Sure things aren’t what they used to be. The special session ends next week, and lawmakers haven't wrapped any of the handful of issues on their agenda. The proverbial fat lady hasn't sung yet, but she is backstage, warming up.

Lawmakers, suddenly aware of what time it is, will work at least one day this weekend to try to get finished before their Tuesday deadline.

* * * * *

If the script calls for legislators to rubber stamp maps that were drawn by federal judges for the 2012 elections, and if legislators do that on two of three maps but change the lines in the third one, does that mess up the movie?

Attorney General Greg Abbott’s idea of getting lawmakers to ratify maps drawn by federal judges — and by doing so, to abandon the maps approved by lawmakers two years ago and all of the losing litigation now attached to them — was going just great until the Texas House arrived. Like the Senate, the House approved the Senate and congressional maps as drawn by the courts without adding so much as a fingerprint. But they made some changes to the House map, which now goes back to the Senate for a blessing or a demand for negotiation.

Only two questions really matter at this point, and they’re related: What maps will be used in 2014 and will the primaries take place in March or later? That ball will move from the Legislature — whatever it ends up doing during its summer overtime — to the courts.

* * * * *

Abortion legislation is still winding through the Legislature with time running short enough to make some of the players nervous about Senate filibusters and House chubs. That’s what happens when you take two weeks off in the middle of a 30-day special session, but it’s also too early for any pronouncements. There is still time to finish if they want to. The Senate took out a ban on abortions after 20 weeks, but House conservatives are pushing to add that back in. If the versions are different, they’ll have to reconcile them and take them back to the bodies for approval. That takes time and gives opponents, in the closing days, some tools they didn’t have earlier in the session.

* * * * *

Transportation funding is in the House, where the Rainy Day Fund is starring as the Golden Calf and nitpickers from the right and the left are starting to find some substance to their arguments about splitting state income destined for the RDF and sending half of it to highways. This one is very much alive but no sure thing.

* * * * *

The fix to sentencing guidelines for 17-year-old capital murderers has become a constitutional law seminar and bogging down what was probably the simplest — most straightforward, anyhow — of the special session’s issues. Like the others, it’s alive and incomplete.

* * * * *

Sideshows are abundant around the close of this special session. Appropriations Chairman Jim Pitts, R-Waxahachie, is testing support for impeachment of University of Texas Regent Wallace Hall, who was confirmed by the Senate earlier this year. State Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, is looking for allies in finding funding for the public integrity unit at the Travis County district attorney’s office. That funding was vetoed by Gov. Rick Perry because of his disapproval of Rosemary Lehmberg, the district attorney. She served jail time for drunken driving earlier this year and Perry conditioned continued state funding of the unit on her resignation. She didn’t go and he vetoed the spending and Turner is trying to find a way to put it back together.

And the political announcements are about to start. Maybe. The governor told Bloomberg News that he will announce his plans for 2014 by July 1 and his plans for 2016 sometime after that. All the others are waiting, as you can see by this list of known and mentioned candidates for various statewide offices (the caveat that some are just looking and some will actually run is the explanation behind the asterisk in the chart).

Even the Americans who cared to do so probably hadn’t read the Supreme Court’s opinion on an Arizona election case before U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, filed legislation to overturn it.

In a case with implications for Texas, the high court ruled in Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council of Arizona that the state must use a simple federal voter registration form created in 1993 instead of a state-issued form that requires proof of citizenship.

Cruz was not amused. He immediately filed an amendment to the Senate’s omnibus immigration reform bill authored by the so-called Gang of Eight that he said would fix the “loophole” that preempts states from enacting their own voting requirements.

“Justice Alito said in his dissent, ‘I do not think that this is what Congress intended’ and I agree with him,” Cruz said in a statement. “The Court’s ruling leaves a hole in federal law that allows non-citizens to register by using the promulgated federal form without showing proof of citizenship. This encourages voter fraud and we must ensure that our elections are fair and accurately reflect the will of our citizens.”

Under penalty of perjury, Texans must swear they are citizens when they register, even though the Texas secretary of state doesn’t require showing actual proof.

It’s unclear whether the Senate will adopt the Cruz amendment: His efforts to tweak the bill have not been well received so far, and Democrats control the upper chamber.

But some analysts said that justices created an outline for states to enact the proof-of-citizenship measure and defend it in lower courts. In short — get ready for another fight on voting, court watchers said.

Reporter Lyle Denniston of SCOTUSblog is a 50-year veteran of the high court beat and said the ruling, if not read closely, is easily misunderstood.

The Supreme Court, he wrote, gave Congress more power to expand the pool of eligible voters but simultaneously solidified the states’ rights in determining who gets to cast a ballot.

“The apparent bottom line: states cannot now require voters to show proof that they are U.S. citizens, but the Court has given them a plan that could gain them that power,” he said.

That plan, according to the opinion, he added, would be to have attorneys for Arizona — or any state for that matter, like, say, Texas — seek the federal government’s permission to add the proof-of-citizenship requirement.

“And, Scalia said, if that doesn’t work — either because the federal agency that would deal with such a request is either not functioning or says no — then a state would be free to go to court and make an argument that it has a constitutional right to insist on proof of citizenship as an absolute qualification for voting, in all elections,” he wrote.

So why does this matter to Texas? Democrats and Republicans have waited all month for the high court’s looming decision on Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, which requires that several states — including Texas — seek and gain approval from the federal government before enacting laws that affect elections.

Even if Section 5 is kept in tact, Scalia’s “roadmap” on how to argue for the citizenship requirement could also be used to fight in favor of voter ID laws in any state.

This week in the Texas Weekly Newsreel: The end of the special session is in sight, the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune polls are out and a judge says new school finance litigation case will begin in January. 

You can view the video at: https://trib.it/105jfsO

This week, we asked the insiders some questions we were also asking Texas voters in the University of Texas/Texas Weekly Poll, and we’ll compare the insiders with the public in a later post. For now, we’ll stick to the political and government folks who take part in Inside Intelligence

Exactly half said things in the state of Texas are going in the right direction, while only 36 percent said as much about the country. The local grass is greener, apparently: 59 percent think the country is on the wrong track, while 47 percent said the same about the state.

Just over half said the quality of public education in the state is good (another 2 percent rated it excellent) while 38 percent said it’s not very good (and 4 percent chose “terrible”).

Only 43 percent said high schools should be trying to get all students ready for college, while 56 percent disagreed with that idea (a position that puts them in agreement with recent legislative action).

Fewer still — 38 percent — said they would oppose a ban on state officials collecting public pensions while still on the state payroll. Supporters of a prohibition accounted for 58 percent of the answers.

And in the midst of a redistricting debate, 62 of the insiders said they would support taking the mapmaking away from legislators and giving it instead to an independent, appointed commission.

We collected comments along the way and have attached the full set. A sampling follows:

Thinking about the country, do you think that things are headed in the right direction, or do you think that things are headed off on the wrong track?"

• "The nation could be better. We should be a world leader in democracy, education and honoring diversity. People living in America should have access to universal pre-k and health care. America should pass a real and just immigration law that provides valid path to citizenship, and, workers should be paid their worth. Voters should be able to vote and have their vote count. The nation has a long way to go."

• "Big pluses: Iraq and Afghanistan wars ending, anti-terror strategies working, economy moving along. Big minuses: federal government spying on journalists and citizens, drumbeat for war in Syria."

• "If it were not for the ridiculous partisan gridlock, I'd say 'right direction'."

• "Anemic growth, Out of control gov't, Scandals everywhere, No foreign policy"

• "But this has less to do with national policy and more to do with economics"

• "I am more proud of being a Texan than an American these days."

Thinking about the state, do you think that things are headed in the right direction, or do you think that things are headed off on the wrong track?

• "If you were to ask me that question in 2011, I would have said on the wrong track. I've seen us bounce back from some serious budget issues, criticism aside as to how we balanced the budget, but I think the state as a whole pitched in and is helping us get to better and higher ground."

• "As a conservative, I am obligated to say we are moving in the right track. But, unless our state fixes public education, our infrastructure, and our water issues, we are headed to a rude awakening."

• "Impoverishing public education and building an economy based on natural resources and low-wage service jobs is no way to prepare for competition in a technologically advanced world."

• "Seemingly ok, but not addressing big ticket items that we need to sustain the state through difficult economic times and during major growth time..."

• "Despite the best efforts of many at the Capitol, the forces of 1950 remain strong."

• "It would be helpful if state leadership wasn't so insulated, wasting far too much time bloviating about social issues. Still, our government spending is in check, we are slowing giving our educational system a chance to succeed and we remain the job creating engine for the entire country."

Would you say that the quality of public education in Texas is:

• "Too many children face poverty and chaotic family lives in their formative years, and the testing industry is consuming too much school time and resources. Despite these challenges, public education does better than one should expect."

• "We won't really know anymore thanks to HB 5. Soccer moms have made sure everyone now gets a diploma... er, ribbon. (And now will move to get only healthy snacks served at all commencements.)"

• "We already spend a boat load and in many cases still get crappy results. When will we learn that more money does not solve the problem. Look at HISD. Cesspool corrupt and total failure. And they want more money. REALY????"

• "Generally depends on whether you're in a suburban school district (then it's to Good to Excellent), rural school district (depends, but generally Good), or an urban school district (Not Very Good). It really depends on where the parents can afford to live."

• "It's far better than average for the U.S., even though funding has been below average. Anglos, Hispanics, blacks all get a better education here than in most places."

• "No objective person can look at our dropout rate, literacy rate, and juvenile crime rate and claim the quality is good."

• "The Teachers Unions, who proved they control the Legislature in the most recent session, are not interested in quality education. They are only interested in themselves. Why else would they try to block an increase in Charter Schools -- (we don't mind having a few exemplary schools, we just don't want a lot of them). Public education will never succeed in Texas until that union is busted."

• "The answer to this question, unfortunately, is it depends which school district you are in. Some are beyond excellent and some are terrible."

• "I went to public school and became a lobbyist. I sure hope education has improved since the days when I was there."

Do you think that public high schools in Texas should have course and graduation requirements that encourage all students to attend college?

• "There are many competent professions that do not require a college degree, but are just as technologically demanding e.g. have you looked under the hood of a car lately and the technology required to make it function?"

• "But we can do this with multiple pathways a la HB 5. Saying we should try to prepare all students for postsecondary education doesn't mean we should try to cram them into a one-size-fits-all approach. The reductionist thinking of critics of HB 5 reduces everything to Algebra II--simplistic thinking for a complex topic."

• "If every student received an adequate education in K-12, then he/she can choose for themselves. That's public education's responsibility--it is NOT to decide for the students."

• "Why is it that the 'college isn't for every kid' line comes mostly from white males in the Legislature, superintendents (more white males) who don't really want to be held accountable for educating minority/low-income kids, and soccer moms from the suburbs?"

• "This is a ridiculous idea. College is not for everyone."

• "It should encourage college as next step. If they choose vocational school instead, at least it is expected that they do SOMETHING to educate for future employment."

• "College isn't for everyone. If you don't believe that, go talk to the folks in the Eagle Ford or the Permian Basin who are making six figures driving trucks."

Would you support or oppose prohibiting elected officials from receiving public pensions what they are still collecting a state paycheck?

• "The public pension system needs review. Why should well-paid public officials get guaranteed benefits now that the private sector uses defined contributions? A well paid public official should get a 401k like Americans working in the private sector and have the same choices about accessing those savings."

• "There are many talented people in state government who are working for a fraction of their worth. If they can 'double dip' at the end of their career from different agencies or branches of government as an incentive to continue their public service, that's an expense the taxpayers should be willing to accept."

• "I strongly support prohibiting state elected officials from receiving a pension without severing employment. They should be subject to the same laws and rules as other state employees."

• "Frankly, this position would encourage many long-time elected officials - mostly bad ones - to retire sooner."

• "Just serve and then get your cushy pension. If you want it, then give up your office."

Would you favor or oppose taking redistricting authority from the legislature and the governor, giving it instead to an independent, appointed commission?

• "It's already controlled by the courts and that's worked out sooooo well. Give it back to the lege and limit litigation. If plaintiffs can't make their case by the filing period, go with the legislative maps."

• "Politics will determine the lines regardless. I'd rather have the authority in the hands of elected officials who can be held to account."

• "I would favor letting the computer draw the most compact districts for each elected official in each elected body. If the Legislature then wants to fight over those boundaries, so be it. Again, the laws we get are only as good as the people we elect."

• "And who really thinks handing it to a commission would be any less political?"

• "You cannot take politics out of the process. And an appointed commission is less accountable."

• "It depends on who does the appointing and the qualifications for service. However, there is a way to build a better mousetrap. What we have right now results in elected officials who are responsive only to their primary electorate, pushing our politics to the margins and making long-term problem solving a pipe dream. It's a strange way to run a government."

• "I love when legislators fight one another. It makes it easier to kill bills."

Our thanks to this week's participants: Gene Acuna, Cathie Adams, Brandon Aghamalian, Jenny Aghamalian, Clyde Alexander, Jay Arnold, Louis Bacarisse, Tom Banning, Dave Beckwith, Andrew Biar, Allen Blakemore, Tom Blanton, Hugh Brady, Chris Britton, Jay Brown, Lydia Camarillo, Kerry Cammack, Marc Campos, Thure Cannon, Snapper Carr, William Chapman, Elna Christopher, James Clark, Harold Cook, Beth Cubriel, Randy Cubriel, Denise Davis, Hector De Leon, Eva De Luna-Castro, June Deadrick, Nora Del Bosque, Tom Duffy, David Dunn, Richard Dyer, Jeff Eller, Jack Erskine, Gay Erwin, Jon Fisher, Wil Galloway, Neftali Garcia, Norman Garza, Bruce Gibson, Eric Glenn, Kinnan Golemon, Kathy Grant, John Greytok, Jack Gullahorn, Clint Hackney, Anthony Haley, Wayne Hamilton, Bill Hammond, Ken Hodges, Steve Holzheauser, Deborah Ingersoll, Cal Jillson, Jason Johnson, Mark Jones, Robert Jones, Lisa Kaufman, Robert Kepple, Richard Khouri, Tom Kleinworth, Sandy Kress, Nick Lampson, Pete Laney, Dick Lavine, James LeBas, Luke Legate, Leslie Lemon, Richard Levy, Ruben Longoria, Vilma Luna, Matt Mackowiak, Dan McClung, Scott McCown, Mike McKinney, Robert Miller, Bee Moorhead, Mike Moses, Steve Murdock, Keir Murray, Nelson Nease, Keats Norfleet, Pat Nugent, Nef Partida, Gardner Pate, Robert Peeler, Tom Phillips, Allen Place, Royce Poinsett, Kraege Polan, Gary Polland, Jay Pritchard, Jay Propes, Bill Ratliff, Shannon Ratliff, Patrick Reinhart, Kim Ross, Grant Ruckel, Jason Sabo, Jim Sartwelle, Stan Schlueter, Bruce Scott, Steve Scurlock, Dan Shelley, Bradford Shields, Christopher Shields, Jason Skaggs, Ed Small, Martha Smiley, Todd Smith, Larry Soward, Leonard Spearman, Dennis Speight, Bryan Sperry, Jason Stanford, Bob Strauser, Colin Strother, Michael Quinn Sullivan, Sherry Sylvester, Jay Thompson, Russ Tidwell, Gerard Torres, Trey Trainor, Vicki Truitt, Ware Wendell, Darren Whitehurst, Seth Winick, Alex Winslow, Peck Young, Angelo Zottarelli.

Tuesday, June 25

•  Last day of the special session

Wednesday, June 26

• Fundraiser for Rep. Harvey Hilderbran; Intercontinental Stephen F. Austin, Austin, 5-7 p.m.

Thursday, June 27

• Fundraiser for Reps. Linda Harper-Brown, Cindy Burkett, Angie Chen Button, Stefani Carter, Myra Crownover, Bennett Ratliff, Kenneth Sheets and Jason Villalba; Four Seasons Austin, 6-8 p.m.
• Fundraiser for Rep. Lon Burnam; 1604 E. 11th St., Austin, 7-9 p.m.

It's virtually impossible to predict what Rick Perry will do, but speculation is mounting that he won't run for re-election. That chatter is increasing now that the governor has said he will make his intentions known before July 1.

Rick Perry isn’t the state’s top Republican in every respect, according to the latest University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll. For instance, he is Texas voters’ second-favorite Republican in the race for president in 2016 — a fantasy contest that saw Ted Cruz getting 25 percent to Perry’s 10 percent. Aside from the political horse races, that survey covered voters’ views of politicians and political institutions, the civic and economic environment,  and issues ranging from abortion and public education to gun laws and gay marriage. 

U.S. Sen. John Cornyn is collecting three pensions on top of his fulltime salary, earning more than $65,000 in benefits last year, according to the National Journal. Cornyn was a state district judge, a Texas Supreme Court justice and then attorney general, and gets a separate pension from each of those jobs. He’s not collecting a federal pension while he works, according to that report.

Here’s a surprise for those who were expecting a special session on public education sometime in the next 18 months: After hearing brief arguments on whether to reopen evidence in the school finance case because of laws passed during the legislative session, state district court Judge John Dietz announced this that a new, six-week trial will begin in January. That probably wouldn’t leave enough time for an appeal to clear the Texas Supreme Court before the 2014-15 school year — and that takes away the biggest reason for a special session on school finance before the 2015 regular session.

Citing concerns about eminent domain abuse and the potential contamination of water resources, a coalition led by former Republican gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina is asking state lawmakers to conduct interim studies and hold public meetings on the issue of oil pipeline expansion.

Ballot notes:

• Rep. Tim Kleinschmidt, R-Lexington, will seek re-election in 2014, so take him off your list of possible candidates for Texas agriculture commissioner. 
• Sen. Craig Estes, R-Wichita Falls, says he will seek re-election.

Constance Allison is the new legislative director and Jamie Dudensing is the new policy director for Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. The two were promoted after deputy chief of staff Julia Rathgeber left the lite guv’s office to become the state’s insurance commissioner. Dudensing has worked for Dewhurst for eight years in a variety of jobs; Allison worked for former Sen. Steve Ogden and joined Dewhurst’s staff last year.