Home

About
- Who We Are
- Community Guidelines
- Right to Respond
Advertising on BOR
- Advertise on BOR
- Buy on all Texas Blogs

Advertisements

Search




Advanced Search


Follow Burnt Orange Report on Twitter (@BOR) and Facebook.

BOR Endorsements: Austin Mayor & City Council (2006)


by: Karl-Thomas Musselman

Thu May 04, 2006 at 08:14 PM CDT


These are our 2006 endorsements. Click here for our current 2009 endorsements.

 Halfway through Early Voting for municipal elections here in Travis County, I've finally gotten around to getting things together for some BOR endorsements.  So we'll start with the big races and then hit the Propositions and ACC/AISD candidates after that in separate posts. Keep in mind that these are all fairly low turnout (and low interest) elections and I only received input from 2 other writers for endorsements.  Let's get started.

Mayor: Will Wynn

This is easy. While Austin's Mayor may have been elected in a whirlwind of moderation and mediocrity three years ago, there is a certain charm about him that has shown through in past couple of years.  A hard worker, believer in downtown density (of which I'm a big fan since I'll probably live there soon enough), and tireless promoter for the City of Austin, its industries, and its people, Wynn should not only be re-elected, but fully deserves a second term.  And considering his competition this year, there is no question in our eyes that Wynn has earned our endorsement and votes. We want Wynn, again.

If you feel that you want to keep Austin weird, you could always vote for perennial candidate Jennifer Gale. We understand. But please don't vote for outgoing councilman and candidate Danny Thomas, as we're not even sure if he knows why he's running. Austin doesn't need to be that weird.

City Council Place 2: Mike Martinez

While more contentious earlier in the race, this one has become clearer to us as time has gone on. Martinez, after winning most every local endorsement, recently picked up the Statesman and Chronicle nods.  A native of East Austin and president of the Austin Firefighters Association, Martinez led the successful public campaign to win collective bargaining rights for Austin firefighters which we also supported. 

This is not to say that his opponent Eliza May is unqualified- far from it. She has received support from the West Austin groups as well as the local Spanish papers and would certainly be an active voice on the council.  But we feel that Martinez has proven leadership skills and will not back down for his community on the council while being the most able to work to bind people east and west of I-35.  Libertarian Wes Benedict is also running.

City Council Place 5: Brewster McCracken

The endorsement for incumbent McCracken is not as enthusiastic as for incumbent Wynn but the two are similar in style, ideology, and we won't be surprised when McCracken announces for Mayor in 3 years.  His opposition is mostly token, but certain interests have spurred them into the race, partly on the issue of Tolls.  While we're no fan of them, what we find even more annoying is it used as a single issue interest group. In fact, I find it as the single most annoying one in Austin. (I have to laugh that their only acceptable single issue option in the Mayor's race is Jennifer Gale, ha!)

That said, his opponents include Mark Hopkins, Kedron Touvell, and Colin Kalmbacher.

City Council Place 6: Sheryl Cole

Cole, like Martinez, is the frontrunner for their respective places for City Council.  If elected, she would be the first African American female ever to serve on the Austin Council.  Endorsed by the Chronicle (the Statesman endorsed Darrell Pierce), Cole has racked up most all the local endorsements, save the few that DeWayne Lofton has picked up.  Each of the three candidates is worthy of a seat on the council in their own right, but Austin's "gentleman's agreement" to reserve one black and one Hispanic seat in order to keep free of federal Voting Rights Act interference has also more or less made these 'reservations' caps as well.

As the seat considered to be the most likely to go to a runoff if one should, the real battle will be between Lofton and Pierce to claim the 2nd spot.  Personally, I voted for Pierce, but an argument has been made for Lofton in the journals.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
The Argument for DeWayne Lofton (0.00 / 0)
is not just being made in the journals. It is being made by progressives across this city who are tired of the central city establishment candidate being shoved down their throat and who, like any reasonable thinking Democrat, don't want to vote for a business conservative who is against civil unions and won't answer how he voted on last November's Prop 2.

The argument for DeWayne Lofton is being made by Sheriff Greg Hamilton, Glen Maxey, the Black Women's Political Caucus, the Austin Lesbian & Gay Political Caucus, the Mexican-American Democrats and many others.

For Austin's sake, lets hope this argument wins out come May 13.


i have seen (0.00 / 0)
dewayne's signs all across town. his message definitely seems to be resonating.

[ Parent ]
The gentleman's agreement . . . (0.00 / 0)
... is what exactly?

I'm not from Austin (which I guess is obvious from the question) but I'll be living there shortly. I understand the premise that people "save" a couple seats for minorities but there are no actuall barriers from keeping someone from running in any particular place. I guess what I'm getting at is how does it really work? When did it begin? What is some of the history behind the "agreement"? Am I the only one who looks at it and says huh?

I'm not trying to knock the idea, just trying to understand it.


It's historical... (0.00 / 0)
... and not terribly interesting. Several people have tried to break it but (to my knowledge) they've all lost.

There is no legal barrier preventing a Latina/o from running in Place 5, for example.


[ Parent ]
For a long time, Place 5 was the Hispanic seat (0.00 / 0)
One year Gus Garcia decided to run for Place 2 instead, hoping that two Hispanics might be elected to the council. All that happened is that the Hispanic seat flipped over to Place 2.

Hope is not a plan.

[ Parent ]
wait (0.00 / 0)
how could you have POSSIBLY voted for Darrell Pierce??????????

dont worry (0.00 / 0)
only two BOR readers/writers support Pierce. A majority are behind DeWayne.

[ Parent ]
"Pierce has also flip-flopped on Prop 6 depending on his audience and he is against civil unions." proof? (0.00 / 0)
i know that line is from a different journal, but where and when, please?

i also voted for darrel pierce, he is for the land bank/affordable housing plans and smart growth and protecting the environment, former councilwoman jackie goodman co-chairs his campaign, and she wasnt a fundamentalist, anti-gay freak... as does celia isreal who is SUPER pro NNN, quite smart, and quite progressive...

i guess you could be suggesting he is lying, in which case i got fooled, but i think i need a little more than just some (other) blogger's say so.

what i regret most is that a bunch of qualified folks are running against each other because of the lame 'gentleman's agreement.' DeWayne or Cole are smart and hrdworking and have plans, and ya know, it was great to have a tough choice, but because of the 'gentleman's agreement' i could only vote for one of them...


-my comments at BOR are mine, and do not represent anything official from LFT.


Darrell Pierce is not against Prop 6 (2.00 / 2)
I just called his campaign and asked his staff.  Darrell Pierce SUPPORTS Prop. 6.  Call them yourself.

[ Parent ]
Pierce "Everything to Everyone"? (0.00 / 0)
Call him and tell him you're a conservative and see if he's for it.  My friend did yesterday and he said he's only for it if taxpayers dont pay for it and the domestic partners pay for it themselves?  Does that make any sense?  It makes less sense than the when he told ALGPC that he opposes domestic partnerships because there should be some order! Yesterday he spouted off the same rhetoric that opponents of Prop 2 in November did.  Sounds like we have another "Everything to Everyone" candidate to me.

[ Parent ]
poor tactics (0.00 / 0)
Maybe people shouldn't be calling up and lieing about who they are in order to try to trick candidates into saying something in order to benefit a different candidate...

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

[ Parent ]
call (0.00 / 0)
DeWayne or Mike Martinez or anyone who doesnt care that not everyone supports their progressive beliefs ... they wont pander.

[ Parent ]
Thanks BOR! (0.00 / 0)
Mike Martinez and Team are thrilled about this endorsement.  We've all gotten to know you over the past few years and are very proud to have your support. 

Mike will be a true progressive voice on the Council and will never back down from a challenge.  He understands and fights for what many in this BOR community hold dear -  such as diversity, neighborhood safety, affordability and environmental protection. 

We know finals are upon you, but if you have any time to swing by the campaign to volunteer or just to say hi, we'd love to see you.  We have an Early Vote Block Party planned for 4pm tomorrow at our Campaign HQ (corner of E. 7th and Pleasant Valley) - which is right across from a major Early Vote location.  If it rains, we'll move it to Sunday.

Please call (699-2693) or email me (everhart26@yahoo.com) to find out more details or to sign up to help. 

Thanks again for all your support!  It really means a lot to us.


What the hell? (0.00 / 0)
Are these endorsements or predictions? I thought BOR was representative of progressive thought on campus?  Guess I was wrong.

Huh? (0.00 / 0)
Which of these four candidates isn't progressive?  And in what ways are they not progressive?

[ Parent ]
Solid Progressives (0.00 / 0)
They are endorsements and in the end, they may very well have been predictions as well. That is for the voters to figure out.

Each of these people are solid progressives (though some may argue that point over Brewster, is that what you are debating?).

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.


[ Parent ]
My point (0.00 / 0)
No, my point was that all four of these folks are liberl progressives.  You can make some argument on the margins, but if you look at these four people in the broad political spectrum, they are on the left side of things.

All four of these folks love this city and want to move it forward.  They're all committed to the environment, affordable housing, and Austin values. 

I'm just really tired of people attacking the Mayor, Council Member McCracken, Mike, and Sheryl.  I believe there is lots of room for people of good faith to disagree, but these ad hominem attacks have gone too far.  Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them evil or a liar. 

I'd just ask everyone to look at the entire body of these folks' records before attacking them for not being progressive.


[ Parent ]
Not you Rick (0.00 / 0)
I was replying to the comment above yours. :) I attached it at the wrong level. I agree with you.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

[ Parent ]
You're Right Rick (0.00 / 0)
All four candidates are progressive.  I'm not one to bash the mayor or Brewster, I like them and know them both, and I also enthusiastically voted for Mike Martinez. 

Sometimes being the establishment candidate does not mean you are the best candidate.  The burnt orange community has  shown a remarkable level of support for DeWayne Lofton.


[ Parent ]
hmm (0.00 / 0)
Not until about 2 days ago. When you and the rest of the new user IDs appeared.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.

[ Parent ]
Hogwash (0.00 / 0)
I know less than half of the supporters who have chimed in on this topic, and having been a reader of this blog since the Byron days, I recognize most of the BOR ID's.


[ Parent ]
I pride myself (0.00 / 0)
in being one of BOR most frequet commenters

[ Parent ]
I certainly would (0.00 / 0)
Even if I wasn't running against him.

Sorry, this guy staffed for two Republican Congressmen before he decided he wanted to get elected himself.

How do you do that in Austin? Vote for Democrats and call yourself a Democrat.

There is nothing progressive about supporting environmental racism and defending your support by cracking a joke.

There is nothing progressive about regressive taxation in the form of tolls on existing roads and then having a "public change of heart" which is a complete sham.

There is nothing progressive about purposefully sabotaging ballot language brought before Council by a coalition of citizens' groups that represent at the lowest count, 20,000 Austinites.

There is nothing progressive about a $230 million corporate welfare check when our Health and Human services budget stands at a paltry $29 million.

There is absolutely, categorically, undeniably nothing progressive, whatsoever about the Public Order Ordinance, which Brewster McCracken voted for, which makes it a crime for the homeless to sleep, sit, or stand outside of the downtown shelters in which they seek refuge.

Gimme a break.

"There's nothing new except for the history that you don't know."
-HST

Justice Addict


[ Parent ]
I'll take the bait. (0.00 / 0)
I disagree with you on virtually all those points.  Council Member McCracken is a good and honorable man.  He votes his heart and he loves this city.  He's been a leader in protecting our environment through ECT and dense downtown development.  He's a man of great conscience and has led efforts to increase oversight on CAMPO.

But let me remind you that as a candidate for public office your duty is not merely to criticize, but also to offer solutions.  With that in mind I'm going to ask you questions based on your criticism of Council Member McCracken.

1.  What is your plan for protecting the environment in central Texas?

2.  What is your plan for fixing our regional mobility crisis?

3.  How would you have dealt with the AMD situation?

4.  What measures would support to attract jobs to Austin and grow our economy?

5.  How would you increase safety in downtown?

6.  How would end homelessness in Austin?


[ Parent ]
I'll take these (0.00 / 0)
1. Props 1 and 2

2. Sarah Eckhardt

3. Desired Development Zone

4. See above

5. No tazers

6. Spend the 1/2 mil that the developers have spent to kill 1 and 2 directly on the homeless.


[ Parent ]
DukeBlueD for Council! (0.00 / 0)
He and DeWayne would make a dynamic team for progressives!

[ Parent ]
Huh? (0.00 / 0)
1.  Please tell me which developments prop 2 would have prevented.

2.  Are you suggesting that the reason our environment has degraded is because the city doesn't post information on their website?

3.  I love Sarah Eckhardt.  I gave her money.  I voted for her in endorsement meetings.  If I lived in her district, I would have voted for her.  But I don't think it's fair to ask her to single handedly fix our transportation mess.  What are the solutions?

4.  Are you saying that police use of tasers is what threatens Austin's safety?  We're the fourth safest big city in America; our police force has its problems but I don't think it's fair to say that police are making Austin unsafe.  They put their lives on the line every day for us.  But what can we do to make downtown safer and more vibrant?

5.  I agree that private citizens should work with non-profits to ease the burden on the homeless.  But what is the proper role for the city?  And what can the city do to ease the problem?


[ Parent ]
Hooked ya. (0.00 / 0)
1. Proposition 2 will go a long way toward protecting the Edwards Aquifer area and Barton Springs. I wholly support it and I support forcing business into the DDZ.

2. Not by adding tolls to roads that have already been paid for. What we need to do is invest in arterial miles instead of new highway miles. It is far more cost effective and taken with a drastic increase in public transportation can strike a fatal blow to congestion in Austin and central Texas.

3. Well, I would have done something. Our City Council essentially sat on their hands but somehow still managed to throw them up in the air and say "But! We said we'd rather AMD didn't build near the re-charge zone!"

Instead of grandstanding on Props. 1 & 2 and lobbying the legislature for a dishonest, across the board tax-cut for the wealthy, McCracken ought to have been lobbying the legislature for the right to close that pesky grandfathering loophole. That's what I would have been doing.

When Prop. 2 came about, I would have come out in favor because it will do exaclty what SOSA says it will--it will stop development where development should not be.

4. This question is predicated on the idea that tax-incentives actually do what their proponents say they will.

Sometimes they might. But when you have even Samsung saying that it wasn't the incentive that made them stick with Austin then there's no excuse for the recent action taken.

I'm not opposed to incentives to attract big business, but if Austin is in the business of giving business breaks, then it had better start giving similar breaks (in scale) to small and locally-owned business, particularly on the East Side.

I'd also like to see a public (City) commitment to the Arts. You can check out my positions on this and how it relates to Austin's economy below:
http://www.songwritersseries.com/candidatesAustin.html

5. Downtown is not a crime zone. The police force is so over-funded that they take to dramatic raids on bars in Sixth Street atop horses for Christ's sake.

I'm glad that we have the highest paid public safety personnel in the state. They're real, regular, working folks doing the toughest jobs next to a middle school teacher and they deserve it.

We're the safest city in America and I'm proud of that too but study after study after study will tell you what I'm about to tell you: that investment in education, health and human services--quality of life, is the biggest deterrent to crime. Not the millions that you pump into the police force to deal with problems after they start.

How would I make downtown more safe? The same way you make any area of town more safe, invest in people at a higher rate than you invest in police.

6. Well, criminalizing poverty and homelessness in the Republican fashion (as opposed to Johnson's War on Poverty) that McCracken and the rest of the Council (except Thomas) did will not and did not, indeed could not do a damned thing to decrease homelessness.

But you know what could? A huge investment in affordable housing, like the $67.5 million that was slated for the November bond package until just yesterday when the City staff slashed the number.

Yeah, our City Council is sure doing a great job for the poor and working class folks in Austin.

Need I remind you that those are the kind of people that PROGRESSIVES ought to be working for?

I don't care what kind of man Brewster is, and I definitely don't care what kind of man that you think he is.

What I do care about is the fact that he has done little to nothing for the most disadvantaged among us and that when he has done things that relate to those groups they have been categorically negative except for his cynical, vote-getting decision to push for Prop. 6.

What I do care about is that this guy used to work for the Right Wing.

What I do care about is his joke about environmental racism that you oh so delicately decided to ignore in your response to me.

What I do care about is the fact that Brewster McCracken decided to snub the NAACP, LULAC and PODER because he was "having a party at [his] house."

What I do care about is the fact that Brewster essentially lied about his "no big box development" stance and that he was responsible for placing the Lowe's proposal on the City's agenda in the first place.

What I do care about is Brewster's double-talk re: providing an arts and community network for African Americans while being the leader of the anti-Midtown Live! loans debate.

And more, but I'm off to eat.

Now why don't you actually address what I wrote this time.

"There's nothing new except for the history that you don't know."
-HST

Justice Addict


[ Parent ]
This is better than studying for Con Law. (0.00 / 0)
1.  There are some good things in Prop 2.  Specifically, making explicit our community's commitment to protecting the aquifer.  That being said, too many elements of prop 2 are simply illegal under federal & state law or unconstitutional.  Further, I don't think putting all our eggs in one basket is a smart thing to do.  Even if prop 2 passes it's not a cure all.  We have to work with other levels of government and with our regional partners to protect the ENTIRE watershed.  Finally, the city can't "force" businesses into the DDZ.  But we can certainly use every tool at our disposable to encourage it.

2. I don't like the toll plan any more than you do.  I just don't think we can demagogue on it and solve anything.  I-30 is an example of proper tolling:  brand new roads.  Tolling existing roads is silly.  That being said, I have no idea what you mean about arterials.  Where exactly between Ben White, 183, 360 and I-35 would you put these roads?  We need a multi-modal solution.  More commuter rail, more trolleys, more light rail, more buses, and more roads in certain places.  But ultimately, in the long-term, we have to change our growth pattern to fix our transportation problems.  Downtown density will increase the attractiveness of non-car based forms of transportation.

3. AMD is a sticky-wicket.  But, in general, that situation reflects an across the board failure of process.  Community consultation is key.  We're all in this together.  And I agree that we need to work with the legislature to fix problems arising out of the state grandfathering statutes. 

4.  I agree with you on this one.  If I could pass a federal law preventing local and state governments from handing out tax incentives, I would.  But living in the current reality, we have to use any advantage we have to bring clean companies to Austin.  I'm a pro-jobs progressive.  With that in mind, any tax incentive program has to meet two conditions:  (1) it must be revenue positive, and (2) it must be conditioned on the company fulfilling its investment responsibilities.

5.  Again, I think we're broadly in agreement here.  Part of what I've learned serving on ACEC is that the investment we make in after-school programs leads to a lot less crime.  And I agree that looking out for our most vulnerable pays dividends in the crime stats.  However, I don't think we've over-invested in our police force.  They do a tough job and deserve our support.  Now that doesn't mean its unquestioning support.  As we've seen over the last few years there are problems.  But we're not going to get anywhere by attacking each other.  If we bring the stakeholders together and sit down we can work out some solutions.

6.  I'm a big affordable housing fan.  But remember two things.  First, there is only so much the city can do.  High property taxes make homes increasingly out of reach of too many people.  But the City component of your property tax bills is only about 18%.  We have to work with other levels of government to keep that tax burden in check.  Second, we can't just mandate affordable housing.  We need a combination of sticks and carrots to get anything done, that also means working with developers.  I don't think you can call developers the devil and then come back and ask them to build more affordable housing.  We have to work with all sides on this issue instead of demonizing folks that have to be part of the solution.

On your other points:

Your characterization of Council Member McCracken's support for prop 6 is cynical.  He authored that proposal because it's the right thing to do.  I think if you were to talk with leaders in the GLBT community they'd tell you the same thing.

I don't think interning for some congressman makes you part of the vast right-wing conspiracy.  Brewster is a great Democrat.  He's worked for tons of Democratic candidates and campaigns.  He's given money and time.  And, frankly, Mindy never would have married him if he were a Republican.

I don't know what "environ. racism" joke you're talking about.

I also don't know what the party thing is about.  Having run one of these campaigns before though, I am familiar with the many, many candidate forums.  There's one virtually every night and sometimes they conflict with something else.  It wouldn't surprise me at all if some of these forums conflicted with a fund-raiser or something else.  In general I think we should give folks the benefit of the doubt and not immediately assume bad motives.

On big boxes, it's my understanding that Brewster's position on that Lowe's issue was in line with most of the environmental community and that his position also led to a smaller amount of impervious cover.  I'm not terribly familiar with the details on this one.

There's a reason the mid-town loan was  killed.  There wasn't support for it. 

Here's my beef.  I think there is plenty of room for people to have disagreements in the public sphere.  That's why we have these discussions.  But to demonize your opponent gets you nothing.  It just calcifies the conversation.  Just because some people have disagreement on a policy item doesn't make either party a bad person. 


[ Parent ]
this is just weird (0.00 / 0)
Darrell Pierce why he doesnt think it should be law for children to be required to wear helmets while riding a bike?

Your rift on parking lanes is certainly a legitimate issue but not requiring children to wear bicycle helmets is just plain irresponsible and could get people killed.

What does Pierce have against helmet laws for kids?

We all seem to agree that Pierce is a conservative (for the most part). Is he also a Libertarian?


The law is racist (0.00 / 0)
Black and brown kids get the most tickets.

"There's nothing new except for the history that you don't know."
-HST

Justice Addict


[ Parent ]
is that why (0.00 / 0)
Pierce is against it?  He does not cite that reason on the website. He merely says it should be a parents responsibility. Thats not good enough if you ask me.

[ Parent ]
I'm assuming (0.00 / 0)
That Pierce knows the real reason and is against it for the real reason but that he cannot speak the real reason because it will upset the many conservative backers (like the UDems) that he has.

"There's nothing new except for the history that you don't know."
-HST

Justice Addict


[ Parent ]
Link (0.00 / 0)
David, in that link I left, read the comments below all the boxes. I think he gave a reason down there.

I don't support requiring helmets for adults, and while not a big fan of the existing law with applies to kids under 17 only, I guess I resect precendent.

Please read the Community Guidelines and How to Rate Comments.


[ Parent ]
who all (0.00 / 0)
has voted already?

Burnt Orange Reader

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Poll
Who would you vote for in the Democratic Primary for Ag Commission?
Kinky Friedman
Hank Gilbert

Results

Advertisement

Best of Texas Left
- (Complete Directory)
- A Capitol Blog
- As the Island Floats
- B & B
- Bay Area Houston
- Blue Bloggin
- Bluedaze
- Brains and Eggs
- Capitol Annex
- Collin County Democrats
- Collin County Observer
- Community Forum
- Dog Canyon
- Dos Centavos
- Easter Lemming Liberal
- Eye on Williamson County
- Feet to the Fire
- Greg's Opinion
- Grits for Breakfast
- Half Empty
- Houtopia
- In the Pink Texas
- Kiss My Big Blue Butt
- Letters from Texas
- McBlogger
- Mean Rachel
- Musings
- North Texas Liberal
- Off the Kuff
- Panhandle Truth Squad
- Para Justicia y Libertad!
- Pink Dome
- San Antonio Mayor
- South Texas Chisme
- StoudDemBlog
- Texas Clover Leaf
- Texas Kaos
- The Caucus Blog
- There..Already
- Three Wise Men
Best of Texas Right
- Blogs of War
- BlogHouston
- Boots and Sabers
- Lone Star Times
- Publius TX
- Rick Perry vs the World
- Safety for Dummies
- Slightly Rough
- Urban Grounds
Other Texas Reads
- Burka Blog
- D Magazine
- DOT Show
- Statesman Elections
- Strong Political Analysis
- Texas Monthly
- Texas Observer
- The Texas Blue
- Quorum Report Daily Buzz
Around Austin
- Austin Bloggers
- Austin Chronicle
- Austin Contrarian
- Austin Metblogs
- Austin on Two Wheels
- Austin Real Estate Blog
- Austin Statesman
- Austin Texas Bike Shit Stuff
- Austin Towers
- Austinist
- Capital MetroBlog
- Daily Texan
- Do512
- Downtown Austin Blog
- East Austinite
- Elise Hu
-
Flash Mob Austin
- Keep Austin Blue
- M1EK
- Travis County Democrats
- University Democrats
TX Progressive Orgs
- ACLU Legislative Blog
- Atticus Circle
- Criminal Justice Coalition
- Equality Texas
- Latinos for Texas
- NOW Texas
- PFAW Texas
- Public Citizen
- SEIU Texas
- Tejano Insider
- Texas AFT
- Texas HDCC
- Texas Watch
- TFN
- TSTA
- TSEU
- Texas Young Democrats
- United Ways of Texas
TX Elections/Returns
- TX Returns 1992-present
- TX Media/Candidate List

- Bexar County
- Collin County
- Dallas county
- Denton County
- El Paso County
- Fort Bend County
- Harris County
- Jefferson County
- Tarrant County
- Travis County

- CNN 1998 Returns
- CNN 2000 Returns
- CNN 2002 Returns
- CNN 2004 Returns
- CNN 2006 Returns
- CNN 2008 Returns
Traffic Ratings
- Alexa Rating
- Quantcast Ratings
-
Syndication

Burnt Orange Reporters
Publisher - Karl-Thomas M.
Editor-in-Chief - Matt G.
Staff Writer - David M.
Staff Writer - Katherine H.
Staff Writer - Michael H.
Staff Writer - Todd H.
Man of Mystery - Phillip M.
Founder - Byron L.

Powered by: SoapBlox