There are many factors and issues that go into winning a political campaign, and the ones swirling about the Texas Republican Primary were numerous. Incumbent governor Rick Perry cruised to an easy victory over sitting U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and activist Debra Medina on Tuesday to set up a general election showdown with former Houston mayor Bill White, a Democrat.
It’s worth recalling that last year Perry distinguished himself as the anti-Smart Growth governor, bucking a trend in which political leaders at all levels embrace this command-and-control planning doctrine. In June 2009, Governor Perry vetoed SB 2169 - a bill relating to “the establishment of a smart growth policy work group and the development of a smart growth policy for this state.”
In his veto message, Governor Perry said:
Senate Bill No. 2169 would create a new governmental body that would centralize the decision-making process in Austin for the planning of communities through an interagency work group on “smart growth” policy…. This legislation would promote a one-size-fits-all approach to land use and planning that would not work across a state as large and diverse as Texas.
I’m not sure if this was on many minds as voters headed to the polls, but there does seem to be a strong sentiment among Texans against top-down centralized planning. The recent mayor’s race in Houston grabbed national attention because of the winner’s sexual orientation. But earlier Annise Parker had soundly defeated über-Smart Growth advocate Peter Brown, setting up her run-off with Gene Locke. Brown had made zoning and central planning a centerpiece of his campaign.
Texas has out-performed most other states in terms of economic vitality, housing affordability and other quality of life indicators, and its cities crowd Business Week’s top ten list of metros least touched by the recession.
When it comes to Smart Growth and centralized planning, political leaders at all levels and in all states should embrace the Lone Star attitude: Don’t Mess With Texas!
Email this Blog entry
Anti-Smart Growth Governor Wins Primary
This is where I want to say is likely to shock you. After all, why should we listen to you? It would not be that Texas cities.
I traveled 50 states and can assure that there are attractive towns and villages across the country and there are some very ugly and unattractive. The State of Texas has the most attractive and the nature of the urban poor than they should. As bad as some cities in Texas, look, it seems that these results have been deliberately, in some cases, as with the apparent lack of planning, care planning or urban sprawl.
Combine that with the monotony of the flat landscape visible in the metropolitan area of Houston, Dallas Fort Worth metro and many other cities there, and you have a recipe for boring, ugly and dishwasher.mortgage calculator
A sirious subject
I congraculate my friend for demanding this subject. dizi izle
I don't think so!
In regard to this article and the conclusion reached in the last paragraph, I strongly disagree!
Texas may be enjoying considerable economic growth & success at this time but no economic trend is permanent or at least without major variations, as Texans who lived there through the oil patch bust of the mid to late 1980's will recall. It was an awful time period for one to try to prosper & find a job in the Lone Star State.
Specifically regarding the last paragraph & it's smart-alecky tone of advice, don't tell the rest of us living elsewhere what to do! And don't bother denigrating our moves toward the smart growth principles. Business & political leadership & the citizenry have made choices to embrace smart growth principles in an effort to improve the quality of life in other regions of the country. It may come as a surprise to you but the market often demands the change toward such new principles.
Here's where what I am saying is probably going to shock you. After all, why should we listen to you? We don't want to LOOK like Texas cities.
I have traveled a great deal through our 50 states & can guarantee that there are beautiful cities & towns across this country & there are some remarkably unattractive & ugly looking ones. The state of Texas has far more of the unattractive & ugly kind of urban settings than it should have. As bad as some Texas cities look, it almost seems that such outcomes were intentional in some instances, what with the obvious lack of zoning, planning or concern for urban sprawl.
Combine that with the dullness of the flat landscape evident in metro Houston, metro Dallas Fort Worth & across many of the other cities there, & you have a recipe for surefire dull as dishwater ugliness.
And I haven't even mentioned the ghastly urban air quality in the summer!
I hate to sound ugly here & did not start out with such intentions but the sophomoric & smug tone of the article called for such a response.
Smart Growth is Fiscally Dumb
In the DC area, our Metro system is asking taxpayers for more money, in order to increase base pay per worker to $70,000, and to offer an additional $31,000 per worker in fringe benefits. Yes, the average transit worker here now makes six figures at a time when private sector benefits have been cut to the bone.
Additionally, this system employs 3,000 more workers than the entire Virginia Department of Transportation, which is responsible for neighborhood streets and handles far more trips per day.
I have no problem with updating architecture away from the unquestionably ugly 1970s junk we see in suburbs across the country, and eliminating cul-de-sacs. But all I've ever seen from "smart" growth is costly transit systems, chain-dominated retail patrolled by mall cops, and publicity seeking architects like Duany Plater-Zyberk. Meanwhile, many of our most interesting and walkable neighborhoods in the DC area are far from metro stations and feature small re-developments that are designed to a scale that meets the needs of the people who will live there, not to one that will catch the attention of the American Institute of Architects.