Big Jolly Politics

politics in Harris County and Texas

Why Jared Woodfill should remove himself from the Planned Parenthood case—and drop out of the RPT Chair race

by

You may want to stop reading right now if you plan to vote for Jared Woodfill for Chairman of the Republican Party of Texas. If you’re willing to stay with me on this and agree Mr. Woodfill—IMHO—should be asked some very tough questions, be asked if he should continue to represent David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt for their involvement in the Planned Parenthood investigation,—-

and be asked if misrepresenting facts to a Family Law Court qualify him to be elected Chairman—then you might wish to read some documents filed with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas.

It seems Mr. Woodfill cannot provide an explanation of funds discrepancies between ledgers & bank statements of the Woodfill Law Firm—(see pages 40 & 45 for highlighted text): Castillio Woodfill Priority 4

The Court finds that there are at least $140,449.36 of funds for which WLF has failed to provide an explanation or has been overpaid. The $140,449.36 is comprised of the following amounts:

  • $25,000.00 (amount required to be paid to Stewart & Hurst per Rule 11 Agreement, but was not paid)
  • $18,562.50 (amount overpaid due to errors set forth in June 30, 2014 invoice)
  • $64,808.33 (difference between IOLTA Bank Statement and IOLTA Ledger as of September 24, 2014)
  • $32,078.53 (difference between IOLTA Bank Statement and IOLTA Ledger as of September 30, 2014)

It seems Mr. Woodfill and an employee of the Woodlfill Law Firm acting on his behalf misrepresented to the Family Law Court that the Woodfill Law Firm was owed attorney’s fees when in fact it was not.

Thus, Woodfill, on behalf of WLF, misrepresented to the Family Law Court that WLF was due a higher amount of attorneys’ fees than what was actually owed. The misrepresentation was material: he overstated the past due amount by $46,701.47.

It seems a Settlement Agreement requires Jared Woodfill to pay a bankruptcy trustee the sum of $135,000 pursuant to the following payment schedule: (see pages 4 & 5) Woodfill settlment agreement

  1. $25,000.00 within 15 days after the Settlement Agreement is Approved by the Bankruptcy Court
  2. $20,000.00 on or before March 31,2016
  3. $20,000.00 on or before June 30,2016
  4. $20,000.00 on or before September 30,2016
  5. $20,000.00 on or before December 31,2016
  6. $15,000.00 on or before March 31,2017
  7. $15,00.00 on or before June 30,20l7

And it seems the settlement agreement does NOT release Woodfill from any malpractice claim his client (or perhaps soon to be former client) may have against him.

When will this be in front of a grand jury?

Do David Daleiden and Sandra Merritt have any idea they’re entrusting themselves, their families and their future to an attorney found by a judge to have provided material misrepresentations to a Court and could be sued for malpractice by a former client?

Texas Republicans Deserve Competent, Ethical Leaders

by

Mark McCaig
Mark McCaig

Observers of State Republican politics will recall a time period not too long ago when the Republican Party of Texas was plagued with a crippling debt, crony contracts, and wasteful spending. Widespread grassroots disdain with the operations of the state Party resulted in the election of Steve Munisteri as State Chairman in 2010. Under Chairman Munisteri’s leadership, the Republican Party of Texas has become a debt free and financially efficient operation that has played a key role in recent Republican electoral gains across our state.

Unfortunately, the recent appointment of Becky Berger by Chairman Munisteri to the Party’s “officials committee” gives great cause for concern. Established by the bylaws of the State Republican Executive Committee, the “officials committee” is charged with transacting Party business between State Republican Executive Committee (“SREC”) meetings, preparing the Party’s budget, and ratifying certain contracts. Considering the Party’s past issues with gross fiscal mismanagement, it is crucial that members of the “officials committee” not only have the highest ethical standards, but have demonstrated competence in the management of financial affairs. Berger is lacking in both regards.

Berger’s name may be familiar to readers of the blog. Not long after her election to the State Republican Executive Committee in 2010, she began what has become a perpetual campaign for public office. After a failed bid for Railroad Commissioner in the 2012 Republican Primary, she almost immediately began campaigning for what was another failed bid for Railroad Commissioner in the 2014 Republican Primary. Despite telling groups such as the Collin County Conservative Republicans during her most recent campaign for Railroad Commission that she had never considered running for another office because the Railroad Commission was where her passion lied, Berger has now begun laying the groundwork to run for the Texas House of Representatives in the likely event that current State Representative Lois Kolkhorst is elected to fill Glenn Hegar’s seat in the Texas Senate.

Berger’s extensive personal and professional baggage should disqualify her from Party office, let alone public office.

During her campaigns for Railroad Commissioner, Berger portrayed herself as a successful oil and gas professional. However, public records paint an entirely different picture.

In 2003, Berger (then known as Rebecca Broesche) entered into a consent order for disciplinary action with the Texas Department of Insurance. The consent order details how Berger- working as an insurance agent- violated state insurance laws with the selling and collecting commissions on unauthorized products. Berger even goes so far as to acknowledge in the consent order that her conduct violated state law. While the Insurance Commissioner found sufficient grounds to revoke Berger’s insurance license on the basis of her conduct, Berger was instead ordered to pay a $12,000 administrative penalty and comply with the provisions of the consent order.

Berger only paid $100 of the $12,000 administrative penalty, resulting in the Texas Department of Insurance sending her a warning letter in 2006 for violating the terms of the consent order. Subsequently, Berger was notified in November, 2007 that the Texas Department of Insurance had scheduled a hearing with the State Office of Administrative Hearings regarding her noncompliance with the consent order. This hearing appeared to be postponed as a result of negotiations between Berger and the Texas Department of Insurance.

In May, 2008, Berger submitted a sworn affidavit to the Texas Department of Insurance claiming she didn’t have a job or the funds to pay the administrative penalty. Berger went on to state that she expected to have the funds in the near future because of a Court of Appeals ruling in the case of her divorce from her first ex-husband that she expected would net her significant funds. (Later in 2008, Berger notified TDI of her name change from Broesche to Berger.)

These expected funds apparently did not materialize in her estimated timeframe and, in September, 2009, Berger surrendered her insurance license to the Texas Department of Insurance to resolve her noncompliance with the consent order and prevent further enforcement action against her.

The divorce proceedings Berger referenced in the affidavit she submitted to the Texas Department of Insurance also merit close examination. Records and opinions issued relating to Berger’s decades-long court battle with her first ex-husband, including a published opinion from the 14th Court of Appeals, demonstrate a pattern of egregious abuse of the Judicial system by Berger.

The trial court in Harris County that had jurisdiction over Berger’s divorce proceedings took the extraordinary step of ordering her to pay $162,000 in sanctions to her ex-husband and another $17,500 in sanctions to her ex-husband’s employer for repeatedly filing frivolous pleadings with the Court and abusing the discovery process. Berger’s outrageous conduct in this litigation is detailed in the sanctions award signed by the trial court. When Berger appealed the sanctions award to the 14th Court of Appeals, a panel of three Republican Justices upheld the sanctions awards. The Court of Appeals noted that “the trial court found at least twenty-six bases to sanction [Berger] based on [Berger]’s conduct and the conduct of her counsel.”

One of incidents resulting in the sanctions award against Berger that was discussed by the Court of Appeals in their opinion was Berger’s hiring of then-State Representative Joe Nixon shortly before the start of the 2003 legislative session and the accompanying motion for a legislative continuance. The court described this motion for legislative continuance as “frivolous and in bad faith.” The opinion also details other examples of misconduct by Berger resulting in the decision to uphold the sanctions awards against her.

The Republican Party of Texas is blessed to have many hardworking members of the State Republican Executive Committee who possess the personal and professional qualifications and experience to guide our Party to continued success and prosperity in 2014 and beyond. It boggles the mind why Chairman Munisteri would entrust such great responsibility and oversight over the Party’s finances and operations to somebody with the checkered background of Becky Berger.

The SREC “Scorecard” Issue

by

There has been a lot of chatter on social media and mass e-mails lately about a proposal to have the State Republican Executive Committee (SREC) issue a legislative “scorecard” based upon a plank of the Texas GOP Platform approved at the 2010 State Convention. This issue is not new. In 2009, when I served as a member of the SREC, a proposal was brought forward to have the Republican Party of Texas issue a legislative “scorecard” in advance of the 2010 primaries. When the resolution to assemble such a scorecard was brought before the SREC, I called a point of order on the basis that such a “scorecard” would be used in primaries and therefore violated the bylaws of the SREC. Even though we had many disagreements and I was hardly her favorite SREC member, then-Chairman Tina Benkiser sustained my point of order.

The section of the bylaws I cited as the basis of my point of order states “Funds shall be allocated for rental space and for personnel, as budgeted by the SREC. No Party funds or resources shall be used, either directly or indirectly, to influence intraparty contests.”

Many proponents of the “scorecard” have called upon RPT Chairman Steve Munisteri and members of the SREC to disregard the bylaws of the Party and accuse them of ignoring the will of the grassroots and protecting insufficiently conservative legislators if they do not. Fortunately, Chairman Munisteri has stood firm and many SREC members, including several who support a legislative scorecard, have stated that the current bylaws of the SREC do not allow it and that the Party platform is a statement of principles, not a binding policy document.

Not to be deterred, the proponents of a Party published scorecard have now set their sights on amending the SREC bylaws to allow a scorecard. Such an action would set a dangerous precedent for the Republican Party of Texas and should be avoided.

The process of assembling a legislative scorecard is completely subjective. The decisions made about how many votes to use and what votes to use rest solely upon those drafting the scorecard. There are also other questions to address as well, such as whether certain votes are given more weight than others. The biases of the scorecard drafters must also be considered. In the case of the proposed RPT scorecard, State Representative Wayne Christian is one of the key figures in the debate having submitted a proposed scorecard for consideration.

At the heart of this debate is this question- “What is the proper role of the Republican Party of Texas?”. I believe the answer to that question is to unite all Republicans across Texas to work towards victory in November. There are plenty of organizations that get involved in primaries, issue scorecards, and/or make pronouncements about who is the “most conservative.” The Republican Party of Texas is not and should not be one of them. Unfortunately, there are some who want to use the name and resources of the Party to favor candidates in primaries and shift the focus of the Party towards March, not November.

This is not about trying to hide legislative voting records or protect legislators who are not doing their job. If an elected official is casting votes that are not in line with the wishes of his constituents or is otherwise derelict in exercising his duties, that elected official should certainly be held to account. The best way to hold that elected official accountable is for individuals to come together, support a primary opponent, and communicate to others why their candidate of choice is superior. It is the role of the primary voter to decide who best represents them, and it is the proper role of the Party to support the choice of the primary voters.

One of the biggest problems many conservatives, myself included, have with groups such as the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee is their practice of becoming involved in primaries and supporting a candidate other than the candidate they personally prefer. Just as it is an unwise practice for the NRCC and NRSC to take sides in primaries, it is of the utmost importance to the continued health of the Republican Party of Texas that it avoid even the appearance of playing favorites in the primary.

There is little doubt that the scorecard submitted by Rep. Christian will be published in some form, the only question being whether it will be published under the name of the Republican Party of Texas. If this debate were truly about making voting records accessible, scorecard proponents would have no problem distributing this or any other scorecard of their choice on their own and keeping the Party out of it. Nothing prevents them from doing so. Instead, they feel they must use the name and resources of the Republican Party of Texas to accomplish what they apparently feel they cannot do on their own. By doing so, they seriously jeopardize the ability of the Party to work with all Republicans and create a situation where we create a circular firing squad going in to the general election in November.