Historically, South Texas has been shaped by entrenched political machines, most notably the one built by Lyndon B. Johnson, who advanced by aligning with local Democrat bosses, leveraging federal patronage, and mobilizing Mexican American voters through New Deal–era programs.
The region became a Democrat stronghold defined by infrastructure spending and centralized political control, with county officials often acting as power brokers rather than neutral administrators.
That system was epitomized by George B. Parr, the Duval County boss who delivered Johnson his first major electoral victories and demonstrated how county-level authority could shape statewide outcomes.
The legacy of that model continues to influence South Texas politics, particularly when modern election disputes arise from the same institutional culture.
In fact, every major failure in American election administration begins long before voters submit ballots. Collapse starts when officials charged with enforcing election law treat statutory requirements as discretionary rather than mandatory.
Once that shift occurs, the legal framework designed to safeguard transparency and the republic itself ceases to function as law. Instead, it becomes a set of procedures that can be delayed, reinterpreted, or quietly ignored.
President Donald Trump’s pardon of Democrat Rep. Henry Cuellar and his wife addressed a politically motivated Biden Justice Department prosecution.
Separately, an unresolved issue remains in South Texas: a congressional election marked by statutory violations, conflicting directives, and institutional resistance that prevented a full accounting of what occurred in Texas’s 28th Congressional District.
Texas’s 28th District occupies an unusually sensitive position along the southern border. Centered on Laredo, the district encompasses Port Laredo, which processes roughly 45% of all U.S.–Mexico trade and oversees more than 260 miles of the U.S.–Mexico border.
Political behavior in the region has shifted rapidly in recent election cycles, mainly driven by dissatisfaction with border enforcement and illegal immigration under the Biden administration.
In 2020, President Trump lost the district by five points. In 2024, he carried the same district by approximately seven points.
This shift occurred despite post-2020 redistricting changes expected to benefit Democrats. Under the new lines, Trump’s 2020 performance would have translated into a loss of roughly seven points.
Over four years, the district moved approximately fourteen points toward the Republican presidential nominee.
Despite that result, on the same ballots and using the same voting machines, Rep. Cuellar defeated Republican challenger Jay Furman by approximately five points. A twelve-point divergence between the top of the ticket and a long-serving incumbent does not, on its own, prove misconduct. Voters are free to split their ballots.
However, ticket-splitting in modern federal elections is extremely rare. In 2024, only 16 congressional districts nationwide split their presidential and House results.
Election law exists precisely to examine outcomes that depart sharply from prevailing voting patterns. In this case, that examination never entirely occurred.
I have personally reviewed approximately 80 sworn affidavits and more than 100 unsworn declarations, all submitted under penalty of perjury, from voters across multiple polling locations in Webb County.
These voters consistently stated that only Henry Cuellar’s name appeared on their congressional ballots.
Cuellar and Furman were the two principal candidates. According to the declarations, the Republican candidate did not appear at all.
Ballot omissions are defects that directly alter the choices available to voters. Furman responded by contesting all Webb County ballots under statutory provisions allowing candidates to inspect and copy disputed ballots.
That process never occurred in a manner consistent with Texas law.
County officials imposed conditions not found anywhere in the Texas Election Code.
Furman was required to physically and personally copy each ballot and was denied access to county equipment capable of handling the 4-by-13-inch ballot format used in the election.
As a result, he spent nearly a week attempting to locate private machinery capable of accurately reproducing ballots at speed. What should have been a supervised, neutral inspection became an improvised and obstructed process.
When copying finally began, the statutory chain of custody failed. The entire Early Vote tally box was reportedly unaccounted for prior to official recording during the recount.
Furman later located the box after it had left the counting room without proper custody controls in place. He observed it at a distance in the Election Administrator’s office, open, with its contents removed.
The box returned nearly an hour later with assurances—unsupported by documentation—that its contents were unchanged.
Texas law treats chain-of-custody breaches as serious violations because they eliminate the ability to verify whether ballots were altered, substituted, or removed. Once custody is broken, ballot integrity cannot be confirmed.
Also unprecedented, Webb County allegedly required that only erasable pencils be used for the recount and for recording all tallies.
When Furman objected—both to Secretary of State representatives on site and to the agency’s legal office in Austin—the Texas department charged with election integrity permitted the use of pencils, despite the absence of any historical precedent statewide and without any regulation expressly authorizing their use.
In a separate violation, certified but unused ballots were witnessed by the Republican Election Judge being actively shredded after the recount was announced but before its commencement.
Texas statute requires all certified and serialized ballots to be preserved as official election records. These records are necessary to confirm that the number of ballots cast matches the number printed and distributed.
Without them, no recount or audit can be complete.
Before the copying process concluded, Webb County halted it entirely, foreclosing the possibility of a full forensic review despite the scale of documented ballot omissions.
The Fourth Court of Appeals ordered Webb County Judge Tano Tijerina to “immediately” allow the copying of all ballots. According to the record, that review never occurred. Consequently, no full forensic report was produced despite a recount proceeding under compromised conditions.
Even so, a disparity was identified between the original canvass and the recount, triggering the legal requirement for a re-canvass.
That certificate has never been produced.
When the U.S. House Administration Committee—the body that adjudicates congressional election challenges—requested the most recent canvass report, the Texas Secretary of State provided only the original canvass.
Furman’s election challenge was submitted within the statutory 30-day window following re-canvassing, but because the updated certificate was never issued, the filing was deemed late.
Furman submitted multiple requests for the recanvass certificate to the Texas Secretary of State—formally in writing, in person, and through legal counsel—all of which were ignored.
Judge Tijerina’s conduct presents an additional institutional conflict. After failing to enforce the court-ordered inspection, he switched political parties and announced plans to run for the same congressional seat at the center of the Cuellar–Furman dispute.
A sworn affidavit states that Tijerina told Furman prior to the election that he intended to run for Congress if Cuellar prevailed.
Judge Tijerina’s actions in blocking a full forensic review align directly with that stated objective. Election contests depend on neutral adjudication; when that neutrality collapses, the electorate is betrayed.
Under Texas law, the Secretary of State must issue a new canvassing certificate following a recount. To date, the Secretary of State’s office has not provided the required post-recount certificate to the U.S. House Administration Committee.
Secretary of State Jane Nelson’s conduct may reflect a broader pattern.
Despite serving as Texas’s chief election officer under a Republican governor, Nelson has repeatedly taken positions at odds with the Republican Party on election administration.
Her office recently authorized up to $1.25 million in taxpayer funds to hire outside counsel to defend Texas’s open-primary system, directly opposing both the Attorney General and the Republican Party of Texas, which has sued to implement closed primaries.
Under current law, any registered voter may participate in either party’s primary, allowing Democrats and independents to influence Republican nominations.
In March 2024, 73% of Republican primary voters supported adopting closed primaries, and the state party amended its rules accordingly.
Federal courts have consistently recognized a party’s associational right to restrict participation. Nelson’s resistance mirrors her approach in the Cuellar–Furman dispute: procedural obstruction rather than common-sense enforcement in service of election integrity.
The broader political environment in South Texas magnifies these concerns. The Cuellar family has exercised influence in Webb County since the 1980s.
Investigative reporting has documented allegations that Webb County Sheriff Martin Cuellar, Henry Cuellar’s brother, used his department to mobilize voters, distribute patronage, and support the family’s political interests.
Former employees described an environment in which hiring and promotion were tied to political loyalty and turnout efforts.
Additional reporting documented similar concerns involving another sibling, Rosie Cuellar, who was paid for a municipal judgeship in Rio Bravo despite never presiding over a case. Public records requests seeking documentation of her compensation and duties were denied or ignored.
In a county where the sheriff’s department is among the largest employers, such arrangements reinforce a political machine resistant to oversight.
This pattern of corruption extends beyond Webb County. In nearby Frio County, 15 Democrat officials—including a county judge, city council members, and a school board trustee—were arrested in a ballot-harvesting conspiracy targeting elderly voters.
The scheme spanned multiple counties, yet received limited national coverage.
The legitimacy of congressional representation depends on public confidence in lawful election administration. Texas Republicans have articulated clear expectations: closed primaries, transparent recounts, and strict adherence to statutory timelines.
Officials who obstruct those principles while claiming partisan alignment weaken the institutional safeguards elections require.
An immediate review and public hearing by the U.S. House Administration Committee on the 2024 election in Texas’s 28th District is necessary. Without such scrutiny, contested federal elections risk being resolved through procedural barriers rather than transparent review.
Texas holds a central position in national politics and federal governance. Allowing this precedent to stand would carry consequences far beyond one district and far beyond one election.
Sustained pressure on the Texas Secretary of State to issue a recanvassing certificate, combined with a fast-tracked review by the House Administration Committee, could ultimately determine whether the 2024 election of a powerful Democrat congressman is deemed invalid.
As a result of redistricting, Jay Furman lives in Texas’s 35th Congressional District and is running to represent it. Furman has vowed to confront election abuses, and his actions reflect that commitment.
Although he is no longer running against Henry Cuellar, Furman continues to press for accountability—not for political advantage, but to ensure the most sacred of American rights is protected for all South Texans: free and fair elections. The rule of law must govern elections—or nothing does.
Written with Roger Stone — NYT bestselling author | Trump loyalist | Host of The StoneZONE on WABC Radio | Author of The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ.