carol@stormzero.com – Carol A. Spencer

Oh, the Irony

Cell phone photo Yesterday, the City of Bastrop Ethics Commission voted unanimously to issue a letter of reprimand against Mayor Lyle Nelson for allegedly “interfering” with an investigation by refusing to turn over his private, personal device data.

Oh, the irony.

This happened at the same time that members of Congress scuttled FISA 702 over the issue of warrantless searches of Americans’ digital data. Our Congressman, Michael Cloud (CD-27), voted against the current iteration of FISA 702, stating “The Constitution is not a set of recommendations or suggestions,” said Rep. Cloud. “It is the limit on our government. Our first job in Congress should be to protect the peoples’ liberties from government intrusion, and allowing for warrantless spying on American citizens is a grave violation of those liberties. This is a red line for me and should not be a partisan issue. If you need to surveil someone, get a warrant.“

Nelson’s lawyer stated “Even as a public official, people have their right to privacy and the minutiae of their private lives are not fair game just because a City Council seeks to pry into their lives.”

No warrant was issued for Nelson’s private device data. While the original allegation was misappropriation of VisitBastrop funds, which are predominantly taxpayer funds, no action has been taken against the former executive director of that organization, the person with the authority to make financial decisions. (In fact, effective January 1, 2024, she officially joined the board of the national DI organization.) Nelson was not a VisitBastrop board member, City Council member or mayor at the time of the allegations.

Based on the Ethics Commission decision, who in their right mind would want to serve on any board or commission in the City? Who would put their name forward knowing that, at any time, the City Council can demand their personal data be provided to an investigator without a warrant; and a refusal to provide that data, demanded without a warrant, would result in a public reprimand or possibly loss of office?

I’ve served on many boards and commissions, both by appointment and by running for office. Luckily, that was prior to the personal proliferation of cell phones. This is why today many elected officials use encryption apps like Signal. Want the password to my Signal account? Get a warrant. Want my personal data? Get a warrant.

The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

While a majority of the US Congress stood for the Fourth Amendment yesterday, these City of Bastrop appointees and elected officials chose to ignore it. Oh, the irony.

Read Between the Lines

People collect things. I collect campaign literature. I have campaign literature going back probably 30 years. Some is good; some is awful; some is clever; some really, really boring. Some has colors that are just atrocious. Some was done with nary a thought for the low-vision user. Some is just evidence the candidate doesn’t know what they’re doing, or worse, why they’re running.

Campaign literature is sales literature. The candidate is selling you on why they’d be the best in the position. Here are my four rules when it’s campaign time: Don’t be fooled or swayed by photographs in the mailers; Know what the candidate can and cannot do in office; Read carefully; Find and research the legally required “paid for by”.

Rule #1: Don’t be fooled or swayed by photographs in the mailers.

Some candidates use photos of themselves with their families or children. Why? To tug at your heart strings… “Oh isn’t that cute!” Cute isn’t what you need from an elected official. Candidates need conviction and back-bone. They need to be strong, not sway the way the wind blows. They don’t need to be cute.

Carol Spencer with Monica Crowley Why do some of them use photos with famous elected officials? To make you think that person supports their candidacy. But do they? This is Monica Crowley and me a few years ago at a GOP event. Having a photo with her didn’t mean she endorsed my candidacy. The same is true of photos with Kellyanne Conway, Rudy Guiliani, Sarah Palin, Ken Paxton, Sid Miller, Governor Abbott and so many others with whom I’ve been photographed over the years. Photos with famous politicos, unless accompanied by the words “Endorsed by [name of person in photo]”, should be interpreted as manipulative, meant to make the candidate look important or to make the reader think that person has endorsed the candidate.

A list of endorsements by others, but not the person in the photo, when used together is pure deception. Back to top

Rule #2: Know what the candidate can and cannot do in office.

Someone running for a legislative position cannot do anything without a majority vote of the body in which they serve (city council, TX House, TX Senate, US House, US Senate). They cannot fix the border or cut government spending. And usually, the executive (mayor, governor, president) has to sign any passed legislation to make it law.

Someone running for an executive position can only do that which the charter or constitution allows. And, a great deal of what is allowed requires a vote of the legislative body: budgets, capital spending for example.

This is called “checks and balances”.

When an incumbent running for re-election says they accomplished this or that, no they didn’t. They cast one vote for legislation to make that happen. Perhaps they swayed colleagues to do the same. But in the end, without a majority vote and a supportive executive, nothing they support will ever come to pass.

And, remember what position they’re running for… a mayor cannot close the border, fund medicare or fix social security issues. A congressman can’t get local roads paved. Back to top

Rule #3: Read carefully

Beware the use of “conservative”. Does a true conservative support Democrat chairs in the legislature? Does a true conservative celebrate being endorsed by staunch Democrats? Does a conservative group endorse candidates who previously voted Democrat?

There’s a big difference between “voted to close the border” and “closed the border” but you’ll see both on campaign literature.

“Most experienced” is something else you’ll often see. If you don’t know what the requirements of the position include, how will you evaluate “most experienced”? If the person has always been a chief executive, but is running for a legislative position, that person probably does not have the requisite experience. A chief executive calls the shots. A legislator must count votes for bill passage and must sway a majority to his/her line of thinking. These are very different skill sets. Back to top

Rule #4: Find and research the legally required “paid for by”

All campaign advertisements must include who paid for them. This is critical to know. Did the candidate (well, actually, the candidate’s donors) pay for the mailer? Did some PAC (political action committee) pay for it?

If a PAC paid for it, ask yourself what that PAC expects to get for the expenditure of funds. Mailers are very expensive: design, printing, mailing costs. A county-wide GOP mailer can easily cost $5,000.

Do an online search for the PAC itself and see what it’s about. Go to OpenSecrets.org for Federal PACs and see who else got money from that PAC. Go to Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) for State PACs.

This is also true of the various emails requesting money. Where’s it going? Watch carefully. Sometimes something will appear to be for a candidate, but the money you donate is going elsewhere. Be careful! Back to top

The Value (or not) of Endorsements

Candidates love to share their endorsements. Why? They believe you’ll find a name among that list that you admire, and thus will vote for that candidate.

But should you? My husband, who has also been involved in the political world for many, many years, says “Endorsements are only good on the back of a check.” I agree.

What difference does it make if a beloved former (or current) governor or legislator, or well-known local, endorses a current candidate? That “former (or current)” or “well-known” won’t be serving in office. They don’t vote. The candidate, once an officerholder, does.

Will that former or current elected official, or well-known local, have significant influence over the actions and votes of the candidate? Will that endorser’s influence exceed that of the voters? Yes, it will. And, if campaign contributions flow from that endorser, my “yes” is iron-clad.

Endorsements List Don’t be awed by endorsements. Rather, ask yourself, “If that endorser opposed a measure I support, who’s opinion would the candidate (now officeholder) weigh more heavily?” When it comes to a vote and the chips are down, if donations are involved, the endorser wins, the voters lose. It’s rarely the other way around.

The TX House vote to impeach Ken Paxton is but one example. All but 5 Republicans who took money from Dade Phelan voted to impeach: 49 of them. Did that accurately reflect the wishes of their constituents? Not likely.

Another example: Let’s say managing excessive growth is your highest priority (as it is for many in Bastrop County). Along comes a candidate’s literature stating that they are endorsed by major residential and commercial developers or a law firm that makes a good deal of its money from representing developers or a real estate PAC or an entity with which they have a business relationship.

Once in office, will that candidate vote with the wishes of his/her constituents or the endorser? What if that endorser helped fund the campaign? You know the answer.

The only caveat in this is if you research the endorser’s background or votes during his/her term of office and find you’re majorly in agreement with the endorser’s stands on current issues. But you must do that research specifically regarding current issues. I repeat: current issues. A good example of this is a Trump endorsement.

It means nothing if you agreed with that endorser’s stand on the war in Iraq, but disagree with his/her current stand on school choice, casino gambling, water, immigration or any other issue facing the county or state.

And remember, current elected officials who endorse often have their own agendas: which candidate can or will help me the most when I run for re-election or which candidate is likely to win, making me look like a winner?

The only endorsement worth anything is that of the voters, your endorsement. You have the power. Don’t be swayed by a list of allegedly important names.

Know Before You Go

There’s an election coming up on March5. Early voting starts February 20. How will you choose which candidates align with your beliefs?

Find your sample ballot.

You can do that on BastropVotes.org. Enter your last, first names and your birthdate. You’ll get this screen:

If you were to choose the Republican ballot, and IF you live in Precinct 1, you’d get this ballot. If you live in a different precinct or choose a Democrat ballot, your ballot will have different choices. Depending on your printer, choose “print to fit”, black & white printing, and print single sided (turn off duplex).

Sample Ballot 2024 Primary Page 2 — Sample Ballot PG 1

Sample Ballot 2024 Primary Page 1 — Sample Ballot PG 1

Go through the ballot and check off or circle those races where you already know who you’ll be voting for.

Did you know you can take the sample ballot into the polls with you? You can. Just don’t leave it behind after you vote.

I typically do not pay attention to a candidate’s materials. Many candidates hire political consultants who design their websites and mailings. They sometimes do polling to see what issues resonate with voters. Then they “wordsmith” every line and every sentence. It’s important to “watch what they do, not what they say”.

Follow the money.

County & Local Candidates

Case full of money The first thing I want to know about a candidate is who has donated to them.

County and local candidates file their finance reports with the County Elections Administrator. You can find them here: https://www.bastropvotes.org/elected-officials/campaign-finance-reports/ Candidates must report all donors over $110 from any one individual in the reporting period. You’ll get a pretty good idea of the source of their campaign funding.

Sometimes, though, candidates fail to file these reports. That’s a violation of law, totally refutes any comments they make about transparency (in my opinion).

The Texas Ethics Commission sets the required dates for finance reports: quarterly were due January 16, the 30-day prior were due February 5, and the 8-day prior are due February 26. ALL candidates must meet these filing deadlines.

State Candidates

State candidates file with the Texas Ethics Commission. Reports are public. Finding and viewing reports is a bit daunting at first, but doesn’t take long to get the hang of it. You use the simple search to find the candidate’s “filer id”. Once you have that, you can do an advanced search for all contributions for that “filer id” or candidate. You can download them as a spreadsheet and from there sort by donor. That will give you a very clear picture of whether a candidate is getting his/her money from out of state, from PACs, which PACs, or from individual donors.

Federal Candidates

Federal candidates are required to follow the rules set by the Federal Election Commission. They are different than state rules and have different filing deadlines. You can see a federal candidate’s donors by visiting the FEC Campaign Finance Data page online.

Generally…

Try OpenSecrets.org. This independent non-profit website will show you donations to state and federal candidates, or you can search by donor. The advanced search allows a more detailed “deep dive” into the data. OpenSecrets has launched a new lobbying data section. If you want to know who is influencing the elected officials that represent you, and those in leadership positions, spend some time looking around this website.

Money is important in politics. Races are expensive. But how much influence will large donors have over a candidate if elected? Once you know who the PACs are, do some research on the PAC. Who runs it? What are their goals? What other candidates receive money from them?

It takes some time, but isn’t your community, your state, your country worth it?

Conservative? Maybe not.

Online Research Often Exposes The Truth.

MAGA matters and those running for office know it. That’s why candidates, mostly Republican but frankly of both parties, claim to be “conservative”.

Football player tossing a football labeled conservative But, voter beware. Just because they say they’re conservative, they aren’t. They easily toss around the word “conservative” knowing that low-information voters are swayed by it. So, become a high-information voter using online resources!

They hope you don’t do your homework. I hope you do. There are many places to get information about a candidate. Campaign literature and websites are not places to go except to learn what the candidate wants you to know. To get to the truth, you must do some research.

Watch what they do, not what they say. I’ve said this for a long time about candidates, something I’ve learned through my 35+ years involved in political campaigns. People can say anything, but they can’t change the record.

Candidates can modify their social media posts, but few are likely to do that unless their comments become big news. Think of candidates and/or office holders that have been caught by salacious or offensive posts. You can learn a lot by a quick scan of someone’s posts. If they’re on X (formerly known as Twitter), that’s the best place to take a quick scan.

Candidates and office holders likely have to file financial reports with either the local election office or the Texas Ethics Commission or the Federal Elections Commission. Visit BastropVotes for local candidates. Visit the Texas Ethics Commission for district, judicial, or statewide candidates. Texas Ethics also has contributor information about Texas Political Action Committees (PACs). Visit the Federal Elections Commission for all federal candidates. A non-governmental source to “follow the money” is opensecrets.org where you can search by candidate, committee, or by donor. Open Secrets also has information about “dark money” groups, Super PACs and more.

If a candidate is an incumbent, their votes will tell you whether they’re actually a conservative or not. For Texas legislators, Texas Legislature Online is chock full of information. For a Texas legislative ranking, visit Mark Jones’ analysis in the Texas Tribune or The Freedom Index where individual legislators can be searched. For US Congressmen & Senators, visit FreedomWorks for an analysis of their voting records.

For example, my Texas legislator received one 50% ranking. How good is that? Prior to casting my vote, I’ll compare it to other rankings and any opponents. My US Representative has a session ranking of 100%, and a lifetime ranking of 94.4%. I doubt any opponent can beat that!

For those running the first time, keep an eye on their financial reports. “Follow the money” is always true in politics. Search online, especially LinkedIn for bios which will include volunteer and employment histories.

Always look at a candidate’s past voter history. See if it’s published on one of your local GOP club websites. If you can’t find it online, then ask your local GOP chair for the information.

If you can find the name of a candidate’s treasurer or campaign chair, search them as well. People typically take these roles for candidates who are like-minded and who the treasurer and chair want in office. You won’t find too many Republicans serving as campaign chairs or treasurers for liberal democrats, and vice versa.

Your vote is critical to the survival of our nation. If you, like me, consider yourself a conservative and vote accordingly, then do your job. Do your homework. Know before you go!

The Man Who Would be King

There are those who choose to work together cooperatively. Typically, those are people who have a goal and understand that others share that same goal. They understand that it takes many ideas and many hands to achieve the goal. They are inclusive, good listeners, and incorporate others’ ideas into a strategic plan. And, they understand that those working for the goal all have talents that are needed to achieve the goal, like individual puzzle pieces creating an entire picture.

Then there are those who want to control everything. To these types of people, having control is as important as (or more important than) accomplishing the goal. They want to pick the players and control the strategy. They will determine, on their own, the road to take to achieving the goal. They will exclude free thinkers, new ideas, and different ways of looking at the steps needed to accomplish the goal. To them, power is everything.

In the end, king-makers fail, just as in the Rudyard Kipling novella and 1975 movie of the same name “The Man Who Would be King”.

Political leaders often fall into these categories as well. There are those who are quite willing to work together with other political organizations to achieve the common goal: winning elections. They understand “strength in numbers” and that everyone has something to offer, some talent in which they excel.

Then there are those who refuse to work cooperatively, sometimes to the point of attempting to sabotage and snuff out related groups working for the same goal.

We call individuals who do this bullies. We identify them as insecure people who are threatened by others’ successes. We say they don’t “play well in the sandbox”. The same can be true of organizations. As Patrick Henry so well stated in 1799, “Let us trust God, and our better judgment to set us right hereafter. United we stand, divided we fall.”

The unfortunate result of this refusal to work together, especially in the political world, is disharmony, distrust, dissension. Participants become disillusioned and stop participating. When that happens, the goal becomes unachievable. In the political world, that translates to losses at the polls.

As in the Bible, Matthew 12:25, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand.”

As per the novella and movie, “The Man Who Would be King” won’t recognize that until it’s too late and the opposing political party has seized control.

The SREC Speaks

I’ve been watching this weekend’s SREC meeting (9/23/23). They just voted on a resolution calling for Speaker Dade Phelan to step down as Speaker and to resign. There were only 2 “nay” votes.

Sad to say, one was our SD-5 member, Bill Fairbrother. I submit that had he talked to the various county parties before casting that vote, he would have found nearly all in agreement that Phelan should step down.

WHEREAS, Speaker Dade Phelan voted for the impeachment of Attorney General Warren Kenneth Paxton and through his leadership team pressured other House members to vote for the impeachment as well, and continues to defend this action despite the weaknesses of the case as demonstrated in the Senate trial that resulted in General Paxton’s acquittal;

WHEREAS, Speaker Dade Phelan appointed nine (9) Democrats to chair important legislative committees, in direct defiance of the wishes of Republican voters and the Legislative Priorities of the Republican Party of Texas; and

WHEREAS, Speaker Dade Phelan ignored or actively undermined several GOP priorities during the regular session, failing to prioritize legislation to secure our borders and elections; and

WHEREAS, new leadership is needed in the House of Representatives for the upcoming special session, and potential subsequent special sessions, to ensure that conservative priorities are achieved and members are no longer pressured to act and vote contrary to the platform, principles, and priorities of the Party they represent and its voters; now

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Party of Texas calls on Speaker Dade Phelan to step down from his leadership role as Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives, and to allow a new Speaker to be elected after a caucus vote in accordance with the Republican Party of Texas Platform; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that should Speaker Dade Phelan fail to step down from the Speaker chair for this upcoming special session, the Republican representatives should vote to vacate the chair and allow for a new Speaker who has pledged to honor and support the priorities and principles of the Republican Party to be elected.