Nobody tells him what to do

"Don't look!"

It's not like he needs vision for reading anyway, since he doesn't read.  People read things to him.  He watches television, and you don't need 20/20 eyesight to watch Fox, unless you're trying to look up skirts.  But he might miss looking at catalogues of golden draperies, or clippings of articles favorable to him selected by his aides.

Sad!

The Weekly Wrangle

The Texas Progressive Alliance supports the employers who feel their workers deserve a break today to view the solar eclipse.

And screw those lousy management consultants who are whining about lost productivity.

Here's the blog post and news roundup from last week.

Off the Kuff notes a new lawsuit filed to protect spousal benefits for Houston city employees against an assault by anti-LGBT zealots.

SocraticGadfly writes about another personal experience with age discrimination.

Texas (aka Greg Abbott and Ken Paxton) are going to take their chances with a new, conservative Supreme Court rather than have the Lege redraw Congressional and statehouse maps ruled unconstitutional for the umpteenth time, reports PDiddie at Brains and Eggs.

A Texas Republican legislator thinks running over protestors should be encouraged. CouldBeTrue of South Texas Chisme thinks he and his party are deplorable.

Texas Vox celebrates the end of the special session.

Texas Leftist reminds us that Trump also tossed out his infrastructure advisory council last week.

John Coby at Bay Area Houston remembers a time when "not all Republicans were racist".

The Lewisville Texan Journal shares the announcement that longtime Democratic activist Amy Manuel will run for Denton County Clerk in 2018.

As always, Neil at All People Have Value took part in the weekly protest outside the Houston office of wicked-doing Senator John Cornyn. APHV is part of NeilAquino.com.

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

Confederate monuments came down on the campus of the University of Texas overnight.  Large rallies supporting their removal in Houston and Dallas were held over the weekend.  Six Flags Over Texas bowed to public pressure and announced that only the United States flag would fly at its front gate (but the flags of Spain, France, Mexico, the Republic of Texas, and the Confederate States of America would continue to fly -- and be sold as novelty items at gift shops -- elsewhere in the park).

Meanwhile Houston's mayor, Sylvester Turner, has called for a study to help him decide whether or not the statues should be taken away in the Space City.

More news and blog posts from across the Lone Star State follow!

The CPPP Blog reflects on the special session, which sine died a day early last week.

Michael Li breaks down the redistricting ruling.

RG Ratcliffe wonders if the Republicans are going to start running the Lege like they do Congress.

Pete Von Der Haar rounds up ten movie scenes in which white supremacists get their butts handed to them.

Better Texas Blog calls the Senate-modified version of HB21 a step in the wrong direction that pits education against health care.

The Texas Living Waters Project calls for proactive drought response plans.

Somervell County Salon suggests Trump's various golf clubs and resorts as a great place to relocate the Confederate statues being removed in various cities across the country.

And Pages of Victory posts the letter from Rosanne Cash that reminds white supremacists NOT to associate their philosophy with the long legacy of social justice her father lived.

Sunday "Many Sides" Funnies

Mayor Turner wants a study about Confederate statues in Houston

No.  No further "study" is needed to decide whether or not to remove the monuments to the Confederacy in the Bayou City.  I'm fisking Kuff here instead of there.

1.  This question suggests you believe that there is no existing record of statuary within the city's archives.  That would be a laughable premise.  If nothing else, the city requires permits and approvals before statues are erected, so if there is no listing, there is surely a history of permit approvals that should be easily searchable.  It might not be comprehensive to the city's 181-year existence, it may not be digitized, but the past fifty to one hundred years' worth ought to both exist and be easily found and poured over.  A list could be made in time for the next council meeting.

It's hard for me to believe this was a serious query, Charles.  If there were no list of statues, then a lot of city administrators have failed over a very long period of time, which is certainly possible but highly doubtful.  On the chance, however, that no list exists or can be found, I will agree that it is way past time for statues of every kind in the city to be documented.

2.  This isn't the part that requires study; this is the action item.  Several cities, such as Lexington, Baltimore, and New Orleans -- not to mention dozens of others across the United States and even Texas -- are way ahead of Houston in this regard.  Why is that?  Houston's reputation isn't one of waiting for others to "innovate", or progress.  Quite the opposite.  Now, when the issue has moved to the forefront of social consciousness, the mayor calls for a study?  I would ask, obviously: why?  How long?  For what purpose?

3.  Maybe you haven't been able to attend or watch on closed circuit television the city council meetings; that's understandable.  But that's where this sort of discussion takes place (besides on blogs, that is).  We elect city council members to make these tough calls.  Again, not sure why this is a question that requires an answer unless everybody in Houston needs it explained to them like they were fifth-graders.  Granted, there are all those home-schooled Republicans in the exurbs, but still ...

4.  My goodness, sir; the mayor and city council are the ones authorized to make this decision.  The bureaucrats you mention are tasked with executing their order.  Although if enough citizens want to sign a petition to put it on the ballot, there's that.

Four-for-four in really and truly dumb questions, Chuck-o.  You should, in fact, keep going until you ask a question that isn't Captain Obviously-answered.

The Mayor's Special Assistant had a better reply, or excuse for the mayor's recalcitrance, as I would define it.  But the answer there is also pretty clear: there shouldn't need to be much rumination involved for someone who has experienced first-hand the very worst of what the Confederacy represents in his own lifetime, to say nothing of his forebearers.

Now then, to demonstrate that there is some discussion, if not study, that's worth having -- considering both sides of the question in a careful manner -- let me paraphrase my friend David Courtney.  Oh hell, let me just quote him direct.

I think that we should rethink the removal of Confederate symbols. It does not improve long standing racial tensions. It does not address the predatorial business which suck the financial resources out of black communities. It does not address disparities in income or political involvement. It does not address the pressures which are being felt by African American owned business, or historically black universities. It does nothing to advance the well being of African American communities across the country. But it does advance the cause of the Alt-Right by providing them with a simple touchstone by which they can organise.

These are thoughtful and cogent words from a school of thought to which I am not enrolled.  I'll simply say that trying to accommodate, mollify, or otherwise negotiate in good faith with Nazis has not been demonstrated to be a successful tactic throughout the course of history.  IIRC we fought a war over that, the entire world was involved, and the Nazis got their asses kicked.

Among the Sixties memories I would choose not to re-live -- like imminent threats of World War Three and white power rallies -- add a Forties lesson our grandparents and great-grandparents all taught us with their lives, the ones lost and the ones forever impacted.

Never A-Fucking-gain.

Same goes for statues to Confederate "heroes" (sic).  They were traitors to their country.  History would be different if they had won the Civil War, but they did not.  Nobody wants to watch an HBO miniseries to see what it may have been like if they had, either.  No rewriting or whitewashing of history at any time, and never by the racist losers of a rebellion.

Take the statues to the Confederacy down from the public square and put them in a place -- a park in the most Caucasian of suburbs, or a museum -- so nobody can whine about their history being erased.  If it's private property, they can charge admission and not be obligated to condition their alternate facts, carefully chosen by white supremacists long ago to twist truth, logic, and reason far beyond its tensile strength.

How long ago?  Read Glenn Melancon's post linking to the New York Review of Book's piece on James McPherson's Myth of the Lost Cause and Civil War History, published in 2001.  For the click-over-disinclined, here's your Cliff's Note:

Southern politicians didn't want states' rights, they wanted slave owner rights. Only after losing on the battle field did they create a States' Rights mythology to cover up their moral and treasonous crimes, but also to start a new one, Jim Crow.

This topic has been studied long enough.  It's time for our leaders to take action.  The Houston activists aren't waiting around, after all.

"Bannon's Fired" Toons

It's remarkable to me how prescient the cartoonists can be; these aren't new.  You'll have to wait until Sunday for the fresh takes.

Texas wants expedited SCOTUS appeal on redistricting

Not reading this anywhere else.

Gov. Greg Abbott announced Wednesday morning he plans to file an appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a Tuesday ruling that invalidated two congressional districts, including Corpus Christi's District 27.

The appeal will be filed this week, unless the state requests — and is granted — an extension on a three-day deadline imposed by the district court's ruling, Kayleigh Lovvorn, a spokeswoman for the Texas Attorney General's office told the Caller-Times Wednesday.

The San Antonio court gave the state a three-day deadline to indicate whether the legislature would convene to consider redistricting, a move Abbott called "astonishing." 

First, I thought these appeals went through the Fifth Circuit before they got to the Supremes (thus the strike-through in yesterday's).  Second, it is a little wild that the three judges who invalidated the constitutionality of the two Congressional districts which Blake Farenthold and Lloyd Doggett currently represent would give the state until this Friday to decide whether to meet with the plaintiffs and start drawing new maps on the day after Labor Day ... or keep fighting it out in court.

Surely it will continue to be the latter.

The federal judges ruled Congressional Districts 35 and 27 violated racial discrimination prohibitions in section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The 107-page ruling, handed down in San Antonio, could lead to a battle to redraw the districts in time for the 2018 elections. 

If Texas does not respond within three days and the Supreme Court does not intervene, the two sides are scheduled to meet Sept. 5 to begin drawing new maps, the ruling states.

Or Abbott's appeal to Justice Sam Alito is taken under advisement by him and he alone decides, or he refers it to the full Court, in which case we're back on the slow track.  If Abbott's appeal is not granted, then Abbott calls another special session for redistricting (rather than leaving it to a squadron of lawyers from the state and MALDEF, etc., and under the supervision of the federal judges of the Western District of Texas).  A special may be coming anyway, since Goobnur Wheels is now grousing about his agenda being derailed by Joe Straus.

IANAL so feel free to weigh, lawyers.

While I was blogging the above, Meagan Flynn at the Press posts an update, beating all the corporate news media outlets and Kuff and the rest of those who are usually on top of these things.  Maybe later today, or tomorrow morning at 5 a.m. in Kuffner's case, with whatever the Chronic or the TexTrib have to say, preceded by "Wow' or something similar.

The ruling means both maps will need to be redrawn in time for the 2018 election, and that lawmakers can't kick the can down the road until the next session. The federal judges gave Texas three days to decide whether it wants the court to redraw the maps for it — or let the Legislature do it. Which would require a special session.

[...]

Expect to find out by the end of the week whether you'll have to watch lawmakers tear up the state Capitol all over again this fall. Who knows, given Abbott's philosophy during this past special session was cram as many bills as possible into 30 days, maybe the bathroom bill will even make an appearance on another ambitious agenda.

Hellza poppin'.

Update: KUT touches base with Brennan Center attorney Michael Li, who is also advising the plaintiffs, and he explains the current situation as I have.

“It’s possible that everything gets put on hold until the Supreme Court decides, but it’s also possible that the court lets that go forward,” said Li ... “I think everyone is sensitive with the close timing of the election and everything that it may make sense to go ahead and redraw the maps now.”

[...]

“The question now is who redraws the maps.”

[...]

“So the normal practice is that a Legislature gets the first shot at redrawing maps," Li said, "and the court has given the Legislature that shot." If they don’t agree to hold a special session to redraw the maps, then the state and plaintiffs go back to court for a hearing in September to hash it out.

The court also still has to rule on the statehouse maps, which could also delay a special session.

Li said legislators will probably want to wait to see if they have to redraw both sets of maps before going into another session. He said it is possible, however, that all this could be sorted out in time for the 2018 elections.

“If all the cards align, and the changes aren’t that massive, then it’s possible that maps could be in place by September or early October,” he said. “But right now everything is up in the air.”

Update (8/18, late p.m.): There will be no special session to address redistricting ... for now. Governor Hell on Wheels reserves his right to call one before 2019 if the Supreme Court lets the air out of his tires.  Ken Paxton's pompous dismay at having judges draw maps -- i.e. his disgust at the governor for failing to take matters into his own hands -- is duly noted for the record.

Sine Died

Buy us another round, Governor?

Texas House members huddled near the dais on Aug. 15, 2017. 

Thanks to Marjorie Kamys Cotera at the TexTrib for the pic.

The special session of the Legislature came to an abrupt end Tuesday night, a day earlier than expected, when the Texas Senate adjourned without acting on a House-passed version of a property tax bill.

The House began the late-session drama when it unexpectedly closed the special session with one item pending — a conference committee on Senate Bill 1, which would have required larger cities and counties to get voter approval for property tax increases.

Senate Republicans wanted automatic elections for increases of 4 percent or more. The House settled on a 6 percent trigger, and by adjourning early, House leaders told the Senate to take the 6 percent rate or leave it.

Later Tuesday night, the Senate chose to leave it.

The RWNJs are up in arms tiki torches, but Greg Abbott is signaling 'success'.

"Our office believes this special session has produced a far better Texas than before," said Abbott press secretary John Wittman.

If you're a woman who wanted a choice as to whether to give birth or not, or even be able to have your insurance company pay for your choice under standard polices ... no.  Not at all.

For his part, Gov. Greg Abbott was silent on the session’s end. He signed three bills on Tuesday, bringing the total number of special session bills he’s signed to five. Four more bills await his signature, including a House measure relating to tree regulations on private property that’s a far cry from what he demanded and similar to a bill he vetoed in June. The only other bill to reach his desk relating to reining in municipal powers was one that restricts the annexation authority of cities in large counties.

Likewise, lawmakers didn’t pass bills restricting transgender bathroom use, an emphasis of social conservatives, or limiting state spending, a cause of fiscal conservatives.

Abbott has asked lawmakers to pass bills related to 20 issues. Just nine and a half of those reached his desk.

A better batting average than I predicted last Saturday, but the ultracons are still howling. We'll have to wait for the governor to decide whether his wheelchair seat cushion feels too warm after he gets off the phone with the Porters.  They don't stay up late, but they do get up early to feed the chickens and milk the cows.

Jane Nelson (Senate Finance chair) says we can do whatever we want; she's going to Italy.  Not quite Davy Crockett at the Alamo.  Not even Billy Bob Thornton in the movie, for that matter.

I'll go out on a limb and predict that Abbott feels comfortable enough with his $41 million to declare victory and go home, leaving Dan Patrick to go after Joe Straus, et.al. now and next spring.

(Patrick) placed the blame for almost all of Abbott's failed special session priorities on Speaker of the House Joe Straus.

"Thank goodness Travis didn't have the speaker at the Alamo," Patrick said. "He would've been the first one over the wall."

Patrick said the San Antonio Republican had treated the governor's agenda "like horse manure," blocking votes on measures like the "bathroom bill," private school vouchers and defunding Planned Parenthood.

"We missed some major opportunities, but what I'm most upset about is the House quit tonight," he said. "With 27 hours to go, they walked off the job."

Sounds like the proverbial line in the sand to me.  It's possible that the federal judicial panel that found two Texas Congressional districts unconstitutional yesterday compels a special session before 2019 if the Supreme Court ultimately agrees, and in turn orders a fix before elections in 2018, but we'll have to wait for that on the usual unpredictable timeline.  The Fifth Circuit is the next stop, whoever loses appeals again to the Supremes, and even on the fast track the SCOTUS doesn't take the case under consideration until the high court reconvenes on the first Monday in October.  It's possible that any redistricting simply waits until the legislative session in 2021, as the regularly-scheduled decennial mapmaking process occurs.

So if I had to guess right now ... no more specials.  But I could be wrong.  Update (8/17): I'm probably wrong.  Read this post for the latest on how the redistricting decision affects the probability of another special session.

Ross Ramsey at the TexTrib has more inside baseball.