In a personal privilege speech, Rep. Richard Raymond, D-Laredo, told lawmakers this morning he would continue stalling in order to prevent a vote on voter ID. Holding up a poll tax receipt owned by his father, Raymond said he could not stand by and see history repeat itself. He’s prepared to question every local and consent bill for the allotted time, 9 1/2 minutes.

Meanwhile, Rep. Dunnam says he has a point of order that will kill voter ID on a technical point. He says he’s waiting for the Speaker to come out of “hiding” so he can present the info to him and see if the Speaker will make voter ID ineligible.

I was just handed a pamphlet of information that relates the history of the legislature’s actions when it comes voting requirements. According the text, the Legislature passed a law in 1997 requiring voters show an alternative form of identification at the polls if they don’t have their registration card (before that, there was no such requirement).

The points highlighted in this document:

• It was co-authored by a Democrat
• No one testified against the bill in committee
• The TX Democratic Party testified in favor of the bill
• The bill passed unanimously out of the Senate

I

On Thursday the House passed no bills on second reading. Today, they aren’t even finished with the local and consent calendar (which usually takes about an hour to get through). The Dems weren’t joking when they said they would do everything in their power to make sure voter ID doesn’t make it to the floor for debate. The voter ID bill (already passed by the Senate) is scheduled for debate tomorrow. However, at this rate, there will be so many other bills that have been put on hold they may not get to it until its too late.

Rep. Castro told me we would see all types of strategic moves today, otherwise known as “chubbing,” and apparently he wasn’t exaggerating.

*strategery

Apparently, the Voter ID bill passed out of the Senate Committee as a Whole on Wednesday is stirring up some concerns on both sides of the aisle in the House. I talked to a Republican yesterday who supports the measure, but doesn’t like the way the Senate changed the rules to get it passed. I also heard Straus saying people had some concerns about the bill, though he didn’t expand on it much. So, if you think it was ugly in the Senate..wait til it gets the House.

There are 7 other states that request a photo ID at the polls, though there are provisions if someone doesn’t have that ID with them. You can check out the list and every state’s voting rules here.

The Senate gallery is nearly empty now, as the Senate continues a debate that could keep going all week. The 150 people who showed up to publicly testify must have decided their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was more important than the right to have or not have a photo ID when showing up to vote. Even the Senators who have been most passionate about this topic seem ready to call it a night.

Sen. Gallegos listening to expert testimony

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?