TX Primary Analysis (How RINO Gov. Perry nominated a Democrat environmental wacko to our courts)

email release | 3/12/04 | David Rogers

[GOPcapitalist]

Analysis of Third Court district voting results Smith / Green /Pemberton In the 3rd Court of Appeals area, three candidates for appellate courts were endorsed by Rick Perry, and two won.

The loser was Ernest Garcia. Why?

The one candidate on whose behalf Gov. Perry was most active was Paul William Green, who defeated Justice Steven Wayne Smith for the Supreme Court. The candidate who beat Ernest Garcia was William Paul "Bill" Green.

William Paul Green is a long-time Democrat and environmentalist whose commitment to the environment is so strong he rides a bus or bicycles to work rather than drive. Paul William Green is a 10-year San Antonio Appeals judge.

Paul Green out-spent Smith by a three-to-one margin. Garcia outspent Bill Green more than thirty-to-one. Pemberton out-spent his opponent by a similar margin.

Yet the results were strikingly different.

Not surprisingly, Paul Green won the majority of the counties - 14 of the 24 -- in the Third Court district. Bill Green won 22 of 24 counties. Pemberton won only 8 counties, but won populous Bell and Travis by large enough margins to carry the day.

Paul Green won his race in the Third by 3,352 votes. December 2003 Perry appointee Bob Pemberton, also endorsed by Perry also won his race by a similar margin (3,344). Despite vastly dissimilar inputs, Ernest Garcia lost to Bill Green by 4,923.

The Green Machine v. The Perry Machine

Did the name matter? Unquestionably. Was the outcome a result of anti-Hispanic bias? Probably not.

In the neighboring, and demographically similar, (Waco-based) 10th Court of Appeals, Felipe Reyna defeated challenger Lynnan Kendrick by 1,347 votes.

The name that mattered was Green.

Gov. Perry's Green, Paul Green, had lots of green ($) to spread around. He sent three mailers into all contested congressional districts, and some targeted counties, including Travis. In addition, Paul Green (HE) spent over $120,000 on radio ADS, and did direct automated phone calls on the first day of early voting and again on the Monday before election day.

And the phone calls that final Monday carried Rick Perry's voice, and emphasized his strong endorsement of Green.

This benefited Paul Green as it was meant to, but also benefited the other Green just below him on the ballot.

There was no rational reason why voters would choose Bill Green, and, as Reyna demonstrates, irrational reasons cannot explain the result. But the endorsement of Paul Green by a sitting governor, reinforced by a phone call the day before, does explain the otherwise inexplicable.

Bill Green made no public appearances whatsoever. Paul Green, like Smith, Garcia, and Pemberton, campaigned energetically.

Garcia was endorsed by Gov. Perry, Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, Agriculture Commissioner Susan Combs, Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams, and 23 of the 24 Republican county chairs in the Third Court. No other candidate came close to such a sweep of elected officials and activists (Smith swept the activists and lower officials) against Paul Green, while Paul Green picked up Sen. John Cornyn and the Combined Law Enforcement Association of Texas.)

Garcia sent out three mailers to most Republican voters, and a phone call to 31,000 active Republican households (the total vote was 77,659 in the Garcia/Green race, 74,658 in the Pemberton race, and 77,884 in the Smith/Green race. The Paul Green advertising apparently created an impression of familiarity in the minds of Bill Green voters, bringing at least an additional 4,001 to cast ballots where they had skipped the less publicized Pemberton race.

Smith v. Garcia

But what accounts for the fact that Bill Green won more counties than Paul Green?

Both Smith and Garcia sent mailers into the area, though Garcia sent more. Smith also advertised on the radio, while Garcia did direct automated phone calls. But Smith was a known elected official and public figure in much of the district while Garcia was not. Not only was Smith known statewide for his work for the plaintiffs in the Hopwood anti-race-preferences case, but he also had run just two years ago in the Republican primary, and fifteen months ago in the general election. Garcia's previous electoral experience was limited to Travis County IN 2000, so he was unknown to many voters across the 24-county area.

Garcia and Bill Green are both Travis County residents, and Garcia cleaned Green's clock in Travis County (1,715 vote advantage).

Perry v. Perry

It seems clear, then, that the Rick Perry recruitment and endorsement of Paul Green led directly to the Bill Green victory.

The irony here is enormous. Perry recruited Paul Green to avenge the loss of Perry appointee Xavier Rodriguez, a self-described moderate with no prior judicial experience appointed solely to allow Perry to claim the mantle of "Hispanic outreach" in his contest against the first ever Hispanic Democratic candidate for Governor. The result was the defeat of Ernest Garcia, an experienced judge whose conservatism has never been questioned - a judge, who, had Perry appointed him in Rodriguez's place in 2002, Smith would not have challenged.

Smith's campaign manager, in fact, appeared as a surrogate for Garcia, and actively worked to promote Garcia's candidacy across the 24-county region.

I know. I managed the Smith campaign. And Ernest Garcia is still the best man for the Republican nomination in the Third Court, place four.

Who is Bill Green?

I know that because I know Bill Green. I met with Bill Green and tried to talk him out of the race, and Green lied to me and said he would withdraw.

And now Rick Perry's machinations have led to a hard-core environmentalist, who voted in Democrat primaries until 1998, and who worked for left-liberal Democrat state representative Steve Wolens (D-Dallas), being selected as the Republican nominee.

He will lose. He will lose to a Democrat who is more conservative than he is.

The result will be that the Third Court of Appeals, the most powerful intermediate appellate court in Texas, stays divided 3-3. Had Garcia been elected (and Pemberton retained), the Third Court, which hears all appeals from lawsuits involving any state agency, would have been in Republican hands for the first time ever.

This court is a critical chokepoint for Democrats who want to stop or delay Republican legislative, administrative and executive reforms.

Now, thanks to Rick Perry, that chokepoint will stay in Democratic hands.

[DrewsDad]

We can blame Perry for ousting Smith and unintentionally ousting Garcia, but the real problem lies with the Republican Party structure.

"What we have here is a failure to communicate."

The state and local party officials need to do a much better job of informing the Republican voters. I'll give the Travis County Chairman credit for spotting the name-confusion possibility and doing an automated call supporting Garcia and pointing out that Bill Green is not a Republican.

Maybe someone can share what happened in Bell County which supported both Garcia and Smith.

Now, WHY did the other counties fail to communicate this information to the voters?

[Xenalyte]

Anyone know what happened in the Rondon-McCally race, the other Hispanic incumbent that was primaried?

According to the Comical, "State District Judge Reece Rondon was narrowly unseated by challenger Sharon McCally."

[Xenalyte]

I'll take Carole Keeton any day of the week, because I know her history and that she is a true Republican, and comes from a large family of Republicans. I also knew her father and I have a great deal of respect for him, and her sons obviously have done well, working directly for President Bush.

If this is the case, and I'm not saying it isn't, why does she come across as such a media whore?

[Humidston]

Thanks for the ping, GOP. With this news, I can see why that rumor was swirling about Perry. What a toad!

[Richard Kimball]

I know Carol Keeton Rylander McLellan also. I would probably support her in the primary over Perry. At this time, though, the primaries are over, and we should focus on this November.

[JohnnyZ]

According to the Comical, "State District Judge Reece Rondon was narrowly unseated by challenger Sharon McCally."

Yeah, but I'm wondering what happened? How strong were McCally's and Rondon's relative campaigns? Why did Rondon lose when Guzman, Reyna, and Carter won?

[Redbob]

Greg Abbott or Jerry Patterson?
That sounds great! Where do I sign up?

But if the choice is Perry vs Hutchison, I'd hold my nose and vote for Perry, as the lesser of two weasels.

Perry is even pushing for a tax increase, masquerading as a state property tax that would be "offset" by "local prpoerty tax reductions" - is anybody buying that crock?
That the counties would cut property taxes?

At least with our current system, local people get to vote on local taxes; with a statewide property tax, what incentive would say the folks down along the Rio have to EVER reject a statewide property tax increase?

[af_vet_rr]

If this is the case, and I'm not saying it isn't, why does she come across as such a media whore?

I think she does it deliberately, and I think she does it to put certain people on notice. Her rejection of the budget was probably carefully orchestrated. Look at what she said about a year ago when she rejected it : "I am here today to fulfill my responsibility. To do otherwise would violate my constitutional duty, and that I will never do."

She's also tossing flames around in the media over Perry and others trying to have her responsibilities moved over to the legislature or govenor's office, kind of a "Rick Perry wants to have the fox guarding the hen house and I'm not going to stand quietly by" strategy. This would play well in 2006.

Perry should not have crossed her over those responsibilities, for several reasons, the least of which he could find himself running against her or Senator Hutchison. He'll find that all those things he did for Tom DeLay won't help him out - DeLay will stay far far away from that struggle, because he values his job too much.

[Bigun]

It is my belief that the Republican Party could successfully fight off a lawsuit of that type based upon a relatively recent precedent in which the Arkansas Democrats were allowed to refuse to seat Lyndon LaRouche delegates at their convention even though they had won delegate slots under state law. The premise of that ruling was that political parties are PRIVATE organizations and can accordingly choose their own candidates. Laws that prevent them from doing so are therefore unconstitutional.

Without even going into the political considerations involved with such a move, I would point out the fact that you left out four CRITICAL words in what you said above.

If it were modified to read:

It is my belief that the Republican Party could successfully fight off a lawsuit of that type IF THEY WANTED TO...

it would be correct IMHO!

[WOSG]

Yes. Every single activist and local activist group was on Smith's side. This include CTRA of which I am a member and which I made an impassioned plea to support Smith. In fact, I didnt meet a single person who was pro-Green, except I guess when Scott Spears spoke for Green at the Austin Repub meeting 2 weeks back.

But the Green fundraisers had James Huffines as the 'treasurer' and a lot of familiar big-money names attached, not just the law firms.
Smith's endorsement list was mostly Cultural Consevatives (eg eagle forum people). Green got the RINO ex-supreme court members (Enoch), Cornyn, etc. Smith had no comparables from theestablishment except Kay B H. By "everyone" I should have said "everyone in the establishment/RINO side seems to have endorsed Green" ... and should have added "NOBODY gave a choerent and correct explanation as to why Smith was undeserving of re-election".

[WOSG]

" It is my belief that the Republican Party could successfully fight off a lawsuit of that type based upon a relatively recent precedent in which the Arkansas Democrats were allowed to refuse to seat Lyndon LaRouche delegates at their convention even though they had won delegate slots under state law. The premise of that ruling was that political parties are PRIVATE organizations and can accordingly choose their own candidates. Laws that prevent them from doing so are therefore unconstitutional."

Great!

Let's lobby for this. Here's my thought of how it should work:
1. A super-majority of the Texas SREC (maybe 3/4s, 2/3rds, or unanamous) declares the vote in question due to voter error, shows evidence of voter error (we get some affidavits from Repub primary voters who voted for Bill Green and didnt know he was a Lib Dem and woefully regret their error) and calls upon the State to renominate in the State convention.

2. The delegates that cover the area of the 3rd court of appeals first vote to affirm that the vote in question should be thrown out, then after affirming that, they caucus to nominate and then elect the true GOP nominee.
3. Ernest Garcia is placed into nomination and then selected as the true candidate.

This can be tried on Smith, but IMHO that would be schismatic in a way that fixing hte Garcia/ Bill Green race wouldnt be.

"It is my belief that the Republican Party could successfully fight off a lawsuit of that type IF THEY WANTED TO..."

Here's how it should work: The Chair (Tina Benkhiser) and the SREC are the ones who need to be lobbied on this. They are the ones who could call an emergency meeting, change the party rules, and get Bill Green thrown off the ballot.

We can make the case on Bill Green because it was a clear case of "voter error". We can verify that by finding out some Republicans who voted for Green and see if they know what they voted for.

[WOSG]

You are ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT!!!

I can tell you why agendas are mis-prioritized, but that would be better a personal discussion.

[WOSG]

Bush 41?!?!

pleeze.

I'm missing Armey, Gramm and Newt real bad these days. But not 41.

[Bigun]

I will bounce this off my SREC reps this weekend.

[TxRep]

How about Michael Williams for Senate or Governor?

[mabelkitty]

Perhaps Perry really was being extorted over those rumors and this was a concession.

[WOSG]

I am studying the election code tosee what is up:

http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/eltoc.html

unfortunately, it is pretty clear, so only a constitutional challenge to see could make the rule go through, and the RPT rules say that they should obey the laws ... so ...

§ 172.001. NOMINATING BY PRIMARY ELECTION
REQUIRED. Except as otherwise provided by this code, a political
party's nominees in the general election for offices of state and
county government and the United States Congress must be nominated
by primary election, held as provided by this code, if the party's
nominee for governor in the most recent gubernatorial general
election received 20 percent or more of the total number of votes
received by all candidates for governor in the election.

Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 211, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1986.

[WOSG]

see my previous post to Bigun.

what is the exact name of the case you mentioned? the arkansas case?

Do you really think the texas section 172 requiring primary election could be overturned?

[GOPcapitalist]

what is the exact name of the case you mentioned? the arkansas case? Do you really think the texas section 172 requiring primary election could be overturned

I'll have to do some research to find it, but yes - I do think that the Republican Party could wage a successful challenge to the Texas laws on the grounds that they are a private organization. It could also be argued that the prcoess of regulating the party's nominating process is an infringement upon the free speech of the party itself.

[WOSG]

"I'll have to do some research to find it, but yes - I do think that the Republican Party could wage a successful challenge to the Texas laws on the grounds that they are a private organization. It could also be argued that the prcoess of regulating the party's nominating process is an infringement upon the free speech of the party itself."

I am not as hopeful. I cant find any case law overturning
primary election law. delegation selectoin to a convention is much more narrow than nomination by primary.

I did find this - McConnell v FEC, and you know how 1st amendment rights of parties fared there:
http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/fec/mcconnellfec050203jhop.pdf

OTOH, there *is* hope if this is Texas statute, and we have the Texas lege on our side: We could add a provision that allows for party selection "if there is clear voter error that puts the election result in question as to being a true reflection of informed voter choice". But whether that could be done in a timely fashion ... nope.