Patrick’s proposal “dead on arrival??”
Ed. Note: We’d like to welcome back Patricia Kilday Hart, who will be covering and blogging the Legislature with Paul. This is her first post.
Ah, opening day of the 81st Session, where the mood in the Capitol is one of grand expectations for Peace on Earth, now that Tom Craddick has been deposed. So, of course, the Texas Senate wasted no time to devolve into partisan bickering over the hallowed two-thirds rule.
Senate Democrats met this morning in an caucus billed as “urgent” to discuss a Republican proposal for a Senate rules change permitting a vote by the Committee of the Whole on two issues: redistricting and voter ID. The committee of the whole setting means there’s no “blocker bill” requiring the two-thirds threshold for debating bills. One Senate Republican told me there was “no consensus” in the Republican caucus on the proposal, while another called it “ill-conceived.”
Then there’s the passion-stirring proposal by Sen. Dan Patrick, set out in a letter to his Republican colleagues, transforming two-thirds into a three-fifths rule. Patrick would require 19 votes to overcome a blocker bill, would mirror the U.S. Senate’s 60 vote threshold for passing legislation without a filibuster. “I like and respect our colleagues across the aisle. I’m also proud we can work with them, however, when it comes to key legislation that matters most to our constituents the minority has a different view. Texans did not elect us to the majority so that we would succumb to the minority in the Texas Senate,” Patrick wrote.
At least one senator was entirely dismissive of Patrick’s suggestion…and of Patrick. “It’s dead on arrival,” said Sen. John Carona. “In large part because of the author.” (A little stunned at his frankness, I asked, “Is that on the record?” ”Sure,” Carona shrugged.)
With twelve Democrats in the Senate, defensive strategies are limited, but intense: First, the caucus could call the Republican bluff by advocating ditching the two-thirds rule for everything. (If it is good enough for voter ID, why not election-day voter registration?) Or they could simply refuse to suspend on any bill. From Day One. Shut things down before they get started.
This is going to be a fun session.
Tagged: dan patrick, senate rules, three-fifths, two-thirds, voter ID
texun says:
What can this be? Dan Patrick not taken seriously? Both of his talk show fans and the American Vulture Forum will be aghast. He has tried to boost his standing among fellow senators by showing up for hearings held by committees on which he does not serve. Apparently, that didn’t help.
Reply »
The Gost of Senate Republicans says:
Message to Senate Republicans:
What goes around comes around.
Reply »
Buck says:
Paul, riddle me this.
Why would Republicans drop the 2/3rds rule when they will be the minority party so soon?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
January 13th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
yeah, right. you clearly don’t understand the senate lines…
Reply »
cynical optimist Reply:
January 13th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Question perhaps better directed to Patricia?
http://www.texasmonthly.com/authors/patriciakildayhart
/poor excuse for a blog comments cop
Reply »
Al in Grapevine says:
Are you the same Anonymous that predicted an easy victory for Ken Brimer or are you a different Anonymous?
Reply »
Don't Mess w/ Pink says:
You gotta love Carona.
Reply »
Buck says:
From Dan Patrick’s friends’ satirical “secret tweet”:
Cripes, Carona is an insufferable prick.
http://twitter.com/danssecrettweet
Reply »
FTW Apologist says:
Al in Grapevine – Before you throw satire out there, its KIM BRIMER not KEN. Wouldnt want such an astute political observer to be mis-underestimated!
Reply »
anon Reply:
January 13th, 2009 at 10:38 pm
FTW Apololgist: Maybe Al just hit the wrong key. Similar deal to your not putting an apostrophe in “wouldn’t”.
Reply »
anonymous Reply:
January 13th, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Yeah, FTW Apologist, how about policing your own posts before you start blasting others. What in the hell does “misunderestimated” mean?
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Good for Senator Carona. It’s about time the other senators stand up to Senator Showboat from Baltimore. He passed three bills last session. I predict he passes none this session. The long knives are out for him. Wonder how long it will take his constituents to realize they’re voiceless in Austin?
Reply »
Anonymous says:
I actually think that the Dems would go along with a threshold of 19 for a “blocker bill” with one proviso– the Dems rserve the right to throw a tantrum and storm out if they can’t round up the required 19 votes and hole up in a Motel 6 in Albuquerque and pout about not getting their way.
Reply »
Tim says:
Yeah, because it’s the Dems at fault. Why exactly do we have a minority part if the whole point of a legislature is to do everything the majority wants? The point of having two parties is exactly this. To keep the majority party from passing every stupid bill they can come up with. This way they have to build consensus and find a middle ground.
Of course, the fact they’re trying to work on redistricting and voter id shows that they’re strongly committed to getting no work done anyway. My guess is that even if the Democrats suddenly disappeared they’d find it hard to get the votes they needed for those bills. The Democrats just provide nice political cover.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
What does ol’ Dan think would transpire AFTER the 2/3rds Rule is abolished? Does he think every bill with bare majority support and intense minority opposition will suddenly pass? How naive. Either the committee chairs will hold more legislation in committee OR the senate will form an eleven-member Senate Calendars Committee (sans Dan) where eleven members – which is fewer than 21 – will decide which bills to set.
Most sophomores get somewhat of a clue since their maiden session. I guess there’s an exception to every rule.
Reply »
letsrock says:
i’m for showing an ID to vote. how is that a burden? who doesn’t have any ID? i have to show mine everyday for something. i can’t even rent a movie without. i think i even showed it when i turned on my electricity and i know i showed it when i rented my apt.
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
Burka, the Voter ID will NOT pass in the State Senate because it will hurt the elderly and minorities, who vote Democratic.
Rumors are that US Rep. Micahel McCaul (R-TX) might run for Texas State Attorney General in 2010.
Reply »
Fitzroy says:
Buck…sounds like Carona stood up to you too. He is the nicest man up there.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Patrick should realize that the voters did not elect a specific party to be the majority in the Senate. They voted for a particular individual to represent the interests of the people in that individual’s district. Of course, he and his fellow Republican Senators are welcome to act as if they were elected to rule the roost . . . but I think it would be a disservice to the party, because ultimately it will result in the chamber being controlled by the Democrats, and he’ll rue the day he tried this sort of thing.
Reply »
KSEV aired strip club commercials says:
Actually, Patrick won’t “rue” anything. He is not about a particular party or ideology. He is all about promoting himself.
He was struggling with a small radio station until he hit it big carrying Rush Limbaugh when he was an unknown. Particular decided to ride that gold mine of pissed off 40+ white males to riches and now he wants political power and prestige. “Conservative” politics is nothing but a means to that end.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
What is happening to the Kumbaya Spa?
Reply »
middleclassR says:
so the elderly and minorities don’t have ID’s? how do they cash checks? how did they rent or buy a home/apt?
i’m pretty sure the voter ID bill last year even offered to give out ID’s. so after that, what’s your problem with it? are you afraid a few people could lose their seats without illegal votes being cast?
Reply »
texun Reply:
January 14th, 2009 at 10:26 am
Sorry middclassR, you need wider exposure to the elderly and the poor. Significant numbers of both groups don’t have checking accounts; those living in variable care facilities don’t need–and no longer have–drivers’ licenses. Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid cards aren’t usually accepted as identification because they don’t contail photos.
This is really another bogus issue, intended to rile gullible voters and boost the GOP.
Reply »
2011 Heaven says:
Oh Jerry, Susie, Gregie and Davey are gonna have SO MUCH fun playing with Senate lines when the LRB gets together in about 30 months.
Little Joey, if he is still around, won’t have a clue what those other Republican playmates are up to. He and Senator Cyndi will be having a seance asking “What would Tower do (WWTD)?”
I will be over before dear old dead drunk John gets in touch with them.
Reply »
Buck says:
Fitzroy, I was quoting the danssecrettweet feed.
Reply »
anonymouse1 says:
wow, 2011, your bar opens a lot earlier than the rest of our’s. apparently.
Reply »
Bubbalou says:
People DO realize that “Dan’s Secret Twitter Feed” is, um, FAKE, right?
Reply »