Babin’s platform the less-extreme option
Since his first election to Congress in 2014, we've disagreed with many of Brian Babin's policy positions.
He's been a vocal supporter of impeaching President Joe Biden and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, efforts that have little merit and are mostly partisan exercises. His rhetoric on illegal immigration is inflammatory, such as when he compared a standoff between the state and federal government over laying razor wire at the border to the Alamo and vowing to stand his ground “if this becomes a hill to die on.”
That hasn't stopped us from endorsing him in previous elections, reasoning that his priorities align with many voters in his heavily Republican district.
There is a difference, however, between hewing to a conservative policy platform and blind partisan loyalty that threatens our democratic institutions. Babin, 75, crossed that line with his actions after the 2020 election. During a hearing held by the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection on the U.S. Capitol, it was revealed that Babin and his colleague, Rep. Louie Gohmert, attended a meeting at the White
House in December 2020 where an adviser to former President Donald Trump presented a plan to have the vice president overturn the election results.
To this day, we have no clue as to the extent of Babin's involvement in this insidious plot. Babin rarely grants interviews and he did not respond to multiple requests to meet with the editorial board to be interviewed for our endorsement. While Babin did publicly disavow the violence on Jan. 6, he proceeded to vote against certifying the 2020 election results anyway. We saw those actions as disqualifying and endorsed his Democratic opponent in the 2022 general election.
So why are we endorsing him now in the primary? Simply put, we believe the policy platform of his only opponent is too extreme.
Jonathan Mitchell, 33, is a pipeline technician from Liberty County. His platform includes positions such as abolishing the IRS and replacing the personal and corporate income tax and payroll tax with a single rate. Yet Mitchell's primary motivation for challenging Babin is because of a bipartisan bill he co-authored: The TAPS Act would establish a national behavioral threat assessment and management process to identify people who could violently harm others. The bill would also provide states with the training and resources to set up threat assessment units within law enforcement agencies.
Mitchell believes this bill is an infringement on Second Amendment rights and an excuse for the federal government to invade people's privacy by monitoring social media accounts. We disagree. At a time when mass shootings are far too common and federal gun reforms remain nearly impossible to pass into law, this bill is a rare commonsense solution that members of both parties have co-signed, even though it hasn't yet passed.
Writing this bill doesn't exonerate or excuse Babin for his disturbing actions four years ago but it sets him apart from a challenger running far to his right. If he wins, we hope a qualified challenger emerges in the general election that can finally hold him accountable.