In light of Rep. Chuck Hopson’s intention to switch from the Democratic party to the GOP, the TDP has come out with some harsh words against the member:

“It takes strength and integrity to stand against the special interests – and while some members have that strength, others like Chuck Hopson, apparently do not,” said Texas Democratic Party Chairman Boyd Richie. “In the Democratic Party, there is room for members who are conservative and progressive – the only reason anyone would leave is for crass political reasons and a refusal to stand up to special interests.” 

Richie is holding a press conference today to speak out more against the switch.

The Senate Democrats have signed a letter to the Lt. Gov., asking he call as Committee of the Whole (what they did with the Voter ID debate) to take up the issue of accepting stimulus dollars. This comes after Governor Perry publicly rejected the $555 million that would have gone to unemployment insurance.  The letter states that the legislature must override the Governor on his decision, considering the chairman of the Texas Workforce Commission has even recommended they take the money, saying the fund will be facing a $750 million shortfall by September.

As of now, the TWC is paying out $60 million a week in unemployment benefits.

We have Sen. Ogden (Chair of Senate Finance) on our show this week and we’ll be talking about that stimulus money and the role it will play in getting a budget out on time (in addition to other issues).

You know, they make a good point about there being no public notice required for a Committee of the Whole. Which means, when the Senate meets in its entirety without technically convening.

I mean, they don’t even have to meet in public.  God knows we’ve slapped them around for that before.

Why would public-meetings rules suddenly apply? Does “substantive legislation” have something to do with it?

Anyone?

Yes, I’m coming in late on this and didn’t hear the arguments, but I’m curious.

I’m sure the senators are well aware of all this and are prob’ly just trying to chub it. And get procedural things on the record for a challenge later.

BTW, anyone know who was present not voting on that last vote?

This could be a long night.

Correction.

This WILL be a long night.

After years of battle - including Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, once getting his catheter ready for a long night of filibustering it and Sen. Mario Gallegos, D-Houston, hanging out on a gurney in the back hall after major surgery just to block the bill - the Voter ID bill gets its hearing today.

And maybe tomorrow. And the next day. And the next day.

The bill would require some form of ID at the polls - not just to register, but to actually vote. Some say this would cut back on voter impersonation (which has yet to be prosecuted Texas), while others say it disenfranchises the elderly and the poor.

It’s a political hot potato, to use a regrettably worn-out cliche, and prime material for conservative lawmakers who, frankly, are facing a decline in state popularity and need to shore up their base with some red meat.

Mainly, the politics divide among party lines, but not always. Well-known conservative columnist Royal Masset came out against it a few years ago when he realized his octegenarian mother would not get the vote under the bill. Some Democrats in conservative areas will be hard-pressed to vote against it unless they can get past the rhetoric and convince their constituents that it may hurt them as well ( you think every baby born in rural Texas has a birth certificate? Think again…)

And Republican Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, while he may be in favor of Voter ID, is strongly against how the Senate has chosen to bend - no, let’s see, CHANGE the rules in order to get it passed.

Which brings me to some background.

Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst let the Senate Republicans override the long-standing (except when it’s not convenient) Rule of 21 at the beginning of the session so that they could get it onto the Senate floor with a simple majority. Most bills need two-thirds of the Senators to allow it onto the floor before it even gets a debate.

That was the ONE THING that made them the “more deliberative chamber.” But hey, anyone who has spent any time in the Senate in recent sessions should know better than that, anyway. I mean. Who are we kidding.

And yes, I know it was technically Tommy Williams that spearheaded that whole thing, and that every time someone tries to give Dewhurst any kind of credit/blame (depending on who you ask) for it, he and his peeps and even some of his more aggreable types in the media get all huffy and say they let the Senate decide its own rules.

Well, deal with it. We’re not stupid.

Right or wrong, whether you like it or not, Williams can’t take the credit and Dewhurst can’t duck the blame. He had the last word, he rules that chamber, everything that happens or doesn’t happen because of this Voter ID bill is all his doing.

Because if you think that decision to change the rules isn’t going to come back and haunt the GOP in that split chamber, you might want to get back on that boat that just arrived yesterday.

And mark my words, if (when) this passes, Dewhurst will be the first to tell his voters that he got Voter ID passed in the Senate, listing it among his accomplishments.

At any rate, watch the livestream and Jenny Hoff’s coverage here at www.kxan.com.

Tom Schieffer, former ambassador to Japan and Australia under President Bush, announced today that he may run as the Democratic nominee for Texas Governor in 2010. He doesn’t really have a platform as far as I could tell, but he did say education is one of his key priorities after seeing how far behind our students are compared to kids in other countries. He also didn’t hesitate in defending his friendship with Bush, saying he does not regret voting for him and he’s the only Republican he’s ever contributed money to because he’s his friend. “I was friends with him before he was president and I’m friends with him after his presidency.” Schieffer is brother to CBS correspondent Bob Schieffer - but wouldn’t disclose any personal remarks his bro might have made about the run. Schieffer doesn’t plan to use his own money to fund the campaign and plans to spend the next couple of months traveling the state to see how people react to him.

It’s not a nice note, but it must have been kinda nice to see.

The Lone Star Project - Democrat activist Matt Angle’s group of political progressives in Texas - is slamming new House Speaker Joe Straus for his chairmanship picks.

“His first major action as Speaker is unquestionably partisan and ideological… It appears that the crude Craddick meat-ax approach has been replaced with a more subtle, but just as partisan and harmful, Straus scalpel approach which undermines fair Democratic participation in policy decisions and undercuts the concerns of fair-minded Texas voters. … Joe Straus, a relatively junior Member serving in only his fourth term, literally owes his Speaker’s post to House Democrats. Straus accepted the Speaker’s post promising a new era of bipartisanship and comity. (Source: Address by the Speaker , January 13, 2009) So far, his words ring hollow.”

Ouch. And hey, thanks.

So, why the double-edged sword, you say?

Well, first off,  one of the biggest criticisms of the Straus candidacy was that he would be beholden to Ds because they helped get him elected. They were vital to his election, in fact. So getting a letter like this on the record can only help shore up his street cred with the R constituency.

The other cut, however, goes like this: Straus, who claimed that he was bipartisan, is now being accused of making hollow promises to Democrats.

Naturally, this is their job - to antagonize the Rs, no matter who is in charge. And frankly, with Craddick out, the Ds are dangerously close to being in the same position MSNBC is in without Bush in office. Totally, and completely, without purpose.

So I guess this was coming.  And while it may sting, it also doesn’t do much to hurt Straus. AND, it’s mildly off base.

The LSP may have a slight point when it says that Straus’ picks are partisan. He gave 8 of the 10 “top tier” committees to Republicans, and then fleshed out the lesser important committee chairs with Dems.

But, please.

First of all, I’m looking over the so-called “top tier” committees, and I don’t see an ideologue in the bunch. Todd Smith? Jim Pitts? Brian Mccall? Rob Eissler? Burt Solomons?  John Smithee and Dan Branch? Are you kidding me? Have you met these guys? At the very least, they’re moderates. At most, they’re willing to reach across the aisle.

Secondly, I’m going to take issue with the categorization of some of these (and omission of others) as Top Tier.

Corrections was one of the most important committees last session. And not only was the Republican chairman Jerry Madden busted from his post, but it was given to a rural Democrat. And let’s look at Local and Consent. These are bread-and-butter local bills that were overseen by Charlie Howard, R-Sugarland, last session. If you’ll recall, his decisions as head of that seemingly innocuous panel were so heavy handed that the resulting revolt was largely credited as one of the final keys to Craddick’s undoing. So Straus busted Howard and put Senfronia Thompson back in charge (I believe she lead that panel in the past). If anything, the Rs ought to be nervous about that pick.

Meanwhile, when did Elections become such an important panel? Suddenly it’s Top Tier? Second tier ….  maybe. But the only reason the Ds think it’s Top Tier is because that’s where the Voter ID bill will come through. Most likely. And it’s headed up by Todd Smith, who is actually accused of being reasonable, in general. And while we’re on the subject, er, what about Human Services? I don’t see it on this Top Tier list, but chances are, Democrat Patrick Rose will weild sizeable influence over subjects very near and dear to Ds - like aid for the needy. That’s kind of their thing.

So, you know. I can see where, in a 74-76 House with Rs having only a slight edge, the Ds would want and expect more important chairmenships. But at the end of the day, they made out a lot better than a lot of other R speakers may have done for them. Straus could have taken that power and run with it (lookin at you, Dewhurst), knowing that it might be the last session the Rs have the speakership if trends continue in 2010.

Instead, he refrained from such childish antics as putting urban vegetarian Democrats on the Agriculture and Livestock committee and instead divided the “top tier” committees fairly evenly, give or take.

At any rate, Straus wins no matter what your interpretation. But it’s fun to see the fireworks again. I missed them.

And our own Shannon Wolfson is there:

“Hundreds of people have started to arrive for the inaugural ball at the Four Seasons. The ball is sold out at $80/ticket. We’ve spoken with former Austin mayor Bruce Todd, Travis County Commissioner Ron Davis, and Austin activist Willie Mae Kirk, mother of President Obama’s nominee for Trade Secretary, Ron Kirk.

Commissioner Davis has an amazing story. His ancestors were slaves on a plantation in Travis County. He told us he never thought he would see an African-American elected president in his lifetime.  His description of today- “awesome.”

At 8:30pm, a live feed from one of Washington’s DC’s inaugural balls will play on two large screens in the Four Seasons ballroom.  The guests are eagerly anticipating that!”

Her name is Ann Venneman and she was the first term Cabinet Secretary of Agriculture for Bush.  That’s right, George H.W. Bush. According to Politico, Barack Obama’s vice presidential search team, led by Caroline Kennedy and Eric Holder, has raised Venneman’s name more than once in discussions. Apparently, she’s clashed with democrats and environmentalists, but according to the article:

Veneman, 59, has a biography that could be suited to Obama’s unifying message. A Republican raised on a California peach farm, she rose to become the nation’s first female agriculture secretary. In 2002 she was diagnosed with breast cancer, which was treated successfully. Today she serves as executive director of the United Nations children’s agency UNICEF.

Word has it Kinky is looking to make another run for Governor in 2010.. if he can make enough money to support his campaign. Hutchison has been all over the airwaves as well..not talking about her possibility of going for gov, but talking about everything else under the sun. This could be a lead-up to an announcement soon. We’ll see!

Well, not really but she’s not conceding yet. Looks like Clinton is angling for a VP position but the question is…would Obama even consider it? I’m torn on this one. On one hand, this has been such a long process and she does have a good portion of the voters that together, they may have a good chance as clinching a victory. However, as a newbie to the White House (if he wins) I don’t know how well the Clintons would do with taking orders from Obamarama.