Texas Democrats Should Be Demoralized by Republican Pete Flores' Victory

Many Texas Democrats were demoralized on Tuesday when Republican Pete Flores defeated Democrat Pete Gallego in the second round of Texas presidential elections in June, following the resignation of Democrat Carlos Uresti.

They should be demoralized. It was a potentially significant loss. Democrats have no one else to blame for that. Flores' victory does not necessarily mean a "red wave" is coming to Texas in this year's midterm elections, as many Republicans have quickly said. But the Texas Democratic Party's response to Gallego's defeat does not augur well for its chances of successfully competing.

"Gov. Abbott stole an election, simple and simple, "party chairman Gilbert Hinojosa said in a statement.

"Republicans set a date that would guarantee a low turnout, so Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and Republican interests poured money into the race, depriving residents of West Texas and the US representation of Mexico who share their values, "he continued.

It's actually irresponsible rhetoric, especially considering the context. Many Texans are rightly concerned about the removal of voters. And a handful of Texans are alarmed by Abbott's disregard for the constitutional constraints on the powers of his office. In April, the governor literally suspended the Texas Electoral Code to call a special emergency election in the 27th congressional district, represented by Republican Blake Farenthold.

In this case, however, Abbott was not even sneaky. He could have asked for a special election on November 6, as requested by Uresti. But Abbott was not obliged to do so, and Uresti was hardly in a position to comment on the needs of his constituents.

In February, Uresti was convicted of 11 crimes. At the time, he was facing allegations of sexual misconduct, reported by Olivia Messer of The Daily Beast. And after covering the Senate of Texas, I would add that Uresti did not contribute much to the debates of the chamber.

A little bit of luck

In addition, Hinojosa has no reason to believe that Flores does not share the values ​​of the Texans who will be his constituents.

He is apparently the first Republican to represent this district in the Texas Senate for over a century, and his election was a bit of a fluke. Flores was ranked first in the special election, which was held in July. But Democratic voters were divided between Gallego and Roland Gutierrez, who represents South San Antonio at Texas House and finished in third place. Together, they won more votes than Flores. And Flores, let's note, was the Republican challenger at Uresti in 2016; in this contest, he won just 40% of the vote.

But that does not mean that Flores, a retired guardian who will be the first Hispanic Republican to sit in the Texas Senate, is an extremist. And the neighborhood is not blue, exactly. In fact, it overlaps much of the 23rd congressional district, which is currently represented by Will Hurd, a Republican who dismissed Gallego in 2014, and beat him on the other hand, in 2016.

Hinojosa's critics are therefore misleading, in addition to criticism. I would not want to extrapolate much of Flores' own victory. This may be a consequence because under the rules of the Texas Senate, legislation can not be introduced unless three-fifths of the senators present agree to hear it. In other words, Republicans need 19 votes to table their bills, despite the objections of their fellow Democrats – assuming that none of the 31 seats in the chamber are vacant and that none of the members not be absent.

But before Uresti's resignation, there were 20 Republicans in the Texas Senate. And they would probably only need 18 votes to trample Democrats for most of the next session. Abbott refused to schedule a special election to replace Democratic Senator Sylvia Garcia, who currently represents the 29th congressional district of Texas.

A wake up call

So the fact that Republicans like Abbott and Patrick have worked so hard to overthrow this Senate seat is suggestive. They claim to see a red wave coming. But they approached this special election as if they were worried about a blue issue in November.

Hinojosa can blame them for that, but I do not do it because it would be a criticism of a political party to compete – which would be strange.

And democrats demoralized by defeat should take Flores' victory as a warning signal. I think we can all agree that Texas Republicans are not shooting exactly at all cylinders recently. I often have the opportunity to criticize them. But in this case, the Republicans did nothing wrong, politically or morally. Democrats can not say as much.

The district favors the Democrats, but the victory of Flores was not a surprise. Uresti's misdeeds created an opportunity that Republicans were doomed to exploit, and Democratic leaders were complacent about the risk of success. This attitude may not have guaranteed Gallego's defeat, but it certainly would not have resulted in a blue wave.