texas tech/U A&M
this is all tx univ, see also UT Austin
---
Hayhoe at tx tech u
may 2016
https://www.texasmonthly.com/articles/katharine-hayhoe-lubbock-climate-change-evangelist/
---
texas tech econ ~ ag-econ, 2 others nix till yes; fac finds out about ctr when press announce; offer $ can't refuse
u kty fac vote no 2x, GMU ~ fac new ctr
kochademic double $ in 3 yrs, 2x # campus ?! exponential?! // koch corp $?
grad fellowships, pick fellows and diss topics?! WCU and wakefield ~
80 min AAAS?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vrz4nBRH4nw
Ralph Wilson senior researcher at UnKoch My Campus was invited to give a presentation to students and faculty of Wake Forest University, Jan 30, 2017, entitled "Are the Koch's a threat to higher education and Wake Forest?"
---
---
west Texas A&M University has received a $20 million gift — the largest gift from an individual donor in the university’s history — to create a new institute to promote American values.
The donation is a gift from Amarillo businessman Alex Fairly and his wife, Cheryl. Both graduated from West Texas A&M.
The new university center will be called the Hill Institute, named after the university’s second president, Joseph Hill.
“The mission of The Hill Institute is to encourage reflection upon the importance of ten West Texas, Texas, and American values and, through study and scholarship, promulgate the values among students within the diverse disciplines of the University and the extended community,” a flier for the new institute reads.
The institute’s website lists those ten values: trust; family life; hard work and persistence; regard for others; personal responsibility and free will; compatriotism and patriotism; exercise of virtue; the free and open exercise of faith; personal and civic loyalty; and rugged individualism.
“Ultimately, the goal is to have the work of scholars impact every profession and area of study represented on [West Texas A&M’s] campus through the firmly held and highly esteemed values of The Institute,” the newly created website reads. “A challenge in contemporary higher education is the retreat of disciplines into silos with little common ground from which to produce engaged citizens. The Institute will illuminate the founding values of our nation as embodied in our region as a means of cementing intellectual processes to make the world a better place to live.”
The Texas A&M Board of Regents approved the creation of the institute in February 2022 and the university had been searching for a donor to fund the center since. West Texas A&M President Walter Wendler said he worked with Fairly on crafting the institute’s mission for three years. He said he sees the university and this new institute as a “launching pad for the future of higher education.”
“Higher education is in the need to continually be reshaped, especially now with forces at work that affect every aspect of university life and the students who come here to study [and] the faculty and staff who come here to work who take care of their families,” Wendler said Wednesday during an event to announce the new center. “The enterprise of higher education is being drawn into a universalist perspective, one which says all institutions should all look the same. There are many forces at work that drive us in that direction and it's a mistake.”
Wendler, who has served as the university’s president since 2016, is known for being outspoken about his Christian beliefs, often publishing articles about his faith on his personal website and in messages to the university community.
In the spring, the university's facultyissued a vote of no confidence in Wendler's leadershipafter he canceled a student drag show on campus, which he called “derisive, divisive and demoralizing misogyny.” They accused him of abusing his role as president by running the university based on his own religious ideology and said he has exhibited a pattern of “divisive, misogynistic, homophobic and non-inclusive rhetoric that stands in stark contrast with the core values of the university.”
Wendler emerged from the controversy unscathed. He’s also received early support from a federal judge who is overseeing a lawsuit that a campus LGBTQ student group filed against Wendler in March, alleging he violated their free speech rights by banning the drag performance. Recently, the judge declined the student’s request for injunctive relief, stating that Wendler acted within his authority when he canceled the campus drag show.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who attended the event announcing the donation Wednesday, said he supported the center as a way to bring Texas “panhandle values” to the rest of the country.
“This is the America that all America used to be, it should be again,” Patrick said of the sprawling, pastoral region whose rural counties and smaller outposts have long been a Republican stronghold. “These are American values here.”
The Hill Institute will seek to embed students and faculty members “to better understand how these values impact daily life, create a better community, prepare us for engaged citizenship and shape our nation,” Wendler said. “We want the mission of the Hill Institute to have an impact far beyond our region.”
“Hill scholars” will also share their ideas and insights through regular publications and speaking engagements, according to a press release announcing the institute.
University officials said the institute will be funded through private donations, not state resources.
Alex Fairly, the donor funding the Hill Institute, told the crowd Wednesday that when Wendler approached him to serve on the committee for the university’s comprehensive fundraising campaign, the One West campaign, he was skeptical that his values aligned with those of higher education broadly.
“We wrestled with the decision to give to higher education because we were no longer sure we trusted the direction we saw higher education taking,” Fairly said. “What Texas and America need today is a leadership of intelligence and virtue. Education must take more account of permanent values.”
Fairly said he and his wife were convinced to make their donation because of Wendler, who they believe is leading higher education in the right direction, and the principles of Joseph Hill, who often spoke publicly about the values of the region.
According to the Texas Ethics Commission, Fairly has sporadically donated to local and state Republican lawmakers over the past few years. In 2022, Fairly and his entity, dealOn LLC, donated $100,000 to Attorney General Ken Paxton and $250,000 to Patrick. He has also made smaller donations to House Speaker Dade Phelan.
This year, Fairly and his wife donated $145,000 to the Defend Texas Liberty PAC, a political action committee led by former Rep. Jonathan Stickland. The PAC was a vocal supporter of Paxton after he was impeached by the Texas House this spring and throughout his impeachment trial in the Senate. In June, the PAC donated $3 million to Patrick, who presided over the trial.
At the event Wednesday, Patrick told Texas A&M University System Chancellor John Sharp that he would work with him to get similar institutes at all A&M campuses by the end of Sharp’s tenure.
“Start from here, make this a national policy program because we need leaders in America,” he told the crowd. “We need to turn our face back to God. Stand on that foundation.”
This isn’t the first time Patrick has supported an institute at a public university that had the financial backing of conservative donors.
In 2021, Patrick worked with private donors and university leaders at the University of Texas at Austin to create the now-called Civitas Institute. Originally called the Liberty Institute, the proposed think tank would be “dedicated to the study and teaching of individual liberty, limited government, private enterprise and free markets,” according to draft plans of the center.
Patrick later said the original concept for the center was “shot down” by UT-Austin professors because they wanted to have control of hiring. Faculty who were involved in the creation of the institute told the Tribune that university leaders diverted from the original plans after faculty pushed back against the idea.
---
regular readers of the denier roundup know this already, but former journalist John Stossels is now a leading disinformation producer, regularly featuring fake experts who just-so-happen to be, like Stossel, all Koch’d up.
But today’s COP, Look, Listen provides some new information on Stossel’s conflicts of interest and his latest high-traction disinformation video, which “racked up
, 674k views / 23k interactions on FB, and909k view / 21k like on Twitter, where it was also the second most-shared post in the ‘anti-green tech’ narrative. In addition, it is being circulated as text via the Koch-funded disinfo media system, with Reason,the Daily Caller andthe Daily Signal all publishing the piece as op-eds.”
The video was “the first in a series” attacking Electric Vehicles, and “featuresMark Mills of theManhattan Institute, who Stossel fails to disclose has received over $1.3 million from Koch foundations since 2014 – see tax filings of Charles Koch Foundation and Charles Koch Institute for further detail. John Stossel’s brother Thomas is also a former senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.”
Unsurprisingly, “the 5-minute segment is rife with already-debunked disinformation. Mills claims that it takes mining ‘500,000 pounds’ of minerals to produce an EV battery, a point that has been comprehensively fact-checkedby AFP andUSA Today. He also alleges that the adoption of 500 million EVs would only ‘reduce world oil consumption by about 10%.’ The roughly 16 million EVs on the road already have reduced oil demand by 3.5% in total, so 500 million would certainly lower emissions by more than an additional 6.5%.”
Stossel and Mills want viewers to think EVs are no cleaner than fossil fueled cars, but “Argonne National Laboratoryproduced a model and have a whole page set upto do exactly this calculation. They found that EVs generally emit far less carbon over a 12-year lifespan.'[ani grx]
what’s more, “even in a coal-only grid, EVs come out better for the environment than diesel or petrol alternatives. In addition, a report from the Union of Concerned Scientists found that over their lifetime, EVs produce 50 percent less Greenhouse Gasses than gas or diesel cars. No matter where in the US, an average EV is cleaner than an average gas car, and for 90% of Americans the average EV is better than even the most efficient gas alternative.”
Whoops!
Surely Stossel’s failure to do any sort of journalistic fact-checking of his guest was just an innocent mistake, right?
Perhaps! Maybe Stossel deserves the benefit of the doubt, those of you more kind and forgiving than us may suggest. But consider Stossel’s history, and see if you’re still feeling generous:
:{:{Failure to disclose financial conflicts of interest is the norm for Stossel’s content and guests. In 2017, when his company JFS Productions was revealed as a top contractor of the Charles Koch Institute, a syndicated op-ed defended the Koch family from public criticism.}: In 2022, a two-part video series from Stosel featured Johan Norberg (senior fellow at the Cato Institute) and :{Texas Tech University professor Ben Powell, who is among those involved in a controversial department that has received over $6.5 million from the Charles Koch Foundation. Powell is also an officer of the Koch-funded Association of Private Enterprise Education (APEE:(style="background-color:#ff6600ff"):}:).}:
In 2019, a Stossel
was critically fact checked, prompting him to unsuccessfully sue Facebook for defamation. The video featured a panel consisting entirely of professional climate disinformers affiliated with the Cato Institute, the CO2 Coalition, the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), The Heartland Institute and the Manhattan Institute.
Stossle’s “Center for Independent Thought” is also totally dependent on the same funders of the groups whose representatives he promotes as “other recent donors to Stossel’s Center for Independent Thought include,” Cato and CEI funding Claws Foundation, Cato, CEI and Heartland funding JP Humphreys Foundation, Cato and Manhattan funding Jewish Communal Fund, Cato, CO2 Coalition, CEI, Heartland and Manhattan Institute funding DonorsTrust, and Cat, CO2 Coalition and Manhattan Institute funding Thomas W. Smith Foundation.
Those funders, according to the bulletin, “plus the Charles Koch Foundation, gave a combined total of $1,494,688 to Stossel’s Center from 2019-2020, worth 40% of its $3,783,057 revenue in that two-year period.”
So while “Stossel tries to maintain his image as a reporter, and judging by his large audience across platforms is largely succeeding in that goal. The content itself, however, is far from adhering to journalistic standards from both a factual, ethical and financial standpoint, and should be exposed at every possible opportunity.”
Normally “exposing yourself” is considered a bad thing, but in this context, it’s about the most ethical thing Stossel could do, and the only way to regain any sense of credibility if he actually wanted to be a journalist again.
(Originally appeared at DailyKos)
---
---
https://www.alternet.org/2021/07/fox-news-vaccines/
Fox News is moving even further toward being fully anti-vaxx.
Tuesday night on the conservative channel's "Ingraham Angle" host Laura Ingraham booked Dr. Peter McCullough, who falsely told America, "There's no reason right now, no clinical reason to go get vaccinated."
That's just plain false, according to the CDC and credible medical professionals.
"Virtually all Covid-19 hospitalizations and deaths in United States are now occurring among unvaccinated individuals," White House coronavirus response coordinator Jeff Zients said last week. Almost no fully vaccinated patients have been admitted to hospitals.
Ingraham herself wrongly claimed – or creatively framed – her response.
"Deaths and hospitalizations in almost everywhere is down. Way down."
That too is just plain false – hospitalizations are up.
Just look at these headlines over the past 24 hours:
Notice she left out the rise in coronavirus cases. The daily average of coronavirus cases has more than doubled over the past two weeks, and hospitalizations are also on the rise.
Dr. McCullough on Wednesday wrongly claimed, "the Delta variant really is not responsive at all, or protected by the vaccines."
That is a curious construction. Vaccines protect people, not viruses. And vaccine manufacturers have said the current slate of US vaccines do protect against the Delta variant.
McCullough is a cardiologist and an affiliate professor at Texas A&M College of Medicine.
He also claims "42% of 90,000 Delta cases in the UK have been vaccinated."
NCRM could find nothing that accurately substantiates that claim.
The vaccine is well over 90% effective in preventing infection, but for those who are infected after being fully inoculated, symptoms are almost always mild and do not require hospitalization. The number of fully vaccinated Americans who have died from coronavirus is infinitesimally small.
The Associated Press late last month reported "only about 150 of the more than 18,000 COVID-19 deaths in May were in fully vaccinated people. That translates to about 0.8%, or five deaths per day on average."
Dr. McCullough acknowledges to Fox News viewers there will be a "mild rise" in coronavirus Delta variant cases for vaccinated people, says those cases are "easily treatable in high risk patients," but then says, falsely: "There's no reason right now, no clinical reason to go get vaccinated."
NCRM has reached out to Dr. McCullough but did not immediately receive a response.
Watch: [TWT VID]
atch: Republicans exposed for flip-flopping on vaccines as soon ... ›
- 'Literally killing his audience': Viewers shocked after Tucker Carlson ... ›
- Tucker Carlson tries to blame Joe Biden for Fox News misleading ... ›
RELATED ARTICLES AROUND THE WEB
- Tucker Carlson's Fox News colleagues call out his dangerous anti ... ›
- GOP and Fox News rush to turn vaccine door-knockers into terrifying ... ›
- Fox News Hosts Smear Covid Vaccine, Despite Outbreaks Among ... ›
---
---
https://web.archive.org/web/20130522152522/http://www.atinstitute.org/the-collusion-of-the-climate-crowd/
:{:{}:
}:
christopher C. Horner; The Washington Examiner; July 7, 2012
Not long ago, the American Tradition Institute initiated a transparency campaign using federal and state freedom of information laws to learn more about how taxpayer-funded academics use their positions to advance a particular agenda. On its face, this should have been welcomed by the Left, which often lays claim to the “transparency” mantle. It is instead causing great angst.
Our project would compile the context to the “Climategate” scandal, which, as activist academics central to its revelations assured us, was really an out-of-context misrepresentation. Curiously, the same people think this project a very bad idea.
So do the media and environmentalist establishments. Of the latter, theUnion of Concerned Scientistsbecame particularly exercised, mobilizing left-wing groups to urge universities not to satisfy our requests for public documents.
None of these groups, incidentally, was troubled by a series of similar requests by Greenpeace,[SOON?] whose effort we replicated. They only became opposed when we sought the emails of the sort of activists with whom they work.
Some of these, recently obtained from Texas A&M [hayhow?]University, provide one explanation for this reversal.
For example, they reveal a sophisticated UCS operation to assist activist academics and other government employees as authorities for promoting UCS’s agenda. This includes “moot-courting” congressional hearings with a team of UCS staff, all the way down to providing dossiers on key committee members, addressing in particular their faith, stance on gay marriage and stimulus spending.Of course.
This also includes directing the taxpayers’ servants to outside PR consultants— apparently pro bono or else on UCS’s dime. Keep this last point in mind.
They also expose the New York Times reporter who covers the environment, science and specifically the global warming issue, Justin Gillis, as being no disinterested party.
Gillis wrote a piece in May laboring to undermine one of the most highly credentialed and respected climate “skeptics,”the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Dr. Richard Lindzen. This front-page article prompted my request for information reflecting how the A&M professor and activist whom Gillis quoted was using his taxpayer-funded position.
The specific correspondence began when Gillis wrote that interviewing Lindzen for a piece on his area of expertise was “unavoidable,” and “[s]oI need a really good bibliography of all the published science” countering Lindzen’s position on cloud feedback — “that is, anything that stands as evidence against Lindzen’s claim that the feedback has to be strongly negative.”
Remember, this was a reporter for the New York Times writing this. In the released emails, Gillis comes off as an activist posing as a journalist, sneering at Lindzen. Of another prominent skeptic, Gillis wrote, “I sense you’ve got him in a trap here … can’t wait to see it sprung.” (Ellipses in original.)
Our transparency campaign caused much wailing and gnashing of teeth among academia and its affiliated societies, the Washington Post, and the American Constitution Society.They joined UCS to attest that these sacrosanct exchanges of ideas would be fatally chilled if not granted an unlegislated exemption from freedom of information laws.
So you might be surprised to learn that the Texas A&M email production shows the academics actually forwarding their email discussions outside their circle. To New York Times reporters, for example. They even often copy reporters on the very exchanges they otherwise insist represent an intellectual circle that must remain free from violation by prying, nonacademic eyes. Awkward.
Following my Texas A&M request, a producer contacted me from “Frontline,” a PBS program known for grinding liberal axes. She wanted to discuss our Freedom of Information Act litigation. As we are currently only involved in the high-profile case involving the University of Virginia’s Climategate records, I referred her to lead counsel.
It turns out she was really interested in records requests with two different, more cooperative schools: the Texas A&M request, and one I filed at Texas Tech University. The latter sought a professor and climate activist’s correspondence about a chapter she was writing for Newt Gingrich’s upcoming book. (Naturally, this Texas Tech professor who opposed providing me the emails had already provided them to a Los Angeles Times reporter.)
Now, you might ask, how would two otherwise fairly obscure Texas activists become the subject of interest to “Frontline”? That brings us back to UCS.
One of the emails produced by Texas A&M shows its activist contacting, and being given advice by, a D.C. media consultant, Richard Ades of Prism Public Affairs, “a strategic communications firm that operates at the intersection of public policy and the media” according to its website. The professor says he was referred by Aaron Huertas of UCS.
I have sent two other public records requests following up on these points. Expect the usual suspects to respond in their usual way. The media, academia and environmentalist pressure groups share an agenda, and work closely together to advance it. Remember this when these interests assail efforts to obtain public records shedding light on these activities.
Christopher C. Horner is director of litigation for the American Tradition Institute and author of the forthcoming book “The Liberal War on Transparency: Confessions of a Freedom of Information ‘Criminal’” (Threshold)
==
==
https://www.texasobserver.org/texas-tech-professor-with-close-ties-ag-industry-nominated-trump-regulate/
Texas Tech University professor and food scientist with close ties to the agriculture industry has been tapped by President Donald Trump to oversee food safety for the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Mindy Brashears, who also heads the university’s International Center for Food Industry Excellence, was nominated on Monday for the post, which has been vacant since 2013. It’s one of the federal agency’s highest-ranking positions and requires U.S. Senate confirmation. And though Brashears is an accomplished food safety expert, which at first glance makes her a good pick to ensure the safety of the nation’s meat, poultry and eggs, she also has a financial stake in the industry.
For example, Brashears holds seven patents and has applied for 14 more regarding food decontamination. Many of those patents are related specifically to eliminating bacteria from beef and pork — two products the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service directly oversees. The division has inspectors stationed at more than 6,000 food processing facilities. If Brashears doesn’t divest herself from the patents, she could profit from the very industry she’s regulating, said Tony Corbo, senior lobbyist at Food and Water Watch, a Washington, D.C.-based group that advocates for food and water safety.
At least some of Brashear’s research at Texas Tech has been sponsored by industry. The National Cattlemen’s Association, a trade group that lobbies for the cattle industry, has paid tens of thousands of dollars to fund several of her studies, and the National Pork Board and the National Pork Producers Council also have sponsored research. Industry-sponsored research is an increasingly common phenomenon at universities nationwide where Big Ag has gladly filled research funding gapscreated by government budget cuts. Last year, Brashears was the star witness in the “pink slime” defamation suit brought by South Dakota meat processor Beef Products Inc. against ABC. Brashears testified during the trial that the news network’s characterization of lean finely textured beef as “pink slime” was inaccurate and that the product is safe, wholesome and “100 percent beef.” The company sought $1.9 billion in damages; eventually a confidential settlement was reached.
“Mindy Brashears is great news for us here in the industry.”
Industry has cheered Brashear’s nomination. Colin Woodall, a lobbyist for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, said in a radio interview on Monday that “Mindy Brashears is great news for us here in the industry.” The Texas Farm Bureau called Brashear “a key expert in her field.”
At times, Brashears herself has come off like a spokesperson for the meat industry. After Consumer Reports found alarming levels of bacteria during a survey of hundreds of pounds of conventional beef, Brashears told NBC’s “Today” show, “The beef industry in the U.S. is safe.”
But food safety advocates say that her expertise is colored by her financial involvement with Big Ag. “A lot of her research she has done has been paid for by the industry itself, and primarily the beef industry,” said Corbo. “Whether she can take into account consumer perspectives on some of these food safety issues is going to be something we’re looking at.” Corbo said he anticipates that senators will question Brashears about her potential conflicts of interest during the confirmation process.
Brashears did not immediately return an Observer call for comment on this story on Tuesday.
The Trump administration has repeatedly returned to Texas to find nominees who’ve been exceptionally friendly to business interests. Last year, Trump nominated Kathleen Hartnett White, an aggressively pro-industry former chair of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to lead the U.S. Council on Environmental Quality. (Her nomination was ultimately pulled after it became clear she wouldn’t be confirmed). The administration also tapped former Texas Comptroller Susan Combs, a critic of the Endangered Species Act, for a top position at the U.S. Department of the Interior. Trey Trainor, a Texas attorney who tried to shred the state’s already-weak ethics laws, was nominated last year to a post on the Federal Election Commission. In April, Trump nominated to the federal bench a former deputy attorney general who stymied the Texas investigation into Trump University.
Trump’s USDA has already proved to be friendly to industry. Last year it nixed the Farmer Fair Practice Rule, which would have protected contract chicken farmers from the companies they say drive them into debt through shady business practices. The Trump USDA has also approved increasing the line speeds at pork slaughter facilities, despite some workers’ contentions that the lines are already too fast and dangerous. But there’s no guarantee Brashears will make it through the nomination process — lawmakers have a long line of Trump nominations to clear already, and there’s no currently no timeline for her confirmation.
Christopher Collins
==
http://newsenter.org/lubbock/2018/05/05/253811-trump-selects-texas-tech-prof-for-usda-under-secretary-job.html
On his 470th day in the Oval Office, President Donald J. Trump Friday announced his intention to nominate Dr. Mindy Brashears as the U.S. Department of Agricultures (USDAs) next Under Secretary for Food Safety. It will be many more days before the Texan food safety expert takes office.
Brashears, who was an expert witness in the BPI v. ABC trial last summer is a professor of food safety and public health who is also director of the International Center for Food Industry Excellence at Texas Tech University.
Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, also had positive things to say about Brashears appointment. “Consumers deserve to have confidence that their food is safe and that sound science is used to ensure they have access to the most wholesome products. That is why President Trump’s selection of Dr. Mindy Brashears as Under Secretary for Food Safety is welcome news to America’s farmers and ranchers. Her extensive and innovative track record of improving food safety standards is an excellent fit at USDA, where food safety remains a core part of the agency’s mission, and always a priority for farmers and ranchers,” Duvall said.
The departments top job over food safety, which Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue says is at the core of USDAs mission has been vacant for the past 1,604 days. And it will remain vacant until Dr. Brashears nomination is confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
Brashears is a professor of food safety and public health and the director of the International Center for Food Industry Excellence at Texas Tech University. Brashears’ research program focuses on improving food safety standards to make an impact on public health. In a statement, USDA noted that her highly acclaimed work evaluates interventions in pre-harvest and post-harvest environments and on the emergence of antimicrobial drug resistance in animal feeding systems. These efforts have resulted in commercialization of a pre-harvest feed additive that can reduce Escherichia coli and salmonella in cattle.
Brashears selected for food safety post
USDA unconfirmed nominations ahead of hers include Stephen Alexander Vader as general counsel, Naomi C. Hart as assistant secretary for civil rights, and James E. Hubbard as Under Secretary for natural resources and environment.
Perdue Friday pressed the U.S. Senate to take up all our nominations as quickly as possible.
Food safety is at the core of USDAs mission, because it directly affects the health and well-being of millions of Americans every day. President Trump has made an excellent choice in Dr. Mindy Brashears, and I am excited to have her join the team. Dr. Brashears has spent decades finding ways to improve food safety standards through innovation, invention, and leadership on research missions across the globe. I look forward to her bringing that wealth of expertise and track record of results here to USDA.
Government-wide, the Trump Administration is currently waiting for Senate confirmation on at least 124 additional nominations. According to the Washington Post/Partnership for Public Services tracking of the top 600 executive positions requiring Senate confirmation, only half are nominated and confirmed.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue applauded President Donald J. Trumps recent selection of Mindy Brashears to be the U.S. Department of Agricultures Under Secretary for Food Safety. After the announcement, Perdue issued the following statement:
The average time to confirm a Trump nominee is taking a historic 84 days. That means if Brashears wins confirmation, its unlikely she will take over until late summer or early fall at the earliest.
“Consumers deserve to have confidence that their food is safe and that sound science is used to ensure they have access to the most wholesome products. That is why President Trump’s selection of Dr. Mindy Brashears as Under Secretary for Food Safety is welcome news to America’s farmers and ranchers. Her extensive and innovative track record of improving food safety standards is an excellent fit at USDA, where food safety remains a core part of the agency’s mission, and always a priority for farmers and ranchers.”
Secretary Perdue Applauds President Trumps Selection for USDAs Under Secretary for Food Safety
Generally speaking, Senate Democrats cannot defeat Trump nominees, but they can and do use a bag of procedural tricks to delay them from getting to the necessary floor votes. Secret holds can be placed on a nominee by individual Senators and the minority party can demand 30 hours debate ahead of any nominees floor vote.
The following statement regarding the appointment of Dr. Mindy Brashears as Under Secretary for Food Safety at the Agriculture Department may be attributed to American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall.
Once the White House sends over the formal nomination for Brashears to serve as Under Secretary for Food Safety to the Senate, it’s certain to be assigned to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry.
USDA works to increase ag exports
The appointment of Ken Barbic as USDAs assistant secretary for congressional relations was the most recent to clear the Ag committee and get a favorable floor vote. It took 103 days.
Background: Dr. Brashears is a Professor of Food Safety and Public Health and the Director of the International Center for Food Industry Excellence at Texas Tech University. Dr. Brashears’ research program focuses on improving food safety standards to make an impact on public health. Her highly acclaimed work evaluates interventions in pre- and post-harvest environments and on the emergence of antimicrobial drug resistance in animal feeding systems. These efforts have resulted in commercialization of a pre-harvest feed additive that can reduce E. coli and Salmonella in cattle. She also leads international research teams to Mexico, Central and South America to improve food safety and security and to set up sustainable agriculture systems in impoverished areas. She is past-Chair of the National Alliance for Food Safety and Security and of the USDA multi-state research group.
While Food Safety News last October alone reported that Brashears was one of two candidates for Under Secretary for Food Safety under serious consideration by the White House, she was last in the news during the June 2017 BPI-ABC trial.
“Food safety is at the core of USDA’s mission, because it directly affects the health and well-being of millions of Americans every day. President Trump has made an excellent choice in Dr. Mindy Brashears, and I am excited to have her join the team. Dr. Brashears has spent decades finding ways to improve food safety standards through innovation, invention, and leadership on research missions across the globe. I look forward to her bringing that wealth of expertise and track record of results here to USDA.
Her testimony, including a cross-examination that turned combative, likely contributed to the decision by Disney-owned ABC News to reach a settlement favorable to South Dakota-based BPI. The undisclosed settlement ended a state jury trial tasked with deciding whether ABC News had defamed BPI by repeatedly calling its lean finely textured beef product pink slime.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue today applauded President Donald J. Trump’s selection of Dr. Mindy Brashears to be the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Under Secretary for Food Safety. After the announcement, Secretary Perdue issued the following statement:
Brashears testified with her smile and Texas twang at trial for BPI as one of the nations top beef safety experts. She said BPIs textured beef product was definitely meat and definitely beef and not pink slime.
Dr. Brashears is a Professor of Food Safety and Public Health and the Director of the International Center for Food Industry Excellence at Texas Tech University. Dr. Brashears research program focuses on improving food safety standards to make an impact on public health. Her highly acclaimed work evaluates interventions in pre- and post-harvest environments and on the emergence of antimicrobial drug resistance in animal feeding systems. These efforts have resulted in commercialization of a pre-harvest feed additive that can reduce E. coli and Salmonella in cattle. She also leads international research teams to Mexico, Central and South America to improve food safety and security and to set up sustainable agriculture systems in impoverished areas. She is past-Chair of the National Alliance for Food Safety and Security and of the USDA multi-state research group.
Her cross-examination by ABCs attorneys from the prominent Williams & Connolly law firm in Washington D.C. was tough and spirited, but Brashears was still left smiling. Disney financial statements later indicatedABCs legal settlement with BPI was at least $177 million.
Food safety is at the core of USDAs mission, because it directly affects the health and well-being of millions of Americans every day. President Trump has made an excellent choice in Dr. Mindy Brashears, and I am excited to have her join the team. Dr. Brashears has spent decades finding ways to improve food safety standards through innovation, invention, and leadership on research missions across the globe. I look forward to her bringing that wealth of expertise and track record of results here to USDA.
Her highly acclaimed work evaluates interventions in pre- and post-harvest environments and on the emergence of antimicrobial drug resistance in animal feeding systems. These efforts have resulted in the commercialization of a pre-harvest feed additive that can reduce E. coli and Salmonella in cattle, Secretary Perdues statement said.
(Washington, D.C., May 4, 2018) – U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue today applauded President Donald J. Trumps selection of Dr. Mindy Brashears to be the U.S. Department of Agricultures (USDA) Under Secretary for Food Safety. After the announcement, Secretary Perdue issued the following statement:
In addition to her research, Brashears has led international research teams to Mexico, Central and South America to improve food safety and security and to set up sustainable agriculture systems in impoverished areas.
Dec. 13, 2013, was the last day Dr. Elizabeth Hagen served as USDAs Under Secretary for Food Safety. She was nominated in 2010 by President Obama and quickly confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
“Her work evaluates interventions in pre- and post-harvest environments and on the emergence of antimicrobial drug resistance in animal feeding systems and has resulted in the commercialization of a pre-harvest feed additive that can reduce E. coli and Salmonella in cattle,” according to the release. She is also a past chair of the National Alliance for Food Safety and Security and of the USDA multi-state research group.
A-J Media Mindy Brashears, a professor of food microbiology and food safety in Texas Techs College of Agricultural Sciences & Natural Resources, has been selected by President Donald Trump as the new under secretary for food safety in the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Brashears appeared as an expert witness last year for Beef Products Inc., helping the Sioux City, Iowa, food company negotiate a multimillion settlement from ABC News. The company had sued ABC, alleging it had been disparaged by the news organization when it described a beef product as “pink slime.” Brashears told the jury that BPI’s lean finely textured beef is meat, is beef, is nutritious and is entirely safe to eat.
Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue said in a statement issued Friday morning that food safety is at the core of the USDAs mission, because it directly affects the health and well-being of millions of Americans every day.
A rose to … the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which this week highlighted USDAs success and continuing commitment to expanding trade and increasing rural prosperity through ag exports. We encourage leaders at USDA to continue talking up ag trade. The message about the importance of trade to rural America and the nations economy cannot be understated, but it can be undermined with threats of tariffs and suspicious comments about multinational trade agreements.
“President Trump has made an excellent choice in Dr. Mindy Brashears, and I am excited to have her join the team. Dr. Brashears has spent decades finding ways to improve food safety standards through innovation, invention and leadership on research missions across the globe. I look forward to her bringing that wealth of expertise and track record of results here to USDA,” Perdue said.
According to a bio on Texas Techs website, Brashears is not only a professor in classes such as food microbiology and food safety, but she also serves as the director of the International Center for Food Industry Excellence at Tech. Her research has focused on interventions in pre- and post-harvest environments and on the emergence of antimicrobial drug resistance. Her interests are primarily in meat and poultry products, with some work on spinach. Her work has resulted in the commercialization of pre-harvest feed additives that reduce E. coli and Salmonella in cattle.
Perdue said there are still qualified people in addition to Brashears awaiting confirmation to fill key roles at USDA, and urged the Senate to take up all of the nominations as quickly as possible.
==
==
Texas Tech University
In 2015, Texas Tech scored more than $2 million from the Charles Koch Foundation, which bankrolls the school's Free Market Institute, a privately funded think tank that also managed to siphon $1.4 million of public money from a state incentives program.
Its director, sweatshop defender Benjamin Powell, got his doctorate from GMU and is on the executive committee of the Association of Private Enterprise Education, an organization financed in part by Koch that holds annual gatherings where Koch-funded professors, think-tank researchers and private industry representatives share strategies for founding and expanding free-market programs at colleges and universities. The Institute's board includes several Koch-linked professors from other schools including Peter Boettke of GMU, who's been a visiting scholar at the Free Market Institute and has been featuring at the Institute's "Weekend Exploring Liberty," cohosted by IHS.
"Evidence of an enduring impact from this research could include observing free-market think tanks change their strategy of promoting social change to more closely mirror the findings of our research," wrote Powell in a grant application to another private funder. "Other evidence may include pro-freedom policy makers changing their strategies to mirror the findings of our research."
The Charles Koch Foundation also funds Texas Tech's Institute for the Study of Western Civilization, which co-hosted an event with the right-wing, Koch-funded Texas Public Policy Foundation that presented a panel featuring the Koch Foundation's director of university relations and the deputy director of the Koch-funded Center for the Philosophy of Freedom at the University of Arizona.
The Texas Observer reported that the Koch Foundation made a $7.7 million long-term commitment to Texas Tech in 2016, causing significant outcry from faculty and students.
Utah State University
==
Wendy and the Pious Hospital Bed Maker
With so many fingers in so many pies, it’s often difficult to keep up with Dr. Wendy Gramm. In addition to Mercatus Center, she serves as the chairman of the board of another conservative organization “whose positions on issues can make the difference between life and death for major legislation.”
The Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) “501(c) non-profit, non-partisan research institute” is run by a man Texas Monthly called “the most influential Republican in Texas” and probably a person most people have never heard of.
Austin Democratic political consultant George Shipley once called the shy and unassuming Dr. James Leninger, “ the sugar daddy and godfather of the Republican right wing in Texas.”
Besides the many groups with a local political interest, Leininger has funded national social conservative organizations, including the American Family Association (considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center) , Christian Pro-Life Foundation, Family Research Council, and Focus on the Family.
Molly Ivins reports:
Leninger tends to give his PACs and foundations innocuous names — Texans for Justice, the Texas Public Policy Foundation, the Texas Justice Foundation, Children’s Economic Opportunity Foundation, Texans for Governmental Integrity, the A PAC for Parental School Choice, etc. According to the Current (a weekly alternative paper), Leininger is also a major donor to, or plays a leading role in, at least a dozen major right-wing groups. Politically, he has given not only to Christian-right school board candidates and right-wing legislative candidates but also to Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Phil Gramm, and he was Rick Perry’s largest campaign contributor ($500,000) in Perry’s race for lieutenant governor.
The mission of TPPF, founded by Leninger in 1989, is to “promote and defend liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise in Texas and the nation by educating and affecting policymakers and the Texas public policy debate with academically sound research and outreach.”
A conservative and devoutly religious Republican businessman, Leininger made his personal fortune through Kinetic Concepts, based in San Antonio, which makes and rents therapeutic beds for patients who are paralyzed or suffer from serious illnesses. As humble as that might sound, take note, KCI Revenue for 2008 was $1.88 billion, increasing to $1.99 billion in 2009 and in 2010 increased to $2.02 billion.
Incidentally, Rick Perry, before he ran for lieutenant governor developed a lucrative relationship with Leininger. According to a Houston Chronicle piece dated September 21, 1997:
On Jan. 13, 1995, Perry bought $38,875 worth of stock in Kinetic Concepts, a company owned by Jim Leininger, a San Antonio physician, conservative activist and major Perry campaign donor. Perry invested an additional $35,167 in the company on Jan. 24, 1996 — the same day he spoke at a luncheon that Leininger attended. Later that day, an investment firm bought 2.2 million shares of Kinetic Concepts stock, driving up its price. Perry sold his Kinetic Concepts holdings a month later for a $38,382 profit. Leininger and Perry acknowledged they spoke at the luncheon but denied discussing the stock.
Just a terribly fortunate coincidence? Back in 1997, Wendy Gramm also (coincidentally) had ties to Leininger’s company. Gramm earned a miniscule $25,000 a year as a member of the Kinetic Concepts board of directors. She also held stock options in the company when Kinetic Concepts Inc. agreed to sell most of the company to two San Francisco investor firms in a deal worth $850 million to $875 million.
It is no exaggeration to say that Rick Perry owes a lot to Leninger. There is the new report issued by Texans for Public Justice, a money-and-politics watchdog group.
Perry might never have been governor — nor now be a presidential candidate — but for James Leininger. In a game-changing 1998 race then-Texas Agriculture Commissioner Perry was elected Lieutenant Governor. That victory secured Perry’s automatic promotion to governor two years later when President-Elect Bush abandoned the Governor’s Mansion. Perry narrowly won his fateful 1998 race against Democrat John Sharp, capturing just 50.04 percent of the vote. This squeaker victory was secured by an eleventh-hour media blitz that Perry paid for with a last-minute, $1.1 million loan. Leininger and two other Texas tycoons guaranteed the loan, which supplied more than 10 percent of the $10.3 million that Perry raised for that election. Leininger’s family and company PAC contributed $62,500 to that Perry campaign. Leininger also was the No. 1 contributor at the time to the Texas Republican Party (then chaired by former Leininger employee Susan Weddington), which sank $82,760 into that Perry campaign. “I congratulate Leininger,” Perry opponent John Sharp said at the time. “He wanted to buy the reins of state government. And by God, he got them.”
Through the TPPF, Leininger has used his wealth to promote his own conservative-religious agenda in a variety of ways. Karen Olsson writes in Texas Monthly, Leininger was the driving force back in 2002 to influence the Texas Board of Education to re-write school textbooks.
... TPPF aimed to influence policy by publishing research reports on state issues; its early preoccupations mirrored several of Leininger's own: tort reform, vouchers, and reduced government. Working in tandem with the new SBOE [State Board of Education] members, the TPPF began objecting to textbook material deemed liberally slanted or morally suspect. The Legislature retaliated in 1995, forbidding the SBOE to question any aspect of textbook content other than "factual errors." Despite the restriction, the TPPF continued to analyze proposed books, hiring researchers to ferret out errors both of fact and of insufficient patriotism. Last winter the group helped bat down an environmental-science textbook (in large part because of a poorly written sentence linking democracy to pollution); this summer it criticized proposed social science and history textbooks for failing to disavow socialism.
While the TPPF’s involvement in Texas textbooks may seem like a very narrow agenda, its policy interests, in fact, are wide-ranging, covering many conservative causes. Teddy Wilson, progressive political activist and blogger notes:
The TPPF supports the predictable conservative line on a whole host of issues. The TPPF disputes the scientific evidence of climate changes and claims that the “scientific consensus has never been as broad as proclaimed,” and the compromised emails of climate scientists showed “data manipulation and fundamental errors now discredit a once broadly accepted body of science.” The “private sector can bring innovation and competition to the criminal justice system” is how the TPPF frames its advocacy of the private prison industry, despite that there has been no evidence to support that the privatization of the prison industry has provided any public savings. The TPPF even has an entire center dedicate to “Tenth Amendment Studies,” which is a favorite Constitutional Amendment among the Tea Party faithful.
If any of this sounds depressingly familiar, then there’s a good good reason. Two long time supporters of TPPF are foundations associated with Koch Industries (Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation and Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation) which contributed contributing $383,125 in 2005-2009 and nearly a half million dollars between 1997 and 2009.
Rick Perry’s Wrong Approach
In Perry’s campaign book, Fed Up! the governor says that he knows of no other organization that is better positioned than Texas Public Policy Foundation to help “foster a national conversation” about “the proper role of government in our lives."
However, last May, TPPF might have pushed its agenda a bit too hard. Its attempts to influence educational policy created quite a controversy. Seven breakthrough solutions to problems with the Texas’ high educational system were drafted by TPPF in its think-tank capacity, and promoted by Governor Perry.
It did not go over as well as expected. In response, five A&M faculty members from various disciplines drafted a letter to Richard Box, the chairman of the Texas A&M University System Board of Regents, laying out their concern regarding the lack of transparency in the board's apparent intention to implement seven proposed "breakthrough solutions" promoted by the TPPF. The seven recommendations advocated “a business-style, market-driven approach under which colleges and universities would treat students as customers, de-emphasize research that isn't immediately lucrative, and evaluate individual faculty by the tuition revenue they generate.”
Within a few days of the letter being posted online, more than 530 faculty members had added their names. The A&M Chancellor Mike McKinney eventually resigned.
All this is rather ironic of course since Wendy Gramm served on the board of Regents from 2001 to 2007, (as mentioned in Part 1) and serves as chairman in TPPF. Coincidence can quickly be discounted.
A concise assessment of TPPF’s market-oriented recommendations makes a fine case for rejection.
Put simply, this is the wrong approach... the classroom is not a marketplace. The proposals reviewed here will not promote effective learning or the responsible use of resources inside a laboratory, library or seminar room. The University of Texas at Austin's bottom line is to provide a first-class education while spending our resources responsibly and efficiently. Separating those two goals is like separating research from teaching: it serves the wrong bottom line. Similarly, treating students as customers, offering them a "product" designed to win positive reviews and then rewarding the most popular instructors will neither challenge students in meaningful ways nor foster the deep learning and skills they will need throughout life.
Many feel the Perry’s close association with TPPF has damaged the university. This is turn has damaged the governor’s image. He would have Wendy Gramm, its chairman, to thank for that.
As the editors of The Eagle Bryan-College Station remark:
Texas A&M University has the support of its former students that is the envy of many universities. Aggies love their alma mater and it shows in many ways. One Aggie, however, should love his school less and, in fact, should stay out of its business. Gov. Rick Perry's obsession and interference in A&M has caused great harm, damage some observers feel could take a generation to undo. From his appointment of regents with greater fealty to him than to the university system they are supposed to represent to his constant meddling in the day-to-day operations of the flagship university to his infatuation with the Texas Public Policy Foundation -- an ultraconservative think tank that seeks to insinuate itself into every corner of state government -- Perry has proven not to be a friend of A&M, but rather a hindrance.Never before has a governor of Texas had such deadly influence on a major state university, and Perry's meddling blocks the way of A&M's oft-stated efforts to achieve greatness.
The Texas Public Policy Foundation seems harmless on the surface, with its stated goals of limited government, individual liberties, free markets, personal responsibility and private property rights. Most Texans probably would subscribe to those goals. Dig below the surface, however, and you see just how radical its efforts are.
Founded by arch-conservative physician James Leininger, the foundation board is chaired by Wendy Gramm, former Texas A&M regent and wife of former Sen. Phil Gramm. Current Regent Phil Adams of Bryan is a board member, a clear conflict of interest to his responsibilities to A&M.The foundations website says, "The public is demanding a different direction for their government, and the Texas Public Policy Foundation is providing the ideas that enable policymakers to chart that new course."
Unfortunately, thanks to Perry's influence, those ideas become mandates, without discussion and input from the people of this great state....Perry has been in thrall to the Texas Public Policy Foundation and its backers since he began accepting generous contributions from them in his first statewide race. Texas cannot, however, be run by contribution and those most able to spend big bucks to help buy elections, no matter which side of the political spectrum they are on.
A&M is well on its way to achieving greatness. It would be a shame to let Rick Perry and his cohorts derail that with their interference.Rick Perry can love Texas A&M more by meddling less -- preferably not at all. Beyond appointing the best regents he can find -- no matter who they contributed to in the last gubernatorial election -- and attending football games at Kyle Field, Perry should leave A&M alone.
Rick Perry Phil Gramm Nexus
A graph of the relationships mentioned in the posts.[dl 7/31/15]
Epilogue
In researching and writing this post, I was astonished at how much harm two people can do to the country. One would think that our system would be stronger than that. That our long established system of checks and balances would prevent people like the Gramms from ever inflicting too great a harm to the nation. But then the underlying purpose of all the de-regulation that the Republicans have called for (and have achieved) is really just a means to an end, a method of abolishing the safety checks that had, for the most part, protected our institutions. Once those have been removed, anything is possible.
Even this list of all of the misdeeds of Mr. and Mrs. Gramm, as comprehensive as it might seem, is partial. Still I should think this is enough information about Perry and the friends of Rick for most intelligent voters to help them decide who the governor of Texas owes his allegiance to.
I began this investigation with a quote from the first president of the United States and I shall end it with two quotes by its fourth, James Madison.
“All men having power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree”
And this is especially true when those that wield the power are partially hidden behind masks and puppets. When it comes to peoples like the Gramms- whose working relationship with a presidential candidate is not only acknowledged but applauded- it is simply not possible to be as vigilant as necessary. Since justice has apparently failed- not once but repeatedly in this case, the only option is to make sure than any candidate connected with such people is not elected to high office. We literally cannot afford it. Now is the time to make sure that Perry doesn't come any closer to the White House than he is at this minute.
When reflecting on the various attempts by Phil and Wendy Gramm to by-pass, ignore or remove the regulatory powers of our government to protect its citizens, it is helpful to recall this other quote by Madison:
“If men were angels no government would be necessary”
And when you are dealing with a pair like the Gramms (along with so many other less-than- angelic types), it's all the more reason that we need more regulations in place, not less. Ironically, despite having waved the flags of deregulation at every opportunity, Mr. and Mrs. Gramm themselves provide the best proof of the necessity, the vital importance of having tight regulations and the power to punish those that violate them.
---
http://politicalgates.blogspot.com/2011/11/friends-of-rick-perry-mr-and-mrs-gramm_14.html
links:
...With so many fingers in so many pies, it’s often difficult to keep up with Dr. Wendy Gramm. In addition to Mercatus Center, she serves as the chairman of the board of another conservative organization “whose positions on issues can make the difference between life and death for major legislation.”
The Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) “501(c) non-profit, non-partisan research institute” is run by a man Texas Monthly called “the most influential Republican in Texas” and probably a person most people have never heard of.
Austin Democratic political consultant George Shipley once called the shy and unassuming Dr. James Leninger, “ the sugar daddy and godfather of the Republican right wing in Texas.”
Besides the many groups with a local political interest, Leininger has funded national social conservative organizations, including the American Family Association (considered a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center) , Christian Pro-Life Foundation, Family Research Council, andFocus on the Family.
Molly Ivins reports:
Leninger tends to give his PACs and foundations innocuous names — Texans for Justice, the Texas Public Policy Foundation, the Texas Justice Foundation, Children’s Economic Opportunity Foundation, Texans for Governmental Integrity, the A PAC for Parental School Choice, etc. According to the Current (a weekly alternative paper), Leininger is also a major donor to, or plays a leading role in, at least a dozen major right-wing groups. Politically, he has given not only to Christian-right school board candidates and right-wing legislative candidates but also to Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Phil Gramm, and he was Rick Perry’s largest campaign contributor ($500,000) in Perry’s race for lieutenant governor.
The mission of TPPF, founded by Leninger in 1989, is to “promote and defend liberty, personal responsibility, and free enterprise in Texas and the nation by educating and affecting policymakers and the Texas public policy debate with academically sound research and outreach.”
A conservative and devoutly religious Republican businessman, Leininger made his personal fortune through Kinetic Concepts, based in San Antonio, which makes and rents therapeutic beds for patients who are paralyzed or suffer from serious illnesses. As humble as that might sound, take note, KCI Revenue for 2008 was $1.88 billion, increasing to $1.99 billion in 2009 and in 2010 increased to $2.02 billion.
Incidentally, Rick Perry, before he ran for lieutenant governor developed a lucrative relationship with Leininger. According to aHouston Chronicle piece dated September 21, 1997:
On Jan. 13, 1995, Perry bought $38,875 worth of stock in Kinetic Concepts, a company owned by Jim Leininger, a San Antonio physician, conservative activist and major Perry campaign donor. Perry invested an additional $35,167 in the company on Jan. 24, 1996 — the same day he spoke at a luncheon that Leininger attended. Later that day, an investment firm bought 2.2 million shares of Kinetic Concepts stock, driving up its price. Perry sold his Kinetic Concepts holdings a month later for a $38,382 profit. Leininger and Perry acknowledged they spoke at the luncheon but denied discussing the stock.
Just a terribly fortunate coincidence? Back in 1997, Wendy Gramm also (coincidentally) had ties to Leininger’s company. Gramm earned a miniscule $25,000 a year as a member of the Kinetic Concepts board of directors. She also held stock options in the company when Kinetic Concepts Inc. agreed to sell most of the company to two San Francisco investor firms in a deal worth $850 million to $875 million.
It is no exaggeration to say that Rick Perry owes a lot to Leninger. There is the new report issued byTexans for Public Justice, a money-and-politics watchdog group.
Perry might never have been governor — nor now be a presidential candidate — but for James Leininger. In a game-changing 1998 race then-Texas Agriculture Commissioner Perry was elected Lieutenant Governor. That victory secured Perry’s automatic promotion to governor two years later when President-Elect Bush abandoned the Governor’s Mansion. Perry narrowly won his fateful 1998 race against Democrat John Sharp, capturing just 50.04 percent of the vote. This squeaker victory was secured by an eleventh-hour media blitz that Perry paid for with a last-minute, $1.1 million loan. Leininger and two other Texas tycoons guaranteed the loan, which supplied more than 10 percent of the $10.3 million that Perry raised for that election. Leininger’s family and company PAC contributed $62,500 to that Perry campaign. Leininger also was the No. 1 contributor at the time to the Texas Republican Party (then chaired by former Leininger employee Susan Weddington), which sank $82,760 into that Perry campaign. “I congratulate Leininger,” Perry opponent John Sharp said at the time. “He wanted to buy the reins of state government. And by God, he got them.”
Through the TPPF, Leininger has used his wealth to promote his own conservative-religious agenda in a variety of ways. Karen Olsson writes in Texas Monthly, Leininger was the driving force back in 2002 to influence the Texas Board of Education to re-write school textbooks.
... TPPF aimed to influence policy by publishing research reports on state issues; its early preoccupations mirrored several of Leininger's own: tort reform, vouchers, and reduced government. Working in tandem with the new SBOE [State Board of Education] members, the TPPF began objecting to textbook material deemed liberally slanted or morally suspect. The Legislature retaliated in 1995, forbidding the SBOE to question any aspect of textbook content other than "factual errors." Despite the restriction, the TPPF continued to analyze proposed books, hiring researchers to ferret out errors both of fact and of insufficient patriotism. Last winter the group helped bat down an environmental-science textbook (in large part because of a poorly written sentence linking democracy to pollution); this summer it criticized proposed social science and history textbooks for failing to disavow socialism.
While the TPPF’s involvement in Texas textbooks may seem like a very narrow agenda, its policy interests, in fact, are wide-ranging, covering many conservative causes. Teddy Wilson, progressive political activist and blogger notes:
The TPPF supports the predictable conservative line on a whole host of issues. The TPPFdisputes the scientific evidence of climate changes and claims that the “scientific consensus has never been as broad as proclaimed,” and the compromised emails of climate scientists showed “data manipulation and fundamental errors now discredit a once broadly accepted body of science.” The “private sector can bring innovation and competition to the criminal justice system” is how the TPPF frames its advocacy of the private prison industry, despite that there has been no evidence to support that the privatization of the prison industry has provided any public savings. The TPPF even has an entire center dedicate to “Tenth Amendment Studies,” which is a favorite Constitutional Amendment among the Tea Party faithful.
If any of this sounds depressingly familiar, then there’s a good good reason. Two long time supporters of TPPF are foundations associated with Koch Industries (Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation and Claude R. Lambe Charitable Foundation) which contributed contributing $383,125 in 2005-2009 and nearly a half million dollars between 1997 and 2009.
:{Rick Perry’s Wrong Approach:{}:
}:
In Perry’s campaign book, Fed Up! the governor says that he knows of no other organization that is better positioned than Texas Public Policy Foundation to help “foster a national conversation” about “the proper role of government in our lives."
However, last May, TPPF might have pushed its agenda a bit too hard. Its attempts to influence educational policy created quite a controversy. Seven breakthrough solutions to problems with the Texas’ high educational system were drafted by TPPF in its think-tank capacity, and promoted by Governor Perry.
It did not go over as well as expected. In response, five A&M faculty members from various disciplines drafted a letter to Richard Box, the chairman of the Texas A&M University System Board of Regents, laying out their concern regarding the lack of transparency in the board's apparent intention to implement seven proposed "breakthrough solutions" promoted by the TPPF. The seven recommendations advocated “a business-style, market-driven approach under which colleges and universities would treat students as customers, de-emphasize research that isn't immediately lucrative, and evaluate individual faculty by the tuition revenue they generate.”
Within a few days of the letter being posted online, more than 530 faculty members had added their names. The A&M Chancellor Mike McKinney eventually resigned.
All this is rather ironic of course since Wendy Gramm served on the board of Regents from 2001 to 2007, (as mentioned in Part 1) and serves as chairman in TPPF. Coincidence can quickly be discounted.
A concise assessment of TPPF’s market-oriented recommendations makes a fine case for rejection.
Put simply, this is the wrong approach... the classroom is not a marketplace. The proposals reviewed here will not promote effective learning or the responsible use of resources inside a laboratory, library or seminar room. The University of Texas at Austin's bottom line is to provide a first-class education while spending our resources responsibly and efficiently. Separating those two goals is like separating research from teaching: it serves the wrong bottom line. Similarly, treating students as customers, offering them a "product" designed to win positive reviews and then rewarding the most popular instructors will neither challenge students in meaningful ways nor foster the deep learning and skills they will need throughout life....
---
atz
Richard A Brain (3)
Syngenta
Ronald J. Kendall
Ronald J. Kendall (3)
Texas Tech University
Alan Hosmer
Alan Hosmer (2)
Syngenta
Todd Alan Anderson
Todd Alan Anderson (2)
Texas Tech University
Michael Winchell
Michael Winchell (1)
Stone Environmental Inc
---
toxicologists?
- Floy Lilley, J.D., Advisor, Chair of Free Enterprise, Univ. of Texas:
- :{:{}:
Floy Lilley, J.D. is the Program Manager of the Chair of Free Enterprise at the University of Texas at Austin, and the Vice Chair of Sovereignty International. She has attended U.N. meetings around the world and brought her dynamic message to audiences throughout the United States.
Her daily reports from U.N. Climate Change meetings, posted on the Sovereignty International web site are among the most comprehensive reports available.
}:
---