#TXLEGE: Pete Flores might be the Biggest Integrity Upgrade of All Time

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

During Policy Orientation last week, Senator Pete Flores spoke on the panel: "South Texas is Texas Too: Bringing South-Texas Priorities to Austin and D.C."  It was a good discussion.  Mostly about South Texas' impact on the broader economies of both Texas and the United States.

Throughout the discussion, however, we kept coming back to one thought: Pete Flores' predecessor.

Pete Flores' predecessor, for those who don't remember, was this guy.  Also this guy.  And this guy.

He's also this guy:

SAN ANTONIO — The courtroom was silent and thick with anxiety Thursday morning as the judge’s deputy read the verdicts: “Guilty,” “guilty,” “guilty” — 11 times over, and on all felony counts.

State Sen. Carlos Uresti sat stone-faced, his gaze directed at the deputy, as he heard the ruling that throws into question his two-decade career in the Texas Legislature and opens up the possibility of more than a century in federal prison and millions of dollars in fines.

If upheld on appeal, the 11 felony charges — including multiple counts of fraud and money laundering — would render the San Antonio Democrat ineligible to continue serving as a state legislator. Uresti, an attorney by trade, would also be disbarred.

....

Uresti was charged last year in connection with FourWinds Logistics, a now-bankrupt oilfield services company that perpetrated a Ponzi scheme against its investors. Uresti served as general counsel for FourWinds and owned 1 percent of the company. He also earned commission for recruiting investors, according to court documents.

Several of the company’s leaders pleaded guilty to fraud charges before Uresti’s case even went to trial, some of them in plea agreements to testify for the government. Prosecutors argued that Uresti had used his prestigious reputation to lend credibility to an unknown company; several investors testified that Uresti’s presence reassured them that their money would be safe with FourWinds. But Uresti’s lawyers countered that the lawmaker was never aware of, or involved in, the company’s shady dealings.

Uresti’s co-defendant, former FourWinds consultant Gary Cain, was also found guilty on all counts.

....

The prominent and at times salacious case has drawn dozens of unaffiliated observers to the courthouse over the past month. The courtroom was particularly packed for three days of testimony from Uresti’s former legal client Denise Cantu, who lost most of the $900,000 she invested in FourWinds. Cantu — who said she had an affair with Uresti — won that money with his legal representation in a wrongful death suit after her son and daughter were killed in 2010 car accident.

That's pretty much what you need to know about Pete Flores' predecessor (although the strong stomached can read more here).

By contrast, Pete Flores is just a guy who wants to maximize economic growth in South Texas.  We don't necessarily agree with every idea he has to accomplish that objective.  Still, our objections to the current Texas Senator from District 19 is limited to a few policy issues.

It's quite the disparity.

Bottom Line: The difference between the last two Senators from SD-19 speaks for itself.

#TXLEGE: The Texas Senate needs to STOP giving the Austin Chronicle easy material

"God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."
John 4:24

Longtime readers know there is no media outlet this author despises more than the Austin Chronicle; which is why it kills us that they got this one 100% correct:

Sex and the Senate
What will it take to curb sexual harassment at the Texas State Capitol?
BY MARY TUMA, FRI., JAN. 25, 2019

Not more than two days into the 86th Texas Legislature, the 150-member House of Representatives approved a new, stronger reporting process to secure justice for victims of sexual harassment at the Capitol. The unprecedented (at least in recent history) move comes in the wake of the #MeToo movement, which ousted abusive male figures from their perches in politics, journalism, and Hollywood. And it follows a string of shocking media reports from last session that alleged harassment in the halls of the Capitol building from Democrats and Republicans alike over several years. Those reports ignited conversation within both legislative chambers on how best to respond to inappropriate behavior moving forward.

However, one body is noticeably working more steadfastly – and openly – on the issue than the other.

The House Committee on Administration acted quickly, proposing a first draft in December 2017 that was seen as a solid start that needed more work. Former Speaker Joe Straus then created a working group in May 2018 to examine the Texas House's sexual harassment policy and recommend ways to improve it. The 10-member group, led by Reps. Donna Howard, D-Austin, and Linda Koop, R-Dallas (who lost her re-election bid in November), was tasked with researching best practices in other states to "prevent and eradicate" misconduct in the Legislature. The latest iteration, approved as a resolution by a unanimous vote of the House on Jan. 9 after months of review, moves misconduct complaints to a House investigating committee with subpoena power, adding real teeth to a once-feeble policy.

Meanwhile, the Senate – recently encumbered by allegations of lewd behavior against one of its most powerful members, Georgetown Republican Charles Schwertner, has taken a slower approach. While the Senate elaborated its misconduct policy from one to six pages some five months after the House released its first draft, it has no plans to hold hearings or take a formal vote as the House did. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, never as engaged on the issue as Straus, also opted not to conduct a Senate investigation into Schwertner, instead taking the wait-and-see route as a University of Texas investigation played out. Both the Senate's weaker policy and its inaction in the Schwertner case have drawn criticism on the state's editorial pages, including a piece penned by former Sen. Wendy Davis.

During the few months of the current regular session, the Senate has the power to strengthen and codify its rules, but will it? Or does the upper chamber hope the issue of sexual misconduct – and public complaints against its members – gradually falls by the wayside?

The article goes on to discuss everything we already know.  We recommend reading the whole thing, but you already know  the names.  Carlos Uresti, Borris Miles, Craig Estes, Charles Schwertner....

The Chronicle then contrasts the reaction between the two chambers.  While we think they give both Joe Straus and the house more credit than they deserve, at least the House is trying.  The Senate, meanwhile, hasn't done anything meaningful.

The Texas Senate's political opponents have noticed.

Unfortunately, they're not wrong.

It gets better:

The Senate's inaction prompted Wendy Davis, who served two terms in the chamber representing Ft. Worth, to pen a critical editorial in the Statesman earlier this month demanding that the upper house get its act together. Among her chief complaints: There remains no legitimate recourse for people who are sexually harassed by legislators; there is no independent, third-party investigator to whom such complaints can be made; the Senate policy fails to define consequences for violations and has not extended its subpoena power, which could have compelled Schwertner (or others) to testify or provide information.

"What happened after the credible allegations against Sen. Schwertner – and also Sens. Miles and Uresti – starkly highlights how broken the system is," Davis told us. "I found myself feeling very upset and frustrated after reading the UT report. I was angry on behalf of the young woman and on behalf of many others who have endured sexual harassment at the Capitol. It's disappointing that the Senate appears disinterested in further investigating the incident."

....

Davis slams the policy as "a little more than window dressing, but not a whole lot more." She notes the "glaring differences" between Straus' leadership and Patrick's. "Straus supported the effort in an authentic and sincere way, with an open process and a work group," said Davis. "On the Senate side, there is more of an appearance of a process, but without any real desire to hear from experts and people who may have been on the receiving end of sexual harassment at the Capitol. To me, the process looked more like a kangaroo court."

There appears to be a "greater interest in protecting the body than in protecting young women working at the Capitol," says Davis. "It's often part and parcel of the way elected bodies function – if you protect your members, you gain their loyalty." Sexual misconduct at the Capitol is an open secret among members, she says, and she had her own brush with harassment as a freshman senator. During a social, UT-affiliated event, a House member, clearly inebriated, touched her inappropriately. She says it took that member three years to apologize; she never reported the incident because the Senate's policy did not make clear where or who to report to. Even if there had been a direct path, there was no hope that anything would come of it because there were no defined consequences, she says.

"We need to apply continued pressure on the Senate," said Davis. "We cannot give them a pass on this."

You know the situation is bad when you're getting hammered by Wendy Friggin' Davis...and she's completely right.

It's pathetic.

Bottom Line: You can't blame the other team for swinging the bat when you're the one lobbing softballs down the middle of the plate....

#TXLEGE: Hot Mess continues to get Hotter

"Can a man take fire to his bosom,
And his clothes not be burned?"
Proverbs 6:27

Apparently, Dan Patrick thought it would be a good idea to go run his mouth to the Dallas Morning News.  Patrick's interview consisted of rationalization filled verbal diarrhea mixed with Olympic level mental gymnastics.  Aka. Not good.

• Patrick: "Senator Seliger, on this particular radio show, has called out Senator Buckingham and Senator Kolkhorst and Senator Perry by name, criticizing them. He, I’m told, and you’ll have to check the facts, but I’m told by them he called them, called Lois and Dawn, ‘gutless,’ you know, selling out to the conservative movement."
  
  Except, apparently, that never happened.

• Patrick: "He, I’m told, and you’ll have to check the facts, but I’m told by them he called them, called Lois and Dawn, ‘gutless,’ you know, selling out to the conservative movement. That does not go down well with members. He’s had a very sharp showdown on the floor with a female senator, dropping the f-word, because he was unhappy with the senator’s vote. These were things, Lauren, I just kind of heard about but I discovered in the last couple of days."
  
  Dan Patrick being oblivious to the Texas Senate not being the best working environment for women...you don't say!

• Patrick: "So it wasn’t his votes. It’s the, it’s the, what’s the word I’m looking for? It was just the way he went about it on the floor and putting amendments on the bills that put members in a very difficult situation."
  
  That's called politics.

• Patrick: "So I didn’t take him off Finance or off Higher Ed because of his votes. I need people – we have a lot of serious business to do and I need people who are on the team, pulling together."
  
  He literally just said one thing then contradicted himself in the next sentence.

• Patrick: "I didn’t see moving him from Higher Ed to Agriculture as a demotion, by the way."
  
  That's preposterous.  It's also insulting to the intelligence of anyone who hears it.  If Patrick genuinely believes this, he's deeper in denial than we thought.

• Patrick: "Finance — I told senators when I became lieutenant governor, ‘I think every senator should have the chance to serve a session or two on Finance’ because until you serve on Finance, you don’t have a complete view of how the process works."
  
  That's not a bad idea in terms of running the chamber, but doesn't change the fact that leaving Seliger on Finance was a face-saving solution to keep him out of the way.

• Patrick: "Uresti had been in the Legislature for 20 years and never been on Appropriations or Finance...."
  
  Polka dot thong.

• Patrick: "You know, this particular senator told me, this female senator, she’s never had a man talk to her in her entire life anywhere like he talked to her on the floor."
  
  This coming from a guy who missed the first day of session to hang out with Donald Trump.

• Patrick: "You know, Lauren look, if somebody said that about you, I would take the same position. It’s just inappropriate. It doesn’t matter. We just went through an hour, an hour and a half training on sexual harassment. Lois Kolkhorst worked all the interim to look at this issue and to be that, you know — Sherry Sylvester is a 30-year plus professional. She’s not ‘some lady.’ She’s not a ‘messenger,’ which I also thought demeaning. I mean, you’re a professional writer. I wouldn’t talk to you in that way."
  
  Guy who 5 paragraphs earlier was bragging about putting Carlos Uresti on the Finance committee now wants female reporter to give him kudos taking for an hour and a half long class.
  
  It's a shame the phrase 'mansplaining' has been so badly abused over the years, because if it were ever appropriate....

• McGaughy: I have to bring up the Sen. Schwertner issue because it’s been an issue that’s been raised in light of all of this. We haven’t seen a similar statement from you that perhaps he should he removed from his vice chairmanship, or, he says he didn’t send this text to this young lady –
  
  Patrick: No, I think you saw me act very clearly. He asked for a lighter schedule.
  
  McGaughy: I’m sorry?
  
  Patrick: He asked for a lighter schedule.
  
  To use the phrase "He asked for a lighter schedule" in describing this situation is, at best, an extremely poor choice of words.

• Patrick: "They are two totally different issues. The one issue he was accused of something where there was no finding and no one has come forward. There is no place for us to go with that. This is a separate issue. This is something said in public on a radio station about a professional woman that every senator – I haven’t talked to every senator – but Democrats and Republicans alike, men and women, were appalled."
  
  You're not seriously trying to rationalize this Seliger situation as being worse than the one with Schwertner in terms of treatment of women...are you?!?

• McGaughy: "Sen. Seliger also said you’ve sent a message to other senators. You’ve talked about being a team player. He’s a free agent now. He can do whatever he wants. Do you have a concern about him going rogue?
  
  Patrick: No.
  
  WELL.  YOU.  SHOULD.  (See what we said above about Patrick being deeper in denial than we thought).

• Patrick also compared himself to Tom Brady.

Bottom Line: Dan Patrick didn't do himself any favors in this interview.

Castro launches campaign (for Governor in '22)

"There are many plans in a man’s heart,
Nevertheless the Lord’s counsel—that will stand."
Proverbs 19:21

We spent today in meetings related to session, but apparently this happened:

SAN ANTONIO — Julián Castro made it official Saturday: He is running for president.

The former U.S. housing secretary and San Antonio mayor made the long-anticipated announcement at Plaza Guadalupe, near where he grew up on the city's West Side. It came a month after Castro formed an exploratory committee, a mere formality on his way to unveiling a 2020 bid that for months appeared likely.

"I'm running for president because it's time for new leadership, it's time for new energy and it’s time for a new commitment to make sure that the opportunities that I had are available to every American," he said.

Blah, blah, blah...

Understand something: Julian Castro will not be the Democrat presidential nominee.  The only elections in which Julian Castro has ever run have been municipal elections in San Antonio.   A municipal campaign anywhere in Texas is, to put it mildly, a different animal from a presidential campaign.

For those unaware: Most Texas cities hold their municipal elections in May.  That means dramatically lower turnout than a November general election.  Heck, that usually means dramatically lower turnout than March primaries.

Consider Castro's three elections as mayor.

2009:

2011:

2013:

This is a guy who has never gotten more than 43,000 votes in an election.  Furthermore, his vote totals plunged as San Antonio got to know him better.  Castro was widely expected to lose his 2015 campaign, which was why Obama offered him the golden parachute at HUD in the first place.

And we're supposed to believe that a guy who's never gotten more than 43,000 votes is going to wage a successful national campaign?!?

Riiiiiiight....

-------

...however.

That does not mean his campaign lacks long-term implications.  A presidential campaign boosts Castro's name ID to the point where he's a viable candidate for Governor.  And 2022, as a six-year itch election, could get really dicey.

[**COUGH, COUGH** Especially with this president ** COUGH,COUGH]

That's not to say that Julian Castro is currently planning a gubernatorial run.  We have no doubt that Julian Castro believes in his own mind that he can win the current race.  But it is to say, however, that a Governor run is Castro's logical next play.

-------

A few thoughts on Castro, in case opposition researchers are reading.

Julian Castro has been playing "the game" in Texas for close to 20 years.  During his time as mayor, he was surrounded by a miasma of crony capitalism.  Nothing ever stuck but, as we said above, there's a reason why Obama gave him the golden parachute prior to the 2015 election.

[Note: We don't have the time or interest to do it ourselves, but if an enterprising blogger/oppo researcher/reporter were so inclined, it could be very interesting to read Castro's campaign finance reports from his mayoral runs and cross reference those against zoning changes made by the SA city council during Castro's tenure.]

Speaking of dirty San Antonio politics, there's also this:

Specifically this:

See here for more.

-------

Bottom Line: Castro's presidential campaign likely won't amount to much, but it could still have long-term implications.

#TXLEGE: Is Schwertner in Deep Doo Doo?!?

"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them."
Ephesians 5:11

Hoo Boy:

AUSTIN — The University of Texas completed its investigation on Tuesday into whether State Sen. Charles Schwertner sent sexually explicit messages — including photos of his genitals — to a student, issuing a report that neither fully incriminates nor clears the Georgetown Republican of wrongdoing.

The same afternoon, responding to a public record request, the university released the offensive text messages and LinkedIn messages that led to the probe. Schwertner told a UT investigator that the texts came from his accounts, but were sent by a person he knows and shared his user information with, but refused to identify.

Schwertner and his attorneys said the report served as vindication for their claims that he was innocent.

"I do not condone sexual misconduct of any kind. The University of Texas has closed their investigation because I did not send the offensive text messages in question," Schwertner said in a prepared statement.

The university reported it could not prove Schwertner sent the offensive messages, and a forensic investigation found that they did not come from his phone. However, the messages did come from Schwertner's Hushed account, a privacy app that allows people to send messages from separate phone numbers, and his LinkedIn account.

The UT investigation also described Schwertner as uncooperative and unwilling to be interviewed or answer questions about whether he had other electronic devices where the messages could have originated.

Schwertner's attorneys said in a statement that they prevented him from being interviewed by the university because they considered the school's investigative process unfair.

An attorney purporting to represent a mysterious third party, whose identity was never revealed to the investigators, at some point claimed responsibility for sending the messages. Schwertner told investigators he knew this unidentified person, and shared his user name and passwords with the individual, but refused to reveal their identity in the investigation.

The university investigative report acknowledged that the unnamed person might not exist.

"We recognize that it is plausible that the Respondent [Schwertner] sent the text messages and photograph from a device other than his personal cell phone and the third person claiming responsibility is being untruthful or does not exist, but we have no evidence to support those possibilities," the investigation summary reads.

[Note: Emphasis added.]

Yikes; this story looks worse every time we re-read it.

Two possibilities exist.  Either Schwertner is lying.  Or, he could be telling the truth.  Neither is good.

If Schwertner is lying, then a 48 year old male elected official sent lewd photographs to a female college student seeking professional advice.

That would be awful.

But consider what it would mean if Schwertner's telling the truth:

• Schwertner engages in enough encrypted communication with an unnamed third party that he gave the unnamed third party access to his encryption account.
  
• Who does that?!?

• Schwertner also gave the unnamed third party access to his LinkedIn account.

• Again, who does that?!?

• The third party in question had a motive to burn Schwertner in the most publicly humiliating way possible.
  
• What, as yet unknown, behavior on Schwertner's part could have produced such a motive?!?

• Even after having been burned in the most publicly humiliating way possible, Schwertner still refuses to identify the third party.

Pick your poison; neither one is good.

-------

That being said, this political cheap shot from the Democrats is cute:

On Tuesday evening, Texas Democrats jumped on the results of the report.

"These are not the actions of an innocent man," said Texas Democratic Party Executive Director Crystal Perkins. "Sen. Charles Schwertner is a liar and clearly unfit to serve in elected office."

Shut up.

You people haven't done a damn thing about Borris Miles.  You didn't lift a damn finger about Carlos Uresti until after a separate criminal conviction.  Yet, now you want to lecture the rest of us on sexual propriety?!?  Puh-leeze.

In a just world, Borris Miles and Charles Schwertner should probably both go.

In the real world, now that they're the political equivalent of "mutually assured destruction," Miles and Schwertner probably get away with everything.  We don't like it.  But that's reality.

-------

Bottom Line: You know it's a bad situation when you can't tell whether lying or telling the truth is worse....

Southwest Texas' ASTONISHING shift to the Right

"And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart."
Galatians 6:9

One week ago:

History was made today in the Texas Senate chamber as Pete Flores, a retired game warden from South Texas, was sworn in as the state’s first Hispanic Republican State Senator.

Flores won the seat in a special election last month in a surprise victory that surprised political onlookers statewide. Many had written off Flores’ hopes of winning the seat. However, Flores ran an aggressive campaign matched by a surge of grassroots energy in the district. Add to that the support of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and Texans for Fiscal Responsibility and Flores ultimately carried the day.

Previously occupied by Democrat State Sen. Carlos Uresti—who was forced to resign from office after being convicted of several federal crimes and sentenced to prison—Senate District 19 had not been held by a Republican since Reconstruction.

Yesterday:

These are both astonishing.

The Texas Observer notices:

The 23rd Congressional District is Texas’ one true swing district. It forms a claw that holds on to the heart of San Antonio and then stretches west all along the border to El Paso County. It’s a gigantic district, encompassing two time zones as well as about two-thirds of the Texas-Mexico border, and it’s more than 70 percent Latino.

If a backlash to Trump — the president who demonizes Mexican Americans, separates children from their parents at the border and obsesses about building a border wall — were to materialize anywhere, you would think it would be here.

But in Texas, perennial concerns about low Latino turnout are again rearing their head. “If you were banking on the Bexar County Democratic Party to carry a heavy share of the load [in the 23rd], you probably want to rethink your plan,” Mark Jones, a Rice University political science professor, warned.

It's quite something.

A few observations:

•  Strong Border Security positions help in November -- While Hurd is a sometimes squish, Flores isn't.  That this is happening at the same time as Trump is doing what he's doing (and the legislature is, however reluctantly, doing what they're doing) tells you everything you need to know.  If the GOP's immigration position were "toxic,' they wouldn't be winning in Southwest Texas.

• The Democrats are simply too liberal (esp. on Guns and Babies) -- We've made this observation before, but it remains true.

• The Failure to address Carlos Uresti has cost Democrats DEARLY -- Another observation we've made previously.  But all they had to do was do the right thing when either the financial or the sexual stuff came out.  But they didn't....

• Southwest Texas REALLY isn't into Bobby Francis -- These are the same counties that he lost in his primary disaster.

Bottom Line: This is VERY bad news for the Democrats....

Government Official Bullies Private Citizen Exercising Their Free Speech Right

"My son, if sinners entice you,
Do not consent."
Proverbs 1:10

Ahem?!?

A campaign sign in Central Texas this week drew the scorn of an elected state official — and then it was confiscated by police.

At issue in the small community of Hamilton was a homemade yard sign featuring an elephant decorated in red, white and blue with its trunk up the skirt of a female saying the word “Help.” The sign said “Your vote matters.”

Other signs promoting Democrats from U.S. Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke to Agriculture Commissioner candidate Kim Olson were in the background.

This “is supposed to be Judge Kavanaugh’s young daughter,” Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller posted along with the photos on Facebook this week. “The Democrat sleaze knows NO bounds!”

....

Miller’s Facebook post drew attention to Stanford and her sign, prompting countless reactions, including those that called for her to be arrested.

Police did show up at her home.

Some say she was told to remove the sign or it would be confiscated. City officials said police visited Stanford’s home and she asked them to take the sign, the Dallas Morning News reported.

....

Miller posted again on Facebook that he’s happy with the result.

“I’m glad that I called out this offensive campaign sign and am pleased that hundreds of others did so as well,” he said. “It’s vulgar and just plain wrong and it had no place in someone’s yard visible from the street.

[Note: Emphasis added.]

 Miller's Original Facebook post:



Obviously, we don't agree with her characterization.  The Republican Party of Texas has the best record of any state-level party in the country at dealing with this garbage.  Ms. Stanford might want to research the fate of former Congressman Blake Farenthold and soon-to-be former Congressman Joe Barton.  She also might want to contrast RPT's record with how the Texas Democrats have handled Carlos Uresti and Borris Miles.

But, that being said, Ms. Stanford is a private citizen.  Sid Miller is a statewide elected official.  This is an obvious, clear-cut, case of constitutionally protected free speech.

To review, Sid Miller:

• Posted a picture of a private citizen's yard to a Facebook page with over 700k followers.

• Lied about the content in the picture.

• Ginned up an angry mob against a private citizen; said mob subsequently called cops on a afore mentioned private citizen.

• Tried to dictate what kind of political speech private citizens can display on private property.
• [Note: Do you even property rights, Sid Miller?!?]

This is outrageous.  It's no different than what Maxine Waters and Sheila Jackson Lee are doing nationally.  If anything, it's worse because Miller is calling for the mob to go after a private citizen.

We didn't vote for him in March and, after this, we doubt we're voting for him in November.

Bottom Line: Private citizens have free speech rights.  Private citizens also have private property rights.  Sid Miller doesn't get to direct how those rights are exercised.

#TXSEN: People who live in Glass Houses shouldn't Throw Stones

"Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye."
Matthew 7:5

Took less than 5 seconds on Google.

Shot, from Friday night:

“Dr. Ford’s allegations should be investigated by the FBI. Full stop,” O’Rourke said. “There is precedent for that,” he said, referring to Anita Hill, who accused Justice Clarence Thomas of sexually harassing her when he was her boss at a federal agency.

Chaser, from August:

In other words: The guy going after Brett Kavanaugh over sexual misconduct allegations is doing campaign events with...BORRIS friggin' MILES?!?

We weren't the only one to notice:

Interesting decision by Beto O'Rourke to appear in Houston alongside state Sen. Borris Miles, who drew calls for his resignation last year over sexual misconduct allegations #txlege https://t.co/H7gF2b7k45

— Aman Batheja (@amanbatheja) August 11, 2018

In case you forgot:

Lauren*, a Texas legislative intern, was standing underneath the bright blue-and-red neon sign of The Continental Club, a famed Austin bar frequented by schmoozing politicians, lobbyists, and reporters.

That week in May 2013 was filled to the brim with end-of-session (“sine die”) parties, and Lauren was with a group of other interns on South Congress when Democratic state Rep. Borris Miles pulled up.

According to Lauren, Miles leaned out of the carriage he was riding in and pulled out a large roll of money. He handed “maybe $500” to an intern and then looked at Lauren.

“You know how you have the roll of hundreds that you see on TV? It was like that,” Lauren told The Daily Beast.

“I said, ‘Hi Representative, how are you?’ Then he slowly looked me up and down, counted out more money, reached out his hand and said, ‘Bitch, you want to fuck with me tonight?’

“I said ‘No, thank you’ and physically stepped back,” Lauren recalled. “I didn’t want to be rude to him. I remember his intern pacifying him and saying, ‘It’s time to go.’

“Everyone was just shocked that he said that—that he cussed at me and that he was offering me money. It was outrageous,” she continued. “I just remember thinking, ‘I need to go, and I need to not be here anymore.’”

And this:

One time, Chris said, he “witnessed [Miles] catcalling women in Downtown Austin on the way back from a Spurs game, and there had to have been at least 15 or 16 other members that were there because it was a member event.”

The Spurs had played the Lakers that April, and the lawmakers went together to San Antonio to watch one of the games. “As we’re driving back towards the W, he’s hanging out of the open door of the bus and shouting at women,” said Chris.

Chris could not recall the catcalls specifically but said, “It was not something that I would want shouted at anyone.”

Chris’ chief of staff confirmed to The Daily Beast that he heard about the alleged catcalling the next morning.

And this:

Ben*, a former staffer who recently worked in the Capitol and “spent a lot of time with Miles,” said he witnessed the then-state representative “forcibly kiss” at least one woman at the W Hotel.

“He offered to buy her a drink, kept trying to kiss her, and she kept trying to push him away,” said Ben. “He kept laughing about it.

“It was so creepy, and he had this big smile,” said Ben. “Borris loves the W Hotel, and he has a tendency to force himself upon women at bars and kiss them or grope them. He’ll tell them that he is a higher elected official than he actually is.”

....

“He also has a tendency to call women out of their name when they turn him down,” he said. “‘Bitch,’ ‘ho,’ ‘whore.’ He doesn’t like being told ‘no.’

And this:

When Heather* first covered the Texas Legislature as a journalist in 2011, she was repeatedly targeted by Miles, she told The Daily Beast in a story published last month.

Late one night when the legislature was in session, Heather was reporting on HB 400, which would have scrapped Texas’ law mandating class size ratio. Miles famously used a point of order to defeat the bill, landing him the title of Star of the 2011 Legislative Session by the Texas Classroom Teachers Association.

Heather said she had been trying to get details about the bill negotiations, when that night, around midnight, Miles cornered her in a hallway and forcibly kissed her outside the House chamber.

“It happened quickly,” Heather said, noting that Miles laughed afterward. “I think he thought it was hilarious.”

“He’d said several times already, ‘If you go out to dinner with me, I’d be happy to give you the details,’ and I’d sort of laugh it off but it was weird and obviously gross.”

You can read the full Daily Beast report here.

There you have it.

Obviously, this is not to belittle the accusations against Brett Kavanaugh.  Those accusations are serious and should be investigated in the most judicious manner possible.  Unfortunately, we suspect that the atmosphere has been so poisoned that doing so might now be impossible.

That being said, however one feels about Kavanaugh, it's impossible to deny that the accusations against Miles have significantly better sourcing.

Anybody who knows this author knows there are few things we loathe more than when serious allegations of sexual misconduct are interpreted through the lens of mindless, rank, partisanship.  This website has called for politicians from across the political spectrum [Note: Including Borris Miles!!!] to resign over this garbage.  Thus, we have little patience for grandstanding U.S. Senate candidates who theatrically call for FBI investigations while they're holding campaign events with BORRIS friggin' MILES.

Finally, a political note: We wrote last week about how the Democrats' failure to do the right things with Carlos Uresti cost them his Senate seat.  It would be fitting for them to go through the same thing a second time.  What a STUPID, completely preventable, unforced error!!!

Bottom Line: There are two possibilities.  Bobby Francis didn't know.  Or he didn't care.  Neither one is good.

Farenthold (and Barton), Uresti, and why the Texas GOP now controls ALL their seats

"Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every branch that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit."
John 15:2

[Note: You can read our call for Barton to go here.  You can read our call for Farenthold, Miles, and Uresti to ALL go here.]

By now you've heard:

Republican Pete Flores defeated Democrat Pete Gallego on Tuesday night in the special election runoff for Senate District 19, a major upset in a Democratic-friendly seat with implications for the balance of power in the upper chamber.

With all precincts reporting, Flores beat Gallego by 6 percentage points in the race to replace convicted former state Sen. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio. Flores had 53 percent of the vote and Gallego 47 percent in unofficial returns.

Gallego conceded to Flores around 9 p.m., according to both campaigns. With the victory, Flores will become the first Hispanic Republican to serve in the Texas Senate.

There's a lot that could be said.  Obviously, Pete Flores ran a flawless campaign.  Obviously, the Texas GOP did as well.

But there's another aspect: For the second time in three months, there was a special election to fill a seat vacated by an elected official amidst a cloud of VERY sketch sexual activity.  The GOP won both.  They're also expected to hold onto the seat being vacated by Joe Barton in November.

Why is that?!?

In late November, the public learned that soon-to-be former Congressman Joe Barton had been sending lewd photos of himself around the internet.  Barton was given a chance to defend himself.  When no defense was forthcoming, the County GOP, Republican elected officials, and prominent grassroots organizations all called for Barton to go.  Then, Barton was gone within 9 days.

Within a week, the Blake Farenthold saga kicked into gear.  Once again, Farenthold was given a chance to defend himself.  Instead, it got worse.  Farenthold announced his retirement within two weeks.  Eventually, in the special election for which Farenthold stuck taxpayers with the bill, the Republican candidate won.

By contrast, the first (recent) report about Carlos Uresti came out in early November (ie. two weeks BEFORE we heard anything about Barton).  The second report came out in early December.  This, of course, is on top of video evidence from 2015:



The Democrats chose to rally around Uresti.  Not a single Senator called on him to resign.  What makes this more astonishing is that Uresti was already up to his eyeballs in financial corruption charges.

So Uresti limped forward into his corruption trial.  During that trial, we learned there was yet another sleazy sexual component to Uresti's activity.  Eventually, Uresti was convicted.  It was only at that point that Democrats called on him to resign.

Uresti still held on until June.  Even then, he only left to lighten his sentence.  For those keeping track at home, that's eight months (or two years and eight months) between the first credible reports of misconduct on Uresti's part and when he left office.

Then the GOP won the special election.  The ironic this is that, had the Democrats cut Uresti loose when the first reports emerged, they wouldn't have been on the hook during his trial.  But they didn't.

The contrast speaks for itself.

This is not to say that the Texas GOP has been fully cleaned out.  More work remains.  But there's a different between persistent rumors and actionable evidence.  And the Texas GOP has the best record of any state level political party in the country of cleaning house once actionable evidence emerges.

While we're on the subject of the party contrast, let's not forget who else is still running around the legislature like nothing ever happened:

I'm in Austin today for a Natural Resources Committee hearing to fight for Houston's share of dollars to combat illegal dumping. I'm also seeking answers and solutions to the problems with the Blue Ridge Landfill in Fort Bend County. #txlege #sd13 #fortbend #houston pic.twitter.com/FPP7KZiGeb

— Borris Miles (@BorrisLMiles) September 5, 2018

Bottom Line: The contrast speaks for itself....

#TXLEGE: Banning Race-Based Abortions could SWING SD-19 Special Election

"For You formed my inward parts;
You covered me in my mother’s womb."
Psalm 139:13

We recently discussed how, in the context of the current special election, a concerted pro-life push could flip SD-19.  SD-19 is filled with culturally conservative legacy Democrats (aka. pro-life Hispanic Catholics) uncomfortable with the Democrat party's current position on abortion.  Looks like Texas Right to Life noticed the same thing:

Now through July 31, Pro-Life voters in Senate District 19 have the opportunity to elect a true Pro-Life candidate to the Texas Senate: Peter Flores.

Senator Carlos Uresti, a radical pro-abortion Democrat who has been the Senator for SD 19 since 2006, was recently forced to resign after being convicted of several felonies. He will serve a 12-year jail sentence. Governor Greg Abbott called an emergency special election to take place July 31 to fill this seat for the remaining two years of the term.

SD 19 has always been represented by Democrats, leaving Pro-Life Republicans yearning for better representation. A little known secret is that SD 19 is not a deep blue one, being in fact a swing district. After more than a hundred years of Democrats owning this seat, now is our time to seize this opportunity!

Soo...you have a strong pro-life contrast in a majority/minority district.

And what, pray tell, is Texas Right to Life's top legislative priority next session?!?

[The Preborn Non-Discrimination Act] would protect preborn children from discriminatory abortions based on race, sex, or suspected disability.

The campaign ads (English and Spanish) write themselves: "Pete Gallego and Roland Gutierrez support aborting babies because over race.  Pete Flores is the only candidate who will protect children of color.  Vote Pete Flores for Texas Senate."

It would tie the Democrats in knots.

Bottom Line: Not killing babies based on their race a solid ethical principle; in a Catholic majority/minority district, it's also a political no-brainer.

#TXLEGE: Following Uresti resignation, Abbott announces QUICK Special Election to fill vacancy

"He who gathers in summer is a wise son;
He who sleeps in harvest is a son who causes shame."
Proverbs 10:5

That didn't take long:

Gov. Greg Abbott has scheduled a July 31 special election to replace state Sen. Carlos Uresti, D-San Antonio.

Uresti announced his resignation Monday, four months after he was found guilty of 11 felonies. The resignation is effective Thursday.

The filing deadline for the special election is Monday, and early voting will start July 16, according to Abbott's proclamation. The document also outlines Abbott's reasoning for calling what is known as an emergency special election, noting Uresti's District 19 has been "without effective representation" for over a year due to his legal troubles and it is important to fill the seat as soon as possible.

....

At least two Democrats are already running to finish Uresti's term, which ends in 2021: former U.S. Rep. Pete Gallego of Alpine and state Rep. Roland Gutierrez of San Antonio. Pete Flores, a Republican who unsuccessfully challenged Uresti in 2016, has also announced a special election run.

Here's the thing: While this district is rooted in San Antonio, it extends WAY out into West Texas.  This is not friendly territory for the Democrat's positions on guns and babies.  In a special election, a disciplined Republican campaign can win.

[Note: There's a reason why, regardless of the degree to which he was a scumbag, Uresti tended to vote somewhat more conservative than other Democrats.]

Speaking of the Republican, meet Pete Flores:

Pete Flores is running for Texas Senate District 19, which is composed of all or parts of 17 counties running from Bexar west to Brewster and encompassing a long stretch of border with Mexico.

A former leader of Texas Parks and Wildlife’s statewide law enforcement division with strong ties to South and West Texas, Flores sees the Texas State Senate as another way he can serve the region.

“I would bring strong managerial, budgetary, governance and leadership experience to the Texas Senate having been responsible for $60-million budgets, managed more than two dozen field offices, and supervised more than 127 civilian employees and nearly 532 commissioned officers,” Flores said.

As Colonel Game Warden for Texas Parks and Wildlife, Flores built a strong reputation for implementing community-based law enforcement protocols and successfully coordinating law enforcement operations with local, state and federal law enforcement officials.

[Note: You can read the rest of Pete Flores' bio here.]

Bottom Line: In their current form, the Democrats are too liberal for this part of the state; it'll be interesting to see if the Republicans can capitalize.

#TXLEGE: Kolkhorst's WAY Too Little, WAY to Late Sexual Misconduct "Policy"....

"It is an abomination for kings to commit wickedness,
For a throne is established by righteousness."
Proverbs 16:12

[Note: You can read what we said last December about the house's new policy here; you can read what we said about the Senate's lack of interest in this topic here and here.]

Nope, not even close:

The Texas Senate has adopted a new sexual harassment policy that mandates in-person anti-sexual harassment training for senators and offers more details on specific steps for reporting inappropriate behavior.

The Senate’s policy, which was sent out to Senate staffers on Wednesday, was expanded from a one-page document to a more extensive set of guidelines that provide detailed examples of what constitutes sexual harassment and more thoroughly explain the ways victims can get help through internal and external complaint processes.

The revisions come months after the The Texas Tribune detailed a wide range of harassment in state politics and the scant protections offered to victims through the chambers' policies, and after The Daily Beast detailed accounts of sexual assault in the Legislature. Those accounts included specific allegations against Democratic state Sens. Borris Miles of Houston and Carlos Uresti of San Antonio. Both have denied the allegations.

Like in the House — where lawmakers revised the chamber’s policy in December — the Senate’s training can’t be required of individual lawmakers, some of whom were behind the worst behavior recounted to the Tribune.

In a letter to her colleagues obtained by the Tribune, Senate Administration Chair Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham, indicated a list of lawmakers who have completed the training would be available to the public. But the chamber’s policy does not appear to set any sort of immediate deadline for current elected officials.

Instead, the revised policy indicates that in-person training will be offered every two years and that new employees must complete an online training within the first 30 days of their employment.

The policy was also revised to specifically state that senators will not be involved in investigating other senators, leaving investigations to the chamber's human resources director and "impartial attorneys."

But questions remain about how senators, who ultimately answer to voters back home, could be disciplined if they are found to have sexually harassed someone.

[Note: Emphasis added.]

What a joke.

So-called "training requirements" don't change behavior.   "Training" is about protecting employers from liability.  To change behavior, you need meaningful consequences.

Then there's the fact that Borris Miles seems to be getting away with everything.  Obviously, Uresti gave them an easy out.  But what about Miles?!?

As far as consequences are concerned, the two most important ones are loss of committee chairmanship and expulsion.

Of course, that's the whole point of our convention resolution.

On the other hand, at least Craig Estes lost his primary.

Bottom Line: The whole situation is disgusting....

#TXLEGE: Kolkhorst belatedly makes vague, open-ended, promise re: Senate Sexual Misconduct policy

"It is an abomination for kings to commit wickedness,
For a throne is established by righteousness."
Proverbs 16:12

[Note: You can read what we said last December about the house's new policy here, and the Senate's lack of interest here.]

Via The Texas Observer:

In the weeks after multiple allegations of sexual misconduct were made against two Texas senators last year, their colleagues called for “zero tolerance” and said changes “must happen now.” Five months later, lawmakers still haven’t updated the Senate’s 23-year-old, one-page policy, which doesn’t establish a formal process for investigating complaints.

“For months, there have been rumors that a revised policy will be released for the Senate to review, but it hasn’t happened,” Senator Kirk Watson, D-Austin, wrote in an email. “We haven’t received any word about next steps, if there will be future public hearings, or how the Senate will adopt changes to our policy.” Asked when an updated policy is expected, Watson wrote, “At this time, I have no expectations.”

Shortly after the Daily Beast published the allegations against Democratic state Senators Carlos Uresti and Borris Miles in early December, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick tasked Senator Lois Kolkhorst, R-Brenham, with reviewing and updating the Senate’s policy on sexual misconduct. “I understand there are rumors, innuendos and allegations in both the House and Senate about both members and staff having inappropriate behavior. Sexual harassment should not and will not be tolerated in the Texas Senate,” Kolkhorst told the Observer at the time.

Still, at a December 14 meeting of the Senate Administration Committee, which Kolkhorst chairs, senators heard only from the Secretary of the Senate and the head of human resources. Not once were senators Miles and Uresti mentioned by name during the hearing.

“It was surprising to me that … no time was given to the public for testimony,” Senator Sylvia Garcia said of the hearing in an email to the Observer. “We should allow the public to be heard in a meaningful way and that must be in an additional public hearing.”

Since then, Kolkhorst has met with staff from every senator’s office to discuss the issue and performed “an exhaustive review” of policies from other states and state agencies, she told the Observer this month. “A revised Senate policy will be reviewed and released in the near future,” she wrote in an email. Asked for a more specific timeline, her office did not respond.

To which we will add: In our conversations with Senate sources, we've been appalled at the...lack of a sense of urgency...this topic generates (and we're putting it very politely).

Furthermore, while Uresti has become persona-non-grata since his criminal conviction, Miles has suffered no consequences.

Of course, that's the reason why we're carrying our sexual misconduct convention resolution.

Bottom Line: See no evil....

Uresti fine illustrates Texas "Ethics" Commission's Mendacity

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord,
But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

Via the indispensable Olivia Messer:

The Texas state senator who has refused to step down, despite 11 felony convictions and several groping allegations, has been fined just $500 in civil penalties by the Texas Ethics Commission.

Democratic State Sen. Carlos Uresti will be sentenced in June on the fraud and money-laundering charges after he was found guilty on all counts related to a Ponzi scheme involving now-defunct frac-sand company FourWinds Logistics. Uresti worked as general counsel for the company.

The Ethics Commission announced on Friday that it found credible evidence the lawmaker failed to appropriately report a $40,000 promissory note from FourWinds to his own personal-injury law firm.

At his federal trial, prosecutors successfully argued that Uresti “groomed” $900,000 of “blood money” out of a grieving mother and former client by manipulating her through a sexual relationship. He convinced her to invest nearly all of the money she won in her childrens’ wrongful-death suit in the company, losing almost the whole sum. (Uresti has repeatedly denied that he had any sexual relationship with the woman. His wife filed for divorce earlier this month.)

Isn't that typical.  You have an actual elected official, with an actual criminal conviction, and the Texas "Ethics" Commission slaps him on the wrist with a $500 fine.  Meanwhile, if a citizens group challenges the Capitol status quo, they're subjected to a four year legal nightmare.

Bottom Line: The treatment of Carlos Uresti, compared to the treatment of Empower Texans, tells you everything you need to know about the so-called Texas "Ethics" Commission.

-------

Note: This is also why you don't want the TEC investigating sexual misconduct charges.

#TXLEGE: Abbott makes serious proposal re: Capitiol Culture of Chronic Sexual Abuse (but questions remain)

"However, he would not heed her voice; and being stronger than she, he forced her and lay with her."
2 Samuel 13:14

Since the first (recent) reports of chronic sexual abuse in the legislature first surfaced three months ago, we've been waiting for someone, anyone, to make a serious proposal to address the situation.  The new house policy, passed by Charlie Geren, was as pathetic as we predicted.  The Senate, meanwhile, is twiddling its thumbs.

Yesterday, Governor Abbott stepped into the vacuum:

Following accusations of sexual misconduct against multiple state legislators, Abbott proposed that the Texas Rangers’ Public Integrity Unit be placed in charge of investigating these reports. The governor's office estimates that charging the Rangers with the task would require $2 million in funding.

“By allowing these cases to be reported to the Texas Rangers ... we can ensure that claims are investigated by an impartial law enforcement body that is equipped to hold public servants accountable,” Abbott said.

This is...interesting.

The good news: In the three months that recent reports have been out, this is the first time anyone in a position of real power has made a serious proposal on this issue.  Obviously, this website has been critical of Governor Abbott over the past couple years.  But, he's the first person to make anything remotely resembling a serious suggestion, so we applaud him.

Furthermore, the Texas Rangers might be a good entity to investigate claims; they have a good reputation, and they know how to do this work.

Nevertheless, some questions:

• What happens with behavior that isn't criminal?!? -- The Texas Rangers are a law enforcement organization.  That means their primary purpose is to gather evidence for criminal prosecutions.  But, in many of these cases, the objectionable behavior isn't necessarily illegal.
  
  For example: Borris Miles forcibly kissing a woman probably constitutes some form of assault.  But Borris Miles aggressively propositioning an intern or Carlos Uresti inquiring about a woman's underwear, while disgusting and horrid, probably isn't criminal.  The criminal justice system can handle cases involving physical assault, but it's not well equipped to handle verbal harassment or intimidation.
  
  Will the Texas Rangers have jurisdiction in non-criminal cases?!?  If not, do we want to give it to them?!?  What would the unintended consequences of such a move be in 20 years?!?

• What sanctions will exist for bad actors?!? -- The Texas Rangers will probably be able to investigate claims well...but what happens once they find something?!?
  
  Are there going to be any actual penalties for this behavior?!?
  
  In this website's opinion, two specific sanctions would go the furthest: Loss of committee chairmanships and expulsion from the chamber; so far, neither of those are under discussion.
• How long will investigations take?!? -- The Texas Legislature only has 140 days to complete its business.  Everybody knows that "delay equals death" in the legislature.  What will prevent investigations from dragging out until the session is already over anyway?!?
  
  The slow-moving, bureaucratic, nature of government is bad enough...but once you add that members might have an incentive to move things as slowly as possible, it doesn't take a genius how this sort of policy could be rendered toothless.
  
  Two weeks seems like a reasonable amount of time after the survivor has come forward, but that's not currently under discussion.

• When will the public be informed?!? -- One of the reasons the culture of chronic sexual abuse at the Capitol became so entrenched is because everything gets handled behind closed doors.
  
  Will the public learn at the beginning of an investigation?!?  At its conclusion?!?  Or is the type of thing that will require regular and diligent open records requests?!?
  
  Sunlight is the best disinfectant and all that.

• Do these proposed changes require the legislature to pass a bill -- If so, see what the house did with Abbott's proposed ethics reforms the past two sessions.
  
  [Note: Isn't it interesting that Charlie Geren, the same guy who killed Abbott's ethics reforms, is also in charge of the new sexual harassment policy.]

• Will Abbott follow through?!? -- You'll pardon us if we've seen this movie before.  Greg Abbott holds a high profile press conference where he says everything you want to hear.  Then, when the rubber meets the road, his personal involvement is...inconsistent at best.
  
  For example: In 2017, Abbott outlined a great special session agenda.  Then, during the special session, Abbott was nowhere to be found, and only about 30% of the good elements of his agenda passed.  Then Abbott promises to hold the legislators who killed his agenda accountable.  While Abbott has endorsed against three of the afore mentioned legislators, he's also let at least half a dozen others off the hook.  Again...inconsistent at best.
  
  When it comes to Greg Abbott, at this point, actions speak a lot louder than anything he says at a high profile press conference during an election year.

Bottom Line: Governor Abbott is the first prominent elected official to make a serious proposal.  For that, he deserves credit.  But we need to work through several more questions before we can have any confidence that behavior in the legislature will change.

Party failing to address Miles/Uresti loses frivolous lawsuit to protect other party's pervert

"As a dog returns to his own vomit,
So a fool repeats his folly."
Proverbs 26:11

Update: They literally dropped the suit while we were writing the original post...

during an oral hearing Wednesday, a federal judge denied a motion to issue a temporary restraining order barring the GOP from removing Farenthold's name from the ballot. The Democrats then voluntarily dropped the case.

Obviously, that means this story is already over.  But the news broke while we were writing the blog post below.  So we're going to finish the original post because we think it makes some important points.

-------

LOL, so this happened:

Today, we filed a lawsuit against the @TexasGOP for failing to follow candidate filing laws. This is about protecting democracy, only voters have the power to choose who leads our state and nation. RELEASE: https://t.co/9510sCZICm #txlege pic.twitter.com/NmIEBtxeFz

— Texas Democrats (@texasdemocrats) December 20, 2017

No it isn't wasn't.  This is was about trying to milk Blake Farenthold for a few more bad headlines for the Republicans.  Everybody knows knew that.

But the amazing thing is that Borris Miles and Carlos Uresti continue to hide in plain sight.  No Democrats have called for them to step down.  The Democrats don't even seem to be willing to talk about them by name.

But they're were willing to file a lawsuit to keep Blake Farenthold's name on the ballot.

As to the legal issues: While this website has never claimed legal expertise, preliminary discussions with legal sources suggests the legal argument is thinner than a wet Kleenex.  Furthermore, this lawsuit opens the Democrats up to discovery.  Speaking of discovery, we strongly suspect that's why the Democrats will ultimately drop this lawsuit.  They were so weak that the lawsuit didn't even survive the time it took to write this blog post.

Make no mistake: The Republican response to what we've learned recently about the culture of chronic sexual abuse at the Capitol remains woefully inadequate.  The Senate has been, at best, lethargic.  The house, meanwhile, has been the house.

But at least the Republicans, no matter how slowly or clumsily, are trying.

That's more than we can say for the Democrats.

Bottom Line: To attempt a stunt like this reveals an unsettling lust for power.  To lose said stunt in less than four hours reveals a comical lack of competence.  If you're looking for a textbook example of why Texas won't turn blue any time soon, this is a good one.