Video: Two Elected Texas Democrats Switch to GOP


#1

Video: Two Elected Texas Democrats Switch to GOP
December 14, 2010 - by Bryan Preston
Pajamas Media

The Democratic Party’s civil war continues to take its toll. Jim Geraghty noted that across the South, a handful of elected Democrat officials switched parties this week, and the week prior to that I noted that several others had switched, including two black Democrats in Georgia.

In Texas Tuesday, two Democratic state Representatives hung up the donkey and switched teams: State Rep. Allan Ritter of southeast Texas (District 21), and state Rep. Aaron Pena of Hidalgo County (District 40) , are now Republicans, giving the Texas GOP an almost unthinkable 101-49 supermajority in the state House.
Usually I’d worry that moves like this are political opportunism, but Pena at least sounds like he’s moving over to the party most like his real views on issues.


#2

People who are elected to office under a certain party banner should be legally bound to keep that banner until the next election.
If I vote for a Republican, I expect to be represented by a Republican, and vice~versa.


#3

I agree - even if the change is in “my” favor. The same should happen when an elected official dies, and his replacement is appointed - should be the same party.


#4

It is a wonder why people call themselves a certain party when they do not believe the tenets of that party. Of course when I see politicians switch parties at the drop of the hat if they think there is an advantage it tells me that the convictions of that politician are very shallow.


#5

Really? You all vote for the Magic “R” or Magic “D” after the pols’ names, not for what they stand for?

I will go this far, though. If the D Party spent $$ getting these two reelected at the most recent election, these two should reimburse the D Party, with interest. My best guess, though, is that these two (or at least Pena has been) have been virtual personas non grata among TX Ds and the Party, and probably got little or no assistance.

Former Pres. Reagan was originally a D. Some time in the 50s or 60s, he realized that the D Party had changed and he switched. The TX D Party changed more slowly than did, for example, the MA or CA D Party. And it looks like these two - possibly after fighting the changes behind the scenes and complicated by the fact of holding office as a D - are acting on the D Party leaving them.


#6

[quote=“PeteS_in_CA, post:5, topic:28604”]
Really? You all vote for the Magic “R” or Magic “D” after the pols’ names, not for what they stand for?

I will go this far, though. If the D Party spent $$ getting these two reelected at the most recent election, these two should reimburse the D Party, with interest. My best guess, though, is that these two (or at least Pena has been) have been virtual personas non grata among TX Ds and the Party, and probably got little or no assistance.

Former Pres. Reagan was originally a D. Some time in the 50s or 60s, he realized that the D Party had changed and he switched. The TX D Party changed more slowly than did, for example, the MA or CA D Party. And it looks like these two - possibly after fighting the changes behind the scenes and complicated by the fact of holding office as a D - are acting on the D Party leaving them.
[/quote]Actually as a conservative independent I vote spit ticket. I choose who I think will benefit the nation rather than do harm. Like my pappy said “vote for the guy who steals the least”


#7

I vote spit ticket

A rather appropriate malaprop, :biggrin: .


#8

I agree - even if the change is in “my” favor. The same should happen when an elected official dies, and his replacement is appointed - should be the same party.

What is the point of that, they could simply just change their voting pattern to be with the other party and caucus with the other party anyway.

One of two things would be better than electing some guy from some party:

  1. Simply elect a generic empty seat: You go and mark democrat or republican or whatever and a party council decides how all of the votes will go. (Basically how it goes now, except one or two members hold out until they are bribed with pork and that is how they break filibusters )

The council can be staffed by volunteers in their free time and their votes could be by near unanimous agreement (say, 80%).

  1. (and I strongly believe this one) You should not be able to run if you are not going to seek reelection, each person in your district should be mailed a complete report of your economic impact on you compiled by an independent company who’s management is sent to prison for fraud if incorrect. This report will include all taxes levied on people in your distric, all regulations placed on you etc etc.

Once you are voted out, there is no lame duck session, it should be illegal to convene the old congress once there is an election. Also, the penalty for election fraud, whether you knew about it or not, is death. (So in the case of ACORN election fraud…)

Actually, creating fair elections seems like a big hassle…


#9

[quote=“GT7, post:8, topic:28604”]
Once you are voted out, there is no lame duck session, it should be illegal to convene the old congress once there is an election.
[/quote]I completely agree on this point. What we are seeing now is efforts by democrats and Rinos to vote in Obama’s agenda before the old congress expires.


#10

No, I don’t. However, a candidate’s party affiliation does have some bearing when weighing my choices.
However, that’s not what I meant. Let me put it another way. If a person runs on a certain party’s ticket, it generally follows that (s)he agrees w/that party’s platform. If he/she didn’t, then why’d they run on that ticket in the first place? Oh, let me guess. Because they KNOW a D or R could never get elected in that particular district, so they play pretend just long enough to get them into office.
How nice. I wish everyone was full of such high integrity.

I will go this far, though. If the D Party spent $$ getting these two reelected at the most recent election, these two should reimburse the D Party, with interest. My best guess, though, is that these two (or at least Pena has been) have been virtual personas non grata among TX Ds and the Party, and probably got little or no assistance.

Former Pres. Reagan was originally a D. Some time in the 50s or 60s, he realized that the D Party had changed and he switched. The TX D Party changed more slowly than did, for example, the MA or CA D Party. And it looks like these two - possibly after fighting the changes behind the scenes and complicated by the fact of holding office as a D - are acting on the D Party leaving them.

Reagan, however, did not RUN on one ticket, then switch horses mid-stream. He went about changing party affiliation the proper way.


#11

[quote=“2cent, post:10, topic:28604”]
No, I don’t. However, a candidate’s party affiliation does have some bearing when weighing my choices.
However, that’s not what I meant. Let me put it another way. If a person runs on a certain party’s ticket, it generally follows that (s)he agrees w/that party’s platform. If he/she didn’t, then why’d they run on that ticket in the first place? Oh, let me guess. Because they KNOW a D or R could never get elected in that particular district, so they play pretend just long enough to get them into office.
How nice. I wish everyone was full of such high integrity.

Reagan, however, did not RUN on one ticket, then switch horses mid-stream. He went about changing party affiliation the proper way.
[/quote]Just as you said, a person runs on a certain platform and I may add if that person then once elected does just the opposite then their true colors are showing.

In that case they need to be removed at the first opportunity. We have already seen that with a couple of “Republicans” who were elected this year who are showing clear signs they were really democrats.


#12

Arlen Specter changed from D to R, because that was the only way he could get elected. Then when it looked like he was going to lose in the primary, he changed back to D - and lost anyway!


#13

I don’t want the opportunists! They saw the political wind blowing the wrong way and changed. They weren’t even smart enough to see it hitting them in the face for the last year and a half. If they had reacted to the way Obama, Reid and Pelosi were ramming crap through from the get go and switched to Independent I could have at least had some respect for sticking to their values.