This may have been the point that Dutton was trying to make: that the logic of the new rules makes the speaker virtually invulnerable to removal. Craddick’s critics argued that the congressional precedents and other authorities (such as Mason’s) empowered the members to remove the speaker at any time by majority vote. The rules as interpreted in Straus’s response to Dutton say that the motion to vacate can only be used once in a session. A motion to reconsider the vote is in order. If the motion to reconsider fails, it may not be made again. Future speakers can control the process completely by arranging, following the vote by which they are elected, to have an ally move to reconsider and table the vote by which the speaker was elected. If it passes (and of course it will), further motions to reconsider are off the table for the rest of the session, and the speaker can only be removed by impeachment or expulsion. Just like Terry Keel said.
Sign up for the Armadillo
Weekly dispatches from the middle of the road of Texas politics.
- Taco of the Week: Weenies and Eggs at Los Muertos BBQ
- “If People Want to Take a Chance, It’s Their Prerogative”: Inside One Bar on the First Day of Reopening
- Dallas-Area High School Seniors Cope With a Semester—and Rites of Passage—Cut Short
- How Houston’s Museum of Fine Arts Planned Its Reopening
- José Ralat Believes the Taco Is Pandemic-Proof