The Dustin Burrows dilemma

I have four things to say about this.

Rep. Dustin Burrows

Five years ago, Rep. Dustin Burrows’ reputation sustained a major blow among his House colleagues.

The Lubbock Republican resigned as chair of the House GOP Caucus after it was revealed that he and then-Speaker Dennis Bonnen tried to collude with a right-wing activist by providing a list of 10 GOP members they believed should be targeted by the activist’s political organization in the upcoming primary. The actions amounted to a shocking betrayal from House leaders who had previously threatened consequences for any incumbents who campaigned against fellow members in future elections. One of the would-be targets, Rep. Drew Darby of San Angelo, said it was time for the House to “begin to heal and rebuild trust” — something that could only happen if Burrows was “no longer in leadership.”

Bonnen retired. Burrows retreated from the spotlight, but steadily worked behind the scenes regaining his standing in the chamber.

Five years later, Burrows finds himself at the center of another Republican House leadership skirmish. Yet again, he got there because of his proximity to a sitting House speaker — this time Dade Phelan — who lost favor with a majority of GOP members. And once again he is at odds with many of the same political powers that contributed to his original demise.

Now, Burrows is seeking the gavel for himself, emerging as the chosen pick of establishment and moderate GOP lawmakers — including one-time critic Darby — after Phelan exited the race earlier this month.

His eleventh-hour speakership bid attracted immediate ire from the House’s rightmost faction and their allies outside the chamber. That contingent has vowed to censure and wage aggressive primary challenges against any House Republicans who do not vote for their preferred candidate, Rep. David Cook, R-Mansfield. Cook became the House GOP Caucus’ speaker nominee after some of Burrows’ supporters walked out of the caucus’ meeting last weekend.

In a declaration of political war, Burrows disregarded Cook’s endorsement and quickly announced that he had enough supporters to win the speakership in January when the full chamber votes. He released a list of 76 supporters, just enough to win, made up equally of Republicans and Democrats. Immediately, a few Republicans named on Burrows’ initial list of supporters asked for their names to be removed.

To date, Burrows no longer has enough public supporters to win. But publicly he is projecting confidence that he will. His path to victory appears to be relying on a coalition made up of more Democrats than Republicans, leading to a situation where his critics on the right are characterizing him as too liberal, while Democrats opposing him complain he’s too conservative. In a blow to Burrows, Gov. Greg Abbott last week urged members to back the candidate “chosen by a majority of Republicans in accordance with the Republican Caucus Rules,” though he did not mention Cook by name.

[…]

As Phelan’s proxy, Burrows is viewed by most Democrats as the more palatable option between the two Republican speaker candidates — as evidenced by the 38 members of the minority party on Burrows’ initial list of supporters. One of those members, state Rep. Josey Garcia of San Antonio, later said she was not supporting anyone for speaker yet. (No Democrats have publicly supported Cook.)

Burrows’ backing among Democrats is far from universal. A group of more than 20 Democratic House members have withheld their support, with some citing his authorship of a sweeping new law, dubbed by opponents as the “Death Star bill,” aimed at sapping the power of local governments, particularly in Texas’ bluer urban areas.

All this has left Burrows to perform a delicate balancing act where his efforts to woo Democrats over to his side could lead to more Republican defections, and vice versa.

Cook, for his part, has vowed to end the practice of appointing Democrats to chair any House committees — a longstanding tradition continued by Phelan and previous GOP speakers, who have all granted Democrats a limited number of chairmanships. Cook has also pledged to ensure that GOP priority bills reach the floor before any Democratic measures.

Burrows said he has not made any concessions to Democrats. On the issue of appointing Democratic committee chairs, he said he would leave it to the members “to work that out amongst themselves” when they approve the House rules next session.

Rather than making specific promises, Burrows said he is courting Democrats by leveraging relationships he has developed working on bipartisan issues, and by signaling support for House rules “that allow the majority to rule but the minority to have their voice heard and respected.”

“And it doesn’t hurt that the other side has wanted significant rule changes to shut them out of the process completely,” Burrows said of his efforts to court Democrats.

1. I am not a fan of Rep. Dustin Burrows, not after his authoring of the “Death Star” bill along with his insulting comments about cities and mayors and whatnot. I empathize with Dems in the Legislature who feel similarly, and there are a few vocal ones out there.

2. That said, if some Dems think they will do better in a House with a Speaker Burrows than a Speaker Cook – not at all an unreasonable thought – then they should by all means talk to him and hear him out. Just be sure to get something in return for that support, and not just something for you but for your colleagues and your constituents.

3. By the artisanal calculations of poli sci professor Mark Jones, Dustin Burrows is somehow one of the more “moderate” Republicans in the House. We need to find a better word for this than “moderate”, because that word has no meaning anymore.

4. By making an enemy of Gollum-wannabe Michael Quinn Sullivan, Dustin Burrows does have at least one redeeming feature.

Related Posts:

• Phelan withdraws his Speaker bid
• We have our Speaker
• It’s all about the tape