The Texas Observer

(Update, Update II, below)

In the next hour, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson plans to publicly endorse Barack Obama, according to CNN. As of this post, the endorsement has not made it to the governor’s campaign Web site yet.

Richardson made the announcement in an e-mail to supporters, which begins, “after careful and thoughtful deliberation.”

Indeed!

Richardson could have made a difference for Obama in Texas, particularly with Latinos, had he chosen to endorse before the March 4 primacaucus. Despite flirtations with an endorsement, including a widely anticipated appearance on Face the Nation right before the vote, in the end he opted to wait. As Mark Penn of the Clinton campaign said this morning in a conference call, “[t]he time when he could have been most effective has long since passed.”

CNN is reporting that where the Richardson endorsement might have the most impact now is in persuading superdelegates to support Obama over Clinton. Hillary Clinton still has the lead in superdelegates, according to Politico.com, but the majority remain uncommitted.

Below is an except from Richardson’s e-mail:

Earlier this week, Senator Barack Obama gave an historic speech that addressed the issue of race with the eloquence, sincerity, and optimism we have come to expect of him. He inspired us by reminding us of the awesome potential residing in our own responsibility. He asked us to rise above our racially divided past, and to seize the opportunity to carry forward the work of many patriots of all races, who struggled and died to bring us together.

As a Hispanic, I was particularly touched by his words. I have been troubled by the demonization of immigrants–specifically Hispanics–by too many in this country. Hate crimes against Hispanics are rising as a direct result and now, in tough economic times, people look for scapegoats and I fear that people will continue to exploit our racial differences–and place blame on others not like them . We all know the real culprit — the disastrous economic policies of the Bush Administration!

Senator Obama has started a discussion in this country long overdue and rejects the politics of pitting race against race. He understands clearly that only by bringing people together, only by bridging our differences can we all succeed together as Americans.

His words are those of a courageous, thoughtful and inspiring leader, who understands that a house divided against itself cannot stand. And, after nearly eight years of George W. Bush, we desperately need such a leader.

To reverse the disastrous policies of the last seven years, rebuild our economy, address the housing and mortgage crisis, bring our troops home from Iraq and restore America’s international standing, we need a President who can bring us together as a nation so we can confront our urgent challenges at home and abroad.

During the past year, I got to know Senator Obama as we campaigned against each other for the Presidency, and I felt a kinship with him because we both grew up between words, in a sense, living both abroad and here in America. In part because of these experiences, Barack and I share a deep sense of our nation’s special responsibilities in the world.

Update:

MSNBC has the full video of the endorsement announcement at a rally in Oregon.

Update, II:

From Bill Burton, Obama Campaign press secretary, on Penn’s comment that Richardson’s value as an endorsement had passed.

“Long since? Actually, it must have passed awfully fast.

Bill and Hillary both called Richardson to ask for his endorsement March 18 — eight days ago, according to a source familiar with the conversations.”

Hmmm. Wonder who that source could be? Governor?

It came as a shock to us last year when we learned that Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff has the authority to waive most any law that gets in the way of construction of a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. It also precludes judicial review if someone asserts that Chertoff is overstepping his bounds. The power was stealthily given to him when Congress passed the REAL ID Act of 2005.

On Monday the Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife filed a petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the authority. Here’s the press release. The filing, a pdf of which can be found here, argues that the REAL ID Act’s waiver provision contravenes the system of checks and balances guaranteed in the Constitution.

“Not only does the waiver authority extend to every federal, state, and local legal requirement, but the statute provides no right to a judicial determination that the Secretary’s exercise of this authority complies with the standard established by Congress. For that reason, this broad delegation of authority violates the principles recognized in the well-established nondelegation doctrine. The unchecked and unreviewable authority to waive any federal law in this case also violates the Constitution’s clear command…”

So far, Chertoff has used his authority to complete a wall near San Diego, to remove vehicle barriers and replace them with a wall in the Barry M. Goldwater Range in Arizona, and to build a border wall within the San Pedro Riparian National Conservation Area. There is speculation that Chertoff plans to waive environmental laws in Texas to build the wall as well. To date that has not happened but a controversial environmental impact statement may be a precursor to such action.

We were curious, given the radical turn of this Supreme Court, whether it might create some really bad law if the justices took this one on. We received a thoughtful response to that question from Bob Dreher, vice president for conservation law with Defenders of Wildlife.

First, we think it unlikely that the Court would grant review just to affirm the district court; if a majority of the Justices think the district court got it right, they will most likely just vote to deny review, leaving the decision as it stands. If they vote to grant review, therefore, we would view that as a positive sign that at least 4 Justices think there may be a serious constitutional problem with the waiver provision of the Real ID Act. The Court may nonetheless decide that issue against us, but in that case all they will have done is to ratify Congress’s existing understanding of their ability to delegate this sort of waiver authority to Executive Branch officials.

The enviros are not the only ones concerned by the use of REAL ID to waive longstanding laws that protect public health and the environment. Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman wrote to Chertoff last December about the waiving of environmental laws to build a fence through the San Pedro conservation area in Arizona.

Lieberman asked several questions, including this rather important one: In what circumstances will Chertoff use his new power to suspend laws?

Chertoff responded (pdf here) with a lengthy letter that is well worth a read. The secretary’s answer reasserts his unilateral authority to a) determine where the wall is needed, b) judge its impact on the environment, and c) set the timeline by which it will be built. The best part perhaps is where Chertoff makes the argument that an enormous wall topped with bright lights through a conservation area will be good for the environment because it will deter trash and human waste from migrants who pass through.

The irony to this whole dance is that even Chertoff has admitted that construction of a border wall is largely symbolic and will not have much impact on illegal immigration.

(Updated below, Update II)

The Associated Press is reporting that the Clinton campaign has asked the Texas Democratic Party to postpone the county conventions scheduled for Saturday, March 29. The conventions are the next stage in Texas’ convoluted caucus process.

In a letter to the party late Friday, the Clinton campaign stated it had received more than 2,000 complaints of violations during the caucus process, in which a million Texans came out. The campaign wants the eligibility of the caucus-goers double checked before the process continues.

With about 41 percent of precinct caucuses reported, rival Barack Obama was ahead with 56 percent to Clinton’s 44 percent.

The party has apparently already told the Clinton campaign it can’t verify the voters before March 29. They have not announced a decision on the Clinton campaign’s request for a delay.

The Obama campaign responded to the request with the following:

“We don’t think that the record-breaking number of Texans who stood up to be counted on March 4th would appreciate the Clinton campaign’s attempt to disenfranchise them and silence their voices just because the outcome wasn’t politically beneficial to Senator Clinton” – said Obama spokesman Dan Pfeiffer.

For now, it looks like what was a historic night for Texas Democrats could well end up as a nasty court battle.

Update: Below is the letter in its entirety.

Update II: This is an interesting take from the pro-Obama folks at Burnt Orange Report on the implications of the Clinton request.

Read the rest of this entry »

Plenty of reports of problems across the state. The Clinton campaign claimed, in an entertaining conference call, widespread skullduggery. In a follow-up memo they listed their charges: [sic] Prematurely Taking Precinct Convention Packets by Obama Campaign; Voter Intimidation: Lock-out of Clinton caucus goers by Obama Campaign; and Obama supporters filing out precinct convention sign-in sheets during the day and submitting them as completed vote totals at caucus. The Obama campaign earlier in the day sent its own memo about Clinton partisans filling out precinct sign-in sheets early.

In reality, it seems if there were any problems they were minor and practiced by both sides. The Clinton campaign’s claims of systematic shenanigans seems a little calculated and far-fetched. In truth the Texas Democratic Party was not up to this challenge. More lack of preparation than anything else. More on that later.

But I hope that when this is all said and done the confusion and disorganization doesn’t overshadow the fact that perhaps hundreds of thousands came out to caucus. At precinct 440 in Austin it was a sight to behold. Neighbors of all colors and ages standing together outside waiting. Some waited as long as two hours to sign in.

The process didn’t begin until 8:00 p.m. when the last primary voter had voted. Because the party failed to provide enough sign-in sheets, someone made a quick run to a place with a copy machine to run off more. The caucus participants filed single file into an apartment complex laundry room that served as a makeshift precinct. The usual precinct, a local elementary school, wouldn’t stay open. At one point a resident actually came in and started doing laundry amidst the caucus goers, who were by and large patient and cheerful. Clinton people respected Obama people and vice versa.

As they waited outside, those with wireless devices checked the results and shouted them out to the crowd. By 9:15 p.m. they had finished. An indeterminate number who couldn’t wait the whole time left before they had a chance to sign in. The final tally was 254 for Obama and 167 for Clinton. It worked out to a delegate split of 24 to 13.

It’s clear that the two camps will be fighting over the exact delegate count from the caucuses for some time to come. Meanwhile, Clinton’s strong showing in Ohio and Rhode Island have emboldened her to continue fighting despite her delegate deficit.

The circus will be leaving Texas tomorrow. Now Texas Democrats just need to figure out a way to keep the energy alive.

There is a debate brewing between Democratic Party officials and the Secretary of State over when results will be available. The Texas Secretary of State’s elections’ division sent a memo around to polling stations, reminding them to turn in their primary results immediately after the polls close — and before the caucus begins (see No. 8 in the memo). Some County Democratic Party officials would rather the workers worry first about getting the caucus started, and turn in the primary and caucus results all together later tonight.

As Ashley Burton at the secretary of state’s office explains it: “Each precinct has a separate list of those who voted at that precinct. The election judges don’t have count the results, just deliver it to the central counting location. They do not have to stay while those votes are counted. Once they deliver the results, they can return to their precinct.”

State officials clearly want primary results as soon as possible for television networks and a national audience. The state party wants an organized caucus so potential Democratic voters aren’t put off and return in November. The secretary of state has no enforcement power. The election judges are appointed by the state party so one does not have to wonder to whom they will listen.

If precinct workers don’t turn in their results until after the caucus, then it could be 10 p.m. or after until voting totals roll in from Tarrant County and other contested areas.

In other words, it could be a late night.

With all our chasing after the campaigns yesterday, we didn’t have time to look at the early vote. Fortunately, the ever-perceptive Leland Beatty did most of the heavy lifting for us. According to the Associated Press, about 2 million people voted early. That’s just a fraction of the estimated 12 million registered voters in the state, but it’s a historic number nonetheless.

Beatty’s analysis points to a few startling and suggestive facts from the early vote numbers:

A huge percentage of the vote is from voters who have not previously voted in a Democratic primary.

In Harris County these newbies make up 66.8 percent of the early vote. In Travis County, they constitute 58.5 percent of the vote. In Dallas County, they are 59.7 percent of the vote. Even in Hidalgo County, where the only game in town generally is the Democratic primary, 40.1 percent are new primary voters. As we’ve discussed before, if Democrats can identify what motivates these folks and dedicate resources to getting them out again in November, they could have a huge impact on Texas politics going forward.

There are a lot of past Republican primary voters casting ballots in the Democratic primary.

Republicans are being outvoted in the primary 3-to-1. If that wasn’t bad enough, some of the surging Democratic vote is coming from former Republicans. The SwitcherShare, as Beatty calls it, is 8.5 percent of the vote in Dallas County, 7.8 percent in Houston, and 11 percent in Travis County. One has to think that this trend favors Barack Obama, who has attracted support from Republicans and Independents in the past.

Despite record youth turnout, the bulk of the vote comes from folks over 40.

In Harris County, 67.5 percent of the vote is from those over 40, and approximately 40 percent of that vote is women over 40. The trend is similar in the other big counties. In Hidalgo, 64.7 percent of the early vote is the older demographic and 37.1 percent is women over 40. In Travis County, with its huge university population, 57.5 percent of the vote is from folks over 40, with 30.8 percent coming from women over 40. In Dallas, it’s a whopping 69.8 percent of the early vote for the older folks, with 39.1 percent of that women. The early turnout of women over 40 is huge for Hillary Clinton.

Some say the early vote favors Obama but other polling indicates Clinton is ahead. We should know soon enough.

Early reports from folks here in Austin are that traffic at the polls has been light. It’s possible this early-vote thing actually works!

Stay tuned. Throughout the day and evening we will have blog posts from around the state, including reports from the caucuses in key cities.

Two campaigns with lots of fire and lots of money. Obama responds to Clinton ad that she is best qualified in a dangerous world.

The ad is here and this is the text:

Ringing”
:30

SCRIPT: It’s 3 a.m. and your children are safe and asleep. But there’s a phone ringing in the White House. Something’s happening in the world. When that call gets answered, shouldn’t the president be the one – the only one – who had judgment and courage to oppose the Iraq war from the start… Who understood the REAL threat to America was al-Qaeda, in Afghanistan, not Iraq. Who led the effort to secure loose nuclear weapons around the globe… In a dangerous world, it’s judgment that matters. I’m Barack Obama and I approved this message.