Off the Kuff Rotating Header Image

January, 2022:

Interview with Duncan Klussmann

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Duncan Klussmann

This week we will have interviews with two of the Democratic candidates in the new CD38, as well as a couple of interviews with legislative candidates, about which I’ll say a bit more tomorrow. Today’s candidate for CD38 is Duncan Klussmann, a retired educator and former Superintendent of Spring Branch ISD. Klussman is a native of Brenham and a graduate of UT and Stephen F. Austin State University. He’s a resident of Jersey Village, where he has served on their City Council, and he was named a Houstonian of the Year for 2014 by the Chronicle. My interview with him is below, but I want to note before we get to it that candidate Centrell Reed declined the opportunity to do an interview, so that’s why there will only be two of them for this race. Here’s our conversation:

cakuffner · Duncan Klussman Interview 011022

As with the judicial Q&A’s, more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet. I will periodically round up the links to these posts as well.

Judicial Q&A: Erika Ramirez

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to those who plan to vote in March. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. Much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet.

Erika Ramirez

1. Who are you and what are you running for?

My name is Erika Ramirez, and I am running to be Judge of Harris County Criminal Court at Law No. 8.

Born and raised in Houston, I was taught at a young age the importance of justice and fairness. My family is from Laredo, Texas. As a teenager, my Dad was diagnosed with Hansen’s disease (commonly known as leprosy). At that time, persons with Hansen’s were removed from society and confined, based on unfounded and unfair stereotypes and prejudices associated with the illness. As a result, my Dad was forcibly sent to the National Leprosarium in Carville, Louisiana, where he lived for several years. My Mom, his high school sweetheart, stuck by his side while he lived in Louisiana. After the unjust practice of confining persons with Hansen’s ended, my parents moved to Houston. My parents harnessed their experiences into a commitment to serve other people who found themselves needing help. They both finished their degrees, became licensed social workers, and have had long careers serving veterans, persons with mental health issues, and children. Knowing my parents’ story and growing up around them, I have always had a deep appreciation for fairness and justice, as well as the urge to speak or act when I think someone is being treated unfairly – especially those who cannot speak for themselves.

After graduating from Bellaire High School, I received a degree in Public Relations from the University of Texas- Austin. I began my career as a teacher in a small rural town in Spain. When I returned to the Texas, I worked as a Caseworker Assistant with survivors of domestic violence. It was there that I was inspired to return to law school. I graduated from South Texas College of Law-Houston and become the first attorney in my family.

I have focused my legal career on criminal law, working as an Assistant District Attorney in Harris County.

2. What kind of cases does this court hear?

Harris County Criminal Court at Law No. 8 is one of the sixteen misdemeanor courts that covers the entire county. Class A and B misdemeanors are heard in the court. Class A misdemeanors are punishable by up to one year in jail and/or a fine up to $4,000. Class B misdemeanors are punishable by up to 180 days in jail, and/or a fine up to $2,000. Some of the common types of criminal cases that appear in the court are Theft, Assaults, Driving While Intoxicated, and Criminal Mischief. These cases are important because misdemeanor courts can provide an opportunity for a great impact on the trajectory of a person’s life and our community’s collective well-being.

3. Why are you running for this particular bench?

Through my experiences, including my time as a case worker assistant and prosecutor, I understand the serious ramifications criminal proceedings can have on all persons involved. I greatly respect the importance of a fair and impartial process. I also understand the interconnected nature of our courts and the communities they serve. I believe that every person who enters the courtroom should be allowed to have their voice heard and to avail themselves of every and all rights permitted by our laws.

I am running for Judge of Harris County Criminal Court at Law No. 8 because I believe that the people of Harris County deserve a Judge who is respectful of the parties and the legal process, fair in applying the law, and involved in our community.

I am also running in the hope of attaining increased diversity in or judicial system.

4. What are your qualifications for this job?

I have a diverse background of experiences that I believe qualify me for this position and allow me to serve Harris County as a respectful, fair, and involved Judge.
I currently work as an Assistant District Attorney in the Financial Crimes Division, where I assist victims of identify theft. In my time as a prosecutor, I have tried a multitude of criminal cases, from Class-C traffic tickets, Sex Assault of a Child, and Capital Murder. During this time, I have served Harris County by thoroughly evaluating every case and taking steps to protect the rights of the persons accused, victims, and the community. I have worked in the Trial Bureau (misdemeanor and felony cases), Juvenile Division, Domestic Violence Division, and Financial Crimes Division. I have served as a Misdemeanor Court Chief, where I supervised and trained junior attorneys. As a result, I am familiar and well-versed with the process and procedures in the County Criminal Courts at Law.

Before law school law school, I worked as a caseworker assistant at the Harris County District Attorney’s Office with the Domestic Violence Division. There, I assisted survivors by documenting their injuries and attending protective order court proceedings.

During law school, I interned with the Harris County District Attorney’s Office, both in the misdemeanor and felony division; the Harris County Attorney’s Office with the Litigation Division, which focused on public nuisance suits (often massage parlors that engaged in human trafficking); the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) Division, which represented DFPS cases in the Juvenile Justice courts; and served as a guardian ad litem with Child Advocates, an organization that assists children who are in DFPS custody. My work earned me a Pro Bono College Award at South Texas College of Law two years in a row.

While in College at the University of Texas- Austin, I interned in the 310th Family Court with Judge Lisa Millard. I also worked at Baylor College of Medicine- Center for Educational Outreach. The program assisted high school students that live in the South Texas Rio Grande Valley to attend college and medical school so that they can return to serve their communities, which, unfortunately, are underserved communities.

5. Why is this race important?

Our County Criminal Courts at Law are of great importance to our community. Generally, misdemeanor cases provide an opportunity for substantial impact on the trajectory of a person’s life. It benefits our community when courts can take proactive steps to mitigate repeated entry into the criminal justice system. The important issues these courts address and serve highlight the need for a respectful, fair, and involved jurist.

6. Why should people vote for you in March?

I believe that I am the most qualified candidate for this position, and my goal is to work hard for our community. If elected, I will serve Harris County by assuring a fair, accessible, and just process for all persons who enter the courtroom. I will also remain involved and visible within our community. Early voting starts on Valentine’s Day, February 14th , through February 25th . Election day is March 1, 2022.

You don’t want to go to the ICU right now

by Charles Kuffner.

7 comments

And even if for some reason you did want to go to the intensive care unit, there probably wouldn’t be room for you.

The number of Texas intensive care unit beds available for adult patients is at an all-time low for the pandemic, with only 259 staffed beds open across the state as of Wednesday, as hospitals fight a historic staffing crisis and more unvaccinated people infected by the omicron variant pour into hospitals.

That’s 11 fewer beds than the previous record set in September during the deadly surge of the delta variant of COVID-19, according to the Texas Department of State Health Services. An average of 295 available beds has been reported in the last week, which is also lower than previous record averages.

The crunch on the state’s intensive care units comes as patient cases skyrocket and as hospitals themselves work to fill shifts left open by more workers home sick from COVID-19.

As of Wednesday, more than 13,300 hospitalized Texans have tested positive for the virus.

“Because of the high level of transmission and infectivity of the omicron variant, so many of our staff are getting positive,” said Bryan Alsip, chief medical officer for University Health in San Antonio. “We’ve been doing this a long time now — close to two years. We’re now experiencing our fourth large surge of those patients. It can get tiring.”

Alsip said University Health — the public hospital system for the San Antonio and the third largest of its kind in the state — is approaching numbers of hospitalized COVID-19 patients that the system has not seen since the last deadly surges in the early months of 2021 or the fall and summer of 2020.

[…]

But while omicron is putting fewer patients into the ICU than in previous surges, there are also fewer ICU beds that are able to be staffed due to a nursing shortage, officials say — and the sheer number of omicron cases is pushing patient counts higher.

The bottom line, they say, is that there are fewer beds for any Texas patient who may be suffering a serious medical event and need intensive care — whether they were put there by omicron or not.

So yeah, now when people tell you to drive safely, it’s more than just a bit of politeness. We might be reaching peak omicron, but as noted before hospitalization is a lagging indicator. There’s still a few weeks to go before we start seeing declines in those numbers.

While it would be nice to think that once this omicron wave recedes we’ll be in for a longer period of calm, but Dr. Peter Hotez says don’t count on it.

Q: There’s a lot of talk about omicron creating herd immunity and the transition from pandemic to endemic. Your thoughts?

A: The big picture, I’m still concerned about. There’s a lot of happy talk about omicron somehow acting as a weakened virus, herd immunity and the end of the pandemic. I do not think so yet. I think we’re in for another wave this summer across Texas and it could be just like 2020 and 2021. Here are the reasons why.

One: I’m not convinced the durability of the protection from omicron is going to be adequate. It may resemble the short-lived immunity you get from the upper respiratory virus. The population could still be vulnerable in the spring.

And vaccination rates are still not great in lower- and middle-income countries where these variants arose. I think we’re still very vulnerable to another variant arising in Africa or Asia.

Q: As you pointed out, that runs contrary to a lot of the hopeful buzz about omicron that I’m coming across.

A: Yeah, you hear that coming from the White House. And I’m hearing it from a lot of my talking head colleagues. But to me, right now, that rings hollow. I don’t think it’s wise. I think what we need most urgently right now is a national strategy for how we’re going to prevent another big variant in the summer from hitting Texas and the southern United States. Here’s what I think that strategy requires.

One: a strategy for global immunization against COVID-19, which just doesn’t exist now. The White House announced another 400 million doses, which is slightly more than what our Texas Children’s vaccine has done. We need 9 billion doses.

Second: We need a greater understanding about the durability and protection from the mRNA boosters. We’re getting conflicting results about the durability. That needs to be clarified. We need to understand that for a strategy for moving forward. Whether we keep the singular focus on the mRNA vaccine or broaden our COVID stockpiles to include additional technology.

And let me say, third: What’s our plan for global surveillance? So far we’ve been surprised by every major variant of concern. We need predictable surveillance models, but we don’t have them. That’s a need. What I’d like to see coming out of the White House is a national strategic task force to really dive into those three components. We need a realistic plan for the country. And I just don’t get the sense we have that right now. Nationally, we’re still in reactive mode every time.

As noted, Dr. Hotez and his colleague Dr. Maria Elena Bottazzi have done what they can to help with global vaccine supply. But we still need to get more shots in arms here – ESPECIALLY KIDS – and I don’t know what we can do to make that happen. Rewards and gimmicks might help a little around the margins, but not enough to really make a difference. The various federal mandates would have made a real difference, but well, you know. Your safety is officially in your hands. Don’t screw around with it.

Trib overview of the Democratic candidates for Lt Governor

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

It’s a good field, I’ll be happy to support any of them, but boy do I wish they’d all raise more money.

Mike Collier

Three Democrats are facing off in the lieutenant governor primary for the chance to challenge a veritable Goliath in incumbent Dan Patrick.

While ideologically similar, their resumes are vastly different and candidates are campaigning on who brings the best experience to the table. But one thing is clear after last week’s deadline to disclose campaign donations for the last six months — even the strongest fundraiser of the bunch is wildly outmatched by Patrick’s war chest of $25 million.

Mike Collier, a 60-year-old accountant and auditor, who came within 5 percentage points of unseating Patrick four years ago, is so far leading the pack in fundraising with a haul of $826,862 over the last six months. Coming in second, Carla Brailey, an associate professor at Texas Southern University and the former vice chair of the Texas Democratic Party, raised a total of $39,490. She entered the race in mid-December.

Michelle Beckley, a small businesswoman who has served two terms as a state representative from Denton County, took in $32,386. She entered the race in mid-November.

Their combined total is still less than a third of Patrick’s nearly $3 million haul over the same six-month period. Patrick, a two-term incumbent who is one of the most conservative and well-known politicians in the state, will be expensive to compete with, especially for candidates with less name recognition.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Dan Patrick’s name ID is an advantage for him. People know who he is, but that doesn’t mean they like him, or even that they feel vaguely positive about him. There’s a reason he came close to losing in 2018, and ran behind all of his fellow Republicans except Ted Cruz and Ken Paxton.

Carla Brailey

Brailey’s political experience stems from her time as vice chair of the state party and in the administration of former District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty. She served in multiple roles under Fenty, including executive director of community affairs.

In 2019, she ran for Houston City Council but did not garner enough support to make the general election runoff.

Brailey, who is Black, is the only person of color in the race. She said her candidacy brings more voters to the table because she understands the experiences of voters of color and can bring them to the forefront.

“It brings experience in listening to other communities that may have not always been listened to or are listened to,” said Brailey, who added that she always seeks to advocate for marginalized communities in her work. “We get to hear their voice early.”

Brailey said her campaign priorities are affordable health care, public education, addressing the shortcomings of the state’s electric grid and the digital divide between poor and wealthy areas of the state.

Brailey said the state’s leaders have taken the state backward by passing laws like last year’s ban on abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy and making it more difficult to vote.

“We’re in a very bad place in Texas and I really believe that our democracy is at stake,” she said. “Everything is big in Texas, and I think so goes Texas, goes the nation.”

[…]

Michelle Beckley

After flipping a Republican district in 2018, Beckley became a lightning rod for conservative criticism because of her support for issues like Medicaid expansion and her aggressive approach to politics.

Once in office, Beckley was vocally critical of what she saw as failures of the state’s GOP leaders and often feuded with Republican colleagues on social media.

Beckley has promised to bring that same combative approach to the role of lieutenant governor. She said Republicans have become too focused on controversial social issues like regulating which bathrooms transgender Texans can use and ignore real issues like the failure of the state’s electric grid, which resulted in hundreds of deaths last February.

“People are sick of that crap,” Beckley said. “People want what I represent: They want a functioning government.”

Even in a GOP-controlled Legislature in which she had a number of powerful enemies, Beckley said, she was able to pass one of her priorities last year when she tacked on to the Republicans’ elections bill a policy that will increase the number of counties that can apply for countywide voting programs.

Beckley said that legislative experience gives her an advantage over her opponents. She is the only candidate in the race to have been elected to public office and to serve in the Legislature.

I trust that my readers are generally familiar with Mike Collier, so I skipped his part of the story. You can listen to the interview I did with him in 2018 if you need a refresher. I have not yet made up my mind in this one. I was happy to see Collier announce his candidacy – he had an early start, which was also a positive – and under normal circumstances, I’d stick with the known quantity. But Carla Brailey and Michelle Beckley deserve consideration, and so they will get it. But again, whoever wins will be fine by me. And a billion times better than Dan Patrick.

Weekend link dump for January 30

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

“After educating the kids on the risks of [drugs and alcohol, premarital sex and gangs], they’d invite them and their parents to evening shows, where they’d break fiery bricks with their arms and run through blocks of ice in the name of God.”

“Crypto’s pitch as a decentralized currency free of state control would naturally resonate with those skeptical of government. But when, exactly, did it become an object of partisan—that is, Republican—obsession?”

“Amidst all the disappointment and tribulation of recent days please join me in taking a moment to step back, in a posture of mindful gratitude, to contemplate the fact that Kyrsten Sinema’s career in electoral politics is already over. Yes, the damage she’s already done will be difficult to remedy. She still has three solid years to do yet more damage. And she probably will. But none of that damage, none of the hijinks and characteristic game-playing to come, will or can change her electoral fate. In political terms, she’s already dead Senator walking. And the most perplexing but paradoxically delightful part of it is that she doesn’t even seem to realize it yet.”

“Ten Dazzling Celestial Events to See in 2022″.

“They slut-shamed the green M&M yesterday.”

“This is literally the definition of a Latin American or Sub-Saharan African style coup d’état.”

Clearly, characters on premium cable TV shows should try to avoid riding Peloton bikes.

“While plenty of random people have hopped headfirst into the world of cryptocurrencies and NFTs, celebrities have played no small role in driving the market to frothy new heights.”

Good for Neil Young.

“The James Webb Space Telescope, the most powerful telescope ever built, has reached its final destination in space. Now comes the fun part.”

RIP, Peter Robbins, child actor who voiced Charlie Brown in the classic “Peanuts” cartoons of the 1960s.

There are some things that actors won’t do.

“Part of the answer there is that we’ve been trained — by automobiles, and walls and screens, and 40 years of Reaganism — to think that there’s no such thing as neighborly obligation. We’ve been taught that a being a neighbor entails nothing more than being Gladys Kravitz on Bewitched — someone who peers through the blinds disapprovingly at all those others we wish would just go away.”

“This is the story of how George Steinbrenner — the most famous owner in the franchise’s long history and one of the most famous and controversial owners in baseball history — tried to take the Yankees “on tour.””

“But so far we haven’t seen this pattern for SARS-CoV-2… Omicron didn’t emerge from the Delta lineage and Delta didn’t emerge from the Alpha, Beta or Gamma lineages”.

“A recent article highlighting comments far right activist Ali Alexander made about coordinating with members of Congress provided a great opportunity to highlight one of these important baselines for the January 6 conversation: members of Congress were clearly involved in what happened.”

IBM’s once-ballyhooed Watson Health is being sold for parts.

“So I repeat—do not use the below as a guide on how to send fake racism tips directly to the VA GOP Governor’s Office. Thank you.”

RIP, Gene Clines, part of the first all-minority lineup in Major League Baseball history and member of the 1971 World Series-winning Pittsburgh Pirates.

RIP, Howard Hesseman, Emmy-nominated actor best known for playing Johnny Fever on WKRP In Cincinnati.

This is what voter suppression looks like

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

I have four things to say about this.

A Harris County man fears new voting laws may prevent him from voting by absentee ballot for the first time in his lifetime.

Kenneth Thompson, 95, has been checking his mail daily in hopes his mail-in ballot is among the pile.

Thompson has been voting since he was 21-years-old, and he even recalls paying a $0.25 poll tax in the 1950′s.

“I’ve been voting many, many years and I’ve never missed a vote,” Thompson said.

Thompson considers voting a duty. He served in the U.S. Army in WWII during the European Theater for the right to vote and other freedoms.

Decades later, the vet fears Texas’ new election law, SB1, could prevent him from voting for the first time in his life.

Per law, Thompson must either provide part of his social security number or his driver’s license number that matches his registration record with the county or state.

“He registered to vote in the 1940′s and they didn’t require that,” said Thompson’s daughter, Delinda Holland.

Since Holland can’t meet the new requirement, his mail-in ballot application was denied twice. The veteran said Harris County election officials never notified him and he had to call to find out both times.

“There’s gonna be a lot of people not gonna vote,” Thompson said. “If I hadn’t have called in about mine, people wouldn’t have known.”

Thompson’s daughter, Holland, who has only missed voting in one bond election herself, said she’s even tried contacting the county and state Secretary of State’s Office to add her dad’s license number to his registration file online. She said she discovered there’s not actually a way to have that done.

“We know it’s a new law, we’re happy to correct it,” Holland said. “He’s a law-abiding citizen. He doesn’t want to miss voting, and yet, there’s no mechanism to add that driver’s license to your record.”

Holland said she had to re-register her dad last week to ensure he makes the Jan. 31, 2022 voter registration deadline. Thompson said he hopes he’ll have a ballot in the mail soon, otherwise he plans to vote in person.

1. Yes, this is voter suppression. This guy has been voting for over 70 years, and now he’s being asked to provide a number to match a non-existent value in a database. Putting aside the question of how this ludicrous charade enhances “election integrity”, this is suppression because it’s an obstacle that was put in the way of a lot of people who have no easy way to overcome it. Look at what he’s had to go through to try to be able to vote as he’s been used to voting and is legally entitled to vote, and then multiply it by however many thousands of people in similar straits. The people who wrote and supported this law knew for certain this would happen – they were explicitly told it would happen – and they didn’t care. The fact that he will ultimately vote in person if he doesn’t get a mail ballot is irrelevant, as many people in the same position will not have that option.

2. Part of the issue here is that Mr. Thompson hasn’t been able to get the help he needs from Harris County or the Secretary of State. We know that county election officials have not been able to get accurate information about the new law from the SOS office in a timely fashion. The SOS office, likely due to a combination of the law being big and complex and there not being a lot of time to read and understand it as well as the fact that the person in charge is a partisan hack who has no commitment to voting rights, has been overwhelmed. The SOS certainly deserves its share of the blame, but again Republican legislators could and should have known this would happen. They could have very easily delayed implementation of the law until 2023 or 2024, to give everyone sufficient time to adjust to it. But they didn’t, because making it harder for people to vote was the point and they didn’t want to wait for that to happen.

3. It’s hard to imagine a more sympathetic victim than a 95-year-old World War II veteran. There was a time when the revelation of his plight would have gotten a reaction from the people who are responsible for it, with at the least some apologies and assurances that they didn’t mean for this to happen and that they would do what they could to make it right for him and people like him. I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for a single Republican elected official to say any of these things now.

4. In the name of all that is sacred, don’t read the comments. You think the comments on newspaper articles are bad, hoo boy.

The Rodeo will (probably) happen

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

Assuming it all doesn’t go south from here.

Harris County Judge Lina Hidalgo said Tuesday the Houston Livestock Show & Rodeo should proceed as planned, citing a decline in COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations.

“It’s difficult to predict what things are going to look like in a month, but I’m very hopeful,” Hidalgo said. “I hesitate to say A-OK, because I know what our hospitals are facing.”

She did not rule out, however, shuttering the event for the third straight year if trends reverse.

Hidalgo returned the county to its highest virus threat level on Jan. 10, which urges the more than 1 million unvaccinated residents here to stay home and avoid unnecessary contact with others.

There is growing evidence that the omicron wave is waning in the Houston region. Virus hospitalizations have declined 8 percent since peaking on Jan. 18. Unlike previous surges, the Texas Medical Center has never exceeded its base ICU capacity while dealing with omicron.

Last year’s Rodeo was cancelled, and the 2020 Rodeo, which began just before COVID became a known threat here, ended early, though some argued at the time that decision took too long. Our current numbers are headed in the right direction and should be better in a couple more weeks. I doubt I’d be ready to attend actual Rodeo events or one of the concerts, as those are all indoors, but I expect that going to the fairgrounds for a day of outdoor activity ought to be fine. Especially, you know, if you’re vaxxed and boostered. Wearing a mask, at least when you’re in line and definitely when you’re getting food, would also be a good idea. Do what you think makes sense for your risk profile.

The Killeen Luby’s mass shooting, 30 years later

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

The Dallas Observer takes a trip down memory lane.

The man and his weapons were both from out of town. That’s one of the first things many Killeen residents, both past and present, will remind you: He wasn’t one of them.

George Hennard was from Pennsylvania, and he was living in Belton, a city about 25 minutes away from Killeen, when he committed what was then the largest mass shooting in U.S. history. On that fateful morning, he stopped for a big breakfast: a sausage-and-biscuit sandwich, a candy bar and doughnuts, all washed down with orange juice. It was Oct. 16, 1991, Boss’s Day.

It would be easy to recap the grisly details of that day, to detail how Hennard, a 35-year-old man recently booted from the Merchant Marine, drove his blue 1987 Ford Ranger pickup through a plate-glass window of one of Killeen’s most popular lunch spots and then opened fire. But this is not only a story about murder, nor is it only a story about the man neighbors called “standoffish” but “friendly,” foreshadowing the cases of often lonely, murderous men who would carry out mass shootings over the years that followed. This is also a story about what comes after, when the cameramen have long since left and the town is left to pick up the pieces. It’s about shadows, about how a day that began with a junk food breakfast casts darkness that shapes lives decades later.

More than 30 years after Hennard killed nearly two dozen men and women, the people of Killeen — and, in some respects, all Texans — are still dealing with the emotional, moral and legal aftermath.

I’m not sure why they ran this three months after the actual anniversary, but whatever. It’s a solid looks back, with contemporary quotes from people who were there and from others who have analyzed its impact. I remember this tragedy well, and the subsequent fights in the Lege over concealed carry that followed. If all of this is unfamiliar to you, a little googling will help, as there was a lot more stuff from the 30- and 25-year anniversaries that came up on the first page of my results. Go read the rest.

Interviews and judicial Q&As through January 28

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

Updating from last week. This is to put all of the interviews and judicial Q&As in a single post for your convenience, in case you missed something. This past week was Senate District 15. This coming week will be CD38 plus the long-awaited Candis Houston in HD142 and Chase West in HD132, with two Land Commissioner interviews for after that. After that, probably just whatever remaining judicial Q&As there are. Why? Because the week after next is when early voting starts, and at this point I don’t have the time to try to schedule more interviews.

Here’s the interview list so far, followed by the judicial Q&As. As a reminder, much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet. Let me know if you have any questions.

Interviews

Aurelia Wagner, HD147
Danielle Bess, HD147
Jolanda Jones, HD147
Nam Subramanian, HD147
Reagan Flowers, HD147

Ben Chou, Harris County Commissioners Court Precinct 4
Ann Williams, Harris County Commissioners Court Precinct 4
Gina Calanni, Harris County Commissioners Court Precinct 4
Lesley Briones, Harris County Commissioners Court Precinct 4
Clarence Miller, Harris County Commissioners Court Precinct 4

Dylan Osborne, Harris County Treasurer (Incumbent)
Carla Wyatt, Harris County Treasurer
Marilyn Burgess, Harris County District Clerk (Incumbent)
Desiree Broadnax, Harris County District Clerk

Sen. John Whitmire, SD15
Molly Cook, SD15

Judicial Q&As

Judge Chuck Silverman, 183rd Criminal District Court
Judge Abigail Anastasio, 184th Criminal District Court
Lema Barazi, 189th Civil District Court
Judge Scott Dollinger, 189th Civil District Court
Judge Greg Glass, 208th Criminal District Court
Judge Chris Morton, 230th Criminal District Court
Judge Tristan Longino, 245th Family District Court
Angela Lancelin, 245th Family District Court
Judge Hilary Unger, 248th Criminal District Court
Dianne Curvey, 280th Family District Court
Judge Chip Wells, 312th Family District Court
Teresa Waldrop, 312th Family District Court
Judge Natalia Oakes, 313th Family District Court
Glenda Duru, 313th Family District Court
Alycia Harvey, 482nd Criminal District Court

David Patronella, County Civil Court At Law #4
Porscha Natasha Brown, County Criminal Court At Law #3
Judge Kelley Andrews, County Criminal Court At Law #6
Judge Andrew Wright, County Criminal Court At Law #7
Judge Michael Newman, County Probate Court #2

Chris Watson, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1 Place 2
Blair McClure, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 2 Place 2
Judge Lucia Bates, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3 Place 2
Herbert Alexander Sanchez, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3 Place 2
Ashleigh Roberson, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 3 Place 2

Three very early primary thoughts

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

1. After the exceedingly small number of mail ballots requested and cast in the District G special election, the primaries will be our next test of the SB1 effect on voting by mail. I will be interested to see if the number of mail ballots requested are down, and in particular if there’s a difference in the numbers for each party. For purposes of comparison, this is how many mail ballots were requested by voters in Harris County for each primary in 2020 and 2018.

Dem – 38,667 requested
GOP – 31,162 requested

Dem – 33,236 requested
GOP – 30,579 requested

That’s how many were requested, not all of which were returned. Switching to returned mail ballots, they made up the following percentages of total votes cast in each primary:

2020 Dem – 28,346 mail ballots out of 328,496 total = 8.6%
2020 GOP – 25,562 mail ballots out of 195,723 total = 13.1%

2018 Dem – 22,695 mail ballots out of 167,982 total = 13.5%
2018 GOP – 24,500 mail ballots out of 156,387 total = 15.7%

I will do a comparison with these totals after the votes are in. Still won’t be enough to draw conclusions, but it will be a significant data point.

2. Also of interest, given the huge amount of attention that the increase in Republican voting in various South Texas counties got in 2020, is how this may affect the turnout for the 2022 primaries. Dems have dominated these for years, so this will be a good test of the idea that the 2020 general election has changed voting patterns in this part of the state. Again, I would not draw any broad conclusions – primary turnout may be affected more by local races than the statewide or legislative contests, and primary voting may be a habit that dies more slowly than general election voting, if indeed there is a real change and not a one-election blip happening. I’m going to watch five counties – Cameron, Hidalgo, Maverick, Starr, and Webb. Here’s how they turned out in the 2018 primaries:


County      Dem votes  GOP votes
================================
Cameron        14,123      4,003
Hidalgo        37,739      7,050
Maverick        6,300        111
Starr           6,729         15
Webb           21,137      1,426

Those totals for Starr and Webb are not typos, I assure you. The Republican statewide primary races are much higher profile this year than they were in 2018, so that by itself might draw more people to that side of the ledger. As before, local races may pull people in the Democratic direction, in the way that numerous Democratic lawyers used to vote in the Republican primary in Harris County so they could affect the judicial races. I’m just looking for a data point.

3. I haven’t gotten any email from Erica Davis recently. That introductory video I noted in her email to Democratic precinct chairs from earlier in the month had 413 views and zero comments as of Friday afternoon. Her campaign Facebook page has 830 followers. She has five posts for January, with this one getting 24 likes and two comments. None of the others has as many as ten likes. By comparison, Judge Hidalgo has 47K followers, and most of her posts have hundreds of likes – this one has over 1,600 likes – and dozens of comments. To be sure, some of the comments are from people who oppose her, and of course she’s had a much longer time to build a following; this is very much an advantage of incumbency. All I’m saying is that whatever Erica Davis is doing, it’s not reaching a lot of people. And she still has not told us why we should vote to replace Judge Hidalgo on the ballot with herself.

HCC will have an election to fill its vacancy

by Charles Kuffner.

4 comments

So much for an appointment.

Re: HCC Board of Trustees District II Position

Residents of District II and the Community At-Large:

The Houston Community College (HCC) Board of Trustees remains committed to serving the best interest of the entire community. This commitment extends to our students, faculty, staff, and equally to each and every district that comprises the HCC service area.

During the course of the past few months, the HCC governing board has had the responsibility of navigating challenging circumstances which directly impact District II and its residents. In fact, these unforeseen circumstances impact the entire HCC district and call upon us as a governing board to act prudently in a manner that best serves our community, while meeting the legal and policy requirements available to us.

Notably, the events surrounding the District II position have been distressing for many in District II, the HCC community, and for the HCC governing board. However, we will overcome this difficulty by working together in service to our remarkably diverse community.

To advance this important matter, the law provides for an election to fill the District II trustee position in May 2022. This anticipated election empowers the people of District II to choose their desired trustee and once elected, that individual will begin service on the HCC Board of Trustees. Until a new trustee is seated, we invite the District II community to apprise us of any concerns, questions and needs that may arise.

We greatly appreciate all the residents of District II and your patience throughout this process. We will continue to diligently work – in partnership – with the community to ensure that we all emerge from this situation stronger.

See here and here for the background. The message was signed by Dr. Cynthia Lenton-Gary, the new Board Chair. I don’t know why they were unable to find a suitable person to appoint to the position, which has been the normal course of action, but here we are. The election has not yet been set – I presume that will happen at the next Board meeting – but as noted before, it will be the only election run by Harris County on the uniform election date in May, which is Saturday, May 7. The primary runoff date is Tuesday, May 24, so you lucky duckies in HCC District 2 will get to vote twice in May. The lucky ducky who wins that election will ~~then have to run again in 2023~~ get to serve through the end of what would have been Skillern-Jones’ term, through 2025. I’ll let you know when there’s more.

We’ll probably never know who Ken Paxton’s big campaign donors are

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

He has no interest in telling us, and there’s basically no mechanism to make him.

Best mugshot ever

Attorney General Ken Paxton recently announced a hefty $2.8 million campaign haul, showing the competition he can still raise big bucks while under FBI scrutiny.

But where most of the money came from is a mystery.

Paxton has yet to name all his campaign donors, despite a deadline last week that required disclosure.

Among the missing are those who paid up to $50,000 to rub elbows with Paxton and former President Donald Trump at a fundraiser in December. Entry to the private reception, held at Trump’s swanky Mar-a-Lago club in Florida, started at $1,000.

Paxton’s campaign blamed technical issues for the delay and promised to file an update once fixed. But the campaign has not said when and a spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.

Lax state ethics laws give Paxton little incentive to move quickly, open government advocates said. The fine for turning in his campaign finance report late is a flat $500, no matter whether it is tardy by a day or a month.

“Texas has the weakest, most corruption-prone campaign finance system in the country,” said Anthony Gutierrez, executive director of Common Cause Texas. “It is striking that our top law enforcement official can’t manage to meet our extremely low disclosure requirements.”

All statewide candidates had to file reports by midnight Jan. 18 that detailed their fundraising and spending in the second half of 2021. The accounts offer a glimpse at campaigns’ financial health heading into the final stretch before the March 1 primary.

Three Republicans are vying to oust Paxton in what many see as the marquee GOP primary race. Texas Land Commissioner George P. Bush, former state Supreme Court Justice Eva Guzman and U.S. Rep. Louie Gohmert all posted seven-figure fundraising hauls last week.

Paxton did too. But his report came a day late and named the donors who gave just $652,000 of his $2.77 million total. Details dropped off for contributions made after mid-October.

The report is notable because Paxton’s fundraising was dwindling in late 2020 after several top staffers accused him of abusing the office to help a campaign donor and the FBI began investigating. Paxton has denied wrongdoing, but his GOP challengers say the scandal makes Paxton unfit for office and leaves the post vulnerable to Democratic flip.

Paxton’s fundraising fortunes seem to have shifted last summer when Trump endorsed his bid for a third term as attorney general. The fundraiser at Trump’s club on Dec. 9 reportedly netted Paxton’s campaign a whopping $750,000 – more than he reported raising in the months of July, August and September combined.

Those donors should be disclosed in Paxton’s campaign finance report. Only people who write checks or give cash worth less than about $90 don’t have to be named.

Staff for the Texas Ethics Commission, which oversees campaign finance reporting, have been in touch with Paxton’s campaign, general counsel J.R. Johnson said in a statement. But Johnson said he is “unaware of any planned date for an updated filing.”

Not really much to add here. Paxton doesn’t care about not following the rules, he knows there’s nothing anyone can do to make him follow the rules or enforce any consequences, and he figures that basically no one will care. He’s shown us who he is at every opportunity, and then goes looking for more. John Coby has more.

I repeat: We need to get more kids vaccinated

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Come on, Houston.

In spite of the spread of the omicron variant, national COVID-19 vaccination rates for children ages 5-11 remain low. The same is true for children in Harris County, according to a Kaiser Health News analysis of CDC data.

Of Harris County’s children aged 5-11, only 18.2% of them are fully vaccinated; 22.2% have received one dose. Pharmaceutical company Pfizer announced the FDA authorization of their COVID-19 vaccine on October 29, 2021.

In Texas, most counties have low vaccination rates. Only 34 of Texas’ 254 counties have child vaccination rates above 10%.

When compared to other counties in the U.S. with child populations over 100,000 Harris County comes near the bottom of the list when ranked by vaccination rate.

At 13% fully vaccinated, Harris County’s child vaccination rate is barely higher than Dallas County’s (11%), lower than Bexar County’s (14%) and is about half of Travis County’s (26%).

That 18.2% cited appears to be a typo – according to both the embedded image in the story and the Kaiser Health News story, the actual figure is 12.8% for Harris. Half of what Travis County has done to this point, in other words. We have to do better than that.

And as a reminder why, there’s this.

Vaccines continued to provide strong protection against death from COVID-19 in December, even against the new omicron variant, according to state data released Friday.

Unvaccinated Texans were 16 times as likely to die from the virus in December, and were two times as likely to test positive for it. That gap has shrunk from the fall, likely due to omicron’s increased transmissibility.

The divide was most evident for Texans between 65 and 75 years old, who were 19 times more likely to die from COVID if they were unvaccinated. Nearly 80,000 COVID deaths have been reported in Texas since the pandemic began, the majority of them in 2021, when vaccines became available. Just under 1,600 deaths were reported to the state in December.

Yes, not being vaccinated is not the same risk for a 5-year-old as it is for a 75-year-old. But still, there are a lot more kids in the hospitals these days, and the little ones can certainly spread COVID to their elders. Get them their shots already.

Judicial Q&A: Alycia Harvey

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to those who plan to vote in March. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. Much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet.

Alycia Harvey

1. Who are you and what are you running for?

My name is Alycia Harvey and I am running for the 482nd Criminal District Court.

2. What kind of cases does this court hear?

The 482nd is a new court as of 9/1/2021 that hears felony criminal cases.

3. Why are you running for this particular bench?

The first elected judge of this new court should be someone that has significant experience, someone who knows the law, someone who has long-standing ties to Harris county, and someone who has demonstrated a commitment to the people of Harris County as a public servant and is ready to roll up her sleeves and get to work.

After finishing a multi-victim Capital Murder trial at the beginning October, I didn’t see anyone stepping forward to take on the task that the 482 nd was presenting. At nearly the same time, I spoke with the father of a murder victim on another of my cases who inspired me to take stock of my skills and abilities, and determine what more I had to offer the people of Harris County.

I have been extraordinarily privileged to be able to represent the people of Harris County over the last 20 years as an Assistant District Attorney. I’ve worked exceedingly hard at becoming a person who is well-versed in every area of criminal law. I’d be honored to use the knowledge and courtroom training I’ve amassed to serve the people of Harris County as the 482nd District Court Judge.

4. What are your qualifications for this job?

I have 20 years’ experience in criminal law. I’ve been Board Certified in Criminal Law since 2018. I’ve handled every single stage of a criminal proceeding, beginning with being physically present at crime scenes. I’ve helped investigate cases, including writing all kinds of warrants; I have significant expertise in those involving electronic communications. I’ve made charging decisions, prepared cases for trial, tried them and even done post-conviction work. I’ve investigated civil rights claims and those involving actual innocence. The depth and breadth of knowledge I have in criminal law is not something that is easy to amass or that very many people possess.

5. Why is this race important?

The criminal justice system in Harris County is under water. The 482 nd criminal district court and the litigants who have cases pending in that court do not have time to wait while a judge gets up to speed on the best way to handle the docket. As a felony district court chief with many years of experience, I am ready to handle the court and the docket from day 1.

6. Why should people vote for you in March?

I am the most experienced person in this race; I am the only one who is board certified. You may not recognize my name, but you know my cases: they’re the high-profile ones you see on the news. My experience in putting cases together for trial and in tearing them apart post-trial gives me an exceptionally wide frame of reference to know both what the law allows and what the people of Harris County expect and deserve. I’m ready to rededicate myself to a new role in Harris County public service and would be humbled to continue to serve you in a new capacity.

The SD10 redistricting lawsuit gets off to a rousing start

by Charles Kuffner.

4 comments

I did not see this coming.

Sen. Beverly Powell

In a sworn declaration submitted as part of an ongoing federal court challenge, a senior Republican state senator with redistricting experience said he believes his party violated federal voting laws when it drew new boundaries for state Senate District 10 in the Fort Worth area.

“Having participated in the 2011 and 2013 Senate Select Redistricting Committee proceedings, and having read the prior federal court decision regarding SD10, it was obvious to me that the renewed effort to dismantle SD 10 violated the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution,” state Sen. Kel Seliger said in a declaration signed in November.

The statement from the Amarillo Republican emerged this week as part of a dayslong hearing before a three-judge panel considering a lawsuit that claims the district was intentionally reconfigured to discriminate against voters of color in Tarrant County.

[…]

Seliger chaired the Senate’s redistricting committee last decade, redrawing the state’s maps following the 2010 census when a similar attempt to reshape the district was found to be discriminatory. A federal court in Washington, D.C., ruled in 2012 that lawmakers had discriminated against voters of color in dismantling the district and cracking apart their communities. As a result, the Legislature went back to restore the district’s configuration.

Seliger affirmed his declaration in a video deposition taken earlier this month — portions of which were played in open court in El Paso this week — during which he also said that “pretextual reasons” were given for how political boundaries were decided during the 2021 redistricting process.

Seliger pointed to the redrawing of his own district in the Texas Panhandle as an example. The district was reconfigured so that it lost several counties from the region while picking up about a dozen on the southern end of the district, closer to Midland, from where Seliger had picked up a primary challenger. He ultimately decided against seeking reelection.

[…]

On Wednesday, Seliger told The Texas Tribune that his statement about the illegality of SD-10 was “more of a concern than it was an assertion” of whether there was a violation.

“When you draw a map that essentially takes out minorities or, in what was more the point, take out the chance that there would ever be a Democrat elected there, was there a violation?” Seliger said. “It’s not an assertion on my part because I’m not a constitutional lawyer, but that was my concern about Sen. Powell’s district — to take that district and completely change it and it still marginalized minorities in that district.”

He added that there was a “context” surrounding the drawing of SD-10 — even as Huffman asserted she had not paid any attention to racial data in drawing its boundaries — that requires lawmakers to consider race.

“The Voting Rights Act says if you can create a district in which a historically marginalized minority can elect a candidate of their choice, you must draw that district,” Seliger said. “You start with that principle in every single district.”

See here for the background. Basically, he’s saying that the Republicans did the same things that they did ten years ago that were cited as illegal under the Voting Rights Act by a federal court in 2012. That’s a strong argument that the district as drawn now is also illegal, though it’s hardly conclusive. The previous lawsuit was settled rather than taken to a verdict, so the state will probably just argue now that they shouldn’t have settled then. It’s a good and unexpected (for me, anyway) start for the plaintiffs, who for now are just trying to get something like the old district restored for the 2022 election, but we haven’t heard from the state yet.

More from the hearing:

Two of Tarrant County’s local elected officials testified Tuesday that new political maps passed by Republicans in the Texas Legislature will dilute the voting power of minority voters in a Fort Worth state senate district.

The testimony from Tarrant County Justice of the Peace Sergio Leon and County Commissioner Charles Brooks came during a hearing in El Paso in one of several challenges against the state of Texas and Gov. Greg Abbott after the Republican-led Texas Legislature redrew political maps following the 2020 U.S. Census.

And although this week’s hearing is limited in scope — it pertains to one state senate district in North Texas — attorneys said testimony could foretell what is to come later this year when a slew of other redistricting challenges are heard in a consolidated redistricting lawsuit.

[…]

During testimony Tuesday in El Paso, De Leon said much of his Precinct 5 was originally in Senate District 10 before redistricting. But now, the Senate District has been split in two. This has shifted some Black and Hispanic voters — formerly in the northern part of his precinct — into a Senate District with more Anglo voters. Meanwhile, Black and Hispanic voters in the southern part of his precinct are grouped with rural white voters.

“They’ll have zero impact” on upcoming races, DeLeon said.

Brooks, who was first elected as a county commissioner in 2004, said redistricting has grouped Black and Hispanic voters with Anglo residents who do not share the same values.

“Their voices will be greatly diminished to the point of not being heard and effective in getting their points of view across,” he said, adding that his precinct is about 60% Democrats and 40% Republicans. But Tarrant County generally tends to vote Republican, he said.

Not quite as much any more. If these plaintiffs can get a favorable ruling, then that is probably a good sign for the others, though of course there are no guarantees and SCOTUS remains hostile to voting rights. If these plaintiffs can’t get anywhere, it’s hard to see how any of the others will fare better. If nothing else, we should have an answer quickly. Spectrum News has more.

Can the CCA withstand political pressure?

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

Best mugshot ever

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals judges’ phone lines and email inboxes have been flooded for more than a week by callers angry about a ruling last month that stripped Attorney General Ken Paxton of the authority to prosecute election fraud cases without cooperation of the local district attorney or county attorney.

At least some of the calls were spurred by an automated phone message from Houston activist Dr. Steven Hotze that were sent to tens of thousands of Republicans statewide by his political action committee, Conservative Republicans of Texas. The pre-recorded message, a copy of which was obtained by Hearst Newspapers, included the phone number to the all-Republican court and urged them to call the judges.

“Leave a message that you want the court to restore Paxton’s right to prosecute voter fraud in Texas,” Hotze said. “If this decision isn’t reversed, then the Democrats will steal the elections in November and turn Texas blue.”

The group is also funding radio and TV ads on the subject, said Jared Woodfill, a spokesman and attorney for Hotze.

“It’s Dr. Hotze’s position that the electorate should be able to reach out to the officials they elect,” Woodfill said.

The court’s general counsel Sian Schilhab on Monday said the unusual flood of communications included one email was referred to the Texas Department of Public Safety, which investigates threats against state employees.

Paxton has requested a rehearing of the case, and Hotze and more than two dozen Texas Republican Congressmen, state senators and representatives are supporting him in friend-of-the-court briefs.

[…]

Paxton has publicly blasted the court’s Republican judges for the decision. He and other Republicans have also suggested Democratic district attorneys will not be vigilant against election fraud.

“Now, thanks to the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals, Soros-funded district attorneys will have sole power to decide whether election fraud has occurred in Texas,” Paxton wrote on Twitter at the time of the decision, referring to the Democratic mega-donor. “This ruling could be devastating for future elections in Texas.”

Other Republicans statewide have made similar comments in pushing for reconsideration.

“The Attorney General’s Office must be able to defend election integrity in our great state,” wrote Sen. Paul Bettencourt, one of 14 state senators who signed onto a friend-of-the-court brief, in a statement last week. “We cannot allow our elections to be manipulated.”

See here and here for the background. The Statesman story about this has the most precious sentence I think I’ve ever read, which is that Paxton’s urging people to call the justices’ office and demand that they change their ruling puts him “in an ethical gray area, if not in outright violation of the state’s rules of conduct for lawyers.” Oh heavens to Betsy, not an “ethical gray area”! Not our dear, super-upright Ken Paxton!

I guess I appreciate the fact that no one here is trying to hide their motives, that this is all very clearly about politics and giving Ken Paxton the unfettered power to attack political opponents (primarily Democrats, though you never-Trump Republicans better not sleep too easily either) in whatever fashion he sees fit. They do this by attacking the political motives of district attorneys, because accusing enemies of doing the things you want to do is how it’s done. There’s no way to remove the politics from the process of investigating and prosecuting politicians for alleged crimes, but one can at least be as professional and dispassionate about it as possible. If we had an Attorney General who could be trusted to act in such a fashion, then the likes of Sen. Bettencourt might be able to shepherd a constitutional amendment through the Lege to clarify that point of law that the CCA cited. He’d need to get some Democrats on board to clear the 2/3 majority requirement in each chamber for this, which will never and could never happen as long as the AG is Ken Paxton, or anyone who wants to emulate Ken Paxton. There is a way forward if we really want the AG to have this power, but you sure can’t get there from here.

As for the big question I asked in the title of this post, there’s this.

Randall Kelso, a professor at South Texas College of Law, said courts like the Court of Criminal Appeals tend to be reluctant to reverse to their decisions unless at least one of three conditions are met: There is a change in the facts at the core of the case, the ruling proves to be “unworkable in practice” or judges are persuaded that the decision was “substantially wrong.” Kelso said he did not see how the first two conditions apply to the current situation, and as for proving that the ruling was “substantially wrong,” he added, there is usually a “pretty high burden.”

“Just because the various Texas lawmakers are petitioning, I wouldn’t predict they’d just cave to them and say, ‘We’ve gotta change our minds,'” Kelso said. “It’d be unusual to do it unless” any of those conditions are met.

I sure hope so. If nothing else, I hope their ego kicks in to the point of them muttering “Those idiots don’t get to tell me how to do my job” for however long it takes. It may be our best hope.

Spare a thought for the nurses

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

And do everything you can to avoid getting COVID.

[Kristen McLaury, a nurse and unit manager at Methodist Hospital The Woodlands] treated one of the hospital’s first COVID patients and hasn’t stopped since. She now runs the respiratory unit, where she and her nurses have watched otherwise healthy young people gasping for breath. They’ve put countless people on oxygen, or taken them off life-support. They’ve had to comfort grieving families, and facilitate video calls so no one had to die alone.

She’s risked her own life on the frontlines for nearly two years, and now, watching these hospital beds fill up again, she just feels defeated. In Montgomery County, a conservative, wealthy suburban county northwest of Houston, only 53 percent of its more than 600,000 residents are vaccinated, which is among the lowest rates for Texas counties with populations exceeding 500,000. Less than 16 percent of residents have received a booster shot.

“I work 60 hours a week and I don’t see my child, I don’t see my husband, so that I can come and care for you while you yell at me because you’re upset that you have a disease that I told you how to prevent in the first place,” McLaury said.

As the unit manager, it’s McLaury’s job to keep morale up among the other nurses, a herculean task right now. Like every hospital across the country, they’re facing a nursing shortage, an increase in employee infections and a potentially terminal case of staff burnout.

As the omicron variant surges, Texas is on track to soon surpass its previous COVID hospitalization record, set in January 2021. Then, at least, there was the hope of vaccines on the horizon. Now, nurses like McLaury don’t see much hope at all.

From behind her Houston Astros mask and face shield, she begins to cry.

“It’s real, and maybe it might not be you [in the hospital], but it might be somebody else,” she said. “That compassion, I think, is just gone. The world has become so selfish.”

[…]

“Patients stay in the lobby for my entire shift,” said Meredith Moore, an emergency room nurse. “12 hours. It’s frustrating. It’s hard for them…and they get angry. It’s justified. But who receives that anger? Me.”

Moore has been a nurse for nine years and joined the emergency department here since soon after the hospital opened in 2017. She’s young and energetic, with expressive eyes that communicate exactly what she’s thinking — even behind a mask.

Before the pandemic, Moore loved the fast-paced environment and the feeling of helping people who really needed it. She was especially good at controlling her emotions, a requisite for this job.

“In the ER, you have a patient die on you and you have to go into your next room, and you have to act like nothing is wrong,” she said. “That has gotten more difficult as this has gone on.”

Last week, for the first time, she broke down and cried in the emergency room.

“I had five ambulances that had to have a bed…I had a patient that was circling the drain…I don’t have a nurse to take care of that patient,” she said. “That was the first time in two years I really felt helpless, because if one thing falls, if one person starts coding, it’s all over. It all goes up in flames.”

“I don’t think that people [know] unless you’re on this side,” she said. “I tell my family all the time. I’m glad you don’t know. But that’s a heavy burden to carry.”

The article started with a focus on one of the patients at Methodist Hospital The Woodlands, some unvaccinated dude who didn’t believe in the science of vaccines but was more than happy to trust the science of hospitals. I think we’ve heard enough from people like that. The rest is about the nurses and their experiences, and we need to be more aware of what they’re going through. Go read it.

Judicial Q&A: Ashleigh Roberson

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to those who plan to vote in March. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. Much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet.

Ashleigh Roberson

1. Who are you and what are you running for?

I am Ashleigh Roberson with the Harris County Sheriff’s Department (Detention Officer). I am running for Justice of the Peace 3 Place 2 located in Baytown, Texas.

2. What kind of cases does this court hear?

This particular court hears the following cases:
Class C Traffic Cases (Judge/Jury Trials)
Small Claims and Debt Collections (Sequestrations)
Civil Disputes
Evictions
Occupational License
Truancy
Landlord /Tenant disputes

3. Why are you running for this particular bench?

I have gained so much knowledge over the years preparing myself for this position. I started as a clerk of the court in this particular court back in 2011, I began seeking knowledge while working in the criminal department along with defendants, attorneys and school triad workers throughout the years. I was actively involved in a program at M. B. Smiley High School called, “Teen Court.” The Judge who presided over this program so happen to be in my precinct that I reside in. I knew then I could one day become a Judge and follow the legacy of what was taught in my earlier years of education.

4. What are your qualifications for this job?

I sought a degree in Criminal Justice to certify myself in more court systems and practices. Through working for the Justice courts, I received a total of 5 years in clerical work later becoming the Assistant Chief Clerk. While in this position I received my certification as a Certified Clerk of the Court as I work alongside of the presiding Judge. As a young natural born leader, I continued to certify myself in the field of Criminal Justice. I was able to work for the Constables office doing multiple food drives and community events to put back into the community. While working hard during the day, I was able to seek Law Enforcement and complete the Police Academy. Now, that I am a Detention Officer (TCOLE Certified) in the Jail, I have seen a full circle of the spectrum of the system.

5. Why is this race important?

This particular race is important to me because my experience has proven over the years to prepare myself for the seat. I am a product of my community, I have been an active member of my church, community events and loyal to our seniors. With my resources and community involvement, I believe the community can help one another. Be resourceful and influential to those are in need our of help.

Knowledge is POWER.

I believe that if we come together and work along with our precinct Judge and Constables office we can make a difference in how the current view our courts are viewed.

6. Why should people vote for you in March?

I am qualified for the position because I am Hardworking, Experienced and Fair with the community. The skills I have acquired throughout the years has prepared me to represent and make the best judgments based individual unique situation. My plan is to educate high schoolers through programs that can influence a future, share with the less fortunate and keep that revolving door of criminals out of the system.

Vote No and take the dough

by Charles Kuffner.

20 comments

It’s as Republican as insurrection and hydroxychloroquine.

Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, last year left little doubt why she was voting against a $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure measure, calling it nothing more than a “socialist plan full of crushing taxes and radical spending.”

Yet, when the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced on Wednesday that very same infrastructure bill would be funding a $403-million flood control project in her district in the Fort Worth area, Granger wasted no time in hailing the effort.

“This is a great day for Fort Worth,” she said in a statement. She did not mention where the Army Corps was getting the money but thanked the agency for its “hard work and tireless commitment” to making her community safer.

Granger is not the only Republican cheering on projects generated by a bill that she voted to kill. In recent days, at least four other Republican members of Congress have praised initiatives made possible by the infrastructure law they opposed. Political analysts say they are not likely to be the last.

“Infrastructure remains a relatively nonpartisan issue, so even though those lawmakers may have not voted for the bill, they still have to answer to their constituents, and they want to align themselves with things that are popular,” said Cynthia Peacock, a professor of political communications at the University of Alabama.

[…]

Granger, the Texas Republican who commended the Army Corps of Engineers for addressing flooding problems, defended her vote against the legislation, saying she “wasn’t against this project.”

“I was against some of the other parts of that bill,” Granger said in a Thursday news conference.

I mean, sure, that’s one way to go about it. There’s also the Gene Wu approach, which gives you legitimate input into the process and enables you to secure at least some of your priorities, even if they come wrapped in a bill you otherwise don’t like. Lord knows, the Dems would have welcomed that collaboration, which they did manage to get in the Senate. To be sure, that route will not be popular with the seething masses of Republican primary voters, but that’s a much bigger problem within the Republican Party, and I can’t help you with it. If you are going to do it this way, you can and should be criticized for it.

And just to prove that this kind of hypocrisy is endemic:

.
2) One of the many ridiculous outcomes of the Texas voter suppression law is that literally anyone EXCEPT election administrators can now send vote-by-mail applications to Texans without limitation. Administrators will go to prison if they proactively provide this service. 2/

— Chris Hollins (@CGHollins) 10:22 PM – 24 January 2022

Yes, what Rep. Crenshaw is doing here is perfectly legal. It makes absolutely no sense to ban elections administrators from doing this same exact thing, but that never stopped the vote suppressors. “It’s fine when I do it and it’s a travesty when you do it” is the logic here, and as you can see it’s pretty much impossible to argue with.

UPDATE: Crenshaw has gotten pilloried for this, not that it matters. Cognitive dissonance is a powerful thing.

Huffman wins District G election

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

No runoff needed.

Mary Nan Huffman

Mary Nan Huffman, an attorney for the Houston Police Officers’ Union, has won a special election to become the next District G representative on City Council, according to the unofficial returns.

With all voting centers reporting Tuesday night, Huffman finished with 54 percent of the vote, enough to clear the threshold to win without a runoff.

Community organizer and volunteer Piper Madland came in second with 30 percent, followed by attorney Duke Millard with 12 percent, retired Houston Fire Department assistant chief Roy Reyes, Jr. with 4 percent, and Houshang “Hank” Taghizadeh with 0 percent.

The election in west Houston was triggered to replace Councilmember Greg Travis, who resigned his post late last year to run for a seat in the Texas House of Representatives. Travis will remain at City Hall until his successor is sworn in.

[…]

Off-cycle elections typically feature meager turnout, and that was true in this race.

Roughly 8,300 people cast ballots in the election, a turnout of about 6 percent. That is down from 29,500 votes and a 23 percent turnout in the 2019 general election. The district has more than 137,000 eligible voters.

See here for the previous update, and here for the final unofficial vote totals. Huffman was just over 50% after early voting, and expanded on that on Election Day. I assume she’ll be sworn in shortly after the vote is canvassed, so maybe by the end of next week.

As for the turnout question, let’s fill in the rest of that table from the previous post:


Election        Mail   Early   E-Day  Total  Mail%  Early%
==========================================================
May09 Dist H     647   1,259   2,280  4,186  33.9%   45.5%
May18 Dist K   1,737   1,867   1,531  5,135  41.2%   70.2%
Jan22 Dist G     191   4,101   4,154  8,446   3.7%   50.8%

Remember, “Mail%” is “Mail” divided by “Mail + “Early”, and “Early%” is “Mail + “Early” divided by “Total”. As previously noted, final overall turnout as a percent of registered voters was 4.46% in H in 2009 and 6.01% in K in 2018. Going by the Election Day reporting (click on the box with the check in it, which is the “Voter Turn Out” tab), turnout here was 6.10%, just beating out the District K special in 2018. Did the previously-discussed lack of mail ballots result in a reduction of overall turnout, or did it mostly just shift voting behavior from mail ballots to in-person ballots? We can’t say from one data point. Might be worthwhile to check the voter files for previous odd-year elections to see who the regular mail voters had been and then see if they showed up for this one. I don’t have the time for that now but maybe someone else does. Whatever the reasons were, it’s a striking difference and will be worth paying attention to in future elections. Anyway, congrats to CM-elect Huffman, who will be on the ballot again next year for a full term.

Texas blog roundup for the week of January 24

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

The Texas Progressive Alliance still feels the urgent need for federal voting rights legislation as it brings you this week’s roundup.

David Ortiz elected to MLB Hall of Fame

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Congratulations, Big Papi.

With the process still tainted by the steroid era, David Ortiz was the lone player elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame this year, while others like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were shut out.

“Big Papi” was the only player to clear the required 75% threshold, according to results of this year’s voting by the Baseball Writers’ Association of America. Ortiz finished with 77.9% in becoming the 58th player elected in his first year of eligibility. At 46, he will also be the youngest of the 75 living members of the Hall.

“I learned not too long ago how difficult it is to get in on the first ballot,” Ortiz said. “Man, it’s a wonderful honor to be able to get in on my first rodeo. It’s something that is very special to me.”

Bonds, baseball’s all-time home run leader; 354-game winner Clemens; 600-homer-club member Sammy Sosa; and longtime ace pitcher Curt Schilling were in their 10th and final year of eligibility in the annual BBWAA balloting.

Bonds, Sosa and Clemens posted numbers that marked them as surefire, first-ballot Hall of Famers, but they became avatars for the era of performance-enhancing drugs. While Bonds and Clemens in particular have long denied using PEDs, accusations have dogged them in the media and in books, and have been the subject of court dramas and testimony in front of Congress. In the end, about a third of the voters decided the allegations were too egregious to overlook, enough to bar their entry to the hallowed halls of Cooperstown, at least via the writers’ vote.

Ortiz is a different story, despite his own PED suspicions. A 2009 story in The New York Times reported that Ortiz was among 104 players who tested positive for performance-enhancing substances during a round of tests conducted in 2003. Those results were supposed to remain confidential, and the tests were done to see if the league had reached a threshold to conduct regular testing.

Ortiz has long denied that he used banned substances, and in 2016, commissioner Rob Manfred said the tests in question were inconclusive because “it was hard to distinguish between certain substances that were legal, available over the counter and not banned under our program.”

Manfred added that during subsequent testing Ortiz “has never been a positive at any point under our program.”

When asked about those suspicions Tuesday, Ortiz said, “We had someone coming out with this one list, where you don’t know what anybody tested positive for. All of a sudden people are pointing fingers at me. But then we started being drug tested and I never tested positive. What does that tell you?”

As for the last-chance candidates, Sosa’s support never approached the threshold for election, but the cases of Bonds and Clemens were more divisive among the selectors. Both climbed over the 50% mark in 2017 only to see their support plateau in recent seasons. The tallies for their last go-arounds were 66% for Bonds and 65.2% for Clemens.

There’s a whole lot of discourse about this, and I’ll just link to a few articles so you can get a feel for it. I’m worn out just thinking about it. Ortiz joins six other former players who were elected via the Eras Committee process in December. And hey, guess what?

The hotly debated cases for Bonds, Clemens, Sosa and Schilling will move to a new arena: the Hall of Fame’s Today’s Game era committee. The era committees comprise players, executives and media members who are charged with evaluating overlooked candidates. The Today’s Game committee is next scheduled to convene during the 2022 winter meetings in December.

We get to live through the whole Bonds/Clemens/Sosa/Schilling debate again later this year, and again in 2024. Deep breaths, we’ll get through this together. Fangraphs, The Ringer, and Drew Magary, among many others, have more.

Judicial Q&A: Judge Chuck Silverman

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to those who plan to vote in March. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. Much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet.

Judge Chuck Silverman

1. Who are you and in which court do you preside?

I am Judge Chuck Silverman, the presiding Judge of the 183rd Criminal District Court.

2. What kind of cases does this court hear?

The 183rd Criminal District Court handles felony cases.

3. What have been your main accomplishments during your time on this bench?

I am proud of my many accomplishments during my tenure on the bench.

1. As evidenced by articles published in the Houston Chronicle, I was a leader of efforts to reform the felony bail system in Texas.

2. I believe that all defendants are entitled to a vigorous defense regardless of their economic status. That is why I support funding for and the use of the Public Defender's Office.

3. I am proud to partner with the Houston Gulf Coast Building & Trades Council to refer appropriate probationers to the Apprenticeship Readiness Program in order to afford such individuals the opportunity to learn a trade skill and subsequently become a productive member of the community.

4. I am proud of my ability to manage my docket during the pandemic as evidenced by the fact that my court has one of the lowest number of pending cases among the felony courts.

5. I am proud to have tried many cases, including a Capital Murder (Death Penalty), Capital Murder (Non Death Penalty) and many other serious felony cases.

4. What do you hope to accomplish in your courtroom going forward?

I will continue to build on my accomplishments. I will continue to efficiently manage my docket. I will continue to treat all parties with the respect and dignity they deserve. I will continue to be a judge that the community can be proud of.

5. Why is this race important?

We have to ensure that we have fair and unbiased representation on the bench. I am sensitive to the challenges in our judicial system and have worked in collaboration with community based organizations and advocacy groups to address issues such as bail reform, indigent defense and pathways to trade skills and employment opportunities.

6. Why should people vote for you in March?

I love my job. I wake up every day looking forward to coming to work. It is the most rewarding and fulfilling work I have ever engaged in. It's an honor to represent the people of Harris County and I would very much appreciate the opportunity to continue to do so.

With respect to the March primary, I would point out that I have been active in the Democratic Party since 1986. I have been a Precinct Chair (711), volunteered for many City, County and State Democratic Party candidates, been a long time member and supporter of Democratic Party clubs and organizations, and, unlike my opponent, have never voted in a Republican Party primary.

The story of the paper shortage and the voter registration forms, in two tweets

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

One:

.
New: League of Women Voters of Texas has sent a letter to the Texas SOS threatening to sue the state unless they are provided with more copies of new voter registration forms. They say SOS is in violation of the National Voter Registration Act.

https://lwv.org/newsroom/press-releases/lwv-texas-sends-letter-texas-sos-requesting-voter-registration-forms?utm_source=PressRelease&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=01212022 #txlege

— Madlin Mekelburg (@madlinbmek) 4:46 PM – 21 January 2022

And two:

.
The League of Women Voters of Houston says they’ve received a total of 10k voter registration applications from the Texas Secretary of State’s office in the last few days, following all of the public pressure.

— Ashley Lopez (@AshLopezRadio) 11:47 AM – 23 January 2022

There was a Chron story about this, but you get the idea. Guess that ol’ supply chain went and got itself unclogged. Funny how these things work. Or maybe SOS John Scott figured out that there’s a whole government department dedicated to printing services, and that perhaps he ought to check with them before declaring that they have no paper. Whatever the case, I think we can put a bow on this one for now. If only we could say the same for the other problem we’re now facing. Take your wins where you can.

Is it time to ditch At Large seats on Houston City Council?

by Charles Kuffner.

17 comments

Here’s one argument for it.

The lack of Latinos on the City Council undermines the legitimacy of Houston’s government, experts say, and is something that a prominent Hispanic organization is pushing to change with a lawsuit and ballot proposition.

The League of United Latin American Citizens, one of the largest Hispanic civil rights organizations in the country, is tackling what they characterize as a gross underrepresentation of Latinos in one of the most diverse cities in the U.S. by proposing that the five at-large positions on council elected citywide be replaced with four seats in heavily Hispanic districts.

Currently, just one Hispanic — Robert Gallegos — holds a seat on the 16-member body. By contrast, 45 percent of Houston residents are Hispanic.

“The most serious threat to the legitimacy of Houston city government is this idea that you can have half of the population of the city represented by 6 percent of the council,” said Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University. “Imagine if we flipped things around and there’s only one African American on the Houston City Council, or there’s only one Anglo, or there’s only one woman … It would be seen as a national travesty of democracy; it would be the subject of constant outcry.”

The city is expected to look at redistricting prior to its 2023 election, and could redraw the 11 districts if they are deemed unbalanced at that point. But LULAC said replacing at-large seats with more single-district seats would reduce barriers that undercut Latino representation.

“If we had parity, half of this council would be Latino,” said local LULAC leader Sergio Lira, co-chair of a new Houston taskforce created under the direction of the organization’s national President, Domingo García, who launched the effort in a meeting with local leaders last week.

García, a lawyer with offices statewide, said the effort includes a push to bring a charter amendment with the proposition to citizens to vote on and to file a lawsuit against the city.

Houston has the worst Hispanic representation in city councils among all Texas cities with populations over 500,000, all of which have eliminated at-large positions in their governments, according to census and government data.

“Houston is the outlier in Texas when it comes to Latino representation and is the only large city with at-large seats,” García said.

Those cities — San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, Fort Worth, and El Paso — all have councils that look much more similar to their cities’ Hispanic populations. Dallas, which is 42 percent Hispanic, has the next-lowest Hispanic representation on council with 29 percent Hispanics.

It’s tough to get elected to Houston’s at-large seats, García said.

“They are very difficult for Latinos to win because of the amount of money, coalitions and logistics it takes to win,” he said. “It’s like running for mayor.”

There’s a lot to say here, and I’ll try to get to the main points, but let me start by saying it’s a little more complex than what Garcia and Lira are arguing. There are multiple districts that have are at least plurality Latino – H, J, F, and A. H, currently held by CM Karla Cisneros, had reliably elected Latinos before Cisneros and likely will again; none of the others have elected Latinos. There is of course a big difference between “population”, “voting-age population” and “citizen voting-age population”, and that’s before we take into account voter registration and who generally turns out to vote in our odd-year elections, where 20% turnout is on the higher end. We could elect more Latinos with the map we have now, at least in theory. It very much hasn’t worked out that way in practice, and I doubt you’d find anyone who would argue that the current map is conducive to having more than two Latinos get elected from the current districts.

It’s also true that Latinos have been shut out from the At Large seats since the days of Orlando Sanchez and Gracie Saenz twenty years ago. We also haven’t had a lot of strong Latino contenders for At Large seats lately. In 2015, no Latinos ran for At Large #3 or #5, and the only one in At Large #1 was perennial candidate James Partsch-Galvan. There were Latinos in all the At Large races in 2019, but none of them raised any money. That’s what Garcia and Lira are saying, and others have said it before them, but it just doesn’t take as much money to run a credible At Large campaign as it does to run for Mayor. Mayoral candidates need well over a million bucks, but the big money candidates for At Large raise in the $200-400K range. Not nothing, but not a huge pile of money either. It’s a bit of a vicious circle – people who might want to run are discouraged because it’s hard for them to raise money and the recent record of citywide Latino candidates is brutal, which leads to a paucity of such candidates for anyone to support.

I can’t leave this point without bringing up, once again, the 2007 At Large #5 runoff, in which Jolanda Jones defeated Joe Trevino in a race where about 25K total votes were cast. Jones had run citywide before (in At Large #3) and was better known, and the other runoffs on the ballot were City Council District D and HISD District II, both of which favored Jones’ candidacy. Trevino was a longshot no matter how you looked at it, but still. This was the clearest shot to get a Latino elected citywide, and he got bupkus in terms of financial support, including from the folks who had been threatening to sue to force City Council redistricting prior to the 2010 Census. Public support of campaigns and candidates is a complicated and nuanced thing that is more often solicited than given, I get that. I’m just saying, none of the folks who were lamenting the lack of Latino representation on Houston City Council were moved to write Joe Trevino a $100 check. Make of that what you will.

(There was also the Michael Kubosh-Roy Morales runoff of 2013. The politics of that one are different, for obvious reasons. I went back and looked, and Roy Morales actually raised about $50K for that runoff, which isn’t too shabby. There were only a couple of Latino names among his donors, though. Again, make of that what you will.)

Moving on. I have generally been supportive of having the hybrid district/At Large Council that we have. At least if you have a sub-par Council person in your district, you still have five At Large members you can turn to for support if you need it, and I think there’s value in having people who need to have a broader perspective. That said, I’d bet that most of the At Large members we have had over the past 20 or so years have come from a limited geographical distribution – this was very much the problem with Austin’s at large system, where nearly everyone on their Council came from the same part of town – and let’s just say that some of our At Large members are better than others and leave it at that. All in all, I don’t think it would be a great loss to change to an all-district system, and I would be inclined to support it if and when it comes to a vote. I’d like to see the proposal first – there are, as we well know, good and not-so-good ways to draw maps – but as a concept, I support it.

Knowing it is a long shot, LULAC decided to initiate a drive to collect 20,000 signatures in February in favor of their proposition, as the early voting for the state primaries begins. The number is the minimum needed to force the inclusion of a charter amendment in the ballot, bypassing the approval of City Council, which would only decide when it should be put for a citizens’ vote.

LULAC is simultaneously preparing a lawsuit it plans to file in court by March to eliminate all at-large positions in favor of single districts.

We’ll see how that goes. Petition drives have been pretty successful in recent years, even if they don’t always get their referenda on the next available ballot. There are already two items scheduled for the ballot in 2023, and with an open seat Mayoral race that will make it a very busy cycle. An item like this could get a bit lost in the noise, or it could be a big issue, as surely the various Mayoral candidates will need to weigh in on it. I’ll be very interested to see how the petition drive and the litigation go.

Have we reached peak omicron?

by Charles Kuffner.

3 comments

I sure hope so (fingers crossed).

Omicron’s swift and sudden surge may have peaked, experts said Monday, but hospitals are likely to remain full in the coming weeks, with the highly contagious COVID-19 strain not expected to recede until March.

Two key metrics — transmission rate and wastewater tracking — indicate the variant may be loosening its grip on the Houston area.

Texas Medical Center records show positive case rates are declining. Around 9,000 people tested positive for COVID each day last week in the greater Houston area, down about 40 percent from the previous week, when the region averaged about 13,400 new cases daily, according to TMC data.

But hospitalizations and deaths lag behind new infections, so health care workers still have a challenging couple of weeks ahead, said Dr. David Persse, Houston’s chief medical officer. Intensive care units around Texas are at 92 percent capacity, among the highest levels recorded since the pandemic began.

“It appears that we may have hit a peak,” Persse said. “However, our numbers are still really really high. I hesitate for anyone hearing that we may have peaked to think that its over. It is far from over.”

[…]

Houston’s declining rate of transmission — a statistic used to gauge how likely an infected person is to spread their illness to others — offers some clues. The rate of transmission fell below 1.0 last week for the first time since mid-December, according to new TMC data. That means each infected Houstonian is spreading the virus to less than one other person.

The city’s wastewater offers another optimistic sign of omicron’s decline. The wastewater virus load last week was about half what it was in December, and appears to be falling precipitously from its all-time high recorded on Jan. 7, officials said.

As a reminder, the wastewater dashboard is here. It’s still high, but compare to January 3, and you’ll see how much better things look now. As noted, hospitalizations lag cases, and deaths lag hospitalizations, so while the number of people getting COVID may now be trending down, we’ll still see high levels of hospital bed usage, and a higher death rate for the time being. But at least there we can begin to see the end as well. Hang in there, and stay safe.

Interview with Molly Cook

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Molly Cook

Sen. John Whitmire hasn’t had a lot of serious challengers in recent years, but he has one this year and her name is Molly Cook. Cook is an emergency room nurse, which would give her more experience in health care policy than at least 90% of the current legislature. She’s also a community organizer and advocate for equitable, sustainable transportation and development in the region. If her name sounds familiar it’s because she has been quoted multiple times in stories about the I-45 project on behalf of the Stop I-45 Coalition. All that gave us a lot to talk about, and you can listen to it all here:

cakuffner · Molly Cook Interview 122821 Audio Only

As with the judicial Q&A’s, more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet. I will periodically round up the links to these posts as well.

Judicial Q&A: Angela Lancelin

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to those who plan to vote in March. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. Much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet.

1. Who are you and what are you running for?

I am Angela Lancelin, a Family law practitioner with extensive litigation experience throughout Harris and contiguous counties. My main practice area has been Family law. I have handled establishment and enforcement of child support orders in Texas, under the UIFSA, collection and enforcement of unpaid child support, asset forfeiture (foreclosure suits) probate, tax lien disputes, cps litigation and contested Bankruptcy issues. I am licensed in the Southern, Northern and Eastern Bankruptcy Districts. My duties also include complex litigation on behalf of the Office of the Attorney General that has been comprised of complex post judgment litigation. I am running for the 245th District Court.

2. What kind of cases does this court hear?

The 245th is a Family Court where matter concerning or related to Divorce, Sapcr, Cps, Adoptions, modification, enforcement related proceedings regarding post judgment property and child support matters. Family Courts also have to rule on matters related to Bankruptcy Stays/proceedings, Probate and civil asset forfeiture matters related to collection proceedings.

3. Why are you running for this particular bench?

I believe being able to have a voice from the bench will allow my diverse work/ life experience and knowledge of Harris county’s underrepresented communities to further broaden my passion for public service. More specifically the current practice and policy for self-calendaring results in a lack of access to participate in the legal system. This system negatively impacts the underrepresented, low-income litigants who cannot afford or have access to internet service or a computer.

4. What are your qualifications for this job?

I have 28 years of Family law experience including 26 years as an Assistant Attorney General assigned to region 6, Harris County. Designated as the Special Litigator for Regions 6, 5 and 10 (contiguous counties), to manage Bankruptcy claims and participate in adversarial hearings from date of filing to dismissal.

I have served as the IV- E (CPS) liaison in Harris and contiguous counties.

Prosecute contested hearings to establish parentage, enforce child support obligations, including child support collections in Tax, Probate, Criminal and Civil litigation matters.

Manage high volume and handle the complex litigation IV-D caseload in Harris and contiguous counties from intake to disposition.

5. Why is this race important?

This midterm election is crucial to determining if the underrepresented, low income, pro se, and private bar attorneys will be allowed meaningful access to the court.

6. Why should people vote for you in March?

I have devoted my legal career to public service. I have learned the art of active listening providing a safe place for each party to express their concerns without judgment. My distinct ability to relate and adapt to different fact patterns, combined with my compassion and knowledge of the law will provide a balanced and impartial setting.

SD10 lawsuit gets its hearing

by Charles Kuffner.

2 comments

The last possible obstacle to a March primary, and the first redistricting lawsuit to get a merits hearing.

Sen. Beverly Powell

A federal district judge in El Paso on Tuesday will preside over one of several challenges against the state of Texas and Gov. Greg Abbott after the Republican-led Texas Legislature redrew political maps following the 2020 U.S. Census.

And although this week’s hearing is limited in scope — it pertains to one state senate district in North Texas — attorneys said testimony could foretell what is to come later this year when a slew of other redistricting challenges are heard in a consolidated redistricting lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge David Guaderrama will hear a challenge to the redrawn political boundaries for Fort Worth’s state Senate District 10, currently represented by Democrat Beverly Powell. Powell and six Tarrant County residents filed the lawsuit in early November, alleging the new map purposely dilutes the voting strength of minorities.

“In each decennial redistricting cycle in modern history, Texas has enacted plans that federal courts have ruled to be racially discriminatory in intent and/or effect. Like clockwork, Texas has done so again,” the lawsuit asserts. “Remarkably, Texas has enacted the same racially discriminatory scheme to dismantle Senate District 10.”

[…]

Attorney Mark P. Gaber, who represents Powell and the other plaintiffs, said their case is scheduled ahead of the others this fall because they asked the judge to make a decision in time for the November 2022 General Election.

“The claims are that the drawing of the senate district was intentionally discriminatory by cracking apart Black and Latino voters. What we are asking the court to do is enter relief in time to affect the November 22 election,” he said. “So, we would put the district that exists now back in place and that would require some changes to the surrounding districts as well.”

Graber said this week’s hearing could foreshadow what to expect later this year.

“I imagine for one thing there is going to be testimony and that doesn’t go away. And that could be relevant to other claims as well,” he said. “We’ll probably get some legal ruling from the court that will affect issues beyond Senate District 10 in terms of what the court determines are the facts of law.”

See here for the background. The DMN has more details.

Of the federal redistricting complaints, Powell’s alone seeks an injunction and changes to the maps ahead of the March 1 primary elections. A panel of three federal judges set a September trial start date in the consolidated redistricting case. There’s also a challenge in Texas state court.

“A crucial fight is underway to preserve District 10 as a Tarrant County-based diverse district where minority voters and Anglos unite to elect their candidate of choice,” said Powell, who is suing as a private citizen and not in her official capacity, when she filed for reelection last month.

The previously Fort Worth-centric seat that had been contained inside Tarrant County grew at least tenfold in geographic size and added part of Parker County and all of Johnson, Palo Pinto, Stephens, Shackelford, Callahan and Brown counties.

It previously favored President Joe Biden by eight points, according to election returns. But the redrawn district would have gone for Donald Trump by 16 points, a 24-point swing that likely dooms Powell’s hopes for reelection.

Republicans say the maps are legal and fair. Lawyers for the state argued the Legislature acted according to partisan motivations, not racial ones, and warned that blocking the map would disrupt the 2022 elections already in motion.

“This case is about politics, not race,” state lawyers responded in a filing that was blunt about the GOP majority’s approach. “Their goal, as always, was to design to elect a Republican. And they succeeded, at least on paper.”

Texas argued the Tarrant County citizens’ claims fail because “the Legislature simply did not consider race for purposes of redrawing” District 10 except for compliance with applicable law.

[…]

To lock things in place until the lawsuit is resolved, Powell’s legal team asked the federal court to block the map, with respect to District 10, from being used in elections and to restore the district’s previous boundaries. The plaintiffs also asked the court to delay primary elections affected by that change, noting that lawmakers already approved a back-up primary schedule.

[…]

It’s unclear, if the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs on District 10, which other primaries would be delayed. The goal is to restore the seat with as few changes as possible to the rest of the map, said Matt Angle, founder and director of the progressive Lone Star Project.

I noted this hearing in yesterday’s post about the state of the state lawsuits, as those now will be held later (if they are not tossed by SCOTx) and will not have an effect on this year’s primaries. I don’t expect there to be any delays in the primaries this year. It’s possible that the three-judge panel, which has one Trump judge, one Obama judge, and the ever-present Jerry Smith, could issue an injunction, but ~~I doubt that the Fifth Circuit would let it stand, and if somehow that happened then SCOTUS would intervene~~ SCOTUS would get to have a say as well. (Yes, maybe I’m being cynical, but how is that a losing proposition these days?) Whatever does happen, it will have to happen quickly – we’ve already passed the deadline for mail ballots to be sent to military and overseas voters, and early in person voting for the primaries starts in less than three weeks. I’ll be keeping a close eye on this.

UPDATE: Made a correction to note that the appeals process from this three-judge panel goes to SCOTUS, not the Fifth Circuit.

Don’t expect the absentee ballot fiasco to improve

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

Things are working as planned.

Signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott in September, the voting law known as Senate Bill 1 contained an array of new restrictions on the state’s voting process and narrowed local control of elections.

Among its many provisions — and the earliest to be tested — are new rules for voting by mail. Absentee voters are now required to include a state identification number like a driver’s license number or a partial Social Security number on their applications for a mail-in ballot. Those numbers must match information in a voter’s record or their application will be rejected.

Regular mail-in voters must submit new applications each year, and when counties began accepting them this year, the rejection rates were staggering. Hundreds of applications were deficient, in some cases missing an ID number. In other cases, voters had listed a number that didn’t appear to be on file with the local elections office.

The secretary of state’s office has been working to backfill its records to include both driver’s license numbers and Social Security numbers for most voters, but various Texas counties — including some of the state’s largest — did not know they were supposed to check the state’s database along with their own when trying to validate an application.

Election officials across the state said they either weren’t aware the driver’s license numbers had been uploaded to the state database, known by election administrators as TEAM, or weren’t aware that the new numbers would not sync with their local databases. To them, it appeared the numbers were missing from a voter’s record.

“There were several large counties that are offline that were not aware that they’d have to go beyond their internal systems, and I’m one of them,” said Chris Davis, the Williamson County elections administrator. (Counties that use a local database are known as “offline counties.”)

The discrepancy helped drive an initial 50% rejection rate of applications in Travis County, the “vast majority” of which officials attributed to the new rules, before offline counties learned the new driver’s license numbers had not been pushed to their local databases. The rejection rate had dropped to 27% in figures Travis County Clerk Dana DeBeauvoir released Tuesday, though the total number of applications the county received had more than doubled by then.

The rejection issues led to a public spat between DeBeauvoir, a Democrat, who criticized the state for not providing counties with comprehensive guidance, and the secretary of state’s office, which zeroed in on the county’s rejection of an “unusually large” share of applications in a press release calling on officials to correct “erroneous” rejections.

But the information gap over matching ID numbers went beyond Travis County. While “waiting to get clear instructions” from the state, Vona Hudson, the election administrator in rural Tom Green County, said she was running into ID issues with 40% to 50% of the applications coming in.

Hudson didn’t get clarity on the syncing problems until a last-minute webinar held by the secretary of state’s office Tuesday morning to address “frequently asked questions” about the new ID requirements.

In a statement this week, the governor’s office put the blame for issues with the new rules on county officials “erroneously interpreting the law” instead of asking the state for assistance.

“The bottom line is that counties should not be rejecting valid mail ballot applications,” said Nan Tolson, a spokesperson for the governor. “The Secretary of State’s office will continue to work with counties across the state to combat the misinformation being spread by county election officials and ensure that all valid mail ballot applications are processed.”

But beyond the confusion over how to match numbers, early figures released by some of the state’s largest counties showed that a bigger problem was applications coming in with no ID numbers on them at all.

For example, Bexar County initially rejected 125 applications because voters provided a driver’s license number that was not in their voter record, while 200 were rejected because the ID section was not filled out. Thirty applications were rejected because the voter submitted an outdated application form that didn’t include the new ID field.

Of the 208 applications Harris County initially rejected based on the new rules, 137 were rejected because voters had not filled out the new ID requirements. As of Jan. 14, county officials said they had rejected another 172 applications that lacked ID numbers.

In its update Tuesday, Travis County said about half of the 509 applications it had rejected did not include any ID information.

County officials said they were also hamstrung in how much education they could provide voters about the new requirements. In SB 1, Republican lawmakers made it a state jail felony for an election official to “solicit the submission” of an application to vote by mail if the voter did not request it — a broad prohibition election officials said has made them fearful that once unremarkable voter outreach efforts could now be construed as criminal.

SB 1 also made it a state jail felony for local election officials to proactively send applications to voters who did not request them, even if voters automatically qualify to vote by mail because of age. Political parties can still send out unsolicited applications on their own dime.

“It’s understandable if you’re focusing on what’s most important in a given week or a given month that you might lose track of some of these other issues, and I think that goes for secretary of state as well,” Remi Garza, the president of the Texas Association of Election Administrators, said of the miscommunication between the state and the counties.

But this was a foreseeable situation, said Garza, who serves as the elections administrator for Cameron County.

Voting rights advocates have panned state Republican leadership over the issues, both because the problems were forewarned and because the law’s implementation date has not allowed election officials enough time to roll out its new requirements. Over the last year, advocates questioned how voters were expected to know which ID number might be on their voter record when they aren’t required to provide both while registering to vote.

Lawmakers bear “the responsibility to foresee problems in the implementation of a law,” said James Slattery, a senior staff attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project, who testified on the ID issues at the Legislature.

“They are now reaping what they’ve sown,” said Slattery. “Though I should say it’s really the voter reaping what they’ve sown, which is the tragedy of all this. At the moment, it’s the voters that are facing the consequences.”

It would be nice to think that the Republicans who passed this atrocity will hear it from their voters who have been adversely affected. I just don’t think there will be that much blowback on them. For one thing, it’s still the case that only a limited number of people even can vote by mail, so the people feeling the brunt of this are a relatively small group. Of those that are Republicans – since let’s face it, those are the only ones that Greg Abbott and company care about – you have to figure that Donald Trump has made voting by mail a lot less attractive to them. And, as we have seen, Republican voters don’t seem to mind laws that make their lives worse as long as they believe that it’s making the lives of people they don’t like even more worse. So, while there is still the potential for disaster that will very much affect only Republicans in the near future, I don’t expect there to be much pressure on the people responsible for it. This was a feature, not a bug. If there isn’t a federal law to clear out some of these obstacles, we’re going to be stuck with it until we can elect enough Democrats to change the law. Given that the State Senate is pretty well out of reach for the foreseeable future, even with a great result elsewhere this is going to take some time.

Interview with Sen. John Whitmire

by Charles Kuffner.

Comments are off for this post

Sen. John Whitmire

We’re going to spend some time in SD15 this week, where we have one of the challenges against a legislative incumbent. You know that incumbent well, he’s Sen. John Whitmire, he’s been in the Lege since 1973 and in the Senate since the 80s. You also know him because I’ve interviewed him before. Sen. Whitmire is the senior member of the State Senate, he’s the longtime Chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee where he’s still able to get things done even in Dan Patrick’s Senate, and he has a long list of accomplishments. He’s also announced that he intends to run for Mayor of Houston in 2023, which is one of the things I asked him about in the interview:

cakuffner · John Whitmire Interview 011022.MP3

As with the judicial Q&A’s, more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet. I will periodically round up the links to these posts as well.

Judicial Q&A: Dianne Curvey

by Charles Kuffner.

1 comment

(Note: As I have done in past elections, I am running a series of Q&As for judicial candidates in contested Democratic primaries. This is intended to help introduce the candidates and their experiences to those who plan to vote in March. I am running these responses in the order that I receive them from the candidates. Much more information about Democratic primary candidates, including links to the interviews and judicial Q&As, can be found on Erik Manning’s spreadsheet.

Dianne Curvey

1. Who are you and what are you running for?

I am a native Houstonian who grew up in Houston’s Fifth Ward and graduated from MB Smiley High School in North Forest ISD. I am a mother of two and a fur-mom of three. Judge of the 280th Judicial District Court is the office is seek.

2. What kind of cases does this court hear?

This is a unique court in that it is the only court specifically designed to handle domestic violence cases in the state of Texas. Any and all cases in Harris County that may warrant the need for a protective order will be heard in this court. Both the District Attorney’s Office and private attorneys may use this court to protect or defend clients who either file or are accused of domestic violence. I envision this court becoming a trailblazer for the manner in which other counties handle domestic violence cases and issue protective orders.

3. Why are you running for this particular bench?

The reason I decided to run for this seat is because the law, under the Family Code, is not being followed. I know this because the rulings in this court have been overturned at least 26 times by the Court of Appeals due to similar improper judgments issued against Respondents. These duplicative errors lead me to believe that there is not only a misunderstanding of the applicable law, but also that there is a complete indifference for the rulings handed down from a higher court. Here is how it affects economically disadvantaged communities. The cases that were overturned were from Respondents who could afford an appellate attorney to obtain justice. Those Respondents who do not have thousands of dollars for that appellate attorney are stuck with the improper rulings that the Court of Appeals has already overturned for wealthier Respondents. That’s just not fair.

4. What are your qualifications for this job?

I am a 16 year practicing attorney in the areas of Family and Criminal Law. I have handled over 2500 cases from Orange to El Paso, Texas. As a solo practitioner, I know how to manage both employees, finances, and dockets. I am a master of multitasking and rarely get rattled when things don’t go as planned. I am the only person in this race who has represented both Applicants and Respondents, which gives me a unique perspective on the people who will stand before me. I know how to be tough and extend empathy without violating the Family Code.

Before I became an attorney, I was a classroom teacher. This background provided me with the ability to understand how to work with communities different from mine with honesty and respect. No matter how disrespectful a young person became, I knew how to keep “my cool”. This is probably the most important skill I possess for the type of court I am seeking.

I have previously run for judge in 2010 and am well versed with the expectations and sacrifices that it takes to be successful.

5. Why is this race important?

Domestic violence is prevalent in all communities, but the consequences being administered seem to affect economically fragile people the hardest. Specifically, I am running because someone has to stand up for children who are losing their ability to have both parents active in their lives. Currently, this court is issuing 18 year protective orders against offenders as it pertains to them seeing their children. While it’s important to be “tough on crime”, there must also be a balance between being tough and being cruel towards the youngest victims of domestic violence. Children need both their parents, even if they only see the offending parent under a supervised setting.

In addition, there is a problem getting signed orders to the correct law enforcement agencies in a timely manner. I will push for legislation and reform that will designate a bailiff to work solely on delivering protective orders to law enforcement agencies by the end of the business day on which they have been signed.

6. Why should people vote for you in March?

The people of Harris County should entrust me with their vote because I am fair, balanced, and competent. I have the judicial temperament to speak to both applicants and respondents in a respectful manner without becoming demeaning or condescending. I am the only person in the race who has handled cases for both applicants and respondents, so I understand how to be unbiased and to see the story from both sides. I also have the foresight to understand that a protective order means nothing unless it gets to the proper law enforcement agencies in a timely manner. Overall, Harris County will be a safer place to live with the judicial temperament, wisdom, and legislative reform I hope to bring to the bench.

Supreme Court to hear whether state redistricting lawsuit can proceed

by Charles Kuffner.

4 comments

Here’s the update I’ve been waiting for. Not what I was hoping for, but it is what it is.

The state’s bid to toss a legal challenge arguing last year’s GOP-led redistricting effort violated the Texas Constitution is headed to the state Supreme Court, which accepted the case Friday.

The all-Republican Supreme Court set oral arguments on March 23, well after the March 1 primary election.

The Legislature’s GOP mapmakers last fall approved new political lines that could cement Republicans’ grip on power for the next decade and blunt the voting strength of nonwhite voters who fueled Texas’ population surge.

As federal lawsuits over the new maps pile up, some Democrats are focusing on fights in state court. In two combined cases, a group of mostly Democratic, Latino lawmakers from both chambers challenged the constitutionality of when and how Republicans drew the boundaries.

After two days of oral arguments in December, a three-judge state district court ruled against temporarily blocking the new legislative maps, but set a trial for January. Texas then appealed the court’s denial of its motions to dismiss the case, putting the trial on hold.

The lawmakers’ attorneys said they don’t seek to overturn the maps for the 2022 election cycle but argued for expedited resolution of the appeal “to allow sufficient time for the parties to litigate the merits before the 2023 legislative session.”

“For decades, MALC has defended the freedom to vote and equal access to the ballot box. We are not surprised that (Texas Attorney General) Ken Paxton would attempt to undermine our members and the millions of Texas voices they represent,” said state Rep. Rafael Anchia, chair of the Mexican American Legislative Caucus, one of the challengers against the maps.

[…]

The consolidated case was assigned to a special three-judge panel of Democrat Karin Crump and Republicans Emily Miskel and Ken Wise. If the state Supreme Court affirms the lower court’s decision, “the parties need sufficient time to return to the special three-judge district court, obtain a final judgment, and complete any appeal from that judgment,” the challengers said in a filing.

See here for the previous update. I’ve been scouring the news for the past two weeks because I knew that proposed trial date was coming up. I had not seen an item about the state’s appeal, so the lack of news about the trial was confusing to me – was this really not being covered, or was there a delay of some kind. Turns out it was the latter. Maybe if I’d spent more time on Twitter I might have seen something to that effect, but too much time on Twitter is its own hazard. Point is, this litigation will not derail the March primaries. Like the litigation over Harris County Commissioners Court redistricting, it may eventually end with a ruling that will force a change to the new maps, but it cannot and will not affect this election.

Anyway, so SCOTx will decide whether to toss the two combined lawsuits or to allow the trial to proceed. Hopefully they will do this in a timely manner, so that we might have a resolution in time for the 2023 legislature to address any remaining questions. Which, let’s be clear, could be a double-edged sword, though at least on the county line question it’s more likely to be good for Democrats if the plaintiffs win and the districts in Cameron County need to be redrawn. And speaking of timing, SCOTx accepted this appeal on the same day that they also accepted the SB8 litigation from the Fifth Circuit. Thanks, I hate it.

One more thing, on a side note:

.
Situational awareness: A push to temporarily block the redraw of #SD10 is scheduled to be heard Tuesday in federal court. #txlege

— Sami Sparber (@samisparber) 11:24 AM – 21 January 2022

That’s the Sen. Powell lawsuit. So there is still one thing that could throw a kink into the March primaries. I’ll keep an eye on that.

They’re the Space Cowboys

by Charles Kuffner.

7 comments

Bet you weren’t ready for that.

You can call them the Space Cowboys.

That’s the name the Astros have picked in their rebranding of the Sugar Land Skeeters, the team’s Class AAA affiliate.

The official announcement will come on Jan. 29 at Constellation Field (no rebranding needed) but a person with knowledge of the change confirmed the new name.

The Skeeters started as an independent team in the Atlantic League in 2012 and drew its own fan base attracted to the lower prices and family atmosphere of the new stadium in Sugar Land along with the occasional celebrity sightings on the mound like Tracy McGrady or Roger Clemens.

The Skeeters went big time last year when the Astros bought the franchise and turned it into their Class AAA affiliate.

Go ahead, make your “pompatus of love” joke, get it out of your system. The Skeeters, whose name (the team has insisted) does not refer to mosquitos, have been called that since 2010. I see from that last link I had favored “Imperials” as their name, which is fine and all but seems now to lack a certain grandeur. As the story notes, there will be an event at Constellation Field to make official the re-branding. It’s a nice facility, if you feel comfortable being in a crowd right now, and I’m sure that will be fun. I don’t know if that logo I found on Twitter is for real or not – I hope it is – but I presume you’ll be able to see for yourself on the 29th. Good luck with the launch, y’all. CultureMap has more.