A scary story is unfolding about our courts. According to Statesman 3rd Court of Appeals Justice Jan Patterson who says Chief Justice Ken Law refuse to let her file a dissent in a politically charged case involving two associates of former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.
Justice Jan Patterson, a Democrat, is asking the Texas Supreme Court to intervene. She claims that Law, a Republican who's up for re-election, blocked the filing of her dissent to last week's ruling on whether fellow Justice Alan Waldrop, also a Republican, should step aside in the money-laundering case involving DeLay's associates.
In addition to the controversy swirling around the 3rd Court of Appeals, Texans for Public Justice has filed a complaint echoing Justice Patterson's sentiment.
Texans for Public Justice filed a complaint with the State Commission on Judicial Conduct today alleging that Third Court of Appeals Justice Alan Waldrop should not have written an opinion in the criminal case against Texans for a Republican Majority (TRMPAC) because his impartiality is questionable.
"Justice Waldrop's August 22 TRMPAC opinion reads like a 'Get Out of Jail Free Card' for Tom DeLay and his cronies," said Texans for Public Justice Director Craig McDonald. "As counsel for Texans for Lawsuit Reform in related civil litigation, Waldrop announced his bias in this matter years ago, dismissing the civil suit as 'politically motivated.' Waldrop should not have participated in this case."
The infighting in the 3rd Court is apparent. The Republicans seem to be shielding their friends and allies, while the Democrats appear to want justice. Democrat Diane Henson went so far as to ask for a full rehearing on the case. An unprecedented move in any circumstances.
Every day it becomes more and more clear why we need Woodie Jones on the bench. Luckily he is taking on Ken Law, and we can remedy these problems once and for all.
Texans for Public Justice (TPJ) filed a pair of complaints alleging that Third Court of Appeals Chief Justice W. Kenneth Law repeatedly violated the Texas Election Code in the course of his current reelection campaign.
TPJ alleges Law illegally collected more than $66,000 in political contributions without appointing a campaign treasurer and taking $10,000 from GOP Swift-Boat activist Harold Simmons-twice what the state Judicial Campaign Fairness Act permits.
Judge Law recently participated in a divisive ruling in the criminal case against Tom DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC). The ruling stated that "checks" are not subject to Texas' money laundering prohibitions.
Central Texas voters elected Law Chief Justice in November 2002. Last month he and two other Republican members of his court issued a divisive ruling in the criminal case against Tom DeLay's Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC). The ruling uses technical distinctions between "funds" and "checks" to suggest that TRMPAC did not illegally launder corporate political funds. To protect DeLay and two cronies, the justices wrote that TRMPAC's checks were not money-laundering "funds."
"As Judge Law labored over the TRMPAC ruling, he appears to have raised tens of thousands of campaign dollars in violation of Texas election laws," said Texans for Public Justice Director Craig McDonald. "The chief justice even may have cashed these ill-gotten campaign 'checks' into 'funds.' So many violations represent incompetence or indifference on his part."
TPJ alleges that Chief Justice Law appears to have:
Accepted $66,850 in campaign contributions at a time when he did not have a duly appointed campaign treasurer.
Accepted $66,850 in campaign contributions without filing his intention to opt in or out of the Judicial Campaign Fairness Act's voluntary expenditure limits.
Violated the cap on judicial candidates taking more than $5,000 from an individual per election by accepting $10,000 from nuclear-dump owner Harold Simmons.
Accepted $1,000 from an out-of-state political committee without following the disclosure requirements prescribed for receiving large contributions from out-of-state PACs.
Used his campaign to reimburse himself for approximately $21,576 of campaign expenditures that were not properly designated as reimbursable expenses.
Failed to include required disclosure information about the occupation, employer, or job title of more than 50 contributors.
Speaker Tom Craddick may be headed out the door of his lobby-financed luxury suite at the Capitol, forced out by his claims of "absolute power" and the corruption that marked his rise to the Speaker's chair and all his days presiding over the Texas House.
On Wednesday, at 2 p.m. in Travis County District Judge Mike Lynch's court, a window will open again into the criminal conspiracy that brought Craddick to power in the first place.
A Travis County Grand Jury indicted the Texas Association of Business for its role in using corporate money to influence 2002 legislative elections. Texas law strictly prohibits use of corporate money in elections. Texans for Public Justice has posted Statesman reporter Laylan Copelin's stories about the case here and here.
If certain images or word associations are popping into your head, they should be. This is all part of the infamous Tom DeLay, Texans for a Republican Majority (TRMPAC) conspiracy to elect a Republican majority in the Texas House so Craddick could be speaker.
Lawyers for all those implicated and/or indicted in the monstrous scandal argue more or less the same thing Craddick argued from the chair when it became clear a majority of the chamber wanted to oust him: They have the power, and any assaults on that power or criminal allegations about how their power was obtained are illegitimate.
House members shouldn't kid themselves. Speaker Tom Craddick has badly tarnished the reputation of the House. Not only has he flouted the House's own rules, but he has abused the state's corporate prohibition and speaker statute and blocked needed tightening of the corporate and union prohibition.
Craddick's alleged promises and threats as to appropriations and legislation to keep his speaker's mantle (posted here) are not just the usual House hardball. If true, these promises and threats are likely criminal on his behalf and those legislators that succumb to them.
Don't believe me? Then read the legislative bribery provisions of the speaker's statute (Tex Gov. Code Sections 302.031-302.033). It is a felony to promise or threaten "with the intent to influence a member of or candidate for the house of representatives in casting a vote for speaker of the house... preferential treatment on any legislation or appropriation." It is also a felony for a legislator "to solicit, accept, or agree to accept" such preferential treatment. And I can assure you that these bribery provisions are constitutional — whatever the problems with other provisions of the statute — for courts regularly have rejected challenges to bribery statutes.
According to the Texas Observer, Tom Craddick might have closer ties to TRMPAC than originally suspected.
Rep. Tom Craddick met Chris Winkle on the night of October 21, 2002, for dinner at Anthony's, an upscale eatery near the Galleria in Houston. Winkle was there on behalf of the nation's largest nursing home trade group. Nursing homes had a big financial stake in a Republican takeover of the Legislature-the industry desperately wanted to cap damages in malpractice lawsuits in Texas. It was an influential Austin lobbyist for the industry, Neal "Buddy" Jones, a friend of Craddick, who had arranged the meeting. Winkle wasn't there just to discuss policy, though. At some point during the dinner, he handed Craddick an envelope containing a $100,000 check.
The check was corporate money-illegal in Texas campaigns if spent on candidates-from an industry trade group called the Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care. It was made out to Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC, the Tom DeLay-founded political action committee that was instrumental in boosting Craddick into the speaker's chair. The $100,000 check from the Alliance was the single biggest check received by TRMPAC.
But records recently obtained by the Observer suggest that Craddick was far more than simply a courier that night. It appears his office was involved in soliciting and collecting campaign money from Winkle and other special interests whose preferred legislation he would later push through the House. Craddick's phone records show an almost nine-minute call to a representative from the Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care a little more than two weeks prior to the meeting with Winkle. Records also show calls to HillCo, Buddy Jones' lobby firm that day. (On the day Craddick met with Winkle in Houston, records show more calls with someone at Jones' firm.)
There have been questions surrounding Craddick's impressive 2002 fundraising cycle since the first subpoena was handed out on TRMPAC. These new details, uncovered by the Observer, confirm two crucial points. First, Craddick's reign as Speaker has a price tag. Second, Craddick plays to win (at any cost).
For those inside the Capitol or involved in the political scene, neither point is especially surprising. However, both points taken together indicate the importance of the first vote of the 80th legislature- a vote for Craddick is a vote for continued corruption in Austin.
Great ad that shows just how bad we need holistic change in the state house. Have I mentioned that Juan Garcia is our Texroots candidate? Well he is...
A three-judge panel of the 3rd Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments March 22 to determine if the conspiracy charge against Tom DeLay should be reinstated.
