BOR: - Chaille Jolink's RSS Feed

Texas Monthly List of Best and Worst Legislators On Stands Next Week

Chaille Jolink — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 00:05:00 GMT

First things first, the list can be found here on the Burka Blog. The list came with a few surprises, (Lon Burnam on the worst list?) and a few as expected (Tommy WIlliams and Charlie Geren on best list).

Early Thursday morning the Texas Tribune hosted the four capitol bureau reporters from Texas Monthly responsible for making the infamous Ten Best Ten Worst List, which is due on newsstands next week. The conversation at the Austin Club Thursday morning (which can be found here) enlightened a few people as to the rationale of the list because as of right now the list is just that, a list. Currently there is no explanation about why each member was chosen.

Evan Smith editor of the Texas Tribune and host of the Tribune Talk did a great job moderating having the unique experience as a former editor of Texas Monthly himself. He asked all the right questions inquiring why Lon Burnam was picked as one of the worst but somehow Ryan Guillen did not even make the worst list (not even a dishonorable mention!).

In the case of Lon Burnam, we might have to wait until the issue is released next week, but in this situation it might be a case of expectation management. Representative Burnam is very well respected and one of the more senior members in the legislature, so when he fumbled the medicaid expansion rider it did not look good, especially from a senior member who is expected to "know better."
If the Medicaid expansion amendment to the budget (that passed and then was reconsidered and failed) had been handled properly, it might have gotten further along, and when or if it did fail, it would have been the Republican's fault, and not Representative Burnam's. One way Burnam could have done this to propose the strongest possible Medicaid expansion amendment (not the watered-down amendment 51 that was crafted as a compromise with the Republican leadership) and force the Republican leadership to make those votes denying Texans their right to healthcare they've already paid for. Then Zerwas could offer amendment 51 in conference or perhaps even on the floor as a compromise piece. Perry might have vetoed the amendment anyway but in this scenario Medicaid expansion has a chance of staying alive a little longer, and Republicans and/or Perry look bad for not passing the compromise.

Jessica Farrar was happy to make a compromise with regards to women's health, and Abel Herrero made a bold move by offering an anti-school voucher amendment that surprisingly passed. None of these things are exactly the same scenario, but it shows that miracles happened and progressive things can come out of the Texas Legislature every once in a while.

The hard part about this past session is that the main conversation, of course, was about the Freshmen, and Texas Monthly's list, by tradition, does not include freshman at all on their best and worst list. The lottery vote is a perfect example of the freshman hijacking a very important piece of legislation by voting it down, only to pass it hours later. Lots of tea party freshman loudly cheered when the bill failed, then were suddenly quiet once they switched their votes after comprehending what they did.

The other story of the regular session was that it was one of a splintered Republican party. Charlie Geren carrying and passing a piece of legislation after Dan Patrick, in an unprecedented move, officially asked him not to, is just one example of how the Republicans this session really didn't get along. As I've said before, 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 policy.

After this session, one thing is clear, this was not the partisan bloodbath that the 2011 session was. Many things have changed since 2011, but one thing hasn't changed, and that is Rick Perry. Last session, it seemed only Democrats were desperate to see him leave. This session, with Republicans in varying factions, and talk of movement of almost every single Republican in statewide office, it feels more like a majority of Republicans are ready to see him go now too.

Perry Adds Partisan Issues to Special Session Call

Chaille Jolink — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 20:05:39 GMT

Earlier this afternoon Governor Rick Perry added two highly partisan issues to the call of this special session, just after he added transportation to the call yesterday.

Transportation was added to the call of this sleeper of a special session in an effort to fund some critical infrastructure Texas really needs. The Governor's website states that, "legislation relating to the funding of transportation infrastructure projects" were added to "maintain the roads to ensure we sustain both our economic success and our quality of life." Currently SJR 2, a bill that transfers money from the rainy day fund into the state's dedicated highway fund, also known as Fund 6, will be heard tomorrow after the full Senate adjourns.

Including transportation the Governor also added abortion and juvenile justice issues to the call. The Governor's website has this particular language:

Legislation relating to the regulation of abortion procedures, providers and facilities.

Legislation relating to establishing a mandatory sentence of life with parole for a capital felony committed by a 17-year-old offender

The Senate Criminal Justice Committee is scheduled to meet tomorrow to hear a bill that expands the life without parole option to 17-year-olds in Texas. Up until 2005 juries in Texas did not even have the option of choosing life without parole. The maximum sentence before the death penally was 40 years with the option for parole. The bill, SB 23, is by Senator Joan Huffman.

No word yet on movement of any abortion legislation, but the bill that got the most traction last session was Senator Deuell's bill regulating away abortion providers in Texas.

UPDATE: The Senate Health and Human Services Committee will meet on Thursday, and will hear several bills relating to abortion.

Special Session Opens Can of Worms

Chaille Jolink — Mon, 03 Jun 2013 22:40:00 GMT

Originally meant to be a quick and dirty adoption of the court drawn interim maps used last election cycle, (since you know, the maps the Republican supermajority drew last session were struck down by the courts as illegal) this special session is now going to last for weeks. Weeks!

Gone are the leisurely summer days of reflection of all the chaos past. Now the Republicans face the chaos within their own party right before their eyes, well that is if they are not on vacation (Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, who urged the call of the special session, as Quorum Report is reporting, is in Europe).

The House met briefly today. Just enough time for the Chairman of the House Select Committee on Redistricting, Drew Darby to announce that he plans to meet in Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio to get input from citizens all over the state.

This special session was meant to be quick because the governor's call was so specific. The governor can call a special session but has to note what items or subjects are relative to the special session. The call read:

"Legislation which ratifies and adopts the interim redistricting plans ordered by the federal district court as the permanent plans for districts used to elect members of the Texas House of Representatives, Texas Senate and United States House of Representatives."

This adoption was supposed to happen fast. The Senate met only hours after they adjourned Sine Die, and the House met the very next day. Yet the committees that were announced to hear the bills of the interim maps sparked a lot of outcry from progressive leaders, noting that if people wanted to give their input (which is what is technically supposed to happen for redistricting, these court drawn maps were only meant to be temporary, not meant to adopted by the Legislature to be in place for the next eight years) they had no time to because there was hardly any real notice given to the public. There was hardly any real notice given to the Legislators themselves.

So oddly responsive to the outcry, the Republican leadership (those that are in Austin anyway) are giving citizens that chance.

The Senate meets later this week. Last week when they met briefly Senator Watson of Austin asked if the legislature was obligated to solely to consider the maps and nothing more (ie. no amendments, no changes to districts that have shown growth from updated census data etc). The concern was because the governor's call was so specific it could jeopardize alternatives to the maps. The response to Watson was, "We are not bound to only consider the court drawn maps."

So now, this special session is anyone's ball game. It is not a clear political win for Republicans. If the Legislature had just adopted the maps quickly, it might have pleased some the of the judges, which was unlikely to begin with. Whatever happens, it should be noted that the Legislature will have to start all over again depending on the courts decision regarding the Voting Rights Act.

So lots of questions remain. Can the democrats who have filed alternative maps prevail? Chairman Darby noted that he was working with Reps Coleman and Davis, both have submitted alternative maps for consideration. Is the Governor going to expand the call to other maps, or even other issues, to make the session a promising partisan parade? Will the Legislature adopt any maps at all, after spending taxpayer money traveling around the state listening to how wrong they got it two years ago? (arguably money well spent).

If you are in the cities of Houston (6/12) Dallas (6/6) or San Antonio (6/10) plan on attending the days announced. To see more details on the hearings when they post (they are not officially posted yet) click here.

For more much detailed information please reference Michael Li's exceptional blog on this very issue, TXRedistricting.org.

Despite Hype, Texas Budget Falls Short

Chaille Jolink — Wed, 29 May 2013 16:30:00 GMT

The State Budget has been one of the more dramatic stories under the dome this session.

Sunday the House had its final chance to debate and discuss legislation with the deadline to adopt conference committee reports (the very last step in the process before the bill is sent to the Governor). This included all of the budget bills: HB 1025, the supplemental appropriations bill and SB 1, the actual budget.

Tempers flared during several moments of debate, including the adoption of SB 1, and HB 1025, (both had several points of order called on the respective bills). The House eventually approved HB 1025, the supplemental appropriations bill, which passed subject to Article 3 Section 49A in the Texas Constitution. This essentially means that it is subject to the spending limitations set by the comptroller.

The supplemental appropriations had some of the most interesting commentary on it. Democrats and Republicans found common ground in opposing this bill, but for completely different reasons. Republicans are against the bill because it uses money from the flushed-with-cash Rainy Day Fund (i.e. uses too much money) and a few Democrats were against it because it still does not adequately fund education, or Medicaid, or pre-k programs. All of these were drastically cut last session (i.e. uses too little money).

One point of contention was regarding how much money was being restored to public education. Although the House passed money for additional or supplemental appropriations in HB 1025 which takes money out of the Rainy Day Fund, there are still monies left in General Revenue, approximately $500 million. That's $500 million dollars left on the table that could go to public education or any number of the initiatives that fell by the wayside.

Still, many Democrats called for celebration back when a budget deal was negotiated, but other progressive groups disagree, noting that partially restoring drastic cuts is still not cause for celebration.

To quote the heckled tea-partier Representative David Simpson from the debate on the House Floor, "Although there are good things in this budget, this is not a good budget."

Rick Perry Vetoes Donor Disclosure Bill

Chaille Jolink — Mon, 27 May 2013 13:05:00 GMT

Yesterday the Texas Legislature debated on bills for the last time this session. There are always a lot of nips and tucks to bills in these final few days, and this is also generally the time where lots of legislation either flies or dies very quickly.

One thing that did not fly by people so quickly, was Rick Perry's first veto of this session. Saturday, Perry vetoed SB 346 by Senator Kel Seliger and Representative Charlie Geren. This bill, also known as the "dark money" bill as reported earlier, would have disclosed donors to non-profits who participate in political activities. Currently these non- profits also known as Political Action Committees, or PACs, donate in very large amounts to political campaigns, which is reported on, but the donors to the PACs are all secret.

The logic for Rick Perry's veto was noted in a strongly worded statement from the Governor, noting that it threatened the donors rights of association:

"At a time when our federal government is assaulting the rights of Americans by using the tools of government to squelch dissent, it is unconscionable to expose more Texans to the risk of such harassment, regardless of political, organizational or party affiliation."

Of course no one is claiming the donors who donate directly to candidates are threatened of their freedom to associate. What is really being threatened are the people who do not have money to influence these non-profits and are not nearly represented as much as these PACs are in the political and electoral process (which are thanks to Rick Perry still unchecked and unchallenged with no political transparency). During the 2012 cycle alone, according to the Tribune, these special non-profits "used the 501c(4) designation (and) spent more than $300 million to influence elections, according to the Center for Responsive Politics."

Representative Charlie Geren is quoted from the same Tribune article:

" 'Certain groups keep scorecards and continuously bombard the internet. All that's fine, it's what this process is about,' state Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, said during House debate on the measure. 'The problem occurs when these groups wade deep into the political process ... and use a loophole that keeps their donors secret.' "

This bill was an interesting story because it was (one of a few) shell games between Michael Quinn Sullivan and Charlie Geren. In this case, Geren represented not only transparency and equity in the political process, but the entire will of the House. The Texas House passed this transparency bill when the Senate couldn't pass it (even though, oops they did), because this vote in the House reflected more than transparency, but a referendum on Michael Quinn Sullivan and his PAC, Texans for Fiscal Responsibility (a great cause with a modest and meager name, yet curiously well funded).

Texans for Fiscal Responsibility is a PAC that traditionally releases rankings of each Texas Legislator in terms of how they score on certain votes relating to "fiscal conservatism." Michael Quinn Sullivan, the leader of the this PAC has a very pervasive social media presence, yet like most Republicans, can't really call a win, lose, or draw for this session yet.

The House adjourns Sine Die today, and if there is an imminent special session coming, it is expected to be announced today as well.

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.

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 this session is the story of Senate Bill 346 by Senator Seliger.

This bill requires 501C(4)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.

House Faces First Midnight Deadline, What's Next

Chaille Jolink — Fri, 10 May 2013 14:00:00 GMT

Last night the Texas House of Representatives adjourned promptly at midnight, passing their first major deadline this session. This closes the first chapter of this session, as all house bills on the calendar that did not pass out of the full House by midnight last night are now dead.

So where are we?

One notable thing was that the House did not approve funding for long term water projects, one of the Governor's stated priorities this session.

HB 4 passed the House earlier this session, which creates long term water preservation projects and authorizes more revenue bonds for the Texas Water Development Board. HB 11 funded this measure, however HB 11 failed. HB 11 funded these long term water projects by taking money out of a 'flushed-with-cash' the Rainy Day Fund. Because HB 11 pulled money out of the Rainy Day Fund it takes a two-thirds vote to pass, which means the bill needed Democratic support for it to pass. This gave Democrats leverage to be able to say that if the legislature is going to pull funding from the Rainy Day Fund for water infrastructure, it should also pull money for education.

HB 11 died with a sustained point of order, proving a show of strength for Democrats. The win declared that if the House were to tap into the Rainy Day Fund the monies will have to be (at least in some part) for education. Now with the house bill deadline past, only senate bills can pass through the House Chamber. So with no current approval for water funding on the House side, lawmakers are scrambling to avoid a special session by searching for ingenious ways to fund HB 4 without an actual house bill. Rick Perry has noted that he will call a special session if there is no funding for long term water projects.

Rep. Drew Darby gave an interesting insight into the future by simply stating the words "special session" on the House Floor last night.

Find out why he said it below the jump.
Rep. Darby had a bill increasing the fee for vehicle registrations by 30 dollars. The fee got reduced in amendments but eventually Rep. Darby felt the pressure and withdrew his bill from consideration. The fee increase was intended to pay off the debt for road projects (not toll roads) in the State of Texas. Governor Perry has stated that he will not support a fee increase for transportation costs, and that he would call a special session if that were to happen. This issue split Republicans, and when Rep. Darby was pulling down his bill he noted that he would bring up this issue again during the likely special session (womp womp womp).

One bill that also split Republicans, but actually passed the House last night was HB 912, which criminalizes the use of drones in the State of Texas. In this epic, 'cart-before-the horse' bill, surveillance with the use of drones with "malicious intent" is considered illegal, but it carves out exemptions for research universities and for monitoring oil and gas pipelines. While the idea of drones sounds scary, criminalizing them creates huge conflicts with existing case law, and actually criminalizes current law enforcement practices that are completely legal. This also forever ties the hands of law enforcement, and will probably create unforeseen circumstances, as is usually the case with laws trying to regulate anything that is a growing and changing technology. This could possibly still be an issue on third reading today in the House (the "third reading" of a bill is the last, final and usually least contentious time the bill is to be voted on).

One final thing about the deadline last night was that when the House adjourned at midnight, it was the latest they had ever met all session. In previous sessions the House has stayed well into the morning hours, or moved the clock so that the deadline is midnight "El Paso Time," but none of these things happened this year. All session long the House has failed to be the long, arduous, drawn out body that it is known to be. There were many times earlier this session when the Senate ended up meeting much later than the House, and currently the Senate has nothing to do and is adjourning in the early afternoon because the House hasn't sent over any hardly any bills yet.

The House has had no sense of urgency until this week, and even calling it urgency is a bit of a misnomer. What happened this week is that suddenly the House freshmen members realized that their bills were going to die, and just because they got a bill placed on the calendar, did not mean that the bill was going to be heard (the House Calendar was a full day behind schedule). This sense of urgency from the freshmen was met with a laissez-faire attitude from senior members who know better. As the tried and true saying goes, "lack of preparation on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part."

House Tensions Run High as Deadlines Loom

Chaille Jolink — Wed, 08 May 2013 05:00:00 GMT

Yesterday was a very dramatic day in the Texas House.

Looming with the deadline that any non-local House Bills must be passed out of the full House by tomorrow night, tensions can run high, and that came to boiling point yesterday.

With the passage of HB 500, a bill that was debated for several hours yesterday, the stage was set for drama. HB 500 cuts taxes for businesses to the tune of almost $666 million dollars. There was vigourous debate on the bill and on the priorities of using these extra monies for tax breaks. Sylvester Turner, proving to be a budget hawk, like most Democrats this session was most notably against the spending, as his displaying of an abacus made clear.

But one of the most tense and contentious moments, forcing R's to battle with one another was what came next, an amendment to HB 3153, a fairly non-contentious bill without the proposed amendment.

The amendment, authored by Representative Phil King, would have transferred funding from the Public Integrity Unity to the Attorney General's Office, unless the current District Attorney, Rosemary Lehmberg resigns. Lehmberg was convicted of a DUI last month and is currently serving her sentence in the Travis County Jail.

The Public Integrity Unit is a unique entity because it is funded by the state, but it is meant to investigate and prosecute officeholders in the state. It is housed and run under the umbrella of the Travis County District Attorney's Office. If Lehmberg resigns, Rick Perry would have the power to appoint someone as the Travis County DA until her term expires.

The amendment had a point of order overruled on it for germaneness, and caused several prominent members to speak against it, noting that it is bad public policy, and bad politics for a myriad of reasons. Democrat Sylvester Turner and Republican Charlie Geren both spoke against the amendment.

To read what they said click "There's More"
Rep. Turner noted that the amendment set a dangerous precedent because the legislature is targeting one person in particular. He noted that here are current procedures in place and a process for removal at the local level. Representative King said that he wanted to protect the integrity of the office, but Representative Turner said that this amendment actually threatens the integrity of the office because it is removing the standard procedures already in place for removal. He also noted that this would greatly disrupt the office and if the funding is moved because there are currently over 400 ongoing investigations within the Public Integrity Unit.

Rep Charlie Geren also noted that he works with the office from time to time as he the Chairman of House Administration. Rep Geren said that the office is run very professionally, and it is actually not directly run by the DA, the DA just happens to oversee the office. Rep. Craig Eiliand has pointed out that moving the unit to the Attorney General's Office "is going to look bad and it's not going to work" because the Legislature directly controls the AGs office, and they also do not have the authority to prosecute the cases the Public Integrity Unit prosecutes.

As Quorum Reports recently noted Article 5 Section 21 of the Constitution states the Legislature could defund the Public Integrity Unit, but not take away its power to prosecute, which is also what makes the unity such a unique entity.

Austin's own Representative Naishtat made sure to point out all the types of crimes they prosecute including motor fuels tax fraud, among many other things. The question was also brought up about the constitutionality of an ex post facto law, making a law retroactive as opposed to prospective (this bill address something that has already happened, not something that could happen).

Representative King eventually withdrew his amendment, but he said he had the votes, despite pulling it down, and he also declared that he will continue to try to add his amendment to relevant legislation.

Throughout the debate Representative King insisted that he was not targeting her in particular, countering the argument that the Texas House, as a body, should not make such personal targets in legislation, yet before pulling down his amendment he declared, "Madam DA, please take this shot across the bow," and then directly called on her to resign.