BOR: - txlege

Legislature Looks Like It's Coming Back Tuesday For Special on Redistricting

Michael Li — Fri, 24 May 2013 20:13:27 GMT

To paraphrase Don Corleone: "Just when you think you're out, they pull you back in . . ."

Wayne Slater from the Dallas Morning News has tweeted that two well-placed sources say that a special session on Texas redistricting will start Tuesday, immediately after sine die.

In the mean time, the Congressional Black Caucus has sent a letter to Gov. Perry expressing concerns about a special session over redistricting and telling Perry that any acceptable map needed to contain at least four African-American ability-to-elect districts.

Currently there are only three such districts (CD-9 and CD-18 in Harris County and CD-30 in Dallas County) where the African-American citizen voting age population is above or just barely shy of 50%.

In addition, CD-33 on the court's interim map has a Hispanic citizen voting age plurality (40%) but was won in 2012 by Congressman Marc Veasey in the Democratic primary largely on the strength of African-American turnout.

The letter also expressed support for Hispanic efforts "to be fully empowered within the Texas congressional plan."

Learn more below the jump.
At least some of the redistricting plaintiffs have suggested that in the Metroplex adequate Hispanic representation would entail addition of a clear Hispanic ability-to-elect district in addition to maintaining a version of the district Veasey currently represents.

Perhaps something like this from Plan C204 proposed by the Quesada plaintiffs in the last go round (CD-34 being a Hispanic opportunity district and CD-35 being an African-American opportunity district in this map):

Or this from Plan C236 (CD-3 being a Dallas-based Hispanic opportunity district and CD-33 being a Tarrant based African-American opportunity district):

Here's a copy of the full letter:

Congressional Black Caucus Gov. Perry Letter by Nicole Narea

Some more Q&A:

Why have a special session if the court in San Antonio is going to be looking at the maps anyway?

The reasons appear to be as much practical and political as legal.

The maps passed by the Texas Legislature in 2011 ended up getting a very cold reception from the three-judge D.C. panel, which not only declined to preclear any of them but also found substantial evidence of intentional discrimination against non-Anglo voters.

In fact, on the congressional map, the court went so far as to say "[t]he parties have provided more evidence of discriminatory intent than we have space, or need, to address."

Simply put, that's not a very good place for a lawyer to be when going back into court.

And the hope among the Republican leadership seems to be that by adopting the court-drawn interim maps, they might wipe the slate at least partially clean - optically if not legally.

On top of that, there are the inevitable political considerations.

Doing everything possible to avoid another messy and unpopular delay of the Texas primary would seem to be in the interest of Greg Abbott, who has all but said he is going to run for governor in 2014.

Although it's been more than a year since the last round of map drawing, memories of the anxiety of the process induced - and the pain of a brutally hot late July runoff - remain fresh. As does the fact that the delayed primary almost certainly gave Ted Cruz a chance to catch up to and overtake Lt. Governor David Dewhurst in the race for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate.

Why wouldn't the Governor wait until after the Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of section 5?

Given that the intent seems to be to adopt the interim maps in an abbreviated special session, the timing may come down to practicalities as much as anything. It just may be easier to do now than to reconvene the Legislature later this summer when people have scattered to the winds.

The uncertainty about Shelby Co. also probably works in favor of the Legislature's Republican leadership by avoiding or limiting intra-caucus fights that otherwise might occur, if section 5 were struck down, about whether to go back to the original legislatively enacted maps.

Of course, there also probably is some wariness about how long the process with the court might take. While the parties have expressed optimism that the court case could be completed in time to avoid too much interference with the election schedule, that's what they thought last time, too.

If the Governor were to wait until after a decision in Shelby Co. to call a special session, it would put a special session close to the optimal late July trial date the parties have talked about.

How would adopting the interim maps change the parties' legal positions?

It is not clear that it would.

Certainly if the Legislature had thrown out the maps it drew in 2011 and started anew - particularly if it had held extensive hearings, engaged minority groups, etc., as part of that process (things the DC court criticized it for not doing the last time) - then it is fairly clear that the new legislatively enacted maps would serve as the starting point for judicial review.

But, by all accounts, the Republican leadership's plan for a special session is simply take the court's interim maps and adopt them as permanent maps.

Those maps, however, were drawn under a Supreme Court directive that told the San Antonio panel to use caution in changing the maps absent a definitive preclearance decision. Moreover the court's orders adopting the maps, by their express terms, said they based on "preliminary determinations"and were "not a final ruling on the merits of any of the claims asserted."

And since then, the D.C. court has handed down a decision that found substantial evidence of intentional discrimination and a number of other problems with the maps not addressed by the interim maps - e.g., the elimination of CD-25 in Central Texas.

The evidence of intentional discrimination cited by the D.C. court especially would seem to undermine claims that the interim maps are new maps.

In North Texas, for example, the interim map made no changes to the Legislature's state house map - despite the fracturing of some of the same minority communities that gave rise to the court's creation of CD-33 in the interim congressional map. The awkwardly drawn HD-93 in Tarrant County and HD-105 in Dallas County are just two examples:

Any sense of where the San Antonio court is?

It's hard to say.

It's been over a year since the court last had a chance to consider that maps in detail - and that was in a mad dash scrum to get interim maps in place to allow the 2012 election to proceed.

However, while we don't have a clear sense of the court's temperature, the court's order clearly envisions a careful look at the maps regardless of whether section 5 survives.

And the fact that the court is starting the process now also indicates that the court is mindful of timing considerations and likely as anxious as everyone else to avoid another primary scheduling kerfuffle.

Celebrate Passage of Fair Pay For Women, Castigate The Republicans Who Voted Against It

Katherine Haenschen — Thu, 23 May 2013 18:54:34 GMT

Yesterday, the State Senate finally passed the Texas version of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which will give Texas women the right going forward to seek redress for gender-based pay discrimination. The bill's next stop is the desk of Governor Rick Perry.

This is a milestone and a significant achievement for State Representative Senfronia Thompson, who introduced HB 950, and Senator Wendy Davis, who have championed this issue.

Also deserving of thanks are the bill's additional authors in the State House, Democrats Nicole Collier and Carol Alvarado, and Republicans Sarah Davis and Jason Isaac. (Credit where due, y'all.)

This is a major economic issue for Texas: if working women are paid less than men for the same day's labor, then they're being denied the economic opportunity to fully participate in society that they've earned. If working mothers are shortchanged on their paychecks, it hurts the entire family -- and Texas school children have suffered enough at the hands of the Republican Legislature as it is.

However, the bill didn't pass unanimously in either chamber -- far from it. The Senate gave the bill a narrow 16-15 victory, and in the House the margin was 70-65 on second reading, 79-50 on third reading.

Click below the jump to find out which Republicans -- and which Republican women, for crying out loud -- don't think women deserve redress for pay discrimination in Texas.
Lest we forget, there's a need for this bill here in Texas, because there is gender-based pay discrimination here in Texas.

As Emily Cadik has written previously, here in Texas women make 82 cents on the dollar compared to men, which gives Texas the twelfth-lowest wage gap in the country, even with women's work equal to four-fifths of that of men. Nationwide, women still make only 77 cents on the dollar compared to men. Over the course of a woman's career, that amounts to $430,000 in lost wages.The pay gap is even worse for women of color and in female-dominated industries.

But hey, that's no problem for Republicans, who comprised every single no vote against this bill. "What 'War on Women'?" conservatives cry with feigned outrage. The answer in this case is pretty damn clear: "the one y'all tried to wage on our wallets!"

Here's a chart showing the vote to suspend the rules and vote for final passage in the Senate, and a list of who voted against the bill in the House.

Roll Call Votes on HB 950, Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

SENATE

Third Reading, Vote to Suspend The Rules: 21-10
Nays: Birdwell, Estes, Fraser, Hancock, Huffman, Nelson, Nichols, Schwertner, Seliger, Taylor

Third Reading, Record Vote on HB 950: 16-15*
Yeas: Campbell, Davis, Deuell, Duncan, Ellis, Eltife, Garcia, Hinojosa, Lucio Jr, Rodriguez, Uresti, Van de Putte, Watson, West, Whitmire, Zaffirini

Nays: Birdwell, Carona, Estes, Fraser, Hancock, Hager, Huffman, Nelson, Nichols, Patrick, Paxton, Schwertner, Seliger, Taylor, Williams

HOUSE

Second Reading (Passes, 70-65)
Nays: Anderson; Ashby; Aycock; Bell; Bonnen, G.; Branch; Burkett; Button; Callegari; Capriglione; Carter; Clardy; Craddick; Crownover; Dale; Darby; Davis, J.; Fallon; Farney; Fletcher; Flynn; Frank; Frullo; Goldman; Hilderbran; Hughes; Kacal; Keffer; King, K.; King, S.; Kleinschmidt; Klick; Kolkhorst; Krause; Larson; Laubenberg; Leach; Lewis; Morrison; Murphy; Orr; Paddie; Parker; Perry; Phillips; Pitts; Price; Raney; Sanford; Schaefer; Sheffield, R.; Simmons; Simpson; Smith; Smithee; Springer; Stephenson; Stickland; Taylor; Thompson, E.; Toth; Turner, E.S.; White; Zedler; Zerwas.

Third Reading (Passes, 79-50
Nays: Aycock; Bell; Bonnen, G.; Button; Capriglione; Carter; Craddick; Davis, J.; Fallon; Fletcher; Flynn; Frank; Frullo; Goldman; Hilderbran; Hughes; King, S.; Kleinschmidt; Klick; Kolkhorst; Krause; Laubenberg; Lavender; Leach; Lewis; Miller, R.; Morrison; Murphy; Orr; Parker; Perry; Phillips; Price; Sanford; Schaefer; Sheffield, J.; Sheffield, R.; Simmons; Simpson; Smith; Smithee; Springer; Stephenson; Stickland; Taylor; Thompson, E.; Toth; Turner, E.S.;
White; Zedler

If your Senator or Representative is among the "Nay" votes, give them a call and ask them why women don't deserve to seek legal redress for gender-based pay discrimination.

What's most appalling to me is the number of Republican women who voted against letting other women address gender-based pay discrimination. Jane Nelson, Joan Huffman, Cindy Burkett, Stefani Carter, Angie Chen Button, Myra Crownover, Marsha Farney, Susan King, Stephanie Klick, Lois Kolkhorst, Jodie Laubenberg, and Geanie Morrison -- what the heck is wrong with you?! Do you really not recognize that women are paid less than men? Have y'all had such rarefied or willfully ignorant experiences that you don't realize the need for this legislation? (I don't understand the pathology of women who vote Republican anyways, but this seems like an extra dose of Stockholm syndrome here.)

When conservative Republican men can vote for this bill -- whether for craven political reasons or out of a genuine concern for economic fairness, on some levels it matters not, seeing as the bill passed -- and a bunch of professional, successful women serving in our Legislature cannot, these women need to reevaluate their decision-making criteria.

The worst part in their votes against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act is that when women don't stand up and stand together against sex- and gender-based discrimination, it weakens the cause for all of us.

Much like the Violence Against Women Act or funding rape kit testing or protecting birth control access and reproductive rights, this should not be a partisan issue. Shame on those women who voted against sticking up for other women, and failing to represent the needs of the women who are among their constituents.

Over on the Senate side, typing this may make my laptop implode, but Senator Donna Campbell deserves great praise for voting in favor of allowing women to seek redress for pay discrimination.

If her proverbial stopped clock is going to be right twice a day, at least the hands landed on fair pay for women. Kudos also to Sens. Deuell, Duncan, and Eltife for voting for this as well. Deuell attached an amendment that weakens the bill by preventing retroactive pay discrimination suits, but still, it passed, and a step forward for women's economic justice is a step forward for all Texans.

Now the big question is whether Governor Rick Perry will sign the bill. His misguided presidential aspirations may be a factor here, but let me make one thing clear: voters understand this issue. Women understand this issue, and there's no way any Republican can peel off moderates and sufficient women to win a national general election with a history of standing up for sex-based pay discrimination.

As for the Nay voters, especially those female Republicans, I'm left thinking about a specific quote from former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright:

"There is a special place in Hell for women who don't help other women."

* Twitter reported the final passage as 17-14, but when I called the Senate Journal they had a final record vote of 16-15. Record vote was not available online at time of publication. We will update if necessary.

Calendars Committee Racks Up Over $20,000 Tab For End of Year Party

Chaille Jolink — Thu, 23 May 2013 00:40:16 GMT

The Texas Tribune posted an eye-opening article earlier today, part of their amazing regular series "Bidness As Usual," regarding an end of session party that the House Committee on Calendars, one of the most powerful committees in the Legislature, had last Sunday night. The party was held at III Forks Steakhouse and apparently it was a big bash.

It is very common for committees in the Legislature to have end of session parties and invite staff and friends of the committee. What is not probably too common is the final tab the party racked up, which was $18,584.55, with a 20% tip of $3656.48 added, the total tab was $22,241.03.

Now according to the receipt 121 people had dinner, which is also a considerable amount of people for the 15 member committee, and at $95.00 bucks a pop it totals to half of the entire tab. The other half, around 7,000 was spent on booze, including three $135 bottles of Cabernet, an explicative ton of liquor, some more wine, and one lonely bud light.

According to the article, the tab was split 65 ways, each person paying roughly about $400. However, as tradition, no one from the committee paid, it was all paid for by lobbyists. This is all perfectly legal, and relatively common, but still it gives one pause when as much money to buy a car or a starting salary, is spent in one night on a party celebrating some of the most powerful leaders in the Legislature, making some of the most important decisions in this state.

The Legislature is currently still in session right now, after working to up to midnight last night, the deadline to pass Senate Bills on the House Floor. The Democrats were successful at killing SB 11, which required drug testing for TANF applicants. TANF is Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and is generally treated as an emergency entitlement. No word on if the House has reached a deal on SJR 1, the bill ensuring a budget deal is resolved regarding water funding . Currently the Senate is taking up HB 1025 which is the supplemental appropriations bill.

If the Legislature cannot negotiate a deal between these two bills, a special session is almost imminent. The last day of session is Monday, May 27th.

Texas Legislature In Home Stretch

Chaille Jolink — Tue, 21 May 2013 13:30:00 GMT

In an exhaustingly long day in the Texas House yesterday, drama erupted on several occasions.

Earlier in the day during the local and consent calendar, Representative Ruth Jones McClendon killed several bills, one later on the general calendar, that were authored by Senator Huffman. As she stated in her must read op-ed piece yesterday, her intent is to not attack Senator Huffman personally, but to oppose her legislation on the House Floor "not because of policy issues, but because the public deserves an open and fair hearing process."

As Michael Hurta wrote yesterday regarding Representative McClendon's Op-Ed,

"Among the bills stalled in the Senate was Ruth Jones McClendon's bill that seeks to establish an Exoneration Review Commission in order to review and analyze the causes for wrongful convictions, gather objective data, and prevent further wrongful convictions from happening in Texas. McClendon complained on the House floor, and she continues to make her stand here. The Senate sponsor is Rodney Ellis."

Representative McClendon's issue with Senator Huffman holding up her bill is also reflective of a general frustration by House members with the Senate to not pass House bills that easily flew by in the Senate. All the dust has mainly settled, but an inquiry on the back mic yesterday revealed that the House had currently passed 525 Senate Bills and the Senate had only passed 283 House Bills at that time.

Later in the day during a very long debate in the House regarding a bill reorganizing the Texas Ethics Commission, several amendments came up regarding moving the Public Integrity Unity, which is currently housed in the Travis County District Attorney's Office, to be transferred to the Attorney General's Office. The Public Integrity Unit is headed by Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg, who was convicted of a DWI last month.

Click on 'There's More' to see what happened.
One amendment regarding this issue failed, one was unanimously adopted, and one was withdrawn. In a moment of uncertainty in the chamber, the House briefly moved to reconsider the amendment that had failed top adopt (by a motion to table). This amendment would have completely transferred the duties and responsibilities of the Public Integrity Unit to the Attorney General's Office. Despite calls from Republicans to reconsider the failed amendment the House rules prevented the House to reconsider amendments that have failed by a motion to table, as the parliamentarian had to point out. With that the amendment was dead.

The amendment that was adopted unanimously creates a study by the Texas Ethics Commission in conjunction with the Supreme Court and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to see if the Public Integrity Unit should be moved to the Attorney General's Office "to maintain separation of powers between the judicial and executive branches" according to the wording in the amendment (note: not the Legislative branch, which does directly control the Attorney General's budget).

Finally in the later hours of the night, an amendment was tagged on a large Medicaid reform bill, SB 7. The amendment authored by freshman Representative Jeff Leach states that Texas Health and Human Services cannot currently add anyone else on Medicaid under new criteria, (in essence expand the program) without approval of the legislature. As overheard in the gallery, this is "unfair to the unborn" seeing as the program would probably need to change criteria in the next several years in order to accommodate the growing indigent population in Texas. This amendment can still get stripped in Conference Committee. Senate Bill 7 is an important and carefully constructed piece of legislation, and it is doubtful something as broad and politically charged as this gets put onto a bill like this.

The House adjourned just before midnight last night, and they are back at it again in the morning. The Texas Legislature Adjourns Sine DIe on Monday the 27th.

McClendon: The People Deserved a Fair Public Hearing of the Exoneration Review Commission Bill

Michael Hurta — Sun, 19 May 2013 17:00:00 GMT

Last week, there was some definite scuffle in the Texas Legislature over bills that were originally set to be "local and consent," or passed pretty darn easily. Some House bills were stalling in the Senate, and the House got upset. In response, the House, led by Harold Dutton, stalled some of the easier Senate Bills.
It was a mess.
Among the bills stalled in the Senate was Ruth Jones McClendon's bill that seeks to establish an Exoneration Review Commission in order to review and analyze the causes for wrongful convictions, gather objective data, and prevent further wrongful convictions from happening in Texas. McClendon complained on the House floor, and she continues to make her stand here. The Senate sponsor is Rodney Ellis.

Read on to see this week's op-ed from Representative Ruth Jones McClendon.

Texas has been showcased as the number 1 state in the nation for wrongful convictions. It is a tragic shame that we continue to put people in prison for crimes they did not commit. Each conviction of an innocent person reveals a failure of the justice system.
We need a Texas where a criminal is NOT still at large, free to commit more crimes because we are spending taxpayer money to imprison an innocent person who never committed that crime. A Texas where an innocent person is not railroaded by false accusations, hidden evidence, or untested DNA. A Texas where those who are convicted in our justice system are truly responsible for their crimes, and are held accountable. The truth is, we can have that kind of Texas if we will not settle for anything less. Although some changes have been made and some are underway, more is needed. I filed House Bill 166 to create the Timothy Cole Exoneration Review Commission, to bring an end to wrongful convictions in Texas. We need to get serious about "liberty and justice for all."
House Bill 166 passed in the House on April 24th with strong bipartisan support. It was sent to the Senate, where a committee hearing was not scheduled until May 14th. In the meantime, the Senator who is vice-chair of the Criminal Justice Committee began a personal campaign against this Bill, distributing literature designed to persuade the Committee members and other Senators in advance why she thought the state should not pursue the truth about our criminal justice system. In essence, her message to the Legislators, prior to hearing public testimony in committee, was that we have made some reforms already, and they ought to be sufficient.
Several exonerees traveled to Austin and spent a day waiting to offer their 3 minutes of personal testimony, hoping to be heard by the full Committee. By the time the Bill was called late in the afternoon, the Senator was serving as chair of the meeting, without a quorum present. Before the exonerees were ever allowed to speak, the Senator recited a litany of changes made in the Texas criminal justice system, even going so far as to say she had "heard the stories of the exonerees several times" and reiterated her opposition. Imagine being a patient with terminal cancer who was misdiagnosed. Imagine coming to testify to a Senate Committee and urge the state to pursue reforms in the medical system to prevent malpractice and assure improvements in proper diagnosis of serious, life-threatening medical diseases so that fewer persons would have their years cut short and lose their lives due to someone else's mistake. Imagine a Senator saying to this cancer patient, "the state has been making progress in the treatment and diagnosis of cancer for many years. You just need to understand, we're sorry you are going to die because of a misdiagnosis, but we don't need any more oversight of the medical profession to determine where and when and why mistakes are being made, in order to take corrective action. We are doing enough reforms and we just don't need that kind of oversight." Just imagine.
The public deserves an open and fair committee hearing process. Someone needs to take a stand when the public interest is being ignored, and I decided it was my time to do that. I intend to oppose this Senator's legislation on the House Floor, not because of the policy issues, but because the public deserves an open and fair hearing process. It is true that the Senator is entitled to her opinion and her single vote, as are all Legislators. I am exercising the same prerogative concerning my position on her Bills, which are now coming to the House Floor for a vote. Let's be clear; I did not launch a personal campaign against her Bills before they were ever heard in committee.
Bear in mind that all Legislators are charged with a responsibility to uphold the U.S. Constitution, which requires due process of law for all persons charged with a crime. A wrongful conviction reveals a glaring lack of due process. A long list of wrongful convictions should serve as cause for alarm. Let us all join together, setting party politics and personal attacks aside, and dedicate ourselves toward building a better Texas justice system by supporting the creation of the Timothy Cole Exoneration Commission.

Representative McClendon currently serves on the House Committee on Appropriations and the House Committee on Transportation. She also serves as Chair of the House Committee on Rules & Resolutions. The 83rd Legislative Session is her ninth term serving Texas House District 120.

Democrats Restore $3.9 Billion to Public Education In Budget Negotiations

Katherine Haenschen — Fri, 17 May 2013 23:28:53 GMT

Today was a huge win for the Democratic members of our Texas Legislature: they held firm in budget negotiations and restored $3.9 billion in funding to public education.

In 2011, the Republican supermajority slashed $5.4 billion from our public schools, resulting in teachers losing their jobs and school children being unable to gain a competitive education. Restoring those funds has been a priority for Democrats this session. Today, Democrats held firm and struck a deal that restores $3.9 billion, which is the best that 55 Democrats in the House and 12 in the Senate can realistically do.

Pragmatically, this is the best we can do with Republicans in charge of our state who still seek to shortchange our children, and represents practically the highest dollar amount discussed to be restored to public education this session.

From the Texas Tribune:

Under Friday's deal, the $2 billion in water funding will come from the state's Rainy Day fund, a reserve made up mostly of oil and gas taxes. That funding will be found in House Bill 1025, a supplemental budget bill that addresses funding on various issues.
The roughly $4 billion for public education hews closely to what Democrats had pushed for all week after acknowledging they were not going to be able to completely restore last session's cuts. Budget conferees agreed to $3.2 billion for the Foundation School Program, the main account the state uses to fund public education. Another $200 million is expected to be added to the Foundation School Program in HB 1025.
As part of the $4 billion education package, negotiators also agreed on a $330 million infusion into the Teacher Retirement System's pension fund.

All in all, this is a major win for Democrats, who restored more funding to education in the budget conference committee process than was present in the House or Senate versions of the budget.

While many Democrats and progressives want to see all $5.4 billion restored, this is still a tremendous leap forward for Democrats, who maximized our leverage by standing together and standing firm against Governor Rick Perry's attempts to prevent funding from being restored to public education.

Special thanks goes to Senators Wendy Davis and Sylvia Garcia and Representatives Rafael Anchia, Lon Burnam, Nicole Collier, Joe Farias, Mary Gonzalez, Ana Hernandez Luna, Abel Herrero, Trey Martinez Fischer, Justin Rodriguez, Chris Turner, and Armando Walle, who voted against the budget in the Senate and House respectively, setting a high bar for what was necessary to gain final passage.

This early opposition to an inadequate budget helped give Democrats leverage to fund education, because their votes in the House were needed to fund the Water Plan. Democrats held firm, and now our Texas school children will have a better chance at success.

Good work today, Democrats. Y'all deserve to celebrate this tremendous effort to restore $3.9 billion to public education. Let's finish strong and keep doing the best we can -- and that happens when we stick together.

Texas Lunch Links: Special Session, Texas Barbecue, and Combs' $1.2 B Piggy Bank

Nick Hudson — Fri, 17 May 2013 17:00:00 GMT

Texas Lunch Links is a lunchtime buffet of Texas News and Views with a heavy emphasis on happenings at the Texas Legislature.

SPECIAL SESSION: Dallas Democratic Senator Royce West told a reporter from the Statesman on Thursday, "I think a special session is pretty much certain... The reason is that the attorney general wants the Legislature to approve the maps the courts have drawn for redistricting. There are a number of people (Democrats) who won't vote for that. (The Republicans) don't have the votes to get it through in the regular session, but they can push it through during a special session."

BARBECUE: Texas Monthly published its annual Top 50 Barbecue Joints list earlier this week. Austin's Franklin Barbecue took the number one spot.

WATER: The key to securing Texas' water future might be to form urban-rural partnerships with local farmers to decrease regional consumption.

BUDGET: Negotiations on Texas' budget broke down on Thursday as Democrats persisted in their demands for more education spending. Katherine Haenschen authored a post on ongoing budget deliberations earlier today.

Read more Texas Lunch Links below the fold!
TAX BREAKS: Texas Comptroller Susan Combs approved $1.2 billion in tax breaks for her campaign contributors since 2006, according to the Texans for Public Justice. Corporations received abatements of up to 90 percent of their property taxes under the 2001 Economic Development Act. Dick Lavine of the Center for Public Policy Priorities tells the Texas Observer "This is a hugely expensive program that has not been monitored closely at all."

ADVANCED DIRECTIVES: Texas Right to Life's criticism of Republican Senator Bob Deuell's painstakingly-crafted bill to improve laws governing end of life medical decisions has devolved into talk about death panels.

WEST, TEXAS: Authorities on Thursday refused to rule out foul play as a possible cause of the deadly, devastating April explosion at the West Fertilizer Co. in West, Texas.

MORTON ACT: Governor Rick Perry signed the Michael Morton Act into law on Thursday. The law requires Texas prosecutors to share information with defendants that could help their case.

Democrats Must Stand Firm on Budget and Restore Education Funds

Katherine Haenschen — Fri, 17 May 2013 13:33:00 GMT

Democrats must stand firm in this last round of budget negotiations and use their leverage to restore $4 billion to public education.

A little Democratic obstinacy can go a long way in restoring the draconian cuts to public education meted out by the 2011 legislature. So far, House and Senate Democrats have held firm during budget negotiations on restoring as much of the $5.4 billion cut from public education as possible. Thanks to our picking up several seats in the 2012 election cycle, there are now 55 Democrats in the House, which provides our party actual leverage.

The key here is Governor Rick Perry's desire to fund the state's new water plan -- an urgent and critical priority to be sure, as is public education. 100 votes in the House are needed to tap the Rainy Day Fund -- the proposed mechanism to fund the water plan -- and since several Republicans are balking at spending money on basic civilization, even more Democratic votes are needed to pass it.

This leverage has enabled and finally empowered our Democratic caucus to stand firm on restoring cuts to education. A deal was within reach earlier this week, when Governor Rick Perry reportedly tried to peel away education funding.

Democrats held firm, and now there is a strong chance that Democrats can force the restoration of $4 billion dollars in cuts to public education. This is the most additional funding for education on the table to date this session.

The Houston Chronicle reports:

Rep. Sylvester Turner, emerging from a caucus of House Democrats, had blamed Republicans for reneging on a deal that had called for putting an extra $3.9 billion back into public schools, which absorbed historic spending cuts two years ago.
"For anyone to represent that Democrats have changed their position or asked for more is absolutely not true," Turner said. He went on to accuse Perry of swooping in late and telling Republicans not to vote for an agreed-upon plan because too much was being spent on reversing public school cuts.
Perry wants $1.8 billion in tax cuts and a new $2 billion water fund, but money is running tight and time is running out. One $500 million bump the House already approved for classrooms, Turner said, was now being targeted to pay for highway projects instead.

The message to Democrats in the House and Senate today is crystal clear: stand firm and restore $4 billion in education.

It's our party's top priority this session, and poll after poll makes clear that restoring education funding is the voters' top priority as well.

The reason why Democrats worked so hard to win elections in 2012 -- to elect new Democrats to the House and re-elect Senator Wendy Davis -- was to force our way into holding a seat at the table, to make the Legislature focus on the urgent needs of the people of Texas.

The $4 billion on the table today presents a real and rare chance to use our political power to do some tremendous policy good. Democrats must not squander this opportunity. Restore this funding through the budget, and make sure every Texas child has the educational resources to succeed.

That's what we sent y'all to the Legislature to do, and we expect nothing less.

Texas Lunch Links: Tornadoes, Charter Schools and the Economist on Julian Castro

Nick Hudson — Thu, 16 May 2013 17:00:00 GMT

Texas Lunch Links is a lunchtime buffet of Texas News and Views with a heavy emphasis on happenings at the Texas Legislature.

TORNADOES: An estimated 10 tornadoes ripped through north Texas on Wednesday, devastating entire neighborhoods, injuring dozens and killing at least six people.

JULIAN CASTRO: The Economist has a political profile of Julian Castro and speculates that by 2018, he might have a real shot at Governor.

TERM LIMITS: The Texas House of Representatives rejected, by a vote of 80-61, a resolution that would have limited statewide officeholders to two consecutive terms.

WEST, TEXAS: The folks at the Texas Tribune have produced a great interactive map of the known 110 facilities that work with ammonium nitrate in Texas, along with esimates of those facilities' proximity to schools and hospitals.
EDUCATION: Senator Leticia Van de Putte has an Op-Ed on minimum standards for Texas education published in multiple Texas papers today.

MORTON ACT: The Texas House tentatively approved the Morton Act on Wednesday. The Morton Act would compel prosecutors to share case files with defense attorneys that can help defendants' cases.

FUSION CENTERS: It looks like the Department of Public Safety's Fusion Center, originally created to organize localized domestic intelligence into a single system, may be shutting down. A bipartisan U.S. Senate Subcommittee report (pdf) in October of 2012 was very critical of state and local fusion centers.

CHARTER SCHOOLS: The Texas House is expected to consider Houston Republican Dan Patrick's bill to expand Charter Schools today.

You're A Good Man, Charlie Geren

Chaille Jolink — Thu, 16 May 2013 13:05:00 GMT

If you're an astute observer of the Texas Legislature you know one of the stranger stories of this session is the story of Senate Bill 346 by Senator Seliger.

This bill requires 501C(4)s and 501C(6)s (AKA SuperPACS) to disclose donor information. Currently they operate unchecked and unchallenged by regular campaign fundraising rules, and since the Citizens United these PACs have operated as fundraising mechanisms for candidates and other issue based campaigns.

One of the more notable PACs affected by SB 346 is Michael Quinn Sullivan's 501(c)4, Texans for Fiscal Responsibility.

As Sonia Smith with Texas Monthly writes:

" His 501(c)(4), Texans for Fiscal Responsibility, would be the most high-profile group required to disclose contributions under Seliger's measure. During the 2012 elections, "Empower Texans dba Texans for Fiscal Responsibility" spent $352,000 in Texas races, according to the state ethics commission. A full $333,000 of that money was spent during the primary cycle to support opponents to Speaker Joe Straus and those allied with him. None of these donors were disclosed.
(And Sullivan, as Texas Monthly's Nate Blakeslee noted in his profile of him in January, faced an ethics complaint filed by two Republican legislators last April that alleged he had acted as a lobbyist without registering as one.)"

Although the bill seemed to have far reaching implications and was ripe for debate and revision, SB 346 still moved along as a somewhat innocuous bill, until it passed through the whole Senate.

Click Below To See What Happened

Once Senator Dan Patrick noticed that this bill had somewhat slipped through his fingers, he did one of the more politically clunky maneuvers available to him and formally asked for the bill back from the House with SCR 33, which requested that "the Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives be authorized to return Senate Bill No. 346 to the senate for further consideration."

Senator Patrick openly admitted to not being present on the Senate Floor during the consideration of SB 346 and said that he felt so strongly over this issue that he felt the need to bring this resolution calling back the bill to Senate Floor the very next day. The debate on SCR 33 in the Senate was one of the more contentious ones this whole session. Senator Carona noted that this resolution (SCR 33) was probably not one the best ways to go about this and that if HB 346 was left alone, it would probably "take care of itself in the House" by either being amended to Senator Patrick's liking or simply dying.

The Senate had voted out SB 346 the previous day with 23 ayes and 6 nays, but SCR 33 managed to pass the same Senate the very next day, with 21 ayes and 10 nays.

When the Speaker's Office was asked about Senate Resolution asking for the bill back, the Speaker's office said that the House had not been notified of any such measure, and that the bill was in full procedural and parliamentary custody of House at that point in time (the day SCR 33 was passed).

Enter Representative Charlie Geren, one of the most respected and senior members of the Texas Legislature. Representative Geren, ignoring the SCR, brazenly sponsored the bill, and had it immediately set for a hearing in the House Committee on State Affairs. He notably told Quorum Report that, "Senator Patrick is welcome to come testify against the bill if he feels the need to."

This set the stage for the "friction and fracture" that Senator Carona foreshadowed, and Sonia Smith with Texas Monthly reported on back in April. The fracture in the Republican ideologies and friction between the two chambers set the stage for a highly anticipated floor debate in the House.

Although the Senate somewhat unexpectedly and contentiously debated this issue, the House somewhat surprisingly passed the bill without any real bickering.

There were a few amendments attempted to be put onto the bill, but the debate was unremarkable and hardly quarrelsome. Representative Geren was skillful in avoiding these amendments to the bill. The most notable moment was not any debate, but when the unfazed Representative Geren directly called out Michael Quinn Sullivan on the House Floor for his aggressive and intimidating social media presence.

Since the bill was not amended the House side it did not have to go back to the Senate side to be approved of in a conference committee, so since there were no amendments added on the House side, the Senate had no more say in the matter, and the bill is now being sent directly to the Governor's desk.

Now SB 346, despite seeming to have all the likelihood in the world that it wouldn't pass is on the way to Governor's desk. As Harvey Kronberg reported on Quorum Report, the Governor actually has to sign or veto the bill by Saturday May 25th. The 83rd Legislative Session ends Monday May 27th.

While a veto of the bill is the most probable possibility, the odds of getting SB 346 passed through the legislature a month ago were not in its favor. While the veto would be the most probably outcome the most improbable one would be the override of the Governor's veto, which would be technically possible because the Legislature would be in session for two whole days after the Governor's deadline.

No matter what happens with the Governor, the passage of this bill through the legislature marks a pivotal note to this session compared to last. Last session Republicans represented a unified partisan front, passing poorly constructed ideologically guided bills, whereas this year the Republicans are split into varying factions passing genuinely thoughtful legislation guided primarily by good policy.

If this bill becomes law, there will be more transparency with regards to these large SuperPACs, at least in Texas, and we can all thank the one time hero but eternal underdog of the Texas Legislature, Charlie Geren.