#TXLEGE: Abbott's Campaign Spending suggests GOP in good shape in Texas house

"and in the morning, ‘It will be foul weather today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Hypocrites! You know how to discern the face of the sky, but you cannot discern the signs of the times."
Matthew 16:3

Interesting:

I've got @GregAbbott_TX's campaign spending $1.8M across 20 battleground state House races on the latest TEC filings (Sept. 25-Oct. 24). The candidate breakdown: pic.twitter.com/wzcaXn7w7t

— Patrick Svitek (@PatrickSvitek) October 28, 2020

Thoughts:

• It's fascinating that he's spending more on two central Texas districts currently held by Democrats than anywhere else.  Since he's Greg Abbott, he must obviously have polling data that suggests this is a good investment.  Think our distinguished #atxcouncil's police defunding policy had anything to do with this?!?

• Steve Allison won in 2018 by close to ten points, it's hard to imagine him being in real trouble.

• Ditto Craig Goldman...although we're less confident about that one based on his actions.

• That being said, Abbott seems to have completely written off Lacey Hull and Morgan Meyer.

• The only incumbent on this list who seems any realistic shot at losing is Jeff Leach, but even that one doesn't seem like a done deal.
• Note: If Leach actually wins, it likely means R's gain seats in the chamber.

• We'll see what happens with Matt Shaheen, but we'd be surprised if any of the seats below him on this list flip.

• All of which is to suggest there will be between 80 and 86 R's in the Texas house next session.
• Note: Absent our distinguished #atxcouncil's police defunding actions, that range is probably 78 to 84.

Remember: Abbott polls EVERYTHING.

Bottom Line: While there might be some tinkering around the edges, something roughly resembling the status quo seems likely to prevail.

#TXLEGE: Who does Leach think he's kidding?!?

"And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?"

Matthew 7:3

Apparently, Chip Roy was (correctly) raising heck in D.C. yesterday:

Well, hardly anything surprises me anymore - but ⁦@SpeakerPelosi⁩ just tore up the Constitution by jamming “proxy voting” thru so members of Congress can turn over their obligation to work for constituents to other members. We ask Americans to work. So should Congress. pic.twitter.com/al7fwiCeOv

— Chip Roy (@chiproytx) May 15, 2020

O.K. Good deal Chip Roy. Ghost/proxy voting is a wretched procedure.

Then this happened:

You're joking, right?!?

As we explained:

It's funny 'cuz proxy voting happens every single day (sometimes dozens of times per day) the Texas house is in session.

(But good deal @chiproytx for trying to keep this travesty out of Congress; we've seen how corrupting it is back home.)

Clerk will ring the bell....#TXLEGE https://t.co/jTmnJpnYFy

— cahnman (@cahnman) May 16, 2020

Case in point:

From last session:

But this isn’t a ghost story. It’s a story of representatives helping each other via an informed courtesy involving pushing their voting buttons when they’re away from their desks. Lots of votes are cast on a long day in the House. And lots of times members are elsewhere in the chamber when votes come up. They often leave instructions with desk neighbors on how they want to be shown voting, though they have to be in the chamber to vote.

But sometimes those votes are cast when a member is not in the chamber nor in the building nor even in Austin. That’s not supposed to happen.

But sometimes it changes the outcome of a close vote on an important matter.

You get the point, but there's a wealth of additional examples here.

Bottom Line:  For a member of the Texas house to decry ghost/proxy voting is quite something.

The System Punishes Dissent

"Yet they would not listen to their judges, but they played the harlot with other gods, and bowed down to them. They turned quickly from the way in which their fathers walked, in obeying the commandments of the Lord; they did not do so."
Judges 2:17

Via Texas Scorecard:

In a closed meeting, concealed from the eyes of the public, the district judges of Tarrant County—led by Judge David Evans—stripped Judge Alex Kim of a job the people elected him to do in November 2018.

Last Thursday, Texas Scorecard broke the story about the emergency meeting called for judges to vote on removing all Child Protective Services cases from the 323rd District Court, where Kim presides. He was elected in 2018 to oversee this court, which specializes in child welfare and juvenile delinquency cases.

Multiple sources in Tarrant County allege Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) of Tarrant County, along with CPS and Cook Children’s Medical Center, influenced Evans—who oversees all district judges of Tarrant and 17 other counties in the region—to make this move. These sources say this is retribution for Kim being an impartial judge, making CPS follow the law, and intervening to save the life of baby Tinslee Lewis.

The grassroots quickly became alarmed and contacted all of the judges, expressing their support for Kim. County Judge Glen Whitley bemoaned the accountability being cast on the judges voting in this meeting. Texas Scorecard was later tipped off that, instead of airing whatever concerns the other judges had about Kim before the public, they would lock themselves away in the courtroom of Judge Jerry Hennigan and vote in secret.

....

After meeting for over an hour, the decision was final: all CPS cases will be removed from the 323rd District Court of Judge Alex Kim. After March 1, 2020, they will be randomly assigned to the 231st, 233rd, 322nd, 324th, 325th, and 360th District Courts.

Wow.

We've followed politics for a long time. We're pretty cynical. The brazenness of this, however, is breathtaking.

All for the audacity of making a government agency that was abusing parents and children follow the law.

It's quite something.

Obviously, we have no specific knowledge here.  History and common sense, however, suggest someone was getting paid.  And that Judge Alex Kim was a threat to them.

We don't know who the "them" was.  It could have been Cook Children's "Hospital."  It could have been CASA.  It could have been some CPS vendor.  It could have been Judge David Evans.  It could have been Judge Jesse Nevarez.  Considering that it's Tarrant county, Glen Whitley is likewise a possibility.

Most likely it's a combination of "all of the above."

But who knows?!?

What we do know is that every piece of circumstantial evidence suggests someone powerful's financial interests were at stake.

That being said, Jeff Leach seems to be on it:

As Chair of the House Committee on Judiciary & Civil Jurisprudence, I’m concerned about what these Judges are considering. If they won’t explain the reasoning & legal basis for this decision today, they can do so in a public hearing in front of our committee very soon. https://t.co/2TuVBu8D31

— Jeff Leach (@leachfortexas) February 20, 2020

We don't know what authority Jeff Leach has under current law. At a minimum, he can embarass them. If he has to pass a bill, we can only imagine the underhandedness he'd face. Regardless, kudos to Jeff.

Bottom Line: This is dirty, even by the standards of Texas politics.

#TXLEGE: Leach, Shaheen, ignore First Rule of Competitive General Elections

 

"Abstain from all appearance of evil."
1 Thessalonians 5:22 (kjv)

How to lose a competitive general election in one press release:

My Joint Statement along with Representatives Jeff Leach, Scott Sanford & Justin Holland regarding Speaker Bonnen. #txlege pic.twitter.com/LcfiVUZeAg

— Matt Shaheen (@MattShaheen) October 18, 2019

In terms of substance, all four representatives should be embarrassed. But at least Justin Holland and Scott Sanford represent safe seats. Jeff Leach and Matt Shaheen do not:

Yet these geniuses are vocally defending Bonnen.

It doesn't take a genius to see how this plays out: Leach and Shaheen are attacked as lackeys of corruption.  They reply with a complicated, political, answer.  The public, hating those sorts of answers in the same way that they always have, votes for the non-incumbent.

Leach and Shaheen lose.

Rule #1 of competitive general elections: Additional baggage is bad.  It's difficult enough to get across the finish line on your own.  Other people's drama can only sink you.  All the blockwalking, messaging, and money in the world won't save you.

Yet Leach and Shaheen chose to do exactly that with Bonnen.

Like we said, doesn't take a genius.

Bottom Line: This will be one of the most predictable political attacks in the history of political attacks...and Leach and Shaheen won't have a good answer.

#TXLEGE: Creighton, Leach, Springer and the GROTESQUE Cheapening of 9/11

"Professing to be wise, they became fools,"
Romans 1:22


UPDATE II: Say whatever else you want about Leach, but his recognized this misjudgement and fixed it.

I’m not afraid to admit when I’m wrong. And, on this, I was clearly and regretfully wrong. I sincerely apologize for this error of judgment and am fixing it immediately. https://t.co/wdTiiHdVcE

— Jeff Leach (@leachfortexas) September 11, 2019

-------

UPDATE (20ish minutes after publication): We just received a message from Jeff Leach acknowledging error, and pledging to fix it.  We appreciate the attention.

-------

Original post:

It started innocently enough:

This times a zillion. https://t.co/enUC1zyFbU

— cahnman (@cahnman) September 11, 2019

Then culprits emerged:

The crisis of September 11, 2001 revealed the true character of our Nation. We saw the exceptional greatness of America through the overwhelming goodness of the American people. May we never forget all that we witnessed together on that fateful day. pic.twitter.com/IMTjHgiiBK

— Jeff Leach (@leachfortexas) September 11, 2019

pic.twitter.com/LrXhRZ79Q1

— Drew Springer (@DrewSpringer) September 11, 2019

Not to be outdone, Brandon Creighton used an actual photo of the plane hitting the building:

#NeverForget #September11 #txlege pic.twitter.com/dHXTWSibk6

— Brandon Creighton (@SenCreighton) September 11, 2019

Ugh.

How tacky.

9/11 was many things to many people.  One thing it is not, however, is relevant to the job of a state representative or state senator 18 years later and 1500 miles away.  One would think you wouldn't have to explain such things.

Yet here we are.

The ironic thing, if you explore social media (which we did after discovering the above), is that the overwhelming majority of politicians get this.  Or at least they have enough political sense to understand why it's a bad idea.  Either way, they kept campaign logos out of their tributes.

Apparently, however, for Brandon Creighton, Jeff Leach, and Drew Springer, 9/11 was all about them.  We know politicians have egos.  But still.

[Fun Fact: Speaking of 9/11 and Texas Legislators, guess which Senator didn't smack their campaign logo on 9/11 imagery?!?  Brian Birdwell.  Probably a lesson in there.]

Bottom Line: It's a small thing in the grand scheme, but it does speak to the degree to which that which once mattered has become a cheap platitude.

#TXLEGE: Oh, Dennis

"The wise shall inherit glory,
But shame shall be the legacy of fools."
Proverbs 3:35

Even from 1500 miles away, it was pretty difficult to miss to continued devolution of the Bonnen saga.

To write a full analysis of the past week would require more time than we have interest, but some thoughts:

• When we've been saying, for years, that state government in Texas is astonishingly corrupt...this is a pretty good example.

• The members defending Bonnen are a bunch of dickless chodes.
• aka. Mayes Middleton, Matt Shaheen, Drew Springer, Craig Goldman, and...especially...Jeff Leach.
• Update: Add James White, Scott Sanford, Brad Buckley, and Cole Hefner to the list.
• Update II: Add Tom Oliverson.

• We haven't seen this level of willful blindness to serious misconduct since Wallace Hall.

• Whether or not Bonnen survives as speaker is irrelevant.  Anyone who can get to 76 votes will be a scumbag.  Gib Lewis, Pete Laney, Tom Craddick, Joe Straus, and Dennis Bonnen have all sucked.

• This is the same Texas house that, nearly two years into the scandal, has yet to say a word about Jim Murphy.

• Does the Travis County DA have jurisdiction?!?

• This is FUN!!!

Bottom Line: These people brought this on themselves and deserve everything that's coming....

#TXLEGE: 2015 Turner supporters who got committee chairs suffered biggest dropoff

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
1 John 1:8

[Note: Jeremy Kitchen created a spreadsheet with information about how legislators scored on various indexes.  We consulted it extensively preparing this post.  Due to formating issues, it's easier to discuss conclusions without extensive cutting and pasting.  But we plug it heavily and you can view it for yourself here.]

With Empower Texans' index out, session to session comparisons are now appropriate.

Among the biggest dropoffs: Jeff Leach (-32), Dustin Burrows (-28), and Stephanie Klick (-20).

[Note: Scott Sanford was also a -26, but he's likely to be the subject of another blog post.]

What traits do the three members listed above share?!?  Two sessions ago, all three voted for Scott Turner for Speaker.  This past session, they were committee chairs.

Indeed, they were the reason why we were initially hopeful over Bonnen's committee assignments.

[Note: LOL on what we said about Leach and Klick here.]

One conclusion is obvious: We thought the committee chairs in question would change the house.  Instead, becoming committee chairs changed those members.  Sadly.

The borg adapts, you will be assimilated.

Bottom Line: It just is what it is (but what it is isn't good)....

#TXLEGE: Not "worst session ever" (but still pretty dadgum uninspiring)

"Let us search out and examine our ways,
And turn back to the Lord;"
Lamentations 3:40

[Note: #TXLEGEwatch has a detailed examination of the session here.]

The 86th is over.  Some say it accomplished nothing, while others claim Texas just won the Super Bowl.  Both hyperbolize.

The truth lies between (though significantly closer to the former).

To call the legislature's results on property taxes and school finance "transformational" is silly.  They are, however, meaningful progress.  Just because legislators exaggerate does not change the fact that automatic rollback elections and automatic tax compression are reforms for which some people have fought for decades.

So one (possibly one and a half) cheer for the legislature.

That being said, they didn't deliver squat on any other major issue.  On medium tier issues (eg. marijuana reform), the pickings are likewise slim.  Minor accomplishments (eg. the so-called 'Born Alive' act) are spun into 'major' victories.

It reminds us of what a former Governor of Texas once said about the "soft bigotry of low expectations."

Bottom Line: White-hot rage is an overreaction, but a bright-orange sense of EXTREME irritation is entirely appropriate.

#TXLEGE: Income Tax election is a GIFT to county GOP's (if they take it)

"But the former governors who were before me laid burdens on the people, and took from them bread and wine, besides forty shekels of silver. Yes, even their servants bore rule over the people, but I did not do so, because of the fear of God."
Nehemiah 5:15

We said our piece about the house's income tax prohibition amendment last fall:  There is a loophole in the Texas constitution the legislature should close.  The Democrats success in last year's election raised the level of urgency for closing said loophole.  Furthermore, from a political perspective, this is a vote you want to make the Democrats take.

Thus, good deal to the house's vote on Thursday; the Senate needs to follow suit.

But there's a funny thing about the Texas constitution: Voters have to ratify amendments.

Thus, if they were smart enough to take it, GOP county party organizations would have to opportunity to practice:

• Identifying Supporters
• Hint #1: This is the easiest possible issue on which to draw people in.
• Hint #2: Data.
• Hint #3: Once you've drawn them in on prohibiting a state income tax, they might be willing to listen to you on more difficult issues.
• Hint #4: If you use your shared opposition to a state income tax as the basis to begin a relationship in 2019, they might be willing to listen to you about the presidency in 2020.

• Disseminating a message/Engaging the community
• Hint: It's impossible to know what this means in individual communities, but it's likely to include some combination of local media and informal social networks.

• Forcing Local Democrats to take a position
• Hint: Most Democrat elected officials secretly support a state income tax.  Most Democrat voters DON'T.  Thus, Democrat elected officials should be forced to take a public position.

Such an effort could yield tremendous dividends in (at least) the following counties: Travis, WillCo, Hays, Bexar, Dallas, Tarrant, Collin, Denton, Harris, Ft. Bend, Webb, Starr, Hidalgo, El Paso.

Some of those are areas that have historically been GOP strengths, but have recently softened.  Some of those have historically leaned GOP, but recently become swing territory.  Even in the deeper blue areas, however, there are intra-D tensions a more nimble GOP could exploit.

You will never have a friendlier issue on which to mount such an effort than opposition to a state income tax.

Bottom Line: The opportunity is there, but it's an open question whether or not anyone will take advantage....

#TXLEGE: Thoughts on the Abolition Bill hearing

"And let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart."
Galatians 6:9

Obviously, we stayed late to testify on Monday night.  These are our thought.  No particular order:

• Jeff Leach did a really good job running the hearing.  With such an intense topic, the hearing could have been easily derailed.  It wasn't.
  
  Credit for that goes to the chair.

• We know some people were annoyed at the pace of the hearing.  We respectfully disagree.  On a topic like this, it's better to let everybody speak.  If it takes an extra four hours, so be it.

• Speaking of Jeff Leach: That exchange with the chick from NARAL was quite something.  ICYMI, she attacked Leach over taking an allegedly non-mainstream position.  Leach asked her whether she supported legal abortion at 39 weeks, 6 days, and 23 hours.  When she said yes, Leach correctly refused to be lectured about mainstream positions on abortion.

• The post-abortive women who testified as to how this sort of law would have impacted their thinking were easily the most compelling of the night; they should be the face of the movement moving forward.

• Tom Glass is right: The real solution on any number of issues, including abortion, is for the states to become much more assertive with the federal government.  Baby steps.

• Speaking of Baby Steps: We referenced the Capitol euphemisms "beginning the conversation" and "multi-session process."  Monday's hearing was the former.  It begins the latter.  You've gotta start somewhere.

• Speakiung of Starting Somewhere: Tony Tinderholt and Jeff Leach deserve tremendous credit for getting this ball rolling.

To be clear: This author's concerns about the unintended consequences of this approach remain, but those concerns weren't relevant Monday night....

Bottom Line: Monday night undeniably moved the cultural conversation forward....

#TXLEGE: Texas Democrats remain NUTSO as ever for Murdering Children

"But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea."
Matthew 18:6

ICYMI:

A frustrated Texas House Republican committee chairman was forced to postpone a hearing on his anti-abortion bill Monday morning after five members on the nine-person panel didn't show up for the meeting — prompting what’s known as a lack of quorum.

At issue is a bill by state Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano. The measure, House Bill 16, would require doctors to care for a baby who survives an abortion procedure. It was unveiled earlier this month and already has more than 70 House members signed on as co-authors.

Four Democrats and one Republican on the committee were absent for Monday’s meeting, which was scheduled to begin at 8 a.m. Leach said state Rep. Morgan Meyer, R-Dallas, missed because of a flight delay. Meyer’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The four Democrats, meanwhile, signed onto a statement Monday saying that they would not “join this charade,” apparently referring to Leach’s anti-abortion proposal that was on the committee’s calendar for consideration.

“While some members of the Texas Legislature insist on attacking as well as offending women directly and indirectly, we will not join this charade by participating in this political grandstanding on issues which are already codified in Texas and Federal law,” read a statement signed by state Reps. Victoria Neave of Dallas, Julie Johnson of Carrollton, Jessica Farrar of Houston and Yvonne Davis of Dallas. “We refuse to offend our fellow Texas women, their families, and licensed physicians by wasting time on unnecessary legislation designed to intimidate and restrict women’s access to healthcare.”

That's insane.

This bill doesn't stop a single abortion.  This bill only goes into effect after the baby is 100% outside the birth canal.  That's why we've been unenthusiastic about it.  But Holy Toledo Democrats....

There will be plenty of time to discuss the proper response, but it's worth taking a second to reflect on the insanity of this position: Texas Democrats want to Deny Medical Care to Infants who are 100% outside the birth canal.

This website doesn't often tout our greatest hits, but this incident from six years ago is re-relevant:



Bottom Line: Clearly, some things never change....

#TXLEGE: Are we trying to prevent Abortions?!? (Or, will cheap theatrics suffice?!?)

"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

Interesting:

AUSTIN — A North Texas lawmaker has filed a bill that could result in doctors being fined for not trying to save an infant born after an abortion.

Rep. Jeff Leach, R-Plano, filed House Bill 16 on Thursday. The legislation would require doctors to provide "appropriate medical treatment" in the event that a fetus lives through an attempted abortion. The parent or guardian — or the infant itself — could sue the physician for damages, and the state attorney general could impose a $100,000 fine if it's proved such treatment was not provided.

"With the filing of the Texas Born-Alive Infant Protection Act today, the Texas Legislature will draw a line in the sand, proclaiming clearly and loudly on behalf of the Texans we represent, that a baby who survives an abortion deserves the full protection of the law and the highest standards of medical care," Leach said Thursday at a news conference packed with the bill's supporters.

....

Brenham Republican Lois Kolkhorst, who is sponsoring the bill in the Texas Senate, said she hopes Lone Star State conservatives will prevail where Washington's failed.

One and a half cheers. Hip, hip, hooray. Hip, hip....

That's all the enthusiasm we can muster.

There's nothing inherently wrong with this bill.  Obviously, babies still alive after an abortion deserve medical care.  But, notice that phrase: After an abortion.

This is a defensive; pro-lifers need to go on offense.

"Going on offense" means actively preventing abortions.

There are currently 3 approaches in play to go on offense:

• Outright abolition.
• Note: This author has some very serious reservations about this approach, but it's a debate worth having.

• Heartbeat.

• Pre-Born Non-Discrimination.

There's a very valid debate in terms of which of these is most prudent, but all three share one common factor: They PREVENT abortions.

[Note: From a narrowly-defined political perspective, PreNDA is the vote we want to make every Democrat elected last fall take.]

Bottom Line: Go on offense....

#TXLEGE: Some subtle, positive, signs from Bonnen

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

Nobody's surprised Dennis Bonnen was elected speaker yesterday, but a couple moves he made shortly thereafter were very interesting.

First, did you notice who's sat behind Bonnen as he gave his acceptance speech?!?

Jeff Leach and Stephanie Klick.

If Jeff Leach and Stephanie Klick were invited to sit behind the speaker as he addressed the body, that means conservatives are no longer shut out of the speaker's office.  It doesn't necessarily mean we get everything we want.  But it does mean we're no longer being artificially shut out.

After the House adjourned, Bonnen then attended Ken Paxton's swearing in ceremony (as the picture above attests).

It wasn't anything Bonnen said or did at the Paxton event...but the fact that he was there spoke volumes.

Put differently: Can you imagine Dennis Bonnen's predecessor showing up at a Ken Paxton event?!?

Subtle, but huge.

Bottom Line:  A lot of work remains...but for the first time in a long time it looks like that work might not be pointless.

#TXLEGE: Income Tax fight is important Economically (and smart politics)

"But the former governors who were before me laid burdens on the people, and took from them bread and wine, besides forty shekels of silver. Yes, even their servants bore rule over the people, but I did not do so, because of the fear of God."
Nehemiah 5:15

Jeff Leach and Greg Abbott made interesting news this week:

AUSTIN -- Months after Gov. Greg Abbott floated the idea of changing the Texas constitution to eliminate the possibility of a state income tax, a Plano lawmaker has filed a resolution in the Legislature that would do just that.

"We must continue to pursue and advance policies that protect and strengthen the Texas Miracle, starting with ensuring that Texans can keep and control more of their hard-earned tax dollars in their own pockets," State Rep. Jeff Leach said in a news release Tuesday.

He said he wanted to make sure that "Texas taxpayers are protected from the possibility of the creation of a personal income tax - which would have disastrous effects on the future of our great state."

The news release carried a show of support from Abbott.

"Texans know far better than government how to spend their own money," Abbott said in the release. "That's why I applaud Representative Jeff Leach's proposal to amend the Constitution and forever eliminate the possibility of a state income tax. I look forward to working with Representative Leach to ensure Texas remains the best place to live and work."

This is smart.

Substantively,  constitutional prohibition of an income tax makes tremendous sense during a discussion of school finance.  In the past, bad things have happened when the legislature has tried to "solve" school finance.  That's how we ended up with the margins tax in the first place.  We really should constitutionally prohibit the worst tax policy mistake we might be tempted to make.

The politics of this issue are fantastic.  The issue is simple and easy for voters to understand.  Any potential contrast would likely be obvious.

None of the Democrats elected last fall want to take this vote.  Such a vote forces them to choose between their educrat/public sector union coalition and taxpayers.  In other words, Democrats would have to choose between their voters and the people who fund their campaigns.

Bottom Line: You might get long-term certainty on tax policy.  If not, you get a campaign issue.  Either is a win.

#TXLEGE: The Bonnen Administration

Left to Right: Evan Smith, Mary Gonzalez, Jeff Leach, and Drew Springer

"When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice;
But when a wicked man rules, the people groan."
Proverbs 29:2

We attended this afternoon's Trib discussion about the new house leadership.  It was very productive.  We should be cautiously optimistic about next session while understanding that it will require a different playbook.

From a conservative perspective, the most important takeaway is that Gordon Johnson is done.  We asked Jeff Leach and Drew Springer, point blank, about Gordon Johnson's influence over both the speaker selection process and his general influence over the GOP caucus moving forward.  Both Leach and Springer used the word "none."  That, by itself, is a game changer.

But beyond that, the tone really does feel different.  For example, Evan Smith asked whether the house members prioritized somebody who could "stand up to the Lt. Governor."  We were astonished to hear Drew Springer throw cold water on that narrative.  Springer explained that, rather, he wanted a speaker who "works better with the Senate."  Leach explained that one of the reasons Bonnen was able to unify the GOP caucus was because he has good relationships with Abbott and Patrick.  Even Mary Gonzalez threw shade on Straus' bad relationship with the Senate.  That's different.

The shift was most apparent in Springer.  Obviously, this website has had some very uncharitable things to say about Drew Springer over the years.  But this does not sound like the same Drew Springer.  Last session, Drew Springer was a key player in killing property tax reform.  Today, Drew Springer was talking about how 93% of the Republican primary voters in his district voted for a lower rollback rate.  Springer also said some good things about not pouring education funding into bureaucracy.  That is, to put it mildly, new for Drew Springer.

Mary Gonzalez also made some interesting comments.  She called Bonnen's promises of a fair process to be "a huge shift."  Coming from a Democrat, that is quite a statement.  Gonzalez also said that Bonnen has made no promises regarding Democrat committee chairs.

One more interesting note: Jeff Leach gave an impassioned, well-informed, stemwinder on the subject of criminal justice reform.  He specifically talked about how leaving people to fester behind bars when it serves no rehabilitative or restorative purpose offends his convictions as a pro-lifer.  In so doing, he damn near got a standing ovation from a room full of Austin liberals.  Duly noted moving forward.

Bottom Line: We don't see how you walk out of today's session feeling anything other than optimistic....

Freedom Caucus gets dirty with Harvey relief....

"But let each one examine his own work, and then he will have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another."
Galatians 6:4

UPDATE (8/30/2017): Apparently, we overlooked Valoree Swanson....




There have been a few photo sets circulating social media that are worth sharing.

First Briscoe Cain:



Also Jeff Leach:



Also, while we're on the topic, Cain also addressed a particarly grotesque piece of misinformation put out by the ambulance chaser lobby:

#TXLEGE: How the LAWLESS Texas house operates (Part 2)....

"They only consult to cast him down from his high position;
They delight in lies;
They bless with their mouth,
But they curse inwardly. Selah"
Psalm 62:4

We finally found the third video we wanted to post yesterday:



Highlights:

• Murders row of Straus lieutenants signed Huberty's petition.

• Almost as many Democrats as Republicans signed the petition.

• Rinaldi: "The effect of the motion you're making is there's no more amendments and we're going to vote on the bill immediately, correct?!?"

• Huberty denies being aware there were pre-filed amendments.
• Note: He's lying.
• Note: Huberty does that a lot.

• Pre-filed amendments would have expanded the scope of the bill.
• Huberty refuses to pull the motion.

• Leach: "Does the chair have the authority to not recognize a motion to call the previous question?!?"
• Straus: "Yes."
• Translation: Straus could have overruled Huberty and allowed debate on the amendments.
• Straus refuses to answer questions about why he's making this ruling.

• Previous question motions have historically been used only after marathon floor debates.

• Briscoe Cain points out how Straus' ruling is a...creative...interpretation of house rules.

• Cain asks why the bill had been delayed 24 hours if getting it over to the Senate was the top priority.
• Note: This exchange happend before the Sine Die stunt.

• Schaefer: "When we objected to the bill being postponed yesterday, we had amendments ready to go that we wanted to put before the body."

• Stickland: "More games are being played in your Texas capitol."
• "There were three different amendments that sought to bring in more Texans."
• "Instead, there are members of this body who are moving to silence folks like myself who believe that people's property taxes are too high right now."
• Straus interrupts Stickland.
• "The substance of this motion is to silence our ability, as members, to bring forth amendments to make this bill stronger."
• None of Dennis Bonnen's constituents were included in the bill.
• Millions left out of the bill.

#TXLEGE: If we're ever gonna get rid of Joe Straus....

"Behold, all those who were incensed against you
Shall be ashamed and disgraced;
They shall be as nothing,
And those who strive with you shall perish."
Isaiah 41:11

...then yesterday's Nay vote on Byron Cook's amendment to restore the rainy day fund raid give you a hint at the type of coalition it might take:

So that's 67.

Also, FWIW, Jeff Leach, Tony Tinderholt, and Scott Sanford weren't on the floor but could have been reasonably expected to vote no.

So that's 70.

Furthermore, Lance Gooden later made a journal statement against the amendment.

So that's 71.

Obviously, you need 76, but that 71 is potentially a start.

Also, FWIW, based on the 2017 Mark Jones index, Trent Ashby is Republican #76:

#TXLEGE: Freedom Caucus DOMINATES Early House Fundraising!!!

"Wealth gained by dishonesty will be diminished,
But he who gathers by labor will increase."
Proverbs 13:11

We obviously know about the Governor and Lt. Governor's fundraising, but did you know that 7 out of the top ten fundraisers on the House side are Freedom caucus members?!?

Your 10 largest Republican fundraisers in the #TXHouse for the July reports. @BriscoeCain is #2, under @SpeakerStraus. #txlege pic.twitter.com/lywWqdB44y

— Luke Macias (@effectualchange) July 18, 2017

While we're on the subject, among challengers Thomas McNutt (running against Byron Cook) raised over $320k and has $250k cash on hand; Mayes Middleton (running against Wayne Faircloth) has $480k cash on hand and has over 100 individual donors including former good UT regent Alex Cranberg!

Bottom Line: This tells you everything you need to know about where the energy and momentum lie.

#TXLEGE: House considers limiting "historical" zoning designations....

Former Austin Historic Landmark Commission member Arif Panj testifies

"Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things? Or is your eye evil because I am good?"
Matthew 20:15

[Note: HB 3418 is the final bill under consideration here; our testimony can be found at the 2:44:20 mark.]

[Note II: Learn more about the history of this issue in Austin here and here and here.]

This afternoon, the Texas House committee on Urban Affairs heard HB 3418 (Elkins).  Elkins' bill would create objective criteria for "historic" designations and require a 75% super-majority requirement for a city council to zone something historic against the property owners will.  Abuses of historic designations to inhibit housing construction is a problem that has been growing in recent years in Austin that can spread statewide if the legislature doesn't nip it in the bud.

An important note: Rep. Elkins' bill only pertains to historical designations that are done against the property owners will.  This bill has no impact on historic zoning when the property owner is in agreement.  This bill only becomes relevant when a city (usually at the behest of a politically powerful neighborhood association)

One central Austin home-builder testified that the historic designation process delayed a project upon which he was working for nine months and added an additional $300k to the cost.  That translated to an additional $10,000 per house for the final buyer.  How many people will no longer be able to afford the house with the additional $10,000?!?

Former state rep Burt Solomons testified that neighborhood associations try to exhaust property owners by dragging out the time and expense involved in these processes.  Another Austin resident testified that the City refused to allow tearing down a house that had been condemned as uninhabitable because it was zoned historic.  We testified that the abuses are well documented and that the bill eliminates uncertainty (our one regret is that we neglected to mention the threat this poses to other cities if Austin is allowed to get away with it).

The highlight of the afternoon was the testimony of former Austin historic landmark commission member Arif Panju.  Arif testified that in his two years on the historic landmark commission, he only saw "7 or 8" cases come before the commission where the property owner was in agreement with the designation.  Likewise, Arif stated that historical zoning is being used to "keep people out" of neighborhood rather than any legitimate purpose.

As to the opponents: They were primarily bureaucrats from various urban "preservation" offices around the state.  They said about what you would expect them to say about how there's no problem with anything they're doing and that we just don't understand the issue.  Still, a couple remarks do stand out.  One gentleman who used to work with the state preservation board opposed the bill and called for more funding for "training."  Another opponent claimed there are 'trade-offs" involving private property rights when you move into an urban area.

Bottom Line: The bill was left pending, and a substitute is working its way through lege council, but it's a pleasant surprise to see the legislature take up this issue.

-----