The “Bellstocracy” v. Texas House Candidate Hickland
Bell County Establishment Wants “Their” Man in Austin
Photo Courtesy of WhisperToMe/Wikimedia Commons
In epic Them vs. U.S. fashion, Bell County’s local “Bellstocracy” appears unappreciative of Belton resident Hillary Hickland’s candidacy against incumbent Texas House District 55 Rep. Hugh Shine, R-Temple, as evidenced by the massive media and mass mail campaign currently underway.
The nature of establishment politics
Comprising a self-appointed kingmaker cabal, longtime residents, business owners, politicians, other government officials and of course, the local “cool kids,” Bell County’s establishment is pushing back hard against Hickland – from their standpoint, an unsanctioned candidate.
Understand that the “kingmaker cabal” exists to ensure the “right” representation of establishment interests in Bell County. Shine is the establishment’s man in Austin – and they aim to keep him there. Hickland has no establishment standing, no prior approval of her candidacy. She’s a political outlier, an insurgent candidate. An unwelcome entry into this race.
Shine, an agent protecting Bell County establishment interests, prompts reminding that establishment interests aren’t necessarily congruent to taxpayer interests – in fact, they often directly conflict.
And hence another establishment issue with Hickland. She’s a pro-citizen, taxpayer-centered candidate whereas Shine’s voting history aptly reflects his pro-government, special interest focus (click here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
Dissecting the rhetoric
As primary voters are bombarded with campaign materials reflecting contentious House races, remember all candidate claims deserve scrutiny. With that, this cycle finds incumbents often relegated to using personal and easily discredited arguments against challengers well-armed with empirical data extracted from opponent records.
In a Feb. 21 Temple Daily Telegram ad, Shine illustrates the point via a campaign surrogate accusing challenger Hickland of accepting SuperPAC money, an allegation that if true constitutes criminal activity. No evidence is offered, no evidence can be found, but the accusation remains in the campaign narrative.
Hickland has also supposedly accepted funding from a “Nazi-sympathizer” PAC. What does this alleged funding have in common with evidence of such? That neither exist.
If she had, perhaps the financial disparity wouldn’t be so stark.
The ad interestingly includes a recent op-ed by Rep. Jared Patterson, R-Frisco, initially published in The Dallas Morning News. Patterson discusses a “relentless barrage of disinformation” primarily aimed at “conservative” House incumbents. Never mind that purporting to be something doesn’t make it true. What Patterson calls “disinformation” directed toward these incumbents often centers on their claims of being conservative.
That certainly is the case with Shine. Indeed he has been on the receiving end of campaign messaging that, as discussed above, is sometimes harsh and usually critical of his past voting record, but with two important distinctions: his is a well-documented record and the attacks are from outside organizations, not the Hickland campaign.
And also important to remember, just because something is unflattering doesn’t mean it’s untrue.
Much of Patterson’s op-ed references actions he attributes to the previously referenced “Nazi-sympathizer” PAC, a PAC from which Hickland has never accepted funding. The inclusion of this piece seems designed to further connect Hickland to nefarious political activity – the connections however are hollow allegations with no evidence or documentation offered.
But why stop here?
Of course there are other claims.
Two favorites are first that Hillary, like that other one, lived in New York. True - for a year while her husband was in medical school. The implication: she’s not really a Texan. Tell that to the eight Texas generations from which she descended and the Texas Daughters of the Republic of Texas whose membership “is limited to descendants of those who ‘rendered loyal service for Texas’” prior to our joining the U.S. in 1846.
Another favorite is her alleged support for giving tax dollars to illegal immigrants via educational savings accounts. Never mind this happening since a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision held states could neither charge undocumented children for free public education nor prevent their enrollment in public schools. At that point illegal immigrant children began receiving the benefit of taxpayer dollars and that benefit continues today.
And campaign mailers for these type charges, like the ad discussed above, are courtesy of the “Hugh Shine Campaign” or “Shine for State Representative.” One can’t control the actions of others (or other organizations), but what about controlling oneself?
The Bellstocracy is rampaging and no doubt the “hits” will keep coming. Meanwhile, Bell County is growing with many new residents seeming less than impressed with the local establishment’s authoritarian impulses and bureaucratic loyalties.
It is therefore important to know that be it in print, on air or digital, all campaign ad claims are not equally true. Do your homework. Protect the interests of you and your family.
Lou Ann Anderson is a writer, former radio producer and current podcaster at Political Pursuits. Her tenure as Watchdog Wire–Texas editor involved covering state news and coordinating the site’s citizen journalist network. As a past Policy Analyst with Americans for Prosperity–Texas, Lou Ann wrote and spoke on a variety of issues including the growing issue of probate abuse in which wills, trusts, guardianships and powers of attorney are used to loot assets from intended heirs or beneficiaries. She holds a degree from the University of North Texas in Denton.