Perry talked to reporters about unemployment insurance stimulus money (he doesn't like it and thinks it would raise taxes, but won't talk veto), secession (he's not for it and has some words for Jay Leno), the budget (he thinks "it's pretty good work" and discounts veto rumors), windstorm insurance and his own budget ("groundhog day").
The Texas Senate bucked the governor, voting out a bill that would change the state's Unemployment Insurance program in order to attract $556 million in federal stimulus funds.
Gov. Rick Perry opposes those changes, calling them strings that he fears will remain in place when the federal money is gone. Federal officials have said, in writing, that the state can change its UI program later, reverting to the current system when that money is gone. But they can't include an automatic reversion now. Perry and others fear the Legislature would never go back once it had made the benefits available to people who aren't eligible now.
The issue doesn't break on party lines, though all of the 'no' votes came from Republicans (GOP senators, however, split their votes). Some agree with the Guv. Others say the federal money lowers by $556 million the deficit taxes Texas employers will have to pay to keep the UI system going in a recession. The Texas Association of Business and the Texas wing of the National Federation for Independent Business are with Perry on this one; the Texas AFL-CIO, among others, thinks the state should make the changes and take the money.
The changes in eligibility will cost the state an estimated $70 million to $80 million annually, and the bill by Sen. Kevin Eltife, R-Tyler, would create a commission to study the system to recommend any future changes. That's the means for a reversion to what's there now — or an overhaul in a few years.
• The next skirmish for the People of Tort will be in the House; the Senate approved an asbestos claims bill supported by labor officials and trial lawyers and opposed by businesses that want to limit lawsuits. The bill in question — authored by Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, changes the standard for linking a cancer called mesothelioma to asbestos products. Texans for Lawsuit Reform and the Texas Civil Justice League say Duncan's bill makes it easier for victims to win those lawsuits; the Texas AFL-CIO and the Texas Trial Lawyers Association support the bill and say Duncan's proposed standard is fairer than the current one.
Tax Day tea party protests swept the nation and the blogosphere. Bloggers are also talking about Gov. Rick Perry's flirtation with Texas secession, bills that have cleared at least one chamber and legislation that hasn't made it yet. Wrapping it up are speculations on next year's elections and other posts.
* * * * *
Mad Hattery
Tea party attendance was about 750,000 nationwide, says Travis Monitor. In Austin, Urban Grounds says at least 2,000 people showed up for the morning party at City Hall, while Patriot Writer says 5,000 folks went to Austin's afternoon tea party.
Blue Dot Blues has video of herself speaking at the Austin tea party. KVUE's Political Junkie got her hands on the tea party speech by Texas GOP Chair Tina Benkiser. And Travis Monitor has a report from Austin and also posts photos from other cities' events.
Lone Star Times reports 8,532 names on sign-in sheets at the Houston rally, where they took pictures, too. Greg's Opinion also has pics from Houston, and Texas Sparkle has an aerial shot of the rally here. Half Empty went to a rally in the next town over, Sugar Land (more here).
Brazosport News attended a party in Oklahoma City and took photos. "It was, by and large, a gray-headed crowd. Very polite," the blogger says. WhosPlayin shot about an hour of video of the Lewisville party. And Panhandle Truth Squad has photos from the Amarillo tea party here and here.
Walker Report has images from San Antonio. Refuse the Juice reports that about 1,500 people attended the El Paso tea party, and Texas Fred puts up a poster advertising the tea party in Rowlett, Texas.
Travis Monitor has five ideas for the future of the tea party movement, and Pondering Penguin reflects on the tea parties and where to go from there.
The Houston Chronicle's Texas on the Potomac has video of U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul having tea and a guest blog by U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions about the "grassroots revolt."
Daily Kos was not pleased with the party goers. Texas Kaos says, "this is not revolution. This is frustration..."
* * * * *
Secede Section
Texans for Rick Perry followed their boss man to rallies in the DFW Metroplex, here, here, here and here. Postcards, the Austin American-Statesman's blog, has Perry talking Texas independence on video after the Austin tea party. Junkie has a transcript of an exchange between Perry and the Capitol press corps, where Perry denies saying he wants Texas to leave the union.
"There is little doubt that Perry is serious about seceding from the union. My guess is he's grown tired of fighting it out for last place with Mississippi," says Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, sound bite courtesy NewspaperTree Blog. Blue Dot Blues ponders over the question of whether Texas really can secede or not. Meanwhile, Pondering Penguin "hope[s] the governor chooses his words a bit more carefully next time."
"He is smart enough to know that it is completely asinine and stupid, but apparently still thinks exploiting this intellectually handicapped segment of the population will prove beneficial at election time," Rhetoric & Rhythm says. Bay Area Houston says GOP voters won't choose U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison as their nominee for Governor because she's pro-choice (though she would disagree with that label). Breaking with her boss, In the Pink doesn't think Perry has a good shot at the 2012 GOP Presidential nomination. She posts a video of Perry talking tea, anyway.
Perry received more than 4,000 messages about unemployment insurance stimulus funds, reports the Houston Chronicle's Texas Politics, which has them all in .pdf format. They also posts negative responses to Perry from Texas Democrats, including one who wants Perry's job.
Click here for the wrapup of late night jokes about Texas secession, via Junkie. Meanwhile, Burka accuses the Governor of showing favoritism toward his alma mater Texas A&M. He's also calling for the Lege to abolish Perry's emerging technology fund.
* * * * *
Chamber Made
Junkie pens a congratulatory letter to Senate Bill 769, the first bill to make it past the Lege and Gov. Perry this year. Burnt Orange Report has more information.
Rep. Ryan Guillen, D-Rio Grande City, has gotten seven bills out of the House and 24 more out of committee, he says on his El Wiri Wiri Blog. And Tex Parte Blog says the Senate passed a bill to create a Dallas law school, noting that South Texas has neither a law school nor medical school.
It took the House almost all night to consider more than 250 budget amendments. NewspaperTree Blog goes over them in 30 seconds. Capitol Annex live-blogged the debate until about 1 in the morning, here and here, and also looks at the 15 record votes House members took.
El Paso's state reps went 0-for-2 in budget amendment attempts, reports NewspaperTree Blog. And Burka is asking readers to choose their own House conference committees on the budget.
* * * * *
On Queue
Bay Area Houston previews HB 1821, which would close Texas' primaries. He also live-blogs a Senate committee hearing on HB 2696, concerning mandatory binding arbitration. Meanwhile, Pollabear filmed a rally at UT against campus carry legislation HB 1893 and videoed a House press conference on energy efficiency.
Texas Blue checks out HB 2084 by Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, called the Texas Parental Rights Restoration Act. And Tex Parte writes about HB 1657, addressing the Texas Supreme Court's decision on the Entergy case, which passed out of the House Business and Industry Committee.
* * * * *
Extra Extra
Off the Kuff speculates on possible statewide Democratic candidates in 2010. Annex does the same. Burnt Orange is excited about campaign finance reports in the U.S. Senate race. And KUT's Notes from the Lege says, "He's Baaaaack...," in reference to Kinky Friedman, a Democratic candidate for Governor. (Annex thinks he's terrible.)
Watchdog hired two new freelancers whom Houston-area readers might already be familiar with. And more than 21,000 people applied for their Rep. Betty Brown-approved name, says creator Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, on his Poli-Tex blog.
This edition of Out There was compiled and written by Patrick Brendel, who hails from Victoria but is semi-settled in Austin. We cherry-pick the state's political blogs each week, looking for news, info, gossip, and new jokes. The opinions here belong (mostly) to the bloggers, and we're including their links so you can hunt them down if you wish. Our blogroll — the list of Texas blogs we watch — is on our links page, and if you know of a Texas political blog that ought to be on it, just shoot us a note. Please send comments, suggestions, gripes or retorts to Texas Weekly editor Ross Ramsey.
Some personal injury lawyers' commitment to the proverb, "if at first you don't succeed, try, try again," is apparently paying off. In a shocking vote, the Texas Senate passed a personal injury lawyer sweetheart deal that will allow asbestos lawsuits that require virtually no proof of who caused an asbestos illness. The shakedown asbestos bill is just the latest in some personal injury lawyers' relentless pursuit to find new ways to sue and to circumvent laws to keep junk science out of our courts.
If the asbestos bill becomes law, it would undermine successful 2005 asbestos litigation reforms that are helping truly injured people receive swift and fair compensation and largely rid our courts of bogus asbestos cases based on junk science. In the "bad old days," inventive personal injury lawyers sponsored mobile screening vans and filed lawsuits for anyone who "tested positive" for asbestos illness. Not surprisingly, nine out of 10 claims examined were based on "wrong" conclusions by the lawyers' X-ray technicians, according to a Johns Hopkins University study. A federal judge in Corpus Christi exposed further abuse when she tossed out more than 10,000 silicosis lawsuits explaining the bogus diagnoses had been "manufactured for money."
The "bad old days" of asbestos lawsuit abuse ended in 2005 when reforms established objective medical criteria and expedited the cases of the truly sick. The reforms struck the proper balance of fairness by ensuring that sick people's cases are heard first while preserving the right of people who were exposed to asbestos but who are not sick to file their case later should they become ill. The current law is working to keep junk science out of our courts and to provide efficient and generous compensation for the truly injured; typically between $1.4 million and $4 million per case.
But now the "bad old days" are threatening a comeback. Personal injury lawyers pushed this bill to open the floodgates for yet another onslaught of asbestos cases based on flimsy — or even non-existent — evidence. Senate Bill 1123 (and its companion House Bill 1811) would allow for lawsuits with virtually no proof required that a defendant caused an asbestos-related injury. The bill sets the level of proof so low that even incidental, brief exposure to a small amount of asbestos would be enough to find a business liable regardless of whether the amount of exposure was enough to cause harm. With the bill approved by the Senate, it's up to the House to stand up for common sense and standards.
Just as reforms from 2005 established medical criteria to determine which plaintiffs are actually ill, Texas must have standards to establish who is at fault for the illness. SB 1123/HB 1811 would do away with such "causation" standards. Essentially, any business that ever had any product that contained any asbestos on the premises could be found liable for the illness — regardless if the amount was enough to cause harm.
People who have been injured deserve compensation and that requires actual, solid proof that a specific person or business caused the injury. A shakedown of peripheral players with little to no dealings with asbestos will only foster asbestos lawsuit abuse. Many businesses — both big corporations and small businesses like auto repair shops— are at risk. Since so little evidence would be necessary under SB 1123/HB 1811, businesses would be forced to settle regardless of liability because they can't afford the cost of a lawsuit and the threat of unlimited damages. Forced settlements and abusive lawsuits ultimately costs jobs by siphoning resources away from a company's payroll. Now is hardly the time to jeopardize more jobs in this economic crisis.
The personal injury lawyers' motive to expand asbestos litigation is simple: Now that reforms have clamped down on junk science asbestos lawsuits, personal injury lawyers are looking to expand the pot of money up for grabs by suing anyone, even if they're not at a fault. SB 1123 and HB 1811 pave the way for a resurrection of the kind of lawsuit abuse that once made Texas infamous. Lawyers may try and try again to find new ways to line their pockets but Texas lawmakers would be wise to ensure they don't succeed on their watch.
Chip Hough is chairman of Bay Area Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse, and managing partner with Basic Industries of South Texas, which operates in South Texas, Corpus Christi and San Antonio.
Texas Weekly's Soapbox is a venue for opinions, spins, alternate takes, and other interesting stuff sent in by readers and others. We moderate submissions to keep crazy people out, and anonymous commentary is ineligible. Readers can respond (through the moderator) to things posted here. Got something to submit? We're interested in everything from full-blown opinion pieces to short bits to observations or tidbits that have escaped us and the mass media. One rule: Your name goes on your words. Call or send an email: Ross Ramsey, Editor, Texas Weekly, 512/288-6598, ramsey@texasweekly.com.
I recently found myself unexpectedly at the center of a national controversy.I testified at a hearing held by the Texas House Elections Committee on a bill that would impose significant restrictions on the identification voters must provide at the polls. Numerous studies have shown that such legislation disenfranchises minority, low-income, and elderly voters and voters with disabilities. Asian Americans encountered particular problems voting in 2008 in states with such laws, such as Florida, but because no one had testified on how the legislation would impact Asian American voters, I signed up to speak at the hearing.
Little did I expect that two days later, stories about questions State Rep. Betty Brown asked me regarding Asian names would be blasted by media nationwide. Since then, when asked how I felt about Rep. Brown's remarks, I said I found it jarring, but just because some people may have limited experience with another culture, it doesn't necessarily mean they're racist. Though I can only speak for myself, I believe she may have been trying, in her own uninformed way, to address some of the issues I raised in my testimony.
However, Rep. Brown should carefully rethink her image of who is and isn't an American, because her comments indicate that certain assumptions, even when innocent, can lead to real and damaging consequences. For example, I am still bothered by the continued lack of understanding about how Voter ID legislation will deprive many Asian Americans of the right to vote. As I stated in my testimony, Asian Americans often encounter problems voting in states with ID laws because of mismatches between the name on the required ID and the voter rolls.
Many Asian Americans adopt "anglicized" names such as John or Mary for convenience, which may also be the names used on their drivers licenses, but not the voter rolls. Other Asian Americans who choose to transliterate their Chinese, Japanese, or Korean names into the Roman alphabet encounter problems because the unfamiliarity of the structure and spelling of such names leads to errors in government records or because the voter has changed the transliteration over time based on what works better for others.
Rep. Brown's comments imply that she believes these problems could be solved by coming up with an easier way to transliterate Asian names. Others have suggested that if Asian American voters are using multiple names, then some restriction should be imposed.
These arguments miss the point. Many of those who work with immigrants already advise people to be consistent in the name they use on different documentation, but we still have millions of naturalized citizens who already have this problem. Not everyone has the luxury of an expensive attorney or the ability to find free resources to help new immigrants learn and navigate the path to naturalized citizenship, and few people understand the full legal significance of every piece of paper from day one.
Not long ago, before 9/11 and the Information Age, identification wasn't as central to American life. Unlike many foreign countries where citizens are tracked cradle to grave, Americans took pride in our freedom from Big Brother's "papers." That's why many Americans still oppose a national ID card, and many didn't give paperwork and record-keeping much thought. Many Americans will discover plenty of discrepancies they never bothered to check or correct if they go back through their records, such as maiden or married name changes.
Finally, and most importantly, existing Texas election law already requires voters to prove their identity by using a voter registration card or another form of ID. A few typos and clerical errors notwithstanding, there is no firm evidence of voter impersonation. However, legislators like Betty Brown want to impose far-reaching, radical changes to the way we vote while glossing over major unintended consequences by blithely telling voters like me that we should just come up with some way to "make it easier," even if that affects our names. Other problems will affect the elderly, the poor, and others if this legislation passes. But the Voter ID advocates, driven by a political agenda, imply that those problems are our fault for wanting to vote, and our fault if we lose the right to vote.
Ramey Ko is a member of the OCA-Greater Houston Chapter; founded in 1973 as the Organization of Chinese Americans, OCA is now a national organization dedicated to advancing the social, political, and economic well-being of Asian Pacific Americans.
Texas Weekly's Soapbox is a venue for opinions, spins, alternate takes, and other interesting stuff sent in by readers and others. We moderate submissions to keep crazy people out, and anonymous commentary is ineligible. Readers can respond (through the moderator) to things posted here. Got something to submit? We're interested in everything from full-blown opinion pieces to short bits to observations or tidbits that have escaped us and the mass media. One rule: Your name goes on your words. Call or send an email: Ross Ramsey, Editor, Texas Weekly, 512/288-6598, ramsey@texasweekly.com.
After the tempest over Gov. Rick Perry's comments on secession (he brought it up without advocating it, but said you never know what Texans might do if they're not treated right by the federal government), Texas House Democrats ordered some t-shirts to commemorate the event.
Neither of the two members of the Texas Railroad Commission looking hungrily at a possible opening in the U.S. Senate is up for election next year. Not now, they're not.Both Elizabeth Ames Jones and Michael Williams can concentrate their political attention on their respective efforts to succeed Kay Bailey Hutchison when she leaves office. Jones isn't on the ballot until 2012, and Williams' term runs through 2014. But all that could change. Replacing the three commissioners with one — elected every four years — is on its way to the full House. It would require a constitutional amendment that would be on the ballot as early as November. And that could demand political attention from Jones and Williams. On the other hand, it could provide a public platform for a couple of state officials seeking wider attention and recognition. Rep. David Farabee, D-Wichita Falls, is the sponsor; it's out of committee waiting for a spot on the calendar. Another bill, by Rep. Tommy Merritt, R-Longview, would prohibit commissioners from running for office during their term at RRC. That one's still in committee waiting for a vote.
Dewhurst wants to bring his own wine. Sharp wants to be his sommelier.The Senate Administration Committee veered from its normal duties to take up a liquor bill — approving a proposal (SB 2523) that would allow people to take their own wine into restaurants that already sell wine, to pay a corkage fee and to take whatever's left in their bottle home with them at the end of the evening. That's an extremely local issue, at least for now: Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst told senators he'd like to be able to take his own wines into local joints whose cellars don't include his favorites. The Lite Guv's staff says the bill was requested by the Texas Restaurant Association. The sponsor, Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, feigns ignorance about all of that. But after word of the bill got out — the Associated Press was the first to report it — one of Dewhurst's former opponents — Democrat John Sharp — sent a bottle of wine to his office. It's probably not the wine Dewhurst had in mind, though.
Check your rearview mirror.
Here, Gov. Rick Perry, raising the specter of secession without actually advocating it, raising his profile inside and outside these sovereign borders.
There, the Texas House — the Fight Club of Texas government — doing everything but roasting s'mores and singing "Swing Low, Sweet Chariot" around the campfire.
All the while, the Senate was chugging away, ambitiously passing dozens of bills and sending them to an uncertain fate in the molasses factory on the other side of the building.
That was some piece of road. And the trip's not over.
House and Senate conferees — as soon as they are named — will start their budget parley. The House is banging away on real legislation now after weeks of relative peace and quiet and a remarkably slow pace.
The 19-hour debate on the budget gave members and their leaders their first real look at how the various factions line up, and on what issues. When they split on straight party lines, it'll be something close to a tie. That's been apparent since November. Other fault lines are just now starting to show. It's too early to lock this down, but when the House splits on lines of power (as opposed to party, or something else), the outties have 55 to 60 votes. The harmony during the budget debate — borne of a mutual pact to drop amendments that had fatal procedural flaws — helped members avoid partisan warfare and skirmishes left over from the speaker race at the first of the session.
Now look ahead.
Sunset legislation for the Texas Department of Insurance could be a battleground. The Senate passed its version after a series of 18-12 party-line votes (Chris Harris, R-Arlington, was out sick), without Republicans fending off Democratic amendments that would have, among other things, created an elected insurance commissioner and given state regulators more oversight over rates. Several House members ran on those issues, and the House numbers are closer than those in the upper chamber.
The Texas Department of Transportation's Sunset bill is in there, too, with toll roads and Spanish engineers and funding shortages and so on.
College tuition, admission, and weaponry, local transportation taxes and fees and projects, public school accountability, property tax reforms, franchise tax adjustments, eminent domain, clean air, windstorm insurance... all of that is still ahead as the final month approaches.
Keep Monday, May 11, in mind. That's the last day, in practical terms, that a House committee can report out a House bill or resolution and have any hope of success. That date also marks the beginning of a series of deadlines that dot the last three weeks of the session.
Sharon Keller goes on the grill next week, when a House committee considers a resolution calling for her impeachment. Keller is the presiding judge on the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, and will face questions about turning away a death penalty appeal that came in after the 5 p.m. deadline. The inmate was executed a few hours later. The State Commission on Judicial Conduct will hold hearings this summer on the episode. The House will do it on Monday.
• A Senate committee approved an eminent domain bill similar to one vetoed by the governor two years ago. That legislation from Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, restricts government use of eminent domain for economic development (private sector) reasons. Agriculture groups, among others, have been pushing for it since a U.S. Supreme Court decision a few years ago. In his veto message two years ago, Rick Perry said that version created new causes of action for lawyers to pursue.
• Cities and counties are gearing up for the latest property tax battle. They oppose a bill that would set up automatic rollback elections when local governments raise taxes more than five percent. In current law, those elections are triggered when the rates rise more than eight percent and enough citizens sign a petition to force the rollback election. Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, got his bill out of committee this week.
The House, meanwhile, wants the state comptroller to test local appraisal values less frequently. The comptroller does an annual study to try to make sure local property values are properly set, since those values are tied to school taxes and the state's funding for public schools is based on how much money comes in from local property taxes. Rep. John Otto, R-Dayton, and others say the state's annual study drives up values and forces tax increases on local property owners. He wants the state to review the local numbers every two years instead of annually. And it would allow more variance between the state and local opinions on property value. Right now, a district that's off by more than five percent gets corrected. Under Otto's bill, they'd be allowed to be off by up to ten percent in either direction.
• Unless leprechauns leave pots of gold laying around, the Texas Department of Transportation will have to forego maintenance to keep up with spending on new roads. The agency, in a friendly letter to the Senate (which asked for it), spells out the financial box it's in: Maintenance is already underfunded. Federal funding is only semi-reliable. Fuel taxes don't produce enough money to build the roads on the books. And state revenues aren't big enough to support the sale of all of the bonds voters have approved. The agency could have a $275 million difference between its plans for 2009 and 2010 and what's actually available.
• Vice President Joe Biden plans fundraising stops in Austin and Houston next week and will also visit the National Domestic Violence Hotline Center in Austin on that trip.