GOP Primary - U.S. House District TX-10 – Discussion Thread

11 February 2004 | PetroniDE

[PetroniDE]

The Texas primaries are set for Tuesday, 9 March 2004. The U.S. Congressional districts in Texas have been significantly altered due to the re-districting battle last year. One heavily altered district is TX-10 which stretches from the western suburbs of Houston to Austin. Since the current office holder (Lloyd Doggett-D) is running in district TX-25, this is one district that many expect to switch from Democrat to Republican.

There are eight (at-least) GOP candidates for this office. Most of these candidates have little name recognition, and many people voting in this race were in other districts for the 2002 election, this thread is started to help gather and share information with fellow voters. Web-sites for the candidates are linked in alphabetical order.

Candidate web-sites are linked in alphabetical order. Chances of a run-off (to be held Saturday 3 April) are high, since it is unlikely anyone will get 50%+1 of the votes; we will deal with any potential run-offs later.

John Devine

Pat Elliott

John Kelley

Mike McCaul

Dave Phillips

Ben Streusand

Brad Tashenberg

Teresa Doggett Taylor

[esarlls3]

PetroniDE, Thanks for the thread.

Here is what I know so far:

I have had extended conversations with McCaul and Streusand. And a couple of short ones with Devine and Phillips. I have only seen one piece of mail from Tashenberg and nothing from Elliott, Kelley or Taylor.

McCaul and Streusand were both out early courting Precinct chairs and Republican groups.

Streusand and Phillips are self-financing to avoid spending time on fund-raising.

I'd rate the one's I know something about in this order:
Best Candidates: McCaul and Streusand
OK Candidates: Devine and Phillips
Poor Candidates: Tashenberg

It appears that McCaul and Streusand are the only ones campaigning hard. I have seen signs for Devine and Phillips but little else. The rest appear to have given up or don't know how to run a campaign.

One of my hot buttons is Tax Reform. On this issue McCaul and Streusand are the only ones to state they support fundamental tax reform including eliminating the IRS. McCaul has publicly endorsed the FairTax (HR25) but I have not seen it mentioned by name in his campaign materials. He also has a consultant on staff who worked on the FairTax. Streusand describes the FairTax in his campaign materials but has not mentioned it by name.

McCaul's Biography explains his positions at the Justice Department.

I have had an email dialog with McCaul (& his wife Linda). Email sent to Marc Cowart for Streusand was not answered. Even after I mentioned it to both of them at the Harris County Republican Party Executive Committee meeting. Email sent to Phillips and Devine was also not answered. That did not impress me.

In the end I feel McCaul and Streusand are both worthy candidates but support McCaul because he has been more responsive to me.

[NewsGal]

My vote would go to Teresa Doggett Taylor.

[DrewsDad]

I guess we'll have to drop the HAT on the last question since they haven't given approval to use their name. Which candidates can you take. I know people working with Streusand and Devine. Gracey, can you take Phillips(via Peggy?) and another one(or 2)? WOSG, do you have any contacts with the others? Let's try to get email responses by the 21st but we can post them when we get them and invite them to join a discussion later.

We probably ought to give them a little intro to FR to get them more interested(1,000+ Texas FReepers). How was it that the one reporter described FReepers after the Hillary FReep(Fierce ?? tribe)?

[Flyer]

I guess we'll have to drop the HAT on the last question since they haven't given approval to use their name.

Laugh. You have the Vice President's okay. Petroni? Bobby?

[DrewsDad]

"Freepers, a fierce, warlike tribe from the Free Republic organization--a fire-breathing conservative band of Internet brothers..." - Matt LaBash from The Weekly Standard Online

Foun it at: Hillary Goes to WalMart (Freepers Applauded!)

[PetroniDE]

Sorry for the delay in response. I am not certain if the chapter **CAN** endorse candidate(s) from a legal (i.e. 501) perspective.

I need help in answering that question; for that reason, I ping Diotima to this response.

[DrewsDad]

HOT never incorporated or whatever you call it, so we don't have to worry about it. I thought for sure I'd get a quicker response from you with the Kerry comment. I just remember you wearing that yankee football jersey. (C:

[diotima]

The non-profit restriction lies with the FRN. (I am referring to the FRN as a corporation, not associates of FRN.) A 501c4 must "demonstrate that it is organized exclusively to promote social welfare. However, because of the non-tax deductible status, such organizations can engage in lobbying for legislative change, but may not directly or indirectly participate or intervene in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office."

Those guidelines apply to the legal entity "FRN." (We can't spend our money on candidate endorsement and so on) However, there is no such thing as _______ Chapter of FRN, legally speaking. All the chapters are all part of freerepublic.com, FRN just provides tools and resources to the chapters that the chapters use. It was always set up this way, lest the chapters be restricted into impotence. We also help coordinate national projects and represent all the FR activism stuff in DC Jim passes along to us. (For instance, Nick Danger will be speaking at a Internet and Democracy conference coming up, we attend Grover Norquist's Wednesday meetings by invite to promote national projects and find out what all the other conservative organizations are doing, Nick was on the CPAC panel and so on...) So, the FRN has not come out ever in favor of any candidate or against any candidate (although personally, we all have opinions ;^) )

As long as the chapters do not spend more than $4999 (this is per the Network's corporate attorney) in candidate advocacy, you should be fine, and realistically the chapters aren't throwing around enough money to get on the FEC's radar.

[Gracey]

So do I hear you say that Ben Streusand is the best candidate? Is he pretty popular in the Houston area? Here in Austin I hear that Ben's the favorite and ahead in the polls but that it probably will be a runoff between McCaul and Streusand. What you think? What are the chances of Devine?

[Gracey]

I have a Texas ping list but I have no idea who lives in this congressional district, for I'm not sure what areas it covers.

[Bigun]

Gracy I'll tell you that If I were able to vote in that district I would vote for Streusand because he is NOT a lawyer and all the others, with any chance of beating Edwards in the fall, ARE lawyers. With me that is a BIG deal.

I wrote the following a LONG time ago (when X42 was president). It was published in several newspapers at the time and may be of interest to you.

James Madison, author of the US Constitution, wrote:

"No political truth is certainly of greater intrinsic value or is stamped with the authority of more enlightened patrons of liberty than that ... the accumulation of all powers legislative, executive and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."

To avoid the "same hands" accumulation of power, the Constitution incorporated a system of "separation of powers" and "checks and balances". This system created three separate branches of government. The Legislative (Congress), which makes the laws, the Judiciary (the Courts), which interprets the laws and the Executive (the Presidency), which enforces the laws. By separating the powers of government in this manner it was intended that each branch would serve as a "check" and "balance" to the powers of the other two. This was done in order to make certain that the government would never possess sufficient power to oppress the people. Our government currently looks like this: · The Judicial branch is, of necessity, composed of 100% lawyers · The executive office is currently held by a lawyer · And the within the 535 legislative seats of the U. S. Congress there are more lawyers than all other professions combined I would submit that Mr. Madison’s greatest fear has been realized despite his best effort (Via the Constitution) to prevent it. Lawyer/judges now make the laws, interpret the laws and enforce the laws and have effectively turned our Constitutional Republic into a Juristocracy, thus defeating the spirit, intent and purpose of the Constitution. Please understand that I hold the legal profession in very high regard and have no personal animosity toward either individual members or the profession in general. In fact, I believe that I am lucky enough to be able to count a number of the members of this honored profession as friends (at least until they read this!). That not withstanding, I will assure you that, because of my knowledge of the above, I would oppose any one of them vigorously, regardless of political party affiliation, should they EVER decide to run for elective office outside the Judicial branch of government. My hope is that those of you reading this, and thus now aware of the problem, will remember it the next time you are called upon to make choices in the election booth as well.

[Tall_Texan]

I was surprised to find out how my little lip near the Arboretum is part of District 10 and no Lamar Smith's district as it was last time. So I am trying to pay attention but I've been quite busy lately so I'm relying on others to do some of the homework.

As for the ads I've seen/heard running, Tashenburg and Streusand sing the tunes I most want sung. McCaul seems the most aggressive , best connected and my guess is he's also the Rove candidate which makes me a tad suspicious even though I've heard nothing bad.

Devine and Phillips are on the fringe. Teresa Doggett fought some windmill-tilting challenges against Lloyd Doggett so I admire her pluck for doing that but she's not the best of this admittedly solid field of candidates. I wish I could vote for about five of them. :)

The district itself should be called the "290 District" since HWY 290 seems to be what connects just about all these counties.

BTW, Gracey, I responded to your request for election judges and will be working a precinct up in Wells Branch for the primaries. I've done this before but it was like a decade ago.

I'll check out all these websites that some Freeper has wonderfully provided all the links for. I'll also have to find out who the Chronicle and Statesman endorse so I can make sure not to vote for their candidate.

[Gracey]

Gracey, can you take Phillips(via Peggy?) and another one(or 2)?

One problem is that I know little about these candidates (except for Devine & Doggett) or who's connected to them since it's not in my district.

But my real issue is, I hate to say this, but I don't have the heart to give candidates this long list of essay questions. I can't do it with good conscience. I'd prefer a YES NO and place for explanation if necessary. Sorry I feel this way. I just can't imagine even one candidate taking the time to answer this unless a staffer does so on a day with lots of time on his hands - with an election three weeks away. I know the intentions are good, and it's an EXCELLENT list of questions, but in the real world it's not practical. I'm sorry.

On another note, I just got kicked out of my precinct and will be in a brand new precinct since the Doggett/Smith divider goes down IH-35. Looks like I'm Pct Chair of a pct that I no longer live in, etc. Lot's of stuff going on... Also, will be working at the TCRP annual bash in a couple of days. Anyone else coming? Senator Hutchison is the speaker.

[Gracey]

Your post is rather interesting.... and SCARY!!!!! Thanks for sharing. Ugh .... to Laywers.

[Gracey]

Your post is rather interesting.... and SCARY!!!!! Thanks for sharing. Ugh .... to Laywers.

[Gracey]

Thanks for all those tid bits of info TT. It's nice to see you again. We miss you. So you're in 10. What a wonderful feeling. You can't go wrong no matter which one of these fine people is elected. Now I have Lamar Smith. good riddance Doggett.

I have to laugh at your "The 290 district." That's pretty good ... and you just educated me. It covers all that Republican farm land from Houston to Austin ...lol

I'm glad you'll be working as election judge. It won't be too hard. You'll catch on fast. The big difference from years ago is everything is computerized...so you'll be right at home. I think you will go to a "training" class also. Thanks for doing your duty.

Lastly, during the primary election, sometimes the papers do a fair job of selecting the BEST candidate. It's usually when they're lined up against a Democrat that things change. One pattern I noticed with the Houston Chronicle through the years is that in the General election, they will usually endorse the DemocRat when it's a close election. When it's a runaway, they endorse the obvious winner. It's rather weird.

[Gracey]

Thanks for the info, Dio.

[DrewsDad]

Are y'all in or should we change it?

[bobbyd]

Are y'all in or should we change it?

I don't see a problem. Count us in.

[Flyer]

Are y'all in

Go for it!