Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

September 20th, 2018:

Judicial Q&A: Chip Wells

(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for Democratic judicial candidates. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to my readers. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. You can see other Q&As and further information about judicial candidates on my 2018 Judicial page.

Chip Wells

1. Who are you and what are you running for?

I am Clinton Chip Wells the Democrat nominee for Judge in the 312 th Family District Court. I have been practicing law for over 41 years in Harris County and across the State. I am married with three children (two of which are from my wife’s prior marriage) and one grandchild. I’ve been practicing law with my law partner John McDowell for more than 28 years.

2. What kind of cases docs this court hear?

The 312th Family District Court hears all cases of which it has jurisdiction in Harris County including but not limited to marriage dissolution, modification of prior orders, support, adoption and cases associated with the Child Protective Services.

3. Why are you running for this particular bench?

I am running for the 312th Family District Court because of the clear distinction between my experience and that of the current Judge. As I stated above I have practiced law for over 41 years representing individual Texans and Texas families across the State. I have tried jury and non-jury cases in counties from El Paso to Beaumont and Denton to Brownsville. My experience is in the private practice of law resolving issues and obtaining relief for clients involving family law and personal injury claims. The distinction referenced above is that my opponent’s experience is almost exclusively institutional employment either through the County, State or Texas Guard. He has little or no experience representing individuals or families seeking affirmative relief. Thus, his experience lacks the component of compassion that comes with representing clients for over four decades.

4. What are your qualifications for this job?

My qualifications are as stated above including the more than 41 years of experience practicing law in Harris County and across the State of Texas. I have represented families and individuals in both non-jury and jury trials in many counties across the State. I am married for more than 24 years. I have raised my wife’s two children from a prior marriage and one of our own. I have been married and divorced. I have experienced as a lawyer the issues that will be addressed in a family court on a daily basis. I have practiced law with my present law partner for over 28 years thus demonstrating loyalty, commitment and the ability to work well with others. I am a certified mediator in civil law and family law mediation.

5. Why is this race important?

This race is important for the same reason that all of the judicial races are important. We elect our judges in Texas. Each Court whether civil, criminal or family is charged with the same obligation, to apply the law to the facts and circumstances of the case before it. Every Judge is required to apply the law. How those facts and circumstances are appreciated by the Judge charged with the obligation of applying the law is often the difference. The Judges that sit in our Courts should reflect the community as a whole and should serve the community with compassion, fairness and equity for all its members.

6. Why should people vote for you in November?

At present, the Harris County Family District Courts consist of nine Republicans and one Democratic Judge. As the Democratic nominee for the 312th Family District Court I am committed to maintain a courtroom open to all citizens of Harris County irrespective of race, origin, sexual preference or position. I am not beholden to any platform or litmus test for relief. I will strive to apply the laws of the State of Texas fairly, equitably and compassionately to all who may come before the Court.

I have the experience and background to serve all the citizens of Harris County. The citizens of Harris County should have access to Courts with Judiciary that reflects the community as a whole.

Differing views of likely voters

First we had this.

Rep. Beto O’Rourke

U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, leads his Democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke by 9 percentage points among likely voters, according to a new poll from Quinnipiac University.

Released Tuesday, the survey found Cruz with 54 percent support and O’Rourke, an El Paso congressman, with 45 percent. Only 1 percent of those polled were undecided.

“The Texas U.S. Senate race between Sen. Ted Cruz and Congressman Beto O’Rourke, and Democratic hopes for an upset win there, have boosted talk of a Senate takeover,” Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll, said in a news release. “These numbers may calm that talk.”

It’s the first time Quinnipiac has released a likely voter survey in the Senate race. Quinnipiac previously polled registered voters three times, finding Cruz ahead by 6 points in August, 11 in May and 3 in April.

Quinnipiac also surveyed the governor’s race in the most recent poll and continued to find a much less competitive contest, with Republican Gov. Greg Abbott leading Democratic opponent Lupe Valdez by 19 points.

I started writing a post about how like everything else this is one result, the first one we’ve had of just likely voters, then I got distracted by all the hot takes about how this means The Race Is All Over And It Was Never Really Close and the shitshow in SD19, so I didn’t get it finished. And then I woke up the next morning and saw this.

U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-El Paso, leads Republican incumbent Ted Cruz by 2 percentage points among likely voters, according to an Ipsos online poll released Wednesday in conjunction with Reuters and the University of Virginia. O’Rourke has been closing the gap over the last several months, but this is the first poll that puts him ahead of Cruz.

Forty-seven percent of likely voters told Reuters they would vote for O’Rourke, while 45 percent said they would cast their ballot for Cruz. Three percent said they would vote for “Other,” and 5 percent said “None.” The margin of error on that portion of the poll was 3.5 percentage points.

A Quinnipiac poll released Tuesday put Cruz 9 percentage points ahead of O’Rourke among likely voters. That poll was based on phone interviews, while the Ipsos poll used an online survey. But it’s trying to predict who will show up on Election Day that shifts the numbers, said Ipsos Vice President Chris Jackson.

Ipsos is trying to gauge political enthusiasm on each side, said Jackson. The poll asked respondents to estimate the likelihood that they’d vote in the midterm elections on a scale from one to 10. “More Democrats are registering at the highest part of the scale, at the 10, than the Republicans,” Jackson said. And that’s what’s interesting, he said, because Republicans usually have the momentum advantage in Texas.

“It demonstrates how Democrats are mobilized,” said Jackson. “This election is going to be really competitive and its going be very hard fought.”

[…]

The poll also questioned voters about the Texas gubernatorial election and found that Gov. Greg Abbott leads his Democratic challenger, Lupe Valdez, by 9 percentage points among likely voters.

Well, well, well. Look, this too is just one result and we can’t really judge either of them until we see enough polls to get a feel for where these fit in. That said, this is 1) the first poll result of any kind showing Beto in the lead, 2) the first poll of any kind in at least a decade showing a Democrat with as much as 47% of the vote, and 3) an extremely satisfying quick corrective to all those hot takes from Tuesday.

So what do we make of all this? I think the DMN has it right:

Polling experts have long warned against putting too much weight in any one survey, particularly since different polls can take widely different approaches. Texas is also a special case, since the GOP’s longstanding dominance there means pollsters don’t usually pay it much attention.

Nate Silver, editor-in-chief of Five Thirty Eight, on Wednesday pretty well summed up the dynamic.

“Texas is a tough state to poll (lots of new residents, low turnout among certain voting groups, may be hard to reach Spanish-speaking voters),” he wrote on Twitter. “It’s probably a healthy sign that we’re seeing some disagreement.”

A closer look at the two surveys perhaps further proves the point. Both polls looked at likely voters, which is a key distinction from earlier surveys. The feelings of likely voters are supposed to give a better representation of Election Day results than those of registered voters. But that approach also means some assumptions have been made on who is likely to vote.

The Quinnipiac poll surveyed 807 likely voters earlier this month, tallying a margin of error of plus-minus 4.1 percentage points. It was conducted using live interviews over landlines and cell phones, which many experts say is the best way to approach the task. It had a sample that featured 35 percent Republicans, 26 percent Democrats and 33 percent independents.

The Ipsos poll, done in partnership with Reuters and the University of Virginia, surveyed nearly 1,000 voters earlier this month, garnering an error margin of plus-minus 3.5 percentage points.

It was conducted by way of online surveys. Its sample is also much different, reporting a significantly lower number of independents. So its breakdown is 47 percent Republicans, 43 percent Democrats and nine percent independents.

So live call versus online, and self-reported engagement levels versus whatever formula Quinnipiac used (they did not elaborate on that). Ipsos wound up with a sample that was slightly less Republican, which is consistent with the thesis that Dems are more engaged than usual. Who’s “right” and who’s “wrong” at this point is impossible to tell, though we may get a better feel for that as voting draws nearer. For now, be aware of the differences in methodology and look for any trends that emerge there. In the meantime and even though it’s mixing apples (registered voters) and oranges (likely voters), I’m updating the now-16 poll average to reflect 46.69 for Cruz, and 41.38 for Beto. Until we can say definitively otherwise, this is still a very close race. Washington Monthly and the Current have more.

Galveston, ten years after Ike

Overall things are better now, but not for everyone, and nothing can ever truly be the same as before.

Galveston has a long and storied history dealing with epic storms, and the destruction Hurricane Ike wrought was no different — a Category 2 storm that battered the island and the Texas Gulf Coast with 100 mile-per-hour winds and 17-foot storm surges, killing 43 people across the state and causing nearly $30 billion worth of damage, the third-costliest storm in U.S. history.

A decade later, post-Ike Galveston looks a bit different. Island landmarks like the Flagship Hotel and Balinese Room, which sat perched on piers overlooking the Gulf of Mexico off of Seawall Boulevard, have been demolished, casualties of the storm surge that leveled parts of the island.

University of Texas Medical Branch, the island’s main hospital and a huge employer, underwent $1 billion worth of updgrades to make it more resilient to major storms, but also ceased providing indigent care.

Galveston’s beaches were restored with 500,000 cubic meters of sand, and tourism rebounded after a sluggish few years in Ike’s wake. In 2007, Galveston raked in $7.5 million dollars in hotel tax revenue from June through August. By 2012, the island exceeded that total with $8.3 million in hotel receipts.

Eighty percent of the city’s homes and much of its critical infrastructure were damaged by Ike’s high winds and devastating flooding, forcing building code changes that led many residents on Bolivar Peninsula and Galveston’s West End to raise their homes on stilts. The city’s population has about 50,550 residents today, per 2016 U.S. Census estimates, still shy of the 57,000 from before the storm.

[…]

And yet a vast swath of vacant land dotted with palm trees on the north side of Galveston, where the Oleander Homes, a public housing complex, used to sit, serves to remind that the legacy of Ike did not reach its most vulnerable populations.

The 10 to 15-foot waves that laid waste to single-family and vacation homes also damaged the island’s four public housing developments — located in low-income neighborhoods with high percentages of people of color. Four months after the storm, the Galveston Housing Authority decided to demolish all four developments — 569 housing units — due to extensive damage to the buildings.

Under a state and federal government mandate, the city is required to rebuild every unit, but fewer than half of the units have been reconstructed — delayed by a toxic combination of bureaucratic red tape, racially-tinged public outcry, political inaction and the housing authority’s lack of financial capital to manage and maintain the new housing.

“It’s just tragic that a decade after the disaster when the money has been available for all of that time that most of the public housing has not yet been rebuilt,” said John Henneberger, co-director of the Texas Low-Income Housing Information Service, a statewide housing advocacy group.

There were serious concerns about UTMB’s ability to exist after Ike. It’s a major employer for the city, so the fact that it’s still there is a big deal. I’d still be very concerned about Galveston’s future – not to mention the future of much of the rest of the Gulf Coast – until some form of the Ike Dike gets built. After Harvey and Maria and Irma and Florence I have to wonder what else needs to happen to get that approved, but here we are anyway. I’m rooting for Galveston, but in a very real sense we’re all in the same boat with them.

Texas blog roundup for the week of September 17

The Texas Progressive Alliance hopes that the federal response to Florence is better than it was for Harvey and especially for Maria as it brings you this week’s roundup.

(more…)