The Austin American-Statesman reported earlier today that Williamson County Republican Rep. Dan Gattis is going to file for speaker, taking the total number of candidates to 12 with just over two weeks to go.
There has been a lot of chatter within conservative circles over just who is the conservatives' choice for speaker. The conventional wisdom is that it's Tom Craddick, who hasn't had a voting record since Republicans became the majority. Many different scoring systems have been used, but so far, no data has come from the only organization to have rated the Legislature since the 64th Session, in 1975. Young Conservatives of Texas has been rating the Legislature consistently since that time, and looking at their historical ratings provides a much clearer picture of just who is a conservative and who isn't. (a spreadsheet concerning House scores since 1975 is available online
here - no downloading required)
YCT takes into account social and fiscal issues, and rates on percentages. They do not rate the speaker himself (no organization does, since the speaker very rarely takes a vote). It's important to look back as far as the 64th Session because Tom Craddick and Senfronia Thompson have been in the House since before that time, and Sylvester Turner and Delwin Jones have been in since the 71st Session. YCT keeps record of both single session ratings and composite lifetime scores.
One last thing - it's important to look beyond last session when judging Republicans in particular, who had a rough session on the floor. The truth is, a lot of conservatism never makes it past the Calendars committee; oftentimes, too, important and revealing votes happen in committee as often as on the floor (take Rep. Tan Parker's lone Republican vote against CHIP in the Health and Human Svcs. last session, or Rep. Dan Flynn and others voting against open records in State Affairs). That being said, the only true measure we have is voting records, and with that in mind, a legislator's career can have dips and curves because of the circumstances surrounding that session. Republicans have, overall, gotten less conservative since taking the majority, as a good look at YCT's historical ratings bear out.
Here is a breakdown of the lifetime composite scores for each candidate running for speaker (as of today):
Bryon Cook (R) - 77.5
Tom Craddick (R-Incumbent) - 89.6
Pete Gallego (D) - 20.8
Dan Gattis (R) - 82.5
Scott Hochberg (D) - 13.4
Delwin Jones (R) - 45.8
Jim Keffer (R) - 77.5
Edmund Kuempel (R) - 79.6
Tommy Merritt (R) - 57.4
Allan Ritter (D) - 38.4
Burt Solomons (R) - 82.7
Senfronia Thompson (D) - 13.5
Sylvester Turner (D) - 16.6
Just going on issues, Craddick is the proven conservative over time; Gattis and Solomons haven't been around all that long (this is Gattis' 4th session, Solomons' 8th). Gattis has been improving since he entered the House, getting a rating of 88.9 last session (excellent in a session that proved brutal for House conservatives). Solomons is kind of up and down, the best example being his 96 in the 79th session and 73.1 in the 80th.
It's also worth noting that Craddick isn't immune to falls himself; in his last three sessions as a voting member (scores: 83, 82, 83), he didn't score above 85. Among the still-serving members who did better are:
Frank Corte (scores: 87, 93, 82)
Wayne Christian (95, 91, 96)
Leo Berman (X, 100, 87)
Betty Brown (X, 91, 91)
Joe Crabb (90, 91, 92)
Will Hartnett (87, 86, 83)
Charlie Howard (95, 95, 88)
Carl Isett (91, 95, 96)
Jerry Madden (96, 86, 83)
and even Jim Keffer (87, 82, 79) did better in two of those sessions.
It's worth noting that one of Craddick's chief opponents last session, Robert Talton, ended his House career with a lifetime 92.1 composite score, and in the last three sessions before Craddick became speaker, he scored 95, 100, and 92.
The truth is that Republicans have not been generally conservative at all since having taken over. Craddick was a member of the leadership during this time; one of the chief complaints that comes about him is that he forced members to vote against their districts - in many cases, their conservative districts. YCT's ratings are most effective in showing long-term trends. Just before the Republicans became the majority and Craddick took the speakership, there was a sharp drop in his and other conservatives' commitment to conservative principles. It's possible, and this will take further analysis, that George W. Bush and the Karl Rove machine drove the party toward the center, and anyone who wanted to climb the ladder during this time had to vote that way. Craddick may be a victim of circumstance in some ways, like his House colleagues that found themselves in a tight spot last session, taking votes to appear above reproach from Democrat electoral attacks later on.
One last "worth noting." YCT's historical ratings include one statistic that perhaps denotes the most interesting point. Each session, all scores are computed to come up with a "House average." The lowest average since 1975 occured in 2003, Craddick's first session (the 77th) as speaker. That average: 43.5. Even since then, the House has not been more or less conservative than it was before Craddick. This suggests that whoever is speaker is not the primary driving force in determining whether the House is conservative vs. liberal; the House is always moderate, in the end, leaning more liberal than conservative and dependent only on what legislation is filed and voted on.
I'm not accusing Tom Craddick of being a liberal or even a moderate - his voting record in the House makes his case as a conservative. The questions for conservatives is not who is the most conservative speaker candidate. The question rather is whether a new speaker, or even Craddick himself, is willing to break with the Republican majority that has misled and misrepresented the conservative cause. Are we going to fight for conservative principles, or are we going to continue to let Jim Dunnam and the liberal wing of the Texas House determine the agenda when they do not have a majority?
Read more...
