You know that a group representing themselves as a "tea party" has jumped the shark when they rate Houston Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-147) as the most influential or best state legislator in terms of "committee performance". Yes, the same Garnet Coleman that called people that attend tea parties racists. Oh, and btw, Sen. Dan Patrick (R-7) had "no impact" on his committee assignements.
Some will argue that membership to the committees should not be penalized (or credited) because of the level of control that the Committee Chairs hold. However, the membership of a committee COULD apply pressure on the chair if they so choose- and had motivation to do so. Hopefully, having the committee’s performance reflecting on them will encourage the committee members to take a more active role in the committee scheduling itself, especially members that serve due to seniority.
Legislator Points Rating Hunter, Todd -59 Terrible Cook, Byron -53 Terrible Hilderban, Harvey -50 Terrible Solomons, Burt -47 Terrible Gallego, Pete -34 Terrible Villarreal, Michael -32 Terrible Hopson, Chuck -30 Terrible Turner, Sylvester -30 Terrible Menendez, Jose -27 Terrible Otto, John -26 Terrible Phillips, Larry -25 Terrible Geren, Charlie -23 Terrible Branch, Dan -22 Terrible Ritter, Allan -20 Terrible Gonzales, Veronica -20 Terrible Pitts, Jim -18 Poor Oliveira, Rene -18 Poor Madden, Jerry -17 Poor Elkins, Gary -16 Poor Rodriguez, Eddie -16 Poor Keffer, James -14 Poor Christian, Wayne -14 Poor Alonzo, Robert -14 Poor Darby, Drew -12 Poor Woolley, Beverly -12 Poor Riddle, Debbie -12 Poor Bonnen, Dennis -12 Poor Zerwas, John -12 Poor Pena, Aaron -11 Poor McClendon, Ruth -11 Poor Harless, Patricia -11 Poor Chisum, Warren -10 Poor King, Tracy -9 Weak Kolkhorst, Lois -9 Weak Giddings, Helen -9 Weak Craddick, Tom -9 Weak Dukes, Dawnna -9 Weak Fletcher, Allen -9 Weak Weber, Randy -9 Weak Frullo, John -9 Weak Miller, Sid -8 Weak Morrison, Geanie -8 Weak Lucio III, Eddie -8 Weak Crownover, Myra -8 Weak Truitt, Vicki -8 Weak Smithee, John -8 Weak Davis, Yvonne -8 Weak Lyne, Lanham -8 Weak Smith, Wayne -7 Weak Martinez, Armando -7 Weak Harper-Brown, Linda -7 Weak Button, Angie -7 Weak Aycock, Jimmie -7 Weak Burnam, Lon -6 Weak Gonzalez, Naomi -6 Weak Castro, Joaquin -6 Weak Murphy, Jim -6 Weak Huberty, Dan -6 Weak Hartnett, Will -6 Weak Alvarado, Carol -6 Weak Patrick, Diane -6 Weak Johnson, Eric -6 Weak Eiland, Craig -5 Weak Margo, Dee -4 No Impact Schwertner, Charles -4 No Impact Hardcastle, Rick -4 No Impact Farrar, Jessica -4 No Impact Simpson, David -4 No Impact Brown, Fred -4 No Impact Miller, Doug -4 No Impact Legler, Ken -4 No Impact King, Susan -4 No Impact Farias, Joe -3 No Impact Lewis, Tyron -3 No Impact Howard, Donna -3 No Impact Lavender, George -3 No Impact Thompson, Senfronia -3 No Impact Creighton, Brandon -3 No Impact Hancock, Kelly -3 No Impact Larson, Lyle -3 No Impact Flynn, Dan -2 No Impact Reynolds, Ron -2 No Impact Kuempel, John -2 No Impact Aliseda, Jose -2 No Impact Zedler, Bill -2 No Impact Torres, Raul -2 No Impact Price, Four -2 No Impact Parker, Tan -2 No Impact Driver, Joe -2 No Impact Mallory Caraway, Barbara -2 No Impact Pickett, Joseph -2 No Impact Carter, Stefani -2 No Impact Burkett, Cindy -2 No Impact Workman, Paul -2 No Impact Cain, Erwin -2 No Impact Beck, Marva -2 No Impact Orr, Rob -1 No Impact Deshotel, Joe -1 No Impact Shelton, Mark -1 No Impact Munoz, Sergio -1 No Impact Bohac, Dwayne -1 No Impact Allen, Alma 0 No Impact Garza, John 0 No Impact Jackson, Mike 0 No Impact Davis, Wendy 0 No Impact Carona, John 0 No Impact Patrick, Dan 0 No Impact Ogden, Steve 0 No Impact Nelson, Jane 0 No Impact Lozano, Jose 0 No Impact Isaac, Jason 0 No Impact Fraser, Troy 0 No Impact Estes, Craig 0 No Impact Davis, Sarah 0 No Impact West, Royce 0 No Impact Deuell, Bob 0 No Impact Davis, John 0 No Impact Eltife, Kevin 0 No Impact Ellis, Rodney 0 No Impact Anchia, Rafael 0 No Impact Watson, Kirk 0 No Impact Miles, Borris 0 No Impact King, Phillip 0 No Impact Hughes, Bryan 0 No Impact Huffman, Joan 0 No Impact Nichols, Robert 0 No Impact Naishtat, Elliot 0 No Impact Gallegos, Mario 0 No Impact Birdwell, Brian 0 No Impact Anderson, Rodney 0 No Impact Williams, Tommy 0 No Impact Wentworth, Jeff 0 No Impact Uresti, Carlos 0 No Impact Lucio, Eduardo 0 No Impact Martinez Fischer, Trey 0 No Impact Van De Putte, Leticia 0 No Impact Quintanilla, Chente 0 No Impact Hernandez-Luna, Ana 0 No Impact Zaffirini, Judith 0 No Impact Shapiro, Florence 0 No Impact Laubenberg, Jodie 0 No Impact Kleinschmidt, Tim 0 No Impact Anderson, Charles 0 No Impact Seliger, Kelton 0 No Impact Rodriguez, Jose 0 No Impact Raymond, Richard 0 No Impact Howard, Charlie 0 No Impact Hinojosa, Juan 0 No Impact Gonzales, Larry 0 No Impact Duncan, Robert 0 No Impact Whitmire, John 0 No Impact Perry, Charles 0 No Impact Hegar, Glenn 0 No Impact Harris, Chris 0 No Impact Guillen, Ryan 0 No Impact Scott, Connie 1 No Impact Vo, Hubert 2 No Impact Taylor, Van 2 No Impact Sheets, Kenneth 2 No Impact Landtroop, Jim 2 No Impact Walle, Armando 2 No Impact White, James 2 No Impact Strama, Mark 3 No Impact Berman, Leo 4 No Impact Gooden, Lance 4 No Impact Paxton, Ken 4 No Impact Gutierrez, Rolando 4 No Impact Jackson, Jim 4 No Impact Nash, Barbara 4 No Impact Hamilton, Mike 4 No Impact Smith, Todd 5 Fair Veasey, Marc 6 Fair Dutton, Harold 6 Fair Sheffield, Ralph 6 Fair Eissler, Rob 8 Fair Taylor, Larry 8 Fair Marquez, Marisa 9 Fair Coleman, Garnet 12 Good
Tea Party Dannie with a zero, no impact rating. Harold Dutton got a better rating than Dannie. And Wayne Christian, the only Christian in the House, got a negative 14 and a Poor rating.
Now that right there is funny stuff.
Felicia Cravens says
I've only heard of one person on that "round table." Weird.
MikeO says
As you failed to include the explanation of the USE of the Committee Performance indicator, I will do so: (NOTHING like takinfg something out of context):
It is an ADDENDUM to add to their VOTING PERFORMANCES; as such, blending the scores of the two indicators we use, brings Garnet up to a total grade of…38{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} JUST above absolutely appalling.
One CANNOT undo a horrible voting record ver much with a good committee performance; but one CAN damage a good voting record with an horrible Committee Performance.
David Jennings says
LOL, as Mitt Romney would say, nice try but it won’t work. Any system of grading committee performance that produces results like the ones your system produced is flawed. Seriously flawed.
MikeO says
BTW: Mind if I cut and stich misleading parts out of your articles from now on? It could be fun.
MikeO says
Flawed by liberal standards? Of course!
MikeO says
Below is the section of the explanation that Davide didn't bother to include, demonstrating his deliberate attempt to be misleading here: Yellow sheet journalism at its worst. He might consider taking down the whole posting before his journalistic ethics become the ONLY question here:
===========================================================================
There are a number of excellent groups providing ratings on State legislators. Empower Texans provide a great Fiscal Responsibility Index (both for the State House and the State Senate). Heritage Alliance also does one, as does the Young Conservatives of Texas. However, all of these are based solely on the actual voting records of the legislators and, as we ALL learned this last session, often voting does not have as much impact- nor tells the legislators true role as well- as the members’ performance in committee. A legislator might have a solid conservative voting record; but does that tell the real picture if- as a Committee Chair- he prevents a large amount of conservative-promoting legislation through? Or waters down good bills; or speeds up bad bills?
In our first ever attempt to address this performance aspect of our legislators, we are posting a ‘Committee Performance Values’; these values need to be viewed as an addendum to the voting performance indicators already out there. Each committee receives a ranking of importance and a general committee performance determination. These values are factored in with the member’s role on the committee (Chair, Vice-Chair, serving by seniority, serving by Speaker appointment) to come up with the member’s points (or negative points) for their involvement. These are added up for all the committee’s served for the total value by member.
David Jennings says
Bottom line: you have an interesting idea but your metrics are flawed. No other explanation for your ratings. Go back to the drawing board and try again.
I'd also suggest putting on your big boy pants.
MikeO says
And David, you might go back to your Remedial Journalism 101 book and read the section on Ethics (if it has such a section; wherever you leardned you craft, the section must have been torn out).
Patriot Shar says
WHO did this ??
Who is Mike O … David I know but who is Mike O???
ROFL
Erin Anderson says
MikeO, to be fair, after reading Dave's post I went to your website, read the whole "Performance Evaluation", then searched the site for more details and found none. I don't questions your motives, just your methods – I don't think you're measuring what you think you're measuring. Here's my original comment via Facebook:
"I didn't see any specifics on the criteria used or how "points" were awarded – it's like saying, "We took a survey, and you got a 12!" – no context. Except in this case, Coleman got the "high score" of 12, which tells me that whatever was being scored, it wasn't successful implementation of "Tea Party" priorities.
I understand the desire to look beyond floor votes to assess our Reps' performance, but I have to rate this "Performance Evaluation" as 'Terrible', and it will have 'No Impact' on my assessment of these legislators."
Please take it as constructive criticism – hurt feelings are for liberals. With the Tea Party under constant attack, it behooves us all to assure the credibility of anything published under its moniker.
MikeO says
OK: for the reading impaired I have replaced the table with one containing the evaluations properly in the kind of blended scoring that the original table was to be used for, and sorted by blended score. The original table was to be used with the conservative benchmarks of your choice. I used EmpowerTexans and Eagle Forum, which were the first ones available. Maybe now, since you don't actually have to READ the instructions, it might be more useful to to you.
http://northtexasteaparty.org/texas-legislative-committee-performance-evaluation/
And, before you jump salty on the work of a 50-year grassroots worker, dating back to before Goldwater, you might try to UNDERSTAND it first. or- Gosh- even ASK!
As for who I am, you are welcome to ask Ken Paxton, Jodie Laubenberg, Van Taylor, Cindy Burkett, Stefani Carter, or even Florence Shapiro, That would be a starting place.
and I would appreciate a correction both here and in the Houston piece. Then I'll be happy to remove the justifiable snark I have at the link.
MikeO says
Another issue I had was I had a LOT of people pushing me to release this before I was ready; the State Senate was mixed in BEFORE I've had a chance to add in the values to the system. For the interim, I've pulled them. That's due to me working stuff every night past 1am; and that WAS erroneous on my part. BUT rather than pound your chest over this stuff, you just might have inquired.
Alvin Walker says
This report is best used to line a bird cage. Debbie Riddle has a -12 poor and Jessica Farrar at a -4 no impact? Over 50? Join the crowd. Working to many hours? Work less and turn out stuff that people can use. Bottom line suck it up, be a man and stop whining!
David Jennings says
LOL, this gets funnier by the minute. You want a "correction" made because you screwed up and pushed out a flawed evaluation? Sure, of course, why wouldn't I do that? Too funny.
Now let's get to your "revised" post. Here is the formula you suggest using:
Blended = (EmpT + EglF – CPE) / 2
Okay, let's take a look at Wayne Christian. He received a 98 from ET, a 100 from Eagle, and a -14 from you. Your formatting has his score blocked off but here it is in the formula:
B = (98 + 100 – -14)/2
B = (212)/2
B = 106
Hey, that's better than 100! How about them apples, boy!
Now let's look at Larry Taylor:
B = (88 + 40 – 8)/2
B = (120)/2
B = 60
Do you really think that Wayne Christian was almost twice as effective as Larry Taylor? If so, you might want to review the session again.
Or Byron Cook:
B = (68 + 40 – -53)/2
B = (161)/2
B = 80.5
So you think that Rep. Cook was "better" than Larry Taylor? Really?
MikeO says
Debbie Riddle served on Appropriations based on seniority; that committee turned in a Weak performance. Would have a good rating, since they controlled spending fairly well, but it turns out that left a lot of 'creative accounting'. They supposedly 'saved the Rainy Day fund, but apparently they mostly did so by pushing the bill due date of a lot of things out a year or two. DC type accounting.
Debbie also served on the Border and Intergovernmental Affairs Committee, which had a Poor performance. They could have taken a lead on the border enforcement issues; but did not. Hence the low grade for her. Farrar servied on a single committee (Border and Intergovernmental Affairs); not much impact at al ON HOW HER VOTING RECORD SHOULD BE LOOKED AT.
Like explained in the writeup everyone seems to be paying NO attention to, it is time EVERYONE on the committees start taking some responsibility for the results of the committee and not just sit there if the Chair is screwing up. Unless you are looking fo passive acceptance of the power brokers whims. We are not.
Folks, if you have a contention for a grade, give a REASON it is wrong, rather than scoffing at it. There is a REASON behind them all. Now if I cand get them all to appear right on the page. I'll be happy.
Yvonne Larsen says
Dave. the first link in the article "they rate Houston Rep Garnet Coleman…" now reads NOT FOUND. Kinda like Obama's pictures with ACORN being scrubbed from the web…