Armando Walle had a well-attended kick off for his primary campaign against Kevin Bailey (Craddick D- Houston).
Armando Walle had a great turnout the other night at his campaign kickoff for Texas House District 140. Linda at My Dee Dee's Pie Shoppe & Café is a great Democrat and her place is beautiful. Enjoying the fare were more than 100 family members, friends and supporters of Armando's bid for State Representative. Armando's wife, Debbie Dimas Walle, stood with him as he was warmly introduced by State Representative Ana E. Hernandez. Ana and Armando have been friends since their days as student leaders at the University of Houston.
This is an interesting primary to watch. Bailey represents a strong democratic district that is overwhelmingly Hispanic and African American. The last census data showed the district with just over 135,000 people and of that 109,159 are minorities.
The voter turnout is low in the district with a tad under 8,000 people voting in 2006. This is a district were community involvement and endorsements go along way. Without seeing any Bailey endorsements yet, Walle (the challenger), seems to be a front runner in both counts.
As an active community leader and six-year staff member to Congressman Gene Green, Armando is honored to have his former boss' support along with the support of District 140 precinct chairs, educators and business leaders. Among those in attendance Wednesday night were District H Council Member Adrian Garcia, longtime residents Sandra and Alfred Ortega, Frumencio Reyes of the Harris County Tejano Democrats, Martha Griffin, attorneys Lupe Navarro and Alfonso Kennard and even some fellow parishioners from St. Charles on Tidwell. Armando's roots in the district run deep as was evident on Wednesday night.
Walle's campaign seems to be focused on Bailey's early and strong support for Craddick seems to be the cornerstone of his campaign.
Representative Hernandez told the crowd that Democrats in the Texas House need Armando's leadership on crucial issues facing our state. Armando's remarks focused on fully restoring funding for children's health insurance, providing access to higher education and dealing with criminal justice issues. Armando did mention that the current Representative wasn't always voting in the interests of his constituents. Time and time again, Armando said, the incumbent sided with the Republican leadership against his constituents or failed to cast votes on matters important to the families in District 140. Armando pledged to work hard, to always put the needs of District 140 above politics and to stay true to the values of the district.
Of course, we support Democratic candidates, but Bailey's support for Craddick and the Republican leadership is a problem. As with any other Craddick D, announcing support to vote against Craddick and Turner (Craddick's Speaker Pro Tem) needs to be done now and with out hesitation. If not, we support any candidate willing to better represent their district and work to end the pay to play model instituted by Craddick and his top lieutenants in the House.
Whether one supports or opposes the actions of the Craddick D's last session, they chose to establish themselves as a separate group in the Texas Legislature. Calling themselves "Democrats for Reform," they laid out an agenda at the start of session. At the end of session, they claimed their agenda was a success, and that the key successes for Democrats this session were the result of the deals they had struck with Speaker Craddick. They also touted the personal victories they won for their district by supporting Craddick, and many were proud to call themselves "Craddick D's."
It should be noted, though, that only a handful of those who attended the first press conference (announcing the Democrats for Reform, at the start of session) attended the second (after the challenge to Craddick at the end of May). More over, the voracity to which "their agenda" can be called a success was called into question.
With the announcement that Chairman Robert Puente will retire, I thought it would be appropriate to see exactly how those "Democrats for Reform" are doing today. This is merely meant as an update -- trying to keep track of our Democrats in the Texas House. I select them out as a group not out of hostility, but because they chose to set themselves apart from the House Democratic Caucus.
Update: To clarify, I designated whether or not any of the following State Representatives would "still vote for Craddick" based on their last known public position -- which I sourced as best as possible in the middle column. Any additional news that any of the Members or anyone else wish to share, please send me an e-mail or post a comment, and I will update the chart appropriately.
The Craddick D's: Where We Are Today - October 22, 2007
Voted "present, not voting" during Rep. Haggerty's roll call speech; Rep. Chavez was quoted in the Houston Chronicle saying she would support new leadership in 2009.
No
Deshotel, Joe
Voted "against" Craddick during Rep. Haggerty's roll call speech.
No
Dukes, Dawnna
Though there were rumors that some in Austin were looking for a primary challenger, none have surfaced. The last known public statement was that Rep. Dukes stands by Craddick - though I'm not certain she'd vote for Craddick again.
Was one of the handful of Democrats proudly trumpeting the "Democrats for Reform" agenda at the end of session. No other public indication of her stance, and no primary news to date.
Yes
Guillen, Ryan
No challenger, no news. Though if the budget committee is still this hard, would he want it?
On the motion to vacate at end of session, was said to be "flip-flopping." No news, though with Rep. Puente's retirement, she is the only Craddick-supporter in San Antonio.
Of the 15, there are definitely 5 fewer supporters for Craddick, two "maybes" (three, if you include Rep. Turner), three Craddick D's facing primary challenges, and maybe a few more who would no longer call themselves Craddick D's.
Some stories just slip through the cracks when there is an interesting U.S. Senate primary going on. Not sure if you noticed, but the primary map is getting interesting around the state.
Clay Robinson wrote a week ago that some “Craddick D’s” are more likely than others to garner primary opponents than others. His list included:
Among the so-called "Craddick Democrats" — Democratic House members viewed as loyal to Craddick, including a number of committee chairmen — those most likely to draw opponents in their party's primary include Kevin Bailey of Houston, Robert Puente of San Antonio, Aaron Peña of Edinburg and Kino Flores of Mission.
Two of those men have either a declared opponent or one looking at the possibilities--Aramando Walle and Roland Gutierrez has started making the moves to challenge Kevin Bailey and Robert Puente respectively.
Armando Walle, an aide to U.S. Rep. Gene Green of Houston, is preparing to challenge Bailey, and San Antonio Councilman Roland Gutierrez is considering a race against Puente.
Another race of interest is Rick Noriega’s seat. Since Noriega cannot run for both a state and federal office his House Seat will be opening up. House District 145 has a few candidates interested.
Elias De La Garza, owner of a busy Gulf Freeway fronted insurance office, is being wooed for the House District 145 race as an alternative to Houston Councilwoman Carol Alvarado and other potential contenders the local Democratic establishment might rally behind as a replacement for Noriega if Noriega gives up the seat.
There's also speculation Roy Morales, a retired Air Force Lt. Col. who ran twice for city council in the last two years, might run for the HD 145 race as a Republican in 2008.
All of these seats are known for being strong Democratic areas. While the newly created TexBlog PAC isn’t going to be involved in influencing the outcomes of these races, we will do our best to continue to cover them. If you have tips, news, or comments please feel free to write a journal or e-mail me at matt@burntorangereport.com.
Remember the Craddick 15. The 15 Democrats who helped Tom Craddick retain his seat as Speaker of the House. As a result, here are the assignments Papa Bear Craddick gave to his children:
Sylvester Turner: Speaker Pro Tempore; CBO of Regulated Industries; Calendars; Appropriations
Kevin Bailey: CHAIR of Urban Affairs; Business & Industry; General Investigating & Ethics
Norma Chavez: VICE CHAIR of Calendars; Appropriations; CBO of Financial Institutions
Joe Deshotel: CHAIR of Economic Development; Redistricting; Transportation
Dawnna Dukes: CBO of Culture, Rec & Tourism; Appropriations; Calendars
Kino Flores: CHAIR of Licensing & Administrative Procedures; Redistricting; Ways & Means
Helen Giddings: CHAIR of Business & Industry; VICE CHAIR of House Administration; Higher Education
Ryan Guillen: VICE CHAIR of Appropriations; Calendars; Natural Resources
Harold Dutton: CHAIR of Juvenile Justice & Family Issues; General Investigating & Ethics; Public Education
Tracy King: CHAIR of Border & International Affairs; Environmental Regulation
Eddie Lucio: CBO of Environmental Regulation; Appropriations; Local & Consent Calendars
Ruth Jones McClendon: CHAIR of Rules & Regulations; CBO of Pensions & Investments; Appropriations
Aaron Pena: CHAIR of Criminal Jurisprudence; Ways & Means
Robert Puente: CHAIR of Natural Resources; Local Government Ways & Means
Patrick Rose: CHAIR of Human Services; Higher Education
I want every Democratic activist to remember this list during the entire 80th Legislative Session - the 15 Democrats who enabled Tom Craddick to retain his undeserved Speakership:
Kevin Bailey
Norma Chavez
Joe Deshotel
Dawnna Dukes
Kino Flores
Helen Giddings
Ryan Guillen
Harold Dutton
Tracy King
Eddie Lucio III
Ruth Jones McClendon
Aaron Pena
Robert Puente
Patrick Rose
Sylvester Turner
Before I get into the heart of my argument, I want to give credit where credit is due. Democratic Leaders in the House, like Representatives Thompson and Dunnam and Gallego and Coleman, did yeoman work in holding 54 of 69 Democratic votes. Two sessions ago, Democrats couldn't get 50 votes for anything (just ask the trials). Two months ago, no one would have believed that Tom Craddick would have to endure am unprecedented 6-hour spectacle on the first day of session to retain his gavel. Now we're within striking distance of taking down the Speaker.
We witnessed real acts of courage from good democrats; Ritter and Eiland risking their chairmanships to do what was right, Hopson taking a principled stand at a critical moment, Martinez returning to the Democratic fold, and Raymond challenging the Speaker directly.
Despite the great work of these great Democrats, it is impossible to ignore the fact that the 15 Craddick Democrats provided Craddick with the margin he needed to get re-elected Speaker. These 15 Craddick enablers put their own best political interest ahead of their party and their constituents. Had just 7 of these 15 Democrats voted their conscience, voted their convictions, or voted their constituents - instead of merely voting their own selfish best interest - we would have kicked Craddick's ass off his $1000 throne.
We should thank each and every one of the 54 Democrats who had the courage to try and make Texas a better place. But let us never forget the Craddick 15.
Races for Speaker of the Texas House ostensibly are a "members only" affair. Ask a legislator what's happening and you'll get stiff-armed immediately. You'll get a polite brush off that "It's an internal deal."
However, it's the most important vote that a member ever casts and sets in motion how everything else is going to play out throughout the session and beyond.
And while a Member might claim this is a discussion among 150 legislators, the weapon that's used by the candidates or their team members has everything to do with insinuations about what lobbyists and special interests will be there for them in the next election and whether you'll get a primary opponent in the next cycle. We're already hearing the Craddick folks and the media talking about which Republican members will draw Leninger/Perry/Lobby fueled opponents if they vote for McCall but Craddick actually pulls it out.
But for the readers of this blog, the real red meat of the Speaker's race politics is what happens to the Democrats who don't stick with the Democratic Caucus on this one.
Thankfully, the Craddick Demo number is fast dwindling, but there seems to be some who'll stick with Craddick to the end.
Most are minority members who are in safe November General election districts. If they are going to be beat, it would have to be in a primary. The few Anglo Craddick supporters are in Republican leaning districts who think they're popular enough to win a primary challenge and will, by default, get solid Democratic support in the fall against a Republican. (Chuck Hopson and Patrick Rose). The other two Anglo Demos on the list are in "minority majority" or high minority impact districts and are even on more precarious ground (Tracy King and Kevin Bailey).
Perhaps the one with the most to lose career-wise is Patrick Rose. Although he's in a Republican leaning district and has to be moderate in his votes in the District, you can smell his ambition for statewide office in the future. To abandon the Democrats on this vote will probably be a fatal blow to his making it through a Democratic Primary for statewide office in the future. Primaries are notoriously progressive and this kind of back stab of the Party will be remembered.
One source tells BOR that Democratic leaders and activists have already began the discussions for opponents to Robert Puente and Ruth Jones McClendon in San Antonio, Sylvester Turner and Kevin Bailey in Houston, and Norma Chavez in El Paso.
Travis County politicos are burning up the holiday Party political gossip mill. They're all talking about perhaps the most endangered of the Craddick D's: Dawnna Dukes of HD 46 in Austin. What she gets for toading for Craddick hasn't been figured out. It's got most Travis County Democrats scratching their heads. Besides, Dukes has gained a reputation in recent years of being AWOL from representing her district. Representing a Travis County district is almost a full time job, and Dukes is rarely seen or heard from in political circles. Activists expect the Dems in Travis County's delegation to be not only at the Capitol, but at every neighborhood cookout and PTA meeting, and especially at Democratic events. Dukes hasn't been seen in a while. (And don't even bring up the anger from her French vacation that left the Democrats one vote short on a critical public education vote during the special session!)
HD 46 is what has been thought of as the traditional "African American" district in Austin. However this isn't like the other minority districts in Texas. African Americans aren't even a majority in the district. In fact the district is only voting age population of 26.1% African American, 32.6 % Anglo, and 37.9% Hispanic. The winner in a primary race here depends on progressive/liberal voters more so than the usual ethnic alliances.
Moreover, Dukes hasn't had a serious challenger in several cycles. Her worst enemy in pure political terms is the swing in voter turnout in the district. In 2006, the primary vote was only 2311 in the rep race. In 2004, turnout was 9662. The difference? A presidential primary. (District 46 contains a whole lot of young folks, UT students, and typical Austin slackers who turn out only for the presidential type races.) And you can bet that in 2008 with a heated prez race, the turnout in the campus and liberal precincts will soar. And that's the problem for Dukes. None of those "new" voters will have heard of her, and what they'll hear from a challenger will be that she's a Republican sell-out. These energized voters will vote against anything or anyone remotely "establishment" at the Lege.
And lastly, Dukes has no organization in Austin. Like most incumbents in safe liberal districts, she's not built any campaign apparatus. She has relied on the liberal political consultants that can influence the outcome of these races before filing day ink is dry. Rumors on the street are that those movers and shakers are doing the most talking about finding the opponent for her if she flubs this one. And even if they don't get out front for an opponent, none will want to take on the job of trying to sell that product. Dukes will be on her own.
And on top of it all for Dukes, a PAC has already been filed called "Too Close To Craddick PAC" whose purpose is to support challengers to Democrats who side with the Speaker. It's Austin based, and you can bet those behind it are looking locally before going statewide.
So watch the fallout. For the first time in history, the votes in a Speaker's race may be cast by members only, but those Democrats who piss on their constituents might have a rude and rank awakening in 2008.
