The Democratic primary turned out well.
Linda Yanez was more experienced than Susan Criss, and I am not surprised that Yanez won the nomination to face Phil Johnson in fall.
Likewise, Sam Houston was the better qualified candidate as compared to Baltasar Cruz, and it reflects well on the Democratic electorate that they chose Houston to face Dale Wainwright in the fall.
The Coming General Election
Johnson versus Yanez
Challenger Linda Yanez versus incumbent Phil Johnson presents Texas voters with a clear choice. Yanez is a progressive Democrat, and Johnson is a moderate Republican. Leaving aside party affiliation, only one of those two candidates has the word "moderate" ascribed to them. I like Johnson in this race because he has been conservative, but not outrageously conservative. While there have been ethical questions raised about more than half of the Justices on the Texas Supreme Court, Johnson has remained above the fray.
Houston versus Wainwright
Houston ought to win this one. In contrast to Johnson, Wainwright is one of the most ethically challenged on the Texas Supreme Court:
Justice Wainwright paid a total of $12,400 to rent a Houston office during his 2002 Supreme Court campaign. The month after he won that race, Justice-Elect Wainwright paid a deposit to a luxury apartment development in Austin: Gables at Town Lake. Wainwright paid Gables a total of $6,983 in political funds for utilities, deposit and rent from December 2002 through August 2003. During this period Wainwright also used political funds to pay $604 in utility bills to the City of Austin. Wainwright then appears to have moved to a more permanent Austin residence in August 2003.30.... Justice Wainwright’s payments to Gables at Town Lake appear to be clear violations of Texas Election Code provisions that prohibit a candidate or officeholder from converting a political contribution to a “personal use.” Lawmakers who ordinarily reside outside Travis County are the only state officials legally permitted to spend political funds on residential costs, according to a 1984 Ethics Advisory Opinion. A 1993 Ethics Advisory Opinion directly tackled the issue of whether or not appeals judges can legally spend political funds on housing. That opinion concluded that, “An appellate judge may not use political contributions to pay the expenses of maintaining a residence in the city in which the court sits.”
Jordan versus Jefferson
I am still evaluating this race, and am not ready to endorse yet.
