Edinburg: Election Insanity?
By Gregg Wendorf
Advance News Journal
Look, up front, I know that David White, Edinburg city councilman and chief investigator with the Hidalgo County DA’s Office, has his detractors. He’s a politician, and along the way, he’s made some people unhappy.
Setting aside that for a moment, with no dog in the Edinburg November 2023 Place 4 municipal election, if you look at the way White was just booted from office, by a visiting senior judge out of Nueces County, Jose Manuel Bañales, who has his own disjointed political and judicial past, you have to be thinking: this creates a terrible future legal precedent.
Not to mention, how is this fair to Edinburg voters?
Plus, you have to ask how one man, a visiting judge, can come to one city and overturn a councilman’s election, kick out White and the 3,330-something city residents who bothered to vote for him, and award the lawsuit’s plaintiff, Gerardo “Gerry” Lozano, White’s Place 4 chair, which he won again last November as its incumbent.
Even if a judge thinks an election is seriously flawed, does he or she not call for a new election, or do you simply upend it?
In Bañales’s case, he chose the latter, and then hopped into his vehicle and headed back to the Corpus area, while Lozano went out to celebrate.
How He Did It
Moving forward, based on Bañales’s Edinburg ruling last Friday, anyone can contest an election if they can come up with, say, two dozen ballots that they can claim are illegal.
I know. In the Valley, this is peanuts. Two vans from the nursing homes. Bingo. Twenty-four voters.
If Judge Bañales looks over the two dozen votes, mainly by deposing the voters remotely, which is what he did in the White case, and determines that more ballots were cast illegally (15) compared to the 2023 ballot win — 10 — then the election can be overturned.
In other words, one man, the judge, can negate the 3,334 Edinburg residents who voted for White, even if he thinks that about 15 were illegal.
If that’s the case, don’t you also have to ask: Out of the 3,323 votes for Lozano last November, how many might be deemed illegal?
I mean, if we’re going to hold politiqueras accountable, every I must be dotted, every T crossed, during the voting process — does the voter need help or not, and who can say for sure, since poll watchers can’t ask them why they are asking for help voting — and this includes curb-side voting and voting by mail, is not every future election at risk?
Just a guess, but I bet with every election, you could easily discount 10 percent of the votes.
In Lozano’s lawsuit filed last December by his attorney, state Democrat Chair Gilberto (no conflict) Hinojosa, the numerous problems related to the election would be spelled out: “Contestant will also show that numerous voters casting votes during early vote and on election day were assisted at the time that they voted even though the voters were not eligible for assistance in reading or completing the ballot, in violation of the Texas Elections Code. Tex.Elec.Code §§64.032, 64.0321 and 86.010(a).
“The votes therefore cast by these persons who were assisted in violation of the Texas Elections Code are therefore illegal and cannot be counted.
“Had these illegal votes not been counted a different and correct result would be obtained in the election.”
All told, he’s got 13 charges laid out just like that, with subparagraphs just to load up the document with more BS.
I’m not saying it’s not true. I’m just saying, you can find anomalies in every election. Grannie is 89 with arthritis. Do you really want her to get out of the car when it’s 101 degrees, or can she just vote here in the car, by the curb?
Please. This is judicial bull that it almost makes you want to shake your head, and think, what’s up with this guy, the judge?
Judge Israel Ramon, of the 430th state District Court, recused himself from the case, this past January. In stepped visiting Judge Jose Manuel Bañales. Why Ramon recused, no way of knowing.
After two days of listening to testimony, mainly by witnesses who were deposed online via a camera/microphone app, the judge ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Gerardo “Gerry” Lozano.
On his Facebook page, May 31, Lozano couldn’t be happier: “Dear Citizens of Edinburg, in December, I decided to dispute the results of the November 2023 election for Edinburg City Council Place 4. After two days of depositions, my attorneys successfully ensured the accuracy and fairness of our democratic process by disqualifying 22 illegally assisted votes.
“Your support throughout this process was invaluable. I deeply appreciate your understanding as we worked towards a resolution that upholds the principles of our democracy.
“I look forward to serving you and our city to the best of my abilities.
“Thank you for your continued trust and commitment to our community.
“Sincerely, “Gerardo “Gerry” Lozano.”
Democratic Principles
Okay, if someone is so interested in “Democratic Principles,” which is what Mr. Lozano made note of in his FB post, do they use the court system to completely overthrow an election?
No matter, that’s the way it went down last week in Bañales’s judicial ruling, which signed off with this political nugget: “…the court HEREBY DECLARES Gerardo “Gerry” Lozano, the winner of the November 7, 2023, City of Edinburg, Texas election for City Commissioner Place 4…”
The upper-case letters make you really sit up and take notice.
So just like that, a senior judge like Bañales, with a history of questionable rulings mixing politics with the law, can overrule a city election and dismiss the approximate 3,300 people who voted for White?
Apparently so unless White wins his expected appeal.
In the ruling signed last Friday, May 31, Bañales wrote that he can ascertain the true outcome of the November 7, 2023, City of Edinburg, Texas election for Place 4.
How? Exactly? Did the judge and his staff actually comb through the more than 6,600 votes cast for the candidates, White and Lozano, last November? Kick out the ballots clearly judged illegal?
No. He took a small sampling, deposed voters by Zoom or some other remote app, and the judge said that because the number of illegal votes outnumbered the vote tally – White was 10 votes ahead – then Lozano can claim the seat.
If you’re with me so far, I know you’re thinking, this doesn’t make any sense because if one were to look over all the 6,600-plus votes cast, maybe more illegal votes could be counted against Lozano. Maybe not, but who can really say for sure without looking at each ballot?
The case now heads to the appellate court, where other judges may look at this ruling, this election-result manipulation by the Bañales court, and think, What the…
I think that just by reading through Bañales’s ruling, one can see the illogic behind it: “…the number of illegal votes which were cast for Contestee David White exceed Contestee David White’s ten vote margin of victory in said election, that by subtracting the illegal votes from the official vote total for David White, Gerardo “Gerry” Lozano obtained more votes than David White,” Bañales stated in a two-page final judgment issued Friday.
It’s sort of legible. Then again, it’s really not. Especially if the court never looked at some of the ballots no doubt in question for Lozano. Every candidate will have a questionable ballot. Not their fault. Just the way the election process down here, and probably everywhere else, works. Especially with the Baby Boomer Generation (born between 1946 and ’64), which isn’t getting any younger each election cycle. With 70 million people in that generation, twice that of the previous generation, that’s going to count as a lot of voters who need help at the polls.
Really something for attorneys to pursue. Just need the right judge in place willing to make bonehead rulings. Maybe hire the same lawyer, Gilberto Hinojosa, who is state chair for the Democrat Party. Can't hurt if the plaintiff's case is tied to politics, even if Edinburg City was a non-partisan race. Surely, being front and center in Nueces County politics and Valley courtrooms for many years, with the judge himself a former politician for many years, he and the state chair are old acquaintances, old friends. Not saying that taints a case, or flies in the face of ethics, but neither can it hurt the plaintiff's position, now can it?
In politics, legal proceedings, some will always make the case — "it's not who you are, but who you know."