As Autumn Approaches, It’s Time To Govern

This column originally appeared at Big Jolly Politics:


The last few months have been a time of reflection and rejuvenation for me, as I attended to personal and professional matters, and stepped away—as much as possible—from political matters. But Labor Day has now past, and the traditional summer “vacation” has ended, so now it is time for me to return to the political issues and races of 2014, which are just now starting to heat-up.

During my hiatus, I accumulated a fairly long list of issues that I could write about when I returned. While I will write about many of these issues over the next few months (and I will return to the issue of Education reform once we get a written opinion from the trial judge in Austin in the school-finance litigation), I want to start with what I perceive as the common thread that runs through so many of these issues: the need for the Republican Party to govern.

The need to govern on first principles

Now those of you who are awake and living in Texas will immediately respond by saying something like, “Ed, isn’t that what we’ve been doing for the last two decades?” And the answer I would give them is, frankly, “no”—at least, not the way I mean it.

To govern, a party must have first principles that it seeks to enshrine in public policy; to do so, the party must work to elect officeholders who will infuse its principles into law and then administer those laws effectively and creatively to achieve ends that are consistent with the first principles. Principles are just that—they are principles, not ideology. The process of enshrining principles into law, requires positive commitment and persuasion, and—yes—the ability to compromise by making wise and timely trade-offs and choices. Then, governing requires competence to administer the laws effectively and creatively, so that the civil society that is realized closely approximates the civil society we had hoped to create and maintain.

We once had leaders in both parties who understood this process. As recently as the Nixon and Reagan Presidencies, we had leaders who understood the guiding principles of American foreign policy (first survival with, and then victory over Communism). Then, with Reagan, came a man who understood the deepest first principles of our country and our party, and who knew how to enshrine those principles in public policy through commitment, persuasion, and compromise. Together, Nixon and Reagan spawned a generation of competent men and women capable of effectively and creatively administer government.

The move from first principles to ideology

Unfortunately, as the Clinton years turned into the Bush 43 years, and then into the Obama years, both parties slowly moved away from competing over principles to fighting over ideology; and worse, the GOP has waged an internal battle over ideology—masked as the perennial fight over whom among us is the most “conservative”—that has left our shared principles flailing to survive. The effects of these battles between the parties and with the GOP can be seen in the sordid responses to so many of the issues that have percolated to the surface this summer, including the pathetic handwringing going on all over Washington about whether and how to address the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime—which, hour-by-hour, day-by-day is slowly ceding the balance of global power and responsibility held by Washington and Europe since 1945 to Moscow, Beijing and Tehran, regardless of the ultimate decision and action that will be taken. Any American over the age of 45 should be very concerned about this drift in global influence.

In the meantime, the Obama years’ shift to an “all butter, no guns” ideology of government is creating a federal government that will be too large and irresponsible to ever govern at home, or maintain the peace abroad, effectively. On the other hand, at state and local levels where the GOP maintains the majority of political power in this country, conservatism has the greatest opportunity it has had in a generation to show that it is an effective governing philosophy. All the GOP needs is a return to the principles that unite us, and an end to the civil war that has divided us; and a commitment to the future, rather than a rigid adherence to the past.

Texas and Harris County as leaders

For Republicans in Texas and Harris County, this process is important not just for the county and the state, but also to the nation. We Republicans in Texas often lose perspective of the fact that we are to American Conservatism what California and New York are to American Liberalism—the outlier state at the farthest end of the political spectrum. Yes, this does mean that we are, more often than not, trend setters for other conservatives, and we get frustrated by the more moderate Republicans in our midst and in other parts of the country. But it also means that most of the rest of our fellow countrymen, including our fellow Republicans see us both as trend setters and as kooks—much like the clothes buyers who have to evaluate the fashion designers who exhibit their new designs in New York, Paris and Milan every year. And, just like the designers at the cutting-edge of the fashion world who value the purity of their creativity over the value of their designs to the general public, we too often value the purity of our “conservatism” over the effectiveness of our ability to enshrine our principles into the real-world policies that our countrymen live with every day of their lives. If we in Texas and Harris County want to be the leaders of a new era of American Conservatism, we need to help design and promote policies that will allow our elected officials to use our principles to address real problems, rather than enshrine the latest ideological fad into bad (and ultimately irrelevant) law.

Defining and deploying first principles

Virtually every Republican I have ever met believes in a constitutionally limited federal government, where the power and responsibility over most daily issues are handled locally and privately by individuals, families, businesses, and civic or religious organizations, or locally and publicly by state and local governments. We believe in the prosperity created by free markets and free trade, which creates a tide that lifts all boats. We believe in a national defense that protects not just our borders and our citizens from immediate danger, but that preserves the balance of power that has allowed for the greatest era of economic growth and prosperity the world has ever known. And we believe in the development of personal character and virtue, which leads us to live a life in which we make more right choices than wrong as we develop relationships, create families and build neighborhoods.

If we believe in these principles, then let’s stop fighting with each other and start building a party that will elect men and women who will enshrine these principles into policy: who will cost-effectively build the infrastructure we need to maintain our communities, reform the schools we will need to educate our children, and promote health through preserving the local doctor-patient relationship; who creatively will bring the message and the policies of our principles into the communities in our region in which too many of our neighbors are under-educated, under-employed and over-incarcerated; and who will promote the right choices in life that slowly, steadily and wisely develop character and virtue, over the constant condemnation of what we perceive as wrong choices that simply separate us and our principles from our neighbors.

An older era has been slipping away this summer. If we conservatives want an effective voice in shaping the new, emerging era in a way that preserves what is best about our society, we need to stop fighting over ideology and start promoting our shared principles.

********

The passing of District Attorney Mike Anderson

On a last point, I want briefly to address the passing of Mike Anderson.

I first met Mike, and his wife, Devon, while I was running as a judicial candidate in 2007-08 and Devon was running for re-election. I grew to like both Mike and Devon personally, and to respect the work they had been doing as prosecutors and district-court judges. The news of Mike’s passing on Saturday was so sad.

To Devon, I think I am expressing the feeling of most members of the Republican family in Harris County when I say that you and your children—and Mike—are in our thoughts and prayers; and we are here for you, just as you and Mike were here for us, if and when you need a helping hand over the months and years ahead.

To the rest of us, we have some soul-searching to do. We have been embroiled in two difficult primaries over the office of District Attorney since December, 2007, when the scandals that brought down Chuck Rosenthal became public, and we now are facing two election cycles in a row when this office will again be on the ballot. As for the last cycle, though Mike won the primary handily, the contest was very bitter among our party activists. Because I also respected Judge Lykos and some of the reforms she had proposed and started to implement, I found the last primary cycle so difficult—two good, conservative public servants, with somewhat different approaches, were fighting over the future of the criminal justice system. We cannot repeat the bitterness of the last primary and hope to keep this office in Republican hands—and the fate of the criminal justice system in this county hangs in the balance.

Soon Governor Perry will appoint someone to succeed Mike, and there will be a contested primary. The names I am hearing so far, for either the appointment or the primary race, are all good and qualified Republicans. Let’s keep that in mind as the race unfolds and make our choice on merit, rather than on one of the many issues that seem to always divide us. That approach would be the greatest legacy we could give to Mike’s memory and tenure in public office.

What is the Fundamental Purpose of Our Public Universities?

This column originally appeared at Big Jolly Politics.

I want to congratulate our Republican legislators in both Austin and Washington, who have started the long process of addressing our fiscal problems. What they’ve passed so far is not perfect, nor everything that many of us wanted, but it has been a good and needed first step. In fact, the federal budget plan passed by the U.S. House of Representatives yesterday incorporates many good, long-term ideas that begin to address both fiscal discipline, and the need to reduce the role of the federal government in local and individual decisions. The debate Paul Ryan’s plan has started is good for the country.

Closer to home, another debate seems to be unfolding over the role of classroom teaching within our state-supported universities in Texas. It’s that debate that I would like to discuss in this post.

I want to start with definitions of three words taken from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (Fourth Edition):

•Education: “The knowledge or skill obtained or developed by a learning process.” (p. 569).

•College: “An institution of higher learning that grants the bachelor’s degree in liberal arts or science or both.” (p.362).

•University: “An institution of higher learning with teaching and research facilities constituting a graduate school and professional schools that award master’s degrees and doctorates and an undergraduate division that awards bachelor’s degrees.” (p. 1883).

Now, let’s also look at the original provision in the Texas Constitution that authorized the eventual creation of our state-supported university systems: “The legislature shall as soon as practicable establish, organize and provide for the maintenance, support and direction of a University of the first class…” (Art. 7, Sec. 10).

When you read all of this together, it’s pretty clear that the fundamental purpose of our state-supported universities is to provide an education to students—specifically, an education that can lead to the award of an undergraduate, graduate or professional degree through a process that includes learning from both teaching and research. Reading these sources, it’s also clear that teaching and research are neither distinct purposes, in and of themselves, for the existence of a university, nor are they independent functions that are separate from the process of providing an education.

Yet, if you listen to the debate over the hiring of Rick O’Donnell by the University of Texas Board of Regents, and the promotion by Governor Perry of Jeff Sandefer’s “Seven Breakthrough Solutions” for higher education (http://texashighered.com/7-solutions) you could come to the conclusion that providing an education is no longer the central purpose of our state-supported universities. Instead, you could determine that the central purpose of our universities is now to provide a source for economic growth for the communities in which they are situated, and for the state, through attracting top researchers and grants and conducting economically-beneficial research. Consistent with this new purpose, the task of providing an education and a degree now may be merely an incidental source of income to the university rather than its core mission.

Quite frankly, I find this whole debate fails to address the real problems with our educational system. Though some correction may be needed, a wholesale change in the way we hire and retain university faculty is not needed. However, the more professors and administrators attack any change, the more they make the case for the wholesale change they don’t want. In the meantime, no one is really addressing how we improve the education of our children.

On the one hand, it is true that there is evidence showing a significant shift in emphasis on some campuses from teaching and research focused on providing an education to students, to “pure” research designed to obtain independent economic benefits for the school and the community. This shift has created an imbalance in the use of public resources (as well as private grants and donations) to create and maintain facilities and faculties for “pure” research on some campuses. Perversely, on some campuses this shift has led to documented under-utilization of existing facilities, which could be more efficiently used to provide more education-related teaching and research. Implementation of a few of the “Seven Breakthroughs” might effectively address this shift and restore the proper focus of teaching and research to education, while still allowing for the incidental, yet important, “pure” research that enriches the learning process while providing an additional source of income and economic benefit. However, a wholesale change in the way universities hire and retain faculty, and provide and account for teaching and research, is not needed to fix the imbalance on some campuses; indeed, there are a lot more fundamental problems with our educational system, starting with kindergarten, that need to be prioritized and addressed over this issue.

On the other hand, the clueless and condescending reactions from some who have attacked the ideas promoted by Governor Perry, Mr. Sandefer, and Mr. O’Donnell underscore a fundamental question that many taxpayers, parents and students now have about our entire educational system: are schools operating for the benefit of the students, or for the benefit of the teachers and administrators? I think most of us outside of the educational system had thought state-supported schools at all levels operated to benefit students. However, to read some of the op-ed pieces and interviews from current and former faculty and administrators, you would think that students are merely incidental nuisances with whom they have to interact periodically while running their facilities and conducting their research. These reactions, combined with the video of teacher union protests in Wisconsin and the sentimental news stories about teacher lay-offs across this State, give credibility to the movement supporting wholesale change in the way we hire and retain teachers, professors and administrators.

While we may not need all “Seven Breakthroughs” to re-balance the functions of our universities, teachers, professors and administrators at all state-supported schools need to remember that they only have one fundamental obligation: they work for the taxpayers and the parents of this State to provide our children, young adults and adults with an education through the processes of teaching and research—everything else, including the research they conduct as part of their job, is incidental to and dependent upon meeting this fundamental obligation. Once we all get this point straight again, re-balancing the use of public resources within our universities and school systems, as well as fixing the more pressing problems with our whole educational system, should be easier to accomplish.

Some Perspective about Electability and Consistency

This column originally appeared at Big Jolly Politics:

Well, we now are getting mercifully closer to the beginning of the voting in the Republican caucuses and primaries to choose our next Presidential Nominee. As I pointed out in a recent post about a focus-group we conducted at the last meeting of the Clear Lake Area Republicans, we Republicans share a lot of anxiety about this approaching election, because we sense that we are at a real tipping point in our history for many reasons. For this reason, we all are concerned about choosing the right candidate who will not only win in 2012, but who will lead a transformation of our political system based on conservative principles to fix the mess we face.

So, the concern of the moment, as Newt Gingrich sustains his improbable rise to the summit of the polls, is whether Newt can sustain the discipline he is showing, and whether he will be accepted by enough independent voters if he wins the GOP nomination to beat Obama and sweep other Republicans into Washington with him. With each passing day, we are being told that he can’t—by the media, by pollsters, by Democrats, and by virtually every Republican who considers themselves to be a leader within our party—while he keeps surging in the polls of GOP primary voters. Two recent images emerged from columns by Jonah Goldberg which aptly portray the anxiety many Republican leaders feel, when he described Newt as both a wild beast re-introduced to his natural habitat, and the re-incarnation of Godzilla (“Newtzilla”). It is this image of Newtzilla that is driving some pundits to start to encourage consideration of a third-party candidacy for Ron Paul, that is driving other pundits to beg voters to take a second look at Rick Perry and the rest of the field, and that is driving fundraisers to shovel money to Mitt Romney. “Newt hysteria” is the psychosis of the season for the Republican establishment.

With all this hyperventilation going on around us, it’s hard to maintain some perspective. But, with just a few weeks remaining before the voting begins, it’s time for all of us to take a deep breath for a moment, and then to remember that many of us have seen and heard all of this at least once before—and, when the dust settled that time, conservatism not only survived, it thrived for a generation.

As I wrote in my last post, it’s so hard now to objectively recall how Reagan was perceived at the end of 1979. When he gave the closing speech of the 1976 Republican Convention, most Republican leaders believed that they had finally vanquished the idea of a Reagan Presidency, and of a conservative ascendency within the party. Although Reagan’s ideas for a “New” Republican Party in 1977 were tolerated as they helped to mobilize conservatives for the mid-term elections, the party establishment believed he could be managed as an elder statesman. Even when he announced that he would seek the Presidency again in 1980, the party establishment did not take him seriously.

I encountered this attitude first-hand during my senior year of college in Rockford, Illinois. John Anderson was the local Congressman, and he had announced that he would run for the Republican nomination. At that time one of my mentors was the co-chair of John Anderson’s Presidential campaign, and he asked me to join the campaign to manage the national recruitment of college-student voters. I’ll never forget the reaction I got when, at the end of a meeting to discuss the offer, I told him and the others in attendance that I could not accept the position because I didn’t agree with Anderson and I was supporting Reagan. The incredulous, smug, and derisive reaction was something I will never forget, and not only my relationship with my mentor soon ended, but not long after that meeting I was asked to stop my work for Lynn Martin’s campaign to succeed Anderson in Congress (Martin later became Secretary of Labor under George H.W. Bush).

In the meantime, I recruited a handful of classmates to block-walk for Reagan, and to work for Reagan at polling places on the day of the Illinois primary in 1980. I’ll never forget one afternoon when I was at a grocery store wearing a Reagan pin, and one of the cashiers—a middle-aged woman—asked if I would wait a minute. She then gathered several of her co-workers and asked if I had more buttons, which I did, and I handed them out. She said her manager said it was “ok” to wear them, and they all put them on the lapels of their uniforms. As I left the store, she thanked me, and said they were praying that now was finally the time for Reagan. I knew that day that something extraordinary might happen that fall.

And, my gut was right—something extraordinary did happen that fall, as Reagan swept the nomination, swept the election, and swept in a Republican Senate for the first time since the Eisenhower years. But that process was not easy or pre-ordained. As much as no one wanted Carter re-elected—even Democrats—there was a lot of apprehension about Reagan until the very last week of the campaign when he debated Carter on national TV. It is hard to remember this now, but Ted Kennedy was leading all candidates of both parties in the polls at this time in 1979. The polls throughout 1980 would reflect a dissatisfaction with Carter, but a real apprehension of Reagan—which fueled Anderson’s ego enough to get him to run as an Independent. The following editorial cartoon reflects the mood and viewpoint of the country toward both Carter and Reagan as the election approached:

Look familiar? Today, in place of the Frankenstein image of Reagan from a generation ago, we are given the images of a wild beast and Godzilla from a fellow conservative to portray the current GOP frontrunner in an election cycle where most voters don’t want to re-elect the incumbent Democrat.

So, before we work ourselves into a frenzy of fear and anxiety, let’s step back. I don’t know if Newt will, or even should be, our nominee, but I don’t fear his candidacy. Nor will I allow myself to be torn with anxiety as the polls move all over the place next year. If he wins this nomination, he has a very realistic chance to win the race as the electorate evaluates his candidacy throughout the next year—even up to the eve of the election. I believe that we will not lose this election if Newt is nominated, but we will lose this election if we let the establishment’s concern over his electability pre-ordain the outcome. We didn’t let that happen in 1980, and we can’t let that happen now.

That reflection leads me to address my final point for this post—the current attack on Newt’s alleged failure to be a “consistent” conservative. The new label of “consistent conservative” is nothing more than a new version of the tired old label of “true conservative,” which typically is trotted out in a final, desperate attempt to differentiate a candidate from his or her opponent when all substantive arguments have failed, and to set the opponent up for the final Scarlett Letter of “RINO” or “moderate.” The use of the label is intended to foreclose serious thought and discussion, and to trigger a Pavlovian response of support for the candidate who invokes it to describe herself and of revulsion toward the opponent. Using labels like “consistent” or “true” underscores a triumph of ideology over principle in conservative debate.

As I tried to subtly point out in another recent post, the battle between libertarians and religious conservatives over the extreme ideological future of conservatism is really hurting this party. This battle focuses on the worst of both extremes—a misreading and misapplication of Adam Smith, and an over-application of the literal Word to secular politics. Russell Kirk, Bill Buckley, Whitaker Chambers, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan roll in their graves as this battle intensifies.

Framing the debate within the Republican field as being about who is the “consistent conservative” necessarily judges conservatism ideologically, which is the antithesis of Kirk's view that conservatism is based on principles, not ideology. It reminds me of Reagan’s favorite philosopher, Ralph Waldo Emerson's famous discussion about the problem with “consistency” in his essay on self-reliance. In that essay, Emerson observed that the consistency that matters is that of character, and that character only reveals itself over time from the cumulative evaluation of actions and statements, not from a foolish adherence to rigidity of action and thought moment by moment, day by day:

• The other terror that scares us from self-trust is our consistency; a reverence for our past act or word, because the eyes of others have no other data for computing our orbit than our past acts, and we are loath to disappoint them. …


• … A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. … To be great is to be misunderstood.


• I suppose no man can violate his nature. … A character is like an acrostic or Alexandrian stanza; — read it forward, backward, or across, it still spells the same thing. In this pleasing, contrite wood-life which God allows me, let me record day by day my honest thought without prospect or retrospect, and, I cannot doubt, it will be found symmetrical, though I mean it not, and see it not. My book should smell of pines and resound with the hum of insects. … Character teaches above our wills. Men imagine that they communicate their virtue or vice only by overt actions, and do not see that virtue or vice emit a breath every moment.


• … The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line of a hundred tacks. See the line from a sufficient distance, and it straightens itself to the average tendency. Your genuine action will explain itself, and will explain your other genuine actions. Your conformity explains nothing. Act singly, and what you have already done singly will justify you now. Greatness appeals to the future. If I can be firm enough to-day to do right, and scorn eyes, I must have done so much right before as to defend me now. Be it how it will, do right now. Always scorn appearances, and you always may. The force of character is cumulative. All the foregone days of virtue work their health into this. What makes the majesty of the heroes of the senate and the field, which so fills the imagination? The consciousness of a train of great days and victories behind. They shed an united light on the advancing actor.

Are we going to continue to live in a time dominated by “foolish consistency”? Are we going to continue to vote for men and women who choose to be “little statesmen” in order to satisfy the test of consistency driven by the 24/7 news cycle, the “Meet the Press” gotcha quotes, and the Internet. In such a world nothing fades into the haze of memory in order to give us the breathing room to think deeply, evaluate our positions based on new facts and information, and apply our principles with imagination over time.

In such a world, men and women like Gingrich, who have served in the Arena over decades, and who have had to think about many issues and ideas over many years as data and circumstances have changed, would naturally be foreclosed from higher office because considerations they discussed 20 years ago no longer meet the test of consistency. If that is to be our world, then our politics will be dominated by those who either have never thought about or discussed the pressing issues of the day, have been too timid to ever deviate from orthodoxy in their consideration of what is the best course of action based on enduring principles, or have been in the Arena too short a time to ever have had to consider the impact of new data or circumstances on the application of conservative principles.

In thinking about this issue, I found the most revealing moment from last Saturday night’s debate on ABC to be when Rick Santorum—a very self-professed “consistent” conservative—said it was Newt’s GOPAC CDs on conservatism that attracted him to politics. Does Santorum really think that the Newt he admired no longer exists? Isn’t it more appropriate to reflect on how Newt has tried to think about and apply conservative principles to the issues he has faced over 40 years, and how he has matured through that process, than to judge him based on whether he said the same thing over and over again for 40 years no matter what the issue was or what experience had taught him?

Say what you will about Newt’s flaws, he’s closer to the Emerson ideal of a leader whose “[g]reatness appeals to the future” than most of the others up on that stage last Saturday night. I don’t know about you, but I’m looking for a leader in 2012, not someone who is trapped by his or her own “foolish consistency”.

Reflections: What will we do the morning after?

This column originally appeared at Big Jolly Politics.

Summer is over, another birthday has passed, and another of my daughters has struck-out on her own-in Austin. The Astros never really competed this summer-and said "good-bye" to some good veterans along the way-but they've ended the season showing signs of life for the future. My White Sox flirted with a pennant race long enough to make reading the morning box scores fun through Labor Day, and have since settled into their usual, second-place position. And the Cubs oh, well, there's always next year!

With fall upon us, politics is back.

I know for many of you it never left, but after the State Convention in June, I needed a break to re-charge my batteries after nearly 2 ½ years of campaigning: in September, 2007, I jumped head-long into what now seems like a continuous campaign that lasted more than 2 ½ years-first for a seat on a 10-county appellate bench; then to revitalize the local GOP; then to formally run for chairman of the Harris County Republican Party; and finally to help elect a new state chairman for the Republican Party of Texas. Even though I entered those campaigns with the support of my family and colleagues, and I believe my team, my supporters, and I made a positive long-term impact on our local party through these efforts, the shear length and depth of such a continuous commitment took a toll on my family and my work, because I hadn't structured and planned my life with an eye toward running for public office. As a result, I've needed to address this toll over the last few months with some long-needed vacation time and then a re-involvement in the practice of complex litigation. With the exception of giving a talk to a local club in August as a favor to fill-in for a speaker who had cancelled, and attending a few committee meetings, I've purposely stayed away from politics for a while to attend to family and work.

But, I haven't stopped thinking about politics completely. So, here are my reflections from a summer's rest...

First, we must finish the task at hand and win this election. There are only a little more than three weeks until the start of early voting, and six weeks until Election Day. While we still have a lot of work to do between now and November 2nd in order to win this election-locally and nationally-a momentum is behind the GOP and conservative candidates this year that I don't think there is time to derail. The biggest enemy now could be our own over-confidence (remember "President Dewey"?), so we need to complete the mission and get the vote out.

Then, when we wake-up on November 3rd, we must be prepared to lead, to govern, and to recruit strong candidates for the next election cycle. Let me give you my thoughts on each of these points:

We must be prepared to lead, with a vision that encompasses our cherished principles.

In my posts on this blog in May, June and July, I discussed an approach called "Renewing the American Community" with a focus on re-capturing a sense of Neighborhood and re-building our communities based on our conservative principles of limited and local government. I won't re-hash what I said in those posts, but I will recap this fundamental point: the original settlers from Europe established neighborhoods and congregations before they established governments. Successive waves of settlers governed their lives by being good and caring neighbors, and then later generations, culminating with the Founding Fathers, created governments to protect the society and culture the settlers had established. Were they perfect? No. Did they fail to apply their principles to all men and women? Yes. But, they built something unique in history, and the following generations fought amongst themselves to eventually apply those principles to all who lived here and came here. The story of the settler's creation, of the founder's vision, and of the following generations' struggles, is our heritage.

That heritage provides the vision we need to use to lead our communities, our state and our nation starting November 3rd. The men and women I've gotten to know over the last 2 ½ years in every corner of this region of the state, in every Tea Party group, and in every Republican organization, crave leaders who understand this heritage, who understand governments' proper role in preserving this heritage, and who are committed to work every day to preserve this heritage for our children and grandchildren. The men and women working hard to get conservatives elected this November need to hear of our party's commitment to this heritage, and of a plan for action consistent with our heritage. If we lead, these men and women will support us and work with us; if we don't, they will throw us out of office as soon as they can.

"The Pledge" that the Republican Congressional leadership presented last week is a good start, but doesn't go far enough. Republicans need a vision of action for not just the next two years, but for the next generation. To find it, we need to stop looking for new slogans, or trying to co-opt the slogans of the Tea Parties-we need to re-commitment to our heritage of Neighborhoods-of local action and limited government-and then fashion an agenda around that commitment. If we truly believe in the primacy of the individual and local government, that agenda must be built from the foundation of local government first. Continually focusing on the national agenda, though momentarily necessary because of the dire straits created by Obama's administration, is self-defeating to our cause in the long-run. Eventually, the national agenda must be drawn to complement and protect our local agendas.

We must turn from critics to problem-solvers and administrators, prepared to turn our principles into action and results.

In my last post on this blog on July 11th, I wrote about the "Tupelo Formula" for local action, which I broke down as follows:

•The community faced a problem that appeared intractable, and that had been confounded by multiple events-not unlike the confounding factors of under-education, under-employment, chronic crime and poverty, and the impulse to be "left alone", which exist in many of our neighborhoods today;

•One person, followed by a group of civic leaders, saw a strength within the community that created an opportunity that could be exploited to help the community address its problem;

•These citizens had the courage to take a risk with their own resources to take advantage of the opportunity and to share the gain with the community;

•These citizens involved businesses, private organizations, and local government in both the planning and the implementation of their plan; and

•The gains to the community were both short-term, and long-term, and were broadly shared-e.g., businesses were created and expanded, employment grew, per capita income grew, and schools improved.

I propose to our local conservative leaders on our school boards and city councils, and to our Republican officeholders at the county and state levels, that we sit-down after the election with other civic leaders, and begin to analyze and address our communities' needs through the prism of this formula. These needs should include at least the following:

•Our educational system, including the type of citizen we want to emerge from an elementary, secondary and college education in this state; the proper curriculum and delivery system needed to produce that citizen; and the most efficient and cost-effective mechanisms needed to pay for, account for, and administer that delivery system;

•Our transportation system and physical infrastructure, including a vision of where our citizens will live and work over the next 25 years; an understanding of how and where our goods and services will need to move; the maintenance cycle for all capital investments; an appreciation for the property rights of all Texans; and the most efficient and cost-effective mechanisms for paying for the needed infrastructure improvements; and

•Our criminal-justice and mental-health systems, including the effectiveness of such systems to protect victims, the public, and the person being held and/or treated within the systems; and alternatives that can reduce recidivism and improve the educational opportunities and long-term economic viability of the families and neighborhoods affected by the incarceration or mental-health treatment.

If we can address these issues, and create long-term strategies for addressing them at the most local level possible, we can begin to make government live by our principles while addressing urgent problems; and we can begin to address some of the most vexing structural pressures on our public budgets, which put upward pressure on our taxes and downward pressure on job growth.

Obviously, other problems, like the looming public-sector pension issue, will have to be addressed soon-but we need to start somewhere and show the public that our principles are relevant to modern life and modern problems.

To be the majority party, we must recruit and support strong conservatives to run for local, state and national offices over the next two years, who share our principles and are committed to use them to govern.

As I often said during my campaign for Chair of the HCRP, if we are the party that believes in local government, we must get involved in local government. This means fielding candidates now for the elections of 2011 and 2012. Remember, that in 2012 the local GOP will be the challenging party for countywide offices for the first time since 1996. Included among these offices will be between 30 and 40 local judgeships that will be open for Republican challengers, and we need to start finding competent, conservative members of the legal community to run for these offices.

But in 2011, many of the 416 local city council and school board seats will be up for election, including Houston's Mayor and Controller offices. Moreover, Utility and Emergency Services Districts hold elections each year. From just a rough review of the current holders of these offices, Republicans or Republican-voting independents hold already hold at least 40% of these offices. We need to talk with those officeholders, determine how we can help them keep their offices and how we can support them after they win. Most importantly, we need to determine who holds the other offices and recruit candidates who share our principles to run for those offices. Given the number of offices spread-out over 24 school districts, 34 cities, and many Utility and Emergency Services districts, this process must start now.

Finally, we need to continue the recruitment of new GOP precinct chairs-especially in communities where we need to re-introduce ourselves. For example, once this election cycle ends, those activists who have helped candidates like John Faulk, Fernando Herrera, Sarah Davis, Jim Murphy, and Steve Mueller, need to be actively recruited to stay involved by becoming precinct chairs.

If we can expand our presence in local offices and precincts before the 2012 election cycle starts in earnest, we will start that cycle with the army we will need to win that election and retake Harris County.

Although I have committed to my family that I will not run again for a public office myself, I am committed to the plan of attack I have outlined in this post, and will do all I can over the coming years to work with our party, our candidates and our elected officials to make the GOP the majority party in every part of this county and this state; and to not just cherish our conservative principles, but to use our conservative principles creatively to govern effectively. Will you help in this effort beginning November 3rd?

Campaign Video - The Time Is Now

Reflections on the last full week of this Campaign

What a week! As early voting has ended, I look back on this week with amazement.

Financially, we started the week at a draw with the incumbent with money raised since the last TEC report filing, and we ended the week with a draw when counting money received and pledged. That second draw was due to the infusion of cash from Bob Perry into both campaigns. Mr. Perry is a great benefactor of our party, whose money has and will allow both sides to take their message to Republican voters through Election Day—allowing the best message and messenger to prevail. My thanks and admiration go to Mr. Perry for his underwriting of the final stage of this race for our party’s future.

Turnout-wise, the turnout so far is surpassing most pundit's expectations. As I stood out at the early-voting poll in Kingwood on Friday, I was impressed by the steady stream of voters and of the education they had gone through to prepare for their votes. We will probably exceed 30,000 voters when the votes are counted on Tuesday night, and that is a great statement about the interest in our party and its future.

Politically, I have seen the breathless support and criticism from friend and “foe” (though we are all family) alike in this race as the week has proceeded, and with continuing questions raised about my history, my beliefs, my judgment, and my commitment to the Republican Party. One of the bright spots was when an old friend of high school not only found me on Facebook, but came to my defense and posted about my conservative activism even as a high school student--thanks, Jim, and good to hear from you after all these years.

In response to the criticism, let’s just say that I have never claimed to be perfect (nor my judgment to be infallible), but my commitment to this party, and to its unity and growth, is total. As I have reiterated often during this campaign, I will support the party if this race ends with the incumbent’s victory, and I have already started that process by committing to the RNC that I would help—win or lose—with the creation and implementation of a pilot program here in Harris County to grow the party into Latino, Asian-American and African-American neighborhoods and precincts, and to recruit Republicans to run for city and school board races.

I also hear and see the last-minute rallying around the incumbent, and the statements that I, and my supporters, are dividing the party at the wrong time, and are distorting the record of the incumbent. With that final criticism in mind, here is the question I pose to you as we enter this last weekend of the race: if everything that the current team at Richmond Avenue has done is so great, why am I essentially running even in fundraising with the incumbent since the last reporting period, and why do I have the support of so many party leaders, civic leaders, and conservative organizations in this race against a 4-term incumbent? This level of support for a challenger in a Republican primary is unprecedented—and it is unprecedented for a reason: the current team has been organizationally and financially floundering for years, and all the insiders know it, and all the activists can see it. The Obama Wave simply unearthed this truth for all to see.

Therefore, let me leave you with a paraphrase of Reagan’s immortal question: Are you Harris County Republicans better off now than you were in 2002?

If your answer is “No”, my candidacy has, at long last, given you a choice on April 13th for a different future.

Coffee with the Candidate

On Friday morning, from 9am-10am, I'd like to invite you to stop by for "Coffee with the Candidate". We will be meeting at Blue Planet Cafe at 1330 Wirt Rd at Westview (a little north of I-10), in the Bell Tower Center. Stop by before work for a cup of coffee, a latte, a juice or a breakfast treat, and we can talk a little politics while we're at it. After our visit, you can proceed one block up Wirt Road to the Trini Mendenhall Sosa Community Center where you can cast your ballot in the Republican runoff election.

Blue Planet Cafe is a real source of pride in our community. They are an independent cafe, on April 15th they will be celebrating their first year in business. Once a month, Blue Planet Cafe features a local organization doing good work in the community. A portion of the tips they collect for that month goes to the organization. But beyond just a monetary contribution, Blue Planet Cafe allows the featured organization to leave their literature for the cafe customers to peruse and possibly get involved. We are glad to have found a cafe, which by the way has very good food and drinks, that is putting principles we believe in to work by supporting a community and seeking people who help people, rather than government doing this work.

You can learn more about Blue Planet Cafe at www.BluePlanetCafe.biz.

A Greeting for Easter and Passover

Let me take a break from preparing for early voting next week to wish happiness to all this weekend who are celebrating either Easter or Passover. There is one word that has come to mind as I’ve thought about both holidays this year: Liberty.

For Passover is, at its core, the celebration of the liberation of the Hebrews from Egypt and the journey to the Promised Land; while the Resurrection gives us the promise of liberation from sin and from the law of the Pharisees. As Paul tells us in Galatians:

For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled with one word, even in this: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.

I know that those of us who cherish Liberty, and who support the Promised Land of Israel, feel like we have not had a lot to celebrate recently. We’ve witnessed our government usurp powers it was never intended to have, and recently it needlessly strained relations with our closest ally in the Holy Lands—Israel. But with all this, we must recognize that we are entering a new season of Liberty, and we must fight for it, and pray for it. Therefore, this weekend let’s together recite and remember the concluding words of the traditional Passover prayer: Next year in Jerusalem.

Reflections on a Democratic Meet-and-Greet

Yesterday, at the invitation of a fellow Republican, I attended a meet-and-greet for a Democratic candidate who is opposing Sheila Jackson Lee. For those of you who follow Big Jolly Politics, and who may have read my response to Dan Patrick’s comments about the CD-18 race, this is not inconsistent with my position in support of our efforts in this race. Instead, it was designed to enhance our growth into this community.

The reality is that we have over 200 precincts in CDs 18, 9, and 29 (Lee, Al Green and Gene Green, respectively), where we literally have no organizational presence, but where Ed Emmett and Pat Lykos had some success in the 2008 election. My goal is to talk to those people who supported Judge Emmett and District Attorney Lykos, and build on what they started in order to bring conservatives in these communities, who now vote primarily for Democrats, over to our party permanently. You can’t do that unless you actually interact with them where and when they gather.

So, here are a couple of reflections on my experience.

First, there were Republicans (and independents who vote Republican) at this event, and I was able to talk with them about our primary and supporting our candidates. There is a lot of support for Judge Emmett and other Republicans among these voters. They are energized about what we are trying to do to expand the party and include them, but they are still listening to what the Democrats have to offer—we are no where near closing the deal with these voters yet for their support for our entire ticket.

Second, I learned what issues are being discussed in this race by the Democrats with members of the Latino, African American, and Asian communities. The Democratic candidate presented a largely pro-growth, pro-education message, which resonated with the conservatives in these communities. However, I saw that he is vulnerable over charter schools and school choice—the people in these communities want someone who will be strong in their support of these initiatives and he waffled. He also is vulnerable over how much he wants to expand federal programs into these communities. If this candidate doesn't beat Sheila Jackson Lee in the Democratic primary, we can use these issues to connect with these voters, who are obviously disenchanted with the incumbent.

Last night, I shared my observation with one of our CD-18 candidates, and I will share them with the other two soon, so that who ever wins our primary will be prepared for the general election campaign and for competing for the votes in these neighborhoods.

I know that there will be some fellow Republicans who may criticize me for going to an event like this one. But think for a second—how do you expect to learn how to connect with voters who agree with us, but who are used to voting for Democrats, unless we actually observe this type of event? Sometimes you actually have to go to where the opposition is meeting and challenge them with your presence. Remember, we didn't grow as a party over the last generation by avoiding contact with Democrats who agreed with us. In fact, such contact and conversion is how President Reagan, Governors Connally and Perry, and Judge Pressler, ultimately joined our party after being life-long Democrats, and that is how our conservative coalition grew. In order to attract them, we actually had to interact with them where they congregated.

So, let’s be clear: I do not support any Democratic candidate, nor do I embrace Dan Patrick's idea about creating a "Republicans for Jarvis Johnson" movement. Nothing "rubbed off" on me by attending this meeting—I am immune to the Democratic philosophy. Instead, I'm hoping my presence made those in the room who might support us realize we care about them; we are unafraid of going to where they live, work and meet; and we are going to compete for their vote.

Massachusetts, the Supreme Court Ruling and Future of the HCRP

Two political earthquakes struck last week: Brown’s victory in Massachusetts; and the Supreme Court’s ruling on campaign finance. Both developments were the result of battles that conservatives have long fought, and our immediate reactions to them were pure joy. However, as euphoric as Brown’s win remains, the Supreme Court’s ruling presents both challenges and opportunities to the Harris County Republican Party.

A wholly new political environment was created. PACs and 527 organizations are now irrelevant--and will probably disappear. Any organization--corporations, unions, chambers of commerce, trade associations, and issue-advocacy groups--now can freely publish endorsements, ads, and documentaries for candidates and issues. Right now this is a mixed-blessing for the GOP, because the left has as many, if not more, groups who are ready to independently spend money to support the Democratic Party and its candidates.

In the meantime, limits on candidates and parties are still in place, including: contribution limits for candidates; allocation restrictions for party organizations; prohibitions on coordinated campaign activities between candidates (and parties) and outside organizations; and the threat of recusal of a judge in any case involving corporations and other entities, whose independent advocacy significantly benefits the judge’s campaign.

The next Chair of the HCRP must address this new reality immediately. If I am elected, I will convene the best political and legal minds to create a strategy to take maximum advantage of this new situation, while helping our candidates and elected officials navigate it. As part of this new strategy, I will re-establish direct relationships with the business community. As evidence of my ability to build this bridge, last week I received the endorsement of the C Club, which is the first time the club has ever made an endorsement in a race for party chair.

We will need to treat the business community, as well as other pro-conservative organizations, as constituents with whom we work to develop our political agenda and support our candidates. I will create a strategy that is legal and ethical, and I will do so while we rebuild our organization to mobilize Republicans to vote in 2010 and 2012.

Old strategies will not be effective in this new environment. For example, our approach to candidate promotion must be more sophisticated than sending an ad-based “Chairman’s Report” by mail on the eve of Election Day. Not only are such late mailings ineffective when 75% of voters now vote early, but the current approach has allowed at least one Democrat to buy ads and has been designed primarily to benefit the incumbent chair’s re-election campaign. This must end.

In fact, let’s stop this practice now. The incumbent has just mailed a solicitation to all candidates on the primary ballot to pay for ads in a new “Chairman’s Report” for the primary. Let’s tell the incumbent that this practice is ineffective and improper, and challenge him to produce a Voter Guide that is even-handed and promotes the party’s candidates—not his campaign.

Let's take control of the new reality and use it to win elections, rather than continue the same, ineffective practices of the past.

Ed Hubbard
Candidate for Chair of the Harris County Republican Party
www.HubbardForHCRP.com

First Endorsement List Released

I am proud to release the first round of endorsements for my campaign. This list, and the names to follow, demonstrates the broad, wide support I have received and I am very honored to have the idividuals behind our efforts.

Betsy Lake
Former Chair of the Harris County Republican Party;
Former President of the Bay Area Republican Women;
Former President of the Greater Houston Council of Federated Republican Women;
Founder of United Republicans

Robert Shults
Precinct Chair—258
President of United Republicans,
Former President of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club

Kay Waghorne
Precinct Chair—642
Former President of the Cy-Fair Republican Women

Larry Tobin
Current Precinct Chair—90
Former President of the Clear Lake Republican Club
Former City Councilman--Taylor Lake Village

Kay Shillock
Former and New Precinct Chair—513
Former President of the Northwest Forest Republican Women;
Former President of the Greater Houston Council of Federated Republican Women

Justin Jordan
Former Precinct Chair—630
New Precinct Chair—76
Former President of the Texas chapter of College Republicans

Atemio Muniz, Jr.
New Precinct Chair—591
Founder of Conservador Alliance;
Statewide director of the Latino National Republican Coalition

Barbara Buxton
Precinct Chair—668

Matt Hefferman
Precinct Chair—127

Eric Walligura
Current Precinct Chair—265
New Precinct Chair—439

Eric Smith
Precinct Chair—460

Joe Spence
Precinct Chair—732

Becky Flowers
Precinct Chair—771

Carmen Cuneo
New Precinct Chair—210

Tom Hodges
Former Precinct Chair—440

Rita Huggler
Former Precinct Chair

Lo Wallace
Former Precinct Chair
Former President of Village Republican Women;
Board member of the Greater Houston Council of Federated Republican Women;
Board member of United Republicans

Sandie Myers
Houston Community College Board member;
Immediate Past President of the Daughters of Liberty Republican Women

Susan Kellner
Immediate Past President of the Spring Branch ISD School Board

Theresa Kosmoski
Member of the Spring Branch ISD School Board;
Immediate Past President of the Memorial West Republican Women

Lilian Norman Keeney
Mayor Pro Tem of Taylor Lake Village;
Currently 2nd Vice President, Greater Houston Council
District Director for Senate District 11 for the Texas Federation of Republican Women;
Former President of the Bay Area Republican Women

John Faulk
Candidate for U.S. Congress, District 18

Jon Keeney
Former candidate for the state legislature

Bill Moore
Former candidate for the Criminal District Court

Toni Anne Dashiell
Immediate Past President of the Texas Federation of Republican Women

Rebecca Williamson
Current Vice President of Programs for the Texas Federation of Republican Women;
Immediate Past First Vice President of the Texas Federation of Republican Women

Jo Konen
Immediate Past Vice President of Bylaws for the Texas Federation of Republican Women;
Former President of the Northwest Forest Republican Women;
Former President of the Greater Houston Council of Federated Republican Women

Jan Ott
Currently 2nd Vice President of the Texas Federation of Republican Women;
Director Greater Houston Pachyderm;
Immediate Past Treasurer of the Texas Federation of Republican Women;
Immediate past First VP of the Greater Houston Council of Federated Republican Women;
Founding President of the Cy-Fair Republican Women

Carolyn Hodges
Current 1st Vice President of the Texas Federation of Republican Women;
Director Greater Houston Pachyderm;
Immediate Past Regional Deputy President, Region II, of the Texas Federation of Republican Women;
Former President of the Greater Houston Council of Federated Republican Women;
Former President of the Village Republican Women

Carol Prince
Immediate Past President of the Village Republican Women

Gaye Neeley Wylie
immediate past president of the Bay Area Republican Women

Gail Shubot
Immediate Past President of the Houston Professional Republican Women

Sue Ann Lurcott
Immediate Past President of the Northwest Forest Republican Women

Patricia McCall
Former President of the Magic Circle Republican Women;
Former President of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club

Sue Kikis
Former President of the Northwest Forest Republican Women;
Former President of the Greater Houston Council of Federated Republican Women

Claudette Martin
Former President of the Northwest Forest Republican Women

Deborah Guitian Roan
Former President of the Bay Area Republican Women

Ruby Cubley
Former President of the Bay Area Republican Women

Carole Ragland
Former President of the Bay Area Republican Women

Joan Buschor
Officer of the Magic Circle Republican Women

Cathie Nenninger
Current officer of the Clear Creek Republican Women;
Past officer of the Bay Area Republican Women

J.D. Joyce
President of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club;
Board member of United Republicans

Alex Montgomery
President of the Pachyderm Club of North Houston


Claver Kamau-Imani
Founder of Raging Elephants.org;
Host of "The Christian Politician" Radio Show and blog;
Former director of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club

Jackelyn Viera Iloff
Candidate for Precinct Chair—499;
Founder and President of “Magdalena’s Table”;
Former Chair of the HCRP Finance Committee;
Creator and Former Chair of the HCRP “First Friday” Program;
Former aide to the Repbulican National Committee;
Former aide to Governor George Allen of Virginia

Rajada Fleming
Former officer of the Village Republican Women;
Officer of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club

John Fedorko
Former officer of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club

Nelson Fisher
Former President of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club

Robert Stevenson
Officer of the Greater Houston Pachyderm Club

David Norman
Former candidate for the state legislature

Barbara Jordan
Kingwood Republican Women

Joe Slovacek
Alvin Walker
Itze Soliz-Mathews
Don McFall
Lloyd Lake
Dr. Mark Fleming
Harold Wallace
Robyn Joyce
Hermann Buschor
Suzanne Testa
George Hrdlicka
Judy Hrdlicka
Kirk Whitehouse
John Manley
Larry Buxton
Bill Ott
Jim Prince
Steve Shaffer
Dr. Rekha Ramesh
Dr. G.S. Ramesh
Phillis Shults
Penny Uselton
Roxie Hefferman
Ilana M. Blomquist
John C. Blomquist
Mickie Comiskey
Charles Comiskey
Chuck Konen
Steve Liljeberg
Ed McCool
Debbie Lindeman
Brian Bayne
Cecil Bishop, Jr.
Tom Whitson
Vanessa Sudeth-Muse
Cindy Hemminger
David Hemminger
Joan Alford
Sally Stricklett
Roxanne Moore
Cindy Kueneke
David Kueneke
Gina Halle
Richard Halle
Kathleen Kearns
Phillip D. Sharp
Raymond G. Hofker
Fred Y. O. Ho
Joy Gregory
Ford Bankston
Patience Myers
Betty Howell
Lucy Forbes
Gienna Adovasio
Gianpaolo Garrone
Ruth Palmer
Robert Palmer
Karen Plante
Dawn Shull
Aaron Simpson
Terence Abrams
Donald K. Eckhardt
Debra Eldridge
Bonnie Norman
Liz Norman
Jeffrey Norman
Wallie Womack
Kevin Yankowsky

To be added to this list when we release future names, please click here, or emails us at HubbardForHCRP@gmail.com.

A Final Update on the Precinct Chair Filings

Well, the filing deadline for the Republican Primary has passed, and the campaign season is upon us. Soon I will be out on the campaign trail, but my focus for the last two weeks has been on our precinct chair predicament—we don’t have enough precinct chairs now, and not enough incumbent chairs were re-filing for their seats. As some of you may know, I’ve been posting updates about this issue on this website and on the Big Jolly Politics website.

When we started the year, we had about 450 precincts filled out of 874 precincts in the county. As of last night at 9:50 p.m., the HCRP posted that we had filings in about 454 precincts out of 885 precincts (11 new precincts were created last year). On the surface, one could say that we had not lost ground, but that really isn’t the whole story.

Through the remarkable efforts of many people and several organizations (especially those people connected with the local Tea Party movement), who recruited precinct chairs by focusing on filling vacant seats in order to expand the reach of the party, and who conducted training seminars for prospective chairs, 181 new people filed to become precinct chairs in Harris County. Again, this was a phenomenal effort and result. The net result meant that about 70 previously vacant precincts would now have GOP precinct chairs.

So what happened? Well, about 27% of the existing precinct chairs—more than 120—chose not to re-file. Therefore, many of our new recruits filed in occupied precincts just to maintain our presence in that precinct. The net result is that at least 60 occupied precincts will have new chairs, while 64 occupied precincts will become vacant.

That's such a shame--and a waste of a tremendous opportunity the HCRP had to expand its reach with all of this new energy. I know that Donna Boharich has worked very hard and deserves a lot of credit for getting the HCRP focused on the primary--this was not her problem to address, and the result is not her fault. Moreover, I have learned that an effort indeed was made in mid-December to finally contact the precinct chairs that had not already filed to find out what they were doing and to remind them to file, but that type of effort, just before the holidays, was too little too late.

I know that I seem like a broken record, but where was the incumbent Chair, our paid Executive Director, and the rest of the Richmond Avenue team on this issue all last year? Why weren't they canvassing the incumbents to determine who was going to run again, and then actively working to keep their seats filled? Why weren't they using their new-found attraction to the internet, and to Townhall audiences, to recruit precinct chairs? It isn't that hard. I was on the phone and using emails to make sure that a few of the precinct chairs who I knew had not re-filed were finding replacements, and that their replacements would file by the deadline yesterday--and that was just with a weekend's effort. Think of what could have been done with a concerted, focused effort by the current team over a period of months. While they were out performing to Townhall audiences and putting the incumbent's face on Voter Guides that were of no benefit to the party—and we were out recruiting new precinct chairs to fill the vacant seats—no one was minding the organization--and it failed once again. Another lost opportunity.

So why is any of this important? There are at least three reasons we should care about this predicament:

1. The precinct chairs are the "roots" of our grassroots organization. We can not grow the party without expanding our base into every neighborhood, and we will never permanently expand into every neighborhood unless we have a chair in every precinct where there are potential Republican voters. They form part of our farm team, and help find others to run for office in their communities to form the farm team; they help with ballot and election security; and they form the frontline that mobilizes our voters to vote and participate in our convention process.

2. The whole purpose of expanding the party is to elect Republicans, and there is a 7% average differential in turnout between those competitive precincts where we have a chair and those where we do not. Of the 64 currently-occupied precincts that we did not re-fill, we were competitive in all but a handful of them in the 2008 general election, and at least 27 of those precincts voted strongly Republican in that election. Of those 27 precincts, 11 had turnouts between 72% and 80%. A 7% drop in turnout in those precincts could spell disaster for our ticket this fall. It is clear that the presence of an effective precinct chair is key to our get-out-the-vote effort.

and

3. It is more difficult to recruit and approve precinct chairs outside the primary process. Because of the current Vacancy Committee process, coupled with the chronic failure to get a quorum of precinct chairs to attend the quarterly Executive Committee meetings, it is not unusual for a candidate to go a half year of more before he or she is approved to be a precinct chair. This drawn-out process is adding to our inability to put the "boots on the ground" we need to fight the Democrats.

I hope that the HCRP will place a priority on filling these 64 vacancies as soon as possible. To fill these chairs quickly, I propose that that the party immediately create a task force to focus on filling these seats as soon as possible, which must include creation of a “fast-track” process for expediting the candidates through the Vacancy Committee and approval process. We simply don't have the luxury to allow this process to drag-out for months, or even half a year or more, before these seats get filled.

In the meantime, I will continue working with the groups I have been working with to find precinct chair candidates for the remaining seats that the party historically has left vacant, and we will direct them to the Vacancy Committee.

To everyone who filed, and to everyone who worked so hard to bring new applicants into this process--thank you. Let's now get down to the hard work of rebuilding this party.

HCRP Finances - The Real Story

As the story about the HCRP's financial predicament and reporting are slowly coming to light, first at Big Jolly Politics, then the Texas Watchdog, and now the Houston Chronicle, I want to clear the air on a couple of points:

First, the two arguments that the incumbent is making in defense of his regime-that the checks in question may have been held and not deposited for months after they were written, that the HCRP raised $2.5 million dollars in 2008-show how out of touch this current leadership team is with sound management practices, and with reality. If the party actually had the checks in question and noted their receipt by acknowledging the contributors on the invitation and program for the annual dinner, but did not deposit them timely, this is highly unsound money management and risk management, and it must be reformed in order to protect the party from the risk of loss or theft in the future. As for the $2.5 million figure, here is the reality (based on the publicly filed reports covering the entire year of 2008):

* A little over $2.4 million passed through the HCRP accounts during 2008;
* Of that figure, over $1.9 came from judicial candidates' campaign accounts, or from the state party, to fund joint campaign activities-it was money raised by others for a specific purpose, dedicated to that purpose, and spent for that purpose-the HCRP did not raise this money itself, nor did it have any discretion as to how it would be spent;
* Of the remaining amount, the HCRP spent a little more than $416,000 on its own operations;
* It raised less than $300,000 to cover those operating expenses, from a contributor base of about 300 individuals-two of whom contributed about $85,000 of the total sum; and
* The remaining amount to cover the HCRP's expenses-$150,120-came from 46 campaign accounts from non-judicial elected officials and candidates, 31 individual candidates and elected officials, and 11 HCRP officials.

In reality, the ticket supported the party, and allowed it to keep the lights on at Richmond Avenue, not the other way around. This trend continued into 2009, as one elected official was the party's largest contributor during the first 6 months, giving $15,000 of the little over $100,000 the party reported it raised.

Second, as I called for before-and the other candidates have since echoed-we need an independent audit and inventory of the party immediately in order to:

* know what our baseline is for budgeting and fundraising needs;
* create an information base from which to institute new and better money-management practices and procedures for the HCRP going forward;
* re-instill confidence in our contributor base that we will handle their contributions wisely; and
* re-build credibility with our constituents that we can be trusted with handling public funds.

I hope you will join us in continuing to call for reform at Richmond Avenue.

Good News for a Transition to a New Chair

At last night’s dinner sponsored by the HCRP, it was announced that Gary Polland will be the co-chair for the local Victory 2010 Campaign, which is the party’s formal effort to support the election of the local Republican ticket next fall. This is good news for two reasons:

1. We are assured of a steady, experienced person being available to help the current team at Richmond Avenue during this critical election cycle; and

2, It will allow for a smooth transition to a new chair after the March primary.

One of the concerns that I have heard voiced over the last few months by both the current team at Richmond Avenue and others, was that changing leadership during the middle of the 2010 election cycle would be too disruptive, and it could hurt the ticket. With this new development, there should be no disruption felt by our elected officials and candidates if we win, and as we focus on implementing elements of our strategic plan.

In fact, to make sure that this positive signal is reinforced, I declare right now that I support this appointment, and, if I win election to the Chair in the March Primary, I will ask Gary to remain as co-chair of the Victory 2010 Campaign.

A Lesson from 2009 for 2010

Let me first start this post by congratulating Republicans Stephen Costello, Brenda Stardig and Al Hoang for their victories in Saturday's run-off election. They will join fellow Republicans Anne Clutterbuck and Michael Sullivan on the Houston City Council next year. Let me also extend congratulations across the aisle to our Mayor-elect, Annise Parker, as we all wish her—and the City we love—well during her term.

Every victory in a contested race means someone lost, and too many Republicans and conservative candidates lost winnable races in November and last Saturday. Some of these losses were heart-wrenchingly close after well-fought battles. Others were lost through mistakes and self-inflicted wounds. Most, I believe could have been won with more effective help from the HCRP.

Like many of you, I have struggled to find a silver lining in this cloud—a positive lesson to take with us into the political battles ahead in 2010. Then, as I watched the recriminations and blame fly in email after email over the last few days, a friend’s comment provided the perspective I needed. In talking about the run-off election, its aftermath, and what it means for our party, he made the following observation:

Ed has the foundation of faith and integrity to unite the party…that should be his focus. We can’t abandon values for the sake of victory. We need less big government and more church involvement to help people help themselves. Look around on who is feeding the poor at this time of year. Churches do it without notice and without seeking praise or recognition. That is not just the words from an ultra right guy. I simply believe it to be true.

For over a year now, I have tried to persuade you to look beyond the faults of our opponents—and those of our friends, too—in order to re-ignite our passion for our shared values, and then to fight for those values in every corner of this county with a positive agenda. At the heart of all of our beliefs in life, liberty, limited government, and effective local government, is a belief that government doesn’t love your neighbor, people do. It is people, working individually, and through their families, churches, civic organizations—and yes, through their local governments and schools, too—that have built our neighborhoods and sustained our society. Government (especially the state and federal government) should marshal the power it is given to protect the society we create and maintain, but it should not use such power to replace us in our duty to care for our children, our families, our schools, and our communities. To defeat the forces that would expand the role of government, we need to live by our principles—not by tearing down our opponents, but by helping up our neighbors.

To do that, we first must re-focus our party toward effectively promoting a positive agenda based on our shared principles, rather than continuing to fight over who among us is the purest in our commitment to those principles. If we Republicans, including all those who have become estranged from our party for whatever reason, unite, and then go out into the communities that we have ignored for too long and invite our neighbors who share our principles to join us in this effort, we can and will succeed in 2010, and for many years to come.

Growth will require Unity within the GOP

Not long ago I posted a summary of my criticism of statements made by a certain local conservative, who has been a close associate of the incumbent HCRP Chair. I posted the criticism both on my blog, and as a comment to a post on another site. The gist of my criticism was that I thought it was wrong for Republicans to inject the sexual orientation of one of the candidates for mayor as an issue into that race, rather than focus on the policies and agendas that candidate is advocating.

After we cut the skin with that issue, the Houston Chronicle tore off the scab and infected the community with an indefensible editorial cartoon depicting Dr. Steven Hotze and Gene Locke. For the record, I am not a fan of “political correctness,” and I support raucous debate of the issues in print and electronic editorials and cartoons. Moreover, I know that one rarely wins in a war of words with a newspaper. But the Chronicle really lost all perspective when it printed this cartoon.

Did the editors not understand the impact that image would have, not just on the individuals involved and their families, but on Evangelical Christians in our community who care deeply about the issues being discussed in this campaign, and on our African-American neighbors for whom images of bondage and submission carry profoundly dark collective memories? Obviously, decency, let alone shame and restraint, were absent from the decision-making process that led to the approval of that cartoon for publication.

However, the real point of this post is not to dwell on the Chronicle’s action, but to challenge my fellow Republicans and independent conservatives about how we will react and move forward into 2010. The lesson we must learn from this entire episode is the lesson I have been promoting for the last year: we must grow this party on the positive message of our shared principles; and to grow, we must first unite. We are stronger together than we are separately, and if we unite we can defeat the forces who find the Chronicle cartoon acceptable.

During most of 2009, I have been both heartened and concerned by the forces emerging on our side of the political spectrum. While those who want to strengthen the social-conservative core of our party by purging any dissent or dissenters, and those who have started various non-partisan conservative organizations, have created great energy for us, if we don’t use that energy to bring all who share our principles together and fight together, the GOP will break apart and there will be no effective political force to combat the Democrats.

Now is not the time for one faction or another of conservatism to try to take over exclusive control of our party, or walk-away to create a third-party—such an effort will assure our defeat by shrinking our movement. Then, the policies we all abhor will become law, and those who promote them will become our elected leaders, for the foreseeable future.

Instead, let’s use this episode to look in the mirror—to understand who we are, what we stand for, and who our allies are. Then, with that awareness, let’s unite. If we unite all of our allies behind our shared principles, we will form the strong foundation we need to grow. Then, 2010 truly will be the watershed year for conservatism and the GOP that we all want.

I Hate To Say I Told You So...

Well, we all knew this was going to happen at some point. As I have been pointing all for quite a while now, the financial problems of the Harris County Republican Party have finally come to light in the media. Today, Texas Watchdog broke the story wide open, you can read the story here. I first raised this issue in September at a forum with the Chairman and Mr. Simpson, hosted by the Memorial West Republican Women, a recap of the event can be found here. I even asked about the very donors who are identified in this article, because their names appeared as sponsors on the program for the Annual Dinner, but there was no record of any contribution having been received by the party in its June 30th Report.

You might recall that just last month, I wrote this blog where I promised, once elected I would conduct a full audit of the HCRP financial situation right away as we are also preparing to hit the ground running into the November general election in 2010.

Together, we must solve this problem and move toward the future. We have important elections to win in November 2010 and November 2012. I'm asking for you to join our efforts today. Please go here and get involved with my campaign to reunite our party around the conservative principles that we share, and let us follow President Reagan's example, join the revolution today.

Press Release Announcement

REPUBLICAN ED HUBBARD OFFICIALLY FILES FOR
CHAIR OF THE HARRIS COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY

HOUSTON - Today, Ed Hubbard officially filed to place his name on the March 2010 Republican Primary ballot as a candidate for the office of Chair of the Harris County Republican Party. The Taylor Lake Village resident and life-long Republican defeated a two-term incumbent (and former Houston Police Chief) in a 10-county race to become the party’s nominee for a place on a local appellate court in 2008. He now will be challenging the 8-year incumbent party chair, who is seeking a fifth term in the wake of the defeat suffered by the local GOP in the 2008 elections, and amid lingering questions about the recent management of the county party.

“The local GOP needs more than a cheerleader—it needs a leader,” Hubbard declared. “It needs a leader who will listen to local Republicans, respond to their concerns, and, ultimately, make the party competitive in this growing metropolitan county. I have run a law firm; managed people and budgets; raised money for scholarships, non-profit entities, and political campaigns; and served on the boards of a non-profit entity and a church foundation, and as an officer of a school board. I also ran a successful 10-county primary race in the last election cycle, and learned what is working and what is not working within our party. Based on these varied experiences, I believe I understand what needs to be fixed and have developed the skills needed to fix it.”

“To win elections in the future, we need to unite, grow, modernize, and better manage the party. To do this we need to re-commit ourselves to Reagan’s vision for the Republican Party: we need to apply our shared principles to issues that are relevant to people’s lives; and we need to include not just all local Republicans in this mission, but also all people who share our principles,” said Hubbard. “This is why, over the past year, I have nurtured new leaders and supported new organizations that are building relationships for the GOP in our African-American and Latino communities, and why I prepared and promoted a strategic plan for the future of the HCRP.”

Uniting and growing the party by being more inclusive is a key element of Hubbard’s plan for the party. Hubbard stated that he intends to re-involve long-time activists and clubs in the party organization and activities, while including new people and neighborhoods in the party by “permanently expanding the grassroots into every precinct, community, and school district.”

Hubbard offered this challenge to local Republicans: “if you are ready to seize the future of our party with the courage to look beyond the arguments and resumes of the past, then I ask you to join our effort as a volunteer or contributor, and to vote for me in the March primary.”

Hubbard has three daughters: Joanna, 22 (now of Los Angeles, California); Becca, 20, and Meredith, 10. Becca served last year as a delegate to the Republican Senate District Convention for Senate District 11. Hubbard is married to Johnnie Hill Hubbard, a native Texan who grew-up in Pasadena, Texas.

Visit www.HubbardForHCRP.com for more information.

The future transition—an Audit and Inventory will be needed as we hit the ground running

Questions have been raised over the last few months about the accuracy of the reporting of contributions and expenditures by the HCRP; about the failure to timely or completely pay payroll, rent, and vendor bills; about payments made by the HCRP to a company owned by the current Executive Director; about the relationship between the incumbent’s campaign and other organizations and PACs; and about who has possession or access to the property and bank accounts of the party. If I am elected to be the next Chair of the HCRP, I will swiftly move to conduct an audit of the party, and an inventory of its property.

I do not plan to use this audit and inventory as a basis for recrimination or criticism of the outgoing team, nor am I committing to this course of action because I think there has been any malfeasance by the current team at Richmond Avenue. Instead, I am doing it so that the party and its contributors will have confidence in the new direction of the party: confidence that we know the actual baseline condition of the property at the time we take over; confidence that we have complete possession and control of the party’s assets; confidence that we understand all current obligations of the party; and confidence that our budget and fundraising needs are based on reality.

The minute my term begins, I will be ready to assume managerial control of the party:

* We will have the party management team in place.
* Based on discussions I am having now, we will have a new Executive Director ready to start work and a bookkeeper, as well as an accounting firm ready to help with the audit and inventory.
* We will have a team of volunteers ready to get the office functioning and be prepared for a special election for the Senate, if that is scheduled before November, 2010.
* We will have a preliminary budget plan and a fundraising plan ready to implement.
* We will have a team ready to implement a new design and function for the party on the Internet, and to create or update a modern, stand-alone database of Republican voters and contributors for the parties use.

In fact, we will be prepared to implement these under any condition we may inherit: if the party is handed over intact as it now exists; or, if we walk into an empty office on Richmond Avenue, as Betsy Lake found when she took over the party many years ago.

I intend to fully cooperate with the current leadership to have a smooth and fast transition. Although Section 171.028 of the Texas Election Code gives the current team up to 30 days to fully transfer the books and records, the incumbent is on notice now that there may be a change in administration, and so, for the good of the party and its ticket in 2010, I hope he and his team will be ready to hand-over the property of the party immediately after the election.

What I Intended to Say Last Tuesday Evening

Because a scheduled speaker had canceled on the Clear Lake Republican Club at the last minute, it attempted to invite each of the candidates for the Chair of the HCRP to speak to the club about the meaning of the November, 2009 elections. Paul Simpson and I responded and agreed to attend; the club’s program director was not aware that Don Large had entered the race, so he did not receive an invitation (though he did attend the meeting after he learned of the event); and the incumbent, as usual, did not respond.

Then, just hours before the meeting, and after emails had been sent to the members about the meeting, the Executive Director of the HCRP contacted the President of the CLRC and tried to get him to cancel the program. As a compromise, and to help the club (even though its bylaws did not prohibit the program that had been planned), Paul and I agreed to limit our remarks to avoid saying anything about the local Republican Party, or our race—and we honored that agreement.

However, I never agreed to remain silent about what happened.

There are two problems with what happened Tuesday: it is further evidence that the paid and volunteer staff of the HCRP, as well as its assets, are being used inappropriately to support of the incumbent’s campaign; and that the current team at Richmond Avenue will attempt to intimidate any opposition to its continued control of the party. I will not be so intimidated, and I will publicly disclose and fight any future attempt to apply such tactics in this campaign. These practices are antithetical to the legacy of Lincoln and Reagan that we say we embrace.

So, in addition to what I did say Tuesday night, here is what I was prepared to say about the HCRP, and the behavior of some of the people who are supporting the current team at Richmond Avenue—

Since late last year, when I, and others, began agitating for real reform of the local party, the incumbent and his team have generated a lot of noise and activity, but they have not figured out how to turn this activity into real results: they have not incorporated the clubs and newly energized citizens into the party; they have not embraced conservatives in communities of color; they still don’t understand that an election now takes place over two weeks, not just on the last day; and they are providing no value to the effort to elect Republicans.

The prime example of these failures can be found in the Voter’s Guide that the party mailed on the eve of the final Election Day. The party charged candidates from $5,000 to $12,500 to run ads in the Guide; it allowed Democrats to buy ads in the Guide for races in which they were running against a Republican; and the Guide was not received by voters until after more than a week of early voting had finished. The only effective result of this endeavor was to put the incumbent’s face, and his message about his re-election campaign, in the hands of 60,000 voters—free of charge to his campaign.

The incumbent’s self-promotion is not helping the party grow or win elections—nor are the words of his long-time associates.

The recent quoted comments about Annise Parker, which were made by long-time associates of the incumbent, are simply deplorable. They should not be embraced by our party. If they are embraced, we will drive people away from this party who otherwise share our principles.

I am not endorsing either Democrat left in the Mayoral run-off; but I believe that Ms. Parker, like any other candidate, should be judged by political leaders based on her competence to be Mayor, her political experience, and on the policy positions she is actually promoting—not on her sexual orientation. If some individuals feel a strong religious impulse to oppose a certain candidate, so be it—that is their right; but it is beneath the dignity of our party's heritage—as the party of Lincoln and Reagan—for the political leaders of our party, or their surrogates, to join and give support to such an impulse as the official, or de facto, position of our party. I know of no political leader in this county, no matter how good a person he or she may be, who is on the short list for canonization—we are all sinners. If the GOP starts to base its membership and support on the prerequisite of having a clean record with God, we will become the smallest political party in the world in record time.

The restraint I am advocating is not capitulation to ideas, agendas, or behaviors we do not condone—it is simply the right way to treat a fellow citizen and neighbor.

As we face the 2010 elections, we Republicans must focus positively and aggressively on the serious issues that confront this community now, and will confront it in the future. The evidence from the 2009 election cycle shows that the current team at Richmond Avenue still doesn’t understand how to do this.