Campaign Finance reduxWatch for legislation from Reps. Todd Smith, R-Euless, and Craig Eiland, D-Galveston, that chews into the same material those prosecutors have been working on, with the aim of making some of what happened in 2002 illegal in future elections. They've looked at several provisions, including a time limit on issue advertising, tighter definitions of what constitutes illegal coordination of campaigns and third parties, tighter rules on how money donated by corporations and unions can be spent, and limits on what kinds of political action committees can accept corporate and union donations. One notion would prohibit so-called issue and advocacy advertising during the last month or two leading up to an election. The walls between those ads and plain old "my opponent's a schmo and I'm a pro" ads have become paper-thin. It's not unusual to see advocacy spots that remain legally but not practically distinguishable from normal campaign ads. It's legal in those spots to say one candidate is an idiot and the other is a genius and to end with "be careful when you make your decision." With a 30- to 60-day period before each election cleared of those spots, the advocates would be able to get their views out without electioneering. Federal law has a similar limit in place now, but it applies only to broadcast commercials. Some activists here want to extend such a ban to direct mail and to phone bank operations. In a strange twist, that can be spun as a defense mechanism for incumbents. Issue ads usually revolve around the stands taken by a particular officeholder -- as attacks on incumbents. Legislators -- incumbents themselves -- might see limits on those ads as prudent defenses against what they might face in future elections. The corporate and union limits pushed by groups like Campaigns for People would restrict contributions to affiliated political action committees and would limit expenditures of those monies to a tight list of non-political items, like light bills and rent and desks. Current law has been read in some campaigns as allowing those funds to be spent on choosing which voters should be approached, on polling to decide which candidates to support and the like. Corporations and unions wouldn't be allowed to give to PACs without direct ties to the donor. With their proposed restrictions, the Intergallactic Garbanzos Corp. could give money to CHICKPEA-PAC, but that corporation couldn't give to an independent committee like Texans for Uniform Lawn Care. The change is directed at complaints that companies and labor unions shuffle money around in a variety of PACs to disguise their influence and the amounts they're spending to try to help particular campaigns.

Got a computer? Get in the news biz for nothing down, nothing a month.If you have something to say but can't scratch up the bucks to buy your own newspaper or radio or TV station, you can blog (it's short for web log, a continually updated website on whatever is of interest to its author). And some of the bloggers sprouting in Texas are looking at state politics and government, generating new sources of information, gossip, political maneuvering; i.e., everything you used to hear in the traditional media and at the bar or coffee shop after work. Several Texas bloggers have been working the political beat for two or three years, and a batch started, more or less, with the beginning of the current legislative session. Several of the national political blogs are working as businesses, supporting their writers (handsomely, in a couple of cases) and opening a new channel in political media. The Texas blogs don't have the same traffic levels, but they're attracting wider audiences. We did a quick and incomplete survey. Drop us a note if we left out a good one.

Eileen Smith, a former journalist turned legislative budgeteer turned blogger, has started a regular riff on state government at www.inthepinktexas.com with the subtitle "Politics on the Lege of Reason." It's nonpartisan, focused on the Legislature and personalities. Smith worked for House Appropriations and then the American Heart Association after writing for a couple of publications, and hopes the blog becomes a full-time, full-pay job. She kicked it off, officially, this week. Not everyone in the citizen/journalism racket is signing their work. That's got an advantage and a disadvantage: On the one hand, you don't become a target because of what you're writing. A lobbyist who wanted to tell true stories about the state Legislature, for instance, could do so on a blog without ruining his or her day job. On the other hand, blogs depend in part on running commentary from readers, and sources don't talk to people they don't trust and if you don't know who you're talking to, what's to trust? If you're saying something sharp, and it's a risky thing to say, it's best to know who's listening. Two new blogs are doing politics the anonymous way. One, called www.pinkdome.com, leans to the left and has some attitude. It's entertaining, so far. And there's yet another blog about Texas government and politics, this one by another anonymous writer who has chosen the name imasuit. That narrows it down to lobbyists, officeholders and people who've been to Men's Wearhouse. The site, called "Inside the Texas Capitol," is more policy-oriented in tone than Pink Dome; the address is texascapitol.blogspot.com. Several of the political blogs in Texas (we're ignoring the folks from Texas who write mainly about national stuff, the better to focus on state politics) have been around for a while and have developed regular audiences. Charles Kuffner of Houston writes at www.offthekuff.com, and another Houstonian, Greg Wythe, has been at it for a while on his site, www.gregsopinion.com. The blogger at Grits for Breakfast identifies himself as Scott Henson, and says he does "research and writing jobs for a wide variety of clients, from politicians to attorneys to non-profits to government agencies." He's at gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.com. The Burnt Orange Report (www.burntorangereport.com), based in Austin, was started by a group of students at the University of Texas. They're Democrats, and three of the four honchos are still in school. Some are paid, and some haven't gone pro. Kuffner, for instance, takes no money and runs no ads. When he started, he thought he'd write more about sports, but his interests led him to concentrate on politics. Grits has no ads, nor does Texas Capitol. Burnt Orange runs ads, and there are a couple on Wythe's site. Kuffner and Wythe and the guys at Burnt Orange joined up during the last elections to do a "Texas Tuesdays" blog that interviewed House candidates in more detail than any other local media. And several blogs around the state are designed, apparently, to work in cyberspace in the same way activists work in real space; to pester enemies and build support for some cause or another. Most of the ones we're aware of reside on the left side of the ledger: www.takebacktexas.com is owned by a Democratic consultancy; www.savetexasreps.com was started by Democrats trying to raise money during the congressional redistricting fight and has remained active; www.drivedemocracy.org, another Democratic blog, started with funding from MoveOn.org, the national bunch that itself got going during the presidential campaigns.

Rep. Mary Denny says now that she had no idea she was messing with gunpowder when she filed legislation to bring the state into local political investigations.As it's written, the Aubrey Republican's bill would force local prosecutors to wait until after the Texas Ethics Commission had investigated a criminal complaint, and a negative answer from the TEC would keep the district and county attorneys out of a case. That's not what Denny says she wants to do. She wants someone with a complaint about a local election -- anything from campaign finance violations to fraud -- to be allowed to report to the local prosecutors and/or the state agency so they don't get sandbagged by district attorneys who'd rather leave politics alone. As she explains it, she patterned the legislation on environmental laws that require certain complaints to clear the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality before local prosecutors can proceed. What she wanted was an alternative place for locals to complain. Denny says local prosecutors often put election cases on hold until after the elections are over, and said the Ethics Commission would have only 45 days to turn a case around after a complaint is filed. Prosecutors could proceed without the state, but state reports would be allowed into evidence; a blessing from the state could be used as a defense if local prosecutors or grand juries decided to pursue charges. Ethics reformers and Democrats with eyes on the Travis County Courthouse say Denny's bill would be an obstacle for future investigations like the one going on now in Austin. That inquiry started more than two years ago, after aggressive Republican efforts to take control of the Texas House in the 2002 elections. Prosecutors and a string of grand juries are looking to see whether campaigns and third party groups illegally coordinated their activities and whether corporate money was illegally used on behalf of some candidate's campaigns. Three individuals and eight corporate donors were indicted in the case last year; three of those corporations signed agreements to cooperate with the investigation and to go forth and sin no more, and indictments against them were dropped. The Texas Ethics Commission is comprised of four Republicans and four Democrats and appears to be designed to get vapor lock on tough partisan questions. As Denny's bill is worded now, a stalemate there or a negative report on what might otherwise be worth investigation could stymie future investigations like the one going on now. Some lawmakers, critical of District Attorney Ronnie Earle's record, think that would be a good thing. But Earle's office -- unlike every other prosecutor in Texas -- has jurisdiction over state elections and officials, and watchdog groups fear lawmakers are trying to declaw him. Denny says flat out that if her bill does that now, it will be fixed to do what she says she wanted in the first place.

Paul Stekler, the documentarian housed at the University of Texas at Austin's film school, is starting a new series on Texas public affairs and it'll begin airing Thursday.Special Session is hooked up with stations all over Texas, and you can get a schedule at www.klru.org/specialsession/. In Austin, the first show is on KLRU-TV on Thursday, Feb. 10, at 7:30. Disclosure: While we aren't making any money on this deal, one of the talking heads is ours. • Feb 10 -- Rick v. Kay v. Carole
Will this year's legislative session end up as the first round in a seemingly inevitable Republican gubernatorial primary battle in 2006, where either Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison or Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn would take on Governor Rick Perry? What can we expect out of this year's session -- and who benefits when specific bills pass or die? Panelists: Harvey Kronberg, Quorum Report and News 8 Austin; Ross Ramsey, Texas Weekly; Wayne Slater, Dallas Morning News. • Feb 17 -- Is the Media Still Relevant?
What kind of a job do Texas journalists do in covering what the legislature does and what the issue choices are? Who's listening and who's reading? A film on the 50th anniversary of the Texas Observer kicks off a discussion on the potential -- and the reality -- of the media's role. Panelists: Cecilia Balli, Texas Monthly; Bill Bishop, Austin American-Statesman; and Lorraine Branham, University of Texas Journalism Dept. Chair. • Feb 24 -- The Lobby and Lege
What is the role and influence of the Lobby in this year's session. Is it fair to look up at the lobbyists in the chamber balconies and call that area the "owner's box"? We'll revisit a classic Texas sequence from the from the 1994 film Vote for Me: Politics in America, and then what's changed in the last ten years. Panelists: April Castro, Associated Press; Christy Hoppe, Dallas Morning News; Michael King, Austin Chronicle. • Mar. 3 -- Karl Rove Speaks
Karl Rove, the architect of President Bush's two presidential campaign victories, talks about the rise of the Texas Republican Party in an exclusive interview with host Paul Stekler -- with commentary by Rove biographer Wayne Slater (Bush's Brain) of The Dallas Morning News.