Big Jolly Politics

politics in Harris County and Texas

Chatting with Lt. Governor hopeful Mike Collier

by

As I noted here, the most interesting race on November’s ballot for me is Democrat Mike Collier’s challenge to Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Dan is and always will be a polarizing figure because of his showmanship background and focus on social policy. As Dan says, he was tea party before there was a tea party and he was Trump before Trump was Trump.

So I was interested in meeting the Democratic nominee, looking him in the eye, and determining for myself whether or not he is an option for fiscally conservative minded, business minded, local control preferring, old school Republicans like me. And the answer is…..maybe.

We met at a coffee shop in a church because I wanted to see if he would melt if trapped in a religious setting. Or if we would be struck by lightning or something. Turns out he is a Catholic and it didn’t bother him a bit and no wrath fell from the heavens. Once we got that out of the way, we were able to talk about his vision for Texas and any changes he would make if he were elected.

Instead of the usual plethora of pie-in-the-sky-never-gonna-happen promises typical of a politician, Mike was adamant that he would focus on only one tax change in his first term in office, even though it would cover two legislative sessions. That one thing would be to repeal the 1997 law popularly called the Equal and Uniform appraisal law. Mike’s assertion is that this law has suppressed commercial property appraisals to the tune of $5 billion since 2006, not adjusted for inflation. Mike insists that reversing this law is not the same as increasing taxes, it is recovering taxes that businesses and corporations already owe under the Texas constitution.

It’s an interesting argument and after researching it, I found that many others have made the same argument. There is a good overview of the issue on the Texas Association of Counties website titled Making Taxation Equal and Uniform Again. Here is a snippet of that article:

With no definitions of what a reasonable number was, what could be considered a comparable property, or even what appropriately adjusted meant, the law was vague at best. It opened to door for cherry-picking comparable properties from anywhere in the country.

It did not take long for the new remedy to be put to the test in the courts. In early 1998, United Investors bought Mason Park Centre in west Houston for $15,200,000. Harris County Appraisal District (HCAD) had valued the property at just $13,900,000 only weeks earlier. Instead of walking away with a break on their taxes, United Investors contested the appraisal and then sued.

The company didn’t argue that their property was over-appraised. They didn’t argue that they over paid and that the sales price was not a true representation of market value. They argued instead that their appraisal was not equal.

According to FindLaw’s factual background of Harris County Appraisal District v. United Investors Realty Trust suit, the United Investors’ expert Ron Little testified that “he did not make a determination of Mason Park Centre’s market value, did not consider market value and did not compare Mason Park Centre’s market value to the market value of any of its comparables.”

Under the new remedy, Little argued that independent findings of market value were not necessary. He instead took the appraised values HCAD had prepared on other properties, made adjustments and used those numbers as his comparables when arguing Mason Park Centre was not equally appraised.

The court agreed. The property was adjusted down to $10,239,163 — just 67 percent of its sales price.

Hopefully that snippet gives you an idea of what Mike is talking about. He thinks that the actual tax revenue that would be recovered by repealing this law would be far greater than $5 billion because of inflation but wants to be conservative and stick with the 2006 number. Mike says that all of this recovered revenue would be used to fully fund the public school system, allowing local districts to lower their property taxes.

As noted, this is the only tax change that Mike would make during his first term in office. The other significant thing that he would do on fiscal policy is to make the State Auditor independent from politicians by appointing an Audit Commission comprised of partners from the state’s largest accounting firms. He also noted that the state does not currently have a State Auditor, the office having been vacant since January 2016.

This issue is clearly a passionate one for Mike. Perhaps it is because he was an auditor for PwC or perhaps he simply sees problems with the current system. In fact, he was so passionate in pointing out the problems the state has in its accounting systems that I asked him if he was saying that the state was full of corruption. He thought about it, then said that corruption is a strong word and that he wouldn’t say that because he doesn’t know it to be true. What he wants to stress is that Texas currently does not have a functioning anti-corruption system and if elected, he will implement one.

We did discuss other issues that fall under the Lt. Gov. position but Mike mostly circled back to his main points, fully funding public education and reducing local property taxes, along with his anti-corruption platform. As for the other issues:

SB4 – Sanctuary Cities: Mike was pretty strong in his opposition to it, stating that he would side with “all” of the police chiefs that are against it. When I pointed out that many police chiefs support it, he disputed that, pointing to the large urban chiefs like Houston’s Art Acevedo.

Border security – Mike thinks that the border should be secured but not by the state. He says it is a waste of Texas taxpayer money that could be better used to fund public education and that we should insist that the federal government secure the border.

Margins Tax – Mike thinks that it is a terrible tax that never met projected revenue streams, leaving a $6 billion hole in the budget and he would replace it by going back to the Franchise Tax or some equivalent. But he stressed that he would not propose any changes to it in his first term in office, focusing all tax policy on repealing the Equal and Uniform law.

School choice – Mike is adamantly against it, saying that it takes revenue from the public education system.

Gasoline tax – Mike told me that there is a structural deficit of at least $4 billion built in to the current gasoline tax because it hasn’t been adjusted for inflation or for the increased fuel mileage that today’s cars get. But he would not address this tax in his first term in office.

Abortion – Mike told me that his positions on social issues are out there and he isn’t hiding them. So I went and looked and he is pro-choice. His position isn’t as well developed as his potential running mate Andrew White but he does have a short statement on his website here, under Women’s Health.

Second Amendment – We didn’t talk about gun rights so I looked at his website for guidance. He talks about preserving the Second Amendment while encouraging Texans to talk about reasonable gun safety.

While Mike wasn’t evasive during our chat, he certainly didn’t elaborate on most issues, sticking to the Equal and Uniform repeal, fully funding public education and his anti-corruption agenda. So I went to Amazon and bought the book he wrote about his experience running for Comptroller in 2014, Out of Comptrol: A Converted Democrat’s Improbable Quest to Save Texas Politics. I’m betting that Allen Blakemore, Dan’s political consultant, has done the same so I will leave it to him to point out the passages that will turn off Republicans. Here are a few things that stood out to me:

Is any politician truly conservative? Or are they all playing the same shell game? When it comes to fighting government debt, Texans believe their Republican heroes are truly conservative. But the numbers suggest they might be mistaken.

In 2002, when Rick Perry was first elected governor, Texas owed $14.8 billion to bondholders, and we owed $2.3 billion to pensioners (this is the unfunded pension liability that we owe to retired state workers and teachers). By the end of 2014 our bonded indebtedness had grown to $40.8 billion and our unfunded pension liability had grown to $38.9 billion. This represents average annual growth in debt and pension liability of 13.5 percent per year, which is much faster than average annual growth in our economy of 6.5 percent and average annual growth in our population of less than three percent.

That’s true and it is disappointing to any of us that have a fiscally conservative mindset. Right? Here is what Mike thinks of Tea Partiers:

“I understand debt,” I told him. “In fact, I suspect that it’s actually the Tea Partiers that are driving us into debt, whether they know it or not.”

Jim’s face froze. His expression was perfectly blank. It appeared I had struck a nerve. So I leaned in and said, “You guys better marginalize the Tea Party, or the Tea Party is going to marginalize the Republican Party!”

There is a lot to unpack in that passage but to me it shows two things. First, Mike really doesn’t understand the original intent of the protests in 2009/2010. Second, Mike understands that the vast majority of the various “Tea Party” groups morphed quickly into Republican auxiliaries and became nothing more than cheerleaders for terrible public policy. I’ll leave it at that.

So back to the question of whether or not he is an option for some Texas Republicans, I’ll stick to maybe. I found that he has some interesting ideas and that he is spot on in his assessment of the way Republicans have performed in office on fiscal policy. Obviously, the hard-core social conservative side of the Republican voting bloc will not be interested due to his positions on gay marriage and abortion. And hard-line immigration opponents will not be interested because of his views on the sanctuary city bill, even though he does say that the border should be secured by the federal government. The rest of the bloc might be open to listening to a fiscally conservative politician, regardless of party label.

Clearly Mike has a long, uphill climb if he is to defeat Dan in November. The Democrats received about 38% of the vote in 2014. I don’t think it is realistic to think that Mike or any other Democrat could pull 12% of the Republican voters to their side. What he will need to do is to try and expand the Democratic portion of the vote into the mid to high 40’s and then hope that Republican crossovers account for the winning margin. A tall order but this is such a strange time in politics that anything is possible.

In any case, I enjoyed the chat and will continue to follow his campaign to see if he can pick up momentum. You can find out more about his campaign by visiting his website, CollierforTexas.com.

One more passage from Mike’s book:

Is It Time to End Tax Incentives?

Few spectacles are as unsettling to a fiscally conservative Texan as the sight of a politician racing across the country to bribe a company into moving here. Yet it happens constantly, and it’s a race to the bottom.

Businesses, for their part, have highly paid managers who have mastered the art of poker’s bluff. They know precisely how to pit two states against each other and get a huge tax break for their shareholders. One thing they’ve got going for them is that politicians don’t drive a hard bargain. In fact, many do just the opposite. They can’t wait to throw money at big companies because that produces a “Toyota Moves to Dallas Thanks to Rick Perry!” headline.

I come from the business world, and I know how the game is played. First of all, very few companies would put themselves, their employees, their employees’ families, their suppliers, and their customers through the trauma of a big move just to capture a temporary tax break. They move because there is a strategic reason to do so: proximity to markets, access to skilled workers, lower cost of living, and so forth. When they start considering a move for strategic reasons such as these, they pick two or more candidate states and start negotiating. They tell each state that they’d better come up with a bigger tax break or the other state will become the company’s new home.

And it works like a charm. Politicians fall all over themselves to cough up the money (our money!), while the men, women, and businesses that are already here keep paying their taxes.

It’s time we bring this to a complete, permanent halt. The leaders of the fifty states should enter into a gentlemen’s agreement that they will stop, once and for all, the practice of giving tax incentives to companies, for any purpose. Let companies pick the state where they are best able to make a profit. It will work wonderfully, for everyone.

 

 

Will Texas Democrats poach moderate, open-minded Republicans?

by

If Texas Democrats are to make gains in the top echelons of political offices in Texas, they are going to have to convince some Republicans to vote for them. Lt. Gov. candidate Mike Collier appears to understand this message and took advantage of the Republican Party of Texas’ shunning of the Log Cabin Republicans to start the process.

 

mike collier

Houston, TX — TODAY, April 10th, Texas Lt. Governor Nominee, Mike Collier reacts the Texas Republican Party’s decision to exclude the LGBT group, Log Cabin Republicans, from their state convention.

From the Log Cabin Republicans Facebook page:

“(The) State Republican Executive Committee voted against allowing Log Cabin Republicans of Texas a booth at the Republican Party of Texas convention in June.”

“Shame on the Texas GOP for shunning a group of their own supporters from their convention. No Texan deserves to be denied their dignity,” Collier said in response.

“The Texas Republican Party, led by Lt. Governor Dan Patrick, is clearly hostile to anyone who doesn’t fit a specific profile. Democrats welcome all Texans, and if the LCR of Texas want to have their voices heard, I welcome them to our Democratic State Convention in Fort Worth in June,” Collier added.

“By refusing to allow the LCR to have a booth at the State Convention, the Texas GOP has drawn a line in the sand. They do not stand for equality, even when it comes to some of their most strident supporters,” Collier said. “Furthermore, the GOP has done irreparable harm to Texas’ standing in the business community. Companies simply will not invest in a state that is hostile to the LGBT community.”

In the 2018 Texas primary, more voters chose Democrats or an alternative to Dan Patrick in the Lt. Governor election. Patrick’s opponent endorsed Mike Collier and has actively campaigned on Collier’s behalf. Democrats doubled their primary turnout from 2014, while the Lt. Governor saw an astounding 20% drop-off in votes from the Gubernatorial primary race.

Please visit CollierforTexas.com for more.

Much of the Texas political media have focused on the Senate race, Ted Cruz vs Beto O’Rourke. I’m pretty certain that’s because they pretty much hate Cruz and are hoping and wishing for an upset. And, you know, it’s the Senate after all.

But from where I sit on the coast of Texas in Harris County, the bigger opportunity for Democrats is the Lt. Gov. post. A relatively unknown primary challenger to Lt. Gov. Patrick was able to pull about 10 points closer to Patrick than anyone predicted, although Scott Milder fell far short of the 40% I thought he needed to spell trouble for Dan in the fall. The Lt. Gov. of Texas is a far more powerful position than a U.S. Senator for everyday Texans, as evidenced by how little Ted has been able to do for the state, even under a Republican president.

Collier is an intriguing candidate for moderate and fiscal conservative Republicans. A CPA, MBA, CFO – you get it, he’s got the acronyms down. But he also worked in the oil business. And he’s a Longhorn. Heck, he probably even goes to church!

On the issues, he’s taking Patrick head-on on Patrick’s signature issue – property taxes. Maybe other Republicans are like me and tune out when Patrick mentions property taxes and are willing to listen to a financial guy instead of political rhetoric. Who knows? After all, property taxes may be Dan’s signature issue but in his now 12 years in office (hard to believe, isn’t it), Dan hasn’t done anything to actually address the problem in any substantial way or we wouldn’t be talking about it, would we?

Of course, there are other issues, namely illegal immigration, and that is going to be a tough hill to climb for Collier, as it’s arguably the number one issue for the majority of Texas voters, moderate or not. And Dan is going to be pounding on that issue and the passage of SB4 to no end.

One issue where Collier should have a large advantage is public education. It’s a mess folks, a total mess. From financing to STAAR tests, it’s a certified mess. If Collier is able to put together a comprehensive package of reform ideas, perhaps teachers and parents will buy in. Patrick’s support of school vouchers does nothing to address the overall problem and even exacerbates the financial issues.

But back to the topic at hand, the Texas GOP’s shunning of the Log Cabin Republicans, I had a reader email saying “So what? The Dumbocrats don’t let us talk about pro-life and guns at their convention!”

Well, actually, they do. It seems that booths representing both of those issues have been rented out to groups that oppose the Texas Democratic Party’s official positions. Here is a link to an article about a pro-life group:

I caught up with the Texas leader of Democrats for Life of America, Lois Kerschen, at her group’s booth to better understand how she squares anti-abortion politics with progressivism, when for most Americans, the two seem to go hand-in-hand.

“The Democratic Party has always been the champion of the weak, of the defenseless, the underprivileged, the disenfranchised, and the unborn child fits all those categories,” Kerschen said. “So it would be more natural for the Democratic Party to defend the preborn.”

Huh. I guess the Democratic grassroots aren’t as skeered of different ideas as Republican grassroots.

I’m hoping to catch up with Mr. Collier and find out for myself if he has a chance at pulling this off. You never know what a voter is going to do when they walk in the booth. And with the Republican Party of Texas pushing out anyone that doesn’t pass their purity test, well, who knows?

2018 Harris County primary is almost over, so who did you vote for?

by

Lots and lots of commentary going on about the root cause for the increased turnout in early voting this year and what it means for November. I think there are some clues for the former and not much for the latter but we’ll talk about that later. Candidates and supporters in those few close races are going to be in mach drive Monday trying to convince one or two more people to get out to the polls. If it helps (or hurts) here is who I voted for and why and a few if I could have voted for and why.

Statewide

I voted against Greg Abbott for the first time ever. Not because I support his opponents because they are clearly not qualified but because if they can garner a few more percentage points than they should, maybe he’ll stop attacking Republicans and start governing. I’m still waiting for him to implement or even propose the great ideas he told me about on education.

In the Lt. Governor’s race, I voted for Scott Milder for the same reason. Dan talks a lot about doing “what the people want”. Unfortunately, “the people” he is referring to are a small subset of the voting population. If Milder, as an under funded, no name recognition candidate, can get up to 40% or more, maybe Dan will realize that as a statewide elected official, he needs to listen to all of the people. And if Milder does get up to 40% or more, November is going to be very tough on Republicans in Texas.

I voted for Jerry Patterson because George P. Bush has been a failure as Land Commissioner. The sooner he gets his ass back to Florida, the better. Dr. Davey Edwards is certainly a good choice here as well. The key is to get P in a runoff and boot his ass out of Texas.

I voted for Trey Blocker because Sid Miller just ain’t right. When you choose Ted Nugent to be your Treasurer, your disdain for the voters is clear.

For Railroad Commissioner, I voted for Weston Martinez. Nothing negative about Ms. Craddick, other than the fact that she wasted more trees sending mail to my home than I thought was possible, I just think that it would be a good change.

In the Criminal Court of Appeals, Presiding Judge, I voted for David Bridges. Sharon Keller should have been bounced years ago for her egregious behavior. Bridges has years of experience on the appeals court and would be a welcome breath of fresh air.

In the CCA Place 8 I voted for Dib Waldrip after learning more about Michelle Slaughter’s record and seeing who was supporting her.

Harris County

Justice, 1st Court of Appeals District, Place 7

As I wrote here, this is one of those races that the voters can’t lose. I ultimately voted for Katy Boatman because I think that her experience in appellate work and background translate better to this specific position. Besides, defendants would be worse off if they couldn’t count on Terry Yates to help them. See Daleiden, David for more.

185th District Court

For those of us voters that are not attorneys and do not work in the criminal justice system, we have to rely upon those that do for help. And we can also look at who is endorsing each candidate and discern who is being endorsed for political reasons and who is being endorsed for merit. One other factor is news reporting about the candidates. In the case of the 185th, Stacey Bond had the audacity as a judge to stand up to the Harris County DA’s office. The “Big 3” slates support her opponent. Attorneys that I respect and have asked all say that they are voting for Stacey Bond. So I did too.

189th District Court

As mentioned above, it’s hard for us non-attorneys to understand this stuff. But, using the criteria above and using the gold standard of passing Gov. Greg Abbott’s vetting process to be appointed, I voted for Erin Lunceford. Abbott’s team is known for thoroughly vetting candidates before appointing them and I surely can’t think of a reason to override that.

263rd District Court

This one was hard because I didn’t see Charles Johnson running a particularly aggressive campaign and I did see Justin Keiter doing that. So in the end, since everything else seemed fairly equal, I went with the guy that I thought wanted it more. Who knows?

295th District Court

This one was easy because I know Richard Risinger and I know that he will be an excellent judge as far as temperament and fairness. The other two candidates seem to be fine people but they never really had a shot at my vote. Just being honest here.

257th District Court

This was another tough decision and the voters will win either way. I find that both candidates are quality people and quality attorneys. In the end, I chose to vote for Alyssa Lemkuil because of that Abbott gold standard – he appointed her to the 507th District Court and she lost in the wave of 2016. Her opponent, Melanie Flowers will do a fine job if she wins.

280th District Court

Another easy one and not even because Abbott appointed her. I’ve known Angelina Gooden for 10 years or so and she is definitely qualified and an extremely hard campaigner. I did not get an opportunity to meet with Geric Tipsword in person but a family court attorney that I respect told me that he was voting for him. But I hope that Angelina holds on to that bench because she will help families in crisis. I know that for certain.

County Criminal Court 8

Easiest one of all. Judge Jay Karahan has the respect of every single attorney that I asked with one exception – his opponent, who has a nice life story but has a tendency to blame others for any problems he encounters. The fact that Judge Karahan follows the law and performs wedding ceremonies for people of the same sex is the stupidest reason I’ve ever heard of for removing such a qualified judge from the bench. I still can’t believe the religious crowd in the party would sacrifice the public good for such a stupid reason. Ask around and you too will find that he is well respected and goes above and beyond in his efforts to seek justice in his court for ALL participants. Look at his work in the SOBER court, his involvement in community events and yes, his refusal to bow down to the Pharisaical wing of the Republican Party and I think you’ll agree with me. You can read Judge Karahan’s thoughts on the slates by clicking here.

County Criminal Court 11

An interesting race. Aaron Burdette certainly checks all of the boxes for a Republican voter. As such, he was able to garner all of the endorsements on the endorsement tracker. But, there is something unique about Lori Botello that resonated with me and for whom I ultimately voted. Her community work and advocacy for the less fortunate is commendable. Her desire to seek justice is unwavering. If you haven’t voted yet, I hope you will have an open mind on this race. Read her Q&A in the Houston Chronicle. Think out of the box! If she doesn’t win the primary, I hope that some of the stalwart women in the HCRP will reach out to her and help her continue in the party. We need so many more quality candidates like Lori Botello.

County Civil Court 2

Another easy one. I voted to re-elect Judge Theresa Chang. Her opponent was put up by some of the same folks that want to get rid of Judge Jay Karahan. Whether it was because she performs gay weddings or whether it was because she ruled against them I don’t know. But I do know that whatever reason it is, they should have found a qualified candidate to run against Judge Chang. Erin Swanson is a nice enough young woman but she simply doesn’t have the legal experience to sit in judgement of anyone, much less a complicated civil case. She has never been in a civil court and her experience in the criminal justice system lasted about a year at the DA’s office. Why do supposed “leaders” of the HCRP care so little about the integrity of our courts?

County Civil Court 4

Another easy one. I hung my chad for Sophia Mafrige. Sophia has a ton of experience and will be a great judge. She has been subjected to the vilest negative campaign I’ve seen in Harris County in a while. I think it has to be personal but I have no idea who is behind it. They sent out fake emails claiming to be from her campaign complete with a “Donate” button to steal people’s identity. They’ve accused her of all sorts of other stuff that I’ll not mention. Now they have a video playing on Facebook claiming that she is a foreigner that supports Sharia law. Just absurd. Mama Mia, vote for Sophia!

County Chair

When I was talking with Dr. Steve Hotze the other day about the primary, he made the observation that the County Chair race was insignificant and that if you asked anyone on the street, they couldn’t name the chair of either party. And that of course is true. But it isn’t the whole story because if it was, Steve and friends wouldn’t have colluded (to use the word of the day) to spend roughly $1.25 million in total to get rid of the current chair, Paul Simpson.

The whole story would have to include the fact that when Paul Simpson was first elected in 2014, he took over a party that was literally broke and had outstanding bills to pay. In the course of rebuilding the party and increasing its reach into the outer suburbs, several of the long time party leaders saw their influence reduced as others stepped in and provided financial support and structure. You can imagine how these leaders felt about that, given their devotion to the party over the past two or three decades. Even with the party’s success in 2014 and 2015, they tried to defeat Simpson in 2016. That didn’t work but with the anti-Trump blowback in Harris County delivering a Democratic sweep, they saw an opportunity to try again and settled on a challenger and truly think that they are going to take the chair’s seat back. Perhaps they will, I’m not very good at predicting outcomes.

When I finally decided whom I was going to vote for, it wasn’t as hard as I thought it would be going into the primary season. I voted for Paul Simpson. For me, Simpson’s opponent, Chris Carmona, never made a compelling case to replace Simpson. It is easy to go around repeating “It’s time to win again” as Carmona and his supporters have. It is more difficult to articulate a way to win again, especially when you ignore the diversity of Harris County and the anti-Trump phenomenon that we saw in 2016. In fact, not recognizing that there was an anti-Trump factor in the results is reason enough to question the legitimacy of a campaign.

In one of his online videos, Carmona uses a partial quote from me saying that we have to stop blaming Trump for the 2016 losses. And that is true. But what he missed was that in going forward, we have to understand why people were so anti-Trump and how to get around that. Simpson did recognize this, commissioned a group to study the problem and implemented or is implementing the recommendations. The new office in Baytown is a direct result of that analysis and it will hopefully increase the GOTV effort on the East Side and convince Republicans to get to the polls.

In Carmona’s latest campaign email, he calls for getting rid of those offices and instead opening community centers year round so that voters can connect with Republicans and see that we are not evil. I recall that Jared Woodfill tried that approach in the East End by opening a community center on Broadway St. We had English as a second language courses. How to apply for government benefits classes. Citizenship classes. Bicycle giveaways. Frozen turkey giveaways (I still remember looking for the WKRP helicopter). And do you know what happened? Nothing. I’d bet we didn’t pick up a single vote from that effort.

Republicans have community centers – churches. We have more churches than we do Christians. What we need to do is get out of our churches and into the community. Chamber meetings, food banks, Head Start centers, etc. Stop focusing on the do not do’s and start focusing on helping people.  I think that any Republican headquarters should be about the business of electing Republicans.

I also see people saying that the party was a failure in 2015 and 2017. Talk about short memories. In 2015, the HCRP, utilizing Paul Simpson’s revamped party infrastructure and resources, helped defeat Annise Parker’s men in women’s restroom ordinance. Probably the biggest win for social conservatives in Houston’s history. But a few of the leaders out in front in that campaign thought that Simpson should be out with a bullhorn and since he wasn’t, that means he did nothing. It completely eludes them that they used the infrastructure that Simpson built to win that election. That structure also helped Republican Bill King come closer to winning a mayor’s race than any Republican in years. And in 2017, there were no city elections, only a few localized ISD elections.

Anyone, and I do mean anyone, that says that the HCRP isn’t more organized and has better and more resources for candidates and precinct chairs today than when Paul Simpson took over in 2014 is either completely uninformed or trying to deceive you. Would I like to see Simpson do even more? Of course. But he can only do that if he is given the opportunity.

The same opportunity that Dr. Hotze gave Jared Woodfill after the Democratic sweep of Harris County in 2008. I reminded Steve that he didn’t call Jared a RINO after that. He didn’t cheer lead against Jared so much that others were enabled to call Jared a pro-abortion supporter. I reminded Steve that bearing false witness is a sin just like the sins he wants to address by kicking certain people out of the party for not holding his religious beliefs.

I hope voters give Paul Simpson that opportunity.

Races in which I couldn’t vote but wish I could

Congressional District 2

I’d run (as best as I can these days) to the polls and vote for Dan Crenshaw. My head tells me that the runoff will be Wall and Roberts, my heart is hoping for Wall and Crenshaw.

House District 126

Another can’t lose for the voters. Sam Harless is a good candidate that has the advantage of his wife’s experience in this district to step in immediately. Gail Stanart is the ultimate grassroots candidate and will fight for grassroot concerns.

But Kevin Fulton stands out, even among this very good field. I first learned about Kevin from an old high school friend, Blair McClure, who happened to sit next to him at a King Street Patriots event when Kevin ran for JP in 2012. Blair called me after that and said, dude, this guy is the real deal. If you know Blair, you know that is high praise indeed. If you don’t, then you’ll have to trust me.

So I did learn more about him and have followed his career over the years. He is the real deal. He not only has a great story, he has a deep set of core beliefs that will benefit his district and the rest of us if he is elected. If you haven’t yet voted, I hope that you will research Kevin Fulton. If you do, I think you’ll agree with me.

House District 134

Ah yes, the Sarah Davis vs Greg Abbott matchup. Greg Abbott is very persuasive. So persuasive that he convinced me that if I lived in that district, I’d vote for Sarah Davis. Sarah is closer to the center than I am, to be sure. But she is not the liberal Democrat that Abbott has been claiming. I saw that Mark Jones, the guy everyone likes to use to define politicians, said that she is more conservative than any Democrat and more liberal than any Republican. In other words, a perfect fit for her district.

And folks, let’s get this out of the way. Sarah Davis is not pro-abortion. There are very few people in this world that are pro-abortion. She is pro-choice because she, as many of us, have seen times when a heartbreaking choice must be made. She does not support late-term elective abortions, as has been claimed. The fact that she is an effective advocate for other parts of women’s health care and reducing the need for abortions in the first place by reducing teen pregnancy irks some in the Pharisaical wing of the party that prefer chastity belts to condoms.

Greg Abbott’s attacks on Sarah Davis do nothing to build up the Republican Party. I hope she wins in a blowout.

House District 150

Valoree Swanson had a good first session according to the other legislators that I’ve talked to. The charge is that she didn’t pass bills but there is more to being a rep than passing bills, especially in your first session. The biggest priority of any legislator should be to kill bills that are bad for the state and she did help in that effort. She has a solid conservative record and will continue to represent her district. Her opponent, James Wilson, is a nice guy but has too many recent financial problems to be considered. I’d vote for Valoree Swanson.

And that’s a wrap on this one. Good luck to everyone.

 

Dan Patrick’s challenger, Scott Milder, releases new endorsements

by

Press release from the Scott Milder campaign:

scott milder
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 22, 2018
PHONE: 512-800-2104
EMAIL: [email protected]

Conservative Lt. Gov. Candidate Scott Milder Announces Endorsements from Former Lt. Gov. Bill Ratliff, Rep. Byron Cook, and Two Former Commissioners of Education, Dr. Mike Moses and Dr. Shirley Neeley Richardson

(ROCKWALL, TX) – Scott Milder, conservative Republican candidate for Lieutenant Governor, has been gathering momentum for his campaign, receiving key endorsements from former Lt. Gov. Bill Ratliff, State Representative Byron Cook, and former Commissioners of Education Dr. Shirley Neeley Richardson and Dr.
Mike Moses.

“I am honored to have the support of each of these leaders, as well as the many voters across Texas who have given their time and energy to my campaign. Throughout the state, I heard the same thing time and again – we need a Lieutenant Governor who works for us, not for wealthy donors and special interests. I agree, and that is why I am running for office. If I am elected, I will work hard for the people of Texas and I will always listen to you, not the special interests that have influenced government for too long,” said Scott Milder.

Quotes from all four endorsers are as follows:

“A great leader must first be a great listener, and never forget that their first responsibility is to the entire state. Scott Milder is a proven conservative whose dedication to serving all Texans is evidenced in both word and deed. He is well-suited to healing the wounds in our State Capitol in order to tackle the many issues facing boardrooms and classrooms across Texas today.” –Bill Ratliff, Former Lieutenant Governor

“Scott Milder offers a common sense approach that would prove beneficial to our state. He is a traditional Republican who believes in and will fight to protect the conservative tenets of limited government, local control, pro-business policy, and our constitutionally mandated system of free public schools.” –Byron Cook, State Representative and Chairman of the House Committee on State Affairs

“Scott Milder has had the courage to put his name in front of the voters in our state to become the Republican nominee for Lieutenant Governor. Scott deserves your support, and by way of this letter, he is receiving my endorsement. For those who are truly serious about wanting a change in the way our state is governed, and the way public schools are treated, it is imperative to support Scott’s candidacy.”

“Scott understands that he is not just running to represent educators. He must represent all Texans, and he will do an effective job of creating an environment that is healthy for business, education and prosperity in Texas. He is the person who can best work with members of the Texas Senate in a positive, constructive way to bring about common sense and fiscally responsible solutions to our state’s challenges. Texans need to take this opportunity to endorse Scott’s stewardship of our future.” –Dr. Mike Moses, Former Commissioner of Education

“I strongly support Scott Milder because I have worked with him, I know Scott and his family and I know how honest, sincere, dependable, intelligent and focused Scott Milder is on doing what is best for Texas! Scott has a grass roots campaign that is transparent, well developed and driven by his vast experience in public schools, public office, the business community and point blank: Scott is not afraid to do the right thing!!! It is time to elect hard working men and women to the Texas Legislature that have truly walked a mile in OUR shoes!” –Dr. Shirley J. (Neeley) Richardson, Former Commissioner of Education

Scott Milder, a conservative Republican, has twenty years of experience as a businessman. Scott served two terms on the Rockwall City Council and co-founded a nonprofit organization supporting Texas education. He lives in Rockwall with his wife of twenty years, Leslie, and their children. The Milders are members of Lake Pointe Church in Rockwall.

###

I’m not sure that rolling out endorsements from the moderate wing will work in the Republican primary, which has long been dominated by the most socially conservative voters in the party. But I suppose it’s worth a try. There is a Twitter hashtag called #blockvote where it appears that a lot of teachers are supporting Milder and other social moderates/fiscal conservatives but my guess is that many of those voting under that tag are voting in the Democratic primary. Here is an example of what you’ll find there:

We’ll know at about 10 pm on Tuesday, March 6th.

Related:

Scott Milder attacks Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick over teacher pay raises

Sen. Dan Patrick at the Rally for School Choice

Scott Milder attacks Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick over teacher pay raises

by

Press release from the Scott Milder for Lieutenant Governor campaign:

scott milder

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: February 8, 2018
PHONE: 512-800-2104                EMAIL: [email protected]

 

Scott Milder Calls Out Lieutenant Governor for Lying to Texans About Teacher Pay Raise

(ROCKWALL, TX) – “I’m running for Lieutenant Governor because Dan Patrick is a liar and cannot be trusted,” said Scott Milder, conservative Republican, referring to Dan Patrick’s disingenuous promise to raise pay for Texas teachers.

“Dan Patrick’s latest radio ad has promised teachers a $10,000 pay raise, but his record shows he will not keep this promise. This is the same man who was instructed by the Governor to find money for a $1,000 raise for teachers and then tried to force local districts – not the state – to foot the bill. This is just a desperate attempt to appeal to the hundreds of thousands of educators he has screwed over during his 12 years in office, and they’re not buying it.”

Scott Milder, a conservative Republican, has twenty years of experience as a businessman. Scott served two terms on the Rockwall City Council and co-founded a nonprofit organization supporting Texas education. He lives in Rockwall with his wife of twenty years, Leslie, and their children. The Milders are members of Lake Pointe Church in Rockwall.

Wendy Davis and friends add clarity to HB21 debate

by

When you have two legislative bodies dominated by conservative Texas Republicans fighting over how to finance public schools, it can be challenging to know who to believe. Fortunately, former Texas gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis and friends stepped in yesterday to provide a bit of clarity. Via Twitter:

Wendy davis twitter hb21

Folks, when Wendy Davis starts cheerleading for one Republican side over the other, it’s time to high tail it to the other.

And when the Texas affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers starts shilling for one Republican side over the other, you know you made the right choice to run to the other.

House Emphatically Rejects Senate Voucher “Poison Pill”

The Senate’s attempt to force acceptance of a private-school voucher scheme by inserting it in a House school-finance bill suffered a major setback today. The House voted 134 to 15 against concurrence in the Senate changes to HB 21, the good school-finance bill by Rep. Dan Huberty (R-Houston). Not only that, the House for good measure supported a motion to instruct House negotiators to reject the inclusion of any voucher provision whatsoever if and when a House-Senate conference committee comes to a final agreement on HB 21. The margin on that anti-voucher instruction was 101 for and 45 against. The pro-voucher faction on the House floor tried to reverse that result with an instruction to “consider all methods of educational choice for special-education students,” but their gambit failed on a vote of 47 for, 89 against.

(click here to read the entire shill on TexasAFT.org)

Allowing parent’s of special needs children to make the best choice they can for their child is a “poison pill” in the eyes of ‘a union of professionals’. Amazing.

The fact that my own House representative, Rep. Dennis Paul (R-129) voted with Huberty and Wendy Davis doesn’t make me particularly happy. He explained via text message that he needed to vote for it to try to get it to conference or it would die in the House. Only 15 Republican reps didn’t see it that way and voted against Huberty and Wendy: Biedermann; Cain; Isaac; Keough; Klick; Krause; Lang; Rinaldi; Schaefer; Schofield; Shaheen; Stickland; Swanson; Tinderholt; Zedler. Kudos to you guys for trying.

It is interesting to look at the Fiscal Notes for each version of the bill.

Dan Huberty’s version:

Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB21, As Engrossed: a positive impact of $33,973,419 through the biennium ending August 31, 2019.

Larry Taylor’s version:

Estimated Two-year Net Impact to General Revenue Related Funds for HB21, Committee Report 2nd House, Substituted: a negative impact of ($1,853,351,923) through the biennium ending August 31, 2019.

Wow. Huberty’s version would ADD money to the state General Fund. Taylor’s version would SUBTRACT money from the state General Fund to the tune of $1.8 billion. Huberty must be a magician.

Nah, not a magician. Just using another one of the tricks in his bag of political tricks. Further down in the analysis of Huberty’s version, we find this:

The bill would result in estimated state savings for the Foundation School Program of $34.2 million for the 2018-2019 biennium. Increased state cost for FSP entitlement, including hardship grant awards, is estimated to be $931.7 million in fiscal year 2018 and $909.1 million in fiscal year 2019. This biennial cost of $1,840.8 million would be offset in fiscal year 2019 by one-time savings of $1,875.0 million due to changing the final FSF payment of the biennium from August 2019 to September 2019.

Ah, a little sleight of hand accounting trick. Delay payment by a month, moving it to the next fiscal biennium and call it one-time savings. In Pasadena, we’d call it kicking the can down the road but hey, we ain’t all that sharp, ya know.

Here is what Lt. Dan had to say:

AUSTIN – Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick issued the following statement today following the Texas House rejection of House Bill 21 — the $530 million school funding plan:

“I am appalled that the Texas House turned down an additional half-billion dollars for public schools simply because it included a program that might allow some disabled child somewhere in Texas to attend a private school that his parents believe would be better for him or her. The House members who voted against HB 21 ignored the needs of disabled children to take a stand against school choice, which is supported by a strong majority of Texans in every demographic group and both political parties. Instead of supporting those Texans, those House members buckled under the demands of education bureaucrats.

“Although Texas House leaders have been obstinate and closed-minded on this issue throughout this session, I was hopeful when we put this package together last week that we had found an opening that would break the logjam. I simply did not believe they would vote against both disabled children and a substantial funding increase for public schools.

“I was wrong. House Bill 21 is now dead.”

House Bill 21 contained the following components:

  • $200 million for ASATR
  • $200 million new money for the Foundation School Program
  • $100 million for fast growth schools and charter schools for facility funding.
  • The bill included Education Savings Accounts for children with disabilities.
  • Upon passage by the House, the official start date for A through F would be pushed back until 2019, making the 2018 scores another sample year.

Once again, Wendy Davis’ friends try to come to Huberty’s rescue. This time in the form of Clay Robison, once a biased liberal reporter for the Houston Chronicle, now the paid shill for the Texas State Teachers Association. Mr. Robison had this to say:

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick waxed sanctimonious after the final defeat of the House’s effort to improve school funding but don’t be misled by his demagoguery. The blame for the school finance failure rests squarely with Patrick.

Speaker Joe Straus and the House majority tried to enact legislation to improve state funding for public schools and take an important first step toward real school finance reform. But Patrick was all about snooping in school bathrooms and trying to force the House into wasting tax dollars on private school vouchers, even after it was clear that a bipartisan House majority was adamantly opposed to vouchers. At the eleventh hour, Patrick had the Senate majority remove funding from the House’s version of HB21, the school finance bill, and attach a special education voucher instead. Then he blamed the House for killing school finance when House members called his bluff.

“I simply did not believe they (the House) would vote against both disabled children and a substantial funding increase for public schools,” he said. Hogwash.

Patrick’s “funding increase” claim was actually a billion dollar cut from the $1.6 billion the House had proposed. And his special education voucher amendment would have been useless for most special education kids because private schools don’t have to provide special education services and those that do are exempt from federal standards designed to make sure the services provided are appropriate.

The House actually had tried to improve funding for disabled kids and all other students by approving additional funding for public schools, but Patrick and the Senate majority killed that effort. That means public schools, including special education classrooms, will remain under-funded, and the burden on local school property taxpayers will continue to increase.

Whenever Dan Patrick opens his mouth about public education and property tax “relief,” he has absolutely no credibility. And the school children of Texas – all the school children of Texas – will be better off if their parents quit believing him.

Someone is waxing sanctimoniously, Mr. Robison, but it ain’t who you say it is. You might want to look in the mirror. I’m reminded of Mr. Robison’s words in his farewell in the Houston Chronicle:

I offer an observation to bloggers, whose presence in the political arena is expanding as the ranks of traditional news reporters thin. There is a difference between reporting and spinning. I have done both for a long time, and reporting is a lot harder.

(click here to read the entire farewell on Chron.com)

Looks like Mr. Robison got tired of the hard work and decided to get paid to do the easy stuff. Hey, it happens.

So, I’ll repeat what I said earlier: Folks, when Wendy Davis starts cheerleading for one Republican side over the other, it’s time to high tail it to the other. To get the complete picture, throw in the teacher’s unions and virtually all paid Texas media as well.

I’d suggest that Republican voters high tail it as fast as they can to the other side and support Sen. Larry Taylor (my senator by the way). If you live in my district, HD129, you might want to let Rep. Dennis Paul know what you think.