The State Republican Executive Committee passed a resolution Dec. 10 calling on the Senate to abandon its tradition of requiring a two-thirds vote in order to debate a bill.

The issue is also dividing Republican candidates in a Houston Senate race.

The two-thirds tradition is a critical element in Senate operations. It contributes to the egalitarian nature of the institution, because every senator – at one point – will be a part of a coalition that gets the two-thirds on a key bill. It also promotes consensus within the institution.

But the procedure has helped kill bills with widespread public support. And most recently it has provided a voice in government to Democrats in an era when Republicans hold all statewide offices.

“[P]rogress at relieving the excessive burdens of over-taxation, overspending, and liberal court rulings, has been blocked by a small minority of senators unfairly and unreasonably derailing bills designed to alleviate these and many other chronic problems of our great State of Texas ,” the resolution reads.

The Senate does not have a two-thirds rule, per se. Current rules state that bills are considered in the order they come out of committee. To take up a bill out of its regular order requires consent of two-thirds present and voting.

By tradition, the chairman of the Senate Administration Committee files a “blocker” bill, which is not designed to reach the floor but which effectively imposes a two-thirds vote requirement for consideration of bills.

The resolution calls on GOP senators to pledge not to file a blocker bill and to amend the Senate rules.

“The Republican Party of Texas State Executive Committee hereby calls upon the Texas Senate to end the practice of considering bills in numerical order, and instead, vest this authority with the Lt. Governor, or a Senate Calendars Committee appointed by the Lt. Governor, but with a ‘fast track’ provision allowing a vote of ‘a majority of the members of the Senate present’ to easily schedule a bill for consideration on the Senate Floor,” the resolution states.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said the two-thirds tradition works for conservatives. “The tradition to have a two-thirds vote when you take a bill out of order has been, time and time again – this year as well as in 2001 – a safeguard for conservatives,” he said. “Time and time again, eleven conservatives came together to make sure that legislation was changed and conservative pieces of legislation were passed.”

In other words, the procedure not only makes it difficult to pass legislation, it also makes it easier to kill legislation – including legislation opposed by conservatives.

This session, a majority of senators supported an effort to allow electronic pull-tab bingo in Texas . The two-thirds tradition prevented expanded gambling from passing the Senate.

Dewhurst told reporters that the two-thirds requirement stopped a 2001 redistricting plan opposed by many Republicans.

The blocker bill, with a two-thirds vote to eliminate it, is not only becoming an issue within the state Republican party, it’s also becoming a campaign issue.

In the open Senate seat in Houston (SD 7), the candidates are sending press releases and talking about the two-thirds tradition.

Candidates Dan Patrick and Joe Nixon both have publicly called for no blocker bill in the upcoming session. Candidate Peggy Hamric, however, has called for keeping the tradition.

“I applaud the State Republican Executive Committee for taking the steps necessary to ensure majority rules in the Texas Senate,” Patrick said. “The ‘blocker bill’ thwarts democracy by requiring a super-majority for passage of any legislation in the state Senate,” Patrick remarked. “The grassroots of our party have worked far too hard to elect a majority in the Texas Senate, only to see their agenda hijacked by a small minority of senators,” Patrick concluded.

Patrick, who as a talk radio host pushed caps on local property tax appraisals, blamed the two-thirds tradition with the lack of action on those issues. He notes that in March of 2003, the House passed appraisal caps but the Senate did not.

In 2005, neither chamber passed an appraisal cap constitutional amendment. The House took a record vote on the issue, however.

Nixon, who currently serves in the House, also called for an end to the two-thirds tradition. “As I publicly declared when I launched our positive campaign for conservative reform back in August – and as I have repeatedly noted on many other occasions before that and since – I strongly favor ending the so-called ‘blocker bill’ in the Texas Senate,” Nixon said. “My fellow conservatives and I in the Texas House have passed strong legislation to fight immigration fraud and to cut property taxes only to see these, and other badly needed pieces of legislation, die in the Texas Senate.”

Nixon is referring to HB 1120, which would have made it illegal for a couple to use fraudulent marriages as a means of circumventing U.S. immigration laws. The bill passed the House in May 2005 but died in the Senate Criminal Justice Committee.

Illegal immigration is also a key issue in the race, and Nixon is running television commercials that discuss his efforts, including HB 1120, to curtail illegal immigration.

Hamric disagreed with eliminating the two-thirds procedure.

“I support rule reform in the Senate to address property tax relief, economic progress, and other vital issues to all hardworking Texas families. However, I agree with the Lieutenant Governor’s stance and that over time the ‘blocker bill’ has been an effective tool for conservatives.

“My opponents want to change the Senate rules without offering an effective and viable alternative,” she said. “While I am disappointed that the Senate didn’t address the property tax relief bills, once elected I will work within the time-honored system to continue conservative change.”

Houston City Councilor and SD 7 candidate Mark Ellis has not yet made a public statement on the two-thirds rule.

Adam EatonThis morning the Texas Ranger's starting rotation had two members:  Vincente Padilla and Chris Young.  This afternoon Texas Ranger's starting rotation now has two members:  Vincente Padilla and Adam Eaton.  The Rangers acquired the San Deigo Padre's Eaton (11-5 with a 4.27 ERA) for Highland Park native Young (12-7 and  a 4.26 ERA).  Eaton will be 28 at the season's start while Young will be 26.  The Rangers also added 34 year old reliever Akinori Otsuka (2-8, 1 save and a 3.59 ERA) while giving up California native and minor league first baseman Adrian Gonzalez and just acquired outfielder Termmel Sledge.

It appears the edge in the trade may go to the Rangers if Eaton can stay healthy.  If nothing else the Rangers got two pitchers for one and two players that didn't figure in their plans.  Eaton is a quality pitcher when healthy but health has been elusive.  He had Tommy John surgery in 2003, rebounded poorly in 2004 and then developed a blister that kept him out for much of last season.  Eaton has always operated in one of baseball's better pitcher's parks and may face shell shock in the American League's best hitter's parks.  Eaton also has a tendency to let his 97 mph fast ball get away from him.  He can survive such mistakes in San Diego but not at Ameriquest.

Akinori Otsuka was the best reliever in Japan before travelling across the Pacific to join the Padres.  Despite his record last year he has generally performed well.  The Rangers see him as an answer to their need for a setup man and as a reliable back up for closer Francisco Cordero.

The departure of Young will not be popular.  However, Eaton is a far more experienced and accomplished pitcher than Young.  There were also questions about Young's staying power.  His ERA exploded over his final six games and the Rangers benched him the last three weeks of the season.  But then all Ranger pitchers tire after suffering through the summer's blast furnace.

Otsuka represents reinforcements for the bullpen and Eaton represents a potential upgrade but hardly represents the ace the Rangers need.  Even if he lives up to his potential it is doubtful Eaton will be around long.  The Padres traded Eaton because he has but one year left on his contract and they didn't expect to close what was reportedly a substantial gap between the club's offer and the player's demands.  If Eaton does live up the Ranger's dreams it is hard to imagine they will be willing and able to pay to keep him around.  And the Rangers still need three more starters.

Along the lines of William Lutz's report on the GOP ballot initiatives, Republican legislators also are talking about taxpayer protection in the special legislative session to be called in the spring on school finance. The Texas Supreme Court ruling on the school finance case indicates that the Legislature could consider -- as a possible bandaid -- raising the current cap on property taxes at the local district level. One area representative tells dallasblog, however, that rather than remove that current protection, legislators would be more inclined to let voters lift the current $1.50 per $100 valuation cap on the property tax rate. The cap is what caused the Supreme Court to declare the school funding system unconstitutional, since almost 70 percent of the state’s school districts are either at the cap or within a nickel of it.  Such action by legislators would get the tax hike onus off their back and make local taxpayers demand more money for schools...and be willing to pay for it. 

Rufus ShawHad a city council person uttered to a Black city council person something to the effect that African-Americans were running city hall, Black folks would have considered the statement a compliment. Had the same utterance been directed at a white city council member, white folks probably would have felt the statement was nothing less then a fact. But when Black city council woman Maxine Thornton-Reese allegedly told city council man Mitchell Rasansky that Jews are running city hall, Mr. Rasansky reacted in horror. And now charges of anti-Semitism have entered the public debate with Blacks and Jews, historic allies, facing off over the issue.

Click to read more ...

When something happens by chance, follow up. Lucky people tend to notice and act on good things that occur by happenstance. I happen to know you are going to have a Good Day today!

The debate over local appraisal and revenue caps and eminent domain took a new turn Dec. 10 when the State Republican Executive Committee (SREC) unanimously voted to put these issues before voters in the March 2006 Republican primary.

Additionally, GOP voters will decide whether the state should require photo identification prior to voting.

“I’m excited because I think these ballot initiatives will bring out conservative voters to the polls in the primary,” said Republican Party of Texas Chairman Tina Benkiser. “And it also gives our grassroots a chance to voice their opinion on these issues.”

Benkiser wrote the ballot language for all four items. (Appraisal and revenue caps limit the speed at which local property taxes can go up.)

The Texas Election Code authorizes state party executive committees to place advisory referenda before the voters in that party’s primary. It also authorizes primary voters to get items on the ballot through a petition process. All four of this year’s ballot items were authorized by the State SREC. The referenda are advisory only and not binding.

In addition to authorizing the ballot items, the SREC passed a resolution calling on state government to return all surplus state revenues to local taxing entities and ordering those entities to reduce property taxes. The Associated Republicans of Texas, an organization founded by the late U.S. Sen. John Tower that helps elect conservative Republicans to state and local office, also passed a similar resolution. ART helped elect many of the current GOP members of the Legislature.

The SREC’s action is the latest twist on the intra-Republican battle over whether it is appropriate for the state government to limit local appraisals and revenue. Some Republican lawmakers support appraisal and revenue caps, arguing they limit government growth and keep taxes low. Other Republicans call the matter one of local control, best addressed by local elected officials and voters.

In the 2005 legislative session, appraisal caps failed to get the 100 votes required for a constitutional amendment. The revenue cap bill did pass the House – with several amendments that its authors opposed – and died in the Senate.

“We’ll oppose the reduction in appraisal caps again, and I’m hopeful that the other interest groups that opposed them along with us will also,” said Frank Sturzl, executive director of the Texas Municipal League. “I’m not terribly surprised by it. I think it was in the Republican platform last time.”

Sturzl also said the way the ballot language was worded may affect the results of the election. On appraisal caps, the ballot will read: “In order to address the inequity of homeowner’s property taxes increasing at a rate far above the rate of inflation, the current 10% cap on the rate of increase of appraised value for all homesteads shall be reduced to 5% or less.”

On revenue caps, the SREC approved the following language: “Every governmental body in Texas should be required to limit any annual increase in spending to the combined increase of population and inflation, except for additional spending authorized by a vote of the people or for official state of emergencies declared by the federal or state government.”

Sturzl commented, “I’ve read the ballot language and the results from that kind of language as opposed to saying ‘Would you be for it if you knew that it was going to reduce municipal services,’ that was a whole different question. So it doesn’t surprise me that it’s there, and it doesn’t surprise me that it’s worded that way. We know what we have to do.”

Benkiser stressed the importance of grassroots Republicans making their voices heard on the appraisal and revenue cap propositions. “As Republicans, we really do believe in less government and lower taxes and less regulation,” she said. “It offers the grassroots an opportunity to contradict the lobby effort of always thinking you need to throw more money at a problem. We want there to be accountability and reform in government.”

Appraisal cap supporters who wanted these items added to the GOP primary ballot predict they will pass overwhelmingly. They also think that a resounding yes will change the mind of some GOP legislators currently skeptical of caps. “The Republican Party officials who voted to put the spending caps initiative on the primary ballot are to be commended for their effort to gauge their voters’ support for taxpayer protections,” said Peggy Venable, Texas director of Americans for Prosperity.

“I anticipate this initiative will resonate with voters and wish it were on both primary ballots. Texas has been a hotbed of activity on taxpayer protections. If voters support the spending caps initiative as we anticipate they will, taxpayers will likely hold Republican officeholders’ feet to the fire,” she added.

Sturzl was not ready to predict whether the election will sway the issue when it next reaches the Legislature. “There are so many variables involved in that,” he said. “Clearly we’ll be doing our own research, and we’ll be doing our own work. We’ll be doing our own polling. We’ll be doing our own pieces on what the effect of such action will be.”

In addition to appraisal and revenue caps, GOP primary voters will get to vote on eminent domain and photo ID at the polls. The Legislature passed, and the governor signed, a statutory prohibition on taking land though eminent domain for economic development. But some GOP senators balked at writing that restriction into the Constitution. Some GOP senators even voted to sunset the bill. “This will give our voters an opportunity to really help our legislature understand how important private property is and protecting that,” Benkiser said.

The ballot item states, “The Texas Legislature should place on the next Constitutional Amendment election ballot, a proposition to protect private property from being taken for economic purposes.”

Another ballot item asks voters whether “The Texas Legislature should enact legislation requiring that voters provide valid photo identification in order to cast a ballot in any and all elections conducted in the State of Texas .”

This is an issue that is very important to the state GOP. The state party actively supported the effort to pass a bill in the Legislature. Though the House twice passed the bill, it died in the Senate on a point of order. The photo ID law has very little, if any, support from House and Senate Democrats. Almost all Republicans support it. Only three GOP representatives and no senators are on the record opposing photo ID at the polls. “We have to protect the integrity of the ballot box, and that’s why the photo ID is so important,” Benkiser said. “We almost got that through in the last legislative session, and we intend to do everything we can to get that though in 2007.”

Peggy Fikac, Austin Bureau Chief of the San Antonio Express News,has an excellent story on how Democrats view their chances of success in next year's state elections.  They are clearly banking on being able to get their message out to a receptive audience without benefit of large amounts of campaign cash.

Santa has had a shock about the size of the elve's retirement contribution.  Adam Kanneman has some ideas that will let him sip his egg nogg and enjoy Christmas.

Click to read more ...