Zapata offers heart and ideas, not divisiveness
The finest moment and the finest speech of Chip Roy’s political career came the same day as one of this nation’s darkest hours: Jan. 6, 2021. Hours after supporters of President Donald Trump stormed the U.S. Capitol to stop the counting of the Electoral College, Roy voted to certify President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.
Before the vote, the congressman representing Texas’ 21st Congressional District stood and said:
“Today, the people’s house was attacked, which is an attack on the Republic itself. There is no excuse for it. A woman died and people need to go to jail. The president should never have spun up certain Americans to believe something that simply cannot be. … We are divided about even ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.’ The words which used to bind us together, now — at times — tear us apart because we disagree about what they even mean.”
Doing his job by upholding the Constitution and voting to certify an Electoral College vote is a low bar for which to commend him, but considering Roy was in the minority of Republicans in the House voting to affirm Biden’s election, his speech and vote were courageous.
The problem is that by the standards he claimed — using words to bind instead of divide — Roy, seeking his third term, repeatedly fails to clear the bar.
Despite his eloquence on Jan. 6, 2021, Roy is better known for incendiary comments via interviews, committee hearings and Twitter, and for being a contrarian vote than he is for crafting policy.
In an interview with an Iowa talk show host in July 2020, Roy suggested COVID was merely something used by Democrats to win the election.
“It is all about November and all about reclaiming power in November,” Roy said. “And I think on November 4, there’ll be a magic awakening on how we suddenly beat the virus.”
He all but called Dr. Anthony Fauci a war criminal when he said, “We are looking at (Ukraine) and we’re talking about war crimes. I want to talk about the crimes against humanity that have been perpetrated by Anthony Fauci.”
During a hearing on hate crimes against Asian Americans in March of 2021, Roy invoked lynching when he said: “We believe in justice. There’s old sayings in Texas about ‘find all the rope in Texas and get a tall oak tree.’ You know, we take justice very seriously, and we ought to do that. Round up the bad guys. That’s what we believe.”
He later defended it by calling lynching a “metaphor for justice.”
One year later, he was one of only three members in the House to vote against the Emmett Till Anti-lynching bill. In May, Roy was one of only nine members in the House to vote against a bill to expand the baby formula brand choices available to women and children on federal assistance.
Roy has used his office as a platform for contempt towards views he doesn’t agree with or understand. It’s odd because when we have met with Roy, there has been a healthy and respectful back-and-forth.
We recommend Claudia Zapata for U.S. House District 21. The 28-year-old Democrat has a degree in philosophy and government from the University of Texas at Austin, and grew up in South Austin and East Austin, Kyle and the border-town barrios of Mission. She’s worked as an organizer, legislative intern, and workforce and budget analyst for the Texas Health and Human Services Commission.
She’s never before run for office, and she was fairly realistic about her odds given Roy’s name recognition and the fundamentals of this conservative district. But she’s got heart and potential. “I was taught to not go down without a fight,” she told us.
She’s passionate. She told us she was born to serve others and “truly cares about humanity.” A supporter of the Second Amendment, she would like to see the minimum age to purchase an assault-style rifle raised from 18 to 21 and add red flag laws. She wants to expand abortion rights and health care in rural areas, and she supports greater environmental protections such as for the Edwards Aquifer, which resides in this district.
On the campaign trail, she calls herself a “fierce Latina” and says she’s “no stranger to hard work.” That’s good — because there’s work to be done. She would offer the constituents a fresh voice concerned about everyday struggles rather than one offering performative and divisive rhetoric with the promise of show trials.