Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

August 7th, 2017:

Dan Patrick hates Texas’ cities

I have so many things to say about this.

City governments, particularly those led by Democrats, are to blame for problems nationwide, Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick said during a nationally televised interview Friday.

“People are happy with their governments at their state level, they’re not with the city,” said Patrick, a Republican, in an interview with Fox Business Network. He was responding to a question about gubernatorial races.

“Our cities are still controlled by Democrats,” he added. “And where do we have all our problems in America? Not at the state level run by Republicans, but in our cities that are mostly controlled by Democrat mayors and Democrat city council men and women. That’s where you see liberal policies. That’s where you see high taxes. That’s where you see street crime.”

1. Just as a reminder, the Mayors of Fort Worth and El Paso are Republicans, and the previous Mayor of Dallas ran in the Republican primary for US Senate in 2012. Among the Mayors who signed a letter to Greg Abbott complaining about his anti-city agenda are those of Amarillo, Arlington, Denton, Frisco, Irving, Lubbock, McKinney, Plano, and Sugar Land.

2. Also as a reminder, the five biggest metro areas in Texas are among the best economic performers in the state, with the Austin/Round Rock MSA leading the way. Yes, that’s the entire metro area and not just the city of Austin, but let’s be honest – if Austin weren’t the thriving economic hub that it is, Round Rock would still be the sleepy little rural town it was as recently as 1990.

3. Is anyone still wondering what our state leadership was going to do once they no longer had a Democratic President to scapegoat? I think this has been obvious for a few months now, but there should not be any doubt if there had been any. I do wonder how vigorous the anti-city jihad would be if Hillary Clinton – clearly the greater evil to them in any equation – had won.

4. For all the attacks on local control that Abbott and Patrick have been leveling so far, there’s nothing stopping them from going whole hog and abolishing the concept of a home rule city, which is what gives cities the authority to write their own ordinances. Indeed, one of Patrick’s pet Angry Old Man Senators – I forget if it was Don Huffines or Bob Hall; they’re both basically the same person – filed a bill this session to do just that. If cities are so lousy at governance and the state is so great at it, then why not just get rid of them and let everything they do now fall to the state, the counties, and the private sector? I’ll bet that would do wonders for the state’s economy.

5. Going back to point #1, Democrats need to figure out how to make more inroads in these more Republican cities. It doesn’t have to be an explicitly partisan thing – the old saw about potholes being neither Democratic nor Republican still means something – just put some effort into identifying and encouraging people who might make good candidates to run. Having such people get elected and do a good job will if nothing else provide local examples of successful Democrats in heavily Republican areas.

6. How many different constituencies can Dan Patrick (and to a slightly lesser extent Greg Abbott) insult and ignore and vilify before he starts to lose a significant level of support? To put it another way, how many members of these “vilified and insulted by Dan Patrick” constituencies will continue to vote for him anyway, and how many will decide that enough is enough? I feel like there needs to be some carefully targeted polling done.

7. Having said all this, I can’t help but feel like I’ve been trolled, and that this whole exercise was the talk radio equivalent of one of those “best/worst cities for x” clickbait stories that no one can seem to resist. If so, then I admit it: You got me, Dan Patrick. Well played. RG Ratcliffe has more.

Gina Ortiz Jones

We have our first declared challenger in CD23.

Gina Ortiz Jones

U.S. Rep. Will Hurd, R-Helotes, is getting his first major Democratic challenger for re-election in Texas’ swing 23rd congressional district.

Gina Ortiz Jones, a former Air Force intelligence officer, is entering the race Wednesday, wading into a potentially crowded primary field for a shot at Hurd, who is widely viewed as the most vulnerable Republican member of Congress from Texas.

Jones said she was inspired to come home to San Antonio and run for Congress after witnessing up close the opening months of Donald Trump’s presidency as a staffer in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which operates from within the Executive Office of the President.

“These policies were directly threatening the opportunities” I had growing up, said Jones, a first-generation American. “To me, it was quite clear that I needed to serve my country and my community in a different way.”

A graduate of John Jay High School in San Antonio, Jones attended Boston University on a ROTC scholarship and served in the Air Force from 2003-2006, deploying to Iraq. After a stint in the private sector, she went to work for the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency in 2008, ultimately becoming a special adviser to the deputy director. In November, she moved to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, where she worked until June.

[…]

Although Jones is the first major Democrat to launch a challenge against Hurd for 2018, at least three others are considering a run. They include Judy Canales, a former Obama and Clinton appointee; Jay Hulings, a federal prosecutor from San Antonio; and former U.S. Rep. Pete Gallego, the Alpine Democrat who represented the district from 2013-2015 and unsuccessfully challenged Hurd last year.

You can find a brief bio of Gina Ortiz Jones here; scroll down a bit. I received a press release with a much longer bio after I did my initial draft of this post, so it’s beneath the fold. Her campaign website is here and her campaign Facebook page is here; both are still bare bones, but one presumes that will change shortly.

As for other candidates, Pete Gallego has said he is seriously considering running again, but has yet to take the plunge. Canales and Hulings, I have heard nothing about, and no one has done any fundraising yet. Which is not that big a deal, as there will be plenty of national support for this race, but sooner is always better than later.

Like many other Democrats jumping into these races, Jones looks impressive, and is also younger than I am, which Lord knows we could use more of. She joins MJ Hegar as a veteran who is now a candidate. This could be a very interesting primary, as Gallego (of whom I am very fond) tends to lean towards the centrist side of things. Regardless, I don’t know how you can look at the large and growing crop of solid candidates we have running and not get excited by them.

(more…)

Still no word on what Pasadena will do with the redistricting appeal

We’re waiting.

Because the ruling went against the city, Pasadena is required to pay legal costs to attorneys for that group, the Mexican American Legal Defense Education Fund. In addition, the city’s fees to its legal representatives at Bickerstaff, Heath, Delgado and Acosta now total approximately $2.8 million as it pursues the appeal.

[…]

The council voted 5-3 on Aug. 1 to pay $45,585 to the Bickerstaff firm, bringing the total paid in legal fees over the last six months to the firm to more than $320,000. The city paid more than $2.5 million before the ruling.

At the Aug. 1 meeting, Councilman Don Harrison broached the topic of a settlement regarding MALDEF’s legal expenses.

“I understand through sources there are negotiations going on with MALDEF, who has requested $1.6 million to settle the lawsuit. We’ve had an executive session to discuss this, and yet we’re still continuing with the appeal,” said Harrison, who joined Sammy Casados and Cody Ray Wheeler in voting against approving the latest payment. “It’s time to settle this matter with MALDEF and get this lawsuit over.”

“We’re working everything we can, and once we get these numbers for sure we will have a council meeting to discuss this,” [Mayor Jeff] Wagner said.

See here for some background. The calculation is that if Pasadena eventually wins the appeal, they only have to pay their own lawyers and won’t owe the plaintiffs’ attorneys a dime. But if they lose, they will not only have paid their own lawyers that much more to keep on this, they’ll also owe attorneys’ fees for the plaintiffs, which will undoubtedly be a lot higher than the $1.6 million they’re apparently offering to take now. It’s almost as if that 2013 redistricting scheme pushed through by former Mayor Johnny Isbell was a really lousy idea that has served to put the city in such a terrible position today. Hindsight, y’all.