Grassroots Power—Texas Style

Remember this foundational principle from our Declaration of Independence?

Governments are instituted among men,

deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

That is literally true in our constitutional republic—if we can keep it. Tuesday is Primary Election Day here in Texas, after two weeks already of early voting. It’s the midterm year, not the presidential election year, so there’s lower turnout. That means those who participate have more say in who our candidates will be—for Congress, for Governor, Lt. Governor, judges, and all the rest.

We have the longest ballot in the country here in Harris County. It took three posts a week or so ago to cover all the contested races.

But having a voice, as the governed, is more than electing leaders—and holding them accountable. It is also about expressing our ideas, to let the elected officials know how we want our state and country to be governed. There’s a process for letting them know, and we’re about to go through that today.

 

The Two-Year Cycle

Let’s start with the two-year cycle. A lot of people think of the four-year presidential election cycle. But, at least here in Texas, we go through a whole process every two years.

from a presentation developed by Bill Ely
for the HCRP Training and Development Committee,
which I used and adapted for the Cypress Texas Tea Party on February 19

In odd-numbered years we have our legislative session: mid-January through the end of May. There may be special sessions called (three in a row this past year, and still there was business left undone). But mainly we just have that 4 ½ months every other year. Which is good, since our freedoms are at risk whenever the legislature is in session. It takes constant vigilance to keep government in check, at every level.

When the session is over, we begin the primary season. Candidates begin their campaigns, which get fully underway by late fall filing deadlines. Here in Texas our usual Primary Election Day is the first Tuesday of March—this year that’s March 1. This ends the primary season—except for those races that had multiple candidates in which no one got over 50%; then there’s a runoff, this year set for May 26. And I expect there will be more runoff races than usual this year.

As soon as the Primary Election is over (excepting runoffs), the convention season is underway. There are multiple levels of conventions. The most local is the Precinct Convention, sometimes called a precinct caucus, or just precinct meeting. A few weeks later, the next level is the Senatorial District or County Convention. In areas like Harris County, there are multiple state senatorial districts in the county, so we don’t do it by county level. In less populous areas of the state, this level may be done by county. Then comes the State Republican Convention—this year held in Houston, in June. In presidential election years, there’s a national convention, but we’re not having one this year, so the state is this year’s top level.

Overlapping the convention season is the general election season, getting ready for that vote in November. Then, in January after that November election, the newly elected legislature is back in session.

 

Conventions—General Purpose

So what happens at a convention? The basic agenda is the same regardless of level:

·         We choose delegates to the next level up.

·         We put forth resolutions for the platform.        

There may be speeches and celebrations, and other necessary party business. But those are the two basic agenda items for every convention.

So, let’s look at each of the levels where grassroots people will be attending this year.

 

Precinct Convention

In past years, in this county, we’ve held our precinct convention on Primary Election Day, after the polls close, at the precinct polling location. A few years ago the county went to countywide voting. This is a great convenience for voters, but it hinders local politics. We don’t necessarily get to see our precinct voters at the polling location in our precinct—if there even is one within the precinct. And besides, many voted during the two weeks of early voting—which can be any of the polling locations in the county. So how do we let people know about the meetings?

Plus, since precinct chairs were often the election officials, how do we get the polls closed down, the materials delivered to the counting locations—and hold a meeting at the same time? Last year we got new voting equipment. The process kinks are still being ironed out. We got a practice run at the low-turnout election in November (ours was just school board races). We learned that closing down the polling location is more time-consuming than it had been before. And delivering materials to counting was an hours-long nightmare. (This time they have returned to multiple dropoff locations, so that may help shorten that part of the process.)

Anyway, doing the precinct meeting at the polling location on election night has become nigh unto impossible. So we’re doing our precinct conventions another day: this Saturday, March 5, if you’re local and interested in participating. Instead of at the polling location, the Harris County Republican Party has set up multiple locations according to state House districts. All the precincts belonging to that House district will meet at a location together and then break out into their separate precincts. (If you’re here in Harris County and want to know your location, the list is here.)

It used to be that the precinct chair would receive the packet of precinct convention materials when they picked up their voting materials. This year the packet will be handed to them at these House district locations. All of these meetings are open for registration at 8:00 AM, and meetings start at 9:00 AM—expect them to last about an hour.

Once the precincts get together, they follow a script that is in the packet. You identify all participants and make sure they are qualified to participate. To qualify you must have voted in the Republican Primary that just took place (and, of course, not voted this year in any other party’s primary); or, if you didn’t vote, you can take an oath of affiliation. In other words, only Republicans get to participate in Republican conventions.

Someone has to lead the meeting. So the setup is for someone, usually the Precinct Chair when available, to get things underway. This is the Temporary Precinct Convention Chair. She appoints a Temporary Secretary and any other needed officers (such as a sergeant-at-arms). Then the first order of business is to elect permanent officers. These are often the people who were temporary officers, who just continue on in official capacity, but they do not have to be. And these permanent positions are only for the business of this meeting. (The elected Precinct Chair—not to be confused with this Precinct Convention Chair—continues on with his/her duties beyond this meeting.) Elections—with brief campaign speeches, when necessary—can put in place any officers the precinct convention participants choose.

This is all done by Roberts Rules of Order. While it sounds official and somewhat intimidating, in practice it can be very simple and somewhat casual—as long as rules are followed. If two people show up, one ends up being the chair and the other the secretary, and they move forward with business. Most of the precinct conventions I’ve attended have had from 5-10 participants. Some less. One I attended had a couple dozen, but that was a rarity.

 

Electing Delegates to the District Convention

First order of business, then, is to elect delegates to the District Convention. It is my experience that the number attending is far less than the number of delegates the precinct is allowed. This is determined by a formula based on the number of Republican votes for governor in the past election. It’s done according to state party rules, and the packet shows the number, so you don’t have to do the math. For example, if you’re allowed 20 delegates, and you have 5 people at your precinct convention, all of you can go as delegates. If by some oddity, you have more people at the convention than delegates allowed, you can send alternates as well. If you’re allowed 20 delegates, you’d also be allowed 20 alternates—which means 40 attendees at your Precinct Convention would be allowed to go to the District Convention. Alternates might not have voting power at that convention—unless a delegate doesn’t show up. Then they would be seated as a regular delegate. But they could participate, regardless, in any activities not requiring voting, such as platform discussions.

Can you be a delegate at the District Convention, if you didn’t attend the Precinct Convention? Good question. You must be elected as a delegate at that Precinct Convention. However, if you know ahead of time that you cannot attend the Precinct Convention, but you know you want to attend the District Convention, you can contact your Precinct Chair, or another person planning to attend your Precinct Convention, and let them know you would like to be a delegate, and they can nominate you. If there is opportunity and the attendees are agreeable, you can be elected in absentia. You’d need to make sure they had your ID information to turn in with their report.

 

Platform Resolutions

So, about those platform resolutions. Once you’ve settled your delegates, that’s the next order of business. Did anyone bring any resolutions they’d like to put forward? If yes, then they present what they have, and the convention participants vote on whether to approve each resolution or reject it. Records are kept of both accepted and rejected resolutions. In my experience, 3-5 resolutions is a typical number. Some people bring a stack of resolutions passed on to them from friends or activists in other precincts, but they had better be able to present and defend anything they bring or it’s a waste of time. Having an idea come from multiple places is intended to show that the idea has much grassroots support. But a good idea from one single person can strike a chord and work its way up to the state platform.

At a meet-and-greet with Mark Ramsey, whom I’m supporting in the new Congressional District 38 race, he talked about seeing an idea from his precinct work its way all the way up to the national platform.

It’s suggested that you bring three copies of your resolution: one for yourself to read from, one for the Precinct Convention Chair, and one for the Secretary. Resolutions can be amended by the participants, somewhat casually, as long as rules are followed. You can even come up with a new resolution on the spot—just write it on a piece of notebook paper.

That said, there is a format, which helps lay out ideas:

Whereas: This is one reason behind our idea;

Whereas: This is another reason behind our idea;

Be It Resolved: We want this to happen.

The essential part is the “be it resolved” part—even if you just say it straight out without any formality. That is the part that would be put in the platform if accepted at the higher levels. The “whereas” clauses are giving background reasoning. When you’re in your precinct, presenting a resolution, you can say why you think it’s important, or why it should be said in a particular way. But once it is passed up the chain, people working on the platform may want to know your reasoning. If it’s there in your original document, that’s helpful to their decision-making process. But, again, if you have an idea, just spit it out and get it in some written form your precinct convention agrees to. That’s all that’s necessary.

The election of delegates and approving of resolutions should take about an hour. Maybe less, maybe a bit more, depending on size and agreeableness of your group. Once adjourned, the Precinct Convention Chair and Secretary get all paperwork copied and turned in to the County party officials as instructed. And they may want to coordinate communications about the upcoming District Convention to those who were elected as delegates.

 

Senatorial District or County Conventions

The agenda at this convention will be the same: elect delegates to the next level convention, in this case to the state convention; and work on resolutions for the platform.

At this level on up, the temporary officers do a lot more work up front. There are people handling credentials, and setting up the bigger logistics of a larger convention. In some past years we’ve held our Senatorial District Conventions at separate locations. This year we’re going back to a central location at which we will meet in separate rooms for just our districts. This helps save money on location rentals, and facilitates candidates who want to address the multiple conventions—going room to room, instead of traveling all over the county. This year ours will be held on March 26 at the Norris Center, near Town & Country (scroll down to info here).

 

Electing Delegates to State

If you want to be a delegate to the State Convention, there’s a good chance you can make that happen, but there may be competition. Usually each precinct gets to send just 2-3 delegates and 2-3 alternates. If there are more who want to go, they can try to be appointed as at-large delegates. Once you get to the State Convention, most—maybe all—of the alternates will be seated as regular delegates. If they’re not, they can be paired with a delegate and, whenever that delegate cannot be on the floor (needs lunch, or needs to be doing business elsewhere), that alternate can be seated and vote in their place. So don’t feel like an alternate isn’t important; you’ll probably act function as a regular delegate, likely for the whole State Convention.

 

Platform/Resolutions Committee—Temporary and Permanent

Those resolutions you turned in at your Precinct Convention—there’s a temporary committee, appointed by the Senatorial District Chair (or County Chair in those more rural places), who gather them, categorize them into the part of the existing platform they would pertain to, and go through each one. They try to make sure each new idea is addressed and considered. There could be hundreds, maybe even thousands of resolutions. Many will be exact duplicates, or will be similar ideas. The Temporary Resolutions (or Platform) Committee will meet to do all this gathering and sorting, along with thinking and rewording.

In large districts like the one I’m in, the Temporary Resolutions Committee will do a complete version of the platform, showing changes to existing planks and the new planks added. Many other districts or counties will just put forth a number of resolutions, in the same way as at a Precinct Convention, rather than a full platform. Either way, all this work is done in the few weeks between Precinct Convention and District Convention.

At the actual District Convention, the body elects permanent officers, which will include permanent committee members, such as these platform people. People who didn’t work on the temporary committee may still be added by the convention delegates, or replace temporary members.

That's me, working on the Permanent Resolutions Committee
at our District Convention in 2020
photo from Pauline Ramsey's Facebook page

During this all-day convention, committees meet for their duties. Rules Committee, for example, might be doing similar early and convention-day work. My experience is with the platform. We meet in a separate room from the body of the convention—while they hear speeches and do other business. (We try to get our votes in as needed—including getting ourselves elected as delegates to the State Convention. It can be hectic.) We’ll have a set amount of time to hear testimony from people who want to support a proposed resolution already being considered, or who want to present a brand new resolution they’ve thought of since the Precinct Convention. The Permanent Resolutions (Platform) Committee hears testimony and then finalizes a version of the platform—which is their Permanent Committee Report. They bring that to the body, which looks at it, discusses it—sometimes at length, sometimes almost not at all—and then votes to accept the committee’s report, which then gets sent up to the state party.

 

State Convention

The same agenda applies—except that this year we won’t have a national convention, so there won’t be election of delegates. There is election of party leadership.

This is a six-day convention. Temporary committees—whose members again are appointed by the Senatorial District Chair (one committee representative per district for each committee)—meet and do the work on Rules, Platform, Legislative Priorities, etc., on Monday through Wednesday. They take testimony and try to come up with their final work product, called the Temporary Committee Report, which will be the starting point on Thursday, when most of the delegates arrive.

During those temporary committee hearings, people can come and testify on issues, to get ideas included that they want, or to get wording the way they want. You don’t have to be a delegate to testify. People can even, again, present an entirely new idea. They have opportunity to testify in separate subcommittee hearings as well as in the committee as a whole.

On Thursday, when most of the delegates arrive, permanent committee members will be chosen. Again, these are usually the ones who did the work on the Temporary Platform Report, but not always. There were some significant changeouts last time, when delegates decided their committee members didn’t hold the prevailing views of that Senatorial District.

The Permanent Committees will have only Thursday afternoon/evening to hear more testimony and finalize any changes to the Permanent Committee Report.

These reports are presented before the entire body of delegates, and are open to floor debate, which can be either very exciting or very boring, depending on issues that come up, and how much the rules of order are used to slow the process.

With Legislative Priorities, the final report comes up with something like 15-16 priorities, which they have narrowed down from around 40 earlier in the week. And then the body votes on their priorities, which narrows it down to a top eight. So that is very grassroots. And we think the innovation of providing legislative priorities is more apt to persuade legislators to do at least these few things.

Platform is usually the last thing to be discussed on the floor. That may be by design. People are tired and ready to go home, so they’re less likely to want an extended floor debate. But another innovation from a few years ago is to have an up-or-down vote on each platform plank. Any plank that doesn’t receive 50% support gets eliminated from the platform.

Other fun things go on at the State Convention. There’s a big exhibit hall, with booths and temporary stores set up. There’s entertainment. Speeches and more speeches, of course. And outside events, like breakfasts and banquets. And lots of new people to meet—just about all working toward greater freedom in our state and country, in other words good people you’d like to have as friends.

In 2018, our kids were also delegates, so we had our
grandkids with us at the State Convention.

Did I mention that the Texas State Convention is the biggest political convention in the country? Possibly in the world. We have up to 9,000 delegates, plus visitors. It’s a big and memorable fiesta—in addition to getting the voice of the grassroots to the people who need to hear us.

It starts at the Precinct Convention. So put that on your calendar, and get your voice heard at least for that hour. 

Whatever state you’re from, there’s some version of this process. Find out what it is, and get your voice heard.

 

 

 

Primary Picks, Part III: Judicial Races and Propositions

This is the third post of three going through our extraordinarily long ballot. In Part I we went through statewide races. In Part II we covered Congressional and County races.

Here in Part III, we’ll be covering just the contested Primary judicial races, starting at the statewide level.

As a reminder, Texas has a two-part Supreme Court. One part is called the Supreme Court; it handles civil law cases. The other is called the Court of Criminal Appeals, which is the Supreme Court level in Texas for criminal cases.

Texas Court System diagram found on Judge Scott Walker's website

Supreme Court, Place 9

The choices are David J. Schenck and Evan Young. Young has the endorsements of Conservative Coalition of Harris County (with 83% of their vote), my SREC committeewoman Deborah Fite, and Texas Home School Coalition. I took a look at Houston Region Business Coalition, The LinkLetter, and Texas Conservative Review; all three went with Evan Young.

Texas Right to Life supports David Schenck, as do Texas Eagle Forum, True Texas Project, and Grassroots America. He has been on the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals (that’s the Texas 5^th Circuit). He claims to be a strict constructionist. But I’m unaware of any reason to particularly challenge a Republican incumbent who seems to be doing well.

Evan Young was appointed to this position on the Texas Supreme Court by Governor Abbott, so he’s the incumbent. I’m unaware of complaints about Young. He has videos on his website from his swearing in ceremony, and he sounds like a constitutionalist. He clerked for Antonin Scalia. His wife, by the way, clerked for Neil Gorsuch.

I’m going to take the word of so many and give Evan Young my vote.

 

Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 5

The choices are Scott Walker and Clint Morgan.

Scott Walker was elected to this position, winning handily. If there’s reason to oust an incumbent, it had better be good. Clint Morgan is not afraid to take on his opponent directly; he lays out some stats on his website that are pretty convincing. Walker lacks credentials and productivity by comparison to Morgan. But then Morgan shows a couple more graphs. One compares Walker to all other appellate judges elected since 1992 who have served 5 years or more; Walker underperforms all of them, by quite a lot. Since his election, most judges have ruled on 35-50 cases, one as high as 60. Walker has ruled on only 18. Morgan’s website claims, “Scott Walker is the least productive judge in the recorded history of the Court.” He also notes that Walker, a former defense attorney, leans toward leniency. You might need to look case-by-case to know whether that assessment is accurate. Morgan is a prosecutor, and a very productive one, from here in Harris County.

comparison chart from Clint Morgan's website

Before taking a look, I would have thought there wasn’t reason to go against an incumbent. But Morgan has the practically unanimous support of all the endorsement lists I look at, including Texas Right to Life. CCHC gave him 100% support. Deborah Fite, my SREC committeewoman, added a comment only on this race, saying, “This race may be the most important on ballot.” Walker lists no endorsements on his website, and I didn’t find any. I’ll be voting for Clint Morgan.

 

County District Judicial Races

Note that, with Democrat sweeps the past two elections, the only Republican judges are appointed ones. There aren’t any Republican judges being challenged in the Primary. And there are only a few races in which there are multiple Republicans running. Those are the only ones I’ll cover here.

 

Family District Judge, 308^th Judicial District

The choices are Todd Frankfort and Michael Patrick Delaney.

I am told by another lawyer who is also running for a judge position that Todd Frankfort is one of the best around, excellent. He’s board certified. And he has a good judicial temperament. According to his website, he “has been selected as a ‘Super Lawyer’ every year since 2012, received the Houston Bar Association ‘President’s Award’ for outstanding service in 2004 and 2012, and received the Houston Bar Association ‘Merit Award’ in 2003.” He has the endorsements from the LINKLetter, Texas Conservative Review, Houston Region Business Coalition, and my SREC representative.

Delaney has been a family law attorney for 26 years in private practice. His website mentions no endorsements, and I found only a 67% vote (not enough for an endorsement) from the Conservative Coalition of Harris County.

Frankfort looks to me like the better pick.

 

Family District Judge, 311^th Judicial District

The two candidates are Gardner Eastland and Ray VanNorman. Many significant endorsements go to Ray VanNorman: CCHC (100% endorsement), Texas Right to Life, Texas Home School Coalition, Texas Conservative Review, my SREC committeewoman. He has strong conservative credentials.

Gardner Eastland has fewer endorsements: Houston Region Business Coalition, BIZPAC, and C Club.

However, when I talked with a lawyer friend, he pointed out that VanNorman lacks experience in the area of family law. On Eastland’swebsite he says, “My Republican opponent has never handled a divorce in Harris County, Texas. In fact, he has never filed a lawsuit of any kind with the Harris County District Clerk’s Office.” Eastland has handled over 500 family law cases in Harris County.

Family law is an area where experience gives better results to families. A wrong decision can ruin lives, maybe for generations.

I feel odd going against the conservative majority here. I think VanNorman must be truly conservative. Maybe civil law would be a better fit for him. But on this one I’m going with the experienced candidate, Gardner Eastland.

 

Family District Judge, 313^th Judicial District

The two candidates are Julie A. Ketterman and Rachel Leal-Hudson, I think.

This race is confusing to me. By the time I got ready to study the race, it looked like this was over. Ketterman had filed suit, saying Leal-Hudson lacked the minimum 250 signatures. Most judicial candidates, by the way, got over 750 signatures, which allowed them to waive the filing fee. Leal-Hudson, I’m told, got into the race late and missed all the signature signing parties. There was a jury trial. Leal-Hudson lost. That meant that, even though the ballot would have her name on it, votes cast for her would not count.

That’s what I thought almost two weeks ago. But since then I continue to get campaign emails. I got a mailer a couple of days ago—those aren’t cheap. And endorsements continue to come in.

I looked up the case. The jury found for the plaintiff, February 4. However, there’s a note that says an appeal has been filed.

I don’t know what to do with this information. Leal-Hudson has endorsements from THSC, CCHC (100%), Deborah Fite, LINKLetter, Texas Conservative Review, HRBC, Rep. Briscoe Cain, PoliceInc, Houston Police Officers Union, and Kingwood Tea Party.

Kettering has 22 years of experience in family and CPS law, and has taught courses on the subject. Leal-Hudson has 11 years of experience in family and CPS law, plus the addition of being the oldest of 19 adopted children, so she has a lot of first-hand experience as well.

I don’t know how to decide this. If there were no court case, I’d probably be swayed by the outpouring of support going for Leal-Hudson. Ketterman didn’t answer the questionnaire for CCHC, so I couldn’t learn more about her. I may go ahead and vote Rachel Leal-Hudson, trusting those who have vetted her, and hope that the court case is resolved appropriately.

 

Justice of the Peace, Precinct 5, Place 2

The candidates are Zee Adam Gire, Bret S. Kisluk, and Bob Wolfe. Bret Kisluk spoke to our Tea Party and was impressive (video here). I haven’t met the others.

Gire is a businessman, not a lawyer. A law degree isn’t required for the job, but understanding of the law would sure help. He has a couple of precinct chair endorsements. Wolfe got the LINKLetter endorsement. Kisluk has endorsements from CCHC (92%), Texas Conservative Review, Houston Region Business Coalition, and my SREC Committeewoman.

I read their questionnaire answers for CCHC.  Gire was unaware that the Justice of the Peace doesn’t do criminal cases (see answer 13). It looks like there would be a steep learning curve.

Norman Rockwell's "Marriage License"

I try not to judge too harshly on grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors, because most people need someone like me to clean up their writing. (Even I could use such a person from time to time.) But Wolfe’s questionnaire answers were remarkably error-filled, enough to be a serious distraction. It says to me that this person doesn’t handle details well. Wolfe also seems to think it’s wrong for Justices of the Peace to spend their time performing weddings. But—the single thing most of us know that JPs do is marriages. There’s a Normal Rockwell painting of a couple going before the JP. He’s an attorney, but he doesn’t have judicial experience.

Kisluk is a part-time municipal judge in three jurisdictions. He knows the law, and he knows how to handle a court docket with proven efficiency. Wolfe brought up that he spends too much time performing marriages, supposedly for the extra money (again, it’s what JPs do) and has even done same-sex weddings. While I would prefer that he didn’t, the law requires that someone be available to do it. I think we would be happy with Kisluk as Justice of the Peace; I’m voting for him.

 

Propositions

These are put forth by the SREC Committee, the two committee members from each senatorial district representing that district at the state level. The propositions, even if approved by the vote, are non-binding. They do not become law. They are intended to direct the next legislative session on issues and policies of importance.

I trust the SREC as a whole. But, as with any legislative body, they are made up of a fairly diverse membership representing different interests and points of view. You do not need to feel required to agree with all these. You might even want to start from the position: convince me to vote for this.

So, I’ll just go through the list and give my impressions. Take it for what it’s worth. Do your own thinking. The numbers after the title are the SREC members voting for, against, or not voting; there are 62 SREC members plus a chair and vice chair who don’t typically vote.

 

Proposition 1: Border Security (61-0-2)

In light of the federal government’s refusal to defend the southern border, Texas should immediately deploy the National Guard, Texas Military Forces, and necessary state law enforcement to seal the border, enforce immigration laws, and deport illegal aliens.

 

This is already taking place. At our expense. I’d like to see a way to get the federal government to pay us back for doing its job. But no one has yet to come up with a way. I’ve offered an idea—have all income tax earned in Texas to go through a sort of escrow account handled by the state of Texas, from which we extract what the federal government should not be collecting; and then we pass along the appropriate remainder. But maybe there’s not a legal way to accomplish it. Anyway, I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 2: Eliminate Property Tax (57-3-3)

Texas should eliminate all property taxes within ten (10) years without implementing a state income tax.

 

Son Political Sphere is absolutely against this; he doesn’t believe this plan—particularly Huffine’s would be anything but extraordinarily unfair to everyone. Do the math. I have heard from people who actually had to move because they couldn’t afford the property taxes on their life-long home that they had paid off. That’s just wrong. So I’m willing to look at alternatives. But, unlike many friends, I’m going to vote NO on this until I can see a plan I feel better about.

 

 

Proposition 3: Vaccine Mandate (61-1-0)

Texans should not lose their job nor students be penalized for declining a COVID-19 vaccine. 

 

This is an obvious YES. Coercion is wrong, which we determined in the Nuremberg Code of 1947.

 

 

Proposition 4: Parents’ Rights and Critical Race Theory (60-0-1)

Texas schools should teach students basic knowledge and American exceptionalism and reject Critical Race Theory and other curricula that promote Marxist doctrine and encourage division based on creed, race, or economic status.

 

Let me edit for clarity: Texas schools should must teach students basic knowledge and American exceptionalism; our schools must  and reject Critical Race Theory and other curricula that promote Marxist doctrine and encourage division based on creed, race, or economic status.

There might be other improvements to make, but in general I like this concept. We did pass a law basically doing this during the past legislative session. Still, in support of the idea I’ll vote YES.

 

 

Proposition 5: Right to Life (61-0-1)

Texas should enact a State Constitutional Amendment to defend the sanctity of innocent human life, created in the image of God, from fertilization until natural death. 

This would codify into the Constitution what the Republicans, and frankly a majority of Texans, want. We already have a trigger bill, outlawing abortion in Texas when/if the US Supreme Court reverses Roe, which could happen this year. Laws, however, can change; it’s harder to amend the Constitution and requires the approval of the people. So this would be a stronger protection. I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 6: Committee Chairs (61-1-0)

The Republican-controlled Texas Legislature should end the practice of awarding committee chairmanships to Democrats. 

I agree with this. I have been told by a representative that the theory was, if you give them some chairmanship where they won’t do much mischief, it keeps them from spending all their energy thwarting Republicans. I don’t think that strategy is working. And certainly any legislator who fled the state to deny a quorum ought to expect no favors from our side. So, I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 7: Election Integrity (58-0-2)

Texas should protect the integrity of our elections by verifying that registered voters are American citizens, restoring felony penalties and enacting civil penalties for vote fraud, and fighting any federal takeover of state elections.  

I support this, of course. I think the phrase “restoring felony penalties and enacting civil penalties for vote fraud” is difficult to understand. They’re trying to say a lot in a short statement, but I need explanation there. I think there must be some we had felony penalties for that were lowered to misdemeanors and we want to restore the felony penalties. Then, also, there are addition penalties (are they all civil?) for other types of vote fraud that don’t yet have penalties attached. Anyway, the intent is good, and this is a resolution, not a law. So I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 8: Gender Modification (59-1-0)

Texas should ban chemical castration, puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and genital mutilation surgery on all minor children for sex transition purposes. 

Excellent concept. It’s already in our platform. Plank 246 looks like this:

246.             Gender Identity: We oppose all efforts to validate transgender identity. For the purpose of attempting to affirm a person 21 or under if their perception is inconsistent with their biological sex, no medical practitioner or provider may engage in the following practices:

a.       Intervene in any way to prevent natural progression of puberty.

b.       Administer or provide opposite sex hormones.

c.       Perform any surgery on healthy body parts of the underage person.

I’m not fully satisfied with that wording either, but the intention of both the proposition and this plank are to outlaw permanent sex transition of minors. There have also been attempts to label this sort of “therapy” as child abuse. Anyway, I’m in favor of the concept and will vote YES.

 

 

Proposition 9: Parental Educational Relief (57-0-0)

Texas parents and guardians should have the right to select schools, whether public or private, for their children, and the funding should follow the student. 

I’m strongly in favor of school choice. We also need to make sure that the state does not attach any strings to that funding. You’d be surprised how many Republican legislators don’t believe in this concept and don’t want a public vote that will reveal that to their constituents. I’m voting YES.

 

 

Proposition 10: Freedom of Conscience (45-7-1)

Texans affirm that our freedoms come from God and that the government should have no control over the conscience of individuals.  

Our freedoms—our rights—either come from God or from some fallible human. If it’s a human, such person can take away whatever they have granted. But God’s promises are sure.  Governments are instituted among men to protect our rights, not to grant or deny them. If a government isn’t protecting our rights, that tyranny’s power needs to be taken away and restored to the people. So, I’m voting YES.

Primary Picks, Part II: Congress and County Races

In part I we covered the statewide races. Today we’ll go over the nearby congressional and Harris County races. In part III later this week, we’ll go over the contested judicial races and the ballot propositions. Have I mentioned that we have the longest ballot in the nation? Feel free to scroll down to races you’re interested in.

Congressional Races

Congressional District 38

I’ve spent the most time on this race—the newly created district here in northwest Harris County. I’ve written about it here, here, and here.

It’s a tree-shaped district; the top branches cover Jersey Village, Cypress areas, and Tomball, reaching almost to Montgomery County. I’m in the stem, or trunk, area, which is a pretty narrow connector to the southern section, the tree roots, which includes the Energy Corridor along I-10 and parts of Memorial. There is no incumbent, since it’s brand new.

There are 10 candidates. What you need to know is that this is a David and Goliath-type contest. The Washington, DC, establishment has put their money and push behind their candidate, and they’re assuming the money will buy them what they want. Their candidate is Wesley Hunt. He ran two years ago in CD 7, losing against Democrat Lizzie Fletcher. This was not my district, but looking at that race, here’s what I wrote about this DC candidate at that time: 

Wesley Hunt looks good on paper. He’s an African-American military veteran, the kind of person you want to be pleased about voting for. However, his voting record shows never having voted in a Republican primary. Maybe we have to forgive him for 2008 (although I’d rather not), but all other primaries? It’s hard to convince me of your dedication to the Constitution without even that minimal record.

Since then he has voted in the Republican Primary—the one in which he was on the ballot. 

I was willing to give him an honest chance, but he failed to show up at two candidate forums in December, and then failed to show up as scheduled at the Cypress Texas Tea Party, despite confirming the night before. The only forums I know of where he has shown up have been fundraising dinners, usually with other Washington, DC, picks, Dan Crenshaw (CD 2) and Morgan Luttrell (CD 8). I get emails from Hunt, but rather than talking about issues, it’s all about fundraising.

There was this one that caught my eye a week ago (Wednesday, February 9, 2:12 PM). The subject line said, “every $5 = 1 new voter”:

What exactly is his Voter Registration Fund? Is it separate from his campaign fund? Because, I’m a deputy voter registrar. There are rules. You can’t distinguish between parties you’re willing to register. You can go to events where there are a lot of people of one party, but you can’t do anything partisan while registering voters—that includes campaigning for a candidate. And, like I said, he’s not going to events where there are Republicans. Also—I don’t get paid for that; it’s volunteer work. So what is this money he’s collecting going to? And why is he equating contributions to this fund to a certain number of new voters? He thinks he can buy votes? If somebody wants to pursue this with election law people, feel free. I’m putting my energy elsewhere, but this seems both offensive and pretty fishy.

So, enough about him. What about the other nine candidates? Most—all but one—lack experience. I’m behind the experienced candidate, Mark Ramsey.

There’s another candidate (Lopez) who has been trying to paint Ramsey’s long years of grassroots volunteer service as “being part of the establishment” “part of the problem.” Really? So, I’m asking, personally, when does a grassroots volunteer suddenly cross over into the establishment? I made this comment on such a post:

Being involved in politics for me has meant being a convention delegate, a citizen lobbyist to my representatives in Austin and their local offices, making calls and emails to my representatives, being a poll watcher, a poll worker, eventually stepping up as precinct chair when mine was moving, volunteering to help on the platform committee. At what point of volunteering my time as a citizen do I step over some line and become "100% part of the problem"? If you're talking about Mark Ramsey, you're saying his experience and success as a volunteer citizen makes him some part of the establishment that he's been fighting for decades. Exactly where does a person cross the line from good citizenship to problem—and would you think of such citizens as problems from Washington?

When you look at voting records—publicly available information—only Mark Ramsey has consistently voted in Republican primaries. Hunt failed to vote even in a general election between 2008 and 2018. His military service was 2004 to 2012, so it wasn’t all the inconvenience of deployment.

Mark Ramsey has these endorsements:

·         Texas Right to Life

·         Texas Home School Coalition

·         Texas Values Action

·         Grassroots America, We the People

·         Americans for Parental Equality

·         Kingwood Tea Party

·         The Conservative Republicans of Texas

·         Texas Conservative Review

·         The Link Letter

·         Conservative Coalition of Harris County

Those are the groups. These include the three "slates,” which people sometimes call pay-to-play. But Mark tells us that was not his experience. They interviewed him, gave the endorsement, before any talk of buying ads. No ads were required for the endorsement. He was told the more ads they sell, the greater their reach. But there was no pressure. I don’t know if that is always the case, but that was his experience.

Then there are the individuals, a long list, including:

·         Sid Miller, Texas Agricultural Commissioner

·         Wayne Christian, Chairman, Texas Railroad Commissioner

·         Mayes Middleton, Representative Texas House District 11, Chair of Texas Freedom Caucus

·         Steve Toth, Representative Texas House District 15, Texas Freedom Caucus

·         Briscoe Cain, Representative Texas House District 128 Texas Freedom Caucus

·         Kyle Biederman, Representative Texas House District 73 Texas Freedom Caucus

·         Rick Miller, Former Representative Texas House District 26, Navy Aviator

·         Derek Townsend, Tomball City Councilmember

·         Gail Lowe, Former Chair Texas State Board of Education

·         Ken Mercer, Former Texas State Board of Education

·         David Bradley, Former Texas State Board of Education

·         Charlie Garza, Decorated Navy Submariner, Former School Board of Education Member, SREC

Add in a lot of members of the SREC members (representatives from each state senatorial district who work on state Republican committees), precinct chairs (76% of those who have committed), grassroots activists, and regular citizens. And me.

He’s strong on all things constitutional—and knows what he’s talking about. And he’s especially strong on energy, being an oil & gas engineer, having run his own consulting business for the last couple of decades.

He has been a mentor to me. I’ve worked with him several times on the district resolutions (platform) committee, and he pulled me along to edit the state platform when he chaired that committee. Here’s a detail you might not see elsewhere: we pray at every campaign meeting, and even at meet and greet events. We have a sense that we need to take back our country—and that God will support such efforts. I guess I just can’t say enough good about him as a candidate. I’m so glad we can choose him, instead of the one Washington thinks they are choosing for us. Here’s the campaign website: RamseyForTexas.com.

Candidate Forums:

The video of the December 1^st HCRP CD 38 Candidate Forum is available on YouTube. The video of the December 15^th forum is available here. Below are links to the videos of the candidates who spoke at our Tea Party in December and November:

·         Mark Ramsey 

·         Jerry Ford 

·         Richard Welch 

·         Roland Lopez 

·         Damien Mockus 

·         Brett Guillory 

 

Congressional District 8

I’ll have less to say about these other districts, since they aren’t mine. But I’ve heard from some of the candidates. After redistricting, many of my friends and neighbors got moved into CD 8, which is west and south of much of CD 38. It should be a strong Republican district, so, again, the decision is essentially being made in the Primary.

There are quite a few candidates. The main three are Christian Collins, Jonathan Hullihan, and Morgan Luttrell. Collins and Hullihan both spoke at our Tea Party. Morgan Luttrell has been campaigning alongside Crenshaw and Hunt. He’s also a former Seal, as is Crenshaw—and his rather famous brother Marcus Luttrell, who wrote Lone Survivor. Morgan Luttrell is colorful. The first I’d heard from him was a forum this past week—linked below—with just these three candidates. On many issues he seems conservative. But there were some points where he just didn’t know enough to be convincing. Both of the other two know conservatism thoroughly.

Hullihan also has a military background, having served as a JAG lawyer. In that position he has actually written legislation. Collins is young, and I expect he’ll have a future. He’s the Christian conservative and pro-life choice of many, although I believe Hullihan could fit that description as well.

People in this district can do what you like, but if I were voting in this race, I’d be leaning toward Hullihan.

Candidate Forums:

These three candidates participated in this candidate forum. These two spoke at our Tea Party in November:

·         Christian Collins 

·         Jonathan Hullihan 

 

Congressional District 2

CD 2 is no longer my district, although I guess Dan Crenshaw is still nominally my representative the rest of this year, because we won’t swear in a representative for CD 38 until next January. Crenshaw has some challengers. I know next to nothing about any of them. I’m aware there is some displeasure with Crenshaw over some votes (related to climate and red flag issues) and some statements that made it sound like he disdains anyone who believes there was significant election fraud. (That would include me.) There have also been some attacks on his faith, and I think that’s out of line. I’ve read his book. I know what he’s been through. God helped him through that. And I pray for him. Heritage Foundation still gives him a 98% rating on votes. If I were in that district, being me, I’d have a hard time pushing him out. But those in that district can make their own decisions on that.

 

Congressional District 7

CD 7 is held by Democrat Lizzie Fletcher, who by all reports, from friends who have needed her help, has been utterly useless. Redistricting changed CD 7 from a close district (that Hunt should have been able to win in 2020, if he’d been such a great candidate) to a D+24 district—which means the Democrat (even non-incumbent random Democrat) is expected to win by 24 percentage points. There are nonetheless a number of candidates willing to go up against the odds. I don’t know much about any of them, unfortunately. So you’re on your own. The candidates are Tim Stroud (campaign info here; article here), Rudy A. Atencio (campaign info here), Tina Blum Cohen (campaign info here), Benson Gitau (campaign info here), Laique Rehman (campaign info here), and Lance Stewart (campaign info here).

 

Harris County Judge

Possibly the most important race in Harris County is to unseat Democrat Lina Hidalgo as Harris County Judge. This is an administrative position, working with the county commissioners to handle logistics and infrastructure. Hidalgo has managed to use it—under the direction of a commissioner who controls her—to take elections away from the County Clerk and put it in the hands of an unelected election bureaucrat that she appoints. She has managed to turn Houston into the crime capital of the nation—wresting that dubious title from Chicago—by insisting on releasing violent criminals without bail. She is far more concerned about implementing woke rules than solutions to flooding after Harvey. If there is something that obviously needs to be done to solve problems in the county, she is likely to do exactly opposite.

So I’ll take anyone who can beat her. But I’d really prefer someone who can do the job as well as recognize the importance of conservative principles—which work every time they’re tried. I think Alexandra del Moral Mealer, Martina Lemond Dixon, or Vidal Martinez could do the job. Mealer seems to be the actual true conservative.

In the forum at our Tea Party, Vidal Martinez spoke first. His resume looks like he’s especially made for the job. He has the right experience and track record. Then, during the Q&A someone asked him about donations he’d made to Lina Hidalgo—after her first year. Really? He says he was trying to be hopeful and supportive, hoping she would improve in the job. I think it’s more likely that, as a corporate lawyer, you use donations like that—sizable to us regular folks—just to smooth the road, so to speak. But I’ve been trying to decide since then if it was a deal breaker.

Martina Lemond Dixon is a black female, relatively new to conservatism. She has handled some challenging school board issues and looks like she might be effective. But her voting record concerns me a lot. She was also asked about Democrat donations. She admitted them (there are nine such donations) but claims they were made by her husband using her credit card. Hmm.

Alexandra del Moral Mealer is former military, where she has leadership experience that actually translates into County Judge duties. She led a bomb squad, and handled logistics, managing personnel in high-stress circumstances. She’s a bit unpolished, but she has improved as the campaign has gone along. She’s getting my vote.

Here is campaign info for all the candidates in this race: Martina Lemond Dixon (campaign info here), Vidal Martinez (campaign info here), Alex Mealer (campaign info here), Randy Kubosh (campaign info here), Oscar Gonzales (campaign info here), Robert Dorris (campaign info here), H. Q. Bolanos, George Harry Zoes (campaign Facebook page here) and Warren Howell (campaign info here).

Candidate Forums:

The Cy-Fair Republican Women are hosting a candidate forum for County Judge candidates on February 26, 1:00-3:00 PM, at Steve Radack Community Center.

There was a candidate forum for Harris County Judge on Sunday, February 6, for two of the candidates: Martina Lemond Dixon and Alexandra del Moral Mealer. Video here or here.

Five candidates spoke at our December Tea Party meeting:

·         Vidal Martinez 

·         Martina LemondDixon 

·         Randy Kubosh 

·         Alex Mealer 

·         Warren Howell 

 

County Treasurer

The only other contested county race this year is for County Treasurer. The two candidates are Kyle Scott (campaign info here) and Eric Dick (campaign email ericbdick@gmail.com).

Kyle Scott was our Lonestar College Trustee from 2013 until term-limited out. He made some good conservative inroads—mainly by standing his ground on budget issues—during that time. We met him at the Tea Party even back then. I’m glad to see him back in the battle. He wrote a recent article on why the county treasurer position is important, here. 

His opponent, Eric Dick, filed later in the process. We never heard from him at the Tea Party. I got one mailer, not particularly informative. He has no campaign website, only a Facebook page. The only endorsement I’ve seen for him is the Houston Chronicle, which he seems proud of (the Chronicle, of course, leans Democrat, even when they offer their choices in the Republican Primary). He is a Harris County Department of Education trustee; we’re trying to get rid of that money funnel. I don’t know what his position is even about that. He works as an insurance lawyer.

So it’s a clear choice. I’m voting for Kyle Scott. You might enjoy his talk at our November Tea Party meeting, here.  

 

House Districts

Most House district in this area (north and west Harris County) are uncontested, so I won’t mention them. The contested ones are 132, 138, and 150. Mine is 138, so that’s where I have the most to say. Then I’ll cover the others just briefly.

HD 138

This has been a painful year of disappointment in elected officials: Governor Abbott, Lt. Governor Patrick, to some extent my US Rep. Dan Crenshaw. Add to that my State Rep. Lacey Hull. This was her first term in the legislature; two years ago I was trying to decide whether she had my vote. I decided late in the Primary process, but I did vote for her. I like her personally. She’s sweet and appears to be the kind of person I’d like to go to lunch with. We could talk homeschooling, and conservative politics, and, I thought, Christianity. But, some months ahead of the 2021 legislative session, I was in a meeting where I said I thought she was going to be good. And someone blurted out that she was now divorced—her fault. Pretty ugly. I didn’t know if it was true; I didn’t want it to be. It was later corroborated by enough sources that I believe it. No need to share sordid details here. I have been praying for her. I believe in repentance; I also believe that takes time.

During the legislative session, her notable accomplishment had to do with connecting with a national database to find John Does, the unidentified dead, to give their families closure. It was a nice piece of legislation. Very non-partisan. She supported school choice—but did not sign on as a co-author. There are things she supported that related to maintaining a lack of transparency—or what looks that way to us out here. The question is, did she fall into the swamp in Austin and get caught up there? I don’t know.

While I’ve gotten campaign literature from the Hull campaign, I’ve also gotten anti-Hull literature. Abolish Abortion Texas points to her broken signed pledge to support and co-author legislation to abolish abortion. I don’t know what her votes were on the heartbeat bill, which passed; but she did not get the endorsement of Texas Right to Life either. A group called Defend Texas Liberty PAC pointed out that she voted to allow Democrats to have some committee chairmanships. That’s a tactical thing. The very conservative Rep. Oliverson told me and a friend, near the beginning of the session, that it’s to keep them from putting all their energy into obstructing Republicans. Personally, I don’t think that strategy is working, but Hull may have taken advice from someone who thought it would be the right thing to do.

She has two challengers. Both are people of remarkable integrity and ability. Christine Kalmbach worked on the district platform committee two years ago, which is where we became acquainted. Josh Flynn ran for this seat two years ago but just didn’t make it on my radar. But then he worked with the RPT during the convention two summers ago—that messy online one. There would have been no way to finish our online caucuses without his technical help and innovation. He’s now serving as secretary in the Harris County Republican Party.

We heard from both of them at our January Tea Party; Lacey Hull was invited but didn’t come. Don’t hold that against her; our reminder to get a final commitment came late and she was committed elsewhere. Here are the two videos:

·         Christine Kalmbach

·         Josh Flynn    

Josh was less comfortable speaking than I expected. Still, he’s very capable. Christine, I thought, got better as she talked more. She was fully conversant on issues of the legislature, and had done her homework on important House votes. I’ve talked with her a couple of times (I initiated the conversations with her) to talk about why she was running. What, legislatively, was bad enough to challenge a Republican incumbent? I took serious notes. She knew what she was talking about. They were things I hadn’t been aware of, as much as I try to pay attention during the legislative session. The transparency issues—she had specific legislation, specific votes even on amendments.

Still, I’ve hesitated. I think it’s an uphill battle to go against an incumbent, so, regardless of what I do, chances are I’m likely going to be in the position of supporting Hull against a Democrat in a district that has been very close the past couple of elections (I’m not sure, after redistricting, how that has changed, only that my slightly R precinct is still there). I don’t want to burn bridges. But I finally decided, a few days ago, to support Christine Kalmbach in the Primary. I’m hoping they’ll be bringing a yard sign by any day. This is another race that could be decided in a runoff.

 

HD 132

Rep. Mike Schofield is one of our Tea Party favorites. He comes often. All you have to do is ask a question and let him talk for an hour. He knows the ins and outs of the legislature better than most. And he’s been an effective conservative there. He’s challenged by Erik Le, whom I do not know, and who doesn’t have a campaign website, only an email. The Primary should be a slam dunk for Mike Schofield.

 

HD 150

I’m not sure what’s going on in this race. Rep. Valoree Swanson is a member of the Freedom Caucus, and is congratulated this past session for successfully getting a bill passed to require high school sports to be according to biological sex. She has the endorsement of Texas Right to Life and Texas Home School Coalition. She was our SD 7 SREC committeewoman before running for the House. She kept in touch with me well during those years.

She’s being challenged by Valerie McGilvery (campaign into here), Bryan Le, and Debbie Riddle (campaign email debbie@rafirm.com). The only one I’m familiar with is Debbie Riddle, who held the seat for a number of years prior to losing it to Swanson. I’ve always liked Riddle, but she supported a House Speaker who was intolerably non-conservative. That struck too many people as going establishment. I’m not sure why all the challengers this year. Maybe it’s a personality thing. Maybe it’s some level of politics that I just don’t follow. I’ll let you figure it out, if that’s your district.

 

State Board of Education

District 6

Our incumbent SBOE is Will Hickman. I like him. I voted for him. The SBOE voted in November on health sciences curriculum. Those who are keeping watch to guard against woke agendas looked at the proposals seriously and recommended voting against all four. Hickman voted against three of them, and only the one passed. There seemed to be some need for a compromise just to have a curriculum to use. I didn’t follow the details closely enough to know if that fourth one should be a deal breaker. For me it isn’t. His challenger, Mike Wolfe, does not seem as capable. So Hickman will get my vote again.

 

District 7

This area is further south, but in case anyone is reading, I’ll just say I support Julie Pickren. She has the right experience, having worked and accomplished what’s needed on a school board. She helped us out up here last spring when we were beginning our fight to oust the pro-CRT board members on our school board. She showed up at a neighborhood event on September 11, where I talked with her—and she pulled me aside and prayed with me; it was a memory moment I treasure. I wish her well. She got a 100% endorsement from the Conservative Coalition of Harris County, and the endorsement of Texas Right to Life.

 

Bonus: For those of you who have actually read this far, here are some of the resources I’ve used.

Voter’s Guides, Endorsements, and Recommendations

·         TTP’s statewide and Harris County recommendations they’ve made so far for the Primary are here.

·         Texas Right to Life pro-life voter guide here.

·         Texas Home School Coalition voter guide here.

·         Conservative Coalition of Harris County voter guide here. Click on federal, state, or county for questionnaire answers from candidates.

·         iVoterGuide here. Click on “more” for each candidate to get questionnaire answers and other details.

·         Conservative Republicans of Texas PAC (Hotze/Woodfill) endorsements here.

·         Texas Conservative Review (Gary Polland) voter guide here.

·         LINKLetter (Terry Lowry) voter guide here.

·         Take Texas Back has a list of 85 candidates who have signed the Texas First Pledge. See that list here.