There is no word on his replacement, but Frank Corte is definitely relinquishing his control of the House Republican Caucus.
Laylan Copelin write's Corte will not seek re-election as chairman of the Texas House GOP caucus.
Corte was late to support fellow Bexar county Representative and fellow Republican Straus (if he ever really did). In fact, Corte has been a loyal Craddick lieutenant which is where his influence came from.
He said some people thought it would be good to have the speaker and the GOP caucus leader from San Antonio. Others thought Corte might be put in the awkward position of criticizing a member of his local delegation.
Corte said he's interested in helping rebuilding the House GOP majority and thought he could do that better outside the caucus leadership.
Corte, Craddick, and Chisum have lost control of the Texas House and they are quickly losing control of the state. It will be interesting to see how many bills these men pass with little influence.
Nathan Macias was recruited by Tom Craddick and his allies to run take out Carter Casteel in 2006. Those are the facts.
Not surprising then that Nathan Macias is a little miffed that he lost his seat after one session to Doug Miller and his buddy Tom lost the dias.
On January 12, Macias opined via e-mail to an undisclosed list about Straus' conservative credentials (the same conservative credentials Dewhurst is trying to solidify in the Senate).
From: Nathan Macias
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 4:57 PM
Subject: My Perspective on The Apparent New Texas House Speaker
Friends:
As your outgoing State Representative I feel compelled to let you know my perspective and some facts about the apparent Speaker of the Texas House.
It appears Representative Joe Straus will be the next Speaker of the Texas House. I served with Joe Straus and have some true concerns. He is not conservative. Therefore, I don't think he will be the best representative of leadership for conservative Republicans or our great state. Below are just some of those concerns:
Rep Straus made his initial move by garnering the support of 70 Democrats and 15 Republicans. This alone will require his strong allegiance to the liberal Democratic Party and moderate Republicans. Shouldn't the Republican Speaker be elected by Republicans and not by a predominance of Democrats along with a few moderate Republicans? Now that would be best for our district and state.
Rep Straus has very limited experience, having served only one and a half sessions in the Texas Legislature. What organization would elect a Chairman of the Board with four years of experience? The Texas House needs an experienced, proven leader at the helm. That would be best for Texas.
The Heritage Alliance, a prominent conservative values organization, gave Rep Straus a 52% conservative score (the second to the lowest score earned by a "Republican"). That's not conservative. To give you a gauge this same organization gave me a 91% conservative score.
Texans for Fiscal Responsibility (limited government/lower tax group) rated Rep Straus at 71%, roughly 4% below the Republican average score. That's not conservative. As a gauge I earned a 93% rating from TFR.
Not a single pro-life or pro-family group endorses Rep Straus. As reported in the news, he was one of 23 lawmakers who opposed a bill to block the government order requiring the HPV vaccine for all sixth-grade schoolgirls. He also opposed a bill to ban gay foster parenting.
Let me also note that Straus supports statewide gambling and opposes school choice for parents. Both of these positions are in opposition to our State and National Republican Party Platforms. Joe Straus will not advance our conservative cause.
I strongly encourage each of you to contact our Rep-elect, Doug Miller, who at first opportunity chose to align himself with the 70 Democrats and 15 moderate Republicans. Let him know that the people of our district (his constituents) are overwhelmingly aligned with the conservative values and principles of the Republican Party of Texas that have made our state so grand, and that we expect him to represent our district in that manner.
Finally, please forward this message to others you believe are conservative and may not be aware of this recent development.
Serving You,
Nathan Macias
State Rep, District 73
Bandera, Comal, Gillespie, Kendall Counties
This seems to be a sign of things to come for Straus and a possible rematch between ultra-conservative Macias and the reasonable Republican Miller.
Also, it might be important to Mr. Macias, he isn't serving anyone and he is no longer the State Representative from District 73. That job has been filled but the people of District 73 are taking applications and interviewing again around 2010.
Mesdames et Messieurs, place your bets, if you please. The high stakes gaming season has commenced in earnest for the Texas Election cycle 2010. The winner will take all.
Drinks and meals will be served on a complimentary basis for the duration of the match. If one should need to take a breather from the gaming tables, massage therapy is available, at no charge. We can also arrange golf, tennis, squash or racket ball, or whenever pleases you. Hunting can be arranged, depending upon the season.
If one should be inconvenienced by an off season urge to shoot something or someone we have provided shooting ranges and weapons on the premises for your convenience.
Any other desired form of entertainment or diversion can be provided as requested. We are discreet and ask no questions.
Please make yourselves comfortable and at home. We are here to serve you.
Ed. note: This is part two of a three part series I've worked on over the break about understanding the Speaker's race. Part one focused on the problem -- why isn't someone else Speaker yet? Part two focuses on the solution -- how to emerge as a legitimate Speaker candidate. Part three will focus on the goals -- what Democrats should want in a new Speaker candidate.
Part Two: How to Emerge as a Legitimate Speaker Candidate
Barriers -- Craddick's incumbency gives him strong organizational capacity, which builds his legitimacy
Individuals -- Craddick is a gatekeeper for power, which prevents Members from moving up
Group dynamics -- When you can't trust a person, you trust a group
Rising in the ranks -- Craddick challengers need a megaphone to build organizational capacity
Originally, I wanted to write about how to overcome these barriers, but as Straus lived it out over the last few weeks, current events took much deserved center stage. So instead of looking forward, we'll use this post to look back a little -- then close out the series either Wednesday or Thursday (again, based on how busy current events are) with Part 3.
How does one overcome the barriers I've argued exist in order to get elected Speaker of the Texas House? Given that there's a purpose -- legitimate or otherwise -- to replace a Speaker, the biggest obstacle to overcome is building the organizational capacity necessary to develop group dynamics and to exhibit the values of your purpose -- trust, cohesion, shared power -- within your own circle of friends. No (wo)man is an island, and "Anybody But" is still not a valid name for a ballot; the solution, therefore, is to be a uniter (not a divider) with a strong positive narrative that (1) gives others a vision while simultaneously (2) reinforcing the negative narrative of your opponent(s).
The coalition building, in regards to the Speaker's race, requires intraparty and cross-party relationships to be built. One thing that can help make that happen is an understanding of 3D negotiation skills. I want to look at how those 3D tactics are put in play in both the intraparty and cross-party relationships we saw develop over the past month(s).
3D Negotiations: Building a Bargain Away from the Table
A quick intro on the framework I'm using -- stolen from 3D Negotiations:
Most negotiators focus on a single dimension of the bargaining process. They are “one-dimensional,” in our terminology, and the single dimension that they embrace is tactics. One-dimensional bargainers believe that negotiation is mainly what happens at the table. To them, preparation and execution is mainly about process and tactics.
But all too often, this one-dimensional approach leaves money on the table. It is inadequate to the tough negotiations in which the other side seems to hold all the cards. It isn’t well-suited to common dealmaking challenges such as many parties—not just two—tricky internal as well as external negotiations, and shifting agendas. It leads to suboptimal deals, creates needless impasses, and fosters conflicts that could have been avoided.
The argument put forth, then, is that a 3D negotiation looks at all levels of the negotiation: the tactics (1D), the deal design (2D -- creative ways of creating value), and the setup (3D). The setup requires the following (emphasis in the original):
This means ensuring that the right parties have been approached, in the right sequence, to deal with the right issues, that engage the right set of interests, at the right table or tables, at the right time, under the right expectations, and facing the right consequences of walking away if there is no deal. If the setup at the table isn’t promising, this calls for moves to re-set it more favorably.
So what are the right parties, sequences, issues, etc., to create a cohesive intraparty and cross-party group for a Speaker's race? Rep. Straus, the ABCs, and the Democrats showed us how to make it all happen:
Intraparty -- Why "Anybody But Craddick" Worked
Ben Barnes, in his book Barn Burning, Barn Building, wrote about the problems that led to the downfall of the Democratic Party back in the 1970's. From his book:
In the absence of a strong opposition party, the Democrats themselves split into two factions, the conservative / moderates and the progressives.
Unfortunately, while there was intraparty opposition to Craddick, there was nowhere for his Republican opponents to go. Governor Perry, Lieutenant Governor Dewhurst, the lobby, the SREC, the Texas GOP, Eagle Forum...every Republican group imaginable was in his pocket. Even the press was on his side -- falsely claiming Craddick gained "momentum" when it was clear he didn't have the votes.
The "ABCs" were a specific group that was a safe landing for those who were no longer comfortable with Craddick. Even if a Republican was not an "official member" of the ABC club, there was at least a public group of individuals who could create a holding environment for anti-Craddick sympathies. The players were all important, too:
Rep. Jim Keffer, a respected conservative Republican from rural Texas
Rep. Charlie Geren, a vocal buddy-buddy from Fort Worth
Rep. Tommy Merritt, an excentric but personable East Texas conservative
For the first time, the ABCs became an actual opposition party within their own party. In 2007, they were newly formed, and it was hard to work together. By 2008 and 2009, they had a better sense of themselves as a group and an organization. What's more, instead of waiting for last-minute tactic deals (like they did in 2007), they set the table and sequenced the Speaker's race brilliantly -- waiting until right after the holiday break to meet, choose a challenger, and giving them the weekend (when Members didn't need to be busy with their real jobs) to make phone calls.
And by waiting until January 2 to make their announcement, Craddick didn't know who to run against. Meanwhile, as he struggled to set up a counter to a new challenger, they had a positive for Rep. Straus, a negative for Craddick, and were making calls while Craddick was still trying to hold a meeting. You want to know how disorganized Craddick was? Look at the 2-second "Speaker race" of Rep. Vicki Truitt.
The Republican challengers set the table up right this time. But, they had some help.
Cross-party: Bringing the Democrats on Board
On the other side, House Democrats have been building their coalition since 2003. However, their coalition has not been built -- as Vince and others would argue -- as "anti-Craddick." Texas Democrats have grown in numbers by uniting behind issues that are important to Texas families. At the end of the day, those Democrats who had supported Craddick and those who didn't still agreed on the issues.
The question was simply -- who delivers the best opportunity for me, personally, and my district?
Well, a caucus that grows from 62 to 74 in three election cycles becomes, just as the ABC Republicans became, a legitimate opposition group. There were some in the Democratic caucus who did not feel comfortable with the Democratic Caucus leadership; thus, they voted for Craddick in 2007. But then throughout last session, and in the eighteen months since, Reps. Dunnam, Coleman, and Gallego have shown a remarkable amount of patience and passion to elect more Democrats.
And remember -- the House caucus was the first group to release a list of names. Speaker Craddick tried to argue that some of those names would support him, but what credibility did he have by the time those names were released? Republicans had left Craddick in the seven weeks between Rep. Dunnam announcing the list and then revealing the names. Why would any Democrat move towards Craddick when Republicans were only moving away?
Thus, the "holding environment" that the Caucus created was the list itself; a group that worked cohesively and trusted one another. During those seven weeks, the group spoke together, worked with each other, got to know freshmen Members, and then agreed to all come together and discuss whether they would vote for Rep. Straus (once he was announced).
The Solution - Building Cohesion Through Empowerment
The barriers Craddick erected were that he controlled all leverages of power, thus making him the gatekeeper for all information. The "insurgency" had to then crash the gates to take power from him, but they had to be smart about it. As we witnessed over the past few months, it's anything but easy.
The right people must be contacted in the right sequence, asked to do the right things, etc. But once Members began feeling their own sense of empowerment -- granted to them through the creation of their own intraparty and corss-party coalitions -- it became easier to step outside the box and consider other options. And with strong leaders among both the Republicans and Democrats opposed to Craddick, devising a strategy that played across the entire 3D negotiation spectum became a more realistic possiblity.
Now that there is a "solution" and that we will see a new Speaker take the gavel in a few hours, only one question remains: where do we go from here? Stay tuned to Part 3 (coming tomorrow or Wednesday) for my thoughts.
For the last few weeks we have been listening to wall-to-wall coverage 24/7 about the flamboyant governor of Illinois, Rod Blagojevich, and pay-to-play politics. As we all know by now the Illinois governor is charged with criminal conspiracy for attempting to sell President Elect Barack Obama's U.S. Senate seat. Rod Blagojevich is clearly another crooked and arrogant politician who thinks he is above the law. But at least this one found himself impeached by the Illinois House.
It is nice to know some states have lawmakers who have an ethical spine where such blatant corruption and beyond the pale pay-to-play politics are concerned. Too bad Texas is sorely lacking in this area. But one has to remember the Party that is running the state at this time, although not all Democratic politicians would receive A's in ethics and integrity departments either.
When the Blagojevich scandal broke, several of the cable TV talking heads and pundits appeared especially outraged by pay-to-play politics and so I promptly sent off an email to MSNBC and CNN and suggested that if they are so livid about pay-to-play, they ought to send their research staff down to Texas to see how it works in a state where purchasing elections and pay-to-play is business du jour. Apparently other folks from around the U.S. contacted the media with the same request. Chris Matthews of Hardball responded with a chart that listed the most offending states. Texas is among them.
First off for those that were not aware, Dallas Morning News political reporter Karen Brooks is moving mediums and joining KXAN's interactive division. That was the cause for tonight's "farewell" party of sorts at the Longbranch Inn and bar (which is like 3 blocks away from where I live in East Austin). I've copied part of that press release below which was sent by Charlie Ray, former owner of PinkDome.com who joined KXAN last year in their online division.
In any case, among the various print, online, and TV reporters there tonight (shout out to John Moritz, R.G. Ratcliffe, Elise Hu, Mean Rachel, among other) as well as plenty of Capital staff, was none other than expected Speaker to be Joe Straus. Which of course, I think was totally unexpected to most everyone there and represents a very interesting note in the relationship between the Capital press corps and the incoming administration. I mean, can you seriously imagine Tom Craddick showing up to something like that?
Kudos to you Joe Straus. My hat is off to you.
Brooks is a 14-year veteran reporter and blogger, serving most recently as Austin bureau reporter for the Dallas Morning News. Brooks has reported on the state's major stories, including extensive coverage of the Texas Legislature. Karen has also been a major contributor to Trailblazers (formerly Capitol Letters), one of the Dallas Morning News' most successful blogs.
In her position with KXAN Austin News, Brooks will continue covering the Texas Legislature with feature blogs and columns on KXAN.com. She will also manage the distribution of local content on KXAN's digital platforms, including web publishing, mobile alerts and email alerts.
"While media is changing, journalism still has the same purpose. Searching for the truth and reporting the story," says Brooks. Adding, "Digital media gives us the opportunity to tell the story in a much deeper, more dynamic and more exciting way than we've ever been able to do before."
Paul Burka kicked up a fuss on his blog when he incautiously and not-quite-correctly re-cycled from memory some old thoughts from Democrats about how Tom Craddick did us a favor by remaining in office. I think the necessary corrections have been made there. But it does beg some questions that deserve longer answers.
Should Democrats have helped unseat such an unpopular speaker as Craddick in favor of a youngish, polished, urban moderate like Straus? That's two questions really. The first's about Craddick; the second about Straus.
My answer to the first: Political opponents are not deer. They don't get fatter and grow bigger antlers next season. You have to defeat them when you can, because you don't know what tomorrow holds. It's too cute by double to believe you can out-think all of tomorrow's political uncertainties. Anyone remember progressives voting for John Tower in the 1961 special election for the U.S. Senate, under the assumption he'd be easy to beat in a general? Good guess, that.
My answer to the second -- what about Straus -- has to do with why I'm a Democrat in the first place. Maybe Burka's right and he turns around the Republican Party. I doubt it, because that party is simply on the wrong side of history.
But I'm a Democrat because I care about children's health, about public and higher education, about jobs, about the availability of health care, about the quality of Texas air, water and soil, about safe communities, about fair and open elections in which scandalous, artificial barriers to voting are removed.
I don't know where the new prospective Speaker is on these issues. But I believe he will certainly be better than Craddick. Democrats are one vote shy of demanding a Democratic speaker. Republicans chose Straus. I'm for change.
Burka was wrong when he implied some Democrats would game the system for future political advantage. That would be bad politics. And I don't know how it could be explained to today's eight-year-old Texan who can't get to a doctor, is stuck in a going-nowhere education system, whose father lost his job and whose mother is still treated as a second-class citizen.
Who among us could look that eight-year-old in the eye and say, "Just wait 'till your 12. We promise."
For the past few days I have been reading about Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick's fall in the Houston Chronicle and here at BOR. The Burnt Orange Report, by the way, has provided excellent moment-by-moment coverage of this fascinating drama. Huge kudos to the outstanding diarists here. The Craddick/Straus issue including BOR's coverage was front page news on Daily Kos on Monday.
Yesterday morning the Houston Chronicle's Lisa Falkenberg wrote an excellent and very revealing commentary on how Houston would benefit from a House Speaker who is from a large urban area.
After reading the article this life-long urban dweller and native of NYC who has lived in Houston for over 20 years, finally understands why I have been so frustrated by how our Austin lawmakers operate. Falkenberg's article nailed it for me. Texas has been run by a bunch of country boys who are more concerned about boll weevil eradication and transporting hogs to markets than they are a big city's crammed prisons, crumbling inner city schools, over-extended hospitals, torn up roads and gridlocked freeways.
A sign of things to come perhaps? Laylan Copelin details Straus' Speaker transition team (emphasis added):
Former San Antonio Sen. Cyndi Krier and former Rep. Clyde Alexander will head the transition team for Speaker-designate Joe Straus.
Krier, a Republican, is a former state senator from San Antonio and Bexar County judge.
Alexander was a Democratic lawmaker from Athens.
The role of Speaker comes equipped with a much larger office and an apartment. Problem is, Tom Craddick has a bunch of his stuff in Joe Straus' future office and residents.
As Elise Hu points out, capitol staffers have been wondering will Craddick will move to. Capitol offices are based on seniority, and Tom Craddick is the most senior member of the House.
Craddick is going into his 20th consecutive term and if he finishes this session he will serve 40 years in the House. Straus on the other hand is going into his second full term.
Straus currently offices in the extension in E2.314, but as that change the question is, "where does Tom Craddick go?"
While it would be funny to see Craddick in the extension with all the freshmen, sophomore and junior Democrats he helped elect with his reign, I doubt it will happen.
From Reps. Dan Gattis, R-Georgetown, and John Smithee, R-Amarillo:
It has become apparent in the last 12 hours that Rep. Straus carries enough votes to become the speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, and that any effort to challenge him is not in the best interest of the Texas House. As a result we are both withdrawing our candidacies for speaker. Our priority is to take the focus off speaker politics and concentrate on how we can best serve the people of Texas in the 81st Legislature.
and Straus as gracious as ever (also from the Austin Chronicle):
"John Smithee is my friend and a highly respected leader in the House. I appreciated his courteous phone call moments ago and notification of his withdrawal. John's difficult decision and gracious gesture is another step towards unity in the House."
Update: Elise Hu did a great job covering this story beginning to end. The KVUE reporter has John Smithee on camera talking about his decision to withdraw his candidacy from the shrinking pool of Speaker candidates.
