Perry, Sharp Debate Ag Issues
At Cattle Raisers’ Convention

DALLAS — Candidates for lieutenant governor of Texas squared off Tuesday at an old-fashioned political rally staged by the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association during the group’s 121st annual convention in Dallas.

Democrat John Sharp and Republican Rick Perry explained their positions on issues critical to cattle producers on a bunting-draped, flag-festooned stage under an open air tent on the lawn of the Wyndham Anatole Hotel. The two candidates introduced their positions with opening statements.

"We've got our priorities wrong in the state of Texas," Sharp began. "Do you reckon maybe something's wrong when you've got your school children in the portable buildings and you've got your prisoners in the brand new stuff? When you've got libraries in our elementary and secondary schools that don't begin to compare with those in our prisons? When the gymnasiums in the prisons are better than those in your schoolhouse? We are being mugged by the prison system in the state of Texas, and it is time that changed," Sharp declared.

"It is time to put the prisoners to work. Less than 50 percent of prisoners work at full-time jobs. And those are the folks that could be above the Edwards Aquifer with chainsaws and bulldozers clearing off the cedar. And when you do that, you're going to give San Antonio more water than they can possibly drink.

"I believe that the right of capture by every landowner in the state of Texas is sacrosanct and ought to be kept that way. I believe that peoples' property rights ought to be sacred unless they devalue the property rights of somebody next door with some sort of activity," Sharp said.

Perry promised the cattle raisers: "I'm not leaving agriculture, I'm taking it with me! We've worked on a lot of issues together during the past seven and a half years," Perry said, referring to his tenure as Texas Agriculture Commissioner. "The most important issue has been our private property rights — making sure that the people know that individual landowners' rights are the most important rights we have as Texans.

"I'll assure you that just as I stood up to Bruce Babbitt and the Clinton administration when they came in and tried to make 800,000 acres of Texas critical habitat for the golden-cheeked warbler, as your lieutenant governor, I will stand up and fight Washington, D.C., or anybody else that tries to come in and take away our private property rights in Texas," Perry asserted. He also promised to stand up against the American Heritage Rivers Initiative.

The two candidates then alternately answered written questions posed by the audience through moderator Dave McNeely, columnist for the Austin-American Statesman.

What should be done about ensuring adequate water for agriculture in Texas, both in terms of supply and access to it?

PERRY: "I think the key words for the future of water is the state of Texas are cooperation and conservation. Senate Bill 1 was a good start. We started talking about drought preparedness, regional water planning, expanding the use of water bonds, and tax credits. Those are all good components of the new state law.

"Some three or four years ago I laid out a water marketing plan. We realized that in Texas, water is always going to be a major issue. And anytime water is talked about it is important to have agriculture sitting at the table as the largest user of water in the state of Texas.

"In a very few weeks we will be announcing, along with Parks and Wildlife and the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, the first-ever effort to use inmate labor to clear cedar off of the Edwards Aquifer. I happen to think that is a great use of those inmates' time."

SHARP: "I think it's a great use of inmates' time too — that's why I proposed it over a year ago. I think one of the things we have to be very careful about is the representation from rural Texas on some of the boards and regional corporations. One of the things that has to happen in terms of Senate Bill 1 is that it is not totally dominated by the urban areas in the state of Texas and that whenever a decision is made to take water from anyone, that there is just compensation and that it is something that is agreed on by the landowner."

Would you support pilot projects geared toward brush control and its impact on water supply?

SHARP: "As a matter of fact, I think we ought to skip the pilot and do it. Anybody that lives in the hill country or in a mesquite-infested place knows you don't need a pilot project to figure it out. If you want a pilot project, go to David Bamberger over in Blanco County; he bought the sorriest piece of land that existed in Blanco County and everybody in Blanco knows it. He now has three 42-acre ponds out there, and all that man did was take the undergrowth cedar and move it out.

"All that's happening with cedar trees is a bunch of folks trying to stop growth by using not-very-good science. Golden-cheeked warblers like water and they like bugs that come off of trees that grow from water. You only need one of those trees for about a hundred acres unless you want to build a nest the size of this Anatole hotel! What we need to be about is doing some brush control in conjunction with people who know about it — at Texas A&M University and others — and use the prisoners to do it.

PERRY: "I agrees with John that we don't need a pilot project; we know what works."

Should the Animal Health Commission remain a stand-alone agency or should it be merged into the Texas Department of Agriculture like we have in other states?

PERRY: "I have been consistent in my public pronouncements in being opposed to moving the Texas Animal Health Commission to the Texas Department of Agriculture or any other agency. It has been an agency that has functioned well where it is. The independence — particularly by gubernatorial appointees — is very important. And one of the reasons that Texas today can be proud of being a Class A state (for brucellosis) is the work that has happened at the Animal Health Commission. I think it would be a travesty to move it."

SHARP: "I am not in favor of moving the Texas Animal Health Commission over to the Texas Department of Agriculture because I don't think you ought to have an agency that's based totally on research and doing the right thing politicized by an elected agriculture commissioner."

Currently the general revenue is used to fund the brucellosis program under the Texas Animal Health Commission; do you have an opinion as to whether it should stay in general revenue or be funded under users fees?

SHARP: "Brucellosis and those things that the Animal Health Commission does are public health policy, whether it has to do with brucellosis or whether it has to do with undulant fever and things like that, and just like things within the Texas Department of Health that deal strictly with humans, ought to be paid from general fees of the state."

PERRY: "I agree. The brucellosis program should be paid from general revenue."

Both candidates said they would oppose a state income tax for Texas.