So why is it such a big deal for Greg Abbott if he succeeds in keeping the primary on April 3, or as early as possible before the Republican presidential nomination is totally sewn up? Perry's not in the race anymore, so what does it matter? The answer lies in Abbott's own future ambitions here in Texas, and his desire to serve the wealthy big-money donors who fund pro-corporate Republicans here in Texas.
Abbott needs to keep a unified primary on the highest-turnout date possible, to make sure Dewhurst wins--as well as the incumbent Republican Congressmen and State Senators--to please the big-money donors that will likely back Abbott when Perry decides he's not running for Governor again.
The Texas Republican Party is primarily dominated by extremely wealthy corporate interests, who in turn want to keep Republicans in office that serve their wishes, rather than the whims of the Tea Party. It costs money to campaign in Texas, and whether you're playing by the FEC's rules or the TEC's, in a state this big if you can't raise real money you won't get too far. In the ongoing Senate primary, Dewhurst is clearly the candidate of the big-bucks donors who backed Rick Perry's gubernatorial and presidential campaigns. While Dewhurst and Cruz both raised similar amounts of money in the last quarter ($1.5M and $1.1M respectively), and both have raised close to $4 million overall, Dewhurst's average donation is over $2000 (and remember, donors are hampered by limits of $2500 per donor, meaning that most of The Dew's donors are maxing out). Meanwhile, Cruz's average donation is a much more modest $319. It's a testament to Cruz's support from the right-wing grassroots / Tea Party / YCT sector of the Texas Republican Party. The big donors are opening their wallets for Abbott as well, who has over $10 million in the bank and raked in $1.6 million during a 10-day period in early 2011, unfettered by individual donor contribution limits. The AG has made it quietly clear that he plans to seek the top spot in the state, but first he's got to dispatch with Dewhurst to be next in line.
So what does the primary date have to do with anything?
Tonight, Republican Representative Quico Canseco of Texas's 23rd Congressional district will be giving the Republicans' Spanish language response to the State of the Union address. Immediately following Canseco's speech, Mitt Romney will ask him to deport himself. Just kidding. But really, how many Republicans are going to listen to Canseco give a speech in Spanish? Alienating Latinos is practically a plank in the Republican party platform at this point. By the time he's done, Sheriff Joe Arpaio might be waiting on Canseco's doorstep with a shotgun to try and intimidate him into not voting.
If you're unfamiliar with the West Texas representative, here's a chance to learn more about Francisco "Quico" Canseco: tax cheat, firefighter defunder, crazy right-winger, and soon-to-be-former Congressman.
7 Things To Know About Republican Congressman Quico Canseco:
Despite record wildfires in Texas, Quico Canseco voted against increased funding for firefighters and first responders. He attacked Obama for not providing funding for Texas wildfires (which Obama did, in fact, provide) and then voted against increasing funding for FEMA firefighter assistance grants by $510 million. The new total funding would have given $390 million for firefighter assistance grants and $420 million for Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grants. Canseco was one of only 113 members of Congress to vote against SAFER. Source: Burnt Orange Report
Canseco is funded by Wall Street, and now serves on the House Financial Services Committee. The bulk of Canseco's fundraising comes from the financial industry, which kicked in over $100,000 to his election effort. Now, he's supposed to be writing the rules to help rein in the worst Wall Street abuses. Source: Sunlight Foundation
Canseco has reportedly had $715,000 worth of federal, state, and mechanics liens levied against him in the last three decades. The liens are to recover unpaid payroll taxes and contracting fees since the early 1980s. Source: Burnt Orange Report
Canseco is supported by the American Action Network, a right-wing organization that recently sent misleading mail to senior citizens about Democrats' efforts to protect Medicare Part D and save the government $112 million dollars. Source: ThinkProgress
During redistricting, Republicans in the legislature specifically looked to draw low-performing Hispanic precincts into the 23rd district to help "shore up" Canseco's re-election chances. By including low-turnout precincts and drawing out high-turnout precincts, Republicans made district look more Latino on paper based on Hispanic surname voter registration than it is based on voting performance. Source: txredistricting.org
During his campaign in 2010, Canseco was endorsed by Michele "Crazy Eyes" Bachmann and followed the Minnesota Republican's then-practice of refusing to debate, declining to meet with the San Antonio Express News' editorial board. Source: ThinkProgress
Canseco has avoided taking questions and talking directly with citizens during town halls. Maybe he's afraid to talk to senior citizens directly about why he supports cutting their Medicaid and Medicare benefits. Source: San Antonio Express-News
Here's the best news about Quico Canseco: he has a great Democratic challenger in State Representative Pete Gallego. Gallego was elected to the State Legislature in 1990 at age 28, and has spent his entire adult life fighting for the people of West Texas. His gigantic legislative district closely overlaps with CD-23, the district in which he's now running for Congress. Gallego is a great champion of the people. As a legislator, he has crafted and passed legislation to invest billions of dollars in public schools, secure our border, reform our criminal justice system, and support Texas veterans.
Gallego also on the DCCC's targeted Red to Blue fundraising list, which looks for the best pick-up opportunities as we fight to take back the House of Representatives. If you like Pete Gallego or you really don't like Quico Canseco, consider dropping Pete some coin here.
Republican Congressman Quico Canseco is failing the people of Texas. He votes against first responders, and wants to weaken medical coverage for senior citizens. He's a tool of the financial industry and backed by right-wingers determined to shred what's left of our social safety net. Let's hope voters sending him packing this November. Then Republicans will need to find another Spanish-speaking patsy to respond to Obama after the next State of the Union.
There's a municipal election this May, but you probably wouldn't know it if you weren't paying close attention. That's because what might have been an exciting election season with the opportunity to oust two of the council members that voted to keep our elections in May has instead turned into a bit of a snooze-fest with no real challengers announced against any of the incumbents.
Nevertheless, Lee Leffingwell is clearly taking nothing for granted as he seeks his second term as Mayor. His campaign has been working hard since November to rack up supporters, endorsements, and the all-too-important campaign war chest necessary to mount a strong re-election effort. Leffingwell has remained active in the community since he was elected, so it's no surprise to see such a broad and deep list of Austinites supporting the Mayor.
This past week, Leffingwell published his public supporter list on his website, and announced an impressive fundraising haul through the end of 2011. The supporter list, available here, is impressive in not only its size (500 and growing) but also in its scale, featuring notable current and former elected officials, city board and commission members, and a wide range of community activists. Not only has Leffingwell been endorsed by his 2009 opponent Brewster McCracken (and McCracken's #1 supporter, Alamo Drafthouse impresario Tim League), he also shows a broad range of support from people who backed both Randi Shade and Kathie Tovo in the last municipal election. Tovo's treasurer Joe Pinelli is on the list, as is former council member Jennifer Kim.
Perhaps the only thing larger than Leffingwell's supporter list is his fundraising haul: an impressive $87,624, with $80,000 cash on hand. That's pretty solid for a campaign that is hampered by antiquated contribution limits of $350 per individual, which, I will note, make running a professional campaign that focuses on voters outside of the traditional city electorate nearly impossible, unless your entire staff can work essentially for free, or you can self-fund to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Today Leffingwell announced the endorsements of the Police, Fire, and EMS employee associations as well. The public safety organizations backed up their support with a full-page ad in today's Austin Chronicle touting not only Leffingwell's accomplishments but the impressive achievements of our city as a whole. Download the ad here. Here's the statistics the ad sites about Austin under the leadership of Leffingwell:
Kiplinger's Personal Finance called Austin "the best city for the next decade." (June 2010)
Austin is #2 on Forbes' list of America's Most Innovative Cities. (May 2010)
Austin ranked first for best economic recovery in the U.S. according to Forbes.com. (March 2010)
Portfolio.com places Austin at the top of the list for "Small Business Vitality Rankings 2010." (January 2010)
Austin ranked #1 among the nation's 10 best places for young adults. (Portfolio.com, May 2010)
Portfolio.com lists Austin in the top 10 for Best Quality of Life. (May 2010)
Austin ranks "low" for Rate of Home Foreclosures according to RealtyTrac's Year-End 2009 Metropolitan Foreclosure Market Report. (January 2010)
Austin ranks #2 among Best Places to Retire & Row in the U.S. (RowingandCulling.com, January 2010)
Grubb and Ellis rank Austin "Best City to Invest in Commercial Real Estate." (January 2010)
Austin is the 9th Easiest City to Find a Job according to Juju.com's Job Search Difficulty Index. (January 2010)
Austin ranks #2 on Forbes' List of Cities Recovering from the Foreclosure Crisis. (December 2009)
As Leffingwell likes to say, if there was a list of cities on lists, we'd be on it, and probably ranked #1!
Meanwhile, former council member Brigid Shea still seems to be circling around a potential mayoral campaign. She filed a treasurer's report with little fanfare back in December, the same day that a poll on municipal issues went out to voters around Austin. However, Shea reported only $4,200 raised from a handful of donors. I hear constant rumors that the campaign is struggling to hire staff. And with so much support already behind Leffingwell, it's tough to see how Shea pulls together a winning coalition.
Let's be clear: challenging an incumbent mayor is very different than challenging an incumbent council member. To say that the Mayor needs to be ousted--and to support the ouster of said Mayor with time and or money--is to suggest that the fundamentals of our city are not strong and that we are in need of serious change at the top. People who want to support a campaign for the sake of "giving voters a choice" or simply because they need clients are nevertheless suggesting that things are going wrong in Austin. And looking at the list above of Austin's accomplishments, it's hard to take the suggestion that things are going in a bad direction very seriously.
Leffingwell ran in 2009 on a platform of focusing on the fundamentals, and he's definitely kept City Hall's eye on the ball. At the same time, he's helped oversee tremendous job growth, especially in biotechnology and information technology, two forward-looking industries that represent long-term potential here in Austin.
While people may disagree with Leffingwell on a few individual votes, his overall record speaks to a balanced approach to meeting the wide range of needs of folks in Austin. Leffingwell's job growth numbers are particularly impressive, with over 2,200 new jobs relocated or created here in Austin during his first term. It's easy to criticize the mayor when you're an independently wealthy gadfly that doesn't actually depend on sustainable job creation at all income levels. It's a lot harder to actually do the work of bringing jobs to Austin in a way that protects taxpayer resources and provides a diverse range of opportunities for our growing city.
The full press release from Leffingwell's campaign is below the jump. Meanwhile, it remains to be seen if anyone will actually take the plunge against the Mayor, and what rationale for replacing our successful city leader they might muster.
Texas and Illinois were the first two states where candidate filing was due to close. Then the US Supreme Court gave Texas one extra day.
But nonetheless wander down below the fold to see how both parties are going at filling the slate in the first two cabs off the rank in the 2012 cycle.
Another day, another Perry gaffe involving numbers. Already having demonstrated that he can't count to three, yesterday Rick Perry released a statement on the death of Kim Jong Il. Only problem? He referred to the deceased North Korean dictator as Kim Jong the Second.
Now, I can understand how in a san serif font, "Il"
(capital I, lower case l)
looks a lot like the Roman numeral II
(capital I, capital I)
which, of course, means 2. But that excuse is only valid if you -- and everyone who proofs your press releases before they go out -- have never heard of the actual Kim Jong Il.
And besides, we all know Rick Perry doesn't know his Roman numerals either.
Perry has excelled at not knowing things during his presidential campaign. What's strange about this one is that the email incorrectly referenced the dictator's name three times, but correctly used "-Il" once. What's unfortunate is that the email was a purely perfunctory statement from Perry on the "death of vicious dictator" who we could have assumed disliked Kim Jong-Il like any other red-blooded American even if he never released a statement.
Yep, looks like the Comms shop is working real hard over there at the Perry campaign.
ThinkProgress makes clear that Republicans have a history of not getting the late North Korean despot's name right. Kind of disconcerting when you think about how aggressive Republican foreign policy usually is. Shouldn't you at least know the names of the countries you casually threaten to bomb back to the stone age?
On an unrelated note, it would be really funny to watch Rick Perry pronounce and spell "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad," am I right?
Would any of us ever have expected that Ron Paul would be the leading Texas Republican in both national polls and crucial early primary states? The Ron Paul faithful probably would, as they've been zealously organizing for their candidate since before 2008, and it's really paying off as GOP voters are still unable to unite behind either Mitt or the Not-Mitt of their choice.
What's most interesting to me in the rise of Ron Paul is that news outlets are actually reporting on field organizing, which traditionally get ignored in favor of splashy TV ads or contentious press releases intended to earn some free media coverage. However, suggesting that the ground game is the only reason why Ron Paul has caught on with so many Iowa caucus-goers basically ignores his Libertarian, isolationist policies, which while petrifying to imagine actually living under, are at least somewhat ideologically consistent.
Back in 2008, I was constantly frustrated by the media's seeming obliviousness to the impact of the Obama campaign's field organizing efforts, and how that could pay off in terms of boosted turnout. So it's good to see that four years later, the mainstream media seems to be taking a closer look at how field can indeed make an impact on the outcome of elections.
The campaign developed an Internet-based phone-banking system that allows people around the country to make calls to Iowans from home using scripts tailored to identify supporters. It seems to be working: a New York Times/CBS News poll this month found that 60 percent of likely Republican caucusgoers said they had been contacted by the Paul campaign, the highest rate of any candidate, and about double that of Newt Gingrich. The true believers have also been coached not to be rude or dismissive to those who do not embrace the message, an issue during the last campaign.
An Internet-based phone-banking system? Golly gee. What newfangled things will campaigns think of next? Maybe a palm-sized digital device to obviate data entry after canvassing!
In all seriousness, the volume of contact from the zealous Ron Paul supporters is impressive. Paul is now leading Iowa polls, as Gingrich seems to be collapsing just before the actual voting starts. And while Paul's isolationist stance sets him at odds with the war-hungry Republican base, his states'-rights, drown-the-government platform otherwise caters to many GOP faithful.
Paul should do well in the caucus states, and his extensive grassroots network should help him expand the number of states in which he's able to contact voters. And while -- just as they did with his 2nd-place showing in the Iowa straw poll -- the media will likely discount Paul even if he outright wins Iowa, Paul should continue to rack up delegates throughout the primary process on the strength of his field organizing. If there's no clear GOP nominee based on delegate accumulation by the RNC convention in Tampa, it would be interesting to see what happens if Ron Paul has enough delegates to play king-maker.
Ron Paul is probably also the only GOP candidate who could branch out and run a legitimate third-party bid. He has a large grassroots base of support, a substantial small-donor fundraising network, and a largely coherent message that sets him apart from the other GOP Nopefuls floundering around during the seemingly endless series of Republican debates. And while a Paul third-party bid effectively guarantees that Obama wins re-election, it would be a really great "Up Yours" gesture from Paul to a Republican Party that has clearly lost touch with just about every value Paul espouses. In any case, he isn't running for re-election, so what's Ron Paul got to lose?
(Now that Perry is dropping out of the race (woo hoo!) and endorsing Gingrich, it's important to remember that the Texas Republican primary will still award delegates proportionally. - promoted by Katherine Haenschen)
I just got off the phone with Chris Elam, Communications Director for the Republican Party of Texas. He confirmed that the TX GOP will NOT change their proportional delegate allotment in the 2012 primary, even though that Presidential primary will now take place April 3.
Let's untangle this confusion: the RNC said that state parties holding primaries before April 1 were required to award delegates proportionally. Parties holding primaries after April 1 had the option to be winner-take-all. Each state had to turn their rules in to the national Republican party in October. Those rules are set. Changing the rules would require a new round of pre-clearance.
Where the befuddlement comes in: the Ohio Republican Party, which recently moved its primary to after April 1, had an "if" clause in their rules, which stated that if they moved the primary back, it would become winner-take-all. Texas had no such "if" clause in their rules. Texas will still have proportional delegate allotment in the April 3 Presidential primary based on the statewide popular vote.
If you really want to know more, Elam directed me to the update from the TX GOP's Third Quarter SREC Meeting, which reads as follows:
Under the new rule, presidential candidates will be allocated national convention delegates in direct proportion to the statewide popular vote they receive in the Texas Republican Primary on March 6, 2012. However, to ensure that local leadership continues to have significant input in the selection of delegates, 3 delegates per Congressional district will still be selected. With 36 Congressional districts, this means that 108 of the state's 155 delegates will be selected by individual Congressional districts. 3 delegate spots are reserved for the National Committeeman, National Committeewoman and State Chairman, pursuant to national party rules. The remaining 44 delegates will be selected at-large by a nominating committee at the convention.
The proposed rule has a mathematical formula by which individual delegates are assigned to a particular candidate. The top vote getter will be allocated delegates first from Congressional districts in which they received the highest percentage of the vote, until their delegate allotment is fulfilled. The second highest place vote getter will be allocated delegates from Congressional districts that they did the best in, whose districts still have non-allocated delegates. This process will then continue with all the candidates until all of the Congressional district delegates are allocated. Once all the Congressional district delegates are allocated, at-large delegates will be allocated to ensure complete proportionality.
Republican delegates from Texas will still be allocated proportionally based on the share of the statewide popular vote they receive on April 3, 2012.
::
So, dear readers, who benefits from a primary that's one month later, after the big Super Tuesday states on March 6? The delegate count is expected to be quite close throughout March. Who benefits from an extra month to organize or write off Texas? Or will the game be over by April 3?
Back in September, PPP Polls had Perry with 49%, but that was a long, long time ago in the agonizing history of Perry's Presidential campaign. Is Perry still a lock to win his home state, or will Ron Paul's superior field organizing and overzealous supporters help him scoop up major delegates? What do you think?
There's a deal on the primary date. Here are the details:
February 1, 2012 - New residency deadline for candidates seeking election to the Texas House and Texas Senate.
February 1, 2012, 6:00 p.m. - New deadline of court-ordered reopened filing period, in which candidates for all offices have the opportunity to amend, withdraw or file a new application for the ballot.
February 3, 2012 - New deadline for County Executive Committees to conduct drawing for candidate order on ballot.
April 3, 2012 - Date of the 2012 General Primary Election.
April 14 or April 21, 2012 - Date of County and Senatorial District Conventions, as determined by the State Chair of each political party.
June 5, 2012 - Date of the 2012 General Primary Runoff Election.
Although there was discussion yesterday about a conditional trigger that would move legislative and congressional primaries to a later date if maps could not be finished in time, the deal announced today does not contain any such provision (although the court presumably could revisit the issue as and if needed).
Here's the proposed order submitted this morning to the San Antonio court:
UPDATE: To answer questions , the filing period is open until 6 p.m. on December 19. It then closes but will be reopened once legislative and congressional maps are settled. It then will re-close on February 1 @ 6 p.m.
Big news: today Dan Grant filed his paperwork to run for CD 10, the Central Texas congressional district currently held by Michael McCaul. Grant filed with the TDP for the iteration of CD 10 drawn by the San Antonio federal court. That district, which no longer includes uber-conservative Tom Ball Tomball in Harris County, is a pick-up opportunity for Democrats, who need to regain only 25 seats nationwide to retake the House of Representatives.
Grant's campaign released a statement today detailing his experience on foreign policy and national security, and his commitment to give working Texans a real voice in Congress. From the statement (reprinted in full below the jump):
Grant said he felt compelled to explore a run for Congress because the people of Central Texas need a Congressman who understands and who will look out for their best interests.
"Central Texans deserve a real voice in Congress. We deserve a voice that speaks up for our needs above the demands of wealthy special interests and Wall Street mega donors. For years it's been clear that millionaire Michael McCaul, the single richest member of Congress, is unable and unwilling to be that voice," Grant said. "I'll make sure the things that matter in Washington are the things that matter to families here in Texas."
They also put together this great video from an emphatic Grant, touching on the populist themes resonating nationwide:
Grant had previously announced that he was forming an exploratory committee for the previous incarnation of CD-25, which stretched from East Austin to Tarrant County, and had drawn 9 Republican primary candidates, including Michael "Bowtie" Williams. Once the San Antonio court redrew the maps, Grant began looking at CD-10, and decided it was worth contesting again, as he did in the 2008 primary.
Clearly, Grant isn't afraid of an uphill fight, and it's great to see the vigor and energy in him as he prepares to take on McCaul. While no one knows what incarnation of CD-10 Grant will be able to contest -- or when the maps will be set or primaries will be held -- the main question is whether a grassroots, citizen-driven effort to take back this seat can trump McCaul's millions of dollars. Michael McCaul's father-in-law is Lowry Mays, founder of Clear Channel Communications. McCaul is worth at least $287 million, and is currently the richest individual in Congress.
With Friday's announcement that SCOTUS stayed the redistricting maps and will review the case, it looks like the primaries for Congress and both houses of the Legislature will move to the May primary run-off date, since the maps won't be set -- and filing may not be extended or resume -- in time to let candidates file for whatever districts we end up with.
From Michael Li's excellent Texas Redistricting blog, here's the election calendar as it looks for the early voting periods for the partisan primary, municipal elections, and partisan run-offs and simultaneous Congressional, legislative primaries. Read the full post here. I added a few additional dates in [brackets].
February 21-March 2: Early voting period (for now) for the March 6 primary.
March 6: Primary election day (for now).
March 6-11: The Democratic and Republican parties hold their precinct conventions to select delegates for senate district and county conventions.
March 24: Democratic and Republican parties hold their senate district and county conventions and select delegates by senate district for their state conventions.
April 7: Deadline for counties to send mail ballots for the May primary runoff to military and overseas voters.
[April 30-May 8: Early voting for Austin City Council elections. added by KH]
May 12: Municipal and local elections in many Texas jurisdictions.
May 14-18: Early voting for primary runoffs and congressional/legislative primaries. (The state has not suggested a period for early voting for legislative and congressional primaries, but the normal primary early voting period is 10 days, which would cause it to overlap with the May 12 municipal elections.)
May 22: Primary runoff election day in Texas. This is also the date the state has suggested for legislative and congressional primaries.
[June 11-June 19, 2012: Early Voting, Austin municipal run-off election, if needed added by KH]
[June 23, 2012: Election Day, Austin municipal run-off election, if needed added by KH]
[Late July or early August: Primary run-offs for congressional and/or legislative primaries, if needed. added by KH]
I'm posting this not only to update y'all on what's happening here, but also to remind everyone that the Austin City Council decided in a 4-3 vote to keep our municipal elections in May, rather than use the state-provided opportunity to move them to November 2012. Laura Morrison, Kathie Tovo, Sheryl Cole, and Bill Spelman were the four votes for May -- just want to make sure all y'alls' Google alerts on your own names catch this!
Their rationale for preserving a May election and its usual abysmal below-10% turnout at a cost of almost $2 million to the City of Austin taxpayers was in the name of "upholding the charter" -- even though SB 100, the State Law that prompted election calendar switches, specifically allowed Austin to move their election without violating the charter. So basically that rationale was false. But, whatever. They also said it should be up to the will of the voters, but grassroots genius Mike Blizzard found a little-known measure approved by the Austin voters decades ago that allows the City Council to move the election if necessary. But, again, whatever -- all of these facts are meaningless in the face of an effort to preserve a no-turnout electorate that guarantees their re-election.
At the time, Travis County Clerk Dana DeBeauvoir said that in her professional opinion, it was best to move the Austin municipal elections to November to save money in contracting fees and purchase of soon-to-be-obsolete voting machines. Now, thanks to Abbott, SCOTUS, and the redistricting lawsuits, it is exceedingly likely that we are going to have a primary run-off / Congressional and Legislative primary election that begins two days after the Austin City Council elections end.
And that's only if the state truncates the Early Voting period for the primary run-off and congressional/legislative primary -- if the state gives the voters the full 10 day period, there would be overlap in early voting for partisan races and the municipal election.
Hey, I'm just glad I'm not going to be running any vote-by-mail programs this cycle. Three to five rounds of applications and ballot chasing? YIKES.
During the debate about whether or not to move the Austin municipal elections, Bill Spelman specifically said that holding non-partisan municipal elections alongside partisan November elections would confuse the voters. Color me crazy, but I am pretty sure that the election calendar we're going to have now -- statewide and county primary, municipal election, statewide and county runoffs and Congressional and legislative primary -- is going to be much more confusing.
It's unclear right now how much more money this election calendar shift might cost Austin taxpayers. Partially that depends on the time frame set for early voting for the statewide/primary run-offs and congressional/legislative primary elections. We won't fully know until March 6 anyways, because if any primary races go to a recount that will put all of our county machines on "lockdown" so none can be used for the May municipals. That means Austin would have to buy even more voting machines. That costs money in an exceedingly tight budget cycle when Council is already struggling to keep our libraries, parks, and pools open.
Oh, and if any of the congressional or legislative primaries go to a run-off, or any of the Austin municipal elections go to a run-off, we'll vote for a potential fourth and fifth time.
Remind me again why it was such a bad idea for a majority of our Council to exercise leadership and save money, increase turnout, and simplify the election calendar?
