Except for timely election info, the extensive list of voting resources will now be at the end.

Welcome to Thinkwing Radio with Mike Honig on KPFT Houston at 90.1-HD2, Galveston 89.5-HD2, and Huntsville at 91.9-HD2. KPFT is Houston’s Community Media. On this show, we discuss local, state, national, and international stories that may have slipped under your radar.

1. I thought I’d look for the election results and turnout for the Saturday, May 3. Numbers and results may be subject to change. I took these numbers between 9-10:30PM on Saturday night. Harris County election resultsare below. These results are straight from the Harris County Elections website. May 03, 2025: Joint Election, Unofficial Election Results, the Election Cumulative Report

City of Friendswood, Councilmember, Position No. Four (1.7% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Robert J. Griffon	81	100.00%
Total	81

City of Friendswood, Councilmember, Position No. Six (1.7% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Tom Hinckley	36	36.73%
Michael P. Ross	62	63.27%
Total	98

City of Jersey Village, Mayor (10.22% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
James Singleton	416	100.00%
Total	416

City of Jersey Village, Councilmember, Place 2 (10.22% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Eric Henao	144	25.85%
Simon Hughes	413	74.15%
Total	557

City of Jersey Village, Councilmember, Place 3 (10.22% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Rachel Beazley	255	46.20%
Michelle Mitcham	297	53.80%
Total	552

CITY OF JERSEY VILLAGE, PROPOSITION A (10.22% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	374	70.83%
NO	154	29.17%
Total	528

City of Nassau Bay, City Council, Position 1 (5.94% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Brian Johnson	142	78.89%
Paula Tomasi	38	21.11%
Total	180

CITY OF NASSAU BAY, PROPOSITION A (5.94% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	186	93.94%
NO	12	6.06%
Total	198

CITY OF NASSAU BAY, PROPOSITION B (5.94% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	161	83.85%
NO	31	16.15%
Total	192

CITY OF NASSAU BAY, PROPOSITION C (5.94% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	173	88.72%
NO	22	11.28%
Total	195

CITY OF NASSAU BAY, PROPOSITION D (5.94%)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	160	83.33%
NO	32	16.67%
Total	192

CITY OF NASSAU BAY, PROPOSITION E (5.94%)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	161	83.42%
NO	32	16.58%
Total	193

CITY OF NASSAU BAY, PROPOSITION F (5.94%)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	163	84.46%
NO	30	15.54%
Total	193

City of Pasadena, Mayor (5134 votes, ~5%?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Ornaldo Ybarra	1,490	29.02%
David Gonzales	143	2.79%
Rex Lindberg	1,740	33.89%
Thomas Schoenbein	1,761	34.30%
Total	5,134

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District A (298 votes)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Carlos Heredia Sr	155	52.01%
Ruben Villarreal	105	35.23%
Felipe Villarreal	38	12.75%
Total	298

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District B (360 votes, 4.89% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Bruce Leamon	146	40.56%
Alisia Cardenas	97	26.94%
Bianca Valerio	117	32.50%
Total	360

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District C (5.12% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Emmanuel Guerrero	183	59.03%
Erik Munoz	21	6.77%
Rachel Moreno	26	8.39%
Juan Solitaire	80	25.81%
Total	310

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District D (367 votes, ~4.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Pat Van Houte	196	53.41%
Suzi Trevino	171	46.59%
Total	367

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District E (5.96%)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Jonathan Estrada	343	75.22%
Aidan Govea	33	7.24%
Raul Camarillo Jr.	80	17.54%
Total	456

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District F (1059 votes, ~8% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Michael “Mike” Hinojosa	301	28.42%
Dolan Dow	758	71.58%
Total	1,059

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District G (8.14% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Jim Dilley	124	19.05%
Paola Velasco	121	18.59%
Johnny Fusilier Jr.	200	30.72%
Amy Hinojosa	150	23.04%
Tonya Brecheen	56	8.60%
Total	651

City of Pasadena, Councilmember District H (1390 votes, ~12% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Aaron E. Styron	710	51.08%
Robyn Davis	680	48.92%
Total	1,390

City of South Houston, Mayor (13.5% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Joe Soto	577	58.11%
Sophia Saenz	416	41.89%
Total	993

City of South Houston, Alderperson Position 1 (13.5% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Mary Castillo	559	57.45%
Claudia Melendez	414	42.55%
Total	973

City of South Houston, Alderperson Position 2 (13.5% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Willie Rios	532	54.73%
Nora Camacho-Munoz	440	45.27%
Total	972

City of South Houston, Alderperson Position 3 (13.5% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Cynthia Pina	558	57.59%
Leslie Montemayor	411	42.41%
Total	969

City of South Houston, Alderperson Position 4 (13.5% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Mauro Barrera	526	54.51%
Juan Guzman	439	45.49%
Total	965

City of South Houston, Alderperson Position 5 (13.5% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Louis Martinez	544	56.37%
Eddie Torres	421	43.63%
Total	965

CITY OF SOUTH HOUSTON, PROPOSITION A (13.5% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	778	84.29%
AGAINST	145	15.71%
Total	923

City of West University Place, Mayor (18.73% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Susan Sample	1,435	100.00%
Total	1,435

City of West University Place, Council Members (18.73% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Nicholas Thomas Stuart	956	12.81%
John Barnes	1,207	16.17%
Clay Brett	1,015	13.60%
Matt Hart	993	13.31%
Kalie Jackura Rainsberger	1,163	15.58%
Matthew (Mateo) Fisher	1,006	13.48%
John Bertini	1,123	15.05%
Total	7,463

CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE, PROPOSITION A (18.73% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	1,274	59.37%
NO	872	40.63%
Total	2,146

CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE, PROPOSITION B (18.73% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	1,453	68.41%
NO	671	31.59%
Total	2,124

CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE, PROPOSITION C (18.73% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
YES	1,243	59.62%
NO	842	40.38%
Total	2,085

CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE, PROPOSITION D (18.73% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	1,007	45.94%
AGAINST	1,185	54.06%
Total	2,192

Lee College District, Regent Position 4 (~2.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Pam Warford	980	100.00%
Total	980

Lee College District, Regent Position 5 (2.34% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Susan Moore-Fontenot	630	48.61%
Heron Thomas	666	51.39%
Total	1,296

Lee College District, Regent Position 6 (2.34% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
David Isaac	343	27.57%
Daryl Fontenot	901	72.43%
Total	1,244

San Jacinto Community College District, Trustee, Position 3 (~3% turnout?) Some precincts heavy, many negligible.

Choice	Votes	Percent
Salvador Serrano Jr.	2,402	40.38%
Mariel Jimenez	512	8.61%
Frank Ortiz	450	7.56%
Judy Harrison	2,585	43.45%
Total	5,949

San Jacinto Community College District, Trustee, Position 4 (~3% turnout?) Some precincts heavy, many negligible.

Choice	Votes	Percent
Larry Wilson	3,771	63.93%
Oscar Del Toro	2,128	36.07%
Total	5,899

Clear Creek Independent School District, At Large Position B (~5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Rebecca Lilley	2,117	54.44%
Scott Bowen	1,772	45.56%
Total	3,889

Clear Creek ISD Pos 1, Single Member District 1 (~4.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Joe Machol	326	36.63%
Jessica Cejka	564	63.37%
Total	890

Humble Independent School District, Trustee, Position 1 (~5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Oscar Silva	4,248	56.32%
Gracie de Leon	3,294	43.68%
Total	7,542

Humble Independent School District, Trustee, Position 3 (~5.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Natalie Carter	3,646	48.30%
Chris Parker	3,902	51.70%
Total	7,548

Humble Independent School District, Trustee, Position 4 (~5.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Brittnai Brown	2,809	37.14%
Ken Kirchhofer	2,455	32.46%
Tracy Shannon	2,299	30.40%
Total	7,563

Humble Independent School District, Trustee, Position 5 (~5.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Judy Castillo	910	12.08%
Elizabeth Shaw	4,110	54.57%
Scott Ford	2,512	33.35%
Total	7,532

Pasadena ISD, Trustee, Position 1 (~5.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Mary Davis	1,731	38.60%
Paola Gonzalez	1,917	42.75%
Maria Castillo	836	18.64%
Total	4,484

Pasadena ISD, Trustee, Position 2 (~5.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Crystal Dávila	2,470	54.96%
Tammie Nielsen	2,024	45.04%
Total	4,494

Pasadena ISD, Trustee, Position 3 (~4.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Fina Govea	1,431	32.19%
Nelda R. Sullivan	3,014	67.81%
Total	4,445

Pasadena ISD, Trustee, Position 4 (~5.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Casey Phelan	2,962	68.30%
Yen K. Rabe	1,375	31.70%
Total	4,337

TOMBALL ISD, PROPOSITION A (~2.5% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	1,004	62.13%
AGAINST	612	37.87%
Total	1,616

TOMBALL ISD, PROPOSITION B (~2% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	1,014	62.79%
AGAINST	601	37.21%
Total	1,615

TOMBALL ISD, PROPOSITION C (~2% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	899	55.70%
AGAINST	715	44.30%
Total	1,614

TOMBALL ISD, PROPOSITION D (~2% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	870	54.00%
AGAINST	741	46.00%
Total	1,611

Waller Independent School District, Trustee, Position 3 (~2% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Christina R. Edwards	24	6.00%
Bryan Lowe	249	62.25%
Cassandra Gonzalez-Posey	127	31.75%
Total	400

Waller Independent School District, Trustee, Position 4 (~2% turnout?)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Jeff Flukinger	333	100.00%
Total	333

CYPRESS FOREST PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT, PROPOSITION A (7.55% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	313	94.56%
AGAINST	18	5.44%
Total	331

GREEN TRAILS MUD, PROPOSITION A (2.9% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	19	39.58%
AGAINST	29	60.42%
Total	48

HC ESD 5, PROPOSITION A (Less than 1% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	52	35.37%
AGAINST	95	64.63%
Total	147

HC FWSD 001A, Directors (10.32% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Anita Gonzales-Evans	61	17.38%
Teresa Lanphier	65	18.52%
Daryl W. Beene	47	13.39%
Helena Auzenne	57	16.24%
Terry Alfred	58	16.52%
Sherman Gray III	63	17.95%
Total	351

HC MUD 016, PROPOSITION A (2 votes, 0.12% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	1	50.00%
AGAINST	1	50.00%
Total	2

HC MUD 016, PROPOSITION B (2 votes, 0.12% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	1	50.00%
AGAINST	1	50.00%
Total	2

HC MUD 105, PROPOSITION A (22 votes, 0.42% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	9	40.91%
AGAINST	13	59.09%
Total	22

HC MUD 105, PROPOSITION B (29 votes, 0.42% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	11	50.00%
AGAINST	11	50.00%
Total	22

HC MUD 118, PROPOSITION A (0.52% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	7	58.33%
AGAINST	5	41.67%
Total	12

HC MUD 118, PROPOSITION B (12 votes counted but 19 cast. 0.52% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	7	58.33%
AGAINST	5	41.67%
Total	12

HC MUD 118, PROPOSITION C (11 votes counted but 19 cast. 0.52% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	5	45.45%
AGAINST	6	54.55%
Total	11

HARRIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 167, PROPOSITION A (3 votes counted but 19 cast. 0.23% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	2	66.67%
AGAINST	1	33.33%
Total	3

HC MUD 182, PROPOSITION A (0 votes cast. 0.00% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	0	0.00%
AGAINST	0	0.00%
Total	0

HC MUD 182, PROPOSITION B (0 votes cast. 0.00% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	0	0.00%
AGAINST	0	0.00%
Total	0

HARRIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 188, PROPOSITION A (35 votes counted, 46 votes cast. 1.57% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	6	17.14%
AGAINST	29	82.86%
Total	35

HARRIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 230, PROPOSITION A (9 votes counted, 14 votes cast. 0.42% turnout)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	6	66.67%
AGAINST	3	33.33%
Total	9

HARRIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 570D – PROPOSITION A (1 votes counted, 1 votes cast. 100% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	1	100.00%
AGAINST	0	0.00%
Total	1

HARRIS COUNTY MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 570D – DIRECTORS (1 votes counted, 1 votes cast. 100% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Emma Ross Del Frate	1	20.00%
Alejandro Luis, Jr.	1	20.00%
Gustavo Olivares, Jr.	1	20.00%
Jeannine Mrlik	1	20.00%
Jill Pavlas	1	20.00%
Total	5

HC WCID 074, PROPOSITION A (17 votes counted, 109 votes cast. 4.61% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	11	64.71%
AGAINST	6	35.29%
Total	17

HC WCID 092, Directors (59 votes counted, 150 votes cast. 5.33% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Chris Arredondo	6	10.17%
Richard Zagrzecki	13	22.03%
Barbara Rivera	7	11.86%
Michael Moscalu	0	0.00%
Randy Hart	13	22.03%
Ronald Bennett	13	22.03%
Wanda Wilcox	7	11.86%
Total	59

HARRIS COUNTY WATER CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 116, PROPOSITION A (133 votes counted, 143 votes cast. 6.77% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	38	28.57%
AGAINST	95	71.43%
Total	133

HUNTER’S GLEN MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, PROPOSITION A (19 votes counted, 21 votes cast. 0.35% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	14	73.68%
AGAINST	5	26.32%
Total	19

MAYDE CREEK MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, PROPOSITION A (7 votes counted, 19 votes cast. 0.59% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	5	71.43%
AGAINST	2	28.57%
Total	7

MAYDE CREEK MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, PROPOSITION B (7 votes counted, 19 votes cast. 0.59% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	4	57.14%
AGAINST	3	42.86%
Total	7

MEMORIAL HILLS UTILITY DISTRICT, PROPOSITION A (3 votes counted, 3 votes cast. 0.39% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	3	100.00%
AGAINST	0	0.00%
Total	3

OAKMONT PUD, Directors (39 votes counted, 226 votes cast. 8.58% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Jennifer Smith	14	35.90%
Tanner Flood	17	43.59%
Robin Barry	8	20.51%
Total	39

Trail of the Lakes Municipal Utility District, Directors (283 votes counted, 214 votes cast. 3.62% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
Mark A. Richards, Sr.	33	11.66%
Jo Ann Smith	47	16.61%
James Stubblefield	48	16.96%
Crystal Kirby	70	24.73%
Virginia Elkins	40	14.13%
Mark Shuffield	45	15.90%
Total	283

WEST HC MUD 005, PROPOSITION A (5 votes counted, 5 votes cast. 0.33% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	3	60.00%
AGAINST	2	40.00%
Total	5

WEST HC MUD 010, PROPOSITION A (76 votes counted, 96 votes cast. 2.11% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	58	76.32%
AGAINST	18	23.68%
Total	76

WEST HC MUD 015, PROPOSITION A (0 votes counted, 15 votes cast. 3.16% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	0	0.00%
AGAINST	0	0.00%
Total	0

WESTON MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT, PROPOSITION A (2 votes counted, 2 votes cast. 0.08% turnout of registered voters!)

Choice	Votes	Percent
FOR	1	50.00%
AGAINST	1	50.00%
Total	2

1. Check for more results in Fort Bend County | Brazoria County | Galveston County | Montgomery County
2. Spring Branch ISD elections were not conducted under Harris County, but rather under their own auspices. As of 11:30 Saturday night, I was unable to find any place on their site to get election results.
3. It’s often said — and I often say — that the most important elections that actually affect you and your family, most directly and most quickly, are local elections.
4. On that score, these elections are an abject failure. The best turnout was in Jersey Village where a bit over 10% of registered voters turned out to make their will known. For that to be something to cheer about is really sad.
5. In the precinct breakdowns which I didn’t go into here, there were precincts with zero votes. There were even precincts with zero registered voters.
6. Is it possible that there are currently election precincts that actually have no residents that are eligible to vote? Maybe. Is it likely? Probably not.
7. These elections were actually pretty important to the people in these cities and districts. They affect governance. They affect infrastructure paid for, or not paid for, by proposed bonds. If Bonds pass with a tiny number of registered voters, that affects not only your neighborhood infrastructure, but also your annual property taxes.
8. In the case of community college districts, governance can be thoughtful and job focused on educational concerns, or governance can be ideological and guided by cultural warfare with education taking second place to political agendas and cultural biases.
9. I’m just a lone voice in the wilderness, on a show with limited listenership on an HD2 broadcast band, but this subject needs to discussed loudly and often and with a clear explanation of the intimate personal consequences of non-participation.
10. Elections have consequences. I can guarantee you that these elections, with these anemic and mostly pathetic turnouts in these communities, will have consequences.
11. And the vast, VAST majority of you will have only yourselves to blame when you’re unhappy with those consequences.

2. In other news — Older water pipes in Pearland will be inspected for lead to comply with new EPA standards; By Rachel Leland | COMMUNITYIMPACT.COM | 12:25 PM Apr 30, 2025 CDT/Updated 12:25 PM Apr 30, 2025 CDT. TAGS: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Pearland, Removing Lead From Pipes, Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Pearland City Council,
   1. Field crews will inspect over 1,500 water service connections in Pearland to comply with updated Environmental Protection Agency regulations aimed at removing lead from pipes in public water systems.
   2. … Pearland City Council voted unanimously at its April 28 meeting amending a contract for the inspections that was originally awarded to Pearland-based LJA Engineering. The amendment will increase the project’s budget by $151,500 to a total of $770,500.
   3. The project will support phase two of the city’s compliance efforts under the EPA’s 2021 Lead and Copper Rule Revisions, which aims to remove lead from the nation’s public drinking water.
   4. The inspections will focus on older water lines installed before Jan. 1, 1989 — before Texas enacted its lead ban in plumbing, according to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s website.
   5. The inspections will identify pipe materials on both public and private sides of each meter, using a combination of visual checks, magnetic and scratch tests and, if necessary, digging to verify if the pipes have lead.
   6. … The project is expected to be completed within six months of the awarding of the contract, according to agenda documents.
   7. MIKE: When I read stories like this now, I half wonder if the Trump regime will issue an executive order canceling this program, and even mandating lead in new water pipes. That’s how sick I’ve come to believe our current government is.
3. Houston officials spend $11.46M for more than 30 new solid waste vehicles; By Kevin Vu | COMMUNITYIMPACT.COM | 3:25 PM Apr 30, 2025 CDT/Updated 4:47 PM Apr 30, 2025 CDT. TAGS: Houston City Council, Mayor John Whitmire, Solid Waste Vehicles, Solid Waste Management Department,
   1. Houston officials approved 34 new solid waste vehicles during an April 30 City Council meeting, which city officials said will improve efficiency and move away from the practice of purchasing used vehicles.
   2. … Mayor John Whitmire said these new vehicles are equipment the city has needed for years, and will prevent the solid waste management department from having to buy used vehicles.
   3. The Solid Waste Department provides weekly garbage and yard waste collection service to about 390,000 residential units and small commercial establishments, according to the department’s website.
   4. The bulk of the purchase went towards 10 Heil automated side loaders for $4.46 million, according to the agenda item. These vehicles will be used for recycling collection and improve service delivery in waste collection.
   5. The rest of the $11.2 million went towards other vehicles …:
   6. $3.88 million[for] nine side loader vehicles used for refuse and recycling collection;
   7. $2.07 million[for] eight rear steer loader vehicles used for bulk waste collection, illegal dumping clean up and the transport of storm debris;
   8. $880,600[for] three rear loader vehicles used to help the department collect, transport and dispose of storm debris more promptly and efficiently;
   9. [And] $168,156 [for] four forklifts used to offload and load containers of large quantities.
   10. … The Solid Waste Department has been experiencing staffing shortages and recruiting challenges in recent years, issues that were highlighted back in early April when City Controller Chris Hollins said solid waste is expected to spend $7.1 million in overtime despite being budgeted for only $4 million, according to previous Community Impact reporting. Additionally, missed trash pickup is a top 3-1-1 complaint, according to the controller’s April presentation.
   11. MIKE: I have qualms about this purchase in the midst of a budget crunch, but it’s not necessarily a bad idea.
   12. MIKE: Purchasing used solid waste vehicles is not like purchasing a used car. It’s not like purchasing a lightly used vehicle with low mileage where you won’t be paying for the first 1-3 years of depreciation.
   13. MIKE: Solid waste vehicles are used harshly for years. Regular and necessary maintenance may have been spotty. And by the time a municipality or private waste collection company sells them, they’re maintenance needs have already started to become uneconomical.
   14. MIKE: In the case of a private waste collection company, they may sell them after they’ve already used up their 5-year depreciation cycle, but that doesn’t mean they’ve been well cared for in that time. It might even mean the opposite, since they had a disposal timetable already planned for that equipment.
   15. MIKE: As a government entity, the City of Houston doesn’t get depreciation. The city pays no taxes from which to deduct any depreciation. So the city will likely keep and use these new vehicles until they become uneconomical to maintain.
   16. MIKE: New vehicles will also extend the life cycle that the city must plan for. Also, buying new vehicles comes with other advantages: Lower initial maintenance needs and costs; higher reliability; less downtime; possibly superior performance than can be achieved with older-technology vehicles; and perhaps last but not least, these newer vehicles may provide better working conditions for city waste collection workers.
   17. MIKE: So on balance, the timing of this purchase is not ideal, but in the long run, it’s probably not a bad investment.
4. Families struggle to relocate after land under northwest Houston mobile home community sold; By Céilí Doyle | HOUSTONLANDING.ORG | April 3, 2025 @ 4:00 am. TAGS: Country Road Park, Trailer Parks, Mobile Home Communities,
   1. … The De La Garzas … are one of 53 low-income families living in the community forced to relocate … after their landlord sold Country Road Park last year.
   2. The new owner … told residents it plans to use the land for something else, but did not specify what. The sale requires residents to move or sell their mobile homes and find a new place to live, a significant expense for community members largely living paycheck to paycheck. 
   3. There are six families remaining in the park who have been unable to sell their homes or find a new place to live.
   4. Residents first learned of the sale in a notice from the landlord last September and were told they had to move out by Dec. 31, but [the] landlord … agreed to push back the vacate date to April 8 after residents held a press conference in November. …
   5. “It’s really frustrating,” said Damaris Gonzalez, an advocate with. “We tried by all means to have a conversation with the owner, but it’s like he’s a ghost.”
   6. [The Texas Organizing Project (TOP)] has been rallying support and connecting Country Road Park residents with resources since last year. [The] nonprofit, which champions Black and Latino communities in Houston, Dallas and Austin, sought financial assistance from Harris County Precinct 1 Commissioner Rodney Ellis’ office last year, but was told the county already had put together its budget for fiscal 2025.
   7. The commissioner declined comment. …
   8. The De La Garza family is one of the lucky ones, Marta De La Garza said.
   9. The move is costing the family roughly $6,200 – the equivalent of 10 months of rent. …
   10. Down the road, Marisol Morales is battling an uncertain future for herself and her family.
   11. The mother of three held back tears last week as she scribbled a FOR SALE sign and taped it to her trailer window looking out across Country Road Park.
   12. Morales’ mobile home was built in 1992, which means most other trailer park communities will not accept it. Even if Morales could relocate it, the 38-year-old doesn’t know if she can afford the $3,000 or more it will cost to move the trailer, on top of storage costs and a new security deposit. Her husband often travels for work at a tree-planting company and brings home roughly $21,000 a year. …
   13. TOP also tried to enlist the help of state Sen. Molly Cook, D-Houston, on behalf of Country Road Park’s residents.
   14. Cook said she called the former landlord every day for two weeks, went in person to Country Road Park and to Brown’s business address, all to no avail.
   15. [Cook said,] “A staffer left their email and number and the landlord called back, but the second he realized it was State Sen. Molly Cook on the phone, he hung up. If I can’t get him on the phone and talk to me, how in the world is someone vulnerable going to get him to talk to them?”
   16. Cook said that she and her office were limited in their ability to advocate for the community because mobile home owners who lease the land their trailer sits on are not protected by state law.
   17. [The freshman senator said,] “Home ownership is really out of reach for a lot of Texans and Americans and manufactured homes are a critical part of making the American Dream accessible. It’s really important we make this right and we’ve been thinking about ways to fix this problem.”
   18. Cook has introduced four bills to protect mobile home owners’ rights, including one that would give tenants in a manufactured home community the right of first refusal when a landlord decides to sell the property. Another would prohibit children in manufactured home communities from being displaced during a school semester by barring landlords from not renewing leases during that time.
   19. Cook acknowledged the bills, if passed, would be too late to help Country Road Park residents, but she hoped lawmakers will consider them because housing affordability is a pressing issue for legislators.
   20. Meanwhile, … advocates at TOP are researching how best to establish a union for mobile home owners and renters. …
   21. Almost two weeks before Country Road Park shuts down, the northwest Houston community looks and sounds like a ghost town.
   22. More than a dozen mobile homes sit abandoned by their owners, who were unable to sell or could not afford to move their homes. …
   23. MIKE: Manufactured homes, also popularly known as mobile homes, are not really particularly mobile. Relocating one is not much different from moving a small building. If a new owner of a manufactured home moves it to a lot-for-rent community, they become hostages to the property owner, as has happened in the case of the residents of Country Road Park.
   24. MIKE: The proposal by state Sen. Molly Cook (D-Houston) for mobile home park residents to get right-of-first-refusal would be an important step in addressing the tenant crisis that occurs when a mobile home park goes up for sale, but it would be only part of the solution. As is often the case, the question soon becomes, “And then what?”
   25. MIKE: One answer is “Resident-Owned Communities”, or ROCs (“rocks”).
   26. MIKE: An ROC is essentially a co-op community for manufactured homes. It’s run by a board composed of homeowners, much like any Homeowners’ Association, or HOA. The HOA is responsible for paying any mortgage on the property and establishing rules for the governance of the property, and any rules that bind homeowners, just like an HOA.
   27. MIKE: A key benefit is that that there are no rents to be arbitrarily raised in order to increase return on investment — commonly known as ROI — since a ROC is not an investment property. Community dues are calculated to pay ongoing expenses for loans and infrastructure, and any other co-op services that may be provided, such as on-site security.
   28. MIKE: For many folks, a so-called mobile home may be as close to home ownership as they can get, but moving their new home onto a rented plot of land makes them potential victims at the mercy of their landlord.
   29. MIKE: My suggestions would be that any new owner of a mobile home — aka, a manufactured home — do their due diligence before they sign on the dotted line.
   30. MIKE: Where will you be locating your new home? I would strongly encourage you not to install it on a rental plot. If it’s on a property you own, make sure you are zoned or permitted for a mobile home installation. Also, can you afford to install all the necessary utilities, such as water, electrical, sewer, etc.? If you’re looking for a co-op such as an ROC, do they have available lots? What are their bylaws, and can you abide them?
   31. MIKE: And of course, there are the three rules for any real estate: Location, location, location. How will the location impact your work commutes? Your physical security? Your taxes? The neighborhood amenities close by for shopping, entertainment, access, etc.?
   32. MIKE: When you start thinking about where you are permanently setting a new manufactured home, whether on a piece of land you own or in an ROC co-op, it becomes absolutely like buying a house. You own it until you sell it, and you sell it pretty much like any other house.
   33. MIKE: There’s also one other important thing to keep in mind when purchasing a mobile home: It’s a depreciating asset.
   34. MIKE: People think of houses as appreciating assets, but that’s not entirely true. The land is usually an appreciating asset, not the house. Just like a car, the house itself degrades with time. It must be kept up, repaired, occasionally remodeled, and eventually perhaps demolished. But the location of the land is forever, and cannot be replaced. That is what actually appreciates.
   35. MIKE: At the bottom of the blog post for this story, I’ve included a couple of reference links. One is to an AP story about “Resident-Owned Communities”, and the other is a link to ROCUSA, an association for “Resident-Owned Communities”.
   36. REFERENCE: ROCUSA (Resident-Owned Communities) — ROCUSA.ORG: Why Resident Ownership
   37. REFERENCE: Mobile home park residents form co-ops to save their homes; By  CLAIRE RUSH | APNEWS.COM | Published 11:00 AM CDT, April 8, 2023
5. Private school vouchers are now law in Texas. Here’s how they will work.; Texas will give participating families about $10,000 to pay for their kids’ private schooling. Other details about the program, set to launch in 2026, are unclear. By Jaden Edison | TEXASTRIBUNE.ORG | May 3, 2025/Updated: 10 hours ago. TAGS: Greg Abbott, Senate Bill 2, Private School Voucher Program, Texas Politics, Children’s Education, School Funding, Private Schools, Public Schools,
   1. Greg Abbott on Saturday signed legislation authorizing a private school voucher program into law, marking the grand finale of an oftentimes ugly conflict that has largely defined Texas politics this decade.
   2. Senate Bill 2 will allow families to use public taxpayer dollars to fund their children’s education at an accredited private school, or to pay for a wide range of school-related expenses, like textbooks, transportation or therapy. The program will be one of the largest school voucher initiatives in the nation.
   3. [Abbott said during the bill’s signing before hundreds of applauding supporters gathered outside the Governor’s Mansion,] “When I ran for reelection in 2022, I promised school choice for the families of Texas. Today, we deliver on that promise. Gone are the days that families are limited to only the school assigned by government. The day has arrived that empowers parents to choose the school that’s best for their child.”
   4. The law will go into effect on Sept. 1, with the program expected to launch in late 2026.
   5. The law’s passage follows years of discord in the Legislature over school vouchers. The Democrats and rural Republicans who fought against it argued that the program would harm already-struggling public schools, a major employer for working families and a resource center for many Texas students — the majority of whom reside in low-income households.
   6. [State Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, said a few hours before at a news conference with other voucher opponents,] “Remember this day next time a school closes in your neighborhood. Remember this day next time a beloved teacher quits because they can’t support their family on their salary. Remember this day next time your local property taxes rise because the state government is not doing its fair share of school funding. And if recession comes and we are forced to make even deeper cuts to public education, remember this day.”
   7. Top Republicans like Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick have forcefully rebutted, saying parents needed more schooling options for their children in the face of COVID-19 health restrictions and frustrations with public schools’ efforts to foster a more inclusive environment for all students. They have insisted that a voucher program and the state’s public education system can coexist.
   8. Those arguments came as voucher programs in other states have largely benefited wealthier families who already had their kids enrolled in private schools and led to disappointing academic outcomes for students.
   9. Here’s a breakdown of how the program will work.
   10. What we know about Texas’ school voucher program
   11. Families can receive about $10,000 to send their children to private school on taxpayers’ dime
   12. Most participating families will receive an amount equal to 85% of what public schools get for each student through state and local funding — roughly somewhere between $10,300 and $10,900 per year for each child, according to a legislative budget analysis, which included financial projections for the next five years.
   13. Children with disabilities are eligible for the same funding as other students, plus up to $30,000 in additional money, an amount based on what the state would spend on special education services for that student if they attended a public school. Home-schoolers can receive up to $2,000 per year.
   14. The money will flow to families through education savings accounts, which essentially function as state-managed bank accounts. In Arizona, for example, which has a program similar to the one Texas is rolling out, families can make education-related purchases through an online platform by the software company ClassWallet.
   15. Texas will spend $1 billion on vouchers in the first two years, but costs could skyrocket
   16. The state can spend no more than $1 billion on the program during the state’s next two-year budget cycle, which begins Sept. 1, 2025, and ends Aug. 31, 2027.
   17. It is not clear how much the program’s costs will rise after the spending cap expires — lawmakers will likely make that determination in future legislative sessions — but state budget experts predict that the tab could escalate to roughly $4.8 billion by 2030.
   18. Most families can participate, including some of the wealthiest Texans
   19. Almost any school-age child in Texas can apply for and participate in the voucher program, including students already attending private schools. Up to 20% of the program’s initial $1 billion budget could flow to wealthier families who earn 500% or more of the poverty rate — roughly $160,000 or above for a family of four.
   20. Families cannot have their children simultaneously enrolled in the program and a public school. The program excludes students whose parents cannot prove their child is a U.S. citizen. Lawmakers are also considering a bill that would bar the kids of any statewide elected official from signing up for the program.
   21. If public demand for the voucher program exceeds the funding available, it will prioritize applicants in this order:
   22. 1-Students with disabilities from families with an annual income at or below 500% of the federal poverty level, which includes any four-person household earning less than roughly $160,000
   23. 2-Families at or below 200% of the poverty level, which includes any four-person household earning less than roughly $64,300
   24. 3-Families between 200% and 500% of the poverty level
   25. 4-Families at or above 500% of the poverty level (limited to 20% of the program’s budget)
   26. The voucher program also prioritizes students exiting public schools over kids already in private ones.
   27. The priority system does not guarantee access to the program, however. The legislation does not require participating schools to change their admissions processes, meaning they can still deny entry to any student they determine does not meet their standards. Private schools are also not required to follow state or federal laws regarding accommodations for students with disabilities.
   28. The program launches next year, but other specifics are still unclear
   29. The voucher program will officially launch at the beginning of the 2026-27 school year.
   30. The comptroller — the state’s chief financial officer, who will oversee the program — has until May 15, 2026, to establish the rules and procedures it must follow. In addition to setting up the application process for Texans who want to enroll their children, the finance chief will select up to five organizations that will help Texas administer the program.
   31. Private schools can choose whether they want to participate. The law requires participating schools to be accredited and to have operated for at least two years.
   32. Participating students won’t have to take the STAAR test
   33. Enrolled students must take a nationally recognized exam of the private school’s choosing. Private schools, however, are not required to administer the same standardized tests currently issued to public school kids each year — the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, or STAAR.
   34. The state must produce an annual report that includes data on participants’ test results, satisfaction with the program, and college and career readiness. It will include information on how the program affects public and private school enrollment. Lawmakers will also get a report every year with demographic data on each participating child, including students’ age, sex, race or ethnicity and zip code.
   35. State officials will also be required to work with a private auditor responsible for helping ensure program participants follow the law. The bill directs the state to suspend the accounts of people not in compliance with the legislation’s guidelines and refer to local authorities any organizations or individuals who use taxpayer funds fraudulently.
   36. MIKE: So Governor Abbott, in the role of the Sheriff of Nottingham, is now managing to rob from the poor to give to the rich. Again.
   37. MIKE: He’s also managed to take another brick or few out of the wall separating religion and state, because many of these dollars will be going to religiously-affiliated schools, and to students who already attend those schools.
   38. MIKE: As the Tribune article points out, “voucher programs in other states have largely benefited wealthier families who already had their kids enrolled in private schools…”
   39. MIKE: Note also that this voucher program is giving money to private schools and home schoolers at a time when the Texas Legislature last increased per-student funding to public schools in 2019.
   40. MIKE: Elections have consequences. If you don’t like the consequences, show up at the polls next time, and every time, and vote like your future depends on it, because it does.
6. President Trump signs order seeking to end federal funding for NPR and PBS; By Brian Stelter and Clay Voytek, CNN | CNN.COM | Updated 11:51 AM EDT, Fri May 2, 2025. TAGS: President Donald Trump Corporation for Public Broadcasting, National Public Radio (NPR), Public Broadcasting Service (PBS),
   1. President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday directing the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to end federal funding for America’s two biggest public broadcasters, which have faced a series of attacks from the White House and Republican lawmakers accusing them of biased reporting.
   2. The order instructs the CPB’s board to terminate direct funding for National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service to the “maximum extent allowed by law and shall decline to provide future funding.” It also orders the board to take steps to “minimize or eliminate” indirect funding to NPR and PBS.
   3. The corporation, however, is a private entity that is supposed to be protected from government interference, including executive orders from the president. The corporation is currently suing Trump because the White House tried to terminate three of its board members earlier this week.
   4. [The corporation’s CEO, Patricia Harrison, said in a statement,] “CPB is not a federal executive agency subject to the President’s authority. Congress directly authorized and funded CPB to be a private nonprofit corporation wholly independent of the federal government.”
   5. [PBS CEO Paula Kerger said in a statement Friday morning,] “The President’s blatantly unlawful Executive Order, issued in the middle of the night, threatens our ability to serve the American public with educational programming, as we have for the past 50-plus years. We are currently exploring all options to allow PBS to continue to serve our member stations and all Americans.” …
   6. The White House has said it will soon ask Congress to claw back the money already allocated for the corporation over the next two years. …
   7. NPR joined PBS in suggesting it will consider legal action against the administration.
   8. [Katherine Maher, NPR President and CEO said in a statement that is linked here in the story,] “We will vigorously defend our right to provide essential news, information and life-saving services to the American public. We will challenge this Executive Order using all means available …”
   9. Trump’s executive order is another pursuit of the same goal – a zeroing out of federal funding for public media. …
   10. When Congress established the corporation in 1967, it specifically tried to insulate public media from political pressure. The law said the corporation is a private entity, not a federal agency, “to afford maximum protection from extraneous interference and control,” and expressly forbids the government from exercising “any direction, supervision, or control over educational television or radio broadcasting.”
   11. But Congress could choose to stop funding the corporation. In that case, bigger stations with lots of donors and other sources of revenue would survive, but smaller stations could be forced off the air, especially in rural areas that are Republican strongholds.
   12. [Ed Ulman, the CEO of Alaska Public Media, told CNN last month that in many cases,] “these are the last locally owned broadcasters in these communities,”
   13. MIKE: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) was established at a time when Democrats controlled the federal government, and it was amply funded. Republicans have always opposed the CPB and any related organizations. Republicans have repeatedly attempted to defund all forms of public broadcasting, and have over time succeeded in reducing federal support for it.
   14. MIKE: Trump’s attempt to kill public broadcasting is not just a Trump target. It’s been a target of Republicans for 60 years, ever since its creation.
   15. MIKE: Because if you’re a Republican, truth is not your friend.
   16. MIKE: As Stephen Colbert once remarked at the 2006 White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner, “reality has a well-known liberal bias.” 
7. This next article is an opinion piece by Robert Reich. Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy emeritus at the University of California-Berkeley. He is a Guardian US columnist. His piece is entitled — If leaders stay silent, the US won’t survive Trump’s next 100 days; By Robert Reich | THEGUARDIAN.COM | Wed 30 Apr 2025 14.07 EDT. Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is a professor of public policy emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley. He is a Guardian US columnist. TAGS: Donald Trump, Opinion, Democrats, Republicans, US Congress, US politics, US supreme court, Bill Clinton,
   1. We have witnessed the first 100 days of the odious Trump regime.
   2. The US constitution is in peril. Civil and human rights are being trampled upon. The economy is in disarray.
   3. At this rate, we will not make it through the second 100 days.
   4. Federal judges in more than 120 cases so far have sought to stop Trump – judges appointed by Republicans as well as Democrats, some appointed by Trump himself – but the regime is either ignoring or appealing their orders. It has even arrested a municipal judge in Milwaukee amid a case involving an undocumented defendant.
   5. Recently, Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III of the court of appeals for the fourth circuit – an eminent conservative Reagan appointee who is revered by the Federalist Society – issued a scathing rebuke to the Trump regime. In response to its assertion that it can abduct residents of the US and put them into foreign prisons without due process, Wilkinson wrote:
   6. “If today the Executive claims the right to deport without due process and in disregard of court orders, what assurance will there be tomorrow that it will not deport American citizens and then disclaim responsibility to bring them home? And what assurance shall there be that the Executive will not train its broad discretionary powers upon its political enemies? The threat, even if not the actuality, would always be present, and the Executive’s obligation to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed’ would lose its meaning.”
   7. Wilkinson’s fears are already being realized. ICE recently deported three US citizens – aged two, four and seven – when their mothers were deported to Honduras. One of the children, who has stage 4 cancer, was sent out of the US without medication or consultation with doctors.
   8. Meanwhile, the regime continues to attack all the independent institutions in this country that have traditionally served as buffers against tyranny – universities, non-profits, lawyers and law firms, the media, science and researchers, libraries and museums, the civil service and independent agencies – threatening them with extermination or loss of funding if they do not submit to its oversight and demands.
   9. Trump has even instructed the Department of Justice to investigate ActBlue, the platform that handles the fundraising for almost all Democratic candidates and the issues Democrats support.
   10. Meanwhile, Trump is actively destroying the economy. His proposed tariffs are already raising prices. His attacks on the Fed chief, Jerome Powell, are causing tremors around the world.
   11. Trump wants total power, even at the cost of our democracy and economy.
   12. His polls are plummeting, yet many Americans are still in denial. “He’s getting things done!” some say. “He’s tough and strong!”
   13. Every American with any shred of authority must loudly and boldly explain the danger we are in.
   14. A few Democratic members and progressives in Congress (Bernie Sanders, AOC, Cory Booker, Chris Van Hollen, Chris Murphy) have expressed outrage, but most seem oddly quiet. Granted, they have no direct power to stop what is occurring, but they cannot and must not appear to acquiesce. They need to be heard, every day – protesting, demanding, resisting, refusing.
   15. Barack Obama has spoken up at least once, to his credit, but where is my old boss, Bill Clinton? Where is George W Bush? Where are their former vice-presidents – Al Gore and Dick Cheney? Where are their former cabinet members? They all must be heard, too.
   16. What about Republican members of Congress? Are none willing to stand up against what is occurring? And what of Republican governors and state legislators? If there were ever a time for courage and integrity, it is now. Their silence is inexcusable.
   17. Over 400 university presidents have finally issued a letter opposing “the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education”. Good. Now they must speak out against the overreach endangering all of American democracy.
   18. Hundreds of law firms have joined a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the law firm Perkins Coie’s appeal of the regime’s demands. Fine. Now they, along with the American Bar Association and every major law school, must sound the alarm about Trump’s vindictive and abusive use of the justice department.
   19. America’s religious leaders have a moral obligation to speak out. They have a spiritual duty to their congregations and to themselves to make their voices heard.
   20. The leaders of American business – starting with Jamie Dimon, the chair and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, who in normal times has assumed the role of spokesperson for American business – have been conspicuously silent. Of course they fear Trump’s retribution. Of course they hope for a huge tax cut. But these hardly excuse their seeming assent to the destruction of American democracy.
   21. We have witnessed what can happen in just the first 100 days. I’m not at all sure we can wait until the 2026 midterm elections and hope that Democrats take back at least one chamber of Congress. At the rate this regime is wreaking havoc, too much damage will have been done by then.
   22. The nation is tottering on the edge of dictatorship.
   23. We are no longer Democrats or Republicans. We are either patriots fighting the regime, or we are complicit in its tyranny. There is no middle ground.
   24. Soon, I fear, the regime will openly defy the Supreme Court. Americans must be mobilized into such a huge wave of anger and disgust that members of the House are compelled to impeach Trump (for the third time), and enough senators are moved to finally convict him.
   25. Then this shameful chapter of American history will end.
   26. MIKE: I’ve coined a slogan that I think should all apply to all our elected representatives, at any level of government in this time of existential national distress: Resist or Resign. If an elected official can’t or won’t resist, let them resign and make way for someone who will. I think that this sums of Robert Reich’s appeal.
   27. MIKE: Our American democracy is in a fight for its very existence. It’s up to all of us to do what we can to defend it, whether it’s being on the street, or writing letters to elected officials, or letters to the editor, or donating money to individuals or institutions that are fighting the attempted fascistic takeover of our country.
   28. MIKE: And for the record, if anyone had told me 10 years ago that I’d be using this kind of language and these kinds of words in respect to our own US government, I would have been extremely skeptical. If I had been told that same thing 50 years ago, I’d have said they were crazy.
   29. MIKE: And yet here we are.
   30. MIKE: The phrase “Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country” is a famous typing practice sentence. But it’s now time for that practice sentence to be taken as marching orders, whether metaphorically or literally.
   31. MIKE: Now is the time for all good men and women, young and old, to come to the aid of their country.
8. I’m not going to read the next article. I’m just going to read the title and it subtitle. Then I’ll try to give you some perspective. It’s from the INDIANEXPRESS-dot-COM — Tariff Tracker, April 28: Thumbs down to his first 100 days, waiting for the ‘Big, Beautiful’ tax Bill; Trump’s approval rating has declined to 40%, amid concerns of rapidly evolving tariff decisions and administrative cuts, as well as the increased cost of living for the foreseeable future. In the week ahead, discussion on his divisive tax bill will continue. Written by Anagha Jayakumar, New Delhi | INDIANEXPRESS.COM | Updated: April 29, 2025 03:58 IST. TAGS: Donald Trump, 100 days, Trump’s Tariffs, Trump Polling,
   1. MIKE: There’s been a lot of talk about Trump’s poll numbers this past week, and just in case you’re taking too much comfort from those numbers, I wanted to put them in some context.
   2. MIKE: First, it’s worth noting that when Richard Nixon resigned the presidency — even as he made his famous V-signs on Marine One as he prepared to leave the White House grounds for the last time — his approval rating was still about 28%.
   3. MIKE: According to Reuters on April 30^th, Trump’s overall approval rating is at 42%, with a margin of error of about +/- 3 percentage points.
   4. MIKE: Listen all you want to Trump being underwater by double digits on specific questions, but that overall approval is the number to watch. If you think about it, within that margin of error, whether in his first term or now, his approval rating has been pretty much rock solid in — at a minimum — the low- to mid-40s.
   5. MIKE: Now think about how low that number would have to go to shake some of Trump’s Republican sycophants loose from his thrall. In my opinion, those overall approval numbers would probably have to fall to within the mid- to upper-30s, even within the margin of error.
   6. MIKE: And then remember that when Richard Nixon was about to literally fly away from the White House in disgrace, his approval was still around 28%.
   7. MIKE: We’ve got a long political row to hoe. It will take a lot of emotional stamina, but we have to be up to it.
9. Rubio and German Foreign Ministry spar on X over comments accusing Germany of ‘tyranny in disguise’; By Jennifer Hansler, CNN | CNN.COM | Updated 5:38 PM EDT, Fri May 2, 2025. TAGS: Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Alternative for Germany (AfD), Germany, German Foreign Office, JD Vance,
   1. A remarkable exchange played out on X on Friday as US Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused the government of key ally Germany of “tyranny in disguise” for designating the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) as an extremist entity.
   2. In a post Friday afternoon, the top US diplomat slammed the classification made by Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, which allows it to increase surveillance of the political party. Vice President JD Vance later echoed the rebuke of the move in his own post on the social media platform.
   3. [Rubio wrote on his official State Department X account,] “Germany just gave its spy agency new powers to surveil the opposition. That’s not democracy — it’s tyranny in disguise.”
   4. [Vance continued,] “What is truly extremist is not the popular AfD — which took second in the recent election—but rather the establishment’s deadly open border immigration policies that the AfD opposes.”
   5. Rubio … said the US ally “should reverse course.”
   6. In a direct reply on X more than three hours later, the German Foreign Office pushed back.
   7. [The account posted,] “This is democracy. This decision is the result of a thorough & independent investigation to protect our Constitution & the rule of law. It is independent courts that will have the final say.”
   8. “We have learnt from our history that rightwing extremism needs to be stopped,” the foreign office wrote. …
   9. MIKE: There’s a lot more in the article, but that’s the essence of it.
   10. MIKE: It’s often said in one way or another that if there’s one nation on Earth that should be able to recognize a dangerous fascist wannabe tyrant, it’s the Germans.
   11. MIKE: Americans should seriously take note.