Rodriguez Upsets Incumbent Bonilla

Former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez completed a stunning political turnaround Tuesday with an upset win over incumbent Republican Henry Bonilla that topped off the Democratic takeover of Congress. Rodriguez overcame a huge financial disadvantage with the help of national party officials, who overhauled his campaign and spent aggressively on his behalf.

Rodriguez arrived shortly after that at the Harlandale Civic Center, which was packed with more than 300 screaming supporters.

After slowly working his way through the crowd to the stage, he declared victory — which came on the heels of two Democratic primary defeats in 2004 and earlier this year in the neighboring District 28.

"I think we have a real mandate," he said. "We needed to make sure we worked on raising the minimum wage. We're also going to take care of prescription drug costs. And, by God, we're going to do the right thing by our veterans."

The election sends Rodriguez back to Congress after a two-year hiatus prompted by the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature redrawing of the state's congressional districts in 2003.

His victory leaves Democrats with 234 seats in the U.S. House, Republicans with 200. A seat in Florida remains contested with the Republican candidate ahead and expected to win.

Tuesday's runoff stemmed from the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling last June that Texas Republican leaders breached the Voting Rights Act by slicing 100,000 Hispanics from the district in their 2003 remap. A three-judge panel answered by removing several largely Anglo Hill Country counties and pulling heavily Hispanic South Bexar County into the district.

The move put Democrats on equal footing with Republicans and increased the Hispanic population to 61 percent.

Bonilla blamed his defeat partly on the court-ordered changes in a speech Tuesday night to about 75 supporters in the lobby of the building housing his North Side campaign headquarters.

"They moved the goal post on us further down the field, and we couldn't score again and again," he said.

After his concession speech at 9:30 p.m., he mingled with supporters and thanked them for their efforts.

Early Tuesday night, it became clear that the San Antonio Republican lost Bexar County for the first time in his political career, and the news didn't get much better.

Bonilla also lost ground in what had been his West Texas stronghold. Only five weeks ago, he carried Dimmit, Culberson, Presidio and Brewster counties in the seven-way special election, but he lost all four to Rodriguez on Tuesday.

Phil Ricks, Bonilla's spokesman, conceded early in the evening that the campaign had lost the ground war, at least as far as early voting.

"I think the other side was much more organized in getting the early vote out, and that's why they sought extra days of early voting," he said.

Soon after Gov. Rick Perry set the runoff date, the League of United Latin American Citizens sued and eventually wrangled three extra days of early voting before dropping the complaint.

Vanessa Gonzalez, spokeswoman for Rodriguez, said the former four-term congressman's campaign had placed heavy emphasis on coaxing voters to the polls early.

She also said the early results Tuesday indicated District 23 would join the Democratic trend that hit Nov. 7.

"People realized the only way to change things was to go out and vote," Gonzalez said.

Andy Hernandez, a political scientist at the University of Texas at San Antonio and a former Democratic National Committee staffer, said Rodriguez's victory was in step with last month's Democratic upheaval.

"You have to see this as part of the national trend where Republicans lost in swing districts," he said. "This anti-Republican trend, which Hispanics had a big part in, played out here."

But Democrats almost didn't have a shot at the seat. On Nov. 7, Bonilla came within a single percentage point of an outright majority, which would've allowed him to avoid a runoff.

Bonilla came into the runoff with $1.6 million in the bank and the advantages of incumbency — a familiar name across the sprawling district and list of projects for which he'd secured federal funding.

Rodriguez hobbled out of the special election nearly broke and with a reputation as a less than savvy campaigner.

But he had a name that registered in Bexar County and South Texas, and soon he had the interest of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. After testing the water with polls, the organization wound up spending more than $900,000 on mail-outs and television ads.

When national Democrats came on the scene, Rodriguez's campaign was transformed from a largely all-volunteer effort to a more professionalized operation.

Rodriguez accused Bonilla of slashing veterans' health benefits and voting against a $1,500 bonus for troops active in Iraq and Afghanistan.

For his part, Bonilla questioned Rodriguez's judgment over his support for repealing a law allowing the use of secret evidence in deportation cases, saying it would have led to the freeing of suspected terrorists, and for accepting a $250 contribution in 1998 from a man later convicted of illegal business transactions with Libya.

Andy Hernandez said Bonilla's accusation and the TV ad that followed might have hurt Bonilla, not Rodriguez. "It just wasn't credible."

Richard Langlois, chairman of the Bexar County Republican Party, blamed Bonilla's fall in Bexar County on his supporters staying home Tuesday.

"Obviously, it was voter apathy," Langlois said. "Obviously, something happened."

I see it that way, too. Many high-class Hispanics have turned away because of that policy. They are just as against, if not more so, to illegals than we are. And why shouldn't they be? They did everything they were supposed to do to be here...why should Pancho get any breaks?

Democrats get more minority votes because they are the party who will keep entitlements. Pure and simple. Minorities are more likely than Caucasians to pursue entitlements.

This is the point Cosby was making. The sheeple have not all realized that entitlements are Dems' way of keeping them down. Feed 'em, have 'em spit out babies to inflate the voting base, and they're too busy and too poor to get educated.

This is not MHO, it is fact. I did the welfare job and I know.

Since welfare reform, the number of people on welfare is about 4 million, 2% of the total US population of 300 million. People on welfare and people in the lowest socio-economic group, incomes below $30,000 are only 23% of the voters in this nation. Persons below $15,000 are 8% of the electorate and persons below $30,000 are 15% of the electorate. You can't win many elections with only 23% of the voters as your core constituency.
In 2004, 36% of poor people voted for Bush and 42% of persons with incomes from $15,000 to $30,000 voted for Bush.
Black voters are 11% of the electorate and Latino voters are 8%.

What you're ignoring is the number of minorities that don't bother to vote! And those that vote, with the numbers you provide, I agree aren't their 'core constituency' but they sure can and do put them over the top.

When I was with the agency, we had that [get out the vote] initiative, too. That was when TX stopped using voter registration for jury duty and began using drivers licenses. I was glad then because I didn't have to solicit them to register anymore. You'd be amazed at how many didn't and don't give a rat's patooti.

"What you're ignoring is the number of minorities that don't bother to vote! And those that vote, with the numbers you provide, I agree aren't their 'core constituency' but they sure can and do put them over the top.

When I was with the agency, we had that [get out the vote] initiative, too. That was when TX stopped using voter registration for jury duty and began using drivers licenses. I was glad then because I didn't have to solicit them to register anymore. You'd be amazed at how many didn't and don't give a rat's patooti."

I'm not ignoring non-voters at all. That wasn't what was being discussed. Only between 45 and 60 percent of eligible voters actually vote, depending on the election.
There are other countries where it is against the law to not vote if you are an eligible citizen! That's the way it is in Australia, to name one.
Blacks are 13% of the US population and they are 11% of voters, so that's pretty close to what it should be. Latinos are 14% of the population but only 8% of voters, so they've got a ways to go to be proportional.

"Latinos are 14% of the population but only 8% of voters, so they've got a ways to go to be proportional."

They've got to me more than 14% of the population. What was being discussed is how Dems pander to them and why.

As for Australia, I've often considered emigrating there if the Dems don't back off their social globalization of this country. I think illegal to not vote may be a little harsh, and maybe failing to vote should cause the privilege to be stripped, as it is for convicts.

"And why shouldn't they be? They did everything they were supposed to do to be here.."

Makes sense to me.

Nobody likes a line jumper, except the President, apparently, and Alberto Gonzales and people who think like them.

Nobody likes to be patronized, especially when the beneficiaries are the line jumpers, a corrupt foriegn government, and a bunch of sweatshop owners.

Ciro Rodriguez is correct and the Republicans are wrong on this one.

All that is there are little IOU's printed on government paper, backed by government printing presses, backed by the earning power of a steadily declining work force to retiree ratio. It's a ponzi scheme!!!

But keep trying to make it sound good.

thoroughly debunked MM's claim that there is no problem with Social Security months ago. She knows she's lying, but doesn't care.

I have noticed many posts in which Murry Mom has her own set of unigue facts.

It's a ponzi scheme!!!

You've seen it said so many times by the liar-in-chief you believe it must be so, don't you? Even though the SS trustees' data totally contradict all of the Republicans' baseless contentions.

I have noticed many posts in which Murry Mom has her own set of unigue facts.

My facts are supported by the SS trustees reports that I cite in my posts. Also, I possess sufficient intelligence to spell "unique" properly.

Just testing to see whether you would catch that. You don't do to well on other things. Such as believeing there is really money in the S.S. "Lockbox."

How is your collection of bridges coming along?

Looking to unload any of that Arizona seaside property?

Only because it's true, when they say it.

That and having by shear force of good sense been able to extract friends from getting involved in them. There have been myriad Pyramid schemes and other con's tried on me.

By force of law, S.S. was the only one I could not avoid.

By force of law, S.S. was the only one I could not avoid.

LOL! Does that mean you would be willing to give your SS checks back to the treasury if they didn't deduct SS and Medicare funds from your paycheck every month?

Damn straight, if we could go back and let me invest it in the market each year. I would have loved a deal like GWB was pushing. So would other thinking Americans.

However between the Dem and AARP demagogy, the lamestream Media bias, and scaring of unaffected geezers, I guess it wasn't gonna happen.

Now that the Dems are in my, buying power which was prevented from growing with the economy will suffer even more due to the upcoming inflation. At least the Republicans were able to grow the economy while overspending.

...let me invest it in the market each year...

That's fine, just so long as you don't invest in companies like Enron, AA, GM, INTC, F, and DD whose shares collectively have suffered varying degrees of net loss over the past 5 years. Congratulations on considering yourself savvy enough to outsmart the stock market.

Meanwhile SS pays its recipients the entire amount of their "investment" in the first 30 months without any market risk and only a 1% "carrying charge" on the payout. In contrast with a 0.5-2% yearly fee on mutual fund investors. Your broker must love you for favoring high cost investments over low cost ones.

You only need to watch Lou Dobbs once in a while to see how the middle class is being screwed by Wall Street. Wall Street managing directors are pulling down holiday bonuses of $50 million apiece from a bonus pool that aggregates multiple tens of billions of dollars earned on the backs of all of middle class investors. From the employers and past employers of these people, the list of corporate executives pulling down annual compensation packages of $50 million or more is getting beyond belief. The losing management teams in corporate takeover wars are walking away with $50 million personal settlements for doing goodness knows what. I have never seen anything like this.

This is what happens when people like you place their trust in Wall Street. The SS system provides a safety net for the losers in Wall Street's "investment" schemes.

You do know even the SS trustees say that by ~2040 all SS funds will be exhausted and outgoing funds will far outstrip incoming contributions. I have seen estimates that a payroll tax ranging from 25-40% and probable benefits reductions will be necessary for SS to meet its obligations. I also don't think those figures include Medicare, and as we all know medicals costs are far outpacing inflation. I believe that Medicare expenses may someday eclipse Social Security's.

I wanted to ask about your rant concerning corporate compensation,.... so what? What difference does it make how much they are paid, if you don't like it don't invest.

Finally you are right IMO about one thing SS was suppose to be a safety net, basically so you'll have food to stay alive and a place to sleep. I don't believe it was ever intended to fund your retirement, to pay for your 2200 sq ft. home, to provide money for two cars, Summer vacation, wintering in FL. or AZ., or subsidizing medical care from retirement to the grave like the addition on Medicare in the '60's brought to the dance. SS was a scam from the start, and for too many, way too many is basically all the retirement they have.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.