They just lie to us

February 20, 2015

The recent discussions about how some of our officials use words to deliberately mislead us have caused me to think about some past examples.

Feel free to add to this list:

“Read my lips–no new taxes”

“It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”

“I did not have sexual relations with that woman”

“Minimal due to condition of the building”

“the fact still remains that no property taxes will go toward ballpark construction”  

“They are treated the same as any other citizen. “

“If you like the plan you have, you can keep it”.

This quote has been attributed to Richard Nixon: “Sure, there are dishonest men in local government. But there are dishonest men in national government too.”

We deserve better

Brutus


Power struggle not necessary

February 17, 2015

We should soon be involved in the discussion about what form of government we want the city to take.

The mayor has told us that he will put the issue to the voters as soon as it is legal for us to consider it in an election again.  That should be in May of 2015.

For most of our history we have operated with what is called the “strong mayor” form.  The mayor was the chief executive of the city and had direct control over the departments.  City council could reign in the mayor in but it took a majority of the city representatives to agree.

There was a time where each city representative was given responsibility for the operation of some departments.  That went away in the 1980’s at the same time that we ended up with single member districts.  Prior to that our aldermen, as they were known then, ran as a slate and the voters essentially picked a team to place on city council.

In the 1980’s we created the position of “chief administrative officer” (CAO).  This person did most of the management of the city departments following instructions from the mayor unless city council put its foot down in which case the chief administrative officer implemented the express wishes of council.  It took a majority vote of city council to fire the chief administrative officer, thus the mayor did not have complete control.

Before our recent switch to the “city manager” form of government the mayor and the city representatives were elected for two year terms.  The mayor and council had to face the voters every two years and if the voters were not happy with the course the city had taken we got new elected officials.

The chief administrative officer’s job was to implement the policies handed down to him by the mayor and council.  The CAO was not supposed to be an activist.  He could not dream up new schemes and fool council into following them.

City manager

Under our city manager form of government we have witnessed several years where initiative was the domain of the city manager.  We saw city representatives trying to work with the city manager without the knowledge necessary to manage her.  The manager and city staff frequently misled council.  We did not have a strong executive or legislative body to keep her in check.

Our new city manager is displaying signs that he will be far more reasonable.  He has openly spoken about how in “El Paso” our wants somehow become “needs” even though we do not have a way to pay for all of them.  He may turn out to be the kind of manager we need.

This is not either/or

There has been talk that the new city manager will be out of a job if the voters return us to the strong mayor form.  That does not have to be the case.

If the voters do make the change, city council and the mayor could decide to ask the city manager to become the chief administrative officer.  If we change the term of office for city council and the mayor back to two years from the current four we could have a situation where we have a professional manager implementing our elected leader’s policies with the voters having a reasonably frequent opportunity to agree or disagree with what is being done.

Local government

There has been much talk about the advantages of having four year terms.  The proponents point to our national government where senators sit for six  years and our president for four.  They ignore the fact that our house representatives sit for two years.

In fact during the convention that led to our constitution there were several delegates that wanted the house terms to be less that two years.  One year was a common choice, but some wanted terms as short as a few months.  Their thinking was that the representatives would represent their districts more faithfully if they knew that they would be held accountable before time diminished the memories of the voters.

Both the strong mayor and the city manager form of government can be made to work.

What is important here is that the voters take an active part in the discussion and the vote.

We deserve better

Brutus


Getting better grades

February 7, 2015

Our current president has brought forward a proposal that two years of community college be made free to everyone in the nation.

His speech stipulated that the students would have to be enrolled at least at 1/2 time level and that they would have to maintain a 2.5 grade point average.

If we skip over the fact that our constitution does not allow our feral government to be in the education business a troubling possibility comes to mind.

If the student maintains a 2.5 grade point average the tuition would be free.  The community college wants the tuition money.  Would grading become easier?

Of course it would.  That is unless the feds would take control over grading.

We deserve better

Brutus

 


City government privately owned?

January 31, 2015

The Times recently published a piece about traffic volumes at our international bridges.  It included this:

Paul Stresow, city international bridges director, said “We have seen a significant increase in cross-border traffic at our ports of entry during the past year, overall a 5.45 percent increase in southbound traffic during the calendar year 2014 over 2013.”

“Certainly, the public-private partnership with CBP at our Paso Del Norte and Ysleta (Zaragoza) bridges, where the city pays CBP to keep additional lanes open during peak travel times and during holidays to reduce wait times is one of many factors that have contributed to the growth in travel and trade,” Stresow said.

Wrong, wrong, wrong

There is no public-private partnership here.  The city government of El Paso Texas is paying the feral government of the United States.

Our feral government has chosen to assume the right to control our bridges.  Our constitution leaves that as a Texas state responsibility.

What we have here is a situation where they are not allocating enough money to operate the bridges.  As a result El Paso suffers economically.  Our city council has decided to step in and make up the budgetary shortfall.

Our local congressman seems to approve of this.  One would think that he would fight to get the funding needed so that local tax payers do not have to make up the difference.

When city council decided to do this we were told that crossing times would be under thirty minutes.  According to the article “The wait times are under an hour and sometimes under 45 minutes.”

What’s next?  Will we have to ante up to pay for other federal departments?

Then again

On the other hand maybe our bridge director was telling us  that our city government is privately owned.

We deserve better

Brutus

 


No cures today

January 2, 2015

The Times finally got around to writing a piece about our county hospital and the failing grade that the folks at Medicare gave them.

Some of you might not have emerged from the fog caused by the new year  celebrations so let us help translate the article.

You should be able to see what is coming when you read the sub-title of the article:

“UMC officials say penalty may reflect challenge of treating the unisured and very ill”– In other words UMC is different than other hospitals.  Our patients are sick, they are dirty, they are poor.

Then the damage control continues:

“University Medical Center officials, who were notified last week about the penalty related to “hospital-acquired conditions,” on Monday confirmed that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) reduction will amount to 1 percent of the hospital’s total Medicare payment for fiscal year 2014-2015, which began Oct. 1.”–  We didn’t know about this when we gave out those bonuses earlier this year although the report is for problems that occurred last year.

“We may appeal the penalty once we complete the review,” said Javier Gonzalez, UMC’s director of quality management. “This is a new program, and this has never happened before.”– This isn’t fair, we didn’t know that we were supposed to make patients well, not make them sicker.

“UMC officials said they believe the penalty may reflect the kind of patients that the teaching hospital is likely to treat.”– Only really horrible people go to teaching hospitals.

“They’re so sick when they come to us that they require prolonged hospitalizations, which studies have shown can lead to hospital-acquired infections or conditions (HAC’s),” Garcia said. “Our trauma patients arrive with deep wounds, multiple fractures, and they might develop blood clots and require multiple surgeries.”– We don’t know what to do.  How did the other thousands of hospitals in the study avoid these problems?  Bellevue in New York received a passing grade.

UMC officials said the Medicare penalty involved potentially 18 out of 33,598 patients between January 2012 and December 2013 that reportedly developed serious complications.”– We didn’t hurt that many people.

“Garcia said that UMC will review the concerns that federal regulators identified to determine if there are any root causes that the hospital needs to address, such as staff training to include nurses and doctors.”– We might not change anything, this will probably blow over.  Besides we can always make up for the revenue loss by raising taxes.

“Gonzalez said, “We will continue to deliver unparalleled care and remarkable patient outcomes.””– Please don’t continue.  Unparalleled?  Remarkable?  Being one of only a dozen or so hospitals out of thousands to receive the worst possible score is certainly unparalleled and remarkable.

“Lorena Navedo, UMC executive chief of staff, said the American Hospital Association and Dr. Ashish Jha, an expert at the Harvard School of Public Health, assert that teaching hospitals and others hospitals that treat the sickest patients were disproportionately hit with Medicare penalties for HAC’s.”– Our doctors are just trainees, you are the one that decided to use amateurs.

“The American Hospital Association said the HAC Reduction Program is “a poorly designed policy that unfairly penalizes hospitals that care for the sickest patients,” and urged the CMS to consider changes in its scoring methods.”– There are over 1,000 teaching hospitals in the United States.  Only a dozen or so hospitals scored as badly as our hospital, and not all of the dozen are teaching hospitals.

Our public relations person at the county hospital recently left.  Could the Times reporter be auditioning for the job?

We deserve better

Brutus