Maybe the times are a-changin’ in the Texas House if legislators are willing to challenge Michael Quinn Sullivan. Win or lose, the ethics complaints lodged against Sullivan by two committee chairs, Vicki Truitt and Jim Keffer, are a shot across the bow and an indication that Sullivan’s detractors are not going to allow him to push around members without his paying a price. Human nature being what it is, however, I suspect that most legislators are telling Truitt and Keffer, “We’re behind you all the way,” and that’s exactly where they’ll stay–discreetly behind them. Very discreetly.

From the Associated Press story, by Chris Tomlinson:

“Taken together, the ethics complaints filed against Empower Texans and Michael Quinn Sullivan reveal violations of important state ethics laws designed to let the public find out who’s lobbying and what they’re spending, and what special interests are spending money to help or hurt candidates,” Keffer said. “When lobbyists don’t register and file reports, and when powerful organizations spend money on campaigns but don’t report it, they hide their true identities and conceal their activities from the public.”

The complaint charges that Sullivan failed to register as a lobbyist and that his organization failed to file a required campaign finance form. Sullivan, who flatly denies the allegations and dismisses them as a “political stunt,” controls three entities, Empower Texans;  Texans for Fiscal Responsibility; and Empower Texans Foundation.

What we don’t know is whether this is a single shot at Sullivan, or the beginning of a campaign to discredit him. I will say this: If I were in MQS’s shoes, I wouldn’t want Truitt and Keffer breathing down my neck. They are tough and fearless adversaries, and if they are out to take him down, I wouldn’t bet against them.

Tagged: jim keffer, michael quinn sullivan, vicki truitt

The 20th edition of the “Best & Worst Legislators” story is complete. Yesterday we posted, on Twitter and on this blog, the names of the ten Best, the ten Worst, the Bull of the Brazos, and the Rookie of the Year. Today the write-ups for all of these 22 members are available online. The full story, including honorable and dishonorable mentions, furniture, and the very special features that mark the 20th edition of the story will be available in the magazine, which will begin reaching subscribers this weekend, and on our website next week.

I have been involved in nineteen of the twenty previous articles, and I cannot recall a more difficult year when it came to selecting the members on both lists. This was a session without heroes. All the usual jokes about naming 5 Bests and 15 Worsts were on point, for a change. The budget dominated everything, with the result that there were few major bills. I count three: Truitt’s effort to regulate payday loans; Ritter’s attempt to get funding for the state water plan (one of several occasions on which Perry could have exercised leadership for the state’s future but did not); and Keffer’s bill regulating hydraulic fracturing in shale formations. The rest was noise. Particularly cacophonous was the governor’s “emergency” agenda, which consisted of nothing but red meat for Republicans. Republicans got to vote on abortion, immigration, voter fraud, tort reform, and, shades of the fifties, state’s rights. Democrats got to vote no a lot. Even the major Sunset bills didn’t seem to generate any interest. You could look out across the House floor during any debate and see few members engaged.

The House Republican caucus was a curious organism. Its members preferred to vote as a block, as if they lived in fear that their age-old enemies, the Democrats, might perhaps be resuscitated to offer a scintilla of opposition. The group-think voting was reminiscent of the refrain sung by the “Monarch of the Sea” in Gilbert and Sullivan’s HMS Pinafore: “I grew so rich that I was sent/by a pocket borough into Parliament/I always voted at my party’s call/and never thought of thinking for myself at all.” The anemic Democratic caucus, meanwhile, mustered up occasional resistance, mostly with parliamentary maneuvers, but the D’s were so outnumbered, and so demoralized by their election rout, that they never seemed to have a leader or a plan. Not that it would have made any difference. (more…)

Tagged: best and worst legislators, jim keffer, John Zerwas, judith zaffirini, rick perry, robert duncan, Steve Ogden, vicki truitt, wendy davis

This was supposed to be an unpredictable election due to the tea parties and the Medina candidacy. It was supposed to be an election in which angry conservatives rose up and smote incumbents. Nothing remotely like that occurred. Republican congressional candidates, who might have been tainted by Washingtonitis, won with ease; the closest race was Ralph Hall’s 57% victory. In fact, this was a bad election for conservatives, with one exception–Rick Perry. He was a ten-year incumbent in an election cycle that was supposed to be terrible for incumbents, but his keen political instincts enabled him to get out in front of the tea party movement early and become its champion instead of its victim.

One of the undercurrents in this election was that conservatives disgruntled by Joe Straus’s defeat of Tom Craddick in the 2009 speaker’s race saw an opportunity to destabilize him by running hard-right Republicans against moderates on his team. Todd Smith was assailed for holding up Voter ID; he won with surprising ease. Vicki Truitt was assailed for offering a local option gasoline tax; she dispatched three opponents without needing a runoff. Burt Solomons had an unexpectedly close race but prevailed. Chuck Hopson, who switched from Democrat to Republican, infuriated Republicans in his district by announcing that he would continue to vote as he had in the past–and smashed his two opponents. Most of the opposition didn’t come from the grass roots; it came from self-appointed kingmakers like Texans for Lawsuit Reform and Michael Quinn Sullivan. Incumbency proved to be mightier than ideology. The voter anger never materialized; it metamorphosized into a brief infatuation with Medina and faded away after she self-destructed on the Glen Beck radio show.

A bonus for Straus: One Republican he surely didn’t want to see in the House was former Legislative Council director Milton Rister, a longtime Republican operative and hatchet man who is close to Craddick and Dewhurst. Rister was running for the Gattis open seat, but Dr. Charles Schwertner won that four-person race without a runoff.

In the end, only five incumbent legislators lost, three Democrats (Al Edwards, Dora Olivo, Tara Rios Ybarra) and two Republicans (Betty Brown and Tommy Merritt), and none of the losses could be blamed on voter anger or ideology. Rios Ybarra could not overcome issues in her personal life that became public, and the others lost for the typical reason why legislators lose: They stayed too long and had too little to show for it. Brown could also attribute her loss to the suburbanization of her district.

(more…)

Tagged: chuck hopson, Debra Medina, Joe Straus, kay bailey hutchison, ralph hall, rick perry, thomas ratliff, todd smith, vicki truitt

My original post on this subject apparently touched off something of a firestorm involving whether Kelly Hancock had a role in opposing Vicki Truitt and Chuck Hopson. In researching the original post, I had e-mailed the Hopson and Truitt campaigns. I accurately published the response and attributed the information to the campaigns. The Truitt campaign has since determined that Hancock is a listed supporter of Vicki Truitt. The Hopson campaign is now amending its statement to say that Hancock recruited Michael Banks as an opponent for Hopson, but it was while Hopson was still a Democrat.

One further update: This morning Leo Berman held a televised press conference attacking Hopson and Tommy Merritt.

In addition, Senator Carona has posted a comment about my report that I had received a call from a source suggesting that he and/or Truitt threatened to oppose members who voted against the local option gasoline tax. As I wrote in the previous post, I have not found any confirming evidence of this. Senator Carona’s correspondence follows:

Just a brief word here to clarify any misinformation: At no time have I or would I work against the re-election of any House member (Republican or Democrat) who did not support the local option transportation bill of this past legialative session. I respect every member’s duty to represent the views of his/her constituency. In fact, I have publicly endorsed the re-election of one of the local option’s strongest opponents, Linda Harper Brown.

It is shameful and short-sighted to see Republican House members turning against fellow Republican legislators. There was a day not too long ago when basic civility (and common sense) would have prevented this sort of thing. Unfortunately, until the State Republican Party exerts more leadership, these mistakes in political judgment will continue.

Tagged: chuck hopson, Kelly Hancock, leo berman, senator john carona, vicki truitt

Note to readers: The descriptions of these races reflect the best information I have been able to glean. It isn’t always possible to know what is happening “out there.”

The four most endangered Republican incumbents (alphabetical order):

Chuck Hopson
Delwin Jones
Todd Smith
Vicki Truitt

Hopson’s problem is that he is in a three-way race. The worst case scenario for him is that there is no runoff in the governor’s race and he finds himself in a Republican primary runoff in which the electorate is likely to be made up of the most activist, most conservative voters. Not a good environment for a Democrat who just switched parties.

Jones appeared to be headed for a runoff with Zach Brady, who spent a lot of money. But word got around that Brady is a lobbyist, and this is not a good climate for insiders. Brady has faded, according to some accounts and Charles Perry has come out of nowhere to be the main challenger. Perry is considered to be the insurgent candidate among the three. Brady is counting on support from the ag counties in the western part of the district, which constitute 30% of the vote. Jones may lead on election day, but, as was the case with Hopson, he will have to cope with a mostly conservative electorate if there is a runoff.

Truitt’s problem is that she has three challengers, and the vote could be split so that she may have to battle to make the runoff.

Smith’s situation is of his own making. Readers will recall that Republicans on the Elections committee wanted the Betty Brown version of the Voter I.D. bill to come out of committee. Smith tried to work on a compromise. Stephanie Klick, the Republican chair, sent out e-mails urging Republican voters to tell Smith they wanted Brown’s bill. Smith left a phone message for Klick in which he said she was putting out wrong information, and added, 

”The league of the Republican women, some of them are too stupid to realize it, and it’s pissing me off, so ‘bye.” And it’s on tape. Self-appointed GOP enforcer Michael Quinn Sullivan is after Smith now. Challenger Jeff Cason, a former Bedford policeman and city council member, is the beneficiary.

* * * *

The battle to replace Carl Isett is another intriguing race. It is a three-way battle between Mark Griffin, John Frullo, and Ysidro Gutierrez. If Griffin’s name sounds familiar, it is because he is the former Texas Tech regent whose resignation Rick Perry’s office demanded after he made kindly remarks about Hutchison. Don Richards, whom Isett defeated in his initial race for the Legislature, is supporting Griffin. Isett is supporting Frullo. Politicians have long memories.

Tagged: chuck hopson, delwin jones, todd smith, vicki truitt

Eiland and Truitt just engaged in a major debate over Teacher Retirement System bill that expanded the types of companies eligible to offer 403(b) retirement accounts to certify with the Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS). Eiland offered an amendment sought by the Houston Independent School District. Truitt, aided by Christian, fought it vigorously. I will readily admit that I couldn’t follow a word of it, nor could I detect any ideological reason why the head of the Conservative Coalition would be involved in the debate. So why am I writing about it? Because this was obviously an issue that was important enough to stir the passions, but no one called for a record vote on Truitt’s motion to table. Straus called for a division vote. There is only one reason for a division vote, and that is to protect members from public scrutiny. I’m all for the new era of cooperation, but letting members hide behind division votes on an issue that must have been important (or else why was Christian banging on the table and Truitt railing at Eiland?) is collusion rather than cooperation. Texas teachers are entitled to know how their representatives voted on this issue. The House has been backsliding into division votes for the last couple of weeks. No one is accountable for his or her votes on important amendments.

This is why I don’t like the constitutional amendment requiring third readings to be a mandatory record vote. Third reading is perfunctory. Second reading is the real test, and often the crucial vote is a second reading amendment, as it was here. Every vote should be a record vote.

Tagged: craig eiland, teacher retirement system, TRS, vicki truitt, wayne christian