Burnt Orange Report

40/40: An Interview with Representative Carlos Uresti

By Phillip Martin

Ed. note: Below is an e-mail interview I had with State Representative Carlos Uresti, who is challenging incumbent Senator Frank Madla for the SD 19 seat. To read my interview with Senator Madla, click here.

What made you decide to challenge your own State Senator -- two time incumbent Senator Madla -- in this primary?

Frank has a long record in Texas politics. For many years, he remembered that his constituents were the ones who voted him into office, not the lobby. Over the past few sessions, though, it became increasingly difficult for me as a Democrat to believe that Senator Madla would be a reliable vote for our district when we needed him. On too many bills, Frank crossed the aisle to vote with Republican leadership to balance our state’s budget on the backs of those who could least afford it. He became more interested in helping powerful special interests while kids went without health insurance, elderly people lost nursing home allowances, and state employee ranks were decimated for the benefit of a few big private interests. Frank’s votes were a slap in the face to me as a Texas Democrat, as a fellow legislator, and as a resident of the district he represents. I live where those children go without medical care. I see the results of his votes. I could have waited a few more years until he finally retired, but I don’t think the vulnerable constituents in his district can.

What has your experience in the House taught you about the legislative process?

The House is not for the faint-hearted. I learned the hard way that doing the right thing can be a punishable offense in the legislature. I learned that sometimes the surest sign you are on the right track is when you lose something you care about, like a committee chairmanship. But I was proud to lose points with leadership in the House for opposing bills that would ask even more sacrifices from Texans who can least afford them. I can hold my head up high at home in my district, even if I didn’t get the best assignments in Austin for the stands I took. My time in the House also taught me this about the legislative process: some bills must be blocked and killed when you have the chance. Moving a bad bill “through the process” just builds momentum that can’t be stopped in the end. That is what happened with HB 2292, and Frank Madla’s votes gave the beast its shot at life.

During the 78th Legislature, you took a strong stance against HB 2292 - a bill that consolidated many HHSC agencies, privatized call centers across the state, and denied health insurance to thousands of Texas children. What have you done, since 2003, to correct the problems you believe exist in this legislation?

I worked with many other concerned House members to ensure that we would put money back into the budget to improve coverage under CHIP and increase eligibility again. Unfortunately, with current leadership in place, we did not achieve all we wanted to. But even many Republicans could see that the shortsighted cuts that 2292 made were actually increasing the costs to their districts, so we had some good bipartisan support for those initiatives. I also demanded – and got – a restoration in child abuse and neglect prevention program funding. While these funds are still too low, we are back from the grave 2292 put us in with respect to child abuse prevention programs. I continue to join my colleagues in a call for a thorough examination of the outsourcing contracts that eliminated so many qualified state workers while creating expensive private sector systems that just don’t work. I intend to examine the state of these systems during the interim in preparation for filing new legislation to address these problems.

During this past session, you were very involved with the creation and passage of SB 6. Why did you feel this legislation was so important? Why is it OK for there to be privatization in SB 6, and not OK for there to be privatization in HB 2292?

SB 6 literally helps to ensure the future of our state by protecting our children. We have an enormous problem today in Texas, and frankly, around the world: It is child abuse and neglect, and it is destroying the fabric of our communities. As a legislator, I could not imagine a more important cause to advance in Austin than protecting those who cannot protect themselves. I also cannot imagine a better investment in the future of Texas. By spending funds now to protect and rehabilitate children from effects of child maltreatment, we can help avoid an endless list of costly social problems in the future. As a fiscally responsible legislator, and as a human being, SB 6 was one of the most important bills I have ever worked on.

To read the rest of Rep. Uresti's answer to this question, and to read his responses about his views on school finance reform, water issues, and how he plans to win the SD 19 primary race, click on the link below.

The privatization component in SB 6 was directly related to improving the quality and continuity of care for children in state custody. It was not done to cut costs at their expense, as was the case with the privatization efforts behind HB 2292. SB 6 did not create an overall net loss of state jobs; we reallocated and actually increased state jobs in that agency. But we did have to use some strategic and limited privatization measures to realign agency functions so that kids would be better cared for than they were under the old CPS system.

I have always been clear on this point: if privatization is a viable means of improving and protecting the lives of vulnerable citizens, and we have data that backs the use of privatization for that purpose, I will consider its use. Where SB 6 was concerned, privatization actually costs the state more money in the short term, but it also should produce better outcomes where saving kids’ lives is concerned. In contrast, HB 2292’s privatization plan led to a large-scale loss of state jobs, reduced service availability and quality throughout Texas, and was a boon to private sector for-profit companies at the taxpayer’s expense. The two bills couldn’t be more different in that respect.

What do you believe needs to be done about school finance and property tax reform?

We need to put all options on the table if we are going to have a serious, productive, and well informed debate on property tax reform. Voters need to know what kind of impact lowering property taxes will have if we aren’t careful: 90% of Texans will pay HIGHER taxes under the kinds of proposals Frank Madla has supported in the past. That isn’t fair to Texans, and it certainly isn’t good for District 19.
I support a thorough overhaul of the state’s franchise tax code to make sure we close loopholes that allow companies to reap the benefits of our public school system without paying their fair share. I think we need to look at other sources of tax revenue that are currently untapped, like an increase in the cigarette tax that I proposed last session; that would generate more than a billion new dollars for the state budget. We also have to consider using every viable means to increase efficiency in school administration so that every cent of every dollar is well spent. We owe that much to taxpayers; as a taxpayer myself, I expect nothing less. But the bottom line for me is this: I will not support lowering property taxes if it is done by passing on the cost to those who can least afford it through higher sales taxes and fees.

Beyond education and health care, what do you feel is the biggest issue for the constituents of SD 19?

Water. We need to get everyone at the table to address this issue. It’s a major problem anywhere in the country where high population growth is occurring. My opponent has cast some votes that really upset most of District 19; essentially he voted to remove citizens from the political process that controls the use and protection of their natural resources. I don’t believe that fits with the needs and traditions of District 19 or the State of Texas. It’s time for a dialogue between all the stakeholders that is guided by one central reality: we all need water and its supply is not endless. We have to embark on a new era of negotiations that stress the conservation, appropriate use, reclamation, and equitable distribution of this precious resource.

Why are you running for Senate District 19?

Texas is at a turning point. Like the rest of our Nation, we are rapidly becoming a state of haves and have-nots. Senate District 19 exemplifies the kind of missed opportunities that characterize our state in far too many places. The only way we are going to adapt to a global economy with opportunities that enrich everyone is by aggressively combating poverty, improving public health and education, protecting our natural resources, and investing in infrastructure that builds a foundation for future prosperity. I don’t see the tough votes being cast from District 19, the votes that demand better health care and education for our children; the votes that create a safety net for elderly and disabled Texans and our vets. I am running because I see years of missed opportunities going by, and a population in the district that can’t afford to wait any more for the future to arrive.

What do you see as the biggest challenges in your upcoming campaign? What separates you from your primary candidate, incumbent Senator Madla?

It is always an enormous challenge to battle an incumbent for a seat, especially one who’s been in that seat as long as Frank has. He has inertia on his side: a body at rest tends to stay at rest. He also has a good relationship with powerful special interests who want him to stay where he is.

What separates me from Frank is a vision for our district that includes everyone. My priest gave me a Bible verse some time ago which I taped to my desk where I can see it each day. It reads, “Without vision, the people will perish.” Our people are perishing. They are losing hope, jobs, security, and lives. It is time for a change. I have a vision for Texas and District 19 that includes everyone – not just those who are powerful and wealthy enough to influence events at the Capitol. I know the problems of those who are least able to defend themselves from the political forces in Austin, and I carry those people with me in my heart whenever I vote. I have vision for the kind of state we all deserve, and I won’t stop fighting for it.

How did your background as a marine help shape your leadership style?

The Marine Corps teaches you something that applies particularly well to political life: leaders are only respected when they respect those they lead. As an elected official, I realize that my first duty is to my constituents; I have to respect the fact that I work on their behalf, that I speak for them in Austin, and that it is my duty to vote in their best interests when a bill comes before me. Marines also have a slogan I take to heart every day: Semper Fi, or always faithful. I am always faithful to those I lead and to their priorities; that is my solemn duty as their elected official.

My time in the Corps taught me to take responsibility for my actions, to own up to the consequences of my conduct as a public official and leader. No one expects perfect performance from any human being all the time, much less from elected officials. But as a Marine, I demand that political leaders, including myself, are held accountable to the people for their conduct and votes – and my opponent has some bad votes to account for.

One of the best lessons I took away from the Marine Corps is to pass leadership skills on to others. I guess I learned that lesson pretty well: my son Carlitos just joined the Corps, and recently left us to begin his career as a Marine. We’re very proud of him.

During your campaign, how do you plan to connect with the large percentage of voters that live in rural areas of Texas you have never represented?

I have been fortunate to have so many folks approach me from those areas, people who are eager for a change after so many years of inaction in Senate District 19. My campaign is well connected to those rural areas, and in many cases, they came to us with the hope that things might finally change. I’ve been traveling throughout the district since last year, making connections with the voters all over District 19, and we are all connecting on one basic point: we need new energy and vision coming from our Senate district.