Your turn! What do you think?

Tattletales and telling tails

Legal reform—the process evaluating laws, changing current laws, and implementing changes within a legal system—is never an easy process.  It is often fraught with complications because of policy debates and special interests.  Especially where you have issue networks—interest groups and individuals who work together to address specific policy areas—it is difficult to reach consensus on what laws should be.

A recent study found that Texas ranked 3^rd in the country for exonerations  in cases ranging from murder to sexual assault and robbery.  These exonerations (the overturning of criminal convictions) by courts tend to be because of coerced confessions, faulty evidence, or mistaken eyewitness identification among other reasons.  Of concern has been informant information (testimony by accomplices or other persons who provide information important for convicting the defendant)  because frequently informants are given lenient sentences or immunity (promises they will not be charged with crimes) in return for testifying the defendant told them incriminating information.

To remedy that, HB 189 has been proposed to prevent prosecutors in death penalty cases from using testimony from informants or accomplices where the person had received any special treatment or promises unless the conversations between the informant and the defendant is recorded. The concern is that these “jailhouse snitches” are falsifying testimony to seek leniency in some way. One study found that the use of such testimony is responsible for 45% of wrongful convictions in capital murder cases. Criminal rights advocates argue that such tattletales are only telling tales about what the defendant actually did.

And speaking of a different kind of tail, a 2011 Texas law that prohibits animal breeders from abusing animals is being challenged in court by breeders because it requires a license by the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation.   The law requires basic standards of humane treatment, along with a $300 application fee.  Animal rights advocates argue that it is critical step in regulatory compliance—the process of ensuring rules and regulations are being followed—to stop inhumane treatment by puppy and kitty mills.  Breeders argue it’s going to put them out of business because of increased paperwork and requiring that they maintain increased levels of veterinarian treatment.  Only time will tell if it means more tongue wagging as the lawyers argue over whether it violates breeder rights or whether there will be more tail wagging because conditions improve for animals that are bought and sold.

Your turn! What do you think?

The flag is up

Last weekend Austin was the site of a Formula One (F1) racing event which the state worked hard to get since 2007 when the first race of its kind was held in the US.  The Circuit of the Americas track (estimated cost $400 million) is hoped to pump $200-300 million into the Texas economy, but here’s the yellow flag causing the state to proceed with caution. The Comptroller of Public Accounts (Texas’ chief tax collector and accountant) Susan Combs agreed to provide financial support to the builders of $250 million over the next ten years in the event that the track does not turn a profit. That means the track was built without any tax incentives or tax subsidies. What’s the difference?  Incentives are part of the tax code designed to encourage a certain type of behavior. Investors might be given a reprieve from paying property taxes for a certain period of time to encourage them to invest in a project. Subsidies are an outright grant of money by the state to assist an enterprise deemed advantageous to the public (so it’s like a loan you do not have to re-pay).  Here the state did neither—instead, Combs agreed to defray the costs of building the F1 before the city of Austin had signed off to give tax incentives on the deal which is required under Texas law.   That means Texans will pay for the 2012 race to the tune of about $25 million from the Major Events Trust Fund (a fund specifically designed to promote economic development).  Tea Party conservatives and newly elected freshmen legislators are not ready to give the go ahead and want to re-visit the issue because they are concerned about Combs’ decision to fund the project without sufficient funding to do so.

One program that did get a green flag by the State Attorney General was the for-profit medical school—the American University of the Caribbean—which requested authorization to allow foreign medical students to complete their coursework and residency in Texas.  Greg Abbot’s Attorney General opinion—a written opinion interpreting a legal provision requested by a public official—found that the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board could allow foreign students to work in Texas hospitals. Some are concerned that these students will take slots needed by Texas students, or that the students will take up residency here after graduation.  The medical school requesting the exemption argues that 60% of its graduates practice in primary care specialties and 50% practice in under-served areas, two areas that have the biggest shortages in doctors.

Finally, Hope Andrade—the state’s first Latina Secretary of State in Texas announced that she was resigning this week—an unusual move given that she serves at the pleasure of the Governor.  This is one of the few positions the Texas Governor can appoint and remove, and typically someone does not leave the office until the end of the governor’s term. One of the office’s key areas of authority is over statewide elections, and Andrade has served for five different cycles.  The most likely reason why she is stepping down involved the furor over her letter sent to Texas residents  designated as “deceased” by Secretary’s office in advance of the 2012 presidential election. Unfortunately, many of the letter recipients were still quite alive and not happy they were being removed. Looks like Andrade got the checkered flag herself.

Data drilling

1) Examine the data for the 83rd session in Bill Tracker.

2) What are the most popular types of bills by subject matter? Which chamber has submitted more bills thus far? What are the key differences between the bills put forward by the House and the Senate? What do you notice about the different patterns in the data?

3) Filter the data by either the House or the Senate and drill down to look at specific legislation in a subject area which interests you.   What do you think is the most important proposal put forward? Why?

4) Now look on down the page and examine the legislation as sorted by different legislators. Choose a Republican or a Democrat and see what types of legislation they are proposing. Based on their proposals, what kinds of committees or interests seem the most important to your legislator?

Your turn! What do you think?

Pushing forward and pulling out

The Texas legislature does not come back into session until January 2013, but the newly elected House and Senate members have already submitted over 250 bills for consideration. The bills range from prohibitions on texting while driving to regulations about where raw (unpasteurized) milk can be sold. The big issues, however, are clearly funding for education, crime, and health care—and these issues are likely to dominate the upcoming legislative session.

Our state’s founders were distrustful of government and the process for passing any legislation is arduous. Under the Texas Constitution, a bill requires three readings on the floor of each house. The first reading is after the bill’s introduction and assignment to a committee by the Speaker of the House or the Lieutenant Governor in the Senate. That committee then begins markup (the process of holding hearings and amending the legislation).  The second and third readings occur after the bill passes out of each chamber. While technically all three readings must occur on three separate days, this rule can be suspended by a super-majority (extraordinary voting requirement to ensure consensus on some issue) of four-fifths vote of members present.  To get the process moving in the short biennial session (the Texas legislature only meets for 140 days in odd-numbered years), legislators file bills in advance of the session so they can hit the ground running.

And speaking of running, both John Cornyn and newly elected Ted Cruz are advancing into key leadership positions in the U.S. Senate.   Cornyn has been elected as Senate minority whip (second in command to the minority leader), while Cruz was selected to be the vice-chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee-a committee which focuses on getting Republicans elected to the Senate.  Cruz’s position is interesting because typically such positions are reserved for persons who have more years of experience, but given Cruz’s growing reputation as a “conservative’s conservative”, his nomination is not such a shock.

One step forward, two steps back is what some people say about the recent spate of over 100,000 signatures on a petition calling for Texas to secede from the Union. Supporters of the petition argue that Texas, ranked as the 15^th largest economy in the world, should be allowed to pull away from the federal government.    The petitions were submitted on the White House through a crowdsourcing website (which allows citizens to express their concerns directly to the President). In essence those petitioning their government are asking for the state to be allowed to form its own “national” government. Even though there had been some speculation back in 2011 that Governor Perry supported secession,  this week Perry was quick to respond that he does not support such talk of pulling out because he “believes in the greatness of our Union and nothing should be done to change it.”

In response, at least one petition has requested President Obama strip the citizenship and peacefully deport those persons who support secession.  Another petition by people in Austin, which is thought to be a liberal stronghold, has requested that Austin be allowed to stay with the Union in case Texas does secede.

Welcome to the new post-election world. Moving on?

Your turn! What do you think?

Your turn! What do you think?

The post-election wrap (part II)

Since Ann Richards’ defeat at the hands of George Bush in the 1994 gubernatorial election, the tide of Democratic control on the legislature and governor’s office has shifted at the statewide level. Texas today remains a Republican stronghold, and undoubtedly when you review Tuesday’s vote at the statewide level, that solid majority continues.  Republican control of the U.S. House delegation continues after having flipped following the 2000 election (24 Republicans – 12 Democrats).

Political scientists speak in terms of unified and divided government referring to whether the legislature and governor’s office are controlled by one or both parties.  Texas is clearly under unified control.  With conditions of unified government, one party generally has the ability to set the agenda and implement its policy preferences.  At the national level, it will be interesting to see how the Texas delegations gets along in a U.S. House controlled by the Republicans, and a U.S. Senate controlled by the Democrats.  The 113^th Congress may be gridlocked especially given that in the Senate, you need 60 votes or a 3/5^th supermajority (60 of 100 Senators) to pass a vote of cloture (which closes off debate and calls the question so the full Senatorial body can vote on whether a bill should become law).  So even though the Democrats technically control the Senate, because Republican Senators can filibuster knowing that the Democrats must get a super-majority to end debate, it is much easier to kill legislation.

Despite President Obama’s re-election victory, the political culture in Texas remains staunchly conservative.  When you examine who the freshmen Republicans were that won election to the Texas House and Senate, there is good reason to believe that the next legislature may have a more conservative agenda.

So what changed? Who did we vote for and what are the demographics of the 83^rd Texas legislature?

We tended to vote for incumbents. True, there were 49 new House members, and 6 new Senators, but these were largely open seats (ones where there was no incumbent running for re-election).  Of the 246 seats available in all statewide elections, there were only 16 people who were challenged and voted out of office.  Republican legislative dominance dropped slightly (95-55) from 102-48, and the Senate stayed the same (19 Republicans-12 Democrats). We have a less experienced legislature, owing in part to a huge pick up in 2010 of freshman.  We continue to have 67 freshman or sophomore members in the Texas House who may be more conservative than their predecessors.  That will depend on what both parties define as the top priorities moving forward.

What will be on the agenda? That one is yet to be unwrapped.