The Texas Speakers Race: A Tea Party Trap?

Setting The Precedent

As any remotely informed resident of Texas knows, the 82nd legislature convened for the first time this week. I spent the big day in Austin to support the various tea party groups present and to get a sense of where the conservative movement in Texas will be expending its energy this year.

The outcome of the Speakers race was weighing on the minds of many – and had been for some time, in Texas and beyond. An unusual amount of attention was paid to the matter, because this session marked the first instance of activist groups having the ability to get involved in the election of Speaker, as a judge ruled the ban on outside political activity connected to the race unconstitutional in 2008.

I ultimately agreed with many tea partiers and other conservative organizations that Rep. Paxton was the better choice. However, my concern at this juncture lies beyond the politics of what has already been determined. While I encouraged the civic activity surrounding the race, the more heated the rhetoric got, the greater my concern about the degree of some people’s focus on the issue grew.

When in Austin, one of the first things I did was stop in to chat with friends at a hospitality suite hosted by various tea party organizations throughout the state. Overwhelmingly, the theme was “Oust Straus”, and upon entering the room, activists were given a pro Ken Paxton t-shirt. Certainly, given the fact that the Speaker vote was that day, I found the focus poignant and sensible. I was, however, concerned with the notion that there’s a potential for tea partiers to become trapped by this issue if they stay focused on it in a longterm sense.

While chatting with activists in the suite, I heard many discussions about the need to hold any legislator who voted for Straus accountable. Empowered cries of, “we’ll just primary ’em all our next year!” filled the air. And can you really blame tea party activists, so central to this unprecedented shift of power in Texas, for recognizing, and attempting to assert the power they worked so hard to garner? I certainly don’t – and am the first to encourage it. But the reason I’m concerned is that I foresee Texas tea partiers falling into a major trap if they continue to expend political capital on the already settled matter of the Speakers race. Especially when it’s highly possible that Straus will govern more conservatively now, given the near super majority Republicans have this session.

The tea party focus up to this point has been merited, but I’m extraordinarily worried that some activists aren’t properly distinguishing between their State Representatives as individuals, and the system all legislators face upon being elected to the Texas House. Failure to make this distinction has the potential to render the tea parties in Texas politically impotent – which would be a serious shame given all the good they’ve done; and the future potential they have.

Wherein The Problem Lies

A friend of mine who’s a leader of a great Tea Party organization here in Texas told me a story about how members of his group spent a great deal of time convincing their State Representative, who had pledged his support to Straus, to finally come to one of their meetings and explain himself. Not surprisingly, he had been hesitant to do so, knowing the members were quite pro Paxton, many of them considering his support of Straus tantamount to completely ignoring the concerns of the tea party.

The Representative explained that his support of Straus was rooted in his continued dedication to a certain policy priority, and that it was incumbent upon him to support the Speaker in order to retain his committee membership. Politically speaking, the worst place a Representative with an ambitious legislative agenda can be is on the wrong side of a Speakers race. That’s simply the reality of the system legislators are faced with. Sadly, I was told that this discussion with the Representative devolved into a screaming match among some – as people who are justifiably angry are taking what in reality, is disgust with the system and imparting it upon individual Representatives.

I’m extremely concerned that Texas tea partiers, if they do fall into this trap of basing their 2011 agenda on the outcome of this race, are setting themselves up for a disappointing amount of failure and alienation. Has a potentially good relationship with a State Representative who likely shares many of the concerns held by the tea party now irreparably damaged?

Of course, part of what makes the Tea Party such a force to be reckoned with is the fact that it’s largely comprised of people who are new to activism. This impressively high level of citizen participation is an incredible step in the right direction for our Republic, and anyone who knows me is well aware of the fact that I’ve been dedicated to the movement since day one, before any of us could even imagine national impact it would have.

However, if tea partiers in Texas, who are doing a great job of focusing on state level issues in 2011, are ignorant to the system their Representatives are faced with, and think the threat of “WE’LL VOTE YOU OUT!” is greater than the Speaker’s “You won’t be granted any committee positions and your policy priorities will be put on the backburner”, guess what? They’re going to take their chances on disappointing the grassroots with one vote – a vote that A: will give their legislative agenda priority if they’re on the right side of the race, and B: provide them with potential fundraising for their reelection campaign.

The Next Steps

What would happen, then, if tea partiers did follow the route of focusing heavily on primarying Reps who voted for Straus? Would they see results? Or in the instance of voting for the Speaker, are legislators simply pawns, facing a system that they as individuals can’t change, but must work within to actually accomplish anything? There are certain systemic variables that individual Representatives can’t control – and voting otherwise solidly conservative Representatives out every two years isn’t going to solve the problems that are perpetuated by the system itself.

This, of course, isn’t to excuse the system. I certainly won’t defend a process that requires Speakers strong-arm, and puts political pressure on Representatives to vote for someone who may not necessarily be the best candidate for the job, simply because they want an opportunity to move their agenda forward. But, if tea partiers aren’t able to distinguish between problems with the system, and problems with individual Representatives, they’re bound to expend political capital pounding their fists, but doing little to actually affect the change all movement conservatives, including many elected State Reps in Texas, agree upon.

As Representative Larry Taylor, Chair of the House Republican Caucus said, “We’re very sensitive to the outside groups, but I think it’s important for these groups to understand that you judge a legislative body by the end of the process.”

What then, is the solution in the meantime? To what extent should tea partiers focus on legislators themselves versus lobbying to actively reform the system? Anyone who has attended a basic American Majority training knows that we start with a presentation on “The System”.  While that particular discussion focuses on what we face federally, the same concept can be applied to state legislatures. To change the process on any level of government, it’s important to understand why we’re here, and how the system sustains itself. So often, legislators are merely variables within a well oiled machine. Switching them out does very little if the system itself isn’t reformed. To what degree tea partiers decide to take up the task of lobbying to reform either seniority rules, committee appointment procedure, the Speakers race, or term limits in Texas among other priorities is ultimately going to be a grassroots level decision.

No higher power does, nor should control these groups. But it’s clear that many of these activists, scores of whom are participating politically at this level for the first time in their lives due to the virtues of the tea party movement, need to be educated about the difference between what aspects of things they dislike about government are systemic, and which come from individual legislators. I’d hate to see tea partiers expending capital on primarying people who voted a certain way in a Speakers race when necessarily, the next person they vote for will be faced with the exact same system, and ultimately make a similar decision, weighing the importance of getting a seat at the legislative table versus considering what the grassroots ask of them. Because while at the end of the day, voters do control who gets elected, and a legislator is first responsible to his constituents, what’s the point of being a legislator if you’re not actually able to legislate?