Candidates and elected officials are held to a higher standard in terms of honesty, integrity, and character. However, an emerging and rather disturbing trend among Texas Republican candidates and elected officials give reason for many voters to question whether possessing those qualities and upholding those standards are an integral part of the GOP candidate vetting process.
Voters are beginning to ask a fair question, which is whether the Republican Party cares about not only vetting candidates that live up to high standards that we as citizens expect of our elected officials, or if the Texas GOP simply takes for granted what power they hold as a Party and suffer from a dual case of incompetence and arrogance about who they are and what they stand for. We have no choice but to presume the latter based on the following evidence:
From a candidate perspective, the challenger to Representative Paula Pierson, Republican Barbara Nash, had serious questions raised about whether she was less than honest to voters about past business affairs nor was she forthcoming about horrendous allegations of elderly abuse at nursing homes managed by companies she and her husband owned. All of this leads one to question the character and integrity of the individual seeking to be a Texas Legislator representing House District 93. If you attempt and hide troubling allegations, attempt and hide questionable business affairs, and potentially falsify state documents in answering questions related to those allegations and business affairs, do you really believe Republican Barbara Nash is capable of being honest with District 93 voters?
Yet another candidate, Stefani Carter, the Republican challenger to Representative Carol Kent, raises questions about her character and integrity when she was caught on tape plagiarizing President Barack Obama's famous 2004 Democratic Convention speech. Republican Carter also embellished on her resume. If Republican Carter isn't original enough to articulate her own viewpoints without copying and pasting, or fails to be honest about her real background and work history, can voters in House District 102 expect Carter to be honest with them?
And finally the character and integrity of Republican Linda Harper-Brown, the State Representative from House District 105, is questioned because she was driving a $55,000 luxury car compliments of a highway contractor headquartered in her district. This contractor, with the help of Republican Harper-Brown, received over $12 million dollars in business with the state of Texas. Republican Harper-Brown is being challenged by Democrat Loretta Haldenwang. Can voters in House District 105 honestly say that Harper-Brown possess the character and integrity they expect from their elected officials?
Enough evidence has come forward to suggest that Republicans care little about the high standards and overall qualities that we as voters expect in candidates and elected officials. The ideas that politicians should be honest, possess integrity, and have moral character worthy of the office they seek or hold, are bedrock principles that Texas voters not only demand, but deserve. So far this election cycle a handful of Republican candidates and elected officials have fallen well short of voter standards.
Republican State Representative Linda Harper-Brown admitted she is involved in her husband's business and that she may be under criminal investigation today in the Dallas Morning News. The story -- "Rep. Linda Harper-Brown says she's given up company's Mercedes" -- lays out the following:
Harper-Brown told The Dallas Morning News that she was directing her husband to rework his compensation package from the company to exclude the cars. In theory, Brown would instead receive cash and then buy vehicles on his own. He said he could end up with the cars, but they would be in his name.
[...]
The Texas Values in Action Coalition, a group that pushes Democratic Party causes, has turned over information about Harper-Brown and Bryan’s companies to the Travis County District Attorney and the U.S. Attorney’s office in Dallas.
Harper-Brown fought back tears when she discussed dealing with perceptions that she was acting unethically by driving the car.
And she conceded that there could be a criminal investigation or one by the state ethics commision and that she would cooperate with authorities.
The Texas Values in Action Committee (TEXVAC), who initially filed the complaints, issued the following statement:
“This is clearly an admission of guilt by Linda Harper Brown that she illegally took a Mercedes from a company that benefitted from her role as a state legislator and has over 10 million dollars in state contracts. She can’t un-ring the bell, un-drive the Mercedes, or un-accept a bribe.”
“Once again, Linda Harper Brown is failing to address the serious issues at hand here, she can’t un-drive the car and think that the taking of it in the first place was ethical or legal. That’s like trying to give back the money after you’ve been caught robbing the bank."
Linda Harper-Brown could have provided documents proving her innocence. But she didn't.
Linda Harper-Brown could have responded directly to media requests for a statement. But she didn't.
Linda Harper-Brown could have held a press conference, filling a room with campaign supporters who stood behind her while she pronounced her innocence. But she didn't.
Instead, Republican State Representative Linda Harper-Brown -- much like Republican Governor Rick Perry -- wanted to work off a script. Harper-Brown got into a small, closed room with her campaign team. She squinted her eyes, looked at the teleprompter, and played the best card she had: THE VICTIM CARD.
It was her only card to play -- other than actually telling the truth -- and she bet the bank on it. Unfortunately, for Harper-Brown and Texas House Republicans, she's now gone all-in with a losing hand. The video she released online fails for several reasons:
The "I Am Not a Crook" Defense Doesn't Work Unless You Prove Your Innocence
Harper-Brown provided no evidence to disprove the mountain of evidence against her. Just saying there wasn't a "lick of proof" to the claims doesn't make it so. We get the messaging ploy -- Washington D.C. trial lawyer liberals are evil; congratulations, we now know you have the IQ of a potato. Just throwing a bunch of buzz words together doesn't address the serious charges leveled against her.
Blaming the Press Doesn't Work When You Refuse to Respond to Interview Requests
On Quorum Report right now, there's a link to Harper-Brown's statement, which starts off:
"State Representative Linda Harper Brown set the record straight today, countering false allegations raised in the press by Democrats, Washington, D.C. political operatives and trial lawyer front groups. Below are just a few of the facts omitted from recent press accounts:"
Harper-Brown chose not to respond to press. From the WFAA story:
Neither Bryan nor Harper-Brown would comment to WFAA about the car arrangement or their relationship regarding legislation.
She declined several requests for interviews this week. Her campaign spokesman referred questions to her husband.
Linda Harper-Brown will only release controlled statements, and not give interviews, because she knows she's done something wrong.
Harper-Brown and Her Husband's Business Are Not Completely Seperate, Despite What She Claims
If anything, Harper-Brown dug herself deeper in her statement, by claiming her and her husband's business are "completely separate." When you share office space and mailing addresses, it's pretty damn hard to pull off the "we're completely separate" line. I'd expect we'll see that claim challenged in the coming days.
Harper-Brown Doesn't Have a Social Network to Get Her Message Out
Harper-Brown has 850+ followers on Facebook, and 524+ followers on Twitter. I'd estimate, after having searched through her Twitter followers, that anywhere from 25% to 50% of people that follow her through social media are Austin Republicans or other Texas Republicans from around the state she gets to know speaking to conservative groups at conferences, town halls, etc.
Now, a large e-mail list would be impressive -- but it's unlikely she has built one herself. She could have a large e-mail list if another Republican group or consultant -- RPT, GOPAC, Dan Patrick, etc. -- helped her push her video out. For an effective enough e-mail list, there would be an in-kind to some Republucan group(s), or some Republican group(s) would have to own it themselves by getting their Republican brands behind it through social media. And in any event, you're still not getting your message through to the actual voters in Irving who will see the media reports and be turned off by Harper-Brown's scandalous behavior.
After all -- what Republucan group wants to stand next to someone who could soon be under investigation for bribery?
If a Republican group does choose to stand by her on this, they've done Democrats' work for them. If no group stands behind her, then the video will solely be seen by diehard supporters and Austin politicos, including lobbyists. Will lobbyists believe such an obvious political statement over the scandal, given Democrats track record of factual, proven research on House candidates in '06 and '08? I wouldn't bet on it.
This is a Sarah Palin type prayer. We've all seen Sarah Palin, and Harper-Brown is no Sarah Palin. Linda Harper-Brown is much more like Richard Nixon, who defiantly proclaimed "I am not a crook" in response to the Watergate scandal in the early 1970's.
And much like Nixon, I expect Harper-Brown to go down in a spiraling batch of flames in the coming days and weeks.
Jason Embry of the Austin American-Statesman released his top five endangered lawmakers list this past Sunday. I really have no quibble with the order of Embry's list and I understand that it is early and so people may go up the list and people may go down the list. Heck, you might find a few new ones on there as well at some point. I do believe he was accurate in at least placing second on the list House District 105 in North Texas.
Rep. Linda Harper-Brown, R-Irving. (2) Harper-Brown barely hung onto her seat last year against a Democrat who had no money and no support from the state party. Now Democrats are paying attention. Democrat Loretta Haldenwang is off and running, having posted a strong fundraising report for the first half of the year. She also has the backing of Annie's List, which has been extremely successful in winning House races in recent years. On the other hand, Republicans need this seat to keep their majority, and even though Harper-Brown is not in Speaker Joe Straus' inner circle, he'll have plenty of money to spend and could spend heavily to help her. The same could be said for Bohac. Obama won Harper-Brown's district, 52-47.
Harper-Brown is most certainly endangered, but nothing has been won yet. Business analyst and former state house district director, Loretta Haldenwang, is considered by most the Democrat to beat in the March 2010 primary. Haldewang, formerly an external affairs director with the Dallas Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, continues to boast impressive financial numbers, Party insider muscle with Annie's List, and campaign infrastructure--particularly with regard to field, that she'll need to weather a tough primary and potential general election battle.
Haldenwang has in no way sewn up victory and she'll be the first to tell you that as she did at our September Mid-Cities Democrats meeting. This race is going to be a trench battle every single day. Obama may have won this district with 52% of the vote in 2008, and Democrats narrowly lost this seat overall---by just 19 votes, but that does not equate to easy victory. Turnout will be lower in 2010 versus 2008. Voter communication will be critical, which means a robust field operation is mandatory. Most importantly, however, will be money. Those three factors will determine whether HD-105 is the barometer by which Democrats can expect a 2010 House takeover, or the race was one of those "the one that got away" stories
Their just isn't a whole lot of room for offense left in North Texas. A "defense wins championships" mentality is one that Democrats in Dallas and Tarrant counties are adopting in the hopes we can retain what we've picked up the last two election cycles, which would be our best contribution that we can make toward our ultimate goal of winning back the Texas House in 2010. However, when you look at the remaining House District seats left that are currently held by Republicans in this region, House District 105, based mostly in Irving, offers the most obvious potential for Democrats to go on offense heading into 2010.
In 2008 Democrat Bob Romano fell 19 votes shy of defeating Republican Linda Harper-Brown, in a race that, because of the razor thin margin of votes, went through a recount and lawsuit. The eight term Republican went on to be declared the winner of this majority-minority seat. Democrats smell blood in the water on this one and have at least one strong, credible candidate in Loretta Haldenwang fielded. Republicans apparently smell the same blood too, because rumors have floated that Harper-Brown may have to fend off a primary challenge from a far-right extremist Irving City Council member in order to make it to the 2010 general election.
Although Haldenwang is not the lone Democrat in this race, she clearly offers our Party the best shot at winning this seat. She has served as a district director and legislative aide to Representative Joaquin Castro of San Antonio and is currently the External Affairs Director for the Greater Dallas Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. On her June 30th financial report Haldenwang reported having raised a little over $61,000 with $52,000 cash on hand. Her largest contributor, and biggest source of support thus far, comes from Annie's List. The presumptive Republican, Harper-Brown, raised barely $2,000 with cash on hand of almost $90,000---the bulk of which is made up of loans.
In a gubernatorial election year, any legislative campaign is going to have to rely heavily on voter identification, communication, and turnout. You'll win it in the field talking about the issues of the day. Local or statewide issues register more with voters in off election cycles, but you have to have the money to communicate and to execute a solid field strategy. Loretta Haldenwang appears to be on the right path toward meeting those expectations.
Although Democrats will be playing a lot of defense in 2010 here in North Texas , House District 105 clearly allows us to play just enough offense that could very well tilt the balance of power in the state house to favor Democrats.
In 2010, voters in Irving will have the opportunity to bring needed change to their community and the state of Texas by electing Loretta Haldenwang to the Texas House of Representatives from District 105. Loretta will be a progressive representative from Irving who will focus on issues that really matter to Texas families, including economic development and improving access to quality education. She will also be the critical 75th vote for new leadership in the Texas House.
Today, Loretta reported receiving more than $61,000 in contributions and in-kind donations since beginning her campaign in late April -- a strong start to what will be a hard fought campaign.
Since starting her campaign, Loretta has been meeting with local activists and leaders in Irving, and has been endorsed by Annie's List, one of the most successful candidate-supporting organizations in the state. She'll be holding a series of meet and greet events this summer and early Fall, which will offer opportunities for volunteers to help with early voter contact and canvassing efforts.
I'm particularly excited about this race, as I'll be leaving Austin for Irving at the end of the month to run the campaign.
If you live in the Irving or west Dallas County area and would like to get involved in what promises to be an extremely exciting campaign, or if you would like to learn more about Loretta Haldenwang, visit her website at www.VoteLoretta.com.
Anyone who has played high school football in Texas, or just an avid college or pro football junkie, you've heard the saying that defense wins championships; but we all know that it's offense that sells tickets and Dallas Democrats are ready to put on a show:
Dallas County Democrats are entering a new phase in the growth of their local party.
For the last two election cycles they have won every countywide race they contested, with their overall percentage of the vote approaching 60 percent.
It's clear to them that they now control the county at large.
Now local Democrats want to gobble up turf inside districts that were once Republican strongholds.
"I don't think it's a big stretch to say we can do 57 percent [countywide] in 2010," said Darlene Ewing, chairwoman of the Dallas County Democratic Party.
Man, isn't that a refreshing story to read in Texas? 2010 can be a remarkable year for counties like Dallas where they are able to really strategically target and show some muscle in elections against our political foes. Taking back the County Commissioners court would be a huge move and targeting Mayfield is where it begins. HD-105 is an obvious target.
Whoever our statewide candidates for office are can benefit from Dallas County and their ability to target and improve Democratic performance in traditionally Republican territory, even if Dallas is a key component of our Party's urban county dominance. It never, ever hurts to maximize numbers and cut your opponents advantage in their own backyard.
The recount requested in HD-105 has been completed under the guidelines directed by the Secretary of State, TDP lawsuits notwithstanding. The end result was a one vote gain for Democrat Bob Romano leaving incumbent Republican Representative Linda Harper-Brown with a 19 vote lead and win for her re-election bid in the Irving based house district.
Austin American-Statesman: Romano's lawyer, Buck Wood of Austin, said his client is weighing whether to challenge the results. The Texas Democratic Party also has a separate federal lawsuit pending.
This leaves a 76-74 Republican majority in the Texas House. In 2003, after redistricting, it was an 88-62 Republican majority. That is a change from having a 26 vote gap to a 2 vote gap. Not co-incidentally Tom Craddick has served as Speaker during this same time frame. Hm.
There is an ongoing debate over how to count the so called "emphasis votes" in the HD-105 recount in Irving in the uncalled race between incumbent Republican Linda Harper-Brown and Democrat Bob Romano. Harper-Brown currently leads by 20 votes.
At issue, a recent ruling/instruction by the Secretary of State's Elections Division that Democrats claim contradicts an earlier policy. For review, Ann McGeehan, Director of Elections, posted the following notice to Election Clerks on October 31 which details how this type of vote should be counted.
The following are quick reference rules for counting a ballot:
An individual mark, or "cross-over voting," always overrides the straight-party mark. Individual marks include write-in votes.
An individual vote for a candidate in the same column as a straight-party mark is regarded as an "emphasis" vote and does not invalidate the straight-party mark. If the only individual votes are emphasis votes, the vote is tallied the same as a straight-party vote without regard to the emphasis votes.
Individual marks for more than one candidate in the same race constitutes an overvote, and neither candidate receives a vote. (This is the rule for general election for state and county officers, when only one vote is allowed in each race. In certain local elections, more votes are allowed, e.g., at-large voting.)
Bruce Sherbet, Dallas County Elections administrator posed the following question for the recount.
"In a recount, if a DRE image shows that the voter cast a straight party vote by there is no vote for the candidate of that same party (indicating it was deselected) does the straight party vote override the deselection (thus giving a vote to the candidate that was deselected)?"
Ann McGeehan of the Secretary of State's division responded in this letter (PDF).
It continues to reference a prior court ruling from 2007 between the TDP and Roger Williams where the court rejected arguments that "absent votes" on electronic eSlate machines (which would be the equivalent "emphasis voting" at issue in the HD-105 recount) could not be summarily judged and counted as emphasis votes because "voters engaging in such behavior were equally or even more likely intending to make no selection in a particular race". The 5th Circuit US Court of Appeals upheld that ruling.
While I'm in favor counting every vote and agree that it sounds like the SOS is reversing an earlier opinion, I hate to say that I actually agree with the SOS on this issue. The problem is the difference of how emphasis votes are marked on electronic ballots versus paper ballots.
Remember all the hoopla about the potentially malicious email that circulated telling people that to vote for Obama they needed to vote straight party Democrat and then also "emphasize" their vote by selecting him again? And remember how everyone tried to correct that rumor by mentioning that selecting Obama again actually deselected him from your ballot? That's all correct- for electronic voting machines which many Texas voters use and nearly all the urban counties.
Problem is, if you mark an "emphasis vote" on a paper ballot that is counted by hand or scanned in, that type of emphasis vote DOES NOT discard your vote for them. That's exactly what the original Oct 31 SOS advisory was referring to.
The problem is that on paper ballots an emphasis vote is a proactive mark which is plainly visible in a recount with no question of the intent of the voter. Why? Because on paper, a mark made for a straight party vote doesn't not automatically make a mark or selection for every candidate of that party on the ballot. It can't, it's paper. Therefore, making an emphasis vote by marking a candidate again visually reinforces a vote for that candidate on a paper ballot. In a recount, this would be obvious in reviewing the intent of the voter, separate from how a machine may have scanned the ballot.
BUT on an electronic ballot, like that used in the HD-105 race (specifically the iVotronic machine made by ES&S- view here), selecting the straight ticket option automatically fills in all candidates of that party on the screen with an X. An emphasis vote would occur by someone selecting a candidate who already had an X by their name. This deselects the candidate on that ballot and does so in the exact same way as if the voter wanted to cast a straight ticket vote but not vote for any candidate in a specific race (for whatever reason).
Because the electronic vote leaves no mark by "emphasizing" the vote which is the same end result as no mark made by choosing to skip the race it is impossible to determine the intent of the voter barring some other clear pattern on the ballot.
In more simple terms, on a paper ballot you "opt in" to the straight ticket vote and additional "opt ins" appears as clear intents to vote for that candidate. On the iVotronic, your "opt in" of the straight ticket immediately (and visually) "opts you in" for all of that party's candidates making any additional "opt in" emphasis votes to appear the same as "opted out" intended votes.
Therefore, the SOS's ruling appears contradictory only because electronic voting machines create a contradictory environment for casting and counting the vote. Which says more about the stupidity of electronic voting machines and their ballot design than the SOS.
Update: Phillip may be providing another perspective on this in the morning. I should make it clear the obviously I favor a Romano win, and if there are some additional fact to this story that alter the landscape, I very much want to hear that perspective.
The Star-Telegram this week rolled out the names of all the ambitious Republicans clamoring to make a run at the likely-to-vacate senate seat of Kay Bailey Hutchison. It would appear that the next election has already begun.
Nonetheless, because of what the Star-Telegram wrote about the likes of Republicans Joe Barton, Jeb Hensarling, and Kay Granger making a run for the senate, and the one Democratic name of John Sharp mentioned, coupled with the lively and hopeful discussion around the recent L.A. Times article about Texas being a battleground state in 2012, I think it is important to take a deep breath and really analyze some things here.
