For the raw data of the cost-per-vote analysis go here.
The Texas Primary Runoff elections took place on Tuesday, May 28, 2024. With regard to Texas legislative races, 7 incumbents (6 Republicans and 1 Democrat) were defeated, and 2 incumbents (Republicans) retained their positions.
Undoubtedly, these results will have significant political ramifications in both the general election in November and in the upcoming 89th Legislative Session, which begins in January 2025. One of the most interesting aspects of the primary runoff elections is the disparity in campaign costs. The following key takeaways are based on data collated from TransparencyUSA (using the most recent 8-day Texas Ethics Commission filings).
Key Takeaways
High-Cost Campaigns
The most expensive campaign, by far, was that of incumbent Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan (R-Beaumont) versus David Covey (R). Phelan’s campaign spent $12,655,784.40, amounting to $987.73 per vote, which is significantly higher than any other candidate. Phelan narrowly won by 366 votes, outspending Covey by a factor of 6 to 1 to retain his seat.
Another costly campaign, despite losing, was that of incumbent State Rep. Justin Holland (R-Heath). Holland’s campaign spent $1,815,392.61, amounting to $231.29 per vote. His challenger, Katrina Pierson (R), spent $725,466.46 at a cost of $71.56 per vote.
In the battle for Texas House District 44, incumbent State Rep. John Kuempel (R-Seguin) spent $2,478,522.33, or $347.67 per vote, and lost by over 1,700 votes to former State Rep. Alan Schoolcraft (R), who spent $838,122.17, or $94.19 per vote.
Significant Differences in Campaign Efficiency
Several examples of significant differences in campaign efficiency were observed.
Ben Bius (R), who ran for the open House Seat in District 12, spent $1,053,981.53 to garner only 27.6% of the vote, costing $273.05 per vote. His challenger, Trey Wharton (R), prevailed by spending only $294,791.48 at a cost of $29.11 per vote.
Similarly, in the race for Texas House District 58, incumbent State Rep. DeWayne Burns (R-Cleburne) spent $1,224,352.86, or $347.67 per vote, compared to his prevailing challenger, Helen Kerwin (R), who spent $696,249.40, or $90.78 per vote.
Consulting and Marketing Expenditures
The most costly political consulting firm used by candidates in the primary runoff was Murphy Nasica and Associates. Candidates who solicited their services spent over $8 million in total. Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan spent $3,379,931.85 on their services alone. Losing incumbents, State Rep. Justin Holland, spent $1,348,773.85, State Rep. John Kuempel spent $2,209,183.73, and State Rep. Frederick Frazier (R-McKinney) spent $1,034,889.32 on their services.
Another expensive consulting firm with mixed results was KC Strategies LLC. Incumbent State Rep. Gary VanDeaver (R-New Boston) spent a total of $871,034.28 on their services out of his total $1,038,109.36 in expenditures, defeating Chris Spencer (R) by over 1,500 votes. State Rep. DeWayne Burns (R) lost re-election despite spending $950,369.83 on the firm.
Not all campaigns used consulting and marketing services, but for those that did, it was the largest expense, with mixed results across the board.
Close Races & Their Costs
Several races were decided by less than 500 votes.
The election between Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan (R) and David Covey (R) was decided by 366 votes out of 25,260 total votes cast. The candidates spent almost $15 million between them, with Phelan spending nearly $13 million of that.
For the open seat in Texas House District 97, John McQueeney (R) beat Cheryl Bean (R) by 300 votes out of 10,646 total votes cast. McQueeney spent almost $600 thousand compared to Bean’s nearly $230 thousand.
For the open seat in Texas House District 139, Charlene Ward Johnson (D) defeated Angeanette Thibodeaux (D) by 188 votes out of 4,834 total votes cast. Johnson spent under $50 thousand compared to Thibodeaux, who spent over $100 thousand.
Low Expenditure Campaigns
Some campaigns had nearly no expenditures.
In House District 76, located in the Southwest Houston area, Lea Simmons (R) defeated Summara Kanwal (R) by just 324 votes, spending only $1,385.94 compared to Kanwal’s $11,420.04. Simmons spent $2.18 per vote compared to Kanwal’s $36.49 per vote. This seat is likely a safe Democrat House seat.
In the open House District 97 seat, both Democrat candidates had very low costs per vote. The prevailing candidate, Carlos Walker (D), spent $10,369.92 on his campaign, amounting to $8.46 per vote, compared to Diane Symons (D), who spent just $5,169.19, amounting to $5.31 per vote. This seat is likely a safe Republican House seat.
Loan Impact on Campaign Funding
Many candidates relied heavily on loans for their campaigns.
In the open Texas House District 12 race, Ben Bius (R) had $1.1 million in loans compared to his prevailing challenger, Trey Wharton (R), who only had $40 thousand in loans.
Chris Spencer (R), who lost to incumbent State Rep. Gary VanDeaver (R), had over $300 thousand in loans.
Former State Rep. Alan Schoolcraft (R), who defeated incumbent State Rep. John Kuempel (R), had over $350 thousand in loans.
Disclaimers
It is very likely this data will be updated once the semiannual reports are filed with the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) and the actual vote tallies are certified. I will endeavor to update that information accordingly.
Regarding consultant and marketing firm solicitation, the data is difficult to accurately portray as many firms have different payment structures. Some consulting firms likely do not charge their clients until the conclusion of the campaign, so the expenditures included in the takeaways above and in the overall data are likely not final and only reflect the highest consulting and marketing expenses listed thus far.
Conclusion
The Texas Primary Runoff elections of 2024 have highlighted the immense financial disparity in campaign spending and its varying levels of efficiency. The data reveals significant differences in cost per vote and campaign outcomes, demonstrating that high expenditures do not always guarantee victory. These results offer a glimpse into the financial strategies and resource allocations of Texas political campaigns, providing valuable insights for future elections.
The upcoming general election in November and the 89th Legislative Session in January 2025 will undoubtedly be influenced by these outcomes. As more detailed financial reports become available, further analysis will be necessary to understand the complete picture of campaign finance dynamics in Texas.
For the raw data of the cost-per-vote analysis go here.
Leave a Reply