Tomorrow is election day for the Houston City elections runoff. It is important that we all come out and vote.  I would would ask that you vote for my good friends Annise Parker for Mayor and Alma Lara for HISD Trustee #1. It only takes a few minutes to vote so please remember to do so tomorrow.

President Obama’s healthcare reform speech was a huge hit, according to Nielsen TV Audience Measurement. In his second address to a joint session of Congress, across ten broadcast and cable networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, BET, CNBC, CNN, Fox News Channel, MSNBC, Univision and Telemundo) last Wednesday night speech aired to over 31 million viewers, adding up to a combined household rating of 20.4 and a share of 35. The TV show “Friends” airing on NBC from 1994 to 2004, had a 9.2 rating at its height and last seasons “American Idol” finale, FOX Network reality show had 28.8 million viewers.

With all the drama that took place at town hall meetings across America this past August you would not have believed that so many people would tune in to watch the President. So the question I have to ask is, why would so many viewers spend time watching a politician, who according to recent polling data, the majority of Americans do not trust, talk about an issue they don’t agree with him on?

Could it be that Americans across all political parties, ethnic and age groups are truly interested in healthcare reform? Maybe the President is right, healthcare reform is tied to our economy’s recovery and Americans understand the connection. Didn’t the polls and the “talking heads” predict early on last year that Mayor Rudy (Winning Florida will win me the election) Giuliani was going to be the GOP nominee for president?

Could it be that they are wrong … again!

In the race to lead the Lone Star State, the choices are getting hairier and hairier…literally.

Picture one 2010 scenario: The perfectly-coiffed Rick Perry, longest-serving Governor in Texas history, squeaks by to win the Republican Primary to face-off against Democratic multi-millionaire hair exec, Farouk Shami (think BioSilk and the CHI hair-straightening irons) or an even hairier opponent, Kinky Friedman, whose cult following has expanded with each bid for Governor.

Seriously, in the “anybody-but-Perry” category, there are no standouts among the motley crew of Democrats. They desperately need a candidate who captures the hearts and minds of Texans or the race for Governor will be decided in the Republican Primary with the promise of orchestrated thrills and chills like Friday night wrestling: Smack-down 2010, Welcome to the Thunderdome.

The Politics of Indecision

U.S. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison aims to send Governor Perry into early retirement and she has the money to make it happen. Kay’s problem is that she suffers from the politics of indecision.

In 2006, she intended to run for Governor, and then sat out the race. Some say that the state’s conservatives sent her a message:  Not now Kay, next time. She says that the Governor pledged to retire in 2010. Either way, she’s a candidate now, and has yet to announce her retirement from the Senate, leaving politicos in limbo questioning when the Governor will appoint her replacement and who that might be…  Kay, it’s time to make a decision already.

Kay’s campaign is all about pointing to Perry’s failures and saying that he’s been there too long. Tough talk coming from a Washington insider. Her 16 years in the U.S. Senate make for a tough sell as she tries to distance herself from Washington and its policies.

Without a clear campaign strategy, she’s tried to out-right Rick Perry and it’s backfired. Labeling Perry “governor-for-life” isn’t enough for Kay to win. She needs to claim the party moderates and change the face of the GOP primary. At risk is her base of women. In particular, those women whose support she won when she voted against overturning Roe v. Wade, and who may cross party lines to vote for her.

Compounding Kay’s ability to connect with Texas women is mounting speculation that Governor Perry may name the first Latina to the Texas Supreme Court in a move to solidify Hispanic voters who are still stinging over the Senator’s snub of Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Though recent polls give Perry a lead over Hutchison, they also show large numbers of undecided voters. Enter Debra Medina, a Ron Paul Republican who chairs the Wharton County GOP (near Houston). Count on her to split the conservative vote. More importantly, she’ll dip into Kay’s base of women and join Perry in branding the Senator a flip flopper who shouldn’t be trusted to lead Texas.

Flip Flopper

Former Forth Worth State Representative Tom Schieffer may lead the field in flip flopping. The two-time Bush appointee and former George W. Bush business partner (co-owners of the Texas Rangers baseball team) has Democrats questioning his pedigree – it’s a bit too red for most of the party faithful to sign on to his gubernatorial bid. His campaign spends most of their time trying to prove their credentials leaving little time to articulate a vision or to connect with Texas Democrats.

Most voters stay home during non-Presidential elections or sit out the primary and cast their vote in the November General Election. This means that candidates must increasingly target their message and presence on the many social media platforms like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter to turn out primary voters.

Take Hank Gilbert, the highest Democratic vote getter on the 2006 ballot. A lifelong Democrat who ran for Agriculture Commissioner, Hank’s a simple man, a farmer chock full of Texas grit who lacks the resources to spread the word about his campaign for Texas Governor. His social media strategy amounts to four photos on his Facebook page (let’s hope the beauty queen in that photo is related). Democrats may need to forfeit the social media advantage to Kinky. There are at least five Kinky Friedman groups on Facebook, 478 videos on YouTube, and Kinky’s crew tweets to boot.

It’s time candidates move forward to fully embrace 21st Century American politics in Texas.

In this new political landscape, shifting demographics and social media have changed almost everything in Texas, although a good media strategy doesn’t guarantee victory. Candidates who ignore these new realities are sure to lose. Remember Tony Sanchez?

Lone Star Latinos

Since 1977, I’ve had a hand in scores of campaigns from school boards to presidential elections and have seen record numbers of Latinos running for office and turning out to vote throughout the country. Nowhere is this truer than in Texas.

Texas’ Hispanic population is the second largest in the nation with roughly 3.6 million Latinos registered to vote.  The largest voting blocs – Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth, San Antonio, Austin, El Paso and the Valley — boast burgeoning Hispanic populations with the fastest growing numbers of Latino voters.

This is good news for Democrats who are focusing new resources on Lone Star Latinos. Democrats are getting a much needed boost in 2010 from the Democratic National Committee. This week Virginia Governor Time Kaine became the first DNC Chair to ever visit South Texas holding the quarterly meeting of the 300-plus DNC members in Austin this weekend for the first time since the 70’s. Proof of their commitment is the team of 10 full-time political strategists on the ground working everyday to turn Texas blue…and they’re still hiring.

Democrats are banking on the fact that Texas is trending blue in a historically red state. The current Gallup poll (Hyperlink: http://www.gallup.com/poll/122003/Political-Party-Affiliation-States-Blue-Red-Far.aspx) ranks Texas as competitive – 42% of Texans call themselves Democrats; 40% Republican. While Democrats are much better than Republicans at losing statewide elections, both parties have a decent shot at losing the important down-ballot races for the Texas House – Democrats are two seats shy of a majority.

Hispanic candidates rarely fare well in GOP primaries, and this year Latinos have little reason to vote Republican …wait, there’s Ted Cruz running for AG, another Republican with good hair.

On November 3, Houstonians will elect a new Mayor, City Controller and 14 City Council members. In the race to lead the City, all three major candidates have a decent shot at losing the election. Based on the most recent polls, not one has broken from the pack to connect with voters.

One candidate is blowing their financial advantage by waiting too long to buy media. Going on TV earlier would have given them a psychological lead and branding advantage over the other candidates. The second mayoral candidate sends daily news releases about who is working for their campaign, or “spinning” about their great campaign organization.  They spend more time talking to insiders than to voters and remind me of a bad episode of the 1990’s sitcom “Spin City.” The third mayoral candidate is too worried about playing it safe to win the election.

While these candidates play insider politics and blow through their campaign war chests, they lose their chance to seize the lead and connect with voters. I should point out, in the interest of full disclosure, that I know all three of these candidates. I know that all three of the top mayoral candidates are well qualified to be our next Mayor, but I do have to question their campaign tactics.

What do these candidates have in common? They over-think their election strategy by flip flopping on issues and campaign strategies. Case in point, can anyone tell me what any of the top 3 candidates for mayor stand for? Can anyone tell me what issues they differ on? Political campaigns are about winning the hearts and minds of voters. They are about ideas and communicating your stance on issues that are important to voters. They are about leadership. But most importantly, campaigns are about building TRUST with voters.

For inexplicable reasons, some candidates don’t seem to understand these basics.  History has shown us that instead of trying to prove to voters that they are the best candidate for the job, they start to worry about losing. And, that’s when it happens…they lose. 

 Flip Flopping

In 2004, Republicans were able to retain their hold on the White House largely by depicting U.S. Senator John Kerry as a “flip-flopper.” It did not help matters one bit that Senator Kerry uttered such dense statements as, “I voted for it before I voted against it.” The Bush campaign was able to spin Senator Kerry into a candidate who could not be trusted on national security and other issues and President Bush returned to a job he did not deserve.

As a veteran of hundreds of campaigns from school boards to presidential elections since 1976, I view the election process with a very unique set of eyes. I can guarantee that the moment a candidate starts seriously thinking about winning and losing, they have lost the heart, soul and direction of the campaign.

It’s time we move forward and embrace 21st Century American politics.

In the new political landscape, social media has changed almost everything. Candidates now post campaign themes and ideas on Facebook. Voters post comments, pictures and videos on multiple social media platforms. Rumors that can boost or kill a campaign (and sometimes facts) move quicker in today’s world than they did just a few years ago.

The real question about social media and candidates is does the number of Facebook fans translate into voters and money for a campaign? It did for President Obama, but that may not translate into voters or money for everyone. In short, having a Facebook or social media page does not win voters.

Candidates need more than a social media strategy. Candidates must learn how to connect with voters outside their base of comfort and show up to special interest screenings whether they share interests or not. Candidates can’t always buy endorsements, as some have done in the current election cycle; they need to actually talk to voters about the issues that impact their daily lives. They need to engage in grassroots campaigns. They need to have a total integrated campaign plan.

The Politics of Indecision

In 2008, the politics of indecision tanked the presidential hopes of U.S. Senator John McCain. While exit polls showed that 62 percent of the electorate ranked the economy as the most important issue, McCain famously quipped, “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should” . The Obama campaign made sure that Americans saw that clip on every social media outlet. McCain would go on to suspend his campaign and fly to Washington with the working theory that he would put country first, and force Obama off the campaign trail. That didn’t happen. What happen was that Senator Obama was able to forge a bipartisan compromise, and alter the dynamics of the race for his advantage. Senator Obama won the election 365 to 173 electoral votes.

 As we embrace a new political engagement strategy in American politics, we need to remember that ours is a representative republic, despite the fact that only 3 of every 10 voters shows up to participate. Low voter turnout insures that political insiders become the new smoked-filled backrooms where elections are brokered.

Houston’s candidates in the November 3 election would do well to remember that engaging voters and connecting with them is still priority #1. Elections are still about ideas and values and not just a personality contest. Elections today are about using all the mediums available – direct communications, grassroots campaigning, voter outreach – and about connecting with the heart and mind of that target voter.

 Candidates that do not understand this are destined to lose.

In California, Congressional candidate Gil Cedillo has taken photos posted on one of his opponent’s Facebook page and used them to craft a fairly vicious campaign mailer targeting young political newcomer Emanuel Pleitez.  Cedillo and Pleitez are among 12 candidates vying to replace newly appointed Labor Secretary Hilda Solis in California’s 32nd Congressional District- which covers East Los Angeles and the San Gabriel Valley. The special election will be held May 19. 

The mailer is obviously intended to portray Pleitez as immature and reckless. This campaign tactic will of course be used more and more in the future – photos capturing your opponent in a bad light have always been too easy to ignore for most campaigns - so candidates dont make it easy for your rivals - be aware and do not upload photos anywhere that can be used against you in any way.  Also check your Facebook settings to control what photos can be added to your site by “friends”. Check out the entire story below from Calitics.com about the mailer, the campaign, and what all this may mean for tomorrow’s election. Links to the actual mailer can be found halfway through the text.

http://www.calitics.com/diary/8783/cedillo-goes-strong-negativeon-emanuel-pleitez

The Hill newspaper carried a great piece on best practices for folks who have the opportunity (voluntary or required) to testify before a congressional hearing.  Lobbyists who work on Capitol Hill in Washington offer their tips to those who find themselves appearing before federal lawmakers. 

A couple of interesting takeaways from the article. First, witnesses should understand that the meeting itself is not a really a formal legal proceeding but better described as a “political proceeding” or a “made-for-TV drama.” The second, witnesses need to be aware of perception and should not wear ties that cost more than the committee chairman’s suit.

Access the story below:

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/dont-wear-a-tie-more-costly-than-panel-chairmans-suit-2009-03-24.html

In March 15 articles, the Politico and the Associated Press forwarded the false Republican talking point that President Obama’s proposals to let the Bush tax cuts for wealthy taxpayers expire and reduce the tax rate at which families making more than $250,000 could take itemized deductions to 28 percent would increase taxes on a large percentage of small businesses. Politico staff writer Carrie Budoff Brown reported, “Whenever Republican criticize [sic] Obama’s tax-hike plans, the group they push front-and-center as bearing the brunt is small-business owners.” She later wrote: “Republicans, in turn, say that it’s Obama’s tax-plan that is providing a double-whammy to these businesspeople, not just the recession but policies that would roll back the Bush tax cuts in 2011 and fall heavily on business owners who earn more than $250,000 a year.” Likewise, the AP’s Hope Yen reported, “Republicans say Obama’s budget proposal to raise taxes, starting in 2011, on individuals earning more than $200,000 and on households earning more than $250,000 will hurt small businesses which face higher dividend taxes and limits on itemized deductions.”

Neither Brown nor Yen pointed out, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented, that according to the Tax Policy Center’s table of 2007 tax returns that reported small business income, 481,000 of those returns — about 2 percent — are in the top two income tax brackets, which include all filers with taxable incomes that would be affected.

Change & Latino Politics: The Good, The Bad & The Ugly

Week of January 27th 2009

The GOOD:        2^nd Annual Latino State of the Union

America’s premier Latino organizations – LULAC, NCLR and MALDEF – convened at the Hyatt Regency in Washington DC last week for a roundtable on law, policy and civil rights. Dubbed the 2^nd Annual Latino State of the Union, the groups held panel discussions entitled Priorities Under the Obama Administration; Putting a Quality Education Within Reach; Hate Crimes and Civil Rights Enforcement; The Economy in Retrospect: What Went Wrong to What’s Next; and Bringing It All Together and Taking Action in 2009.

During his address, MALDEF President John Trasviña mentioned that Latinos have “friends in high places” in the Obama administration, like the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar; the Labor Secretary Hilda Solis; and the White House’s director of intergovernmental affairs, Cecilia Muñoz, formerly a vice president of NCLR.

The Latino political blog www.latinopoliticsblog.com reported on the 2^nd Annual Latino State of the Union as did last week’s New York Times politics blog. Except for these two news sources and a couple of Spanish news outlets, the gathering went unnoticed by mainstream media.

That these highly-respected advocacy groups would formalize a Latino agenda is commendable. That so few were part of the discussion and that even fewer know about the Latino agenda points to the challenge that lies ahead: The challenge of including Latinos in the life of our country.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/19/immigration-tops-latinos-wish-list-at-dc-meeting/

The BAD:           No Regrets? Bush, Cheney and Gonzales, Oh My!

It seems none of the out-going Bush Administration has any regrets from their tenure in the White House. Not the war in Iraq, not the economy, not the handling of Katrina … no regrets.

BUSH - Columnist Ellen Goodman put it best, “The 43rd president is going home with less remorse and fewer regrets than my grandchildren express for spilling their cereal.

This is the tenor of the farewell tour being conducted across the landscape from ABC to the American Enterprise Institute. It’s the No Regrets Tour, the non-reflective “reflections by a guy who’s headed out of town.”

George W. Bush will be remembered with names such as Abu Ghraib, Gitmo and Katrina. With phrases such as “weapons of mass destruction” and “mission accomplished.” He came in with a budget surplus and leaves with a massive deficit. He blew the goodwill of the post-9/11 world. But being this president means never having to say you’re sorry. . .

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2008561234_opin26goodman.html

CHENEY - In his first television interview since the presidential election in November, former Vice President Dick Cheney displayed no regrets and gave no ground to his many critics within America and around the world. He summed up his record by saying: “I think, given the circumstances we’ve had to deal with, we’ve done pretty well.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/17/dick-cheney-interview-guantanamo-waterboarding

GONZALES - “As for regrets,” says former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, “I’m not sure how productive it is to lament about things that went wrong. Maybe it was inevitable.” The former AG has had trouble finding new work since he left the Department of Justice. He told NPR that things are looking up: “Gonzales says he is writing a book, and he believes his job prospects will look up when the economy improves and when investigations into actions of his Justice Department are put to rest.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/26/alberto-gonzales-i-dont-t_n_160955.html

The UGLY:  Immigration Reform Headed for the Back-Burner

Taking to heart an inauguration speech that honored those who “traveled across oceans in search of a new life,” thousands embarked on a campaign last week to make immigration reform a priority for the new president.

Immigrants who lent President Barack Obama their support at the ballot box joined those who cannot vote in marches and prayers, writing letters and raising banners from Miami to Los Angeles to push the issue to the top of Obama’s long to-do list.

In spite of the president’s promise to tackle the thorny issue within his first year in office, even advocates recognized that with two wars and a floundering economy on the table, immigration reform was a tough sell.

Compounding the frustration with comprehensive immigration reform is Obama’s appointment to Homeland Security, Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano, who became the first woman to serve in this post when she was sworn in January 21, 2009. Her record on immigration has leading immigration activists questioning her “smart” reform stance along with the fact that the state of Arizona leads the country in the number of immigrant deaths annually along the border.

It should be pointed out that the two Latino groups: Puerto Ricans and Cuban-Americans do not have an immigration issue as such. Both groups view immigration not an immediate concern: the Puerto Ricans are born U.S. citizens and the Cubans are paroled into the U.S. once they touch dry land. Hence, both have no employment issue for their newly arrived migrants or exiles.

http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_11519751

10 Democrats — and some runners-up — who could soon find themselves on the White House Frenemies List:

1. Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) — Conyers, the outspoken chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, hasn’t been shy about pressuring Obama — vowing to proceed with investigations into the Bush administration’s sacking of eight U.S. attorneys and other potential violations of federal law. Obama has said he prefers to “look forward” and not rehash the past — but House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has indicated she’s open to allowing Conyers to proceed. Remember: In the 110th Congress, Conyers had to be talked down from pushing for the impeachment of President George W. Bush. 

2. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) — The incoming chairwoman of the Intelligence Committee forced Obama to apologize after he nominated Leon Panetta to head the CIA without consulting her first. Feinstein is not afraid to break with her party on thorny issues, as she did recently during the Roland Burris affair and last year when she essentially declared Hillary Clinton’s presidential run over before her candidate was ready to concede. Feinstein also may be positioning herself for a 2010 gubernatorial run, a potentially bigger factor for her than making Obama look good.

3. Vice President Joe Biden — Biden survived the campaign, the transition and even Inauguration Day without any Obama-embarrassing verbal gaffes. But on the first full day of the Obama presidency, Biden made a joke — on live TV — about Chief Justice John Roberts’ fumbling of Obama’s swearing-in. Obama, who had tried to smooth over the oath of office glitch, looked visibly unhappy with his VP, touching his arm in a sign that it was time to shut up and move on. If Biden can’t button it — and encourage his wife to do the same — expect to see Obama’s pinched-face look a little more often.

4. Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.) — Waxman, who knocked off John Dingell to become chairman of the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee, is no party maverick: He’s an enthusiastic Obama and Pelosi supporter with a long history of defending Democratic presidents, namely Bill Clinton. But he’s also among the House’s most aggressive proponents of addressing global warming fast, and he recently promised to act “quickly and decisively” in his capacity as committee chairman. The problem is that both Pelosi and Obama have a lot on their plates and want to ring up a series of legislative victories before addressing a controversial, technically complex issue that could create a stalemate. Plus, Waxman’s push for stronger emissions standards could alienate some Rust Belt members whose states depend on coal. Runner-up: Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.).

5. Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) — The new head of the Appropriations Committee is old school when it comes to legislative earmarks. This is the same guy, after all, who from 1998 to 2004 steered $1.4 billion to military projects in his state. That puts him at philosophical loggerheads with Obama, who ran against the culture of pork and influence peddling in Washington. “Inouye isn’t going to bend to accommodate” Obama, said a senior Democratic aide. Moreover, this beloved war hero — who stood up for fellow earmarker and former Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) when the latter was convicted on federal fraud counts— is probably reflecting the views of many other Democrats. Said one Senate aide: “That anti-earmark stuff sells nationally, but earmarks are still great politics locally.” Runner-up: Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.).

6. Rep. Allen Boyd (D-Fla.) — Obama has carefully courted Boyd, one of the most influential of the pay-as-you-go Blue Dog Democrats — but an unprecedented congressional spending spree and the new administration’s commitment to throwing more aid at flailing banks will create inevitable tensions. Those tensions have been stoked by the new president’s waning commitment to repealing tax cuts for families earning $250,000 or more — a rollback backed by both the Dogs and Pelosi. Some Blue Dogs, many of them newly elected moderates responsible for expanding the Democratic majority in the House, have also shown a willingness to break with party leadership on national security issues — and 15 of them refused to pay Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee dues in 2007 over differences with antiwar Democrats. But with $1.2 trillion in government spending at hand and the worst economy in 75 years, budget hawks are not exactly in vogue in the Democratic Party, so Blue Dogs may be diminished. Runners-up: Reps. Heath Sh uler (D-N.C.) and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-S.D.).

7. Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) As chairman of the Finance Committee, Baucus has often infuriated liberals with his pro-business positions and his penchant for striking deals with Republican Chuck Grassley. If Obama chooses to govern from the middle, he could find a key ally in Baucus. But trying to enact the tax, health and trade policies he touted on the campaign could hit a roadblock if Baucus doesn’t give them his blessing.

8. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) — The head of the Congressional Black Caucus represents several potential fault lines between Obama and Hill Democrats. As a CBC leader with a lock on her Oakland district (and a solid relationship with Pelosi), she’s secure enough to buck the White House if she thinks that Obama is taking African-American support for granted. She is also a founder of the Out of Iraq and Progressive caucuses — and she stood up to Bill Clinton on his use of military force in Iraq and Serbia — so she won’t be shy in criticizing the administration if it tarries on withdrawing from Iraq. Runner-up: Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.).

9. Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.) — Because none of his fellow Democrats ever know what he will do or say.

10. Michelle Obama — She’s glamorous, she’s on message, she’s the nation’s favorite mom — and now she has nowhere to go but down. The press, which helped savage Michelle Obama for her “proud of my country” remark during the campaign, has since built her into a 21st century Jackie O. With the spotlight shining so brightly on her now, any misstep by the first lady — a slip of the tongue, a too-frank statement, any disagreement with the administration’s positions — could reflect harshly on her husband.

Compiled from www.politico.com

Historic numbers of Latino voters delivered for President Barack Obama and share in the victory we all honor today.

Indeed Latinos contribute to the rich fabric of this country, whether on the front lines in Iraq, in the farms of California, or at the voting booths in Florida.

As we celebrate the diversity that is America, let us move forward from a nation of black and white to fully embrace the many shades of color: Latinos - whose phenomenal growth and $1 trillion buying power fuels our nation’s economy.

But in watching the news coverage today I never once saw a Latino anchor or commentator, never once saw a Latina being interviewed on the Mall, never once felt that we too are celebrating the great new beginning. We all wanted change when we voted for President Obama, let us hope that the national news media gets that the change that commences today is for all America, not just for Black or young America.