Houston lawyer Sam Houston, the Democrat running for attorney general, would make a compelling case for our endorsement even if the Republican nominee could match his resume and unblemished reputation for ethics. Republican Ken Paxton should be disqualified from consideration because his compromised ethics are a matter of record. We’re disturbed that Republican voters didn’t do that in the primary or the runoff.

There’s no ignoring Houston’s famous name. Longtime followers of Texas politics will know what we mean when we say that he’s no Gene Kelly. Kelly was a perennial candidate for a multitude of offices whose famous name gave him more attention than he deserved. Houston, an accomplished civil trial lawyer, deserves serious attention on the strength of his qualifications and positions.

Houston would focus the office of attorney general more forcefully upon its core functions — enforcing consumer protection laws, collecting child support, issuing open-records opinions — and less on suing the federal government at Texas taxpayer expense. Attorney General Greg Abbott famously sued the government to obstruct environmental regulation and Obamacare implementation, and to stop a federal judge’s ruling that would have protected the endangered whooping crane. All of the Republican candidates for attorney general, especially Paxton, promised more of the same. So, we probably would have endorsed Houston anyway had Rep. Dan Branch or former Railroad and Public Utility commissions chairman Barry Smitherman been the GOP nominee — but not without acknowledging their undeniable fitness for the office.

The State Securities Board fined Paxton $1,000 and reprimanded him for recommending investments without disclosing that he’d be compensated and for failing to register as an agent of an investment firm. Paxton helped pass the law he violated.

The attorney general, by job description, must be above that kind of reproach.