Put the governor in the group that wants the state to refund some of the money it has collected from taxpayers. He added an emergency item to the legislative agenda, saying it ought to be legal to give rebates to state taxpayers. Gov. Rick Perry also wants quick action on property tax relief for elderly homeowners, who were passed over during the special session on school property taxes. Lawmakers can't pass legislation during the first 60 days of the session unless it's designated an emergency by the governor. Perry told reporters earlier this week that the break for elderly homeowners would be an emergency item. And while he scorned talk of a $14.3 billion budget surplus — it's about half that amount, he said — he also named some conservatives outside the government who were, as he put it, on the right track. Some of those folks have been calling on the Legislature to refund money that's in the till but not needed to pay for promised cuts in local school property taxes. Perry also included room to exclude the state's tab for the local tax cut from constitutional spending limits. The constitution limits growth in the state budget, saying it can't exceed projected growth in personal income. Barring a new law, that means they'd have to vote to bust the spending cap in order to pay for the school property tax cuts. Perry's order makes passing that new law a state emergency.

Starting today and rolling through the week: A revenue estimate, a cap on growth in state spending, a report on appraisal reform, and a proposed budget. And who gets to play, anyway?

Because they delayed their vote to set a cap on growth in state spending, Texas budgeteers now get to see how much money they'll have before they decide how much of it they should or shouldn't spend.

Normally, the Legislative Budget Board meets before a legislative session to cap the spending growth rate. The idea is that the state can't increase its spending faster than total personal income in the state is growing. They have a number of estimates to choose from, ranging from about 13 percent to about 17 percent.

Then, as the session begins, the state comptroller issues a revenue estimate telling them how much money the finance folks think will be available. And the budget-writers submit a "base" budget as a starting point for the 20-week debate over state spending.

There are (at least) two kinks this time. The LBB didn't do its bit before the session started, and that panel of House and Senate budget folk will meet this week to set the spending cap.

The comptroller is announcing the revenue estimate later today, giving lawmakers an outer limit on what can be spent.

The budget comes out within days — after the current appropriations chairman and the speaker who appointed him are finished running against each other for the speakership.

The LBB's spending cap will be contentious later: In order to swap state money for the local school property tax cuts approved last year, the Legislature will have to increase spending at a rate much higher than personal income growth. They'll have to vote to do that, a prospect that's got some lawmakers fidgeting in their seats.

And within the week, the appraisal reform task force set up by Gov. Rick Perry and headed by Dallas lawyer Tom Pauken will make its recommendations. Among the discussion topics: Limits on increases in spending by local governments. State lawmakers might find it awkward to put limits on cities and counties while they're exceeding limits on their own spending at the same time.

And the numbers from the comptroller are supposed to be big. That's good news, in a way: The state will have what it needs and won't have to cut programs unless it wants to. But it's bad news, in a way: If budgeteers were to spend all that's available this time, they'll set a spending pattern that might be too expensive to maintain when they write the next budget in 2009. One camp wants to spend what's available. Another wants to sock the money away in the state's Rainy Day accounts as a buffer against later shortages. And a third group thinks any money that's left in state coffers should be refunded to taxpayers.

Footnote: Who's on the LBB anyhow? The panel includes, automatically, the chairs of a couple of House and Senate committees. But those committees won't officially be named until later in the session, and the chairs from the last session might or might not keep their positions. This is ordinarily not a question: the LBB doesn't often meet while the Legislature is in session. But it'll be interesting to see who shows up and votes later this week.

One of many ways to vote for a speaker and to hold the voters accountable for what they do.

The battle over voting rules shows, if nothing else, that the race is close enough that the conduct of the election is critical. Some — mostly on Craddick's side — want a public vote. Others — mostly on Pitt's side — want a secret vote.

One suggestion that keeps coming up: Cast ballots privately, with members voting on ballots that have their names as well as those of the candidates. The voting would be done secretly. The ballots would be counted. A speaker would be declared. And then the boxes could be opened to the public so it would be clear who voted for whom.

That would satisfy the open government crowd and the folks worried about intimidation or fear (they make lawmakers sound so brave, don't they?) while the voting is actually underway.

The state Senate did a variation on this when Rick Perry got promoted to Guv six years ago. But they didn't require members to sign their ballots. When the boxes were opened after Bill Ratliff was elected, some members had signed their work. Some had not.

Rep. Charlie Geren, R-Fort Worth, is touting a variation on this sort of disclosure. He'd do everything but the last step in the same way, but instead of showing how people voted right after the election, he'd wait until the winner of the election had named committee chairpeople. That would take away the risks of voting against the winner, and it would remove the spoils of backing the winner. Even enemies could get committee gigs.

Texas has $14.3 billion in "new money" available for the next budget, according to Comptroller Susan Combs.

The news isn't a surprise to lawmakers who've been paying attention to the budget, but it confirms their suspicions that they'll have more money to spend than some of them think they really need.

That presents a problem for appropriators. It's easier to say 'No' when you're short of cash. But spending all of the money available this time could set a pattern they don't think they can afford later.

In her first biennial revenue estimate, the new comptroller says legislators will have $82.5 billion in general revenue available for the next two-year budget, and that current spending in that part of the state's finances totals $68.2 billion in the current budget. The difference is $14.3 billion — theoretically the amount that could be added to current general revenue spending without breaking the bank.

Some of the money is already spent. Increased school enrollments, prison populations, caseload and costs in health and human service programs, and other growth in current programs will eat into the total.

Part of the state's new business tax will be dedicated to local school property tax relief. But lawmakers promised voters even bigger increases, and general revenue money will have to supplement the dedicated funds.

Combs warned of some potential bad weather ahead, with charts showing a slowdown in the growth of the state economy, a drop in the amount of money people are extracting from their home equity to spend on other things, falling housing permits in the state during the past year, and a slight cooling of energy prices and drilling activity. None of that is dire at this point, but it could give some ammunition to budget-writers who want to shoot at various new spending plans.

Some of what's available now is left over from the last budget, which ended with $7 billion in the state treasury. And the $14.3 billion does not include about $2 billion that went straight into the state's Rainy Day Fund.

The new comptroller ditches the tax court, a task force waits for a wave to pass, and the Texas Senate might change it's rules while we're all watching the lower chamber.

Comptroller Susan Combs immediately made good on a big campaign promise, moving the tax courts from her office to the State Office of Administrative Hearings.

The move only involves five judges and, at $431,000, only a relatively small amount of money relative to her agency budget. But the political move is big.

To this point, Texas comptrollers have assessed and collected taxes and oversee the initial judicial review when taxpayers think they've gotten a raw deal. From the taxpayer standpoint, it's as if the cop, the prosecutor and the judge all worked for the same boss.

The cops and the prosecutors are still with Combs, but taxpayers who disagree with the deal they're getting from the comptroller will now take their cases to a separate agency for hearings. There are some limited cases, apparently, that can still come back to the tax folks at the LBJ building, but for the most part, Combs won't have final say when taxpayers disagree.

If SOAH doesn't make them happy, taxpayers will be able to do what they've always been able to do — take the state to court.

The five people moved to SOAH with the judicial section are Joe Greco, Eleanor Kim, Anne Perez, Roy Scudday, and Al Stoll.

Because You Weren't Looking

The govenor's office delayed the release of his task force's report on appraisal reform and caps and all that. They didn't want it buried under the noisy session beginning. That means — though no one is saying so out loud — that they didn't want the speaker's race to overshadow a major announcement.

Because You Might Not Be Looking

Most of the attention at the start of the session will be on the House. While that's going on, the Texas Senate will start with a motion to adopt the same old rules and then possibly move to a couple of other ideas that are floating around.

Sen.-elect Dan Patrick, R-Houston, told his voters he'd try to knock down the rule that requires two-thirds of the Senate to approve something before it can be considered. He has said that empowers the Democrats who are in the minority and limits the Republicans who have the majority.

There's a proposal floating around to lower the requirement from two-thirds, or 21 votes, to three-fifths, or 19. That'd move less dramatically in the same direction and follow the lead of the U.S. Senate.

And there's a proposal to give every member one free run at any piece of legislation, allowing them to introduce something without the two-thirds obstacle. Last session, that would have brought at least two hot items to the full Senate that in fact never came to a vote: caps on increases in appraised property values, and slot machines at horse and dog tracks.

The Senate will caucus — that's a respectable term for doing their work without you watching — before they take up the rules, to decide how to decide what to do.

What the camera caught outside the Austin Club, where House Speaker Tom Craddick talked to his supporters Sunday night.The videographers caught 63 members coming to hear the incumbent.

Rep. Jim Pitts withdrew from the race for speaker after his side lost a procedural vote that would have made members' votes secret until after the new speaker had made committee assignments. That left House Speaker Tom Craddick as the sole nominee in the race, securing a third term for the Midland Republican. Pitts didn't cite the 80-68 vote total on that procedural issue. But after speaking briefly, shaking hands, and hugging Craddick, he told the full House that he didn't want to endanger House members who had told him they'd vote for him if they could do so in a secret ballot. "In my campaign for Speaker I promised my colleagues I would not expose them to a selection process that would leave them vulnerable to retribution. I felt the adopted ballot resolution that required the publication of their names did just that," he said. Had the disclosure passed the way it was intended, the winner of the race for speaker would have had to make committee assignments without knowing who had supported and who had opposed him. The argument was that the assignments would be based on merit rather than loyalty. By forcing a vote on whether the ballots should be opened to the public immediately or after committees are assigned, Craddick's side effectively forced a test vote on the contest between the speaker and Pitts, the Waxahachie Republican who has been his appropriations chairman. That was that. The few folks actually counting votes might have had a notion before the rest of the people in the room were clued in — Pitts told reporters he knew he was cooked well before he conceded. But the procedural vote, and the record vote sheets that spread quickly through the room, showed all of the representatives who stood where, more or less, on the Craddick-Pitts contest. Craddick's challengers were seven votes short of the 75 needed to knock off the incumbent. Once they were flushed out and it was obvious that Craddick had the votes to win, Pitts didn't see any reason to go on. After Pitts quit, the actual vote to keep Craddick in office was 121-27, with all of the Nays coming from Democrats. How they voted: AYES - 80 (65 Republicans, 15 Democrats) Democrats: Bailey; Chavez; Deshotel; Dukes; Dutton; Flores; Giddings; Guillen; T. King; Lucio; McClendon; Pena; Puente; Rose; Turner. Republicans: Anderson; Aycock; Berman; Bohac; Bonnen; Branch; B. Brown; Callegari; Chisum; Christian; B. Cook; Corte; Crabb; Craddick; Creighton; Crownover; Darby; J. Davis; Delisi; Driver; Eissler; England; Flynn; Gattis; Goolsby; Hamilton; Hancock; Hardcastle; Harless; Harper-Brown; Hartnett; Hilderbran; Hill; C. Howard; Isett; Jackson; Keffer; P. King; S. King; Kolkhorst; Krusee; Laubenberg; Macias; Madden; Miller; Morrison; Mowery; Murphy; Orr; Otto; Parker; Patrick; Paxton; Phillips; Riddle; W. Smith; Smithee; Solomons; Swinford; Taylor; Truitt; Van Arsdale; Woolley; Zedler; Zerwas. NAYS - 68 (54 Democrats, 14 Republicans) Democrats: A. Allen; Alonzo; Anchia; Bolton; Burnam; Caraway; Castro; Cohen; Coleman; R. Cook; Y. Davis; Dunnam; Eiland; Escobar; Farabee; Farias; Farrar; Frost; Gallego; Garcia; Gonzales; Gonzalez Toureilles; Heflin; Hernandez; Herrero; Hightower-Pierson; Hochberg; Hodge; Homer; Hopson; D. Howard; Leibowitz; Martinez; Martinez Fischer; McReynolds; Menendez; Miles; Moreno; Naishtat; Noriega; Oliveira; Olivo; Ortiz; Pickett; Quintanilla; Raymond; Ritter; Rodriguez; Strama; Thompson; Vaught; Veasey; Villarreal; Vo. Republicans: Elkins; Geren; Haggerty; Hughes; D. Jones; Kuempel; Latham; McCall; Merritt; Pitts; T. Smith; Straus; Talton; West. Rep. Fred Brown, R-Bryan, was absent, and HD-29 is empty until after a special election later this month.

Briefly. . .We spent most of our time in the lower chamber, watching the race for speaker, but the Senate did a couple of things you should know about. First, they adopted their rules, rolling freshmen Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, in the process. He has campaigned for an end to the rule that two-thirds of the Senate must approve before any legislation can be considered on the floor. The vote was 30-1. Second, the senate named its newest president pro tempore. It's Mario Gallegos, D-Houston.

The Legislative Budget Board says, officially now, that the state budget can't grow more than 13.1 percent over the next two years.The only problem is that lawmakers already know it'll grow more than 30 percent because of their agreement to lower local school property taxes and make up the difference with state funds. That promise alone would force them past the spending cap. And the regular stuff in the budget — increased school and prison populations, health and human service caseloads and costs, and so on — will be added on top of that. Lawmakers will have to vote to break the spending limit sometime this session. Some are nervous that their voters won't understand that or that their opponents will exploit it. So they're looking for escape routes. One possibility is to pass a constitutional amendment — quickly, so voters can see it in May — that says the school money doesn't count against the cap. That would give them cover, if voters approved it. If voters didn't, though, it would just increase the risk of spending the money. An amendment requires two-thirds approval from both halves of the Legislature to get on the ballot, then a thumbs-up from voters. Some legislators don't think this is a big deal, and that group includes some conservative Republicans. They think they can explain the spending surge easily, just telling voters that was a one-time consequence of lowering property taxes.

Gov. Rick Perry will ask the Legislature to fast-track legislation that passes along the school property tax cuts to homeowners with over-65 exemptions. When lawmakers replaced local school taxes with a new state tax last year, they left elderly homeowners out of the deal. Those taxpayers already had their rates frozen — that's the benefit of the over-65 exemption. But there was no provision to cut their rates along with everyone else's. Perry will declare that an emergency item, allowing the Legislature to act right away (without that tag, legislation can't be passed by either chamber until the session has run for 60 days. The break for seniors requires a constitutional amendment; that could be on the ballot as early as May.

Gov. Rick Perry starts the session with higher education, health care, border security, appraisals and the state budget on his list of things to do. The governor, who'll be sworn in for his second full four-year term next week, lived through a day of serial interviews with reporters, taking small bunches for a half-hour at a time.

You'll see varied reports depending on what he said to which group and what they thought was important. Some of the high points from our group's interview:

• The Guv foreshadowed initiatives in higher education, health care, border security and appraisals. He's teasing now, saving the surprises for later. But he gave some hints, saying he'd have "a very intriguing and thoughtful way to address that big group of, the working uninsured in particular." Asked whether it would be like programs passed in Massachusetts or proposed in California, he offered, "Not like California."

He said the border security program will be partly what he's already outlined; during his reelection campaign, he said the state should spend $100 million fighting border crime. "It's a shame we have to spent $100 million when it's the federal government's job — it's kind of like us having to deliver our own mail," he said. He said it would be "idiotic" to build a fence from El Paso to Brownsville — though he thinks they make sense in some urban areas — and said much of the legislation that's been filed on immigration is divisive and in some cases, unconstitutional. And he said border security was one issue he thought was clearly addressed by Texas voters in November.

He didn't say what he wants to do with higher education. But asked what he thinks is wrong with it, he said it should be more accountable, more affordable, more accessible, more competitive and more open. He said the value of college isn't clear enough to enough people. It's not clear to them how it's priced, or what — exactly — they get for their money. He said the state should figure out how to keep more of its smart kids in Texas schools instead of exporting them, and said that community colleges have an important role to play. "I'm not saying on the face that there are any huge problems, but I'm not saying there aren't, either," he said.

• A state water plan — and water issues generally — could be important sleeper issues this session (former Sen. Ken Armbrister, Perry's new legislative director and a veteran of several water law fights, sat nearby, nodding). He said East Texans might decide some time to sell water "rather than let it run out into the Gulf," but he said he's against inter-basin transfers unless "the basin wants to." He called water the only real limiting factor on the state's growth. He said he's looking at everything: conservation, reservoirs, desalination, and water transfers. The real push, he said, will be on reservoirs. And he went out of his way to slap "the antics of those in the environmental going out and trying to create reserves in the middle of a reservoir site."

• He said the press ought to lay off lawmakers on the spending cap and whether busting it is a big deal. Perry said it's goofy to call a tax cut a spending plan, and said that's a sort of "lawyering the numbers" that only makes sense in Austin and Washington. The budget folk would say — anonymously, if they have any sense — that the state is spending more money so that the local school districts can spend less. Perry said it won't be a messy political mire unless the media and other troublemakers make it one.

• Perry said only half of the $14.3 billion in new money reported by Comptroller Susan Combs can actually be called a surplus. Even that's a big number, in his estimation, but some of it is encumbered.

• He'll back what he called "a real spending limit" as opposed to the one the state has now, and hinted — without details — that he'll have a proposal along those lines. His appraisal task force is expected to issue a report soon that will include recommendations for leashes on spending by cities and counties. Perry apparently wants the state government similarly shackled.

• He reiterated his support for operational funding for a Texas Tech Medical School facility in El Paso and said it was a shame the state didn't fund it last time around (it got stuck in the House).

• He had high praise for Combs' decision to put spending records from her agency online, and said his office would soon follow. They need help from the comptroller to do that and wanted to wait until Combs was in office. Her predecessor, Carole Keeton Strayhorn, ran against Perry last year, and they don't get along so well.

Every returning senator who chaired a committee in the previous Legislature kept their position in this new lineup.

The 31-member Senate has five new members. Only one of the five senators they replaced — the late Frank Madla, D-San Antonio — chaired a committee.

• Dallas Sen. Royce West, a Democrat, lost the chairmanship of the Subcommittee on Higher Education, which went to Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo. He also lost the vice chairmanship of the parent committee, Education, to Republican Sen. Kyle Janek of Houston. But he's a chairman now, heading the Intergovernmental Relations panel.

• The other new chairman is Sen. Mario Gallegos, who heads the newly created Subcommittee on Flooding & Evacuations.

Sen. Chris Harris, R-Arlington, is apparently still in the doghouse with the lieutenant governor. A senator since 1991, he's on some strong committees. But he doesn't chair any of them.

• El Paso Sen. Eliot Shapleigh's campaign assertion that he'd been assured a spot on the Finance Committee didn't come true. At a campaign forum during his reelection bid, Shapleigh said Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst had promised him a spot on the budget-writing panel. Asked then, aides to Dewhurst ducked, saying the Lite Guv hadn't made up his mind about who would be on what committee. A spot was open at the time — it had been emptied by the resignation of Madla (who died a few months later in a fire at his home) — but it didn't go to  Shapleigh.

• The Finance Committee has three new members in its highly coveted spots: Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler; Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay; and Eddie Lucio, D-Brownsville. Two of those spots were opened by departures (Madla and Sen.-turned-Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples); the other belonged to Sen. Kim Brimer, R-Fort Worth. Brimer had spots on Business & Commerce and Finance last session and now has spots on Government Organization and Natural Resources instead.

• There are 15 standing committees and five subcommittees. Republicans chair 10 of the committees and two of the subcommittees, leaving the Democrats with five and three, respectively. Women chair three committees and one subcommittee. Hispanics chair two committees and two subcommittees. Blacks chair two committees.