It's Only Just Begun

In case you missed the news this morning, Speaker Pelosi has issued marching orders to members of Congress leaving Washington for their two week recess. Among the many lowlights of Speaker Pelosi's directives is the following:

"With the passage of health insurance reform, this District Work Period is a critical time to go on offense.” Pelosi continued, "Convey the immediate benefits of health reform to your constituents (such as better prescription drug benefits for seniors, tax credits for small businesses and prohibiting insurance companies from canceling your policy if you get sick).”

The Hill reported: "Democrats are bracing for significant losses in the House and Senate this fall, but believe they can at least mitigate expected mid-term losses by aggressively touting the healthcare bill and moving to other issues, such as financial regulatory reform, that they believe put Republicans on the defensive.

Obama kicked into campaign mode Thursday, saying he welcomed a fight with Republicans over healthcare. If the GOP wants to repeal the bill, it should “go for it,” the president said."

In a memo to his members, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Friday stressed that Republicans would work not only to repeal the healthcare law, but to “replace it with solutions that will protect jobs and lower Americans’ health costs.”

Boehner said his party would “repeal ObamaCare’s job-destroying tax hikes and mandates and replace them with common-sense, market-based solutions that cover Americans with existing conditions.”

Fellow Republicans, I don't need to tell you that when the one side goes on offense, the other side can only respond by going on defense. So, my advice to our side: Let's go on offense, FIRST. Whether it's in conversations with friends or family members, opportunities to speak with your local, state or congressional representatives, or online in forums or your private email blasts, go on offense, be armed with facts and truth, and be civil in your efforts to promote he conservative cause.

Minority Leader Boehner has given us some pointers and some direction. Congressman Paul Ryan provided a great number of ideas and details in a New York Times column Friday. Byron York wrote a column this week detailing the lack of support nationally for the health care bill the democrats forced through Congress last Sunday. All of this points to the obvious: The democrats are coming home to sell us on something we didn't want in the first place, they're now in the position of having to tell us after the fact that we really did want it after all.

Armed with the truth, the facts and with history; Americans across the country, let's go to work for our cause.

A Response to Terry Lowry: We Republicans have a Choice for Unity, and a Choice against the taint of Pay-for-Play politics

For most of the 33 years since Ronald Reagan first proposed to build a New Republican Party with a coalition of traditional Republicans, economic conservatives and social conservatives, the great moral issues of our time have involved abortion and the institution of the traditional family. As serious as these issues are, they should not be used as a weapon at this hour in our history to destroy fellow Republicans.

We Republicans have struggled within our family over these issues because of the teachings of our respective faiths, and because of our commitment to the inalienable rights of life and liberty. Even when some in our party might disagree on where lines should be drawn in the political and legal arena, however, we generally have agreed that abortion is wrong, and that the traditional family should be protected. That consensus led virtually all Republicans to support the appointment or election of conservative judges and justices to state and federal courts, including Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Samuel Alito.

Unfortunately, there continue to be those among us who would rather pick and fight a civil war against our friends and allies in this party over these issues, rather than try to find common ground to advance our shared principles. I believe this approach is the wrong, and that it is self-defeating in the end. In fact, Reagan noted that this tension would exist within the “new” party he was proposing when he said:

"I want the record to show that I do not view the new re vitalized Republican Party as one based on a principle of exclusion. After all, you do not get to be a majority party by searching for groups you won't associate or work with. If we truly believe in our principles, we should sit down and talk. Talk with anyone, anywhere, at any time if it means talking about the principles of the Republican Party. Conservatism is not a narrow ideology nor is it the exclusive property of conservative activists."

For the last 15 months, I talked to our friends in this party about our principles, and about revitalizing our party to elect Republicans and promote Reagan’s agenda--but, I also listened. I heard so much about what we agree coming from people who had labeled themselves, or who had been labeled by others, as inhabiting separate factions within this party, that it gave me hope that we could stop fighting each other and focus on fighting the Democrats. I built on what I heard to form a coalition of supporters from every faction in this party, to run for HCRP Chair, and to successfully make the run-off election. At the core of what we built was the recognition that to elect Republicans we must grow, but to grow, we must first unite.

Unfortunately, earlier today, I saw the first salvo in this run-off election from those who would rather exclude fellow Republicans whom they have labeled as being in a different camp within this party—it was ugly, and it was a lie. It came through a Facebook post by Terry Lowry, a precinct chair, supporter of Jared Woodfill, radio host, and proprietor of the LinkLetter. I first met Terry in early 2008, and through discussions with him I know we agree on much: we support the platform of the Republican Party of Texas; we are pro-life; and we want to protect the traditional family from the political and legal assault promoted by Democratic-aligned interests groups. He knows that I am not an ally of pro-abortion politics or the “homosexual” political and legal agenda. And yet, he smears me by smearing some Republicans who have supported me—who want to unite all of the factions of the party like I do—because some of our friends in this party draw lines on these issues differently than I do, or Terry does. This politics of lies, smears, innuendos, and exclusion is beneath not only the Christianity that Terry and I share, but it also is beneath the principles of the party Reagan tried to build. To Terry, I simply ask: Have you no shame? To Jared, I simply ask: Do you condone this divisive conduct?

Why is Terry doing this? I don’t know, but maybe it has to do with the fact that last Thursday I dared to criticize his use of the LinkLetter (and similar mailers promoted by a few other individuals), to act as a self-anointed gatekeeper to the local Republican nominations. I dared to criticize his simultaneous promotion of endorsements and the sale of advertising in the same races, which has created the appearance to many that prospective candidates in our party have to pay Terry (and others) in order to have a chance of winning a local Republican primary. I dared to state that the whiff of Pay-for-Play should not exist in our party.

Ultimately, it is for you the Republican voter to choose which path to follow—Terry’s path of perpetual war with our friends and allies in this party, or the path I am offering. If you want to unite and grow around our shared principles and win elections, you have a choice to make between the politics of lies, smears, innuendos and exclusion that have divided us for too long, and the politics of unity against a common foe. If you want to rid our party of the whiff of Pay-for-Play tactics, and of self-anointed gatekeepers, and take your party back and make it the inclusive, welcoming majority party built on timeless conservative principles that Reagan dreamed of, you have a choice to make.

First Radio Commercial Released

Endorsements or Spin? You be the judge.

You can tell that we are getting closer to the start of early voting—endorsements are flying, as is the political spin that surrounds every campaign. Ever since the C Club of Houston (now joined by United Republicans of Harris County) announced its endorsement of me, the fur has been flying at Richmond Avenue. Now, Gary Polland has weighed in—as is his right. Welcome to the debate, Gary.

As endorsements go, the incumbent and I are now even as to the former Harris County Party Chairs who built the modern Republican majority in this county: I have Betsy Lake, under whose leadership the county first went Republican; and Jared now has Gary, who built a strong operation upon the foundation of Betsy’s success. I am sure that Jared would concur that we are both proud and appreciative of these respective endorsements.

What is odd about some of the recent endorsements Jared has received, including the most recent one from Gary Polland, is that they are not really typical endorsements. Instead, they appear to be nothing more than vehicles to create or support talking points for his campaign. First, they contain short accolades of Jared’s ability to talk about public-policy issues, and of his service to the party, without much discussion of his overall management of the party, which has allowed the organization Betsy and Gary built to wither over the last 8 years. Then, these accolades are coupled with criticisms of the rest of us who are running. These criticisms are then immediately seized by Bill Kneer and Richard Dillon—two men who are supposed to be working for the party, not Jared’s campaign—who then use them as the basis to spin more criticisms on their Facebook pages.

Do Jared’s supporters really think that their approach helps the party in the long run? Although I find the issue that was raised about me by Gary to be fair game to debate, I have addressed my experience for this job—both politically and organizationally—for months, in public meetings, in emails, and on my website. I will let the voters decide whether the party’s problems can be fixed from inside the current HCRP “cocoon” with the same group that has run it into the ground, or whether it needs fresh thinking and action. Obviously, members of the C Club, United Republicans, and many leaders of our affiliated clubs and organizations agree with me that the party can’t be fixed using the current approach.

But regardless of the arguments made against me, let's all remember that this race is not about the 1990s, it’s about the future.

If you check the endorsements that I have posted, you will not see criticism of the incumbent (or anyone else)—only a list of people making a statement of positive support for me. That is how it should be.

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

A Message From Ed Hubbard About Recent Disinformation

My Fellow Republican,

Since late Friday afternoon you may have received an email from Kathy Haigler announcing her support for one of my opponents to be the next Chairman of the Harris County Republican Party. I respect Kathy's decision, as I do the decision of everyone within this party to choose a candidate in this race—that’s why we embrace competition.

However, in the email she also made incorrect assertions about the amount of money I had contributed to the party, and a false accusation that I gave a large contribution to a Democratic candidate in 2001. I could have ignored the former mistake, but the latter accusation was patently false and demeaning. I have never contributed to a Democrat, and the only candidate I ever gave that much money to was George W. Bush in 2000.

Within minutes of receiving this email, a review of the Texas Ethics Commission records indicated that, indeed, the contributor was another Ed Hubbard--one from Granbury, Texas. If I could find this information that quickly, so could Kathy. This was a sloppy and irresponsible accusation by Kathy, and I immediately asked Kathy to issue a retraction of her disinformation, which she had already forwarded widely within the party. As of the time of sending this email, I have not received any response—no apology, no promise of a retraction, nothing. This silence in the face of such a clear mistake is beneath the dignity of the office of Secretary of our state party, which she currently holds.

If you are not familiar with me, I have been incredibly open during the entire campaign process. I released what became known as "The Hubbard Plan", shortly after the election of 2008. No other candidate has put forward such a plan to detail how they would lead the party, including the current chairman. In the spirit of Ronald Reagan, I have been going from one end of the county to another, having conversations about the greatness of our party, the greatness of Texas and the greatness of America. I have been forthcoming on my website, on Facebook and on my blog, about my ideas and about my plans for the future of the Harris County Republican Party.

I thank you for taking the time to read this email. I have received the support of many great individuals in and around Harris County (you can view that list here), and these attempts to distribute disinformation not only offends them, but it offends those of us who have worked to build the party up by finding the best in people and working with them, not attempting to destroy those who disagree with us.

If I win this race, I will no longer tolerate such behavior among fellow Republicans in this county.

All my best,

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

**UPDATE**
Saturday morning 8:50am

Late last night Kathy Haigler sent out the following retraction/correction of her earlier email:

Republican Friends,

I made a huge mistake in not checking all my facts before I sent out the email this afternoon. Although I stand by my endorsement of Jared Woodfill, I wish to now correct my own misinformation: the people who gave $2,500 to John Sharp in 2001 were Edward and Gerry Hubbard of Granbury, TX, and that is not the same Ed Hubbard running for Harris County Chairman.

I am sending this note of retraction to everyone I sent the original message to, and I ask that if you forwarded my e-mail to anyone else, that you also forward them this correction.

I apologize to Ed Hubbard for any anxiety from my incorrect statement about that donation.

Kathy Haigler

Kathy and I also traded private emails at about midnight. With this correction, and based on our private conversation, I thank Kathy for her effort to correct her mistake, and I retain my respect for her as a leader of our party, and as a friend. We both now consider this issue over, and ask everyone else in our Republican family to consider it over as well.

Ed