Email, Emmanuel Garcia, communications director, Texas Democratic Party, on behalf of Leticia Van de Putte campaign, Oct. 15-16, 2014
From: Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin)
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 12:20 PM
To: 'Manny Garcia'
Subject: Inquiries for a fact check
Manny:
We are reviewing this claim in the ad: “In 2013,” Dan Patrick voted “against funding to test the backlog of rape kits, allowing rapists to walk free.”
Patrick voted against the final version of the budget, as we’ve noted before, but he voted for earlier Senate-considered versions.
At what point was the described funding put into that appropriations act?
How does Van de Putte know the cited vote on the final budget allowed rapists to walk free?
Thanks.
g.
W. Gardner Selby
Reporter / News
Austin American-Statesman
PolitiFact Texas
4:17 p.m.
At what point was the described funding put into that appropriations act?
The Earliest Mention of The Funding For Rape Kits Was In March 2013, However, The Final Vote Approved The Funding And Patrick Voted Against It
March 2013: Earliest Mention of Funding For Backlog of Rape Kits In Budget. On March 21, 2013, “The House Appropriations Committee unanimously approved a $193.8 billion budget...Before the vote, Pitts listed some of the details of the bill he was proudest of, including money to address the state’s testing backlog in rape kits, which he described as “the first significant funding of this program by the state.” [Texas Tribune, 3/21/2013]
May 2013: Dan Patrick Voted Against Final Version of The Budget That Included Funding For Backlog of Rape Kits. In May of 2013, Patrick voted against SB 1, the general budget bill for 2014 and 2015, which allocated funding for rape kits. The bill was signed by the governor. In June 2013, Texas Tribune reported, “The final budget also allots the Texas DPS $11 million to help address the state’s massive backlog of untested rape kits. In 2011, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1636, by state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, which requires that state law enforcement agencies report the number of untested rape kits and submit a certain number to DPS for testing. The line item will cover the outsourcing costs to have the kits tested, and DPS estimates that based on historical data, about half of the untested kits will yield traces of DNA.” [Senate Journal: 83rd Legislature, 05/25/13, pg 3528]
How does Van de Putte know the cited vote on the final budget allowed rapists to walk free?
2013 Budget Vote Funded The Testing of Rape Kits That Caught Rapists
Line Item In 2013 Budget Covered Costs To Test Rape Kits; Texas Department of Public Safety Estimated Half of Kits Would Yield DNA. In June 2013, Texas Tribune reported, “The final budget also allots the Texas DPS $11 million to help address the state’s massive backlog of untested rape kits. In 2011, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1636, by state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, which requires that state law enforcement agencies report the number of untested rape kits and submit a certain number to DPS for testing. The line item will cover the outsourcing costs to have the kits tested, and DPS estimates that based on historical data, about half of the untested kits will yield traces of DNA.” [Texas Tribune, 06/06/2013]
“Without A Doubt, There Will Be Cases Solved That Were Previously Unsolved.” In August 2013, The New York Times reported Torie Camp, the deputy director of the Texas Association Against Sexual Assault stated, “Without a doubt, there will be cases solved that were previously unsolved.” [The New York Times, 8/3/2013]
Houston’s Backlog of Untested Rape Kits Was Eliminated In 2013. In October 2013, Houston Chronicle reported Houston’s backlog of untested rape kits, “which at one point totalled 6,600 untested rape kits, was eliminated by sending the kits to outside labs, Police Chief Charles McClelland said in August.” [Houston Chronicle, 10/9/2013]
Houston Rape Kits Were Processed To See If Evidence Matched DNA of Suspected Rapists; One Arrest Made As Result of DNA Match. “Rape kits are processed at crime labs to see if evidence matches the DNA of a suspect. One charge has been filed and one arrest has been made in Houston so far as a result of DNA evidence found among those rape kits that were sitting on shelves so many years, said Mayor Annise Parker.” [Houston Chronicle, 10/9/2013]
464 of Houston’s Rape Kits Had Usable DNA That Was Entered Into Federal Database. “Parker also said that testing has been completed on about 2,800 cases. Of those, 464 had usable DNA that will be entered into federal databases.” [Houston Chronicle, 10/9/2013]
Houston Police Department Saw Results From Clearing Backlog of Rape Kits, Testing Led To Arrest of Man Charged in 2003 Rape. In January 2013, the Texas Tribune reported, “Some agencies, like the Houston Police Department, are seeing results from clearing the backlog. The city uses a fee collected from strip-club patrons to pay for kit testing. In July, testing led to the arrest of a man who was charged with a 2003 rape.” [Texas Tribune, 01/04/2013]
--
Emmanuel Garcia
Communications Director
Texas Democratic Party
4:25 p.m.
Oct. 16, 2014
It looks to me like Sen. Patrick supported this funding before the final budget vote before and after which he made no mention of the funding as his reason for voting no. It even appears he was among a few members of the Senate Finance Committee – acting as a public safety budget work group (see p. 12) -- who made the March 2013 decision to put the spending into SB 1 before he voted for committee approval of the overall act and, a week later, Senate approval.
Let me know if you have anything else factual we should consider?
…
g.
W. Gardner Selby
Reporter / News
Austin American-Statesman
PolitiFact Texas
4:38 p.m.
Oct. 16, 2014
But for the good grace of God, the Texas Legislature voted for this funding in the final budget that was enacted and implemented.
Patrick did not vote for that budget. If it was up to him alone, the budget would not have passed at that point in time. Meaning that testing for the rape kits would not be funded.
Also, As you detailed before in the piece on his Education funding claims, he voted for increases, but not for the final budget, you did not give him credit for supporting those restorations of funds then.
Your final vote on a budget, is your final vote. Patrick's vote was reckless. It has consequences.
Best,
EG
--
Emmanuel Garcia
Communications Director
Texas Democratic Party