Who speaks for you?

The first thing to understand about Juan Garcia's win in HD32 (once you're done doing the Happy Dance) is that Tom Craddick has lost a lot of support since he became House Speaker in 2002. In addition to the seven Democratic pickups since 2002, several loyal Craddick Dems such as Ron Wilson, Al Edwards, and now Vilma Luna are no longer serving. There are a lot more members who have no reason to be loyal to Tom Craddick any more, and Craddick has a much smaller margin of error than he once did.

So with that in mind, let's look at today's story in which Craddick is claiming that enough people still love him to keep him as Speaker.

Craddick, R-Midland, won the speaker's position in 2003 after the GOP dominated the 2002 elections, winning 88 of the 150 state House seats. But his party has lost seats ever since, and will have 81 in January.

"This is a very shifting landscape, and it's really too early to make any predictions" of a speaker's race, said [Rep. Pete] Gallego, chairman of the House Mexican-American Caucus. "There's certainly a lot of energy and enthusiasm on the Democratic side, but we have to wait and see what percolates on the Republican side.

"There's some conversations going on right now," he said.

[...]

It takes 76 votes to win the top State House position; some Democrats said they might be better off politically with Craddick staying on as speaker.

"I'm torn, frankly. Tom Craddick has been single-handedly responsible for rebuilding the Democratic Party," Gallego said. "His leadership style is not ever going to change. As long as he's the leader, the Democrats will continue to pick up seats."

Republican lawmaker Pat Haggerty of El Paso said he's heard "mutterings" of a GOP challenge to Craddick.

"Is there dissatisfaction? Yeah," Haggerty said. "Most of the unrest comes from not letting the process work and being told how to vote, being told when to vote and being told that if you don't like this, then we'll just get somebody to replace you. Based on the outcome last night, that's a rather empty threat now."

Haggerty was targeted in the GOP primary this past March, but he survived. He's almost certainly not in Craddick's corner, and I would expect the same is true for folks like Tommy Merritt, Delwin Jones, and Charlie Geren, all of whom were attacked by Leininger candidates but lived to tell about it. They took the machine's best shot, and they have no reason to fear it right now.

Several potential Republican speaker alternatives to Craddick did not return phone calls.

Republicans can either elect a new speaker, [Rep. Jim] Dunnam said, "or they're going to continue to be strong-armed by Craddick, and Democrats will pick up more seats in the next election."

"He does not allow any members of his own party or the other party to vote their district," Dunnam said. "He coerces them and strong-arms them into doing what he wants done."

Craddick spokeswoman Alexis DeLee said perceptions of a strong-armed Craddick ruling the House are wrong.

"Members vote in the best interests of themselves and their constituents 99 percent of the time," she said. "One percent, they probably vote for other reasons, but I don't think that has anything to do with the speaker."

Craddick has 109 pledges of support for his re-election, she said. "We don't have any reason to believe that those people are going to change their pledge."

To put this as politely as I can, that's pure baloney. I've seen the list of alleged pledges (the Quorum Report has it), and I don't believe it for a minute. Do we know when he got these pledges, for example? Anything collected months ago, before Senfronia Thompson threw her hat in the ring, and before Tuesday's results, is meaningless. Maybe some of these folks made pledges months ago, during the special session. Doesn't mean they still mean it, and it sure doesn't mean they can't or won't take a better offer if one comes along.

What's more, the word I've heard from two different sources is that Craddick's original claim, back in 2002, that he had 100 pledges in hand was phony. It was a straight up bluff, and it worked - Pete Laney chose not to challenge him, and everybody fell in line after that. I see no reason why it wouldn't be the case this time as well. What's Craddick going to do, wring his hands in public and worry that he might not be as all powerful as he once was? Please.

It's simple. Either the Anybody But Craddick forces can get enough people in the here and now to support someone else, or Craddick wins again. Thompson's candidacy gives Dems who might otherwise vote for Craddick a reason not to, at which point it becomes up to the dissatisfied Republicans to take action. Along those lines, it's time to take a look at some of those Dems who are enabling Craddick's Speakership. There's three such members in Houston, and the one I'm looking at is Kevin Bailey, because frankly he'd be vulnerable in a primary if it came down to it. He had a primary challenger this year in his mostly Latino district, but turnout was pathetic - something like 1000 votes cast total (the SOS site is down, so I can't check this). In 2008, when there might actually be a meaningful Presidential primary to vote in, I'd think there'd be a higher level of participation, and it would do Bailey some good to contemplate what else might be motivating voters in two Marches' time.

I'll have more on this later. For now, take what Craddick is saying about his non-binding pledge cards as little more than bluster, because that's all it is.

UPDATE: Paul Burka calls for Craddick to resign as Speaker.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on November 09, 2006 to Election 2006 | TrackBack