Hillary Clinton in Houston next week to accept award

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee comes to Texas Southern University next Thursday, June 4, at mid-afternoon to receive the Barbara Jordan Gold Medallion from Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee.  This adds to the former Secretary of State's Lone Star itinerary of fundraisers in Austin and Dallas.

Attendance is free but seating is "very limited", so RSVP quickly.  We'll keep a lookout for media availability but based on her recent history, I'm doubting it.

The image below isn't transferring very well from the hosting source so go here for more details (if it hurts your eyes as much as it does mine.  No, I don't mean it that way).

Update: There's a big-dollar fundraiser now scheduled for Thursday evening.

The two-hour reception costs $2,700 to attend, $27,000 to co-host and $50,000 to host, according to the invitation from Houston-based lawyer Arthur Schechter, who was appointed ambassador to the Bahamas by President Bill Clinton.

Duggar, Santorum, and ten years after, Hastert *update*

Probably enough has been said elsewhere about those first two.  But if not, then clearly 'Duggary' is the new 'Santorum'.

 And there might be a fresh dictionary definition available for getting 'Hasterted' now.

J. Dennis Hastert, the longest-serving Republican speaker in the history of the U.S. House, was indicted Thursday by a federal grand jury on charges that he violated banking laws in a bid to pay $3.5 million to an unnamed person to cover up “past misconduct.”

Hastert, who has been a high-paid lobbyist in Washington since his 2007 retirement from Congress, schemed to mask more than $950,000 in withdrawals from various ac­counts in violation of federal banking laws that require the disclosure of large cash transactions, according to a seven-page indictment delivered by a grand jury in Chicago.

It's Capone-style Chicago politics, as Republicans like to say.  Another shopworn cliche' is that it's not the crime so much as the coverup ("illegal cash structuring"", which means Hastert tried to avoid federal disclosure of amounts just under ten thousand dollars).   Turns out the former speaker lied to the FBI about hush money paid to someone he had sex with.  And the rumors are a decade old.  I am just surprised that Hastert didn't get outed in the Mark Foley matter in 2006.

So to be clear, the latest GOP sex scandal this month has nothing to do -- as far as we know -- with a sex crime involving a minor.  The 'crime' is that it was gay sex.  But that's not what drew the federal indictments, of course.

Just imagine a what a wonderful world it would be if people could be with the person they love without fear of reprisal... biblical, financial, social, or otherwise.

Update (Saturday, May 30): We know more, sadly.

Indicted former House Speaker Dennis Hastert was paying a former student from Yorkville, Ill., to conceal his alleged sexual abuse of the young man while Hastert was a teacher at a high school there, federal law enforcement officials said Friday.

A top official, who would not be identified speaking about the federal charges in Chicago, said investigators also spoke with a second person who raised similar allegations that corroborated what the student said.

The second person was not being paid by Hastert, the official said.

It would be valuable to note at this point that child sexual abuse -- which Hastert has not been charged with -- isn't about "being gay" as much as it about power and control.  In the same vein that rape isn't a sexual act so much as dominant behavior.  Hastert, again, is charged with the crimes associated with the coverup, and is even claiming that he's also been a victim.

The FBI began investigating the cash withdrawals in 2013. According to the indictment, agents were interested in whether Hastert was using the cash "for a criminal purpose" but were also investigating the possibility that Hastert "was the victim of a criminal extortion related to, among other matters, his prior positions in government."

I think I'll wait a bit for more details to emerge before I post further about this sordid business.

Update:  Just because I'm witholding judgement doesn't mean I'm not laughing out loud at those who are not.  Some of the best is in the comments, by the way.

Scattershooting some soft targets

Hypocritical Republicans, clay pigeons, false flags... you know, the usual stuff.

-- GOP tries new/old way to suppress the vote.

The number of ways that Republicans invent to reduce the voting power of the Democratic Party is truly impressive. Here's the latest:

The court has never resolved whether voting districts should have the same number of people, or the same number of eligible voters. Counting all people amplifies the voting power of places with large numbers of residents who cannot vote legally, including immigrants who are here legally but are not citizens, illegal immigrants, children and prisoners. Those places tend to be urban and to vote Democratic.

A ruling that districts must be based on equal numbers of voters would move political power away from cities, with their many immigrants and children, and toward older and more homogeneous rural areas.

....The Supreme Court over the past nearly 25 years has turned away at least three similar challenges, and many election law experts expressed surprise that the justices agreed to hear this one. But since Chief Justice John G. Roberts has led the court, it has been active in other voting cases.

Over the past few decades we've seen pack-n-crack, photo ID laws, old fashioned gerrymandering, mid-decade gerrymandering, the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, reductions in early voting, the crippling of campaign finance law, illegal purges of voter rolls, and now this: a change in the way people are counted that would favor Republican-leaning districts.

From a purely academic view, you really have to be impressed by the GOP's relentless creativity in finding ever more ways to trim the votes of groups who lean Democratic. They've done a great job. Sure, it's been a violent and cynical assault on our country's notions of fairness in the voting booth, but that's for eggheads to worry about. After all, it worked. Right? Maybe its made a difference of only a point or two in presidential elections and fewer than a dozen districts in congressional elections, but in a closely balanced electorate that counts for a lot.

Harold Cook had the earliest and best take on this; he's been working with Texas Democratic state legislators for years on it.  If the SCOTUS decides it's time to return to valuations of brown people as 3/5s of a person, then you know they've finally succeeded in taking "their" country back.  All the way to the 1700s.

-- Over one million Texans, out of about 7.5 million low-and moderate-income Americans, stand to lose their healthcare insurance coverage if the SCOTUS rules against Obamacare subsidies next month.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in a major new lawsuit against Obamacare this June, and the health coverage for millions hangs in the balance.

This challenge to the Affordable Care Act, called King v. Burwell, came from longtime Obamacare opponents who claim that, because of a key phrase in the law, the federal government may provide tax credit subsidies only in states that operate their own health insurance exchanges. Thirty-four states declined to establish these marketplaces, and instead left that responsibility in the hands of the federal government.

If the Supreme Court rules for the plaintiffs in this case, it would eliminate health insurance subsidies for 7.5 million low- and moderate-income people in those states, causing most of them to become uninsured when their premiums become unaffordable without financial assistance.

Here's how the numbers break down in each state with a federally operated health insurance exchange.

It's hard for those average Americans -- hell, it's hard for me -- to understand how this can even be possible.  But it's part of the reason why I got off the Obama bandwagon nearly four years ago once he took a public option off the table.  Insurance companies and their profits take precedence over people and their health in this country.  That's why America is so exceptional.

-- Ross Ramsey explains the arcane way the Texas Lege operates, through odd rules and fits of pique, especially in the last few days before Sine Die.  It's just what you need if you're only a casual observer of the sausage-making process in Austin.

Update:

A small group of Texas House Republicans on Wednesday morning hijacked the often rote Local and Consent Calendar because they wanted to exact vengeance on some of their adversaries they blame for the deaths of their bills. That is the way it played out on the floor, at least.

After killing several Democratic bills, Rep. Jonathan Stickland, R-Bedford, expressed disbelief that his motives were being questioned.

“People think that we're up here, that this whole thing today has been some kind of show!” he said. “That it's political retribution.” It’s not, Stickland assured listeners, just before essentially filibustering a measure aimed at reducing pet euthanasia in San Antonio.

-- Marriage equality in Texas is as unwelcome in the Loon Star State as Obama, Ill Eagles, federal disaster relief for the recent floods, and Operation Jade Helm 15 military exercises.  So we get the state Senate declaring once more its opposition to same-sex marriage -- despite several failed legislative attempts, a ten-year-old state constitutional amendment already forbidding it, the increasing tolerance of teh gayz, and a pending decision striking down all of this obnoxious bigotry from that same US Supreme Court previously mentioned -- in an utterly meaningless demonstration of bravado and machismo for the exclusive purpose of preening to the virulently heterosexual Texas Tea Party.

(Nice run-on sentence, yes?)

"We affirm the preservation of the present definition of marriage as being a legal union of one man and one woman as a husband and wife, and pledge to uphold and defend this principle that is so dearly held by Texans far and wide," the resolution read.

State Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, said he wanted to make sure that while some might read the resolution as a unanimous measure, there was staunch opposition to it passing the Senate.

"So is this a response to some legislation that hasn't been successful, or is more out of concern for what the U.S. Supreme Court might rule this summer?" Whitmire asked the resolution's sponsor, state Sen. Kelly Hancock, R-North Richland Hills.

Oh yeah, fuck Sen. Eddie Lucio.  Preferably employing a man with an exceptionally large penis.

Texas Lege update from Glen Maxey

About 2 a.m. this morning, posted to his FB page.

Whoa, I'm bone tired.

LGBT people are finally, FINALLY free from all types of mischief and evilness. The Senate gets to debate the Cecil Bell amendment by Sen. Lucio put on a friggin' Garnet Coleman bill tomorrow. It's all for show. Garnet Coleman is one of the strongest allies of the LGBTQ community. They could amend all the anti-gay stuff they want on it and he'll strip it off in conference or just outright kill the bill before allowing it to pass with that crap on it. This is for record votes to say they did "something" about teh gays to their nutso base.

And lots of high stakes trading to make sure that other stuff didn't get amended onto bills today (labor dues, TWIA, etc.) and making sure an Ethics Bill of some sort passed. We didn't want that to die and give Abbott a reason to call a special session.

Campus carry got watered down... no clue what happens in conference. And the delaying tactics kept us from reaching the abortion insurance ban.

Four good Elections bills passed today. Three on Consent in the House, three in the Senate, all will be done by noon Wednesday.

And Lastly: Pigs have flown and landed. HB 1096, the bad voter registration bill, is NOT on the Calendar for tomorrow and is therefore DEAD. I am one proud lobbyist on that one. With its demise, no major voter suppression bills passed (well, except for Interstate Crosscheck which is only bad if implemented badly, and we have to stay on top of it to make sure it's not), and over forty good ones survived.

Just a few technical concurrences, and we're done. Thank the goddess and well, some bipartisanship for once.

I've been rough on Maxey in the past, but he has fought the good fight throughout this session.  He was also the counsel behind the Texas House Democrats' moving over to 'aye' on the pastor protection bill.  My hat is doffed and I am deeply bowing in his general direction (toward Austin).