BOR: - TLR

TLR Trying to Buy Democratic Senate Seat With Carol Alvarado

Katherine Haenschen — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:15:18 GMT

The ethics commission financial reports for the SD-6 runoff were released earlier this week, making clear where Carol Alvarado's financial support has come from in the last month of this expensive race to replace Sen. Mario Gallegos.

Carol Alvarado raised almost half of her run-off money from Texans from Lawsuit Reform, Stand for Children PAC, a teacher's union-busting organization, payday lenders, and several Republican PACs and mega-donors.

Her campaign is being heavily funded by organizations and individuals that work every day to block our core Democratic values.

Sylvia Garcia, on the other hand, is primarily funded by trial lawyers and labor organizations, the tradional donors to our Democratic candidates and causes.

Before we get into the details of who's giving to who, here's a quick run-down of the notable donors and links to each candidate's runoff report.

February 22 Runoff Reports for SD-6 Special Election Covering January 17-February 20
Carol Alvarado Runoff Report Raise: $581,969 Spend: $463,496 COH: $99,432 Report available here. Alvarado's Major Donors: $184,000 from TLR PAC $54,317 from Stand for Children PAC (in-kind) $20,000 from Barbara and John Nau $14,000 from payday lenders $10,000 from HillCo PAC $10,000 from Ryan Texas PAC	Sylvia Garcia Runoff Report Raise: $662,686 Spend: $641,435 COH: $119,227 Report available here. Garcia's Major Donors: $356,750 from the Mostyn Firm $117,000 from Texas Organizing Project (in-kind) $8500 from AFSCME's federal PAC $5000 from the Teamsters $5000 from the Plumber's union $2500 each from ILA Local 24 & 28 $2000 from SEIU's federal PAC

Below the jump, find out more about Alvarado's donors and their long history of working against Democratic ideals and -- and usually candidates, too.
Who Are Garcia's Donors?

Reading Sylvia Garcia's report, it's clear that the bulk of her support comes from the trial lawyers and labor groups, the traditional source of funding for Democratic candidates here in Texas. She also has some solid support from engineering firms. Texas Organizing Project also in-kinded an extensive field organizing campaign to boost their endorsed candidate. There isn't much that's too surprising here, and nothing that gives me serious qualms about who wants her to get elected.

Who Are Alvarado's Donors?

Not familiar with all of the players on her list? HillCo PAC has a primarily Republican donor history, is primarily funded by Republican mega-donor Bob Perry, to the tune of $2 million. Ryan Texas PAC supports primarily Republican candidates. Perry appointee John Nau is a major donor to Rick Perry, Greg Abbott, and David Dewhurst, as well as to the Beer Alliance of Texas PAC in efforts to maintain his corporate interests as one of the Big Beer distributors.

Alvarado also seems to have won the support of the vast majority of corporate donors here in Texas. She's receiving substantial money from the oil industry, namely BP Corporation, ConocoPhillips, Marathon Oil Company, Valero. She received $7,500 from Cash America International, $1500 from EZCORP, and another $5000 from Texas Consumer Lenders PAC. She's even taking money from "Big Beer" -- i.e. the wholesale distributors that have worked hard to block deregulation of Texas beer laws to enable craft and microbreweries to flourish and expand their market.

Earlier today, Texans for Public Justice reported that Alvarado's #2 cumulative contributor is Stand for Children PAC, which gave over $54,000 to Alvarado. The organization's founder boasted about spending millions to destroy teachers' collective bargaining rights in the Illinois legislature.

Then, of course, there's TLR.

Texans for Lawsuit Reform, or TLR, is dedicated to "tort reform," which has delivered none of its promised cost savings, and so far only managed to deny individuals the opportunity to seek redress in our civil court system.

TLR wakes up in the morning dedicated to serving the interests of corporations over the individuals who might have cause to pursue legal action against them. They're also dedicated to shutting down the trial lawyers themselves -- traditionally the most significant donors to Democratic candidates and causes in Texas -- preventing from making any money off jury verdicts. The direct result of their efforts is that Democrats have a harder time getting elected.

Whether barriers to justice or destruction of the Democratic party rankles you more, we can agree that TLR doesn't have Texans or Democrats' best interests at heart.

Look at TLR's 2012 General Election endorsements. This is the very group that specifically endorsed the likes of Donna Campbell for State Senate and Debbie Riddle for State Representative. They endorsed Mark Shelton over Wendy Davis. They endorsed Robert Thomas over Donna Howard. Dee Margo over Joe Moody. They didn't endorse in every race, but when they did they overwhelming endorsed Republicans over Democrats in crucial races.

Earlier this week we reported that State Senator Larry Taylor, a Republican Senator, was blockwalking for Carol Alvarado. It appears that we have the answer: Taylor, a TLR stooge, apparently wants Alvarado in the Senate as bad as their shared financial backers do.

For TLR and the special interests listed here, it's all about their bottom line, and they think their interests will be better served with Carol Alvarado in the State Senate.

This is a staunchly Democratic district. Strong districts like this are where we as partisan Democrats can elect those who will be most true to our principles and stand up for what we believe in. The finance reports make clear that Alvarado has taken substantial cash from individuals and organizations that usually devote their efforts to defeating Democrats or fighting our core progressive values. That gives me serious pause about her ability to advance our Democratic goals.

Not all of Alvarado's donors and supporters oppose our Democratic causes. I like and respect many of the Democrats lined up behind Alvarado. But I have serious qualms about the willingness of anti-Democratic causes to line up behind her and marshal such substantial resources -- resources that are usually directed at defeating Democrats.

Some people seem to think that compromise is the best we can do as Democrats. I disagree.

On the backs of which Texans do we make these compromises? Our core values and constituencies are not to be sold to the highest bidder. Especially now, with renewed interest and support for turning Texas blue, we have an obligation to build the strongest, most progressive caucus we can, and grow it every step of the way, so that when we are in the majority, we have leaders ready to fight for our core values and never back down.

This is a strong Democratic district, and it's our duty to fight like hell to elect the best Democrat that we can, one who will stand up for her constituents and against the special interests who care only about profit and not our shared public good. It's clear that the worst special interests have chosen their side.

Let's hope Democratic voters know who's more likely to be on theirs.

Did Dee Margo Pay Off Naomi Gonzalez and Marisa Marquez to Support Him Over Joe Moody?

Katherine Haenschen — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:30:00 GMT

Something's rotten in the legislative districts of El Paso.

Back in the fall, in the battle for HD-78, Democratic state representatives Naomi Gonzalez (HD-76) and Marisa Marquez (HD-77) endorsed Republican incumbent Dee Margo over Democratic challenger and previous officeholder Joe Moody.

That wasn't smart politics and it wasn't responsive to the needs of their constituents -- any Democrat is going to be more responsive to the needs of El Paso residents than a Republican, and Joe Moody is an exemplary public servant dedicated to making life better for all Texans.

As part of the endorsement, Gonzalez and Marquez appeared in at least three direct mailers supporting Margo. One is seen at right (click to open in new window). Turns out their opinion evidently didn't sway a lot of voters, as Moody was returned to office with 53.82% of the vote, ousting Margo.

Now, thanks to their January 15th semiannual reports, it is clear that Gonzalez and Marquez each took a $2500 donation from Margo's personal account, just days before the mailer went to print.

They also received another $2500 each from Margo's personal account after he lost. That's a total of $10,000 from Margo's personal bank account to the two Democrats.

Did Dee Margo give Naomi Gonzalez and Marisa Marquez $5,000 each to endorse him? Or are they actually just bought and paid for by Republican mega-donors?

See the details below the jump and decide for yourself.
Now, I'm not directly claiming that Dee Margo paid off Naomi Gonzalez and Marisa Marquez to endorse him and appear on three of his mailers. (The history of the two "Democrats" is shady enough that they may have gone along with an effort to hurt their own party and constituents.) I just want to put the evidence out there and let people decide for themselves.

First, let's consider the timeline for the mailers.

9.24.12 -- The first piece of mail in which Gonzalez and Marquez endorse Margo hits mailboxes.
9.20.12 -- Mail piece with Gonzalez and Marquez is printed and mailed*
9.20.12 -- Margo donates $2500 to Naomi Gonzalez from personal account
9.19.12 -- Margo donates $2500 to Marisa Marquez from personal account

* My estimate is based on backing out two days from the first mailer's "hit" date for our fine friends at the postal service and two days to print and ship.

Now, let's consider the TEC reporting timeline.

TEC Reports

Margo had a contested race, so he had to file semiannual TEC reports on July 15 and January 15, as well as a 30-Day report on October 9 and a 8-Day report on October 29. The "Amigos for Dee Margo" also filed a series of special telegram reports.

Neither Gonzalez nor Marquez had any opponent in 2012, so they only had to file semi-annual reports. Their most recent fundraising report came out on January 15, which detailed contributions and expenditures from July 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012.

Both Gonzalez and Marquez received $5,000 from Margo's personal bank account, not his campaign (or "Amigos of Dee Margo"), since contributions to either Democrat do not appear on their reports, and the contributions are listed as coming from Dee himself, not a campaign account.

While Dee Margo had to report all transfers of money in and out of his campaign account, he was under no such rules pertaining to his personal bank account. Since neither Gonzalez nor Marquez had November 2012 opponents, they would not be required to report any donations between July 1 and December 31 until January 15, 2013 -- over two months after the election was over. Dee Margo's donations were a secret until this month's TEC filing.

And why did Margo give them money in the first place?! Neither of them had a general election opponent. They were unopposed on the ballot, guaranteed to win. Why would a Republican bother giving two Democrats such hefty donations?

Why would Gonzalez and Marquez do such a thing?

I can understand folks wanting to make an argument that with a Republican majority, El Paso might be better off with one Republican speaking up for the county and city's needs in this legislative session. But given the spectacularly lackluster legislative efforts of Dee Margo, that argument doesn't hold water. He was barely capable of the legislative equivalent of renaming post offices, and campaigned on supporting the sonogram law and allegedly increasing funding to education after the legislature cut $5 billion from Texas public schools.

Meanwhile, in the 2009 session, Joe Moody passed actual legislation to prevent gang violence, provide property tax relief to disabled veterans, and fund domestic violence centers across Texas. He was honored as "Freshman of the Year" by two non-partisan groups, including the Texas District and County Attorneys Association. This line of errant reasoning simply doesn't make sense.

Follow the money from Republican donors to Gonzalez and Marquez.

Gonzalez is basically in the house because Texans for Lawsuit Reform wanted to unseat former Representative Norma Chavez, and funded Gonzalez's campaign. To date, Gonzalez has taken $336,065 in her career from TLR. TLR is no friend to Democrats. Marquez, meanwhile, has taken almost $80,000 in her career from TLR. The group is her most significant donor.

The rest of Gonzalez's and Marquez's money comes heavily from Republican mega-donors who were also significant supporters of Dee Margo and Amigos of Dee Margo, not to mention our current statewide Republican officeholders.

"Dee" Margo (all-time)
TLR PAC: $209K (1st)
Woody Hunt: $200K (2nd)
Paul Foster: $168K (3rd)
Frederick Francis: $12,500 (28th)

Amigos of Dee Margo (all-time)
Paul Foster: $27,047 (2nd)
Woody Hunt: $25,000 (3rd)
TLR PAC: $15,000 (6th)
Frederick Francis: $5,000 (7th)

Marisa Marquez (all-time)
TLR PAC: $79,644 (1st)
Woody Hunt: $13,500 (3rd)
Paul Foster: $11,500 (4th)
Frederick Frances: $6,000 (8th)

Naomi Gonzalez (all-time)
TLR PAC: $336,065 (1st)
Woody Hunt: $6,500 (4th)
Frederick Francis: $4,500 (5th)

Who are these donors? What's the big deal? Well, basically Gonzalez and Marquez get their money almost entirely from Republican mega-donors, the same folks funneling money into Dee Margo and "Amigos of Dee Margo," and statewide Republican candidates.

Woody Hunt has given over $190K to Texans for Rick Perry, $150K to Associated Republicans of Texas, $100K to David Dewhurst, and substantial sums to Friends of Susan Combs and other statewide Republican efforts. L. Frederick "Rick" Frances is a Perry appointee to the Texas Tech Board of Regents who has given heavily to Texans for Rick Perry ($50K), David Dewhurst ($22K), and Texans for Joe Straus ($15K). Paul Foster is also a Perry appointee -- to the UT System Board of Regents -- and El Paso's only billionaire. He has given over $400K to Texans for Rick Perry, $168K to Dee Margo, $126K to David Dewhurst, $117K to Texans for Greg Abbott, and $77K to Friends of Susan Combs. The Texas Tribune reports that Hunt and Foster were instrumental in rallying business community support for Dee Margo in his 2010 Republican primary against Jay Kleberg.

Watch Gonzalez and Marquez this legislative session and see where their loyalty really resides.

These two Democrats endorsed a Republican and take primarily Republican money. Thankfully Margo lost, so clearly the endorsements of Gonzalez and Marquez weren't game changers. And El Paso residents are lucky to have Representatives Joe Moody and Mary Gonzalez working hard for their needs every day.

Now, it all comes down to how they vote this session in the legislature. If Naomi Gonzalez and Marisa Marquez hold the Democratic line, especially on issues such as the budget, education, women's health, and healthcare, then maybe this can just be chalked up to one bad episode of really poor decision making. They would be wise to redeem themselves and work hard next cycle.

If, on the other hand, Gonzalez and Marquez repeatedly vote against Democratic priorities or undermine or weaken our efforts as a minority, then it's time to look for new candidates who will give the people of these districts what they want and deserve -- actual Democratic representation, in the Legislature and in the campaign seasons that precede them.

We Broke Texas! Let's Party!

Katherine Haenschen — Mon, 21 Feb 2011 20:36:20 GMT

It's plain to see that our state is broke, literally and figuratively. The Republicans broke it, what with their relentless obsession to cut spending, slash revenue, and shove right-wing ideology into any corner of government left standing.

Time to party!

That's right. Next month, the Republicans are holding a real humdinger of an event where you can dump money into the Texas Republican Party's coffers and get in good with the powers that be. Though it's illegal for individual officeholders to raise money during session, political parties and PACs face no such restriction.

From Wayne Slater:

...the Texas Republican Party is throwing a fundraiser next month featuring the state's big three GOP leaders - Gov. Rick Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Joe Straus and "many of our statewide elected officials and state legislators." It's a chance for lobbyists and anybody else with interests before the state to spend some quality time with influential policy makers, who will benefit from the fundraising the next time they seek office.
For $25,000, you get dinner for ten, access to a private VIP reception before dinner and photos with the governor, lieutenant governor and speaker. For $15,000, the same deal for six. $1,000 will get you dinner, but none of the trimmings. The event is set for March 9.

Got that, lobbyists and special interests? You know how Rick Perry plays. Give him some cash, and you might get your pet agenda items looked on with favor. This would be an especially good opportunity for recalcitrant KBH-supporters to try and beg their way back into the fold, lest their issues and concerns hit sine die with nary a hearing or vote.

What price Texas? Evidently $25,000.

Slater continues:

Not to be left out, Texans for Lawsuit Reform is sponsoring "Girls Night Out" the next day for all women legislators, legislative spouses and female staffers. "Join us for good times galore: Manicures, pedicures, chair massages and more," says the invitation for the evening to be held at the Four Seasons in Austin. Among lobby groups, TLR is one of the biggest spenders of campaign contributions. The group advocates curbing lawsuits against business.

That's right, ladies! Join the group that plows millions of dollars into primarily Republican campaign war chests, making sure not only that citizens can't get their day in court, but also that you can't exercise as much reproductive freedom as women elsewhere in this country.

I wonder if there's an RSVP list for this, or if I can just round up every out-of-work trial lawyer, pro bono attorney, and Legal Aid employee and take them down to 98 San Jacinto. Lord knows the do-gooder types can't afford a mani-pedi in this atmosphere.

Note: as of press time, it was unclear if Sen. Dan Patrick would be on hand to choose each lady's polish color for them, or to force each woman to gaze upon a sonogram before the procedure and exclaim "Wow, those are my cuticles."

Need to be Pampered? Call TLR

Matt Glazer — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:27:17 GMT

Texans for Lawsuit apparently has some money to throw around. Elise Hu, a political junkie, received the invite from TLR to female legislators to be pampered ~~on the PAC's dime.~~

Texans for Lawsuit Reform, the power-advocacy group behind tort reform in Texas, is going to take good care of the ladies of the legislature. TLR is treating female lawmakers, spouses and staff members to "manicure, pedicures, chair massages and more" (not sure what more means) at the Four Seasons Hotel next week.

The actual invite can be found on her site here.

It's no steak dinner, but in these troubling economic times, it is good to see TLR knows how to spend their donors money. It is good to see they know how to prioritize spending. I know some PAC's would rather spend money getting good people elected. Some PAC's don't waste people's donations on expensive, unnecessary pampering.

If we did, we would at least make sure everyone was invited.

Update: One reader pointed out this may or may not be the PAC itself. If it is, then the invite is not properly disclaimed. More likely, this is an expense out of their non-profit corporation and will be a lobby expense (which we will find out soon enough). In either case, this is a donor funded pampering.

Update by KT: See, that's where John Sharp went wrong. We should have gotten together and chatted Senate race politics over mani-pedis!

SD-17: One More Race to Win in 2008

Matt Glazer — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:00:00 GMT

As Kirk Watson said today, "we're not done yet."

Senate District 17 still needs our help; the Texas Senate needs one more Democrat. Kyle Janek vacated his seat before his term expired to anoint Republican Austen Furse. Because of Republican infighting, Furse lost and only received 10% of the vote. The winner on the Republican side was uber-conservative Joan Huffman, who squeaked in to a runoff with only 26.13% of the vote.

Democrats should have won this race on November 4, but ~~Craddick D's~~ Ron Wilson and Al Edwards meddled in SD-17 and endorsed and supported the stalking horse candidate.

Simmons did what she was supposed to do: she forced a runoff. Simmons received 13.8% of the total vote in the high turnout election, and pushed it to a low turnout runoff. To add insult to injury, if you combine this percentage with Chris Bell's numbers, the Democratic Party received 52.2% of the total vote.

Because Edwards and Wilson decided to support the TLR candidate and force a runoff, taxpayers will be required to spend more money on another election during an economic downturn. On the other hand, Democrats need to step and help Congressman Bell overcome these political games by donating today.

Democrats can be cautiously optimistic going into the run-off. Bell was the top vote getter in every county except Brazoria. In Brazoria, the Republican runoff candidate Joan Huffman won with only 2,101 votes. On the other hand, Bell was the top getter in Democrat friendly Jefferson County with 6,335 votes (which is 3,433 more than Stephanie Simmons received).

The other high note is Bell's resounding victory in Harris County. Bell won 37.6% of the vote in Harris and the Democratic Party received 52.8% of the vote. Harris County also represents 36.4% of the total vote.

While the numbers favor Bell, the district is drawn to be Republican. While Democrats have done well in special elections recently, they are harder to win and money and a good ground game mean more.

Chris Bell can win, but what Dan Barrett and Donna Howard have proven is it takes statewide focus for us to win in a special election.

Kirk Watson wrote today:

Many of you have already given generously of your time and resources during this election cycle, and I wouldn't be asking you again if the stakes for Democrats weren't so high.
With the election of Wendy Davis on November 4th, Democrats will hold 12 of 31 seats in the State Senate. With Chris as our lucky number 13, Senate Democrats will be able to make a real difference for Texas families by fighting for high-quality public schools, affordable utility rates, and accessible health insurance.

Having 12 Democrats in the Senate makes a difference. Having 13 means more. 13 can be our lucky number in the Senate. Having Chris Bell and Wendy Davis in the Senate requires a bipartisan approach to legislating.

Texans for Lawsuit Reform gave Simmons $201,745 just to force a runoff. Ron Wilson gave her another $30,000 and loaned her $7,000 more.

This has to be a people powered campaign. Help Chris today by donating your time or money.

HD-17: Dippel Running on Common Sense, Kleinschmidt Running on Nonsense

Robert Ryland — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 21:25:39 GMT

While the Presidential race continues to suck a lot of the air out of the Texas political atmosphere, vitally important down-ballot races are kicking into high gear as early voting approaches. The race for HD-17 (Bastrop, Fayette, Lee, Burleson, Colorado counties)is heating up as the GOP looks to pick up the seat vacated by Robby Cook (D-Eagle Lake) and Donnie Dippel works hard to keep it in the Democratic column.

Rick Perry tool Tim Kleinschmidt has been spending gobs of PAC and lobbyist money (much of it from the likes of TLR, TX Oil and Gas PAC, and Bob Perry) trying to discredit Dippel and press hot buttons like he's done with his insidious mailers. The latest one I received (thanks, Tim!) touts his "plan to secure our borders" by spending state funds on border enforcement and requiring photo I.D. to vote. Apparently the cookie-cutters who designed his campaign neglected to tell Tim that border security is a FEDERAL issue and that photo I.D. for voting is an unconstitutional imposition akin to a poll tax.

Needless to say, Tim is not the sharpest knife in the drawer. Kleinschmidt was recently busted for paying his daughter with campaign funds in direct violation of state election laws, and also apparently tried to film his campaign commercials during a non-partisan public forum in Bastrop recently. Later that week, at another candidate forum in Colorado County (in which the parties had agreed to no candidate cameras), Kleinschmidt failed to even show up and sent a surrogate instead. Clearly he's not interested in talking about the issues, since he's apparently confused about a number of them: Kleinschmidt mentions "supporting local schools" but also supports private school vouchers (which is it, Tim?), and claims to oppose toll roads and the TTC ( a new position from 2006...) while having fundraisers hosted by the Godfathers of the Toll Road Lobby like Perry and Mike Toomey. But despite his many ties with big insurance, big oil, and various other anti-labor and anti-working family forces that have made the Capitol and Guv's Mansion their personal playground for the last 10+ years - Tim claims he's an "independent voice" for rural Texas "values" !

Meanwhile, long-time Fayette County rancher and ag consultant Donnie Dippel (who would the cows really support, Tim?) is running on a sound platform that speaks to the actual issues affecting working families of the 17th District: fully funding our public schools and bringing back vocational training programs(strengthening the rural labor force), support for rural health care services like CHIP and local hospitals, support for volunteer fire departments and rural law enforcement, repealing the Republican-enacted small business tax, (back to those "small town values" again) , protecting our water resources (as Kleinschmidt sells his water out of the District!) and encouraging economic development in HD-17, with it's mix of rural and exurban communities.
Dippel is also pro-2nd Amendment and an avid sportsman, and wants to restore funding and proper stewardship for our parks and public lands. As an assistant State Ag commissioner in charge of pesticide management for many years, it was Dippel's job to understand the dangers posed to our environment by various chemicals and to see that they were used properly and effectively by licensed professionals. Dippel understands the needs of farm and ranch families and advocates for them. He's worked in and out of state government and has navigated the bureaucracy; he knows how it works and how we can make it work better for us - it's why he's running for this seat.

Kleinschmidt seems to have only two weapons in his arsenal: fear and dishonesty. In 2006 he also spent gobs of corporate money trying to tie Robby Cook to NAIS, and came up just shy - losing by ~ 400 votes - though his disinformation flipped a number of votes among farmers and ranchers in the district. This time, however, many of those same swing voters say they won't be fooled by Timmy again - many of his misleading advertising and direct mail was exposed in the wake of the 2006 race. But apparently Tim hasn't learned his lesson yet, and thinks he can "close the deal" in 2008.

Well, not on our watch, friend-o. Tim may have cookie stacks of corporate money, but Donnie has the right message and the grassroots ground support to keep HD 17 Democratic.

But he needs our help. Craddick and his associated PACs have made it clear that they'll spend what they have to to steal this seat - DON'T LET THEM BUY HD-17. If we flip 5 other seats but lose this one, it'll all be for naught.

Contribute to Donnie Dippel's campaign here to help us give Craddick and the House Republicans the BOOT!

The Truth About Texas Tort Reform: More Doctors, Worse Care

Phillip Martin — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:30:00 GMT

This past Friday, the New York Times ran a piece on the recent influx of doctors to Texas ("More Doctors in Texas After Malpractice Caps," October 5, 2007). The article cited the long waiting lines for doctors wanting to receive their license to practice medicine in Texas:

The Texas Medical Board reports licensing 10,878 new physicians since 2003, up from 8,391 in the prior four years. It issued a record 980 medical licenses at its last meeting in August, raising the number of doctors in Texas to 44,752, with a backlog of nearly 2,500 applications. Of those awaiting processing, the largest number, after Texas, come from New York (145), followed by California (118) and Florida (100).

But are Texas patients receiving better care? Another set of statistics -- which was not included in the NY Times article -- shows that there has been a significant increase in disciplinary actions against doctors. The following figures are from the Texas Medical Board:

Total Disciplinary Actions:
2002: 187
2003: 277
2004: 256
2005: 304
2006: 335

Eric Turkewitz, a personal injury attorney in New York, also notes that the figures don't look much better for 2007:

By the way, 2007 isn't shaping up much better, with 88 doctors disciplined at the Medical Board's August meeting, 30 in June, 34 in April, and 41 in February. That's 193 so far, with two more meetings to go, on a pace to well exceed the 2002 numbers.

Ultimately, it is better for Texas to attract high-quality doctors --- but not if recruiting those doctors jeopardizes the health care of Texans. Texans for Lawsuit Reform -- the group that pushed tort reform through in 2003 -- would disagree with me, I'm sure. But they also hired as a TLR spokesmen a doctor who misdiagnosed bone cancer in a 16-year old girl, so their credibility on promoting patient's rights comes into question.

Prop 12 was all about the politics -- Republicans wanting to limit the size of lawsuits so that trial lawyers wouldn't have as much money to donate to Democrats. Prop 12 was never about Texas patients having greater access to quality health care -- and all you have to do is look at the Texas Medical Board's own disciplinary action history I cited above to believe me.

For more on the push for tort reform in 2003, read the Texas Monthly article, "Huty? Injured? Need a Lawyer? Too Bad!"