James Barragán

Inside the mutiny in the Texas House GOP

Last year, state Rep. David Cook of Mansfield was quietly but steadily climbing the ranks of Texas politics.

The sophomore lawmaker had been named vice chair of the committee overseeing the state’s criminal laws. He carried and passed a GOP priority bill aimed at reining in “rogue” progressive district attorneys. And he had a coveted seat on the powerful Calendars Committee, which acts as the House gatekeeper because it controls which bills reach the floor for a vote and which never see the light of day.

Cook’s promising start was a clear indication House Speaker Dade Phelan considered him an ally.

Then, in September, Cook made an audacious gambit by announcing he would join an increasingly crowded field challenging Phelan for the speaker’s gavel. By the end of that month, Cook emerged as the consensus pick of the anti-Phelan House Republicans to replace the sitting speaker.

In announcing his run for speaker, Cook said that political infighting, breakdowns in communication and a lack of transparency from Phelan had hindered the Republican majority’s work. He promised to engage regularly with lawmakers if elected.

“My philosophy is rooted in returning power to the members and fostering an environment where we can work together effectively,” he said.

Cook, whose voting record placed him near the ideological middle of the House Republicans, is an unlikely choice to be standard-bearer for a coalition looking to oust Phelan on the grounds that he is too moderate. The group is dominated by social conservatives from the chamber’s rightmost flank, many of whom opposed Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment last year or won their seats by defeating members like Cook who had supported it.

They want to further disempower the House’s Democratic minority by putting Republicans in charge of every legislative committee. They also want to speed the passage of conservative legislation and ensure that major GOP bills reach the floor before any Democratic measures.

On paper, other GOP candidates who’d announced challenges to Phelan appeared more representative of the insurgent crowd, including Rep. Shelby Slawson of Stephenville, one of the House’s most conservative members, and Rep. John Smithee of Amarillo, who won plaudits from the far right for vigorously opposing Paxton’s impeachment.

“If you’re a reformer, I’m not sure how they settled on him,” said Rep. Carl Tepper, R-Lubbock, a Phelan supporter.

Now, Cook and Phelan are waging a behind-the-scenes battle for control of the Texas House, each projecting confidence that they have a path to victory despite shaky public support.

In early December, the House GOP Caucus is scheduled to meet to settle on their endorsed nominee for speaker. Under the group’s rules — which are occasionally disregarded by members — whoever gets 60% or more of the votes at the meeting will be the caucus’ endorsed candidate and should receive support from all Republican members when the vote goes to the full House.

Phelan, a Beaumont Republican who has served as speaker for two terms and a House member since 2015, insists he has enough votes to lead the chamber for a third time in January — but he has not produced a list of supporters. Cook is touting 47 Republicans who would back him, short of the threshold required to gain the endorsement of the House GOP Caucus and far short of the 76 lawmakers from either party he would need to win the real speaker’s election on the House floor in January.

His allies remain hopeful that enough Republicans will buckle under the pressure of drawing a career-threatening primary challenge from Phelan’s deep-pocketed political foes if they lend their support to the incumbent speaker. But that threat has not produced any new pledges for Cook since he announced his initial list of supporters, signaling that Phelan could keep the gavel with backing from the chamber’s 62 Democrats and a minority of the Republican caucus.

Cook and Phelan both declined comment for this story.

The caucus meeting is a pivotal moment for Cook’s bid. The 53-year-old lawmaker will either emerge as the clear frontrunner to lead the chamber or potentially be relegated to the doghouse next session for challenging the sitting speaker.

“A coalition builder”

Cook’s roots in the Texas Capitol go back more than 30 years to 1993 when he got his start as a legislative aide for conservative Democrat Rep. Jerry Johnson of Nacogdoches while attending Stephen F. Austin State University.

But his biggest mentor and influence in the Legislature was the late Republican Sen. Chris Harris of Arlington, whom he worked for as an aide in the mid-1990s. The two became law partners at Harris’ family and business law firm, where Cook now works as managing partner.

As a lawyer in Tarrant County, Cook was able to rub elbows with movers and shakers in Texas’ largest Republican county who could help him launch a political career.

In 2008, he won his first election for mayor of Mansfield, a suburb south of Arlington with about 50,000 residents. During his 12 years at the helm, the city’s population grew by more than 40%, part of the explosive growth seen throughout the North Texas suburbs.

Larry Broseh, a longtime Mansfield city council member, said Cook helped usher the city out of its “sleepy, bedroom community era” into a booming suburb marked by mixed-use developments and a growing web of master-planned communities.

He began to show some of the hallmarks of how he would govern as a state legislator, focusing on a conservative approach to the city’s finances and promoting economic growth, over culture wars.

“He was definitely a coalition builder,” Broseh said, describing how the seven-person council typically decided matters with 7-0 or 6-1 votes. “I’ve worked with four mayors throughout my tenure, and by far I think he was the most collaborative person.”

Broseh said he was “surprised as much as the next person” when he heard that Cook was challenging Phelan, in part because Cook had left City Hall for the Capitol so recently. But Broseh contended that Cook’s ability to build alliances and find common ground — underscored by his work as a family law mediator — would serve him well in the race.

In late 2019, Cook launched a primary challenge against longtime Arlington Rep. Bill Zedler, a staunch social conservative and member of the Texas House Freedom Caucus. Zedler bowed out of the race, citing health concerns, and Cook went on to win the seat in 2020.

In his first session the following year, he filed 10 bills, several of which dealt with family law. He passed his first law, making it easier to modify child support and other family legal orders — his only bill to reach the governor’s desk that year.

Cook was more productive during his second term in 2023, when Phelan named him vice chair of the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and placed him on the Calendars Committee.

That year he filed 69 bills and passed 14 of them, including the Republican priority that allowed courts to remove district attorneys for misconduct if they did not pursue certain types of crimes. The bill, which was signed into law and took effect last September, targets progressive prosecutors in large urban counties who have declined to pursue low-level marijuana possession cases and vowed not to prosecute abortion-related crimes.

Last year, Cook also took two of the most consequential votes of his short legislative career. Near the end of the spring regular session, he was one of 60 House Republicans who voted to impeach Paxton for allegedly accepting bribes and abusing the power of his office, charges on which he was later acquitted by the Senate. Cook was the only member to note in the House record after the vote that he supported some — but not all — of the articles of impeachment.

Later that year, Cook sided with Gov. Greg Abbott’s bid to enact a private school voucher program, voting against an amendment that stripped vouchers from a broader education bill.

Those two votes paved the way for an ugly primary season. To vote for impeachment meant Paxton’s far-right allies were coming for your seat. To vote against vouchers meant that Abbott and a lineup of pro-voucher groups might spend millions to oust you. Despite his impeachment vote, Cook managed to avoid a primary challenge, which kept his name out of the headlines during a period of intraparty mudslinging.

Why Cook?

Capitol observers and legislative colleagues said Cook tends to push his bills through quietly, steering clear of the bomb-throwing tactics intended to attract attention and rile controversy.

Bill Miller, a veteran Austin-based lobbyist, described Cook as “a watcher and absorber” with a tendency to keep his cards close to his vest. He said Cook’s style is reminiscent of former House Speaker Joe Straus, who also emerged from the background after just two terms to challenge an incumbent speaker.

“He’s one of the members, I put him in the category of people, they’re smart, they pay attention, and they keep their own counsel,” he said.

Cook sometimes sided with Phelan’s team to beat back ideas pushed by the right wing of the GOP.

Last year, he voted with Republicans and Democrats to redo a vote on a bill that would give tax breaks to businesses that bring jobs to Texas, after some of his far-right colleagues snuck in an amendment targeting transgender health care and abortion access. He later supported the bill’s passage when the amendment was removed.

Cook also supported legislation to legalize sports gambling, which many social conservatives, including some of those now in his camp, oppose.

Luke Macias, a consultant to some of the state’s most socially conservative legislators, said focusing the race on Cook’s record is a mistake.

“The coalition that’s formed has formed around how the House operates,” he said. “It’s not formed around a personality on either side but on structurally changing the Texas House in a way that’s better for every single member.”

On top of removing Democrats from leadership positions, the anti-Phelan coalition also wants the speaker to ensure Republican priorities receive floor votes early in the session, among other demands laid out in their manifesto called the “Contract with Texas,” to which Cook has committed.

Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington, said Cook’s decision to sign onto that pledge, which was drafted by lawmakers pushing for a new speaker, was a major factor in deciding to support him. Tinderholt, one of the chamber’s most hard-right conservatives who is often at odds with House leadership, said he doesn’t always agree with Cook on policy but likes that he treats other House members with respect.

“This quality in David is what makes him a good consensus candidate to unite Republicans,” Tinderholt said in an email. “His governing philosophy is in the middle of our caucus and his track record of treating members with dignity and respect is impeccable.”

Rep. Ellen Troxclair, a Lakeway Republican who is one of Cook’s core supporters, said he won her over in part by showing her and other freshman members respect despite their lack of seniority.

“In an atmosphere that tended to tell freshmen to keep their heads down and mouths shut, David had the opposite approach, where he really wanted to help the new class be successful,” Troxclair said. “I know that was appreciated not just by me but by my other classmates who had similar experiences.”

Cook’s public support has stalled since the late September meeting after which he put out a list of 48 supporters. That number has dropped to 47 after one of his pledges, Republican Steve Kinard of Collin County, lost his challenge to Rep. Mihaela Plesa, a Democrat.

To win the GOP caucus endorsement, he needs 53 votes when the group meets on Dec. 7.

Most of the 41 other House Republicans have yet to voice their support for either GOP speaker candidate. Cook has tried to win over some of those unpledged caucus members, so far to no avail.

With neither candidate touting enough votes for the caucus’ stamp of approval, the possibility of a third GOP contender has gained traction. Some lawmakers are actively calling uncommitted Republicans and those on Cook’s pledge list to see if they would entertain breaking away for a new to-be-determined candidate, according to three sources who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the race candidly. The idea, they said, is to lay the groundwork for someone who could draw support from the pro- and anti-Phelan camps if Cook and Phelan deadlock at the caucus meeting.

Miller, the Austin lobbyist, said the fluid state of the race means that, for now, many members see little upside in voicing public support for either candidate and risking political exile if they pick the losing horse.

“They want to bet right, or more importantly, they don’t want to bet wrong,” Miller said.

Phelan loyalty

The outcome will shape much of the direction of Texas politics next year, with the speaker wielding enormous control over the fate of major bills and billions in taxpayer dollars. Phelan’s reelection would likely ensure a rancorous session between the two legislative chambers, with the Senate controlled by Phelan’s political rival, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who tried to end the speaker’s political career by backing a primary challenger earlier this year. If Phelan is deposed, Patrick and the rest of the GOP’s most conservative faction could have a willing ally in driving a hardline agenda through the Legislature.

Tepper said he has decided to vote for Phelan because he views him as the stronger conservative, particularly on tax policy. He said he likes Cook personally but questioned some of his bills, including proposed changes to background checks for public sector employees. Based on his conversations with the Mansfield lawmaker, Tepper said Cook seemed “very friendly to the cities,” perhaps from his time as mayor. Tepper hopes to continue curbing the power of municipalities, a long-running priority of many Texas GOP lawmakers.

On Sunday, Rep. Jared Patterson, R-Frisco, a Phelan ally, told CBS News Texas that he is “fully supportive” of Phelan serving a third term as speaker. Others say they want to “maintain” the House’s current trajectory, as Reps. Drew Darby of San Angelo and Cole Hefner of Mount Pleasant, told The Texan. They point to conservative wins on abortion, property taxes and more under Phelan’s leadership.

Phelan has also tried to shore up support by adding firepower to his staff, hiring longtime lobbyist Mike Toomey as his chief of staff and bringing on former Gov. Rick Perry as a senior adviser. Perry told KXAN earlier this month that Phelan has “got the votes” to hold onto the gavel.

But with a majority of Republicans behind Cook, Phelan’s current path to 76 votes relies on support from the Democratic minority. And the speaker’s opponents say that the entrance of two Democrats into the speaker’s race — Ana-Maria Ramos of Richardson and John Bryant of Dallas — suggests that Phelan may not have as firm a lock on the Democratic caucus as his camp believes.

Tinderholt, meanwhile, said he believes Cook already has enough backing to reach the 60% threshold for the GOP caucus’ endorsement.

“I believe those votes are already secured,” Tinderholt said, “and the only path that Dade Phelan has to the speakership is to reject the caucus vote and rely on the Democrat caucus to support him on the floor.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2024/11/27/david-cook-dade-phelan-texas-house-speaker/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Texas GOP seeks to keep its elected officials in line with new rules

Republican voters in Texas sent a strong message this primary season about their expectations for ideological purity, casting out 15 state House GOP incumbents who bucked the grassroots on issues like school vouchers or the impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton.

At the same time this spring, the party itself has been making moves beyond the ballot box to keep its elected officials in line.

At its biennial convention last month, the Texas GOP tried to increase its party purity by approving two major rules changes: One would close the Republican primary elections so that only voters the party identifies as Republicans can participate. The other would bar candidates from the primary ballot for two years after they had been censured by the state party.

Jon Taylor, a political science professor at the University of Texas at San Antonio, said the moves are clear political shots by the increasingly dominant right wing of the party to root out dissenters and shape the party in its image.

“It says something about this battle, this civil war that’s broken out in the Republican Party of Texas that one side has gotten so concerned that they haven't been able to solidify their control of the party that they want to close their primary,” he said.

But the ideas have drawn pushback from inside and outside the party, with many questioning whether the GOP has the power to enact them without action from the state Legislature.

James Wesolek, a spokesperson for the Republican Party of Texas, said the party will be pursuing the policies regardless. He added that “an overwhelming majority” of Republican voters supported the ideas when they were included as propositions in the GOP primary this year.

“We hope the legislature takes action, but we will move forward as our rules dictate,” Wesolek said in an email last week.

Questions remain about how that would work.

Eric Opiela, a longtime Republican who previously served as the state party’s executive director and was part of the rules committee at this year’s convention, said moving forward on closing the primary without legislative action would lead to legal challenges.

Because party primaries are publicly financed and perform the public service of selecting candidates for elected office, they must adhere to the state’s election law, said Opiela, who has also served as a lawyer for the state party.

Currently, any voter can participate in a Democrat or Republican primary without having to register an affiliation. Without a change to state law, the Texas GOP could open itself to liability if it barred voters from participating in its primary elections, Opiela said.

Under the rules approved by the GOP, a voter would be eligible to cast a ballot in a primary if they voted in a GOP primary in the past two years or submitted a “certificate of affiliation with the Republican Party of Texas” prior to the candidate filing period for that election. They also could register with the state party, though the party hasn’t yet unveiled a process to do so.

A voter under 21 could also vote in the primary if it were their first primary election.

But critics are concerned that the party is underestimating the amount of work required to vet a person’s voting history. And Opiela also said that there are concerns about how to provide proper notification to new voters, especially military voters, who might have recently moved into the state and are not covered under the proposal as written. He said such concerns are why these changes should be left to the Legislature, where lawmakers can consider obstacles to implementation and come up with solutions.

“I don’t know that the process was given much thought,” said Opiela. “Those of us who have run an election know that this isn’t easy to pull off.”

Texas is among 15 states that currently have open primaries, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Ten states currently have closed primaries.

Closed primaries are a particularly hot topic in the GOP due to frustration among some in the conservative grassroots over House Speaker Dade Phelan’s primary runoff victory.

Phelan oversaw the passage of major conservative victories including restricting abortion and loosening gun laws in recent years. But he has become a target of the hard right for failing to pass school voucher legislation, appointing some Democrats to chair legislative committees and presiding over the impeachment of Paxton, who is a darling of the hard right.

He finished second in his March primary, but won his primary runoff against right wing candidate David Covey by fewer than 400 votes. Covey and his supporters blamed Phelan’s victory on Democratic voters who crossed over into the GOP primary runoff to vote for Phelan.

It’s difficult to say whether that’s true; Texas doesn’t track party registration. About 4% of the people who voted in the GOP primary this year had most recently voted in the Democratic primary, according to data compiled by elections data expert Derek Ryan, a Republican. But party leaders, such as recently departed party Chair Matt Rinaldi, have pointed to the Phelan race as a reason for a need for change.

“The time is now for Republicans to choose our own nominees without Democrat interference,” Rinaldi said in May.

Taylor, the UTSA professor, said the push to close the primaries was in line with the right wing’s push to force GOP candidates to follow the party line.

“You’re engaging in a form of ideological conformity, you’re demanding 100% fealty to the party,” he said.

But Daron Shaw, a political science professor at the University of Texas, pushed back against those crying foul.

“It is completely unclear to me how it is the ‘right’ of a voter in Texas, particularly one that does not identify as a Republican, to vote in the selection of Republican candidates,” he said. “Ultimately, a party is a private association and if it chooses to select extreme candidates, then presumably the general electorate will react accordingly.”

The rule to bar candidates who had been censured by the state party has also been met with skepticism.

Opiela said that if a candidate turned in an application that otherwise met the requirements for running for office, a court would likely order the party to allow the candidate on the ballot. He also said the provision could open up precinct and county chairs to criminal liability for rejecting applications that met the requirements.

The state party rule tries to cover for that potential liability by stating it would provide legal representation for any party official who is sued for complying with the rule.

Asked by The Texas Tribune to assess the legality of the idea, Rick Hasen, a UCLA professor and election law expert, called it “dicey.”

Taylor, from UTSA, said the move was also a pretty transparent message to elected officials like Phelan and U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales to fall in line. Phelan was censured in February for overseeing Paxton’s impeachment and appointing Democrats as committee chairs. Gonzales was censured for supporting a bipartisan gun law in the wake of the 2022 Uvalde shooting, which occurred in his district, and his vote for a bill that codified protections for same-sex marriage.

The censure rule in particular has been denounced as undemocratic, an increasingly common criticism from the GOP’s loudest critics. At the same party convention, the state party changed its platform to call for a new requirement that candidates for statewide office must also win a majority of votes in a majority of Texas’ 254 counties to win office, a model similar to that of the U.S. Electoral College.

That proposal, which represents the official position of the party but does not have any power of law, has been panned as unconstitutional.

“There’s a very good argument that such a system would violate the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court,” Hasen said.

Under the proposal, the 4.7 million residents of Harris County would have the same voting power as the 64 residents of Loving County.

“It’s basically a tyranny of the minority,” Taylor said. “This is designed to potentially go a step further in nullifying the concept of one person-one vote.”

The proposals come even as the GOP has dominated Texas politics for decades, and the hardline conservative movement continues to grow its influence. Brian W. Smith, a political science professor at St. Edward’s University in Austin, questioned the moves on a political level.

“Texas is already gerrymandered to elect ideologically pure candidates. We’re not seeing a lot of Republicans or Democrats moving to the middle to attract a broad swath of voters,” he said. “The Dade Phelans of the world are not winning because of independents or Democrats, they’re winning because they’re more popular among Republicans than their opponents.”

Keep reading...Show less

Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick in lecture

"Texas A&M suspended professor accused of criticizing Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick in lecture" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Keep reading...Show less

Here are the top allegations that led to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment

"Here are the top allegations that led to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton’s impeachment" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Keep reading...Show less

Austin real estate developer at center of Ken Paxton impeachment arrested

Nate Paul, Austin developer at center of Ken Paxton impeachment, arrested in Travis County

"Nate Paul, Austin developer at center of Ken Paxton impeachment, arrested in Travis County" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Keep reading...Show less

Ken Paxton impeachment fight exposes deep fissures among Texas GOP

"Ken Paxton impeachment fight exposes deep fissures among Texas Republicans" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

The impeachment of Attorney General Ken Paxton exposed long-simmering and bitter divisions within the Texas Republican Party — infighting that has hindered the ability to unite behind a single vision for the state’s future despite a generation of political dominance.

Just this legislative session, Republicans were unable to find agreement on school choice, stricter immigration laws and other big-ticket promises that could have given Texas bragging rights as a conservative hothouse, on par with Florida.

Nowhere was the GOP chasm more apparent than the fight over Paxton’s future. Hard-line conservatives fought to protect one of their own, criticizing the impeachment process as an effort to overturn the will of voters. Former President Donald Trump also entered the fray, blasting “Republicans in name only” for targeting a patriot and calling out Gov. Greg Abbott for failing to protect Paxton.

It wasn’t enough. About 70% of House Republicans voted Saturday to impeach — 60 of the 85 Republicans in the 149-member chamber. That included a coalition of center-right and conservative Republicans who defied their party’s far right and heeded the call to protect the state from a public official who had abused his office and power for personal gain.

That division will continue to fester as the Senate takes up Paxton’s impeachment trial, with continued pro-Paxton pressure likely to come from Trump, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and Republican Party Chair Matt Rinaldi.

Some of the tension arises from differing political goals.

The Republican Party’s center-right faction favors a loose regulatory environment and economic policies that entice businesses to move to the state. The more conservative wing opposes some policies that favor big business and emphasizes social issues like loosening gun laws and limiting abortion, immigration and LGBTQ rights in the state.

Often, members of that wing express skepticism about House Speaker Dade Phelan’s support for those social issues. In the run-up to impeachment, their common attack line was to paint Phelan as a liberal or soft Republican who allowed Democrats to lead the charge.

Paxton himself pounced on that skepticism Saturday night.

“Phelan’s coalition of Democrats and liberal Republicans is now in lockstep with the Biden Administration, the abortion industry, anti-gun zealots, and woke corporations to sabotage my work as Attorney General,” he wrote in a statement after the impeachment vote.

But that skepticism ignores that the House has moved to the right in some ways during Phelan’s time in charge. In 2021, his first legislative session, the chamber was involved in passing what was at the time the most restrictive abortion law in the country. And his chamber led the charge on a bill to allow people to carry handguns without a state-issued permit.

Still, in the Legislature, the House and Senate usually stand as proxies in the ideological fray, with the House representing the center-right and the Senate the conservative wing.

Under Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s leadership, the Senate rapidly passes a conservative wish list of ideas as early as possible each legislative session. Some gain traction in the House, such as limits on transgender medical care and a ban on diversity, equity and inclusion offices at public universities. Other ideas find a chilly reception, dooming efforts this session to approve a school voucher-style program and end tenure for university professors, among other priorities.

The House approved 20 articles of impeachment against Paxton, laying the first glove on a political leader who was reelected twice despite long-standing criminal charges of securities fraud and a federal investigation into allegations that he used the powers of his office to help a friend and political donor.

During Paxton’s reelection campaign last year, U.S. Sen. John Cornyn called the attorney general’s laundry list of legal problems “an embarrassment.” Paxton fired back, calling Cornyn a squishy conservative who compromised with “radical Senate Democrats in D.C.”

Sensing vulnerability, three well-known Republicans — then-Land Commissioner George P. Bush, former state Supreme Court Justice Eva Guzman and then-U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert — challenged Paxton in the GOP primary, arguing that his legal entanglements were a distraction and made him unfit for office.

But Paxton almost won the primary outright and went on to blow away Bush in the runoff, then decisively defeated Democrat Rochelle Garza in November.

Republican voters rewarded Paxton for launching a series of legal challenges on abortion and Democratic policies on immigration and the environment — dealing a blow to the party’s center-right faction by rebuffing Bush and Guzman.

The House’s impeachment of Paxton is another battle in the continuing war between the party’s factions.

“If Star Wars had ‘The Empire Strikes Back,’ this is ‘The House Strikes Back,’” said Mark Jones, a political scientist at Rice University. “Dade Phelan and the House Republicans have been on the defensive all session. This is a chance for them to strike a blow against the conservative wing of the party that’s been criticizing them and attacking them the entire session.”

Before the impeachment vote, the 85 Republicans in the House were hounded by conservative political groups that were backing Paxton. Defend Texas Liberty PAC spent the days and hours before impeachment sending text blasts asking voters to urge their elected officials to support Paxton. The group received an added boost when Trump cast his lot with Paxton, giving Defend Texas Liberty ammunition to use in follow-up messages.

In the end, 60 Republicans pushed past those efforts to vote for Paxton’s impeachment. But with a Senate impeachment trial not yet scheduled, senators can expect additional pressure from groups on both sides of the impeachment question.

“It’s going to be a lot more difficult for the senators,” Jones said. “Because Phelan kept this under wrap until the end, there wasn’t a lot of time for Paxton’s defenders to react. Now, they’re going to have a few weeks.”

Paxton has already said he expects the Senate to be “fair and just.”

Trump, Cruz and other conservative stalwarts may play a more significant role heading toward a Senate trial, Jones said.

“What Cruz and Trump do is they provide political cover for those Republican senators who want to vote for Paxton but don’t want to be seen as backing a corrupt official who’s committed a number of illegal acts,” Jones said. “They can say, ‘I’m with Trump and Sen. Cruz.’”

Other Republican officials in the state, like Abbott, who has been silent on impeachment, will also be put in the uncomfortable position of weighing in on the matter.

Late Saturday, Trump called out Abbott specifically, declaring that Abbott was “MISSING IN ACTION!”

Throughout his time as governor, Abbott has moved to the right along with the GOP base, but he is frequently criticized by the party’s conservative wing as insufficiently conservative.

“Abbott is not one who’s out there in front being aggressive, and risk-taking has never been Abbott’s style,” Jones said. “This is one of those situations where whatever you do, you’re going to alienate somebody.”

On the political front, House Republicans face election every two years and will have to explain their impeachment votes to a GOP primary base that has stuck by Paxton.

“Phelan as well as some of his leadership team will now have to face primary challengers that they most likely would not have faced had they not gone this route of trying to impeach Paxton,” Jones said.

Many of the Republicans who voted in favor of impeachment portrayed their decisions as nonpolitical, including Rep. Briscoe Cain, R-Deer Park, one of the most conservative members of the House.

“I understand my vote will elicit both praise and criticism from different quarters,” Cain said. “However, my role as a representative is not to prioritize popularity but to act according to what I believe is right.”

If two-thirds of senators decline to support impeachment, Paxton opponents can find themselves in a more difficult position, Jones said.

”Because they’ll have a sitting attorney general who’s angry with them and a Republican presidential candidate in Trump who will be campaigning in Texas and probably campaigning with those primary challengers,” Jones said.

Disclosure: Rice University has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/28/ken-paxton-impeach-republican-infighting/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Texas AG Ken Paxton impeached — suspended from duties pending outcome of Senate trial

"Texas AG Ken Paxton impeached, suspended from duties pending outcome of Senate trial" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

In a history-making late-afternoon vote, a divided Texas House chose Saturday to impeach Attorney General Ken Paxton, temporarily removing him from office over allegations of misconduct that included bribery and abuse of office.

The vote to adopt the 20 articles of impeachment was 121-23.

Attention next shifts to the Texas Senate, which will conduct a trial with senators acting as jurors and designated House members presenting their case as impeachment managers.

Permanently removing Paxton from office and barring him from holding future elected office in Texas would require the support of two-thirds of senators.

The move to impeach came less than a week after the House General Investigating Committee revealed that it was investigating Paxton for what members described as a yearslong pattern of misconduct and questionable actions that include bribery, dereliction of duty and obstruction of justice. They presented the case against him Saturday, acknowledging the weight of their actions.

“Today is a very grim and difficult day for this House and for the state of Texas,” Rep. David Spiller, R-Jacksboro, a committee member, told House members.

“We have a duty and an obligation to protect the citizens of Texas from elected officials who abuse their office and their powers for personal gain,” Spiller said. “As a body, we should not be complicit in allowing that behavior.”

Paxton supporters criticized the impeachment proceedings as rushed, secretive and based on hearsay accounts of actions taken by Paxton, who was not given the opportunity to defend himself to the investigating committee.

“This process is indefensible,” said Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo, who complained that the vote was taking place on a holiday weekend before members had time to conduct a thorough review of the accusations. “It concerns me a lot because today it could be General Paxton, tomorrow it could be you and the next day it could be me.”

Saturday’s vote temporarily removes a controversial but influential Republican figure in Texas and nationally. He has led an office that initiated lawsuits that overturned or blocked major Biden and Obama administration policies, sought to reverse Trump’s electoral defeat in 2020, aggressively pursued voter fraud claims and targeted hospitals that provided gender care to minors.

The Legislature had impeached state officials just twice since 1876 — and never an attorney general — but the House committee members who proposed impeachment argued Saturday that Paxton’s misconduct in office was so egregious that it warranted his removal.

“This gentleman is no longer fit for service or for office,” said committee member Rep. Ann Johnson, D-Houston. “Either this is going to be the beginning of the end of his criminal reign, or God help us with the harms that will come to all Texans if he's allowed to stay the top cop on the take, if millions of Texans can’t trust us to do the right thing, right here, right now.”

Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, a member of the investigative committee, used his presentation time to criticize Paxton for calling representatives as they worked on the House floor to “personally threaten them with political consequences in the next election” if they supported impeachment.

Speaking against impeachment, Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington, called the process “wrong.”

“Don’t end our session this way. Don’t tarnish this institution,” Tinderholt said. “Don’t cheapen the act of impeachment. Don’t undermine the will of the voters. Don’t give Democrats another victory handed to them on a silver platter.”

The vote came as hardline conservatives supportive of Paxton’s aggressive strategy of suing the Biden administration were lining up in support of him. Former President Donald Trump — a close political ally to Paxton — blasted the impeachment proceedings as an attempt to unseat “the most hard working and effective” attorney general and thwart the “large number of American Patriots” who voted for Paxton.

Trump vowed to target any Republican who voted to impeach Paxton.

As lawmakers listened to the committee members make their case, Paxton took to social media to boost conservatives who had come to his defense, including Trump, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Georgia, and conservative radio host Grant Stinchfield, who tweeted, “Kangaroo Court in Texas.”

About 90 minutes into the debate, the official Twitter account of the Texas attorney general’s office began tweeting at members of the committee to challenge some of the claims being made.

“Please tell the truth,” the agency’s account said.

Because Paxton was impeached while the Legislature was in session, the Texas Constitution requires the Senate to remain in Austin after the regular session ends Monday or set a trial date for the future, with no deadline for a trial spelled out in the law.

Impeachment represents the greatest political threat to date for Paxton, who has been reelected twice despite a 2015 indictment for felony securities fraud and an ongoing federal investigation into allegations of official misconduct that began in 2020.

The impeachment vote, on the third-to-last day of the regular legislative session, capped a tumultuous week at the Capitol. From Tuesday to Thursday:

  • Paxton abruptly accused House Speaker Dade Phelan of presiding over the chamber while drunk and demanded that he resign.
  • The House General Investigating Committee revealed it had been investigating Paxton in secret since March.
  • The committee heard a three-hour presentation from its investigators detailing allegations of corruption against the attorney general.
  • The committee’s three Republicans and two Democrats voted to forward 20 articles of impeachment to the full House.

Paxton, who was comfortably elected to a third term last year, made a rare appearance before assembled reporters Friday to criticize the process, saying he was not given a chance to present favorable evidence. He called impeachment an effort by Democrats and “liberal” Republicans to remove him from office, violating the will of voters and sidelining an effective warrior against Biden administration policies.

“The corrupt politicians in the Texas House are demonstrating that blind loyalty to Speaker Dade Phelan is more important than upholding their oath of office,” Paxton said. He added, “They are showcasing their absolute contempt for the electoral process.”

Many of the articles of impeachment focused on allegations that Paxton had repeatedly abused his powers of office to help a political donor and friend, Austin real estate developer Nate Paul.

In fall 2020, eight top deputies in the attorney general’s office approached federal and state investigators to report their concerns about Paxton’s relationship with Paul.

All eight quit or were fired in the following months, and most of the details of their allegations against Paxton were revealed in a lawsuit by four former executives who claim they were fired — in violation of the Texas Whistleblower Act — in retaliation for reporting Paxton to the authorities. Paxton’s bid to dismiss the lawsuit is awaiting action by the Dallas-based 5th Court of Appeals.

According to the lawsuit, the whistleblowers accused Paxton of engaging in a series of “intense and bizarre” actions to help Paul, including intervening in an open-records case to help Paul gain documents from federal and state investigations into the real estate investor’s businesses. They also accused Paxton of directing his agency to intervene in a lawsuit between Paul and a charity, pushing through a rushed legal opinion to help Paul avoid a pending foreclosure sale on properties and ignoring agency rules to hire an outside lawyer to pursue an investigation helpful to Paul’s businesses.

In return, the whistleblower lawsuit alleged, Paul paid for all or part of a major renovation of a home Paxton owns in Austin. Paul also helped Paxton keep an extramarital affair quiet by employing the woman Paxton had been seeing, the lawsuit said, adding that the attorney general may also have been motivated by a $25,000 contribution Paul made to Paxton’s campaign in 2018.

In their report to the House General Investigating Committee on Wednesday, the panel’s investigators concluded that Paxton may have committed numerous crimes and violated his oath of office.

Investigators said possible felonies included abuse of official capacity by, among other actions, diverting staff time to help Paul at a labor cost of at least $72,000; misuse of official information by possibly helping Paul gain access to investigative documents; and retaliation and official oppression by firing employees who complained of Paxton’s actions to the FBI.

The articles of impeachment accused Paxton of accepting bribes, disregarding his official duties and misapplying public resources to help Paul.

The articles also referred to felony charges of securities fraud, and one felony count of failing to register with state securities officials, that have been pending against Paxton since 2015, months after he took office as attorney general. The fraud charges stem from Paxton’s work in 2011 to solicit investors in Servergy Inc. without disclosing that the McKinney company was paying him for the work.

The impeachment articles also accused Paxton of obstruction of justice by acting to delay the criminal cases with legal challenges and because a Paxton donor pursued legal action that limited the pay to prosecutors in the case, causing further delays “to Paxton’s advantage.”

Taken in total, the accusations showed a pattern of dereliction of duty in violation of the Texas Constitution, Paxton’s oaths of office and state laws against public officials acting against the public’s interest, the impeachment resolution said.

“Paxton engaged in misconduct, private or public, of such character as to indicate his unfitness for office,” the articles said.

An attorney general had never before been impeached by the Legislature, an extraordinary step that lawmakers have reserved for public officials who faced serious allegations of misconduct. Only two Texas officials have been removed from office by Senate conviction, Gov. James Ferguson in 1917 and District Judge O.P. Carrillo in 1975.

If Paxton is to survive, he will need to secure the support of 11 senators. With the 12 Democratic senators likely to support his removal, votes for acquittal would need to come from the 19 Republican members.

None has publicly defended Paxton. In a television interview Thursday, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, who presides over the Senate, said merely that he believed senators would be responsible jurors and “do their duty.”

A complicating factor is Sen. Angela Paxton, R-McKinney, Paxton’s wife. State law requires all senators to attend an impeachment trial, though whether she will recuse herself from voting is unclear.

Paxton’s political base lies in the far-right faction of the Republican Party, where he has positioned himself as a champion of conservative causes and a thorn in the side of Democratic President Joe Biden. Paxton has criticized his opponents as RINOs (Republicans in name only) who “want nothing more than to sabotage our legal challenges to Biden’s extremist agenda by taking me out.”

He also retained the backing of the state Republican Party, led by former state Rep. Matt Rinaldi, who frequently attacks Republicans he considers to be insufficiently conservative. On Friday, Rinadi said the impeachment was Phelan’s fault for allowing Democrats to have too much influence in the House.

“The impeachment proceedings against the Attorney General are but the latest front in the Texas House’s war against Republicans to stop the conservative direction of her state,” Rinaldi said in a statement.

Paxton also has maintained a close relationship with Trump and filed an unsuccessful U.S. Supreme Court challenge to the 2020 presidential election. Paxton also spoke at Trump’s rally on Jan. 6, 2021, shortly before the president’s supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2023/05/27/ken-paxton-impeached-texas-attorney-general/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

Texas GOP state rep resigns ahead of expulsion vote over inappropriate relationship with aide

"State Rep. Bryan Slaton resigns ahead of expulsion vote over inappropriate relationship with aide" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Keep reading...Show less

Complaint alleges Texas state GOP rep. had 'inappropriate relationship' with an intern

"Complaint alleges Rep. Bryan Slaton had “inappropriate relationship” with an intern" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Keep reading...Show less

Texas lawmakers jeopardize AG Paxton’s $3.3 million settlement with whistleblowers

"Legislature has little appetite to fund Ken Paxton’s settlement with whistleblowers" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Keep reading...Show less

Attorney General Ken Paxton apologizes to whistleblowers in $3.3 million settlement

Attorney General Ken Paxton and four of his former top deputies who said he improperly fired them after they accused him of crimes have reached a tentative agreement to end a whistleblower lawsuit that would pay those employees $3.3 million dollars.

In a filing Friday, Paxton’s and the whistleblower’s attorneys asked the Texas Supreme Court to further defer consideration of the whistleblower case until the two sides can finalize the tentative agreement. Once the deal is finalized and funding is approved, the two sides will move to end the case, the filing said.

“The whistleblowers sacrificed their jobs and have spent more than two years fighting for what is right,” said TJ Turner, an attorney for David Maxwell, one of the whistleblowers. “We believe the terms of the settlement speak for themselves.”

This is a developing story.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2023/02/09/ken-paxton-attorney-general-settlement-whistleblower/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

'Pugilist Patrick on full display': Texas lieutenant governor takes aim at 2 Republicans who crossed him

"“Pugilist Patrick on full display”: Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick takes aim at two Republicans who crossed him" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s pugnacious leadership style was on display this month as he took public aim at two fellow Republicans who crossed him, sending an early message in this year’s legislative session that anyone — friend or foe — who gets in his way will face his wrath.

State Rep. Steve Toth, a fellow conservative from The Woodlands, learned that lesson earlier this month when Patrick unleashed a spirited attack against him in the form of multiple press releases from his campaign that were sent to news organizations and posted on social media. Patrick criticized Toth over comments he reportedly made suggesting the Senate shared blame for the Legislature’s failure to pass a bill that would have banned gender-transitioning medical care and surgery for children. Patrick denounced Toth as a “fraud” who was using misdirection and revisionist history to cast blame on the Senate, which Patrick presides over.

A few days later, Patrick ratcheted up an older feud when he took to Twitter and essentially demanded that several companies and organizations drop former state Rep. Chris Paddie as their lobbyist. Patrick has had a vendetta against the Marshall Republican since 2021, when the Senate clashed with the House over the policy response to the power grid failure. At the time, Paddie chaired the powerful House State Affairs Committee, which was a major clearinghouse for grid reforms.

The conflicts with Toth and Paddie highlight an aggressive start to the session by Patrick, who begins his third term overseeing a state Senate in which the GOP majority is more in lockstep with him than ever.

“This is the pugilist Patrick on full display,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston, adding that Patrick is “at the apex of his power right now” and pressing his influence. “He runs the Senate as effectively and without fear as any lieutenant governor since Bob Bullock,” the formidable Democratic lieutenant governor who served in the 1990s. “This to me is something that he wants to complete across the rotunda.”

Patrick, who has presided over the Senate for eight years, has used his power as lieutenant governor to push Texas politics in a more socially conservative direction.

[Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, Trump’s man in Texas, has quietly amassed influence — to the detriment of fellow Republicans]

Easily the most outspoken of the Big Three state officials — the governor, lieutenant governor and House speaker — Patrick has made no qualms in the past about bending arms or using public pressure to get other state officials, including Gov. Greg Abbott, to go along with his plans. In the past, he has stripped Republican senators of leadership positions for refusing to go along with his priorities, contributing to an environment where he wields tremendous control of legislation passing the Senate and rarely faces dissent.

But much of his wrath has been focused on members of the House, the lower chamber which Patrick views as insufficiently conservative and which has sometimes thwarted his priorities.

His recent feud with Toth is striking in that they are two sides of the same ideological coin. Toth is one of the most socially conservative lawmakers in the Legislature, a member of the far-right House Freedom Caucus and a usual favorite of grassroots conservatives. He has filed two bills this session to ban transition-related care for children.

Toth, in an interview, was not keen on being on Patrick’s bad side and insisted it was all a misunderstanding.

“He’s a freaking rock star,” Toth said of Patrick. “Who’s a bigger supporter of him than me in the House?”

The issue started when Texas Scorecard, a conservative website, published an article that said Toth blamed the Senate for “killing” such legislation, which is a major priority for the Republican Party of Texas. The website said Toth had made those comments in a private meeting that was secretly recorded.

“It came over from the Senate ridiculously late, and they knew that we were going to have trouble,” Toth said. “There’s plenty of blame that needs to be spread around in this thing.”

One day later, Patrick’s campaign issued a news release pushing back against Toth’s “irrational accusations.” The release went into lengthy detail about when the Senate pushed out legislation to ban transition-related care for children and how the House bills on the same issue stalled in the lower chamber.

“Rep. Toth has a reputation for blaming others to cover up his own shortcomings on getting his bills passed,” Patrick said in a statement. “Rep. Toth’s baseless allegations and misplaced blame have cost him any shred of credibility.”

Toth has said his comments were taken out of context. He said he was explaining the difficulties lawmakers face when going through the legislative process and did not blame the Senate or Patrick for the bill’s death. Toth said the conservative website was trying to drive a wedge between conservative lawmakers who were naturally aligned.

In the recording, Toth said the Big Three leaders could have put more muscle behind the issue and he criticized Abbott for not putting the issue on the agenda during three special sessions he called in 2021. Toth also criticized Patrick for not asking for the issue to be taken up during the special sessions.

“None of them wanted it,” Toth said on the recording.

Toth’s explanation has not appeased Patrick, who issued another news release calling Toth a fraud. Patrick has not responded to Toth’s request for a meeting to clear the air.

On Thursday, Patrick again attacked Toth in a statement to The Texas Tribune saying Toth’s words had not been taken out of context and had misled the group he was talking to about the Senate’s intent.

“He continues to ignore the truth and has not publicly apologized for blaming the Senate. He knows we wanted to pass that legislation to the Governor’s desk,” Patrick said.

A grudge becomes more personal

Patrick’s beef with Paddie dates back to 2021, when Paddie was a key player in the policy response to the grid failure as chair of the House State Affairs Committee. Patrick went all out to try to reverse billions of dollars in charges for wholesale electricity during the winter storm that caused the disaster, but the House resisted the idea, known as repricing, favoring a more deliberative approach. Along the way, Patrick accused House leadership, which included Paddie, of siding with “big business” over average Texans.

Patrick never got his way on repricing, a rare high-profile loss for the all-powerful Senate leader.

But Patrick’s grudge against Paddie only became more personal. In a statement later that year, Patrick accused Paddie of misleading state utility regulators about the intent of a bill to help power companies who had to swallow massive prices from gas suppliers during the grid crisis. Patrick said Paddie had been “disingenuous throughout the legislative process and after.” He also publicly speculated that Paddie, who had since announced he would not run for reelection, was preparing to take a “highly compensated position in the same electric industry that stands to benefit from his position” on the bill.

Paddie indeed went on to become a lobbyist for the electricity industry, signing clients such as Vistra, the Irving-based energy company, after finding a way around an ethics law that had previously ensnared him. When that became known late last year, Patrick reupped his criticism of Paddie, saying in a tweet that “Vistra leadership & shareholders should know he’s lost his credibility & not welcome in my office.”

In his latest tweet this week, Patrick tagged six of Paddie’s lobby clients and said he hopes they “know he has no credibility & not welcome in my office for his disingenuous & unprofessional conduct last session on the grid.”

Paddie declined to comment on Patrick’s latest attack. So did Vistra, the company whose hiring of Paddie seems to have angered Patrick the most.

As of Thursday, records with the Texas Ethics Commission showed Paddie was still registered to lobby for all the clients that Patrick had singled out.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/27/texas-dan-patrick-senate-legislature-steve-toth-chris-paddie/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Texas lawmakers push to end state holiday honoring Confederate veterans

Calling the celebration of Confederate Heroes Day a "constant reminder" of a horrible past, state Rep. Jarvis Johnson, D-Houston, on Wednesday called for Texas to end its commemoration as a state holiday.

Confederate Heroes Day is celebrated on Jan. 19. The holiday commemorates the lives of Confederate President Jefferson Davis and Gen. Robert E. Lee as well as soldiers who died fighting the Union during the Civil War. Texas used to separately celebrate the birthdays of Davis and Lee, but consolidated them in 1973 into Confederate Heroes Day.

"When we talk about what Confederate Heroes Day is, it is a remembrance of a horrible past," Johnson, who is Black, said at a press conference surrounded by other lawmakers. "A past that has done irreparable damage to many of the residents of the state of Texas."

Johnson's bill to end Confederate Heroes Day is his third attempt; similar legislation didn't make it out of committees in the past two legislative sessions. In 2019, the House State Affairs Committee, then led by now-Speaker Dade Phelan, a Beaumont Republican, didn't bring up Johnson's bill for a vote.

In 2019, the Descendants of Confederate Veterans opposed the legislation. A spokesperson for the group declined comment on the new legislation.

Johnson was surrounded by leaders of the Texas Black Leadership Caucus, the House Democratic Caucus and the Mexican American Legislative Caucus at Wednesday's press conference.

"We cannot stand by as our state continues to formally celebrate and glorify the men who believed so deeply that Black men and women did not have rights, that they would go to war," said state Rep. Christina Morales, a Houston Democrat who is vice chair for the Mexican American Legislative Caucus. "We must teach our history to our children, but our children should grow up knowing that the Confederacy does not stand for the values of freedom that we continue to fight for today."

Johnson pushed back against those who say the celebration of Confederate veterans is part of their heritage by saying he is also the descendant of a Confederate soldier — a white slaveowner who raped his Black slave. Johnson said his great-great-great-grandmother later ran away to Texas.

"At no point in my life, at no point in my children's life, will I ever celebrate that part of my history," Johnson said. "There is no point in celebrating an individual that created harm and did such harmful things to others."

Confederate Heroes Day often falls close to, or on the same day as Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, which celebrates the Black civil rights leader murdered in 1968. In the next 20 years, the holidays will fall on the same day four times, according to state Sen. Nathan Johnson, D-Dallas, who is sponsoring the legislation in the upper chamber.

Seven other states have similar Confederate memorial days. Mississippi and Alabama have a joint Martin Luther King, Jr. and Robert E. Lee Day. In 2020, Virginia removed its Confederate holiday, Lee-Jackson Day, as a state holiday.

Nathan Johnson said the celebration of the holiday in Texas makes him "feel sick."

"If I filed a bill today to establish Confederate Heroes Day, would you vote for it? Would you give it a hearing?" he asked. "This thing doesn't belong on our books. It creates divisions whether we want it to or not."

Jarvis Johnson said he is hopeful the legislation will advance this session, but significant barriers exist. No Republicans, who hold majorities in both chambers of the Legislature, attended the press conference, even though some have previously signed on as co-authors of Johnson's bills. And in recent years, top Republican leaders have acted to defend Confederate monuments even as other states like Virginia have been tearing them down.

Jarvis Johnson said every time the bill is filed it gains momentum with the public.

"I believe through perseverance and persistence that we will be able to get this done," he said.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2023/01/18/texas-confederate-heroes-day-holiday-bill/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Greg Abbott expands Texas’ migrant busing plan to Philadelphia

"Gov. Greg Abbott expands Texas’ migrant busing plan to Philadelphia" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Gov. Greg Abbott said Tuesday that Philadelphia has been added to the list of Democrat-led cities where Texas will bus migrants, with the first bus set to arrive in the Northeastern city on Wednesday morning.

For months, Texas has sent buses of migrants to Washington, D.C., New York and Chicago in an effort to pressure Democratic President Joe Biden to stiffen his immigration policies, which Republicans say have led to record-high numbers of border crossings.

“Since April, Texas’ busing strategy has successfully provided much-needed relief to our border communities overwhelmed by the historic influx of migrants caused by President Biden’s reckless open border policies,” Abbott said in a statement. “Until the Biden Administration does its job and provides Texans and the American people with sustainable border security, Texas will continue doing more than any other state in the nation’s history to defend against an invasion along the border, including adding more sanctuary cities like Philadelphia as drop-off locations for our busing strategy.”

Abbott’s news release added that “Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney has long-celebrated and fought for sanctuary city status, making the city an ideal addition to Texas’ list of drop-off locations.”

In a statement Tuesday night, Kenney said his city welcomed the migrants and that city departments had worked with community partners since the summer to prepare for the possibility of Texas sending migrants on buses to Philadelphia.

“As a proud welcoming city, we will greet our newly arrived neighbors with dignity and respect,” said Kenney, adding that the city had been told a week ago that buses could be sent to the city from Del Rio. “Philadelphians know that diversity is our strength, and we want to acknowledge the generosity and compassion we have already seen from residents and community partners since we were alerted to a possible bus arriving in Philadelphia. It is possible for government and local communities to work together to strengthen systems of support for newcomers and that has always been this administration’s vision and commitment.”

But Kenney also blasted Abbott for continuing the busing program.

“It is truly disgusting to hear today that Governor Abbott and his Administration continue to implement their purposefully cruel policy using immigrant families—including women and children—as pawns to shamelessly push his warped political agenda,” he said.

Abbott’s expansion of his migrant busing program comes a week after he won a third term as governor by handily defeating Beto O’Rourke, the Democrats’ brightest gubernatorial prospect in nearly a decade. Abbott made immigration and border security a foundation of his reelection campaign, promising to build a state-funded border wall, deploying thousands of National Guard service members and DPS troopers to the border, and spending more than $4 billion in state funds on border security.

Through Monday, Texas had bused 13,200 migrants to Chicago, New York and Washington, D.C. The Texas Division of Emergency Management, which manages the busing program, has spent $26 million since the program began in April, the agency’s chief, Nim Kidd, told lawmakers on Tuesday.

The program has been widely criticized as a political stunt by opponents but defended by its supporters as a way to share the immigration burden with other states. State officials have emphasized that migrants get on the bus voluntarily after they have been processed by the Department of Homeland Security. Most are seeking asylum and aim to continue their immigration process once they arrive in their destination cities.

Abbott was criticized by the leaders of destination cities for failing to coordinate the arrival of the migrants when Abbott first started sending buses to their cities. Yet Texas and city officials failed to communicate in the months after Abbott began sending the buses, leaving nonprofits to step up and coordinate the migrants’ arrivals.

Kenney said Abbott had similarly not contacted the city of Philadelphia to coordinate about the arrival of the buses. But in a change to his previous announcements of new destinations, Abbott gave a public, one-day notice to the city of Philadelphia about the bus headed to the city. He also announced publicly where the buses would arrive: William H. Gray III 30th Street Station.

In the past, the migrants would be dropped off without notification, with city officials and nonprofits learning of their arrival on social media or conservative news outlets like Fox News.

But Kenney said the city was alerted about the impending arrival of buses by nonprofit partners in Philadelphia and Texas. The Texas Division of Emergency Management does not coordinate with destination cities and largely leaves it to nonprofit groups to coordinate the arrivals.

One of the nonprofits helping to coordinate the migrants’ arrival said the arrival of buses to Philadelphia has been smoother than in other cities. Tiffany Burrow of the Val Verde Border Humanitarian Coalition said the buses left Texas Monday night with 31 people on board. Burrow said her group has already arranged for nonprofits in Philadelphia to welcome the migrants when they arrive in the city and guide them toward local resources and they have been given an estimated time window for the arrival. She said the city of Philadelphia has also been notified.

But of the 31 migrants on their way to Philadelphia, only three had the city as their final destination. The rest were planning to continue their travel to other states.

Peter Pedemonti, co-director of the New Sanctuary Movement in Philadelphia, said his group is part of a coalition in the city that has been preparing for the possibility that Texas would send buses to Philadelphia for months. The coalition includes community groups, advocacy organizations, refugee resettlement groups, legal services and the city’s immigrant affairs office.

Kenney’s statement said the city’s immigrant affairs and emergency management offices have been meeting regularly with nearly 15 community groups to prepare for the arrival of buses from Texas. The city is preparing a “triage center” for any arriving migrants who need medical care and has also set up a donation fund for organizations providing services to the migrants.

“We have a pretty solid plan,” Pedemonti said. “We’ll have a group of folks as well as the city being ready to make sure people have food, warm clothes and also seeing if people are continuing on in their journey or need temporary place to stay until they get to their next spot.”

“The heads up was very helpful,” he added. “I’m really grateful for Tiffany and her group for having that coordination.”

Karen Brooks Harper contributed to this report.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/11/15/texas-migrant-busing-philadelphia/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

'Does he learn anything from this?' Experts discuss Beto O'Rourke's future after third loss in four years

Four years ago, Beto O’Rourke became the next great hope for the Texas Democratic Party.

"Beto O’Rourke has lost three races in four years. Is his political career over?" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Starting his senatorial campaign as a little-known congressman from El Paso, he captured lightning in a bottle by barnstorming across the state’s 254 counties on his way to a narrow loss to Republican U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz.

[Greg Abbott reelected Texas governor, defeating Beto O’Rourke]

Though he came up short, O’Rourke helped sweep in down-ballot victories across the state and helping Democrats pick up 12 seats in the Texas House, two seats in the Texas Senate and boosting newcomer Lina Hidalgo over longtime Harris County Judge Ed Emmett, a Republican.

His meteoric rise brought back hope to a struggling minority party that has not won statewide office since 1994, and it attracted a frenzy of national attention that set up his run for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020.

But after dropping out before the primaries and now notching a third consecutive electoral loss on Tuesday, O’Rourke is in danger of being lumped in with Democratic symbols of political failure like Wendy Davis, the former state senator who ran for governor in 2014 and the U.S. House in 2020, and the 2002 “Dream Team” of Tony Sanchez, Ron Kirk and John Sharp, which spent millions of dollars on flashy campaigns for governor, senator and lieutenant governor, respectively. All of these candidates once promised to help flip the state blue, but that ultimately ended in embarrassment.

Get the data and visuals that accompany this story →

“With each new race he loses it becomes more difficult to convince voters and persuade them that he can still win the next race,” said Sharon Navarro, a political scientist at the University of Texas at San Antonio. “That’s a very difficult barrier to overcome for a third-time loser.”

Abbott and his allies are expected to frame Tuesday’s election results as a sign that Texans have soured on O’Rourke and that he has exhausted his political future in the state. O'Rourke was down by 11 percentage points by Wednesday morning with some votes still being counted. He won in 19 counties, fewer than the 32 counties he won when he ran against Cruz.

“This is three statewide failed races,” said Corbin Casteel, a Republican consultant. “He’s a perennial candidate. He hasn’t shown any ability to win outside his hometown and his ideas are just way too radical for Texas and he keeps getting rejected left and right.”

Beto O'Rourke gives his concession speech after being defeated by incumbent Greg Abbott in the race for Texas governor on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2022, in El Paso.

Beto O’Rourke delivers his concession speech after being defeated by incumbent Greg Abbott in the race for Texas governor on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2022, in El Paso. Credit: Ivan Pierre Aguirre for The Texas Tribune

O'Rourke addressed his political future in his concession speech Tuesday night in El Paso, saying he would remain involved but that he did not "know what form that will take."

"I don’t know what my role or yours will be going forward, but I’m in this fight for life," O'Rourke said, a line that drew more cheers than any other in his speech. “Who knows what's next for any of us, right? But I just cannot thank you enough."

Afterward, O'Rourke supporters said they did not want him to disappear from politics, but they acknowledged he could use a respite.

"I'd honestly like to see him take a break," said Carolina Machado, a 47-year-old school counselor from El Paso. "I think he needs some time to kind of chill and be a family man for a little bit ... but I'd love to see him get back out there and really fight for us as Texans."

Nicole Munoz, a 42-year-old paralegal from El Paso, said she would like to see O'Rourke run for president again. She fought back tears as she talked about how she likes how O'Rourke fights for the "average Joe" and people of color.

Michael Apodaca, the chair of the El Paso County Democratic Party, said one of the best things O'Rourke could do is keep building party infrastructure in the state through his Powered by People group.

"We really desperately need that," Apodaca said, referring to statewide organizing both election years and off-years. "He has the resources, he has the organization, and they’re gonna be ready to go when he calls.”

Political experts say they do not expect O’Rourke to disappear from the scene — though his role in future elections could change, going from candidate to organizer or fundraiser before, possibly, running again.

“For Democrats, you want to ride your fast horse until you get a faster one,” said Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University. “Until you find someone better than Beto, what would be the point of exiling him into the wilderness for someone that has the skills and fundraising ability?”

Perennial candidate

At this point, O’Rourke is better known for the races he’s lost than the ones that he won — including serving as an El Paso councilman from 2005 to 2011 and a congressman from 2013 to 2019. After three high-profile losses in a four-year span, O’Rourke will have an uphill battle to convince skeptical voters that he should launch another bid for a major office.

But such a move would not be unprecedented in Texas history. In the 1950s, liberal Democrat Ralph Yarborough ran three unsuccessful campaigns for governor between 1952 and 1956 (the term of office was two years back then) before ultimately winning election to the U.S. Senate in a special 1957 election to replace Price Daniel, who had beaten out Yarborough for the governorship in 1956.

“It does show that while it seems embarrassing and you’ve gotta explain why you can’t win a big race, that you are building name recognition and there may be an election cycle that there’s an opening for you,” Jillson said.

Texas Republicans have also come back from bruising political losses to rise to the highest positions in government. In 1964, George H.W. Bush lost his U.S. Senate challenge to Yarborough by 12 percentage points. But despite the loss, Bush was considered a top prospect for the Texas GOP, which was then the minority party. Bush won the election to Texas’ 7th Congressional District two years later.

In 1980, Bush lost another major election when he was beaten out by Ronald Reagan in the Republican presidential primary. But after joining Reagan on the Republican ticket that year, Bush served two terms as vice president and eventually won the presidency in 1988.

“Different people take different paths to office,” Jillson said. “Grover Cleveland went from mayor of Buffalo to the White House in a little over three years. Things just laid out for him: mayor, governor of New York and first Democrat elected after the Civil War to the presidency.”

“It’s not that a good candidate wins every race and moves up the ladder because the environment within which you’re running even if you are a good candidate can be very difficult and in that race you might lose even if you’ve got all the skills,” he added. “Things have to line up, especially at top levels — senate, governor and presidency. It’s gotta be your party’s year and then you have to have the campaign skills and finances to give yourself a chance to win.”

But Matt Mackowiak, a GOP consultant, said O’Rourke has not made the adjustments he needed to mount a winning campaign since first running for statewide office in 2018.

“It’s not clear that Beto has learned anything from his three losses. He’s learned how to organize, how to raise money and fire up the progressives, but none of those things have delivered victory,” he said.

While O’Rourke certainly had the finances — he broke fundraising records in his senatorial campaign in 2018 and again during the governor’s race this year — political experts say he will have to work hard to overcome the tricky policy positions he put himself in during the 2020 presidential primary if he wants to win statewide office in conservative Texas.

High on that list is O’Rourke’s promise to confiscate assault-style rifles when he famously proclaimed during a presidential debate, “Hell yeah, we’re going to take your AR-15.” The stance has hampered him in gun-friendly Texas, and Abbott has used it effectively to drag down O’Rourke’s favorability.

Abbott also attacked O’Rourke for previous statements he had made in support of the Black Lives Matter movement, which the Republican used to paint him as an opponent of police funding, and for his statements that churches should lose their tax-exempt status if they opposed same-sex marriage.

“He was definitely not as strategic as he possibly could have been every time he went in front of a mic,” Navarro said. “It’s also about the ability to be more strategic in front of a microphone and be careful on issues you speak of [that] can be used in a way that can harm any future campaign.”

O’Rourke was more disciplined during this year’s gubernatorial run, saying he still believed that people should not own assault-style rifles, but that he was focused on policies that were politically realistic, like universal background checks, red-flag laws and raising the age to purchase assault rifles from 18 to 21 — all of which have the support of a majority of Texans. He also walked a difficult line on immigration, criticizing Abbott’s border policies as “political stunts” but also stressing the need to secure the border and advance immigration reform.

But to Mackowiak, O’Rourke continued to misunderstand the Texas electorate, discussing issues in a way that motivated the progressive Democratic base but alienated middle-of-the-road voters.

“He ran a standard progressive campaign in a red state that might be becoming more purple. His whole strategy was hoping there would be more school shootings and the grid would fail,” Mackowiak said. “He had no message on the economy, and his position on the border is laughable. He didn’t give himself a chance in this race because he never moved to the middle.”

Matt Rinaldi, chair of the Republican Party of Texas, said O’Rourke benefited from how little people knew about him during his senatorial run. But by the time he ran for governor, his policy positions, including those that are controversial among the state’s conservative electorate, were well known.

“He was a blank slate and people put whatever their hopes were on to him,” he said. “But as he spent the tens of millions of dollars in these races running for Senate, president and governor, people realized that he had a very scary message that would lead to increased inflation, greater crime and an open border and they rejected that. They just don’t want it here.”

“He spent a lot of money on messaging but maybe he should move to California or New York,” Rinaldi added. “His message resonates a little better there.”

While Jillson said it would be difficult for O’Rourke to get beyond his past policy positions, it is not impossible. Barack Obama, for example, was able to “evolve” his clear opposition to same-sex marriage in 2008 to support for the issue just four years later — notably during the first year that support for same-sex marriage surpassed opposition.

“His strategy on (guns) should probably best have been, ‘Look, I’m from El Paso, the shooting was very raw and fresh, that’s what I was talking about and it was an emotional response. Here’s what I’m actually going to do,’” said Jillson, referring to the 2019 shooting at a Walmart in El Paso that left 23 people dead. “You have a one- or two-sentence quick response. You have to explain what you said but you don’t have to hold to every syllable of that sentence. You can reframe it now that the moment has passed.”

But Republicans said O’Rourke’s challenges this cycle spread beyond his campaign to an overall issue with a struggling Democratic Party that cannot connect with Texas voters.

“We’re coming up on three decades and you have to ask, what do all these people have in common?” Casteel said, referring to the period of GOP domination in Texas politics. “Promising candidates like Wendy Davis and Beto O’Rourke, what do they all have in common? [Policies like] higher taxes, anti-oil and gas, anti-gun, pro-abortion. It’s just not the values of Texas.”

Experts said O’Rourke could benefit from taking time away from running for office. Instead, he may be of more use to Democrats as a fundraiser or organizer, two areas in which the state party is desperately lacking. Navarro said O’Rourke could help build out that infrastructure to compete with the partisan and fundraising advantage that Republicans have held in the state for nearly three decades.

“He could begin to build a strong Democratic Party structure with what he’s done up to this point,” she said. “Definitely a fundraiser. He has the energy to bring that in and it could be to the success of other future candidates.”

Before running for governor, O’Rourke had started building out his political infrastructure to benefit other Democrats through his political action committee, Powered by the People. After dropping out of the presidential race, he spent much of 2020 trying to help Texas Democrats win a majority in the Texas House — they didn’t — and his group sent $600,000 to the Democrats who decamped to Washington, D.C., in 2021 to try to stop a Republican priority bill that further limited voting rights in the state.

Mackowiak said it’s unclear if O’Rourke will get another shot at a statewide bid and his legacy may be that he served as a catalyst for other candidates during the 2018 cycle, when Texas Democrats desperately needed a boost.

“It’s not 100% negative,” he said. “[But] at some point the Democrats will want to try to run something different.”

But others think O’Rourke could still have another statewide race left in him. With enough time, the political dynamics in the state may shift to be more in O’Rourke’s favor, said Renee Cross, executive director of the Hobby School of Public Affairs at the University of Houston. She noted that President Joe Biden ran two unsuccessful campaigns for the presidency 20 years apart before finally winning the White House in 2020, 12 years after his second attempt.

“There is certainly a place for luck in these victories,” Cross said. “Coupled along with various changes that may be occurring or are occurring with our population, I could see a political path but probably not real soon.”

But if O’Rourke wants to have a realistic shot at statewide office in the future, Mackowiak said, he will have to make tough adjustments that he has so far been unable to make.

“The question for me is does he learn anything from this?” he said. “Politically, without something fundamentally changing, it’s hard to see how he can convince anyone he can win office in this state.”

Patrick Svitek contributed to this report.

Disclosure: Southern Methodist University, University of Texas at San Antonio and University of Houston have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.


The Texas Tribune is a nonprofit statewide news organization dedicated to keeping Texans informed on politics and policy issues that impact their communities. This election season, Texans around the state will turn to The Texas Tribune for the information they need on voting, election results, analysis of key races and more. Get the latest.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/11/08/beto-orourke-texas/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Texas state bar files professional misconduct lawsuit against Ken Paxton for attempt to overturn 2020 presidential elections

"Texas state bar files professional misconduct lawsuit against Ken Paxton for attempt to overturn 2020 presidential elections" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

A disciplinary committee for the State Bar of Texas on Wednesday filed a professional misconduct lawsuit against Attorney General Ken Paxton for his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential elections in four battleground states won by President Joe Biden.

The filing in Collin County by the Commission for Lawyer Discipline, a standing committee of the state bar, is an extraordinary move by the body that regulates law licenses in the state against the sitting attorney general. It stems from complaints against Paxton for a lawsuit that the U.S. Supreme Court threw out, saying Texas lacked standing to sue and that Paxton's political opponents called "frivolous."

It seeks a sanction against Paxton, which will be determined by a judge, that could range from a private reprimand to disbarment.

In its filing, the commission said Paxton had misrepresented that he had uncovered substantial evidence that "raises serious doubts as to the integrity of the election process in the defendant states."

"As a result of Respondent’s actions, Defendant States were required to expend time, money, and resources to respond to the misrepresentations and false statements contained in these pleadings and injunction requests even though they had previously certified their presidential electors based on the election results prior to the filing of Respondent’s pleadings," the lawsuit read.

The lawsuit also says Paxton made "dishonest" representations that an "outcome determinative" number of votes were tied to unregistered voters, votes were switched by a glitch with voting machines, state actors had unconstitutionally revised their election statutes and "illegal votes" had been cast to affect the outcome of the election.

The lawsuit says Paxton's allegations "were not supported by any charge, indictment, judicial finding, and/or credible or admissible evidence, and failed to disclose to the Court that some of his representations and allegations had already been adjudicated and/or dismissed in a court of law."

The complaint asks for a finding of professional misconduct against Paxton, as well as attorney's fees and "an appropriate sanction."

Earlier this month, Paxton had said he'd been notified that he and one of his top deputies would be sued for professional misconduct following a state bar investigation into multiple complaints against them. The lawsuit against First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster in Williamson County was made public that day. But the lawsuit against Paxton was not filed until Wednesday, one day after Paxton defeated Land Commissioner George P. Bush in the GOP runoff for attorney general.

"Texas Bar: I’ll see you and the leftists that control you in court," Paxton said earlier this month. "I’ll never let you bully me, my staff or the Texans I represent into backing down or going soft on defending the Rule of Law — something for which you have little knowledge."

Later that day, Paxton announced an investigation into the Texas Bar Foundation for "facilitating mass influx of illegal aliens" by donating money to groups that "encourage, participate in, and fund illegal immigration at the Texas-Mexico border." The foundation is made up of attorneys and raises money to provide legal education and services. It is separate from the State Bar of Texas, which is an administrative arm of the Texas Supreme Court.

The lawsuit against Paxton stems from multiple complaints filed by Kevin Moran, president of the Galveston Island Democrats; David Wellington Chew, former chief justice of the Eighth District Court of Appeals; retired attorney Neil Kay Cohen; attorney Brynne VanHettinga; and Gershon "Gary" Ratner, the co-founder of Lawyers Defending American Democracy.

Cohen said he was outraged by Paxton's attempt to overturn the election results and filed a 51-page grievance to the state bar on why he thought the attorney general had violated state disciplinary rules for attorneys. The grievance was initially rejected, but Cohen and several others won their appeal to move the complaint forward. On Wednesday, Cohen said he was happy the state bar was moving forward with the lawsuit.

"I wasn't sure this day would come," Cohen said. "I wasn't sure until they actually filed it that they were actually going to file it."

Still, Cohen said, his reaction is tempered because Paxton has so far avoided punishment for other accusations that he's violated the law. Paxton has faced securities fraud charges for seven years now, and more recently has come under FBI investigation after eight former top deputies accused him of bribery and abuse of office. Paxton denies all wrongdoing.

"I'm not sure what it matters," he said. "Paxton's in a lot of trouble already. If the worst that can happen to him is getting disbarred, well, compared to going to jail for obstructing a criminal investigation or for stock fraud, the penalties should be super embarrassing but the penalties are slight compared to the criminal things."

Cohen said he still hoped those cases eventually go to trial, but that the professional misconduct suit by the bar is an opportunity to dispel the prevalent idea among some that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

"I would like something on the record that these claims of a stolen election are bogus," he said.

Disclosure: State Bar of Texas has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.


Stories like the one you just read come to life at The Texas Tribune Festival, the Tribune's annual celebration of politics and policy happening Sept. 22-24 in downtown Austin. For just a little bit longer you can grab a discounted ticket to this year's event, but act fast — savings end on May 31! Buy now and save.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/25/texas-bar-ken-paxton-2020-election/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Ken Paxton says he’s being sued by the state bar for misconduct over his lawsuit challenging the 2020 election

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, the state's top lawyer, said Friday the state bar was suing him for professional misconduct related to his lawsuit challenging the 2020 presidential election.

"I have recently learned that the Texas State Bar — which has been waging a months-long witch-hunt against me — now plans to sue me and my top deputy for filing Texas v. Penn: the historic challenge to the unconstitutional 2020 presidential election joined by nearly half of all the states and over a hundred members of Congress," Paxton said in a statement released on social media. "I stand by this lawsuit completely."

A few hours after saying he was being sued by the bar, Paxton’s office announced an investigation into the Texas Bar Foundation for "facilitating mass influx of illegal aliens" by donating money to groups that "encourage, participate in, and fund illegal immigration at the Texas-Mexico border." The foundation is made up of attorneys and raises money to provide legal education and services. It is separate from the State Bar of Texas, which is an administrative arm of the Texas Supreme Court.

Alistair Dawson, a Houston trial lawyer who is the chair-elect of the Texas Bar Foundation, said in a news release that the foundation was "disappointed to learn that AG Paxton has decided to use taxpayer dollars on a fruitless exercise." He said the foundation does not receive taxpayer funds and its grants are paid for by donations from Texas lawyers.

"Had AG Paxton taken the time to come and speak with us rather than issue a press release, I am confident that he would have found no wrongdoing on the part of the Foundation," Dawson said. "Nevertheless, the Foundation is happy to cooperate and provide the AG’s office with documents and information relevant to the investigation."

Paxton, an embattled Republican seeking a third term, said state bar investigators who now appear to be moving on a lawsuit against him are biased and said the decision to sue him, which comes a week before early voting in his GOP runoff for attorney general, was politically motivated. He is facing Land Commissioner George P. Bush in the May 24 election.

"Texas Bar: I’ll see you and the leftists that control you in court," he said. "I’ll never let you bully me, my staff or the Texans I represent into backing down or going soft on defending the Rule of Law — something for which you have little knowledge."

In fact, the investigation into Paxton has been pending for months. Last July, a group of 16 lawyers that included four former state bar presidents filed an ethics complaint against Paxton arguing that he demonstrated a pattern of professional misconduct, including his decision to file a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn the 2020 presidential elections in battleground states where former President Donald Trump, a Paxton ally, had lost. The attorneys said the lawsuit was "frivolous" and had been filed without evidence. The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed it, saying Texas had no standing to sue.

In March, the investigation moved ahead and Paxton was given 20 days to decide whether he wanted a trial by jury or an administrative hearing to resolve the complaint.

Jim Harrington, a civil rights attorney and one of the lawyers who filed the ethics complaint, said he also had not been notified of a trial but that Paxton would have received notification.

"I was as surprised as you were to see that tweet this morning," Harrington said.

But the complaint filed by Harrington's group was one of multiple grievances filed to the state bar. Another filed by attorney Brynne VanHettinga accused Paxton's top deputy, Brent Webster, of professional misconduct for filing the lawsuit to overturn the 2020 election results. The state bar's Commission for Lawyer Discipline investigated that complaint and found that Webster's representations in that suit were "dishonest," according to a lawsuit filed in Williamson County court on Friday.

"His allegations were not supported by any charge, indictment, judicial finding and/or credible or admissible evidence, and failed to disclose to the Court that some of his representations and allegations had already been adjudicated and/or dismissed in a court of law," the complaint read.

The commission said Webster had violated the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct by engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.

A filing for Paxton's case was still not available as of Friday afternoon.

Because Paxton appears to have chosen a trial over an administrative hearing, the case would be tried in Travis County, Harrington said. The case would not be overseen by a judge from the heavily Democratic county, however. Instead, it will be overseen by a judge from outside the county but within the Texas Judicial Branch’s administrative region, which stretches north to Hill County, west to San Saba County, east to Austin County and south to Lavaca County.

Sylvia Borunda Firth, the State Bar of Texas’ president, said in a statement that the group is "dedicated to fostering ethical conduct in the legal profession and protecting the public through the attorney discipline system" which provides procedural rules to process, investigate and prosecute complaints.

“The system is designed to ensure fairness to all parties," she said. "Partisan political considerations play no role in determining whether to pursue a grievance or how that grievance proceeds through the system. Any claims to the contrary are untrue."

Borunda Firth said the bar’s 12-person volunteer committee called the Commission for Lawyer Discipline provides oversight to the group’s disciplinary counsel, which administers the discipline system with help from volunteer grievance panels across the state. The committee members determine whether an attorney violated the state’s rules of professional conduct and what sanction is appropriate.

“These unpaid volunteers devote countless hours to hearing and considering cases to ensure attorneys are fulfilling their obligations to the public," she said. "Without them, the attorney discipline system could not function. We are grateful for their service.”

Separately, Paxton faces multiple other scandals. He continues to fight a seven-year-old securities fraud case and last year came under FBI investigation for abuse of office after eight of his former deputies accused him of bribery. He’s also asking the Texas Supreme Court to throw out a whistleblower case against him by four of those former employees, who allege they were fired after they reported Paxton to authorities. Paxton has denied all wrongdoing.

Greg Abbott's border inspections found 'zero drugs, weapons, or any other type of contraband': report

State troopers ordered by Gov. Greg Abbott to inspect every commercial truck coming from Mexico earlier this month — which clogged international trade with Mexico — found zero drugs, weapons or any other type of contraband, according to data released by the Department of Public Safety to The Texas Tribune.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/21/greg-abbott-texas-border-inspections/.

Earlier this month, Abbott ordered troopers to thoroughly inspect every commercial truck coming from Mexico’s four border states in what he described as an effort to stop illegal drugs and migrants from being smuggled into Texas. His order for increased state inspections was part of his response to the Biden administration’s announcement that it will lift Title 42 — the pandemic-era health order used by federal immigration officials to expel migrants, including asylum-seekers, at the U.S.-Mexico border. The expiration of the order is expected to increase the number of migrants seeking entry to the U.S.

Over eight days, starting April 8, troopers conducted more than 4,100 inspections of trucks. Troopers didn’t find any contraband but took 850 trucks off the road for various violations related to their equipment. Other truckers were given warnings, and at least 345 were cited for things such as underinflated tires, broken turn signals and oil leaks.

DPS Director Steve McCraw said at a Friday news conference with Abbott that the reason troopers hadn’t found any drugs or migrants in commercial trucks is because drug cartels “don’t like troopers stopping them, certainly north of the border, and they certainly don’t like 100% inspections of commercial vehicles on the bridges. And once that started, we’ve seen a decreased amount of trafficking across bridges — common sense.”

But Adam Isacson, director for defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America, an advocacy group for human rights in the Americas, said it’s not likely cartels stopped the smuggling of drugs because of the state’s inspections. He said many illegal drugs smuggled into the United States are hidden in small compartments or spare tires of people’s vehicles going through international bridges for tourists. He said if smugglers were trying to hide illegal drugs in a commercial truck, it’s most likely federal immigration officials found them before the trucks were directed to the DPS secondary inspections.

“It just seems odd to me that DPS would be that much of a deterrent for smugglers deciding whether to bring something after already passing through the gauntlet of CBP,” he said.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection routinely inspects commercial cargo coming from Mexico for illegal drugs and people being smuggled as soon as truckers cross the international bridges. CBP called Texas’ inspections duplicative and “unnecessary.”

The state inspections created a backlog of 18-wheelers on both sides of the border, with truckers reporting delays of several hours up to a few days, when it usually takes between 20 minutes and a couple of hours for commercial trucks to cross after they’ve been inspected by CBP. The delays also resulted in rotten produce and lost business for grocers.

The state’s inspections at eight commercial bridges that connect Texas cities with Mexican cities in Chihuahua, Coahuila, Nuevo León and Tamaulipas ended Friday after Abbott signed agreements with the four Mexican governors that they would increase security measures to prevent the smuggling of drugs and migrants. Abbott has said he would bring back the secondary inspections if the governors’ security initiatives don’t decrease the number of migrants attempting to cross the border.

Abbott said the deals with the four governors were “historic,” calling them an example of how border states can work together on immigration. But three of the four Mexican governors said they will simply continue security measures they put in place before Abbott ordered the state inspections.

Mexico is among the United States’ largest trading partners. The total trade between the two countries amounted to $56.25 billion in February, according to recent government data. Texas’ biggest ports of entry — Port Laredo, Ysleta, Pharr International Bridge, Eagle Pass, El Paso, Brownsville International Bridge and Del Rio International Bridge — accounted for nearly 65% of the total trade between the U.S. and Mexico in 2021.

Reporters James Barragán and Mitchell Ferman contributed to this report.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

'I hate it here': National Guard members sound off on Texas border mission in leaked morale survey

Feb. 24, 2022

"“I hate it here”: National Guard members sound off on Texas border mission in leaked morale survey" was first published by The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

This article is co-published and co-reported with Military Times, an independent news organization reporting on issues important to the U.S. military. Sign up for its daily Early Bird Brief newsletter here.

When asked in January what they liked about their deployment to the Texas-Mexico border, members of the Texas Air National Guard had few nice things to say.

“I hate it here,” one respondent said in an anonymous survey about the involuntary mission with no set end date that has taken as many as 10,000 troops away from their civilian lives and families.

Another, asked for general feedback, simply posted four middle- finger emojis.

Frustration, anxiety and anger prevailed in the survey responses obtained by the The Texas Tribune and the Military Times. The survey includes responses from nearly 250 members of Task Force South, one of six units that fall under the umbrella of Operation Lone Star — Gov. Greg Abbott’s unprecedentedly large attempt to secure the border with Guard members and state troopers.

“I’m wasting time watching the grass grow at my [observation] point [along the border], while my civilian job is dying on the vine,” one Guardsman wrote in response to another question. “IF my job still exists when I return, I will have a giant hole to dig out of.”

Another member, whose husband travels for work, said they’ve had to pay an extra $2,000 each month for a nanny to watch their kids. Yet another worried about the future of a strained marriage after having to leave his wife and new baby behind.

The survey responses provide the clearest insights yet into the simmering dissatisfaction among troops stationed at the border. The survey was distributed before the Tribune and Military Times published an investigation earlier this month detailing problems with the mission that included hasty mobilization, alarming morale issues, meager living conditions, delays in payment and the perception by troops that the mission was politically motivated to score reelection points for Abbott. Those findings have been consistently denied or downplayed by Texas officials.

Nearly 250 members of the unit — around half its troop strength — completed the survey between Jan. 5-10, according to the source who provided the survey results. The source is not being named because they were not authorized to share the survey.

Task Force South largely consists of Texas Air National Guard members under the 432nd Air Expeditionary Group. Those troops work in the Brownsville area of southernmost Texas and most are living in hotels during the deployment — the best living conditions among the thousands of Texas troops at the border.

The obtained data is from five free-response questions that asked airmen to list positives and negatives about the mission, offer feedback on benefits and off-duty restrictions and weigh in on Operation Lone Star in general. An analysis of the responses by the Tribune and Military Times found:

  • More than half expressed skepticism or frustration with Operation Lone Star and how senior leaders planned, executed and communicated about the mission.
  • Nearly 30% vented about the mobilization's length, haste or involuntary nature in their answers.
  • About 30% said the most difficult part of Operation Lone Star was the deployment’s impact on their civilian lives, including lost wages, disrupted families and interrupted careers and educations.
  • More than 1 in 5 either offered no substantive feedback on what they “like most” about Operation Lone Star or said they disliked everything about the mission.
  • Almost 3 out of 4 airmen said they wanted better state benefits. Troops on state active-duty missions like Operation Lone Star don’t get benefits common to federal deployments like tax exemptions, retirement credit, Veterans Affairs disability coverage for injuries or education benefits like GI Bill credit or the Hazlewood Act, which is a Texas education benefit that gives free tuition to veterans who served on active-duty missions.

It wasn’t all bad though. While the feedback was overwhelmingly negative, there were a few members who said they were happy with the pay (“when it comes on time,” some specified) and around 2 in 5 said they appreciated the camaraderie among the troops.

When reached for comment, Texas Military Department spokesperson Col. Rita Holton said the agency “consistently seek[s] opportunities to recognize service members, instill esprit de corps, and solicit feedback in order to continue improving morale across the board.”

“Surveys are an important, yet confidential, method in doing so,” Holton said. She also said the benefits disparity is an unavoidable consequence of the mission being done under state active-duty authority.

Holton said the surveys “[allow] leadership teams to proactively address” problems, but the source who provided the survey results said task force leadership initially didn’t respond to the results or communicate a plan to address the complaints troops made. Internal leadership meetings “focused on the positives that people seem to like their [colleagues], Mexican food in the area, etc.,” the source said.

But seven hours after the Tribune and Military Times submitted questions to the agency asking what it had done to address the troops’ concerns, Brig. Gen. Monie Ulis, the operation’s commander, signed a policy memo relaxing the off-duty curfew, alcohol restrictions and distance limits on off-duty travel. Leaders communicating the changes to the troops said they were the result of members’ feedback in surveys — despite the surveys being completed more than a month ago.

The agency refused to provide the results of a similar survey sent to all Operation Lone Star troops on Jan. 3. State military officials are trying to block a public information request from Military Times and the Tribune for that information, claiming that releasing the results would put troops at risk and “have a chilling effect” on future survey participation.

Lives left behind

The responses illustrate the personal consequences of the short-notice, involuntary activation.

Most state active-duty missions are short-term emergency responses, such as the Texas Guard’s response to the 2021 winter storm or hurricanes in recent years. But Operation Lone Star is different — thousands of troops have been there involuntarily since last fall, and they’re likely to be there until they’re replaced with a fresh wave of troops this fall, according to planning documents.

“What strategic or tactical thought has there been toward the impact of [Operation Lone Star] on the morale and retention of the Guard?” one member asked. “I had [nine days’] notice to leave my wife and baby during an immensely stressful point in our marriage.”

Another echoed his concerns.

“[I had] 10 days to try and find a substitute who could manage my classes at work, make plans to keep my house in shape, prepare my family mentally and emotionally, and of course, pack myself,” the airman said. Troops who don’t report for the involuntary mission could be arrested, Texas officials have acknowledged.

Many of the troops on the mission arrived immediately following federal deployments and a separate state mobilization to help with hurricane relief in Texas and Louisiana, one airman said. Now, major life milestones are still on hold.

“Myself and others have been gone for what will be a year and a half … with mere days in between,” another airman said. “Weddings, home builds and starting [a] family have been put off for the time being, and [this mission] is grinding down what little resolve we have left.”

The mission has halted schooling and day jobs as well. One airman said they were taking a pay cut from their civilian job, and the Texas Guard’s hardship bonus pay wasn’t enough to make up their salary.

“We were rushed down here from our homes and families just to sit around for a month waiting on training [and] equipment (most of which we are still waiting on), without the proper infrastructure to support such a [massive] mobilization,” the airman said.

A college student bemoaned that the mission had delayed their graduation — and worried they “may have to restart my nursing program all over again even [though] I was supposed to graduate in December 2022.”

And one health care worker, exasperated that the Guard had indefinitely “plucked” them from their job amid the coronavirus pandemic, argued they were “lied to about the duration.”

“Whether or not you agree with the politics and morals of [Operation Lone Star], the best thing you could do to improve morale would be to shorten [deployments],” the member said. “I’ve spoken to very few people who plan on continuing their service in the Texas [National Guard], much less staying on [the border] any longer than they have to. Send people home.”

Meanwhile, problems stemming from the mission’s rapid expansion are alienating even the troops who support Abbott’s approach to securing the border.

One Guard member who reported enjoying “working in the field” to catch migrants also decried leadership’s “lack of answers [and an] unknown date to return to family and civilian career.”

“People [quit] school, [their] jobs, [their] relationships all because of the stress of not knowing when they can pick it back up or plan to start again,” the airman explained. “It’s unrealistic for the younger [airmen].”

Another service member, who thinks the operation isn’t tough enough on migrants, also demanded that senior leaders also “pay us correctly and give us actual [health] insurance.”

Other troops resented feeling like a number or a political pawn in Abbott’s 2022 reelection campaign. Abbott is facing multiple challengers from his right in the Republican primary on March 1 who have criticized him for not being tough enough on the border. Many of the mission’s critics have condemned its scale as a political ploy, despite record migration at the border.

“Members feel like political [pawns] and do not feel like their [issues] are being heard,” said one airman.

Another decried how the mission “feels like being used for a political agenda.”

“Most of us signed up to help Texas in times of need like hurricanes,” the Guard member said. “This doesn’t feel like we are helping any Texans besides the governor and his ability to say he has activated the [Guard] to the border.”

Flagging morale

The mission’s shortcomings could exacerbate a deepening morale crisis in the Texas Guard.

“I support the mission and overall am glad to be part of it,” one Guard member said. “But morale issues are becoming critical and will get worse unless dramatic action is taken to get ahead of it.”

Following a string of suicides linked to the mission, there’s fear of future self-harm by members.

“I’m concerned with having members drinking without limits, knowing they have personal firearms [with them] and mental health struggles,” one airman explained. “With limited … access to mental health providers, and the rise in suicides on the Army side [of the mission], I feel we are doing nothing to prevent suicides coming to the 432nd.”

That airman called Operation Lone Star a “huge disappointment.”

“I never imagined members of the military would be treated so poorly[,] and I plan to leave the Air Guard after this because of how myself and others around me have been treated,” the member said.

Some respondents praised the effort and said they’d stay on as long as they could, despite the murky timeline and living with roommates or without a full kitchen. But more airmen indicated in the survey that Operation Lone Star will be their final mission in the Texas National Guard.

Military Times and the Tribune previously reported a recent trend of low retention numbers for the state’s Army Guard, while more troops leave critical fields like cyber warfare for the Air Guard as well.

Some are burnt out by the onslaught of missions and activations in recent years, from pandemic response to assistance in severe weather. Others worry their civilian lives have suffered too much.

According to one service member, multiple airmen had just returned from basic or technical training or a deployment, only to be pointed to the Mexico border during their first Guard drill back home.

“We’re going to lose a lot of good [airmen],” they said. “Why are we doing that to our members?!?!?!?”

Multiple people are bracing themselves to rebuild progress they’ve lost at their regular jobs when they return from the border. One airman, who called Operation Lone Star a “political mess between the federal and state government” now plans to separate from the Guard when their contract expires in 2023 after losing most of their clients from their civilian job.

“[Operation Lone Star] cares more about numbers than the impact on individuals and their families,” said one. “It does greater harm to our members than good by putting their families and own lives at risk for an unclear mission.”

Another said they hope other states learn from the mission’s troubles.

“We are disposable in the eyes of top leaders, from the governor on down,” declared the service member. “The leadership failures of this mission will be a case study for military leaders for years to come.”

José Luis Martínez contributed to this report.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2022/02/24/national-guard-Texas-border-morale-survey/.

The Texas Tribune is a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

BRAND NEW STORIES
@2025 - AlterNet Media Inc. All Rights Reserved. - "Poynter" fonts provided by fontsempire.com.