Indivisible Kingwood’s leader, Cindi Hendrickson, organized a protest challenging a hidden meeting between Congressman Dan Crenshaw and a group of Republican women at The Woodlands Country Club.
Indivisible Kingwood protests TX Rep. Dan Crenshaw
Watch Politics Done Right T.V. here.
Podcasts (Video — Audio)
Summary
Indivisible Kingwood leader Cindi Hendrickson and fellow activists picket Rep. Dan Crenshaw’s closed‑door fundraiser at The Woodlands Country Club, denouncing his refusal to hold open town halls. Protestors demand answers on voting‑rights rollbacks, Social Security threats, veterans’ issues, and wavering support for Ukraine. Crenshaw’s staff photograph the rally, while residents of all ages underscore that accountability requires direct dialogue.
Key take‑aways
- Demonstrators gathered at Grand Fairway & Cochran’s Crossing to confront Crenshaw’s pay‑to‑enter event.
- Constituents called his prior “town hall” a private, question‑screened session—effectively denying public input.
- Signs highlighted opposition to the SAVE Act’s voter‑ID hurdles, potential Social Security cuts, and attacks on scientific grants.
- Veterans and seniors decried Crenshaw’s stance on military benefits and GOP plans to privatize Medicare.
- Organizers urged wider action—national strikes, sit-ins, and more —through the creation of additional Indivisible chapters—to defend democracy.
The episode illustrates how grassroots persistence can pierce the velvet rope of donor politics and expose the hollowness of performative patriotism. When ordinary Texans stand shoulder to shoulder for voting rights and economic justice, they illuminate the path toward a multiracial democracy that serves the people, not plutocrats.
Premium Content (Complimentary)
Late on a warm April afternoon, drivers turning off Cochran’s Crossing in The Woodlands confronted a sea of handmade placards and a line of determined activists who refused to cede the public square to power and privilege. Cindi Hendrickson, the relentless organizer of Indivisible Kingwood, led the demonstration after learning that Representative Dan Crenshaw would spend the evening inside the exclusive Woodlands Country Club addressing a ticket‑only gathering of Republican women. Hendrickson’s group argued that a Member of Congress who touts his Navy SEAL valor on campaign mailers must face constituents outside a donor enclave. Their allegation—that Crenshaw hides from open town halls and cherry‑picks audiences—mirrors a nationwide pattern in which hard‑right lawmakers limit face‑to‑face accountability even as they vote on issues that place millions of lives and livelihoods at risk.
The protesters’ grievances trace directly to the legislation now being considered by the 119th Congress. Chief among them is the recently passed SAVE Act, authored by Texas Republican Chip Roy and backed by Crenshaw, which would force every new voter to produce documentary proof of citizenship. Voting‑rights scholars warn that the measure would effectively impose a poll tax on working‑class voters who must pay for birth‑certificate copies. They would disenfranchise married women whose legal names no longer match their birth documents—roughly one‑third of the adult female electorate. The protesters framed the bill as “the biggest Republican attempt to smother young, brown, and low‑income voices since Jim Crow,” and their indictment carries weight: the nonpartisan Brennan Center finds that documentary‑proof requirements depress turnout among naturalized citizens and the rural elderly by up to 11 percentage points.
Other signs on the roadside demanded that Crenshaw defend Social Security. GOP leadership keeps floating “reforms” that would raise the retirement age or replace guaranteed benefits with private fee‑for‑service vouchers. Crenshaw flirts with these proposals in conservative media, calling them “hard conversations about earned benefits,” yet he refuses to speak plainly in public forums. The House Republican Study Committee’s latest budget blueprint shows how drastic those cuts could become: Indexing the retirement age to life expectancy would slash benefits for a worker born in 1990 by more than 20 percent. Independent analyses by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities confirm that such reductions would push nearly five million additional seniors below the poverty line. The picket line in The Woodlands thus represents more than partisan theater—it embodies the stark class implications within the Social Security debate.
Foreign‑policy dissent animated the crowd as well. Protestor Curry Haley waved a Ukrainian flag and blasted Crenshaw for “cow‑towing to Trump” after appearing to hedge on supplemental security aid for Kyiv. The record shows that Crenshaw voted “Yes” on the April 2024 standalone Ukraine appropriation after House leadership stripped out humanitarian assistance and added border militarization riders. However, before that vote, he championed amendments that would have diverted funds to domestic weapons firms instead of frontline defenses. Haley’s frustration exposes a broader moral fault line: progressives argue that genuine solidarity with democratic allies abroad requires resisting the authoritarian reflex at home—yet Crenshaw, they say, cannot reconcile his “freedom warrior” branding with his alignment behind Donald Trump’s nativist agenda.
The congressman’s preference for closed‑door engagements is hardly unique, but the trend has grown more severe since 2022. Data compiled by the Town Hall Project show that House Republicans held barely half the number of in‑person, full‑question town halls that their Democratic colleagues convened in 2024, with the gap widening in Texas districts where the Cook Political Report rates races “safe R.” Scholars of democratic participation emphasize what is lost when elected officials retreat from unscripted dialogue: fewer opportunities for constituents to relay local knowledge, diminished trust in institutions, and a steady tilt toward policymaking that favors donors over voters. A 2023 American Political Science Review study found that representatives who abstain from open meetings also introduce fewer district‑requested amendments and draw more corporate PAC money—an empirical confirmation of what the activists on the curb already intuited.
Hendrickson’s coalition bridges multiple generations and policy concerns. Regan, a young mother from Porter, condemned the $40 admission fee Crenshaw charged for his most recent “town-hall-style” event, held on Zoom with pre-screened questions. Melissa Perry asked how a veteran could gut the VA services, while William Bingman called for Trump’s impeachment over immigration defiance. Together they articulated a narrative of interconnected crises: voter suppression, austerity economics, and creeping authoritarianism are not discrete battles but strands of the same rope squeezing democratic possibility. Their strategic escalation—from peaceful rallies to talk of national strikes—signals a calculated recognition that normal protest may not suffice when structural levers tilt toward entrenched minority rule.
Crenshaw and his allies brand such dissent as performative outrage. Yet, history teaches that grassroots discomfort, sustained and magnified, can crack even the thickest armor of incumbency. The civil rights sit-ins of 1960, the Medicare-for-All barnstorms of 2017, and the teacher strikes of 2018 all began with marginal groups who decided that decorum could wait while human dignity languished. Contemporary progressive movements channel that lineage. When activists line a manicured thoroughfare outside a private golf club, they expose the spatial metaphor of American inequality: lawmakers and donors meet behind gates while constituents swelter on public sidewalks. Every honk of solidarity from passing cars extends the protest’s reach beyond The Woodlands, puncturing the myth that suburban Texas remains an immutable conservative fortress.
Journalists sometimes dismiss localized demonstrations as ephemeral. Yet the surge of Indivisible chapters after the 2016 election reshaped congressional calculus and helped flip 41 House seats two years later. Political scientists Leah Greenberg and Ezra Levin, co-founders of Indivisible, argue that consistent district-level pressure remains the most effective way to influence swing votes on Capitol Hill. Hendrickson extends that blueprint by urging supporters to visit indivisible.org, locate or create a group, and build sustainable infrastructure for 2026 and beyond. Her message: democracy survives not because elected officials grant access but because ordinary people seize it.
In the end, the Woodlands protest distilled a universal democratic demand: representation must be reciprocal. If Rep. Crenshaw continues to privilege donors over dialogue, the citizens of Texas‑02 promise to meet him—whether on sidewalks, in voting booths, or, should necessity dictate, through the civil‑disobedience traditions that have repeatedly forced America closer to its egalitarian creed.
