Vol. 1 - Issue 23 Vol. 2 - Issue 2€¦ · collecting autographed baseballs. BY LAUREN LAWSON EMPOWERTEXANS.COM BY MICHAEL QUINN SULLIVAN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM NELSON SPEAR READY FOR

A NEWS MAGAZINE FOR ALL TEXANS

CORECARDPowered by

Empower Texans

Vol. 1 - Issue 23The latest news content is available at TexasScorecard.com

www.TexasScorecard.com

IN TH

E LE

ADNO

W How were you represented during the 84th session?— PAGES 10-14

A NEWS MAGAZINE FOR ALL TEXANS

CORECARDPowered by

Empower Texans

Vol. 2 - Issue 2The latest news content is available at TexasScorecard.com

www.TexasScorecard.com

IN TH

E LE

ADNO

W

AROUNDT E X A S

INSIDEPG 2

PG 3

PG 4

PG 6

Three Scary Men

Red-Faced Lies

Abbott-Patrick Agenda For 2017 Starts Now

Abbott’s Fundraiser For Democrats?

TEXAS 2016PRIMARY ELECTION

EARLY VOTINGTuesday, February 16, 2016 – Friday, February 26, 2016

PRIMARY ELECTION DAYTuesday, March 1, 2016

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWS DIGEST AT www.EmpowerTexans.com

As voters head to the polls in February, they should beware of an unethical judge who is running

away from his local voters by “falling upward.”

Collin County District Judge Chris Oldner, who appears to have violated numerous ethics rules in orchestrating the outrageous criminal indictment of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, has filed for an open seat on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Local observers report Oldner faced a difficult reelection to his seat as a district judge.

Rather than running a real campaign for the state’s highest criminal court, Oldner appears to be running for the court in order to avoid the blemish of being defeated for reelection by his local voters. A defeat would render Oldner ineligible to serve as a visiting judge, cutting him off from future judicial wages.

Oldner recused himself on the same day Paxton turned himself in for booking. Motions filed by Paxton’s attorneys have

Unethical Judge Falls UpwardBY TONY McDONALD EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

documented a myriad of ethics abuses by Oldner, including leaking confidential grand jury information to his wife.

Beyond the leak to his wife, the motions describe a litany of abuses, including violating the grand jury empanelment process, unlawfully sealing the names of grand jurors, repeatedly entering the jury room while the grand jury was in session, and unlawfully withholding the indictment from the Collin County Clerk for several weeks. Most disturbing, Paxton’s motions credibly allege that Oldner arranged to have Paxton’s case assigned to his court.

If he had not been forced to recuse himself because of his wife’s leak of the grand jury information, it appears Oldner was prepared to railroad Paxton’s case to a conviction.

Judge Oldner’s behavior has precipitated at least one ethics complaint to the State Commission on Judicial Conduct.

This is not the first time Oldner has been under scrutiny for abusing his office. In 2008 CBS 11 caught Oldner spending public dollars to take a trip and stay at the Planet Hollywood in Las Vegas, prompting calls for his resignation.

JUDGE CHRIS OLDNER — 416TH DISTRICT COURT

— PAGE 3

SCOTX ELECTION REVIEW

CORECARD WWW.TEXASSCORECARD.COM2conservative reforms, Spear’s political involvement isn’t confined to the office. Since 1988, he’s been consistently involved in local and national campaign efforts as a donor, volunteer, event host, and as an active member in local Republican organizations.

Spear has served as a Delegate and Alternate Delegate to two national Republican Conventions and, while attending the 2012 RPT State Convention, helped draft and pass an immigration reform measure.

Spear has also engaged his government where it matters the most—at the local level. In 2015, he opposed a property tax increase ultimately passed by Midland County Commissioners, despite hundreds of residents signing a petition against it, and facilitated a campaign opposing a controversial texting ban pushed by Midland City Council. Most recently, Spear voiced his opposition against $22 million in new debt proposed by Midland City Council. This particular fight ended in a victory–with conservative members of the council tabling the measure.

Like most lawyers, Spear isn’t afraid to fight back- even if it doesn’t always end in his favor. And since the ripe age of eight years old, he has, in his own words, “loved being a part of the fight.” So much that he is willing to devote not only his career, but his life outside of work to fight against laws that infringe on personal liberty.

Spear’s favorite pastimes outside the realm of politics include spending time with his family, “anything and everything” related to guns, and collecting autographed baseballs.

CORECARD2

BY LAUREN LAWSON EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

BY MICHAEL QUINN SULLIVAN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

NELSON SPEARREADY FOR THE FIGHT

Fighting to preserve conservative principles has long been a way of life for Permian Basin-native

Nelson Spear. As a lawyer and passionate conservative, Spear has utilized his educational background, assertiveness, and drive to advocate for liberty-minded reforms and candidates.

“I have always had an interest in politics,” says Spear, “I remember being eight years old and I was a solid Nixon supporter…I was so impressed with him that my mom helped me write a letter to him.”

It was also at the age of eight that Spear realized where he fit ideologically. “[While watching TV with family] there was a scene in which one of the characters called another character a ‘genuine liberal.’ I asked my mom- a registered Democrat- what a liberal was. I cannot remember her answer, but I remember my response was ‘Ewww!’”

It appears Spear’s opinion of liberals has changed little in the last 52 years.

Since receiving a Bachelor of Arts from SMU in 1987 and his Juris Doctorate from Washburn University in 1990, Spear has gravitated towards a hands-on career in public policy. For over a decade, he served in various

the team

President & CEOMichael Quinn Sullivan

Managing EditorMorgan Williamson

Assistant EditorBuddy Kipp

Field CorrespondentGregory Harrison

Metroplex BureauRoss Kecseg

Houston BureauCharles Blain

West Texas BureauLauren Lawson

General CounselTony McDonald

CORECARDPO Box 200248,

Austin, TX 78720 or [email protected]

Texas Scorecard is a general interest news magazine produced by Empower Texans. Unless otherwise noted, the content is the property of Empower Texans and may not be reprinted without permission. Content from Texas Scorecard is available to the public online at TexasScorecard.com.

Entire contents © 2015 Empower Texans. All rights reserved.

PROFILES IN CITIZEN LEADERSHIP

positions in New Mexico such as Assistant District Attorney in the Fifth Judicial District, Commissioner and Member of the New Mexico Gaming Control Board, and as the Chief Financial Analyst for the House Republicans in the State House of Representatives. Then, Spear served for 27 months as an Assistant United States Attorney in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in New Mexico where he prosecuted immigration and drug crimes.

In 2006, he returned to West Texas to work with his family’s oil and gas business, Spear Brothers Group. However, took a sabbatical in 2015 to go to Austin and work as General Counsel for freshman standout and Taxpayer Champion, State Sen. Konni Burton (R-Colleyville). During his time in Burton’s office, Spear helped draft, review, and analyze legislation. During the 84th legislative session, Burton was ranked one of the most conservative members of the Texas Senate by both Texans for Fiscal Responsibility, Young Conservatives of Texas, and Rice University.

Despite devoting countless hours to

There are just some lists conservatives don’t want Texas to make. As the clock counted down

on 2015, the conservative national news group Watchdog.org listed the 25 scariest people of the year.

At the top of that list was none other than the Republican Speaker of the Texas House, San Antonio’s Joe Straus. They noted his “bad governance and betrayal of conservative principles” for his inclusion on the list. (If your legislator is defending Straus, this is what they are defending...)

Despite Texas’ reputation as a red state, Straus fronts a powerful political machine blocking school choice, protecting public employee labor unions, and relegating conservatives to the back-benches.

There are a lot of things Texans want to be known for, but having a Republican leader who draws power from a left-wing base probably isn’t one of them.

Sadly, Straus wasn’t the only Texan on the list. Also included on the “annual parade of malfeasance and miscreants “ were the chancellor of the University of Texas, Bill McRaven, and Collin County District Judge Chris Oldner.

UT has been at the center of national controversy after financial corruption

and an admissions scandal were uncovered (in which Straus was involved). As Watchdog reports, McRaven “formalized the corruption, making secret cash-for-admissions transactions actual university policy.”

Meanwhile, Oldner was singled out for his “dangerous absurdity.” Not something one wants in a judge. (Our own Tony McDonald has an extensive article about Oldner’s judicial abuses... and desires for higher office.)

For all that is right about Texas, we can never rest on our laurels or be satisfied with the status quo. That men like Straus, McRaven and Oldner hold power in the Lone Star State is a reminder of just how much more work each of us have to do.

Three Scary Men


CORECARDVOL. 2 - ISSUE 2 - WWW.TEXASSCORECARD.COM 3

BY MICHAEL QUINN SULLIVAN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM BY MICHAEL QUINN SULLIVAN

EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

IN THE LEAD

Judicial races go overlooked too often on the ballot, despite the impact our courts can have on

people’s lives and the state’s economy. Three seats on Texas’ highest civil court, the Supreme Court of Texas, are up for election.

Massengale challenging LehrmannIncumbent Justice Debra Lehrmann

faces a tough re-election match. She’s being opposed by Justice Michael Massengale from the First Court of Appeals in Houston.

While a pleasant conversationalist, Lehrmann has nonetheless produced a spotty record on the bench. Enough so that legal-issues powerhouse Texans for Lawsuit Reform was an early supporter of her opponent.

That opponent, Michael Massengale, has also earned our endorsement. He has maintained an outstanding record on the First Court of Appeals by simply honoring the rule of law and refusing to legislate from the bench.

Massengale is a proven and resolute strict-constructionist who has worked diligently to advance individual liberty, promote personal responsibility, and protect property rights. We have endorsed Massengale.

GUZMAN FOR RE-ELECTIONJustice Eva Guzman deserves

re-election to the high court. She has a strong record of standing for the rule of law while articulating a thoughtful defense of civil liberties and due process rights.

She is being challenged by perennial candidate Joe Pool Jr of central Texas. In his last go at the high court, Pool was part of a collection of “Republican” candidates aided by the Democrats. (Pool tried unsuccessfully to have his opponent, incumbent Jeff Brown, tossed off the ballot for a number of incoherent reasons. Pool’s chief claim to fame appears to be that a Metroplex lake is named for his dad.)

Guzman’s passion for the mission of the Supreme Court of Texas, and defense of liberty, is readily apparent. Guzman has served admirably on the Supreme Court, and should be kept on the bench. We have endorsed Guzman.

GREEN VERSUS GREENNo judicial race will be more

confusing for voters than Green versus

Green. That’s incumbent Paul Green being challenged by former State Rep. Rick Green.

Paul Green has served on the high court for more than a decade, and developed a strong reputation as a serious and competent jurist. Previous to the Supreme Court, Paul Green served for a decade on the Fourth Court of Appeals (San Antonio). Attorneys and other court watchers say he has a strong work ethic and reliably sides with conservatives. Like Massengale, he’s been endorsed by Texans for Lawsuit Reform.

Rick Green is the conservative warrior. After losing re-election to the Texas House and failing at a prior bid for the Supreme Court, Rick Green has built a successful nationwide program training young people in conservative values and practical political engagement. Despite having a law degree, Rick Green is not a practicing attorney and has never served on a bench. Instead, he has made a career advancing constitutional principles.

Once they get past the name game,

Supreme Court of Texas Election Review

For a man who has honorably served our nation in uniform, James “Red” Brown’s failing

campaign for the Texas Senate is destroying his reputation through lies and misrepresentations. Considered by many to be at best a moderate, Brown was recruited by the Austin establishment eager to turn their fortunes in the conservative-leaning Senate.

In early December, his campaign sent breathless emails describing Brown’s fundraising prowess to the Austin lobby. Brown is running for the Texas Senate District 1 open-seat. He is challenging conservative State Reps. Bryan Hughes and David Simpson, and newcomer Mike Lee.

It was nothing but lies, as evidenced by official state filings by the campaign last week. That, or James Brown perjured himself in his campaign finance report.

A December 12 email Brown’s campaign sent to Austin donors and lobbyists claimed:

“The campaign has raised more than $250,000 and believes it is on target to reach its finance goal by December 31. A collected pledge of $100k has been made to be paid before the end of the year.”

Yet candidate Brown told the state of Texas he had only been able to raise “$184,282.01.” Further, Brown reported no pledges whatsoever.

Was Brown lying in his filing with the state, or was his campaign staff fraudulently bloating his political stature?

It’s widely reported in Austin that Brown was recruited to run by the cartel of Democrats and liberal Republicans who have been cornered in the Texas House. His campaign is being run by a consultancy group called Murphy Nasica, which works exclusively with establishment politicians favored by the House leadership cartel.

Since it is unlikely a retired general would knowingly lie in documents filed with the state, one can only assume the campaign team was being deceitful in their December emails. While Brown is responsible for surrounding himself with people of such character, voters and donors should be wary of any communications they receive from Murphy Nasica or others associated with the Austin cartel.

Red-Faced LiesRepublican primary voters will have to choose between a conservative constitutional activist (Rick Green) and an experienced conservative jurist (Paul Green).

We have not endorsed in the race, though we will continue to cover it. Needless to say, Texans have in Green vs. Green a GOP primary a race they cannot lose.

UPDATE: After original publication we were contacted by Rick Green who asked us to clarify his professional work background:

“Your statement that I am not a practicing attorney is not accurate. While I have spent little time in the courtroom, not all practicing attorneys are litigators. I’ve been a practicing attorney for 19 years. I’ve been with a large (Loeffler, Jonas, & Tuggey) firm and small (Eggleston, Flowers, & King), I’ve served as in house counsel, and I’ve done my fair share of transactional work, as well as serving as a mediator and arbitrator. I don’t talk much about any of that because those are not the things that qualify me for the court.”

CORECARD WWW.TEXASSCORECARD.COM4

There are more than 12 months until the next legislative session convenes, but Gov. Greg Abbott

and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick are wisely laying out a governing agenda ahead of the 2016 primaries. If your state legislators (and their chamber leadership) aren’t signed on, they are part of the problem.

Speaking at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s annual policy meeting, Gov. Abbott last week called on the legislature to enter the “Convention of States” movement that has swept the nation in order to assert the authority of the states over the federal government. Under Article V of the U.S. Constitution, amendments can arise either from Congress or a convention of states; either way, the amendments must be approved by the states to be adopted.

Abbott’s Texas Plan recognizes that federal lawmakers from both parties have historically refused to give up their own power and so it calls on the state’s

to use their full authority to limit Federal overreach.

From balancing the budget to giving the several states power to overturn federal actions, the constitutional amendments proposed by Abbott would never arise from Congress.

But beyond the Convention of States, Abbott and Patrick have been speaking and writing forcefully about their policy goals and objectives for the state. Yet their legislative initiatives will only be accomplished if candidates for the Texas House and Senate agree now to take action.

More directly, these items will only move if members of the Texas House pledge only to support leadership that is committed to working with Abbott and Patrick, not against them.

Culling through recent speeches and policy papers, here are eight of the common 2017 policies Abbott and Patrick are promoting.

An Abbott-Patrick Agenda for Texas• Ban sanctuary cities in the Lone

Star State.• Protect the sanctity of life and

Pro Speed TrapBYRON COOK

BY TONY McDONALD EMPOWERTEXANS.COM


Abbott-Patrick Agenda for 2017 Starts NowBY MICHAEL QUINN SULLIVAN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

prevent any tax funds from subsidizing abortion providers.

• Refocus ethics laws on elected and appointed government officials rather than using them to restrict the First Amendment rights of private citizens.

• Enact a strong constitutional state spending limit to prevent government in Texas from growing faster than population and inflation.

• Increase the rights of Texans to self-governance and reduce the power of the federal government by enacting legislation that would allow Texas to participate in a convention of states limiting the powers of the federal government.

• Promote competition in public schools and freedom for parents to determine the educational environment best suited for their children.

• Support employee freedom by prohibiting governmental entities from colluding with labor unions to automatically deduct labor union dues from public employee paychecks.

• Protect the religious liberty of individuals, organizations, and businesses, so they are never forced to act in any way that violates their religious beliefs.

Collin County Judge Chris Oldner, who unethically procured the indictments of

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, will be facing an investigation from the State Commission on Judicial Conduct. Facing a tough reelection in Collin County, Oldner is instead attempting to “fall upward” by running for the Court of Criminal Appeals.

A complaint filed by Tarrant County resident Aaron Harris alleges that Oldner violated several canons of judicial ethics by disparaging Paxton’s defense team in media interviews and leaking confidential grand jury information to his wife, amongst other offenses.

“Judge Oldner’s actions violate terms of good government, judicial impartiality and restraint, and prohibitions on the use of government power for political purposes,” said Harris. “Judge Oldner should be held accountable for his improper conduct.”

Under Judicial Canon 4A, “A judge shall conduct all of the judge’s extra-judicial activities so that they do not: (1) cast reasonable doubt on the judge’s capacity to act impartially as a judge; or (2) interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties.” Under Judicial Canon 3B, “A judge shall abstain from public comment about a pending matter or impending proceeding which may come before the judge’s court in a manner which suggests to a reasonable person the judge’s probable decision on any particular case.”

By commenting publicly about Paxton’s case, Oldner has not only biased the pool of potential jurors, he has done so on a case that may eventually appear in front of the Court of Criminal Appeals, to which Oldner is seeking election.

Harris’ complaint asks the Commission on Judicial Conduct to investigate Oldner and hold him responsible for his violations. The Texas Constitution authorizes the Commission to take appropriate disciplinary action, including issuing sanctions, censures, suspensions, or recommendations for removal from office.

Complaint Filed Against Judge Chris Oldner

Residents of House District 8, which is currently (mis) represented by State Rep. Byron

Cook (R–Corsicana) are beginning to hear about his many misdeeds – including efforts to violate the First Amendment rights of Texans, give special privileges to illegal aliens, and strip “mother” and “father” off of birth certificates. But do they know about the time Cook authored a bill to increase “speed traps?”

That’s right. Byron Cook is pro-speed trap.

During the 83rd legislature, Cook authored HB 811 and managed to the get the bill voted out of the House Transportation Committee before it died in Calendars. The bill, “Relating to the disposition of fines for traffic violations collected by certain municipalities and counties,” would have repealed provisions of the transportation code designed to eliminate speed traps. Those

local governments, which are prone to setting up speed traps in order to collect revenue from passing motorists, are disincentivized from harassing taxpayers by a statute that requires them to remit a portion of traffic ticket revenue to the state. Cook’s bill would have repealed those restrictions.

According to the background and purpose for HB 811 authored by Cook’s

staff:“Interested parties contend that

current law limits the amount certain municipalities and counties can collect from highway traffic fines, and they further characterize these limitations as a means of preventing the operation of speed traps. However, there is a concern that these restrictions have a negative impact on municipalities and counties that are attempting to deter motorists from driving at speeds significantly over the speed limit. C.S.H.B. 811 seeks to remedy this situation for certain small municipalities and counties by repealing provisions limiting the amount of revenue from traffic violations such entities are authorized to retain.” [emphasis added]

One of Cook’s constituents, a resident of Rice, testified in support of the bill. Rice, population 798, is located on Interstate 45 between Corsicana and Ennis and is precisely the type of town which would want to set up a speed trap in order to harass Texans traveling between Houston and Dallas.

Byron Cook’s record in office is so bad that at times it seems unbelievable. Cook’s constituents will have an opportunity to vote on his record of supporting unpopular policies in the March 1st primary election.

BYRON COOK (R — CORSICANA)


For those interested in fixing the public education system in Texas, they now have their number one

target. According to sources, Gordon Johnson, the top political advisor to liberal House Speaker Joe Straus has informed Straus’s vendors that Georgetown Republican Marsha Farney’s reelection is one of Straus’s “top five” races.

The vendors – including pollsters, consultants, and mail shops – have apparently been forbidden by Straus from helping Farney’s opponent.

This can only mean one thing. Straus is

Straus Marks Farney for Protection




Desperate consultants can get their desperate candidates to say the craziest things. That’s certainly

the case in the race for the Texas Supreme Court, where Michael Massengale is challenging incumbent Debra Lerhmann. Lehrmann is raising money on the basis of being worried about voter interest in her race.

Lehrmann is a pleasant person. I know she is, because Justice Lehrmann sat in my office last fall for the better part of an hour seeking the Texans for Fiscal Responsibility endorsement. (Remember that as you keep reading.)

Sadly, her fundraising consultant – Austin-based Susan Lilly, who works mostly for the establishment class – has her doing some truly bizarre things in the last 60 days of the campaign.

It’s not hard to understand why.None of the statewide conservative

movement groups or personalities are supporting Lehrmann; they’ve all backed Massengale (Texas Right to Life, Texas Home School Coalition, Cathie Adams, Kelly Shackleford, David Barton, the Kingwood TEA Party… oh, and Texans for Fiscal Responsibility).

Even judicial reform behemoth Texans for Lawsuit Reform, known in recent years for playing it safe by rarely opposing any incumbent, was an early supporter of Massengale.

So, yes, Lehrmann and her team are feeling a little desperate. How desperate?

I’ve received calls from acquaintances describing similar voicemails they received from Lehrmann. Some of these folks are unaligned with me and my organization. Some are even, honorably, on the opposite end of the GOP’s ideological spectrum.

Her voicemail to these folks:“Hello, [name redacted] this is Debra

Lehrmann, L-E-H-R-M-A-N-N, justice on the Supreme Court of Texas, and I’m calling about my re-election to the court. As you may know, I am finishing up my first term, I’m starting my sixth year and it’s just been wonderful. And you may be aware that I have an opponent who’s being supported by Michael Quinn Sullivan and I’m calling to visit with you about that. So if you could please give me a call, I certainly would appreciate that very much. My number is 817-[redacted], that’s 817-[redacted]. It’s Debra Lehrmann, thank you so much. Bye-bye.”

Let’s face it: Debra Lehrmann is smart enough to know I’m not on the ballot. She never mentions her opponent’s name. She uses my name instead. As an anybody, and a nobody. As a stand-in for everybody who isn’t backing her re-coronation to the court.

(And I’m certain she’s calling other donor types, fitting other profiles, using other names as the boogeyman.)

She’s making these desperate fundraising calls because her

planning to appoint Farney as chairman of the Public Education Committee if he himself is reelected to office and as speaker. The current chairman of Public Education, Jimmie Don Aycock, is not seeking re-election.

Farney has not been a major player in the House since her election in 2012. She is most well known for passing bills designating pecan pie and the cowboy hat as state symbols. However she has been a consistent vote against education reform and has been placed in positions where she can be controlled by Straus and Johnson.

She is being challenged in the Republican primary by retired Army Colonel Terry Wilson, who has earned the endorsement of Texans for Fiscal Responsibility.

Farney has never faced a contested election for state representative. After defeating a conservative opponent for a seat on the State Board of Education in

Desperately Misjudging the Electorate fundraising consultant has told her to; because the establishment class likes to use my name when they really mean to use your name.

Lehrmann and her team are desperate, because they know they are losing. In a sign of political unity, the grassroots and business community have both lined up against her.

So the establishment consultants have Lehrmann desperately raising money against the establishment’s boogeyman.

What are they truly scared of? You. What Lehrmann, a justice on the Supreme Court of Texas, is really worried about are citizens paying attention to the content of judicial rulings, and exercising accountability at the ballot box.

So worried, in fact, that she let her consultant have her make fundraising calls about me at the same time I happen to have a case pending before the Supreme Court.

This is only a voicemail. One can only imagine what her consultants have her saying when she connects with what she believes to be her people. (Those recordings might fun!)

Even good and decent individuals doing business with the establishment-class, crony-consultants will eventually be turned to doing desperate things in their desperate bids to cling to power.

Frankly, incumbents would have an easier time staying in power if they spent more time paying attention to the citizenry than the insider-cronies. But maybe some of them just like living desperate lives making desperately degrading calls.

2010, Farney ran unopposed for an open House seat in 2012. Farney is well known as one of the legislature’s wealthiest members and can presumably put millions of dollars of personal wealth into her election effort.

Farney’s appointment as chairman of Public Education would be a disaster for anyone interested in reforming public education. During the most recent legislative session Farney was one of the 12 most liberal Republicans, earning a 59 on the Fiscal Responsibility Index.

Last session Farney supported a liberal “community schools” bill designed to turn public schools into full-service social welfare offices. She also supported a Democrat bill designed to weaken property tax rollback rate protections.

For education reformers, their number one target is clear. Anyone supporting Marsha Farney, or sitting on the sidelines, cannot honestly say they are interested in fixing Texas’ education system.

In state after state, the "exchanges" set up to administer ObamaCare are imploding under the weight of bad

public policy. Even in Kentucky, once considered the lone ObamaCare success story, the exchange is now folding up shop.

In Texas, conservatives successfully stopped Democrats and liberal Republicans from burdening the Lone Star State with an ObamaCare exchange.

Liberal Republican State Rep. Jason Villalba of Dallas once predicted that the GOP would warm up to ObamaCare after they learned how successful it was. He described opposition to ObamaCare as "posturing." He later doubled-down, saying he wanted Texas to pay for the administration of an ObamaCare exchange.

But he wasn't the only Republican wanting to go along with ObamaCare. A longtime Republican cheerleader for ObamaCare has been State Rep. John Zerwas of Simonton. In 2013, he pushed a sneaky amendment that would have sucked Texas into the ObamaCare scheme. Joining him were 32 other Republicans and all the Democrats.

The Republicans still in the Texas House and seeking re-election this year who voted for Zerwas' efforts are:

Dennis Bonnen; Byron Cook; Drew Darby; Marsha Farney; Charlie Geren; Todd Hunter; Ken King; Phil King; Lyle Larson; Doug Miller; Geanie Morrison; Four Price; John Raney; J.D. Sheffield; Wayne Smith; John Smithee; and, Paul Workman. (David Simpson also voted for the measure; he is seeking election to the Texas Senate.)

After the sneak was discovered, and people began learning what the Republicans had just done, the Texas House was forced to re-consider the Zerwas amendment. Once the amendment was discovered and rejected, all of the Republicans voted as a bloc to pull it down.

It seems GOP support for ObamaCare lasts only as long as the citizens don't know about it...

ObamaCare Fails Again

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWS DIGEST AT

www.EmpowerTexans.com


Recently, State Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) endorsed conservative Mike Lang in his bid

for Texas House District 60, further establishing Lang’s conservative bona fides and setting an optimistic precedent of cooperation between the two chambers for the two overlapping districts should Lang win the nomination.

“As a law enforcement officer, Mike Lang has been on the front lines and understand the importance of solving our illegal immigration crisis,” said Perry. “I need him in the House to join me in my fight against sanctuary cities.”

Texans for Fiscal Responsibility was proud to endorse Mike Lang back in September. As an elected constable, Lang is not afraid to put in the work for his

Serious criminal justice reform is going to play a major role in Texas’ next legislative session, as evidenced by the

interim policy charges issued to the Senate by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Among the first items senators are to explore deals with police safety and community engagement.

“Review law enforcement efforts to engage community leaders and increase their involvement in communities. Assess dangers to law enforcement officers and the collection and distribution of threat assessment data. Make recommendations to reduce the number of injuries and deaths to or by law enforcement officers.”

It’s no secret that many communities are experiencing tension between the police and citizens. The integrity of the justice system as a whole has lost credibility amongst many citizens. It seems that many view the system as antagonistic—citizens versus law enforcement.

There was once a time in history where citizen walked side by side with the police, when the police and citizens were viewed as allies, not opposing forces. The police would walk the streets and know the citizens assigned to his or her area by name. When faced with a minor dispute,

the citizens trusted law enforcement to be a mediator and rarely did it required involvement of the courts. That’s not the case these days.

Although there is no “silver-bullet” solution, this problem can be resolved, but doing so will require a paradigm shift inside the criminal just system itself. We have to go back to the old school community-policing model.

We see it today with Officer Norman who is a patrol officer in North Little Rock. You may see him in YouTube videos doing the latest dance move with kids in the community.

“Obviously, they see the gun and the badge and the uniform and the police car, so that presence alone, typically they’re gonna respect that. But to me, instead of Officer Norman, you’re more Uncle Tommy, because you’re a family member to them. A lot of people out there consider police officer’s family. Some call me ‘uncle’ or ‘daddy.’ Which is cool. They’ll turn to you in more ways than one.”

The difference, in the case of Office Norman, is that he has established a relationship with this community to build and earn trust. When a crime occurs, to whom do you think the people of this town are going to reach out? Always, every time, someone they trust.

constituents — before the legislative session had ended, Lang had already secured the support of an overwhelming majority of his district’s Republican Party precinct chairs against longtime malefactor Rep. Jim Keffer (R-Eastland).

The race for HD 60 became an open seat earlier this year when Keffer announced he would not attempt to blight the legislature with a reelection bid. Unfortunately, his tainted legacy is not entirely removed from the HD 60 race — Lang’s opponent, Kevin Downing, is a former Keffer campaigner and donor from Granbury, and is likely to propose the same variety of big-spending, liberal policies his predecessor offered on behalf of the Austin establishment.

Sen. Perry, on the other hand, has been a consistent voice for conservative values in the Senate. His endorsement of Mike Lang marks not just a philosophical semblance between the two, but offers an atmosphere of effective, conservative representation for overlapped constituents — an opportunity that voters would be remiss to squander.

With the Texas Ethics Commission admitting in federal court filings recently

that they do not have the authority to regulate non-profit organizations which speak out on policy and political issues, the president of Empower Texans has called on the agency to drop its lawsuit against them.

“Even as we decried their malicious attacks on our organization brought by cronies of House Speaker Joe Straus and a lobbyist for the Texas Trial Lawyers Association, we attempted to comply with their absurd, unconstitutional requests for our records,” said Empower Texans’ president, Michael Quinn Sullivan.

“A federal judge called their subpoenas ‘absurd,’ but they are now in state court attempting to force us to comply despite having told a different federal judge they do not have any authority to regulate groups like ours.”

In a separate case involving a Travis County citizens’ group, the TEC argued to a federal court that they do not have the authority to regulate the non-profit organization as if it were a political action committee. That admission undercuts the theory of the TEC’s “case” against Empower Texans, according to General Counsel Tony McDonald.

“The Third Court of Appeals based in Austin has called the TEC’s theory of the case ‘an affront to the First Amendment,’” added McDonald.

Sullivan said the TEC must now drop its actions against Empower Texans.

“We gave the TEC everything we could, showed them they did not have a case, but they have used their process as a way to punish us for shining a light on their cronies in the Capitol,” said Sullivan. “I am calling on the TEC and it’s chairman, Paul Hobby, to drop enforcement of these absurd subpoenas, and to dismiss these vindictive, unconstitutional complaints against Empower Texans.”

EMPOWER TEXANS TO TEC Drop Your Suit NowBY MORGAN WILLIAMSON EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

BY GREG HARRISON EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

BY LAWRENCE JONES, III RESTOREJUSTICEUSA.COM

Community Policing Works

Sen. Charles Perry Endorses Mike Lang for HD 60


As a self-professed conservative, Gov. Greg Abbott is planning to do a fundraiser that puts him in with

some very strange bedfellows.On March 23rd, Gov. Abbott will be

the featured speaker at a fundraiser held by Friends of the University PAC “in recognition of his dedication and assistance to The University of Texas at Austin and Higher Education.” The attraction for such an organization to headline a fundraiser with the state’s head executive is an obvious one — but one can’t help but wonder why the Governor would help an organization raise money that will, without question, be spent against conservatives in the upcoming general election.

A cursory glance at Friends of the University PAC’s most recent filings with the Texas Ethics Commission isn’t very encouraging: $10,000 to Texans for Joe Straus — the notorious war chest for establishment sycophants — and $2,500 to State Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston).

That’s just so far this year.

If history is any indicator they’ll be spending much more against conservatives.

Throughout 2014, Friends of the University PAC reported $151,249 in total expenditures, roughly two-thirds of which were direct contributions.

While Democrats hold just one-third of the seats in the House and Senate, almost half of the UT PAC’s contributions went to Democrats. A whopping $7,500 went to notorious legislative bully Rep. Trey “Ferdinand Frank” Martinez Fischer (D-San Antonio) who, ironically enough, that same year referred to Abbott as “El Diablito” (meaning ‘little devil’) via a set of offensive trading cards he distributed at the Democrat’s biennial convention.

Unfortunately, the Republican ranks of the UT PAC’s beneficiaries don’t inspire much confidence in their priorities, either. That list is entirely populated by liberal loyalists of the Straus cartel, including State Reps. Charlie Geren (R-Ft. Worth), Byron Cook (R-Corsicana), and Sarah Davis (R-West University Place). The 2014 reports can be found in full uninspiring detail here and here.

The support of left-leaning Republican incumbents is less than surprising — plenty of PACs stick to this as their model of buddying up with those in power. But one has to wonder…

Why is Greg Abbott helping raise money that will inevitably be handed to Democrats?

In an expose by the Fort Worth Star Telegram, it was discovered that elected school board members for the

Fort Worth Independent School District have gone hog-wild on travel spending. According to the newspaper:

From 2006 to 2014, trustees’ collective annual tab was $45,000 on average. But from July 1 to June 30, the current board incurred more than $82,000 in travel expenses… About $24,000 of the sum was incurred by the school board president alone, records show.

Of that $24,000 incurred by high-flying FWISD president, Jacinto Ramos Jr., only $558 was for “local mileage reimbursement.”

Ramos told the FWST the spending was justified because he wants “young people and staff know that I’m accessible.

I’m really touchable.”Does an adult working in public

schools really want to say they are “touchable”?

If Ramos’ first justifications doesn’t cause nausea, consider his back-up justification: “my growth as a board member was accelerated due to the traveling … so much so that I got the [board] president’s role in two years on the board.”

Additionally, since the vast majority of the funds were spent traveling outside the region, it appears the expenses have made Ramos less (not more) accessible, to the students and teachers of the district he was elected to govern.

Could those dollars have been better spent by educators actually educating, rather than a Democrat holding a “non-partisan” elected office building industry clout and feeding his ego?

Seems like Jacinto Ramos likes having your wallet “accessible” so he can get “touchable” with your money.

Touchable School Spending?BY MICHAEL QUINN SULLIVAN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

BY GREG HARRISON EMPOWERTEXANS.COM


Abbott’s Fundraiser for Democrats?

The organizers of the “Black Lives Matter” movement appear more concerned about self-promotion

and empty rhetoric than encouraging a thought-provoking debate on how best to reform the criminal justice system or improve race relations.

Their actions and statements suggest that if cities are damaged, and businesses are destroyed, that their “voices will be heard” and the “system will change.” But their movement lacks a solution-focused message. In other words, after people hear “black-lives matter,” then what?

Some claim that policing bans in and around black communities are a solution to preventing deadly confrontations with law enforcement.

Other voices blame “white people” for racially motivated hate, including an institutional racist bias among white offices across police agencies nationwide.

Some suggest that black Americans should start their own “white-free communities” as a means to eradicate

racial tensionNothing could be further from the

truth.Many of these communities are

already largely made up of African Americans, and are suffering from death and violence—not from police officers or white people—but from gangs and other criminal activity. In the city of Chicago, there are more black murder victims then fallen American soldiers in Afghanistan. In fact, over 90% of all black murder victims are killed by other black Americans.

It raises the question; do all black lives really matter to the movement? And what are potential solutions that could restore justice to the system and to communities across the country?

There is a need for reform. For example, the government should focus on prosecuting violent offenses and restoring victims. In many cases, doing so will require changes in federal and state laws, not law enforcement.

What has become very apparent is the black lives matter organizers refuse to adopt a solution-focused message or communicate a desire to begin that conversation. Instead, they provide nothing more than an outlet to express hate and frustration, and distract attention away from the movement to actually restore justice.

Do All Black Lives Really Matter to the Movement?



Despite taunting his Dallas-area constituents to “bring him an opponent” during a disastrous

debate performance last year, State Rep. Jason Villalba (R-Dallas) recently tried to have his opponent yanked from the ballot.

Dallas attorney Dan Morenoff, who filed against Villalba, published a video on social media accepting Villalba’s challenge and telling voters how Villalba tried (and failed) to block his candidacy with a frivolous legal challenge.

“If [Villalba’s record] was my record, I wouldn’t want to defend it either,” said Morenoff.

Villalba’s record is marred by policy flip-flops and public comments that have caused great embarrassment for his district.

Villalba began his political career by predicting Republicans would eventually “soften” to Obamacare, even advocating for a state-funded healthcare exchange. As critics correctly predicted, states that followed Villalba’s advice by setting up exchanges are now watching them implode.

More recently, Villalba admitted to a Republican audience that House Speaker Joe Straus, who Villalba ardently supported, would stack the House Calendars Committee with his loyalists.

Villalba then predicted the Straus-led House – using the Calendars committee – would likely kill conservative reforms

passed by the Senate (audio), which Villalba himself referred to as “the most conservative in state history.”

During the controversy over the Michael Brown shooting in Missouri, Villalba received intense criticism for authoring a bill banning CHL holders and other citizens from filming police. Criticism came from every ideological camp (from libertarian-leaning U.S. Rep. Justin Amash to the liberal Huffington Post) berating Villalba for his unconstitutional bill. After briefly attempting to defend the bill, he eventually withdrew it.

But that wasn’t Villalba’s only flip-flop. After championing a measure aimed at protecting religious liberty from governmental persecution, Villalba dropped his amendment two days before the filing deadline, admitting he did so at the behest of business interests supportive of homosexual marriage.

Villalba’s actions ludicrously suggested that common-sense efforts to protect the constitutional rights of all Texans would somehow deter businesses from relocating to the Lone Star State.

Despite his “Reagan-esque” rhetoric, Villalba is one of the least conservative House Republicans, ranking in the bottom third of the caucus according to a non-partisan study conducted by Rice University. His voting record also earned him a failing grade on the Fiscal Responsibility Index in both 2013 and 2015.

Despite his best efforts to avoid accountability, Villalba will have to answer for his record in the March primary.

Visit TexasScorecard.com to see the Morenoff ’s video.

BY DUSTIN MATOCHA EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

BY ROSS KECSEG EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

State Rep. Jason Villalba (R–Dallas) donated money to his openly pro-abortion colleague Sarah Davis

(R–Houston), calling into question his pro-life credentials and further dispelling the myth he is a “Reagan-esque” conservative.

On October 12th, 2015, Texans for Jason Villalba donated $250 to the campaign of Sarah Davis. Davis is well known for being the only openly pro-abortion Republican in the Texas Legislature.

Davis is not only on the wrong side of the pro-life issue, she’s also notoriously left-leaning on fiscal issues as well. She scored an anemic 52 out of 100 on the 2015

Villalba Donates to Pro-abortion Colleague

Fiscal Responsibility Index, and ranked as the most liberal Republican in the Texas House in a non-partisan Rice University study.

Why would Villalba, who once held up a sonogram of his unborn son on the floor of the House in defense of landmark pro-life legislation in 2013, now suddenly give campaign cash to his fellow colleague who openly works against efforts to protect the unborn?

Voters in HD 114 have become accustomed to such comical inconsistency from their state representative. This past session, Villalba filed a “religious liberty” bill, promoting it in the media before he ultimately caved to LGBT lobby groups and abandoned the bill at the last minute.

Villalba is being challenged by Dallas attorney Dan Morenoff in the Republican primary, a challenge Villalba literally begged his constituents for at the beginning of last session.

Villalba Fails to Block Primary Opponent

The notion that criminal justice reform is a Republican or Democrat issue couldn’t be further

from the truth.Both conservatives and liberals push

“tough on crime” messaging, without evaluating whether or not it actually works.

For far too long local sheriffs, state attorneys and legislators have used “tough of crime” rhetoric hoping that “talking tough” would increase their electability.

But being “soft on crime” isn’t a problem in need of a solution, but rather a distraction away from efforts to reform the criminal justice system.

People who commit violent crimes pose a danger to the public and should be prosecuted accordingly. However, is it accurate to say that the majority of those currently in prison are violent criminals?

According to the bureau of prisons, forty-eight percent of inmates are behind bars due to non-violent, dug-related convictions.

There is a fundamental problem with a minor being caught possessing drugs and becoming a felon. Such labels equate such an offense with something violent [rape or assault??].

I am not suggesting that we legalize drugs nor am I suggesting that drugs aren’t a plague on communities. I’m not even suggesting that drug traffickers or gangs don’t pose a risk or danger to society. In many cases, they do.

The question is: does the punishment fit the crime? If the goal of the criminal justice is to protect society from violent criminals, then we must restore justice to the system by improving our legal framework to ensure that our policies are effectively accomplishing that objective.


Is Criminal Justice Reform a Policy Issue for Republicans or Democrats?

There is a fundamental problem

with a minor being caught possessing drugs and becoming a felon.


BY STEPHEN HOWSLEY THSC.COM

KASSI DEE PATRICK MARKS, JD

The sad passing of Chris Dunn very publicly highlighted the outrageous Texas Advance

Directives Act which gives hospitals the right to decide whether you live or die regardless of whether you have an advanced directive or power of attorney.

Chris was an ill man, who was never definitively diagnosed by Methodist Hospital. Methodist invoked TADA to withdraw his life-sustaining care (“LST”) which would, of course, hasten his death. A lawsuit was filed before he died to challenge the constitutionality of TADA. I have a lot to say, but I want to focus on a few major points here that are getting lost in the smoke and mirrors created by supporters of TADA and Methodist.

First, it is for the patient to decide if/when LST is withdrawn. It is neither moral

nor constitutional for a doctor and hospital to make that decision against the wishes of a patient or his closest surrogate. Video showed Chris’s will to live. His mother pleaded his case before the arrogant medical ethics committee. It did not matter. (NOTE: We are talking LST (food, water, air), not cures for cancer here.) Chris did not die through the withdrawal of his LST, as Methodist had planned, but only because a lawsuit was filed.

Second, under TADA a patient has no due process rights, making it unconstitutional. All power lies with doctors who recommend withdrawing LST and hospital committees that agree. A patient has no opportunity to present evidence, patient’s “advocates” may not be allowed to attend, and there is no appeal. Any subjective reason, e.g., “quality of life,” can be the basis to terminate LST. A family has only 10 days to find a new

CHRIS DUNN’S DEATH A Case Study in Immorality, Constitutional Rights Violations, and Creeping Euthanasia in Texas

facility before their loved one is killed by the withdrawal of LST (unless a court grants more time).

Third, any argument justifying withdrawing LST to stop “suffering” is the very definition of euthanasia. This language is used by a pro-life organization supporting Methodist and TADA. There was no evidence in this case that Chris’s LST caused him more harm than benefit, which might be a moral basis for withdrawing such care but only if he agreed. An argument by an attorney was made that Chris was suffering, but there was no evidence to support this (even were that a moral basis for withdrawing LST against his will, which it is not). Ethicist Wesley J. Smith said, "Once avoiding suffering becomes the primary purpose of society, it too easily mutates into license for eliminating the sufferer." This is exactly what this pro-life organization (and attorneys for Methodist) advocate.

The more open advocacy for euthanasia in the wake of Chris’s death is our clarion call for 2017. If TADA has not been held unconstitutional by then, we must work even harder to significantly reform, if not outright repeal, it. We know how slippery and steep the anti-life slope is.

Texas has reached a new age in politics. In an overwhelmingly red state, it has become increasingly

more difficult for Democrats and outspoken liberals to become elected to the Texas Legislature to represent citizens in Austin. The majority of the state is outspokenly Republican with a majority of those Republicans being outspokenly conservative.

The main roadblock to conservative legislation in the Texas Legislature is not the Democrats; the “Republicans” hold the majority in both the House and Senate. The question is then posed: Why can’t conservative advocacy groups pass their conservative legislation with such “conservative” leadership? How is it possible that 98 Republican Texas State Representatives (out of 150 House members) cannot pass critical pieces of conservative legislation?

It seems that more and more moderates and liberals are running under the guises of conservative Republicans. Many of these fraudulent conservatives are forced to vote conservatively on critical pieces of conservative legislation in order to maintain their public appearance within

their conservative House District. However, you will rarely see these “representatives” advocating for and championing these key pieces of legislation that would assist Texas in becoming an even greater state.

A prime example of this is Texas State Rep. John Raney. Ever since his election to House District 14 in 2011, Representative Raney has grown closer to House Leadership and farther from the conservative base in his district. House Leadership has become the single largest roadblock to conservative legislation passing in the Texas Legislature, and Representative Raney has not aided in alleviating this issue.

For example, House Leadership was instrumental in obstructing THSC’s efforts to reform Senate Bill 206 in order to curtail an enormous increase of power that the bill was giving to CPS over Texas families. House Leadership reportedly threatened conservative State Representatives who sought to fix the bill by implying that Leadership would use procedural tricks to kill the pro-life bill and the pro-gun bill behind SB 206 on the calendar if anyone tried to amend SB 206. As a result, amendments to the bill were pulled and the reforms failed to get on the bill.

Representative Raney did nothing to aid THSC in furthering or strengthening parental or home school rights during the legislative session, despite many visits to his office regarding these important issues. In addition, Representative Raney earned alarmingly low scorecard ratings from Empower Texans and Texas Right to Life on his lack of defense for conservative fiscal issues and his failure to defend the unborn.

It is a critical time for parental rights and home school rights in our state, and it is no longer acceptable for so-called conservatives to simply vote for conservative legislation under pressure of what the public will think. Texas needs legislators who actually agree and advocate for conservative principles and values.

Parents, home schoolers, and conservatives need advocates in Austin to accurately represent them in the Texas Legislature. It is for this reason that THSC has endorsed Jess Fields for Texas House District 14 over Rep. John Raney. Jess is a strong advocate for conservative values who will accurately represent his constituents in Bryan and College Station, Texas.

As a father and husband, Jess will push to expand parental and home school rights in Austin as he fights with us to Keep Texas Families Free.

A TIME FOR CHOOSING How Rep. John Raney Lost Support of Parents and Home Schoolers

Although he was expected to attend and answer questions at an Arlington Republican

Women’s candidate forum, Jonathan Stickland’s opponent was a no-show.

Scott W. Fisher of Bedford is challenging Stickland (R–Bedford) in the Republican primary. The Republican Women’s luncheon was expected to be Fisher’s first public appearance since starting his campaign.

Since announcing in September, Fisher has engaged in a vicious campaign attacking Stickland over statements he made years before he was in office, including when he was a teenager. The dirty tactics have received the praise of DC-based Democratic operatives eager to see the conservative Stickland removed from the Texas House, where he serves as the chief advocate against liberal special interests.

Fisher’s dirty campaign has been run by establishment consultant Craig Murphy and is financed by a number of former Republican politicians who have been defeated or opted not to seek reelection in order to avoid voter scrutiny of their records.

Sources at the forum suggested that Fisher skipped the event out of fear that he might be forced to answer questions about his campaign’s questionable tactics.

Fisher has also refused to distinguish himself from Stickland on the issues. However, in one media release, his campaign falsely alleged that one of Stickland’s bills to ban red light cameras was “opposed by conservatives.” In 2015, Arlington voters supported a local ban on the city’s red light cameras by a healthy 59-41 margin.

As a member of the JPS Hospital board, Scott Fisher has also received scrutiny for obstructing transparency reforms.

Unfortunately voters were not able to ask him questions about these issues today.

Fisher AWOL at Republican Women’s Forum


MORE NEWS ONLINE

www.EmpowerTexans.com

CORECARD WWW.TEXASSCORECARD.COM10 HOUSTON AREA

BY CHARLES BLAIN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

A politician fighting for his political life and a duplicitous Austin blogger who has been cozying up

to the Houston Chronicle have been caught in blatant lies thanks to video footage received by Empower Texans.

On October 30th, State Rep. Byron Cook (R–Corsicana) launched his campaign for reelection and the results were a disaster. While Cook had planned for as many as 450 people to attend his kickoff, less than 100 actually showed up. Outside the event, which was held at the Corsicana Country Club, approximately 75 citizens from within the district and across the state rallied in the pouring rain to protest Cook’s record of attacking the first amendment and obstructing pro-life reforms.

Cook is locked in a tough reelection battle against Corsicana businessman Thomas McNutt.

Corsicana police, who had been called out to the protest by the Cook campaign, issued citations to Empower Texans President Michael Quinn Sullivan and Texas Right to Life President Jim Graham. Both attended the protest, which was

organized by a local citizen, along with members of their staff. Citing Corsicana’s “parade ordinance,” the police explained their belief that city ordinance required a permit when 25 or more citizens gathered in a public assembly.

While attempting to coerce the protesters into leaving before Cook’s guests showed up, Corsicana Chief of Police Randy Bratton made clear that he had the authority to arrest Sullivan and Graham (and possibly the other attendees) for the alleged violation of the parade ordinance.

After the debacle, Cook’s campaign and Austin blogger Scott Braddock launched into spin mode. Braddock is the editor of the Quorum Report, a liberal blog and news clip service that frequently defends members of House Speaker Joe Straus’s leadership coalition of Democrats and liberal Republicans, including Byron Cook. In recent months Braddock has become a contributor to the Houston Chronicle.

Both Cook’s campaign and Braddock lied to readers and constituents and claimed the event was well attended – with Cook’s campaign claiming that nearly 300 guests attended. However, neither could produce any photographs

substantiating their claims.In a post releasing body camera

footage of Corsicana police actually issuing citations to Sullivan and Graham, Braddock dishonestly claimed: “Contrary to his claims, police video shows MQ Sullivan was not threatened by Corsicana Police.” In the post Braddock imbedded a video that showed the issuance of citations, but did not show any threat of arrest.

But even that video contradicted Braddock and Cook’s propaganda. At 24 minutes in length and taken while the bulk of Cook’s guests were arriving, the video shows only 24 vehicles entering the country club, not hundreds.

However it was the videos that Braddock possessed when he wrote his piece but chose not to release that truly expose his mendacity.

Empower Texans duplicated the request Braddock made to the Corsicana police under the Public Information Act, requesting the exact same videos that were provided to him.

A total of eleven videos were produced. Not just one, but two of the videos capture the moment when Corsicana Police Chief Randy Bratton threatens Sullivan and Graham with jail,

reminding them that he had the power not only to issue citations but also to place them under arrest if they did not leave.

Braddock had both of the videos in his possession when he dishonestly called Sullivan and Graham’s claims that they were “threatened with arrest” lies.

The videos not only show that act of intimidation, but also show Corsicana police working over a line of protesters, demanding their names and driver’s licenses. One protester is told that his information is being collected because he will be subpoenaed to testify in court if Graham and Sullivan fight the citations. Another is told – incorrectly – that she could be charged with “failure to identify” if she does not produce identification to the police.

The lies Scott Braddock writes further prove how irrelevant Quorum Report has become. With virtually no readership outside of Austin, QR has become nothing more than a managed listserv for lobbyists and establishment cronies inside the capitol.

Braddock’s mendacity is a black eye for the Houston Chronicle, one of the state’s largest daily newspapers. Their continued relationship with him gives weight to the distrust Texans have for traditional print media.

Visit TexasScorecard.com to see the videos.

Houston Chronicle Blogger Caught in Blatant LieBY TONY McDONALD EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

An overzealous groundwater regulation in Montgomery County, at the behest of

bureaucrats, is costing taxpayers millions, killing lakeside business, and driving property values down.

Last year, the Lone Star Groundwater Conservative District (LSGCD) placed a mandate on residents’ use of groundwater out of fear of over usage and the mandate impacts taxpayers within 147 local entities. Montgomery County residents, at last check, were pumping roughly 83,000 acre-feet of water per year out of the Gulf Coast Aquifer. In the name of conservation, LSGCD decided, without voter approval, to cap usage at 64,000 acre-feet per year starting in January 2016. The difference in acre footage is expected to now come from Lake Conroe, the area’s manmade reservoir that has become the lifeblood of business, recreation and real estate.

To comply with the LSGCD mandate, another unelected government entity, the San Jacinto River Authority (SJA), developed a $479.8 million surface water treatment plan that Montgomery County residents will pay for through a fee tacked on to their water bills.

But not everyone paying the fee is benefitting from the surface water pumping.

SJA is the wholesale groundwater provider in The Woodlands, which historically pumps the most water out of all Montgomery County communities. Many residents in the county are too far out to be connected to the surface water pumping station and are still going to rely solely on groundwater, yet they are still being forced to pay the fee for development. Conroe Mayor Webb Melder said, “Many people feel in the county like there is an incestuous relationship between SJRA and [LSGCD].” Going on to say that SJA needed an alternative source of water and,

through LSGCD, made everyone else in the county pay for it.

Aside from paying for an unwanted surface water treatment plant, Montgomery County residents are being dealt even harsher treatment.

Since the plan has been unveiled, businesses that have flourished because of their lakeside appeal have been saying that pumping from Lake Conroe is unjust. Opponents of the plan say that increased pumping from the lake for fast-growing Montgomery County will kill lakeside businesses as the lake begins to recede, especially during the dry summer months. Property owners along the lake have joined in with opposition saying that their property values are directly tied to the lake and pumping it will force them to see a gradual decline. Along with business and residential property owners, a number of Montgomery County municipalities signed on to oppose the project.

Now, the LSGCD mandate is being challenged in court by the City of Conroe and seven privately owned water and sewer utility companies. The companies are suing saying that SJRA is unjustly attacking groundwater producers and that the cost of the project is too high.

Melder said, “The biggest impediment today in the State of Texas to the development of natural resources is politics. If we can produce groundwater cheaper than being forced to buy surface water then we should have the right to produce that.”

Montgomery County residents have shown they are a force to be reckoned with when a group opposed, and soundly defeated, an unwanted road bond issue just last year. Now, coalescing in defense of property rights, taxpayers are going to fight this issue until their concerns are addressed.

Montgomery County Water Fight


CORECARDVOL. 2 - ISSUE 2 - WWW.TEXASSCORECARD.COM 11HOUSTON AREA

The abuse of taxpayer dollars by public-sector employee unions has become commonplace across

Texas. Unlike private-sector unions, public sector unions aren’t limited by pesky factors such as market conditions — meaning there is no counter force preventing them from making unreasonable demands from local governments.

Last year, Houston Organization of Public Employees (HOPE), a chapter of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), successfully won council’s approval of a minimum wage increase from $10 to $12 per hour. Although municipal employees were already making over $3 more than their private sector counterparts living in Houston, the public-union felt it was “only fair” to take more from taxpayers. This year,

As Houston begins to chart a new course under Mayor Sylvester Turner’s administration, there are

a few big-ticket policy items that are sure to come up around the dais that will shape the city and test his managerial skills.

Here’s what Houstonians should be watching for:

BUDGET AND DEFICITOne of his first major tests will be how

he constructs his FY17 budget and addresses the looming $126 million deficit at the same time. Turner has touted his experience in the legislature as preparation for this, but Houston is a unique environment and we’ll see in the coming months how he begins to manage the city’s finances.

WORKER PAYMayor Turner has been a vocal

supporter for increasing the minimum wage and possibly enacting a ‘living wage.’ Citing Houston’s failed attempt at increasing local minimum wage in 1997, Turner says that under the current climate, he believes Houstonians would

be more amicable to such a ballot measure this time around. State law prohibits cities and counties from setting a wage that would require private sector employers to increase the wage of their lowest-paid employees, but Turner feels that cities should be given that ability. Currently though, he does have the power to push for minimum wage increases for public employees, and in some cases, employees of private companies that contract with the city or receive government incentives.

PROPERTY TAX CAPTurner has voiced his displeasure with

the voter-imposed property tax cap, even going so far as to use the Texas House Republicans’ inaction on a tax cap as justification to repeal Houston’s. But the lack of a state tax cap is anything but a positive reflection on House Republicans —rather, it illustrates how liberal leadership continues to fail Texans. Houston’s tax cap is the last protective barrier for city taxpayers—and voters should prepare to fight hard to keep it.

OPT-OUT EXEMPTION FOR HOUSTON OPEN CARRY

Initially mentioned at a legislative recap event hosted by the Tribune, then-Rep. Turner said, if elected Mayor,

he would advocate the legislature to provide an open carry opt-out exemption for the City of Houston.

PENSIONSAccording to Texans for Local

Control, Turner refused to sign their pledge. However, he has since said he does in fact support local control as long as there is support within the city. Only time will tell if he advocates as strongly for that as he does for issues he’s more passionate about.

ILLEGAL IMMIGRATIONHouston is a prime destination for

undocumented immigrants because of proximity to the border and lax enforcement of immigration laws. Turner supports driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants and the Texas DREAM Act. Turner also wants to hire an additional 6,000 police officers but believes that, “our police officers should not be asking immigration status when investigating – the immigrant community needs to know that police are not interested in their immigration status…”

BONUS: REBUILD HOUSTON AND TERM LIMITS

Both are currently being decided in court and not at city hall, but the decisions will certainly impact the Turner administration.

Turner Administration: Issues To WatchBY CHARLES BLAIN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM


ReBuild Houston hangs in the balance as the Texas Supreme Court has deemed the ballot language which ushered in the program was misleading. The city is appealing the case but if struck down, Houston may have to repay the millions collected by the program. If the program stays in place, Turner says he will work to strengthen it, if struck down he said he would find a replacement.

The voter-approved change of term limits from three two-year terms to two four-year terms is also being contested in court over its ballot language. Though the lawsuit was recently filed it has the potential to reverse the change.

GOING FORWARDWhile Houstonians made their

mayoral choice, it was only by 4,000 votes out of the roughly 212,000 cast. This near-even split means Mayor Turner doesn’t have a mandate for Houston and everyone’s voice needs to be represented in policy discussions.

Now, more than ever, as Houston stares down the barrel of an uncertain financial future, taxpayers, activists, and groups need to stay involved. Turning out the vote is great, but to have real skin in the game is to be involved in the policy that comes out of city hall and that impacts every Houstonian. The municipal election season may be over, but Houstonians’ duty as citizens is far from complete.

they have already signaled a push for another increase to $15 per hour.

According to the city, the original $2 hike cost taxpayers an additional $1.4 million per year, while the total cost of the contract is $9.1 million for fiscal year 2016.

Similarly, in San Antonio unions pushed for minimum wage increases for municipal employees citing a nebulous need for “increased neighborhood safety.” SEIU Texas led the fight for a $13 per hour wage floor from the previous $10 bilking taxpayers an additional $1.7 million. The $3 wage hike wasn’t enough to satisfy public-unions, so they also pushed for a 2% cost of living adjustment — and succeeded

Unions in right to work states such as Texas frame the argument by labeling opponents as “anti-worker,” but in reality it is the complete opposite. Private sector union demands are kept in check by market realities such as budgetary constraints and non-union labor market competition—by contrast, public-sector unions don’t

have to deal with these realities. They drain city and state coffers on salaries, benefits, and pensions, which limits resources available to provide government services to taxpayers.

The largest portion of expenditures financed by union dues go to political contributions, the pockets of union leaders, or to organizations that lobby state legislatures for increased public-union power – not to advance workers’ rights.

Unions have the ability to donate to whom they please, but governments are unfairly aiding unions by automatically collecting dues from their employees’ paychecks, including those who don’t necessarily support the union’s causes.

Follow the money trail and you’ll quickly see that contributions primarily go to Democrats or liberal Republicans without regard for the political preferences of the dues-paying members. Their donation trends explain why the Texas House refused to pass the Paycheck Protection bill last session, a measure that passed the

Senate and was supported by the State Chair of the Republican Party.

Government workers belonging to these unions, and the politicians bankrolled by them, are aided by government in their ability to harass any individual or businesses that opposes limits on union power.

Consider Houston’s HOPE agreement— where the city government discloses the personal information of non-union employees to the union to help forward their cause.

Why would a public-union need information on a nonmember if not to gain leverage and undue access to drive increased membership?

We’ve seen public-sector unions in other states take full advantage of their ability to cajole government officials at the expense of non-union taxpayers. The fact that Texas is a right to work state isn’t enough

Significant legislation to limit the power of public unions in Texas should be a priority for conservative lawmakers next session.

Public-Sector Union Abuse

CORECARD WWW.TEXASSCORECARD.COM12 HOUSTON AREA

The infamous video of State Rep. Dan Huberty (R-Kingwood) visibly intoxicated and

confrontational in the state capitol has become a campaign issue as the primary season heats up.

Signs are popping up around his district calling Huberty “shameless” and an “embarrassment.” The signs then read, “Have you seen the Dan Huberty video on YouTube?” referencing the video released by the American Phoenix Foundation that shows the representative intoxicated just minutes after coming off the house floor, cursing at a reporter, and being forced away by his staff and DPS officers. The video has since been viewed over 27,000 times.

Ironically, just two days prior to the incident, Huberty voted in favor of the House committee substitute to Senate Bill 19, which would have made it illegal for citizens to videotape or record conversations with legislators in the capitol without their consent.

Now facing a challenger, Huberty is being held responsible for his actions. On March 1st, Humble and Kingwood voters have an opportunity to choose either the same embarrassing representation in Austin, or opt for a change in the status quo.

Katy Independent School District (KISD) is the latest district to enact rule changes that lower the ethics

standards, making it harder for citizens to hold public officials accountable.

KISD’s Board of Trustees recently voted unanimously to remove the public comment section from regular meetings, where citizens were previously given three minutes to sound off on a topic of their choosing. Citizens wishing to address the board will now have to attend the board’s work-study session, which is a week before the regular board meeting, and will no longer be recorded.

These work-study sessions are generally a preview of the items to be considered at the following week’s board meeting, although they receive much less attention from the public.

The district is claiming that since it is only required by law to record the regular board meetings, they are “saving” taxpayers $4,000 by not recording the work-study sessions. With the removal of public comment from regular meetings, district residents will no longer have a viewable public record of testimony given during these sessions.

KISD’s board and administration claim this change will somehow boost communication between the public and the district. The board wants to present an agenda item, hear citizen concerns, and then look into those concerns during the week leading up to the regular board meeting. According to the district, this will allow time for thorough consideration, according to the district.

Taxpayers and residents of KISD say otherwise.

The board has always had the ability to

their campaign. Former Board President Rhonda Skillern-Jones wanted to remove the abstention requirement all together, but after a strong showing of opposition at the board meeting, the proposal was amended to keep the requirement and increase the contribution limit. In doing so, the board signaled to the public that contributions of $1,999 or less did not somehow pose a conflict of interest.

School districts often get an unwarranted pass from public scrutiny by those who follow the actions of their officials and government entities. The lowering of ethical standards enacted by both HISD and KISD further public skepticism by creating an environment for potential conflicts of interest, outright corruption, and fiscal mismanagement.

It is incumbent upon citizens to be engaged at the local level to ensure that the abandonment of public accountability measures in HISD and KISD don’t become a broader trend adopted by districts across the state.

postpone an item until the following meeting if concerns from the public during the regular meeting gave them pause. Interestingly, the change comes months after 12-year old Jordan Wooley addressed the board detailing the now famous “God Is A Myth” class assignment. Many are saying this change is an attempt to avoid any further public embarrassment regarding controversy exposed by parents and students.

Last week, Houston ISD also lowered their ethics standards after they finalized their proposed rule change regarding campaign donations. Now, Trustees will only have to abstain from voting on contracts of vendors who have donated $2,000 or more to their campaign in the past twelve months.

Previously, Trustees were required to abstain from voting on contracts with vendors who donated $500 or more to

Embarrassing Huberty Video Becomes Campaign Issue




Katy ISD Follows HISD In Scaling Back Ethics Regulations

In typical fashion, former Houston Controller Ron Green quietly released the city’s 2015 Comprehensive Annual

Financial Report (CAFR) late New Year’s Eve, hoping to draw as little attention as possible.

Green’s own statements suggest he hoped to bury the report. He told the city council in November that the CAFR would be publicly available shortly thereafter. The now published report is even dated December 2nd, but Green delayed its release until well after Houston’s municipal runoff election, preventing Houstonians from casting their votes with an accurate portrait of the city’s finances.

The Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) mandated this year that cities more accurately report their net pension liability, or the difference between their future liability and the funds the city has set aside to pay those benefits. As we recognized months ago, Green used accounting tricks to downplay the scary fiscal mess he, former Mayor Annise Parker, and the current city council left in their wake.

The GASB’s newly implemented accounting method shows Houston’s pension liability grew from $1.2 billion in FY14 to $5.6 billion in FY15.

James Quintero, Director of the Center for Local Governance at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, said of the new report, “The latest financial reports suggest that Houston’s pension problems are much bigger than previously acknowledged, and getting a handle on that could mean higher taxes, benefit reductions, or some combination of both.”

The only way to increase property

taxes in Houston is to modify the voter-imposed revenue cap. Mayor Turner has already signaled his intention is to carry forward Parker’s legacy of attacking the tax cap. For Houstonians, this signals the predictable big-government response to the all-too common problem of fiscal mismanagement by elected officials—unjustly shift the responsibility of government incompetence onto the backs of the taxpayers.

The FY15 CAFR shows roughly $160 million in total revenue increase over the last fiscal year with $100 million of that coming solely from property taxes. The problem is that while the city’s revenue increased by about 3%, its expenses increased by roughly 10%. The new administration needs to look in the mirror for a solution to its spending spree, instead of reaching into taxpayers’ wallets.

Simply put, even with the revenue cap, the city brings in more property tax

Houston Finances From Bad To Worse

SEE HOUSTON — PAGE 13


Every election cycle, interest groups across the spectrum make recommendations about which

candidates they believe will best work to achieve certain policy ends in elected office.

The Pro-Life community is no different. Each primary election season, the Texas Right to Life Political Action Committee vets candidates and invests in certain races. These races encompass the Texas House and Senate, statewide offices, judicial elections, Congressional seats, and even various local races.

While some accuse Pro-Lifers of being too narrow in their focus, relying on Pro-Life principles as the priority in selecting a candidate is not actually being a “single-issue” voter. The community that places Pro-Life values as their guiding principle in vetting candidates is no more a “single-issue” voter than one that places the state of

BY EMILY KEBODEAUX COOK TEXASRIGHTTOLIFE.COM the economy at the top of their

candidate “must-haves” list. The economy, as an issue, includes

various taxes, trading policies, and government spending. The same is true for the Pro-Life cause. Pro-Lifers believe in the sanctity of human Life from the moment of conception until natural death. Such belief means the Pro-Life movement addresses not only abortion, but also euthanasia, assisted suicide, cloning, stem cell research, genetic engineering, frozen embryos, adoption, and much, much more.

To earn the Texas Right to Life political seal of approval, each candidate must first complete a straightforward issues survey, and then members of our PAC panel conduct an interview. The personal meeting opens windows into the candidates’ hearts and minds and reveals the underpinnings of their political beliefs—key factors in shaping one’s Pro-Life values.

Such respect for the value of others,

Is voting Pro-Life really necessary? without requiring an achieved age, an achieved mental or physical level of development, or a particular “status” in society, is a respect for humanity and the individual that will no doubt shape a policymaker’s view of civil rights, economic rights, and security. How can we trust legislators to lower property taxes or increase penalties for violent crimes if they not fundamentally believe each life is valuable? We can’t.

Life is of the utmost importance. Our country was based upon the principles of "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Life is the first and foremost of these rights, for without the Right to Life, one cannot enjoy any other rights. The Right to Life is the most basic and most essential of rights. To best support strong, protective legislative measures, the convictions of the men and women who hold public office is an essential ingredient.

Although other issues are also significant to Texas and our nation, Life surpasses all. When you step into the voting booth in the following weeks, remember this, and please vote for Life!

revenue year after year because the cap allows for a population and inflation adjustment. Limiting tax growth requires that politicians and bureaucrats prioritize spending, something Parker’s administration proved unwilling to do.

Perhaps most shocking is the unprecedented evaporation of Houston’s assets. In one year’s time, the city’s total net position decreased from roughly $3.2 billion to $146 million.

Although some council members gave undue credit to Parker on her way out by calling her “extremely fiscally conservative with the city’s dollars,” the city’s financials prove otherwise.

In his first few days in office as mayor, Turner has repeatedly mentioned the need for “shared sacrifice” to get out of this situation, but that sacrifice needs to start within Houston’s government. Turner may have his own mayoral agenda, but the city's finances need to take precedence.

There will come a time when the city will no longer have assets to sell. If Houston’s most recent CAFR doesn’t serve as a sobering alarm for the need to cut the empty rhetoric and government waste, then nothing will. Houston provides yet another example that government will only be reformed by the continued engagement of its citizens. SEE TARRANT COUNTY — PAGE 15

HOUSTONfrom PAGE 12

An appeal filed by Empower Texans recently centers on the core question: Are there limits

on the Texas Ethics Commission’s power?

After a liberal Travis County Judge refused to issue a temporary injunction restraining the TEC, Empower Texans took its opportunity to appeal the issue to the 3rd Court of Appeals in Austin.

For almost four years the Texas Ethics Commission has investigated legally baseless complaints brought by allies of Texas House Speaker Joe Straus. The complaints allege that Empower Texans, by engaging in too much First Amendment-protected political speech, “morphed” into a Political Action Committee and should be forced to file paperwork with the state and disclose the identities of its donors.

The complaints were frivolous when they were brought, and the Austin Court of Appeals has twice confirmed that corporations cannot “morph” into Political Committees by engaging in constitutionally protected

speech. Despite these rulings, the TEC refuses to dismiss the complaints and is insisting on proceeding with their investigation.

In a hearing last month on Empower Texans’ motion, TEC chairman Paul Hobby and former chairman Jim Clancy were questioned on the stand.

Hobby confessed that the TEC could not articulate a theory of its case against Empower Texans. Despite this, he and Clancy claimed that the agency needed to be able to investigate Empower Texans in order to determine if the agency could articulate a case.

Essentially Hobby, Clancy, the TEC, and its lawyers from the Attorney General’s office are arguing they have the authority to investigate any citizen, business, church, or civic group for unknown violations of elections laws just because a political opponent filed a complaint against them.

In other words – the TEC thinks it can investigate anyone, at any time, for any reason.

Empower Texans disagrees and believes that the First and Fourth Amendments apply to the TEC and limit their power.

Are there Limits on the TEC’s Power?BY TONY McDONALD EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

BY ROSS KECSEG EMPOWERTEXANS.COM

The recording and publishing of public meetings is a best practice that’s been broadly adopted by

many governments in Texas. But despite discussions surrounding a $1 billion debt plan still looming, the appointed board charged with oversight of Tarrant County’s hospital district (JPS) have stalled transparency efforts aimed at restoring public confidence.

Newly appointed JPS Board Member and local attorney, Warren Norred, has run into apathy from colleagues after requesting that public meetings be recorded and published online. The board has paid lip-service to the idea at Norred’s prodding, resisting even the formal discussion of such an agenda item, until recently.

Citizens keeping tabs on the district have reason to push for greater transparency from the JPS board and hospital executives.

In the absence of a Chief Financial Officer in early 2015, JPS hired outside financial consultants (Financial Resource Group) to make lofty and dubious financial forecasts surrounding their proposed $1 billion bond. This enabled Tarrant County officials such as County Judge Glenn Whitley (R) to float empty promises that “no new property tax increase” would result if local voters approved the proposition.

Because the board does not record its meetings, there is no easily accessible public record of deliberation regarding any of the above issues.

But during local town hall meetings, JPS representatives were unable to satisfy residents who surprised them with educated questions and concerns.

Despite plans to dramatically expand the size of the system with a new psychiatric center, patient tower, and renovations, JPS’ forecasts claimed their annual operating costs would actually decrease following completion in 2020.

Not only did their projections fail to add up, but JPS executives admitted in public meetings the board would not follow through on huge layoffs totaling over 350 current employees, “efficiency” savings their own consultants said were

Tarrant County Hospital Board Stalls on Transparency


State Rep. Sarah Davis (R–West University Place) and State Rep. J.D. Sheffield (R–Gatesville) are

consistently rated as the least conservative Republicans in the Texas House. On the Fiscal Responsibility Index, they only score three and four points higher than the highest ranked Democrat. But despite having voting records that are marginally better than Democrats on fiscal and role of government issues, are they actually worse than a Democrat when it comes to the liberty and prosperity of Texans?

Consider the issues that are not included on the Fiscal Responsibility Index.

Sarah Davis has been openly "pro-choice" for years. J.D. Sheffield, despite being elected as the result of a crossover

effort run by Planned Parenthood, had claimed to be pro-life until this session. However, in a debate on the House floor, Sheffield finally admitted he supports abortion rights. But Democrats are reliably “pro-choice” and typically have anti-taxpayer voting records, so how are these two Republicans worse for Texans?

The answer is simple. With “Republican” branding, liberal Speaker Joe Straus uses the two legislators to take up “Republican” spots on committees, hoping his trick fools unassuming Texans.

For instance, the Public Health Committee in the House typically handles pro-life legislation. It is critically important to pro-life Texans. This past session, Straus appointed six Republicans and five Democrats to the committee, ensuring – at least on paper – a narrow Republican advantage.

But Straus appointed both Sheffield

and Davis to the committee, guaranteeing that the real partisan balance, particularly on pro-life issues, was seven-to-five in favor of liberal Democrats and pro-abortion interest groups.

Similarly, the Appropriations Article II subcommittee is in charge of drafting the portion of the budget relating to Health and Human Services, including issues related to abortions. On that subcommittee, Straus again appointed four Republicans and three Democrats, giving the Republicans the appearance of a narrow one-vote advantage. But Straus put both Sheffield and Davis on the committee, meaning the real balance was five-to-two in favor of the liberals.

The consequences of Sheffield and Davis carrying the GOP label plays out throughout the House under Straus. Straus is able to appoint Davis to positions to which he would only ever appoint a Republican, effectively giving the Democrats a gift.

For instance, when a joint interim committee was created in 2013 to look at the state’s ethics laws, Straus appointed Sarah Davis to chair it. The committee proceeded to waste an entire interim,

ultimately filing its report after its due date. The report contained less than a single page of actual content and was based on a single hearing in which the public was not allowed to testify.

Because she chaired that committee and was a “Republican,” Davis was tasked with carrying major legislation relating to ethics laws and the Texas Ethics Commission. In one debate on the floor, Davis’s failure to do her job was exposed when she could not answer a simple question about the number of commissioners present on the TEC. In one of the session’s most embarrassing moments, Davis was forced to call out to Empower Texans’ counsel Trey Trainor in the gallery to ask him to answer the simple question.

If Sarah Davis or J.D. Sheffield were replaced with a Democrat, the new representative would probably have a marginally worse voting record. However, Straus could no longer use the two “Republicans” to thwart conservative reforms and fool Texans. That, coupled with the inherent value of truth in advertising would certainly be a better result for Texans.

Texans are getting lots of campaign mail from Gary Gates. Who is he? He’s a Houston businessman

who lost each of the six times he’s run for public office. He promotes liberal Republicans. And he hopes voters are too stupid to know what the Railroad Commission does.

Most Texans were first introduced to Gary Gates by way of his advocacy on behalf of the liberal lieutenants of House Speaker Joe Straus. Now, Gates is hoping to parlay that notoriety, and his personal fortune, into a seat on the Texas Railroad Commission. He’s more likely to maintain his status as a perennially losing candidate.

Gates made his fortune owning and operating apartment complexes in the Houston area. He first came to public attention during his fight with the state’s Child Protective Services over allegations he and his wife were abusing their children. The Gates prevailed against the charges.

This race will actually be Gates’ seventh run for public office. The first six were expensive and unsuccessful.

Are Sarah Davis and J.D. Sheffield Actually Worse than Democrats?



His record of losses is complicated. Gates first sought a seat in the Texas House. He lost. He tried again. And he lost again. He ran for the Texas Senate. And lost. Then he tried again for the Texas Senate. And lost. Along the way, he twice ran for a local school board seat. And he lost both times.

It’s tempting to label such a record as “sad.” But “pathetic” seems more appropriate.

After his most recent defeat for the Texas Senate, in which Gates wildly outspent his opponent, he shifted gears and founded the “Texas Citizens Coalition.” By his own admission, the TCC was launched so lawmakers in Austin would return his phone calls. Gates has admitted that he’s funded his TCC operations himself to the tune of several million dollars.

Those operations have consisted of a glossy mailer sent regularly around the state to Republican primary voters singing the praises of Straus’ lieutenants, and promentientley featuring photos of Gates. More precisely, he has allowed his mailer to be a place where Straus’ lieutenants sing their own praises. For example, liberal House Republican Byron Cook, who has worked over the past two sessions to give driver’s permits to illegal aliens, was recently bragging in Gates’ mailer about his purported tough-on-immigration stances.

In each issue, Gates’ mailer has offered

a glowing “conservative” review of the House leadership, despite it being led by Democrats and liberal Republicans, and generally ignored the accomplishments of actual conservatives who are fighting for taxpayers.

Whatever the message, each mailer had a singular purpose: building Gary Gates’ name among the Austin establishment by letting them pose as conservatives in his publication.

After a year in operation, Gates’ TCC mailer has taken a hiatus as Gates runs in the crowded open field to replace retiring Railroad Commissioner David Porter. His campaign materials look a lot like the TCC mailers, and Gates’ campaign publicity photographs are the same he used in conjunction with his project supporting the Straus leadership.

Gates has no experience in the oil and gas industry that he seeks to regulate. He just wants so badly to be elected – as evidenced by his six failed runs – to any office.

If the story of a wealthy candidate with sycophantic ties to the Straus leadership team in a crowded statewide race sounds familiar, it should. Last go-round, the Straus crowd had their lawyer, Eric Opiela, run for Agriculture Commissioner. A trust-fund millionaire who typically lives in Austin, Opiela spent more in 2014 than his opponents combined trying to portray himself as a South Texas farmer. The con job failed

and, despite spending seven-figures of his family’s money, Opiela didn’t even make the run-off.

Gates is so tied to the Straus regime that he brags about having disgraced Republican State Rep. Jim Keffer of Eastland as a senior advisor to his campaign. Keffer isn’t in the oil and gas business, and was forced to retire this year rather than engage in what observers knew would be a losing bid for re-election.

Gates’ campaign is as absurd as it is disingenuous. Gates has been buying radio time around the state promising that from his post as one of three elected members of the Railroad Commission he’ll somehow keep Syrian refugees out of Texas. Come, again? Does he really think his fellow Texans are that stupid? Apparently.

The challenges before Gates are numerous. After aligning himself with the Austin establishment, he now must convince voters he is actually a conservative. And while he has no apparent qualifications for the office he seeks, Gates’ campaign is being advised by Straus loyalists instead of someone actually knowledgeable on the oil and gas industry.

More than anything, Gates’ own loss-filled electoral track record – built close to home where people know him best – shouldn’t give him much confidence.

Gary Gates: Hopes Seventh Run Is His Lucky Number


It’s sometimes hard for voters to know how to judge judicial candidates; today I’m thinking we should include

basic math skills. A justice on the Texas Supreme Court is claiming to be the “top fundraiser among all Texas candidates for statewide offices.” Yet according to official state filings, she was out-raised by her own opponent.

Maybe it’s another case of incumbent Justice Debra Lehrmann being led astray by her campaign’s fundraising consultant, Susan Lilly?

Her campaign recently emailed and tweeted that Lehrmann “was the top

fundraiser among all TX candidates in the upcoming Primary Election.”

On her campaign finance reports, Lehrmann reported a respectable $332,618.46 in political contributions. Not too shabby.

Except in comparison to her own opponent, Michael Massengale, who serves currently on the Houston court of appeals. Justice Massengale reported to state officials that he raised $353,471.36.

In other words, Massengale raised about $20,000 more than Lehrmann.

None of this would be that notable except for Lehrmann’s campaign making such an audacious, and easily checked, claim. It turns out Lehrmann wasn’t even the top fundraiser in her own race.

There’s an old joke that people who can’t do math go to law school. Guess there’s some truth in that after all.

necessary to meet the lofty projections they were touting.

JPS’ annual expenses have historically increased, rising by over $40 million the last several years. A large portion of this annual increase is the result of an ever-expanding staff, which has exceeded JPS’ own budget projections over the same period, and tripled over the last decade.

The JPS board was asking the public to believe that, after approving nearly $1 billion in new debt to build a brand-new patient tower, their annual costs would somehow flat-line over time, while the size of their staff would mysteriously shrink.

After over 650 local residents signed a petition to delay the controversial measure, the Tarrant County Commissioners Court decided not to place the bond on the November 2015 ballot. Sources inside JPS say they are now eyeing May 2016 to place a similar package before voters.

Speaking at a conference for proponents of cronyism, House Speaker Joe Straus derided the

reforms championed by conservatives like Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.

A left-leaning Austin gossip website devoted to protecting the Straus coalition of Democrats and liberal Republicans quoted Straus as describing conservative reforms as “side issues.” Straus went on to describe his interest in what the blog called “smart investment” — which is usually code for higher taxes and unreformed spending.

Straus Brands Conservative Priorities as ‘Side Issues’



TARRANT COUNTYfrom PAGE 13

It’s worth noting that former JPS Board Chairman Scott Fisher, who supported and rubber-stamped both the dubious 2015 debt-deal and its faulty financial forecasts, is now running against taxpayer champion State Rep. Jonathan Stickland (R-Bedford) in the upcoming Republican primary.

Fisher has received support from JPS attorney Neil Adams ($5,000), whose law firm (Adams, Lynch & Loftin, P.C.) holds a multi-million dollar contract with JPS, and was approved while Fisher served as Board Chairman.

He’s also received support from former state legislators John Carona (and the Associa PAC), Patricia Harless, Rob Orr, John Otto, and Vicki Truitt. Each of those former members notoriously aligned themselves with liberals and government-interest groups while in Austin.

Aside from the questionable political alliances inside JPS that warrant concern from Tarrant County conservatives, the board should record and publish their meetings online to foster public accountability. Taxpayers have good reason to be skeptical.

The kind of “side issues” derided by Straus can be found in what the Texas House under his speakership has refused to address:

• Banning Sanctuary cities, which is polling over 50 percent in many areas;

• State and local spending limits favored by 94 percent of primary voters;

• Ethics reform promoted by Gov. Abbott;

• Educational freedom measures found in the GOP platform; and,

• Ending the government-union collusion, a priority for the Texas Republican party in 2015.

• Straus and his coalition refused to include tax reduction in their budgets last year, and only did so after the Texas Senate led on the issue.

But, again, Straus considers all of those “side issues.”

It’s time for voters to sideline Straus and his cronies.

Lawyers Can’t Do Math?

When the framers crafted the United States Constitution, they did so with the intent

of creating a government that secured—not abused—the rights of its people. The ultimate governing authority resided with the people, not their “rulers.”

As reported by IJ, a couple in Massachusetts has been fighting for three years to regain money they say was wrongfully seized from them in October of 2012.

While on their way to a medical appointment, state police pulled Adam and Jennifer Perry over for speeding as they drove through Henry County, Illinois on Interstate 80.

“A drug dog sniffed and indicated on the car. Officers then searched the vehicle and found $107,520 in cash in a suitcase and in Jennifer’s wallet.”

The Perrys claim the search was without their consent and without a legal warrant to search their vehicle or persons. The police claimed they found

a duffel bag that smelled of marijuana, although no drugs were reported to have been found in the vehicle. Interestingly, no charges were ever filed against the couple.

They wrote in a letter to a federal prosecutor, “Our faith in the United States legal system has been shaken. Why are officer’s [sic] allowed to be judge, jury and executioner on the side of the road?”

IJ reported that the Perry case was anything but unique:

“An extensive investigation by The Washington Post into one federal forfeiture program found nearly 62,000 cash seizures since 9/11 where police did not use warrants or charge the owners with a crime. Out of those seizures, more than 1,700 were in Illinois alone.”

In 2014 alone, the value of assets confiscated by governments across the United States totaled over $3.5 billion, exceeding the amount of property stolen by thieves.

In the 1700s a government charged with serving its people, instead of serving its own interests, was a truly revolutionary innovation—and it seems it still is, today.

Many governments inside the United States are grossly violating the constitutional rights of citizens. Reforms need to come to the “criminal justice” system not only in Illinois, but nationwide.

Local law enforcement in Albuquerque has run amok. They are currently ignoring state law and

abusing their authority, creating more innocent victims and selfishly serving themselves, not the public interest.

For example, Susan is working at a bar in New Mexico. During her shift, a known drug dealer illegally breaks into her car and steals her vehicle. She files a police report and never hears anything back.

Later that month the drug enforcement unit raids that same drug dealer’s house.

While collecting evidence they notice Susan’s car. Instead of returning the vehicle, Susan is notified that she won’t be getting her car back because it is now evidence.

The criminal justice system has now created an innocent victim as a result of investigating a separate crime.

This is unacceptable and must stop now.

The governor and state legislature of New Mexico have already passed many reforms but many cities like Albuquerque are refusing to comply with the new protections.

Couple battles Illinois State Police after they seize $107,520 in cash



New Mexico refuses to follow their own laws

SEE NEW MEXICO — PAGE 16


The Institute for Justice has released a jaw-dropping report on this very exact issue.

Albuquerque officials have responded to these landmark reforms with defiance. Albuquerque has continued to run its lucrative civil asset forfeiture machine despite the legislature’s clear command that only criminal forfeiture is allowed.

This is clearly criminal and those officials who are creating new victims should see the other side of the justice system themselves.

While a heavily reformed version of civil asset forfeiture laws may be appropriate, they must serve justice and not create more victims in the process.

NEW MEXICOfrom PAGE 15

As early voting for the Texas Primary draws near, THSC is reminded of past elections and

past promises that were made by past candidates. Numerous promises have been made, and far too many have been broken.

Before the beginning of the 2015 campaign cycle, THSC committed to strengthening the vetting process for interviewing and endorsing candidates. THSC fights every day to defend home schooling and parental rights, but Texas needs legislators who are open, honest, and just as dedicated to this cause as THSC.

A prime example of why THSC is focusing and strengthening the vetting in this primary cycle is Texas State Rep. Debbie Riddle. Despite aligning herself with THSC values and principles in past races, Representative Riddle has begun to trend more and more left while moving closer and closer to House leadership in Austin. In addition to earning extremely low scores on several conservative scorecards in the past, including Texas Right to Life and Empower Texans, Representative Riddle especially betrayed the trust of THSC and many other conservative groups and individuals during the 2015 84th Texas Legislature.

First and foremost, Riddle was the primary roadblock for THSC’s House Bill 524, also known as the Texas Parental Rights Restoration Act, getting through the Texas House. This bill would have

closed a loophole in the Grandparent Access Statute that allows for single parents to lose their children to vindictive in-laws without evidence that the parents were unfit to raise their own children.

This past legislative session Representative Riddle was the swing vote in the Juvenile Justice and Family Issues committee in the Texas House when THSC’s bill came to a vote. Representative Riddle was the only Republican legislator on the committee to withhold her vote on the bill.

After bringing in numerous single parents to testify about how this issue had devastated their families, as well as several family law experts who identified for the legislators what the key problems were with the law, Representative Riddle informed the committee that she had changed her vote and could no longer support the legislation.

Responding immediately, THSC’s lobby team followed up continually with Riddle’s office, attempting to get an audience with her before the critical deadline for getting bills out of committee. During those two weeks Representative Riddle was consistently unavailable for an audience and was unable to even offer information about her specific concerns on the bill.

THSC’s lobby team made visits, left messages, and dropped off literature with office staff, explaining changes that had been made that might address her concerns (of which Riddle still had never articulated). After nearly two weeks of attempts to reach Representative Riddle,

THSC finally got word that she was willing to support the bill again.

Those who worked the legislative process daily, like Representative Riddle, knew clearly that the two weeks it had taken to regain her support had been the same critical two weeks needed to meet with other legislators to gain their support and get the bill to the House Floor on time. As a result of these delays caused by Representative Riddle, the bill died in committee.

Untold numbers of parents in Texas will be devastated by this draconian statute before the next legislative session because of these tactics by Representative Riddle.

In addition to this, Rep. Debbie Riddle effectively killed HB 562, which is known as American Law for American Courts. This bill would have prevented Texas courts from using foreign law over Texas law in our legal system. For someone who so clearly states on her website that she “wholeheartedly agree(s) that no foreign law should supersede Texas law, Federal law, or our Constitution,” it seems inconsistent that she would cease to support this bill authored by Texas State Representative Jeff Leach with the help of Texas Eagle Forum.

Last, but certainly not least, one of Representative Riddle’s other high profile mistakes during the 84th Legislative Session was on Senate Bill 575 in the House Calendars committee. The bill, which was authored by Texas State Sen. Larry Taylor with the help of Texas Right to Life, would have prohibited insurance companies from covering abortions in the state of Texas. According to Texas Right to Life, Representative Riddle originally voted for the bill to not be placed on the

calendar in order for a hearing on the Texas House Floor to be scheduled. Once she had made this critical mistake, she quickly asked the chairman for a second vote. This time, she reversed her vote, and the bill was placed in the middle of the calendar. The damage had already been done, however, because the bill was placed so low on the calendar, it would not be heard before the deadline.

Conservatives all over the state are fed up with empty promises made by false conservatives and the time has come when legislators are to be held accountable for their decisions. There is no place in the legislature for politicians who lie and who do not properly represent their conservative constituents.

How to Stop Rep. Debbie Riddle?The best way to stop a false

conservative is to vote in a true conservative. Therefore, the Texas Home School Coalition is proud to endorse Valoree Swanson over Representative Riddle for House District 150. Valoree is a home school mom and a dedicated and conservative public servant who has been endorsed by countless other conservative groups and individuals.

Valoree is an example that everyone on the Hill in Austin can look to as a truthful and transparent candidate for State Representative. As a parent, we know that she has the best intentions for furthering parental rights in the State of Texas. As a home school mom, we know that she believes in the home school movement and that she will fight in Austin for home school rights.

We are more than excited to see how Valoree Swanson will help us in Austin to continue to Keep Texas Families Free.

How to Stop a False ConservativeBY STEPHEN HOWSLEY THSC.ORG

This is the season when some home schoolers begin to ask THSC why we “do all this political stuff.” We

are in the midst of the primary election time when voters will choose what will become not only the political party nominations for local, state, and federal offices, but what will also be in many cases the actual elected official.

While many of us parents would like to focus on the important issues of raising our children in the admonition of the Lord and educating them for life, I and many other Texas parents learned 30 years ago that we ignore the process of

choosing those who represent us in our government at our own peril. These officials at every level can and often do make decisions that directly impact our rights as parents to direct the care, control, and upbringing of our children; and if we wait until there is a problem to help these officials understand parental rights and home education, it will be too late.

Over and over again THSC finds that in dealing with bureaucrats at the local, state, and national level, it is the elected officials who understand and support parental rights and home schooling who intervene with us to resolve attacks or acts of discrimination against home school

families. But, if we have not elected those officials into office, they cannot help us. Therefore, it is not only our right as citizens to choose our elected officials, it is our duty as it is critical that we do so in order to protect our freedoms.

That is one of the reasons that THSC has sued the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) in Austin district court over its rule change designed to limit, inhibit, and chill the rights groups like ours have in helping elect people to office.

We are urging home schoolers in Texas to help us by not only voting for candidates who understand and support the rights of parents (see THSC endorsements), but also teaching their children what it means to practice good citizenship by helping people register to vote, elect officials to office, and lobby

How to Teach Good CitizenshipBY TIM LAMBERT THSC.ORG

SEE CITIZENSHIP — PAGE 17


CITIZENSHIPfrom PAGE 16

BY SARAH CRAWFORD TEXASRIGHTTOLIFE.COM

Recall in 2015 when a Texas “Republican” stood on the floor of the Texas House and proclaimed

preborn babies with perceived disabilities should be “dealt with?”

Texas Right to Life does. Remember when that same Texas

“Republican” was publicly praised by Planned Parenthood the very next day for the shocking speech?

We remember that, too.Pro-Life Texans in House District 59

are continually lied to by the man who is supposed to represent their conservative values. An integral part of conservative values is respecting the sanctity of every Life. J.D. Sheffield, a doctor, touts supposed Pro-Life convictions and even claims he “helped to pass new pro-life laws.” But his dismal record in Austin reveals the truth.

On House Bill 2510, Representative Matt Schaefer (R-Tyler) offered a much-needed Pro-Life amendment to close dangerous loopholes in Pro-Life laws in Texas. In contrast, J.D. Sheffield voted to kill the Pro-Life amendment. If attempting to block Pro-Life amendments aimed at protecting disabled preborn babies is his version of passing new Pro-Life laws, then J.D. Sheffield excelled.

Pro-Life voters in House District 59 and J.D. Sheffield’s definitions of Pro-Life are obviously different. When Planned Parenthood praises legislators, liberal democrats are usually the ones accepting their accolades. However, J.D. Sheffield’s floor speech in support of allowing disabled preborn babies to be brutally dismembered through late abortion prompted a statewide email from Planned Parenthood applauding Sheffield’s stance.

Passing Pro-Life laws does not mean abandoning preborn babies and their

families when love and support are needed the most. Passing Pro-Life laws means giving babies, even babies deemed imperfect by some, a chance to live for as long as they are able – and protecting their right to do so.

During that torturous stump speech on the floor of the Texas House (starting at the 4:14:00 time stamp), Sheffield not only claimed these babies should be “dealt with,” but he asked “Why should the heavy hand of government come into that most heartrending decision?”

What exactly does passing new Pro-Life laws accomplish if our government is not allowed to protect the most basic right we have – the Right to Life – even for preborn babies with disabilities?

J.D. Sheffield is not concerned with passing new Pro-Life laws, and he is not concerned with representing the strong Pro-Life views of voters in House District 59. Sheffield would rather protect his name with the Austin establishment and look for more ways to garner Planned Parenthood’s praise.

Planned Parenthood would rather have J.D. Sheffield. Voters in House District 59 know Brent Graves, the true Pro-Life alternative, is ready to fight for the lives of all Texans.

DISHONORABLE MENTION Planned Parenthood praises “Republican” state representative, J.D. Sheffield

those officials once they are elected. This is how Texas families protect and promote our freedom to teach our children at home.

THSC designed the THSC Rangers program to provide opportunity to Texas families in teaching good citizenship to their children. The program achieves this purpose in two ways:

• Teaches young people about how government works--not just from an academic standpoint, but practically as well. THSC Ranger Clubs are a fun and very effective way to teach our children good citizenship that will benefit them for a lifetime.

• Helps in the election of those who believe in parental rights. This educational process will “be there” when we need help in Keeping Texas Families Free.

Irishman John Philpot Curran said, "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance,” and over the last three decades in Texas we have certainly found that to be true for parental rights and home school freedom. Please consider helping us in this ongoing battle for freedom by voting and establishing or joining THSC Ranger Clubs in your area.


TEXAS SENATE:

Bryan Hughes SD 1Brent Mayes SD 24

TEXAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES:

Bryan Slaton HD 2Stuart Spitzer HD 4Cole Hefner HD 5Matt Schaefer HD 6David Watts HD 7Thomas McNutt HD 8Jess Fields HD 14Mark Keough HD 15Brent Golemon HD 17Keith Strahan HD 18James White HD 19Terry Wilson HD 20Rick Miller HD 26Paul Workman HD 47Larry Smith HD 54Molly White HD 55Philip Eby HD 58

Brent Graves HD 59Mike Lang HD 60Tan Parker HD 63Ron Simmons HD 65Matt Shaheen HD 66Jeff Leach HD 67James Frank HD 69Scott Sanford HD 70Chris Carnohan HD 71Josh Crawford HD 81Dustin Burrows HD 83Jim Landtroop HD 84Jodie Laubenberg HD 89Stephanie Klick HD 91Jonathan Stickland HD 92Matt Krause HD 93Tony Tinderholt HD 94Bill Zedler HD 96Bo French HD 99Pat Fallon HD 106Jonathan Boos HD 113Dan Morenoff HD 114Matt Rinaldi HD 115Jeff Judson HD 121Kevin Roberts HD 126

TEXAS HOME SCHOOL COALITION 2016 PRIMARY ENDORSEMENTS

TEXAS RIGHT TO LIFE 2016 PRIMARY ENDORSEMENTS

STATE SENATE

Byran Hughes District 4Brandon Creighton* District 11Larry Taylor* District 18Lois Kolkhorst* District 24Brent Mayes District 28Charles Perry*

STATE HOUSE

District 2 Bryan SlatonDistrict 3 Cecil Bell Jr.*District 4 Stuart Spitzer*District 5 Cole HefnerDistrict 6 Matt Schaefer*District 7 David WattsDistrict 8 Thomas McNuttDistrict 9 Chris Paddie*District 10 John Wray*District 12 Kyle Kacal*District 13 Leighton Schubert*District 14 Jess FieldsDistrict 15 Mark Keough*District 18 Keith Strahan James MorrisonDistrict 19 James White*District 20 Terry WilsonDistrict 21 Dade Phelan*District 23 Wayne Faircloth*District 24 Greg Bonnen*District 25 Dennis Bonnen*

Partial list at time of printing. Please see www.TexasRightToLife.com for full endorsement listing. “*” = incumbent~~ Races in which no Pro-Life candidate is running are not listed. ~~ Other candidates and incumbents who did not undergo the Texas Right to Life PAC endorsement process are not listed. All candidates and incumbents listed are endorsed by Texas Right to Life PAC.

District 26 Rick Miller*District 29 Ed Thompson*District 33 John Keating District 44 John Keumpel*District 45 Jason Isaac*District 47 Paul Workman*District 55 Molly White*District 56 Charles “Doc” Anderson*District 59 Brent GravesDistrict 60 Mike LangDistrict 61 Phil King*District 62 Larry Phillips*District 63 Tan Parker*District 64 Read KingDistrict 65 Ron Simmons*District 66 Matt Shaheen*District 67 Jeff Leach*District 68 Drew Springer*District 69 James B. Frank*District 70 Scott Sanford*District 82 Tom Craddick*District 83 Dustin Burrows*District 84 John Frullo* Jim LandtroopDistrict 85 Phil Stephenson*District 86 John Smithee*District 87 Walter “Four” Price*District 89 Jodie Laubenberg*District 91 Stephanie Klick*District 92 Jonathan Stickland*District 93 Matt Krause*District 94 Tony Tinderholt*

District 96 Bill Zedler*District 97 Craig Goldman*District 98 Giovanni Capriglione*District 99 Bo FrenchDistrict 105 Rodney Anderson*District 106 Pat Fallon*District 108 Morgan Meyer*District 112 Angie Chen Button*District 114 Dan MorenoffDistrict 115 Matt Rinaldi*District 121 Jeff Judson Sheila BeanDistrict 122 Lyle Larson*District 126 Kevin RobertsDistrict 127 Dan Huberty*District 129 Dennis Paul*District 130 Tom OliversonDistrict 132 Mike Schofield*District 133 Jim Murphy*District 134 David PalmerDistrict 135 Gary Elkins*District 138 Dwayne Bohac*District 150 Valoree Swanson

STATEWIDE

Justice, Supreme CourtPlace 3 Michael Massengale

Judge, Court of Criminal AppealsPlace 2 Ray Wheless

JUDICIAL

Harris CountyJustice, 14th Court of Appeals District, Place 2 Bud Wiesedeppe

District Judge, 127th Judicial DistrictSarahjane Swanson

District Judge, 129th Judicial DistrictSophia Mafrige

District Judge, 165th Judicial DistrictDebra Ibarra Mayfield*

District Judge, 177th Judicial DistrictRyan Patrick*

District Judge, 179th Judicial DistrictKristin M. Guiney*

District Judge, 333rd Judicial DistrictJoseph “Tad” Halbach*

District Judge, 334th Judicial DistrictGrant Dorfman*

District Judge, 338th Judicial DistrictBrock Thomas*

DALLAS COUNTY

Justice, 5th Court of Appeals District, Place 7 David John Schenck

District Judge, 416th Judicial DistrictAndrea Bouressa

CHEROKEE COUNTY

District Judge, 2nd Judicial DistrictChris Day

Dan Huberty HD 127Briscoe Cain HD 128Tom Oliverson HD 130Mike Schofield HD 132Dwayne Bohac HD 138Valoree Swanson HD 150

TEXAS SUPREME COURT:

Michael Massengale Place 3Rick Green Place 5Eva Guzman Place 9

TEXAS CRIMINAL COURT OF APPEALS:

Ray Wheless Place 2Brent Webster Place 5

COLLIN COUNTY DISTRICT COURTS:

Jim Pikl 401st District Court

GALVESTON COUNTY DISTRICT COURTS:

Wayne Mallia 56th District Court

HARRIS COUNTY DISTRICT COURTS:

Fred Shuchart 215th District Court

TERRANT COUNTY DISTRICT COURTS:

Traci Hutton 96th District CourtBrooke Allen 348th District CourtPatricia Bennett 360th District Court

ROCKWALL COUNTY JUSTICE OF THE PEACE:

David White Precinct 3

COLLIN COUNTY COMMISSIONER:

Chris Hill Precinct 3

TARRANT COUNTY SHERIFF:

Bill Waybourn

Partial list at time of printing. Please see THSC.org for full endorsement listing.


TEXAS VALUES ACTION 2016 PRIMARY ENDORSEMENTS

PRESIDENT

Ted Cruz

TEXAS SUPREME COURT

Place 5: Rick Green

STATE SENATE

District 1: Bryan Hughes

STATE HOUSE

District 4: Stuart Spitzer

District 5: Cole Hefner

District 6: Matt Schaefer

District 7: David Watts

District 8: Thomas McNutt

District 14: Jess Fields

District 15: Mark Keough

District 19: James White

District 33: John Keating

District 55: Molly White

District 60: Mike Lang

District 66: Matt Shaheen

District 67: Jeff Leach

District 70: Scott Sanford

District 83: Dustin Burrows

District 91: Stephanie Klick

District 92: Jonathan Stickland

District 93: Matt Krause

District 94: Tony Tinderholt

District 96: Bill Zedler

District 99: Bo French

District 105: Rodney Anderson

District 106: Pat Fallon

District 114: Dan Morenoff

This is the list at the time of publication, to see a full list of Texas Values endorse-ments please visit their website: txvalue-saction.org/endorsements

District 115: Matt Rinaldi

District 121: Jeff Judson

District 126: Kevin Roberts

District 128: Briscoe Cain

District 129: Dennis Paul

District 130: Tom Oliverson

District 134: David Palmer

District 138: Dwayne Bohac

District 150: Valoree Swanson


INSIDE

ON THE SCORECARD

PO Box 200248

Austin, TX 78720

CO

REC

AR

D

NELSON SPEAR Ready To Fight

PG 14

PG 15 Straus Brands Conservative Priorities as ‘Side Issues’

Gary Gates: Hopes Seventh Run Is His Lucky Number

PG 10 Houston Chronicle Blogger Caught in Blatant Lie

PG 2

Non-P

rofit Org.

U.S

. Postage

Paid

San A

ntonio, TX

Perm

it #244

— PAGE 8

PRESIDENTIAL ENDORSEMENT

Senator Ted Cruz

STATEWIDE JUDICIAL ENDORSEMENTS

Supreme Court of Texas, Place 3Michael Massengale

Supreme Court of Texas, Place 9Eva Guzman

Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 2Ray Wheless

Court of Criminal Appeals, Place 5Brent Webster

LEGISLATIVE ENDORSEMENTS

NAME DISTRICT

Bryan Hughes SD 1

Brandon Creighton SD 4

Brian Birdwell SD 22

Brent Mayes SD 24

Bryan Slaton HD 2

Stuart Spitzer HD 4

Cole Hefner HD 5

Matt Schaefer HD 6

David Watts HD 7

Thomas McNutt HD 8

Jess Fields HD 14

Keith Strahan HD 18

Terry Wilson HD 20

John Keating HD 33

Jay Wiley HD 47

Larry Smith HD 54

Molly White HD 55

Philip Eby HD 58

Brent Graves HD 59

Mike Lang HD 60

Read King HD 64

Matt Shaheen HD 66

Jeff Leach HD 67

Scott Sanford HD 70

Kyle Biedermann HD 73

Josh Crawford HD 81

Dustin Burrows HD 83

Jim Landtroop HD 84

Stephanie Klick HD 91

Jonathan Stickland HD 92

Matt Krause HD 93

Tony Tinderholt HD 94

William Zedler HD 96

Bo French HD 99

Rodney Anderson HD 105

Pat Fallon HD 106

Jonathan Boos HD 113

Dan Morenoff HD 114

Matt Rinaldi HD 115

Kevin Roberts HD 126

Briscoe Cain HD 128

Tom Oliverson HD 130

David Palmer HD 134

Valoree Swanson HD 150

REGIONAL JUDICIAL ENDORSEMENTS

David Schenck5th Court of Appeals, Place 7

Bud Wiesedeppe14th Court of Appeals, Place 2

Jim Pikl 401st District Court, Collin County

Andrea Thompson416th District Court, Collin County

Wayne Mallia56th District Court, Galveston County

Brooke Allen 348th District Court, Tarrant County

TEXANS FOR FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY 2016 PRIMARY ENDORSEMENTS

— PAGE 3

SCOTX ELECTION REVIEW

Is Criminal Justice Reform a Policy Issue for Republicans or Democrats?

Documents

Vol. 1 - Issue 23 Vol. 2 - Issue 2€¦ · collecting autographed baseballs. BY LAUREN LAWSON EMPOWERTEXANS.COM BY MICHAEL QUINN SULLIVAN EMPOWERTEXANS.COM NELSON SPEAR READY FOR