TLCV: Want Clean Air, Clean Water? Let’s Clean the House

First, thanks to The Texas Blue for the opportunity to introduce TLCV to your readers. Simply put, we’re the non-partisan political action arm of Texas’ environmental movement. We’re a political organization first, an environmental organization second. No other environmental group focuses as much of their financial resources and organizational energy to the nitty-gritty, down-and-dirty process of elections and politics.

But we don’t just write a bunch of checks to candidates. We conduct rigorous research on candidates and educate them on how to use pro-conservation positions to win votes. We then put money into hard-hitting, independent media campaigns contrasting the candidates' position on the issues — making sure that an effective message reaches voters. Finally, we hold politicians accountable with our legislative scorecard. Our 2007 scorecard is almost ready to be released.

Perhaps the best way to give you a picture of who we are and what we do is to take a look at the last election cycle and some of TLCV’s successes. In 2006, our efforts helped elect three challengers who defeated bad incumbents, defended two good incumbents, and won two open seats for the conservation community.

The first rule of thumb for political advocacy is to make sure that your friends, the “known quantities”, the people who have proven their commitment to your issues, get re-elected. Both of our supported incumbents won re-election.

The environment played a significant role in 2006 House races where we were involved. A good example is the Ellen Cohen campaign in Houston’s district 134. Cohen ran against incumbent Martha Wong. In December of 2005, after the legislative session, we released our scorecard. The scorecard and our press release pointed out that 20 Houston area Representatives had voted against amendments which would have cleaned up toxic air emissions in Houston. This inspired the Chronicle to write a front page, above the fold story (pdf) on these votes. This was followed up by an editorial labeling these twenty House members, Martha Wong included, as the “Toxic Twenty”.

Cohen’s campaign, along with TLCV and other outside groups, made this a centerpiece issue of the campaign, repeatedly reminding voters of Wong’s irresponsible record on the issue, and her inclusion as a member of the “Toxic Twenty”. Cohen defeated Wong, and the issue of toxic air emissions in Houston arguably reached a political tipping point. Clearly, Cohen’s campaign victory was due to numerous factors (Bill Kelly’s campaign expertise included), but I do have a convincing anecdote to back up this claim.

We spent significant money creating and sending a mail piece (pdf) to 20,000 voters in the district labeling Wong a member of the Toxic Twenty. Another non-environmental political organization did a similar independent expenditure specifically on this issue as well. You know you’ve reached a political tipping point when an outside organization, with no explicit interest in environmental issues, is spending their money on your issue to impact an election.

In Dallas, TLCV priority candidate Allen Vaught unseated incumbent legislator Bill Keffer in District 107. According to TLCV’s legislative scorecards, Keffer had a lifetime voting record on conservation issues of 8%, and voted against bipartisan legislation to increase renewable energy in Texas. Vaught strongly criticized Bill Keffer’s support for Perry’s coal plant fast-tracking decision; many of the proposed coal-fired plants would directly impact Dallas’ ongoing clean-air efforts. Vaught’s position on this issue was one of the reasons the Dallas Morning News endorsed him over Keffer. TLCV targeted 1000 voters identified as interested in environmental issues with a direct mail piece supporting Vaught, and the district, which includes the beautiful and highly prized White Rock Lake, was receptive to his campaign’s pro-conservation message.

Now, why is it important for the environmental community to participate in the political process at the campaign level, and what is the direct impact of this participation in getting our issues attention at the legislature? First, let me ask another question. What do you think is the main priority for a candidate or incumbent? The answer: getting elected. And it is here where TLCV starts. With money and resources, TLCV fulfills this fundamental need of a political candidate. That’s not to say that the candidates we support don’t want to do the right thing — they do. Or that we don’t hold candidates to standards — we do.

But candidates and incumbents know that while we have policy expectations, we also share the primary goal of winning. This is the common starting point for our relationship. We not only share values, we share the common interest of that candidate’s political survival. And when our candidate wins, this provides the basis for a unique and strong relationship with that elected official.

Our support and help in fulfilling their fundamental motivation — getting elected — also means that the basis for our relationship is different than other organizations.

How does this help? I would argue that in most things, politics included, relationships are more important than information. We, as environmentalists, can have all the facts on our side, but ultimately, people listen and react to those that they know and trust. Polluters spend millions of dollars lobbying the legislature every year to make sure their interests are protected. The vast majority of this money doesn’t go to pay for policy papers or fact-based reports. It goes to professional lobbyists who know little to nothing about the facts. But these lobbyists have strong personal relationships with members of the legislature. TLCV creates these same deep, long term relationships on behalf of the environmental community. And therefore, we create leverage that can then be used to get our issues attention, and hopefully to enact legislation.

Fulfilling needs and building long term relationships is a warm fuzzy. But ultimately, besides a good candidate and good ideas, what a winning campaign needs is money. We can decry how money distorts the political process — and it’s true. But that doesn’t change the reality on the ground. If environmentalists want a voice in the political process, we have to bring money to the table. And it needs to be smart money — spent on candidates, not just because they are the chapter president of their local Sierra Club, but because they can win. When environmentalists enter the political arena, we need to think and act strategically; we should pool our resources for bigger impact; and we should make sure we have mechanisms in place to hold people accountable.

That’s TLCV’s mission in a nutshell. I hope all of you reading will consider joining us as we continue our fight for a conservation majority in the Texas legislature in 2008.