What will the Republicans Do in the Mayor's Race?
With Democrats breaking largely along racial lines and Latinos showing little interest in the current mayor's race, white-suburban-Republican-leaning (WSRL) voters will likely to be the deciding factor in the runoff. A KHOU poll released last week showed Locke and Parker in a statistical dead heat. But significantly it showed that Locke, who got very little white vote in the November 3rd contest, is now polling at about 25% of the white vote. This is consistent with the poll from the Locke campaign showing a significant block of the WSRL voters immediately moved to Locke after the November 3 election. As I suggested in my previous post, it seems reasonable to speculate that a great many of these voters are social conservatives for which Parker's lifestyle is the deciding factor. But that leaves about 25% of the white vote, mostly WSRL, as undecided. Which side this group comes down on will probably decide the election.

A number of Parker supporters have been making the case that since Parker came in first or second and Locke came in last in many WSRL precincts, she has the upper hand in winning this vote. However, I think that analysis misreads the November 3rd results. It overlooks that even in the most Republican precincts there are still Democratic voters. For example, Precinct 612 is in the heart of Kingwood and is rock-ribbed Republican. However, in the 2008 election, Obama still got 24% of the vote in that precinct.

The November 3rd City election Parker came in second to Roy Morales in Precinct 612, getting 25% of the vote. Morales got 48%, Brown 22% and Locke 7%. Because Parker's vote is virtually identical to Obama's it seems likely that the voters that voted for her on election day were not Republicans, but rather the Democratic voters that live in 612. Therefore, Parker's vote total in Precinct 612 really does not tell us much about how the Republicans in that box will vote in the run-off. In almost no Republican-leaning precincts did Parker's vote exceed Obama's percentage in 2008. So the belief that Parker got a lot of Republican-leaning votes in November is probably inaccurate.

So what will move the undecided WSRL voters? Personally, I do not think it will be the gay/lesbian issue. The polling seems to indicate that the voters that feel strongly about that issue have already made up their minds. Rather, I believe the balance of the WSRL voters are going to be motivated by two issues: crime and property taxes. Crime continues to poll as the issue with which Houstonians are most concerned. It seems likely this issue will favor Locke. Parker cast a problematic vote against continuing the Gang Task Force while on Council which will be hard to explain. Locke has the backing of the Houston Police and his account of his home being burglarized twice as the motivation for him entering the race has a powerful effect on audiences.

I think the property tax issue will also favor Locke. Locke's biggest advantage is that he has no record. Since he has never served in public office, he has never had to vote on the issue. Parker, on the other hand, has a lengthy record of opposing tax decreases, revenue caps and appraisal caps which the Locke campaign is attempting to exploit (click here to view). Revenue caps and appraisal caps are heavily favored by Republicans voters. She also chaired a commission that proposed imposing a garbage fee. While an argument can be made that these were the responsible course of action given the City's deteriorating financial condition that will be a hard case to make to WSRL voters who live in the areas of the City with the highest property taxes.

Probably the best indication that the Republican vote is likely to break Locke's direction is the candidates' comparative Republican endorsements. Locke has stacked up an impressive list, including Robert Eckels, Ned Holmes, Beverly Kaufmann, Mike Sullivan, Jim Murphy, John Davis and Beverly Woolley. I have it on reasonably reliable information that Locke will receive additional high-profile Republican endorsements before the run-off. In contrast, I am not aware of any Republican elected official that has endorsed Parker. And while the Republican Party is unlikely to get involved officially, Party regulars tell me that Locke is heavily favored among Republican precinct chairs.

But here is the real problem for the Parker campaign: There are more African-American voters than white Democratic voters. If both candidates win their bases by similar percentages (which seems likely) Parker will have to make up the difference by winning the Republican vote by a substantial margin. Based on the issues and how the Republican leadership is lining up that prospect seems increasingly unlikely.

First Post-Election Mayoral Poll
Gene Locke's campaign has released the first poll taken since November 3. The poll was conducted Monday and Tuesday nights (November 9 & 10) by Paul Maislin, who also polled for Lee Brown and Bill White. The poll showed Parker leading by a 43-39% with 18% undecided. The margin of error was 4%.

The poll shows that Parker and Locke are splitting Peter Brown votes fairly evenly with most white Democrats shifting to Parker and Brown's African-American supporters moving to Locke. The undecided voters at this point are mostly suburban, white and Republican leaning. The suburban-white-Republican-leaning voters that have made up their minds about the race are breaking strongly in Locke's favor by about a 70-30 margin. This group is primarily been responsible for Locke moving from 10% down in the election to within the margin of error of Parker.

The poll is modeled on a 170,000-voter turnout in the election. About 180,000 voters voted on November 3. Turnout normally falls in a run-off election, however in the 2001 mayoral election, when Lee Brown was challenged by Orlando Sanchez, the turnout actually increased from 280,000 to 310,000. UH political science professor and long-time Houston pollster, Dick Murray, thinks this could happen again this year. The general consensus is that a low turnout in this election helps Parker because of her relatively small, but very loyal base. Conversely, if turnout is higher, Locke will be the likely beneficiary because additional voters will more likely be African-Americans or Republic leaning voters.

Here in my mind are the critical factors to watch over the next four weeks:

1. African-American Turnout/Enthusiasm. Locke got just under 70% of the African-American vote with almost all the rest going to Brown. This poll indicates that Locke will virtually shut Parker out of the black vote. The question is how many African-Americans will vote. On November 3, probably only about 45,000 African-Americans voted. In the 2001 election, when Lee Brown was besieged by Orlando Sanchez, nearly 100,000 voted in the run-off. As a result Locke has huge up-side potential in the African-American vote.

2. The Suburban-White-Republican-Leaning Undecideds. The suburban-white-Republican-leaning voters do not have an ideal candidate in this race. The ones that decided quickly broke to Locke. One can speculate that these were likely social conservatives for which Parker's lifestyle and liberal activism are automatic disqualifiers. The balance of these voters will be more likely motivated by policy specifics such as crime, immigration, city finances and traffic. How the candidates differentiate themselves on these issues will likely be the deciding factor. The debates could be very important in competing for these voters. Locke has some advantage in that a number of high profile Republicans such as Robert Eckels, Ned Holmes and Chase Untermeyer have already endorsed him. Parker has few offsetting Republican endorsements.

3. The Suburban-White-Republican-Leaning Turnout. The second question with respect to suburban-white-Republican-leaning voters is will they vote. Of course, historically this group turns out at very high rates. However, there is also the possibility that with two clearly identified Democrats in the race they may declare a pox on both their houses and stay home. Based on how this vote is breaking so far, a higher turnout will likely favor Locke.

4. Fundraising. It is likely that both campaigns will be reasonably well funded. Locke has enjoyed the support of most of Houston's business establishment and Parker has the ability to raise national GLBT money. Parker's first-place finish has also won her the support of some traditional City Hall vendors such as the engineers and contractors. Having a war chest will be critical. The race is likely to turn highly negative in the home stretch. Each side will need to have funds to respond to the negative ads you will undoubtedly be seeing soon.

I think the main take away from the poll is that this race is very much up for grabs. Parker has the inertia but Locke has the momentum. However, neither is an immoveable object or an irresistible force.

Erasing the Mark of Cain:
The Plight of Ex-Offenders
In case you missed it, the Chronicle published an op-ed on Sunday that I authored that discusses the plight that ex-offenders face in our society. (See http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/outlook/6709207.html.)

I began thinking about this issue after some friends had a son that ended up in prison as a result of a drug problem. Near the end of his sentence, they began to think about what he would do once he was released.

For the last couple of years in prison, this young man had a job as a trustee working in the prison dog pound, taking care of the bloodhounds. He loved the job and the animals and by all accounts did an excellent job. In addition to the trustees that worked in the pound, there were several civilian employees that supervised the work. As his release neared, an opening in one of these positions became available. It occurred to the young man that working in one of these positions would be something that he would enjoy and might provide a good transition to back into civilian life. So he applied for the position. TDCJ turned him down because he had a record.

Of course, the fact that the agency that is charged with responsibility of rehabilitating criminals refuses to hire them drips with irony. To be entirely fair, TDCJ, especially compared with other State prison systems, is in the forefront of developing programs to assist ex-offenders to prepare for life on the outside. But even so, the programs are woefully small and poorly funded. Spending money on "locking them up and throwing away the key" is more popular politically than spending money on rehabilitation programs.

Considering the current prison population and the rate at which individuals in Texas are incarcerated, there will be thousands of individuals released from prison for many years to come. Most have little or no family support and get off the bus from Huntsville with $50 in their pocket. No job. Nowhere to live. No credit. No driver's license. And on and on.

Many will say that these ex-offenders made their bed and now they have to lie in it. It is an understandable sentiment, but certainly not one to which people of faith, and especially Christians, can adhere. For the central tenant of the New Testament is forgiveness, even of the most heinous offenses, such as St. Paul's persecution of Christians prior to his conversion.

But laying aside the moral issue, what we are currently doing is just dumb public policy. With no alternative but to go back to "the street" to survive, it is hardly surprising that a significant majority of ex-offenders end up back in trouble with the law in a relatively short time. And in the meantime, crime rates and the cost of our criminal justice system soar.

There are no easy answers to this dilemma. Given current attitudes and potential liability issues, employers and landlords can hardly be blamed for being reluctant to hire or lease to ex-offenders. In the end it is going to take all of us changing the way we feel about and treat ex-offenders. If we do not, this destructive cycle will continue and we will all suffer the consequences.