Scorecards, Report Cards and Wild Cards….
June 18, 2015
How many times have you heard sportscasters say, “The game was closer than the
score indicated?” In other words, the score may not have reflected the actual action,
ebb and flow of the game, or tell the listener whether the players performed to the best
of their abilities. Or, whether the score was an accurate reflection of the “game” at all?
Obviously, governance is different than sports. Just as governing is different than
campaigning. Scorecards are better related to campaigning. Governance is about
getting legislation enacted into law to benefit the people of the State of Texas and in my
case, House District 65.
Now that the 84th Legislative Session is complete, several organizations will be
publishing “scorecards” in an attempt to let the people who visit their respective
websites or receive emails from the various groups know how individual members
“scored” with their votes during the session. I am not in any way opposed to these
scorecards as I think some of them are a good measure of voting and all have at least
some value. However, some scorecards or report cards are really confusing. For
example, one publication listed our Senator Jane Nelson as one of the worst legislators
of the 84th session. Hogwash! Senator Nelson led the Senate team who, in
conjunction with the House team, passed the most conservative state budget in
decades!
In order to properly evaluate the scorecards themselves, I encourage you to educate
yourself on the organization issuing the scorecard. Later in this communication I will list
my votes and how I know they compared to some of the organizations that might issue
scorecards (some organizations do not inform legislators of votes they will “score” and
some do).
The questions you might want to know the answer to when evaluating the validity of the
scorecard itself are:
1. What are the driving issues behind the organization issuing the scorecard? For
example, pro-life organizations should be only concerned with votes directly
relating to pro-life issues. Also don’t confuse Conservatism with
Libertarianism. A conservative wants government to be limited and perform the
core functions of government in an efficient and low cost manner. A Libertarian
wants to eliminate government in every possible fashion and have virtually no
regulations over issues such as drug use and also regularly supports ways to
reduce penalties for crimes committed.
2. How does an organization choose which votes to “score?” In the 84th legislature
we voted on over 1500 pieces of legislation and amendments, yet many
organizations select a small percentage of the votes to grade. This may be fine
for organizations with a narrow focus of issues, such as pro-life or education
related organizations. Also beware of broader based organizations who claim to
use large volumes of data, but mysteriously drop certain data points to protect
their favored legislators. Members who vote in lock-step, regardless of their
intentions, often fail to serve their districts by being unable to pass legislation
their districts need. Getting 76 votes for a specific bill is very difficult. Campaign
claims come easily on the stump, but are extremely tough to fulfill.
3. What does the organization have to gain by issuing a scorecard? Is there a
personal vendetta or a fundraising agenda behind the scorecard? If the purpose
of the organization is to promote a particular type of policy, then it should be clear
that those are the votes being scored. If it seems that an organization is only
scoring votes to make some legislators look good and others look bad, then at a
minimum it should raise questions in our minds. It could very well just be
coincidence. We should make sure our legislators and the organizations
following and rating them are transparent.
While several organizations will issue “scorecards” only a few organizations provide
advance notice of which votes will be “scored” – and even then, some of the
organizations will not use all the votes they said they would consider. I wonder why
not? Below is a summary, by organization, of the number and percentage of times I
voted with or in opposition to a particular organization. Attached is a link to a detailed
spreadsheet of my votes versus the Republican Caucus. This link also shows how I
voted versus the organizations that gave us advance notice of their recommendation on
a particular issue.
Of course everyone will draw their own conclusions but the great people of HD65
elected me to be their conservative, Republican, representative. I do not vote based on
scorecards, I vote my values and those of you, the constituents of HD65. We had a
great 84th Legislative Session by any measure and HD65 fared exceptionally well with
heavy influence on transportation and tax cut legislation. Please feel free to call me
with any questions!
Follow this link to view how I voted on bills for which one or more organizations took
an affirmative (support/ oppose) position: http://bit.ly/1BmFn78
House Republican Caucus – I voted with the Caucus virtually 100% of the time. The
Caucus took a position on 353 bills for which a vote took place on the House floor. This
is obviously a very broad based group of bills that focused mainly on core Republican
issues.
Texans for Fiscal Responsibility – TFR gave advance notice of about 100 bills they
would score- however, only 73 of these bills made it to the House floor for a vote. I
voted with TFR approximately 80% of the time. TFR follows many core Republican
principles but leans a little more Libertarian. Also, TFR has indicated they may “throw
out” some votes they originally stated they would use in creating a scorecard. Not sure
why.
Texas Conservative Coalition – TCC is a core conservative organization. While
technically bipartisan, many of the policies they promote fall in line with core Republican
values. TCC reviewed every bill on the House calendar, excluding those on the Local &
Consent Calendar, and issued an affirmative support or oppose position on 554 bills for
which a vote took place on the House floor. I voted with TCC 91% of the time. TCC
might also not include every vote they told us they would consider during the session in
their end of session scorecard. Again, not sure why.
Texas Public Policy Action – TPPA does not issue an official scorecard but they do
send us recommendations on many of the bills that come before us on the House
floor. TPPA has a loose affiliation with Texas Public Policy Foundation – TPPF – which
is a conservative think tank in Austin. TPPA seems be a little more Libertarian than
TPPF but generally provides good analysis. TPPA reviewed every bill on the House
calendar, excluding those on the Local & Consent Calendar, and issued an
affirmative support or oppose position on 541 bills for which a vote took place on the
House floor. I voted with TPPA a little over 80% of the time.
This information is based on the records kept by my office during session and the work
done by my staff.
My voting record, like my policy positions, are an open book so please just contact me
or my office if you have any questions.
Best Regards,
Capitol Office:
E2.712
P.O. Box 2910
Austin, TX 78768
Phone: (512) 463-0478
Fax: (512) 463-2089
District Office:
1029 W. Rosemeade Pkwy
Suite 108
Carrollton, TX 75007
Phone: (972) 492-2080
Fax: (972) 492-7408
Chief of Staff:
Ben Lancaster
Email: [email protected]
District Director:
Ebony Daughtry
Email: [email protected]