The Texan Podcast - Get Loew, Get Loew: Smoke Filled Room Ep. 22

Episode Date: October 27, 2025

In this episode of Smoke Filled Room, Brad Johnson sits down with Adam Loewy, a prominent attorney and Austin billboard icon, to discuss his founding of a successful law firm in Austin, insights on Austin's homeless crisis, his opposition to Prop Q, and the broader implications for city politics. They also touch on Lowey's political evolution, the far-left versus far-right dynamics, and the future of tort reform in Texas.Listen to more Smoke Filled Room podcasts from our team wherever you get your podcasts. If you like what you hear, subscribe and leave us a review.Timestamps:00:00 Intro01:43 Starting a Law Firm and Early Struggles03:48 Billboards and Wisconsin Basketball Memories04:23 Law School and Career Advice05:31 Prop Q and Homelessness15:51 Personal Political Evolution22:56 Israel, Far-Left Concerns, and Trans Issues29:51 Tort Reform and Insurance Companies31:27 The GOP's Shift Away from Tort Reform31:59 Insurance Companies and Rising Rates36:20 The Role of Insurance Companies in Politics40:30 The Political Dynamics of Tort Reform43:39 The Future of Tort Reform in Texas48:27 The Broader Political Landscape51:57 The Republican Primary and Key Figures56:12 Term Limits and Political Tenure58:06 The Texas AG Race01:00:21 Financial Influence in Texas Politics01:01:07 Conclusion

Good morning, everybody. This is Brad Johnson, senior reporter here at the Texan for this month's edition of the Smokefield Room podcast. And this month we have Adam Lowy, attorney, extraordinary, billboard connoisseur. What else do you want to say about yourself? Welcome. Yeah. It's an honor to be here.

Thanks for joining. And you've got a great story about, first of all, how you came to Texas. and starting your own law firm, you know, a big risk, right? And you took it on and you've been massively successful. So give us the background on how you got here and how you started. Yeah, I grew up in the Midwest as all great young men do like yourself. And I'm from St. Louis. I went to Wisconsin for undergrad and came down here for law school,

kind of on a whim, just wanted to see a different part of the country. At the time, Austin was quickly growing, was about to explode in growth. Kind of the same feeling people have now, obviously we're retracting a bit and so never been to texas before uh didn't know much about it other than just sounded like a cool place to go so went to u t law had always wanted to be a lawyer but then something problematic occurred is i got more into law school uh hated it hated law school uh had a couple jobs during law school didn't like working for people and um it just wasn't quite sure it was going to work um somehow talked my way into a job endowed

Dallas doing corporate bankruptcy of which I can't tell you three things about corporate bankruptcy have no idea how I held on like a foreign language now foreign language so I was fired about six months in very nice firing nothing dramatic just I don't want to be there they don't want me there and so we went on my merry way and I moved back to Austin in 2004 late 2004 called my now late father and I said dad I'm gonna start my own law firm he said you've got no clients you don't have a lot of money and you've absolutely no idea what you're doing. All three things were obviously true. I said, Dad, I'm going to do it. He said, go get a job. So I got a job that was with actually an injury

firm, and it was right around March Madness. And the Badgers at the time had a very good team that year. This was 2005. It was the star on the team. It was, Stimke was the center with the Brian Boucher, Bo Ryan, right before they got really good. But they had a good run that year. And we were playing NC State in the Sweet 16. I remember the tip was at 616, 615 on a Friday night. I'd gone out the night before. I was very hungover at work and I needed to get a nap in before the Badger game. You know, the priorities are important, right? Especially when you're 27 years old. So I took a nap. The Badgers won really fun night. And then we played North Carolina and the Elite 8, the Carolina team that won the national title. We lost. And so that was Sunday afternoon.

I went into work Monday morning and was fired because apparently you're not supposed to go take a nap and not come back to work. And so that was it. So I drove to my friend's house here. It was one of those beautiful days in March in Austin, Texas. And I said, I'm going to start my own firm. My friend was very supportive, but I had to call my father and tell him this. And, you know, of course, waited three or four days because I wasn't quite sure how he'd react. To his eternal credit, because there was probably no other options in his mind.

told him, I'm going to start my own law firm. I quickly said I got fired. I'm going to start my own law firm. And he said, I'm 100% behind you. You'll do great. I'll go for it. And so I did it. So it was May 19th, 2005, sent out an email from my one-bedroom apartment, about five blocks away at the original Amley.

And it's been a great right ever since. And so. Your face is all over town on billboards. You're probably, other than Don Huffines, the biggest proponent of billboards, I'd say, in the state's political sphere. Yeah. Two things that came to mind when you're talking. First, Wisconsin teams, whenever they make a run, are always so much fun to watch.

You know, the one with Kaminsky and who are some of the other players on that? Went to the National Center. Yeah. That was an awesome team. I was really rooting for them against Kentucky, wasn't it? Yep, yep. Yeah. Ten years ago now.

Also, you know, so I went to, I didn't go to J school. I just kind of fell into this. You didn't fall into it as much because you did. have to go to law school, but you didn't like it. It seems like there's a message in there for people that maybe they don't like, they're not great at the school side of things, but they're still an opportunity to succeed in the professional world, right? I think that's it. I talk to the law school every year, often a couple times, and I always tell law students that, you know, you just don't know where the journey is going to take you. And for a large part of my life, because I had done well

academically until law school, I just thought like, okay, I'm doing well academically, and so I'm going to get this job and that job. And with law, I thought, okay, I'll go to a big law firm and I'll make partner and I'll live happily ever after. And that's not what happened, and I'm glad it didn't happen. But yes, I think that there's just things happen in life. And I think it's hard to know that when you're 18 or 21 or even 25. But as you look back at life, as you get older, just you never quite know where it's going to go. And I think it's tough when you're young to know that. but it's a good lesson to know. I'm sure this is the same for you,

but it's certainly the case for me that you learn more on the job than you ever did in school. Yeah, without a doubt. It's not even a question. Without a doubt. Yeah. Well, let's move on to some political topics.

Of course, you know, the biggest thing you dive into is Austin politics here. Obviously, we'll get into other stuff across the state later, but Prop Q is the biggest topic right now in the Austin political sphere. It's a, what, $110 million dollar tax increase on the M&O side. So this is a Vader. This is not a bond election, right? We first saw

this employed for Project Connect, I believe, in 2020. And so it's kind of an in perpetuity tax increase, and the purpose is to fund a larger homeless response apparatus for the city, right? You're opposed to it. Give me the upshot of why. I'm strongly opposed. I've been dealing politically with this homeless issue now for about six years, seven years, and I'll preface it by saying, I don't, I feel the government has a role in the homeless crisis, but I think that what you find is it is truly a homeless industrial complex in which the money never stops. And in Austin, we started this fight in 2019, in which the city council led by then, who I called the de facto mayor, Greg Kazar, now Congressman Kazar, pushed through.

a repeal of the camping ban, and it was the craziest thing I've ever lived through. For those who weren't here, what you had was homeless people camping literally wherever they wanted. And I'll never forget going on Fox Local News in 2019, very critical of it. I was very close to the then-Mayor Steve Adler. He was very upset at the interview, and he called me into his office, and he proceeded to speak to me for 30 straight minutes. And it was the same kind of messaging you're still here today of like, well, we need to identify them. And if we don't identify them, then we can't help them. And if we can get them on the continuum.

And so we need to know where they are. So we need to allow them to camp wherever they want. And I said to him, Mr. Mayor, look, I'm fine trying to help these folks, but I don't want us to be Seattle. I don't want us to be San Francisco when you walk downtown in any of those cities and there's homeless people literally everywhere. At that point, homeless folks were camping on the trail. They were on Congress.

It was totally out of control. And so in 2021, I was involved with a bipartisan coalition that helped push through the reimposition of the camping ban, Prop B, 2021. So I have lived this now for years. And Prop Q, in my opinion, is the latest iteration of this in which the city council, who has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on this issue, once a hundred million dollars more. And I think what folks need to realize is, as you correctly put it,

this is an election for more tax money for the homeless issue. And at a certain point, I think the city needs to say no. And I am cautiously optimistic the voters will say no here in a few weeks. That was the reinstatement of the camping ban was a remarkable rebuff of the city council. And it was bipartisan because you can't win an election without Democratic voters in this city, right? But it was Democratic voters, a large number of them, that reinstated this after that policy. And I remember when it first went in place, this is one of the first things I covered when I got here for the Texan, covered in depth. It was remarkable the amount of camp encampments that popped up overnight.

Down on Caesar Chavez under the I-35 overpass, literally the first day it went in place. My then coworker and I were going around taking photos. And we got chased out. Luckily, we got across the street and traffic started because this really massive dude didn't look homeless at all other than he was grungy. I mean, he roared it out, frankly, was, you know, going to attack us. And, you know, who knows what would have happened then. But one thing that struck me on this was looking over there, taking photos, there's scooters. Yeah.

And in order to have a scooter, you have to have a credit card. In order to have a credit card, you have to have a bank account. and what are we doing here? You know, it was really wild to see the facts of homelessness in Austin really become that unavoidable for the city. And that's probably why it passed, the reinstatement passed so overwhelmingly. Yeah, I think that's it. And I can speak, you know, I used to be a partisan Democrat.

I'm more independent now. But the Democratic Party that I grew up in, the Bill Clinton Democratic Party, never would have allowed this. You know, what happened was you had the far left, such as with now Congressman Khazar, the DSA crowd take over in many ways and have this great influence in cities like Austin. And this idea of allowing homeless people to camp wherever they wanted it is a very far left idea. And so we used to have Democrats who would say, no, we're not doing that. And what you have

now in other cities, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle is that people have allowed it. And then it gets out of control to the point, which there's no going back. And so today, I'm sure you saw the news that Governor Abbott's finally going to do something as well, because it is a starting to get bad again downtown and you know to me this is a this is a social contract issue i mean the idea that you cannot walk downtown that you cannot walk on the trail without being harassed is a core question of how you want a city to function and we can't go the route of seattle or san francisco and the other day i saw someone uh pants around their ankles just taking a pee on the sidewalk and it's just it's it's awe striking to see

especially in a city as big as this, as prosperous as Austin is, the seat of the state government, too. I noticed it really took an uptick after session ended. I don't know if you noticed that at all, but it was, I didn't see much of a problem at all downtown during session, which is late of session, and after it really spiked up again. You know, this is a difficult problem to solve if it is even solvable, right? what has worked in your estimation in terms of trying to chip away at this problem? Well, I think you're right. I think there's been a cultural collapse.

And I think that no matter what the politics is, there's something that is seriously broken in this country. Because I'm in 48. And when I grew up, there was homeless people, obviously. There has been since the beginning of time. But it was not at this level. We're in America now you have, what, a million people that are experiencing homelessness. And so part of that is, yes, you do have stories of people that are going to. truly down to their luck. And again, I'm fully in favor of government, charities, whomever,

helping folks like that. But I would submit a large percentage of these people have very serious drug problems, very serious mental health issues, and a lot of these people just have checked out and they want to be living this life. And I read a very good book about this, very famous sports writer, had a book about his son, leave out the tragic parts, I think it's the title, and his, excuse me, his grandson, and his grandson just went early when he was 17, 18, just caught up with a group of homeless youths that would travel the country. I believe they're called the crunchy kids, and they were just living on the streets. And tragically, this young man had a terrible ending, drinking himself to death at 24. But the grandfather and the parents kept trying to get him

out of this lifestyle. And sadly, this young man said he wanted to be there. He wanted to be living on the streets. And I think that is often not discussed enough. And I'm not sure. if politics can fix that in full. There's a broader cultural problem going on. But I believe what politics can fix is doing everything we can to keep the city safe and clean. And there needs to be rules in place about where people can camp, where people can beg for money, and so forth. And I think there are cities that have addressed this well. Like Fort Worth is always a good example. I think San Antonio is a good example. And I think that we as Austin were on the precipice in 2019 to 21, that if that did not pass, if Prop B did not pass, I think we would have been

lost, and I think we would have turned into a Seattle or San Francisco. So I think that you've just got to enforce these things, and you've got to encourage people to get help, but you can't allow them to do whatever they want. What do you make of Mayor Kirk Watson's handling of this issue compared with Steve Adler's? I mean, I think that when Mayor Watson came in, He was doing a much a better job. I agree with you that it's gotten worse. I went off for a birthday dinner with my kids at Truelux, September 12th, and there was a man experiencing homelessness who was clearly very messed up on meth or something,

was screaming, walking around, came up to us, and it was one of those exchanges we've all had. I kind of don't know what to do. You hope he walks away. He eventually did, but my kids are there, and the little ones very freaked out. And so I think that Mayor Watson came in with good intentions of keeping the downtown more safe and secure. I think he has slipped a bit. I don't know exactly why, but I think the fact that governor is now getting involved, there are more stories like this popping up.

And I have no one said information on this, but it wouldn't surprise me if the mayor reached out for help. Because at a certain point, I think you do need DPS, you do need state agencies involved. because the good news about being in Austin is I do not think the governor hopefully would ever let it get this bad and so that might be a sign it's getting that bad and this state agency action DPS as you said going through and cleaning up these camps that's not new like this has happened multiple times in recent years it's kind of a it's a new iteration of it this year though right we have not seen that yet that I'm aware of maybe even last year I don't think I saw anything like that

but it's the state like you said revamping and reintroducing their response that, in their view, Austin is not handling. Yeah, and I think also this could be something to do with what Trump's doing. I mean, there could be a change in how the governor, Republican governors are looking at these issues when you look at Trump using the National Guard. And so that could be connected to this. But whatever it is, I'm very glad the governor's focused on this because it's a serious problem. You mentioned you used to be a Democrat.

You're now more independence. Tell me why. So I used to not only be a Democrat, I was a very proud Democrat. I would go to events in Austin, Travis County Democratic events, call it 2010, 2012, 2014. And I had just this great pride in being a Democrat because I'd grown up a Democrat. I loved Bill Clinton. I liked Obama. I just kind of bought into everything the Democratic Party was selling at that time. And I would have never voted for Republican. What began to change was, of course, the election of Trump. I did want Hillary, but I didn't panic like other Democrats did. I wasn't quite sure what to expect, but I didn't think he was Hitler, it was going to be the end of the world. And then suddenly, there were things he was doing that I liked. I liked his foreign policy. I kind of liked the not typical politician thing. But the big change for me was 2018 with the election of the squad, because I saw what was coming after that. And when you have the far left

winning elections like this. I was seeing it in Austin with Greg Gazzar. We saw it nationally. And these are people that I feel is I see the Democratic Party or used to see the Democratic Party are not Democrats. I mean, you had Bernie, who's not a Democrat. He's proud to be not a Democrat. So you have this rise of the far left who pushed things that I just strongly disagree with, from the homeless stuff to rabid anti-Israel stuff to just crazy, woke stuff that we all had to live through. And again, the party that I grew up in never would have done it. So started shifting shifting right at that point. Then the homeless stuff we've talked about. And then COVID. I couldn't cheer enough for Governor Abbott opening the schools when he did. I had my then two-year-old back

in a school in May of 2020. Thought that was the right decision. I was very happy that AG Paxton was fighting my friend Annie Brown, the county judge and Mayor Adler, getting things open. I did not want this to shut down. I thought it was absolutely insane. for the first month or two, and then on and on that, you know, living through that summer and so forth. And so now at this point, you know, I'm still happy to support Democrats that I feel are normal Democrats, but I think the party, I don't feel unlike some of my friends on the right that the whole party is far left and it's all woke. The problem in my mind is you have normal Democrats, but they coutout out of these people. It used to be, you used to

always have democratic socialists or far left people, but the Democrats, 10, 15 years, ago just kind of ignored them. They just kind of weren't part of the picture. But now, especially in this town, they all kind of bend the knee. They all are worried about them. So they take positions to make them happy. And that's losing the battle in my mind. I mean, that's when the side starts winning. So it's a long way of saying I've changed a lot over the years. I think the Republican party also has gotten more big tent. I think it's more welcoming to people. And so it's been interesting journey. Yeah, it's funny you say that because something I brought up on, I think, each of the last couple versions of this podcast is it seems like the, whether it's big tent

or coalitional, the Republican Party is shifting towards that, whereas the Democratic Party is getting more ideological. Without a doubt. That's an incredible point because when I, I, in 2016, 17, 18, I started to get attacked by people on the far left in Austin, and the message was, you're not a Democrat. This guy's not a Democrat. And then when I started shifting over, I remember meeting with Cap Parks, who's just wonderful, and I had coffee with her. And she was so welcoming, so welcoming.

Like it was nothing like, oh, your views are this. It was just like, look, I just see you online. I think you have a lot more views than you realize that are more Republican now. And so people just were much more welcoming, just in my experience. And so I think that what you saw with the Trump coalition, I like to joke that I'm one of the reasons Trump won the popular vote. I'd never voted a Republican for a president until Trump 2024. It's an incredible point you just made. You're correct.

It's more of a coalition now, and it's less ideological than the Democratic Party is. One of the rising factions of that coalition, though, is the right wing of the Republican Party. As someone who is now friendlier with the GOP, how do you view that rise of broadly speaking the right wing of the GOP? Well, I think it's interesting. I think the Dobbs decision has really helped someone like myself navigating that in the sense that abortion was always this huge litmus test. And then after Dobbs, I think it's almost like no one's talking about it. Because if you're in a red state and it's banned, it's banned. And to be blunt about it, most people have the means to go to another state if they want to get an abortion. If you're in a blue state, you've won, it's secure. And so, So people are talking about other issues. And so once you start talking about other issues, I personally feel I don't agree with a lot of things on the far right, obviously the extreme stuff like text it, you know, this crazy stuff.

But even stuff like when it's the Ten Commandments. I mean, I look at that. I don't agree with it. But I respectfully think it's such a goofy issue. And people will get really worked up about it. And I respect people who disagree with that. We'll see what the courts say. But to me, it's like this kind of strange symbol.

issue, but it doesn't, to me, mean we're going to have a Christian nationalist government at this point. So, obviously, this is just confirming priors probably, but the far right doesn't bother me as much as the far left at all. I think the far left wants to create this world that we have seen several times in the past eight years that would not be fun to live in. Well, I think, you know, somebody who's maybe the inverse of you, who is a more moderate Republican, who is now friendly, familiar to the Democratic Party, someone like Bill Crystal comes to mind, they would probably have the opposite take that it's the far right that worries them. Is it just because that was the camp that you come from, then you were closer to it than the other one? I don't know. I mean, I'll tell

you I like a lot of people in the far right, you know, like I like Mitch Little, if he's, I don't if he called himself far right, you know. I mean, as you know, we had a big fight in the legislature and a lot of the far right was with us. Obviously, that affects my view. But, you know, I just, I hear these things about, oh, these people want a Christian national society that I'm Jewish. I've been in Texas for 25 years. I've never at one point felt worried about being a Jew because of the right wing in the state. And the story that's always brought out is, oh, Tim Dunn said that he doesn't want a Jewish speaker of the house, which no idea if that story is true or not.

But to me, you didn't hear that story for like 10 years after it allegedly happened. But point being, again, I've never felt. as a proud Jew, anything coming out of the legislature that's like worried me at all. And in fact, I think that with the last two years, this crazy situation, terrible situation in Israel, the right is much more pro-Israel than the far left and also the Democratic Party now. I think it's sadly becoming an open anti-Israel party on the Democratic side. And we're going to have to see how that plays out. But that's a long way of saying that the far left concerns me a lot more.

What do you make of the peace deal, getting the captive's home from the October 7th attack? It's pretty profound, and especially for someone like you as a Jew. What do you think about that? I mean, obviously, it's great. I'm very, very happy with Trump. Obviously, I don't think Kamala could have pulled that off. I think Israel mishandled this in the past year. They needed to wrap this up sooner.

History books will tell us if they could or could not. I don't know if Netanyahu had the ability to do it or not, but it went on way too long. I'm hoping the peace holds. It probably won't, but the fact the postage is around, obviously, the best thing. But it's treacherous times. I mean, I'll tell you, I'm very involved in pro-Srael politics. I'm very involved in A-PAC. And, you know, I remember the years that doing pro-Srael politics was very easy.

Both sides were very pro-Israel. That's totally changed now. The Republican side is still very pro-Israel. Obviously, there's issues on the farther right of the party among some, but overall, you're typical Republican. It's very pro-Israel. And then it's TBD on the Democratic side. I'm not as pessimistic as others because I know many members of Congress, many Democrats,

including many in Texas that would never tweet in support of Israel, would never say anything publicly, but they're still with Israel. And they don't want to openly support it for the reasons I already talked about. They're worried about the far left. The question's going to be, do those people change? or not. The question's going to be, can the far left win? They typically have problems winning congressional races. But the very fact that I have to deal with it and fight in the Democratic Party on the Democratic side, it's very troubling. I never thought I'd see it this way.

The, you know, it's pretty wild to take the significance of Israel out of it. There's one smaller country out in the Middle East. is such a big talking point in our politics, such a big litmus test on where you fall. That's pretty wild, is it not? I totally agree. And I'm not, listen, Israel has made mistakes. I don't think Israel is a perfect country.

Any Israeli would tell you that. I mean, they're very realistic about their own country. But you're correct, the total obsession with this country, especially what you're seeing on the left of just people that are, you know, even a good example is when the hostages were released, No Democratic electives that I saw in Texas, especially in Austin. I can only speak to Austin because I looked at it, said anything. Two years and no one said anything.

And I thought that was just so troubling where, you know, you don't have to go cheerily to the Lekud Party, but say something about glad the hostages are out. And I think that shows the shift here that they're worried about the farther left of the party. And I think you're seeing this on other issues too. The trans issue is a great example. the trans issue specifically the men and women's sports it's totally crazy when you talk to democrats and i have and i'm friends with some when you get them one-on-one electeds they'll admit it's crazy but they'll say i don't want a primary challenge i don't want to deal with these people and you know

that to me is another example of like how crazy this has gotten that you can't say i don't think we should have boys and girls sports and that you have to you know we had the famous you know, the vote, there was a more serious vote in which there was the age limit on transitioning or puberty blockers, the medical care. And so, you know, Sean Theory was the only Democrat who voted for that. And I was proud to support her and she lost in the primary. But again, I felt that the party needs to have a bigger tent for it. But again, these people are scared of the farther wings of the party. And, you know, that issue was such a big wedge issue for Republicans last year in the election. They just beat Democrats over the head with it. We saw Colin Allred have to go face to

camera. Yeah, terrible. The man played in the NFL, and he couldn't give his honest answer on this. You know his honest answer is, no, it's crazy. I mean, he's an elite athlete. And I just, I cannot believe, I mean, I coach, my kids are a little, so I've coached co-ed soccer. And even at the five-year-old level, there's differences. You know, there's difference between boys and girls. And I believe firmly that girls sports should be fully funded. I think it's awesome that we have a Caitlin Clark, that we have people selling out stadiums for volleyball now. But the idea that people show up and say, oh, you should just let men play with them. Insane. Totally insane. And I think that I honestly believe the majority of Democrats feel that way. But I think that these people are

so caught up in the politics of it. So what will it take to counter that? I have no idea. I keep waiting for somebody to come out and say, I'm not for it, but it just seems they're not doing it. And so, you know, and to me, it's the dumbest issue because I agree with the people on the left. They're like, it's a small percentage. This happens. And I'm like, well, I agree with that. We shouldn't be having a national issue on it. But why is it happening, though? You know, why don't you just say, look, I just think people should have boys and girls should be separate. I mean, it's just, you know, the more serious issue is the care, the medical care for children that feel that they need a transition and so forth. I was very happy that the legislature passed that because there had been no guard rails in place.

And I will tell you that as a personal injury lawyer that when I settle a case for a minor, if I represent a 15-year-old or a 5-year-old or a 6-year-old, I cannot give the money, of course, to the child. right? I also cannot give the money to the parent. So what the law does is it has what's called an ad litem process where so say I settle a case and 10,000 is for the child. I have to get an attorney ad litem. I have to make sure the money with the parents help either goes into the court or goes into an annuity and a judge has to sign off on it. It's a great system. So you have that for a car wreck case. But then you had that same 10 year old who wants to start taking puberty blockers, you had Democrats in the legislature said they should be allowed to do that. Insane. I mean, there's no guardrails, you know. There needed to be guardrails in place.

And so I think that Democrats are on the losing side of this issue. And I think that it's an incredible winning issue for Republicans that they're going to keep using until Democrats change. You mentioned Mitch Little and the issue that Democrats and the right wing kind of united on us tort reform, killing it specifically. specifically, the nuclear verdicts bill, the public nuisance law bill, and then the addition to the trucking bill, right? That was a very interesting political fight, and obviously you were very much on one side of it.

Why do you, other than your personal investment as a personal injury attorney, it applies to your job specifically, right? Why do you fall on that side of things? Because I've done this for 20 years, and the truth is that if you're hurt in a crash or you're hurt with your child being injured or being burned or whatnot, it affects Democrats and Republicans equally. So the question then is, if somebody is hurt in Texas, how should the system be set up? And what we're dealing with at all times is insurance companies.

And so what TLR never wants to talk about is that there is multi-billion insurance companies to deal with this. They just don't want to pay. and they want to do everything possible not to pay. And anyone who has dealt with an insurance company knows that, whether it's just getting your car repaired or house repaired. They make it hard to deal with them because they don't want to pay out the billions that they have.

So I think that the reason I believe in it is that I think we should have a fair system in which someone is injured in Texas. They should be allowed to pursue through the justice system and be compensated and be able to present it to a jury. And so I feel that what you see on the GOP side, when I moved here, tort reform was a top three issue in the GOP. I mean, you had George W. Bush talk nonstop about it. You had Rick Perry talk about it.

George W. Bush had it as a top three issue. Fast forward 25 years. I don't even think it's a top 30 issue in the GOP. I don't think it's a top 50 issue because the grassroots doesn't care about it. And if they care about it, it's because they don't like insurance companies. So, in short, I believe that TLR is doing the work of insurance companies so insurance companies can screw over Texans more. That's all what this fights about. And I think that when you can show Republicans that, they are very understanding of that.

You know, TLR's counter and the insurance companies counter would be that insurance bills are rising constantly. I mean, it's increasingly hard to find an insurance policy for school districts, for anything that has any sloth. light expectation of a payout, right? And their theory is that by putting downward pressure on one end, which in this case is the nuclear verdicts limiting those, that you will start to see that trickle down into lower rates at the smaller level. Is there anything to that? No, it's total nonsense. And Lee Parsley, the president of TLR, admitted the rates were not going down last time. And importantly, and I mentioned this at my testimony, when you have these hearings with Chairman Leach and Senator Schwartner in the Senate, they have all these people

show up. And of course, we bring the accident victims and these horrible stories, inspiring stories, and TLR always brings these small business owners, who I respect, I get it. They're upset about their insurance premiums. But who you never hear from at these hearings are insurance executives. You will never have Germania or State Farm or Fred Loyal show up and say, Chairman Leach, great news. If y'all pass SB 30, we're lowering the rates. All we need is this to pass. They will never say that. They never show up because they'd be lying. They don't want it on the record that that is their position. The truth is they're raising the rates because they can because they're insurance companies. Forget car crashes for a second.

Look at homeowners insurance. Homeowner's insurance does not pay a lot of lawsuit claims. Homeowner's insurance covers things like dog bites or if something happens at someone's house, but it doesn't cover car crash cases. Homeowner's insurance has rocketed in Texas. It has nothing to do with lawsuits. It has gone up and they'll spin it and say, well, there's California wildfires and there's, there was winterstorm Uri. So we have to increase by 30, 40 percent. It's total nonsense.

And Senator Josh Hawley has done great in hearings at the Senate about calling them out on this. They are simply raising the rates because they can. And until Congress and the legislature stops them, they'll keep doing it. It is very little to do with lawsuits. Okay. I know I've talked to them and they say it's getting increasingly hard to increasingly costly because that's all we're talking about here is paying out to do business in Texas. And we have seen some insurance companies either pull out entirely or limit their offerings.

Is there a middle ground here where we can via policy? Maybe it's at the national level because this is a national and global issue. Is there a way to find a middle ground where you don't put on a cap, but you do find a way to put downward pressure on the costs that insurance companies are incurring by insuring? I mean, I think going back to they have to be able to show that the rates will go down if something passes. And to your point, they're not doing that. They're not saying that. They're not saying that. So I think that this idea that there's all of these.

problems in Texas because of this. It's just not demonstrated in the economic reality of Texas. It's the top 10 economy in the world, not just in America. It's number one in America or number two. I know California and us go back and forth, but the GDP of Texas is comparable to top 10, 15 countries in the world. So the idea that lawsuits are kind of holding Texas back is complete nonsense. I think that the insurance companies are concerned. If they're concerned about anything, I do think they have an argument to be concerned about these rising natural disasters, whether it's climate change or not, I think they do take big hits like when there's California wildfires. But at the end of the day... Well, the Smokehouse Creek Fire was a multi-billion dollar disaster, right? Then you had

Hurricane Barrel. Hurricane Harvey, obviously, eight or so years ago. It does seem like from a disaster level, the payloads are just getting higher and higher. Right. And so I think that I just don't buy the arguments because when you look at the financials of insurance companies, insurance companies have been around for 700 years. Warren Buffett, and you can look this up, said, his best investment ever, ever. This is Warren Buffett. He said it was GEICO, an insurance company. They make so much money.

It's a trillion-dollar industry. And so they do a good job of saying, well, look, we're having all these issues. It's that. The reality is they're making decisions. not to insure people. And so, you know, I've seen my homeowners rock it up. I was dropped by a high-end insurance company because my house backs into the greenbelt. So they dropped me. So there's a lot of things going on that go way beyond lawsuits. In terms of negotiating something, I will say this, TLR started with the original bill of SB 30. It would have totally destroyed the tort system in Texas.

I mean, we're not talking about an issue with how meds are submitted to the jury. We're talking about if you lost your leg in a crash in Texas, you could not seek physical disfigurement damages. They went so over their skis and what they were trying to do. And I believe they did that as a flex because they were politically being hit because of the Pax and stuff. And so I think TLR felt they had to flex this session and it blew up in their face. I think if they were to show up with more reasonable proposals and would negotiate with us, you know, I know the people that make decisions at TTLA and some other groups are always happy to sit down, but that's not how they came in. They came in with guns blazing, and they had it blown up in their face.

It seems to me to be a Motten Bailey strategy where you stake out an initial, not in a pejorative sense, but a more extreme version, and then find a middle ground retreat to a more defensible position. And I know because I saw the original bill. Right. And it reduced the amount of categories of damages you could seek, of non-economic damages you could seek, right? The other part of it, and it was a lesser part of it, but it was talked about quite a bit, was the alleged collusion between medical providers and attorneys. I've talked to people on your side of things, and there is acknowledgement that there's a problem there.

and that is kind of where the final bill ended up on the floor that still died. In your estimation, is that something that should be tackled next session? I mean, I think it's a real dilemma because we get a call by someone injured in a car crash. And the logical thing would be to say, oh, go to your primary care physician. Primary care physician will do nothing for you. They don't know how to treat soft tissue entries. So what we do is we work with companies, one in particular name ProCare, which I've worked with them for 15 years. Brent Boking's the CEO, amazing guy. We refer people over there to get

treatment and they treat people on a letter of protection. There's no collusion. It's just good economic business and it's good for the client to get the medical care. And so the problem that TLR had was they were trying to say, well, we won't allow the medical bills to be submitted. Well, where are these people going to go get treated them? Okay. So yes, there are are extreme examples that you can show that is a problem. You can also show extreme examples on the other side where you would say, well, if y'all are going to have three times Medicare is the rate here, people are not going to put their medical bills. Forget pain and suffering. They're not going to people be able to pay their medical bills. And so I think that truthfully,

I think the current system works. It doesn't make everyone happy, but it allows people to get the medical care they need. And I've yet to see a proposal that could fix this in terms of making everyone happy. But we're going to do this all again in 27. You know, I think that it's going to be curious what TLR tries to do. But broadly speaking, having done this for 20 years, I think most personal injury lawyers are ethical people that are helping their clients and do great things for Texas.

You mentioned the more political side of this fight. That was all the economic side, the personal injury versus the business community side. But there is a political side, and that's where we're, we saw this kind of strange bedfellows come in with between Democrats and the right wing of the party, was that more impactful than the economic side? Or what shape did that take in the legislature as you saw it? I mean, it was the most amazing thing I've ever lived through politically. I mean, it was just, you know, I didn't believe it was actually going to happen when I started getting calls about it. I wasn't quite sure what to believe. I talked to representative little

early on and I kind of did a double take because he's always been honest with me and he told me he was really opposed to this bill and explained why. But you never know until you know, right? I'm not naive enough to suggest that everyone who was with us on the Republican side did it because they believe in what we do. But I think that there was the politics of the Paxton impeachment and many people that Paxton supported. I met with Attorney General Paxton in February, about the Senate race because I'm involved with APEC and at the end we talked about these bills

he said he was going to help kill them for us and I was expecting to see pigs fly when he said that I thanked him but I didn't know what he was going to he did he literally helped kill them he's gone now he's going to be gone next session and so my optimistic side

is that more Republicans realize that the portrayal of TLR is inaccurate and false, and they are going to be open to what we're saying again. But if I'm going to be a pessimist, I know these things can change quickly. And we've got a lot of open seats. We've got people leaving. And so we're going to have to do this all over again. One of the segments of Republicans who voted against this bill were not right wing of the party. They were more moderates who were pissed off about the school choice issue. And what happened in the

2024 elections in terms of some of their rural friends who were against the ESAs getting taken out by Governor Abbott. TLR played a role in that. A lot of money went around. Obviously, the Jeff Yas money. That was a strange wrinkle to see as well, I thought, politically. Yeah. I mean, the truth is, and you know this, you've been here for a while. You know, when you get to brass tax as to who's voting for what in that chamber, it's a lot about who you know, who they know, who they're reacting to other people in that chamber. It's often not about the bill in front of them. And so that's why I love it.

That's politics. And it's just good to know these folks and hope they're going to listen to you. But at the end of the day, this dynamic this time correct was school choice, with the Paxton impeachment hangover, if you call it that. You know, it had a lot of effects. In 27, there'll be all different issues. You know, I think. I think there'll be things we don't know about quite yet.

But I think that it's going to be tough for TLR because I, again, we'll say, the GOP of the grassroots does not care about this issue. They're not calling the representative saying pass tort reform. And many of them, when they're showing the consequences of this, don't like it. And so when these folks go back home, they're not leading off with, I'm going to try to pass tour reform. They don't want to talk about it. You know, and so there's someone in the legislature I won't name who I'm friends with, and this person was not on our side, but in talking to this person, it was very obvious that the representative did not believe in the TLR side. I just thought it was, thought they went totally overboard. And I think there's many like that.

And I think that even if they had voted yes or that the final bill passed, we had already won because we had. watered it down so much. I hope we never lived to see the day in which a real serious tort reform bill is in that chamber, but we're going to have to hope those people that quietly don't like what TLR is doing will oppose it. I had a couple members tell me during, on the floor, during that eventual vote that, and these are guys who self-interest-wise in the personal business, they are anti-lawsuit. Right. But they, told me I just trusted Mitch little and he seemed to have a lot of poll especially among the Republican freshmen and obviously went down by two votes

so every vote mattered yeah in that one he's an incredibly impressive person I've been incredibly impressed with him actually was in law school with him I don't remember him but I think that he is one of the rare people in Texas politics that is crazy smart and that reads all the bills and understands it and if you pull up his testimony when he went to J.C.J. late at night after we'd had the whole day hearing, his breakdown of the bill was better than nearly anyone on our side could have done. Just the level of legal knowledge that he has, that's rare in there. You've got people that all are great folks for serving, but there's a lot of people in that chamber, even lawyers, that could not understand

these issues. Much like during the impeachment trial when he was cross-examining the witness, he was cross-examining the bill author, the bill of itself, right? It was very, it was very, precision like I was staying in the back of the room watching that when it happened. But going into the next cycle, this tort reform fight is going to be a big theme. You have the Arnold Lincoln Pack, $10 million, and a fairly new pack that's going to be dispersed, already has been dispersed to some degree. I've also heard TTLA is trying to raise boogoo bucks on that for this. And then, of course, you have TLR, who is the big giant elephant in the room.

I think the last I saw they had $34 million in the bank. they'll have more. Where is this political fight centered in terms of some of these races that you're going to be watching? Well, I think this is the first time in my career, and really in anyone's memory, that injury lawyers like myself and Arnold and Nick and Alex Begham and TTLA to an extent are very happy to get involved in Republican politics. It had always been that injury lawyers are Democrats and state of their side.

what everyone saw this time was, we need friends on both sides. The other change is that there are serious money now at play. It used to be very difficult for TTLA to raise serious money. We're never going to outraise TLR, but with the numbers that I am hearing, we are competitive at this point. That is the change now. So if you are a candidate running in a primary and we are supporting you, we will be able to get you real money. So I don't know how it's going to play out. Other than that is going to give us a competitive advantage, or at least to be competitive, and I think that we're going to win some seats. But I think that TLR's not given up. And like you said, they not only have 34 million, they can raise 34 million by Tuesday. So I think that that, in my mind,

that then shifts back to the issue in which I'm hopeful that certain Republicans, will look a little harder at what TLR's trying to get them to do. Is it just Republicans that your side's going to go after? Well, there are some Democrats. I don't know if we're going to go after any Democrats. There was always a few Democrats that don't vote as we hope they would vote. As of today, I don't sense there's going to be a huge primary fight. There are, there's going to be maybe a couple races that we're interested in, but for open seats.

but I think the action is going to be more on the Republican side. Gotcha. Let's talk broader next year in that midterm. What are Democrats' chances in your estimation of taking a statewide seat, whether it's Senate or anything else? I think it's zero. Maybe I'll say 2%. I've been friends with James Tala Rico for eight years. He is very talented, okay?

No one else is winning. So we don't need to talk about anybody else. Tala Rico, though. Really? I don't think so. All right doesn't have a chance, do you think? No, I think Tala RICO is going to destroy Allred. And I think Tala RICO, I think, is on the Mitch Little level of a politician.

He's very good at communicating, who's very smart. And so if it is a Tala RICO-Paxton battle, I think Tala RICO has a shot. I just don't know how he's going to play in a general election when things get nasty, because he's never had to do that. And so does he catch fire like Beto in 2018? that's tough to replicate. It's possible, but it's tough to replicate. It's also not the same state.

It's not the same state. So the broader issue is that I think Republicans are going to have a very good cycle. I think as of today, Republicans keep Congress, which is a bold prediction because as we know, it generally goes back to the party. I just think the Democratic message is so convoluted at this point. I think they're having serious leadership issues. They have the far-left issues. And I think that Trump is becoming this figure.

that you'll read about in history like a Roosevelt that just totally redefine the politics. And it doesn't mean everyone likes them. I know people hate them. But just in terms of his influence, I think the fact he won the popular vote shows he's much more popular now than he ever was. And I think that less things change and get really bad that Republicans will win in D.C. and it'll trickle down. Talarico is chief among them, but he's not the only one. It seems like Democrats in Texas are really staking a lot on this messaging point of it's the billionaires versus the people and we're with the people and Republicans are with the billionaires. Obviously, I wrote my newsletter on this this morning,

Democrats have their own billionaires, right? And they're going to need those billionaires to come in with money. Does that issue play at all? I don't think it does, but I, again, I'm probably biased because I'm not young and, you know, I've been successful. But I mean, when I think of billionaires, and when I hear people talk about billionaires, I think a lot of Americans, like billionaires. They like their Apple phone. They like their computers. You know, I know Elon's controversial now, but they used to like Tesla. So I don't think it's this like palpable anger. And it's also such a vague term of a billionaire. It's like what billionaire? To your point, there's billionaires like a Reid Hoffman or Soros that like people love on the left. So I don't quite understand

the messaging. Again, another reason that I'm not full of Democrat anymore because I don't quite understand what they're doing, but maybe the focus groups are telling them that. I think they don't have the other thing to run it on because I think that, and somebody pointed this out to me about Gina Hina Hose's launch, she doesn't even mention Trump. Can you imagine somebody even three years ago, not mentioning, not mentioning Trump? So it's almost I feel that the focus groups have been telling them quit with the Trump stuff, focus on billionaires, but I don't even know what that means. You know, so I don't know. I think that, I think Democrats, as of today, I I think that they do not fare well in the elections.

And I think that the question is going to be in the U.S. Senate race, but it's Texas. And Republicans always win these things. And you endorse Paxton, right? Yeah. Okay. What do you make of the Republican side, not just Cornyn versus Paxton, but now Wesley Hunt's in the race? I think Paxton's still going to win. I think Paxton's got that support at the grassroots level that now that it's likely going to be a runoff that if he gets to a runoff, he's definitely going to win.

And, you know, I think that I'm friends with Matt McCoviac, who's running Cornyn's campaign or comms, and we've been texting about it, fighting about it on X. But, you know, they've got good stuff on Paxton, but it's like we all know this stuff on Paxton. It's been 10 years. So I think that I'm friends with a mayor of a small town around here. And he said that when he goes, and this is like a normal Republican, he said he'll go to these Republican luncheon with just regular voters.

but people that are engaged enough to go to a Republican luncheon event. He said people love Paxton. Love him. He said it's shocking to him. So, I mean, I think he's got, it really got that. And I think Cornyn is just, is too old. Okay. Why did you pick Paxton in that race?

Because he was helping us on tour reform. Okay. That was an endorsement in the primary. I haven't yet made by a general endorsement. So, no, I mean, I'm going to, I'm going to donate to James, I think. I mean, well, it's interesting you bring this up. I brought James to a APAC event in 2019, and, you know, it was good, and he had some good questions, but I felt he was on board. And he's been, he hasn't released a paper yet.

And we've had some discussions that I won't publicly get into. But I think he's a candidate. I think he's supportive of Israel. But again, this is the tension I'm talking about. I think he doesn't quite know which way to go because he can't be what an old school Democrat would be, meaning an old school Democrat from 10 years ago of just, I support Israel. I'm proud of support Israel. He can't do that. But if he's truly anti-Israel, that's going to cause him problems.

So he's trying to walk this middle line. And I think it's something to keep an eye on in this race because I don't know he can do it. As usual with these things, it's very hard to tow that line. Very hard. It's very hard because it's like you're either for or against it. No one's saying that you need to say it's a perfect state or anything. But once you start getting into that anti-Israel stuff, people quickly get lost on it. would tell you, and you know this, it's like you follow the state capital, and I love it to death,

but there's people that are organized with the national stuff, like APEC, the proserial community, and just national issues in general, there's so much more money involved and there's so much more... We've seen that with Cornyn. Yeah. I mean, there's huge money. So it's like you've got to be able to navigate that where you might not get that money, but you don't want that money against you. Yeah. It's been fascinating, though, to see Cornyn repair his image so effectively. Now, part of that is just spending a king's ransom on ads while Paxton hasn't really yet. The super PAC is chief among them in that, which is being run by Chris Las Vita, who ran Donald Trump's campaign was one of them who ran it. But it is remarkable to see how in the toilet Cornyn's fave on faves were,

and it was I think the poll that I saw come out today, which was UT Tyler, which is always a fairly questionable pollster. But we'll use what we have. I think it was 51, 17. Fave on Fave for Cornyn. Imagine saying that back in April. Yeah. Like, no way. It's insane. I never would have thought that.

So he has made, he's turned this from a landslide to now, actually, it seems like a fight, I think. I think that's true, and he's got a ton of money. So I just think that I don't think he's going to win at the end, but, you know, I have nothing against him personally. He always has been very nice to me. But the thing I don't like about him, though, is that I just don't like these guys who are serving to their 80s. I think that's a broader issue that we have in this country. I think, you know, you should know when it's time to wrap it up. I mean, I met him in law school literally 25 years ago.

I was invited to a fundraiser with a friend, and he was then the AG. And it came up to me. He was the most gracious guy talking to this law student for what I felt was a long time. It was probably like five minutes. But I think he served really well. But it's been 25 years. I mean, you're going to serve 32 years? It's nuts.

It's just these guys can never stop. The topic that comes up with this, whenever a separate. octogenarian or octogenarian is brought up in political circles is term limits. Yeah. Do you have any thoughts on that? I'm not in favor of term limits. I just think people should know when to stop, but maybe they don't, so we need them. I don't know.

I mean, it's like Janet Mills in Maine, 77-year-old governor running. It's crazy. Yeah. I mean, you would never, what I always say is you would never hire, you know, an 81-year-old surgeon to do surgery on you, an 81-year-old lawyer. And, like, we're putting these people in very important positions. Yeah. And some of them are in very bad shape by the. the time they actually do. Correct. Like McConnell. I mean, it's terrible. Look, the guys had a distinguished

career, but he should not be in office right now. Yeah. The other problem with term limits is you end up with staffers being the de facto representative because the expertise just isn't developed there. You get these, you know, every eight years or whatever, these freshman reps that have to learn the ropes again. And so they become even more dependent on someone who wasn't elected to run the office, right? I think that's a pretty persuasive. Yeah, we're never going to see term limits, but it's fun to debate it. What do you think about Wesley Hunt? I mean, I don't think he has a chance, but I think he's got an impressive resume.

Yeah. You know, I'm not quite sure why he's doing it. I mean, I don't see, I don't see what the path is here. And so I think there's a lot of just plain displeasure with being a representative in Congress. That's true. There's not a very pleasant thing. There's no, listen, I'm friends with several of them. It's a terrible job, man.

I mean, it's just, they're on the plane every week. When they're not on the plane, they're doing call time. Yeah. And it's like, it sucks. Yeah. And so that's why I went to law school with Chip Roy. It doesn't surprise me if running for AG because I'm sure he's sick of it. Yeah.

You know, and he thinks he can win. I think he can win too. But, you know, it's a real grind on the family and everything. Yeah. So I totally agree with you with Wesley Hunt. That's the last thing I want to ask you about is the AG race. What do you think of that race so far? I mean, look, man, I hope Chip can win this.

I'm very optimistic today. But I think that his anti-Trump stuff, I don't know if it's going to come back to haunt him. I think he's done a good job with the answers so far. But then you look at what Aaron Rates is saying, and I'm friends with Aaron. I gave him some money before Chip got in. You know, Aaron's theory of the game, which I think he'd be fine if I publicly said it, is he thinks he can get to a runoff with Chip and then MAGA will come in for him and for Trump. I'm not sure if Aaron can get there right now, who I do think can get there.

and I've kind of changed my mind on the last few days is Middleton. If Middleton gets to the runoff with Chip and then Trump comes in from Middleton, I think, you know, Tripp has a challenge. But I just don't think anyone knows who Middleton is. Now, with 10 million and probably 20 million behind it. With the John Cornyn Playbook, that's how you do it. You spend enough money people will know you quick enough. Yeah.

So I'm hopeful Chip wins just because I think it'd be cool to have some of my law school classes, A.G. Yeah. But I think the polls are good so far, but we've got ways to go. What about Nathan Johnson? He seems like a very formidable opponent. I mean, Nathan Anjewarski, you're great, but they have no chance. You know, I've wasted so much money in prior years than thinking of the Democrat out of a chance. And now I'm just like, look, I'm not giving you money.

You guys are great. You're smart. But the guy out of their chance was Justin Nelson. And Justin, to this day, feels he was $5 million short in that race. And this was 2018. And so Justin's an amazing lawyer. Would have been an amazing AG. but that's a good example of the money issue.

At the end of the day, if it's Nathan Johnson or Jaworski, they will not have enough money even if it is close. Tala Rico is the only one who will have that kind of money. But for A.G, they're not going to have enough money to get the name out. Yeah, makes sense. And trickle down from the top of the tickets doesn't cut it. Yeah, man. I just, I used to, trust me, I used to buy into all these theories, oh, this and that.

I came down here in 2000, and I heard Texas we blew in 10 years. 10 years came, Texas is blue in 10 years, 2020 came. I haven't heard anybody say that in the next 10 years. I think it's finally settling in. It's a conservative state. There's a history here. And then the biggest issue, which no one talks about enough, is there are Democratic donors who have the money that Tim Dunn has.

They never put anything in. That's just the reality. There are Democrat multi, multi-millionaires and billionaires in Texas who have nothing to do with politics. And so until that changes, there's such a huge. huge money advantage to the GOP, that it's like they're not losing elections. Just because they see it as a lost cause? I mean, it's the self-fulfilling thing.

They see it as a lost cause or they are upset about the candidate. But go through the number of Democratic, very rich people in Texas who donate nothing, nothing. I mean, you've got guys worth hundreds of millions to billions of dollars who donate nothing. They're on the Republican side, you have these guys that play. And money talks, right? That's it. Adam, anything else you want to touch him? No, this was great, man.

Thanks for joining us. we appreciate it. Thanks.