Texas PACS: A Roundup of the Special Interests Driving Texas' Political Action Committees

home | table of contents | previous | next

Lawyers & Lobbyists

Forty-seven law-related PACs accounted for almost $6.9 million, or 12 percent of all PAC expenditures.

The PACs of 33 law firms and two lobby firms that predominately serve corporate interests account for 84 percent of this money ($5.8 million), outspending four plaintiff-oriented PACs ($979,874) almost 6 to 1. Just the leading corporate defense PAC, Vinson & Elkins ($1.4 million), spent more than all four plaintiff PACs.

The Texas Trial Lawyer Association and its Austin chapter spent $882,024, accounting for 90 percent of plaintiff PAC spending. Edwards, Perry & Haas spent more than any other single plaintiff PAC ($84,100), followed by Hill & Parker ($13,750).

Law firms have a keen interest in how laws are made and interpreted, spending considerable sums of money to influence both lawmakers and judges. Many top corporate defense firms lobby the legislature and contribute heavily to legislators. Top plaintiff lawyers are major contributors to Democratic candidates, a fact which formed part of the political subtext to the fight over the 15 percent lawyer fees incurred in the state’s $17 billion settlement of its tobacco lawsuit. This study just tracks PAC contributions, not direct contributions by individual attorneys of any stripe.

Texas judges are partisan, elected officials who—in a controversial practice—often raise large shares of their campaign funds from lawyers and law firms that argue cases in their courts. Currently, members of the Texas Supreme Court are financed by—and overwhelmingly rule in favor of—corporate defense interests. Ten years ago, the plaintiff’s bar financed the justices on the state’s High Court, with a predictable impact on the court’s rulings.²³

Judicial
Ten judicial PACs, which primarily channeled money from lawyers to judicial candidates, spent $118,230. The Committee for Judicial Reform, which got most of its biggest contributions from corporate defense firms in San Antonio, led these PACs, spending $51,980, primarily to benefit GOP candidates. The bulk of the $14,500 spent by San Antonio-based Vote Texas PAC benefited Democratic judicial candidates.

PAC for Harris County Judiciary spent $14,372, giving to local criminal court candidates. The so-called Texas Bipartisan Justice Committee raised most of the $12,685 that it spent from defense lawyers and doctors. In the first half of 1998, it financed slate cards and direct mail for three Republican candidates led by Attorney General candidate John Cornyn. Finally, the Committee for a Qualified Judiciary, headed by oil magnate Louis Beecherl, Jr., spent $9,455. Most of this money came from Dallas lawyers, the majority of whom do corporate defense work.

Though not analyzed in this report, five specific-purpose PACs active on judiciary issues spent $85,931 from 1995 through 1997 (see the appendix). Two PACs operated by lobby firms that mainly represent corporate clients appear here: Emil Peña Interests ($126,650) and Carl A. Parker PAC ($64,706). Most lobbyists contribute as individuals rather than as PACs. Individual contributions are not covered in this report.

home | table of contents | previous | next