ACA exchange plans cost near-poor more than Medicaid

The Commonwealth Fund just released an interesting brief regarding the effects of failing to expand Medicaid on the health care costs of people between 100 and 138 percent of the poverty line.

Yes, that sounds about as exciting as watching paint dry, loyal readers (both of you) but it’s important – so wake up, dammit!

Here’s the score:  the Affordable Care Act expands Medicaid to cover everyone under 138 percent of the poverty line. The problem is that 19 states – generally dominated by Republicans – have

refused to expand their Medicaid programs. This poor public policy has created a “Medicaid gap” consisting of people who are too rich to qualify for legacy Medicaid (in Texas, for example, parents earning more than 15 percent of the poverty line – about $2,400 a year for a family of 2 – don’t qualify) but too poor to qualify for subsidies on the health insurance exchanges, which are available to households earning between 100 and 400 percent of the poverty line.

The 3.2 million people in this gap have no functional access to insurance, since there’s no way a person making, say, $10,000 a year can afford several hundred dollars a month in health insurance premiums.

People earning between 100 and 138 percent of the poverty level in non-expansion states are considerably better off though, because they qualify for both premium subsidies and cost-sharing subsidies for exchange plans. The indispensable Charles Gaba has estimated this group at roughly 1.9 million people.

But do the exchange plans stack up favorably with the generosity of Medicaid for poor people?

The good scholars over at Commonwealth Fund set out to find out. And their general answer is “no.”

Follow me below for more details.

A crosswalk!

It's about darn time.

I love running along the bayou trail (in fact, I'm about to head that way now.) However, it's considerably less lovely playing live-action Frogger crossing 45 mph five-lane Allen Parkway at Dunlavy St. with no crosswalk, signal or median.

This will increase usage of the Bayou, which is looking a lot more inviting after $58 million in renovations.

Both the renovation and the stop light (and the coming speed reduction on Allen) definitely makes the half-marathon training more pleasant and safer.
  

Today in counterproductive posturing, LA edition

I fail to see how stopping the construction of housing will make housing more affordable.

Granted, I do live inside the loop in Houston and I recognize from here and my experiences in Ann Arbor concerns about only building super-fancy housing for rich people. But the solution is mandating affordable housing or thinking about clever ways to subsidize housing for working class people, or better zoning rules like cutting parking minima. 

But simply stopping the construction large apartment projects in dense areas only drives up rents in the existing housing stock, which forces out working class and poor people. Or just as badly, it forces the development to the outer rim of the community -- which induces more sprawl, traffic, pollution, wasted time etc.

How do we use bikeshare in the Sun Belt?

The Kinder Institute at Rice University has an interesting report out comparing four Bike-Share Systems in four "Sun Belt" cities.  Three are in Texas (Austin, Houston, Fort Worth), while the other is in Colorado (Denver).  The report's central idea is to get a snapshot of bike share in newer cities with lower density and planning optimized for the automobile -- in contrast to the old urban areas in the Northeast with high density.

The study, which covers the first five months of 2015, notes that most kiosks and most trips are still of the two-way weekday variety (i.e. from one-Kiosk to another), indicating that most users use the system for work trips.  However, there is a greater percentage of users in Houston and Fort Worth -- especially Houston -- who use the systems for round trips (i.e. they start and end at the same Kiosk). I'd be interested to see how this compares with bike share systems in older, denser cities.

The study is a good first stab and thinking about how we use bike share in newer cities, but I do have several additional points to make here, including a criticism or two. 

First it's interesting to note that the broad pattern of trips in these Sunbelt cities still is two-way weekday trips, which indicates that many residents here use the program for similar purposes to those in older cities -- though the report doesn't explicitly compare the two.

Second, I think that the report misses a rather obvious explanation for the differences in trip types between the cities. The authors do suggest several useful variables to explain the differences in usage across kiosks and cities. For example, they note that cities with greater numbers of kiosks have more two-way work trips. Also, the kiosks with more round-trips tend to be located near bike paths or in large parks. Also, Houston allows for a full hour of use before additional surcharges kick in, unlike the traditional pay system which gives a free half hour to the first members.

However, the report misses the idea of density.  Denver's and Austin's systems seem at first glance to be more closely spaced in a tight network, facilitating two-way commuter or errand trips. In contrast Houston and Fort Worth's systems are more spread out, limiting the utility of the system and leading to people treating it like a bike rental than bike share. They don't have any measurements on density, which would be interesting to see as well (maybe a median distance between adjacent kiosks, or a distribution of distances would be a good measure here....)

Density of the network is also rather valuable to total usage, as a National Association of City Transportation Professionals study has noted. So as Houston looks to expand this year, while I hope officials expand the scope of the bike share (please, please come to Rice Village!), I also hope they reinforce its density in its existing footprint (more stations in the Museum District!). This will expand its utility as a short-distance commuting tool.

And it goes without saying that expanding the bicycle infrastructure on the ground (more and better bicycle lanes please...) will help bring more cyclists on to the roads and keep cars moving at more reasonable (and safer) speeds.

But with this gripe aside, the report is a nice initial foray into how bike share works, and has nice nuts-and-bolts data on the use of each kiosk in all the cities and some good basic visualizations of usage in each city's network.

The invaluable Charles Kuffner, as always, has a summary and extensive analysis of a Houston Chronicle article on the subject.  He also makes the trenchant point that while knowing how people use bike share is useful, the fact that they are using it widely is the most important point.

Amen to that.

Court upholds Ohio Medicaid expansion

Good news, via Ideastream (NE Ohio's public broadcaster)

The state’s highest court says it is constitutional to allow the controlling board, a panel of legislative leaders, to allow the Medicaid department to accept the federal funds that would allow for expansion of Medicaid. 

The Ohio General Assembly didn't vote to expand Medicaid, but Gov. John Kasich used the state's budget controlling board -- made up by several legislative leaders (several handpicked by Kasich) to accept the federal grants. The state Supreme Court ruled 4-3  that the board acted within its rights to accept the money for Ohio's Medicaid.

I'd have rather it gone through the legislature, but I'll take it -- as will the 275,000 Ohioans who are going to get health insurance.

Also, there's a long-term issue here -- the board has the power to accept grant money, but it has very limited power to expend state funds. Starting in 2017, the legislature is going to have to vote state monies to cover the state's share of the expansion or lose the federal money. By then of, course, we hope that the expansion will be tough to take away and the ledge will come in line. 

Doing my part to be a good citizen

I found this tucked under my windshield yesterday:

Yes, it looks like I'm doing my part to keep petty theft down in the Houston metro area. Of course, locking your doors and windows is easy and any criminal who saw my possessions would probably leave me $100 cash in sympathy.

In all seriousness though, I wonder if these sorts of awareness programs actually work to reduce crime and how the Houston PD actually evaluates them. It's an interesting question I might have to look into.

Houston passes wage theft law

Annise Parker has certainly had a productive two weeks.

First, she signs an executive order extending benefits to same-sex married couples, citing federal law.

Then, the City Council unanimously passes a beefed up wage-theft ordinance.  The wage theft bill is something of a compromise, but it does prevent the city from contracting with firms convicted of stealing workers wages. That's big.

As the esteemed Laura Clawson has noted, wage theft nationally steals more than bank, gas station and convenience store robberies combined. So it's good to see a major city, in Texas no less, taking this seriously.

But what's even bigger is that those firms won't be able to get occupational permits or licenses for several years. So the law not only bans firms from doing business with the City of Houston, but also from conducting business in the City of Houston. Now, very few firms tend to get convicted of theft, but the threat of this sanction should serve as a nice deterrent and encourage scofflaws to settle up with their employees instead of gumming up the judicial process.

We still need workers to come forward with claims, and need to support those claims. That's a logical next step in the Down with Wage Theft Campaign, a broad coalition of community organizations spearheaded by the fine folks over at the Fe y Justicia Worker Center.  This was an effective grassroots campaign -- good work all.

Making connections

So I was closing up shop last night at the tutoring place where I do some contract work at and the cleaning crew was on their way out.  One of the two of the crew wished me a good night. I replied almost automatically in Spanish, for some reason.

"Habla español?"  he asked with notable surprise.

"A veces" I responded.

He turned, walked back across the room, shook my hand, introduced himself and asked me where I was from. We chatted for about two minutes in Spanish.

Nice end to my day, and I'm glad I got to connect a bit with a side of the Texas workforce I suspect most Anglos take for granted and never really think about.  This Anglo for one will be thinking about them a bit more now.

I always feel a little nervous about speaking Spanish with the Hispanic population here, because I don't want to seem like I'm showing off and their English is generally much better than my Spanish. Still though,  the night cleaning man seemed to feel really validated when I addressed him in Spanish. I felt validated by his response. I hope Juan and his co-worker had a good night (and are able to get decent health insurance -- cleaners get paid badly down here)

Small victories. 

Political Cues and Stealth Campaigns, or "How we elected a complete wackaloon to the Houston Community College Board of Trustees"

And just when I thought that local Houston elections had gone reasonably well in the "let's not embarrass ourselves in front of the country" metric,  I find out that Dave Wilson, a noted anti-LGBT activist, busybody and general slime ball who makes a living as an infected boil on the body politic, beat a respected incumbent on the Houston Community College Board of Trustees. Great.

Via the ever-handy Charles Kuffner  (criticizing the Houston Chronicle's coverage):

So a 24-year incumbent gets ousted in a race decided by 26 votes, and what do we learn about his victorious opponent? Just that he’s a “small-business owner”. Not that he’s a notorious, longtime anti-gay activist who ran against Mayor Parker in 2011 and is currently embroiled in a legal battle against the Harris County Democratic Party over his attempts to run for County Commissioner while claiming his business address as his residence. Not the fact that he meddled in the HCC 1 race by sending one of his patented attack mailers, sliming Zeph Capo and Kevin Hoffman for being gay. Not the fact that the mail he sent on his own behalf would make you think he himself was African-American, which he is not. Just, you know, a “small-business owner”. Nothing to see here, folks.

 Incidentally, Kuffner entitled his post "Why Stealth Campaigns can Work," which is a great statement about the political science behind how Wilson got elected.

In crowded, low-profile local races on ballots with lots of items, information is at a premium. Voters don't have time to extensively investigate every race, so they rely on cues. (Political Party is an example). What Wilson did was pretend he was black to get a heavily African-American community to identify with him. In effect, he scrambled the cue to voters in order to mislead them.

It's the same principal that helped unscrupulous petition gathers get Michigan's notorious 2006 Proposition 2, the so-called "Michigan Civil Rights Initiative" that banned affirmative action, on the ballot. Canvassers would go door-to-door in African American neighborhoods and tell them to sign up to support civil rights.

It's also the same reason why "Right-to-Work" or "Freedom-to-Work" campaigns are so lethal. Their proponents cloak anti-worker union-busting laws in pro-worker language to camouflage their true intent.

Guess I won't be teaching at HCC anytime soon. 

And Kuffner's criticism of the Chronicle here is spot on. By not even mentioning Wilson's past or tactics and identifying him merely as a "small business owner" they actively aid his deception. Of course, it's often tough for reporters -- especially new ones, and I've been there -- to know the history of local politicians, but some one in the editorial chain should have caught this one.

For more on cues, how voters use them and how political operatives use false rhetoric to hide them, check out the work of political scientists Arthur Lupia and Matt McCubbins. Or read George Orwell.

On the bright side,  Wilson has never claimed to be Santa Claus. Clearing that bar means he's at least marginally better than at least one congressman I could name.

New Texas water fund offers some risks -- but also huge opportunities

Imagine that it's January 2015 and Governor Wendy Davis announces her first major budget initiative with a speech in drought-ravaged central Texas:

"My Fellow Texans, we stand at a start of a new journey. For too long, we have failed to invest in this state's people. We have failed to invest in this state's future. We have failed to invest in jobs. We have failed to invest in common-sense conservation initiatives that wisely use our resources and protect both our economic growth and our natural environment.

Today, that all changes.

Today my administration proposes that we invest $2 billion in this state's infrastructure.Today, we propose investing $2 billion in generating jobs.  Today, we propose investing $2 billion to help our communities who and in wisely using a precious natural resource.

It's fitting -- we're taking money from our rainy day fund and helping our drought-affected and cash-strapped communities gain access to much-needed water. And $200 million of the fund is reserved for the smallest parched rural communities who need water the most yet can't afford it.

But we're not going to be merely giving water away to Fracking companies profligate users. Getting access to water is important, but using it wisely is too. That's why least $400 million of the fund is strictly reserved to finance conservation projects -- better water pipes and control systems in our cities to stop waste, more efficient drip irrigation to make our successful agricultural sector even more competitive and storage projects that reduce erosion and runoff while simultaneously recharging our groundwater supplies.

 I know I would be pretty happy with that speech.

Well, the contents of that "speech" are essentially what Proposition 6 did.  It takes $2 billion from the rainy day fund and uses it to create a revolving loan fund -- essentially an infrastructure bank -- for water projects called the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas (SWIFT).  The general principal is somewhat similar federal funds out there already. At least $400 million of SWIFT goes to conservation programs and an additional $200 million is reserved specifically for rural and agricultural conservation projects.

Follow me below the fold for details

The Costs of Voting: or "I blew it again" or "Who the heck is running for this office?"

Here's another installment in my ongoing series about the costs of voting.

So it's an off-year election here in Texas, which means local elections and statewide constitutional amendments.

For the most part, I didn't have a problem. I took about an hour to research the nine different state constitutional amendments. A few required some thought, but most were no-brainers.  The mayor's race in town was an easy choice, especially after Ben Hall decided to come out against policies that would start treating gays and lesbians like human beings.

That was probably another hour of research.

There were no school board seats up in my district, the two local bond issues were well covered and my local City Councilwoman was unopposed. 

That's another hour, but still so far so good.

And then I got to the five at-large council seats.With interviews from sites like Texpatriate, and Kuffner's, as well as candidate web sites, I was able to get enough information to make a semi-informed choice on four of five. For one, a good working relationship with Annise Parker made the decision, on another a good interview on planning issues put me over the top. For another, seeing a list of accomplishments on his Web site leaned me in his direction, while for a fourth candidate earned my vote because a local progressive had volunteered for her campaign.

This was about two hours of research.

But I STILL couldn't figure out who I wanted in one of the races.

You see, there's always one electoral race that I have no clue is coming or overlook. In Ann Arbor, it was always the local library board. There always seemed to be four people running for three slots.  Three of the candidates were usually nice, upstanding, stewards of the community -- and the fourth was a raging lunatic. The problem was that I could never suss out the lunatic and information was usually thin on the ground.

And so I -- a guy who has either covered or studied politics for a living for the past 15 years -- still have not filled out a complete November ballot in my life.

Also, even after five hours of research,  note how many of my choices were made by cues and vague impressions and not necessarily carefully considered information.

The costs of voting are real -- and that's even without my having any problems with ID, or having to wait in line at my conveniently located rich-neighborhood well-run polling place.

Voter guides and voting info, Texas-style

So who's on Row A?

We've got a lot of low-intensity, yet rather important local elections and state-wide amendments on the ballot.  To help disentangle the issues, here's a list of voting guides.

The folks at Burnt Orange Report check in with their votes on proposed constitutional amendments here.

Progress Texas has their own (slightly different) recommendations here

(Note, all these places giving endorsements come from a general left stance, which mirrors many of this blog's views)

For interviews with literally every (and not in the Joe Biden sense) candidate for local Houston or Harris County office, check out Charles Kuffner's site. Kuff has been doing great work on local politics for years and he also has coverage of important local bond issues like the prison bond and the Astrodome project, as well as local issues like Pasadena's proposed redistricting.

Also, here's a handy guide for what you'll need to vote in this state.

Please vote, and vote in an educated way on Tuesday.

Ben Hall comes out against LGBT rights

This is not cool. Via Kuffner

I was already leaning one way in this mayoral election. Mr Hall's actions just confirmed that choice. 

Houston Half-Marathon blogging

Good day at the Houston Half-Marathon and Relay.

... aside from the one-hour freak flash thunderstorm that arrived at precisely 6:30 a.m. to delay the start by an hour and wreck all our carefully calibrated warm-up and digestive routines. I felt bad for all those runners caught out in the open (I just happened to be on the Sam Houston Heritage's society building's spacious front porch.

Though I must say, running in a rain shower when it's 65 degrees out sure beats running in the sun when its 98 degrees out in this town.  I think I also came home drier too.

But in any case that feeling of flying up the home stretch after a great race is one that every runner craves. I also richly appreciated the strategic and generous application of spectator cow bell on mile 12.

1 hour, 38 minutes, 37.7 seconds. New PR -- and I probably had a bit left in the tank. Sure, it's not going to get me into the winner's circle, but it's pretty darn good for an civilian.

Time for two weeks of down time with lots of stretching and rest for bits and pieces that hurt, then I get to plot my next race. Probably something shorter in December.  I haven't put together a good 5K in two years, and haven't ever put up a 10k time. It'd be interesting to see what I could do at that distance.

Texas Adjustments Part V

So, now we're down to the local level.

I traded in Mayor John Hietfje of Ann Arbor:

And picked up Annise Parker:

 
Both are interesting. Hietfje may have overstayed his welcome in Ann Arbor, where he was first elected mayor in 2001. I was frustrated with how he treated city employee unions from time to time, as well as some of his budget-cutting moves toward fire and police protection. On the other hand, I was generally pleased with his environmental and transportation initiatives. The central city, which was already a nice place to live, continued to become much more walkable during my time there under his tenure in City Hall. Some (though not all) of the complaints against him were the result of clubby Ann Arbor townie stuffed shirts who had no clue about urban planning or development. And frankly, the opposition candidates who ran against him were absolutely laughable.

Parker is something of a liberal lion in southeast Texas, though a quietly pragmatic one. Houston is light years behind Ann Arbor in sustainability and livability, but Parker has hired a cracker jack sustainability director from San Fransisco, installed and expanded bike share, gotten curbside recycling off the ground, cleaned up a mess at Metro, worked with the county to improve parks, presided over the expansion of light rail and generally kept the metaphorical trains running on time.

I suspect she would make an excellent state comptroller (her old job in Houston) if Democrats can ever win a state-wide election again.

I'll give the edge here to Texas, just because of Parker's shiny (at least to a new resident) sheen.

I skipped over the state legislature as well -- I trade State Sen. Rebekah  Warren and Rep. Jeff Irwin, both solid progressive Dems (and lovely people) for State Sen. John Whitmere and Rep. Garent F. Colman, who seem at first glance to be quite adequate. Time will tell.

Enough with politics -- future installments will include really important things, like food. Texas should be able to do better here than in the political section.

Texas voting #headdesk blogging II: Bring your concealed-carry permit to the polls

So, Texas has a Voter Photo ID law, which is spelled out in great detail on my new voter registration card -- it takes up the entire back of the card. (Maybe that's why they don't have room for extraneous information, like say, the location of my polling place. Sigh.)

Voter ID. OK, so what's acceptable ID, Texas?

"The following forms of voter identification ... may be accepted for voting: Driver's license; election identification certificate; personal identification card or concealed handgun license issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety; United States Military identification card that contains the person's photograph; United States citizenship certificate that contains person's photograph; or a United States Passport."

Right. A photo ID from a state college or university or state agency apparently isn't official enough. But boy, if you have a gun, that sends you right to the front of the line. 

Because it's getting old to detail all of the reasons why photo ID for voting is unnecessary and discriminatory, I'll link to a quick list here.

On the bright side though, at least they accept a passport for the present -- sometimes Texas officials don't really like to acknowledge the authority of the United States.  

May God help this state, 'cuz its political leaders sure won't.

And on a related note Godspeed to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Texas Adjustments Part IV

Enough with the federal delegations, time to head to the State level.

When I fled south, I got to leave Rick "Governor Nerd" Snyder, Michigan's CEO:

And when I crossed the border at Texarkana, I inherited Rick "Governor Hair" Perry, Texas' CEO.

Ugh. Both men are complete Richards who go by Rick. They are also both obscenely Rich. And, not incidentally, they both have acted like complete Dicks during their terms in office.

I'm thankful Snyder actually understood the need to expand Medicaid in Michigan -- and pushed for it. But I will never, ever, ever forgive Snyder for signing "Right-to-Work" legislation in Michigan. End of story -- the man is dead to me.

Perry, well, there's not enough space here to talk about him. From the death penalty, to guns, to threatening the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, to showing zero compassion and intelligence with regard to health reform, to his stupid secession talk; I sure hope the door smacks his butt hard on his way out in January, 2015. Of course, we're probably going to get some one even worse, so... sigh.

Anyhow, this one is a push -- preferably off a cliff, Thelma-and-Louise-style. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to read a few Molly Ivins columns with a stiff drink nearby.

Low voter turnout in local elections: an analysis

During their "Houston Matters" weekday show on Monday Oct. 14, KUHF dedicated its first segment to the mayoral election. The station brought in three professors of political science -- Mark Jones and Paul Brace from Rice University and Renee Cross from the University of Houston.

Most of the segment was dedicated to analyzing the resumes and plans of each of the nine(!) candidates for mayor, which got to be a lot of fun when you moved down to the names of the people you had never heard of (who knew the socialist workers party even existed in Texas?).

But a large undercurrent of the show was dedicated to wondering why people don't vote in local elections. I don't disagree with any of the reasons the three gave, (less prominence, people

1. Lack of mobilization resources. Ben Hall and Annise Parker have considerable resources, their campaigns simply don't have the national prominence or organizing ability that a presidential or even a gubenatorial campaign might have to turn out voters.  Mobilization -- through advertisements, door-to-door visits, offers of rides to the polls -- lowers costs for voters

2. It's a non-partisan election. One of the simplest pieces of information to give voters is a Party ID, which cuts voting costs by giving you a cue about a candidate's positions on everything from gay rights and abortion to labor unions, the environment, mass transit and government regulation of the economy and jobs.

Don't believe me?

Take the following ballot:

1. Warner
2. Warner

Do you know what the candidates stand for? Do you know who you are going to vote for?

Probably not.

Now let's make it a partisan election

1. Warner (R)
2. Waner (D)

Now do you have a better idea of what the candidates stand for and who you are going to vote for?

I rest my case.

We love to decry excessive partisanship, but there is something to be said for both the mobilizing capacity and information-provision that well-organized political parties provide.

Texas Adjustments Part III

So let's move to the House of Representatives.

From my old Ann Arbor district, we have John Dingell:

In my new west Houston district, we have Ted Poe.

According to Project VoteSmart, Poe actually received a voting score of above 20 percent from the SEIU on several occasions in the last decade. He also took a recent surprising, yet gratifying stance taken in favor of getting federal funds for the University Light Rail line. Of course, on everything else, he's terrible, but those two facts alone make him Nelson Rockefeller by the usually Neanderthal standards of the Texas House delegation.

But still, Dingell is the real deal -- His dad was an original New Dealer and Dingell has been voting like one ever since, supporting Medicare, Medicaid, worker safety, unemployment insurance, higher minimum wages. He's introduced a universal health care bill on the House floor on the first day of every session he's been in Congress. Some of his stances on guns and the environment weren't perfect, but he's swung quite a bit on greenhouse gas regulation over the last decade. He's also remarkably coherent and thoughtful for a man who's 87 years old -- he might be a bit frail physically but the brain is still working hard.  Advantage, Michigan.

Houston mayoral poll doesn't tell us much of anything

At the end of last week, Rice University released the results of a polling it conducted on the Mayor's race for NPR's KUHF and TV station KHOU.

The poll, which interviewed 424 registered voters (margin of error of +/-4.76 percent) showed the following results:

48%: Undecided:
34%: Annise Parker
13%: Ben Hall:
5 %: other candidates

Based on these results, KHOU and Rice’s PR office both proclaimed respectively that a run-off election is likely, as Parker wasn’t close to the 50 percent mark necessary to gain a majority and win outright in the general election.

Here’s Rice’s subhead:

Despite lead, findings suggest a runoff election 

Here’s KHOU’s lede and follow-up grafs:

Annise Parker seems headed for a runoff in her campaign to keep her job, but she commands more than twice as many supporters as her leading challenger in a newly released poll commissioned by KHOU 11 News and KUHF – Houston Public Radio.

Still, just six weeks before Election Day, roughly half of all surveyed voters either didn’t know or wouldn’t say how they’re going to vote.

Parker leads the pack of candidates at 34 percent, with former city attorney Ben Hall at 14 percent. About 48 percent of voters are classified as undecided, indicating the incumbent mayor will have to fight to keep the post to which she was narrowly re-elected two years ago.

Ahem. (Patrick toggles controller to engage political scientist “beast mode”)

*HULK SMASH BAD HORSE-RACE REPORTING ON POLLING AAARGHHH*.

(Patrick jams large pins in Politico reporter Voodoo doll on desk, returns to human form. Takes deep breath, feels better)

Sorry about that. Rice’s PR office and KHOU way overplay these results. The poll itself has several very serious limitations that their reporting ignored.

Complaint 1: The poll is of registered voters

The sample size is OK, and I’ll assume the methodology to draw the sample is fine (Bob Stein knows what he’s doing and has a decent history of polling local issues within the constraints given him by his clients). But the poll talks to registered voters about a local race, where turnout is usually under 200,000 voters in a municipality with well more than a million registered voters (see the always-insightful Charles Kuffner on this point).  And we know from studying politics that those undecided voters generally aren’t thoughtful moderates agonizing over the issues. Instead, they often don’t have a clue as to what is going on and will probably sit the election out unless they can be reached by a good mobilizing effort.

So let’s assume for a second that none of the 48 percent “undecided” will vote and recalculate the numbers We roughly get:

65% Parker (34/52)
27% Hall (14/52)
8% Everyone else (4/52)

That would put Parker safely in the Mayor’s chair without a run-off (even with the larger margin of error created with the smaller sample size, see explanation below).  Of course, this still would leave us with a turnout rate of 52 percent of registered voters, which is far too high for even the most hotly contested local election. If we assume that the drop-off rate of supporters is roughly equal among candidates, then Parker still wins in a breeze. I certainly don’t endorse that assumption – turn-out operations are key in mobilizing voters and I don’t know enough judge the various campaigns’ abilities. (Though Hall hasn’t impressed me much in the little that I have seen.)

What the poll needed was a screening question or two that asked residents if they voted in the last municipal election, which would have sorted out likely voters from registered voters. It wouldn’t be perfect, but it I think it would have improved the results quite a bit. (I suspect that cost scuttled this idea, because it would have entailed another 1,000 phone calls or more.)

Complaint 2: The emphasis on subgroup reporting with small samples.

My second complaint about the coverage is its discussion of the candidates’ support. See Rice’s release:

Parker’s share of the vote by race and ethnicity is broad, according to the poll. She garnered 38 percent of the Anglo vote, 42 percent of the Hispanic vote and 24 percent of African-American vote. Hall, an African-American, has support from 29 percent of African-American voters. Parker garnered 27 percent of Anglo Republican voters’ support, compared with only 11 percent for Ben Hall.

Remember that margin of error for the total poll being 4.76 percent? Well, that’s based on the sample size of 423 respondents. When we’re talking about support among different racial/ethnic groups, we’re looking at the Anglo subgroup, the African American subgroup and the Latino subgroup. Each of these groups is probably between 100 and 200 people (except for Anglo Republicans, which is even smaller). Guess what? That means the margin of error goes up accordingly, roughly 7 percentage points for a sample size of 200 and 10 percentage points for a sample size of 100, which makes these subgroup analyses practically useless.^1,2

As usual, Kuffner is all over some of these points. He's kinder than I am to the poll's methodology, but his speculation is generally intelligent, appropriately cautious, and well-leavened with historical context.

The point is to be VERY WARY of extrapolating from a single poll, especially a small one conducted on a local race that doesn’t have a good likely voter screen.

1.  This assumes a confidence level of 95 percent
2. To pile on here, the Rice release also incorrectly states that Parker won narrowly against former City Attorney Gene Locke with 51 percent of the vote in 2011. She beat him in a runoff in 2009 with 52 percent of the vote. She avoided a runoff with 51 percent in 2011's general election against 5 relatively unknown candidates.