Joe Straus, Reestablishing Conservatism

The past week I have received a barrage of emails, phone calls and news updates indicating of a released letter by "conservatives" asking for more conservative leadership for our Speaker of the House position. Fair enough, we should always aim to push forward the conservative cause. I know what conservative means, but something in this letter has led to me to believe that our "conservative leaders" have again lost their way. In the letter, the most revealing sentence is the one that says "The victory of nearly two dozen new conservative Republican legislators reflects the mood of Texas voters on the state’s critical issues. It was a clarion call for conservative leadership in the Texas House – leadership that has been absent the past two years." Two years ago we had Speaker Craddick. Sorry, but that was not the conservatism that Americans overwhelmingly voted for this election cycle. Americans made it clear at the ballot box that we should be focused and united on the size of government, the deficit and spending. This is how Russ Feingold was overthrown by Ron Johnson, how Chris Christie beat Corzine, and how Republicans across the nation once again convinced fed up Americans to trust us one more time to lead. Straus has proven in leadership that we could go against the grain and actually cut our spending by $1.6 billion ending with a balanced budget. This being done for the very first time since World War II in Texas. This would include any previous "conservative" class of representatives in Texas who had every opportunity to lead and exemplify their definition of conservatism.

Am I saying that Speaker Straus should be given a pass, that we should never speak against the "Lord's anointed"? No. All of our leaders should be held accountable and measured, it is our duty to remain vigilant at all levels of representation. Still we have to also be careful when others attempt to define what conservatism is. Blue Dog Democrats, oh they are very "conservative", but look where that led us. Have you checked how many so called "conservative" Republicans have signed on to the federal "No earmark pledge"? It is sad to say this, but still not every GOP "conservative" representative has signed on. This is where it hurts the most and where one's bonafides is tested, it's in the arena of fiscal conservatism. Under Straus' leadership we were able to commit $9 billion dollars to a Rainy day Fund. Listening to Governor Rick Perry beat on Bill White about how Houston's budget is loaded with debt, but Texas itself having a Rainy day Fund was the perfect message for Texans this election.

To read across national publications, how the Texas economy is number one, while still being able to save 40,000 small businesses from paying the business margins tax is something to be very proud of. Just ask California who is burdened with $83.5 billion in long term debt if they wish they could be in our position. It took leadership to get to this point. Of course this was not all attributed to Joe Straus, but it was a serious team effort, and nothing says team more than Joe Straus, when he raised close to $1 million dollars for fellow conservative Republicans to be able to win their races. This historic takeover of our State House in part happened because we had the financial weaponry to promote fiscally conservative Republicans and challenge blue areas thought to be Democratic strongholds. This is the true definition of a team effort. To throw this all away, to discount these achievements with claims that we need someone "more conservative" is ridiculous. Nothing is more of a conservative victory than having the power in your hands to spend someone else's money but instead you are able to guide all 150 House members, Democrats included to vote for a spending decrease, and without raising taxes, giving your citizenry more of their own money to do as they please.

We must be aware that conservatism at this point in time, has the opportunity to take hold as a powerful and lasting American ideology all across our nation. It will be our collective fiscal behavior, however that our neighbors will be watching to see if we truly mean what we say. I don't think it is too much to ask of fellow Conservatives to finally listen to the voices of our neighbors.

Here is a link that debunks the claim that Straus is not willing to fight for pro-life causes.

Here is the link that shows Joe Straus is one of only 17 legislators to receive the "Americans for Prosperity Defenders of the American Dream" Award.


Mr or Ms Anonymous.

You are sounding like Lloyd Doggett saying I was bussed in to his event last year from out of district or that I was working for some special intrest group!

When Craddick appointed Dems and they all went to Ardmore it just showed that the Dems can not be trusted to do their jobs! Craddick was wrong to appoint them!

Just because Craddick was wrong does not mean Straus should be allowed to be as wrong as Craddick was!

Which part of WE THE PEOPLE don't want business as usual didn't you understand?

Distracted by what?  Killing unborn babies?  Anyone who supports abortion, especially the hideous late-term abortions, is no conservative.  Planned Parenthood, the world's largest abortion-providers, does not hand out such glowing endorsements to just anyone.
Here are some of the bills which Joe Straus supported:

  • Making it easier to perform late-term, third-trimester abortions (SB 419, vote 672, 2005). And in the 2007 session, he received a 100 percent voting record from the radical pro-abortion group NARAL, and the pro-abortion group Planned Parenthood contributed to his reelection campaign
  • Homosexuals as foster parents (SB 6, vote 327, 2005)

    If we do not have right to be born, no other rights matter.  There can be NO compromise on this.  If you think the voters are not very concerned about this, you are kidding yourselves. 

  • Let's all take a moment to remember that Craddick needed members of the democrat caucus to be speaker. One of those was Patrick Rose, whom he supported and even directed funding to.

    Straus did what needed to be done to save the Republican Party and the FISCAL Conservative cause. He also spent more than one million dollars of his campaign money to help elect conservative Republicans this year.

    This session is going to be a much different story. Now he doesn't have to facilitate or cooperate. Now Speaker Straus can lead this state back to it's constitutional foundation.

    We don't need to go back to the bad old days of Craddick and losing elections. I like winning better and with Straus we have a leader we can take pride in!

    We played the socon game for years and it almost gave the democrats a majority.

    You may care. Some of your friends may care. Most voters just want lower taxes and less spending and a Constitutionally based government. That's Joe Straus.

    I'm done fighting your stupid culture war. I want REAL conservatives, not people who are overly concerned with what the gays are doing.

    Speaker Straus does not support abortion; he is pro-life, consistent with former President Reagan's position on the issue. His public statement on abortion is "As you know I believe in the sanctity of life. I am consistent with existing restrictions on abortion including parental notification/parental consent. I believe exceptions should exist for rape, incest and harm to the life of the Mother. That said, I fervently hope abortion is the rarest medical procedure conducted in 2009 and beyond." (
    Here's the facts:
    "Making it easier to perform late-term, third-trimester abortions" --SB 419, vote 672, 2005--  Vote 672 is a vote on a motion to table an amendment to an amendment to SB 419.  Take a look at vote 676, Rep. Straus voted for the amendment that vote 672 cited was related to which actually strengthened prohibitions on doctors performing third trimester abortions.  
    "Homosexuals as foster parents" --SB 6, vote 327, 2005-- Again, a vote on an amendment to an amendment.  The amendment had a fiscal note of $7-8 million and would have required HHSC to investigate whether a foster parent was homosexual and removed the child if their investigation showed that the parent was homosexual.  In this case, then Representative Straus voted for an amendment to this amendment which would have eliminated the investigation requirement (and the $7-8 million cost associated therewith) and merely required the foster parent applicant to indicate his or her sexual orientation on the application. 

    Speaker Straus never pledged to Craddick in 2009.  He's a man of his word and expects others to be as well.  
    You have found a Speaker of the House that is not power hungry in Joe Straus.  He vowed to let every measure that had majority support to come to the floor for a vote and he kept his word.  

    Please name one piece of legislation Joe Straus "killed."

    Temo it really hurts to know that you and I talked, I explained why your number were misguided and why much of what Straus is claiming credit for would have happened no matter what. 
    But you didn't listen. 



    © 2015 TexasGOPVote  | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy