The syndicated columnist Molly Ivins once opined that Texas politics was “Better than the zoo.”
Yeah, I don’t know. Wild animals at the zoo do tend to shit on everything, but they can’t cause nearly as much permanent damage as Texas politicians can. From my perch in Austin, perhaps I’m on the wrong side of the cage to fully appreciate the entertainment value.
For those of you who don’t live in Texas, you might want to keep reading anyway. We have over 8% of the votes in the U.S. House. Take that, Alaska!
Texas Demographics
I contend that Texas is intrinsically purple. I say that knowing full well that Republicans currently have a rock solid red grip on, well, everything in the state.
It wasn’t always that way. From 1978 to 2003, Texas government was a power-sharing exercise between Democrats and Republicans. Outsize personalities (okay, Texas-sized personalities) were substantially more important than political parties. Sure, there were issues. But, in general, we had a quarter century of fairly pragmatic government until Republicans gained the complete control that they still have today.
The reasons for this stranglehold boil down to two factors: maps and turnout.
With respect to maps, Texas Republicans have done a very good job of gerrymandering U.S. congressional districts to minimize Democratic representation. While there are ongoing legal battles regarding our district maps, Republicans hold most of the cards. The major cities of Austin, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, and El Paso are blue dots of Democratic strength in Texas but their influence has been largely marginalized by very creatively drawn maps. For example, the quite liberal city of Austin has been divided between six congressional districts with Austin residents being a minority in every single one. Five of those seats are currently occupied by Republicans. So much for representative government.
With respect to turnout, Democrats can’t blame the Republicans. Texas holds “semi-open” primaries where voters can choose the party primary in which they want to participate for a given election cycle. This metric thus provides the best solid data point we have to determine voter turnout by party in Texas. Here, we need to give Republicans in my home state some credit. They simply show up to vote more often than their opponents. That’s on us. We suck. In the 2018 Texas primaries, Democrats turned out 1 million voters; Republicans turned out 1.5 million. (While we independents get to pick a primary each election cycle, we can assume that most of us vote – or don’t vote – in the primary that best reflects our priorities.)
The primary voting metric tells us something about the people that turn out to vote and is, of course, is the most important metric. However, in terms of “eligible” voters, Democrats in Texas are on the rise and may indeed already have an edge.
While Hillary Clinton carried all of the Texas cities noted above in 2016, she didn’t turn out enough of the urban vote to offset the rural vote that went solidly and heavily for Donald Trump. However, the urban population in Texas is rapidly growing and is showing signs of becoming more politically active.
It has also long been presumed that if Hispanic voters in Texas turned out in larger numbers, Democrats would see gains. Indeed, almost 80% of the votes cast by Texas Hispanic in 2016 were for Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately, while Hispanics accounted for 28% of the eligible voters in Texas in that election, only 40% of them actually voted. By contrast, 63% of eligible White voters cast ballots. However, Hispanic turnout improves every year. A third of the Texas Hispanic population isn’t yet of voting age and 95% of these young Hispanics are U.S. citizens.
Thus, at some point, there will be no way to draw a district map that protects Republican candidates from a population that gets more actively blue each year. It’s just a matter of time.
And that brings me to the 2018 elections in Texas at both the federal and state levels.
Federal Races in Texas
In the U.S. House, Texas is currently represented by 25 Republicans and 11 Democrats in 36 strangely-drawn districts. While Democrats are fielding a candidate in all 36 races this year for the first time in a quarter of a century, the reality is that the most of the districts are drawn to be safe seats. As noted in my previous post on the 2018 elections, my best guess is that only two races (TX-07 & TX-23) provide Democrats with a decent chance to flip Republican-held seats in Texas. Two other races (TX-21 & TX-32) provide non-zero chances to flip (R) seats to (D), but both seem unlikely at the moment. I’ll also personally continue to support MJ Hagar in my home district (TX-31) but that’s an even longer shot. The good news is that the Democratic challengers in each of these five races raised more money than the Republican incumbents in Q2. Texas Democrats will likely see some minor gains in the U.S. House this cycle.
On the other side of the Capitol, the U.S. Senate race in Texas has become very interesting with Beto O’Rourke (D) running a surprisingly competitive race against incumbent Ted Cruz (R). O’Rourke has proven to be a good candidate and a solid fundraiser. Current polls rate this a toss-up. In Texas!
The two candidates just completed the first of three televised debates and gave some credence to the zoo metaphor.
Cruz is a massive asshole, but he’s not an idiot. He’s a competent speaker and he’s very experienced in debate tactics. On debate points alone, Cruz probably won. I fully suspect that O’Rourke will improve in subsequent debates, but I frankly don’t think it really matters. Both candidates needed to do exactly two things: (1) motivate their respective bases to cast ballots and (2) appeal to undecided voters.
I’ll contend that both did (1) fairly well. Cruz went with fear; O’Rourke went with inclusion. While there was absolutely nothing that either could have said to change any minds in the other’s camp, Cruz’s style likely provided motivation to Democrats as well as Republicans. Hence, the edge here goes to O’Rourke.
As for (2), O’Rourke won handily. Any issue voter already had a favorite candidate; others might be more inclined to consider intangibles such as likeability. O’Rourke came across as a nice guy; Cruz did not. Absolutely no one liked Cruz before the debate and he spent an hour making sure everyone knew exactly why.
In addition to two more debates, both Cruz and O’Rourke have big events planned: Cruz with Donald Trump, O’Rourke with Willie Nelson. While it seems likely that a Willie Nelson concert wins in Texas, I have to admit that I am so looking forward to the Cruz/Trump rally. Can a train wreck be awkward? (Cruz: “I know I called you a ‘sniveling coward’, but thanks for coming!” Trump: “And I know I said you’ve ‘accomplished absolutely nothing’ for Texas while insulting your wife and father, but I’m glad to be here!” ) Again, while Trump “may” help motivate Republican voters in Texas, he will most certainly motivate Democratic voters.
I’m optimistic enough to personally continue donating to O’Rourke’s campaign. He’d be good for Texas. Also, while successful navigation of the precariously steep & winding path to a Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate is still highly improbable, that path most likely runs through Texas.
The data analyst in me, however, insists on being at least a damp blanket. The fundamentals in Texas heavily favor Republicans. If the Texas Senate race remains a toss-up on Election Day, Cruz will win.
While O’Rourke still has a small chance to actually win the election, it is important to note that he’s also doing an excellent job as the de facto head of the (D) ticket in Texas. Even if he doesn’t prevail, he’ll help bring out the Democratic vote for other races in Texas. Additionally, O’Rourke is making national Republicans spend a ton of money on a Senate race that should have been a slam dunk. They can’t spend that money elsewhere.
State Races in Texas
The 2018 state-level picture in Texas is pretty bleak for anyone without an (R) after their name. The Texas superfecta (Governor, Lt. Governor, House, & Senate) is a safe bet for Republicans. In fact, state-level politics in Texas – at least in the short term – will likely get even more radically conservative than it already is.
There’s nothing much new here. Texas Democrats haven’t held a statewide office since 1994 and the last Democratic governor elected in Texas was Ann Richards back in 1991.
The 2018 races for Governor and Lt. Governor (both of which are important in Texas) are foregone conclusions and will remain in Republican hands. Early Democratic hopes that Lupe Valdez (D) at the top of the ticket could energize Hispanic voters have largely dissipated – partially due to a lackluster campaign and partially due to Democratic infighting. <insert heavy sigh here>
Republicans have controlled both state legislative chambers in Texas since 2003 and that’s not going to change in 2018. While all 150 Texas House seats and 15 of the 31 Texas Senate seats are up for election, the state districts are way too Republican-friendly and the current margins are way too great to overcome even if Democrats somehow manage to make gains this year. That’s just the way it is.
Of most interest in the state legislature mess will be the race to succeed the retiring Joe Straus (R) as Speaker of the House. In Texas, the Speaker is a very powerful position and Straus has used it to modulate some of the more aggressively partisan inclinations of the rest of his party. While definitely a Republican, Straus has been a reasonable, old-school, consensus-focused politician and his voice will be missed in Texas politics. The Speaker is elected by his peers in the Texas House and, since Texas Republicans aren’t any more cohesive a force than Texas Democrats, it is possible (but by no means guaranteed) that the new Speaker will require at least a few Democratic votes to get a majority. That fact just might help elevate someone in the mold of Straus. Personally, though, I’m not holding my breath.
The one possible chance for Democrats at the state level is the race for Attorney General where Justin Nelson (D) is running a close race against incumbent Ken Paxton (R). Of course, Nelson is aided by the fact that Paxton was indicted in 2015 for securities fraud in a case that has yet to go to trial.
In any other state, Nelson’s election would be a given. He’s a well-respected Professor of Constitutional Law at the UT Law School and a former clerk for Justice Sandra Day O’Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court. His opponent in the race for the chief legal officer in Texas is under indictment.
But this is Texas. The latest polls give Paxton a slight lead.
Molly Ivins might have a had a good point after all.