Was Abbott's first legislative session a success or a failure?

It's all in the spin.

Republicans -- after changing state Senate rules -- cut taxes, loosened gun laws and boosted border security. They also put off addressing complicated issues such as fixing the school finance system, avoided more contentious proposals such as banning so-called sanctuary cities and repealing in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants, and, perhaps not coincidentally, averted the special sessions that have become common in recent years.

"Legislators are going home today," Gov. Greg Abbott told reporters after signing a narrow bill to allow Texans to treat epilepsy with an oil derived from marijuana, "and I do not anticipate them coming back until 2017."

No special session is the best news post-Sine Die.  But the many downsides of the 84th include one of the governor's emergency items -- ethics reform -- that died like a dog in the street.

A new loophole elected officials can use to avoid financial disclosure? Check. Giving Texas politicians and bureaucrats special treatment when they commit white-collar crimes in Austin? Done. Keeping the public in the dark about lobbyist wining and dining? Accomplished. Sweeping ethics reform? Not so much.

[...]

“This session there was a real opportunity to improve that process and enhance trust, and instead I think things went backwards,” said Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Watson, who saw his bills shedding light on lobbyist wining and dining go down in flames. “The governor had an emergency declaration that it was supposed to be about ethics, and we’re watching real ethics legislation die a brutal death.”

Aides to Gov. Greg Abbott, who in February called on legislators to “dedicate this session to ethics reform,” did not respond to messages seeking comment about the failure of one his signature initiatives. Abbott has given no hint that he would call a special session on ethics reform.

This part is especially revealing.

One place to start might be the rubble of Senate Bill 19. That major overhaul effort fell apart two days before the clock ran out on the session and quickly dissolved into finger-pointing between the House and Senate over whether to require disclosure of anonymous donations given to politically active nonprofits.

The House wanted it. The Senate didn’t. And efforts at compromise failed.

More on that.

“I’ve already written about (campaign cash disclosures) as a justice on the Texas Supreme Court,” Abbott said. “I wrote that laws like that are unconstitutional, and I based that decision on United States Supreme Court decisions, and I think it’s important for legislators not to try to pass laws that have already been ruled unconstitutional.”

[...]

Abbott aides did not respond to inquiries about what ruling he was talking about, but in 1998 Abbott wrote in a decision for the majority that Bay Area Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse did not have to identify its contributors.

And that's why we need a constitutional amendment.  Back to the original.

Buck Wood, a Democratic lawyer who helped push though ethics reform after the Sharpstown stock fraud scandal shook up Texas politics in the early 1970s, predicted as much several weeks ago, as hearings on the broad reforms were just starting.

“The Legislature is just not willing to regulate itself, and that’s always been the case. It takes some sort of massive scandal to get anything done,” he said Sunday. “I don’t think frankly there was really any serious effort to get it done. There was a lot of talk, but I think that’s all it was — talk.”

That’s not to say lawmakers didn’t do anything to change the laws that affect them, but it wasn’t what the reformers had in mind. Sen. Joan Huffman, R-Houston, managed to tack on an amendment — in two different bills — that opens up a “spousal loophole” allowing politicians to shield details about their spouses' financial holdings.

Huffman was also instrumental in passing a bill creating a unique carve-out for lawmakers accused of public corruption. If Abbott doesn't veto it, no longer will he or other state elected officials be required to face an investigation by local prosecutors in the county where the alleged corruption occurred. Instead, they will face an initial probe by the state police — whose budget the politicians oversee — and then prosecution and trial in the county where they maintain a homestead.

So Abbott can say he batted .800 on "emergency items", but his big whiff on ethics reform is a foul stench that hangs over the Capitol like a dark cloud.  His crack as he signed the medicinal cannabis bill was also something we can wish that Republicans who favor legalization might remember to hold against him.

Surrounded by families whose loved ones have suffered from intractable epilepsy, Abbott insisted that the new law was narrowly tailored for a specific purpose.

"I remain convinced that Texas should not legalize marijuana, nor should Texas open the door for conventional marijuana to be used for medicinal purposes," Abbott said before the signing. "As governor, I will not allow it; SB 339 does not open the door to marijuana in Texas."

But not all medical marijuana advocates are celebrating. Many believe the new law does not go far enough, offering limited options to Texans with epilepsy — the proposal requires a CBD-THC ratio of no more than 20:1 — and nothing for those with other diseases that can be treated with medical marijuana, such as cancer.

So nearly no advancement -- even some regression -- on these matters of concern, but a lot more small-government intrusiveness into the lives of pregnant teenagers.  Teabaggers aren't happy about the lack of progress on their issues, while most of the rest of Texas gives thanks that it wasn't worse.

Win-win?

Only if you're into that 'lesser of two evils' BS.

Update: If you prefer an executive summary of the 84th from the AP's perspective, go here.  And read Texans for Public Justice's take on Abbott's leadership missing in action on ethics reform.

Graham: McCain 2.0

If you liked the Republican nominee in 2008, you'll love Miz Lindsey Graham in 2016.

For those who follow congressional politics, Graham and McCain have been inseparable — and practically indistinguishable — from each other for more than a decade, since Graham arrived to the Senate in 2003. Graham is often spotted just feet from the Senate floor, barking into a flip phone to a staffer about coordinating press strategy with McCain, meaning that “Statement by Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham on [foreign policy issue X]” is a frequent refrain in reporters’ mailboxes. A search of McCain’s Senate website, for example , found 239 press releases mentioning “Lindsey Graham” since 2005, many of which are from the past two years. 

"Invading Iraq after 9/11and capturing Saddam Hussein was the greatest foreign policy success of the last fifty years".  "The surge worked".  All your favorite hits from the Aughties plus this decade's remix: we need ten thousand troops' boots back on the ground in Iraq to fix the mess Obama made when he pulled them out.

The Iraq War, and McCain’s unwavering support of it, hurt him with a war-weary electorate in 2008. Graham, along with former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania , will be the only Republicans in the 2016 primary field who actually voted for the Iraq War. (Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton also voted for the war.) 

But perhaps more relevant to the current moment, Graham is currently calling for thousands more U.S. troops to be deployed to Iraq to fight the Islamic State, and the burden will be on the South Carolina Republican to articulate to GOP primary voters what makes him different from McCain and what distinguishes this political moment from the immediate post-9/11 years, when such interventionist fervor and support for the fight in Iraq were at their peak. 

Essentially Sen. Huckleberry J. Butchmeup -- he's never been married, can't imagine why -- is running for president so that he can take shots at Rand Paul.  And to be clear, he's not calling Paul a non-interventionist or even a pacifist.  He's calling him a pussy.

... Graham called Paul weak on foreign policy, saying that his Senate colleague has “been more wrong than right” and that “even Obama is more aggressive.” Similarly, McCain told Fox and Friends (in April): “He just doesn’t understand. He has displayed this kind of naiveté since he came to the Senate.”

When Lindsey Graham says you're a pantywaist... it might be time to send somebody around to whip somebody else's ass.  That is, before he tries to put wood on yours.  I'm. Just. Sayin'.

Paul and Graham clashed most recently in a debate over whether to extend the domestic surveillance provisions of the USA Patriot Act, which coincidentally were set to expire on the very day Graham launched his presidential campaign. C-SPAN cameras even caught Graham rolling his eyes, as Paul, standing behind him, decried a Big Brother-like federal government on the Senate floor.

But that made-for-“The-Daily-Show” moment obscured a much larger division, as previously reported by Yahoo News, between the two politicians and the libertarian-leaning and establishment sides of the Republican Party over what Americans should fear most: government encroachment on civil liberties or uncontrollable insurgent growth in the Middle East that could lead to an attack on the homeland.

While the GOP figures out where they are on spying on the American people -- thank goodness it stopped last night, but here it comes again this morning -- it's still on Graham to determine a broader vision for his being commander-in-chief than just more war.

South Carolina’s importance as an early primary state — the first in the South —could make Graham’s presence in the field a disruptive force for other conservatives, although recent polling from the state suggests that even though voters there have overwhelmingly elected Graham to Congress, on multiple occasions, they’re not too keen on his presidential run. 

Palmetto bugs, greasy biscuits, mosquitoes as big as drones, and shrimp and grits.  Those Low Country hillbillies will certainly be separating the GOP sugar from the cane next spring.

Which one will be the last rat standing?  Your guess is as good as mine.

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance hopes everyone -- even Ted Cruz -- is dry and safe as it brings you this week's roundup of lefty blog posts from our rather soaked Lone Star State.

Off the Kuff reviewed how several bad bills met their end in the waning days of the legislative session.

Letters from Texas worries about the possible effect of the Supreme Court taking up the latest Texas redistricting case.

Lightseeker at Texas Kaos shines a bright light on the woeful lack of responsible, adult leadership among some in the Texas Legislature: Texas Legislators Who Put the Child in Childish.

Socratic Gadfly, with a hat tip to a fellow TPA blogger and his favorite name for a certain Southern senator, killed the birds of both Rick Santorum and another possible GOP candidate.

Hillary Clinton visits Houston on Thursday to collect an award and raise funds, notes PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme is appalled at the level of racism and xenophobia exhibited by Texas Republicans who deny birth certificates to Texans born to not properly documented mothers.

From WCNews at Eye on Williamson: There are many Texans that need a government that works for them and not just for business, corporations and wealthy campaign donors.  It's been a windfall for business, and scraps for the rest of us.

Egberto Willies indicates that America needs more from Hillary Clinton at this stage than 'listening and learning', while McBlogger takes a swipe at Bernie Sanders.

The Lewisville Texan Journal posted about the flooding in North Texas, while Neil at All People Have Value said that floods in Houston forced people to yield some habitat to wildlife, if only for a brief time. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

==================

And here are some posts of interest from other Texas blogs.

The Queso documents flood effects in Wimberley and rounds up a bunch of flood-related resources for those who need them.

Eric Berger tries to explain where all that rain came from.

Offcite has ten of the major changes to I-45 wrapping around downtown Houston that you might not have been aware of.

Free Press Houston recapped the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Inductions, which included a tribute to Stevie Ray Vaughn.

Texas Vox celebrates an expansion of homeowners' solar rights.

Ashton Garcia advocates for gender-neutral bathrooms.

The SA Current introduces us to "Mansplainer: The Statue".

RG Ratcliffe reminds us that the Lege is hoarding $18 billion of our money.

jobsanger sees the Texas Senate's emphasis on bigotry in this past session.

And Chris Hooks took note of one of the stranger bonds formed during the 84th Session: The Texas Observer and Dr. Steven Hotze.

Houston mayoral fora next week

The weather is turning suitable to outside the home activities for the local citizen political activists.

With three mayoral forums scheduled for next week, the policy debate in the race to become Houston's next mayor is about to begin in earnest.

The events, which will focus on arts and culture, economic development, and labor and community concerns, kick off a months-long cycle in which the candidates will appear before various interest groups, speaking to their specific concerns.

Teddy Schleifer's departure from the Houston Chronicle resulted in the expected void of coverage of the scrum to be the city's next chief executive.  Hopefully that's improving with Rebecca Elliott on the beat, the Texas Lege wrapping up (without a special session), and that the only flooding to be concerned with is the runoff from North Texas (Brazos, San Jacinto, Trinity).

Wednesday's arts forum at the Asia Society comes two days after the conclusion of this year's legislative session in Austin and is expected to be the first time the candidates appear together since former Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia entered the race.

The forum hosted by Houston Arts Alliance, Houston Museum District, Theater District Houston and Miller Outdoor Theatre begins at 6:30 p.m. and will be moderated by KTRK reporter Miya Shay. Each of the seven attending candidates -- Garcia, Rep. Sylvester Turner, former Rep. Chris Bell, City Council member Stephen Costello, former mayor of Kemah Bill King, 2013 mayoral runner-up Ben Hall and businessman Marty McVey -- will have a minute to introduce himself before being asked a series of four arts and culture-related questions, for which he will have two minutes to respond. Time allowing, the candidates also will take questions from the audience before offering closing statements.

Thursday's forum hosted by SPARC Growth Houston, a coalition of economic development groups, will focus on the city budget and economic development. It begins at 6 p.m. at the University of Houston and is structured similarly, with Rice University sociology Professor Stephen Klineberg discussing the results of his Houston Area Survey before representatives of area chambers of commerce ask the seven candidates five questions, to which they each will have 90 seconds to respond.

Then, on Saturday, the candidates are set to appear before area labor and community organizations for a 9 a.m. forum at Talento Bilingue. Each will have a minute to introduce himself and a minute to answer the 10 questions posed by panelists from the Texas Organizing Project, Harris County AFL-CIO, Fe y Justicia Workers Center, Mi Familia Vota and Houston Gulf Coast Building and Construction Trades Council. Six of the candidates, Costello not included, have confirmed their attendance, according to event organizer Linda Morales.

Charles has some good questions.  And two weeks from tomorrow, the Meyerland Dems host mayoral, council at-large, and controller candidates at their regularly scheduled meeting.  Hopefully many blog posts to come on the issues presented by Houston's next leaders to start the summer.

Sunday Funnies

It's floodin' down in Texas, Lucky Charms gets a new flavor, and I never really liked soccer anyway.

The good and the not-so-much about Martin O'Malley

Think Progress with these five things.

• Ended the death penalty in Maryland
• Raised the minimum wage to $10.10 an hour
• Legalized gay marriage
• Implemented stricter gun control laws
• Gave in-state tuition to the children of immigrants

Five Thirty Eight with at least these four things.  Maybe one more (click over).

1. Hillary Clinton.
2. O’Malley has essentially zero support from Democratic office-holders.
3. He’s garnering just 2 percent support in Iowa, New Hampshire and national primary polls — far worse than Barack Obama at this point eight years ago.
4. O’Malley made some noise about running to Clinton’s left, but Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders is already occupying that ideological space. Meanwhile, O’Malley has been attacked from the left for his policing strategy during his time as Baltimore mayor.

O'Malley came to Houston and spoke at the Johnson-Rayburn-Richards dinner to Harris Democrats in 2013.   Even Matt Drudge likes him (that's a false flag).  The former governor of the Terrapin State does cut an impressive jib: tall, fit, handsome fellow.  And he's correct on many of the issues Democrats might be looking for in a presidential candidate in any other year but 2016.  But it's going to take lot more than good looks and good policy positions to gain some traction in the D primary at this point.

Update: The Onion with the candidate's profile. 

Armed protestors outside AZ mosque for Mohammed cartoon contest

More than 200 protesters, some armed, berated Islam and its prophet Mohammed outside an Arizona mosque on Friday in a provocative protest that was denounced by counterprotesters shouting "Go home, Nazis," weeks after an anti-Muslim event in Texas came under attack by two gunmen.

The anti-Muslim event outside the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix was organized by an Iraq war veteran who posted photos of himself online wearing a T-shirt with a crude slogan denigrating Islam and waving the U.S. flag.

The protest organizer won't be there, apparently; he claims he's been forced to lam it due to threats against him and his family.  Whether you prefer irony or poetic justice to describe it, it's no surprise.  The social media debate is happening at the hashtag #NotMyAmerica, if you want to check in on that.

Most of this reporting and pictures is from yesterday early evening; no reports of continuing strife during the night or this morning from what I can learn.  So let's hope the testosterone-poisoned rednecks got it all out of their system without bloodshed.

Update: More from the Daily Mail.

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.