Tag: republican

Vote Term Limits

Do you support Congressional term limits? Do you practice what you preach?

John Cornyn is running for US Senate for his fifth six-year term, thirty years. He is 74 years old and will be 80+ at the end of a fifth term. If you truly believe in Congressional term limits, you cannot vote for John Cornyn.

political funnelPolitics is like an upside down funnel: there are lots of positions at the bottom but as you climb higher, there are fewer and fewer. For those who climb the political “ladder” thinking one position prepares you for another, politicians who don’t step aside block out other qualified individuals. With the amount of money raised by incumbents and the cost to campaign, one has to be a multi-millionaire (or have very wealthy friends) to slide into a higher position. Was our Republic created so only the wealthy can serve in elected office? I think not.

Not voting your belief in Congressional term limits does two things: it forces out some very talented people with new, fresh ideas and it creates an environment where only the wealthy, or those with massive war chests, can serve in office.

Term limits, and voting accordingly if you believe in them, keeps our Congress a citizen congress, one where people with other career experiences come to serve, using their experience to make America great again, and then head back to real life.

Americans Overwhelming Support Term Limits

According to TermLimits.com, in 2025 over 83% of Americans favored term limits for members of Congress. For Republicans or Republican-leaning respondents, that percentage was 85%. Even for Democrats, the percentage was huge: 79%.

clocksIn 2025, US Senator Dave McCormick (R-PA) introduced a joint resolution limiting US Senators to two six-year terms and limiting US House members to six two-year terms: a maximum of 12 years in both offices. The President is term limited. Why not Congress?

Did you know?

More than one-third of Senators in the 118th Congress were 70 or older. The 119th Congress is the third oldest in history. The average Senator is nearly 64 years old, which is 11 years older than the average Senator in 1981. Similarly, the House Members are nearly nine years older on average than they were in 1981. As of this year, Members of the House and Senate have an average of 8.6 and 11.2 years of prior service in their respective chambers. This represents a steady increase from the early 20th century when that number fell below six years for both the House and Senate.

~ McCormick Press Release, April 10, 2025

Early voting for the runoffs starts May 18. Think about this when you go to vote. Should any member of Congress serve 30 years? If you agree with me that’s far too long in one position, then it’s time to retire John Cornyn and elect Ken Paxton.

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.

Because you asked

I’ve been asked quite a few times who I recommend on the ballot. I’ve written a lengthy endorsement for the Attorney General’s race. Since tomorrow is election day, I’m going to share a few other recommendations.

US SENATE
Ken Paxton. Paxton has been a bulldog for Texans and Texas Values in his role as Attorney General. His opponents have not. Texas desperately needs a strong voice representing conservative Texans in the US Senate.

US HOUSE – CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 27
Michael Cloud. Michael Cloud is a strong Texas conservative and votes accordingly. He has earned positions on the Appropriations Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He deserves to be returned to Congress.

GOVERNOR
“Doc” Pete Chambers. Governor Abbott has, overall, done a good job for Texas. However, his endorsement of legislators based on one vote (School Choice) was inappropriate. I loved his bussing of illegals throughout the country as it brought that issue front and center for places that weren’t feeling our pain. I didn’t like his Covid decisions. Keeping big box stores open and forcing small businesses to close was unacceptable. Forcing bars to close because more than 50% of their revenue was alcohol while allowing restaurants to open and serve lacked consistency. Too many appointments and decisions seem to be made due to campaign financial support and I oppose that. Doc has said he will not appoint people to positions if they donate large amounts of money to his campaign. Refreshing.

LT GOVERNOR
Perla Hopkins. When Dan Patrick pushed for half a billion dollars for the movie industry every 2 years, he lost my vote. Texas Scorecard explained “The Texas Moving Image Industry Incentive Fund would receive $500 million every two years over the next decade, amounting to $2.5 billion by the 2034-2035 biennium.” If I wanted to support that industry, I’d go to the movies. I’m frankly sick of dolling out tax money to the favorite industry of the day…. especially one that has no impact on my quality of life.

ATTORNEY GENERAL
Aaron Reitz. 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. Read my entire endorsement.

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, PLACE 3
Lesli Fitzpatrick. Lesli is the most qualified candidate. She has a broad range of legal experience including significant criminal courtroom experience. She had her own legal practice, has worked for the State of Texas in a position that provided extensive knowledge of the Texas prison system. This race is for a seat on the highest criminal court in Texas, the one that reviews every death penalty case. Lesli is a solid conservative Republican. With her criminal courtroom experience, Lesli is the best choice.

TEXAS HOUSE DISTRICT 17
Tom Glass. If you’ve been to your mailbox lately, you’ll understand this endorsement. More than 125 Political Action Committees have donated to Tom’s opponent. Texans for Lawsuit Reform has donated well over a quarter of a million dollars to Tom’s opponent. If you want a legislator that answers to the big money donors, vote for the other guy. But if you want a legislator who fights for conservative Texans in his district, vote for Tom Glass.

BASTROP COUNTY JUDGE
Don Loucks. I was shocked when, at a candidate forum, our current County Judge had to ask the emcee what an NGO is. What?? He’s reviewing, voting for, and presiding over a multi-million dollar budget that includes tax dollar payments to NGOs and he doesn’t know what one is. He struggles to run a meeting as seen by those who were at the last County Commissioner’s meeting: taking testimony after an item had already been tabled. That violates Robert’s Rules.

Don’s opponent has shown that he does not have the skill set to make decisions for a county whose population is exploding. The County Judge literally has the lives of over 100,000 Bastrop County residents in his hands. We need a leader trained in emergency management, who understands budgets and taxes, who is conversant with the public safety needs of a growing Texas county. We need a strong, conservative leader and that’s Don Loucks.

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.

Financials~Local Races

DEMOCRATS WITH OPPONENTS

Dock Jackson: County Judge: Hasn’t filed one report for this election cycle: no Jan.15; no 30-day prior; no 8-day prior. Hasn’t even filed a treasurer appointment for this race.

Tamara McIntyre: JP1: Hasn’t filed one report: no Jan.15; no 30-day prior; no 8-day prior. Hasn’t even filed a treasurer appointment.

Ruth Todd: JP2: Did not file 30-day prior or 8-day prior. Did file a report that she had exceeded the modified reporting limit.

Rachel Turman-Smith: JP4: Hasn’t filed one report: no Jan.15; no 30-day prior; no 8-day prior. Hasn’t even filed a treasurer appointment.

REPUBLICANS WITH OPPONENTS

Don Loucks: County Judge: All required reports filed.

Gregory Klaus: County Judge: All required reports filed.

Holly Cox: District Clerk: All required reports filed.

Ward Northcutt: District Clerk: No 30-day prior or 8-day prior report filed. All other required reports filed.

Sarah Loucks: District Clerk: No 8-day prior report filed. All other required reports filed.

Tammy Batot: District Clerk: All required reports filed.

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.