Texas Legislature latest: Countdown until end of session is on
Monday marked one week to go until the end of regular session
Voting would go until midnight, another late push on Tuesday
Several issues are still at play here
AUSTIN, Texas - With only a week to go until the end of the regular session, the countdown is on for the Texas Legislature.
House Speaker Dustin Burrows issued a warning before Monday's final hard press started. Voting would go until midnight with another late push on Tuesday.
Big picture view
Political analysts Mark Jones and Brain Smith gave their impressions of the political end game that's being played.
"It is all coffee and cigarette this week, because everything has to be through the legislature process, through all the channels and done by next Monday," said Smith.
Jones anticipates the 48-hour period to be frantic.
"And at the end of the day, Democrats now can see light at the tunnel," said Jones.
The light for Democrats, is not a green light. Monday, House Democrats hit the brakes at times. During the day they engaged in debate by asking multiple questions and many of the questions seemed to be raised only as a way to burn time.
This tactic, called chubbing, was even used on a bipartisan bill that encourages movie making in Texas.
"So every minute that Democrats waste chubbing on bills like the motion picture bill, which is going to pass, which they actually, virtually all, support is less time for bills that are on the calendar on Tuesday, or potentially even some bills that run the Monday calendar, but very low down on the list," said Jones.
The stalling effort was used a few weeks ago with earlier deadlines.
Dig deeper
Several issues are still at play here and some recently saw votes.
House Republicans have pushed through several abortion bills.
They include clarifying when doctors can perform the procedure to save the life of the mother, and a bill banning the use of tax dollars to pay for out-of-state trips for abortions.
SB 2880, which bans the sale of abortion-inducing medication, moved out of a House committee on Saturday but has not yet been posted for a floor debate in the full House.
There was a vote that brought about a political death and resurrection.
The Texas Lottery Commission was abolished with the games moved to a new agency.
State Rep. Gene Wu (D-Houston) in questioning state Rep. Charlie Geren (R-Fort Worth) noted the switch over would start September 1st. State Rep. Chris Turner (D-Plano) reminded House members the action will save a game that helps veterans.
"While it's a relatively small aspect of the lottery overall, the impact that the veterans scratch-off ticket has is immense for the men and women who have served our state," said Turner.
Legislative survivors included two hard-line bail reform measures.
Debate on a bill to deny bail for undocumented immigrants was moved to Tuesday. A no-bail resolution for repeat offenders with violent crimes failed to gain the necessary 100 votes. It could get a second chance on Tuesday.
Another critical 2nd Reading vote was on SB13. It would create school library advisory councils to make recommendations on books.
The committees would consist of parents, educators, and local community members.
What's next
The latter part of the week will be focused on finalizing deals involving several big bills that are in conference committee. That process could carry over into next Monday.
The Source
Information in this report comes from reporting/interviews by FOX 7 Austin's chief political reporter Rudy Koski.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Tulsi Gabbard is setting Trump's base up for the next Epstein disappointment
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is sowing the seeds for MAGAs next Jeffrey Epstein moment and perpetuating a dangerous retaliatory cycle. She has accused former senior government officials of directing a treasonous conspiracy to undermine President Trump's 2016 campaign. Nothing Gabbard has released proves that assertion, including the 2017 House Intelligence Committee report questioning the intelligence community assessment that Russia wanted Trump to win the 2016 election. That 2017 conclusion is at odds with the unanimous and bipartisan findings of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that found Russia did in fact try to influence the campaign in Trump's favor but those efforts did not affect the outcome. Gabbard's claims reinforce a long-standing narrative prevalent among MAGA supporters that Democrats sought to destroy Trump's candidacy, and then undermine his presidency, by manipulating information about Russian interference in the 2016 election. Gabbard's unsubstantiated conclusions will come back to bite the Trump administration the same way Attorney General Pam Bondi's inability to release the Epstein client list has upset the president's supporters. Unless the Trump administration is prepared to fabricate evidence, it's unlikely enough new information will ever be discovered to prove a conspiracy of the magnitude suggested by Gabbard. MAGA supporters will be waiting for the mass arrest and imprisonment of Obama administration officials that never comes. Gabbard, and ultimately Trump, will be left to weakly explain why the conspirators aren't coming to justice. Gabbard's powerful assertions came at a delicate moment for a Trump administration already caught in the middle of a similar storm of their own making about Epstein. From the start, the investigations and public communications about Russian interference in the 2016 election were mishandled. It's important to acknowledge that fact upfront. President Obama didn't have to release the government's conclusions about Russian interference a month before the 2016 election, conclusions that lent an air of legitimacy to accusations against Trump being discussed publicly by supporters of Hillary Clinton. The FBI's probe into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia was itself predicated on flimsy information. Even if Gabbard's wild assertions aren't true, and there's no evidence so far to suggest they are, the judgement exercised by parts of the government during and after the 2016 campaign still left a lot to be desired. The Trump campaign had been the primary victim of the government's poor judgement, but former FBI Director James Comey evened the score a bit when he announced the opening of an FBI probe into Clinton's use of an unclassified email server days before the 2016 election. Democrats botched the messaging around Russia's interference with the 2016 election, either accidentally or intentionally inflating its role and falsely insinuating the Trump campaign had been involved. But Gabbard is now recreating their mistakes with her reckless accusations. Now that both sides have weaponized intelligence for political purposes, what matters is to restore trust in the intelligence community. Gabbard would say she's doing that by leveling her accusations in the name of transparency, but her aggressive assertions go beyond where the facts are leading and perpetuate an overblown narrative of government conspiracy. Already, Democrats aren't inclined to believe what she's saying, just as most Republicans never bought into the Steele dossier or the assertions about Trump's collusion with Russia. Beyond the trust gap with Democrats, Gabbard is setting the conditions for a major falling out with the MAGA faithful. After Epstein, this will be the second time that Trump administration officials allege a massive conspiracy but aren't able to produce evidence to support their claims. Trump's core supporters believe these conspiracies are real because their leaders, officials like Bondi and Gabbard, keep telling them that proof exists. They'll demand action over Gabbard's accusations, the way they are with Epstein, then be left with no choice but to assume the Trump administration is complicit in the coverup when no action comes. This is a distraction Trump doesn't need. He would do well to direct Gabbard to tone down her assertions rather than egg her on. Going forward, the intelligence community, elected officials, the Justice Department and the government in general should take a lesson from former President Gerald Ford. Ford understood that prosecuting President Richard Nixon would divide the country and create more problems than it solved. He made the hard decision to allow what was probably criminal conduct to go unpunished to allow the nation to heal. Except in cases of the most egregious crimes supported by the strongest evidence, the U.S. government should take a break from seeking to prosecute former government officials. Democrats spent years rooting for Trump to go to jail or actively trying to put Trump in jail for perceived crimes. Gabbard seems intent on doing the same in reverse. This is a bad place for the country to be, with the intelligence community being used against former officials and sensitive information being declassified when it suits a political purpose. This type of behavior will have a chilling effect on everything the intelligence community does and further divide our country. The Trump administration should be the grown-up in the room and break this dangerous cycle now.
Axios
8 minutes ago
- Axios
Metro faces major shakeup as city waits for Supreme Court ruling in council size lawsuit
Metro leaders are one loss at the Tennessee Supreme Court away from having to completely remake Nashville's city government. The big picture: The size of the Metro Council would be reduced from its current 40 members to no more than 20 under a state law that has been the subject of a contentious two-year legal battle. Metro wants the Supreme Court to overturn a lower appeal's court's ruling upholding the law. The intrigue: The political reality around the court — all five members were appointed by Republican governors — makes the city's chances of a legal victory seem unlikely. It's possible the Supreme Court doesn't even take up the case. Between the lines: Since its formation in 1963, the Metro system of government favored the executive branch. With an unwieldy 40 members, legislative powers were watered down, and the mayor enjoyed significantly more control. Slashing the council in half could serve as a rebalancing. Flashback: In 2023, Republicans in the legislature passed a law capping the size of Metro Councils across the state at 20 members. Nashville's is the only such government in Tennessee with a council larger than 20, and some critics viewed the measure as retribution for its Metro Council refusing to bid on hosting the Republican National Convention in 2024. After a lower court panel ruled the law unconstitutional, the state won at the appeals court level and the law was upheld. State of play: City leaders insist they are not actively working on the details of reducing the council, but the uncertainty of the Supreme Court even taking up the case means behind-the-scenes conversations must begin. "For a matter of this complexity and potential magnitude, without presuming any particular outcome (in the legal challenge), as president of the Metro Council, it would be irresponsible of me not to be thinking through various scenarios and contingencies," Vice Mayor Angie Henderson tells Axios. "This moment requires thoughtfulness and prudence as we await the response of the Tennessee Supreme Court." What he's saying:"If we have to face the reality of a smaller council, there will be multiple voices in the room, including the Planning Department, the mayor, the vice mayor and the council itself," Metro legal director Wally Dietz tells Axios. "It's a very complicated legal process inside Metro. But, we're not there yet." What we're watching: Here are the monumental logistical questions facing Metro leaders should the appeal to the Supreme Court fail. How many at-large members The current council consists of five at-large seats representing the entire county and 35 district seats representing smaller sections of town. If the council is reduced to 20, city leaders will have to determine how many at-large seats should remain. Some council members want to keep five at-large seats, while others have mentioned three or two. There figures to be some members who push for eliminating the at-large roles altogether and forming a council with 20 district seats. Staffing and funding The most time-consuming part of a district council member's job is dealing with zoning applications and constituent services. If the council shrinks, meetings, texts and emails double. That could lead to needing more staff and paying the council members higher salaries. Increasing the pay creates the possibility of the council being effectively a full-time job, compared to the part-time job it is for most members now. How to draw the district lines Metro already goes through redistricting every decade, and typically the lines are drawn so that incumbent members don't have to run against each other in the next election. It will be impossible to maintain that approach with just 20 seats. It could lead to intriguing match-ups on the ballot in 2027. A guiding principle in drawing the lines will be maintaining the percentage of minority representatives on the council. Flashback: In 2023, the Planning Department released proposed maps for a 20-person counci l. The maps were moot because Metro won the initial court challenge and the law was struck down. Revisiting the old maps is a guide to what the new council districts could look like. All eyes on 2027 If the council is cut in half, as many anticipate, it will create a political battle royale for the city in 2027. In the last election two years ago, business groups faced off against progressive activist organizations in backing different candidates in Metro Council races. Overall, the progressive groups won that battle, flexing their grassroots organizing strength to overcome the fundraising advantage of the pro-business organizations. The result has been a council skeptical of increasing policing funding for initiatives like license plate readers, as well as increased scrutiny on economic development measures.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Democrat told Jesse Watters that the 'world is talking about Epstein' whereas Fox was still dragging the Bidens.
Veteran Democratic strategist James Carville tore into Fox News over its lack of coverage on the Jeffrey Epstein saga while appearing on the pro-Donald Trump network itself. During an appearance on Jesse Watters Primetime, the host asked Carville whether former President Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, is the 'masculine guy' Democrats need as a future presidential contender following his recent fiery podcast appearances. 'Everybody in the world is talking about Epstein, and Fox is still talking about Biden's memory,' Carville shot back. 'I mean, it was so long ago I can't remember it, to tell you the truth.'
