Category Archives: State news

Campus-carry gun bills are reloaded

Yeah, that’s the ticket.

College and university campuses have been victimized for decades by gun violence, so what do some Texas legislators want to do? They want to allow folks to pack heat onto those campuses.

That’s the way to solve the issue of gun violence. Bring in more guns.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2015/01/texas-lawmakers-reload-campus-carry-bills/

Texas Senate Bill 11 has 19 co-sponsors, which under the new rules of the Senate makes it eligible for vote in the full Senate. SB 11 won’t allow guns into campus hospitals, nor will it allow guns in elementary schools. I guess that’s a small victory for common sense.

When I read a blog posted by the Houston Chronicle about the bill’s status with the University of Texas System, well, I got a bit confused. The blog states: “Similar legislation has been proposed in previous years but failed after heavy opposition, especially from campus leaders. University of Texas Chancellor William McRaven recently came out against the effort.”

I can’t tell by reading this post whether McRaven — a retired Navy admiral and one-time SEAL — opposes the legislation or opposes the effort to derail it.

Whatever the case, the notion of allowing more guns onto higher education campuses makes this Texan — that would be me — quite nervous.

 

 

Patrick fills the chairs; now let's watch

Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick is the Man of the Texas Senate and his first serious act as the No. 2 man in state government is complete: He’s filled Senate committee chairs.

By the looks of it, he more or less made good on a campaign pledge by putting almost all Republicans in those chairs. Two of the chairmanships went to Democrats — John Whitmire at Criminal Justice and Eddie Lucio at Intergovernmental Affairs.

Patrick had suggested during the 2014 campaign he might go all-Republican if he was elected.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/23/larry-taylor-named-lead-senate-education-committee/

The tradition of past lieutenant governors has been to sprinkle chairmanships a bit more liberally — if you’ll pardon the expression — to senators from the opposing party. Patrick doesn’t much adhere to Senate tradition, though, as Texans soon will learn.

Patrick’s immediate predecessor, David Dewhurst, followed that lead, as did his immediate predecessor, Bill Ratliff, and the man before him, Rick Perry, and the man who preceded Perry, the late Bob Bullock.

Lucio, I should add, got the chairmanship after voting with Republicans to do away with another Senate tradition — the two-thirds rule that required at least 21 votes in the Senate to send any measure to a full vote. What the heck, you do what you gotta do, correct?

As for payback in reverse, longtime GOP Sen. Craig Estes was denied a chairmanship after he abstained on the same vote. Did one thing have to do with the other? Well, I’m just askin’.

***

Perhaps the most closely watched chairmanship selection focused on the Education Committee. Amarillo’s Republican Sen. Kel Seliger has wanted to chair that panel. He sought it actively. However, he and Patrick aren’t exactly close, so the Education gavel went to Larry Taylor of Friendswood. Seliger’s consolation prize was to retain his chairmanship at Higher Education.

I guess that will be enough to sustain Seliger’s interest as the Senate slogs through its business.

But the place won’t be as friendly as it has been for, oh, most of the past century.

 

So long, Texas Senate civility

It took Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick no time at all to get his wish as the man who runs the Texas Senate.

The Republican super-majority that now comprises the 31-member legislative body has done away with the two-thirds rule.

As Texas Monthly blogger/editor Paul Burka notes, it signals the end of “adult behavior” in the Legislature’s upper chamber.

Here’s what Burka wrote: “The death of the two-thirds rule was inevitable from the moment that Dan Patrick defeated David Dewhurst in the primary. Patrick has always opposed the rule, even before he became a senator. The Democrats’ reduced strength in the Senate made it all but impossible for the remaining members of their party to muster the ability to fend off the majority (one Democrat, Eddie Lucio Jr., joined the Republicans in the vote).

“I have always been a fan of the two-thirds rule because it gave the minority a fighting chance to take on the majority and it required a level of bridge-building and consensus to pass legislation. On a more basic level, it imposed ‘adult behavior on people who might be otherwise inclined.’ Unfortunately for the Democrats, their party just doesn’t have the numbers to fend off the majority, so Patrick doesn’t have to worry about bridge-building, consensus, or adult behavior as the presiding officer.”

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/end-two-thirds-rule

The only party crossover vote was Lucio, according to Burka, who made no mention of whether Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, crossed over to the other side to preserve the two-thirds rule — which Seliger has said repeatedly that he favors.

I’m guessing Seliger sided with his GOP brethren to show unity among the ranks.

This tradition has lasted through the decades as lieutenant governors of both parties have honored the rule of requiring two-thirds of senators to approve of a bill before sending it to the floor for a vote.

Patrick laid down his marker early in his 2014 campaign by declaring that a simple majority of Republicans ought to be enough to decide the fate of any Senate bill.

Bridge-building between the parties? Who needs it? Lt. Gov. Patrick got his way.

Now the fun can really begin.

 

Public integrity takes hit from veto

Rick Perry won’t acknowledge this, of course, but I’ll say it anyway.

The former Texas governor’s veto of money for the Public Integrity Unit has stripped that office’s ability to do its job on behalf of Texans interested in preserving an ethical state government.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/17/report-prosecutors-dropped-probe-after-perry-veto/

The Public Integrity Unit has been the subject of much controversy ever since Travis County District Attorney Rosemary Lehmberg’s arrest on drunken driving charges, to which she pleaded guilty. Perry then entered the fray and sought her resignation. If she didn’t quit, he said he’d veto $7.5 million appropriated for the office. Lehmberg didn’t quit; Perry vetoed the money.

Now we find out that the office didn’t have the fund to pursue some important ethical investigations.

Thanks a lot, governor.

The PIU was going to examine some contract issues with the Department of Public Safety. No can do now, given the absence of money.

The Legislature now is likely to consider referring a constitutional amendment to voters this year that would call for placing the PIU in the hands of the Texas Attorney General’s Office, and removing it from the Travis County DA’s office.

I’m not at all sure that would be an improvement. Both offices are run by partisan politicians; Lehmberg is a Democrat, Attorney General Ken Paxton is a Republican. GOP officeholders long have accused Lehmberg of targeting Republicans; meanwhile, look for Democrats to make the same accusation in reverse if the office transfers to the AG’s authority.

The veto has rippled its way across the political landscape. A grand jury indicted Perry on abuse of power and coercion. The case has yet to be settled.

Still, the damage was done.

The Public Integrity Unit’s pursuit of ethical complaints has been derailed.

Thanks for nothing, Gov. Perry.

 

 

Where to put Public Integrity Unit

This one has tied me up in knots.

State Rep. Debbie Riddle, R-Spring, has pitched a proposed constitutional amendment that would remove the state’s Public Integrity Unit from the Travis County District Attorney’s Office and place it in the Texas Attorney General’s Office.

It’s a no-brainer, yes?

Not exactly.

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/texas-politics/2015/01/riddle-bill-would-move-public-integrity-unit-to-ags-office/

This has “political payback” written all over it.

The Public Integrity Unit became the source of intense controversy this past summer when a grand jury indicted former Texas Gov. Rick Perry on charges of abuse of power and coercion of a public official, DA Rosemary Lehmberg.

OK. Hang with me. Lehmberg is a Democrat. Perry is a Republican. Lehmberg pleaded guilty to drunken driving and should have quit her office; she didn’t. Perry then issued a public threat to veto money for the Public Integrity Unit if Lehmberg didn’t resign. She stayed in office and Perry made good on his threat.

The grand jury — guided by a special prosecutor — returned the indictment and Perry accused the panel of playing raw politics.

Now comes the Legislature controlled by Republicans, saying that the attorney general, Republican Ken Paxton, should manage the Public Integrity Unit.

The Public Integrity Unit’s major responsibility is to investigate complaints against officials who’ve been accused of misusing their authority. The office has investigated Democrats as well as Republicans. Has it been an inherently partisan political office, targeting Republican officeholders unfairly? I haven’t followed the PIU’s activities closely enough over the years to draw that conclusion.

Riddle’s legislation would amend the Texas Constitution to put the PIU under the attorney general’s purview. Can an agency run by a partisan Republican do a thorough, fair, unbiased and objective job of investigation complaints leveled against public officials?

I think so, just as I believe the Travis County DA’s office can do the very same thing.

Why change? Well, it seems that Riddle and other legislative Republicans are seeking to make good on a campaign promise. As the San Antonio Express-News notes in a blog about Riddle’s proposal: “Republicans prefer that model, in part because the current set-up gives power for investigating mostly GOP state leaders in the hands of a prosecutor elected by one of the most liberal parts of the state.”

Interesting.

Here’s a possible third option: How about creating an independent agency led by someone approved by a bipartisan panel of legislators?

Dan Patrick to take office flush with campaign cash

Dan Patrick is a cash-raising machine.

The new Texas lieutenant governor is going to take office next week with about $4 million in leftover campaign money. He’ll put it away, sit on it for, oh, the next three years or so.

Then he’ll get to decide whether he (a) wants to seek re-election or (b) go for the next highest office in the state, governor, the one that will be occupied by his fellow Republican Greg Abbott.

https://wordpress.com/read/post/feed/12395410/603467735/

As the Texas Monthly’s Paul Burka has noted, there can be no other reason than a possible governor’s race in 2018 to explain why Patrick raised so much money to become the state’s lieutenant governor.

Gov. Abbott had better watch his back.

Patrick’s presence as presiding officer of the Texas Senate is going to put a lot of pressure on Abbott to ensure that he remains faithful to the TEA party principles on which he ran in 2014. He’ll have to persist in suing President Obama every chance he gets at least until Obama leaves office in January 2017. He’ll have to keep the lid on Medicaid expansion. He’ll have to promote tax cuts — even if they damage the state’s ability to provide essential government services.

All this is essential to the TEA party wing’s platform. Lt. Gov. Patrick is the TEA partyer in chief, so he’ll be watching with a keen eye to ensure that the governor toes the line.

As the saying goes, money does talk.

 

Gov. Perry sounds bipartisan note? Wow!

Why do politicians do this? They campaign for office as tough partisans, govern the same way and then, as they prepare to leave office, sound like the Great Compromiser in Chief.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry took his turn at the farewell podium this week as he said so long to the Texas Legislature. He’s leaving office, having served as governor seemingly since The Flood.

He’ll likely run for president of the United States — again! — in 2016.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/15/farewell-speech-perry-encourage-compromise/

But his Austin swan song, in the minds of some of who heard, sounded like a “campaign speech.”

Perry told legislators: “There is room for different voices, for disagreement … Compromise is not a dirty word if it moves Texas forward.”

Some Democrats thought the Republican governor’s speech took a surprising turn, given that he often dug in his heels at Democratic initiatives during his umpteen years in office.

One comment stands out as I read reports of his speech. It was his support of drug treatment diversion programs as an alternative to jail time for non-violent drug offenders. “We must remember when it comes to the disease of addiction, the issue is not helping bad people become good, but sick people become well,” he said. “Turning to diversion programs hasn’t made us soft on crime. It’s made us smart on crime.”

That sounds like a ringing endorsement of drug courts, such as the one started in the Panhandle by 181st District Judge John Board.

Well, the speech is over. Perry is cleaning out his office. He’s heading back onto the campaign trail soon. One of his first post-governorship stops will be in Iowa, where he’ll attend a conservative political forum hosted by TEA party Republican firebrand U.S. Rep. Steve King.

I’m guessing he won’t sound so conciliatory there.

Still, thanks for the good words, governor.

 

Texas Democrat talking bravely

Marc Veasey can be forgiven for speaking with utmost hope about the future of his political party.

The young state representative retains a youthful exuberance when he says he remains hopeful that the Texas Democratic Party is going to come back … eventually … some day.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/15/veasey-democrats-abbott-davis/

Let’s hope he’s not holding his breath. He’ll need to be resuscitated if he’s waiting for Democrats’ return to ascendancy.

I share his hope. I, too, want to see the Democratic Party revived in Texas. Republicans have too much power. They own every statewide office there is. I’ve long been leery of one-party domination. It breeds arrogance — no matter which party is in control.

Veasey told the Texas Tribune: “There’s no question about the fact that for Democrats, Texas is a tough place. It just is,” he said. “It seems like the Republicans are winning everything, but things are changing.”

Those “things” are demographics. The state has a growing minority population, comprising primarily Hispanics who tend to vote Democratic. The problem, however, remains in the dismal voter turnout.

The 2014 mid-term election was supposed to signal a turning point for Democrats. It didn’t. Wendy Davis got thumped in her campaign for governor, as did Leticia Van de Putte, the party’s nominee for lieutenant governor. All the way down the ballot the result was the same for Democratic candidates.

What’s the solution? How does the Democratic Party restore itself? How does the state become competitive and how do Democrats become capable of challenging standard Republican TEA party orthodoxy that seems to be ruling supreme in Texas?

Rep. Veasey says the party apparatus shouldn’t just wait for the demographic shift to put Democrats over the top. Well, given the party’s lack of success to date, that might be the only option left — particularly if Republicans keep promoting anti-immigration measures that work against their own efforts at party expansion.

 

Farewell, Lt. Gov. Dewhurst

David Dewhurst has bid the Texas Senate farewell after serving 12 years as lieutenant governor and presiding officer of the 31-member legislative chamber.

It was an emotional good bye.

I’m glad the Senate approved the resolution honoring him for his service. Dewhurst did serve the state well.

That is until he got outflanked on his right by Ted Cruz in their campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2012. Then the lieutenant governor became someone that many of us no longer recognized. He got outflanked once more this past year as he lost the Republican primary to Dan Patrick.

The cause of good government has lost a one-time champion.

***

I recall when Dewhurst splashed onto the state political scene in 1998 when he ran for land commissioner. I’d never heard of this wealthy guy from Houston. He’d been a political insider downstate and was well-connected.

But he became land commissioner and did a great job expanding veterans home loan benefits, which is one of the office’s key duties.

Dewhurst was an occasional visitor to the Panhandle while serving in that office and later as lieutenant governor. He always seemed quite appreciative of the time we spent visiting about the issues of the day. And I think we forged a nice professional relationship over the years.

Dewhurst could talk forever about the tiniest details of legislation, which he did often either on the phone or in person. Indeed, I often heard from my sources in Austin that Dewhurst might have been the hardest-working state official in Texas.

He was elected lieutenant governor in 2002, succeeding Bill Ratliff who was appointed by the Senate to fill the term vacated when Rick Perry became governor — after George W. Bush was elected president.

Dewhurst ran the Senate the way most of his predecessors did, with a flair for bipartisan cooperation. He was unafraid to appoint Democratic senator as committee chairs, sharing the power with senators from the other party.

I always appreciated his adherence to Senate tradition.

Then came his failed bid to be elected to the U.S. Senate. Ted Cruz battered him for being too moderate. Dewhurst fought back — uncomfortably, it appeared to me — by saying in effect, “I’m no moderate. I’m as conservative as you are, Mr. Cruz.”

He didn’t wear the TEA party label well. Cruz beat him in the 2012 GOP primary.

Then came Patrick in 2014 to do the same thing to Dewhurst: painting him as some sort of squishy moderate Republican In Name Only. There’s nothing worse in the Texas GOP than to be called a RINO.

They fought through the primary. Patrick defeated Dewhurst in the runoff.

Now the new guy is set to take over. The Senate won’t be the same. Dewhurst has said farewell.

I am glad to have gotten to know Lt. Gov. Dewhurst. I wish him well in whatever future awaits him.

 

Let's quit the Hitler references

Randy Weber is making a strong case for the title of looniest Texas member of Congress.

The right-wing Republican who represents Southeast Texas — where I used to live — has gone overboard in criticizing President Obama for his absence from the massive Paris “unity rally” the other day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/13/randy-weber-obama-hitler-parsi_n_6460280.html

The GOP nimrod posted on Twitter that Adolph Hitler bothered to go to Paris for the wrong reasons, while the president didn’t go “for the right reason.”

Good bleeping grief, dude.

Hitler went to Paris in 1940 to declare victory over the French during World War II. And this episode has reached some sort of moral equivalency? Give me a break.

I’ve criticized the president for failing to attend, or for the absence of a high-level, high-profile American official at the event; the U.S. ambassador to France did attend. And the White House did offer an unusual admission that it erred by not sending, say, the secretary of state to the enormous rally.

To compare the president of the United States to the 20th century’s most hideous dictator?

Keep your mouth shut, congressman.