Ethics Commission Rejects Terry Keel's Complaint About Anonymous Blog

by: David Mauro

Fri Dec 26, 2008 at 06:16 PM CST

Remember when the Austin Political Report alleged that Terry Keel was helping the campaign of District Attorney candidate Mindy Montford?

It caused a big stir last spring when the author of the anonymous APR revealed himself to be Kelly Fero, a long time Democratic consultant who was advising Rosemary Lehmberg's campaign.

Terry Keel then filed a complaint with the Texas Ethics Commission. Keel argued that Fero's post had violated the state's truth in political advertising laws.

Earlier this week, the Ethics Commission ruled that it did not violate state law. The ruling establishes a precedent for the protection of anonymous bloggers and the rights of bloggers who are affiliated with political campaigns yet maintain their own personal blogs.

From the Austin American-Statesman:

Keel, who tracked down the creation of the Web site, argued that Fero violated the state's truth-in-political-advertising laws by hiding his identity. The Ethics Commission, however, dismissed the complaint, saying there was no violation because the anonymous posting made no representation of its true source.

The commission acted at its Dec. 4 closed-door meeting, but letters announcing the decision to both sides were not released until Tuesday.

Jason Nassour, Keel's lawyer, criticized the ruling in a written statement.

"The conduct was unethical," Nassour wrote, "and the Ethics Commission's failure to enforce statutes forbidding this conduct will undoubtedly lead to an increase of these sorts of unethical campaign practices."

In the spirit of the holiday season, Fero told Laylan Copelin of the Statesman, ""Mr. Keel's had a bad year, but I hope he has a good holiday."

This ruling gives bloggers something else to celebrate this holiday season, too.

Kelly Fero Talks to Nate Wilcox, Author of "Netroots Rising"

by: David Mauro

Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 01:29 PM CDT

Netroots Rising author Nate Wilcox has an interesting interview with Democratic consultant Kelly Fero that I recommend reading.

Most of the interview focuses on 2002, when Fero, a long-time ally of John Sharp, witnessed the beginnings of what would become the "Dream Team."

The way Fero tells the story makes it seem like the "Dream Team" wasn't so much about electing a full slate of Democrats as it was about electing one man in particular.

[Garry] Mauro lost by 19 points at the top of the ticket and the next race down was essentially a tie, showing that Perry wouldn’t have won without Bush’s big coattails. The thinking was in ‘02 who could we get at the top of the ticket who could fix that problem because Sharp wanted to run for Lt. Governor again. So after looking at demographics we thought how bout a well-funded Hispanic.

So we thought of Henry Cisneros. I’ll never forget that meeting. After the long pitch, Cisneros looked at Sharp and said, “Sharp, could I win?” and Sharp goes, “No, but I could” only partly tongue in cheek.

Fero is also pretty hard on Tony Sanchez's campaign, who spent $87 million and didn't have much to show for it.

... I got a call from Hidalgo County in the final days before the election saying that the field program that we were hearing about for months amounted to kids standing in medians holding up Sanchez signs. Another person working for the Sanchez campaign told me that the day after the election he tried to return $80,000 in cash to the campaign and they wouldn’t take it. So he bought a new car.

In the end the NASA like command and control center turned out to be a typical street money in south Texas operation. We could’ve run a campaign like that for slightly less than $87 million.

Read the entire interview and consider purchasing Netroots Rising.

A Very Interesting CD-23

by: Matt Glazer

Thu Aug 31, 2006 at 05:06 PM CDT

In another twist, The AFL-CIO has already picked their guy.

The Texas AFL-CIO Committee on Political Education (COPE) endorsed San Antonian Albert Uresti in the special election in the newly drawn Congressional District 23, Texas AFL-CIO President Emmett Sheppard said today.

The AFL-CIO mentioned the reasons for their endorsement to include:

Uresti, a retired district fire chief in the San Antonio Fire Department and a long-time member of the San Antonio Fire Fighters Union, is challenging U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-San Antonio, in a district that newly includes a large portion of South San Antonio. Past election results suggest the district is closely divided on a partisan basis. Uresti is the brother of state Rep. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio, who is the odds-on favorite to be the next District 19 state senator.

“Union members in C.D. 23 are impressed with Albert Uresti’s understanding of the issues that concern working people,” Sheppard said. “They also are persuaded he will run a proactive campaign in a district that is somewhat similar to the one in which his brother is campaigning so effectively.”

“In an era of gerrymandering, this is clearly a winnable election for a strong challenger against an incumbent who has voted an agenda that is counter to the interest of working families.”

Is this the gold star Uresti needed to catapult himself to become the candidate in CD-23?

Is the Party Irrelevant?

by: Karl-Thomas Musselman

Thu Jun 01, 2006 at 01:04 PM CDT

Chronicle: "I consider the state party to be at its best when it's almost wholly irrelevant, which it currently is."

-Kelly Fero

Yup, roll up the carpet, close the shutters, the Democrats of Texas are apparently best served by not actually having a party at all- a ringing endorsement for the leadership of Malcolm, Soechting, and Richie.

Of course, I'm of the opinion that we should bother to actually have a Democratic Party in this state. One that might actually be able to help statewide candidates from having to waste their time building infrastructure that should be the job of the Party. Call me crazy.

From the article, which is mostly a piece on Maxey for the better and worse, a response.

"We need a party that allows statewide candidates to run for office without having to build an infrastructure for their campaigns," Maxey said. "Right now, Chris Bell and Barbara Radnofsky have to go county to county to create an infrastructure. My goal is to rebuild the nuts and bolts of the organization."

Regardless of who people support for Chairman, I would hope at the very least that there is agreement that having an irrelevant state party is probably not the best idea.

Update: Eye on Williamson adds their thoughts.

Let me see if I have this straight. The Republicans who have had more success than the Democrats in Texas over the last 20 or so years have built a party infrastructure and have have taken over the state. The Democrats whose party has fallen into disarray has strengthened the tradition of the Democratic party’s irrelevance in putting Democrats in office, no longer holding any statewide office. That looks to me like the Party with the “more relevant” party is running everything. I don’t see how what Mr. Fero said proves his point of the Democratic Party’s irrelevance being a good thing. It probably proves why he’s no longer working for the party though.