What is Texas Gov Rick Perry's record? What has he DONE?

[Little-Acorn]

Sounds like more and more people are pushed for Texas Governor Rick Perry to run for President. And I guess he gave a real barn-burner of a speech the other day.

But pretty speeches are a dime a dozen, especially from politicians. Recall how many the present suit in the Oval office has given.

I much prefer to judge a politician by what he as DONE, not what he says. One of the reasons I don't care much for Mitt Romney, who signed Romneycare into law in Mass and still says it's good.

So, what is Rick Perry's record? I haven't paid much attention to him so far, and don't know. What has he voted for, gotten enacted, signed into law at Governor of Texas, and before?

Anybody know?

[Little-Acorn]

A few things noted in HotLineOnCall:



http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2011/06/perry-roadtests.php

This year alone, Perry's 11th in the governor's mansion, he signed legislation to require plaintiffs who lose lawsuits against corporations to pay additional legal costs and a measure that requires voters to show identification when they show up at the ballot box


Not a bad start, if true.

Anything else, good or bad?

[fj1200]

The Federal Reserve Bank in Dallas recently estimated that since June 2009, Texas has produced about 37% of the net new jobs in the U.S. At The Journal's offices this week, Gov. Perry said a closer look puts the Texas new-jobs number closer to 48%. Whatever. It's an astounding feat.
...
Texas. Without the details of the Texas economic boom, this is a normal candidacy. But the details are impressive. Texas is a zero income-tax state, and Mr. Perry gives the impression he'd die at the Alamo before allowing one. The state is historically business-friendly. I recall attending the 1992 GOP convention in Houston, visiting from New York, and feeling as if I were in a capitalist utopia. You could argue that many of the state's new companies are mainly fleeing intolerable hells, such as California. But Texas and Mr. Perry keep producing new welcome mats, notably the recent passage of a loser-pays tort-reform bill. Mr. Perry says Haley Barbour told him they'd need turnstiles on the border if that tort bill passed, and indeed the in-migration of doctors to Texas is significant.

What makes a Perry candidacy intriguing is that he has built out the Texas story into a political philosophy, or movement, erected around the Tenth Amendment. In economic terms, Mr. Perry argues that the nation will grow more if we have 50 states competing with each other rather than competing to survive Washington. But it's broader than that. The tea party is mostly about spending. The Perry argument is about the fundamental relationship between the states and Washington. It's about decades of federal encroachment on state prerogatives.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304319804576387780314819172.html

He beats the Tea Party on that last point if you ask me.

[Kathianne]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304319804576387780314819172.html

He beats the Tea Party on that last point if you ask me.

I disagree with the emphasis credited to the tea party. Those that are yaking about planned parenthood and such are not the tea party, but the far right wing of GOP. The tea parties are framed around principles that include federalism, the same principles that you are crediting Perry with.

[fj1200]

I disagree with the emphasis credited to the tea party. Those that are yaking about planned parenthood and such are not the tea party, but the far right wing of GOP. The tea parties are framed around principles that include federalism, the same principles that you are crediting Perry with.

The article didn't mention PP. I didn't credit Perry, the article did, but nevertheless I don't think deficit reduction/spending should be THE argument to be making in the coming election. It has to be more about what the Federal/State relationship should be as well as the best way to get the economy on more firm ground. It can't be a whole bunch of "we're not Obama..."

[Kathianne]

The article didn't mention PP. I didn't credit Perry, the article did, but nevertheless I don't think deficit reduction/spending should be THE argument to be making in the coming election. It has to be more about what the Federal/State relationship should be as well as the best way to get the economy on more firm ground. It can't be a whole bunch of "we're not Obama..."

I couldn't agree with you more, neither could most that agree with the tea parties. What I originally feared has come to pass, they are being smeared as if the far right were them. They are not.

[fj1200]

It'll be up to the candidates to drive their own message but if we nominate a Tea Party "favorite." That would spell trouble IMO.

[Kathianne]

It'll be up to the candidates to drive their own message but if we nominate a Tea Party "favorite." That would spell trouble IMO.

Those actually that are aligned with the tea party, aren't looking at the next presidential election, but local reps and state reps to Congress. Those that have co-opted are saying that they are something they are not.

[revelarts]

Rick Perry
Wolf in Sheep's clothing
http://conservativebyte.com/2011/06/texas-governor-orders-std-vaccine-for-all-girls/


This story covers at least 2 issues
Parental rights -- Respect for Legislative Authority

Bypassing the Legislature altogether, Republican Gov. Rick Perry issued an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.

By employing an executive order, Perry sidestepped opposition in the Legislature from conservatives and parents’ rights groups who fear such a requirement would condone premarital sex and interfere with the way Texans raise their children.

Beginning in September 2008, girls entering the sixth grade — meaning, generally, girls ages 11 and 12 — will have to receive Gardasil, Merck & Co.’s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV....
What does that show us about how he'll handle congress , or stay within his legal limits as CiC. Not so good.
If you check you'll find info about his link to the drug companies that make the vaccine.




This Story Show how Perry worked against Property owners and For Foreign Corporation Campaign donors to Pass/veto regs to build the NAFTA Super highways, Texas portion.
Perry = Pro Eminent Domain, Pro Serve Major Campaign donors over the peoples representatives.

Texas governor clears way for NAFTA superhighway Vetoes legislation to delay
big transportation corridor

But, Corsi reported, Steven Anderson of the Institute for Justice's Castle Coalition, objected. He said Perry's action "left every home, farm, ranch and small-business owner vulnerable to the abuse of eminent domain."

Earlier, Corsi reported, Perry vetoed a plan to impose a two-year moratorium on the TTC project.

As WND previously reported, these measures were approved overwhelmingly by the Texas Legislature.

On learning that Perry had vetoed the eminent-domain legislation, Corridor Watch, a public advocacy group that opposes the TTC project, responded immediately.

"It sure didn't take TxDOT long to shake off the legislative session and resume their headlong rush to use every available loophole, exception and remaining authority to build toll roads and grant toll road concessions just as fast as possible," the organization said.

Corridor Watch also noted that in the 49 bills Perry vetoed June 15 were measures that would have required TxDOT to consider using existing highway routes for future TTC routes and a bill that called on the Texas attorney general to study the impact of international agreements on Texas.

An override of Perry's vetoes is unlikely, since the governor threatened to call a special session of the lawmakers to handle transportation issues if his veto fell by the wayside.

As WND has previously reported, the $180 billion needed to build the 4,000-mile TTC network planned for construction over the next 50 years will be financed by Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, S.A., a foreign investment consortium based in Spain. Cintra will own the leasing and operating rights on TTC highways for 50 years after their completion is complete.

WND also has reported Perry has received substantial campaign contributions from Cintra and Zachry Construction Company, the San Antonio-based construction firm selected by TxDOT to build out the TTC.

Read more: Texas governor clears way for NAFTA superhighway http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=42209#ixzz1PqBWaMJ3



There's more,
to say the least I Don't trust this guy.

[fj1200]

to say the least I Don't trust this guy.

With all due respect, which candidate, besides Paul, do you trust?

[gabosaurus]

A lot of my family lives in the Dallas area. Plus one of my best friends lives in Austin. So I asked them this question. Here are some of the answers:

** Perry basically believes the federal government is useless. He has advocated Texas seceding from the union. Since Perry has stated in the past that Texas is the only state he would ever want to live in, it is surprising that he would want to move to D.C.

** Perry is in favor of sharing costs of legal immigration between states & federal.

** Perry ran for governor his first two terms advocating allowing the hiring of Mexican immigrants to work farm and domestic jobs

**Perry's stands on immigration vary on whether he is speaking in a border city or not.

[fj1200]

** Perry basically believes the federal government is useless. He has advocated Texas seceding from the union. Since Perry has stated in the past that Texas is the only state he would ever want to live in, it is surprising that he would want to move to D.C.

He pretty much nailed that one. Secession, that would be interesting for a state such as Texas.


** Perry is in favor of sharing costs of legal immigration between states & federal.

As opposed to...


** Perry ran for governor his first two terms advocating allowing the hiring of Mexican immigrants to work farm and domestic jobs

Good idea... legally.


**Perry's stands on immigration vary on whether he is speaking in a border city or not.

What are his varying stands?

[revelarts]

With all due respect, which candidate, besides Paul, do you trust?


LOL

I trust Romney to do, Pretty much, what he says, He seem like a pretty honest politican.
i just don't agree with what he wants to do. more not do.
Same with non candidate Huckabe

I think Bachman is Sincere as well, From what i've seen so far, I like her a lot. I'm not sure she's got a lock on the civil liberties angle though. and I'm not sure about her war stand.

Cain seems like an real Strait shooter. I get the impression he would really move some bureaucrats off there collective @$$e$ on a few issues but For some reason his lack of political experience Makes me a bit uneasy of what the congress might pull on him to keep him tied down. He need a great chief of staff with that experience to stratagize with, someone like Bob Barr or J.C.Watts.

Backmans a lawyer and had a few years to get a feel of the political games and legalese. But a Barr and or Watts would be great for her too.

I trust Kucinich for the democrats He's not a lier, as far as i can tell, you know exactly where he stands. He seems pretty clean. He's just a socialist, though he's GREAT on civil liberties.

I've been trying to get to know some of the other republican folks
Jon Huntmans and Gary Johnson seem interesting. i don't know anything about Santorum.

I like Judge Roy Moore, a lot, just not for President. Supreme court, Federal Judge, Great. not president.

Who I Don't trust:
Gingrich- Fool me once shame on you...
Giuliani- Don't get me started
Jeb Bush -You don't want to know.
Graham- Well Graham is sincere, i think, most of the time, just dark and way wrong. and way to partisan for my taste to the point that it does seem to affect his honest judgement.


I waiting to see who the constitution party Runs. I might vote that way again. If the republicans don't look serious about REALLY taking significant steps back toward the constitution.

[Kathianne]

Serious response to the original post can be found here, by a supporter that understands addressing negatives too:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/06/a-case-for-rick-perry/

[fj1200]

Serious response to the original post can be found here, by a supporter that understands addressing negatives too:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/06/a-case-for-rick-perry/


Under Perry’s leadership, Texas has prospered like no other state. Isn’t it time we could say the same thing about America?

That's hard to argue with.

[Kathianne]

That's hard to argue with.

The only things that will prevent me from finding out more about a candidate are 1. proven instances of behavior I think relevant and of harm to citizens of the country, (thus Ron Paul). Clinton's behavior known before the first election? Nope. Finding out he'd left one to drown? Yep, would have killed my interest.

2. Blatant attempts to appeal to the stupid of any constituency. The D's do it with minorities and the R's with for want of a better term, Orthodox Christian Right. In both case my outrage is on their behalf, most don't seem to get they are being useful tools.

3. Someone so lacking in experience or with a proven record of ineptitude. Obama qualifed for this, Cain does at present.

[Kathianne]

Another interesting Perry piece that I'd probably rename, "The Un-GWB". LOL!


http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/270103/rise-uncompassionate-conservatism-rich-lowry


...Bush spoke in dulcet tones. He separated himself from the firebrand politics of Newt Gingrich and even took a swipe at the insufficiently cheerful Robert Bork. Perry is telling Republicans to stop apologizing and elect more conservatives. He’s Rick Perry, and he’s from the Republican wing of the Republican party.

The backlash against Bush has long been brewing. Compassionate conservatism was a product of the moment when Bush began to run for president in the late 1990s. The congressional wing of the party had immolated itself in the government-shutdown fights and then the impeachment of Bill Clinton. A rebranding was in order, and Bush wanted to signal to general-election voters that they needn’t fear him...

While I like Lowry fine, he's definitely a GOP supporter, me? Not so much so anymore.

[PostmodernProphet]

48 percent of the jobs created in the United States in the past two years have been created in Texas

Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/politics/article/Perry-stresses-record-during-N-Y-speech-1424584.php#ixzz1Pw4E30c6

he must be doing something.....

[revelarts]

http://www.thenhf.com/article.php?id=1796

...Why did Gov. Rick Perry reverse his pre-election position and issue an outrageous executive order mandating that all girls in the sixth grade receive the human papilloma virus vaccine?

This action took place without a single word of public debate and appears to be a corporate welfare program for Merck, the creator of the vaccine, and will be paid for at the expense of Texas schoolgirls who will be the guinea pigs for this unproven treatment.

Pharmaceutical companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars to lobby politicians for legislation, which will give them financial benefits. Merck's lobbying efforts on Gov. Perry have paid off handsomely. The HPV vaccine has been coined Merck's "How to Pay for Vioxx." Merck manufactured Vioxx, an anti-arthritic drug, which was pulled from the market in 2004 because it had caused 125,000 heart attacks. In lawsuits, Merck was found to have withheld information about the cardiac dangers of Vioxx from the FDA, physicians and patients. In the first of many trials, the jury found Merck guilty of knowingly causing harm and awarded punitive damages amounting to $254 million. Merck lost billions in profits when their corrupt behavior was exposed.

Merck developed a plan to recoup their losses. They organized a strategy to have state governments mandate their HPV vaccine. They contributed to medical organizations and to a group, called Women in Government, to buy support for the mandatory vaccination program, and hired lobbyists to swarm the state capitols across the nation, pushing this legislation. Until now, Merck's efforts had been rejected, but with the help of Gov. Perry's executive order, Merck bypassed the Texas Legislature.

The cost of each vaccination is $360. Perry's mandate will generate more than $100 million every year for Merck in Texas and, if adopted nationwide, would generate billions more each year.

According to the British medical journal The Lancet, the vaccine is only effective for 4-1/2 years. A booster injection will be needed every five years. You can count on Merck to lobby to have this booster shot mandated and paid for with tax dollars. The HPV vaccine only protects against 4 of the 127 strains of HPV. Merck admits in its own literature that it did not prove the vaccine would prevent cancer.

The average age of a woman with cervical cancer is 48.....

[revelarts]

the rest of the article was cut off..


...The effectiveness or dangers of this vaccine will not be known for at least a decade. Cervical cancer results in just 3,700 deaths nationally every year compared with heart disease which kills over 300,000 women annually. These facts coupled with the Vioxx fiasco make the motivation and competency of Merck highly suspect. This decision is not based on science but upon personal power, profit and politics. Texans need to think twice before having this vaccine administered to their daughters.

No public emergency existed for Gov. Perry to have assumed dictatorial powers and mandated this vaccine. Perry's arbitrary decision sets a dangerous precedent.

British statesman Lord Acton's words warn us, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Dr. Steven F. Hotze is the president of both the Conservative Republicans of Harris County and the Conservative Republicans of Texas.

3700 deaths nationwide.
the "vaccine" only covers 4 of the 127 known strains HPV it suppose to prevent.
Untested.
11 year old girls,
Boosters every 4 years

Am I miss conscrewing something to think that Perry's defense of "You can opt out" "I'm for life" rings hollow and corrupt?

[J.T]

#1 Rick Perry is a "big government" politician. When Rick Perry became the governor of Texas in 2000, the total spending by the Texas state government was approximately $49 billion. Ten years later it was approximately $90 billion (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/06/first-look-rick-perry.html). That is not exactly reducing the size of government.
#2 The debt of the state of Texas is out of control. According to usdebtclock.org (http://www.usdebtclock.org/state-debt-clocks/state-of-texas-debt-clock.html), the debt to GDP ratio in Texas is 22.9% and the debt per citizen is $10,645. In California (a total financial basket case), the debt to GDP ratio is just 18.7% and the debt per citizen is only $9932. If Rick Perry runs for president these are numbers he will want to keep well hidden.
#3 The total debt of the Texas government has more than doubled (http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2010/mar/04/bill-white/white-says-texas-debt-has-doubled-under-perry/) since Rick Perry became governor. So what would the U.S. national debt look like after four (or eight) years of Rick Perry?
#4 Rick Perry has spearheaded the effort to lease roads in Texas to foreign companies, to turn roads that are already free to drive on into toll roads, and to develop the Trans-Texas Corridor which would be part of the planned NAFTA superhighway system (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=43433). If you really do deep research on this whole Trans-Texas Corridor nonsense you will see why no American should ever cast a single vote for Rick Perry.
#5 Rick Perry claims that he has a "track record" of not raising taxes. That is a false claim. Rick Perry has repeatedly raised taxes (http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2010/nov/01/rick-perry/gov-rick-perry-says-he-has-track-record-not-raisin/) and fees while he has been governor. Today, Texans are faced with significantly higher taxes and fees than they were before Rick Perry was elected.
#6 Even with the oil boom in Texas, 23 states (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHb2fb1ZB1g) have a lower unemployment rate than Texas does.
#7 Back in 1988, Rick Perry supported Al Gore (http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2011/06/first-look-rick-perry.html) for president. In fact, Rick Perry actually served as Al Gore's campaign chairman (http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2010/jan/16/debra-medina/debra-medina-claims-rick-perry-was-democrat-and-al/) in the state of Texas that year.
#8 Between December 2007 and April 2011, weekly wages in the U.S. increased by about 5 percent. In the state of Texas they increased by just 0.6% (http://www.americanindependent.com/189314/msnbcs-maddow-highlights-texas-independent-reporting) over that same time period.
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/14-reasons-why-rick-perry-would-be-a-really-really-bad-president

[texasrancher]

I have a few problems with Perry. However, I feel that he is also the strongest candidate at this time. For this reason, I want to briefly address the vaccine/mandate issue.

Perry wasn't a big fan of mandating the vaccine. Was he lobbied - probably. But he was also advised within his circle that this was in fact a serious health issue. As a result he felt compelled to make a decision. What Perry and his Camp won't say, and what I probably shouldn't, was that mandating the vaccine (with an opt out) was really the only option enabling middle and lower class patients to receive the vaccine.

I originally agreed with those who said that it shouldn't be mandated, thus creating an 'opt in' situation. The problem is that the vaccine wouldn't be covered if the vaccine was merely suggested. The vaccine cost was somewhere around $300-500 plus administration. Perry believed this to be a serious health issue at the time. Was he correct - I don't know. I wouldn't say his decision was the result of lobbying because there was a growing consensus at the time that this vaccine was necessary. I might be lobbied by my employees for a raise, but the truth is, many of them would have received a raise anyways.

Perry has failed to defend his decision properly because the real answer is that he was screwing the insurance companies. He can't come out and say that plainly.

[fj1200]

He can't come out and say that plainly.

But he has no problem with "vulture capitalism"? He's done, he just doesn't know it yet.