Tag Archives: Texas House of Representatives

'Open-carry' votes missing in state Senate

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick is showing some early signs of realism.

He said the Texas Senate might be unable to approve a bill allowing Texans to carry firearms in the open.

I hope his skepticism hold up.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/27/lt-gov-patrick-open-carry-votes-arent-there/

Patrick told the Texas Tribune that while he embraces the Second Amendment, open-carry legislation isn’t a top priority among state senators. “Second Amendment rights are very important, but open carry does not reach to the level of prioritizing at this point,” he said. “I don’t think the votes are there.”

I’ve waltzed all over the pea patch on this one. I used to oppose concealed-carry legislation, fearing the worst. The worst hasn’t happened and it doesn’t appear that it will, so I’ve acknowledged by mistaken fear of concealed-firearm carry legislation.

This open-carry business, though, still gives me the nervous jerks.

I keep asking myself: Back in the days of the Old West, was this a safer place with good guys packing heat right along with bad guys?

Yes, this no longer is the Wild West and we’re supposed to be more, um, civilized now than they were back in those days.

It’s just the idea of seeing folks with guns on their hips …

Patrick might be able to count votes among the 31 senators, but he’s got a wild bunch across the way in the House of Representatives who are going to put the pressure on enact this legislation.

Be strong, senators.

 

Feds aren't seeking to create 'moral standard'

Here’s a shocker: The Texas Legislature and its Republican super-majority in the House of Representatives is likely to consider legislation that blocks any effort to lift the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

OK, it’s not a shocker. I was kidding.

State Rep. Cecil Bell, R-Magnolia, has filed House Bill 623 that would prevent the federal courts or the Congress from legalizing same-sex marriage.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/01/08/no-salaries-for-recognizing-gay-marriage-bill-says/

According to the Texas Tribune: “The federal government is trying to act to create moral standards, and that’s just not acceptable,” Bell said.

Let’s hold on for a moment.

I do not believe the feds are seeking to “create moral standards” with court rulings striking down same-sex marriage laws in several states. The impetus behind the rulings — in every instance — has been the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which grants full rights of citizenship to every American citizen. Full rights of citizenship means that every American is guaranteed “equal protection” under the law.

That means, quite clearly, that if you love someone who happens to be of the same sex as you, the Constitution gives you the right — as a citizen — to marry that individual, just as any citizen is able to marry someone of the opposite gender.

The Tribune reports: “The bill also requires state courts to dismiss legal actions that challenge a provision of the bill and award legal costs and attorney fees to the defendants. Citing the 11th Amendment, which gives states sovereign immunity, the bill also says the state isn’t subject to a lawsuit for complying with the act — regardless of a contradictory federal ruling.”

But wait, says a gay-rights group. Again, from the Tribune: “Daniel Williams, a legislative specialist for the gay rights group Equality Texas, said the bill would go against legal precedent.

“’This bill is retreading very well-established precedent here. In 1869, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Texas v. White that no, Texas does may not ignore federal law whenever it wants,’ Williams said. ‘Beyond it ignoring federal law, it would actually punish state employees who follow the law.’”

The setting of a “moral standard” is not at issue here. Adhering to federal law is what’s at stake.

Smithee for House speaker? Don’t think so

Paul Burka, the estimable Texas Monthly editor and blogger, is one of the smarter Texas political analysts around.

I like his analyses — most of the time. I have to disagree with his view that Republican state Rep. John Smithee of Amarillo may be angling for a shot at becoming the next speaker of the Texas House of Representatives.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/does-john-smithee-want-be-speaker

He’s posted a couple of blog items wondering out loud about Smithee’s aspirations in the wake of his emceeing an event in Tyler involving some tea part Republicans.

Burka notes that Smithee voted against the House budget this past session. It’s a big deal, Burka said, because Smithee chairs the House Insurance Committee, thanks to Speaker Joe Straus’s appointment powers.

Burka asserts further that Smithee appears to have a following among members of the tea party wing of the Republican Party, who don’t like Straus’s coziness with House Democrats.

Here’s my take: John Smithee is a comfortable as a back-bench member of the House, where he has served quietly since 1985.

He’s been mentioned in recent times as a possible speaker candidate. I have asked him directly about the earlier reports of his alleged interest in becoming the Man of the House. I’ve always thought Smithee to be a pretty direct guy; he answers direct questions with direct answers. His response to the query was that he didn’t like the “political” nature of the speakership. And political it is. It involves a lot of deal-making, cajoling, hand-holding, bullying … all of it and more.

Smithee just doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy who’s comfortable assuming all those responsibilities.

Would he make a good speaker? He has a lot of friends in both legislative chambers — in both parties.

My sense is that he values those relationships more than he values being speaker.

Smithee for Texas House speaker?

Et tu, John Smithee?

Paul Burka, the blogger/columnist for Texas Monthly, thinks state Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo, might be thinking about challenging Speaker Joe Straus as the Man of the House.

That would be a most interesting turn of events.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/brewing-speakers-race

It’s not that Smithee isn’t worthy of consideration. He’s been in the House since 1985 and is by far the senior member of the Texas Panhandle legislative delegation; I think he’s got something like 18 years on the second-ranking Panhandle legislator, Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, who was elected in 2003.

Burka thinks Smithee could be among a group of legislators looking to oust Straus, who I guess they believe has become too, um, “mainstream” for their liking. Smithee is set to emcee a fundraiser for an East Texas representative, Republican Kent Schaefer of Tyler.

I’m trying to figure out Smithee’s end game, if he has one, regarding the speakership.

I remember asking Smithee about the speaker’s office back when former Speaker Tom Craddick was being ousted from that high post. Smithee considered a run for it, but backed out. He said he disliked the political nature of the office. He preferred to be more of a legislative workhouse, staying in the background. He’s been known to walk across the aisle to work with Democrats, which I’ve become accustomed to believing is a big strike against any Republican serving in the state House of Reps.

I got the strong sense from Smithee — who I’ve known and admired since arriving in the Panhandle back in early 1995 — that he didn’t like the power brokering the speaker occasionally has to do. I’ve long thought of Smithee as a straight shooter who never was afraid to answer a direct question with a direct answer.

Smithee for speaker? Seems like a stretch to me. Then again, I haven’t been close to Smithee for some time. Maybe he’s been infected by the right-wing virus that’s been going around.