Gov. Abbott Wins, But Texans Lose

 

As the media and academic experts explained in various recent postmortems, the outcome of the mid-term election was no surprise and a slam dunk for Gov. Abbott: 54.8 percent for Gov. Abbott and 43.8 percent for Beto O’Rourke -- an impressive 11-point margin indeed. In the various news reports in Dallas News, Texas Tribune, WFAA and Texas Monthly, the consensus emerging from interviews with several political science experts was that Gov. Abbott was destined to win the election given his past election victories, a substantial campaign war chest, and a successful campaign strategy that resonated with Texas voters. A critical question raised during these interviews was: How could Beto O’Rourke lose by 11 points, especially since he had generated substantial campaign funds, had high visibility and substantial political experience?  

The explanations provided by the political experts varied but generally included the following: 

• The Democratic Party did not deliver the right message to persuade Texas voters to support their candidates.  
• Beto O’Rourke has outlived his usefulness to the Democratic Party with liberal ideas that did not resonate with Texas voters and should consider retiring or finding a job that utilizes his excellent fundraising skills. 
• Latino voters had lost faith in the Democratic Party and shifting their support to the Republican Party – part of the supposed “red wave” -- that was illustrated by South Texas voters. 
• In Gov. Abbott’s favor, voters experienced a memory loss of the various recent failures associated with his administration: the energy grid failure that caused the lives of 700 Texans, the mass murders in Uvalde and El Paso, the millions of dollars taken from law enforcement to build the border wall, and various others.  
• More importantly, considerable praise was attributed to Gov. Abbott’s campaign which was judged as well executed and relevant to Texas voters.  

Although presented as objective appraisals of the campaign, these insights appeared to focus blame primarily on the inadequacies of the Democratic Party strategy and overlooked other tactics employed by Gov. Abbott’s campaign to paralyze the threat posed by Beto O’Rourke’s campaign. Let’s consider some of these tactics. 

Remove the Threat by Any Means Necessary. Gov. Abbott’s campaign strategists were very aware of the potential threat posed by Beto O’Rourke’ candidacy and decided to deploy the necessary tactics to reduce this threat. Borrowing from the MAGA playbook, the messaging relied on false information to create anxiety and hysteria about a Beto O’Rourke governorship and the potential damage that would follow such as wrecking the Texas economy, increasing crime rates and illegal immigration, and eliminating gun-friendly laws – just to name a few. Most of the campaign messages lacked factual evidence, presumably because the targeted audience – conservative Republicans – were party loyal, often embracing conspiracy theories, and generally indifferent to facts that challenged their beliefs. A similar tactic was employed by Republicans in other high-stakes areas, such as discouraging vaccinations for COVID-19 and rejecting the 2020 election results.  

Control of Media Coverage. From observations of news stories covering the campaign, it was obvious that Abbott’s campaign strategists had exerted influence in media coverage as well. The most obvious example was Gov. Abbott’s willingness to debate Beto O’Rourke only once on a Friday evening that assured the lowest potential viewing audiences, while not allowing the presence of a live audience. This decision clearly minimized the potential exposure of any negative publicity resulting from the debate with a seasoned debater like Beto O’Rourke. Gov. Abbott’s efforts to bus asylum seekers to sanctuary cities also received considerable media coverage that likely amplified his favorability among conservatives in Texas.  

Journalists have also been complicit in discouraging Latino voter support for Democratic candidates by their consistent coverage of Gov. Abbott’s polling lead over Beto O’Rourke, the “red wave”  that was supposed to sweep the mid-term elections, and amplifying the significance of South Texas Latinos shifting their loyalty to the Republican Party. Of course, the outcome of the mid-term elections illustrated that this “red wave” did not materialize, although Latino support for Republicans was observed in Florida and Texas. Importantly, less than one percent of all Texans are registered to vote in the South Texas region, which would make their votes relatively insignificant in statewide elections regardless of party affiliation. Nonetheless, the consistent focus of news stories on South Texas Latinos as a bell weather of their diminishing loyalty to the Democratic Party was misleading and a potential source of discouragement to Latino voters and donors to support Democratic candidates.   

Misleading Messaging. Gov. Abbott did not waiver in his messaging about preserving the Texas economy by creating jobs, keeping taxes low and attracting large corporations.   While the Texas economy remains strong, it is equally true that the state has fallen behind in several key areas that are often overlooked in news stories associated with Gov. Abbott’s performance, such as: 

• Texas has the highest number of severe weather disasters in the nation. The last energy disaster in Texas cost the lives of 700 residents and millions in damage to the state’s infrastructure. 
• Texas has the highest number (5.2 million) of residents without health insurance coverage – an outcome of Gov. Abbott’s refusal to participate in the federal Medicaid program that provides funding that would increase healthcare access for millions of residents in need. 
• Texas experienced an increasing number of mass murders in the past decade – a direct result of Gov. Abbott’s gun-friendly policies and unwillingness to restrict the sale of weapons of mass destruction like the AR-15. 
• Texas is one of the most difficult places to vote, ranking 49 compared to all states. 
• Despite little to no evidence of voter fraud, Republicans led by Gov. Abbott passed some of the most restrictive voting laws in the nation to solidify their political base.   

Exactly how does one glorify a strong economy if millions of residents lack healthcare; if hundreds of adults and children are being murdered by weapons made for war; if hundreds of residents continue to die because lawmakers have neglected improvements to the state’s energy grid; or if Texans are stripped of their voting power to change these policies? 

Equally misleading messages focused on (a) Abbott’s struggle to overcome his physical disability resulting from an accident, for which he was compensated up to $9 million, but later supported a cap of $250,000 on pain and suffering awards in medical malpractice lawsuits; using his Latina niece to convey his affinity for Latinos although much of his policies on healthcare, abortion and gun control are especially damaging to Texas Latinos; and accusing Beto O’Rourke of supporting efforts to de-fund the police and increasing crime while it was Gov. Abbott who took $160 million from the Texas Department of Public Safety and tens of millions of dollars from the Department of Criminal Justice and the Juvenile Justice Department to support his failed Operation Lone Star initiative. 

In summary, while Gov. Abbott’s campaign team deserves some praise for implementing a successful campaign during the mid-term elections, one cannot lose sight of the fact that his victory was facilitated by a series of misleading messages.  

Given the substantial obstacles faced by Beto O’Rourke’s campaign, it was remarkable that he was still able to get nearly four of the eight million votes cast in the mid-term election – hardly a “failed governor race” as it has been described recently in recent news stories.    Journalists analyzing the election results have largely overlooked the fact that Beto O’Rourke was the dominant choice in four of the largest counties in Texas, including Dallas, Harris, Travis and Bexar counties (see Table below). Of the 3.5 million votes cast statewide for Beto O’Rourke, these 20 counties accounted for 86 percent of these votes. Importantly, these four counties are key centers of future population growth in Texas and include large communities of college students. Another important observation is that Beto received support from several counties with large proportions of non-Hispanic whites, including Travis, Collin, Tarrant and Denton.  Consequently, if Gov. Abbott chooses to run again for governor in the next four years, he is likely to face a decidedly larger community of racially diverse college-educated voters who are likely to support a Democratic candidate. 

 

Top 20 Counties Ranked by Number of Votes for Beto O'Rourke and Race-Ethnicity
COUNTY	Support for Beto*		ACS 2020 County Race-Ethnicity**
	No. Votes	Pct. of State Votes	Pct.  White	Pct.  Hispanic	Pct.  Black	Pct.  Asian	Total Population
Harris	592,494	54.0	29.0	43.1	18.5	7.0	4,680,609
Dallas	390,390	62.8	28.6	40.2	22.3	6.5	2,622,634
Travis	334,502	72.6	48.6	33.6	7.9	6.7	1,250,884
Bexar	309,334	57.4	27.1	60.5	7.0	2.9	1,978,826
Tarrant	278,899	47.2	45.9	29.0	16.3	5.5	2,077,153
Collin	161,152	44.3	55.5	15.3	9.7	15.7	1,006,038
Denton	136,102	42.9	58.2	19.4	9.7	9.1	861,690
Fort Bend	128,783	51.6	32.2	24.6	19.8	20.6	790,892
William-son	109,810	48.8	58.3	24.6	6.1	7.1	570,437
El Paso	103,864	63.4	11.7	82.7	2.9	1.1	836,915
Hidalgo	82,513	58.5	5.9	92.3	0.4	0.9	861,137
Montgo-mery	52,536	25.3	64.9	24.6	5.0	2.9	590,188
Hays	48,647	54.5	52.5	39.5	3.7	1.4	222,827
Brazoria	43,282	39.4	46.1	31.0	14.1	6.6	368,062
Cameron	41,607	54.0	8.8	89.8	0.4	0.7	422,135
Nueces	40,293	45.3	29.0	64.1	3.6	2.0	362,151
Galveston	40,114	36.3	56.7	25.0	12.3	3.4	337,600
Bell	34,590	39.5	44.7	25.3	21.7	2.7	355,700
Webb	27,107	60.7	3.5	95.5	0.3	0.5	274,847
Jefferson	26,512	42.6	39.9	21.2	33.4	3.8	253,136
Sources: *NBC Exit Polls 11-9-11; **American Community Survey 5-Year File

 

An added advantage for the Democratic Party over the next four years is that Gov. Abbott is not likely to change any of his controversial policies and likely to repeat the same mistakes. Texas voters may be less likely to forgive Gov. Abbott for continuing such past failures, although party-loyal voters tend to be very forgiving of past failures or controversies associated with Republican politicians – including Gov. Abbott, Donald Trump, Dan Patrick and various others.  

Beto O’Rourke is a significant asset to Texas Democrats whose value would be enhanced by added campaign expertise.  Indeed, Beto O’Rourke is a recognized and experienced politician, well liked and supported by a cross-section of white, Black and Latino voters and a highly successful fund raiser. It seems shortsighted to suggest that Beto should change jobs or be replaced by a celebrity. His campaign could have benefited from earlier endorsements, such as advertising expert Lionel Sosa or other leaders or celebrities, which could have engaged more voters and donors to support the campaign. The campaign messages were generally well designed but insufficient to address the broad attack ads that were directed at Beto O’Rourke by Gov. Abbott’s campaign. While television was used by both campaigns to drive their messages, Beto O’Rourke’s messages did not appear to utilize radio advertising to the same extent as Gov. Abbott’s campaign --- a potentially significant limitation since Texans spend a lot of time driving their vehicles in large urban areas.  An audit of Beto O’Rourke’s campaign would be very beneficial to explore these issues as well as the role of research in planning campaign strategy.  

By building on his experiences with the mid-term election, creating a more data-driven campaign strategy, expanding the list of donors and celebrity endorsements, and mobilizing the nearly four million Texans that supported his campaign, Beto would be difficult to beat in the next governor’s race in Texas. 

Texans Face a Grim Future: While the media and Republicans will continue to praise Gov. Abbott’s mid-term election victory, one should take pause and consider that many Texans will have little to celebrate during his next administration. For example: 

• More pregnant women will be forced to bear unwanted pregnancies that will force many into poverty, bankruptcies and evictions – based on recent national research trends.  
• Mass murders, road rage incidents, and other crimes will continue to rise under the current gun-friendly environment with little interest in limiting access to AR-15 weapons.  
• More deaths and damage to infrastructure will result from extreme weather conditions due to the unwillingness of current legislators to require energy providers to make improvements identified by experts.   
• Current labor shortages among Texas businesses will worsen as Gov. Abbott continues to bus asylum seekers to other U.S. cities. 
• Gov. Abbott will continue to blame others for de-funding the police while he continues to transfer funds from state law enforcement agencies to support the failed Lone Star Project.  

Congratulations, Gov. Abbott, on your mid-term victory. Unfortunately, your victory has contributed little to the advancement of humanity in Texas.

Click here to download a pdf version of this blog. 

Is polling and related media coverage artificially inflating Gov. Abbott’s ratings in the Texas gubernatorial race?

The polling industry and the public recognizes that polls are imperfect measures of political events and outcomes, and sometimes can be dead wrong.  The 2020 presidential election is a good recent example of the extent to which Donald Trump’s ratings were significantly under-estimated, although no consensus has emerged about the exact reasons for these polling inaccuracies.  The unwillingness of Republican voters to respond to polling was one factor that seemed to gain more acceptance in the polling industry.

Interestingly, polls surrounding statewide and municipal elections do not appear to capture the same level of scrutiny as national polls even though they are also susceptible to various sources of bias.  The race for governor in Texas is a good example of how media and polling activities can combine to artificially elevate the standing of a favored candidate -- i.e., Gov. Gregg Abbott.  Let’s first discuss some two potential sources of polling bias, then follow with a discussion of potential media bias surrounding this campaign.

Potential Polling Bias

The most recent poll was conducted in September 6-13, 2022 by The University of Texas at Tyler Political Science Department and co-sponsored by The Dallas Morning News. [i]  Methodological information about the poll is presented on this web site which shows that 1,268 interviews were completed with registered voters using a sample derived from two different sources: a panel used for on-line surveys and a telephone listing used for telephone interviews.  Both English and Spanish-language options were reportedly provided to the survey respondents.  In reviewing a survey tabulation provided on their web site, the following two findings were observed:

·         One question that asked respondents about their employment status during the last week prior to the survey showed that the proportion of retired White respondents (42%) was twice as high as Black (21%) and Latino (15%) respondents. Compared to other national polls like the General Social Survey, this proportion of White respondents is unusually high, and may artificially inflate the poll’s rating for Gov. Abbott whose support comes primarily from White voters.  Whether due to actual interviewing or weighting adjustments, why were retired White respondents given so much weight or presence in this poll?

·         Potential Sampling Bias: The selection of poll respondents from two differences sampling sources or frames points to a potential sampling bias. Despite the detailed methodological steps that described the manner that these two sources were combined into one total sample with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percent,   one needs to recall that panel respondents are not usually selected at random and are usually paid incentives to complete surveys on a periodic basis, while telephone survey respondents are usually selected at random and not paid an incentive to participate in a survey.  Also, online panel members are typically younger, more educated and have higher incomes than the general population, and often exclude people of color and immigrants – a profile that could also bias the poll ratings in favor of Gov. Abbott. [ii]  Demographically speaking, these two groups of respondents are apples and oranges. Given this information, it would be helpful to know the proportion of Black and Latino poll respondents who were selected from a panel or the telephone listing to verify this potential sampling bias and its influence on the poll ratings. 

Potential Media Bias

·         A second tab on the UT-Tyler web site asks respondents to identify their main source of news, and shows that Spanish-language news – like Telemundo and Univision -- were used by an extremely small proportion (2%) of the poll respondents.  In Texas, this is highly unusual given the number of eligible immigrant voters: 52 percent are Latino immigrants [iii]  that past research confirms frequently use Spanish-language news sources.   Even though the UT-Tyler poll methodology  explains that both English and Spanish-language options were provided in the poll, it would be helpful to know the actual unweighted number of Latino surveys that were completed in English and Spanish.  Why? Because pollsters often state that language options are provided in a survey, but that does not tell us the extent to which these options were actually chosen by the survey respondents. If Texas immigrant voter participation in the poll was inadvertently minimized due to poorly implemented language options, one would expect Beto O’Rourke’s ratings to be systematically lower since Texas immigrants tend to support Democratic candidates. Again, a potential unearned benefit for Gov. Abbott.  

·         The recent televised debate between Gov. Abbott and Beto O’Rourke also revealed both logistical and media bias that favored Gov. Gregg Abbott.  To begin, Gov. Abbott’s campaign deliberately defined the debate logistics in his favor by scheduling the debate on a Friday evening that is known to attract few audiences of potential voters and further required that no live audience was present in the auditorium during the debate.  Despite these limitations, an informative debate still took place and provided viewers an opportunity to understand these two candidates in more detail. It was clear, for example, that Beto O’Rourke performed well  by focusing on the repeated failures of Gov. Abbott over the past eight years of his administration – facts that were verifiable by external sources. By contrast, Gov. Abbott focused on Beto’s “flip-flopping” on issues like gun control and alleged statements by Beto (e.g. “Beto supports open borders,” “Beto supports de-funding the police”) that were not supported by any facts presented by Gov. Abbott. Interestingly, it was Gov. Abbott who actually took millions in funding from law enforcement agencies in Texas to support his failed border wall project.[iv]  The main outcome of the debate was Gov. Abbott’s evasiveness and unwillingness to explain (a) his lack of accountability for the Uvalde massacre; (b) why he did not taken decisive action over the past eight years to avoid the recent energy crisis that cost the lives of 700 Texas residents; [c] his lack of support for gun legislation that has resulted in numerous mass killings during his administration; and (d) his support for restrictive abortion laws. Thus, the debate was a significant learning opportunity for its viewers.

Media bias, however, was evident in the follow-up report in The Dallas Morning News by Gromer Jeffers [v] who was one of the panel members that presented questions during the debate. Jeffers concluded based on insights from other experts that the debate outcome was fairly inconsequential and not likely to change the minds of Texas voters unless Beto was able to muster strong voter turnout – which would have more significance on Election Day than “throwing jabs at a debate.”  While one cannot argue about the value of voter turnaround, it seems unwarranted, and perhaps a sort of media bias, to describe the recent debate as “jabs” thrown at a debate.  These “jabs” were very informative in distinguishing the two candidates:  Gov. Abbott as the incumbent who blames others for his failures over the past eight years vs. Beto O’Rourke who voices strong support for policies that will improve the quality of life for Texans.   

In conclusion, the Texas Poll results suggest that Beto O’Rourke continues to face an uphill battle in beating Gov. Abbott in this highly competitive race.  The media’s consistent coverage regarding the polling advantage that Gov. Abbott currently enjoys is clearly benefiting his campaign but also likely to discourage voter turnout by supporters of Beto O’Rourke. But history tells us that polling results are not infallible and sometimes undeserving of the confidence accorded them by media sources. While there is some reason to believe that the Texas Poll ratings for Gov. Abbott may be inflated, there does not appear to be much concern about obtaining an objective, independent critique of the methodology used.  Beto O’Rourke’s campaign has been consistently on-target in documenting the failures of the Abbott administration over the past eight years and is aggressively reaching out to various segments of potential Texas voters.  By contrast, Gov. Abbott’s well-funded campaign is driven by advertising messages that are false and designed to portray Beto O'Rourke as a governor who will wreck the Texas energy industry, worsen border security problems, and promote a socialist agenda.  If the recent Texas Poll ratings have been artificially inflating Gov. Abbott’s standing and Beto continues his successful strategy of relying on the facts and focusing on voter turnout, Texans may witness an unexpected surprise this November.   

It should be noted that these concerns for potential methodological biases in the Sept. 2022 Texas Poll were emailed to the poll director on Oct. 3, 2022 using the email posted on the UT-Tyler web site. No response has been received at this writing.

 

Reference Notes

---

[i]  UT Tyler Political Science Department, Center for Opinion Research.  Accessed at: https://www.uttyler.edu/politicalscience/pollingcenter/ 

[ii] Rincon, E.T. (2020). The Culture of Research, Publisher: The Writer’s Marq.

[iii] Noe-Bustamente, L. and Budiman, A. (2020 March). Most of the 23 million immigrants eligible to vote in 2020 election live in just five states. Pew Research Center, Accessed at:  https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/03/03/most-of-the-23-million-immigrants-eligible-to-vote-in-2020-election-live-in-just-five-states/

[iv] Kriel, L. and Trevizo, P.  Texas has spent billions of dollars on border security. But what taxpayers got in return is a mystery.  Texas Tribune, Accessed at:  https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/18/texas-border-security-spending/

[v] Jeffers, Jr. G.  (2022 October).   Abbott, O’Rourke near finish line. Accessed at:  https://www.pressreader.com/usa/the-dallas-morning-news

Seven Reasons That Gov. Abbott Should Retire

 

De-Funding the Police? Gov. Abbott, not Beto, Has Taken Funds from Law Enforcement

The recent Dallas Morning News-UT Tyler Texas poll just revealed that Gov. Abbott now has a 9-point lead over Beto O’Rourke -- likely a result of a heavy barrage of campaign advertising that the Abbott campaign has launched using their large treasure chest of campaign funds.[1] The political edge that Gov. Abbott is enjoying, however, stems from deceptive messages that continue to mislead Texas voters. 

For example, in an earlier post I discussed how one of his campaign messages that focused on the challenges that he faced in overcoming his physical disability may have won him praise but overlooked the fact that he was awarded up to $9 million from a personal injury lawsuit.  In his effort to become the Texas governor, Abbott supported legislation to limit personal injury awards in Texas to $250,000 – thus denying other Texans who suffered personal injuries access to medical equipment and other necessities that would help them adapt their lifestyles to their disabilities.[2] 

In more recent political advertisements, the Abbott campaign focuses attention on a past statement by Beto O’Rourke that appeared to explain his support for Black Lives Matter and their efforts to de-fund the police. Interestingly, several public policy decisions in Texas related to law enforcement and public safety suggest that it is Gov. Abbott who has been “de-funding” public safety for Texas residents. For example:

·         To support Operation Lone Star, a border security project that deployed thousands of state troopers and National Guard soldiers at the border, Gov. Abbott took approximately $160 million from the Texas Department of Public Safety, while tens of millions of dollars were also taken from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and the Juvenile Justice Department. Despite the absence of any evidence that Operation Lone Star achieved its objectives, Gov. Abbott decided that his pet project was more important than the public safety of Texas residents. [3]    

·         Of the 283 killings resulting from mass shootings since 1966, 58 percent of these killings (or 163) occurred since Gov. Abbott took office in 2015.  Many of the mass shootings involved AR-15 assault weapons.  The figure below illustrates that the number of killings in mass shootings have been accelerating since 2015, a likely consequence of gun friendly legislation more recently adopted under Gov. Abbott’s leadership. Killings for 2022 reflect only the first five months of the year and likely to exceed all previous years  assuming that no future changes are made in Texas law related to gun control. [4]

 

 

·         Despite protests from Texas law enforcement officials, Texas has adopted gun-friendly legislation – promoted by Gov. Abbott and Republican legislators – that has allowed residents to   purchase and carry weapons in public without required training.  The fact that mass shooters are often 18 years old has not prompted Gov. Abbott to add an age restriction that restricts access to assault-style weapons. Gov. Abbott has also made no secret of his endorsement of the NRA.

  

Texas voters should look past the deceptive advertising that is being promoted by the Abbott campaign and focus on his past record of de-funding law enforcement programs and endangering the public safety of Texas residents with gun-friendly legislation.

 

Reference Notes

---

[1] Garrett, R. T. (September 2022).  Texas Gov. Greg Abbott widens lead on Beto O’Rourke in new poll. Dallas Morning News, accessed at:

     https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/texas-gov-greg-abbott-widens-lead-on-beto-o-e2-80-99rourke-in-new-poll/ar-AA120gWd

[2]   Rincon, E.T. (September 2022). Disability Messaging by Gov. Abbott Misleads Texas Voters, accessed at:

       https://thecultureofresearch.blogspot.com/2022/09/disability-messaging-by-gov-abbott.html

[3] Beeferman, J.  (April 2022).  Gov. Gregg Abbott redirects $500 million from other agencies to fund border security mission through end of fiscal year.  Texas Tribune.  Accessed at:  https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/29/greg-abbott-texas-border-mission-funding/

[4]   Rincon, E.T. (May 2022). Uvalde School Massacre: Another Mass Shooting Under Gov. Abbott’s Gun Friendly Leadership.  Culture of Research Blogpost, accessed at: https://thecultureofresearch.blogspot.com/2022/05/uvalde-school-massacre-another-mass.html 

Disability Messaging by Gov. Abbott Misleads Texas Voters

The most recent polling numbers regarding the Texas gubernatorial race is rightfully giving Gov. Abbott severe indigestion with Beto O’Rourke trailing by only 7 points.  In an effort to increase his standing among Texas voters, Gov. Abbott’s campaign recently launched political advertising that surprisingly focuses on the challenges that he has experienced and overcome with a physical disability that confined him to a wheel chair for the remainder of his life.  Although well executed, the ad was likely launched as a tactic to distract public attention away from the series of blunders that have occurred under the administration of Gov. Abbott.  Let’s first evaluate Abbott’s  current campaign using the disability messaging tactic, then refresh your memory about the various blunders that he would like Texas voters to forget.

Why the Disability Message is Ill-Conceived:  First, a bit of history about Gov. Abbott’s disability.  When Abbott was 26 years old, he was injured by a falling tree that fell on him while jogging. At that time, Texas did not have a cap on personal injury lawsuits and Abbott was able to win a settlement up to $9 million over his lifetime. In 2003, Texas capped pain and suffering awards in medical malpractice lawsuits at $250,000 – legislation that was strongly supported by Abbott, attorney general at that time, who was eagerly seeking political support for his gubernatorial campaign. Critics, however, have questioned how a man who received a multi-million dollar settlement after a falling tree left him paralyzed and wheelchair bound could support caps on medical malpractice awards.  Gov. Abbott justifies his position by pointing out that his settlement was not based on medical malpractice and there is still no cap on non-medical injuries. Some legal scholars, however, have a different point of view: [1]

“Charles M. Silver, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin School of Law, said changes in personal injury law and a pro-defendant posture in the judicial branch would still make such a large financial award today substantially less likely.” 

Like Gov. Abbott, there are many Texans that have suffered personal injuries and forced to endure considerable pain and suffering throughout their lives. However, there is no sound reason to limit the settlement awards that these individuals deserve to help pay for medical bills and sustain their families. As another legal expert explained:

“The ‘innocent victim’ Greg Abbott continues to enjoy the benefits of an $11 million settlement while ‘politician’ Greg Abbott fights against the rights of other victims by denying them the same rights afforded him.”   [2]

Gun Violence:  Under Gov. Abbott’s administration, 19 mass shootings have occurred in Texas since 1966, including the recent massacre of 19 children and two teachers in Uvalde, Texas.  Allowing the sales of AR-15 assault rifles has unleashed the anger of so-called patriots and Rambos who seem to delight in mass killings of Texas residents. As shown by the following figure, the number of killings from mass shootings have been accelerating since 2015, a likely consequence of gun friendly legislation more recently adopted under Gov. Abbott’s leadership.  Killings for 2022 reflect only the first five months of the year and likely to exceed all previous years assuming that no future changes are made in Texas law related to gun control.  Rather than advocate for gun control legislation, Gov. Abbott has chosen to focus expanding access to mental health services and encouraging teachers to arm themselves – both options that are controversial and soundly rejected by law enforcement and safety experts.

 

Treatment of Immigrants:  Gov. Abbott and his cronies have yet to appreciate the economic contribution that immigrants have made to the Texas economy and continue to find ways to reduce their presence in Texas – despite the fact that many of them are seeking asylum from dangerous conditions in their home countries.  In 2016, the Texas State Comptroller’s Office conducted an analysis of the economic contributions of undocumented immigrants and concluded that the absence of the estimated 1.4 million undocumented immigrants in Texas in fiscal 2005 would have been a loss to Texas’ Gross State Product of $17.7 billion.  [3]  In 2019, Texas had the second largest immigrant population in the country with more than 4.9 million immigrants calling Texas home.  The growth in the immigrant population has strengthened the Texas labor force and represented 21.9 percent of the state’s workforce in 2019.  [4]  The U.S. Patent and Trade Office also reported in 2020 that more than half of U.S. patents (53%) were issued to immigrants. [5]  And experts have dispelled the commonly held notion that crime rises with increasing numbers of immigrants.  As reported recently by the Cato Institute:  [6]

“In 2018, the illegal immigrant criminal conviction rate was 782 per 100,000 illegal immigrants, 535 per 100,000 legal immigrants, and 1,422 per 100,000 native‐​born Americans. The illegal immigrant criminal conviction rate was 45 percent below that of native‐​born Americans in Texas.”

 To demonstrate to the Biden administration that the federal government was failing to control “rampant” immigration at the Texas border, Gov. Abbott initiated a busing program to transport hundreds of immigrant border crossers to cities like New York and Arizona – a program that has cost Texas taxpayers an estimated $12 million and still continuing.  Two other failed efforts initiated by Gov. Abbott included the added inspection of trucks crossing the Texas border, which resulted in significant delays and millions in losses in spoiled food; and millions of taxpayer dollars that were re-allocated from the Dept. of Public Safety to pay for a border wall that never achieved its stated objectives. Given their economic contributions to the state and the high demand for workers, Gov. Abbott’s unfriendly immigrant policies do not make much sense.

Inaction in Regulating the Power Grid:  Despite the millions in damage to Texas homes and over 200 lives lost, energy experts state that Texas has not made significant upgrades to the Texas power grid and remains vulnerable to additional catastrophic events. Gov. Abbott has apparently not learned any lessons from the recent power grid failure and appears reluctant to lose favor with energy industry executives.

Restricting Women’s Reproductive Rights:  Perhaps the most significant public policy to stain Gov. Abbott’s administration relates to the restrictive abortion policies that severely restrict the reproductive rights of Texas women. The zealous efforts by conservatives to save the lives of the unborn flies in complete contradiction to their support of fewer restrictions on guns that leads to the termination of life. Indeed, is it possible to be pro-life and pro-death at the same time?  Republicans running for office in different primaries are learning the hard way that this will be a show stopper for many women voters.  

Thus, the disability message initiated by Gov. Abbott’s campaign is misleading and intended to convince Texas voters that he is somehow deserving of their support by overcoming his physical disability – a distraction that overlooks the multi-million dollar settlement that he obtained but has conveniently denied to other Texans who may suffer catastrophic injuries.  “It is not the challenges of life that are important, but rather how you handle those challenges” – a message that Abbott has repeated in his campaigns.  It is clear that Abbott indeed handled his life challenges: he sued and obtained a multi-million dollar settlement, then closed the door on other Texans by endorsing a limit on personal injury settlements.

Gov. Abbott has abandoned Texas residents in pursuit of misguided public policies.  It is time for Gov. Abbott to move on and allow another candidate the opportunity to improve the quality of life for Texas residents by supporting more reasonable tort reform for victims of personal injuries, gun control legislation that protects our children, women’s reproductive rights, welcoming immigrants to help maintain the Texas economy, and taking decisive action on improvements to the power grid.

References

---

[1] Oginski, G.  Politician who fought to cap medical malpractice awards received huge personal injury settlement 30 years ago.  Accessed at:  https://www.oginski-law.com/library/politician-who-fought-to-cap-medical-malpractice-awards-received-huge-personal-injury-settlement.cfm#:~:text=The%20insurance%20companies%20for%20the,to%20the%20cap%20Abbott%20supported.

[2] Bello, M.M. (August 2013).  Greg Abbott: Tort reform hypocrite.  Lawsuit Funding News. Accessed at:  https://lawsuitfinancial.legalexaminer.com/uncategorized/greg-abbott-tort-reform-hypocrite/

[3] Keaton, C. (December 2016). Special Report by Texas Comptroller.  Undocumented immigrants in Texas: A financial analysis of the impact to the state budget and economy.

[4] American Immigration Council (July 2022).  The economic contributions of immigrants in Texas. Accessed at:    https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/economic-contributions-immigrants-texas

[5] U.S. Patent Statistics Chart Calendar Years 1963 – 2020. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Technology Monitoring Team.   Accessed at: https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/us_stat.htm

[6] Nowrasteh, A. (October 2020). New research on illegal immigration and crime. CATO Institute. Accessed at: https://www.cato.org/blog/new-research-illegal-immigration-crime-0#:~:text=In%202018%2C%20the%20illegal%20immigrant,%E2%80%8Bborn%20Americans%20in%20Texas.