HD 40: Saenz Offers Misleading Information About Pena’s Vote On Legislation Authorizing Proposition 15

Political races in the Rio Grande Valley are almost always so nasty they could gag a buzzard six times over. They are almost always filled with rumors, innuendo, and elaborate attempts to distort the opposition’s voting record.

And, just about every election cycle, there is one distortion that requires a lot reading through the House Journal to sort out.
This year, the first candidate to manage to run up against having released such a distortion is Edinburg engineer Eddie Saenz, who alleged as follows at a recent event, which was subsequently quoted in a press release distributed by Legislative Media:

Sáenz, whose father is currently battling cancer, also pointed out that Peña was the only Democrat to vote against legislation last May that allows Texans to vote for the proposed $3 billion cancer research plan on November 6.
“This past session, my opponent co-authored a bill to bring $3 billion in cancer research over the next 10 years,” Sáenz added. “When it came time to vote for his own bill, he voted against it, and was the only Democrat to vote against it.”

Sounds pretty damning, right? Of course. Who wants to be on record voting against cancer research?

The reality, however, is far different. We’ll take each of Saenz’s claims one-by-one and debunk them here for you.

The first claim made is:

Peña was the only Democrat to vote against legislation last May that allows Texans to vote for the proposed $3 billion cancer research plan on November 6

The Reality: HJR 90, the enabling legislation for Proposition 15, had exactly three record votes before the Texas House of Representatives, excluding committee votes. One of those votes was on an amendment during passage, the second record vote was on final passage and the final record vote was in concurring with Senate amendments.

Record Vote 1093 was the vote for or against adoption of HJR 90. Rep. Aaron Pena is shown voting for adoption (an “aye” vote) on Page 3541 of the House Journal.

Now, for the rest of Saenz’s claims. Here’s one:

“This past session, my opponent co-authored a bill to bring $3 billion in cancer research over the next 10 years,”

Reality: That one is actually true. Pena was one of several dozen bi-partisan co-authors of HJR 90.

And, the final claim:

“When it came time to vote for his own bill, he voted against it, and was the only Democrat to vote against it.”

Reality: Saenz’s claims are pretty puzzling. Unless there is a vote somewhere I am unaware of that Pena–or any other House member, for that matter–cast on HJR 90, I can’t see how Saenz’s is doing anything other than distorting the truth.

In order to explain this, we’ll go over each of the three votes taken on HJR 90 in the House.

RV 1092: This was a vote on an amendment by Hochberg and Kolkhorst. The amendment altered the mechanism in which the program would have ultimately been funded. There is no way that a vote “for” or “against” this amendment could be construed as a vote “for” or “against” cancer research. Pena voted for a motion to table the amendment, but was by far not the only Democrat to do so. Other Democrats casting “yes” votes on RV 1092 were Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston), Mark Strama (D-Austin), and Valinda Bolton (D-Austin). While the majority of Democrats did vote against tabling the amendment, Pena wasn’t alone in his vote.

RV 1093: This was the record vote on final passage. Pena, along with every other Democrat in the House who was present, voted “aye,” meaning they supported the bill on final passage.

RV 1720: This was the final vote taken on the legislation in the House. It was the vote to concur with the Senate’s amendments. Again, Pena cast an “aye” vote, meaning he voted for passage.

Saenz’s addition of the phrase, “the only Democrat to vote against it,” makes his claim sound more legitimate. However, I can’t find a single instance–aside from on the amendment–where any House Democrat cast a vote counter to HJR 90. The only instance which could even be construed this way was when Rep. Tracy O. King (D-Batesville) had his vote recorded as a “no” on final passage of HJR 90. Even then, however, he corrected the record in the House Journal to indicate his intention was to vote “yes.”

Still not satisfied that I’d done enough digging on this, I decided to go over to Saenz’s campaign website and see if they had any further information. On their campaign ‘blog’ (which, by the way, lacks the “paid political advertising” disclaimer) I did find that it appears they are actually talking about HB 14, not HCR 90.

On RV 1391, Pena is, indeed, recorded as voting against the bill. And, he is the only Democrat recorded as voting as such.

There is an interesting twist to that, however. Between “absent, excused” and “absent” legislators, 57 members of the House were listed as “absent” or “absent excused” for RV 1391. Since Pena voted for CJR 90 on two separate occasions, and was a sponsor of HB 14, and a vote against HB 14 wouldn’t be in harmony with either of those facts, one of two things seems logical here: (a) Pena’s vote registered incorrectly and, as with many legislators, he didn’t catch it until it was too late; or (b) Pena wasn’t even in the Chamber and someone voted on his behalf. Since Debbie Riddle, Betty Brown, and Robert Talton–all people voting against the bill–sit near Pena, I suppose that’s possible.

Even so, in light of Pena’s votes on HJR 90, Saenz’s version of Pena’s voting record is heavily misleading. It makes it sound as though Pena voted against cancer research lock, stock, and barrel. When you look at the actual voting record with any understanding at all of how the Texas House works, Saenz’s looks like he’s grasping at straws.

Which do you look at: someone’s vote on the Joint Resolution to enable the Amendment, or the bill to enable the Joint Resolution–especially when someone is on the record voting for the HJR?

Bookmark It