Contract with Texas is a Sophomoric Attempt to show Leadership

By my count, the number is twenty-five who have signed onto a document titled “The Contract with Texas,” which is the latest coordinated marketing tactic being used to spark a grassroots movement “To reform the House of Representatives and Select a Real Republican Speaker”.  

This latest effort against sitting House Speaker Dade Phelan is being led by Representatives Brian Harrison, Steve Toth, Tony Tinderholt, and Nate Schatzline, who all serve in the Texas House. JM Lozano, a former Democrat who became a Republican in 2012, has also signed it.

The other signatures on the letter represent a group of Texas House candidates who have not yet been elected to office but will be the Republican nominees on the ballot in their districts in November. Those include Mitch Little, Don McLaughlin, Matt Morgan, Wes Virdell, Janis Holt, Shelley Luther, Brent Money, and Mike Olcott, to name a few.

Challengers Chris Spencer, David Covey, Katrina Pearson, Alan Schoolcraft, Helen Kerwin, Keresa Richardson, Andy Hopper, David Lowe, and Cheryl Bean, who are all in runoffs with sitting House members, are also signing onto the Contract.

Twenty of the twenty-five who have signed the Contract have not yet been elected, they have not served in the House for one day, and don’t have any first-hand knowledge of House rules or procedures they claim to want to change.  

But that’s not the worst part.

The Contract with Texas is reminiscent of Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” from 1994, a set of ten policy reforms pushed by Gingrich and his leadership. The Contract with America was a promise that the newly elected Republican Congress would reduce the size of government, cut taxes, pass tort reform, and pass welfare reform. Those policy initiatives were coupled with a set of operational reforms that would help them achieve those goals. 

The Contract with Texas attempts to mimic the Contract with America but fails in a big way because instead of it being an inspirational, visionary promise of a better Texas, it is instead a self-serving political document that stinks of the Austin swamp. The Contract with Texas is a sophomoric failure of leadership that highlights the problem with the Republican House insurgents movement and gives us a glimpse into what a House run by this faction of the party would look like.

I strongly agree that Texas Republicans need to lay out a vision for our State. I was a big fan of Newt Gingrich and the strategy behind the Contract with America. However, despite what it promises, the Contract with Texas does not promote bold policy initiatives and does not empower “we the people.” It is written by and made for Austin insiders and will result only in the transfer of political power from one group to another.  

Those leading this movement are cultivating an environment that values politics over policy-making and doing what’s best for Texans. Most alarmingly, the Contract promotes principles that only establish a power structure to turn the Texas House into a Washington, D.C.-style political body.

The legislature is a representative body made up of men and women from both parties and all types of business and professional backgrounds. To successfully represent your constituents in the Texas House, you must approach the job with respect, exercise due diligence, be a little savvy, and work well with others.

It should not be surprising that the members pushing this effort out front are some of the least successful House members in passing bills for their constituents because they are the most critical of their colleagues and House leadership at the back mic and on Twitter. For example, Brian Harrison has been in office since 2021 and has filed countless bills, but only one bill has passed. Schatzline and Toth’s results are not much better. These members are detractors in an environment that requires working together and collaborating. They are not good at being legislators either. 

So, while they say that their reason for this Contract is that they can’t get conservative bills passed, it’s really that they can’t get their own bills to pass, so they want to change the rules. One complaint is the death of a school voucher bill because they didn’t count their votes to get it passed. It didn’t take a rocket scientist to know that the rural Republicans were opposed to vouchers and that they could block it. They talk about the “real” border bill being killed on the point of order, but that happened because they put forth a poorly drafted bill that couldn’t survive an inevitable parliamentarian challenge — all the high-profile bills will face challenges from the opposition. My old boss had something to say about that, “bad staff work.” 

I’ll say it again: don’t be fooled. The Contract for Texas is just another gimmick being used to incite anxiety and to weaponize the grassroots against our best interests. The proposed changes to the House rules have long-term consequences for Texas Republicans and conservative policies; it should concern us all that the insurgents are willing to make this trade for their short-term power. 

Thankfully, so far, none of our rural Republicans have signed onto this nonsense. And that should say a lot. You have representation in your locally elected official who knows your community and what is in your best interest, and the good ones know how to navigate the legislative process to represent you.

The Texas Rural Reporter is a subscription-based publication supported by our readers. Please consider joining us as a Paid or Insider Member to support our ongoing efforts.