Why the Taylor County Republican Party is turning on Stan Lambert

TAYLOR COUNTY, Texas (KTAB/KRBC) – Earlier this month, the Taylor County Republican Party voted to censure District 71 State Representative Stan Lambert, accusing him of straying from conservative values. While Party Chair Ryan Goodwin says Lambert no longer represents the Republican voters of West Texas, Lambert insists he’s still serving his constituents exactly as they elected him to do.

TCRP Leadership Says Lambert “No Longer Represents Us”

Chairman Goodwin said the local party was dissatisfied with several of Lambert’s decisions during the most recent legislative session, starting with his support for Rep. Dustin Burrows as Speaker of the House.

“We were really disappointed at the very beginning when David Cook didn’t become the Speaker of the House, and we got Dustin Burrows in because we felt he was more conservative,” Goodwin shared. “There’s a reason Greg Abbott is calling everybody back to session again to to come back, because I think overall, I do think it was more conservative than we’ve seen, but I think there’s a lot of room for improvement, especially when 88 of the 150 people in the house are Republican, work together, get the platform done.”

Goodwin said the censure is based on Lambert’s voting record, which he claims does not reflect the will of Republican voters in Taylor County.

“We have expectations when you run in that seat, when you put the R by your name, we expect you to run like a Republican, act like a Republican when you get up there. And there are certain values that come with that,” Goodwin explained. “We felt that Stan would be better running as an independent, and he believes Abilene will vote for him, and that’s if they vote for him, that’s great, but when you get the R by your name, we believe that comes with something… We don’t always agree on the 250 things that are on the platform. But you know, when it comes to legislative priorities, there are only eight, and those are the ones pushed up to the top, and a lot of us agree on those, and so we have expectations for our candidates in those seats.”

Lambert Defends Record: “I Vote for District 71”

Lambert brushed off the censure as a political gesture, noting that only 10 of his nearly 3,700 votes were flagged by the Taylor County Republican Party.

“10 votes out of 3,700 is less than half of 1% so the way I look at it is they agree with me on 99.5% of the votes I took… But it’s interesting to me that the 10 items I voted not in the way that they wanted me to vote ranged all the way from the Speaker of the House vote, which was at the very beginning of the session… Then another item on the agenda was that one day I missed being available to vote because I was sick. So the range of issues that they’re calling me out on and asking the state Republican Party now to reject, rebuke and reject the application that I will file when it’s time to file to run again, which is in December, that that that is enough information that they feel compelled to censure me,” Lambert explained.

He emphasized that representing House District 71, not pleasing party officials, remains his priority.

“District 71, the 194,000 people in House District 71 elected me. They’re the ones who write the big check every month for me to go to Austin and serve. It’s not going to be 11 people who take a vote on a Monday night, five, six days after I come back from Austin, who are going to decide whether I’m going to continue in this job or not,” Lambert said. “We’re going to try to represent those constituents and vote accordingly, even if it doesn’t match up with the state Republican Party platform. So I’m going to vote for House District 71, I always have and always will.”

Divided Over Speaker Vote

A key point of contention is Lambert’s vote for Burrows as Speaker, which some local Republicans see as crossing party lines.

“Everybody says, Well, it’s the most conservative session ever. But could you imagine if we actually went with the guy who was actually voted in as the nominee, and how much more conservative we would be?” Goodwin questioned. “He teamed up with a bunch of Democrats and Republicans. All of a sudden, what hits the floor is a little bit different than what I feel like would have happened with Cook, because when you have 88, you get in there and you all agree together, you talk together, and then you really can control where things go. For me, I know a lot of us were disappointed with that.”

Lambert, however, said Burrows was a strong West Texas candidate with solid conservative credentials and that legislative progress requires compromise.

“You have to have 100 votes, and you have to have two-thirds of the house. We only have 88 Republicans. We have to have Democrats come over and support some of these issues. One of the biggest issues that I worked on this this session, was making sure that Texas State Technical College has the resources available in a permanent endowment for them to grow their campuses and expand throughout the state of Texas so we can grow our workforce, which we are in so much demand for, that required 100 votes. We got 129 votes. So we have to work across the aisle,” Lambert added.

He also said the special session likely centers on addressing the THC ban vetoed by Gov. Abbott.

“The Lieutenant Governor wanted a ban. He was adamant about having a ban. The governor never really voiced his opinion during the session about where he stood on that particular issue. So I think it was a little bit of a surprise, especially for the Senate,” Lambert shared. “I think the house had more of a lean, more towards regulation, trying to put in some guardrails and make sure that our young people were not getting access to the consumable products… At the same time, we’ve got other constituents and other people around the state who depend a lot on the ones that are available to them, and have used those for different types of chronic disease or pain, joint issues, and things of that sort. So we’ve got a real, you know, we’ve got a set of circumstances here where there are arguments on both sides. They’re good arguments, and we’ll just have to see where we can find some common ground.”

Party Wants Him Off GOP Ballot — Lambert Says It’s Unenforceable

Goodwin said the local party hopes the censure will lead to the State Republican Executive Committee (SREC) barring Lambert from running as a Republican for 24 months. The SREC’s 64 members are expected to review the censure in the coming months.

“What we’re trying to do is say, ‘Hey, we need to look at our next election, and so we’re not looking back to impeach anybody.’ We want to make sure that there’s a Republican candidate who has Republican values, that was willing to honor the platform, and that’s the person who gets put forward,” Goodwin explained. “Now, this doesn’t mean that he can’t run as an independent. Everybody says it’s unconstitutional. We aren’t kicking him off the ballot. We’re saying that the person who runs as a Republican needs to have a jersey that runs like you.”

Lambert’s response: The censure likely has no legal effect.

“Everything basically indicates that I can run, that I can be on the ballot, and there’s no legal or judicial methodology that they can use to prevent me from being a candidate next March. So I’m not too worried or concerned about what I think the final outcome is going to be,” Lambert assured. “This 1% or half of 1% that evidently, I’m being told, you weren’t Republican enough for us to be able to allow you to be on the ballot, and so it’s going to be settled in court. They’re going to be lawsuits filed, I’m sure, and my consultants and my attorneys that we’re talking to at least say they don’t feel like this has any standing.”

Tensions Rise Over Communication Breakdown

Goodwin said Lambert was given 10 days’ notice about the planned censure and invited to speak at the meeting.

“He refused to show up,” Goodwin said. “And I haven’t seen him at a party meeting since I became chair.”

Lambert said he was notified only after returning from Austin and had prior commitments the night of the vote.

“No communication until I came back from Austin. The day after I came back, there was a certified letter in my mailbox, welcome back. And oh, by the way, we’re going to meet next Monday night and have a meeting to censure you, and you’re welcome to come and defend yourself. So I had other plans. I had other commitments. I wasn’t able to attend the meeting, but that was the gist of the conversation or communication that was provided to me,” Lambert shared.

Will Lambert Run Again?

Lambert said he will evaluate whether to run for re-election over the summer, a process he goes through after each legislative session.

“After every session, I take a little time off to kind of review what has happened, what’s transpired. Usually, that takes two or three months in the summer to review the successes we had, where we didn’t have success, or where we failed to get the bill across the finish line. As a family, we kind of regroup and ask, ‘Are we still making a difference?’ Are we helping District 71 in West Texas and rural Texas, the way we said we wanted to when we first started running 10 years ago?” Lambert explained. “We’ll do that evaluation sometime here in the next few weeks, and the special session is going to kind of put a little bit of a crimp in that process of evaluating and deciding, but we’ll know something by the end of the summer.”

Despite the censure, Lambert says he remains open to dialogue with those who disagree.

“We answer their email as much as we can, although during session, you know, things get a little bit hectic, but those channels of communication are always open. We can agree to disagree and be respectful and civil about it,” Lambert shared. “But I just thought the way that this censure process transpired was more or less not recognizing the fact that 99% of the time, I’m voting the way they want me to vote. It’s those very small 1% but when you’ve got 9,000 bills filed, 1% can start adding up, but call me. Talk to me, email me. Let’s talk about it, instead of just waiting until the session is over, then saying we’re going to censure you.”