Nathan Johnson on victory in Texas AG race, plans for taking office: "Respect for the rule of law"

As part of the blue wave that transformed Texas politics in last week's midterm elections, the state attorney general's office flipped from Republican to Democratic. State Sen. Nathan Johnson defeated state Sen. Mayes Middleton 52.4% to 45.9%.

Johnson is sure to overhaul the office, stepping back from the conservative culture war battles waged by his predecessor, Ken Paxton. The day after the election, Johnson spoke with CBS News Texas political reporter Jack Fink for "Eye On Politics" about his victory and what he plans to do when he takes office in January.

Their conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.

Jack Fink, CBS News Texas political reporter: Did you see this Democratic blue wave coming?

State Sen. Nathan Johnson, D-Dallas, Texas attorney general-elect: I did, Jack. I've been talking about it for a year and a half. I did not see how tall the wave was. I didn't realize it was a tsunami. I don't think anybody could have, and I didn't even know that I was going to win, but I've been saying for about 18 months, that the political tactics, the arguments, the narrative that has been so successful for a faction, the controlling faction of the Republican Party for six, eight years now, especially the last four, was going to wear out. That voters were gonna get tired of it, that kind of rhetoric and those kind of tactics were not going to meet the actual needs of the public. 

And there was going to be a large-scale swelling of Democrats who, both because of anger and a sense that they could could win, were going to surge, that independence would break to the left, and that Republicans would say, 'you know what, this isn't what I meant by being a Republican, I'm going to cross over.' And I think that's what happened. I was anticipating a two- or three-point win, not six or seven. 

I do want to add here, Jack, that it leaves Democrats in a position they have not been in for three decades, and that is of governance. And that's going to be the challenge for all of us, and I plan to do my part at taking our jobs seriously and delivering. 

Fink: What do you think in your race the biggest contributing factors were to your 600,000-plus vote margin?

Johnson: You know, in my particular race, in my particular office, I really wanted to emphasize a return to respect for the rule of law. And whether you're talking about voting rights or consumer protection or market competition or busting up cartels, it's all a respect for the rule of law. If we're talking about how we have conversations about the legislation that we moved through and separation of powers.

All of this has to do with rule of law, and I think that really was very appealing to people who have grown accustomed to politics being a big show. Did that get me 100,000 more votes or half a million more votes? I don't know, Jack. I do think that, at a minimum, we have contributed to a change in the way people think about partisan politics, a way they think about what it means to be responsible and responsive in government, and I think that was an important development that we need to carry forward.

Fink: So what will an attorney general's office look like with Nathan Johnson as the attorney general?

Johnson: It will look like a much more serious one. I do think that there are many good people who worked for Ken Paxton at the attorney general's office who were serious about their work, who did some good work. But to an inexcusable degree, the power of that office was used as a tool of partisan warfare. There were numerous lawsuits that were filed that were, I guess, to use... well, I don't want to use too harsh a term, but they were frivolous, shall we say. They were done for political stunts.

The Republican Attorneys General Association called the Texas Attorney General's Office the largest legal power for the conservative movement. The AG's office is not supposed to be a power for a conservative or a progressive movement. It is supposed to uphold the rule of law, it's supposed to root out corruption, it's supposed to protect consumers, it's supposed to make sure that markets are competitive, work with district attorneys, it's supposed to administer child support, it's supposed to work in public finance. Those are the fundamentals. And Nathan Johnson's Attorney General's office is going to do the fundamentals really well, because I'm going to be surrounded by really good people.

Fink: What are your first steps once you enter office? What would you like to improve right away?

Johnson: I think the most important thing we can do is rebuild personnel. The culture that Paxton created, I think, was too much for a lot of good people to stick around. There's an insufficient number of employees, they're short from their allocated payroll. There's too much of an ideological thread woven through everything. I think there's some ideologues that need to go look for work elsewhere. And then I think there's a lot of really good people there who are going to be freed up to do their jobs to their fullest potential. 

So to me, the number one priority, having served in government for eight years now, I realize that the quality of your work is very dependent on how you structure your organization and the people you surround yourself with. My number one priority is rebuilding the office. 

Secondly, Paxton has a lot of pending litigation, a lot of pending investigations. Some of it's meritorious, some of it isn't. We are going to clear out the political nonsense so that we have the resources to pay attention to the things we're supposed to be paying attention to. And I also want to review the law generally, particularly in market competition, consumer protection, and employment, to see are the statutes that we have, keeping up with changes in technology, changes in marketing technique, changes in corporate structures, so that I can do my job of fulfilling the constitutional obligations of this office, of acting as a check against the abuse of power by anyone, anywhere.

Fink: Now that there's going to be a Texas Democratic House majority, are you going to be pushing for any new laws that you would like to see the legislature pass?

Johnson: I've got well over 100 laws sitting in my office that we've been unable to move, and of course those won't all be filed by other people. But many of these laws are in areas where some of my colleagues have expertise, so I'm going to be taking legislation that we've worked on for the past several years and be handing them off to legislators who I know are competent and motivated in a couple of different spaces. I have some, what I think is important, housing legislation. I have some recycling legislation. I have stuff regarding THC and penalty parity and other things that I think are important. And I want to hand these off to other people so they can build on it, put their own stamp on it, and move it through the legislative process.

Fink: When you talk about THC, what are you talking about? Because obviously that was a big controversy at the end of the legislative session last year.

Johnson: There were multiple regulatory frameworks introduced, and I think there's a broad consensus that a straight up ban on THC is neither effective nor beneficial, but a completely unregulated regime is also not functional. ... We need to have a new approach to this. I had legislation last session, but we are talking about a strict regulatory enforcement, but not a ban, on the sale or use of the substances, making sure that they're safe and kept out of the hands of minors.

Fink: President Trump will have two years left in the office. Is there any federal policy that impacts Texas right now where you feel as if the state will need to challenge him in court?

Johnson: Well, there's a bunch going on, and for most of these kinds of things, I do want to take a breath, Jack, 12 hours after the election, and really assess these kinds of things, and not just go firing off what my plans are on day one with respect to federal policies that are still in progress. 

However, there are some things out there that are already problematic. I know that [Administrator of the Centers of Medicaid & Medicare Services] Dr. Oz is trying to gut another couple hundred billion dollars out of federal funding for state Medicaid programs, and I'll be looking at whether or not he has the legal authority to proceed with that, and to the extent he does not, I would be challenging the federal government. That's just one example.

But I also don't want to give the impression that I'm coming off of here just, you know, ready to shoot in every direction. I think it's important that the attorney general follow the rule of law, and I'm going to do a careful study of everything that's pending and ask myself, does this harm the interests of people in the state of Texas? Is it illegal, and can I prove it? And if the answer to all those questions is yes, I'm going to pursue it.