leftist

This contradicts other planks that call for elimination of all federal programs not in the Constitution's enumerated powers. NASA is not such a power.

It is difficult to place NASA in a platform document for a fiscally conservative Texas party. The greater Houston area clearly benefits from NASA's presence. However, far too much of NASA's work either has no direct or even near-term application that will possibly benefit humanity, and even the parts that do benefit humanity are so collosally expensive to be a grossly inefficient way to develop useful technology. Therefore, much of NASA is a make-work program for nerds. If NASA must be in the platform, the plank must oppose much of NASA's current allocation.

The Texas Aerospace Commission should have been decommissioned per the Texas Sunset Commission because it "is not an efficient use of the State’s limited resources." It is ironic for a platform plank to directly support wasteful spending.

This is a terrible, unfocused plank that is a grab bag of random wishes and left-wing government expansionism.

Wages are an economic issue in every industry, including the military. If wages are too low, they will show up in poor recruitment and retention numbers. Given good recruiting numbers, there is little evidence of insufficient wages.

There is no credible movement to:

• Reassign commandment of the armed forces away from the President.
• Move away from a volunteer force.
• Recruit to fill ranks with unqualified people.

The issue of women in combat roles is an internal issue for the military and does not deserve mention here. If it comes down to it, women may decline to serve in the military if they do not want a combat role.

These are in fact left-wing and remarkably expensive policies:

• Removing disability pay offset: A lack of an offset for other disability pay is unfair: you collect twice for one disability!
• Full health benefits for National Guard and reservists: U.S. health benefits are typically a function of employment. National Guard and reservists do not work when they are not on duty, so it makes little sense to extend health coverage to off-duty times.
• Lifetime health benefits: Just like with any other employer-sponsored health plan, military health plan should terminate upon end of employment.

It is counterproductive and pointless to have a witch hunt for homosexuals.

There is zero evidence that the military is mishandling HIV.

Separation of men and women in basic training is counterproductive. They will have to work together in the field. Why create artificial barriers?

The G.I. Bill provision is accomplished. The current bill pays up to $47,556 in educational benefits over a maximum of 36 months.

This plank is wordy. For example:

• "Upgrading" and "modernizing" are the same thing.
• Vehicles are a type of equipment.
• Something that is safe and efficient is also effective.

There is nothing in the regulartory process that excludes small business per se.

Mitigating regulatory costs suggest business welfare.

Also, the government should not pick winners and losers in the marketplace. Small and large business should all compete on a fair playing field, and neither should have costs "mitigated."

Protecting people from themselves is not a conservative value.

Better advice comes from Saturday Night Live: Don't Buy Stuff You Cannot Afford

Property taxes are a sound and relevant taxing tool. They are even supported in The Federalist Papers. There is little (any?) mainstream conservative support for abolishing them.

It is unclear how a 3-year-at-a-time freeze would benefit Texans. They don't effectively temper growth, and they risk trapping Texans with high valuations if property values declined substantially in the 3 years after valuation.

The current state of tax deductability means few middle class Americans get a meaningful homeowner tax deduction.

Unlimited home tax deductions are an indirect wealth transfer benefitting the rich. That is not a conservative value.

Homeowner tax deductions should taper off after some point. There is no pressing economic rationale to federally subsidize mansions.

The problem is abuse of earmarks, not the earmarks themselves.

"Carve out" earmarks do not increase spending; those earmarks are a critical Congressional check against intransigent bureaucracies. Certainly our motto is not "in bureaucrats we trust"! Trusting bureaucrats is Democrat policy.

This proposal distracts from the underlying problem: unending government expansion. Arresting runaway spending is the only effective way to end the abuse of earmarks.

Earmarks are like money. Neither are evil; how they are used is the issue.

Suggesting a governmental acknowledgement of God is necessary is pointless or dangerous. It either diminishes God to a petty character or it suggests an official government's role in promoting religion.

The idea of the separation of church and state being a myth is a dangerous and radically liberal concept.

Acceptance of comprehensive sexual education is almost universal. Therefore, prior written consent is usually meaningless red tape. We should not take the Democrat route and keep adding more bureaucratic hassles for parents.

Existing open records laws already allow interested parents access to sexual education curriculum and materials if a district is not forthcoming.

This contradicts other planks that call for maximizing local control.

That is hardly a consensus conservative viewpoint.