Republican Party of Texas Chair Candidate Debate

The Clear Lake Area Republicans hosted a debate between the named candidates in the race to replace retiring Republican Party of Texas Chair Steve Munisteri on Wednesday, February 25th at the University of Houston Clear Lake.  The debate featured candidates (from left to right on stage) Robin Armstrong, Tom Mechler, Wade Emmert, and Jared Woodfill. The debate was moderated by AM 1070 The Answer’s Sam Malone.

Unique Debate Format

The format of the debate was fairly unique and split into three segments. In the first segment, a candidate was first asked a question by the moderator and had two minutes to answer. After the candidate’s answer to the moderator’s question, each of the other three candidates were given a chance to ask the candidate a follow up question related to the moderator’s question, for which the first candidate was given one minute to answer. And at the end, each candidate was given two minutes for a closing statement. This format resulted in an engaging and challenging debate with far more interaction between the candidates than in other political debates I’ve seen around Harris County.

The second segment was a “lightning” round, with each candidate asked a question by the moderator and given one minute to answer. The third segment featured each candidate answering one question submitted by the audience and given 30 seconds to answer.

I enjoyed the first segment, although at least one of the questions had nothing to do with running the RPT. My suggestions for the next debate CLAR holds would be to stick with the first segment, make certain that the questions were germane to the position in question, and drop the “lightning” round and audience questions segment.

Robin Armstrong

The two questions Armstrong addressed in the first segment were about ballot integrity and the amount of time he could commit to the job.  His “lightning” round question asked if he had been sued before. His audience question asked if he thought that every county in Texas should have a Republican primary.

I can’t say that I was overly impressed with his answers. They seemed to me to be almost boilerplate. He struggled with the question about the time commitment necessary to do the job. At one point he said that Munisteri spends 60-70 hours a week because he likes to drive places and that he would instead use Southwest Airlines for his travel. He also stated that he has told staff at the RPT that he would be in Austin at least two days a week. The other candidates obviously asked how he could do that and still maintain his medical practice and if he would visit other parts of the state. He maintained that he is a good manager of his time and that he was the boss of his practice so he could set his own schedule.

The real problem for Armstrong in this debate was his answer about being sued. I thought at first that the question was probably intended for Woodfill given his legal problems but it turns out that it was on target for Armstrong. Being that he is a doctor, I wasn’t surprised when he said that yes, he had been sued once many years ago and that the suit had been settled. He then talked about his work in the late 90’s and early 2000’s in support of tort reform and that we needed to go further with it. It sounded like a good answer until someone told me that I should verify it because it wasn’t true and this was the second time he had answered the same way.

Turns out that Armstrong is in the middle of another medical malpractice lawsuit today. It is incredible to me that Armstrong would not answer this question with the whole truth, knowing how easy it is to check his veracity. All you have to do is search the Galveston County District Clerk’s website and, shazaam, there it is. Below is a screenshot, click here to go directly to the website.

Notice that one was from 2005 and one from 2014. Who in the heck advised him not to come clean? I have no idea about the merits of the lawsuit but it is in fact a second lawsuit against him for medical malpractice. In fact, an expert witness against him filed his report the day before the debate. His current defense against the lawsuit is that it was filed about 30 days after the statute of limitations expired and he is asking the judge to dismiss it.

Tom Mechler

Mechler’s first segment questions were about his campaign experience and his view on immigration. His “lightning” round question was to define conservative and his audience question was how to increase evangelical turnout and straight ticket voting.

During the follow up questions from the other candidates, Wade Emmert pointed out that Mechler’s experience running a county party was a decade ago in a very small county in the Panhandle. Mechler handled it well with an analogy to football, citing the need to master the basics of blocking and tackling to be successful. He then talked about expanding on the basics by using technology to target specific voters, ala the Abbott campaign, to increase voter turnout.

I don’t think that his personal views on immigration are relevant to leading the RPT. The question was posed to him because several members of CLAR and the Clear Lake Tea Party think that he did something untoward as chair of the platform committee in regards to the so-called “Texas Solution”. He took the opportunity to explain that as chair, his job was to bring the various factions together to come up with a plank and not to force his personal beliefs on them.

About that evangelical question, the point was raised several times during the debate that “4 million evangelicals stayed home” in 2012 because Romney was too moderate, thus causing his defeat. That false meme has been circulating since the day after Romney lost. I wish that people would check the facts instead of blindly repeating false information. The FACT is that Romney received MORE votes than John McCain did in 2008. Please, check it out for yourself and then STOP repeating this nonsense so that the correct strategies to win elections can see the light of day.

Mechler’s definition of what conservative means was interesting to say the least. He says that to be considered a conservative you must be pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, pro-2nd amendment, and against political correctness. I guess fiscal issues, a pro-growth regulatory environment, and freedom/liberty no longer matter? Like I said, interesting.

Wade Emmert

Emmert’s first first segment question was how would he deal with elected officials that did not follow the party platform and did he disagree with any of the planks in the platform. His second first segment question was about expanding the Republican voter base and increasing Republican voters in low income areas. His “lightning” round question asked if he thought Republican auxiliaries were important. His audience question asked if he had any experience combating Democrats.

Armstrong asked a follow up question using last summer’s controversy at the state convention involving the Log Cabin Republicans being refused a booth at the convention. Armstrong referred to that incident several times during the evening. Emmert had a great answer, saying that Republicans cannot be afraid of debate and that although he disagreed with the LCR’s position on gay marriage, he was secure enough in his beliefs to allow the debate. He also asked how the party can grow if we shut out everyone that disagrees with a plank in the party platform.

Mechler challenged him on the one race that Republicans did win in Dallas County, the District Attorney’s race, asking him if the best way to win was to get Democrats to switch parties. Again, Emmert handled it very well, talking about the history of the DA candidate that won, the conditions in Dallas County prior to his chairmanship, and that, yes, he would take Democrats that chose to switch parties. Armstrong asked him why there were so few Republican challengers to the Democrats in judicial races. Emmert talked about the difficulty he had in convincing people that it wasn’t a waste of time and money after so many years of neglect under other chairs in Dallas County, noting that success breeds success and now that they had won the DA race, he expected it to be easier to recruit candidates in the future.

After listening to Emmert’s description of the improvement for Republicans in Dallas County under his leadership, I decided to check the facts. Unfortunately, the facts do not support Emmert’s enthusiastic narrative of a changing landscape for Republicans in Dallas County. Here are a couple of quick tables showing straight ticket Republican voting before and after he assumed the chairmanship in May, 2011.

Emmert was responsible for the results in 2012 and 2014. As you can see, in 2012 it was a small increase of 1{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} but in 2014, it was a drop of 1.5{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. I’m not saying that Emmert didn’t improve things, he might have but the numbers fall a bit short of the enthusiastic narrative he gave at the debate.

Jared Woodfill

Woodfill’s first segment questions were about the finances of the Harris County Republican Party under his leadership and what his plans were to unify the various factions of the party should he be elected RPT Chair. His “lightning” round question was about involvement in local, non-partisan elections. His audience question asked to list his top three priorities for the party.

Mechler and Emmert were tough on him during the follow up questions on finances. If you have heard Jared, or read David Barton’s fawning endorsement of him, you’ll hear the claim that Jared raised over $20 million in his tenure as HCRP Chair. Mechler busted him, pointing out that 80-90{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of that money was actually a pass through from judges. Woodfill danced around it but Mechler is factually correct. Emmert asked him about the overall condition of the HCRP’s finances and again, Woodfill danced but anyone that has paid attention to the party knows that the finances were a disaster under his leadership. I like Jared and think he has many, many political skills but financial management simply isn’t one of them. And he has a tendency to try and revise history.

Woodfill’s tendency to view the RPT as an extension of the church was on full display during the debate. His top three priorities for the party were the border, abortion, and gay marriage. In answering Armstrong’s question about allowing the Log Cabin Republicans a booth, he flat out said no. Not only no to the LCR, but no to ANY group that disagrees with ANY plank in the party’s platform. When asked how the party could grow under those conditions, he used Dan Patrick as an example of someone that sticks to their principles and can still win. His method of growth, using the false narrative of evangelicals not turning out during 2012, was to meet with pastors, get them to support Republicans from the pulpit, then the people in the pews would go to the polls. Pulpit to pews to polls is how he phrased it.

In a follow up to the unity question, Mechler asked him if he would continue to sue municipalities about local issues and if so, wouldn’t that open up the party to paying attorney fees and court costs when he lost? Woodfill was clear that yes, he would use the RPT to sue if municipalities enacted laws contrary to the RPT platform. He stated that the leader of the RPT must embrace the platform, not run from it.

Straw Poll Results

Here are the results of the straw poll taken after the debate (click to enlarge):

Who should the SREC elect?

That is the question because the grassroots of the party (precinct chairs) do not get to vote for Munisteri’s interim replacement. We’ll get to vote on the permanent replacement at next years’ state convention. So what should the SREC do now?

If I knew nothing about the background of the four candidates before walking into the building for the debate, I’d tell the SREC members that they should elect Wade Emmert hands down. His vision for expanding the party and his ability to articulate and communicate Republican values stood out during the debate. But of course, there is more to the story than a single debate.

I would rule Armstrong and Woodfill out immediately. When Armstrong was Vice-Chair with Chair Tina Benkiser, the party finances were in shambles, at one point being almost a million dollars in debt. Payroll was hard to meet some months, with staff having to go out and beg donors to contribute so that they would be paid. Woodfill’s financial management was almost as bad, although the HCRP didn’t go into debt. During his last term as chair, the professional staff was laid off and replaced with little more than interns in an effort to pay the bills. I remember the time that the office copier had to be returned because there was no money to pay the lease. It was an embarrassment for the largest Republican county in the state.

By all accounts Emmert has been a positive for Dallas County, although as noted above, it hasn’t shown up at the polls yet. He said during the debate that he has raised over a million dollars for the Dallas County Republican Party but in reviewing the party’s campaign finance reports, I don’t see anything close to that. I did like his to the point closing argument: “If you want someone to picket City Hall, I’m not your guy. If you want someone who can get Republicans elected, I’m your guy. “

And then we come to Mechler. He certainly wasn’t the most dynamic speaker of the bunch but he was able to get his point across most of the time. I thought his definition of “conservative” was goofy. But the one thing he has going for him is that he has been a part of Munisteri’s finance team from the start, has worked closely with the current staff, and has been an integral part of the RPT’s success in the last four years.

If I were an SREC member, I’d vote for Tom Mechler as Interim Chair. This will ensure that the party’s finances are stable through the 2016 primaries. Then, at the state convention, the grassroots will have the opportunity to choose the person that they want at the helm for the 2016 Presidential election.

Here’s to hoping that whomever the SREC chooses, the party will continue to have the electoral success and financial stability we’ve had under Chairman Munisteri.