Advocacy Update: Interesting Takeaways

Interesting takeaways from architect voting participation patterns:

Roughly three of every four “Voting Age” Texas architects (TA) were registered to vote (76%) in this year’s primary election, about the same percentage as the general population—

            2014 Primary…General Population (GP)—71.9%
            2016 Primary…GP—73.8%
            2018 Primary…GP—76.7%

Over the past three elections, however, registered-voter TxA members have been voting at a markedly higher rate than others registered to vote in the state—

            2014 Primary…GP—14.1%, TA—16%
            2014 General…GP—10.1%, TA—59% 
            2016 Primary…GP—30%, TA—60%
            2016 General…GP—60%, TA—91%
            2018 Primary…GP—17%, TA—29%

From the 2014 general election on, TxA members have been kickin’ it—with rates almost six times (>6x) higher in November 2014, two times (2x) higher in March 2016, 50% higher in November 2016 and more than two-thirds (71%) higher this year.  [SNAP!]

GOOD ON YOU…GOOD FOR US!

While we’re on “Interesting Takeaways,” here are a few results from Texas’ 2018 Primary Campaign season…at least we found it interesting that:

Republican candidates identified as the “Social Conservative” did not fare well in head-to-head races against their “Business Conservative” counterparts.  Of those supported by Empower Texans et al (or those who promised to join the Freedom Caucus if elected), only one-third (12 of 36) won.  Breaking it down a bit more, however, of the Top 20 races that ET funded, only five prevailed—only 25% of their priority races wound up on the positive side of their ledger…and only one of those five is a “net gain” win, meaning the SC challenger ousted a BC-incumbent.  (And of their 12 wins, four will have very serious challengers come November, including ‘Mr. Net Gainer;’ their “wins” are not safely in the fold yet.)

Speaking of highly competitive November elections, we will have almost twice the usual number (18 this year vs. 10 normally), and seven of them—two in the Senate and five in the House—will be stark contrasts between an obviously Empower(ed) Texans ‘Social Conservative’ and someone billing himself/herself as a ‘Business Democrat,’ an obviously “more-moderate-than-my-opponent” candidate.  All are in districts that are not heavily stacked in favor of one party of the other (i.e., <10% vote differential) or they are in districts where Clinton pulled more votes than Trump in 2016.  With only one exception, a Dallas House seat, all the incumbents are Republican, not way off the partisan divide among all the “swing seats” of five Ds and 13 Rs.

And, last but not least, if you are an incumbent legislator who doesn’t win his/her contested primary race outright—i.e., you are forced into a run-off contest—start packing up that Austin office for the return trip home, history is not on your side.  Both such incumbents this year—Democrat Rene Oliveira of Brownsville (HD 37) and Republican Scott Cosper of Killeen (HD 54)—lost their run-off races by a margin of about 15%.  In the last 30+ years, only five such incumbents forced into a primary run-off came out alive (politically), overall less than a 20% success rate.

P.S.  Once again, primary run-off turnout was abysmal.  While over 1.068 million voted in the Democratic primary on March 6, fewer than half that number came back to vote in the run-off.  The one statewide run-off race, between Lupe Valdez and Andrew White for the gubernatorial nomination to face Gov. Greg Abbott, garnered only 415,000 votes…less than 3% (2.7%) of all registered voters.  Shame on all of us.  As they say, Texas is not so much red, blue or purple—it’s just a non-voting state.