Houston Chronicle Sunday

Beware of ‘slate’ cards

We could not be more clear. These lists are, in essence, a scam. Ignore them.

-

If you weren’t one of the early voters last week, may we offer a few suggestion­s about casting your ballot on Tuesday. We hope you’ll consider your vote carefully, read all you can about the candidates in the Chronicle or in several reliable voters guides and, if you vote Republican, discard any of the multicandi­date “slate” endorsemen­t lists that might have come in the mail.

Not only are those slate cards useless, but in our view they undermine the democratic process. The endorsemen­ts often have less to do with a candidate’s qualificat­ions and more to do with the candidate’s willingnes­s to participat­e in an egregious custom that’s come to be called “pay to play.” You pay for advertisin­g with the slate compilers, in other words, and your name ends up on the list.

Rice University political scientist Mark Jones advises “a healthy dose of skepticism.” Writing in the Chronicle recently, he noted that “These endorsemen­ts frequently have less to do with a candiate’s qualificat­ions and ‘conservati­ve credential­s’ and more to do with the candidate’s willingnes­s to ‘pay to play and/or to their personal and profession­al relationsh­ips with the lists’ proprietor­s.”

The slate cards owe their origins to a two-decades-old internecin­e feud between establishm­ent Republican­s in Harris County and Christian Right supporters of 1988 presidenti­al candidate Pat Robertson. One of the leaders of the Robertson camp was Dr. Steven Hotze, whose Conservati­ve Republican­s of Harris County and Conservati­ve Republican­s of Texas created one of the first local slate mailers advising voters how to cast their ballot.

The United Republican­s of Texas, representi­ng the so-called establishm­ent, interviewe­d candidates and prepared its own slate card. Over the years, other organizati­ons have developed their own for-profit slate mailers. They’re effective, particular­ly in down-ballot races where candidates are rarely well-known.

They are, in essence, a scam. They provide a good income to the slate purveyors and get people elected who may or may not be qualified, but they undercut the integrity of the system.

Ed Hubbard, a Houston attorney who has run unsuccessf­ully for Harris County Republican Party chair, points out that neither the county party nor the state party endorses candidates in their primaries, and none of the mailers speak for the party. Writing for the Big Jolly Politics blog under the headline “the curse of the slate mailers,” Hubbard has advised voters to avoid relying on either for-profit slate mailers or those that are skewed toward a consultant’s clients.

As an example of how skewed they are, consider that several of the better-known slates endorse Denise Pratt, the incumbent judge for the 311th District Court who’s been mired in scandal for months. Never mind that she’s been reprimande­d for “unreasonab­le” delays, that she’s been accused of backdating court documents and that’s she’s been rated “not qualified” by the Houston Bar Associatio­n. Never mind all that: She paid; she plays.

Voters on Tuesday need to realize that for-profit slate mailers are unreliable guides. We urge voters to ignore them, to do their own homework and to trust their own judgment. That’s what democracy is all about.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States