Travis Precinct 211

Runoff elections are scheduled for April 13th.
For precinct 211, there are two races on the ballot. Altogether, 4 races show up on ballots somewhere in Travis County.

Due to the low turnout expected for the runoff, there will only be 5 days of early voting: Monday April 5th through Friday April 9th. Similarly, the county is consolidating polling places. Precinct 211 will be voting at Graham Elementary instead of our usual polling place.

Locally, we have to choose between Rick Green and Debra Lehrmann for Supreme Court Place 3, and between Brian Russell and Marsha Farney for Member, State Board of Education, Place 10. Elsewhere in Travis County there is a runoff between Holly Turner and Paul Workman for State Rep in district 47, and just one Precinct Chair race.

The State Board of Education race is an easy one for me. I have worked with Brian Russell for ten years, and I know him to be well qualified for the post. He understands the need for a rigorous, knowledge-based education, and will continue to press the case for American Exceptional-ism and preserving our heritage in our textbooks. Brian has been endorsed by most of the State Republican Executive Committee members, and several current and former members of the State Board of Education. Brian is also a solid conservative. He has served on the Republican State Platform Committee, and the State Republican Executive Committee Resolutions Committee. In contrast, Marsha Farney is a part of the professional educational establishment, with minimal classroom experience; most of her time was spent as a counselor and curriculum researcher.

The State Supreme Court race is a bit more challenging to me. Rick Green is a great speaker and has solid conservative underpinnings, but I’m not certain that he has the level of legal scholarship required to be a Supreme Court Justice. Debra Lehrmann is certainly well qualified, with 22 years on a District Court bench focused on Family Law, she is one of the state experts in the field. Although she tries thousands of cases each year, she is seldom overturned on appeal. Her annual Annotated Family Law book, reviewing all family law cases at the appeals and supreme court levels each year, demonstrates her level of scholarship.

Personally, I would trust Rick to understand the legislative thinking that produced a statute, and the Constitutional underpinnings, but would be concerned that he might have to rely heavily on his law clerks for the minutia of the law. I know Rick to be pro-family, pro-life, and pro-second-amendment. His experience as a legislator would be a valuable addition to the Supreme Court, bringing legislative intent to the forefront in some areas. For the past 10 years he has been working with David Barton of Wall Builders – a conservative think-tank that researches and teaches about the founding fathers of the United States from their original writings.

On the other hand, Debra is also a social conservative. She has spent a great amount of effort promoting adoption in Fort Worth, and is well liked by the grassroots conservatives there. I expect the Supreme Court to hear a number of high-profile family law cases, particularly around the Texas Defense of Marriage Act and Constitutional Amendment. In fact, after the Yearning for Zion Ranch cases reached the Supreme Court, a couple of current members approached her to consider running for the Supreme Court because they felt that they lacked a sufficient depth of understanding for that sort of case, and predicted that more family law cases would come before them.

Beyond the ability of each on the Supreme Court, there are two other factors involved. Firstly, Rick Green has a large and active grassroots network constructed – probably larger than Medina’s was for the primary, and certainly much more effective. These people are the platform-affirming, dig-in-the-trenches sorts of activists that the party has not been able to activate for a while, and I personally would love to see them involved. Keeping Rick in the general election keeps these activists motivated to continue to bring out the whole ticket.

On the other hand, the election of Rick Green poses a threat to an elected judiciary. There have been a number of proposals to switch Texas from an elected to an appointed judiciary. Does the average citizen really have the information needed to elect these people? As a quick test – see if you can name off the top of your head all 9 sitting state supreme court justices. No peeking! I couldn’t – I only came up with 4, and I spend a lot of time with political activism. A Rick Green win might suggest to those legislators on the fence about an appointed system that the time has come to get serious about controlling access to the Supreme Court to only those most qualified.

Whom will I vote for? I truly haven’t decided. Rick deserves an “A” for effort – his campaign is everywhere. I think most of the Debra Lehrmann votes will be votes against Rick rather than for Debra – a great pity, because I think she is a well qualified candidate. From the primary, and certainly based on her lack of campaigning for the runoff, I don’t know that Debra is ready to mount a serious statewide race for the General Election. But I’m not ready to state that her weakness as a campaigner makes her less viable in a general election in Texas in a Gubernatorial year.

The Third Court of appeals is, arguably, the most important court in Texas. In addition to hearing criminal and civil appeals, it hears every case involving the State Government. Of the two candidates for place 4, I am endorsing Melissa Goodwin.
Judge Goodwin has experience as a sitting Judge. She served as Justice of the Peace, and as a District Judge covering hard felony criminal cases. Her private practice has a significant appeals focus, both in civil and criminal cases, and her early experience was as a briefing clerk for the Court of Criminal Appeals. Her opponent, Scott Fields, has a mostly civil background. He is a civil litigator with significant experience at the Appeals, State Supreme Court, and US Circuit Court levels. He is well qualified for the complex civil litigation that often comes before the 3rd Court. But that is his only focus. The court as currently constituted is heavy on civil practice attorneys. For more diversity of opinion, I believe Goodwin would provide a more rounded view of the law in all of its facets.
Finally, there is the issue of Republican party loyalty. Goodwin has been working in the trenches of the Republican Party for decades. She has a long record in various Republican clubs, as a delegate to various conventions, and voting in every Republican primary election. King has only voted in one Republican primary, 2006, despite living in Travis County for almost a decade. He made campaign contributions to the current sitting Democrat Chief Justice Woody Jones in 2008. It is hard for me to back a man for party office who only gave money to Democrats before announcing his candidacy as a Republican.

I want to say a few words about a few of the races in other parts of Travis County. I have done considerable research on these, but I just want to put a couple of sentences out on each one.
For US House District 25, I am recommending Donna Campbell. I believe Dr. Campbell’s vibrant campaign will be able to sway many voters from long-time Democrat incumbent and co-author of the health-care bill Lloyd Doggett. Dr. Campbell’s campaign is not only exciting and drawing many active workers and volunteers, it is based on solid Republican values. Dr. Campbell gets it right on most issues, and I look forward to having sensible representation in Congress for all of Travis County. Her opponent, George Morovich, is a fine man with good ideas. He has a solid track record of being able to take votes from Doggett, as he proved in 2008. But his campaign is mostly in tatters, dwelling on the past rather than looking to the future. He has had a hard time keeping campaign staffers, much less volunteers.
For US House District 21, I am endorsing Lamar Smith. Smith has a long record of admirable service in congress. He does admit his mistake of voting for TARP. Smith is right on the ideas, has good debating skills and is able to build coalitions to get good legislation passed. His opponent, Stephen Schoppe, has no record, and has focused his entire campaign on why Smith is bad without stating why he is better. On the issues, I disagree often with Schoppe.
For Justice of the Peace District 3, I believe Michael Barre to be the better candidate for Travis County than Madeline O’Connor, despite my previous endorsements of her in 2006 and 2008. In 2006 she ran as a Republican for a District Court spot. in 2008, she ran in the Democrat primary for a different District Court position. Her experience in the Attorney General’s office suits her much more for a District Court, or even a County Court at law position than Justice of the Peace. I see her run for Justice of the Peace as merely resume padding. Michael Barre, on the other hand, is a fine, detailed lawyer. He practices as an intellectual property attorney, has a good grasp of the law, and would be a fair and honest judge. He would likely be able to serve in that position for a long time, and Travis County would be better off for it.
House District 47 is a more fickle kettle of fish. I have only interacted with two of the three candidates. Paul Workman is a fine, successful businessman who has lived and worked in Travis County for decades. As president of his trade association, he has been active in the Texas house, formulating and promoting legislation. His ideas are sound and his values are right, and I would find him a welcome addition. Holly Turner, on the other hand, is a young lady with a great deal of drive and charisma. I think she would be better suited to “take Valinda Bolton on” and win victory in the fall. But she has a number of liabilities. The first is that she is new to the district. Her husband runs a campaign consulting firm, and they were living in Fort Worth until very soon before the filing deadline. He moved down here to be closer to his clients. I also am leery of some of Turner’s views and legislative plans. I would also expect her to continue to back Speaker Joe Strauss, a moderate Republican elected mostly by Democrats in 2008, who managed to kill most of the Republican proposals and gave Democrats much more power in the legislature than their voting strength deserves. For the third candidate, I have yet to meet David Sewell, and can make no recommendations at this time.
Finally, State Board of Education Place 5 provides an easy endorsement for incumbent Ken Mercer. Mercer has been instrumental in maintaining the coalition of conservative members of the State Board of Education, helping Texas maintain traditional values and actual content in schools. His opponent, Tim Tuggey, is a lobbyist, and has lobbied for Textbook publishers. I do not believe he would hold up Texas Values as strongly as Ken Mercer has demonstrated.

The State Republican Executive Committee has placed 5 propositions on the ballot. These are non-binding, for the purpose of encouraging skittish Republicans to pay attention to the Republican Platform. A “YES” vote on all of these will encourage the party leadership to push these ideas forward.
Incidentally, the main contributer on the State Republican Executive Committee resolutions sub-committee, which produced these propositions, is Brian Russell. So, if you agree with these positions, and vote for them, I hope you will also vote for Brian Russell in the State Board of Education District 10 race.

Ballot Proposition #1: Photo ID

The Texas legislature should make it a priority to protect the integrity of our election process by enacting legislation that requires voters to provide valid photo identification in order to cast a ballot in any and all elections conducted in the State of Texas.

Ballot Proposition #2: Controlling Government Growth

Every government body in Texas should be required to limit any annual increase in its budget and spending to the combined increase of population and inflation unless it first gets voter approval to exceed the allowed annual growth or in the case of an official emergency.

Ballot Proposition #3: Cutting Federal Income Taxes

In addition to aggressively eliminating irresponsible federal spending, Congress should empower American citizens to stimulate the economy by Congress cutting federal income taxes for all federal taxpayers, rather than spending hundreds of billions of dollars on so-called “federal economic stimulus”.

Ballot Proposition #4: Public Acknowledgment of God

The use of the word “God”, prayers, and the Ten Commandments should be allowed at public gatherings and public educational institutions, as well as be permitted on government buildings and property.

Ballot Proposition #5: Sonograms

The Texas Legislature should enact legislation requiring a sonogram to be performed and shown to each mother about to undergo a medically unnecessary, elective abortion.

I support Rick Perry for Governor. Rick has worked hard to pass legislation that I care about. He has the best record of any Governor in the country reducing abortions and promoting adoptions. He took a state with a huge deficit and gave us a state that has maintained a surplus. While the rest of the nation has been plunged in deep recession, Texas has been adding jobs – not just government jobs as Medina claimed, but real, honest-to-goodness private sector jobs. And even the City of Austin has seen sales-tax revenue increase 11% since last year. Texas is growing in population and prosperity, and will continue to grow under Rick Perry.
That’s not to say that I always agree with him. He has made significant mistakes. He handled the Trans Texas Corridor poorly. If the Trans Texas Corridor had focused first on expanding roads for Texans where the congestion is worst, I think he would have had much greater success.
I’m very glad that our slim Republican majority in the Texas House was able to overturn his executive order on the HPV vaccine. Although I understand his motive, I would be greatly concerned about vaccinating my then-13-year-old daughter with a vaccine with no track record. The promise of the drug – to save thousands of twenty-something young ladies from a slow and painful death – was surely appealing. Better methods could have been used to promote it without the “mandate” language.
And there have been other Perry missteps. Tax reforms are always messy. Much more so when they are only half-passed. Until appraisal reform has been realized in Texas, tax swaps to reduce property taxes will always end up badly for the tax-payer.
But I still feel that Perry has been, in balance, an excellent leader for the State of Texas and that he more yet to give to our State.
In the past 36 hours, a little-known outsider named Debra Medina has demonstrated, for all the world to see, why she should remain a little-known outsider. She has worked herself into a tight box. Her base supporters are not Republican activists; rather, they are libertarian-leaning, anti-establishment types. Many of them have so little pride in their country that they believe the Government would actually stage terror attacks. Debra Medina needs these people: they form the bulk of her campaign force. If she insults them by declaring that “9-11 Truth” is a vicious, absurd lie, then they will leave her campaign immediately. If she doesn’t, then the sensible folks who have a beef with Perry and are convinced that Kay Bailey Hutchinson offers a bleaker outlook will not vote for her. For those of us involved in state politics, Medina has raised red flags for some time. For those in the “Tea Party” movement, her followers have given us pause. Her true character has been revealed in her statements, and I am very glad that it is out in the open now.
Kay Bailey Hutchinson? Hardly a fiscal conservative – she has voted for almost every spending increase ever proposed. Hardly a leader – you have to look long and hard to find legislation that she has written and promoted. And hardly upholding Texas values. Her record of constituent services for our Servicemen is abysmal. Her votes in favor of abortion-on-demand are several and prominent. I only hope that, after she loses the primary, she will keep her promise to resign from the senate so that a better Texas leader can take the point position to defeat the Democrats agenda.
Perry’s record is strikingly different. He has reduced State spending and lowered State Taxes. He encouraged and signed with pride a rising cascade of bills reducing abortions: Women’s Right to Know, Parental Notification, Parental Consent, Fetal Protection, increased funding for Adoption, strengthened adoptive parents rights. Promoting Adult Stem-Cell research to develop hundreds of effective therapies saving thousands of lives while opposing the morally bankrupt embryonic stem cell research that has thus far yielded nothing but deadly tumors. There is a lot to like about Rick Perry, and I hope you will join me in voting for him.

I am pleased to endorse Michael T. McCaul for US Representative in House District 10. Michael has been a firm supporter of the Texas Republican Platform. He has consistently voted well, is well respected by his peers, and has written cogent and constitutional legislation. McCaul has stood strong on life issues, on border security and other homeland security issues, and against the take over of our healthcare and energy industries.
McCaul also has a strong campaign organization. I expect he will do well against Ted Ankara in the November General election. I would encourage voters to receive the public newsletters put out by McCaul’s office.