Fun w/ Ballot Access: HD133 Version

Funny things happen in Texas. People file for office and then the first round of the battle takes off: who can get their competitors kicked off the ballot and win without a real contest. I'm sure there's nothing that offers a partisan monopoly on such activities, but thus far, the GOP certainly seems to be knee deep in the hoopla of robbing as many voters of a choice as possible.

Terry Keel, the outgoing, endangered State Rep moving upward to a multi-county Court of Criminal Appeals post managed the feat twice, knocking two primary opponents off the ballot - including the incumbent. And due to the craptacularness of no Democrat stepping up to the plate, Terry Keel has effectively been elected without a single vote being cast.

Closer to home, there's the potential saga of Jim Murphy, running on the Republican side of House District 133. Seems there's some issue taken with Murphy serving two taxpayer-funded gigs at once: one as a Houston Community College Board member ... the other as President of the Westchase Management District.

The Republican website, Texas Insider has the background ...

MORE PROBLEMS FOR JIM MURPHY IN GOP RACE FOR NOD IN HOUSE SEAT 133
Republican Activists Whispering: "Is Murphy running in the right primary?"

Last week it was reported that a recent Texas Attorney General opinion might give a fig leaf of coverage to Jim Murphy if he is elected to the Texas House and tries to keep his taxpayer-funded salary as an executive with a municipal management district.

The AG opinion suggested that a member of the Texas House could be a "consultant" and still get paid with taxpayer dollars by the management district, thus basically circumventing what some believe to be the intent of the well-known ban on public officials holding two taxpayer-funded positions at once.

Property rights and economic freedom advocates are reportedly considering what legal action might be taken against Murphy if he wins and attempts to become a paid consultant to the Westchase District. An Attorney General's opinion is just an opinion, they point out - until it is tested in court.

At the minimum, GOP activists are beginning to grumble that they want to know if Murphy intends to "double-dip". Some of the more strident conservative GOP activists are wondering out loud if Murphy would not be a better fit for the Democratic primary.

To make matters worse for Murphy, the Texas GOP recently refused to certify a primary candidate for the Texas House in the Amarillo area, because the candidate served on a school board and allegedly has been the recipient of some form of monetary compensation or reimbursements for that service. The Republican Party of Texas believes that Texas law does not allow a member of a governmental board to accept compensation and also run for the Texas House, so the candidates filing was rejected.

Enter Jim Murphy in District 133, who touts his service as a trustee of the Houston Community College System, to which he was elected in 1997 and re-elected in 2003.

Observers are having a hard time wondering what distinguishes the Amarillo case from Murphy's case. One difference is simply jurisdictional: since district 133 lies solely within Harris County, the ballot filings for the GOP primary are governed not by the Republican Party of Texas, but by the Harris County Republican Party. The relevant law is thus being read, interpreted and applied by two different organizations.

Even so, Harris County property rights activists, using the Amarillo precedent, are reportedly attempting to find out if trustees of the Houston Community College System are compensated in the same way as trustees of Amarillo ISD.

If that turns out to be the case, then the legal fur may begin to fly.

To summarize, Murphy may face a legal challenge to stay on the ballot, if the Amarillo precedent appears to be indistinguishable from the facts of his case.

If he survives that battle and wins election to the Texas House, he may face a legal challenge to his livelihood if he attempts to go the "consultant" route. Not a good position for a campaign to be in in mid-January.

In the meantime, Murphy has to try to convince Republican primary voters that he is a true fiscal conservative and convince nervous donors that his victory is assured.

Serving as a trustee of a community college and having a taxpayer funded job, may not the best way to do that.

Funny, because Jim Murphy's one of those folks on the west side of the county that I think engenders a bit of respect from both sides. He's done solid work with the HCC board along with the likes of Herman Litt and Jay Aiyer (as well as the rest of the board). And anyone who's been through the Westchase area can attest to the improvement it's seen as a result of the Management District's efforts.

But all the infighting will be for naught when it gets past April (assuming there'll be a runoff among Murphy, Mike Schofield, and Barbara Larson). The 133rd district has been trending Democratic over the past few years and represents one of the likeliest pickup opportunities for Democrats in 2006. Clearly, Joe Nixon realized that when it came time to make a decision about where to run and opted for a safer seat in SD7 (assuming he can find an opening to run to the right of Dan Patrick). Kristi Thibaut awaits the nominee as it is, though ... and it'll be real interesting to see if GOP voters in the district opt for the Rick Perry-employed lawyer (Schofield), the ethically challenged school board member (Larson), or the one Republican who's actually done something to make a difference in his neighborhood (Murphy).