Chad’s Morning Brief: It’s Super Tuesday, Local Election Filings & More

Here is your Morning Brief for the morning of March 6, 2012. Give us your feedback below and tune in to Lubbock’s First News with Chad Hasty for these and many more topics from 6-9 am.

1. Super Tuesday

Well it's Super Tuesday and it could be a big day for Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum. Newt Gingrich will win Georgia, which has the most delegates up for grabs, but unfortunately for Gingrich, that's about all he will win tonight. Both Santorum and Gingrich are seeing problems from the past come back to haunt them. Both lacked money and campaign staff to actually get on the ballot in Virginia leaving only Mitt Romney and Ron Paul to compete there. In Ohio, which will be closely watched, Santorum can't even win all of the delegates even if he wins the state. Why? According to ABC News:

Santorum failed to submit the required paperwork in three of the state’s congressional districts to be eligible to win any delegates and only partial paperwork in six other districts. And it’s in those six where things start to get complicated.
The former Pennsylvania senator’s campaign needed to come up with at least three names in each of the state’s 16 congressional districts for full delegate eligibility, but his failure submit full slates in some places will result in “unbound” delegates, which will be up for grabs after Super Tuesday.
Take the state’s fourth congressional district, for example. There Santorum submitted the name of one delegate, but left two other lines blank. If Santorum were to win the district, the state party would award him one delegate with the other two remaining officially un-allocated.

Bad for Santorum, good for Mitt Romney. A new Gallup poll out yesterday held good news for Mitt Romney and it seems as though the momentum is on Romney's side. Of course, we've seen the momentum switch before.

Today on Lubbock's First News we will visit with GOP Strategist Matt Mackowiak and Editor of RedState.com, Erick Erickson, will join us to give their analysis of Super Tuesday and the GOP race going forward.

2. Final Filings (link)

The deadline to file in the May Municipal elections has come and gone. KFYO News has a look at who decided to run.

In the City of Lubbock election, Tom Martin will run again for Mayor, challenged by Glen Robertson. In District 2, Councilman Floyd Price is currently running unopposed. In the District 4 race, current CouncilmanPaul R. Beane will face off against James Gerlt.
Also, Dwight Fullingim held a press conference at 4 p.m. Monday at City Hall to announce his candidacy for District 4. The Lubbock County Appraisal District website lists Dwight and Frances Fullingim’s address as 4807 87^th Street in Lakeridge since 2006, which is the property for which Fullingim has a homestead exemption listed. That particular homesteaded property is in District 5. There is a property listed under the name J. Worth Fullingim located at 3024 67^th Street, which was owned by Dwight Fullingim’s brother who died in January of this year. Fullingim used that address on his filing Monday afternoon. City Secretary Becky Garza said that her office does not have the authority to investigate anything past what is listed on the filing.
In District 6, Randy Sanders is running for the seat held by Jim Gilbreath, who chose not to run for reelection. Local attorney Latrelle Joy has filed to run against Sanders for District 6.

You can read who filed for LISD and Frenship ISD by clicking on the link above. I still believe the Mayoral race will be one to watch here in Lubbock. Overall, I think Mayor Tom Martin has done well for the City of Lubbock. However, Glen Robertson brings a fresh outlook and new ideas to the table. The debate of fees vs. taxes will take center stage in this race.

The Dwight Fullingim candidacy is interesting. According to KFYO News, Fullingim filed to run in District 4 against Councilman Paul R. Beane, but he listed his address as being in District 5. The City Secretary Becky Garza said her office doesn't have the authority to investigate anything past what's listen on the filing. So who does? And wouldn't the address be on the paperwork? Something weird is going on here. Not sure this is how Fullingim wanted to kick off his campaign.

3. Guns

Two different stories out there today involving guns. A federal judge ruled on Monday that Maryland's gun law is unconstitutional.

Maryland residents do not have to provide a "good and substantial reason" to legally own a handgun, a federal judge ruled Monday, striking down as unconstitutional the state's requirements for getting a permit.
U.S. District Judge Benson Everett Legg wrote that states are allowed some leeway in deciding the way residents exercise their Second Amendment right to bear arms, but Maryland's objective was to limit the number of firearms that individuals could carry, effectively creating a rationing system that rewarded those who provided the right answer for wanting to own a gun.

Great ruling from the judge on this case. Look for Maryland to appeal the ruling of course.

Another story out the Dallas-Ft.Worth area claims that guns sales are on the rise due to the worry that President Obama will be reelected. Gun owners are worried that if Obama is re-elected then he will go after the guns and take away the rights we all enjoy right now. Might as well stock up now I guess. Won't hurt.

4. Sandra Fluke Argued for What? (link)

Not only does Fluke want you to pay for her birth control, but she also wants a certain kind of surgery covered.

Sandra Fluke is being sold by the left as something she's not. Namely a random co-ed from Georgetown law who found herself mixed up in the latest front of the culture war who was simply looking to make sure needy women had access to birth control. That, of course, is not the case.
As many have already uncovered Sandra Fluke she is, in reality, a 30 year old long time liberal activist who enrolled at Georgetown with the express purpose of fighting for the school to pay for students' birth control. She has been pushing for mandated coverage of contraceptives at Georgetown for at least three years according to the Washington Post.
However, as I discovered today, birth control is not all that Ms. Fluke believes private health insurance must cover. She also, apparently, believes that it is discrimination deserving of legal action if "gender reassignment" surgeries are not covered by employer provided health insurance. She makes these views clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law.
The title of the article, which can be purchased in full here, is Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons and was published in the Journal's 2011 Annual Review. I have posted a transcript of the section I will be quoting from here. In a subsection of the article entitled "Employment Discrimination in Provision of Employment Benefits" starting on page 635 of the review Sandra Fluke and her co-editor describe two forms of discrimination in benefits they believe LGBTQ individuals face in the work place:
"Discrimination typically takes two forms: first, direct discrimination limiting access to benefits specifically needed by LGBTQ persons, and secondly, the unavailability of family-related benefits to LGBTQ families."
Their "prime example" of the first form of discrimination? Not covering sex change operations:
"A prime example of direct discrimination is denying insurance coverage for medical needs of transgender persons physically transitioning to the other gender."