Big Jolly Politics

politics in Harris County and Texas

So what’s happening with political party finances in Harris County?

by

I finally got around to looking at the 30 day out finance reports for the two major parties in Harris County. And as expected, the Harris County Democratic Party is well funded while the Harris County Republican Party is, shall we say, not.

Harris County Political Party 30 day Campaign Finance
Democratic Republican
Raised $ 231,904.11 $ 2,770.00
Spent $ 105,552.32 $ 1,240.00
Cash on Hand 9/24 $ 161,360.27 $ 1,760.05
Period (7/1/20 – 9/24/20) (8/3/20 – 9/24/20)

So, if you are one of the ones asking why there isn’t much activity from the HCRP via traditional communication avenues, I think you have your answer. Note the different reporting periods – that reflects the date that Keith Nielsen took over as chair of the HCRP.

Those numbers are from the County Executive Committee reports required by the state and do not include Federal reports. They are just as lopsided but there is one very interesting entry on the HCRP’s report filed yesterday.

BILL GATES 10230 NE POINTS DR SUITE 200
KIRKLAND, Washington 98033		 GATES FOUNDATION / CO-CHAIRMAN CONTRIBUTION 09/29/2020 5000.00 5000.00

$5,000 from Bill Gates? Huh. Who’d a thunk it?

If you are a Republican in Harris County, you’d better be out there doing non-traditional campaigning if you want your candidates to have a prayer.

In Shoreacres, we had a golf cart Trump parade!

 

 

Interview with Joe Danna for Sherriff

by

Joe Danna was kind enough to agree to be interviewed regarding his race for Sherriff.  Running against an incumbent Democrat in this election cycle is a difficult proposition, and he is to be commended for taking the time, effort, and expense of this uphill battle.  This interview focused on what his vision for the Sherriff’s office looks like, and how will he differ from the current incumbent.

He indicated that his priorities are taking politics out of the office, filling budgeted but unfilled positions within the office, and making sure the bad officers are identified and removed from the office.  He believes these steps will lead to better community relations and better service to the public.  To understand how all of this impacts law enforcement and the Sherriff’s office it’s best to start with an overview of the overall political climate.

It’s been discussed ad nauseam, but we live in a time where we have a soft on crime District Attorney, and criminal court judges are criminal friendly.  Criminals don’t fear committing crime, and he pointed out how this has the effect of having criminals from outside the county coming into Harris County to commit crime since the criminal justice system has become so criminal friendly.  It’s a deliberate calculation – crime is a safer proposition in Harris County than in the surrounding counties so they come here to commit crime.  Not only does this create a greater danger to the citizens of the county, but it also demoralizes law enforcement especially in the overall context of the Democratic party’s hostility towards law enforcement in general.  This, in turn, has lead to negative public safety and public service impacts.  He noted that the average response time for a hit and run, which if injuries are involved is at least a state jail felony, is four hours.

To address these concerns he has a plan to take politics out of the office and to fundamentally change the organizational structure to improve functioning of the office.  The organizational structure would change to where five individuals in the office would answer to him directly; they would have five individuals answer to them, and so on.  This decentralizes the power at the top of the organizational chart, and improves communication by eliminating bottlenecks with communication.  This also leaves a clearer picture of where responsibilities lie and how to address issues that arise.  From a decision making standpoint he wants to make decisions from a good of the Sherriff’s office prism with the belief that a happy functioning department will be better able to serve the public.

He was concerned about the various efforts to centralize power and staffing of the Sherriff’s office.  Adrian Garcia has proposed a plan that would have eliminated the Constable contract program and assumed it under the Sherriff’s office.  He believes this is a bad idea.  Although the idea was withdrawn by Commissioner Garcia the intent was clear – centralize the program under the Sherriff’s office.  This plan is especially concerning since the office is understaffed.  He noted that right now 101 budgeted and approved positions are vacant.  The failure to fill these positions seems like an under the table way to defund the office, and with Commissioner Garcia’s attempt to divert the Constable contract program to the Sherriff’s office this seems like a coordinated effort to decrease law enforcement effectiveness and weaken law enforcement’s capabilities to address crime.

The last area we covered is how his office could better enhance public safety if he is elected. In addition to filling the 101 positions noted above, he felt it was important to build better to build community relationships. He said this starts by making sure HCSO treats everyone equally regardless of race, gender, ideology, or the number of contacts they have had with law enforcement.  Each contact is a new contact and everyone in the county is on equal footing when they reach out to the Sherriff’s office for assistance.  Building community relationships is important because he noted that people tend to not get involved unless they are a victim, and cited Mothers Against Drunk Driving and Texas Equasearch as examples.  Building community relationships takes time, especially in this current political climate, and in the meantime he felt that immediate actions he could take are reallocating resources to areas of need – human trafficking only has three people assigned to the division – and to accept calls and investigate crimes that Houston Police Department is unable to investigate since the Sherriff’s office has jurisdiction county wide.  He also noted a willingness to actively identify and remove bad officers whether it’s 0.001% or 10% of the force.

The overall impression he left was that he would change the focus of the office.  Rather than politically oriented he would be office and public safety oriented.  Reallocation of resources to meet the current needs of public safety and filling the 101 available and funded positions alone would help to increase public safety.  The willingness to remove bad officers, and desire to treat each call and every individual on a clean slate every call should give comfort to the entire community.  The willingness to investigate crimes the Houston Police Department is unable to allocate resources to investigate will help to make sure everyone can receive assistance if they reach out for help.  All of this is especially important in our current political climate where criminals feel that it is safer to come to Harris County to engage in criminal behavior than to conduct crime in their own areas.

He is endorsed by: Mike Knox, The “C” Club of Houston, Texas Homeschool Coalition, J.L. Trahan (BIZPAC.US Executive Chariman), Representative Briscoe Cain, Michael Berry

Interview with Ted Heap

by

Ted Heap was kind enough to agree to be interviewed regarding his race for reelection as Constable for Precinct Five.  He was initially elected in 2016, and is one of the rare Republicans up for reelection. The success he has had in his first term supports his reelection.  While the interview cannot cover all aspects of his term in office he presented as exceptionally intelligent and well versed in policy and how his office can best serve the public.  He also came across as humble and having a servant’s heart noting at one point that the position is one of service and that a good law enforcement officer is a true public servant.  This interview focused on what the role of the Constable’s office is, and how the office has been able to successfully serve the public.

Precinct 5 is an unusual precinct in that it is extremely populated, and is a near even mix of city and county areas.  Although the county is broken up into 8 different Constable areas precinct five has a whopping 1.2 million people in the precinct.  This is in a county where the population estimated at 4.7 million by the Census Bureau, meaning this office handles approximately 25% of the county population.  Despite this, the average response time for a non-emergency call to the Constable’s office is 3 minutes 30 seconds, and the average response time for an emergency call is 2 minutes 50 seconds.

The constables are the primary agency to serve process in litigation, and to execute writs.  He noted the Constable’s office was originally legislatively enacted in the 1800s to, “keep the peace and squelch riots.” In modern times the city is the primary law enforcement responsibility within their jurisdiction, and the Sherriff’s office is the primary responsibility in unincorporated areas leaving the Constable’s office as a supporting law enforcement agency, and they respond to approximately a quarter million service calls in the City of Houston and an additional quarter million service calls in unincorporated Harris County each year.

The Constable’s office is a legislative creation, but as with all county agency’s is at the whims of Commissioner’s Court for their budget.  When the Commissioner’s Court allocates the budgeted amount, the Constable is free to use it at their discretion.  This obviously is an area of concern with Commissioner Adrian Garcia proposing to eliminate the Constable contract program.  Heap noted that the contract for the Constable program is the exact same, to the penny, as the Harris County Sherriff’s Office contract program, and the same contracts are entered into with the County Attorney office.  Eliminating the program would only serve to decrease the law enforcement services available since the Sherriff’s office has primary law enforcement responsibility in the unincorporated areas of the county and the Constable’s office serves in a secondary roll and therefore has a greater ability and neighborhood connection already established.

Cooperation with other law enforcement agencies is important to Constable Heap.  His office reports statistics to both the city and the county, and he noted cooperation is high and they can access city information and exchange intelligence with Houston Police Department.  He also indicated this level of cooperation and technology sharing is new, having only started 3-4 years ago, and that more progress needs to be made in this area.

Constable Heap has made community relations a priority with his office. He stated, “We don’t answer a call and say show me your voter registration card.  We help everyone without consideration of their background and status.”  To further this goal, he has created a community outreach division, citizens police academy, teen police academy in Spring Branch and Katy ISD, and created a Hispanic, African American, Muslim, and Asian community liaison.  He also expressed support for Councilman Edward Pollard’s creation of the District J patrol noting that it fills in a gap in enforcement of city ordinances since his office does not have authority to enforce the ordinances.  

He believes that crime deterrence takes many things, but education, relationships, visibility, and quick response times are important.  The quick response times noted above allow the officer to secure a scene and preserve evidence and catch more suspects.  To increase visibility, he has all his investigators conduct investigations in uniform and in marked patrol cars.  His office will investigate property crime the city and county agencies do not or cannot investigate, and he has instructed his investigators to follow up with the victim on every case to see if they have more evidence or information than what was originally discovered.  Access and cooperation are important also.  He added a victim’s assistance office to the west side of Houston to make the office more accessible to other areas of the precinct.  He is working with the Mexican Consulate regarding their plans to move into Precinct Five.

All his efforts are having success.  His office just busted a three-year long theft ring where individuals were walking into Home Depot stores filling shopping carts, and walking out without payment.  In the bust they were able to recover $140,000 worth of merchandise and an additional $40,000 in cash.  This isn’t just a single example, when I told him of stores in Sharpstown where similar activity was occurring, he gave me the name of a specific person in his office to contact and asked me to pass on the information to the stores.

Although it doesn’t precisely fit in anywhere else in the article it’s noteworthy that his precinct has no fleet debt. 

Constable Heap has very quietly made remarkable strides for Precinct 5.  Whether it’s community relationship efforts, involvement with high risk students, breaking down technology sharing barriers with other law enforcement agencies, or the quick response times leading to criminal apprehension he has made remarkable strides for the precinct in his first term in office.  We are all better off for his dedication, and based on the merits of his performance he deserves another term in office.  He has the following endorsements that are important for law enforcement related races:

  • Houston Police Officers Union (HPOU)
  • Harris County Deputies Organization
  • Harris County Deputy Constables Association
  • National Constables and Marshals Association
  • Organization of Spanish Speaking Officers (OSSO)
  • Mexican American Sheriff’s Organization (MASO)
  • Houston Police Retired Officers Association
  • Combined Law Enforcement Association of Texas (CLEAT)
  • Mexican American Bar Association of Houston (MABAH)
  • The Blues Police Magazine
  • Texas Humane Legislation Network
  • HRBC

Save Democracy. Vote in Person!

by

leo vasquez
Leo Vasquez

By Leo Vasquez (@LV_HTX)

As the former official Voter Registrar for our county, I was asked by my elder colleagues at a monthly luncheon I recently attended whether they should vote in person or request absentee ballots to vote by mail. After the lunch, I regretted that I did not more emphatically urge them to vote in person.  The risks of voting by mail far outweigh the perceived protections it affords.  A vote cast by personal appearance not only supports the democratic election process and guarantees your vote will be counted, it also makes it easier for elections administrators to efficiently count your vote. By opting to mail in your ballot, especially in this 2020 election, not only do you risk your vote being rejected for any number of reasons (as highlighted, below), but you unnecessarily add fuel to a potential vote counting crisis.

This mania scaring our citizens into an unnecessary need to vote-by-mail is completely unreasoned. It is perplexing as to why political leaders and so many elections administrators are urging people to vote-by-mail. If not for seeing video clips of these officials actually making the statements, I would think it likely this must-vote-by-mail concept is being spread by foreign bots and trolls. And, putting on my tinfoil hat for a moment, my conspiracy theory is that the foreign influencers are, indeed, fueling the must-vote-by-mail nonsense via social media, essentially giving U.S. citizens the misimpression that they might lose their opportunity to vote if they do not vote by mail and that voting in person is a suicide-by-Coronavirus death sentence. Not since they dreamed up the buy-all-the-toilet-paper scheme have the Russian trolls seen such success. [Now removing my tinfoil hat.]

Even if you have the option of voting absentee by mailing in your ballot, if you care about a smooth election and results being accurately tabulated and quickly announced –meaning you care about maintaining the Democratic Process in the United States–  you should make every effort to cast your vote in person. If you are physically able to get yourself to a polling location either during your jurisdiction’s Early Voting period or on Election Day, please make that effort.

Safe & Easy In-Person Voting

Back when the Coronavirus was seemingly running rampant and unchecked early in the year, there may have been some basis for extra caution. Today, by contrast, the virus is very much in check across the country. We know how to treat it.  Most new cases are asymptomatic. We know the simple personal measures to take in order to virtually eliminate the chances of possibly catching the virus (i.e., wear a mask, wash your hands, socially distance). And elections administrators will take extra precautionary measures to protect the health of voters at the polls.

In the home of Houston, Texas, the Harris County Clerk (who currently serves as the county’s elections administrator) has taken extraordinary measures to ensure the health safety of voters in our nation’s third-most populous county: Those waiting in lines will be socially distanced. At check-in, there is a big plastic screen between voters and the masked-up poll workers. They give you a little, rubber fingertip cover to use when touching the electronic voting machines. The voting machines are spaced apart from each other. And, they give you a little wet wipe disinfectant packet to wipe down the voting machine. … The voting process is safer than going to a grocery store, the pharmacy, a restaurant, your place of worship, your place of work, or your local peaceful protest!

Leaders across the nation are taking steps to make voting in person easier. In Texas, for example, Governor Abbott has even expanded the Early Voting period to a full eighteen (18) days, October 13ththrough October 30th. Most days in Harris County the polls will be open 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. and there will be at least one day during Early Voting where several polling locations will be open 24-hours! The old-school traditionalists among you can, of course, wait until the actual Election Day to cast your vote. All this is to say that a voter will have ample opportunity to vote in person and avoid long lines.

Counting (or Rejecting) the Ballots

Elections administrators and county clerks are not geared up to efficiently and effectively receive, process, and tabulate hundreds of thousands of ballots received by mail. It is a tedious, time-consuming, manual, and often highly-subjective process. If elections administrators strictly follow the letter of the law(s) for accepting mail-in ballots, significant percentages of these mailed-in ballots are sure to be rejected.

Mailed-in and absentee ballots need to be cross-checked against the original, signed voter registration application. A notable number of the signatures on the ballots will be obviously fraudulent and glaring mismatches, so those ballots will slow the review process and should be rejected.  Then there is the screening for the dotting of the I’s, the crossing of the T’s, and the checking of the boxes needing checking.  Again, per the letter of the law(s), ballots filled-out incorrectly should be rejected.  Further complications are compounded by late delivery with timely postmarks, late delivery with no postmark, spoiled/damaged ballots, tampered ballots, etc. Most of these mailed-in ballots will also be rejected. The accumulation of all these rejected ballots will inevitably cause calls for lawsuits across the country.

Bipartisan Alignment

America’s voting systems are not geared toward receiving vast quantities of ballots submitted by mail. Remember George Bailey calming his account holders and saving his Bailey Building & Loan bank in Frank Capra’s Christmas classic, It’s a Wonderful Life? If all of his account holders (read: registered voters) had all at once demanded their cash (aka, ballot-by-mail), his bank would have collapsed. That is not the way banking works. Sure, there is always cash on hand available for those who need it, as is the case for absentee voting for those special circumstances who need it. But the standard is that U.S. citizens vote by personal appearance either during the ample early voting period or on Election Day.

Albeit for differing reasons, both sides of the aisle should agree on this principle of “Please vote in person if you are physically able.” Republicans sincerely want to minimize the possibilities of fraudulent votes slipping through the system, which is significantly less likely to occur when people are voting in person, but is easier to attempt via the anonymity of mailed-in ballots. Democrats want to avoid giving Republicans a chance to claim malfeasance, which becomes a stronger argument if mail-in percentage results differ substantially from the in-person results. No one should want to increase the chance that their vote will be rejected. Everyone should want to guarantee their vote is counted. And both sides should recognize that the longer the time needed to count sacks of mailed in ballots, the more screaming –and suing– there will be from both sides.

Don’t contribute to the chaos. Help the democratic process. Vote in person.

Leo Vasquez lives in Houston, Texas, is a business strategy advisor and is an advocate for evidence-based practices and good government. You can find him on Twitter at @LV_HTX or visit his website, leovasquez.com for more information.

The Reality of Voter Registration Records

by

leo vasquez
Leo Vasquez

By Leo Vasquez (@LV_HTX)

To safeguard our electoral process, Americans need to understand the realities of maintaining voter registration records and the potential chaos which is sure to result from states mailing out ballots to all “voters” recorded in their databases.  Plans to have all voting occur by mail suffer not from the malintent of their proponents, but rather from a naively Pollyanna-esque hope that such a plan will not trigger significant, unintended, negative consequences. An unacceptable percentage of every official voter registration database is inherently out-of-date.

I served for roughly two years as the Voter Registrar for Harris County, Texas. Harris County, the home of Houston, Texas, is the third-most populous county in the United States, with a population ranking greater than half of the states in the country. At the time, there were just about two million voter registration records in our database. Today there are almost 2.4 million.

It is important to understand the distinct difference between voting absentee versus mailing ballots to the entire voter registration database. The former – absentee voting – involves those qualified to cast their ballots on an absentee basis specifically requesting a ballot from their voting administrator. In this request process, the absentee voter has specified their current, up-to-date mailing address. This process increases the probability that these absentee ballots are highly likely to arrive at the correct place as delivered by the U.S. Postal Service and improves the accuracy of current voter roll data. In contrast, all-vote-by-mail plans will send physical ballots to the large number of inaccurate, out-of-date addresses present in every voter registration database.

While many Americans live in the same home for virtually their entire adult lives, a notable percentage change residences frequently, especially in urban areas where there exist many options for where one lives. People move. People die. Prompt notification to voter registrars of these common occurrences is rarely high on people’s lists of things to do surrounding these events. Have you received mail for a former resident that is not directed to you? You are not alone. Per the U.S. Census Bureau figures, in any given two-year voting cycle, upwards of twenty (20%) percent of residents in a given jurisdiction may move.

Do the math on Harris County, Texas: that’s almost 500,000 out-of-date addresses.

My real world experience as voter registrar also contradicts the utopian view of voter registration that denies the reality of fake voter registrations and the legal-but-improbable registrations. During my tenure as Voter Registrar, we exposed a fraudulent voter registration program submitting thousands of fake voter registrations. While we caught a great number of these, it is inevitable that many others dotted all the I’s and crossed all the T’s sufficiently to cause them to be input to the voter rolls. In other instances, homeless people are registered using their “current address” at shelters or other random-but-valid addresses. By law, voter registrars are mandated to enter these records to the official voter rolls even though there is little chance these individuals will actually receive correspondence at that address months or years later.

Good solution. Bad moniker.

There exists a procedure for cleaning up and maintaining the accuracy of the voter rolls. Unfortunately, this is referred to as “purging” the database. Is there any context where the verb purge has a positive connotation? No. It sounds like you are going through a painful process of getting rid of something bad. We need to rename it something like “confirming” the voter roll and it should be positively characterized as prudently maintaining an up-to-date and accurate database.  A voter registrar cannot unilaterally purge or confirm the voter database for no reason. There must be a trigger such as receiving notice of a person’s death, a voter registration card being returned by the USPS as undeliverable, or a voter not voting in multiple election cycles. Under all of the above scenarios, the voter record is not immediately deleted, but rather placed in “suspense” pending the voter returning a letter confirming they [are still alive and] want to remain registered or simply showing up in the next general election cycle and confirming they still wish to remain registered. Thus, it is a long process to remove, i.e., purge, someone from the voter roll, consequently, maintaining an inherent level of inaccuracy in the voter registration database.

Ironically, the same people always fighting cleaning up the voter roll per the law – and per common sense – are the same ones advocating for implementing all-mail-in-voting. If they had allowed for, and encouraged, proper maintenance of voter registration records there would be less argument against the all-vote-by-mail idea. However, as it stands, there exists an unacceptable percentage of bad addresses in every local voter registration database.

Let’s not make things worse…

Even under normal circumstances, the process for reviewing and accepting mailed-in absentee and provisionally-cast ballots is a less-than-scientific process. Everyone who argues for all-mail-in-voting should first be required to have participated in or observed a ballot review board process.  Remember the hanging chads? Well, this process is often worse than that. Mailed-in absentee ballots need to be cross-checked against the original, signed voter registration application. A significant number of the signatures on the ballots are obvious and glaring mismatches. Further complications are compounded by late delivery with timely postmarks, late delivery no postmark, damaged ballots, tampered ballots, etc. This review is a manual, time-consuming process and is often very subjective.  With absentee and provisional ballots only being a relatively tiny percentage of the overall votes cast, their review is a doable task. However, quickly doing it for hundreds of thousands of ballots would be a nearly herculean task. Mailing ballots to all registered voters simply exacerbates a process already rife with the opportunity for error.

At a very optimistic minimum there are inherently at least five (5%) percent bad addresses in any given voter registration database. Hopeful optimism places that figure over at least ten (10%) percent. And, pessimistically but most realistically, the bad addresses are over twenty (20%) in major urban areas. How often are elections decided by a smaller margin than these percentages? Mailing ballots to all of those on the voter roll will result in these same percentages floating about as tempting fodder for unscrupulous actors willing to do anything to ensure their preferred candidate wins the election.

For those who qualify for absentee voting, they still have that option available. In person voting does not suppress anyone’s ability to vote and states are taking steps to ensure there is plenty of opportunity for in-person voting. Texas has extended the Early Voting period to three (3) weeks and voting administrators have implemented every recommended health safety precaution possible. In-person voting is safer than going to a grocery store.

2020 has given us enough problems. It does not make sense to create more problems by implementing all-mail-in voting.

Leo Vasquez lives in Houston, Texas, is a business strategy advisor and is an advocate for evidence-based practices and good government. You can find him on Twitter at @LV_HTX or visit his website, leovasquez.com for more information.

Texas 14th Court of Appeals denies assault as protected speech

by

From the InBox:

Orlando Sanchez applauds the Texas 14th Court of Appeals Decision in Assault Case

On December 28, 2018, Orlando Sanchez stood as the lone conservative advocating on behalf of all Houston’s school children.  In a widely publicized press conference, Orlando stood silent as union and Antifa-inspired protesters threatened him and others in attendance.  Finally, after multiple calls to the police for protection, Orlando was assaulted from behind by having a bottle of water poured on his head.  The assault was captured by every camera in attendance.

Sanchez sued the assailant, who won dismissal in a District Court under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA).  The trial court opined that the assault was protected under free speech and under the TCPA and dismissed Sanchez’s case because Sanchez sought to silence the assailant.  Sanchez appealed the ruling to the 14th Court of Appeals.  Even the Houston Chronicle’s Editorial Board decided to pile on Sanchez, giving his lawsuit against his assailant a “Thumbs Down”, describing the suit as, “frivolous”.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Thumbs-up-down-Orlando-Sanchez-Dr-Evil-and-13602884.php

This morning, in a landmark case, the COA ruled that the TCPA does not provide a shield to those who commit assaultive acts in the name of political protest.  “We hold that the TCPA cannot reasonably be construed to protect assault as an exercise of the right of free speech.  Assuming that (the assailant) intended to communicate a message on a matter of public concern by his act of pouring water on Sanchez, we do not construe the TCPA to apply to such conduct because doing so contravenes the act’s express purpose and would lead to absurd results the legislature could not have intended”, the Opinion stated.

 

In reaction to the COA’s ruling, Sanchez stated, “It’s a great day in Texas when the Court of Appeals recognizes a citizen’s right to speak in the public square, without fear of assault.”

###

Good. A lot of people laughed at Orlando for doing this but not me. You might think that a bottle of water being poured over your head for speaking out is cool but maybe someone is not quite as peaceful as Orlando and would beat the crap out of that idiot. Which would be perfectly fine by me but they would probably get arrested.

Keep going O.