We'll have to wait a month or more to see how state legislative leaders handle a budget that's bound to grow 30 percent or more.

The really, really condensed version: School tax fixes from last spring will likely force lawmakers to spend money faster than is allowed under a constitutional cap on growth.

They can vote to bust the cap. They can cut spending they think is necessary. Or they can put the choices off until January while their employees try to find them a fast car out of here.

The Legislative Budget Board, given those options, chose Door Number Three. They'll wait until January to vote on the allowed rate of growth and on the dollar value of the part of the budget that's limited. That panel, headed by House Speaker Tom Craddick and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, is also hoping there's a way to ease the pain of a vote by a conservative Legislature to spend money faster than personal incomes in the state are rising.

That's a characterization built on incomplete information. Without the state spending money to lower local school taxes, lawmakers wouldn't be in much danger of busting the cap.

With that tax swap, there's almost no way for them to avoid it. But that's politically unpalatable to some members, and so the ten folks on the LBB are trying to find a way to sugar-coat the bitter pill.

Two points of interest. The part of the budget that's subject to the cap now stands at $55.5 billion (that's a moving target, so if and when you see a new number in a few months, don't squawk at us). They've got five estimates of how much personal income will grow over the next two years, ranging from 13.1 percent to 17 percent. The lower number would put the cap on discretionary general revenue spending at $62.8 billion; the larger one would put it at $65 billion.

The increased costs of doing what the state does now are estimated by various budgeteers at $4 billion to $8 billion. The school tax swap will cost around $11 billion in the next budget, according to some estimators we trust.

Scribble it on the chalkboard. The spending cap, depending on the growth rate, would allow $7.3 billion to $9.5 billion in new spending. School finance is $11 billion — well above the high estimate — and growth in public school enrollments, welfare and health programs, prisons, and other existing services, would add $4 billion to $8 billion. If lawmakers decided not to make cuts, and if this back-of-the-envelope figuring is in the ballpark, the Texas Lege is on the way to spending $15 billion to $19 billion more than it currently spends in discretionary funds, an increase of up to 34 percent.

They can safely and honestly blame the school deal, and say the spending cap was sacrificed to lower local taxes. Some members are comfortable with that. Some aren't.

There's an addendum to this: Some number-crunchers think the "sweeteners" included in the school tax package last spring would be enough to bust the cap if they're included with the normal growth in the budget. Add those things — teacher pay, etc. —to the $4 billion to $8 billion expected (by some) for normal growth in enrollments and caseloads and such. It's as much as $3.9 billion, and it's part of what got the school mess solved last year, but it might be considered outside the easy formulation of "we busted the cap to cut property taxes." One suggestion we've heard would be to split the budget, voting for a normal growth package, then voting on a second spending bill that included the busted cap and the school finance stuff. It might turn out to be easier to vote it all together: Incumbents could attribute the growth to the tax cut, and challengers would be burdened with doing the math for voters with short attention spans. The LBB will wait until January to see if there's an easy out, or at least an easier one.

The tragic loss of former senator Frank Madla, D-San Antonio, his granddaughter, and his mother-in-law left the Capitol in shock after Thanksgiving. Bloggers, who for the most part were hard on Madla during the last year of his legislative career and his life, have been respectful of his passing. But bloggers, being bloggers, have found new targets for the next legislative session.

* * * * *

Frank Madla

A touching collection of memories is on the San Antonio Express-News website.

Dos Centavos remembered, "A few years ago, as I worked from here to stop the name change of Southwest Texas State University, it was Senator Madla that at the very least discussed my concerns with me, while others looked away."

* * * * *

Round Two

The runoff election for CD-23 between Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla and Democrat Ciro Rodriquez has been set for Saturday, December 12.

Phillip Martin of Burnt Orange Report notes the date, December 12, is the same day of a major event for Hispanic Catholics. Martin said, "What extent will having the runoff on the same day as the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe have on the election? It's hard to say — possibly none. But in a district that's heavily Hispanic, it'd be wrong not to recognize the coinciding dates."

Paul Burka at Texas Monthly's Burkablog agrees the date gives Rep. Bonilla a big advantage, but for secular reasons. "By choosing the earliest possible date for the run-off," Burka said, "Perry narrows the window for Rodriguez (and, more to the point, the national Democratic party) to try to overcome Bonilla's sizeable advantage in fundraising and name identification. Fewer than three weeks remain to produce TV spots and mailers to reach voters."

* * * * *

Legislative Odds

Scott Henson at Grits for Breakfast analyzes the number of bills filed per chamber and how many pass in each. "In my experience, a bill's passage often depends more on the legislative skill of the bill author than the content of the legislation — certainly that's true of the originally filed language. Some members know how to pass bills. Many don't. It's a lot of work to get a piece of legislation that's worth a damn all the way through the process. It's much easier to pass a piece of compromised junk, which is mostly why the laws are written the way they are."

Henson also tells us we should appreciate the House Research Organization.

* * * * *

Rules are Meant to be Broken?

Vince Leibowitz at Capitol Annex is worried senators will vote to rid themselves of the 2/3rds vote rule required to bring legislation up for consideration on the floor. "So, will the 80th be the last hurrah for the two-thirds rule? We've already seen what can happen when the rule is suspended, a la the '03 Redistricting debacle. Only 16 Republican senators are needed to vote to eliminate the rule. I'm not sure that, given the political climate and the fact that some of those Republicans may finally face heavy opposition next cycle, there are 16 votes to be had for such a partisan issue."

* * * * *

Ethically Speaking

The Texas Ethics Commission ruling that it's okay to report a monetary contribution as "check" without reporting the amount of the check set off some blog reaction.

John Cobarruvius at Bay Area Houston, who's been pouring over officeholder's expense reports the past few months joked, "The TEC is now looking for the ethically challenged legislature to come to their senses and file a bill to correct the problem."

Burnt Orange Report's Cody Yocom said, "This is certainly an issue that has earned addressing. Regardless of party affiliation, it has been shown time and again that the people do care about full disclosure of political contributions and donations, perhaps more than even whom the donations are from. Keep your eyes peeled for this issue to come up in the spring. How it is handled may make a world of difference in 2008.

* * * * *

Dan-A-Palooza

Bloggers on the left and right are champing at the bit, waiting for Senator-elect/conservative talk radio show host Dan Patrick, R-Houston, to be sworn in.

Lone Star Times predicts a future "smack down" between Patrick and the rest of the Legislature, using a Pink Dome-doctored photo of Patrick promoting sterilization (because he had a vasectomy performed during a radio broadcast).

On Eileen Smith's In The Pink Texas, it's hard to find a quote that's not slanderous or sacriligeous, but we found this one: "There has been talk of Patrick (mostly conversations with God going on in his head) running for Governor, which would most likely put him up against Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and Democrat Carole Keeton Goeb Strayhorn." (Reporter's Note: Dan Patrick's original surname is Goeb and the running blog joke of adding extra married names to Carole Keeton McClellan Rylander Strayhorn still cracks me up).

Smith was quick to point out this week that bloggers — at least those in California — can't be sued for slander.

* * * * *

A Rose By Any Other Name

Musings, following up on the Houston Press, gives us a sampling of spellings voters used on the voting machines while voting for Shelley Sekula-Gibbs. "I know that state law says that voter intent is all that matters when making a decision on whether a write-in spelling counts or not, but good grief. Shelley could have conducted her voter education campaign on the e-slate in a completely different way, with commercials showing voters spinning and clicking anything that came to mind with a 'S' or 'G'. 'Just Dial In Whatever The Hell You Want' should have been on every piece of Shelley campaign literature."

Wonkette found, by far, the most outrageous write-in name that we're too embarrassed to re-write. Some voter wasn't, though — you can click on the link and read it yourself. And the original story from the Houston Press is here.

A more serious-minded blogger — Evan at Rick Perry vs. The World — starts the speculation on which Republicans will run against Shelley Sekula-Gibbs in the next GOP primary for CD-22. "Paul Bettencourt has already announced, via a Kristen Mack Houston Chronicle column, that he's planning on running. He's hoping to scare other candidates off, so that he gets her one-on-one. Bettencourt is definitely popular among the Harris County activists, and polls pretty well in Harris as well." He continued: "Certainly (Sen.) Kyle Janek would have to take a strong look at running. He was up for re-election to the state Senate in '06, so he chose to pass on this year. But he is the one candidate who can probably unite the regional factions, as a guy who lives in Houston, was born and raised in Galveston, and represents half of Fort Bend County right now. He can also certainly raise the money. There are rumors that he's waiting for Dr. (Ron) Paul to retire in CD-14, however."

* * * * *

And To All a Good Night…

With all the real and faux terrorist threats our friends in D.C. have had to battle, it's good to see they haven't lost their sense of humor.

---

Robyn Hadley cherry-picks the state's political blogs each week, looking for news, info, gossip, and new jokes. Robyn, a veteran of both journalism and the state Capitol, is the owner of Capitol Crowd, a networking site for people who work in and around state government. The opinions she quotes belong to the bloggers, and we're including their links so you can hunt them down if you wish. Please send comments, suggestions, gripes or retorts to Robyn at robyn@capitolcrowd.com, or to Texas Weekly editor Ross Ramsey, at ramsey@texasweekly.com.

Rosary, followed by Mass
Thursday, November 30, 2006, 9:30 a.m.
Our Lady of Guadalupe Catholic Church
13715 Riggs
Helotes, TX

Burial Services
Friday, December 1, 2006, 1 p.m.
Texas State Cemetery
909 Navasota
Austin, TX

In lieu of flowers, donations may be sent to the Senator Frank Madla Scholarship Fund, c/o Frank Madla III, P.O. Box 1087, Helotes, TX, 78023; or Cordi Marian Sisters, 1162 FM 471, San Antonio, Texas, 78253.

Texas law says officeholders have to report gifts they receive, but not the value of those gifts, according to the state's Ethics Commission. That includes checks: They have to be reported, but the amount does not.

The ethics folks say they're not necessarily in favor of that weird form of disclosure, but say they're following the law passed a few years ago by the legislators to whom it applies.

Here's a sign of just how weird this is: Officeholders have to report the receipt of gifts of more than $250, meaning they have to know the values they're not required to report. As Charles Dickens' Mr. Bumble said: "If the law supposes that. . . the law is a ass — a idiot."

The ethics commissioners don't necessarily agree or disagree with that assessment, but they're recommending a change in the law. And at least four legislators have already filed bills that would require disclosure of the amounts on checks along with the receipt of the check as a gift.

Not everybody reads the law as they do. Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle, who's got the job of prosecuting public officials who stray from the straight and narrow, wrote the commissioners before the vote to say their interpretation "would render it perfectly legal to repot the gift of 'a wheelbarrow' without reporting that the wheelbarrow was full of cash."

This started, you'll recall, when Houston builder Bob Perry gave two checks totaling $100,000 to Bill Ceverha, who was on the Employee Retirement System's board at the time. Ceverha had just lost a civil suit stemming from his job as treasurer for a political action committee that helped Republicans in 2002 House races. Democrats who lost sued over the PAC's conduct and Ceverha, as treasurer, was on the hook for damages. The lawsuit accused the PAC of failing to disclose $600,000 in corporate contributions.

He reported receiving two checks from Perry, but not the amounts. The two disclosed the amounts voluntarily when the issue arose in public, but Democrats and some of Austin's good government types squawked to the ethics commission for a formal ruling.

They got it in the commission's last meeting of the year. Commissioners said officeholders don't have to include amounts when they report getting checks as gifts.

A quick note: The commission didn't get to whether checks are legal gifts in particular situations and didn't talk directly — at least in public — about Ceverha's case. If you were wondering, it's still illegal, for instance, to stuff lawmakers' pockets with cash.

How the parties have fared in the Texas House and Senate over the last 20 legislative sessions.Republicans gained one seat in the Senate in this year's elections, while Democrats gained six seats in the House. The Red team remains in control, after rising from near insignificance at this point in 1969. Two notes: We're counting HD-29 as a Republican seat until and unless a Democrat wins it. Rep. Glenda Dawson, R-Pearland, died in September but won reelection in November. A special election to replace her is set for later this month. Second, you'll notice we're only counting 149 members in the House in 1969; Rep. John Poerner of Medina served that year as an independent (the last member to do so) before becoming a Democrat. (Click here or on either chart to download a copy in .pdf format.)

Outsiders ought to be careful when they tinker with the internal politicking in the Texas House. And the state representative who asked the Texas Ethics Commission to say that says she hopes it will have a "chilling effect" on lobsters and others who are meddling in the race for Speaker.

Before the Thanksgiving break — when rumors of a challenge to House Speaker Tom Craddick were more active — Rep. Jessica Farrar, D-Houston, asked the TEC about lobbyists she said were pressuring members to support "a named Speaker candidate." In her letter, she asked whether promising committee positions for support — or retribution for supporting other candidates — would constitute legislative bribery.

She also asked whether that sort of thing should be reported to the authorities and whether evidence — voice mails and emails — should be reported.

In its opinion, the commission says it would depend on the facts of a particular case. But the opinion says the conduct she described "is intended to influence a member in casting a vote for or against a speaker of the House of Representatives." That's potentially out of bounds, but the commission stopped there. Their opinion letter says outsiders should "exercise caution in these matters." As for reporting it, there's no legal obligation to do so.

"It affirmed what I thought — 'Yeah, this is a big no-no,' " Farrar says. She's not sure what, if anything, she'll do next, but she says the exercise of asking for and getting an opinion has apparently put a stop to what alarmed her in the first place.

Muffed election dates and on to the races. . .

In some editions last week, we merged two election dates. The special election runoff in CD-23 between Republican U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla and Democratic former U.S. Ciro Rodriguez will be on December 12. The special election to replace state the late Rep. Glenda Dawson, R-Pearland, will be on December 19 (and a runoff could follow, if nobody breaks 50 percent). We implied the elections were on the same date. Sorry, sorry, sorry.

Now to election business. The state's routine request for federal review of its special congressional election runoff date has run into a hitch because that's also an important feast day for Catholics. And the League of United Latin American Citizens — LULAC — has filed papers with the U.S. Department of Justice saying another date would be more appropriate. DOJ has no deadline for a decision.

Early voting — barring something from the feds — will start on Monday and run through Friday of next week. The election would be on the following Tuesday, meaning nobody gets a chance to vote during either of the two weekends between now and the election. Who benefits from that, if anyone? We honestly can't say, but some Democrats wanted a Saturday election date, so there's a clue.

One last thing there. U.S. Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Laredo, endorsed former U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, D-San Antonio, in the runoff. That's significant in two ways. They ran a bitter race against each other two years ago. And Cuellar's bipartisanship has rankled Democrats here and in Washington, D.C., who don't think he's loyal to the party. In this contest, he's sticking with the donkeys.

Early voting will be early after all. . . DSHS gets a new boss. . . and U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes will chair House Intelligence.

Early voting in the CD-23 runoff can start this weekend in counties that want to do that. The state and MALDEF — the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund — agreed to give the locals the option to start on Saturday instead of on Monday, and then filed a friendly suit in court to get it all ratified by a judge. Bexar County wanted to open early. The state said no. The county pressed on, and now this. Early voting will continue through Friday in all of the counties in that San Antonio-to-El Paso district; counties that don't want to open the polls this weekend can wait until Monday. The actual election will be held on December 12. Both campaigns involved — that of U.S. Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-San Antonio, and former U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, D-San Antonio — had said they favored the weekend voting.

• Dr. David Lakey of Tyler will be the new chief at the Texas Department of State Health Services. Lakey is now the chief of infectious disease and medical director of the Center for Pulmonary and Infectious Disease Control at the UT Health Center in Tyler. He's replacing Dr. Eduardo Sanchez, who resigned after five years at the head of the agency. Sanchez is now director of the Institute for Health Policy at the UT School of Public Health in Houston. Health and Human Services Commissioner Albert Hawkins hired Lakey after getting an okay from Gov. Rick Perry. Lakey will start January 2. And Dr. Charles Bell, who's been acting commissioner at DSHS, will return to his post as Hawkins' deputy.

• U.S. Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-El Paso, will chair the House Intelligence Committee when the new Congress convenes next year. Reyes, a career Border Patrol official, is the third-ranking Democrat on that panel, but he had the support of Speaker-presumptive Nancy Pelosi, D-California.