Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Place in Line
Latest video: Burka on the Speaker’s race, naming names, the “Craddick Effect” (copyright pending), and broken pledges. For the first time, Paul wonders if Craddick can keep his post.
Honorably Mentioned: the candidates, the Conservative Coalition, Plan B, and Warren Chisum.
(Note: If you are having trouble viewing this, try updating your flash player plugin when prompted. Or, contact our IT administrator Paul Burka.)
Tagged: eileen smith, paul burka, speaker’s race video, texas conservative coalition, tom craddick.
Anonymous says:
Paul, lots of criticism of Craddick’s efforts and chances, but no real attention to the organization, or lack thereof, on the other side(s). How long until the silence from the D’s/Insurgency/etc. becomes deafening? No list of names. No candidate even. Wouldn’t they be at their strongest point right now, right after the election? And aren’t they only losing steam with each passing day they fail to organize?
Reply »
anonymous says:
This list is pasted from the Texas Conservative Coalition Board of Directors (2007-2009). It is essentially the same list that Leo Berman published in his letter. The members of the Legislature know that Craddick has about 76 votes today, but not a large enough margin to release a list yet.
How could Moody say something like that when he had to file at the same time that Haggerty did.
Wayne Christian, President
Linda Harper-Brown, Vice-President
Ken Paxton, Secretary/Treasurer
Leo Berman
Warren Chisum
Dan Flynn
Bryan Hughes
Phil King
Jodie Laubenberg
Geanie Morrison
Larry Taylor
Corbin Van Arsdale
Bill Zedler
Reply »
poindexter says:
anonymous, look at the past couple of elections where Democrats filed and withdrew after Haggerty won his primary.
Reply »
anonymous says:
Poindexter:
You are correct. I have not looked at the past couple of elections but he could have withdrawn. Thanks for the information.
Reply »
paulburka says:
Haggerty told me that Moody told him that he, Moody, would not have run had Haggerty been unopposed in the primary. Before Craddick got Margo in the race and split Haggerty’s suppport, Haggerty was unbeatable.
Reply »
paulburka says:
To anonymous on November 10, 11:23 p.m. –
What is there to say about the Democrats? They say they are united when everyone knows they are divided. They are full of petty jealousies and big egos. They will find a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and allow Craddick to serve another term. They can’t help themselves.
Reply »
Huck Finn says:
I would really like to take exception to Paul’s last comment about the D’s not being able to help themselves.
I can’t, but I’d really like to.
Reply »
Save the R's says:
True that the D’s may be divided and disorganized, but the R’s a just as divided and do not appear to be doing any better in the way of getting their act together.
The difference for R’s is that they have joined with a few D’s to elect one of their own who has decided that his own interests trump the interests of the House as a whole and the party in general.
Have the members forgotten that Craddick has declared that he has absolute power? And that he has entrusted impartiality and fairness to Terry Keel?
Reply »
YellowArmadillo says:
As always, great insight and commentary, though I take issue with a couple points.
1. I do not see how it was a mistake for Craddick to attempt to take out Haggerty. Margo had a chance to win, albeit the district was difficult to hold, so there was a chance of gaining a vote for Speaker (and a vote on several issues). However, how does the election of Moody over Haggerty hurt Craddick? Both were no votes for Craddick for Speaker. Both did/will vote with Democrats on education issues, tax issues, etc. Haggerty might as well have been a Democrat when it came to a close vote. Most importantly, Haggerty was a vocal critic who was not afraid to criticize Craddick from the front mic. When a senior Republican criticizes Craddick, it’s a much bigger story than if a freshman Democrat criticizes Craddick.
2. I have no idea why Berman did not explicitly say that the list was every returning board member of the Conservative Coalition. That was a mistake on his part, because the list looks weak, as you mentioned. However, the fact that the entire board of TCC shows that the conservatives in the Republican Party are united behind Craddick, putting pressure on Republicans who seek to forge a coalition with Democrats to overthrow the Speaker. I recall this being written about extensively in 2006-07 when McCall and Pitts attempted to do the same. It will be very difficult for 15 Republicans to vote with 61 Democrats for a new Speaker. There are 5-10 Republicans who would not care about how such a coalition might appear, but that would mean getting 66 Democrats to unite. That has been, and will continue to be, very difficult for Democrats to pull off given the fear expressed by some Craddick Ds about retaliation for their past support of the Speaker.
Reply »
A new day in Texas says:
Yellow Armadillo, is correct. It made political sense at the time for Craddick to challenege Haggerty. While Republicans lost a seat, Craddick did not lose a vote. I also agree with his asessesment about the conservative coaltion relase. Without an explanation it made Craddick look weak and it had the extra impact of pissing people off–both those who signed the letter and those who didn’t. Those who signed it did not like the fact that it created the impression that Leo Berman was bringing them to the table. Many have been at the table longer than Berman and Chisum, Isett and King are three very powerful committee chairs who could have issued press releases in their own right. The thing that made the list important, the support of the entire TCC board, was lost. Regardless of whether that was because of the incompetence of Wayne Christian, Leo Berman or John Colyandro,it made Craddick look weak and disorganized. And because there was no mention of the TCC in the release other Craddick supporters got made because they felt they were being slighted by not being asked to sign on. Why didn’t Craddick make sure it was done right? The Craddick spin is that his Chief of Staff knew about the letter but did not let his boss know. Typical Craddick behavior to throw people under the bus if it makes him look good.
Reply »
Tommy Merrit's brain says:
The way I understand it the original plan included the letter being printed on Texas Conseravtice Coaltion letterhead and mentioning that it included the signatures of the entire TCC board of Directors. Instead, they realized that it would violate their charter to do so. That is the problem with the TCC and just one of the many reasons it needs to go away. It won’t of course because Wayne Christian needs a title and John Colyondro needs a job.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
I’m getting a big sense of deja vu.
From what I can gather, the House is currently split into two groups. The first group is those who support Craddick. The second group is those who support…Anyone But Craddick. The media keeps reporting that the second group seems to be larger, therefore obviously Craddick will lose and…somebody else will win.
Don’t we already know how this will end? Since we’ve already seen this show about 5 times before?!
Reply »
Anon says:
Well, I think that is kind of the point. It makes sense to go after Haggerty for Craddick, but it didn’t make sense to go after him as another Republican. And that has been one of the criticisms of Craddick- that he is willing to benefit himself at the expense of the party. Haggerty definitely voted more liberal than most R’s, but he was in a more liberal district than most R’s and he was one of the few guys who could hold it.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
It violates the charter and the tax exempt non profit status of the TCC to advocate for Craddick in an election, so Leo Berman sat down on his 1997 version of Word and pasted Colyandro’s email into his own shoddily created letterhead (check the properties of the press release). Christian did the same, albeit with better graphics, but he wanted to change up the talking points with his own virtual school nonsense, and the whole thing came off rather cheesy and disorganized.
You know, for all the talk of Dems being disorganized and fractured coming from Craddick’s camp and Burka – they are the caucus with 60 signed pledge cards taking a clear position on Craddick. Craddick can’t even get his die hards to organize their press release, let alone get more than a dozen people to vocally support him.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
YellowArmadillo and A new day in Texas are both right and simultaneously wrong and that’s the point:
From Craddick’s selfish perspective, it was right to go after Haggerty because — if blind support for Craddick in the only measure of a Representative — there is no difference between Republican Haggerty and Democrat Moody.
From the Texas GOP’s perspective, Haggerty was a Republican long-holding a seat in a heavily Democratic district (we won’t EVER see that seat again) and he was a leader and a reliable voice on property tax relief, right-to-life issues, fiscal conservatism, and law-and-order issues.
In sum, the loss of Haggerty and his replacement with a Democrat who will be able to hold that seat for a generation is no loss for Craddick but a huge loss for the lower-taxes, right-to-life, smaller-government, and law-and-order advocates within the Texas GOP.
No one who knows Craddick is surprised that he would direct statewide GOP money to replace a personal foe with a Democrat at the expense of the GOP’s strength to fight for lower-taxes, the right-to-life, and smaller-government.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
If even the media is calling this for Craddick, you know the other side is in complete disarray:
Posted on Wed, Nov. 12, 2008
Narrow GOP majority in state House appears to bolster Craddick
The Associated Press
AUSTIN — A late legislative win for Republicans seems to have secured the GOP majority in the state House, if only by a two-seat margin.
With a crowded field of candidates and no clear alternative to Republican House Speaker Tom Craddick, the razor-thin 76-74 majority appears to give momentum back to Craddick in the volatile speaker’s race — and all but guarantees the next speaker will not be a Democrat.
“Speaker Craddick is extremely organized and very good at what he does,” said Democratic former state Rep. Sherri Greenberg, now a fellow at the University of Texas at Austin’s Center for Politics and Governance.
Until Tuesday, all eyes had been fixed on the Irving seat held by Republican Rep. Linda Harper-Brown. But after the count of overseas and provisional ballots was completed late Monday, the incumbent held a 20-vote lead over her Democratic challenger.
If the late count had turned in the Democrat’s favor, it would have meant a 75-75 split in the House. Now it seems the race is Craddick’s to lose. “Up to this point, they’ve been waiting to see what happened to the Harper-Brown seat in Irving,” Greenberg said. “I do think that [Craddick’s foes are] going to have to get organized quickly around a single opponent.”
But disarray seemed to prevail for the group known as ABCs — Anybody But Craddick.
His Republican and Democratic opponents are divided and, as yet, unable to coalesce behind one of the three Republican or four Democratic alternatives. It’s much the same scenario the ABCs were in last year, when they twice tried to oust Craddick from the post.
Reply »
paulburka says:
To anonymous on November 10 –
Craddick has 76 votes today? I’ll take the under.
Reply »
RealVoter says:
What if a Republican who cannot stand the thought of another Craddick stint as Speaker switched sides and became a Democrat… That could mess things up for Craddick!
Reply »