Three-term incumbent State Representative Ken King narrowly avoided a runoff for the Republican primary by a mere 186 votes. The seventeen-county district saw two candidates challenge King – banking and finance businessman Jason Huddleston and Richard Beyea, owner of an oil and gas company. King’s voting record caused him to be ranked as the 4th most liberal Republican in the Texas House according to Dr. Mark Jones of Rice University. Both Huddleston and Beyea touted their conservative beliefs in an effort to distinguish themselves from King.

By the narrowest of margins, voters in House District 88 ultimately decided to stick with King.

Here’s a quick look at the numbers:

In legislative races across the state, the numbers showed us that the real battle was not only between candidates for legislative office, but also between the underlying factions each candidate represents. Competitive Republican primary races across Texas featured these two ingredients: an establishment incumbent whose top donors included Joe Straus-supported organizations, Associated Republicans of Texas and Texas House Leadership Fund, versus a conservative challenger whose top donors included Empower Texans and Texas Right to Life. The race for HD 88 fell along those same lines, as King was supported by establishment groups and Huddleston received his biggest contributions from conservative organizations.

Key Takeaways from the HD 88 race:

1. New Kids on the Block.
   Breaking onto the 2018 Primary Election scene was New Leadership PAC, a group of wealthy conservative donors whose policy goals include expanding education choices for Texas parents and students. While none of the marquee donors to the PAC were new to Texas politics, combining their efforts in this way was. HD 88 was one of the few Texas House races where the New Leadership PAC invested heavily. With Speaker Straus’ retirement, the New Leadership PAC announced they were pooling their money together to defeat those likely to fill the power vacuum created by Straus’ departure. King was believed to be among those incumbents, thus Huddleston’s campaign received $40,000 from New Leadership PAC.
2. Cost-per-vote.
   Cost-per-vote tends to be higher in rural districts because resources are typically more spread out than in urban districts. King’s cost per vote though, at $41.06,  is remarkably high, even for an incumbent from a rural district. Given how narrowly he won, King likely needed to spend at that rate, but it does not bode well for his re-election position in two years.
3. In-district Support.
   Having more in-district donors than one’s opponent can be a key factor in winning an election. King’s in-district support was on the low side given his incumbent status, bringing in less than 7% of all funds from HD 88. Similarly, Huddleston’s in-district support was severely lacking, as he raised only $8,462.50 from voters in HD 88. Beyea was the outlier in this category, raising an astonishing 67.78% of his money from inside the district – a number not matched even by most unopposed incumbents. This high in-district percentage is partly due to the fact that his overall contributions were low, but the feat is impressive nonetheless. Moving forward, the top two vote getters — King and Huddleston — clearly need to work on their in-district fundraising pitches.

Before you go…

It’s not unusual for candidates to bet big on themselves, especially if they have a good chance to win. By all accounts, Richard Beyea was a long shot in the race for HD 88, but it  didn’t stop him from loaning his campaign $200,000. Money well spent? Maybe, if he decides to challenge King again in two years and voters remember his name. If not, those loans might be painful to repay.

Our Race to Raise series takes a deeper look at the most high-profile races of the election cycle, focusing specifically on money raised by those seeking to serve in public office. Stay tuned for the next installment.