Preparing and Being Ready

There’s an eclipse coming up on Monday, which you may be aware. We’re planning to celebrate with kids, who live not far away but in the path of totality. There are predictions of cloud cover, but that’s life. We will experience the daytime total darkness regardless.

image is screenshot from this KTVB7 News story

Warning Sign

Does it have meaning? Is it a warning? Maybe. In fact, I think it likely does have meaning, although its exact predictive meaning evades me—and most of the various YouTubers offering their speculations.

I have a few favorites:  

·        Christian Homestead (see his Signs in the Heavens playlist) 

·        Christian Fire Poppy (hers are full of connections she’s made, often looking at constellations, using the online tool Stellarium; I recommend her first one, together with Christian Homestead, and there are three with "Revelation 12 sign" in the title from September-October 2023, plus more as we approach the eclipse)

·        Allie Duzett (she has an entire playlist for the 2024 eclipse; hers is astrology, but looking at the energetic types of influence from the stars and planets, rather than predicting future events; much is puzzling to me, but I love her positive and practical attitude and approach)  

Even if this eclipse is just a stunning natural event in the sky, it still might be a good time to prepare. We're already in times of chaos, so it seems prudent to prepare for any eventuality we can think of.

Every location has its risks. Here in Houston we have hurricanes and tornadoes, and floods (Hurricane Harvey combined these), and power outages, which we get with frequent brief technology failures, and with hurricanes, but we’ve also experienced them with a rare severe freeze. There are certain things we know to do now. Although, my husband says if we have another hurricane with power outage, he’s going to send me away to stay with kids, because that’s easier on him than worrying about me.

Disaster Preparedness

On Wednesday night, Glenn Beck’s program was “Prepping 101: The Step-by-Step Guide to Surviving Global Chaos” (also on YouTube), complete with multiple chalkboards. He was talking mostly physical preparedness—storing food and water, having tools and ammunition, keeping some money on hand (or gold, or something tradeable).

First up in his show, he talked about the electric grid. There are three in the US: east, west, and Texas. Yes, Texas has its own. We prefer that. In that failure we had during winter storm Uri, in 2021, that happened for reasons that would only be magnified by US-level control: windmills froze and wouldn’t turn, so no power from them; solar doesn’t provide power during a storm that blocks the sun (or when it’s night). Some things were offline for repair or inspection at a critical time. There were other reasons that all lined up, as things tend to do. But there have been some improvements and protections since that disaster.

It’s true, though, that an attack on the power grid would put a majority of people in the US at risk of death, if not immediately, then within weeks or months. (I wrote about this here and here.) It’s a bit scary to be that vulnerable.

screenshot from Glenn Beck's "Prepping 101" program

There are so many ways we’re vulnerable, it’s hard to list them. Nor do we want to tempt fate. But there are some principes of survival. First up, that Glenn showed, were what is called the Rule of 3s, because so many things relate to that number:

You can survive:

·        3 minutes without air.

·        3 hours without shelter in bad conditions.

·        3 days without water.

·        3 weeks without food.

·        And you have 3 days to get out of a perilous situation and get to safety.

screenshot of one of Glenn Beck's chalkboard lists

Home Preparedness

Next up, Glenn put up a chalkboard with 6 basic steps to prepping. (He’s something of a prepper himself, and often foresees disasters coming—sometimes he’s right.)

So here are the steps:

1.      Build a solid personal finance and health foundation (money in various levels of availability, plus medicines, first aid, etc.)

2.      Get your home ready for two weeks of self-reliance. (Food, water, fuel, and any essentials to shelter in place for a couple of weeks.)

3.      Know when to “bug out.” Have “go bags.” (Essential food, clothing, meds, water to get you through about 72 hours away from home. It may be a good idea to have one packed for each member of the family, and update frequently.)

4.      Prepare for emergencies away from home. (If you can’t get home, do you have essential meds, first-aid kit.)

5.      Learn core skills—and practice! (Here’s where he suggests camping, and maybe hunting, as good practice for cooking and cleaning away from home.)

6.      Share what you’ve learned, and build a base of like-minded friends. (Around here, we have people assigned at church to learn and share preparedness skills with us. So we know who the experts are, and we get info and learn from them pretty regularly—and maybe especially as hurricane season approaches.)

screenshot of another Glenn Beck chalkboard

The next chalkboard was for getting your home ready for a two-week shelter in place. Glenn Beck offers a pretty extensive list—but many of these things are what you have already. You just need to take inventory and add what you’re missing. The categories are:

·        Water—15 gal./person (1 gal./person/day)

·        Food—23,000 calories per person (1500 calories/person/day)

·        Fire—lighters matches, fire starters

·        Light—flashlights, candles, lanterns

·        Heating/Cooling—indoor heater, extra blankets, USB-powered fan

·        Shelter—beyond home, tarps for improvised shelter, or tents

·        Medical—create list of medical supplies

·        Hygiene—wet wipes, sanitizer, camp soap

·        Communications—ham and/or NOAA radio

·        Power—batteries, rechargers, solar charger (I would add generator to this list)

·        Tools—axe, shovel, work gloves, wrenches, zip ties, duck tape

·        Self-defense—guns and ammo

·        Cash—as much as you can afford to store

o   Bartering items (alcohol, cigarettes)

o   Precious metals

·        EMP proof home (I think this means grounding, as we do to protect against lightning strikes, but maybe this is more—like a Faraday cage, but I don’t know how you do that with your whole house.

screenshot of another Glenn Beck chalkboard

Glenn Beck has a quiz to assess your readiness for whatever, and I came out “better than most.”

We have a fair amount of food—most of which I cannot eat now, because of food sensitivities/allergies. So it would be challenging to eat just from the pantry and not the refrigerator or freezer.

We have a generator (since Hurricane Ike in 2008). It’s noisy. It takes fuel. And it’s not enough to handle the air conditioner or heater. But it’s good for lights, fans, recharging phones and batteries. In fact, we were able to help neighbors on both sides keep their freezers alive as well (with long extension cords).

We used to camp, when we lived in the northwest, and Mr. Spherical Model used to camp a lot even here in Texas, as a scoutmaster. Camping is good practice, to learn skills and think of better ways of doing things and learning to be resourceful. But I haven’t been willing to camp in the Texas heat with Texas mosquitos. I’m not much of a pioneer. Still, we do have a camp stove and some basic equipment.

There’s always more to do. And it’s better done a little at a time, as you can handle things with clear thought, without panic or urgency. The idea is to prepare so you don’t have to fear.

 

Spiritual Preparedness

Near the end of his program—too late to spend time on it, Glenn Beck suggested we also need to do some spiritual preparedness.

This, I would suggest, includes the basics: knowing how to pray, and how to hear answers and receive direction from God. It includes putting your life in order, daily repentance and improvement, refining—so that the Lord (and life in general) doesn’t force you into that refinement. And it includes learning to trust God.

A friend once gave me a lapel pin of a frog, with a note that it was a reminder to “Fully Rely On God.” I like that.

We have been practicing this for a while now—maybe through some of that forced refining. We’re not really ready—as the story of Joseph in Egypt goes—for a coming disaster such as seven lean years that have followed seven prosperous years. Because we’ve been depleting our stores the past seven years. We think we’re nearing the end, and rains that make the ground fruitful are about to come down on us—despite what an eclipse may portend. But this has really stretched our reliance on God, Who has been good to us throughout.

If you’re feeling less than fully prepared, or maybe just need a reminder of what the Holy Spirit feels like, I suggest tuning in to the worldwide conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints this weekend. Boosting your spiritual preparedness is what that’s all about. You can find it on BYUTV, on YouTube, or at ChurchofJesusChrist.org. There will be three two-hour sessions on Saturday, April 6, and two more on Sunday, April 7, just ahead of the eclipse. You can watch live, or come back later to watch; transcripts will be available a few days later. And, since it's a worldwide conference, it's available in many languages.

The Short Answer Is Fear

I’ve spent the last couple of weeks working through resolutions from the precincts in our senatorial district and creating amendments and additions intended for the state platform. I headed the Education subcommittee in my SD, so much of my attention was there.

Rep. Tom Oliverson dropped in to speak at our SD7 Convention
on Saturday, a couple of days after announcing his intention to
seek the House Speaker position. (Wish I had better photos, but my precinct was
seated far back and to the side. And I forgot to get photos of any committee work.)

Our very large SD does things as a mini version of the state platform committee. And since rule changes from last biennium, we had open meetings. We also took testimony. It turns out, Education is where much of the testimony was aimed.

Two years ago there was a huge push for more parental rights and controls, and included in the many rights of parents is school choice. That became a governor’s priority, but it nevertheless did not get through the legislature, even during four special sessions (add-on month-long sessions for specific purposes).

Why is there pushback, especially among Republicans, against school choice? The short answer is fear.

At the state Republican convention two years ago, we were in permanent committee, taking the last hour or two of testimony before final deliberations. All of the testimony time for the Education section taken up by anti-school choice delegates. (I wrote about this here.) It gave the impression that there was a huge sentiment in that direction from across the state. But that was an illusion. Those people were organized to get their names on the list to testify. But there were literally hundreds of precincts around the state that had submitted resolutions in favor of school choice. The anti-choice people almost caused the plank to be taken out, but it was rescued by the Education subcommittee chair at the last moment, describing the overwhelming testimony for school choice.

So, moving ahead two years, we got the same organized group of vocal anti-school choice people (I don’t know if they’re the same individuals, just the same sentiments) taking nearly all the testimony time. This was in our temporary subcommittee, and again during our permanent committee at the senatorial district convention last Saturday. We gave them far beyond their allotted time. I wanted to fully understand their arguments. There’s actually a fair amount we agree on.

We want options to be available to all. They say there already are options, which they want to keep: those options are public school, charter school, private school, or homeschool. I personally do not think that is anywhere near enough choice—and most people don’t even have those choices available to them. I’ll get back to this.

What these opponents fear is that, if you have money follow the child anywhere away from public or charter schools (charter schools are a public school entity; it’s complicated), then you allow government influence into wherever that money goes.

Our platform already says that the money must follow the child with no strings attached. These opponents say you can’t have the money follow the child without strings. And, they claim, this is a back door to government getting control within private schools—namely, church/parochial schools, but also homeschools—where they have no oversight now. Any time the federal government gives money, they attach strings.

Our platform already states that we want to abolish the federal Department of Education. We do not intend for any money following the child to come from a federal funding source.

When we asked the testifiers, what about families who are trapped in public schools that are failing their children—people who are paying taxes for that education they’re not getting—who can’t afford to also pay tuition elsewhere, there were two responses: that isn’t paying double (um, yes it is), and who is deciding the schools are failing—that’s a government entity trying to get more control (um, no; in my case it was me observing and experiencing the failure to meet my children’s specific needs, so I as the parent decided to call that a failure, and I pulled them out).

In other words, they do not care about parents whose children are trapped in schools that do not meet their needs. They will insist that those parents continue to pay taxes with no promised benefit. Tough luck.

These people write books and give presentations (there’s one nearby this week). They will go through the history of education—as I have done (here’s a sample I wrote and presented in 2019, and a part 2 on related info here)—and show the growth of indoctrination over time—again, as I have done. And then they conclude that, because we haven’t yet stopped the indoctrination, we never will, so the only solution is to keep the status quo in order to protect homeschools and private schools.

And that is where we diverge. We haven’t yet stopped the indoctrination—but, while some of us have had that mission for a long time, most parents just woke up in 2020, when the schools utterly failed their kids. This army of newly awakened parents spoke up. In 2022, the call for parental rights and school choice were loud enough to be deafening. We’ve been successfully flipping our school boards to conservative majorities. And so far, since that awakening, we’ve only had one legislative try—and there’s a lot of opposition to overcome there. But we already have the state senate on our side, and we have turnover this year in the House (ousted in the Primary a number of rino-Republicans who had voted with Speaker Phelan to impeach Attorney General Ken Paxton without presenting evidence; Speaker Phelan is on the verge of being ousted in a runoff, and Rep. Tom Oliverson, from here in our area, is stepping up to take on the speaker role, and he's on our side).

And the parents are continuing to call for their rights—including their right to choose concerning their child’s education.

Instead of doomsaying, maybe we ought to open our minds to more possibilities. We know that whenever the free market solves problems, it does it with higher quality and lower price than a government monopoly. So let’s see if we can inject some actual free market into the school system. And let’s do it by cutting strings to indoctrination sources—like the federal government, the teachers’ unions, the nonprofits offering “help.”

In our platform, the first Education plank already called for choice. We clarified what we mean—a lot more choice than what kind of classroom the child sits in. Who know what the state committee will do with it, but here’s our SD’s version of the plank with our amendments. Black is wording from the 2022 platform. Red indicates our additions. Green with strikethroughs is what we deleted:

101.  School Choice: Texas families shall be empowered to choose from public, private, charter, or homeschool options, or any combination thereof, including private tutors, lessons, therapies, online courses, technical schools, apprenticeships, certification programs, etc., for their children’s education, and the funding shall follow the student without strings attached, meaning accountability is measured by the parents, in place of any state or federal oversight. We also support tax credits and exemptions for education and choice within the public school system. Public Schools from which funding is removed when the funding follows the student elsewhere shall be prohibited from being replaced by funding with revenue collected from taxpayers or from state or local governments.

We deleted that green line, because the idea of putting choice within the public school system is now expressed in the “or any combination thereof” idea, so it became superfluous and confusing.

The last red sentence was an amendment during floor debate (when we present our platform to the body at the SD convention). The person who suggested it was dealing with that free-market idea. If an entity isn’t providing value, they should suffer the consequences, rather than be subsidized in their failures. I didn’t think the sentence was necessary, and I was concerned it might detract from the good we did earlier in the plank. But I agree with his idea. If they don’t provide the quality, the students leave, and the schools, who get paid according to attendance, lose money. So they are incentivized to improve.

There’s always concern about whether the schools have enough money, and there was another legislative change that made it so there could be quite a shortfall this year. But, as I have mentioned a time or two (or ten), in our district maybe we could empty out that brand new multi-level office building for administrative staff—who do not work in schools! No school district ought to have so many admins. So, let go of any non-essentials (I don’t know, maybe all but a dozen), and if that doesn’t cover the shortfall, then rent out the building as office space.

The mission is not about preserving the public school system; it is about providing the education every individual child needs—without indoctrination, sexualization, data mining, or any of the other things parents are rightly alarmed about.

(This photo is from a source no longer available; I previously used it here.)
We live not far from the bus barn, where lines of school buses come out onto
the street at certain times of the day. Back during homeschooling years,
my kids thought it was funny to hum the Darth Vader march from Star Wars
when we saw these.

But how can you have both freedom and accountability? You leave the accountability to the parents. You don’t need a huge bureaucracy to hover over the parents and examine their decisions. Think about how a health savings account works; you choose how to spend the money, but it can only be spent on healthcare. It’s up to you what out-of-pocket healthcare expenses you use that money on. Or, think of a GI bill, which can be used for higher education. The government doesn’t tell the veteran what to study, or where to study. It can even be used at a religious school, even to become a minister or chaplain. The only stipulation is that it be used for higher education. That’s the kind of choice we’re looking for in school choice.

Can it be done successfully? It can. Will it? I don’t know. But I’m not willing to keep children trapped in the status quo because a small but vocal minority has made it their life mission to prevent school choice—because of their fears.

Lowest Level Primary Election Campaign Debrief

Our Primary in Texas was on Super Tuesday, along with many other states. All in all, it was a good day.

The race I experienced most closely was my own—for precinct chair. It’s the lowest elected political office there is. I represent my neighborhood at the Harris County Republican Party meetings. There are somewhere around 600 of us in the County. My total constituency, including all voters of any party, is around 3300 (precinct size varies; mine is probably a bit over average size). Of those, about half are Independent voters—meaning they have not voted in a Primary, where party is declared, so we don’t know how they vote in a general election. Of the remaining, I think my precinct is about 54% Republican, which is solid but not stellar.

Republicans are more active here, though. Often the Dems have trouble hiring someone to run their Primary; two years ago the County notified us in the middle of the night that they had no one, and we’d have to run their Primary in addition to our own. This year they had a good person—from well beyond the precinct. And as far as I know things went smoothly. My husband and I were not allowed to run the polling location, because I was on the ballot.

I won! After Early Voting and Ballot by Mail (BBM) were counted, I was leading with 70% of the vote. That decreased to 67% in the official count. I actually did better on Election Day than Early Voting, but my BBM percentage was 86%, so, while that number was few, it had helped my percentage to look high. Still, 67% is a huge win. The ballot doesn’t indicate the incumbent, and I was listed as the second choice, so random votes (no name recognition but voting anyway) would have gone against me. I’ll need more data to know for sure, but I also think we had a relatively good turnout in our precinct for a Primary.

Election results provided on HarrisVotes.com/Election-Results. 

This was very nearly my first experience with intense block walking and electioneering at polling places. Add to that texting every known Republican voter who had not already voted. I also had a website, and business cards, and flyers.

I got a lot of help from friends. In the area that comprises our school district, there were eleven races with challengers. Most of us had worked hard to flip the school board to conservative. Some of the challenges came because someone didn’t like that. Two on our team were challenging incumbent precinct chairs who had worked against us (supported a different conservative candidate who split the vote and caused one loss out of four school board seats in November). We teamed up to help each other block walk every Republican voter in every precinct. And we got help building the website, designing business cards, covering electioneering for Early Voting, and doing a few timed mass texts. I had done only small amounts of those things until now, although I had helped with various races in small ways. It was kind of a new experience to meet so many voters—outside of duties as an election clerk, where you don’t talk views at all.

All eleven of us who worked together won, by the way.

I’m going to share a few memories of this campaign experience, which is maybe a micro version of what any higher office campaign goes through.

Let’s get the few negative ones out of the way first, and then enjoy the good ones, for dessert.

Block Walking Adventures

While block walking, most people were either not home or very gracious, and many were friendly and welcoming. But there were some exceptions. We were aiming at houses with known Republican voters; we don’t need to talk with Democrat voters about a Republican Primary. So, there was a house where a man came to the door. The app on my phone told me two female Republican voters lived there, but sometimes people move, so we make a note of that. Anyway, I offered him my flyer, and he said, “I’d never vote for a Republican!” I laughed. I thought he was kidding, because I believed I was knocking on a Republican’s door. He wasn’t kidding. He said all Republicans are—the usual list of horrid things. And then, he’s looking at me and seeing I am none of those things, and he says, “But thank you for being involved and caring.” And I left. It could have been worse.

Some of the block walking crew; I'm so glad we could help each other.

There were two houses with a similar story. In one I was block walking with a friend in her precinct, near the end of our route. We pulled up in her car. I got out sooner and rang the doorbell. The woman answered and I began to offer the flyer. She said, “Tell me who won the 2020 Presidential Primary.” OK, weird question. But I said, “Well, I think Trump won,” and began to finish, “but here we are.” And she said. “Liar! I’m a Christian, and I won’t tolerate any more of these lies.” OK, I didn’t lie; I am the expert on what I believe, and I spoke the truth about what I believe, although I didn’t argue. Then she started to rant about how women need to get abortion rights back. Um. Christian? Calling me a liar when I didn’t? Expressing her hatred toward Trump and Trump voters? Insisting the urgent Christian priority is killing babies in the womb? (She wasn’t, by the way, anyone who would be facing that in her life going forward, since her childbearing years were in the rearview mirror.) By the time most of this happened, my friend had joined us, and quickly extracted us. This was not a voter worth a conversation.

The second similar story was in my precinct—block walking with the same friend. Vicki had gone to this house and left a flyer when no one answered the door. But we were walking back from further down the block when a woman came out of the house to the mailbox. So we approached her. She said she was a Democrat—and her husband wouldn’t be voting Republican anymore either, because women need to get back their abortion rights. OK. Noted. Again, this is a married woman beyond childbearing years, whose priority is getting those babies killed before they can be born. Apparently our constitutional liberties, our border, or economy, our First and Second Amendment rights, and just about anything else we care about is unimportant, but we need to get those babies killed. Hmm.

 

Electioneering Adventures

There were a few negative encounters while electioneering at polling sites, but a large percentage were positive. During Early Voting I spent time at three different polling locations. They are not set up for electioneering (approaching voters before they go in to vote). Unless the main parking areas are full, as when it’s really busy, then every voter is already beyond our reach. It was frustrating and fruitless.

But when voters were available, those tended to be good encounters. We were giving people information they weren’t getting from the various organizations that send out their ballot recommendations. Those didn’t include precinct chairs; that would be too granular for a mass mailer. So, unless someone had filled out their own sample ballot, they wouldn’t even be aware of precinct chairs. And a lot of people don’t know what such a position does. So we were giving them information they didn’t have, and most people seemed to appreciate that.

Electioneering at Radack Community Center, along with
House Rep. Lacey Hull's mom (right).

I had really good, long discussions with a couple of voters at one polling location—two different days. They were wide ranging but turned to religion. One man was into a particular preacher, who has a YouTube following, and I followed up and watched that. Interesting. I thought he had a few things right, and a few things I see differently, but I like to see what other people believe—especially about the times we’re living in. The next day, in the second of these conversations, a man gave me a book—that he had written about the Rapture and the Two Witnesses, talking about end times. I’ve been reading it; again, we don’t agree on all points. But I’m pleased to see he’s a good writer, and he lays out his points very clearly.

At my own polling place on Election Day, at the middle school, they assigned us to the gym, instead of the usual band room. The door into the gym is a bit further from the parking lot than the band room door, which meant the 100-foot line past which no electioneering can be done was more advantageous to me. I could encounter almost every voter who came.

It was a very hot day—our first day in the 90s. I set up a lawn chair and attached a very large umbrella to give myself some shade. I also brought along my mountain dulcimer and played music during slow periods (around 3:00 PM was slow). A few people asked about it. When school got out, some kids came and thanked me for my impromptu concert.

My electioneering oasis on Primary Election Day 2024

Later in the day, until the polls closed, I had company campaigning for the next precinct over (people can vote at any polling location, and ours attracts 3-4 nearby precincts). So that was good for conversations too, and for catching all the voters.

Electioneering with Heather Palomo (left), the new
precinct chair just west of my precinct.

There was something I noticed, anecdotally, but maybe it’s meaningful. We’re told in various news sources that 90% of blacks vote Democrat, but that may be going down. So I go up to any voter I can get to, because you never know. At the Early Voting locations, sometimes Democrat voters were rude, but very few at mine on Election Day. I would offer my information, about precinct chairs, the last race on the ballot for anyone in a precinct with a challenger. I let people know the people on the list I was providing were conservative Republicans. Nevertheless, people I thought might not be interested (if I were profiling) were polite and accepted the information, even thanked me. If they were voting Democrat, they could have said so, or said, “No thanks, not interested,” as some did. But a surprising number showed interest and appreciation. They could have been just being polite, but it seemed to me more than was needed for politeness. I had the impression that either there are more black Republican voters than we knew of, or there are more becoming Republican voters this year.

The most gratifying thing to me was encountering voters who are already on my email list, who thank me for providing good information. They so appreciate it. I love hearing that. Providing them with good information—so they will not only just vote, but have what they need to be informed voters—that is my mission in this position.

How to Write a Resolution

Once the primary election is over, then convention season is underway. At each convention level we choose delegates for the next level up, and we put forth resolutions for the platform. At the local level, our platform resolutions move on up to the senatorial district level (some places move up to the county level, but our county has many senatorial districts in it), where they are sorted, refined, and sent on up to be considered for the state platform. (Texas Republican Platform here.)

 

The Process

How do those ideas get started? If you’re new to the process, how would you go about putting forth an idea?

You write it down, take it to your precinct convention (or whatever version of that you have in your area), and present it to the other grassroots participants. They might like it as is. Or they might reject it. Or they might suggest amendments to make it something they could support.

The ones that get supported (by majority vote in your precinct convention) will get turned in for the next level up to consider. The ones that get rejected are also recorded, as part of the record of what took place in that precinct convention.

A resolution that came out of our precinct convention in 2022.

It used to be that you were required to bring several copies of your resolution: one for the precinct meeting chair, one for the secretary to turn in, one for you to read from. That would still be helpful. But less formal versions—even handwritten resolutions that you come up with during your meeting—are acceptable. That would make more work for those you turn them in to, because someone is going to have to type up what you wrote so it can be considered along with the other resolutions. So, be considerate, but don’t be discouraged by formalities.

It also used to be required that you write using formal resolution language. There’s a “Whereas” section, often several paragraphs all starting with “Whereas,” that explain the background for your resolution. The final, essential part is begun, “Therefore be it resolved that,” followed by what you really want to state.

The platform planks are likely to include only that part following the “Therefore be it resolved that.” The resolution can be accepted by your group without the “Whereas” section. If what you’re resolved to have happen has obvious reasons, then no “Whereas” section is needed. But if you need to convince people of the reasons, or explain the importance of what you’re suggesting, you might want to include that part. The platform committee will only consider the final statement as a plank, but they can and do turn to the “Whereas” section when they want greater understanding of the resolution’s intent.

If the formal language is a barrier to you, just use plain language. You could start out, “Because…” which is what “Whereas” means, then give your explanation. Or just dive in and explain. Then, when you get to your final statement—the resolution—you could say, “Therefore,” followed by your resolution statement. Or say, “So, we should have a plank that says this:” and then give your statement. Or just give your statement without preliminary explanation—as long as you make it clear what statement you want to make.

What the minutes will look like for your precinct convention.

The Content of Your Resolution

What should you write a resolution about? What matters to you. You might have concerns that many others have, and putting ideas forth from many places in the state emphasizes how important it is to the people. Or you might have a particular interest, concern, or expertise that others don’t have, and you’d like it to be brought to the attention of people.

You probably ought to read the current state platform first. (Texas Republican Platform is here. There’s an index to help you find ideas.)

You might have an idea that’s already fully covered. Even so, you might want to state that this idea is still important, and you want the legislature to know it’s important to you and they should act on it.

Or you might find that there’s a close idea, but the current plank is missing a particular detail or nuance that you could add. In such a case, you could even have your resolution reference the existing plank and say you want certain wording added to it, or changed in a way that you state in your resolution.

Or you might be looking at an idea that has come up recently, because of things that have happened since the last platform was written. Maybe you’re the very person who has noticed and needs to bring this idea forward. There are planks in our platform literally brought forward by one person’s resolution out of the whole state. Others saw it and said, “Yes, that needs to be in our platform; we need to do something about that.”

 

My Possible Resolutions

I’m in the process of writing my resolutions to propose at our precinct convention on March 9. Here’s one, in the somewhat formal language, that I plan to put forward in my precinct. And following this one are some ideas I’ll be working on between now and the precinct convention. (You’re willing to take these and use them in your precinct conventions. We share ideas. The same resolution repeated from around the state can indicate a strong grassroots idea.)

 

Chaplains in Schools—Safety

Whereas the Texas Legislature passed SB 763, allowing school districts to decide whether to allow chaplains in the schools for mental health counseling purposes, and

Whereas individual school districts can decide what rules will apply in their district, and

Whereas counseling in schools is beyond the scope of authority given from parents to schools and parents have not delegated their right and authority to the care and upbringing of their child, and

Whereas parents have a right to know who and when any adult has influence on their child in school and whether indoctrination or influence against the parents’ will could be happening, and

Whereas predators can and do set themselves up with opportunities for access to children and may not be easily detected as a threat, and

Whereas a false accusation of abuse from a child against an innocent adult can have dire consequences for the adult, and

Whereas the safety of the child in the school is a paramount concern,

Be it therefore resolved that: Any school district choosing to bring in chaplains or other volunteers to the schools must set up circumstances for contact between the child and the chaplain to be only in public, or private contact with two adults present; and the parents must be informed that contact occurred.

 

Ideas I’m in the Process of Working On

·        Border security is a requirement of the federal government. Failure to protect the Texas border entitles Texas to not only protect its own border, but to require reimbursement from the federal government.

·        After the abject failure or fraud against the world population during the COVID pandemic should prevent any authority being given to WHO forever. Indeed, no submission to any international body will be tolerated by the American people.

·        Pornography in school is already unlawful. Any adult involved in placing or keeping such materials in schools—including but not limited to librarians, teachers and principles—shall be subjected to the full force of the law, which may include the permanent child predator label.

 

Here are two we put in our senatorial district platform last year, in the Education section. Some of the intent made its way into the final state platform, but I still like these and may submit them again this year.

·       Schools Are Not Families: Schools are hired to provide academic education, while parents retain every right to the child’s care and upbringing. Therefore we insist on the elimination in school of any Social Emotional Learning (SEL), mental health evaluations, sexuality education, gender-identity ideology, Critical Race Theory (CRT), socialism, Marxism, and other social indoctrination. Schools must be limited to teaching the Basic Standards as listed in the Basic Standards plank. All school districts, individual schools, or charter schools are prohibited from contracting with or making any payment to any third party for material concerning any of the above prohibited topics.

·        Parental Rights Reaffirmation: We insist that schools must not usurp the rights of parents. We recommend that there be annual training for all pre-K-12 personnel explaining and laying out the natural and legally encoded rights of parents in the care and upbringing of their children. We further recommend a brief printed delineation of parents’ rights to be provided to the parents at the beginning of each school year.   

Primary Ballot Picks

The Texas Primary is March 5, with early voting starting this coming Tuesday, February 20. I’m finding this primary season less contentious, or maybe simply with fewer contested races, than in past primary seasons. So there are fewer races to focus on.

I’m going to go through my Republican sample ballot below, and share my views, in hopes of helping to inform other voters, starting at the top of the ballot, the US and statewide races, on down to local, and finally the propositions.

I look back on this blog, started in 2011, and feel pretty solid about what I’ve said. The few places I look back and feel like maybe I was wrong had to do with candidates. I have always been cautious about supporting candidates. It’s easy to trust God; it’s not so easy to trust people. But you do have to decide who is the best candidate at the time, based on the information available to you, added to your own feelings. Maybe even in the times I look back with disappointment on past candidate choices, those might have been the best at the time. Maybe they were worth trusting—until they made trust-losing decisions. This is to say, add my comments to what you already know, and make the best, most informed decisions you can.

I use a standard in trying to decide on candidates. I write this in more detail here. I don’t always get a chance to go through these questions with a candidate—in fact, I rarely do. But I try to discern what their answers might be from whatever else I can learn about them, from their campaign literature, sometimes candidate forums, sometimes from friends and other sources I trust. In the past, I’ve even had grids showing at a glance what various sources choose. I won’t this time, simply because there aren’t as many controversial decisions. Where I can, I’ll share the endorsements of other sources.

I suggest iVoter Guide. Put in your address and get the races on your ballot. If you click on “View Candidate Profile,” you’ll get more info, including the candidate’s responses to a questionnaire related to conservative issues.

Also, True Texas Project offers their choices for about 40 counties, here, and a one-page sheet for statewide races, here. My choices align pretty closely with theirs.

For the most part, I won’t be covering races with no primary challenger, but I will be voting for those candidates. The races I’m paying the most attention to are Harris County Sheriff, House District 138, and Harris County Republican Party Chair. Plus, it turns out there’s some info worth discussing related to three Criminal Court of Appeals races.

This piece is long, so use it as a resource and scroll to the races you’re trying to learn about. I’ve highlighted my choices. And my sample ballot is available on my precinct chair campaign website; scroll down to see it.

 

US RACES

PRESIDENT

This is often the most contented and important race on the primary ballot. Those tend to be open years, when the other party has many candidates. We have many candidates on the ballot this year too, but it’s more like a second-term presidency year. Donald Trump is far and away the favored candidate. As far as I can tell, every other candidate except Nikki Haley has dropped out, so a vote for those candidates will be wasted. There are two on this list—Ryan L. Binkley and David Stuckenberg—are totally unfamiliar to me. I didn’t watch the debates, although I paid attention to some follow-ups to them. But Trump wasn’t there, so what was the point? I did watch his interview with Tucker Carlson, which coincided with a debate and received a much higher viewership.

from Donald Trump campaign website

Some of these people I have liked, in the past or even still. I liked Nikki Haley as ambassador to the UN. But what I really wanted was for us to withdraw from the UN. Since then, she seems to me to be a RINO who never finds a war she doesn’t want to fund—at our expense. In other words, even if Trump were not in the picture, I would not consider her.

I think Ron DeSantis has been a good governor in Florida. He didn’t run a good presidential campaign. I think we are all better served with him continuing as governor. He seemed to grasp that too, after the Iowa Primary, which left him in a distant second place to Trump.

To make this short: I’m voting for Donald Trump for President. And the more the Democrat machine attacks him with lawfare, the more determined I am to support him.

US SENATOR from TEXAS

I was surprised to see Ted Cruz has two challengers, Holland “Redd” Gibson and R E (Rufus) Lopez. I haven’t heard of either of them. I’m a precinct chair, so my contact info is easily available to any candidate, and I wasn’t even aware of them. Nor do I recognize their names, at all, from the decades I have participated in Republican politics in Texas.

Ted Cruz has remained strong and rational. I enjoy his podcast, Verdict, which often offers useful inside information. No need for more discussion here. I’m voting for Ted Cruz for Senator.

US REPRESENTATIVE, DISTRICT 38

Wesley Hunt has no challenger this year. This is the end of his first term—the first term in the existence of CD 38, which was created after the 2020 census. I had supported a close friend and strong conservative in the primary two years ago. Wesley Hunt was always a no-show at any of the several forums where I expected to hear from him. I had met him years before, running for a different position, and I didn’t think he was the best choice then either. He won the primary but lost that election. He has also been closely aligned with Dan Crenshaw—both military guys. I supported Dan Crenshaw in 2016, but he has been one of my candidate disappointments. All that said, Hunt hasn’t been a disappointment. His votes are typically conservative. He has spoken up on a few key issues and appears to represent us well. My expectations were low, but he has surprised me and some friends with how well he’s doing. There’s no choice here, but I’m glad to vote for Wesley Hunt.

US REPRESENTATIVE, DISTRICT 7, and Other Congressional Districts

This is a nearby district, challenging a Democrat incumbent, Lizzie Fletcher. Other than a candidate forum this past Tuesday (I didn’t attend; I was out block walking), I haven’t really noticed the race. But Ballotpedia offers links to the four Republican candidates:

Tina Blum Cohen 

Carolyn B. Bryant 

Caroline Kane 

Kenneth Omoruyi 

You can get more information, and better detail, from iVoterGuide. True Texas Project has endorsed Caroline Kane.

 

TEXAS STATEWIDE RACES

RAILROAD COMMISSIONER

This is a strangely named position in Texas. It has mainly to do with Oil & Gas. There are three RR Commissioners, who come up on the ballot in different years. The incumbent on this year’s ballot is Christi Craddick. I’m pleased with her work. iVoter Guide rates her as next to highest level conservative. The one challenger who provided information, James Matlock, is less conservative. True Texas Project has unanimously endorsed Christi Craddick. I’m voting for Christi Craddick.

JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT, PLACE 4

John Devine and Brian Walker are the two candidates. True Texas Project has unanimously endorsed John Devine. Texas Home School Coalition also endorses him. He was first elected to this position in 2012 and continues to be a solid member of the court. His campaign site is here. I am voting for John Devine.

PRESIDING JUDGE, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

The two candidates are David J. Schenck and Sharon Keller. Keller is the incumbent of 21 years. Keller will reach age 75 during the upcoming term and would be replaced at that time by a governor appointee. I voted for her in the past. However, this year there is strong support among my conservative friends for David Schenck.

It appears the deciding factor was the Texas v. Stephens case, in which there was election fraud, the county DA declined to prosecute, and Attorney General Paxton prosecuted in an adjacent county. The Court of Criminal Appeals voted 8-1 that he couldn’t do that, based on Article II of the Texas Constitution, which says no member of the state’s executive, legislative, or judicial branches of government “shall exercise any power properly attached to either of the others, except in the instances herein expressly permitted.” Paxton disagrees with the ruling, saying it gives power over election fraud cases to Soros-funded DAs, and it will be devastating for Texas elections in the future. [You can read the entire case decision here; Judge Yeary’s dissent begins on p. 22.] 

I tend to agree with Paxton on this one—and with Yeary’s dissent (as far as a lay reader can understand it). It seems to me, Paxton, while technically an elected official under the executive branch, is akin to the DOJ in the federal government. It would be like saying the DOJ has no power to prosecute, because that’s a judicial function, even though prosecuting crimes against federal law is the express purpose of the position. AG Paxton is called on to represent Texas in the law, including to prosecute cases against Texas law, but these judges are saying, “You can’t do it without the permission of the local officials complicit in the crime.” Texas Scorecard points out, “The ruling upended more than seven decades of precedent and has been criticized as activism disguised as originalism.” This affects Harris County, where we have a DA that refuses to prosecute election fraud, or illegal immigration, and sometimes violent crime. Democrats think Kim Ogg isn’t extreme enough for them, so she’s being challenged in the Democrat primary by someone even much worse.

The three incumbent Criminal Court of Appeals judges targeted for replacement
in the Republican Primary, from left, Presiding Judge Sharon Keller,
Judge Michelle Slaughter, and Judge Barbara Hervey, image from here.

Some are calling it political, but Paxton has targeted specifically Presiding Judge Sharon Keller, Judge Michelle Slaughter, and Judge Barbara Hervey, who are the three Criminal Court of Appeals justices thwarting him who are up for re-election this year. Read more here.

True Texas Project is unanimously supporting Schenck. iVoter Guide doesn’t include judicial races. For information about any of the statewide or appeals district races, Texas Judges provides basic information here. Schenck’s campaign website is here. I am voting for David Schenck.

JUDGE, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, PLACE 7

The two candidates are Gina Parker and Barbara Parker Hervey. Hervey is the incumbent. For the same reasons as above, conservatives are supporting the challenger. Hervey also will reach age 75 during the upcoming term and would be replaced by a governor appointee. Gina Parker has the unanimous endorsement of True Texas Project. Her campaign website is here. I am voting for Gina Parker.

JUDGE, COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, PLACE 8

The two candidates are incumbent Michelle Slaughter and Lee Finley. This is the same issue as those two criminal court races above, but there is some disagreement on this one, I’m not sure why. When True Texas Project first came out with their recommendations, they had selected Slaughter. Their list was used by those handling my campaign (for precinct chair) website; at that point I hadn’t yet done my deep study, and I couldn’t see anything to disagree with, so I went with their picks. However, TTP has since changed to endorse Lee Finley, and I have become aware of the issues with these judges. My friend who did the sample ballot on my website has already changed his sample ballot to choose Finley. For consistency with the other two criminal appeals races, that makes sense. However, my SREC (State Republican Executive Committee) representative is still going with Slaughter. So is Texas Right to Life (they endorse challengers Schenck and Parker, however, in the other two races).

Slaughter has held the office since 2018, so this completes her first term. Lee Finley is a lawyer in Collin County (Ken Paxton’s home county), and a former Marine (1990-1994). The link to Finley’s campaign here. His Facebook page is also active.  He gives a good brief explanation of the ramifications of the bad ruling in Texas v. Stephens, which go far beyond election fraud, in this short video from an event. 

While I would have liked meeting any/all of the three challenger candidates for Criminal Court of Appeals, I’m willing to go with what I’ve seen. I’m voting for Lee Finley in this race.

From left, David Schenck, Gina Parker, and Lee Finley,
candidates for Criminal Court of Appeals,
photo from Finley's Facebook

 

STATE DISTRICT RACES

STATE SENATOR, DISTRICT 7

Paul Bettencourt is the incumbent. He has no primary challenger, which is as it should be in his case. We continue to rely on him to help us in our cause for good limited government. I’m happy to vote for Paul Bettencourt.

 

STATE REPRESENTATIVE, DISTRICT 138

Lacey Hull is the two-term incumbent. Jared Woodfill is the challenger. I have good friends championing both. I supported Lacey Hull in her first election. I didn’t in her primary two years ago. She had moral issues in her personal life that conflicted with who she represented herself to be. She sides with Dade Phelan way too often. And yet, she is part of the Freedom Caucus and can generally be counted on for a conservative vote. She doesn’t tend to sign on to anything as a co-author, to help move important bills along. This has brought her an F rating from Texas Right to Life and a D rating from Texas Values Action PAC, noting that she supports casino gambling, which typically leads to $2 spent on social costs for every $1 of revenue brought to the state. (Sands Casino donated $27,000 to her campaign.)

That said, even after I didn’t endorse her two years ago, she has been friendly to me and willing to meet with me. The most troubling thing this past session was her vote to impeach AG Paxton, on 48 hours notice, with no direct testimony or evidence presented, and no chance for defense. The ensuing Senate impeachment hearing, in which Paxton was acquitted and we all saw that the evidence was innuendo and hearsay, was a waste of time and taxpayer money that could have been avoided by more House members doing their due diligence.

This is to say, I was willing to look at a primary challenger. Jared Woodfill was the Harris County Republican Chair when I was signing up to be a precinct chair. He lost his election as Chair at the same primary where I was elected precinct chair. I didn’t see any particular problems with him then. I tend to be amazed that there are people who would take on what is essentially a full-time unpaid volunteer position. Since then, I continue to see his name involved in lawsuits, particularly related to moral cases. He has close ties with Dr. Steve Hotze. I get Hotze’s newsletter. He often has good, conservative messaging. However, he puts out his slate of electors—as I do, although his has much greater reach—and his choices are often at odds with mine, particularly when I’m looking for a strong grassroots constitutional conservative, and he goes with the long-time party insider or known Rino. People say his slate is pay-to-play. In other words, the candidate makes a donation or buys an ad, or whatever the requirement, and then they can get an endorsement. I don’t know if that’s true; I just notice the difference of opinion.

Jared Woodfill presents himself as a solid Christian conservative. He probably has a record long enough to verify that, although not as a legislator. He is saying he wants to replace Dade Phelan as House Leader. We all want to replace Phelan—but we don’t all mean we want to be the replacement, especially immediately upon being elected. That gives me pause.

I have been undecided far longer than I ought to be in this important race. I have had opportunities to be campaigned to up close and personal, as a precinct chair, but I didn’t go to the events, which would have pushed me to commit and endorse. What I wanted was an open forum, with questions from the audience. I had looked forward to a candidate forum at the Cypress Texas Tea Party last month, but a late change in date because of a scheduling problem with the venue led to both of them declining.

My SREC committeeman supports Lacey Hull. I have gone with him to her office. She has been accommodating, as I said. One of my block walking friends in my precinct strongly supports her. She shared with me a negative piece of mail she got from Coalition for Good Government about Woodfill. They mention a child sex abuse case involving a Southern Baptist leader and Woodfill law partner, with stories dating April 2018 (Houston Chronicle), March 2023 (Texas Tribune), and January 2024 (Click2Houston). The negative add implies Woodfill knew and failed to report, and that he has had shady business dealings and is surrounded by fake conservatives.

I simply don’t know how to tell what is true. I suspect we will get some conservative work from either of them, along with some disappointments. While I am not endorsing in this campaign, at this point I am leaning toward Lacey Hull, where I kind of know what to expect.

 

JUSTICE, 14^TH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT, PLACE 3

The candidates are Steve Rogers and Tonya McLaughlin. I heard Rogers speak at our Cypress Texas Tea Party meeting in January. (Recording is here.) 

There’s a chart of basic information on candidates in this race done by Texas Judges here. 

I'm voting for Steve Rogers in this race.

 

HARRIS COUNTY RACES

HARRIS COUNTY SHERIFF

The four candidates, as listed on the ballot, are Mike Knox, Joe Danna, Paul Day, and Glenn Cowan. I’ve been aware of Mike Knox, former City Councilman, and Joe Danna, who has been running essentially since the end of the last campaign, for a long time. I’m less familiar with Paul Day. Glenn Cowan got on my radar a few months ago. He spoke briefly at our Cypress Texas Tea Party. And I’ve heard him and run into him a time or two since. He’s hard to miss; he’s 6’10” tall. My husband is 6’6”, so it takes something well beyond that to make me think, “Wow! That guy is tall!” Such is the case with Cowan. I understand he is also the father of triplets. That could make for some fun family basketball.

Glenn Cowan, candidate for Harris County Sheriff,
screenshot from here

I don’t have anything against any of the candidates, but I had been leaning toward Cowan for a while. He seems very competent in the particular skills needed for the job. And he’s a strong constitutional conservative. But I wanted to know more, so I was pleased that Cypress Texas Tea Party had a candidate forum for all four this past Wednesday. Each candidate got around 15 minutes, to introduce themselves and to take some Q&A. I was able to record the meeting. You might find these useful, in the order that they spoke:

·        Glenn Cowan 

·        Paul Day 

·        Mike Knox 

·        Joe Danna 

I thought Cowan did well, although he doesn’t appear as impressive here as I’ve seen before. Still, it was a good showing. Mike Knox probably looks the part of a Texas sheriff, with a cowboy hat, handlebar mustache, and just enough Texas accent. His most recent experience has been in city government, and it has been a while since he was in law enforcement. He also lacks the hostage negotiator experience that Cowan has. But with name recognition, he’s a formidable opponent.

Paul Day is older and has hostage negotiator experience similar to Cowan. He started out life as a Democrat and now calls himself a constitutional conservative. I asked for his conversion story in that context; he misunderstood and answered about his conversion for regular Lutheran in a household that didn’t give him all the background he needed to realizing abortion was wrong and some other things, and he became born again. That was not the conversion story I had asked for. It’s easy to misunderstand things when you’re in front of a crowd, but he didn’t win any points from me. Joe Danna was OK.

I would be willing to support any of these candidates in a general election. They would all be better than the Democrat incumbent, who is allowing rampant crime. (Houston is now the number 1 hub for human sex trafficking in the nation, not a distinction this conservative Christian state and community deserves.) My guess is the top vote getters will be Cowan and Knox. All the conservative sources seem to be aligning behind Cowan, probably for the reasons I am. We think he has the right stuff. I am voting for Glenn Cowan.

 

JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, PRECINCT 5, PLACE 1

The two candidates are James Lombardino and Arlene Hecht. This JP district is the area south of Hwy 290 and west of the 610 Loop. Lombardino is an experienced judge (8 years as a district court judge), one of those good Republicans swept out in the 2018 election, which we’ve been struggling to recover from ever since. He spoke at our Tea Party meeting in January, not on the agenda but invited up to say something briefly. He has occasionally attended over the years, not just when campaigning. Video here.

Hecht is a defense attorney. She ran for a district judge position in 2020 but didn’t win. While she also claims she is running for the JP position to clear the backlog, she doesn’t have the track record as a judge running a docket and lowering the backlog, which Lombardino has. There’s a Houston Chronicle story here. JP Precinct 5 has a large number of eviction cases, exacerbated by the incumbent’s mishandling of 2020 COVID funds and rules. And it also has a high number of debt default cases. While I have nothing against Hecht, she is less experienced, so I’m going with a known quantity. I’m voting for James Lombardino in this race.

 

HARRIS COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY CHAIR

The two candidates are incumbent Cindy Siegel and challenger Bobby Orr. Many of us are wondering why a disrupter would come in, in a presidential election year, to tear down and build up. Many of us wondered that the last time it happened, when Paul Simpson was ousted. People started talking about changing the rules so that such elections would happen in the HCRP Executive Committee meetings where precinct chairs are comprise the committee, who are the people working with the Chair, rather than tossing it out there to the primary voters, who have much less contact with the chair. It caused a mess last time, and a resignation, with lack of funds and organization just weeks before the November election. People don’t want that to happen again. What’s more, people are satisfied with the way Cindy runs things.

HCRP Chair Cindy Siegel (on the right) gives her report at the
HCRP Executive Committee Meeting, January 29, 2024.

Bobby Orr came to our Tea Party in January. My phone gave up during his talk; I got most of it, but in two parts, but it didn’t seem worth posting. My impression was that what he was proposing to do was exactly what we already did to flip our school board: block walk and campaign like crazy to known Republican voters. Orr said that was the model he wanted to use for all of Harris County. What he fails to see is that we did this with Cindy Siegel as chair. We didn’t need new leadership to do it. And we didn’t need Bobby Orr either.

He pretty much torpedoed his campaign by being caught on a recording saying that he hated the grassroots and didn’t want to work with an of us crazy people. So that means, when he says he’s going to inspire the whole county to do what we did in CFISD (Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District), he’s lying to our faces.

The final nail was at the January 29 HCRP Executive Committee meeting. There was a resolution gaining signatures ahead of the meeting in an attempt to censure Cindy Siegel. There was a list of 8 or so items they were accusing her of—all of which seemed to me either lies or spin. Siegel started the meeting by going through that list, item-by-item, with charts and receipts, defending her actions, simply as part of her Chair's report. It was very satisfying when, after other business, someone called for the meeting to adjourn before that resolution could even be brought forward. From my viewpoint, that was effective leadership on Cindy Siegel’s part.

Some of the accusations relate to a disagreement between Siegel and Orr about fighting voter fraud. There are multiple cases (which I’ve written about). You can’t get good candidates, if they know they can’t win, because their best efforts will be stolen from them and the party turns a blind eye. But the accusation that funds were used that could have gone to campaigning is also false. Funding to cover the lawsuits was a grant/donation earmarked for that purpose, so the campaign funds were not touched.

Let’s hope the voting public goes with the incumbent. We need her to stay, especially this year. I am glad to be voting for Cindy Siegel.

 

PRECINCT CHAIR 622

I’m the last race on the ballot. I think I’ve been a hardworking, effective precinct chair. Being a precinct chair means taking time to build relationships, both in the precinct and with the rest of the grassroots and elected officials. I’ve been doing that for 10 years. You can learn more at my campaign website. Those of you in my precinct, I hope providing information like this is useful to you. Vote for Linda Nuttall.

Linda Nuttall. That's me, from my
precinct chair campaign bio

 

BALLOT PROPOSITIONS

photo of page in the Link Letter,
January 2024, Volume 32, #1

Ballot propositions on a primary ballot are different from those on a November ballot following a legislative session. The November ones come out of the legislature, bringing possible state constitutional amendments before the people. The starting assumption on those is to vote NO unless you’re convinced it would be an improvement to have that written into our state constitution as law.

A primary ballot proposition is non-binding. It is a way for the grassroots of the party to tell the legislature what is important to us. This is in addition to the State Platform and the Legislative Priorities, both of which come out of committees at the State Convention. The list is approved by the SREC (State Republican Party Executive Committee), the two representatives from each senatorial district in the state. That does not mean these are approved unanimously. While the assumption is a YES vote unless you’re convinced it would be wrong, the SREC can have individually diverse opinions. My SREC committeeman, Tom Nobis, suggests voting no on Proposition 1 and Proposition 7. I didn’t get his reasoning from him.

Brandon Waltens of Texas Scorecard discusses the 13 proposition here. 

Proposition 1 would eliminate all property taxes without increasing Texans’ overall tax burden. That was in the 2022 State Platform; plank 90 calls for eliminating property tax, and 91 offers an incremental way to reach that goal. People making the argument point out many elderly people who have had to sell their homes, which were paid for, because they couldn’t afford the property tax. This isn’t hypothetical; it happens to people in our neighborhoods. This denies actual property ownership and looks more like paying rent to the government, which will evict you if you don’t pay up. There may be some concern about the word “all.” But this is just to get the attention of the legislature, not to write the law itself. If there needs to be some nuance, that could be debated on any specific bill.

Proposition 7 is about access to gold and silver for use as legal tender. Plank 46, Resistance to the Great Reset, has a bullet point related to this. So, again, there’s widespread approval among conservatives for this concept. So I don’t know the arguments against it.

I haven’t done a deep dive on the Propositions yet. My plan is to vote YES on all propositions, unless I learn something between now and voting day.

It’s important to vote. It’s even more important to be an informed voter. I hope this has been helpful.