Big Jolly Politics

politics in Harris County and Texas

Local debt bleeding us dry

by

Dear Editor:

Come November, while most people focus on candidates, our local officials bleed us dry with bond proposals and proportions. Some to save the roads, some to save our children. But, don’t be fooled, the lack of any real discussion on these issues is always done so we blindly bury ourselves in more and more debt. Does it matter who wins while on the same ballot we vote for more debt?

“$6,700,000,000.00!!!!!! That is the amount of local debt voters are being asked to vote on this November. Keep in mind voters were asked to vote on over $6,000,000,000.00 in May!!! There is no wonder Texas leads the nation in local debt. Only NY is ahead of Texas. Even CA is doing better.”

On the Dayton Bond issue:

All bond issues should be a no, as they are nothing more than future debt described as ‘for the children” or whatever pet project is wanted.

When school boards find themselves in budgeting crisis, it usually of their own doing for only planning for the ‘now’ and not the future. This is evident by the last bond to build the new high school which by the way is already too crowded. Forward thinking?

Now, they are back for more money.

“Nottingham Middle School is now 63 years’ old, Stephen F. Austin Elementary was built 53 years ago, and the district’s oldest facility is the main building at Colbert, built in 1929.” This is an example of planning and budgeting. So, in 60 years, those elected to do just that, never thought, never planned for what surely is a human fact of repairs and upgrades that would be needed? All facilities come with a life span. Officials had 60 years to be financially stable and plan for these replacements. Because they were not, they want a bond? So, the community now pays for inept budgeting?

Some icing added? Always! “At Dayton High School, they would like to build six tennis courts so that the Broncos tennis team will no longer have to practice at Eagle Point, ….” Where are the booster clubs for these organizations? Six lighted tennis courts and parking for 50 cars? Oh, and a new auditorium for 850 people, also a covering for the rodeo arena and resurfacing the track. Let’s not forget new showers and locker rooms for athletes. 87 million dollars is a large price tag, people. We must sift through our wants and our true needs.

Bonds are always a clever way used to deceive the public into debit. It is good measure to ALWAYS vote no to most bonds.

To be against a bond, the following is what will be said:

“You don’t care for children or their future. We must invest this money for our students to excel”

First, children excelling scholastically has nothing to do with this bond. That falls squarely on educators. Second, throwing money at a problem never solves it. We, as a nation and community, should learn this.

“This bond will only raise taxes by $20.00 for every $100,000.00 in property in the district.”

Yes. And doesn’t that sales line sound great? Ask yourself why the district doesn’t just ask you to vote on a $20.00 tax per property? This is a perfect example of how bonds twist thinking into forgetting the $87M in debt its truly creating. If they were to ask via taxation for these funds…do the math..it would be an unfeasible rise in taxes, WAY higher than $20.00 per $100K. What the
y will continue you to do is push this line of only costing you $20.00. What you must remember is this district is shouldering this community with $87 Million dollars in debt, and that is the bottom line, no matter how you twist numbers.

Break it out:

Dayton ISD population at 28,170.

That is $3,088.40 per person in new debt.
That is $12,353.60 of new debt per a family of four.

With over 60{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the ISD classified as disadvantaged, by the ISD’s own calculations, can a family afford $12,353.60? Also, the ISD is shrinking, the growth rate is -1.27.

· Total Proposition Amount ($): $87,820,000
· Individual Proposition Number: 1
· Individual Proposition Amount ($): $87,820,000
· City: Dayton
· County: Harris/Liberty
· Local Election: TBD
· State House Districts: 18
· State Senate Districts: 3, 4
· Number of Schools: 9
· Population in ISD: 28,170
· ISD Enrollment: 5,067
· ISD Growth Rate 2003 to 2013: -1.27{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}
· Current I&S: 0.168
· Current M&O: 1.04
· Total Tax Rate: 1.208
· {997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of Debt Service: 7.43{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}
· Proposed I&S: TBD
· Proposed Total Tax Rate: TBD
· Last Bond Election: September 21, 2002
· Last Total Proposition Amount ($): $15,400,000
· Carried/Defeated: Carried

This gets better, the total combined debt currently is $17 Million. Adding
$87 million more puts at a combined debt over $100 million.

Now, ask yourself, could you afford this amount of new debt? THIS is what they are truly asking for. Do not be fooled by the $20.00 being thrown around. The amount of debt being called for is what is above. Could that money be used for higher education for your children?

Can we agree there is something good in this bond? YES. However, the needs and the wants clearly need to be separated out. Do we need more tennis court than almost as many traffic signals in Dayton? Where are the booster clubs for the athletics? The tennis team, the ones who have a vested interest in building this should be raising money. Either they don’t have one, which begs the question how important is it to have this, or they won’t raise it themselves and expect that everyone should pay for this and not just the vested team. Same with the rodeo arena being covered. This bond has many wasteful, un-needed items. As most do. As written, we call for the community to reject this proposal.

Bottom line, we shouldn’t nor can we afford 87 MILLION dollars in debt. We have fire departments in this county that can’t even afford liability insurance on their trucks. Do we need $87 million wasted on pet additions to this bond?

Debt: http://localdebt.texastribune.org/

Bond Breakout: http://daytonisd.net//index.php?pageID=127565_3

District Growth and Population: http://localvoicesolutions.com/

District Growth and Population: http://localvoicesolutions.com/

Jeff LeBlanc
Dayton, Texas

Letter to Shoreacres City Council

by

City of Shoreacres graphicHonorable Mayor and Council Members,

Reference:  Proposed .844381 Tax Rate Hike

Be advised I am opposed to the proposed tax rate hike.

My reasons:

I believe the proposed .844381 tax rate is excessive and unfair to the citizens of this city.

When I compared the tax rates of 52 cities in Texas having populations between 1,351 and 1,758 with Shoreacres’ proposed tax rate it showed our city’s .844381 (replicates the 2013/14 rate) was the highest in the state in that population range.

Many citizens are already being assessed dual tax rate hikes.
•       Rate hikes from recent increased property value appraisals by the county.
•       Another from the continuation of the city tax rate of .844381.

As you are aware, the substantial increase in the appraised values of homes during fiscal year 2013/14 created additional funds for the city.  During the city budgeting process of last year property tax revenues were projected to be $769,498 for 2013/14, but thanks to unprecedented increases in appraisals of many houses the city tax revenue increased to over $811,000, creating over $42,000 in additional funds for the city.

During fiscal year 2014/15 you are projecting $850,000 property tax revenue if a .844381 rate is imposed.

Note:  Before hurricane Ike the tax rate was .700560.  In 2009 and 2010 the rates were increased to .884264 and.82467 to compensate for the loss of tax base from homes damaged or destroyed by hurricane Ike.  Since then, the tax base has gradually increased as houses were repaired and new ones constructed.  Recent city reports show the tax base is near the pre-Ike level and will likely surpass it during year 2015.

The City’s infrastructure currently is in good condition.  Funding for roads, the water distribution system, sewer lines and building in the immediate future should be minimal.  I recognize Council has already passed salary increases in the 8{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} range for Administration employees and in the 17{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} range for Public Works employees and lesser percentages for the Police Department.  I don’t know what citizens supported this action but apparently there wasn’t any serious objections since the budget proposal was passed by a majority vote of council.  I do know several Shoreacres citizens who live on fixed incomes.  Their pay hikes during the past two years amounted to 1.5 {997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} and 1.7{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} from Social Security, the same rate hike for recipients of federal pensions, and in the case of IRAs approximately ½ {997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} to 1{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} annual increase in their investment and retirement return.  In other words citizens on fixed incomes received only minimal increases in their checks during the past two years and expect the same during fiscal year 2014/15.

Recent councils have gone through efforts to ensure Shoreacres’ city employees achieve salary parity with employees of nearby communities.  However, I doubt if there was any effort by recent councils to achieve parity of Shoreacres’ tax rates with other Texas cities of comparable size.  The tax rate information of all of the cities in Texas is available on the Texas Municipal League website for review.  If you compared the tax rates of 52 cities in Texas having populations between 1,351 and 1,758 with Shoreacres’ proposed tax rate you will find our city’s .844381 is the highest in the state in that population range.

I encourage you to reconsider the proposed 2014/15 tax rate.  The city will be receiving additional revenue from increases in property value appraisals imposed by the county, and from the addition of several new houses to the tax base.  This should be the year to start reducing the city tax rate.

“The TML Survey website contains property tax base and tax rate data for all cities in Texas.”

Gerry Victor
Former Alderman Shoreacres City Council

 

On mental illness and David Dewhurst

by

letter-to-the-editor

(Editor’s note: As I mentioned earlier, I had the privilege of speaking at the Downtown Houston Pachyderm Club today. A moving speech against the tactics of Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst’s campaign was given by Judge Bill Henderson. Although readers will be unable to see the passion with which Judge Henderson delivered this speech, I asked him if I could republish it in full for you.)

First and foremost I want to tell you that what I am saying today is my opinion and I am not speaking for my employer, County Judge Ed Emmett. I have reason to believe that he will agree with a lot of what I am saying, but I want to make it clear that I am not speaking for him.

The issue of mental health has been put in play by the Dewhurst campaign. The accusation that Sen. Patrick sought treatment for depression 30 years ago and had to be hospitalized is despicable. It does not matter whether it was Commissioner Patterson or Gov. Dewhurst who made the accusation, the Dewhurst campaign has sought to benefit from the accusation. I personally believe it has backfired on the Dewhurst campaign because there are so many of us who have personally been treated for depression or have had close family members that were treated. In fact, I believe Sen. Patrick should be congratulated for seeking medical treatment for a medical condition and then following the advice of his doctors.

It made me angry that Gov. Dewhurst would do this. He has been an ardent supporter of increased resources for treating mentally ill Texans and to do what he has done is beyond inconceivable. But it was not until I read Susan Fordice’s article in yesterday’s Deer Park Broadcaster that i realized why I was so angry. I have placed copies of Ms. Fordice’s article on every table and anybody who doesn’t get one, I have more with me.

Let me read one paragraph in her article:

Stigma is a powerful and unnecessary deterrent to care for a person experiencing symptoms of a mental health concern. it is especially important for not only our families and friends, but also the media, elected officials, and others in leadership positions to view and to portray people with mental health issues sensitively and realistically; and to challenge the use of stigmatizing language which is common, often accepted and rarely questioned.

I am here today to challenge the use of stigmatizing language by the Dewhurst campaign. We are not talking about discouraging good people to run for public office because they have sought treatment for mental illness, although that may be one consequence. More importantly, we are continuing the stigmatization of seeking treatment for mental illness. Those veterans who come home from the battlefield who feel like they will be less of a person for seeking treatment. Or the mother who suffers from post partum depression but doesn’t believe she should seek treatment. We as a society owe it to those who are suffering from depression, whether temporarily or permanently, to encourage them to seek treatment. Senator Patrick has always included people who are unable to take care of themselves as one of the four groups that the government must care for and that is just part of the 80% that Sen. Patrick and I agree upon. To show him and others that I support individuals who seek medical treatment for their depression, he will get my support in this election. I thought I would probably support Gov. Dewhurst but I must make this statement.

Bill Henderson

Dishonesty in race for Galveston County Judge

by

letter-to-the-editorIn the debate between Michelle Hatmaker and Mark Henry, the Galveston County Judge has perpetrated another outrageous lie – this time using the local media as his forum for deceit. The Hatmaker Campaign has allowed Henry to make other false claims and exaggerations up to this point however, degrading Texas City for his own political ends has gone too far and he is now being called out to either apologize or become known as the biggest storyteller in County history.

In a recent newspaper candidate questionnaire, the County Judge responded to Question 13 (Does county government have a role in economic development? What is it?) with the outrageous falsehood that, “….Hollywood demonizes industry as a villain. My opponent did too, in a movie where she mocks Texas City, calling it “Chem City,” where “someday we’ll see the face of God through the ozone hole.” This sends the wrong message to our biggest taxpayers…“

The County Judge – along with every politician in America – would be well served to watch the movie he references, The Bracelet of Bordeaux, a 2007 family film written, produced, and edited by Frank Eakin and directed by Casey Kelly. Filmed entirely in The Woodlands, this children’s movie delivers the message that the bracelet (power) changes you and should only be used for good and only by the right people.

The Hixon family’s move to Chem City, Texas began with a theft from their new home and daughter Helen’s meeting of Marie Meir, a neighbor and new friend whose poodle was one of many victims of a dog theft ring. The crime ring is busted thanks to the proper use of power delivered by the bracelet – an artifact stored away in Marie’s grandmother’s attic – a magical bracelet from her life in Nazi Germany.

How ironic that this Austin Film Festival award winner with such a significant message for our youth has been used by a powerful official to perpetrate an outrageous lie upon the citizens and voters of Galveston County. 

The Hatmaker Campaign deserves an immediate apology for these lies as well as the newspaper used to publish his propaganda and the citizens and industries of Texas City who he defames.

Power and influence in the hands of the wrong people enables corruption – a valuable lesson taught by this children’s film and never better demonstrated than by the irresponsible behavior of the current Galveston County Judge. He more than anyone would be well served to learn the lesson imparted by The Bracelet of Bordeaux.

Cheryl E. Johnson
Citizen of Galveston County

Bill Frazer: City of Houston Audit Findings – The Tone at the Top

by

Editors note: This is a guest post from recent candidate for City of Houston Controller Bill Frazer.

“The tone set by top management—the corporate environment or culture within which financial reporting occurs—is the most important factor contributing to the integrity of the financial reporting process.” – (Report of the National Commission on Fraudulent Financial Reporting, October, 1987, Page 38)

Bill Frazer
Bill Frazer

As a result of my good friend Bob Lemer’s efforts for many years, the City of Houston finally released a long list of auditor’s reports. The release of these audit letters has received a lot of press lately, so I thought I’d walk you through the summary findings for the past seven years to illustrate what’s been going on, or not going on, with respect to the City’s systems for accounting and financial reporting.

It’s important to note that there has never been any report or indication of fraudulent reporting. I think when you get through reading this lengthy narrative you’ll agree that we still have some serious problems with the tone at the top, and that the City needs to clean up its accounting, reporting and internal controls.

A good start would be to immediately form an Independent Audit Committee, as highly suggested by the Government Finance Officers Association (the “GFOA”). This should be a top priority of the Mayor’s Office and Council Committee on Budget & Fiscal Affairs.

In its recommendation for audit committees the GFOA specifically states that “The audit committee should be formally established by… appropriate legal means and made directly responsible for the appointment… of any independent accountants…[and] all accountants thus engaged [should] report directly to the audit committee.”

Accounting and audit reports are dry and overly technical, so allow me to draw a simple analogy to help non accountants understand what’s going on.

While on vacation in California several years ago I noticed that they use a grading system for retail food establishments like restaurants, fast food places, bars, etc. The health inspector issues a card with the grade on it, a large bold “A”, “B” or “C: that the restaurant is required to post in plain site near the entrance, for all to see.

Most establishments get an “A”, which means “Generally Superior in food handling practices and overall food facility maintenance.” “B” means “Generally Good” and “C” means “Generally Acceptable.” There are a few B’s and C’s, but frankly I’d be reluctant to try them. Would you dine at a “B” or “C”?

Better still, let’s assume for a moment that you are an investor in a restaurant that got a “C” and you’re not only forced to eat there but have to make capital contributions to keep the place open. Management completely ignores the problem and hides the grade card from you. How would you feel about that?

There is a grading system for the reviews that auditors conduct on the internal controls of companies and government entities such as the City of Houston. If we could put letter grades on the auditing system, the City of Houston would have received a C (Significant Deficiency) in three of the past seven years and a D (Material Weakness) in four.

That’s right! Your tax dollars are supporting an administration that gets Cs and Ds in Internal Controls. Not only do they completely ignore the grades and the problems that cause them, they tried to hide the grade cards from public view.

Accounting and financial reporting systems in companies and municipalities have to meet minimum standards and have processes designed to provide reasonable assurance with regard to the reliability of financial reporting, effectiveness and efficiency of operations, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. This includes the safeguarding of assets and providing reasonable assurance that someone doesn’t walk off with or embezzle a lot of money.

Auditors test these systems during the financial statement audit and issue reports on their findings typically referred to as “management letters” or “internal control reports”.

It’s important to note at this point that even though the Management Letters were released last week, the exhibits and appendices were not. It remains to be seen if these additional exhibits will shed any more light on the matter.

Although Houston’s auditors have issued Management Letters for quite a number of years, the rules for reporting internal control weaknesses changed in 2006. So I’ll start there and will go through a set of findings over a seven year period. I’ll start with the report issued for the year ended June 30, 2006 and will go through the latest report issued for 2012. I have to stop there because the report for the year ended June 30, 2013 report hasn’t been issued yet. The deadline for the 2013 report is February 10th.

During a financial statement audit the auditors may notice internal control deficiencies. A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis.

If everything looks OK there are simply no findings reported. If the auditors notice any deficiencies they categorize them into two types. One type is a Material Weakness, a really bad grade, which means there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected on a timely basis.

The other type is called a Significant Deficiency, which is less severe than a Material Weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by “those charged with governance”.

In 2006 the auditors reported a Material Weakness in internal controls over financial reporting. This is at best a grade of D. They reported, in Finding 2006-1 “The City’s financial accounting and reporting process is not adequate to ensure that accounting transactions are being properly captured and recorded by the City in its financial statements.”

The City promised to fix this problem by conducting financial management literacy courses for City department heads and executive staff. After that, these people would review process and procedures to reduce the number of accounting errors. Estimated completion date was December, 2007.

The following year, Finding 2007-1 was issued as a Material Weakness, and stated: “The City’s financial accounting and reporting process is not adequate to ensure that accounting transactions are being properly captured and recorded by the City in its financial statements.”

Sound familiar?

The City promised again to fix this problem by conducting financial management literacy courses for City department heads and executive staff. But the estimated completion date was pushed back to December, 2008.

Moving on to 2008 and Finding 2008-1, a Material Weakness: “The City’s financial accounting and reporting process is not adequate to ensure that accounting transactions are being properly captured and recorded by the City in its financial statements.”

Wow. A trifecta~! The very same Material Weakness three years running.

This time the City promised to fix the problem through “… a process of quarterly reconciliations and financial statement preparation. Instead of waiting for the annual audit, these periodic reviews will improve the proper reporting of financial operations.” Promised completion date: December 2009.

I’m happy to report that the following year, 2009, there were no Material Weaknesses reported, so whatever they started doing seemed to be working. Instead, the issue was downgraded to a Significant Deficiency, reported as 2009-1: “While there was significant improvement in the City’s financial reporting process in the current year, the City should enhance this process by requiring responsible financial reporting personnel, at the department level, to perform analytical reviews of financial results on a periodic basis, and also review and approve material journal entries that affect their respective departmental financial results.”

The City’s response: “Departments will perform quarterly analytical reviews of financial results and review material journal entries.” Estimated completion date: June 2010.

Well, THAT didn’t work out so well. The following year the auditors reported that the issue was not adequately addressed, so they upgraded the issue back to a Material Weakness, as Finding 2010-1: “The City’s financial accounting and reporting process is not adequate to ensure that accounting transactions are being properly captured and recorded by the City in its financial statements.”

The City’s response this time: “City officials intend to form a team consisting of accountants and system personnel from several of the City departments to review the year-end financial accounting and reporting process and to make suggestions for improvements.” Promised completion date: June 2011.

June 2011 rolls around and VOILA~! The Material Weakness has now been demoted once again to a Significant Deficiency in the form of Finding 2011-1: “While there was significant improvement in the City’s financial reporting process in the current year, the City should enhance this process by requiring responsible financial reporting personnel, at the department level, to perform analytical reviews of financial results on a periodic basis, and also review and approve material journal entries that affect their respective departmental financial results.”

Significant Improvement? At least the auditors should be offering a discount for being able to just copy prior years’ findings. This time the City said: “The City will develop a procedure to support high level analytical reviews. A review of the journal entry approval level will also be made.” Estimated completion date: September 30, 2012.

You won’t believe the findings for 2012:

Finding 2012-1. “While there was significant improvement in the City’s financial reporting process in the current year, the City should enhance this process by requiring responsible financial reporting personnel, at the department level, to perform analytical reviews of financial results on a periodic basis, and also review and approve material journal entries that affect their respective departmental financial results.”

The City’s response: “Establish a policy and procedure to determine a financial threshold to trigger an automatic review by respective Departments which will also be monitored by Finance Department. In addition, any unusual transactions will be reviewed by Finance and Controller’s Office as they occur.” Estimated Completion Date — Policy to be completed by March 15, 2013

As one famous restaurant health code reporter used to say: “Slime in the ice machine.”

It’s simply time for the City of Houston to join the rest of the world and appoint an independent audit committee.

Bill Frazer

Texas: Still a One-Party State

by

Wayne Thorburn
Wayne Thorburn

This past year saw much fanfare surrounding the formation of “Battleground Texas” as a coordinated effort to “turn Texas blue.” As we approach the 2014 elections, however, the reality of the situation shows how difficult a task this would be. From the candidate filings posted by the Secretary of State’s elections division, it appears that the Texas Democratic Party already has, once again, conceded much of the state to the Republicans without a fight.

A considerable amount of media attention has been directed towards the candidacies of state senators Wendy Davis and Letitia Van de Putte for governor and lieutenant governor on the Democratic ticket. Less mention is made, however, of the little-known candidates for U.S. Senator, attorney-general, and the other statewide offices where the party is fielding someone. In fact, the Democrats are contesting only 12 of the 15 statewide offices on this year’s ballot, roughly the same percentage as they have run each time over the past eight election cycles. Democrats have ceded the same percentage of congressional districts to the Republicans in the upcoming election. Although admittedly no Democratic candidate has won statewide since 1996, the lack of success is even more guaranteed when the party fails to file a candidate for office.

The situation is even more depressing for a viable Texas Democratic Party as one goes down the ballot. For the Texas House of Representatives, voters in forty percent of the state’s districts will have no opportunity to support a Democratic candidate for state representative, almost guaranteeing a continued Republican majority before a single vote is cast. The same statistics hold true for the fifteen state senate districts up for election this year, where forty percent have no Democratic candidates.

Perhaps the most striking failure of the Democratic effort so far can be seen in a survey of the state’s 254 county courthouses. These courthouses have been historically the focus of Texas Democratic politics, with county officeholders backed by the votes of “yellow dog Democrats.” For many years the Republican Party did not even hold primary elections let alone run local candidates in many counties. The last two decades, however, have seen a sea-change in the state’s politics at the county level.

The number of elected county offices on the ballot in any one election can vary tremendously from as many as fifty to as few as five. Despite this variance, the Texas Democratic Party failed to file a single county office candidate in 86 counties – over one-third of the state’s total. When plotted on a map, these counties represent most of the Panhandle and Hill Country, areas where the GOP has historically obtained support. Also included is a wide swath of west central counties and even a pocket in East Texas, traditionally a Democratic stronghold. Included among those without a single Democratic county candidate are not merely small-town counties but also the more heavily-populated suburbs such as Denton, Montgomery, and Parker along with the urban areas of Randall, Bell, and Grayson counties. Not included here are an additional 33 counties where one lone Democratic candidate filed for one of the many county elected positions on the 2014 ballot. Together, this accounts for almost half of all Texas counties.

When one looks at specific offices, the situation is even more dramatic. Before a single vote is cast the Republican Party knows that it will control the office of county judge in 168 counties, almost two-thirds of the state’s total, since no Democratic candidate has filed for this office. This includes most of the twenty-nine suburban counties around the state’s four major metropolitan areas as well as two-thirds of the twenty-one smaller urban counties in the state. In fact, less than twenty percent of the state’s counties will see a November contest between a Democratic and a Republican candidate for county judge. The same result can be shown for the precinct two and precinct four county commission seats up in 2014, where statewide some 62.4{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} have no Democratic candidate, thus guaranteeing a Republican victory.

With 168 counties having no Democratic candidate for any county office on the ballot, it would not be surprising if several do not even hold a Democratic primary this March. That was the case in the presidential election year of 2012 when 13 counties provided no opportunity for voters to participate in the Democratic primary process. Until the beginning of this century, this was often the situation for the Republican Party but seldom, if ever, was there a county not holding a Democratic primary.

Former Democratic Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill is credited with the saying, “all politics is local.” Unless and until the Texas Democratic Party is able to rebuild a foundation of support throughout the state with viable party organizations recruiting candidates for county and district offices, its effort to promote a few top-level candidates will take a very long time to succeed. Just ask the Republicans who elected John Tower in 1961 and waited nearly twenty years before electing any other statewide official.

Wayne Thorburn ([email protected]) is author of the forthcoming Red State: An Insider’s Story of How the GOP Came to Dominate Texas Politics to be published by University of Texas Press this Spring.