Greg Abbott and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad, Three Days

"Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap."
Galatians 6:7

Stories one and two (both from Saturday):

The Ector County Republican Party voted Saturday to censure Gov. Greg Abbott, accusing him of overstepping his authority in responding to the coronavirus pandemic, while state Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, called for a special session so lawmakers could have a say in how Texas proceeds amid soaring caseloads.

Story number three (from earlier this morning):

Approval ratings of Governor Greg Abbott's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic remained net positive: 49% approved and 41% disapproved. This represented a 7-point drop in his positive rating in April, and a 12-point increase in his negative rating, amounting to a 19-point reduction in his net approval rating from + 27 in April to +8 in June.

We don't have time to address each of these stories on their own. But the TL,DR version is that any one of them would be bad for Abbott. The three of them together is brutal.

Again, each of these deserves a full post...but quick hits:

• Censure is pretty much the most embarrassing thing that can happen to a GOP elected official in Texas.

• Charles Perry calling for a special session means Abbott's loss of support in the legislature is growing rather significantly.

• The Trib poll means Abbott has nowhere to go if he truly loses his base.

Also, keep in mind that the Trib poll was conducted before the mask order...and there ain't no way Abbott's numbers went up after that.

It's quite the pickle.

Bottom Line: One of these headlines is bad enough. Three is brutal. But the worst part for Abbott is that there's no reason to believe the bad headlines will stop any time soon.

#TXLEGE: Things *might* not mean what Lt. Dan apparently thinks they mean

"Pride goes before destruction,
And a haughty spirit before a fall."
Proverbs 16:18

This is...quite the arrogant press release:

PR 19 12 11 by DanPatrickTX on Scribd

To be fair, everything on which this author was working this past session passed the Senate.  We're not particularly angry with the Senators listed in this press release.  At least, not anymore than we're angry with the rest of the institution.

But come on: Does anybody seriously think that successfully primarying Dawn Buckingham or Charles Perry (two of the bigger drop offs this session) will change anything?!?

Cuz' it won't.

And it won't change anything...because of people like Dan Patrick.

Speaking of primary challenges.

Bottom Line: This was an astonishingly stupid press release to send out.

#TXLEGE: The wrong questions on Occupational Licenses and Religious Liberty

They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”

And He said to them, “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
Matthew 22:21

We made a similar point about a similar topic over the weekend, but it looks like the topic is here to stay.

From Yesterday:

Opening what promises to be one of the most contentious fights of the 2019 legislative session, a Senate committee on Monday approved a bill to give state-licensed professionals — including doctors, lawyers, pharmacists and barbers — broad protection for actions taken according to their religious beliefs.

Opponents said the bill, and more than a dozen similar measures that have not yet been acted upon, would give religious people, particularly conservative Christians, the power to discriminate against gay, lesbian and transgender people as well as anyone they don’t want to do business with or serve.

But supporters of Senate Bill 17 — including its Republican author, Sen. Charles Perry — said the protections are needed to ensure that licensing agencies do not discriminate against religious professionals by forcing them to do something that violates their beliefs.

That's fine.  Government licensing boards certainly should not abuse individual conscience rights.  In that sense, SB 17 is worthwhile.

But, let's get real: Is anybody surprised?!?

Occupational licensing, by government, is inherently political.  Period.  End of story.  For a political process to reflect political trends is completely predictable.

Even if you delineate some protections this session, as long as this licensing monstrosity remains in place, those protections are temporary at best.

In the spirit of permanent relief, the Institute for Justice offers something intriguing:



TL,DR version: Take these decisions out of the realm of politics, return them to the free market.

Bottom Line: Maybe it's time to start asking if we've been rendering too much to Caesar in the first place....

#TXLEGE: Hot Mess continues to get Hotter

"Can a man take fire to his bosom,
And his clothes not be burned?"
Proverbs 6:27

Apparently, Dan Patrick thought it would be a good idea to go run his mouth to the Dallas Morning News.  Patrick's interview consisted of rationalization filled verbal diarrhea mixed with Olympic level mental gymnastics.  Aka. Not good.

• Patrick: "Senator Seliger, on this particular radio show, has called out Senator Buckingham and Senator Kolkhorst and Senator Perry by name, criticizing them. He, I’m told, and you’ll have to check the facts, but I’m told by them he called them, called Lois and Dawn, ‘gutless,’ you know, selling out to the conservative movement."
  
  Except, apparently, that never happened.

• Patrick: "He, I’m told, and you’ll have to check the facts, but I’m told by them he called them, called Lois and Dawn, ‘gutless,’ you know, selling out to the conservative movement. That does not go down well with members. He’s had a very sharp showdown on the floor with a female senator, dropping the f-word, because he was unhappy with the senator’s vote. These were things, Lauren, I just kind of heard about but I discovered in the last couple of days."
  
  Dan Patrick being oblivious to the Texas Senate not being the best working environment for women...you don't say!

• Patrick: "So it wasn’t his votes. It’s the, it’s the, what’s the word I’m looking for? It was just the way he went about it on the floor and putting amendments on the bills that put members in a very difficult situation."
  
  That's called politics.

• Patrick: "So I didn’t take him off Finance or off Higher Ed because of his votes. I need people – we have a lot of serious business to do and I need people who are on the team, pulling together."
  
  He literally just said one thing then contradicted himself in the next sentence.

• Patrick: "I didn’t see moving him from Higher Ed to Agriculture as a demotion, by the way."
  
  That's preposterous.  It's also insulting to the intelligence of anyone who hears it.  If Patrick genuinely believes this, he's deeper in denial than we thought.

• Patrick: "Finance — I told senators when I became lieutenant governor, ‘I think every senator should have the chance to serve a session or two on Finance’ because until you serve on Finance, you don’t have a complete view of how the process works."
  
  That's not a bad idea in terms of running the chamber, but doesn't change the fact that leaving Seliger on Finance was a face-saving solution to keep him out of the way.

• Patrick: "Uresti had been in the Legislature for 20 years and never been on Appropriations or Finance...."
  
  Polka dot thong.

• Patrick: "You know, this particular senator told me, this female senator, she’s never had a man talk to her in her entire life anywhere like he talked to her on the floor."
  
  This coming from a guy who missed the first day of session to hang out with Donald Trump.

• Patrick: "You know, Lauren look, if somebody said that about you, I would take the same position. It’s just inappropriate. It doesn’t matter. We just went through an hour, an hour and a half training on sexual harassment. Lois Kolkhorst worked all the interim to look at this issue and to be that, you know — Sherry Sylvester is a 30-year plus professional. She’s not ‘some lady.’ She’s not a ‘messenger,’ which I also thought demeaning. I mean, you’re a professional writer. I wouldn’t talk to you in that way."
  
  Guy who 5 paragraphs earlier was bragging about putting Carlos Uresti on the Finance committee now wants female reporter to give him kudos taking for an hour and a half long class.
  
  It's a shame the phrase 'mansplaining' has been so badly abused over the years, because if it were ever appropriate....

• McGaughy: I have to bring up the Sen. Schwertner issue because it’s been an issue that’s been raised in light of all of this. We haven’t seen a similar statement from you that perhaps he should he removed from his vice chairmanship, or, he says he didn’t send this text to this young lady –
  
  Patrick: No, I think you saw me act very clearly. He asked for a lighter schedule.
  
  McGaughy: I’m sorry?
  
  Patrick: He asked for a lighter schedule.
  
  To use the phrase "He asked for a lighter schedule" in describing this situation is, at best, an extremely poor choice of words.

• Patrick: "They are two totally different issues. The one issue he was accused of something where there was no finding and no one has come forward. There is no place for us to go with that. This is a separate issue. This is something said in public on a radio station about a professional woman that every senator – I haven’t talked to every senator – but Democrats and Republicans alike, men and women, were appalled."
  
  You're not seriously trying to rationalize this Seliger situation as being worse than the one with Schwertner in terms of treatment of women...are you?!?

• McGaughy: "Sen. Seliger also said you’ve sent a message to other senators. You’ve talked about being a team player. He’s a free agent now. He can do whatever he wants. Do you have a concern about him going rogue?
  
  Patrick: No.
  
  WELL.  YOU.  SHOULD.  (See what we said above about Patrick being deeper in denial than we thought).

• Patrick also compared himself to Tom Brady.

Bottom Line: Dan Patrick didn't do himself any favors in this interview.

#TXLEGE: Abbott's property tax plan likely faces similar trajectory as Perry's 2013 "Budget Compact"....

"That which has been is what will be,
That which is done is what will be done,
And there is nothing new under the sun."
Ecclesiastes 1:9

We've seen this movie before.

Setting: The Governor of Texas announces a fantastic fiscal policy proposal a year before the next legislative session.  The Lt. Governor signs on and the relevant activist/policy groups tout it's merit.  Then, once session gets underway, the proposal dies due to a combination of a couple intransigent Senators, a house that likes to spend money (no matter what they say on the campaign trail), and a Governor too distracted to get his own policy proposal implemented.

We've discussed more than once how Rick Perry's 2013 "Texas Budget Compact" proposal was our formative experience in the Texas legislature.  It's worth reviewing that history in the context of Greg Abbott's current property tax proposal.  We don't think all that much has really changed.

In 2012, following the collapse of his first Presidential campaign, then-Governor Rick Perry returned home and outlined a very strong package of budget/transparency reforms he wanted to see the legislature implement.  Under pressure from Ted Cruz during their original U.S. Senate race, then-Lt. Governor Dewhurst quickly signed on.  Empower Texans and TPPF did everything right.

Then, we got into the legislative session in 2013.  Joe Straus did what Joe Straus does.  Dewhurst, despite a good faith effort, couldn't line up the votes he needed in the Senate.  And Rick Perry was more interested in bashing California on Fox News than doing the day-to-day work of the Governor of Texas.

Sound familiar?!?

To be fair, a few things have are different since then, specifically:

• The Senate has a) changed the 21-vote threshold to 19, and b) grown significantly more conservative in its membership.

• Joe Straus, personally, is leaving.

Both of those changes are positive...but it's an open question whether either is a big enough to get Abbott's property tax proposal across the finish line.

While Abbott's proposal has a decent chance in the Senate, it's not a slam dunk.  Charles Perry pulled some major league shenanigans on property taxes during the recent special session.  Bob Nichols is always a wild card.  There's a 50/50 chance Seliger returns.  Even if Lt. Governor Patrick can line up 19 votes, doing so could easily involve icky legislative trade-offs.

On the house side, as the membership currently stands, 76 votes DO NOT EXIST for Abbott's proposal.  That's true regardless of the next speaker's identity.  For that to change, conservatives are going to need to have a very, very good primary season.

A better speaker can get a bill to the floor, but you still need 76 votes.

Bottom Line: Don't get your hopes up.

#TXLEGE: Roundup from today's pro-Life hearing....

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;
Before you were born I sanctified you;
I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”
Jeremiah 1:5

[Note: The hearing can be view here; our testimony on the DNR bill can be views around the 3 hour 20 minute mark, our testimony on the local defunding bill is a smidge before the 5 hour mark.]

This morning, the Texas Senate committee on Health and Human services committee heard bills on four distinct pro-life related topics.  This website supports all four.  However, we specifically testified in favor of abolishing involuntary Do-Not-Resuscitate orders and in favor of eliminating all local government subsidies to abortion providers.

SB 11, by Charles Perry, would prohibit hospitals from placing a DNR order on a patient without their consent (or, in certain circumstances, the consent of the person with medical power of attorney).  Did you know that's currently legal in Texas for hospitals to do?!?  Well, it is....

We testified that we find it astonishing that this practice is even legal in the first place.  Furthermore, it's a symptom of the erosion of patient rights alongside the enlargement of bureaucrats that's currently taking medicine in really creepy direction.  Finally, we discussed how the recent Charlie Gard case in the UK illustrates the urgency of this issue.

SB 4, by Charles Schwernter, would prohibit abortion providers from receiving taxpayer funding from local governments.  Emily Horne, of Texas Right to Life, gave detailed testimony about the various offenses from cities, counties, and hospital districts around the state.  Horne furthermore explained that a statewide prohibition was the only way to end the cycle of local whack-a-mole.

We testified about how, as a resident of Austin and Travis County, we're offended that our tax dollars go to subsidize this brutal, gruesome, barbaric process.

The committee voted everything out at the end of the hearing; the bills succeeded along party lines.

Bottom Line: All of the Senate's pro-life bills are out of committee, they'll probably be on the floor early next week.

------

DAMN RIGHT:

This guy wants everyone to know that he really really really hates abortion... #TXLege pic.twitter.com/FMjmm1qcYq

— Teddy Wilson (@reportbywilson) July 21, 2017

#TXLEGE: Freedom caucus DELIVERS Dismemberment Abortion Ban!!!

"His lord said to him, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.’"
Matthew 25:21

So Awesome, from Texas Right to Life:

Austin, Texas—May 19, 2017: Today, the Texas House of Representatives passed Senate Bill 8, which prohibits partial-birth abortions and regulates the disposition of the bodies of abortion victims....During debate on the floor of the Texas House, Pro-Life representatives proposed substantial amendments to SB 8 to add life-saving measures. Most notably, the House adopted the Dismemberment Abortion Ban Amendment, Texas Right to Life’s priority legislation for the 85th Session of the Texas Legislature.
....

The Dismemberment Abortion Ban, originally filed as HB 844 by Representative Stephanie Klick and SB 415 by Senator Charles Perry, would prohibit the gruesome and inhumane practice of dismemberment abortion in Texas. In a dismemberment abortion, the child is killed in utero by being torn limb from limb while his or her heart is still beating. Under the leadership of Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick and State Senator Charles Perry, the State Senate passed the Dismemberment Abortion Ban in March with bipartisan support.

....

Senate Bill 8, including the life-saving Pro-Life amendments added by the House, will return to the State Senate next for a procedural vote before heading to the Governor’s desk. Governor Greg Abbott is expected to sign the bill into law soon.

Texas Right to Life thanks the Freedom Caucus and other Pro-Life Champions for helping to organize the strengthening amendment strategy and for whipping other Pro-Life members of the Texas House to support these life-saving reforms to SB 8. The amendments to SB 8 will protect pregnant women and save countless innocent human lives in Texas.

Read the whole thing, and get a rundown the dirty political games played by House leadership, here.

Bottom Line: This doesn't happen without the Freedom Caucus....#Onward

Texas Senate hears ban on Dismemberment Abortions

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;
Before you were born I sanctified you;
I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”
Jeremiah 1:5

Update: Texas Right to Life has an update on how the hearing went:



-----

Kudos to Chairman Charles Schwertner for not wasting time:

A separate bill by Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, would ban “dismemberment” abortions performed in the second trimester. Senate Bill 415 requires that there be no fetal heartbeat before a “dilation and evacuation,” or D&E, abortion can be performed, he said.

“You are required to terminate the life of a child before you tear it apart piece by piece,” Perry said. “We are not outlawing D&Es,” which he said account for 96 percent of second-trimester abortions.

Watson asked what about the bill would enhance the health and safety of women.

“If you are going to allow abortions, then (the Supreme Court has said ) the state has a vested interest in doing it as humanely and civilly as possible,” Perry said. “The health and safety of a woman is not the target, not the intent of SB 415.”

While Senator Schwertner's bill (SB 8) that was heard today is also a worthwhile effort, as Texas Right to Life pointed out last month not all allegedly 'pro-life' bills are created equal:

These policies, while well-intended, only take effect after an abortion. Although these policies reflect the values of Texans — ensuring dignity is afforded to all innocent humans when they die, regardless of circumstance — the proposals do not stop abortion, nor do they offer protection to pregnant women.

The 85th Texas Legislature includes 98 Representatives in the 150-member Texas House, who can be relied upon to publicly oppose abortion. Similarly, the 31-member Senate opened with 21 members professing to want to protect the unborn and abortion-vulnerable pregnant women.

With overwhelming pro-life majorities in both chambers, the passage of nominal or symbolic pro-life bills that do not protect life before abortion would be embarrassing. In other words, this session will be a dismal failure if the Legislature fails to stop any of the 55,000 abortions occurring within Texas each year. Merely regulating what happens after a baby is killed by abortion is not enough.

Bottom Line: While other efforts have merit, SB 415 (the dismemberment abortion ban) is the strongest pro-life bill with a realistic chance of getting through the legislature this session.

85th #TXLEGE: Dismemberment Abortion ban filed today....

"And they built the high places of Baal which are in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, which I did not command them, nor did it come into My mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin."
Jeremiah 32:35

Dismemberment abortion is a particularly gruesome form of partial birth abortion whose occurrence in Texas was brought to light two summers ago; via Texas Right to Life:

Austin, Texas—January 5, 2017: State Senator Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) and Representative Stephanie Klick (R-Fort Worth) filed the major Pro-Life bill for the 85th Session of the Texas Legislature, the Dismemberment Abortion Ban. Senator Perry and Representative Klick have both achieved high rankings as Pro-Life legislators and are capable bill authors. The legislation will ban the torturous practice of dismemberment abortion, a procedure that ends the life of an unborn child by removing his or her limbs while his or her heart is still beating.

Texas Right to Life, the oldest and largest statewide Pro-Life organization in Texas, stands with Senator Perry and Representative Klick in prioritizing the Dismemberment Abortion Ban. Elizabeth Graham, Director of Texas Right to Life, insists that the Dismemberment Abortion Ban must reach the governor’s desk this year:

The Dismemberment Abortion Ban is the only Pro-Life measure filed that will actually stop abortion and protect pregnant women and their children. Other bills offer life-affirming nuances, but SB 415 and the companion, HB 844, directly save lives while addressing the criminal activity of the abortion industry documented over the last two years.

....

When the Dismemberment Abortion Ban measure was overwhelmingly adopted in the 2016 Republican Party Platform, Pro-Lifers and activists signaled to statewide leadership that they will not be satisfied with symbolic “life”-sounding legislation that regulates what happens to the victims of abortion after their deaths. Further, this ban earned the most support among the Pro-Life policy planks when delegates to the Republican Convention voted plank by plank.

 Kudos to Charles Perry and Stephanie Klick, read the whole thing here.

First Major Pro-Life SENATE Bill of 85th #TXLEGE Filed!!!

“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you;
Before you were born I sanctified you;
I ordained you a prophet to the nations.”
Jeremiah 1:5

We've yet to make final decisions about how we will pursue the life issue next session, but this is a strong start:

PR 11 17 2016 Lt. Gov. Patrick Statement on Filing of the Pre-Born Protection and Dignity Act by Cahnman on Scribd

Bottom Line: What you really need is a full ban on dismemberment abortions (to say nothing about a full ban on ALL abortions), but considering political reality at the Capitol this might be an achievable step towards eliminating the most abhorrent practices in which we learned two summers ago that Planned Parenthood was engaged.

Controversial U.T. Regent Nominees face the music

"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you."
Matthew 7:7

Betty King Room -- Earlier today, the Texas Senate nominations committee held a confirmation hearing for Governor Abbott's controversial U.T. regent nominees.  The nominees faced a number of difficult questions from Committee Chairman Brian Birdwell, along with fellow committee members Konni Burton and Van Taylor.  Senator Charles Schwertner, who has taken an interest in higher ed issues this session, spent more time at the hearing than several committee members.

Regent nominee Steve Hicks was the first to testify, A known defender of Bill Powers, Hicks is the only current nominee being re-appointed.  While Hicks confessed that undue influence in the admissions process is undesirable, he nonetheless made the excuse that Powers was "the only one who sees the whole field of battle."  Hicks also denied the obvious similarities between the current issues at U.T. and the 2009 scandal at the University of Illinois.  Under questioning from Senator Burton, Hicks defended his vote against investigating the law school's secret "forgivable loan" program.  Hicks also made the absurd claim that while regents are supposed to "ask tough questions," they are subsequently expected to accept whatever answer the administration gives them.  Hicks could not provide answers to Senator Schwertner's questions about accounting gimmicks used to keep tuition "artificially low."

Nominee Sarah Martinez Tucker, who has come under fire for supporting Common Core, was up next.  Asked about the forgivable loan program, she explained "I don't have a lot of specifics," which makes one wonder how she will perform her duties if she can't prepare for an obvious question in a confirmation hearing.  Asked about her support for the controversial educational program, Tucker explained "I APPLAUD COMMON CORE."  Pressed to explain, Tucker made vague claims about Common Core being bad for Texas but o.k. for other states.  Asked by Senator Schwertner about the role of the student loan bailout she helped engineer in 2008 in higher education cost explosions, Tucker unconvincingly attempted to shift blame to the Obama administration.  To her credit, Tucker spoke favorably about zero-based budgeting for the U.T. system.

David Beck faced the most intense questioning.  Beck was a key player in creating the afore-mentioned forgivable loan program, and was mentioned by name in a scathing Attorney General's report released last year.  Pressed by lawmakers, Beck claimed "we can't compete" in retaining faculty with public compensation.  At issue was an undisclosed "deferred compensation" agreement with lame-duck university president Bill Powers during Powers' previous tenure as law school dean.  Beck told Senator Burton he had assumed that off-book compensation agreements had made their way up the chain of command.  As Senator Schwertner told Beck, seven years is a long time to not know the details of a compensation agreement not going up the chain of command.  Beck was also unable to answer questions about cutting university costs, although he did oppose a tuition increase "at this time."

Tony McDonald testified against all three nominees.  McDonald, who was a law student at U.T. during the height of the forgivable loan scandal, discussed professors of his who were visibly distracted by it.  Regarding Hicks, McDonald objected that he could not clean up a mess he helped create.  McDonald also explained that off-book compensation was not subject to open-record's laws.  Finally, McDonald chided Beck for "a shocking refusal to take responsibility" for his role in creating the mess.

The committee adjourned following testimony; no vote on the nominees has been scheduled.

Today's hearing asked difficult questions of these controversial nominees.  The committee maximized this point of leverage.  The nominees answers left much to be desired, but at least they were asked to the questions.  Kudos especially to Senators Burton and Schwertner for their question.  It's a start....

Faith and Family Day: Cathie Adams (Marriage)

"Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh."
Genesis 2:24

Texas State Capitol -- Cathie Adams discussed traditional marriage this morning:



Highlights:

• Praises Abbott re: Marriage.

• Texas needs to prepare for SCOTUS ruling.

• Paxton did the right thing and did it quickly.

• Bell/Perry marriage bills.

• Founders thought judicial branch would be the weakest.

Texas Senate Nominees rebuke Texas Ethics Commission

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord, But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

Good for them (letter on page 2 of SCRIBD document):

Republican Senate Nominees Warn Texas Ethics Commission Over Potential Abuse of Their Rule Making Authority...

SD-28: Prop. 6 Slush Fund Loses Big

"Dishonest scales are an abomination to the Lord,
But a just weight is His delight."
Proverbs 11:1

We haven't discussed the Prop. 6 Slush Fund since it passed last fall.  But last night, in Northwest Texas, something interesting happened.  Charles Perry decisively won a special election in SD-28, despite the fact that the George W. Bush crony running against him attacked him relentlessly on water:



Ouch....