Republican Party of TX Executive Committee sends strong reminder to GOP officials of its stance on gunownership rights

At the quarterly meeting last weekend, the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Texas passed a unanimous resolution to remind Republican officials of the party's strong support of gun ownership for the protection of person and the State.  The resolution enumerated the planks from the 2018 Republican Platform that were passed at the state party's last convention in regard to the defense of those rights.  The Executive Committee members are elected at the state party's convention, and there is one man and one woman who represent each of the state's Senate Districts.  The committee performs the business of the party between conventions.

Now we will see if the officials have the courage of their convictions to uphold the platform of the Republican Party of Texas.

Resolution calls to action:

"THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Party of Texas calls upon our elected leaders to protect and defend the inalienable right of Texans to keep and bear arms for the defense of themselves and of the State by supporting policies consistent with the aforementioned planks of the 2018 Republican Party of Texas Platform; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Republican Party of Texas calls upon our elected officials to protect community safety without infringing upon the ability of law-abiding Texans to freely exercise their Constitutional rights and defend themselves, their families, or their property; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that this resolution be distributed to all Republican members of the Texas House of Representatives and Senate, the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, all Republican members representing the State of Texas in the United States House of Representatives and Senate."

FULL TEXT OF RESOLUTION:

WHEREAS, an individual’s ability to keep and bear arms is fundamental to preserving and protecting our God-given rights and the sustainability of our free republic; and

WHEREAS, the Platform of the Republican Party of Texas affirms:

The Right to Self-Defense: We affirm that lawful gun ownership and carry by the people protects us from those who wish to do harm and guards against tyranny by our own government. We call upon our elected officials to resist the narrative that the solution to every problem is less freedom and more regulation, and instead pursue policies that respect freedom while also increasing safety. (#69)

Constitutional Carry: We support constitutional carry legislation through any legislative means so law-abiding citizens may carry any legally owned guns openly or concealed, while maintaining the option of a permit for reciprocity purposes only. (#70)

Intrastate Protection Act: We support an Intrastate Protection Act to clarify that guns made and sold in Texas are not subject to the Interstate Commerce Clause of the US Constitution, and legislation denying state funding to any state or local agencies that enforce federal weapons laws not also affirmed by the laws of the State of Texas.
(#71)

Gun-Free Zones: We oppose governmental prohibitions on citizens who have a constitutional right to own and carry firearms and knives from doing so. We oppose state-mandated location restrictions, the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990, and the National Firearms Act. (#72)

Red Flag: We oppose monitoring programs, including the Red Flag (that would deprive someone of their right to keep and bear arms without being convicted of a crime or found mentally incompetent by a medical psychiatric professional) or iWatch proposals, and any program that causes gun owners to be investigated by law enforcement or appear before a judge when there is no reasonable cause of a crime committed. We oppose increased background checks, as they are highly prone to “false positives” and hinder law-abiding citizens’ ability to defend themselves, rather than reduce crime. (#73)

Firearms Storage: We oppose mandates on personal firearms storage, maintaining that it is the responsibility of an individual to safely store his or her firearms and choose responsibly when and how to make them available to minors. (#74)

Weapons Restrictions: We support all legislation and policies that reduce restrictions on legal gun owners to purchase, own, or carry any type of gun, ammunition, accessory, knife, or other weapons, and oppose all that hinder the same. (#75)

Amend Texas Constitution: We call for the Texas Legislature to propose to the people of Texas a constitutional amendment to strike the following words from Article I Section 23 of the Texas Constitution: “but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.” (#76)

Responsible Gun Owners: We call upon gun owners of Texas to regulate themselves through exercising safe handling procedures, voluntarily receiving training and helping others to train others, and safely carrying firearms as a deterrent to crime. (#77)

Gun Owner Age: We believe law-abiding citizens 18 years and older have the right to purchase, possess, and carry firearms, including hand guns. (#78)

National Reciprocity: We support national reciprocity and call upon Congress to pass it (#79); now

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Republican Party of Texas calls upon our elected leaders to protect and defend the inalienable right of Texans to keep and bear arms for the defense of themselves and of the State by supporting policies consistent with the aforementioned planks of the 2018 Republican Party of Texas Platform; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Republican Party of Texas calls upon our elected officials to protect community safety without infringing upon the ability of law-abiding Texans to freely exercise their Constitutional rights and defend themselves, their families, or their property; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that this resolution be distributed to all Republican members of the Texas House of Representatives and Senate, the Governor, Lieutenant Governor, all Republican members representing the State of Texas in the United States House of Representatives and Senate.

(LINK: https://www.texasgop.org/resolution-urging-support-of-the-republican-party-of-texas-platform-planks-related-to-the-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms/ )

Focus on AR-15 is a ruse for broader bans

Democrat candidate Robert Francis O'Rourke last week at the debate in Houston declared, "Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15!"  Only last year then Senate candidate O'Rourke assured Texans that if you had an AR-15, you can keep it.  Speaking to the broader Democrat base, O'Rourke has shifted left and now calls for full confiscation of AR-15s.  We must understand that confiscating AR-15's will not be the end.  It will only be the beginning.

Statistics show that over 60% of gun-related murder is by handgun.  “Assault rifles” account for 4% so those are not the type of firearm used in 96% of the cases.  AR-15s are a very popular semi-automatic rifle with 10-30 million owned in the U.S., and in an informal poll, gun shop owners say that about 20% of sales of rifles are AR-15s.  The rifles are popular among men and women for many features including light weight, customizations, cheaper ammunition, and less kick-back than other semi-automatic rifles or traditional shotguns.  Viral videos of women using traditional shotguns versus AR-15s demonstrate why many choose it. (Example video:  https://youtu.be/DUY3V9JFJLg)   Also, the name "AR" does not mean "assault rifle", but rather is the name of the manufacturer Armalite Rifle.

Semi-automatic guns are a very common type for both handguns and rifles.  Semi-automatic means that the next bullet is loaded into the chamber after one is fired, but the shooter needs to pull the trigger again to shoot.  Fully automatic guns (i.e., one trigger pull and multiple bullets fired) are already extremely restricted in the U.S.  

‘Assault rifle’ bans create a list based on the ‘look’ or ‘style’ of the gun instead of the operation or functional features.  Once some semi-automatic guns are put on a ban list due to their ‘style’, it is easy to see how the list will be expanded by function to most modern firearms.  ‘Assault rifle’ is a term that has little meaning, but people, who do not understand the features of guns, can easily agree with a dangerous sounding term and descriptions of ripping flesh and gaping wounds.  Of course hunting rifles with larger caliber will create an even more fearsome wound, and even a basic shotgun scatters pellets broadly and will also create a large wound. Besides, handguns are the most common weapon in murders and were the weapons used for the 1991 Texas Luby's Massacre.  The gun controllers will come after them ALL for one reason or another because in the end all are capable of killing people.  Here is a video demonstrating and making similar points:  https://youtu.be/in4XzTZaYp0.

We cannot give up the AR-15 hoping that the gun control advocates will be satisfied.  The American left, like the European left, want to disarm citizens for greater control.  Vladmir Lenin said, "One man with a gun can control one hundred without one."  They may let you keep your revolver and shotgun similar to Mexico where the type of firearms and number per household are extremely restricted and registering them is intentionally cumbersome.  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_regulation_in_Mexico) Stricter gun laws have not made Mexico or Chicago safer.  Several states in Mexico have been identified by the State Department as 'no-go' zones (https://www.businessinsider.com/mexico-states-no-go-zones-for-americans-us-state-department-2018-1). 

In the U.S. guns are used in self defense hundreds of thousands to millions of times per year.  Non-suicide gun deaths were reported at under 20,000 in 2018 which, although tragic, is a very small number relative to the over 330,000,000 people in the U.S. where there are over 350,000,000 guns owned by citizens. 

While self-defense and hunting are often cited as the reason for owning firearms, the true intent of the Second Amendment is to protect and defend the people from government tyranny.  Picture citizens left to throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails as tanks roll against them in China and in Venezuela to name recent examples.  To be effective citizens must be able to own semi-automatic rifles capable of deterring federal forces.  Deputy Barney Fife with a revolver and one bullet in his pocket may be the model of the left, but our rights to bear firearms must not become restricted to the point of ineffectiveness.  We must stand strong for the right of law-abiding citizens to own semi-automatic firearms without bans, burdensome fees, or cumbersome regulations.  

ACTION ALERT on Gun Control - 3 Bad Bills, Call DC

Congress is back in session and Speaker Pelosi has three gun control bills queued up.  These bills are NOT GOOD for gun owners and our liberties.  The following guidance comes from Heritage Action for America (https://heritageaction.com/), the political action organization associated with the  national, conservative policy group Heritage Foundation.

"Second Amendment. This week, Democrats will begin “marking up” three gun-control bills in the House Judiciary Committee. Heritage Action is opposed to all three bills as they unnecessarily restrict Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

• HR 1186 - Restricts Americans’ ownership of magazines of certain capacities, with exemptions for law enforcement and government agencies.
• HR 2078 - Individuals who have been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime would be prohibited from owning firearms. Currently, the law prohibits individuals who have committed felonies from owning firearms—this is the appropriate and correct standard.
• HR 1236 - This bill falls under the category of “red-flag laws” and allows law-enforcement to confiscate individuals’ firearms when other individuals report them as a danger or threat. There is some broader nuance on the general idea of red-flag laws, but there is no nuance on this bill. It’s a far-left bill that does not provide adequate due-process protections."

All conservatives, liberty-minded Americans, and gun owners must contact your Congressman, your Senators, and the White House to tell them that you oppose these three bills.

White House contact: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

Senator Cornyn contact:  https://www.cornyn.senate.gov/contact

Senator Cruz contact:  https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=email_senator

U. S. Congress contact:  https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

There are solutions to gun violence that do not abridge your constitutionally guaranteed rights to due process and gun ownership.  For liberty-minded solutions see yesterday's blog entry: https://travis-outrider.blogspot.com/2019/09/do-something-we-can-address-gun.html. 

Do Something! We can address gun violence AND uphold the rights of lawful gun owners.

After every high-profile shooting the calls to "Do Something!" begin immediately.  Most of the proposals have little to do with effective solutions to gun-related deaths, and too many create barriers for law-abiding gun owners.  Here are some proposals that address gun-related violence while upholding the rights of law-abiding citizens to own firearms.  Elected officials who claim to support gun ownership rights should be pushing these kinds of solutions instead of back-pedaling on Second Amendment rights.

1.       Since the majority of deaths by firearm are suicide (60%), increase funding for mental health services and suicide prevention campaigns especially in vulnerable communities such as veterans.

2.       Enforce the laws.  This includes holding government agencies accountable to update the NICS databased used for background checks in a timely manner and add more reporting criteria associated with criminal activity.

3.       Enforce the laws.  The majority of gun-related deaths besides suicide stems from organized crime.  Empower and fund law enforcement to root out sources of organized crime and increase security at ports of entry and the borders where drugs, firearms, and human trafficking are occurring.

4.       Enforce the laws.  End the soft-on-crime policies for violent juveniles like the ones implemented at Parkland’s school district that allowed a repeatedly violent, troubled student to avoid a criminal record even though ‘everyone knew’ he had severe problems.

5.       Continue funding for security in vulnerable public areas such as schools, arenas, and transportation hubs for physical barriers, technology, and armed, trained personnel.  

6.       Allow law-abiding citizens to own and carry weapons as a first line of defense against criminals including the recognition of state-issued carry licenses across state lines.  Statistics show guns are used in self defense hundreds of thousands up to millions of times each year.

7.       Ensure that law enforcement can act on explicit threats while maintaining current legal standards of due process with a presumption of innocence. Circumventing due process or using safety panels outside the legal system are an abridgement of liberty.

8.       Expand the definition of sellers that are required to do background checks based on number of transactions per year and location of sales (eg. gun shows) without criminalizing private person-to-person transfers and without creating gun registries, fees, licenses, or other barriers to gun ownership by law-abiding citizens.

Cedar Park City Council - Incumbents started 2019 with large reserves, challengers faced steep fundraising climb

Cedar Park City Council - Incumbents started 2019 with large reserves, challengers faced steep fundraising climb

The Community Impact posted an article today that called the fundraising efforts of all candidates "competitive" but only considered campaign reports for April 2019 without mention of the beginning campaign funds for the incumbents.  The analysis in the article did not include finance reports from January 2019 thereby omitting more than half of the campaign contributions for incumbent council members.

The Community Impact article also failed to use a consistent standard for reporting on the campaign contributions in its commentary.  The following analysis provides a consistent report on the incumbents of direct PAC contributions and contributions of $1,000 or more from a single donor.

According to campaign finance reports, Cedar Park incumbent council members started 2019 with significant campaign funds.  The incumbents reported the following maintained funds as of the end of January 2019 (approx.):  Jefts $20,000, Duffy $12,000, Thomas $31,000.  The challengers faced a steep fundraising hill to climb in only a few months to be competitive in a city with the population (over 80,000) and geographical size of Cedar Park.  

Noteworthy is that all three incumbents reported the majority of donations in dollar amounts from outside Cedar Park. Travis Outrider previously reported on the incumbents receiving the majority of their money from outside Cedar Park while the challengers received the majority of funding from contributors in the city.  (Reference:  https://travis-outrider.blogspot.com/2019/04/duffy-and-jefts-hold-big-money-lead.html)

In terms of individual contributions Duffy and Jefts drew roughly 60% in Cedar Park transactions and 40% outside the city.  Thomas reported an unusually large amount of unidentified cash, and most of his contributions were from PACs.  Thomas underperformed the other incumbents by significant amounts although he personally donated $650 each to Duffy and Jefts while neither Duffy nor Jefts donated to his campaign.

Duffy reports the following donors of $1000 or more and PACs:

• Husch-Blackwell of Austin $1500, 
• Hillco PAC and associates of Austin $1000, 
• Ellis of Austin $1000, 
• Maria Martin of Cedar Park $1000, 
• Freese and Nichols PAC of Ft. Worth $500, 
• Halff PAC of Richardson $500, 
• Homebuilders PAC of Austin $250,
• CPPFA PAC $1000.

Jefts reports the following donors of $1000 or more and PACs:

• Maria Martin of Cedar Park $1500, 
• Milestone Builders of Austin $2000, 
• Pohl of Austin $1000, 
• Hillco PAC of Austin $1000, 
• Homebuilders PAC of Austin $250, 
• CPPFA PAC $1000, 
• Meade (Husch-Blackwell) of Austin $1500, 
• Halff PAC of Richardson $250, 
• Freese and Nichols PAC of Ft. Worth $250.

Thomas reports the following donors of $1000 or more and PACs:  

• $2,060 in unidentified cash   
• Citizens for Sensible Growth PAC of Cedar Park $1000, 
• Milestone Builders of Austin $2000, 
• TREPAC of Austin $500, 
• NBA Home PAC of Austin $500.

Cedar Park campaign finance reports are available at  https://www.cedarparktexas.gov/departments/city-secretary/candidate-officeholder-campaign-finance-reports.

Duffy and Jefts hold big money lead, mostly out-of-town donations

Cedar Park City Council – Incumbents Duffy and Jefts hold big money lead, mostly out-of-town donations

 (4/30 Updates:  Correction of place numbers and inclusion of Duffy's final April report which was not available at the time of the original post.)

Place	Candidate	Total contributions	Out of town contributions+
3	Christopher	$ 10,848.64	$ 1,828.30
3	Duffy	$ 20,246.80	$ 10,915.00
5	Jefts	$ 27,231.80	$ 14,475.16
5	Robinson	$ 11,523.64	$ 1,350.00
1	Thomas	$ 7,260.00	$ 6,010.00
1	Kelly	$ 8309.34	$ 2,735.00

 

+Out of town contributions include unidentified cash

With all finance reports through April 26 now posted, Ann Duffy’s contributions of almost $20,000 are far ahead of challenger Hulyne Christopher, who reported over $10,000.  Duffy’s out-of-town contributions were about $11,000 while Christopher received just $1,800 from donors outside Cedar Park including about $1,200 from Andy Pitts of Leander.  Duffy reported donations from several PACs.  Duffy’s donors include area Democrat elected officials John Bucy and Gloria Dholakia as well as fellow city officials Corbin Van Arsdale and Stephen Thomas.  Christopher’s donors include former Republican office holders Tony Dale, John Lux, and Lyle Grimes.

With all 2019 reports filed, incumbent Heather Jefts reported the most contributions so far with over $27,000.  Of those contributions Jefts has reported over $14,000 in out-of-town money plus donations from several PACs. Jefts's donors include area Democrat officials Rep. John Bucy, Rep. Celia Israel, Rep. Vikki Goodwin, Brigid Shea and Gloria Dholakia as well as fellow city officials Corbin Van Arsdale and Stephen Thomas.  Challenger Rodney Robinson reports contributions around $11,000 with about $10,000 coming from Cedar Park.  His donors include area Republicans Tony Dale, John Lux, and Lyle Grimes.  He received $1,203.30 from Andy Pitts of Leander as one of his out of town donors.

Of the incumbents Stephen Thomas trails significantly behind Duffy and Jefts with only $7,260 reported in contributions for 2019.  Thomas, a Republican, lost supporters due to his donations of $650 each to Democrats Duffy and Jefts.  The large majority of Thomas’s contributions came from out of town sources and also from PACs. Challenger Tim Kelly reports just over $8,000 total contributions received.  Of that Kelly has about $2,700 out of town money with no PACs reported and no donations from Andy Pitts.  Kelly’s donors include former Republican office holders Tony Dale, John Lux, and Don Zimmerman.

Citizens for Cedar Park PAC reported expenditures for Christopher, Kelly, and Robinson of close to $15,000.  The PAC contributors are listed in the finance reports.  The One Cedar Park PAC did not file for April.

Cedar Park election finance reports are found at the city website -- https://www.cedarparktexas.gov/departments/city-secretary/candidate-officeholder-campaign-finance-reports.  Note that Duffy’s final April report was not posted at the time of the initial posting of this article, but was posted at the end of the day April 29.

Leander City Council Race - What Candidate Finance Reports Show

Leander City Council Race - What Candidate Finance Reports Actually Show
(Hint:  There is more to Leander elections than Andy Pitts.)

Remember the movie "Ground Hog Day" with Bill Murray where the main character wakes up only to find that he is repeating the same day over and over?  Yesterday I felt that way about the Leander City Council election.

With the first week of Early Voting for the 2019 city council positions complete, the Hill Country News issued what could be described as a "hit piece" against some of the candidates in the Leander and Cedar Park elections using some of the same narrative used in the 2018 election.

In both cities candidates fall into two informal groups or slates.  In Leander the challengers are endorsed by recently elected mayor Troy Hill and are seen as part of the 2018 changing of the guard that also elected Christine Sederquist and Marci Cannon.  Kathryn Pantalion-Parker, Chris Czernek, and Jason Shaw are running with the endorsement of current Leander mayor Troy Hill.  Jason Shaw has also received the endorsement of the Williamson County Republican Leaders organization, and Parker has received the endorsement of prominent Williamson County Republicans including Commissioner Cynthia Long and former Texas House Representative Tony Dale.

The Hill Country News article titled "Big money dominating local city council races", dated April 27, 2019, revived a theme from the 2018 mayoral campaign that accused the city council of being bought by Leander citizen Andy Pitts through the Texas Stronger PAC and other outside money.  Travis Outrider researched those claims during the 2018 runoff election and found that while Texas Stronger PAC made a significant financial contribution to Hill, his opponent Villareal had received twice as much money as Hill with less than Hill's amount coming from Leander citizens.  You could perhaps describe the claims as "fake news" or at least a campaign claim that did not hold up to facts and worthy of Pinocchio.   (Reference:  https://travis-outrider.blogspot.com/2018/05/.)

Based on research of the campaign finance documents available publicly on the city website, it appears we have another day but the same song. (Trivia:  "I Got You Babe" by Sonny and Cher plagued Murray.)  The facts show that although Texas Stronger did make significant contribution to those three candidates, they each received more donations from Leander citizens than their opponents.  In fact all three received more contributions than their opponents even without the Texas Strong PAC donation.  Apparently Pitts makes a great boogie man in campaign opposition pieces, but analysis shows that the three candidates he supports would be beating their opponents in donations in both dollars and citizen support without him.

Here is the breakdown of campaign contributions as currently posted on the city webpage. (Reference:  https://www.leandertx.gov/citysecretary/page/elections2019)

Place	Candidate	Total contributions	Leander contributions
1	Parker*	$  9,570.00	10
1	Lantrip	$  2,325.04	2
3	Shaw*	$  9,415.04	10
3	Ross	$  646.00	2
5	Seiler	$  5,306.50	8
5	Czernek*	$  10,005.00	12

* Received $3000 from Texas Stronger PAC according to finance reports filed.