Name 3 primary reasons why you are running for RPT Chair (i.e. including what changes, if any, are needed).

My decision to run  for RPT Chair is to:

- revitalize, increase, and diversify the fundraising sources for the party,

-implement active, robust election integrity programs (ensure secure and transparent elections, train election workers, clean voter rolls) so Texas is prepared for the November 2024 election. Without a strong election integrity effort, a robust GOTV effort, and the infrastructure to support them, the Party will fail at its primary purpose – electing conservatives.

- and ensure every eligible Republican is registered to vote, energize our grassroots base, and build the party infrastructure necessary for effective Get out the vote campaigns to preserve and grow our conservative majority and protect Texas, thereby protecting our 40 electoral votes for President Trump to win the White House.

-The party must, register conservative voters, fight leftist propaganda, advocate for conservative causes, and empower our activists to successfully promote their causes. -The party must build relationships with our elected officials and serve as an intermediary between our conservative movement and those officials.

All of these tasks require a chair that is beholden to no one group, but who can work with them all.

My personal beliefs are very conservative, yet I know that for us to succeed, I must be willing to engage with some who are less conservative. I don’t attack them for being less conservative; I try to lead and convince by example.

Some Republicans are what I call just barely right of center. I do not align with them, but I can work with them to win elections.

The Chair is not beholden to any part of the Party but to the Party as a whole.

As Chair, one of the most important aspects of my job is to help our candidates, chosen by the grassroots in the primaries, to win in November.

Do you believe in the Texas Republican Party Platform? Do you feel it should be downsized? Please explain.

I support the party platform. Many conservatives(new and old) have voiced concerns that the many planks make it difficult to follow and reference. I support a more streamlined, easily understood document that is used and referenced frequently by our activists, candidates, and legislators to advocate for our positions and inform new voters.

The election process in choosing a House Speaker appears to be broken. What can you do to fiix it?

The House sets its rules and determines how it will choose the Speaker. The Party and the Grassroots are not without recourse. Voters must elect a Republican majority that will work together. Republican House members should be able to set the rules in the caucus without depending on Democrats. This is vital for two reasons. By setting the rules for the Chamber, the Republican Caucus can choose the Speaker and eliminate Democrat chairs. We also need to end taxpayer funded lobbying that seems to exert an undue influence on some of our legislators.

Many of you are aware that there is a move afoot, led by some strong conservatives, to restructure the Speaker’s role. Without saying more, I am confident we will emerge from this process stronger than before.

The Party can exert pressure on our elected officials, but the greatest leverage is always exerted at the ballot box.

Do you believe the Texas Election Code should be removed from the Party Rules and if so, why?

This is closely related to the question of closing our primaries.

I certainly believe we should thoroughly examine how we could do this as part of closing primaries. There is already a designated Convention working group assigned to research these variables and I await their findings and recommendations. Once we have fully evaluated all the requirements, risks, and benefits, we can make an informed decision.

It is easy to say, “Let's separate!” It is harder to do without planning for possible logistical, financial, and legal aftereffects. We also have to be prepared as a party to fund running our elections in 254 counties, train, and also be prepared for the costs of lawsuits to the party and possibly any individual party members. The Party and Party officials will face legal exposure from litigants who are unhappy with Party decisions. This gets back to what money the RPT does or does not have currently.

Having spoken with many county chairs and CEC’s, they also want to be sure they have proper training and understand how their roles and responsibilities may change should this occur.

The cost will be a challenge. Currently, the state provides funds for our primaries. Removing the party from the Election Code, done without careful coordination and/or support of the legislature and the SOS elections division, may leave the party with inadequate funds to hold elections. I am also very concerned of the timing of implementing this right before a presidential election; one that is crucial for the trajectory of the country. Will fundraising be delegated to county parties? The job of the state party? Both? These are just a few of the many questions that must be answered.

Lastly, as the border areas continue to trend and flip to Republican, the border area county chairs, elected Republicans, and activists there are voicing concern that closing the primaries may halt their shift to red because in their area some folks still vote on the person and not the party affiliation. We must know more about the percentages of voters who split their tickets in that region.

What should be the legislative priorities for the coming session?

Closing the Border and creating a Texas Border force, Election Integrity (multiple initiatives as banning RCV, making sure only US citizens can register to vote and only US citizens vote, banning NGO money in GOTV and voter registration efforts, paper ballot voting, etc to name a few), Protecting our children (K-college) and defunding leftist grade school/college ideologies and NGO funding , End taxpayer funded lobbying, empower parents with Educational Savings accounts, Make the energy grid more reliable and safe, pass a conservative budget and rein in spending and taxes to name a few. The convention delegates will decide our list of legislative priorities.

Should Texas GOP limit their elected officials to 8 years or less from the same office, even though it will force some good candidates to leave an office?

Yes. Term limits have always been a sound idea. Florida has imposed limits like these, and they have been very successful. Whether 8 years (4 house terms/2 senate) or 12 years (6 House terms/3 senate) for example.

Should the Republican Party close its primaries. Why or why not?

Yes.I first advocated for closed primaries at the GA-WTP forum for Vice-Chair candidates in 2022. My views have not changed from those I expressed in that video. We must work on a plan to address the financial and legal challenges of closing the Primary, but it is worthwhile to do so.

There are generally two ways to accomplish this. The first is through legislation. If our conservative majority holds, this path is open. The major hurdles there are continued infighting and procedural barriers.

The other alternative is through a Party-led process. This will almost certainly invite litigation, and we must be prepared for many cases involving the State, Local Parties, and possible individual party officials including the  potential cost/liability for such a move. Discussed extensively in question 4 as well.

The SREC is tasked with enforcing the Rules adopted at the last convention. Have they done their jobs and if not, what & why not and how can you fix it?

Grading the SREC as a whole is difficult. Some have focused on specific legislative priorities and advocated strongly for them. Others have not focused on issues at all. Some have worked tirelessly across their Senate District, attending meetings and forums, spreading the Republican message, and growing our ranks. Others have not. I think that the SREC should communicate more frequently as a group on ideas and plans, short term/long term goals, and metrics to determine if successful outside of quarterly SREC meetings.

I have met with many members of the SREC to discuss this inconsistency. We all agree that this is because so many in the SREC are not versed in their responsibilities, expected duties, and statutorily defined roles in the bylaws. The Party did not guide or train them. It took about two years to revise the Party’s Precinct Chair Guide; the SREC guide is, when last I checked, still a work in progress as is the County chair manual.

It is important to set expectations and goals right from the start. As Chair, this will be one of the first administrative tasks I will accomplish.

Are you willing to call out Legislators that will not support the Party Platform?

I am. I apply the principles of Matthew 18:15-17 to issues like this.

A polite, respectful  private conversation is usually productive as the first step. If that fails, a conversation with a few other influential persons in attendance often works. If this fails, a more public (and still respectful) discussion between the Party and the legislator. A confrontation is the last recourse.

I always want to give the legislator the opportunity to explain their actions. There may be some circumstances we do not know about or do not understand.

Condemnation without a documented conversation, facts, or transparency in the process is not productive and is, in fact, destructive to and will create a lack of trust that prevents further collaboration.

A public confrontation as a first step is far less likely to achieve success, but when it is needed, we must act swiftly, transparently, and justly making sure we notice and invite the person being discussed. That is only fair and as how we would want to be treated if the situation were reversed.

At an SREC meeting, if a motion was up for petitioning the State of Texas to release RPT from state law, in exchange for the State of Texas not providing tax funds to defray election costs, would you vote for or against? Why?

I enthusiastically support such a petition, provided we already have an ongoing funding mechanism in place for our elections that is immune to donor issues.

Elections are expensive, and they cannot be subject to the whims of large dollar donors. Some always proclaim, “The money will always be there,” but these same folks are nowhere to be found when the funding fails.

The moment we have a financial shortfall, we will have a crisis – we will disenfranchise our own voters, harm our candidates, and hurt the message and brand of the RPT. We cannot surrender before we take the field of battle.

As a Republican, if you had to give up one of the following core principles, which one would you select first and why? 
a. pro-life;
b. 10% reduction in state, fed, local spending;
c. 2nd amendment;
d. illegal immigration;
e. foreign bases; 
f.  10th amendment

This is a difficult question, but I believe that when we weigh the options you provide, the one we can compromise on is (b) the 10% reduction in spending.

Why? It is simple - because we can revisit spending issues at a later date and reverse our course and may be able to find cost savings in other departments. The others are either values which I cannot compromise or where compromise, even if intended as a short-term one, will prove far, far harder to undo and have far ranging deleterious effects.

Fundraising for the party is a big part of the RPT Chairs job. How does fundraising this year compare w/prior years? How is the fundraising going that will eventually be used to meet all expenses the RPT incurs, including the state convention? Please explain.

Fundraising has suffered significantly as the Party has relied on a handful of major donors who contribute, for the most part, to the same PAC. I have met with other  conservative donors across Texas who have been large contributors to understand why our donations have fallen significantly. Many have redirected their giving because they did not like the Party messaging, Chair, or particular votes/actions. Some asked why they should donate to a party that would then spend the funds they donated to attack them. Many  felt some donors were using the Party as their personal Political Action Committee and they did not want to be associated with that effort.

I am optimistic, however, because many of these donors have expressed a willingness to return if I am elected. I have made it clear – the Party is no one faction’s tool. We work for the Republicans of Texas, rich and poor alike, advancing our core principles. No strings can be attached to the donations; they may designate what initiative (such as Election integrity) that they want to fund.

I hold this optimism because many of the donors I approached who had previously said that they would not give to the party, have been very generous with advice and support. The Party had slashed its election integrity funding at the end of December 2023. I convinced these generous hardcore conservatives to support a training program for teaching poll workers and GOTV efforts. In effect, the money is there, and will be available.

As to the convention, I must be frank. I am concerned that our registrations are down significantly to date compared to past years. Donations are also down. This is made even worse by the fact that this is a presidential year, which should be more robust and active than a midterm convention.

Support by legislators and other officials is diminished, and again, when asked why, many of these officials point out that the party spends a great deal of time attacking them – so why should they help the party attack them? That is why I believe it is important to use the Matthew 18 strategy to first express our disapproval but still hold people accountable to their voters, we the people.

I realize that in June, if I am elected Chair, the Party may have substantial debt left over from the convention. My fundraising plan, targeting new and old  donors who have been left behind by the party, will address this. I have already built a team of local, state, and federal level professional fundraisers who will assist me should I win as Chair.

We can and will raise funds, and we will never sell our souls doing it.

Is there anything in your background of an embarrassing nature that should be explained before your election? Arrests/Convictions? Bankruptcies?

No

Who are the top 2 donors to your campaign?

Aside from my family, Joe Hurt (Oil & Gas, Rancher) is my largest donor. Earnest Angelo (Oil & Gas, Former National Committeeman, Reagan Campaign chair), Don & Gwyn Sparks (Oil & Gas), and Jeff & Val Sparks (Oil & Gas) have all donated identical sums.

What is your current family & employment situation that enables you to take on the responsibilities of the State Chairmanship?

I am blessed to have a family that is at a point in life where I can devote myself full-time to the duties of the Chair.

I work with my husband’s firm (Spiers Group). While Jon and I are very active politically, we have been able to conduct our work from just about anywhere, thanks to the Internet. We have spent much of my term as vice chair on the road reaching groups untapped by the Party.

Jon recognizes that this office will require my full-time attention. He is supportive of my work and commits to assisting me in any way I need.

Amnesty comes in many forms.  What's your view as it pertains to Texas?

Today, when someone speaks of amnesty, it is often in the context of immigration.

Illegal immigration is illegal. Period. I do not condone amnesty for this. I do not condone amnesty for DACA participants.

Texas is a proud state of legal immigrants, in a nation of immigrants – legal and lawful immigrants. To grant amnesty to those here illegally dishonors every person who ever was a naturalized citizen, who came here lawfully and followed all the rules to become a citizen of our great nation. It cheapens citizenship in general, making it something to be given away or even stolen.

Are some of the folks here illegally nice people, just looking for a better way of life? I am certain there are. But there is a proper legal mechanism for them to come to the USA lawfully and legally, and for them to obtain citizenship.

It is time to quit cheapening our citizenship.

In your opinion, who runs the County Executive Committees(CEC) - the elected County Chair or the elected Precinct Chairs?

I believe the power rests in the body unless the CEC has vested it in the chair when they drafted their bylaws. “Who is in charge?” depends on foundational documents – the bylaws - created at the county party level. In a state with 254 counties, there could be 254 answers.

Whenever there is a change in leadership of a county party, from precinct chairs to the chair, the County Executive Committee meets and adopts its bylaws. These bylaws are similar to those of any corporation or club, defining the roles and powers of all the parties.

Some CECs vest their power in the body, while others place power in the chair. Many are surprised that Texas Republican CECs do not have one uniform set of bylaws.

The State Party’s bylaws are drafted at the RPT convention, and delegates can participate in shaping the party's rules. They entrust the SREC with implementing, adapting, and modifying these rules as needed.

Many of these same delegates who draft the State Party Bylaws will not participate in the drafting of their County Executive Committee Bylaws!

I propose that the state provide every elected CEC with model—sample or template—bylaws, which the counties can use as a guide. The CECs don’t have to use any part of these model documents, but they will provide a roadmap to construct bylaws that vest power in the CEC, power in the Chair, or divide it between the two somewhat equally. How they choose to divide power is the CEC's choice, not the RPTs. It is not my goal to dictate how the individual CECs conduct their business.

In these bylaws, I will also encourage the inclusion of a provision that should a conflict between the CEC and the Chair arise, the RPT Chair shall be empowered to mediate a solution and the ability to appeal to the SREC as a whole.

This is so important as we go into November of the most important Presidential election of our lives. We cannot have our CECs in disarray.

What's your opinion of RPT Platform Plank 248, regarding the CEC electing their chairman, like the Congress and State Legislature elects their speakers, rather than in the primary?

I have served in administrations where the Chair was elected in the Primary, and I have served when the Chair was elected by the CEC. Having served in both, I can weigh the pros and cons of each.

That said, I favor the CEC electing their chair and vice chair.

What would you be willing to do to rein in rogue county chairs?

As chair, I am willing to do everything the state and local bylaws allow me to do. To date, as vice chair, I have successfully mediated settlements between local factions. I use the Matthew principles I describe above.
(FYI: Although I offered to attend, I was not invited to participate in the MoCO mediation.)

Given the division within county partys, what combination of quorums, elected status, seniority etc would you support to prevent such division in the future?

Each county party must decide how it wishes to operate and memorialize those wishes in its bylaws. I cannot emphasize that enough – bylaws matter. CECs draft their bylaws, and by ratifying them, they agree to be bound by them. The Chair is also bound by them.

Remember, the RPT does not dictate to or control the counties. I want to unite the party in purpose, not control and dictate their individual beliefs. After all, the real power in the Republican party is reserved for the individual rank and file.

That said, carefully constructed bylaws are essential. Here are some examples:

CECs set forth their definition of a quorum in their bylaws.

CECs can set the date of meetings unless they have given that authority to the Chair.

CECs can set the location of their meetings, unless they have given that power to the Chair.

CECs can approve some or all expenditures  (often express financial limits set) unless they have given that power to the Chair.

CECs can initiate or approve officer appointments unless they have given that power to the chair.

CECs can admit affiliated groups unless they have given that power to the Chair.

CECs can remove County Chairs if they provide a mechanism to do so in their bylaws and adhere to the policies and procedures set forth.

These are some of the reasons it is so important that CECs work carefully to draft the bylaws they wish to be used to govern their local party.

There will come a time when a Chair or some members of the CEC will not abide by the bylaws. If the bylaws permit action by the RPT, then the RPT can step in readily. Even so, as Chair, I will work to mediate a solution aggressively. It will be just and impartial.

Related to the previous question regarding fairness … and the issue of a conservative county chairman (and assuming that there was a pattern of unfairness), would you openly support replacement of the conservative chair over this matter? Even when you would be on the minority side?

I have always worked to be impartial and just when handling the affairs of others, no matter my personal feelings. I may have a friendship with one group or another, and I have always put friendship or business relationships aside in order to do what is right.