Texas Legislative Watch

A conservative information source for Texas Legislative matters & elections

Mabrie on the PAC Exchange

Posted by Mike O on April 5, 2010

UPDATE: It turns out, apparently Dr. Christopher Crow apparently spoke for others doctors- which is completely inappropriate, but may not fall to David Marwitz as the guilty party here.  Investigation continues, but somewhere, someone took serious liberties with some doctor’s good names.  I strongly urge that the doctor’s spouses form an alliance group to serve as assistants to make sure the doctors’ viewpoints are properly expressed and managed from this point forward. This has been effective in Denton County and can be in Collin County as well.


David Marwitz has much to answer for, as does Mabrie Jackson, by associating herself with such questionable dealings.

The way of PACs in Austin handle things pretty well resembles a stock exchange, where ‘legislative voting options’ are bought and sold.  This disgusting process is something that needs to change.  Legal or not, the process is an unethical abomination that subverts true representation, even that of the rank and file members of the PACs.

The TexPAC endorsement of Mabrie Jackson is a classic- an unsavory- example.  TexPAC represents doctors across the state as a lobbying organization.  Doctors pay $2500 per year to be members.  Their normal vetting process involves questionnaires and interviews, but was NOT used in this case; neither of Mabrie’s opponents were talked to or sent questionnaires.  TexAC claims they have a second method, where they go on the recommendation of doctors; it is said that 3-4 primary care doctors (out of over 750 member doctors who live in the district) made recommendations for Mabrie, but the dates of those recommendations remain unknown.

However, there ARE dates that are relevant that ARE known.  In Jackson’s filing of political expenditures, a record of the Texas Ethics Commission, Jackson filed two payments of $21,031.62  and  $10,126.00 to the “Election Group” at 408 West 14th Austin, TX. (Update: in the runoff, she has dropped over $102K on this outfit, 10 times what she’s spent in all of Plano for the same period!)  This turns out to be a subsidiary and exists at the same address as the Eppstein Group, whose managing partner David Marwitz.  David Marwitz among other things is “director of political education for The Texas Medical Association (and) oversaw the association’s million-dollar political action committee”. TexPAC has not given monies to any of these candidates for this primary (Update: in the runoff, they contributed $2,500), but that endorsement came out fast enough after those initial payments.

The ironic thing about this endorsement is Mabrie has received large PAC donations from from some PACs controlled by trial lawyers, who the rank-and-file doctors would very likely consider NOT their best friends.  So Mabrie- after an initial payment, then additional payments to the tune of $133K on the firms in which the PAC’s political director apparently has a financial interest- gets an unapproved endorsement from the medical group; this clearly looks like a deal sweetener.  This is what the slickness- and questionable ethical conduct- that comes from Austin handlers; not from being a representative of the district.  And it is the type of shenanigans that has so disgusts the independent voters and has caused the rise of the Tea Parties.

As for any TexPAC doctors out there reading this; is this REALLY the way you want things handled?  And who do you think Mabrie will pay attention to; the endorsers or the ‘money people’?  You just might take just a bit of time and ask some questions of the candidates and your TexPAC lobbyist.


The TexPAC letter:


Dr. Tea Acuff’s response to fellow doctors:

April 3, 2010

Dear Colleague,

How is your personal political strategy working for you? Did you like me support the Republicans to have them serve up this Democratic sponsored “healthcare” bill?

We spend countless hours each week working on the problems brought to us by our patients, but we can barely manage to spend a few minutes on tasks that have immense impact on our profession and daily lives. Is voting in each race and sending a check to TMA and TEXPAC enough to insure our political health?

It is said all politics are local. Let me tell you a short local story from Plano, TX, District 66 of the Texas House of Representatives.

In the primary election last month my wife worked for a losing Republican, Wayne Richard, in a three way contest which is now in a runoff between Mabrie Jackson and Van Taylor. TEXPAC sent out a letter of endorsement for Jackson to the 500 TMA members in District 66. In the primary roughly 10,000 votes were cast in District 66, and 500 physicians alone would represent 5% of such a vote. Many elections are won by less than 5% margins.

Since my wife and I were involved in the election, we actually called TEXPAC to see how Jackson was selected among the three Republican candidates. (There was NO Democratic primary candidate for the vacated “Republican” seat.)  TEXPAC told us that all candidates are vetted…blah, blah, blah…but we responded that since we worked with the election we knew for a fact that such never happened. We were then told that a few local physicians requested that endorsement. I was given mailing addresses but no TEXPAC letterhead to do the same which is how I came to send you this letter after my complaint of improper due process.

Perhaps you received another TEXPAC endorsement for Jackson over Taylor for the pending runoff election as did I. Perhaps when you see your patient you order some tests to evaluate the significance of the patient’s story. We already know that TEXPAC did not vet these candidates. Is there other information that ties Jackson and TMA /TEXPAC together?

In Jackson’s filing of political expenditures, a record of the Texas Ethics Commission, Jackson filed two payments of $21,031.62  and  $10,126.00 to the “Election Group” at 408 West 14th Austin, TX.  This address also turns out to be the address of the Eppstein Group named for Bryan Eppstein, a Ft. Worth political consultant/lobbyist. The managing partner of the Eppstein Group is David Marwitz. David Marwitz among other things is “director of political education for The Texas Medical Association (and) oversaw the association’s million-dollar political action committee”. TEXPAC has not given monies to any of these candidates for this primary.

The interesting thing about this from my naïve view is that the money is flowing backwards. Those in the political know are not interested in us doctors for our token $2500 TEXPAC donations. They are interested in our votes. They are buying our votes by paying our consultants; or at least the “data” suggest that.

If we go back to this District 66 primary, we now have an entirely new vision of our political options. If half of our 500 doctors take a little time to meet the candidates and find out if they value our values, we can just by talking to our family, one or two patients, or staff and informing them of our concerns elect the candidates that then are dependent on us. We scattered doctors are like a big labor union. Mabrie Jackson spent $30,000 dollars betting on that belief. TEXPAC did their part.

But we now circle back to how we ended up with the Democratic mandates by our blind support of a Republican agenda. Since all politics are local, let’s put it in local terms. Mabrie Jackson takes political donations from trial lawyers to pay our consultants for our votes. When we go to Austin to fight for tort reform to whom will she be most beholden: trial lawyers, lobbyists, or us? Are we playing this game backwards?

I’ll vote for Van Taylor on this one.

For whomever you decide to vote make sure that your representative personally understands why you voted for them. You can see them and their informants about and at the polls, and right now they are interested in your vote. They may be more open to listen to you when you need something later if you are clear on why you voted and helped them win today.

If we expect to have the resources to help our patients in the future, we better use all our present resources now.

Tea Acuff MD


11 Responses to “Mabrie on the PAC Exchange”

  1. Tea Party Member said

    Kinda like Carlos being an officer of the Conservative Hispanic Society (treasurer of the PAC?) as well as Van’s campaign treasurer.

    CHS endorsed Van without a formal vetting process. Come on, Mike – you (MO, not the NTTP) will remain irrelevant as long as you put forth this type of dishonest drivel.

    Looking at the latest campaign finance reports – Van’s up to $710,000 in loans to his campaign. These aren’t contributions, but loans, that will be repaid by special interests if he wins. If he did not intend to be “paid back” they would be classified as regular contributions.

    So at this point – Van’s outstanding loans are more than 23 times the amount of Mabrie’s. If Mabrie’s the PAC-Lady, then have most certainly found our PAC-Man.

    • Mike O said

      Oh, tyeah, the Conservative Hispanic is a PAC, just like the NTTP; with about the same financial resources- essentially nil. Of course, Mr. gadfly, if you WERE actually a member of the Tea Parties, you might know that.

      It is SOP for all candidates to list their own contributions as loans; but Van’s utter lack of fundraising effort shows he is NOT planning for those to be paid back. When you have $10s of millions in the bank, that is a decision he can make.

      My relevancy is certainly not for gadflies to determine and is not even relevant to the core question of whether Plano can afford to have a representative who is bought and paid for by Austin-centric interests long before she ever gets there.

  2. Tea Party Member said

    “It is SOP for all candidates to list their own contributions as loans.”

    That is false. But don’t let the facts get in your way.

  3. Mike O said

    Well, there are new facts at the top of the article; you might want to bounce those off your brain and try to come up with some sort of retort to distract.

  4. Tea Party Member said

    So one doctor, because his wife worked for Mr. Richard and now works for Mr. Taylor, doesn’t agree with TEXPAC’s endorsement. Riveting stuff, Mike.

    I’m a member of the NTTP – and I don’t agree with this group’s endorsement of Van Taylor, so should I just pack up and leave and head for the Democratic party? Nope – I just want this group to support candidates that have actually walked the walk of fiscal conservatism instead of just talking about it. Call me crazy.

    Good for Dr. Acuff that he is exercising his right to advocate on behalf of the candidate that he thinks will represent him best. It is strange, however, that Mabrie was sending me mailers that included her position of being staunchly against ObamaCare back in January. I didn’t see anything from Van about ObamaCare until March.

    Always the political opportunist, that Nick Taylor.

  5. Tea Partier said

    Sounds like something the TX Ethics Comm. Should investigate. Sending a phony endorsement letter using doctors names.w/o their knowledge. Smells like FRAUD.
    Maybe they wrote themselves some prescriptions while they were at it too!?!?
    Wow. That’s big.

  6. Mike O said

    Until it became known the the four doctors DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE USE OF THEIR NAMES, you might have been close to right on that, Mr. Gadfly Faux Tea Party Member (A couple of our board members are ‘members’ of MoveOn.org every bit as much as you’re a ‘member’ of the NTTP). It’s called being a ‘plant’ and our effectiveness has been drawing a few of you for some time.

    ‘Walked the walk’ of fiscal conservatism is done with a single ‘safe’ vote (sure that it won’t impact the outcome). A lot more is indicated by the association with PACs that are constantly seeking ‘favors’ (i.e. tax money) in Austin. Mabrie has received only 13% of her donations from Plano, a tiny fraction compared to what the PACs and big influence peddlers have kicked in. And she has spent 10 times the money in Austin than in Plano. The ‘K Street equivalent’ in Austin doesn’t need another representative; Plano does.

  7. Tea Party Member - (ed. NOT!) said

    How was a 5-3 vote to increase taxes a “safe” vote? One more vote, and it wouldn’t have passed, right?

  8. Mike O said

    If you don’t think everyone knew how everyone was voting before it was cast, you really don’t know how all this works in Plano. It was pretty clear, for example, that Ben Harris’s vote was ‘flexible’.

  9. Tea Party Member - (ed. NOT!) said

    So in your world, people’s “no” votes are actually “yes” votes. Take off the tinfoil hat once in a while.

    Best of luck to you tomorrow, Mike.

    To rehash, this conversation, you never answer the question of why PacMan Taylor loaned his campaign all of that money, or how those loans are going to be repaid. It bothers you that Mabrie has $30k in loans but it doesn’t bother you that Van has nearly a quarter of a million.

    Consistently inconsistent.

    I guess I’ll check in here with you again in two years.


    Tea Party Member

  10. Mike O said

    Gadfly, (whose email is NOT registered as an NTTP member) Never commented about the loans, other than responding to your comment that Van expects his to be repaid. My supposed ‘tinfoil’ isn’t impacting my reading comprehension, but something you are taking must be interfering with yours.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: