The primary season is upon us, even if we don't have legislative maps or a primary date. That's not going to stop the eager Democratic activists of Travis County from kicking off the club endorsement season! Last night, the South Austin Democrats held their forum, and voted to endorse in several Travis County primary races.
The SAD endorsement is viewed as one of the more valuable ones to earn in Travis County, since the group has often mailed yellow postcards to Democratic voters who live south of Lady Bird Lake touting their chosen candidates. Here are the results, from their Facebook page.
2012 South Austin Democrats Endorsements
Tax Assessor Collector: Bruce Elfant
District Attorney: Rosemary Lehmberg
Sheriff: Greg Hamilton
167th District Judge: David Walberg
Commissioner Pct. 3: Karen Huber
Constable Pct. 3: Sally Hernandez
Constable Pct. 4: Maria Canchola
The 167th race initially went to a run-off between Wahlberg and Efrain de la Fuente, after no one failed to clear the 50% endorsement threshold in the first round of balloting. (Attorney Bryan Case is also in the race.) Wahlberg prevailed in the run-off.
SAD didn't endorse in the County Commissioner Precinct 1 or Constable Precinct 2 races, but to be fair, they are the South Austin Democrats, and those races are Northeast and Northwest, respectively.
Next up, the Austin Progressive Coalition will hold its endorsements a week from Saturday on February 18th. At that time Central Austin Democrats and the University Democrats will vote on the candidates of their choice. Any candidate who receives both endorsements gets the coveted APC endorsement. APC in turn will distribute thousands of fliers touting their endorsements to doors across Central Austin. This is widely considered to be one of the more valuable endorsements in the local election scene.
In other primary news, the San Antonio court moved up the date of the next hearing on redistricting/maps/primary dates from the 15th to the 14th. That's good news if you want to spend Valentine's day with your fellow redistricting litigants, I guess.
(What's going on in Big D? James Van Sickle is here to tell us. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
While speculation and bargaining continue for how the 2012 maps for Congress, State Senate, and State House will look, I wanted to take some time to look at the contested Democratic Primary races in Dallas based on current filings. Once the maps are finalized, I will post another article discussing changes we get when the filing period reopens for a brief period of time. It should also be noted that this article will be discussing only races contained solely within Dallas County and not any statewide or multi-county campaigns. All tables in this article are sorted by Contributions in descending order.
United States Congress, District 30
Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson is currently serving her 10th term (20 years), and is actively campaigning for another term in office. So far two candidates have risen to challenge Congresswoman Johnson in Democratic Primary. State Representative Barbara Mallory-Caraway (HD-110) filed for a ballot position, along with Taj Clayton who is a litigator at international law firm Fish and Richardson.
It should be noted that only the below table only looks at reporting period totals between 10/1/2011 to 12/31/2011.
In theory, State House Districts 110 and 107 should be hot primary races. The ongoing issue regarding our maps is putting all of that into question, however. Regardless of how the maps come out, District 110 will be a hot race because it will be to replace Barbara Mallory-Caraway as she runs for Congress. HD-110 is a safe Democratic district with a large African-American population. Right now there are three candidates for HD-110, but this could easily change depending on how those maps lines come out. Once the maps for 2012 have been finalized, I will put together a follow-up article discussing who is and who is not running for each State House district in Dallas County.
District Judge, 162nd Judicial District
The 162nd Judicial District has been held by Lorraine Raggio since her initial election in 2004. Judge Raggio announced her retirement, several candidates have announced or filed for this seat.
Phyllis Lister Brown is currently a municipal judge in the City of Dallas. According to the city charter, city appointees and elected officials must resign their position when seeking higher office. Judge Brown has argued that she does not have to do so given past precedence of when municipal Judge Elizabeth Frizell ran in 2006 for higher office. Dallas City Council voted on January 18 to remove Phyllis from office. Phyllis' lawyers filed a restraining order against the removal, and the city attorney appealed this order. Now it appears that this will be going to court to decide whether Judge Brown gets to keep her seat on the municipal bench or be removed. (See Judge Phyllis Lister Brown Will Soon Get a Shove Off the Bench or a Day in Court)
In the interest of transparency, it should be noted that I am providing technology and communications support to Maricela Moore in this race.
Criminal District Judge, Count No. 4
John Creuzot is the incumbent judge for Criminal District Court 4, and has served since 2008. Judge Creuzot has indicated that he will be retiring and not seeking re-election. So far two candidates (JR Cook and Dominique Collins) have filed to run for this seat. Races for the criminal bench tend to be low dollar affairs compared to their judicial counterparts in Civil Court (i.e. 162nd Judicial Court).
In the interest of transparency, it should be noted that I am providing technology and communications support to JR Cook in this race.
Sherriff
In 2008, Lupe Valdez solidly won re-election in both Primary and General elections. Sherriff Valdez has remained very popular in local Democratic circles. In 2011, Dallas County Jails passed inspection for the 2nd year in a row, which was a top issue for Republicans and other opponents in 2008. An individual named Charlie J. Thomas has filed to run against Lupe in the Democratic Primary, but I have no information about his candidacy at this time.
County Commissioner, District 1
In 2010, Democrats gained majority on the Dallas County Commissioner's Court, and have subsequently redistricted District 1 to be a Democratic-opportunity district. This seat is currently held by Maurine Dickey who along with her husband owns the Dickey's BBQ franchise. Originally, it was rumored that there were over 7 potential candidates interested in running. Since the map was finalized, that number has now sized itself down to 3.
In the interest of transparency, it should be noted that I am providing technology and communications support to Theresa Daniel in this race.
County Commissioner, District 3
Commissioner District 3 had been held by John Wiley Price since 1985. On June 27, 2011, FBI agents searched Commissioner Price's offices and home, and were looking for documents relating to fraud, bribery, money laundering, and tax evasion allegations (See Commissioner John Wiley Price's Office, Home Searched). The investigation is still ongoing, and no charges have been filed against Commissioner Price. Commissioner Price has drawn three opponents in the upcoming 2012 Primary.
While Bennie Brown did file the required January 15 campaign finance report, they failed to mention the $1,250 filing fee paid to the Dallas County Democratic Party in the campaign finance report. According to Dallas County Elections Department, neither Betty Culbreath nor Micah B. Phillips filed their January 15 campaign finance reports. All candidates are required to file campaign finance reports on January 15 and July 15 each year as long as they have a treasurer appointment on file.
Commissioner Price wrote "N/A" under the Cash On Hand line item for his campaign finance report, which is why I left question marks under that section.
DCDP County Chair
In a previous article, I had mentioned that an individual named Lymon King was looking to run for County Chair. Mr. King has since decided against running in 2010, and made this announcement through a robocall to his supporters. No one else has indicated about a run for County Chair so it appears that Darlene Ewing will be starting a fourth term, which she announced will be her last as County Chair.
Unopposed Countywide Races
Here is the list of countywide offices up for re-election in 2012 that so far do not have a primary opponent.
With the retirement of Charlie Gonzales TX 20 Joaquin Castro looked like a shoe in, but at the Northeast Bexar County Democrats meeting Saturday Ezra Johnson http://www.ezraforcongress.com/ showed why that hasn't been the case since he announced his candidacy. Johnson was certainly the most dynamic and animated candidate from any district represented and the "fire in his belly" delivery won enthusiastic applause. Ezra spoke of having the courage of his convictions and when he was done I believed him. Johnson's top issues included comprehensive immigration reform, strengthening social security and Medicare without shrinking benefits, taking care of our veterans as they justly deserve and getting our economy back on its feet.
Joaquin Castro put on his usual smooth performance and spoke about his success in getting things done even when in the deep minority in the legislature. Other attendees I spoke to found Ezra's delivery as refreshing as I did. While I don't have a horse in that race I'll be watching it carefully and I'm going to find it difficult not to be disappointed if Johnson doesn't pull of what the conventional wisdom would call an upset victory.
As the SDEC Committeeman for SD-25 I try to keep an eye on what's going on in the major races in the area but I was surprised when out of the blue I had the opportunity to meet a terrific woman who has taken it upon herself to challenge the odious Lamar Smith in TX 21. That woman is Candace Duvál http://www.candaceduval.com/ and she too has the fire inside her. She's another truly progressive candidate and she's willing to go toe to toe with anyone to bring fairness and justice to Texans and all Americans. Candace focused on the need to protect our environment through green initiatives and renewable, sustainable energy projects.
Candace is running a grassroots campaign just like Ezra Johnson and she can use both your financial and shoe leather support. If you're a Central Texas progressive I urge you to give them both a look.
Central Texas has some really great Democratic candidates and I can't wait for November.
Today's Northeast Bexar County Democrats meeting was a forum for congressional candidates and the TX 35 race was the most hotly contested with 3 candidates. Patrick Shearer made a strong case for his candidacy and the need for a progressive who will not just vote the right way but who will be a real leader.
The club members seemed genuinely enthusiastic about his candidacy and one attendee told me that Patrick is just the kind of congressman the district deserves. That same person, a Hispanic male, was disappointed in Sylvia Romo whose case for her candidacy was largely "this district was drawn as a minority district and I'm a Latina, I represent diversity."
(Please welcome Senator Van de Putte to BOR! And if you're in San Antonio, check out the Save Texas Schools conference this weekend. It's such an important issue here in Texas. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
This past legislative session was devastating to our public schools. When lawmakers came to the Capitol a year ago facing an $18 billion budget deficit - a structural deficit caused by ill-advised changes to our state's business tax structure in special session back in 2006 - too many of my colleagues were locked in to a "cuts-only" mentality, adamantly refused to touch the Rainy Day Fund (despite the fact that it was pouring), and slashed funding where it was too often needed most.
One area that got hit hardest was public education. In an incredibly short-sighted move that shortchanges the future of our state, $5 billion was taken from the next generation of Texans and the dedicated professionals responsible for educating them.
We must reverse that decision next year - by acting this year. Although we're still 12 months away from the start of the 83rd session, we cannot wait until 2013 to begin building the political muscle and momentum necessary for change. As of this writing, we're still awaiting decisions in the redistricting trials before we can move ahead with elections, but rest assured, those elections will eventually happen - and you must make those seeking office realize that properly funding education is the top priority for Texans.
To help lay the foundation for this change, please join me Friday, February 3 and Saturday, February 4 for the Save Texas Schools Conference in San Antonio. Pro-education state and local leaders will speak out on how we can turn the tide back toward investing in the future of our children, and on Saturday, workshops will be held that will equip you to support and spread a pro-education agenda in your community.
In the Friday night session, held at the Northside ISD Activity Center (7001 Culebra Road), I will join Mayor Julian Castro, Rep. Mike Villarreal, state Superintendent of the Year Dr. John Folks of Northside ISD, and high school student activist Connor Brantley, among others, to declare our support for turning back the cuts and how to do it. (Dinner will be served.)
On Saturday, at Holmes High School (6500 Ingram Rd.), workshops include such topics as Understanding the Education Funding Crisis, Developing and Supporting Pro-Education Legislators, Sharpening the Education Message, How to Hold a House/Neighborhood Meeting plus a special youth track for high school and college students. A panel discussion with San Antonio area school superintendents and school board members is also planned. (Box lunches will be provided.)
The registration fee is $20 in advance or $25 at the door, and scholarships are available, but space is limited, so sign up now! You may also register individually for Friday or Saturday only.
Don't miss this important event! But whether you attend or not, get involved with defending our public schools! Go to savetxschools.org to learn how, and to register for the conference.
(This week's Watson Wire was particularly solid. If you're not getting the Watson Wire, you should be. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
K. R. "Doc" Vanderslice was a true cowboy. He was also my maternal grandpa.
He grew up in Northwest Oklahoma working as a cowboy. When I was a kid, my brother Kyle and I spent time on his place getting to do "cowboy" stuff.
Grandpa was a cattle guy. I don't recall him ever having a goat and am certain he never thought too highly of what my mother called "goat ropers."
Now, most folks know that a "goat rope" refers to a big fiasco and mess. While he never would have allowed his grandsons to participate in a real goat rope, Grandpa did get a kick out of putting us in situations that led to utter chaos, particularly when he was partnering with my dad. Those two loved to make each other laugh, including at the expense of their progeny.
One of my strongest memories is of being 6 or 7 (heck, I might have been all of 8), when Grandpa had picked up a new Shetland pony named Dusty. Somehow, it was decided that I'd be perfect to "break" the horse.
I chased that mean little jackass of a horse around the corral, occasionally caught him without help, and tried to avoid getting bit as I fought to crawl on his back. Every time, over and over, he'd jump and buck and throw me hard to the ground.
All the while, as I'd get up, I'd look to Daddy and Grandpa, two men I loved who were, uh, keeping an eye on me – probably to make sure I didn't get hurt, but certainly to have a little fun, too. They were ceaselessly encouraging (and not just a little teasing), telling me "You almost had him that time," or "I think he's worn out," or "Hang on. You'll get it."
But, no, this was a goat rope, only with a pony. It had all the signs:
It went on forever and seemed to get worse and worse.
There was no end in sight.
Nothing seemed to work.
What I thought I knew one time didn't work the next time.
I couldn't figure out what success was supposed to look like.
It really hurt.
I was covered in filth and it stunk.
A goat rope with, y'know, democracy.
But this Watson Wire isn’t about cowboys or dubious moments of family history. No, this is about redistricting. (If that's the sort of rapid change of subject that makes you feel like you've been bucked from a horse, well, as Doc Vanderslice would say, "Just hang on. You'll get it.”)
Redistricting is the process of redrawing lines for districts represented by state legislators, Congressional reps, and other elected officials. Basically, people move out of one place and into another, so district lines have to shift with the population (legally every 10 years, though you can try doing it more often depending on how little shame you have) to make sure that an elected official represents about as many constituents as his or her colleagues.
If that sounds boring and technical, well, that’s probably how it should be. The problem is that it’s a very political exercise – always has been – that can affect which political party controls a particular legislative delegation or chamber. So things have a way of getting unpleasant and nonsensical really fast.
And that’s before the folks running the redistricting process in the Texas Capitol decided to make this goat rope even more messy.
Take this redistricting. Please!
Last year, the Texas legislature passed maps for state senators and representatives in its regular legislative session, and passed another map for Congressional representatives in a special session.
A number of us argued at the time, over and over, that the maps frequently failed to allow minority voters in some parts of Texas to elect candidates of their choice. Those in control ignored us.
The state, which is required by the federal Voting Rights Act to get preclearance before using the new maps, had a choice to seek approval from either the U.S. Department of Justice or a three-judge federal court in Washington, DC. The state chose to seek this preclearance from the court instead of the Department of Justice.
At the same time, some folks sued the state, claiming – quite persuasively – that some parts of the maps violate the U.S. Voting Rights Act. That case ended up being before a different three-judge federal district court in San Antonio. So the Texas redistricting process was falling apart in two federal courtrooms about 1,500 miles away from each other.
The DC federal court denied the state's request for a quick, summary decision approving the maps. It said that the court needed more time to investigate if there was discriminatory intent or effect, and that there needed to be a full trial to do so.
The court opinion said the state needs to use a more comprehensive definition of what it means for a group of minority voters to have the "ability to elect" the candidate of their choice. The full trial finally started last week. It's still going on and won't wrap up for a while.
Then, last fall, the federal judges in San Antonio – sensing that the legislative maps would not be approved or denied in time for Texas' 2012 primary elections – drew some so-called "interim maps." That shuffled all of the timelines for when candidates have to file for office and even required new election dates.
And last week, the U.S. Supreme Court threw out the maps that the San Antonio federal judges drew – yes, the same maps that replaced the not-quite-legal maps that those in control of the legislature drew. The Supreme Court sent the San Antonio judges back to the drawing board.
Good news and bad news
But there was some good news: the Supreme Court ordered the judges to keep Voting Rights Act-related concerns in mind as they work through this. That’s a big deal, because some had worried that the Supreme Court would use this case to throw out vital portions of the Voting Rights Act. That doesn’t seem likely to happen at this point.
The bad news, however, is that almost everything else is up in the air right now, particularly when it comes to this year’s legislative and Congressional elections:
We basically have no maps.
Thus, if you live in Texas, you have no way to know for sure who you’ll be voting on this year to represent you in the legislature or in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The primary elections, which had already been postponed from March until April, now probably can’t be held until sometime after that – unless both of the courts in San Antonio and Washington really hustle.
The whole mess is now split between a court in San Antonio, which is trying to draw interim maps that the Supreme Court will like, and the court in Washington DC, which is evaluating the legislatively drawn maps in the context of the Voting Rights Act and trying to figure out a permanent solution.
I’m missing Daddy, Grandpa and even Dusty right about now.
(Great post from Back to Basics PAC, who continue to hammer on Perry's abuse of the public trust and our tax dollars. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
Rick Perry did a funny thing yestoday - he actually responded to his critics. In the past few days, our friends at Progress Texas and Democratic Caucus chair Rep. Jessica Farrar called on Perry to pay back the approximately $2,651,429.14 that his presidential campaign burned through in security costs. This confounding sum wasn't paid for by the Perry campaign though - it was your tax dollars. And the Perry campaign's answer?
The Department of Public Safety has a policy of providing security for governors and their families everywhere they travel ... These policies are determined by DPS and not the governor's office.
Apparently, it was also the policy of longtime Perry ally and civil liberties foe Steve McCraw to insist on keeping the travel security costs secret. It was so important to keep the public from knowing what was in those records that both Perry and Anita spent time during the June special session pressing for a measure to keep the records sealed for 18 months. In other words, until after the 2012 election. According to an August story from the Washington Post:
One Republican legislator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, described the governor as "extremely concerned" about keeping his records sealed, and said Perry was actively lobbying key legislators to get it passed in the waning days of the special session. The legislator said Perry's wife, Anita, also was pressing legislators on the issue.
But Perry didn't have to stick Texas taxpayers with the bill for his security. Presidential campaigns typically pay for private security services. Or he could have requested Secret Service protection, as former candidate Herman Cain did in November 2011. Although he may not have met the requirements for protection - the law stipulates that a candidate must have "national prominence," along with other qualifying factors.
So what was that security money spent on exactly, and was it worth it to fulfill Rick Perry's calling? Maybe we'll find out - after the election.
In an order issued this afternoon, the San Antonio court asked the parties to appear for a status conference this Friday, January 27, at 1 p.m.
However, the court told the parties that if they wish to maintain a unified April 3 primary date that they would need to agree among themselves on interim maps by February 6. (Yes, there probably is some parallel universe out there where this will happen- and Greg Abbott has a beard - but my irking suspicion is that it's not this one.)
If the parties are unable to agree upon maps, they are to submit a list of unobjected to districts by February 6 for the court's consideration.
The court also said that it was giving 'serious consideration' to a split primary and asked the State of Texas to be prepared on Friday to say whether it would reimburse counties and political parties for the added expense. That added costs is expected to run somewhere in the neighborhood of at least $13 million.
The also asked all parties to be prepared to discuss two alternative options for split primaries: one that would have a presidential (+ precinct chair) primary on April 3 and another that would have an April 3 presidential primary and primary countywide and whole county races (+ precinct chairs). [Before you ask, it's not entirely clear why the court rolled precinct chair elections into the first option except that it seems to be under the impression that having precinct chair elections is necessary to start the process of having precinct conventions. It'll get sorted out.]
On Thursday in Charleston, South Carolina, the same city in which he announced his candidacy, Rick Perry delivered the news that has been inevitable for three months: his candidacy is over.
And what a run it was.
In the beginning, when the Perry-for-President rumors hit a fever pitch, it seemed Republicans had found their ideal non-Romney candidate.
He was a great campaigner and a proven conservative, someone with a strong record who could mount a real challenge to President Obama.
None of that turned out to be true.
He was gradually exposed as a pay-for-play politician who used government as a piggy bank for his donors. Perry's previous support for a mandatory HPV vaccine, and less-than-insane immigration policy, did him in with the new Tea Party-infused Republican Party. He could never correct the image of himself as less-than-pure because he has always acted out of political expediency, not principle.
Culminating with his now-legendary "oops" moment at a September debate, Rick Perry made a mockery of himself and our great state. He never recovered from the American people's realization that he is an utter fool, utterly unprepared for the presidency.
Perry became a non-factor in the Republican primary even before the voting began. When it did, he lost desperately in Iowa (5th) and even worse in New Hampshire (5th with 0.7% of the vote).
Though he deemed South Carolina a state of "real Republicans" where his candidacy would turn around, Perry couldn't inspire any new support there and dropped out two days before the primary.
As a political story alone, Perry's candidacy is a sad one. But as the story of a politician as disastrous for Texas as this one, it is an uplifting one.
The Perry campaign couldn't find a strategy that would cover up their candidate's fatal flaws. The real Rick Perry seemed to teem over the edge of his artifice, no matter what tack he took.
"Keep in mind that almost all of our nominees in the last 50 years have been on their second attempt at the White House, so Republican voters tend to like experienced candidates that they've seen for a long time," Sullivan said, also noting that "we don't have term limits in Texas."
Not a chance. Perry disqualified himself from another viable run by accidentally showing America who he really is: a shell of a politician who stands for nothing but self-promotion.
And if he does run for governor again, he may well lose. In the last poll of Texas primary voters, Perry placed third. And it's not because Republicans want their governor back - he was far ahead in Texas months ago.
Attorney General Greg Abbott wants to be governor and has a serious war chest, preparing him to mount a serious challenge against Perry.
The best path forward for Perry would be to finish his term quietly. In the 2013 Legislative session, he should completely change course and prioritize issues like public education and clean water so that Texas can support its recent population growth and prepare for the future. Afterwards, he should release his death grip on state government by retiring from public life.
But we can't expect him to do the right thing. He's Rick Perry, bound to continue his awful record leading our state. As Texas progressives, it is our responsibility to fight him at every turn.
At least we can say this definitively, and very happily: there will never be a President Rick Perry.
It's been a great experience writing "On Perry's Trail" and hearing back from BOR's insightful readers. The complete archive is here.
Patrick Shearer, candidate for US Congress in district 35 spoke to the Dem's Café Wednesday evening, the democratic club in Schertz/Cibolo. The members in attendance were sufficiently impressed with him that we all signed his petition for a place on the primary ballot which would allow him to save the $3000 filing fee and use those funds for campaigning instead. Given that his is a grassroots campaign he'll need every penny he can get. http://shearerforcongress.com/
We asked Mr. Shearer about his positions on various issues and he kindly responded to all of them, this is my interpretation of his answers as I of course can't speak for him.
