Ha!  Zing!  Except this column isn’t evidence of anything.