Tag Archives: Texas Legislature

State news

Craddick leads text-ban fight

It’s hard for me to believe I am thinking so highly of state Rep. Tom Craddick, R-Midland.

I once exchanged testy letters with him after he engineered the ouster of Pete Laney, D-Hale Center, as speaker of the Texas House of Representatives.

That was then. The now has revealed that Craddick is emerging as a good-government Republican. Evidence of that is House Bill 80, which today passed the state House, and brings the state a big step closer to banning the act of sending text messages while driving a motor vehicle.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/25/texas-house-texting-while-driving/

Craddick is on the side of the angels in this fight. Good for him. Good for the Texas House in approving the legislation.

HB 80 resembles a bill approved by the Legislature in 2011, only to be vetoed by then-Gov. Rick Perry, who called it an attempt to “micromanage” Texans’ behavior.

Gov. Greg Abbott hasn’t yet weighed in on HB 80, but my sincere hope is that he signs it.

Texas is among a handful of states, six of them, that haven’t approved a statewide texting-ban law. Several cities within the state — such as Amarillo — have enacted ordinances banning the insanely stupid idea of texting while driving.

The state needs to stand up for those who are threatened by the nimrods who cannot grasp the danger involved in operating a texting device while driving a 2-ton — or heavier — motor vehicle.

Craddick has been at the forefront of this important legislation.

I congratulate the former speaker for his guts on this issue.

Now it’s the Senate’s turn. Approve the bill, send it to Gov. Abbott’s desk, and then demand he sign it into law.

 

local news, State news

Sullivan threw out the bait; I took it

2 Comments

Michael Quinn Sullivan runs an outfit called Empower Texans. He sent out a mailer to Texas Senate District 31 residents which contained a bit of red meat of which I took a bite.

It implied that state Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, opposes a Senate bill that would provide $4.6 billion in tax relief for Texans. Dumb me. I fell for it.

Seliger called this morning to remind me that he voted for Senate Bill 1, but simply declined to sign on as a sponsor of the bill.

The antipathy between Seliger and Sullivan is as strong as ever. Indeed, I happen to stand with Seliger in his distaste and distrust of Sullivan, who sees himself as a kingmaker, seeking to elect legislators and statewide officials who agree with his brand of ultraconservatism.

I also happen to agree with those who believe the state should hold off on tax cuts until it takes care of some essential needs, such as infrastructure improvement and restoring money to public education.

Lesson learned: Read everything that Michael Quinn Sullivan sends out — carefully.

 

legal news, local news, State news

Texas grand jury system under review

The Texas criminal justice system has this strange idea about how to select trial juries and grand juries.

Grand jurors are chosen in most counties by jury commissioners, who are selected by a presiding judge; the commissioners then look for people they believe are “qualified” to serve on a panel that determines whether a criminal complaint should result in officials charges brought against someone. The issue is whether a grand juror can commit to meet over the course of several weeks to make these determinations.

Trial jurors are selected at random. District clerks go through voter registration rolls to find people whose names are put into a large pool of potential jurors. The only qualification is that they be residents of the county and be of sound mind, etc.

Here’s an interesting aspect of the selection processes. The state believes it is fine to select someone at random, and then ask that person to determine whether some lives or dies if that individual is convicted of a capital crime. But a grand jury requires more of a screening process to find individuals who can serve on that panel.

Texas legislators are considering a bill that would make the grand jury selection system look more like the trial jury selection method.

I say, “Go for it, lawmakers.”

Back in 1984, when I arrived in Texas, the newspaper where I worked at the time, the Beaumont Enterprise, was involved in an editorial campaign to change the grand jury selection system. There had been questions raised about whether a particular grand jury had been chosen because grand jurors had a particular bias. The paper raised all kinds of heck with the two judges in Jefferson County with criminal jurisdiction. We argued vehemently that the system needed to be changed. Over time, the judges heeded our calls and changed to a random selection method.

State Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, thinks the state should require a random method in all 254 Texas counties.

He says the system needs total confidence in all its working parts. As The Associated Press reported, the current system is ridiculed as a “pick a pal” system in which friends pick friends to serve on a grand jury.

Now, for the record, I once served on a grand jury in Randall County. I was asked by a friend, who was serving as a jury commissioner for the 181st District Court, presided over by Judge John Board.

I agreed. Board chose me along with several other people and we met regularly for three months. We confronted no controversy during our time and our service ended without a whimper of discontent.

That particular grand jury worked well. The threat, though, of dysfunction created by potential bias has created a need for the Texas Legislature to change the selection system.

If the random selection method is able to seat people who then can determine whether someone should die for committing a crime, then it will work to select people who can decide whether to charge someone with a crime.

 

State news

An interesting argument on open-carry …

Many of my friends, acquaintances and colleagues seem to think I live, breathe, eat, drink and smell politics and policy … 24/7. Most of them know that I once was a full-time print journalist whose job was to stay abreast of these things.

That’s all they want to discuss with me. That and my granddaughter.

A friend and colleague, though, posed an interesting notion this week about the proposal in the Texas Legislature to allow Texans to carry firearms openly, where everyone can see them.

My friend told me he has a concealed-carry license and carries a gun, presumably where the sun doesn’t shine.

“I think open-carry is a stupid idea,” he said. “Why? Because of something happens and someone starts shooting a gun, he’s going to shoot the guy with the gun. The individual who’s carrying openly becomes a target.”

Interesting, yes?

My friend wants the open-carry legislation to become law in Texas. He and I shared our views on it and I told him I remain concerned about it, although I perhaps could change my mind on it over time as I did — more or less — with the state’s concealed-carry law.

I certainly will pray my friend’s concern about the target aspect of open-carry legislation doesn’t pan out.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/18/brief/

 

national news

Wyatt Earp: Now there was a gun control freak

1 Comment

Texas is inching closer toward a law that would allow residents to carry guns openly, where everyone can see them.

The state Senate has approved a bill allowing it, prompting the debate yet again about what the Second Amendment says and what its authors intended. Are all citizens given the right to “keep and bear arms,” or is it referring to the “well-regulated militia” having that right?

Let’s save that one for another day.

But a friend of mine, Benny Hill, reminded me today that Wyatt Earp perhaps was one of the earliest advocates of gun control.

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jan/23/nation/la-na-tombstone-20110123

Good ol’ Marshal Earp used to keep the peace in Tombstone, Ariz. How did he do it? One way was to require everyone entering his town to check their firearms as the proverbial front gate. No guns allowed, said Earp. He just kept ’em locked up until the folks left town.

Would anyone dare consider Earp to be a soft progressive, a flaming left-wing liberal intent on taking everyone’s gun away from them? I doubt it sincerely.

Yes, he had good reason to confiscate temporarily people’s guns. Crime was running rampant in the Old West town. It was worse in Tombstone, apparently, than in most places.

As the Los Angeles Times reported in January 2011: “You could wear your gun into town, but you had to check it at the sheriff’s office or the Grand Hotel, and you couldn’t pick it up again until you were leaving town,” said Bob Boze Bell, executive editor of True West Magazine, which celebrates the Old West. “It was an effort to control the violence.”

Imagine someone trying that tactic today. Imagine as well the reaction from, say, any gun-owner-rights advocacy group — no need name names here — to the notion of surrendering your sidearm while you entered any city in America.

Gun laws were a lot tougher than they are now. And to think so many Americans keep wishing for the good old days.

 

national news, political news

No love for Hillary from White House

The late state Sen. Teel Bivins, R-Amarillo, once told me that the Legislature’s decennial redistricting effort gave Republican lawmakers a chance to show how they “eat their young.”

It’s a cutthroat business, carving up a state into equally sized legislative and congressional districts. It has to be done once the census is taking every decade.

Well, it’s good to point out that Republicans aren’t the only ones who “eat their young.” Democrats do it, too.

http://nypost.com/2015/03/14/obama-adviser-behind-leak-of-hillary-clintons-e-mail-scandal/

A New York Post columnist reports that sources tell him that White House senior adviser Valerie Jarrett leaked to the press Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email account while she served as secretary of state.

Where’s the love from the White House? Not with Jarrett, apparently. It remains to be seen if the Post article can be verified by other, independent sources. A part of me isn’t surprised by what the columnist is reporting.

Remember ol’ Willie Horton? He was the murderer whose prison furlough was approved by then-Democratic Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis, who was his party’s presidential nominee in 1988. Then-Vice President George Bush, the Republican presidential nominee, hammered Dukakis mercilessly over that furlough, as Horton went out and killed someone during the time he was set free.

Do you remember who introduced that issue into the 1988 political campaign? It was a young U.S. senator from Tennessee, Democrat Albert Gore Jr., who was seeking his party’s nomination along with Dukakis. Gore ratted out Dukakis in a Democrat vs. Democrat game of insults.

I’m certain my friend Teel Bivins would enjoy watching this latest bit of political cannibalism.

 

 

legal news, political news, State news

Oops, Perry has own email trail

Doggone it anyhow, former Gov. Rick Perry.

Why did you have to be so quick on the trigger in criticizing Hillary Rodham Clinton over this brewing email controversy, in which it is alleged that Clinton used a private email account to conduct federal government business.

It turns out the former Texas governor has done the same thing while working for our state.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/04/perry-faces-transparency-questions-after-clinton-r/

Perry piled on Clinton quickly, accusing her of lacking “transparency” in the way she conducted the public’s business while serving as secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.

Now, though, two legislators — both Democrats — say they believe Perry is just as non-transparent as Secretary Clinton. The questions come from state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer of San Antonio and former state Rep. Naomi Gonzalez of El Paso.

As the Texas Tribune reported: “Martinez Fischer and Gonzalez both sat on the House Committee on Transparency in State Agency Operations as it looked into turmoil on the University of Texas System Board of Regents. At a meeting of the panel in 2013, Martinez Fischer brought up the emails in question, some of which were then obtained by The Texas Tribune. The emails, in which Perry is identified as only “RP,” show him corresponding with a number of UT regents as well as Jeff Sandefer, a prominent Republican donor and informal adviser to Perry.”

The Tribune also reported that Perry’s office has responded to the allegations: “’The Governor’s Office complied with state law regarding email correspondence,’ Perry spokeswoman Lucy Nashed said. ‘While serving as governor of Texas, Gov. Perry’s emails were requested and released through public information requests.'”

Isn’t that what Clinton’s team has said, that she complied with the “spirit and letter” of federal law?

Is this yet another hurdle the ex-Republican governor will have to clear — along with that felony indictment alleging abuse of power — if he intends to seek the presidency once more?

 

local news, State news

Ex-mayor sounds cautious tone in Texas Senate

Kevin Eltife is demonstrating that reason still exists inside the Texas Senate.

He’s a former Tyler mayor who’s served in the Legislature for a decade. While many of his colleagues — perhaps most of them — want to cut taxes, Eltife is sounding a note of caution and restraint.

Let’s take care of some business, Eltife asks. Sure. Why not?

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/03/03/analysis-tax-cutting-frenzy-and-call-restraint/

As the Texas Tribune’s Ross Ramsey notes: “This is a peculiar time in Texas: The state government has more money than its lawmakers are willing to spend. Political respect for a constitutional cap on growth of the state budget is high, as is the appetite for property tax cuts — especially among Republicans.”

Eltife is a Republican, but he remains part of what’s been called the “establishment wing” of his party. He has a few allies in the Senate. One of them is Kel Seliger, a fellow Republican, from Amarillo. The two men joined the Senate at the same time and have been trying to take a more moderate course in a body commanded by the more conservative wing of their party, starting with Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick.

“Everybody wants a tax cut,” Eltife said in an interview with the Texas Tribune. “I want one. I just think it’s more conservative to meet your obligations first.”

Those obligations include, say, public education, highway infrastructure and an assortment of other items that have gone begging back when money was tight and demand was high. Now it appears the reverse is true.

As Ramsey wrote of Eltife: “He wants the meat and potatoes before dessert. Most of his colleagues, however, have their eyes on the pies.”

 

political news, State news

Battleground Texas: They're back … or are they?

Battleground Texas — remember that outfit? — says it’s back in the game.

And the game is its goal of turning Texas from a reliably Red Republican state to a Blue Democratic one.

From my perch here in the heart of the most Republican region of this most Republican state, well, Battleground Texas has some work to do. Lots of work, as a matter of fact.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/21/battleground-texas-optimistic-it-licks-its-wounds/

Battleground Texas seriously oversold its impact on the 2014 midterm election in Texas. As one BT official noted rather pithily, “We got the s*** kicked out of us.”

Yeah. Do ya think? Democrats came nowhere close to winning any of the race they hoped would be competitive. The races for governor and lieutenant governor? They each went Republican by more than 20 percentage points. The Legislature’s GOP majority became even more GOP after the ballots were counted.

Democrats keep saying the demographic trends in Texas are working in their favor, with Hispanics comprising an increasing portion of the state’s population. And, yes, Hispanic voters are much kinder to Democrats than they are to Republicans. The problem, though, is that Hispanic voters, um, don’t turn out in numbers that enable Democrats to turn back the Republican tide.

I’m one who is pulling for Battleground Texas to get its act together. I’ve long wanted Texas to become more competitive. I know what you’re thinking: Sure he does, as he’s one of those lefty types who just cannot stand Republican control over all things political in Texas. Perhaps there’s some truth there.

A more competitive environment builds a bit more honesty, though, in both political parties. It deters the kind of arrogance of power one finds when one party holds such dominance over the other one. What’s more, such deterrence is more conducive to the kind of “good government” that should flourish.

That, I submit, is the result when the parties learn to work together rather than have one party trample the other one in the halls of government, which is exactly what I fear is going to happen with the current session of the Texas Legislature.

So, go for it, Battleground Texas. Here’s a word of advice: Be humble as you seek to rebuild and don’t over-promise what you can’t deliver.

 

State news

Who picks up the tab for meals?

State Sen. Kirk Watson wants Texans to know more about the folks who spend money on meals for registered lobbyists.

He wants to close a loophole in the state ethics laws. From where I sit, the Austin Democrat is spot on in seeking what looks like a minor change, but which could carry significant symbolic weight.

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/02/16/watson-pushes-more-disclosure-wining-and-dining/

Watson has filed some bills that seek to require lobbyists to be more forthcoming on who picks up the tab for meals.

As the Texas Tribune reports: “Watson said he’s not casting ‘aspersions’ on anyone but hopes his legislation will increase public confidence in state officials as they interact with lobbyists representing various interests at the Capitol. State Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, has filed similar legislation, but Watson’s bills take the concept a few steps further. They extend the reporting requirements to spending on relatives of state officials while building in protection against future loopholes.”

The Tribune adds: “Under current law, lobbyists are supposed to disclose their wining and dining activities to the Texas Ethics Commission. But there’s a catch. They can spend up to $114 on a single legislator or state official — for items such as meals, lodging and transportation — without having to disclose the details to authorities. Anything over that is supposed to be itemized and include the name of the official.”

One of the bills Watson has filed would reduce the limit required for expense reporting to $50.

Watson’s effort is a worthwhile attempt to shine some light on the interaction between lobbyists and legislators. Given that the state allows legislators to leave public office and become lobbyists almost immediately, it’s good to have some sharper eyes on the activities of the men and women who put the squeeze on legislators to do their employers’ bidding.