Author: mopress

  • Victor Carrillo's Letter to Supporters: ''I Refuse to Walk Away in Shame''

    LETTER TO SUPPORTERS FROM VICTOR CARILLO (Chair of the Texas Railroad Commission, March 3, 2010)

    Dear Family, Friends, Colleagues, Supporters:

    As you now surely know, last night I was defeated (61% / 39%) in my statewide
    Republican Primary by my opponent, David Porter.

    Porter, an unknown, nocampaign,
    no-qualification CPA from Midland residing in Giddings filed on the last
    day that he could file while I was waiting in Abilene to bury my dad. He has
    never held any elected office, has no geoscience, industry, or legal experience
    other than doing tax returns for oil and gas companies.

    I was handily defeated in spite of spending over $600,000 to do the following:

    1. Distribute two direct mail pieces to almost 500,000 Republican primary
      households;
    2. Run a 60-second radio spot on TX State Radio Network, supplemented by
      key conservative talk and Christian radio stations;
    3. Run ads in several targeted newspapers;
    4. RoboCalls to thousands of “Independent” households;
    5. Distribute election push cards, website, Facebook page, bumper stickers,
      letter writing;
    6. Actively campaign in-person by my campaign staff and me.

    Early polling showed that the typical GOP primary voter has very little info about
    the position of Railroad Commissioner, what we do, or who my opponent or I
    were. Given the choice between “Porter” and “Carrillo” — unfortunately, the
    Hispanic-surname was a serious setback from which I could never recover
    although I did all in my power to overcome this built-in bias. I saw it last time
    but was able to win because the “non-Carrillo” vote was spread among three
    Anglo GOP primary opponents instead of just one. Also, the political dynamics
    have changed some since 2004.

    Screenshot of Web Page for Victor G. Carrillo, Chairman of the Texas Railroad Commission (accessed March 6, 2010)

    Many of you have begun to call and/or write to express your concern over the
    whole situation. You are correct to be concerned over the fact that the GOP (our
    party) still has these tendencies to not be able to elect or retain highly qualified
    candidates who WANT to continue serving the public as I do.

    It is indeed a
    shame. Nevertheless, I refuse to walk away in shame because I know that my
    team and I did just about all we could have done to ensure that the primary
    electorate knew of my qualifications, expertise, and experience. The rest was
    beyond my control. I also urge party leaders to not alienate the Hispanic/Latino
    voter in Texas, as we now comprise about 39% of the population and we remain
    the fastest-growing minority group in the nation.

    However, none of you should be concerned about me and my family or my staff.
    Justin, my dedicated chief of staff and former student, gave up an excellent
    position to come back to help me through a most difficult time in my personal life
    with regard to my health and campaign. He remains a trusted friend and advisor
    and I will do all I can to ensure that he and his dear family are well positioned to
    allow his true, full potential to shine.

    As for me and my family, I have learned much over the last several months of
    personal tragedy — after my own brain surgery/recovery, the death of my halfbrother
    at Thanksgiving, and the death of my Dad (my best friend) in January:

    THE SPECIFIC OUTCOME OF MY PATH IN LIFE IS NOT IN
    MY CONTROL, BUT WHOLLY IN THE MERCIFUL HANDS OF
    MY LORD & SAVIOR. HE, BEING SOVEREIGN, KNOWS
    WHAT IS BEST FOR ME & HE ALONE REMAINS IN FULL
    CONTROL! AS FOR ME, IT IS WELL WITH MY SOUL!

    So please don’t fret over my situation! God has known my path from before the
    beginning of time and He guides my path and I am fully confident that He will
    work things out for His ultimate glory! I do, however, seek your continued
    prayers for my wife (Joy) and my daughters (Laura, Christina, Grace), that they
    not overly worry about our future. I also covet your ongoing prayers for my 86-
    year old mother (Alicia), who continues to grieve the loss of her firstborn son
    and my dad within a six-week time period.

    Sincerely,

    Victor Carrillo

    Exceprt from a March 5, 2010 report by Steve Taylor at the Rio Grande Guardian:

    Carrillo was not the only Hispanic to go down to a surprise defeat in the Republican primary. Harris County Tax Assessor Leo Vasquez also lost to an Anglo. And, in South Texas, a young and highly-regarded former White House staffer, Daniel Garza, failed to make it to the runoff in the Congressional District 15 race.

    In an article about Carrillo’s defeat for Texas Insider, political consultant Suzanne Bellsnyder said the state’s Republican leadership has to confront the “elephant in the room.” Bellsnyder works with conservative Hispanic leaders nationally and in Texas on outreach and leadership development.

    “Tuesday night’s defeat in the Republican Primary of Railroad Commissioner Victor Carrillo sent shockwaves throughout the state, and rightly so. How could a well-funded, conservative and proven incumbent go down so handily in defeat?” Bellsnyder asked.

  • Why Rick Casey Should Apologize

    In a Feb. 8 column, Rick Casey of the Houston Chronicle quotes the editor of the Texas Civil Rights Review to the effect that the election-contest hearing in the Heflin-Vo race had not demonstrated fraud BY Democrat voters of West Houston, but instead had “served up a fine public record of practices by Republicans and unknown others that would suppress their rights.”

    Casey then goes on to show that “unknown others” included folks who were not Republicans. On that basis, Casey concludes that the sentence written by the editor of the Texas Civil Rights Review is false. But the sentence above expressly admits that some parties to fraud perpetrated against voters of West Houston would NOT be Republican, and that’s why we called them “unknown others.”

    So we conclude that the purpose of Casey’s column was simply to discredit the work of the Texas Civil Rights Review. But we will not be deterred. Thanks to our prodding, Casey’s column addresses issues that did not previously appear in the Houston Chronicle’s coverage of the Heflin-Vo hearing.

    We’re not saying we’re perfect here. Like any editor or reporter, I wish I never made a mistake. But when we put in more hours than anyone else on an issue, and when we take the time to point out what is not being covered in the corporate media, and when we make claims that are logically sound, we expect a fair hearing.

    We certainly expect introductory level logic. When we claim that Democratic voters of West Houston have been wronged by Republicans and unknown others, and when Rick Casey proves that West Houston voters have in fact been wronged by unknown others, then we expect the decency of admitting that we were right, not wrong. Otherwise, there is nothing going on in Rick Casey’s column beyond a blatant use of his corporate space to suprress other voices around him, which is a misuse of his power.

    We picked no fights with Casey, and we feel he owes us an apology. Either in the form of a direct apology or in the form of serious attention to our continuing work on the Heflin-Vo docs, this time by name.

  • Portales: Why We Must Insist

    via email
    March 5, 2004

    I dislike being so insistent, but sometimes

    one
    has no choice–given where we have to go.
    Did others notice yesterday’s [Mar. 4] Houston

    Chronicle
    editorial titled “For Green”? The editors wrote
    that they recommend Paul Green and

    not Steve
    Wayne Smith to serve as Place 5 justice on the Texas
    Supreme Court.

    They

    point to the fact that they prefer Green because
    Smith is credited with the Hopwood lawsuit

    that
    “injuriously halted” race as an admissions factor in college admissions, which lost financial

    aid for countless students in Texas. If students were injured by Hopwood almost 8 years ago this

    March 18th [1996], what can we say today about our admissions policy at Texas A&M?

    We

    continue to follow Hopwood’s color-blind policy.
    In GRUTTER (June 23, 2003), the Supreme

    Court
    allowed institutions like Texas A&M, who are
    struggling to recruit minority students, to

    tailor race as one of other accepted factors in college admissions.

    We have, in short,

    now a LEGAL tool–just as Hopwood
    WAS legal–to recruit more minority students, but we
    are not

    using that tool.

    Indeed, our administration refuses to avail itself of that

    tool.

    Why? Because it basically does not want to. For there are now no constitutional

    grounds for embracing Hopwood’s failed color-blind policies, especially when there is a perfectly good

    and legitimate tool for recruiting the minority students that Texas A&M so badly

    needs.

    I believe that we now have no choice but to challenge the administration to

    provide legal support for not considering race when that option is now legally acceptable. Not to do so

    would make us remiss in our responsibilities to the changing demographics of the state of

    Texas.

    So, how should we proceed?

    Sincerely,

    Marco

    Portales, Ph.D.

  • Task Force Docs at Downloads

    View crucial documents that were considered by the
    summer 2003 Task Force on Admissions,

    appointed by
    Texas A&M President Robert Gates.

    The following documents in pdf format

    (5.0 or higher)
    have been added to the Downloads section at the Texas
    Civil Rights Review.

    Please go to Downloads, then to
    “A&M Task Force

    Documents:

    http://texascivilrightsreview.org/phpnuke

    *****Aug. 6 Agenda

    “Lite”

    Description: Six pages of the Aug. 6 agenda (excluding
    the sample copy of the

    “Texas Common Application”.)

    *****Aug. 6 Task Force Agenda

    Description: Agenda

    for Aug. 6 meeting of the 2003
    Task Force on Admissions at Texas A&M, discusses
    options,

    including the one eventually adopted by the
    TaskForce, favoring affirmative action in

    admissions.

    *****Confidential Laycock Analysis

    Description: On July 1, 2003,

    Univ. of Texas Law
    Professor Douglas Laycock issued this 7-page analysis
    of the Supreme Court

    opinions in Grutter and Gratz. It
    is marked “Confidential” as legal advice, but was
    divulged by

    Texas A&M in response to an open records request.

    *****July 18 memo from Gates

    Description: 2-page memo from Texas A&M Univ.
    President Robert Gates, inviting participation in

    the
    2003 Task Force on Admissions.

    *****Nixon Peabody Analysis
    Description: In

    June of 2003, the law firm of Nixon
    Peabody issued this 7-page analysis of the Supreme
    Court

    opinions in Grutter and Gratz. This document was divulged by Texas A&M in response to an Open Records

    request that asked for materials considered by the 2003 Task Force on Admissions.

    The

    final report of the Task Force is posted at “Open
    Records” under COLLECTION

    B.