It’s interesting how a little bit of research can change your mind about a race. I came into this primary season expecting to vote for current Harris County Republican Party Chair Paul Simpson. That might come as a surprise to you and to Paul but it is true. The overwhelming amount of emails we get promoting the changes in the HCRP had me convinced that he would be the best choice among the three people running. After all, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right?
Well, here’s the problem. It’s kinda, sorta broke. And while Simpson certainly has increased fundraising as promised, he’s spending more than he’s bringing in. That’s a fact, at least if HCRP Treasurer Cindy Siegel’s campaign finance reports are correct.
We’ll get back to the finances in a bit but there are a lot of other things that point to things not being quite as rosy as Chairman Simpson says they are. Now, I know, the Simpson folks are already going nuts that I would even bring this up but I’m not the only one. Whether or not you like former HCRP Chair Gary Polland, you can’t argue with the facts that he lays out.
As we move into primary season, it is important to look at what progress the current leadership of the Harris County Republican party has made. If you are following the campaign for Chairman, you have read a lot of bragging by the current chair Paul Simpson. But what matters are the facts.
We should judge a political party on results and turnout, so let’s first review election results by comparable election years 2014 (Simpson) to 2010 (previous Chairman):
- Straight party Republican vote (number of votes) – 290,355 in 2010 down to 254,006 in 2014;
- Straight party Republican votes (percentage) – 54.33{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} in 2010 down to 54.26{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} in 2014;
- Votes for Republican candidate for Governor – 379,516 in 2010 down to 349,639 in 2014;
- Turnout – 41.67{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} in 2010 down to 33.65{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} in 2014; and
- Down ballot races – Republicans won every countywide race in 2010 with the sole exception of Governor where we had a popular “conservative” Democrat to run against, unlike in 2014 when a liberal woman was running.
Next, let’s look at the party organization and see how it’s doing:
- Number of Precinct Chairs – 540 in 2012 down to 452 in 2016;
- Percentage of precincts with Republican Precinct Chairs – 51{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} in 2012 down to 45{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} in 2016;
- Turnover – 50{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of Senate District Chairs have resigned or chosen not to re-run since Simpson took office;
- A significant number of Precinct Chairs have resigned or elected not to re-file since Simpson took office;
- Republican Election Judges for Primary Election – Concern was voiced at the last HCRP Executive Committee Meeting about lack of vetting of Election Judges by Simpson leading to Democrats running Republican primaries in precincts;
- Election Judges for General Election – Chairman Woodfill went to court to support Republican Election Judges (and alternates). Simpson has discouraged Precinct Chairs from even serving as Election Judges; and
- In 2010, every polling location had a Republican Election Judge or Alternate Judge position filled by a Republican. In 2014 under Simpson, more than 50 polling locations had no Republican Judge or Alternate Judge!
Next, party finances:
- Income – Contributions have increased substantially, but unfortunately the expenses are through the roof;
- Expenses – Expansion of staff overhead and move to Wynnwood increased operation expenses, including a significant increase in monthly rent from the former headquarters, as well as having to pay for both headquarters at the same time for several months;
- At the 2015 Executive Committee, current HCRP treasurer Cindy Siegel reported that the party was short of having the money to pay monthly expenses;
- Campaign database – Software (Precinct Manager Program) developed “on his (Simpson) own time and on his own dime” was discarded soon after his election in favor of an expensive alternative controlled by outsiders;
- Overall assessment – Huge increase in fundraising expenses with little positive net to negative results.
The increase in donations is being squandered on unnecessary overhead.
Stunning. At least it is for me after believing most of the emails that Simpson sent out. Sure, I knew he wasn’t telling the truth about Campaign for Houston but I let it slide because I believed the rest of it. Precinct chair recruitment up! Fundraising up! Wow.
But I’m not taking Polland’s word for it anymore than I should have taken Simpson’s word. Before I even read Polland’s piece today I had found the problems with the fundraising by reviewing not only the HCRP’s campaign finance reports but also by reviewing the campaign finance reports for Simpson and for the PAC he is closely aligned with, the Houston Realty Business Coalition.
Simpson took office in June of 2014. The following spreadsheets contain all contributions and expenditures between 7/1/2014 and 2/15/2016 for the HCRP, the HRBC, and the Paul Simpson campaign. I would urge you to review the sheets to see not only the raw numbers, but the links between the three and the change from the HCRP being a grassroots organization to something very much different.
Harris County Republican Party
Houston Realty Business Coalition
Stunning. Or did I already say that?
During the 19 months that Simpson has been Chair, the HCRP has raised $1,734,754.28 at the state and local level. That is indeed impressive. Here is the problem. During those same 19 months, the HCRP has spent $2,055,031.29 at the state and local level. Ooopsie.
To see how far the party has transformed from a grassroots organization to…something not grassroots, take a look at the average and median contributions for the HCRP under Simpson. The average contribution at the state and local level during those 19 months was $8,673.77. The median contribution was $2,500. Compare that to the previous 19 months under former chair Jared Woodfill.
11/01/2012 – 05/31/2014 |
07/01/2014 – 02/15/2016 |
|
Number of unique contributors |
439 |
147 |
Total funds raised |
$673,782 |
$1,734,754 |
Average contribution |
$659 |
$8,674 |
Median contribution |
$125 |
$2,500 |
Still think the HCRP is a grassroots organization? Three times the number of contributors. The difference in average and median contributions is astonishing.
I always focus on the state campaign finance reports but to be fair there is a portion of the HCRP activities that are considered Federal. For those same 19 months, the HCRP reported $1,256,899 in contributions and $1,285,195 in expenditures, a net loss of $(28,296). If you want to view the reports, here is the information you need:
State – Texas Ethics Commission, Filer ID 00025207 (main) and Filer ID 00023764.
Federal – FEC Campaign Finance, Committee ID C00326835
Browse around those spreadsheets and you’ll find a lot of interesting similarities. What is really fascinating to me is how much the three groups intersect in donors and expenditures. One vendor, Mammoth Marketing Group, stands out. This group is an establishment, Austin political insider consulting firm. Between the three groups, Mammoth has received $550,011.93 in the 19 months Simpson has been in charge. And if you look at Simpson’s overall campaign finance reports, his campaign has paid Mammoth a mind boggling $287,759.25 for consulting and strategy since he began his campaign in 2013. For an elected position that pays nothing, nada, zip, zilch.
Amazing. Do you now have any doubt whatsoever as to why the HCRP is now silent on illegal immigration, abortion, and gay marriage?
The finance reports can also put to rest Simpson’s claim to have led the fight against HERO. Here is what Simpson said in his email titled “Why I’m Running for Re-Election”:
Led grassroots efforts in 2015 Houston elections to defeat HERO and to elect candidates in the runoff, yielding the closest Mayor’s race in over 50 years.
Now, I’m not going to call him a liar but I am going to tell you how I know that his statement is false. Click on the HCRP campaign finance spreadsheet above, sort it by date, and then compare the amount of money the HCRP spent before and after the November 2015 city elections. Remember, the election was held November 3, 2015. Here is what you’ll find.
Expenditures before November 3 – If you go back to Sept 1st and stretch your results to include food, etc, you’ll find about $2,000 spent on the city elections.
Expenditures after November 3 – Between Nov 3 and the Dec 12th runoff, the party spent $208,000.
So yes, Simpson did help during the runoff. In fact, the party became an extension of the Bill King campaign. But HERO was decided on November 3rd – the party and Simpson did not lead the effort to defeat HERO, in fact, they refused to participate.
In any other election year, Simpson’s exaggerations about his record, his penchant to take credit for other people’s work, the organizational change away from the grassroots, and the bloated state of the party would make me vote against Simpson.
But not this year.
Have you ever heard the term “too big to fail”? That is exactly what we are facing in the chair race. Simpson has built an organization that is too big to fail in a presidential election year. I know both of the guys running against Simpson, Rick Ramos and Tex Christopher. Good people. But neither one of them could operate the system that Simpson has built. Within a month of being elected, they would be closing the doors because they cannot go to big business and get the same funding that Simpson can. Big business knows that both men would speak out on the social issues confronting our society and they surely don’t want that, as evidenced by the Simpson administration. So that avenue of funding would be closed. The grassroots would come back but they cannot fund an organization as big as Simpson has built.
The bottom line is that I don’t think we have a choice but to re-elect Simpson. It would be a disaster to the entire Republican slate in November if the HCRP cannot function. Perhaps the Executive Committee can start to reign him in or he’ll see the problems with his current methods and begin to make corrections.
One thing is certain. Simpson is going to have to do better in getting the vote out this November. After the 2014 election, when I would tell people that voter turnout was down significantly, they looked at me like I was nuts because of the “sweep”. But as Polland points out above, turnout was down. Significantly. Why? Is it because Simpson refused to talk about the big three social issues? I think so. People need a reason to turnout. I hope he thinks about that.
Don Hooper says
Better explanation as to why he was defending Devon Anderson at the Downtown Pachyderm.
Lauren Taylor says
Young voters (like under 50) are sick to death of hearing about the three social issues. Talk economics, talk business. Leave the social issues alone.
County chair is a thankless position, and was left in a state of confusion by the last chair. Let’s give Simoson a little more time to figure it out. Easy to be critical, and god knows republicans are great at that, but in reality, it’s a lot of work, there was a lot of clean up to do.
And while we are comparing straight ticket voting, from one year to the next, what I would be interested in seeing is how the whole country faired? How major counties in the nation did….I would think there is probably a trend w younger voters to not straight party vote everywhere, not just in Harris co.
david jennings says
Lauren,
Your blanket statement about young voters isn’t backed up by data. In fact, some of the most fervent supporters of including social issues are from young people. You should go to a pro-life rally sometime and check the ages of the participants. And young folks surely are as interested in illegal immigration as any other age group. You might be right on LGBT issues because of the indoctrination by the education system over the past couple of decades.
It’s bad form to blame your predecessor for the problems you control for two years. Sure it is a lot of work but Simpson wanted that work and knew how hard it would be.
When I’m interested in something, I go look it up.
DJ
Lauren Taylor says
Well great. Give me the stats. I’m 35 I’ve worked in politics since I was 19, very few younger folks want to talk social issues. So show me the stats in it. The research I have seen shows otherwise.
Jack says
It appears that the “pay for play” group leaders have much credibility on this blog which is surprising. I can understand why they would find fault with the current chair who has established independence and neutrality of the HCRP. The source for this post was and is a close associte of Jared Woodfill, the past HCRP Chair. and the source is also the head of ……Conservative Review a successful pay for play organization as well as a past Chair of the HCRP. It seems logical that your source, Gary Polland wants back in and heat taken off his money making successful slate publication.
In 2010 I was a candidate for a State Rep position. The Linkletter approached me for an interview. I gave it and was asked to buy advertising space. I was funding my Primary campaign and told my consultant No. Terry Lowry came back with very large discount and my consultant advised me to take it. Then Big Jolly (Jennings) accuses me of buying the endorsement and he used an interview with an opponent and his father as a basis of his attack on me. I was certainly less experienced than David Jennings and thank him for telegraphing the style and tactics of Big Jolly and the Pay For Play scheme.
I understand another one of your authors has agreed to or considerating writing a article for the Linkletter, high on the Pay For Play list condemning a candidate.. Is this true ?
Jack says
Above from my hand held phone and not checked for spelling or puncuation.
david jennings says
Jack,
Why do you continue to do this? Every four or five months you pop up slamming us and telling us how we should be doing business. If you don’t like it, don’t read it. It’s really pretty simple.
You never offer anything worth responding to. For instance, you say my “source” for this was Gary Polland. No, my source for this was my own work on the campaign finance reports. I happened to see Polland’s work and thought others should see it. I’m sure that some people have motives for removing Simpson. I do not. I will be voting for him, as I noted.
I’m sorry that you are still butt hurt about my exposing your purchased endorsement many years ago. Most people would have moved on.
As a matter of fact, Don Hooper did write a short piece for the Link Letter. That’s his business and I’m happy for him. Turns out that we all can agree on pro-life issues. Go figure.
You can’t keep walking into someone’s home and insulting them without the host at some point getting tired of it. I enjoy honest disagreements but you don’t bring anything but petty whining.
DJ
Jack says
If you do not think I offer anything worth responding to why are you doing so. Let me suggest that you block me out of your blog if you want.
How you arrived at your comments about me with regard to The Pay for Play some time ago is consistent with how you arrive with much of what you publish now. Conjecture is presented as reality and quite honestly the fiction you mix in with reality that attempts to undermine people deservedly or not is more interesting to the Democrats than you know. I do think some of Big Jolly’s publications are very worthwhile.
I thought what I wrote was mild but if you want to block me out do so and stop whining !
Cypress Texas Tea Party says
Do you have any evidence to back up this statement you made: “Simpson has discouraged Precinct Chairs from even serving as Election Judges” I haven’t seen that and do not believe that it is true.
david jennings says
David,
I didn’t write that, Gary Polland did. And it is hard to believe. But I know Polland and he would not have put that out there if he didn’t have proof in the form of someone telling him that Simpson did this.
DJ
Erich says
Pre-2014 editions of the Precinct Chairman’s Handbook stated, “Primary Election – Working at the Polls. In primary elections, HCRP County Chairman requires that their Precinct Chairs be the Election Judge or find a replacement to run the elections…” Clearly, the previous administration expected Precinct Chairs to run elections in their precincts.
Contrast that with what it says on one of the handouts I received at an April 2015 Precinct Chairman Training event, listing Precinct Chair Duties, which states: “The precinct chair has the opportunity to serve as Election Judge or Alternate Judge in the precinct polling place on Election Day.” An opportunity is not the same as an expectation.
On multiple occasions I have personally heard Paul say that he prefers Precinct Chairs to find someone else to run elections so they can be getting out the vote on Election Day (which of course they can’t be doing if they’re serving as Election Judges). .Given that County Judge Ed Emmett was a big contributor to Paul’s 2014 campaign, I can see where that is coming from. (As long ago as 2010, Emmett proposed putting an appointed bureaucrat in charge of elections duties currently split between two elected officials… but of course voters can’t hold an appointed election administrator accountable if he or she doesn’t hold clean, well-run elections.)
Follow the money.
Alan Vera says
David, it’s unfortunate that you did not reach out directly to me or your other friends who volunteer their time at HCRP. As the Chairman of the ballot Security Committee, I can assure you Gary Polland is not stating “facts”.
Paul Simpson went out of his way to defend Republican election judges placed on the “Do Not Rehire” list by the County Clerk’s office. He successfully re-instated every single Republican election judge on that list, except for 2 whom the HCRP Ballot Security Committee flagged for poor performance at the polling place.
Simpson has NEVER “discouraged” precinct chairs from serving as election judges. Specifically, he recommended that, when possible, precinct chairs find another experienced Republican in the precinct to run the election to free the precinct chair to turn out the GOP vote. That’s been clear since day one.
In 2010 there was NOT a Republican Election judge or Alternate Judge in every polling location. I know because I was involved with True the Vote in having candidates appoint Poll Watchers to every single polling place. As reported by the Poll Watchers, there were many polling places with no Republican judge present. The claim of 100{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} GOP coverage is simply not true.
Further, in 2010 it was the efforts of True the Vote that turned out nearly 100 judges or alternate judges that were officially “appointed” by the HCRP. I was one of them. These judges volunteered through no effort by the HCRP. They stepped forward because they answered a call from True the Vote. Any claim otherwise is false.