Follow the Money and Other Observations

In case you were not able to attend yesterday’s debate … I was there to live blog the event and Martha Griffin offers her insight on the event and Charles Kuffner adds his two cents.

Bradley Olson captured the true essence of the event by claiming “the four candidates vying to become Houston’s next mayor emerged from the first major debate of the campaign Sunday evening unscathed from any attacks or gaffes, choosing instead a style that may not have cost or won them any votes.”

In other words … it was as exciting as watching paint dry … which is pretty exciting if it happens to be burnt orange. For a political junkie as myself I love watching a debate (yesterday wasn’t a debate) in which the candidates take the opportunity to hold the other one accountable.

Yesterday … I saw none of that and I guess I have not missed out much over the past three months. Since this was a televised debate … I was expecting Parker going after Locke and Brown after Parker and Locke after Parker or Brown and Morales jumping up and down asking “when is it my turn?” but of course all I got was the most serene … calm … courteous politicians that only seem want to attack each other behind the scenes and not in front of them.

The filing deadline was today and everyone is making a fuss about who raised the most and who has the least but I want to touch upon what this really means as we hit the home stretch to election day.

Martha Griffin and John Coby have some great stories regarding Gene Locke and a possible conflict of interest. Did you know Locke makes $640 an hour as general counsel for the Sports Authority? Who wants to leave making that much money in order to take a pay cut to be Mayor of Houston?

My apprehension and any potential voter should stop themselves and ask why is Gene Locke getting all the endorsements from the Democratic establishment … sprinkle in some Republican big wigs and voila it seems rather unanimous how big business wants to win?

This is of concern to me because … with all those endorsements who will he govern for … the people or the businesses that are footing the bill so that he becomes Mayor? Please folks, be skeptical of Locke’s endorsements … they are too good to be true and when I get a bad vibe … my intuition is usually right.

Locke has great ideas and he is a great candidate that anyone should vote for in a heartbeat but at the end of the day one must be on high alert for any ulterior motives.

But … then you have Annise Parker who “critics” claim is being funded from San Francisco to be the next Mayor. Although, I have not found any proof of this and believe me I have gone through her finances and just because a couple of people sent $25 dollars from the Bay Area … it suddenly isn’t a conspiracy.

My concern with Parker though is that she is cash strapped. Let’s call it what it is … it seems Locke was smart enough to dump Sue Walden because Parker only raised $425K and Locke easily doubled that with $949K.

But … that is not my concern … it is the cash on hand that may be an indicator of what to expect before Election day. Parker only has $222K on hand. What does this mean? With so little cash … Parker may have to join the dark side and go rogue … unleashing negative attacks on Locke and Brown in order to get into a run off.

What the campaign finance numbers do tell me is that apparently San Fran is not funding her campaign but if she can stay clean, as a whistle there is hope for her. Annise Parker has great ideas and she is a great candidate that anyone should vote for in a heartbeat but at the end of the day one must be on high alert for any negative attacks directed at Peter Brown or Gene Locke and take those with a grain of salt.

And finally … last but not least is Peter Brown who has the most money than the other candidates. With close to $2 million in the bank ready to be unleashed this month … Brown can single handedly stimulate the Houston economy with his own finances.

But … that is my concern … Brown raised the least out of all the candidates and has self-financed his own campaign. Why would a wealthy person do this? What is at stake for them? Why does he really want to be Mayor?

Folks have to ask themselves these questions … at the end of the day perhaps Brown and Locke really want to improve Houston and thus they are willing to take a pay cut in order to make Houston better.

Peter Brown has great ideas and he is a great candidate that anyone should vote for in a heartbeat but at the end of the day one must be on high alert and ask themselves why would he bankroll his own campaign to that degree and at the end of day will he be able to deliver?

Folks … you have three great candidates but before you pull the lever on any given individual … try to understand who they are and where they want to go with the city.

The questions I ask do not necessarily mean that A) Locke has already sold out to the Establishment B) Parker will resort to negative attacks in order to win and C) Brown can not deliver because he is self-financed … look at current Mayor Bill White who footed his own bill … he is leaving office as one of the most popular Mayors of the 713.