Texpatriate endorses for Attorney General

This should be a long and intellectual editorial about the political history of the Attorney General’s office, about the nuanced policy disagreements between the major candidates and the different criteria one should use before making a decision on whom to support for the state’s top lawyer. But this decision is just not complex enough to warrant all that. One candidate is an admitted crook, and should stay far away from high office.

State Senator Ken Paxton (R-Collin County) has admitted to engaging in securities fraud, a felony in Texas, when he solicited clients to a capital management firm without properly registering himself, despite being paid to do so. He has been officially reprimanded and fined by the State Securities Board. The Public Integrity Unit of the Travis County District Attorney’s office has even initiated an investigation against Paxton, though any indictments that might be issued would not occur until after the November election.

Now, if Paxton wins the election but still gets disbarred for his unethical behavior and just shoddy lawyering, he would still be able to continue on in office (our state’s founding fathers, in their grand wisdom, decided you don’t have to be an Attorney to be Attorney General). But if convicted of a felony, he would be removed from office. This is not that small of a possibility.

In our opinion, Paxton is already a confessed crook. Someone like him is either too nefarious or too mindless to follow the law; either way, he should not be rewarded with the privilege to help enforce it. And Texas should not have to relive the excitement of the 1980s when it comes to dealing with public officials who have been found guilty of felonies.

The Democratic candidate, Sam Houston, has a great deal of problems himself that make us think perhaps he is also not ready for prime time. But being camera shy and perplexed on some more complicated issues is a far cry from a felonious crime-spree.

Houston specifically has a rather unclear stance on what criteria the Attorney General should use when determining to defend a state law or not. We don’t know exactly what he believes, and this ambiguity troubles us to some extent. However, we do agree with Houston on many of the underlying principles, such as personal opposition to Texas’ strict anti-abortion laws and homophobic constitutional amendments.

In our view, the second-most obvious difference between Houston and Paxton is their legal experience. Paxton is a second-rate lawyer who has been propped up merely by his skills in Tea Party rabble rousing. Sam Houston, on the other hand, is a well-respected attorney in the City of Houston area, focusing on litigation as a named partner in a major firm.

Though most of all, Houston is willing to approach the issues of the Attorney General with an open mind. This stands in contrast to Paxton’s small and petty ideological approach, which results in the exact type of hubris that can lead to the aforementioned hubris.

What type of laughing stock will Texas be when it has the only Attorney General in the country who is no longer an attorney? We’re not sure what the punch-line would be, and we don’t care to find out by electing Paxton.

Accordingly, this board endorses Sam Houston for Attorney General.

The Texpatriate Editorial Board is comprised of Noah M. Horwitz & Olivia Arena of Austin, George Bailey of Boston, Luis Fayad of College Station and Andrew Scott Romo of New Orleans. Editorials represent a majority opinion of the voting board.

Texpatriate endorses for Comptroller

 

The Comptroller of Public Accounts has an inquisitorial quality about it. While reforms throughout the 1980s and the 1990s gradually gave the office most of the powers of the former State Treasurer position, its two original duties are still arguably the most important. The Comptroller is charged within collecting the taxes of the State of Texas, namely the sales tax and excise taxes. The post also comes up with a biennial revenue estimate, which the Comptroller relays to the State Legislature, and the legislature is compelled to use when writing their budget.

Without a doubt, the current officeholder of this position, Susan Combs, has failed in both respects. Tax revenue has been down around the state considering our population. This stands in stark contrast to some of the bombastic Democrats, namely Bob Bullock, who have held this position in the past. Bullock infamously organized high-profile raids to tax evaders, and cleaned up inefficiencies and corruptions to ensure that coffers remained filled. His two successors, John Sharp and Carole Keeton Strayhorn, one a Democrat and one a Republican, also ensured that revenue forecasts were accurate.

This is greatly important, because an incompetent or malevolent Comptroller could fudge the numbers and wreak havoc on the state. That is precisely what happened in 2011 when Combs negligently low-balled the revenues, prompting enormously painful austerity cuts, especially to education, that just weren’t necessary.

Democratic candidate Mike Collier, a longtime CPA who calls himself “the watchdog,” pledges to fight exactly this type of ineptitude. Previously an apolitical person, Collier jumped into the race after witnessing the deleterious effects caused by Combs’ dereliction of her responsibilities. He wants to run the office better, not as a stepping stone to higher office but as an actual place of accounting and reasonable forecast.

In our opinion, the office of Comptroller should not be elected to begin with. And while lifelong politicians such as Bullock did great things with the post, the era of the goodhearted statesman is simply a thing of the past in the same respect as black-and-white televisions and horse drawn carriages.

The Republican candidate, State Senator Glenn Hegar (R-Harris County), is not an accountant or in any way well-versed in the financial sector. He is a farmer, and his claim to the fame in the legislature was authoring the omnibus anti-abortion bill that Wendy Davis filibustered. He offers no specifics as to how to improve upon the office form Combs and his campaign has consisted of little more than right-wing sound bites heralding his support from anti-abortion rights and anti-LGBT interest groups.

Hegar, in one of the few issues pertaining to the office he is actually running for, advocating lessening property taxes. This is all good and fun, as few Texans besides masochists in Austin would actually be comfortable with their property tax bill, but Hegar’s proposed alternative is much, much worse. He wishes to replace the property tax with a new statewide sales tax that climbs more than 20 cents on the dollar. This stupid — and there just isn’t a better word for it — regressive tax would greatly hurt the poorest among us. It would result in an effective tax hike for a majority of the population.

Like many of this year’s elections, the choice in November is crystal clear. Collier is qualified, would do the job capably and does not want to raise your taxes. Hegar is not qualified, would not do the job capably and wants to raise your taxes. Don’t raise taxes, vote Democrat.

Accordingly, this board endorses Mike Collier for Comptroller of Public Accounts.

The Texpatriate Editorial Board is comprised of Noah M. Horwitz & Olivia Arena of Austin, George Bailey of Boston, Luis Fayad of College Station and Andrew Scott Romo of New Orleans. Editorials represent a majority opinion of the voting board.

Texpatriate endorses for Land Commissioner

The Commissioner of the General Land Office, commonly known as the Land Commissioner, has broad powers over relatively random portions of state government. Public land (including beaches), education and veterans’ affairs round out their duties. It is a job that requires both political acumen and considerable policy knowledge. In these categories, the choice that is best for Texas is clear.

Republican candidate George P. Bush is about far, far more than a continuation of a political dynasty. The son of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and nephew of former President George W. Bush, he has a lot to live up to in arguably the most visible conservative political dynasty in the country. But unlike the partisan excesses pushed by his family members, Bush is pragmatic in his outlook. And standing in stark contrast to his uncle, the last member of his family in Texas politics, Bush has demonstrated considerable mastery of the issues at hand for the Land Commissioner office.

A former teacher, Bush has a special place to understand the plight of many within the public school system. Overseeing the moneys that would go to many schools, Bush has no power to change standards or increase funding, but he does have the capacity to ensure that funds are spent efficiently and responsibly. We have every reason to think he would capably do this.

On veterans, Bush pushes a plan that is both realistic considering the powers of his prospective office and has the capacity to greatly improve the lives of many veterans affected by debilitating conditions such as post traumatic stress disorder. It’s relatively simple; he would publicize and tout the myriad programs Texas already has in place to assist veterans, such as low-interest loans and subsidies involving healthcare. For all our reputation of being a no-frills state when it comes to social welfare programs, Texas already ostensibly does a great deal regarding veterans; we just do a lousy job advertising that fact. Bush would change that.

Most importantly, regarding public land, Bush would push for programs that respect the integrity of our parks and reserves while still allowing the responsible exploitation of the resources underneath the ground. It’s a win-win situation.

Contrary to many in his party, Bush is an environmentalist. One of the mantras of his campaign is that there is no “false choice between protecting the environment…and promoting job creation.” He acknowledges the reality of climate change, as well as the terrifying phenomenon of rising sea levels. Texas would do well to have such a pragmatic steward of both positions in office.

The former Mayor of El Paso, John Cook, is also running as a Democrat. He is a passionate candidate, but his criticisms are far more pointed at the incumbent Land Commissioner, Jerry Patterson, than they are directed toward Bush. To put it bluntly, Bush commands a mastery of the issues regarding the office that Cook simply does not possess. Despite an impressive resume, he has largely dropped the ball on a serious campaign ahead of the general election.

Educated by the best institutions of higher learning in the state, Rice University and UT Law, Bush is obviously smart. But he is also a passionate and comprising politician as well. Such qualities make him stand apart in Texas politics to most of his compatriots in the Republican Party, much less his family. Texas voters have an easy decision to make, so as long as they do not blame one candidate for the sins of his father.

Or his uncle.

Accordingly, this board endorses George P. Bush for Land Commissioner.


 

Noah M. Horwitz dissented from this editorial, and wrote his own addendum.

My colleague makes some good points in his editorial that urges support of George P. Bush for Land Commissioner. He is, indeed, a pragmatist compared to those within his party, believing in things such as climate change and the need to allocate resources protecting both schoolchildren and veterans from the perils of austerity. Such beliefs were also somewhat evident back in February, when I joined with my colleagues in unanimously selecting Bush as the best choice within the Republican primary. But the points just don’t hold water when Bush is challenged by the reasonableness of John Cook, a Democrat vying for the position.

While it is true, for example, that Bush recognizes the very real danger presented by climate change, he is still willfully ignorant regarding the source of these dangers. Bush still officially doubts the idea that people are the main source of climate change, despite the fact that 97% of pertinent climate scientists agree on that point. Why? The reason is that, like nearly all of the high profile figures within his political party, he has to mollify a zealous, extreme and anti-intellectual faction that dominates primary elections.

What good is a steward of public lands if he does not acknowledge the driving source behind the greatest danger to them? Recognizing that climate change exists merely means you are not delusional as to present realities, but if you think humans are not causing it, there is little you can do besides wring your hands and lament the conundrum while you refill the oversized gas tank in your hummer. He is without any type of actual strategy to deal with the rising sea levels that threaten to eviscerate our beaches.

Speaking of beaches, Bush supports an abominable ruling of the Texas Supreme Court that guts the state’s venerated Open Beaches Act. While the law mandates that all of Texas’ beaches are state parks, to be used by anyone, the high court has adulterated the state constitution to fit their bizarre interpretation that an exception may be carved out if a property owner’s previous non-beachfront land becomes the “first in line,” so to speak, as a result of erosion. With the state’s rapidly eroding coastline (which, not to keep beating the same point, is not a result of mysterious circumstances, but the obvious byproduct of the rising sea levels and increased tropical activity that come with man-made climate change), this terrible ruling will affect more and more parcels of land in the forthcoming decades.

Bush supports this misguided ruling. On his watch, Texas beaches could easily find themselves like the northeast, where the rich and powerful monopolize all the good locations, hogging these pristine landscapes from the public. Now, Bush can just go to his family’s compound in Kennebunkport, Maine. But for most honest Texans, the state beaches are all we got.

John Cook opposes this silly ruling, and recognizes the very real threat that man-made climate change poses to the state’s beaches and other public land. With years of experience as both the Mayor of El Paso and a member on the El Paso City Council, Cook is not a political novice. Since my colleagues evidently values policy acumen so highly, it should be worth mentioning that Cook also knows the nitty-gritty intricacies that this office faces remarkably well. Cook doesn’t have Yankee family money underwriting his travels around the state, so he may not be quite so ubiquitous of a presence around our humongous state this general election. But that just should not be important.

Be it the editorial board of this publication, or those of just about any newspaper in the state, it appears everyone has lost sight of their priorities this election. Obsequious adulation is directed toward Bush for his passion, campaign skills and the size of his war-chest, as if those are things any articulate person would prioritize in an endorsement. We’re better than that, we’re better than the sophomoric illogic used in picking the student council candidate with the prettiest posters; at least, I think we are.

What far, far too few people have done is actually look at the policy disagreements between the two, albeit well-qualified, candidates. Bush ascribes to the fairy tale that climate change is not caused or affect by people, whereas Cook thinks we should be vigilant in trying to stop it. Bush thinks the One-Percent should be entitled to steal state parks along the ocean from the average Texan to ensure their million-dollar second homes are protected from eminent domain; Cook thinks this 55 year-old law is valid and should remain enforced. Most importantly, Bush simply will go through the motions of this office for four years while he plots his campaign for Governor, as everyone in this state fully expects him to do. Cook actually wants to get into the weeds and leave his mark on the General Land Office.

I don’t punish Bush for the sins of his father, or his uncle. I punish him for his own. Respectfully, but sternly, I urge you to disregard the majority’s opinion and vote for John Cook for Land Commissioner.
—Noah M. Horwitz

The Texpatriate Editorial Board is comprised of Noah M. Horwitz & Olivia Arena of Austin, George Bailey of Boston, Luis Fayad of College Station and Andrew Scott Romo of New Orleans. Editorials represent a majority opinion of the voting board.

Texpatriate endorses for Railroad Commissioner

The Texas Railroad Commission, despite its byzantine name, is responsible for the regulation of oil and gas throughout the state. It is an enormous responsibility for a state so inextricably linked with the creation of energy. With three commission members serving staggered terms, a sole commissioner seat will be up for election this year.

The incumbent, Barry Smitherman, has been a terrible commissioner in his limited tenure. Between focusing on red-meat social issues that have little to do with energy and neglecting his duties for an ill-fate run toward higher office, Smitherman has — as Chairman of the Commission — reduced the position to a rubber stamp for the oil and gas industry. With Smitherman retiring, Republican candidate Ryan Sitton looks certain to continue this legacy.

Now, in the midst of Texas’ biggest oil boom since the 1970s, being friendly to the industry is not necessarily a bad thing. The recent rev-up in production has the capacity to revitalize the lives of countless Texans and send our economy into overdrive. But the point of a regulatory body is not merely to be a cheerleader for the industry, but to protect the public and foster policies for the benefit of the entire community.

Sitton, an oil and gas engineer, appears complacent to continue along with business as usual. On the other hand, Steven Brown, the Former Chairman of the Fort Bend County Democratic Party, wants to ensure people are protected above all else. Though not classically trained in the industry, Brown has proven himself to have an impressive mastery of all the issues that the commission faces.

At issue here more than anything else is the dispute over hydraulic fracturing, colloquially known as “fracking.” The process involves injecting high-pressure liquid into shale rocks that contain natural gas and petroleum, making previously unreachable resources available. Without a doubt, these processes have left a positive mark on Texas. They have helped expedite weaning us off of foreign energy sources, as well as enriching portions of the state and jumpstarting the economy.

But real concerns remain. Namely, the freshwater of these regions has been comprised and some evidence exists that these procedures can cause minor earthquakes. This has prompted many liberals and others affected to call for an outright ban, if not a moratorium, on the measure.

For Brown’s part, he has been more tempered. He wishes to end some fracking into those areas with serious earthquakes, as well as ban the use of freshwater for fracking, but he does not merely want to end the largely successful practice. This measured approach is far superior to Sitton’s mindset, which is to ignore the myriad complications that have arisen.

Additionally, we simply cannot take Sitton seriously as a candidate considering his serious ethical breaches throughout the campaign. As someone who has a significant interest in many oil companies, Sitton originally defiantly stated that he would not divest his interests if elected, despite the fact that he would have regulatory power over those same companies. Only much later did he reverse his stance in an insincere effort to carry favor with voters. This led us against endorsing Sitton in the Republican primary for the post, despite the fact that we agreed with him on policy more than his opponent in that election.

Thus, it would be an easy choice to support Brown in this election. But we also tend to agree with him more on policy choices and actual issues that the commission might face. He wants to be for the people, Sitton wants to be for the profits.

Accordingly, this board endorses Steven Brown for Railroad Commissioner.

The Texpatriate Editorial Board is comprised of Noah M. Horwitz & Olivia Arena of Austin, George Bailey of Boston, Luis Fayad of College Station and Andrew Scott Romo of New Orleans. Editorials represent a majority opinion of the voting board.

Texpatriate endorses for District Attorney

For years, Harris County was run by a brutal and harsh District Attorney, Johnny Holmes, who turned the office into the nation’s busiest source of death sentences. As this board has opined in the past, we think that the death penalty is tantamount to unjustified killing. In addition to the outright cruelty used in depriving a fellow human being who is not actively threatening you their life, the penalty has been carried out arbitrarily and capriciously. Black defendants are targeted more frequently by prosecutors, and sentenced to death by juries with even more reliability.

While, sadly, both candidates for District Attorney support this appalling practice, only one actively trumpets her support of the penalty and even appears proud of it. Furthermore, only one candidate supports the status quo on the racially biased policies that have contributed to many of this county’s problems regarding criminal justice. That candidate is the incumbent, Republican Devon Anderson. Her policies have failed Harris County, and they should be wholeheartedly repudiated.

Anderson was first appointed about a year ago by Governor Rick Perry to this post following the death of her husband, Mike Anderson, in the post. Devon Anderson, however, also had a illustrious career as both a prosecutor and a Judge. Sadly, she has continued the misguided policies of her predecessor. Be it the death penalty, the elimination of the DIVERT program to deal with driving while intoxicated, illogical grand jury systems or policies on marijuana, Anderson is just not the right candidate for Harris County.

Kim Ogg, the Democratic candidate for this post, is completely different. She has a record as both a defense attorney and a prosecutor, being able to see both sides of the courtroom in an honest and noble manner. As the longtime director of Crime Stoppers, she also has the capacity to examine crime from a more objective point of view, seeing it as something to be prevented rather than just punished.

Ogg is also a little less eager on the death penalty, and she advocates for reforming the venal grand jury system, which allows the political buddies of Criminal District Judges to recruit their friends. This has reduced the grand jury system into little more than a rubber stamp for zealous prosecutors. Under Ogg’s purview, combined hopefully with certain Judges (such as Susan Brown) being defeated for re-election, hopefully this system can be reworked into an effective check and balance once more.

Perhaps most importantly, Ogg has taken bold stands on the need to reform asinine policies on drugs within Harris County. She would rescind the so-called “trace case” policy, which prosecutes residents with felonies for even mere residues of cocaine in dramatically capricious fashion. She would also take advantage of an obscure state law to cite-and-release all those caught with small amounts of marijuana, then work out pre-trial diversion programs that would dismiss all charges if a small amount of community service is rendered. This board supports the full legalization of marijuana, but given that the District Attorney cannot change the law, we believe Ogg’s program — known by the acronym G.R.A.C.E. — is the next best thing. Anderson has only offered a lackluster imitation.

More so than almost any other election at the local level, Harris County voters have a very clear choice this November. They can go with another predictable Republican, trigger happy with putting people to death and complacent with a horrifying status quo that is corrupt, racist and ineffective. Alternatively, voters could rightly repudiate these realities and choose a candidate with an actual plan to shake up the DA’s office for the better.

Accordingly, this board endorses Kim Ogg for District Attorney.

The Texpatriate Editorial Board is comprised of Noah M. Horwitz & Olivia Arena of Austin, George Bailey of Boston, Luis Fayad of College Station and Andrew Scott Romo of New Orleans. Editorials represent a majority opinion of the voting board.

Texpatriate endorses for Juvenile Courts

Juvenile Courts are very special places within our society. The entire process is deemed civil, and not criminal. Rehabilitation — and thus not punishment — is the main priority. The accused are not defendants, but respondents. They are not convicted or found guilty, but rather adjudicated delinquent. And sentencing is not levied for merely punitive measures; rather, the court finds a solution that teaches the respondent what he or she did was incorrect while still trying to rehabilitate the person back into society as a productive citizen.

Basically, more than any other court, it is absolutely imperative that Judges are found who are not trying to prosecute from the bench, who are not merely attempting to woo the Pachyderm Club with their “tough on crime” stances and who are willing to ensure society continues being there for the troubled youths among us. It is not enough to find Judges who want to teach right from young. We need to find Judges who will work with these young people in hope that they can truly turn their lives around.

There are three Juvenile District Courts up for election this year, but only two feature contested elections. The unopposed Judge, Mike Schneider of the 315th District Court, is an adequate jurist who deserves a vote of confidence. In the other races, we endorse the Democrats.

313th DISTRICT COURT
Judge Glenn Devlin is a longtime officeholder at the Juvenile Justice center. On the bench since 2011, this freshman Judge has already left his mark upon the courts. A former defense attorney for juvenile matters with more than 30 years of experience, Devlin, a Republican, has the right temperament for the bench. Respondents before his court are dealt with fairly and nobly, and are given a fighting chance to reenter society a better person.

We also like Devlin’s Democratic opponent, Tracy Good. He has a good plan to modernize the courts, as well as address some of the equitable concerns they face. Be it the cultural problems that causes what he calls the “cradle to prison pipeline” or the bureaucracy that blocks much proposed change, Good has a grander plan at hand. Rather than faulting any specific actions of the incumbent, which we think have been admirable in most cases, Good seeks to improve the entire juvenile court system.

He wants to reform the inept ad litem procedures, which we have opined against a plethora of times. He also wants to increase collaboration between the courts and the Public Defender’s office, as well as greatly reform elements of how the courts do business. They are ambitious goals, and will require a lot of work to achieve. But we agree that they are good goals to set, and we think a Judge who would work toward them is worthy of support. Perhaps even more than a fair and balanced Judge who we still believe in. This was one of our toughest decisions.

Devlin is a tried and true choice, the safe bet to be a compassionate and fair adjudicator. But Good represents those who still want to do more, those willing to take a chance. Both are good options. Personally, we are going with the latter.

Accordingly, this board endorses Tracy Good for the 313th District Court.

314th DISTRICT COURT
Judge John Phillips, a three term Republican incumbent, has a mixed record. Harris County just deserves better. His Democratic opponent, Natalia Oakes, is a spectacularly well qualified attorney who simply needs to be elected to the bench. All around better qualified and better tempered to deal with these unique and important types of disputes and issues, Oakes would be a great asset to Harris County.

Oakes has, in the past, pointed to the incumbent’s high rate of reversal by higher courts for terminating the parental rights, 31 times in all. She contends that she would not be quite so eager to enter an order that irrevocably ends the legal relationship a parent has over their child, and would instead engage in more judicial restraint. As an attorney with a long resume in cases of children’s welfare, Oakes undoubtedly knows the serious consequences of such an action, would be far more tempered on the bench. She’s the better choice, without a doubt.

Accordingly, this board endorses Natalia Oakes for the 314th District Court.

The Texpatriate Editorial Board is comprised of Noah M. Horwitz & Olivia Arena of Austin, George Bailey of Boston, Luis Fayad of College Station and Andrew Scott Romo of New Orleans. Editorials represent a majority opinion of the voting board.

Texpatriate endorses for District Clerk

Four years ago, a 27 year old lawyer and Community College Trustee made headlines by becoming one of the most powerful individuals in the county, when Chris Daniel was elected Harris County District Clerk. In the quadrennial since, he has followed his predecessor’s start by implementing ambitious reforms at the office. Daniel has done a great job of it too.

The office has broad powers regarding most filings involving the county, and it also oversees jury service. However, under Daniel’s leadership, the office has also begun to process passports, just as Federal facilities around the country have started cutting back. It is a profitable industry for the county, and it provides an invaluable service for constituents.

Furthermore, unlike his colleague in the County Clerk’s office, Daniel has skillfully guided his office into the age of electronic filing. While other departments of the courthouse have struggled to move into the 21st century with inconsistent criteria or choppy transitions, Daniel has overseen the process rather seamlessly.

Daniel has also made a name for himself as a ubiquitous presence at public events throughout the county, as well as a participant in public service announcement trumpeting the county’s biggest civic priorities. Be that the importance of answering the call to jury service or the need to file certain government funds properly, Daniel has made big improvements in the way his office interacts with the public. We certainly think that most of the other county officials, both Democrats and Republicans, would be wise to follow his lead.

Obviously, we would be remiss if we did not stipulate our deep opposition to many of Daniel’s underlying political beliefs. A frequent guest at Tea Party events, we lament that he has aligned himself with such troubling political ideology. But, as far as we can tell, any of the diverging positions we hold compared to him have no bearing on the job that Daniel does. He holds himself with integrity in all of his official actions, and politics is checked at the courthouse door. If that ever changes, we’ll be the first to complain. But we don’t think it ever will.

Judith Snively, the Democratic opponent for this position, is a skilled attorney and politician. She is more than capable of leading of the office, and we sincerely think she would do it quite well. However, we think Daniel already is an effective manager, and we typically defer to incumbents unless we can prove they have failed in some specific way. Snively declined to return a questionnaire to the Editorial Board, but she has more broadly been without effective concrete examples as to how she would do the job effectively better than Daniel. We hope she chooses to run again in the future for a County post, but this board thinks Daniel is the right choice this time.

Accordingly, this board endorses Chris Daniel for Harris County District Clerk.

The Texpatriate Editorial Board is comprised of Noah M. Horwitz & Olivia Arena of Austin, George Bailey of Boston, Luis Fayad of College Station and Andrew Scott Romo of New Orleans. Editorials represent a majority opinion of the voting board.