Category: republican

Precinct Resolutions

Precinct Conventions were held Saturday March 7. Anyone who voted in the Republican Primary was eligible to attend. Our precinct, 1008, passed 8 resolutions that will now move on to the Bastrop County GOP Convention on March 28.

Resolution #1 – Unanimously Approved
TITLE: Remove Texas Secretary of State Jane Nelson
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Bastrop County Republican Party demands the Governor remove Jane Nelson from her position as Texas Secretary of State.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Governor Abbott appoint a Texas Secretary of State who will support the closure of Republican Primary elections as demanded by the Republican Party of Texas.

Resolution #2 – Approved 4 Ayes, 2 Nays
TITLE: No Social Media Under Age 16
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican Party of the State of Texas believes the Texas Legislature and Governor should pass legislation and/or take all available steps to prohibit children under the age of 16 from accessing social media sites like YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Threads, X, Bigo Live, and Roblox following the lead of Australia.

Resolution #3 – Unanimously Approved
TITLE: Opposing Casino Gambling in Texas Due to Documented Ties to the Chinese Government
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican Party of Texas opposes the legalization, authorization, or expansion of casino gambling in the State of Texas; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Party specifically rejects any casino-related legislation or constitutional amendment backed by corporations with documented contractual, regulatory, or strategic ties to the government of the People’s Republic of China; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Party urges all Republican elected officials to defend Texas from foreign-influenced gambling interests and to prioritize the sovereignty, security, and economic integrity of the State of Texas.

Resolution #4 – Unanimously Approved
TITLE: State Electoral College
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Texas State Legislature shall cause to be enacted a State Constitutional Amendment creating an electoral college consisting of electors selected by the popular votes cast within each individual state senatorial district, who shall then elect all statewide office holders, provided that electors reside within the senatorial district to which they are elected, and that no Texas State Senator, Texas House Representative, or statewide elected official, be elected an elector.

Resolution #5 – Unanimously Approved (Splits Plank into 2 planks)
TITLE: Electing Commissioners
BE IT RESOLVED, that the people of Texas should elect their own Secretary of State and Texas Education Agency (TEA) Commissioner.

Resolution #6 – Unanimously Approved (Modifies Plank 181)
TITLE: Prohibition of acts restricting freedom of others
BE IT RESOLVED, Protect the 1st Amendment rights of any citizen to practice their religion and exercise their right to free speech in the public square but without impeding the rights of others including freedom of movement in public places and without the commission of acts of intimidation and disorder likely to produce danger to the peace of the neighborhood.

Resolution #7 – Unanimously Approved
TITLE: Legal Disputes Based on American Law Only
BE IT RESOLVED, that all legal disputes in Texas must be decided based on American law rooted the fundamental principles of American due process; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that no orders other than those issued by official Texas government courts carry authority in the State of Texas; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that all legal issues in the State of Texas must only be adjudicated in accordance with the Constitution of the United States, the Constitution of the State of Texas, and the laws duly adopted in these United States and the State of Texas.

Resolution #8 – Unanimously Approved
TITLE: Defining Islamism as a Political Entity
BE IT RESOLVED, that Islamism is a political ideology and not a religion, subjecting its organizations to all laws and obligations of political parties in Texas; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Constitutional and legal protections applicable to religions do not apply to Islamism and its organizations, but rather only to those who practice the religion of Islam; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that those entities determined by the State of Texas to be foreign terrorist organizations and transnational criminal organizations may not benefit from any freedom of religion provisions of the Constitution of these United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas.

These may not be specifically in the order in which they were adopted. Some included a fair amount of discussion prior to adoption. All but one were adopted unanimously.

Bought?

Did you see when Stan said on Facebook that he didn’t have any idea some of these mailers were coming from PACs until they arrived in his mailbox? Now that the 8-day prior to the election reports are out, we have a broader view of where the money is sourced.

Stan’s consulting company (Catalyst Advisors Group LLC) is also the consulting company for Protect and Serve Texas PAC. This PAC received $15,000 from Texans for Lawsuit Reform. They’ve sent several mailers for Stan.

Then there’s the Alliance of Texans for Conservative Leadership PAC. In our last post, we told you their only report to Texas Ethics showed they had no money. Zero.

Their 8-day report is very revealing. This PAC received $1.6 MILLION on February 5 this year. Yes, that’s right. Just 21 days ago, Texans for Lawsuit Reform put $1.6 MILLION into Alliance of Texans for Conservative Leadership PAC. They are the sole donor to this PAC. They then spent $692,762.63 on mailers. They failed to list the amount spent on each candidate, but Stan was a recipient, not once, but three times.

Candidates also have to file an 8-Day prior (to the election) report. We’ve already discussed the donations to Stan Gerdes from PACs in Sneaky but Legal Part 1 and Part 2.

The 8-day prior report covers just 30 days: Jan 23, 2026 – Feb 21, 2026.

Gerdes took in a whopping $549,682.65 in donations in that one month, overwhelmingly from Political Action Committees, not from district constituents.

Has someone been working the phones to raise money from Texas PACs and across the country to save his seat? Is Gerdes getting very nervous about the challenge from Tom Glass? This is a very long list of PAC donors directly to Gerdes in just 30 days.

  • Texans for Lawsuit Reform PAC $237,448 (does not include their donations to PACs that sent mailers for Gerdes);
  • Weekley, Richard (co-founder Texans for Lawsuit Reform) $2,500;
  • Texas Conservative Majority PAC $67,750;
  • Dustin Burrows Campaign $50,000;
  • Protect and Serve Texas PAC $35,150.89;
  • Texas REALTORS PAC (TREPAC) $28,842.34;
  • Associated Republicans of Texas Campaign Fund $19,259.83;
  • Troutman Pepper Locke LLP $5,473.25;
  • Texas House Republican Caucus PAC $5,000;
  • TX Diamondback Energy, Inc. PAC $4,000;
  • Texas Building Branch Asso General Contractors PAC $2,500;
  • Koch Industries, Inc. PAC (KOCHPAC) $2,500;
  • Rural Friends of Texas Electric Cooperatives $2,500;
  • Pape-Dawson Engineers PAC $2,500;
  • Texans for Reasonable Solutions PAC $2,000;
  • Texas Dairymen PAC $2,000;
  • Delisi Communications PAC $2,000;
  • Texas Manufactured Housing Assn. Committee For Responsible $2,000;
  • Texas Food & Fuel Assn. PAC $1,500;
  • Texas Society Of Anesthesiologists PAC $1,500;
  • AT&T Texas PAC $1,000;
  • Beer Alliance of Texas PAC $1,000;
  • Charter Schools Now PAC $1,000;
  • Congress Ventures LLC $1,000;
  • ConocoPhillips SPIRIT PAC $1,000;
  • Consulting Engineers PAC $1,000;
  • The American Electric Power – Texas – Committee for Responsible $1,000;
  • EYE PAC of the Texas Ophthalmological Assn $1,000;
  • Houston Police Officers Union PAC $1,000;
  • K & L Gates LLP Committee for Good Government $1,000;
  • Germania Farm Mutual PAC $1,000;
  • Gulf States Toyota Inc. State PAC $1,000;
  • H B Strategies (Jefferson City MO) $1,000;
  • Mike Toomey & Associates $1,000;
  • Moak Casey PAC $1,000;
  • NRG Energy Inc. PAC $1,000;
  • Stan Schlueter Consulting $1,000;
  • Texas Farm Bureau AGFUND $1,000;
  • Texas Optometric PAC $1,000;
  • Texas Pipeline Assn PAC $1,000;
  • Tenaris Global Services (USA) Corp. PAC $1,000;
  • Texas Nurse Practitioners PAC $1,000;
  • PNM Responsible Citizens Group (Albuquerque NM) $750;
  • Greenberg Traurig, P. A. PAC (Albany NY) $750;
  • Texas Chemistry Council/Assn. Of Chemistry Alliance FREEPAC $500;
  • Texas State Assn. Of Fire Fighters Action Committee $500;
  • ExxonMobil Corp PAC $500;
  • Hochheim Prairie PAC $500;
  • Longbow Consulting Partners LLC $500;
  • ONEOK Inc Employee PAC (Tulsa OK) $500;
  • P. John Kuhl Jr., PC $500;
  • Sampson Public Affairs, LLC $500;
  • Texas Dental Association PAC $500;
  • Schwartz, Page & Harding, L.L.P. $500;
  • Liriano Motors LLC $250;
  • Texas Conservative Coalition PAC $40;

After the 8-day prior report, daily reports over a certain amount of contribution and expenditure are required. Gerdes reported this daily contribution: AFSCME Texas Correctional Officers PAC $5,000.

Ask yourself when you vote: who will Stan represent in Austin: you or these PACs? If your issue conflicts with their priorities, with whom will he vote? The answer is clear if he wants to stay in elected office (or move higher up the ladder which requires more and more money).

Think about it before you cast your vote.

In Memory of Charlie Kirk

If nationwide reporting happens, it’s good to have it be positive reporting. That’s not what happened to Bastrop County TX. After the Bastrop County Commissioners’ caved in the face of opposition on the Charlie Kirk Memorial Corridor resolution, articles appeared in “The Hill“, “The Western Journal” and it was a subject on the Charlie Kirk Show.

Something similar happened when I was mayor of Denville NJ. My office got a call from a gentleman in Denneville France. Denneville is in Normandie, a small farming town with a beautiful beach area. Interestingly enough, the Ile of Jersey is just off the coast. Pierre Oheix had hoped we could establish a connection between our small towns. Both of us wondered if there was an historical connection.

I was a French major in college so was pretty excited about this possibility. I had the opportunity to travel to Denneville while mayor. An American flag was flown at the entrance to town when I arrived. There was a ceremony in town hall, a dinner with their state officials. What memories. Upon my return, though, the town council refused any connection. Why? Politics pure and simple. The press was quite negative toward the Council’s decision. Leadership in another town even wrote a letter to our paper stating that if Denville didn’t want to be sister cities, they gladly would do so.

Political foolishness. Just like the Bastrop County Commissioners back-peddling from an opportunity to honor a man whose life was savagely taken through political violence.

Postings on social media made it obvious people had not read the resolution and didn’t understand it. For days I had been posting on various forums that this was not a renaming of the highway but rather a request to the legislature for the designation of a memorial corridor.  Additionally, people kept claiming Charlie had no connection to the County.

That’s flat out wrong.  In 2019, I personally invited Charlie to speak in Bastrop County.  I was president of the Lost Pines Republican Women and we contracted for 8/29/2020.  Due to Covid, that event had to be cancelled and we rescheduled for May 1, 2021. 

Charlie Kirk at the Convention CenterWe were so lucky to host Charlie in Bastrop County.  Having had the privilege of meeting him and talking with him, I’m very disappointed and saddened at how fast our all-Republican Commissioner’s Court caved on this issue.  Elected officials need to have solid core beliefs that guide them.  They cannot back down from that which is right just because some people don’t agree with them or for purely political reasons. Imagine if Charlie had lived his life that way…. TPUSA wouldn’t exist. 

Charlie was a very religious man who gave everyone a chance to express their opinions, to ask questions, to discuss. He was not argumentative. What came through was his strong core values, deep faith and love of family. I was privileged to have met him and hope the day comes when our County Commissioners change their minds.

Read Between the Lines

Original post published Feb 13, 2024. Reprinted because it’s applicable for the 2026 election cycle.

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 CrowleyWhy 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

Your Vote is Yours, not Theirs

Two years ago, I wrote a column on candidates citing their endorsements.

This year, let’s discuss the entities who make endorsements. What’s the value of those? Well, it depends.

Did the organization interview all candidates for an office?

If not, did the organization indicate that they did not?

Did the organization send a questionnaire to all candidates?

If not, did the organization state that they did not?

Did the organization provide an explanation for their choices?


We’re going to use the email sent out from Bastrop County Conservatives with their list of endorsements as an example. The BCC website states:

Process

A BCC committee sources, identifies and meets with potential candidates for office and meets with declared candidates in order to consider them for support and endorsement by BCC. Our Leadership Team then votes to determine which candidates BCC will endorse.

Did the organization interview all “declared candidates” for an office?
BCC did not interview all “declared candidates”. If the organization didn’t interview all candidates for an office, they can’t possibly know which candidate most closely aligns with their values.

If they did not interview all “declared candidates”, did they indicate that they did not?
BCC did not indicate that they failed to interview all “declared candidates”. A simple statement under the endorsement like “We did not (or ‘We were unable to’) interview candidate A or candidate B” helps lend credibility to the endorsement.

Candidates for Texas Attorney General, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, Bastrop County Judge, Bastrop County Precinct Chair 1004 (and possibly other races) were not interviewed or even contacted.

The list below doesn’t say that so how would voters know?

Did the organization send a questionnaire to all candidates?
BCC did not send a questionnaire. Another PAC invites all candidates for an interview. If a candidate doesn’t respond, oh well. The candidate had a chance and didn’t take it. If the candidate is non-responsive, they can’t expect an endorsement. That’s fair. Just ignoring candidates for an office, then endorsing some alleged favorite, is of no value to voters.

If they did not send a questionnaire to all “declared candidates”, did they state that they did not?
There is no statement indicating whether all candidates were interviewed or sent a questionnaire. The “process” BCC describes on their website leads the voter to believe that all “declared candidates” were interviewed. But they were not.

Did the organization provide an explanation for their choices?
BCC provides no explanation of how it decided who to endorse. There is not one sentence that explains what about a particular candidate caused them to endorse that candidate.

What good, then, are these endorsements?
None. Personally, I think voters need to know why a candidate was chosen for endorsement, what makes that person more fit for the job than any of the other candidates.

BCC (and any other PAC that provides a list without explanation) thinks GOP voters are lemmings and should just vote for whomever BCC endorses.

The conclusion of my April 22, 2024 blog post bears repeating:

Never be a lemming. Just because this group or that says “vote for our list of candidates” or worse yet, “take our list to the polls with you”, that’s not what you should do in a primary, runoff, or uniform (May non-partisan) election.

Expect information. Better yet, demand information or refuse to be a lemming. Your vote is yours, not theirs.

Aaron Reitz is the Right Man for AG

I’m not fond of endorsements from famous or connected people. I’ve written about that before. But I do support endorsements from grassroots voters who do their homework and research candidates. In that same blog post, I said “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.“

Y’all know I do my homework. I teach a “Data & Research” class. I authored a PPT on how to research candidates.

I’m strongly endorsing Aaron Reitz for Attorney General. Not only is he Ken Paxton’s choice for the next AG, but he has the tenacity, core values, and strength of character to protect Texas and to manage over 4,000 employees.

Three of the four candidates running for TX Attorney General are legislators. I’ve not written about it in detail, but I’ve been vocal about most legislators not making good executives. The skill set is very different.

To net it out: legislators have to convince others to join them in supporting a bill; they have to compromise; they count votes. Executives have to be able to make decisions after gathering facts. They have to think strategically… play chess… and be many moves ahead of their opponents.

That’s the thinking needed for an effective Attorney General. There is only one candidate in this race that has that capability: Aaron Reitz.

Mayes Middleton

Mayes, calling himself MAGA Mayes, has told you that because he helped push a MAGA agenda through the legislature, he should be AG. No, that just shows he shares Trump’s opinions. It shows he can count votes. It doesn’t show he can execute when the going gets tough.

Joan Huffman

Joan cites her prosecutorial and judicial experience. That experience would serve her well working in the AGs office, but not as AG.

Chip Roy

My opinion of Chip Roy is that he’s a political opportunist. He says what he thinks voters want to hear. But a good look at his record shows otherwise. Roy supported Trump’s impeachment. He defended Liz Cheney.

And, in December 2024, Trump posted on Truth Social:

In case you think that was a one-off, just a year earlier, Trump had posted:

My guess is that’s why Roy pivoted and decided to run for AG. He has name recognition and he wouldn’t have Trump after him. So beware the political person who pivots and changes positions with the wind, saying anything he thinks the voters want to hear. That’s the definition of political opportunist. That’s Chip Roy.

In case you don’t know Aaron or haven’t heard him speak, watch this video:

I hope you will join me (and Ken Paxton) in voting for Aaron Reitz for TX Attorney General.

IMPORTANT CALENDAR ISSUE

BCC Event Summary without LPRW EventsIf you’re only on the BCC email list, you may have noticed that you don’t ever see Lost Pines Republican Women events on its “Events Around the County” summary. But you always see Lee County events. Odd. Exclude Bastrop County Republican events but include Lee County events.

When President of LPRW, I personally reached out multiple times to the BCC president about this but, whatever his reason, LPRW events are never included.

LPRW runs some fantastic and educational events. If you only see the BCC email, you will miss these events:

UPCOMING: FREE to the public: GOP Primary Candidate Forum. This is on Thursday, January 29 at the Bastrop Convention Center. Brandon Waltens from Texas Scorecard (Texas Minute daily email) is our emcee.

2026 Candidate Forum information postcard

UPCOMING: Monthly Meeting. Thursday, Jan 15 at 6PM.

UPCOMING: Data & Research Committee. On Saturday, Jan 17 from 10AM to noon, I will be teaching a class on how to research candidates: social media, funding, campaign donations and expenses. Taught at the LPRW Club House, membership is not a requirement to attend. Bring a laptop.

UPCOMING: Super Bowl Watch Party. Sunday, February 8.
Kickoff is at 5:30PM Central Time. We’ll gather 5:00 for pre-game festivities and food.

I wrote about the damage of divisiveness a year ago. I wrote about working together two years ago. Nothing’s changed. And pundit after pundit points out how Republicans damage themselves with circular firing squads.

It doesn’t have to be this way, but until that other organization decides to play nice in the sandbox, join the LPRW email or text list to get LPRW info sent directly to you. Or check the LPRW calendar periodically for upcoming events.