House passes redistricting bill

I was going to put this as the last item in the earlier post, but I didn’t want to change that post’s title and I also didn’t want to gloss over that this happened. We knew it was going to happen, and despite a clever amendment from Rep. Gene Wu that “would only allow the congressional maps to be implemented once the Jeffrey Epstein files were released by the Trump administration”, opposition and delay were swatted aside, as one would expect. It is what it is.

The Senate will pass this soon enough, and then the Lege will move on to other matters. The Senate did have a hearing about flood matters, which of course came after they passed the map bill out of committee, because priorities, but you know they’ll be on this like JD Vance on a nice couch. From there we wait to see what happens in California, where Republicans have sued to stop that process from going forward, and with the federal court in El Paso. But redistricting and placating Donald Trump are why we are here, everything else is an afterthought. The Trib has more.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Beto scores a win against Paxton

Nice.

An El Paso judge this week temporarily stopped Attorney General Ken Paxton from prosecuting former U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke’s political group, Powered by People, after Paxton moved to block the organization from financially supporting Texas Democrats who left the state.

Judge Annabell Perez of the 41st Judicial District Court issued a temporary restraining order Tuesday barring Paxton from prosecuting O’Rourke’s nonprofit or otherwise initiating or filing legal proceedings aimed at revoking Powered by People’s charter.

The group has been fundraising for Texas Democrats who decamped to Illinois and other states in protest of a proposed GOP congressional map that would net Republicans up to five more seats in the U.S. House.

Powered by People already donated $1 million to the Democrats, whose two-week absence denied the Texas House the minimum number of present members needed to conduct business. Many of those Democrats have since returned to the state, and Gov. Greg Abbott called a subsequent overtime legislative session after the first one ended last week.

Paxton previously secured a temporary injunction blocking O’Rourke from fundraising for the Democrats or spending money to cover their expenses. He then sought to jail O’Rourke, arguing that the El Paso Democrat had violated the court order, which O’Rourke’s attorneys have disputed.

O’Rourke responded by filing his own lawsuit alleging that Paxton was engaging in a “fishing expedition, constitutional rights be damned,” by targeting Powered by People.

[…]

In her order, Perez said it was imperative to “prevent imminent, irreparable injury” but that it was not a ruling on the merits of the case. The order expires in two weeks.

See here and here for some background. I have no idea how this knot will get untangled, but I’m happy to see this result. In fact, one could argue, as Jeremy Wallace outlined, that Beto had already won, at least in the big picture.

Paxton was right that he got a court order stopping O’Rourke’s Powered by People PAC from sending donations directly to state representatives who left the state and covering their potential fines in the Texas House for leaving. But Powered By People said they didn’t do either. Instead of sending money to any individual members, the group sent the money to the caucuses that can then use it as they please, just like any other donation from the public. Those donations are essentially helping Democrats who both fled the state and those who didn’t.

“Powered by People did not make any offers to fundraise or help pay for legislative fines, hotel, and travel expenses in exchange for any political action or restraint,” a court filing from David Mills Wysong of Powered by People stated.

The irony of this, an effect of Texas’s weird campaign finance laws that are routinely exploited by the billionaire wingnut class, is rich. I doubt this will stop Paxton, and I suppose he could eventually wrangle some kind of Moebius strip ruling that makes this activity illegal when Beto does it but not when Tim Dunn does it, but in the short term the money was delivered. Suck on that, Ken.

On a different legal front:

Rep. Nicole Collier, the Democratic state lawmaker who spent Monday night inside the Texas Capitol, is asking a court to let her exit the building, alleging she’s facing “illegal restraint by the government” after she was told she needs a police escort to leave.

The Fort Worth lawmaker and dozens of other Democrats left Texas earlier this month to delay a vote on a GOP-led plan to redraw the state’s congressional map. The Democrats returned to Texas in recent days and they were given state police escorts to ensure they will show up when the state House convenes Wednesday, but Collier refused to sign a “permission slip” to be under escort by the Texas Department of Public Safety. Collier says she slept on the House floor overnight.

Collier told CBS News’ “The Takeout” on Tuesday that several other Democrats “tore up their permission slips” and will join her on the House floor Tuesday night.

“I refuse to comply with this unreasonable, un-American and unnecessary request,” Collier said.

Meanwhile, in a habeas corpus application filed in Austin state court on Monday, lawyers for Collier alleged “illegal confinement.”

The petition says state Rep. Charlie Geren, a Republican who chairs the House Administration Committee, told Collier: “If you leave the Capitol you are subject to arrest.” Collier’s petition does not mention the state police escorts.

Collier’s attorneys argue that’s illegal. They acknowledged that Texas law allows lawmakers who are absent from the Capitol to face civil arrest, but they say state officials have no legal right to detain legislators who are already present at the Capitol to ensure they don’t leave.

“The plain language is clear: a member may be compelled by the Sergeant-at-Arms to attend a legislative session if he or she is physically absent, but no such power is conferred on the Legislature to arrest or otherwise compel a member who is currently present (and not absent) to stay,” the Democrat’s court petition read.

Collier, a seven-term lawmaker and former chair of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus, is asking a judge to order the House Sergeant-at-Arms to “immediately release” her, and to bar the Sergeant-at-Arms from “restraining Representative Collier in any respect.”

See here for the background. Again, I have no idea what will happen – the word “unprecedented” is permanently stamped on my brain these days – but I am excited by the effort. Reform Austin, The 19th, the Trib, and Slate have more.

Posted in Legal matters, That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Beto scores a win against Paxton

CD18 forum and fundraiser

Item one:

I don’t have a link to share, but I think you can see all the details. There will be five candidates for the forum, we precinct chairs will vote on who will be invited. As someone who has moderated debates as well as been in the audience for them, there’s just a limit on how many participants you can have before it becomes unwieldy. And let’s be honest, not every candidate in this race is worth taking seriously. I will be there for this and I look forward to seeing how everyone does.

And as a pregame event for this:

Monday, August 25, 2025 • 6:30 PM – 8:30 PM East River 9 • 65 Hirsch Rd, Houston, TX 77020

Join us for an exciting kick-off event ahead of The Official CD-18 Candidate Forum on August 28th! Connect with fellow activists, meet the candidates, and fuel our Get Out the Vote drive for the November and mid-term elections.

Event Highlights • Pre-Forum Kick-Off: Be among the first to hear from CD-18 candidates before the big debate on August 28th. • Meet & Mingle: Mix and mingle with candidates, community leaders, and fellow precinct chairs. • GOTV Support: Help power our grassroots effort to turn out every Democratic vote in CD-18.

Admission • General Public: $20 donation • CD-18 Precinct Chairs: Free

I unfortunately can’t make this one but I’ll be there in spirit. If you want to get to know some of the candidates before you see them speak on stage, this is a great opportunity to do so.

UPDATE: Here’s the Mobilize link for the candidate forum.

Posted in Election 2025 | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on CD18 forum and fundraiser

Texas blog roundup for the week of August 18

The Texas Progressive Alliance stands with the quorum breakers as it brings you this week’s roundup.

Continue reading

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged , | Comments Off on Texas blog roundup for the week of August 18

Motion for expedited review of proposed Congressional map filed

From the inbox, on Monday night.

Today, the National Redistricting Foundation (NRF) filed a motion in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to ask the court to quickly set a hearing for a preliminary injunction that will be filed in order to block the enactment of a new gerrymandered congressional map that is making its way through the Texas Legislature.

Marina Jenkins, Executive Director of the NRF, issued the following statement:

“Despite bipartisan opposition among Texans, the Texas Legislature is pushing forward a congressional map that includes even fewer minority opportunity districts than the current discriminatory map, which is already being challenged in court for violating Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. In other words, the legislature is grafting a new, more extreme gerrymander onto an existing gerrymander that adds even more insult to injury for communities of color in the Lone Star State, despite the fact that they make up 60 percent of the state population. Should Governor Abbott sign the new gerrymander into law, the NRF will quickly challenge that map in federal court, and the court must be prepared to act swiftly to intervene and protect the rights of Texans.”

I got a second press release on Tuesday morning, from the Lone Star Project, that at first made me think there were two separate motions, but both releases referred to the same filing. The key to understanding this is to read the opening paragraphs of that filing:

The Brooks Plaintiffs, LULAC Plaintiffs, and Gonzales Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court set aside dates for an expedited September hearing to adjudicate forthcoming motions for preliminary injunctions raising claims against the soon-to-be-enacted 2025 congressional redistricting plan. Moreover, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court vacate, as to the state legislative challenges, its August 11, 2025, order suspending the deadline for submitting proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Plaintiffs conferred with State Defendants, who report that they are not opposed to a preliminary injunction hearing generally, believe a hearing in “early” September is “too soon, especially if [they] are briefing FOFCOL concurrent with hearing prep,” and oppose the lifting of the suspension on the briefing deadline.

I don’t know what all of those words mean, but this boils down to two things that the plaintiffs are asking for. First, just to clarify, the plaintiffs in question are the ones that are challenging the current map. The hearings are done with that case, though there were some post-trial briefs still to be filed, after which a ruling would be made. In the interim, during the first special session, the three-judge panel in that case put everything on hold pending the outcome of the legislative process as well as a couple of other cases that are on SCOTUS’ docket. So basically, this is a new filing by the existing plaintiffs of the in-progress litigation over the 2021 redistricting maps asking for those judges to take action on what is happening now.

Specifically, they want two things. One is for there to be an initial hearing on the proposed map, to get that process started now so we can perhaps have some kind of rulings in place before the 2026 elections. The defendant, which is to say the state of Texas, is more or less open to that idea, for the same reason. The other thing they want is for the panel to go ahead and continue with the process of the existing litigation so as to get to a final ruling in that case. They argue that there was no reason to put the remaining steps in that case on hold (the panel issued its ruling on its own and not in response to a motion), that the existing case isn’t affected by the outstanding SCOTUS cases, and that the plaintiffs deserve a final ruling. You can read all that for yourself in the motion, which is only six pages long and is easy enough to understand.

I don’t know what the court might do and what the effect of a favorable (or unfavorable) ruling for the plaintiffs might be. We’ll have to see if they set a briefing schedule and go from there. The promise made by the quorum busters was that they would fight the new maps in court, and while there will certainly be more litigation once a map is passed, the existing lawsuit is another avenue that is being pursued as well.

One last note:

I looked at the 2018 and 2024 data for this new map and it doesn’t appear to be noticeably different for the most part. Just noting this for the record. The Chron has more.

Posted in Legal matters | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

West Texas measles outbreak declared to be over

Good news.

The West Texas measles outbreak, the nation’s largest in 30 years, is now over, state health officials announced on Monday.

The Texas Department of State Health Services announced the outbreak was over after no new cases had been reported in 42 days.

“We arrived at this point through a comprehensive outbreak response that included testing, vaccination, disease monitoring and educating the public about measles through awareness campaigns,” DSHS Commissioner Dr. Jennifer A. Shuford said in a statement. “I also want to recognize the many health care professionals who identified and treated cases of a virus that most providers had never seen in person before this outbreak.”

The outbreak began in late January in Seminole and eventually spread to more than 10 Texas counties and to three other states — Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma — as well as Mexico.

As of Aug. 18, 762 Texas cases of measles were detected and more than two-thirds of the cases involved children. Ninety-six people were hospitalized and two Seminole children died from the disease. Most of those infected were unvaccinated.

See here for the last case count update I had, and here for the most recent post on the subject. The full press release is here, and while this is unqualified good news for Texas, it comes with two provisos. One is that this is just the end of the outbreak that began in Gaines County. Elsewhere in the country and the larger region, second proviso:

Texas school districts are coming back from summer with a rising number of parents asking for vaccine exemption forms and a new law that will make those documents even easier to obtain.

Combined with funding cuts to public vaccination programs, chilling effects of immigration policies on health care, and the wearying battle by school nurses to balance parental consent and overall student body health, Texas schools are on track to have the lowest vaccination rates in decades if exemption rates continue to climb.

“I do think that there is a problem — period — that is worse than we have known about previously,” said Terri Burke, executive director of The Immunization Partnership, which advocates for public policies that support increased access to vaccines.

Since 2018, the requests to the Texas Department of State Health Services for a vaccine exemption form have doubled from 45,900 to more than 93,000 in 2024.

In July, ahead of the new school year, the state received 17,197 requests for a vaccine exemption form, 36% higher than the number reported in July 2023. Because each requestor can have forms for up to eight individuals, the number of children those forms covered also soared — 23,231 in July 2023 compared to 30,596 in July 2025.

Now, as some public health departments indicate there are drops in the number of poorer children coming to them to get vaccinated during the summer months, and a new Sept. 1 law that will make the vaccination exemption form downloadable instead of it being mailed, vaccine experts fear herd immunity will be tougher to achieve.

There will be more of these outbreaks in the future. Maybe not next year, and maybe not as bad as this one. Or maybe worse, who knows. But there will be more. Everything we’re doing is making conditions more hospitable for the viruses.

Posted in The great state of Texas | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on West Texas measles outbreak declared to be over

Leave the “Be Someone” artists alone

How is this a good use of HPD’s time?

Photo by Monica Kressman

Investigators are searching for the people who repainted Houston’s popular “Be Someone” graffiti mural in June after a video of the act was posted on Instagram.

Three people participated in repainting the slogan on the Union Pacific-owned railroad bridge over Interstate 45 near downtown, as shown in the video posted on June 8, according to the search warrants. The Houston Police Department assisted the Union Pacific Railroad Police Department in its investigation of the incident.

The “Be Someone” mural, created in 2012 by an artist who goes by the same name, struck a chord with Houstonians. The mural has been painted over with other messages several times, but the changes were always temporary.  Most recently, the mural was painted over with the words “Mog Coin” — which is a meme coin. So, unidentified people came together to bring back the iconic artwork, “Be Someone.”

The video showed two people walking down the railroad tracks while carrying paint rollers toward the rail bridge crossing over Interstate 45, according to an Instagram account @lurkinghouston that a Union Pacific peace officer had been following.

The two people were seen painting over the mural with black paint. The Union Pacific peace officer found comments made by the same account revealed that the “Be Someone” graffiti was allegedly restored with help from Instagram users known as @luc.xplore and @dodge.my.ram. The officer found another video on @luc.xplore’s page showcasing the finished “Be Someone” graffiti, but with blue paint.

The officer searched the area after the mural was finished and found paint trays and rollers, as well as a paint lid from a can of blue Glidden latex paint.

“The people responsible for painting the I-45 bridge with paint buckets and rollers are putting their lives and the lives of motorists passing underneath at risk,” Union Pacific officials said in a statement. The railroad transport company called the incident a “threat to public safety” and is taking the issue seriously.

The manager responsible for maintaining the bridge said that repairing it would cost $9,700, according to the documents.

[…]

This isn’t the first time that authorities have taken action against people in connection with graffiti at the site. In 2023, felony charges against graffiti artist Chandrika Metivier were dismissed after Metivier was accused of painting over the sign with “Woman, Life, Freedom,” and “No War Know Peace.”

See here for some background. I agree that this is a risky activity and the potential damage from a screwup is non-trivial. But so far this has been painted and repainted multiple times with no mishaps. I’m not here to tell the Union Pacific Railroad Police Department how to do their business, but I do think that HPD should have higher priorities than this. What exactly was the assistance HPD provided, and how many person-hours did it take up? That might be nice to know.

Really, I question the validity of pursuing this as a crime, at least when the “Be Someone” mural is being restored. This little bit of graffiti, which many people love, is a featured work on the Arts District Houston website and has its own Wikipedia page. Why can’t we just leave it be? Not only is it not hurting anything, it’s a public good at this point. Leave it be and let us enjoy it.

Posted in Elsewhere in Houston | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

And they’re back

Quorum time again.

Texas House Democrats announced they would return to Austin Monday, ending a two-week walkout over a GOP mid-decade redistricting plan and paving the way for the map’s passage.

“We killed the corrupt special session, withstood unprecedented surveillance and intimidation and rallied Democrats nationwide to join this existential fight for fair representation — reshaping the entire 2026 landscape,” Rep. Gene Wu of Houston, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, said in a statement.

Over 50 Democratic lawmakers left Texas earlier this month for Illinois and elsewhere in a bid to stall passage of a congressional map that was demanded by President Donald Trump just four years after Republicans last redrew the state’s lines, and that is designed to give the GOP five additional U.S. House seats in next year’s midterm election.

In an unprecedented response, Republican state leaders issued civil arrest warrants, sought to extradite absent members from Illinois, launched investigations and sought to declare at least one Democrat’s seat vacant. The Legislature ended the first special session early on Friday because of the walkout, with Gov. Greg Abbott promptly calling a second overtime session with virtually the same agenda as the first one.

Though Democrats won’t have the votes to defeat the map on the floor, they framed their protest as a victory for sinking the first special session and building a national appetite among blue state leaders for their own partisan redistricting efforts in retaliation to Texas’ plan. And they said that the end of the walkout only marked the next phase of their plan to fight the map in court.

“We’re returning to Texas more dangerous to Republicans’ plans than when we left,” Wu said. “Our return allows us to build the legal record necessary to defeat this racist map in court, take our message to communities across the state and country and inspire legislators across the country how to fight these undemocratic redistricting schemes in their own statehouses.”

I started writing this post early in the day yesterday, before the Lege gaveled in, so there may be subsequent news about some extra punishment or who knows what else for the Dems when they actually arrive. And now I hope I haven’t just manifested this into existence.

Anyway. Republicans just can’t wait to get to redistricting again – the Senate committee on redistricting approved the map on Sunday, when normal people were thinking about baseball or going to the beach or the new season of Love is Blind UK. (UPDATE: The House committee passed the map bill on Monday, literally the first action in that chamber for Session II.) It’s clear that this will be the top priority again, and that any action related to the Kerr County floods will be “whenever we get to it” issues. This is the message to drone on about over and over again. It’s one of the reasons for the quorum break in the first place. Now that the Dems are back and the session will happen, make this session be about their warped priorities first and foremost.

And over in California:

California Democrats unveiled a new congressional map on Friday, aiming to counter a planned Republican gerrymander in Texas by making several GOP-held districts in the Golden State bluer while also shoring up a number of Democratic seats.

The plan was rolled out haphazardly on Friday evening, leaking to the public several hours before a committee in the state Assembly published an official version on its site.

For unclear reasons, the map was not drawn by California lawmakers. Rather, it was prepared by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the House Democrats’ official campaign arm based in Washington, D.C., according to a letter submitted to the legislature along with a presentation explaining the map.

That letter chastised Republicans in Texas and elsewhere for “doing the bidding of their DC party bosses.” In a statement, the DCCC said its map was created “with collaborative input from stakeholders and legislators” but did not offer further details about its provenance. When asked for comment about why the plan originated with the committee, a spokesperson referred The Downballot back to that statement.

Lawmakers are set to take up the proposal this week, according to a schedule released by Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas. Committees in both chambers are set to hold hearings on Tuesday and Wednesday, with final votes to put the plan before voters in a November special election expected on Thursday.

Voters will be asked whether they want to temporarily replace California’s current map, which was crafted by the state’s independent redistricting commission in 2021, with this new plan. According to Gov. Gavin Newsom, the proposal will include a provision requiring California to stand down if Republican-run states like Texas back off their plans for mid-decade redistricting.

Just below, we outline the most important changes to the five Republican districts that Democrats are targeting. In each case, we’ve also included figures showing how each current district voted in the 2024 and 2020 presidential elections, as well as how the proposed new districts would have voted in those same elections.

There’s plenty of data, as is the way of The Downballot, so check it out. There’s also now a move to do re-redistricting in Colorado, and maybe Maryland, while Trump is putting more pressure on Indiana to cave to his wishes for re-redistricting there.

And some more on how the Texas map was drawn.

In their bid for five more congressional seats, Texas Republicans are turning to an unlikely source to help spread out their gains: noncitizens.

Four of the five districts that are drawn to be newly winnable for the GOP include pockets of current Democratic-held congressional districts with low rates of citizenship. In other words, Republicans appear to be padding the new districts with people who are counted in the census, but who can’t actually vote.

“If you are Republicans, and you are seeking to maximize your seats, you have to collapse Democratic districts, and that means giving their constituents to Republican seats somewhere else,” Dave Wasserman, a political analyst with the Cook Political Report, told the Houston Chronicle. “What are the precincts that can accomplish that goal? They’re precincts with high numbers of residents but low numbers of voters.”

This is one of those interactive stories that shows you via map highlights what is going on. I had not seen this particular angle before, but it makes sense and it echoes a strategy from the 2003 Tom DeLay effort that involved low-turnout versus high-turnout Latino areas in constructing a Republican-leaning CD23.

That’s it for now. The plan, per Speaker Burrows, is to speed through all of the agenda items by Labor Day. I have my doubts about that, but that’s what they’re saying.

UPDATE Of course the Republicans made it weird.

Texas Democrats who returned to the House floor Monday are being required to sign “permission slips” and seek a personal Department of Public Safety escort just to leave the chambers, NBC News correspondent Ryan Chandler tweeted Monday afternoon.

One democrat, State Rep. Nicole Collier of District 95 in Fort Worth, refused to sign the permission slip. As of press time, she is still locked in the chamber, alone, according to Chandler.

The correspondent tweeted a photo of Collier alone in the chamber, adding, “Members are really not happy with the individual DPS escorts. Say they are not free to move on their own.”

“In my heart I don’t feel compelled to sign it,” Collier told Chandler of being forced to sign the permission slip to leave.

When asked what her plan is, Collier said, “I’ll just sit here, I don’t know… I guess I’ll wait til Wednesday.”

More on Rep. Collier’s protest here. It’s going to be a long however many days.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on And they’re back

Judge rejects land ownership ban lawsuit for lack of standing

Hmph.

Two Chinese citizens who sued Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton over a new law banning people from China and three other countries from buying property in the state do not have standing to bring a class-action lawsuit over the legislation, a federal judge said Thursday.

U.S. District Judge Charles Eskridge agreed with attorneys from Paxton’s office who said the two plaintiffs — Peng Wang and Qinlin Li — were not among the people who would be affected by Senate Bill 17.

Eskridge, from the bench, said he would deny class certification to Wang and Li, dealing a potentially fatal early blow to the lawsuit. However, Eskridge said he anticipated that his ruling would be appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans, leaving open the chance that the new law could be blocked by the court.

[…]

Brian Ingram, a lawyer for the attorney general’s office, said the law isn’t meant to apply to people like Wang and Li who have permission to be in the U.S. The law is meant to apply only to “adverse governments and their agents.”

“It prohibits individuals who are domiciled in China, Russia, Iran and North Korea from purchasing property in Texas,” Ingram said. “It does not apply to persons from those countries who are domiciled in Texas.”

Ingram said there were carve outs in the law that allow people in Wang and Li’s position to buy and rent property.

Justin Sadowsky, the lead counsel for the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance, the group backing the lawsuit, said Ingram’s argument didn’t match what was written in the law.

“The disclaimer he was basically trying to make was that they’re not going to enforce this law against ordinary people,” Sadowsky said. “The problem is the statute applies to different groups of people.”

One of those groups is specifically foreign agents, Sadowsky said. But the law also specifies it applies to foreign nationals who aren’t domiciled in Texas.

The alliance argues that Texas laws prohibit people on nonimmigrant visas from being considered domiciled in the U.S. because the nature of their visa means they intend to return to their home country.

See here for the background. My interpretation of this – insert standard I Am Not A Lawyer disclaimer here – is that if Ken Paxton says he isn’t going to enforce this law against people like the plaintiffs, then they have suffered no injury and thus can’t sue. I can see the logic in that, but given that there’s a dispute over what the law actually says and that we’re going to have a new AG in less than a year and a half, I find it lacking as a justification. Even if you fully buy into Paxton’s promise, we don’t know how that will play out in practice, and the threat of being caught up by mistake or design seems to me to be enough to put the law on hold pending the outcome of the litigation. Not how the judge saw it, though. Maybe the Fifth Circuit will see it differently. Yeah, right.

Posted in Legal matters | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Judge rejects land ownership ban lawsuit for lack of standing

The “Faux Faculty Senate”

I love this bit of resistance, as I deplore the reason for it.

In response to Texas’ crackdown on faculty governance, two University of Houston professors are pushing back by creating their own “Faux Faculty Senate” to give faculty a real voice.

Dr. Maria C. Gonzalez and Dr. David Mazella, both associate professors of English at UH, are forming a faculty-led entity to replace UH’s Faculty Senate, which the university dismantled due to its implementation of Senate Bill 37 in late July.

“With the dismantling of the official University of Houston Faculty Senate on July 31, 2025, and since I had been elected by my colleagues this past spring to represent them on the Faculty Senate with my term beginning on August 1, 2025, I felt I owed my colleagues their voice in a body representing the faculty,” Gonzalez said in a statement announcing the group.

Mazella noted that the body would hold meetings and gather faculty and “unheard voices” despite their “official nonexistence.” The two professors invited their fellow faculty members to join them.

“Since we cannot use any state resources and since we will only be drawing upon our own personal resources for meetings, the [group] will hold monthly gatherings at designated Happy Hours around the Houston area for fact-finding and conversation,” Mazella added.

Mazella said beverages “may very well be involved,” but was serious when referring to the business of the covert collective’s operations, saying attendees could expect “serious discussions about issues that concern higher education.”

Gonzalez will serve as the “self-proclaimed” president, and Mazella will serve as the president-elect of the group. The statement announcing the formation of the organization did not include a date for the group’s first meeting but said it would be announced soon.

Senate Bill 37 removes the traditional role of faculty governance and designates any faculty representative body as strictly advisory at all state higher education institutions.

I didn’t write about SB37, which is another regrettable and deeply stupid attack on higher education, but you’ve probably seen stories of the public universities in Texas shutting down their faculty Senates in response to it. That doesn’t mean the spirit of them can’t live on and be ready to snap back into place when we finally get to a better place politically. It’s also got some “you’re not the boss of me” energy we could all use. I hope other schools look at what UH is doing here and find their own way to take action.

Posted in School days, That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

July 2025 campaign finance reports – HCC

PREVOIUSLY:

Harris County
Senate and Congress
City of Houston
HISD

And we wrap up our look at July campaign finance reports with a check-in on the HCC Board of Trustees, whose reports can be found here. At the time of this writing, there weren’t any opposing candidates for the three positions on the ballot – Districts I, II, and VII – so all I have is the incumbents’ reports. It’s possible there won’t be any multi-candidate races, which is what happened in 2023. If that happens, these elections may be called off to save the expense of having them. We’ll know at the filing deadline. The January reports are here.

Monica Flores Richart – District I
Renee Jefferson Patterson – District II
Adriana Tamez – District III
Lalou Davies-Yemitan – District IV
Sean Cheben – District V
Dave Wilson – District VI
Cynthia Lenton-Gary – District VII
Eva Loredo – District VIII
Pretta VanDible Stallworth – District IX


Candidate     Raised       Spent       Loan     On Hand
=======================================================
Richart
Patterson      8,400       4,764          0       3,636
Tamez              0         128          0       9,340
Davies             0         777      1,000       3,956
Cheben
Wilson             0           0          0           0
L-Gary             0           0          0           0
Loredo             0         500      4,500         699
Stallworth

As was the case in January, not everyone had a report. You can click over to that post to see what was the most recent information we had for those incumbents.

Renee Jefferson Patterson is the new kid in town, being appointed on January 29 to replace Charlene Ward Johnson, who is now the State Rep in HD139. She’s the only one to have any real activity to report. I feel reasonably confident she is running for what would be her first full term. The others, who can say. Both Sean Cheben and Lalou Davies-Yemitan came onboard two years with no opposition, and this was only apparent after the deadline. Maybe something like that will happen this time, maybe not. If there are races to run, I’ll do interviews. If not, given how much busier this November will be than I had expected, I won’t. I’ll let you know when I know more.

Posted in Election 2025 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on July 2025 campaign finance reports – HCC

On HPD and overtime

Lots to think about here.

Mayor John Whitmire

Houston senior police officer Matthew Davis’ annual salary was about $90,000 this past fiscal year. He made nearly $170,000 more in overtime.

It was not an anomaly. Davis has collected more in overtime than his base salary every year since at least 2020, and was previously disciplined for participating in an overtime scheme involving fabricated witness claims on traffic tickets. He is part of a growing pattern among the city’s highest-paid traffic enforcement officers who routinely collect overtime earnings that match or exceed their base salaries, a Houston Chronicle analysis found.

Houston police’s overtime spending, which has been growing for years, reached a new high of $74 million this fiscal year, which ran from May 2024 to April 2025. That’s up 26% from the previous fiscal year and eclipses the city’s police overtime budget of about $45 million.

The overtime surge is largely driven by the department’s traffic enforcement division and stems, in part, from a basic scheduling conflict: traffic officers tend to work afternoon and evening shifts when traffic – and traffic violations – peak, then must appear in court in the mornings to testify about the tickets they issued.

Over the past five fiscal years, seven out of the 10 highest police overtime earners worked in traffic enforcement and, together, banked a whopping $3.5 million in overtime alone. Citation records obtained by the Chronicle for Davis, one of the seven, show he devoted a large part of two workdays every week to court activities.

In what could compound the issue, a new contract approved by Houston City Council for the department’s more than 5,200 officers doubled the minimum overtime pay for court appearances from two to four hours. That means police that show up to court will earn at least four hours of overtime even if they only spend 10 minutes at the courthouse.

Officials with the Houston Police Department didn’t respond to a request for comment about their use of overtime funds. The agency declined to make Davis available for an interview.

“We won’t protect public safety by compromising financial safety,” City Controller Chris Hollins said of the police department’s overtime woes.

The police department’s overtime spending consistently surpasses budget projections and underestimates those costs again in the upcoming fiscal year, Hollins said.

“It’s time to invest in smarter workforce planning, more accurate forecasting and better fiscal discipline across the board,” he said.

Houston police leaders can control some aspects of overtime spending, by managing schedules and hiring more officers full-time, but some budget issues are outside of their direct control, said Doug Griffith, president of the Houston Police Officers Union. And the 2026 fiscal year, which will include major events like the 2026 FIFA World Cup, looks to be an expensive year for overtime spending.

“Just wait until next year with FIFA and it being 21 days,” Griffith said. “If you don’t think there’s going to be a ton of overtime spending during that event, you’re sadly mistaken.”

Traffic enforcement and staffing for major events are inherently expensive types of policing, Griffith said. And it’s hard to budget for them, because so much of it comes via state and federal initiatives and at the request of the mayor and individual councilmembers.

Mayor John Whitmire, for instance, has talked publicly about how more traffic enforcement will be a priority moving forward. And traffic officers have already written more than 1,000 citations as part of highly-publicized one- and two-day operations on the city’s roadways.

It’s a long story and that’s a gift link, so read the rest. Just a couple of high-level thoughts:

– One way or another, we have to get this cost under control. I’d take the Mayor’s entire “root out waste” schtick more seriously if he put a higher priority on stuff like this. His answer is to hire more cops, in part by paying them a lot more, but that neither addresses the scheduling issues for traffic patrol cops nor fixes things in the short term. Given that 2026 is going to be a big year for this kind of spending, what are we going to do about that?

– One thing we could do is crack down on cops who abuse the overtime system, as documented in the story. That sort of thing should not only be a firable offense, it should be potentially a criminal offense. I feel like that would go a long way, but I doubt there’s anything in the collective bargaining agreement or in this Mayor’s DNA that would allow for that. Demanding that HPD be more efficient just isn’t in the cards.

– We absolutely do need traffic enforcement, as anyone who has marveled at the lunacy of too many drivers in this town can attest. But much of what we get are speed traps that to my mind have limited usefulness. And in the meantime, we’re prioritizing vehicular speed in our road designs over safety, which just makes no sense at all.

– What most of this comes down to for me is the concern that there’s no mechanism in place to enforce reasonable spending controls at HPD, ones that put a premium on high-value work like clearing cases. And we’re not getting something like that anytime soon.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on On HPD and overtime

First Ten Commandments lawsuit heard

We are promised a ruling before September 1, the date the law would go into effect.

The debate surrounding a state law mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in public schools intensified Friday as attorneys representing 16 Texas families argued to block it before a federal district judge in San Antonio.

The lawsuit against multiple school districts across the state comes as the law is set to take effect Sept. 1. It was passed in the main legislative session earlier this year as Senate Bill 10, sparking concern from students and parents about religious exclusion and, consequently, lawsuits.

The law instructs public schools to hang the commandments on a poster or framed copy in classrooms that are legible and without any content added on. The case made against the requirement in Friday’s nearly six-hour hearing claimed the bill violated the First Amendment’s religious clauses by putting forth “coercive” displays of religious text.

The law’s proponents have claimed the Ten Commandments include essential and basic moral teachings, like “thou shalt not steal.” Its adversaries see it as more complicated than that — worrying it’s making a statement that one sect of religion is more favorable over others.

“The displays usurp the parental authority of the parents who have stood up to file this case,” said one of the families’ attorneys Jonathan K. Youngwood. “These parents have the authority to dictate their children’s religious upbringing.”

[…]

Friday’s hearing comes as another federal case in the Northern District of Texas against the law is ongoing. A hearing has not yet been set for the other case.

The parties will reconvene Monday morning for closing arguments. U.S. District Judge Fred Biery, an appointee of former president Bill Clinton, said the court’s decision would come before Sept. 1.

See here for the background on this case, and here for the background on the North Texas case. If we are valuing parental choice, as we claim to be doing with various other laws, then of course you find for the plaintiffs. Unless what we’re really saying is that the choice of some parents is more valid than the choice of some others. Which many parents of LGBTQ kids, especially trans kids, would say is exactly what we’re doing. Be that as it may, I do think there will be a favorable ruling for the plaintiffs here. After that, as is always the case with the Fifth Circuit and SCOTUS, who knows.

Posted in Legal matters | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on First Ten Commandments lawsuit heard

Weekend link dump for August 17

“Veterans hospitals are struggling to replace hundreds of doctors and nurses who have left the health care system this year as the Trump administration pursues its pledge to simultaneously slash Department of Veterans Affairs staff and improve care.”

“A string of previously undisclosed break-ins at Tennessee National Guard armories last fall marks the latest in a growing series of security breaches at military facilities across the United States, raising fresh concerns about the vulnerability of US armories to theft and intrusion.”

“Why Evangelicals Couldn’t Care Less About Trump’s Epstein Scandal”.

“In other words, the Egg McMuffin might be the answer to the question that has bedeviled economists since Donald Trump launched a global trade war on “Liberation Day”: When will the U.S. economy respond to these big new taxes?”

“The unlikely coalition fighting to keep Energy Star labels on your appliances”.

“It’s the end of an online era: AOL will end its dial-up internet service next month after decades in use.” Yeah, I had no idea it was still a thing either.

“In short, what we are witnessing is the FBI morphing, 117 years later, into the kind of nightmare national police force that Congress and the public feared the Bureau could turn into when it was first created in 1908, and which Director Webster and every other director made their mission not to let happen.”

“The President’s Policy is working as designed. Even as federal judges have ruled over and over that the Law Firm Orders are plainly unconstitutional, law firms that once proudly contributed thousands of hours of pro bono work to a host of causes — including causes championed by the ABA — have withdrawn from such work because it is disfavored by the Administration.”

RIP, Marina, 21-year-old white Bengal tiger who had been in Houston’s Downtown Aquarium.

“Judging Tesla Robotaxi On What It Does, Rather Than What Musk Says”.

“What alternative designs for the Senate might we consider, assuming that changes could be made possible? The most obvious tweak, of course, would be allocating senators proportionally to each state’s population. But some reformers, arguing we’ve outgrown the need for an empowered upper house, have suggested that the Senate could be transformed by amendment into a mostly ceremonial body, like the United Kingdom’s House of Lords, which itself was gradually disempowered in favor of the House of Commons. In 2018, Michigan Congressman John Dingell, the longest-serving member of Congress in American history, backed a much simpler idea: The Senate, he argued, should simply be abolished.”

“If we’re serious about confronting the threats facing American democracy, then it’s time to fully embrace blue state power. Not as a fallback, not to punish in retaliation against the people of red states, but as the confident exercise of power in the public interest, to make people’s lives better.”

“I’m 56 now, and if you’re recommending the same science fiction books to a ten-year-old today that would have been recommended to me when I was a ten-year-old — and were old and kinda dated even then — I think you should seriously reconsider recommending science fiction books to young readers.”

“‘I’m sitting behind the bench’: Inside sports’ escalating stalking problem“. A harrowing read. See also the story on NFL star Aaron Donald and his stalker, and why tennis is at the epicenter of the larger story.

RIP, Christophe de Menil, fashion designer and daughter of John and Dominique de Menil, founders of the Menil Collection.

RIP, Dorothy Caram, trailblazing educator, patroness of the arts, longtime advocate for Houston’s Hispanic communities.

RIP, Danielle Spencer, former child actor best known for What’s Happening!! who went on to become a veterinarian.

A book checked out from the San Antonio Public Library (SAPL) has been returned nearly 82 years after its original due date.

“I have been reading Loomer’s deposition for more than seven hours now — hey I finally finished! — and I have many, many, many thoughts, which I will share with you because I love and hate you very much.”

“Centers for Disease Control and Prevention workers whose jobs have been reinstated after dizzying Trump administration disruptions say they remain stuck in a budgetary, political, and professional limbo.”

“A couple of sitting justices would likely leap at the opportunity to cast Obergefell into the dustbin of history. But it is pretty clear that they haven’t yet secured a majority for their mission. And in the unlikely event that they do, Kim Davis’ case will not be the vehicle they use to eradicate the equal dignity of same-sex couples.”

“Anna Delvey’s Bunny Dumping Controversy Explained”. Yeah, I can’t believe I just wrote those words either.

“Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones could soon be forced to stop airing his Infowars show and give up the company’s property, including everything from desks and microphones to the Infowars brand name.”

“I fell down the fake food rabbit hole“.

Go read this interview with Weird Al. We are lucky to be alive at the same time as he is.

“I go back to a point I’ve made repeatedly over the last six-plus months. We are fundamentally in a battle over public opinion. If a decisive majority of the public opposes Trump his rule and criminality won’t stand.”

“4 out of 5 US troops surveyed understand the duty to disobey illegal orders”.

This is exactly the kind of evasion that anti-abortion zealots used to hide behind whenever one of theirs killed a doctor or firebombed a clinic. It was BS then and it’s BS now that it’s anti-vaxxers doing the same.

Happy 20th birthday, Fangraphs! May you have many more.

RIP, Takè 16-year-old red panda at the Houston Zoo.

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged | 2 Comments

And the At Large #4 race gets underway

Bring it on.

Alejandra Salinas

Two candidates for Houston City Council for are waging a war over who used AI to create their list of campaign priorities.

Alejandra Salinas’ campaign website lists a series of priorities she would champion if elected to fill the council seat of Letitia Plummer, who is running for Harris County judge. Those priorities include quelching violent crime, honing in on everyday city services like on-time trash pickup and readying the city for potential floods.

Salinas, though, thinks her priority list is a little too similar to her opponent Dwight Boykin’s list.

Boykins’ website similarly lists the same priorities and solutions in the same order, prompting Salinas’ campaign to suspect AI-generated plagiarism, the campaign said in Wednesday news release.

“The last thing we need representing us on Houston City Council is an AI bot,” Salinas said in a statement.

Dwight Boykins

Boykins’ campaign wrote in a statement that Salinas’ campaign did not “hold propriety rights to A.I., which they clearly also used to draft their priority list.”

“This is simply an attempt to get name identification with voters, and distract from the momentum and overwhelming support Councilman Boykins continues to receive from all corners of Houston,” Boykins’ campaign said.

A representative for Salinas’ campaign said her priorities were published July 7. A represenative for Boykins’ campaign didn’t immediately say when his list went up.

It isn’t uncommon for candidates to have similar campaign priorities as they run for the same office. For example, both Mayor John Whitmire and the late Sheila Jackson Lee made addressing public safety a priority if elected, as well as creating more infrastructure to address flooding.

“Campaign concepts and ideologies are so hard to differentiate,” said Nancy Sims, a politics lecturer at the University of Houston.

While Sims acknowledged the two candidates’ priority lists were “unusually similar,” she said “everyone wants to fight crime and pick up the trash so it’s one of the harder areas, in my opinion, to challenge as stolen or copied.”

We agree that Salinas was first out of the gate – she was fundraising well ahead of CM Plummer’s announcement. Boykins was not far behind as a candidate, though that doesn’t mean his website was up in a similar time frame. That said, he has run and served before, so one presumes he has a list of campaign priorities set aside somewhere. If the accusation is that he copied her content then I’m not sure what AI has to do with it, but I’m happy to make it a villain anyway. The story goes into an issue-by-issue comparison, so read the rest and judge for yourself.

Posted in Election 2025 | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on And the At Large #4 race gets underway

Second lawsuit filed against Tarrant County over its mid-decade redistricting

This one has an interesting twist.

The League of Women Voters of Tarrant County and the League of United Latin American Citizens are suing Tarrant County, the county’s commissioners court and County Judge Tim O’Hare over its mid-decade districting.

The two groups claim in a lawsuit filed Thursday the “secretive, rushed process” violates the Texas Open Meetings Act, purposely discriminates against Black and Latino voters and O’Hare as well as most of the commissioners violated the state constitution.

“In Tarrant County, a county with more residents of color than white residents, the Tarrant County Commissioners adopted a precinct map that dilutes the power of those residents of color, over the objections of the community,” said Janet Mattern, president of the League of Women Voters of Tarrant County. “This is illegal and is something the League will not stand for.”

[…]

The suit says in 2021, the Commissioners Court conducted a redistricting review of its commissioners’ precincts by “explicitly adopted criteria.’ The criteria, among several rules, required any new map to “avoid racial gerrymandering” and “have compact and contiguous precincts,” according to the suit.

The precincts at the time were “evenly distributed” amid recent population growth, according to the suit, and says the Commissioners Court voted 4-1 to keep that electoral map in place until the 2030 Census.

It claims the commissioners, led by O’Hare, ignored the criteria with its proposed redistricting efforts in April.

“There was no new census data or apparent triggering event to justify this abrupt decision,” the suit read.

O’Hare hired the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a conservative law firm to redraw the lines of the four commissioners court precincts. Each Tarrant County commissioner represents one geographic precinct, except for the county judge, who represents the whole county.

The suit claims PILF’s aid helped quicken the process behind closed doors by not providing publicly adopted redistricting criteria or public drawing sessions. Five proposed maps were submitted to commissioners in May and then released to the public by Democratic Tarrant County Commissioner Alisa Simmons, who previously said are an attempt to draw her out of her seat. Two more proposed maps were submitted at the end of May.

This is the second such lawsuit filed over Tarrant’s extracurricular redistricting effort – see here, here, and here for the background. The main difference here is the inclusion of the Open Meeting Act allegations. Those are illuminating, but I don’t know how useful they are in getting an injunction against this map. The rest of it sounds familiar, and based on past experience I’d expect these two suits to be combined at some point.

And just to reiterate what I said before, yes I know that Harris County was similarly aggressive in turning its Commissioners Court precincts into a 3-1 advantage for Democrats. Assuming that Tarrant County Commissioners Court didn’t violate the Voting Rights Act in its redraw – and assuming that SCOTUS hasn’t turned the VRA into toilet paper by the time this gets to a courtroom – then that is a thing they can do. But Harris County did its business at the normal time, following the 2020 Census, while Tarrant County decided it didn’t need to redistrict since the precinct populations were sufficiently in balance. As the 2020 Census would still be in use now, they have no justification beyond “we felt like it” to do this now. Make of that what you will.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Second lawsuit filed against Tarrant County over its mid-decade redistricting

The private school grift is gearing up

What happens when you spend a billion taxpayer dollars with no oversight and no accountability? We’re about to find out.

For about eight years, a Houston private school has followed a unique pattern when appointing members to its governing board: It has selected only married couples.

Over 200 miles away, two private schools in Dallas have awarded more than $7 million in combined contracts to their board members.

And at least seven private schools across Texas have issued personal loans, often reaching $100,000 or more, to their school leaders under terms that are often hidden from public view.

Such practices would typically violate laws governing public and charter schools. But private schools operate largely outside those rules because they haven’t historically received direct taxpayer dollars. Now, as the state moves to spend at least $1 billion over the next two years on private education, lawmakers have imposed almost none of the accountability measures required of the public school system.

If held to the same standards, 27 private schools identified by ProPublica and The Texas Tribune through tax filings likely would have violated state law. The news organizations found, and three education law experts confirmed, more than 60 business transactions, board appointments and hiring decisions by those schools that would have run afoul of the state rules meant to prevent self-dealing and conflicts of interest if they were public.

“It’s frankly astonishing to me that anyone would propose the massive sort of spending that we’re talking about in these school voucher programs with, at best, minimal accountability,” said Mark Weber, a public school finance lecturer at New Jersey’s Rutgers University who opposes vouchers. “If I were a taxpayer in Texas, I’d be asking, who’s going to be looking out for me?”

Texas has long stood as a holdout in the national push for voucher programs, even as other conservative states embraced them. Gov. Greg Abbott gave school voucher proponents a major win this year, signing into law one of the largest and costliest programs in the country. In doing so, Abbott’s office has argued that the state has “strict financial requirements,” saying that “Texas taxpayers expect their money to be spent efficiently and effectively on their behalf, both in private and traditional public schools.”

The law, however, imposes no restrictions to prevent the kinds of entanglements that the newsrooms found.

The contrast is sharp. Public or charter school officials who violate these rules could be subject to removal from office, fines or even state jail felony charges.

Private schools face none of those consequences.

Supporters of the voucher program argue that oversight of private schools should come not from the state, but from their boards and the marketplace.

“If you transform the private schools into public schools by applying the same rules and regulations and procedural requirements on them, then you take the private out of the private school,” said Patrick Wolf, an education policy professor at the University of Arkansas. Wolf, who supports vouchers, said that if parents are unhappy with the schools, they will hold them accountable by leaving and taking their tuition dollars with them.

Typically, neither parents nor the state’s taxpayers have access to information that shows precisely how private schools spend money. Only those that are organized as nonprofits are required to file public tax forms that offer limited information. Of the state’s more than 1,000 accredited private schools, many are exempt from submitting such filings because they are religious or for-profit institutions, leaving their business conduct opaque. It is unclear if private schools that participate in Texas’ voucher-like program will have to detail publicly how they use taxpayer dollars.

“The public system is not always perfect, but when it’s not perfect, we see it,” said Joy Baskin, associate executive director for policy and legal services at the Texas Association of School Boards, which represents public districts across the state. “That kind of transparency doesn’t exist in private schools.”

There’s a particular blind spot that free market zealots inevitably have and which Patrick Wolf demonstrates here. One of the basic tenets of capitalism, as I was taught in econ classes lo those many years ago, was that buyers and sellers all needed to have full access to information about products and prices and whatever else in order for the market to work as God and Adam Smith intended. If you don’t know about a lower price here or a superior product there or some shady practices that you would disapprove of if you did know about it somewhere else, you can’t “hold them accountable” for those actions. The ability of many businesses to hide key information from their customers is one of the biggest flaws of our economic system today. The solution to that has always been robust regulation and enforcement, and it’s hardly a coincidence that those things have been under sustained attack for decades. The applicability of this tenet to vouchers and the complete lack of public scrutiny that private schools face is left as an exercise for the reader.

Posted in School days, That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Special Session 2: [Insert dumb sequel name here]

As promised/threatened.

With the Texas House still frozen by Democrats’ absence from the state, Gov. Greg Abbott on Friday called a second special session to begin less than two hours after the Legislature gaveled out the first overtime round.

The second session is set to consider virtually the same agenda that stalled in the first, with redistricting and disaster response at the top of the governor’s priorities. As in the first session, Abbott called on lawmakers to also tackle stricter regulations on consumable hemp products, property tax relief and eliminating the STAAR test, along with a host of socially conservative measures.

“Delinquent House Democrats ran away from their responsibility to pass crucial legislation to benefit the lives of Texans,” Abbott said in a statement. “We will not back down from this fight. That’s why I am calling them back today to finish the job. I will continue to use all necessary tools to ensure Texas delivers results for Texans.”

Democrats had not yet returned to Austin on Friday, again denying the House the quorum needed to conduct business on the first day of the second session.

But Democrats indicated that they were likely to return soon, saying in a Thursday statement that they would come back to the state after the first special session adjourned and California introduced a new congressional map designed to offset the GOP gains built into Texas’ draft map.

[…]

The governor, who controls the agenda for overtime legislative sessions, again directed lawmakers to take up legislation on flood warning systems, emergency communications, natural disaster preparation and relief funding for impacted areas. He added a new item — “legislation to ensure and enhance youth camp safety” — after lawmakers filed a number of bills during the first special session that touched on camper disaster drills, improving camp emergency plans and providing life jackets in cabins, among other measures. The victims of the July 4 floods included 27 campers and counselors at storied Camp Mystic along the banks of the Guadalupe River.

On Friday, Democrats continued to call on Abbott to send the remaining $70 million in the state’s disaster fund to areas of the Hill Country and beyond affected by the floods.

“It’s past time the Governor focused on flood relief for families in need,” Rep. Ann Johnson, D-Houston, posted on social media. “He can sign the check today. He doesn’t need the legislature. Get it done.”

See here for the background. Not being there yesterday is fine, no one on the Republican side would have wanted to be there for anything more than a check-in so they could go home for the weekend. There will be enough of them there for Monday or Tuesday, whenever the actual start of the session will be – they don’t all need to be there for what will likely be a mostly ceremonial day, they just need to have enough of them there for a quorum. And then we move on.

To me, the main focus at this point is to hammer Abbott and the Republicans at every opportunity for prioritizing redistricting over flood issues. Remind everyone, especially our new pals around the country who have a platform, that we broke quorum in Session 1 in part because they were going to do redistricting before they ever even had a committee hearing on a flooding bill. If they do put flooding first in this session, say it’s because we shamed them into it. If they don’t, say they haven’t changed and still care more about placating Trump and rigging the 2026 election than they do about everyone who was harmed by the flooding.

They’re going to pass a new map eventually, one way or another. They have the numbers; they can do it. The goal of the quorum busting was to raise the political price for doing it. That was a success, but it doesn’t end here. The mantra about redistricting from here through next November is that they cared about doing that more than they cared about anything else, and their actions showed it. There are plenty of other things to hit them on, but they’re all of a piece about fealty to Trump and not doing what the people actually want. Do not let up for a minute about that. KUT has more.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

How’s that economy doing?

Not great!

All signs point to a slowdown of the Texas economy as job growth slows, construction declines and inflation ticks up, according to a Monday report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

The report on the Fed’s recent Texas Business Outlook Surveys — recurring surveys of Texas business executives across industries — was published as President Donald Trump attempts to reshape the U.S. economy through aggressive immigration and trade policies through the first six months of his second term in office.

Texas industries rely heavily on immigrants to fill jobs and international trade to sell their goods. Uncertainty surrounding Trump’s tariffs is giving investors pause and increasing costs for consumers while tough immigration enforcement is affecting the ability of businesses to recruit and retain employees, according to the report.

“Certainly from the private sector, this volatility obviously creates uncertainty,” said Ed Hirs, an economist and energy fellow at the University of Houston. “I would delay any investments, and really anything I’m doing. It’s pretty clear the economy is on a path to recession. It’s pretty clear the economy is on a path to inflation. The numbers are there.”

[…]

While the report said the inflation level is low, it called the lack of significant tariff-driven price increases “concerning and puzzling.” The nation’s effective tariff rate has risen to 17.5% from 2.4% at the beginning of the year. While businesses may decide not to pass on the entire cost of tariffs to consumers, “they will likely pass on some,” according to the report.

The report speculated that consumers simply are not buying as much, causing businesses to avoid hiking prices over fears of losing customers. Companies stockpiling goods throughout the winter and spring ahead of expected tariff increases may also be allowing business to absorb some of the increased costs in the short term, according to the report.

You’re probably already feeling this at your favorite restaurant or coffee shop. That Trump has done, is doing, and will continue to do things that harm all of us is beyond question. That the lickspittles of the Texas GOP will cheer him on every step of the way is equally certain. It’s on all of us to make sure that the people who sat out 2024 and the people who rolled the dice on Trump because they believed his lies about the economy and what he would do to fix it know these things as well as we do.

Posted in The great state of Texas | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

First Kerrville flooding lawsuit filed

Sure to be joined by many others.

In the weeks since devastating floods hit Central Texas, killing 119 people in Kerr County — including 39 children — much has been made of various investigationslegislative proposals, and potential lawsuits over what went wrong in the early morning hours of July 4. Questions remain over where exactly to place blame for the high death toll, and to what extent.

A new lawsuit, filed in Kerr County on Tuesday, appeared to be the first to make a direct claim.

The eight-page complaint was filed on behalf of the family of Jayda Christeel Floyd, a 22-year-old from Odessa, Texas, who died after floodwaters swept through a luxury RV park — or “glamping resort” — and campground on the Guadalupe River in Kerrville. The suit was first reported by KSAT and KENS5 and seeks at least $1 million in damages, claiming gross negligence against the investors, owners, operators, and general manager of the HTR TX Hill Country Resort.

Floyd was staying at the resort with her fiancé, 23-year-old Bailey Martin, a City of Odessa police officer, and his family when the river swelled 26 feet in 45 minutes before dawn that Friday morning.

Entire homes and RVs full of families were carried off all along the river, where the extraordinary “once in a century” event also swept through cabins full of eight-year-olds at a private all-girls camp. The youngest victims were 1 year old.

Like dozens of other Texans spending the holiday weekend on the river, Floyd and Martin were awoken suddenly by the sound of rising waters, then helped Martin’s teenage step-siblings climb onto the roof of the RV, saving their lives, according to a press release issued by attorneys on Tuesday. The couple were swept away with their RV, according to the lawsuit.

[…]

A spokesperson for HTR TX Hill Country responded to the lawsuit in a statement to Fox 7 Austin by saying that the company had not yet been served with the complaint but had reviewed a copy, rejected its “fundamental thrust,” and “will be prepared to vigorously defend ourselves in court.”

“Our hearts go out to Ms. Floyd’s family, her fiancé, and other loved ones — and to all of those who were impacted by the flooding that devastated the Kerrville community,” the statement said. “As has been widely acknowledged by state and local authorities, meteorologists, and other experts, no one could have anticipated the unprecedented severity and rapid onset of the flooding that occurred and that exposed serious failures in public warning systems and emergency response protocols.”

A press release from the plaintiff’s law firm is here, and a copy of the lawsuit is linked in the story. The basic allegation is that businesses like HTR TX Hill Country knew the risks of flooding – remember there was a flood in 1987 that killed ten campers – but lacked monitoring or alerting capabilities and had no evacuation plan. You know, like there has never been any mandate for them to have. One way or another, I think that aspect of this tragedy will come to an end. Spectrum News has more.

Posted in Legal matters | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on First Kerrville flooding lawsuit filed

The end (of the quorum break) is near

And getting nearer.

The House Democrats who fled Texas to block GOP redistricting appear likely to return in the coming days, according to a press release they issued Thursday.

The caucus said its members will return if Republicans follow through on their word to end the special session on Friday and California releases its own redistricting map meant to wipe out any GOP gains in Texas, which is expected Friday.

“Now, as Democrats across the nation join our fight to cause these maps to fail their political purpose, we’re prepared to bring this battle back to Texas under the right conditions and to take this fight to the courts,” said Caucus Chair Gene Wu of Houston in a statement.

At a campaign-style rally in Los Angeles, California Gov. Gavin Newsom did not produce an actual map that would yield California Democrats as many as five additional winnable seats in the U.S. House. Instead, the governor said the question allowing lawmakers to engage in mid-decade redistricting would be put to the voters on Nov. 4. Then, after the 2030 census, California would resume assigning districts through its independent commission.

“It’s not complicated. We’re doing this in reaction to a president of the United States that called a sitting governor of the state of Texas and said, ‘find me five more seats,'” Newsom said. “We’re doing it in reaction to that act.

“I know they say, Don’t Mess With Texas. Well, don’t mess with the great Golden State.”

You can see a copy of the statement here. I’m going to assume that the House adjourns sine die today, and then we’ll see what happens. California has done its part, at least as far as it can.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom said Thursday his state will hold a Nov. 4 special election to seek voter approval of new congressional map drawn to try to win Democrats five more U.S. House seats in 2026.

[…]

“We can’t stand back and watch this democracy disappear district by district all across the country,” Newsom said, joined by prominent labor leaders and Democratic politicians.

California lawmakers must officially declare the special election, which they plan to do next week after voting on the new maps. Democrats hold supermajorities in both chambers, and Newsom said he’s not worried about winning the required support from two-thirds of lawmakers to advance the maps.

Democrats signaled that they plan to make the campaign about more than maps, tying it explicitly to the fate of American democracy and as an opportunity for voters to reject Trump’s policies.

“Donald Trump, you have poked the bear and we will punch back,” Newsom, who is seen as a possible 2028 presidential contender, said at a news conference with other Democrats.

[…]

The California map would take effect only a Republican state moves forward, and it would remain through the 2030 elections. After that, Democrats say they would return mapmaking power to the commission approved by voters more than a decade ago.

Based on that reporting, it may be that the Dems make their return after this vote takes place. Or maybe they show up on the first day of the second session, so as to not rack up more fines that they may or may not ever pay. I’m curious if their appearance back at the Capitol will moot the ridiculous “abandonment” lawsuit. Hard to make the case for “abandonment” if they’re right there, and I’m sure SCOTx would rather not have to make a decision if they don’t have to, but who knows. I doubt Abbott or Paxton will make the motion to dismiss themselves.

As to whether the Republicans now decide to go bigger on redistricting, including the legislative maps, who knows. I don’t expect them to be cordial in any way, but they may also just be happy to get this over with and take the win. And hey, maybe they will actually take up flooding and THC this time.

One last thing:

President Donald Trump’s aggressive redistricting push is sparking public concern from an unusual mix of Republicans.

Resistance to mid-decade redraws is running the ideological gamut and cutting across levels of government. While many are backing Trump’s gambit to protect the GOP’s House majority in the midterms, a growing number of Republican lawmakers are airing concerns — a list that spans lawmakers from swing districts in blue states to safe territory in ruby-red Florida.

Trump and his team have convinced once-wary Texas Republicans to draw a new House map and lobbied the GOP governors of Missouri and Indiana to at least “seriously” consider following suit, but the Republican governor of New Hampshire has ruled out pursuing any changes because “the timing is off.” And GOP state lawmakers across the country — who hold the power to redraw lines in several of the states at the forefront of what’s becoming a nationwide redistricting arms race — are finding themselves similarly split.

These strange divisions underscore the complex political dynamics of the president’s latest power play. It’s become a loyalty test that could boost Republicans’ chances of keeping their trifecta in Washington, but one that also carries significant electoral risk for several of their own members in Congress and potential for broader voter backlash.

I’m not in the business of trying to suss out what Republicans will do. Redistricting is a weird thing, there are always complicated and self-interested dynamics involved, and not every state makes it as easy to do mid-decade redistricting as Texas does. While one should never underestimate the Republican capacity to cave in to Trump, it makes sense to me that there’s no clear consensus on this from their end. Life is like that. The Trib, CBS News, KUT, and KXAN have more.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The end (of the quorum break) is near

From the “Abortions for me but not for thee” department

Wild, wild stuff.

Three years after Starr County prosecutors charged 26-year-old Lizelle Gonzalez with murder for inducing her own abortion, District Attorney Gocha Ramirez swore under oath that when his office brought the case in early 2022 he didn’t know about the section of state law that forbids charging a woman with homicide for ending her own pregnancy.

It wasn’t until another local attorney sent him a screenshot of that snippet of penal code that Ramirez spotted the problem and moved to dismiss the case.

But new court filings in Gonzalez’s lawsuit against the county officials who prosecuted her argue that Ramirez must have known much earlier that Gonzalez inducing her own abortion was not a crime — in part because he allegedly paid for one in the mid-1990s while having extramarital affairs with a pair of sisters, before he became the D.A.

“It was Gocha’s child,” one of the women said in a sworn deposition reviewed by the Houston Chronicle, adding that Ramirez asked her sister “not to have the child” and allegedly paid for the abortion, then took them both out to eat at Red Lobster.

The startling deposition was one of several Gonzalez’s legal team filed in federal court on Tuesday, along with a 70-page brief arguing that Ramirez, another prosecutor in his office and the county sheriff should all be held personally liable for “maliciously abusing their power to concoct charges” against the South Texas mother of two.

It’s tough to sue police and prosecutors for bad behavior because they’re usually shielded by controversial doctrines known as qualified immunity and prosecutorial immunity, legal rules that protect them from personal liability. Lawyers for the three county officials have repeatedly argued that those rules apply, so the case should be tossed out.

But immunity has its limits. Prosecutors aren’t immune when they take on certain roles outside the courtroom, such as giving legal advice to police or acting as investigators. And police don’t get qualified immunity if their conduct is so egregious it violates a constitutional right that’s been “clearly established,” usually by a past court decision.

In this week’s court filings, attorneys for Gonzalez said evidence showed that Ramirez and his first assistant prosecutor, Alexandria Barrera, had been involved in the investigation more deeply than they’d previously admitted. At times, Barrera allegedly gave specific direction to sheriff’s office investigators about what evidence to collect and offered legal advice on how to move forward.

And Ramirez, they alleged, received updates on the case and ultimately made the decision to send it to a grand jury – one of the actions the State Bar of Texas took the rare step of disciplining him for last year, saying he “failed to refrain from prosecuting a charge that was known not to be supported by probable cause.”

And all three county officials — Ramirez, Barrera and Sheriff Rene Fuentes — violated “clearly established” constitutional rights when they pushed forward a murder charge and arrest for something the law explicitly said wasn’t murder, this week’s filing alleges.

“This was intentional,” Cecilia Garza, a South Texas attorney representing Gonzalez, told the Houston Chronicle. “It was brazen. They really do feel that they are above the law.”

See here, here, and here for some background. It’s a long story and that’s a gift link, so read the whole thing. All I can say is that I hope very much that Lizelle Herrera wins her lawsuit. She deserves it, and so do all the people she has sued. Texas Public Radio has more.

Posted in Crime and Punishment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on From the “Abortions for me but not for thee” department

Dispatches from Dallas, August 15 edition

This is a weekly feature produced by my friend Ginger. Let us know what you think.

This week, in news from Dallas-Fort Worth: more about redistricting; the good, bad, and indifferent about the first draft of Dallas’ budget; trouble in Deep Ellum (and not the Deep Ellum Blues kind); the departure of Dallas’ election chief; news from area schools; the latest awfulness from the mouth and keyboard of Bo French; transportation news, including the it-ain’t-dead-yet-honest bullet train; news from the suburbs; the latest on Dr. Phil and his media empire; wildlife gone wild; and the newest smoothie from Coppell-based Smoothie King. And more!

This week’s post was brought to you by the music of Annie-Claude Deschênes, whose French new wave music I found, again, through the algorithm, and Empress Of, whom I knew of and had actually seen at SXSW back when we regularly attended, but hadn’t gone back to in a while.

Let’s start this week with redistricting. Our host has been keeping us all up to date on the statewide issues, but there are always local angles here in the Metroplex. Here are a few stories you might be interested in, mostly from local news outlets:

  • The Fort Worth Report talked to State Rep. Chris Turner (D-Arlington) about Ken Paxton’s threats to get him and his colleagues removed from office.
  • WFAA talked to State Rep. Shelly Luther (R-Sherman) who told us the Dems who broke quorum might lose seniority, chairmanships, and even their parking spaces! If you’re remembering her name and don’t know why, Luther parlayed her quarantine-breaking haircut for Ted Cruz a few years ago into a term at the statehouse.
  • The Dallas Observer talks about the 2003 quorum break and how it compares to the current quorum break. If that’s not enough history for you, Texas Monthly, the Texas Tribune, and even the Atlantic are in on the quorum break discussion.
  • And taking the history back even further, KERA tells us about quorum breaking in the wild session of 1870 and how it allegedly got one senator removed from office.
  • Beto O’Rourke held a rally in Fort Worth over the weekend. I was unfortunately unable to attend, but KERA and the Star-Telegram both covered it.
  • And of course Ken Paxton came to Tarrant County to shop for a favorable judge in his efforts to stop Beto’s Powered by People from supporting the quorum-breakers. He managed to get a TRO from an Abbott-appointed judge in the 348th District Court and after the rally, took some out-of-context quotes from Beto’s remarks to try to get the judge to jail Beto.

Meanwhile, in more local news, we also have some stories for you:

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Dispatches from Dallas, August 15 edition

So when might the quorum busters return?

Before I address that question, here’s an important bit of business to resolve.

Illinois courts will not force Texas Democrats back to the state, a judge ruled Wednesday, dealing a blow to Attorney General Ken Paxton and House Speaker Dustin Burrows’ efforts to restore the headcount necessary to pass the GOP’s new congressional map.

Burrows issued civil arrest warrants Aug. 4 for the dozens of House Democrats who left the state to deny quorum, the minimum number of people required for the House to take up legislation. Those warrants can only be enforced within state lines, making them largely symbolic for the lawmakers who had absconded to Illinois, Massachusetts and New York.

But Burrows and Paxton took the unusual step of asking courts in those states to carry out the warrants and bring the lawmakers back to Texas.

On Wednesday, Illinois Judge Scott Larson rejected the petition, ruling that Paxton and Burrows had “failed to present a legal basis for the court” to take up the issue.

Illinois courts’ cannot consider whether “foreign legislators” were willfully evading their duties, and they cannot direct Illinois law enforcement to execute civil quorum warrants upon “nonresidents temporarily located in the State of Illinois,” Larson said, noting that the warrants specifically say they are to be enforced within Texas. Even if the court were to take up the case, which Larson ruled it lacks the ability to do, the response would be a ruling on whether the lawmakers are willfully disobeying a court order — not an order returning them to Texas as Paxton and Burrows demanded, Larson said.

See here for the background. I’m not sure if the proper reaction to this is “womp womp” or “neener neener”, but either way it’s always a delight to see Ken Paxton get beclowned. Remember, these jokers venue-shopped their lawsuit, filing it in a county that “voted for Trump by 47 percentage points in 2024” even though the Dems were nowhere near it. And yet, the judge they got told them to GTFO with this malarkey. Whatever else is going on in the current hellscape, that made yesterday a good day.

Back to the headline question. There was a report from KTRK on Tuesday night that seemed to be well sourced claiming that Dems would return after the first session ended. Not so fast, it seems.

With Texas expected to end its first special legislative session Friday and immediately begin a new one, the dozens of Democratic legislators who fled the state to block Republicans’ redistricting proposal are hammering out a plan for their return home.

Texas Democrats met late into the night Tuesday then again Wednesday, including breaking into smaller groups, to discuss their next steps and what their ultimate exit strategy looked like after spending the last 10 days out of the state, according to four sources close to the talks.

But those sources said the lawmakers do not yet have full consensus on an exit plan. “It’s hard to get folks on the same page,” said one of the sources, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal party strategy.

Still, there does appear to be agreement on one point: The Democrats won’t come back to Austin until Republicans officially bring the first special session to a close. They’re beginning to describe their ability to block Republicans from passing their new map that could net the party as many as five seats in the U.S. House during the first special session as proof of victory.

[…]

So while it appears likely that Democrats will succeed in delaying the process enough to force a second special session, there is an acknowledgement among the caucus that their protest will need to come to an end some point soon.

“From the get-go, they knew they were never going to stay out of Texas forever. People didn’t expect them to. The goal that the smartest among them set was: We need to bring national attention to this issue so other states are ready to counter if Republicans really do this,” one aide to a Texas House Democrat breaking quorum told NBC News.

“They’ve done that. That’s as much as anyone could expect — they are a minority in a legislature, but the entire country turned their attention to this issue. And the fact that California and New York are now considering redrawing their maps [in response to Texas] is a win,” the aide continued.

The aide added that while it’s “hard” to strike a victorious message if Republicans ultimately enact the new maps, as expected, it’s incumbent on Democrats across the country to drive the point home.

“This is a communications battle. When you’re in the minority, what you have is a bullhorn and an ability to draw attention to issues. Eventually, the majority will vote. That’s democracy,” the aide said.

My take on this is that while they probably won’t be boarding planes on Saturday, the end of the walkout is in sight. As it was always going to be, for reasons we have discussed before. Daily Kos adds a bit of detail:

Despite earlier speculation that Democrats might return this weekend, Texas House Democratic Caucus Chair Gene Wu made clear on Wednesday that his colleagues are prepared to again deny the quorum needed to pass the GOP maps.

“What happens next is entirely up to Greg Abbott. After deliberation among our caucus, we have reached a consensus: Texas House Democrats refuse to give him a quorum to pass his racist maps that silence more than 2 million Black and Latino Texans,” Wu’s statement read. “Texas House Democrats will issue our demands for a second special session on Friday. Abbott can choose to govern for Texas families, or he can keep serving Trump and face the consequences we’ve unleashed nationwide.”

We should know more tomorrow, but do bear in mind that this is a situation where even a couple of outliers can force the issue by simply returning home themselves. That’s basically how the 2021 quorum break ended. If there’s one lesson I hope everyone learned from that, it’s that it’s much better to return together, as they had left together, rather than have a few stragglers come in on their own. If that means the group comes back earlier than some might like, so be it. Acting as one maintains the show of strength fueled by unity. Anything else undermines it. Here’s hoping they get that right.

On a subject we touched on yesterday, we have another poll about how people have viewed this standoff.

A recent YouGov poll found that large majorities of Americans see gerrymandering as a major problem, think it is unfair, and say it should be illegal. But what do Americans think about the specific situation in Texas? In another survey, we found that few Americans approve of Texas’ redistricting proposal. Americans are divided over whether to approve or disapprove of state legislators leaving Texas to prevent a vote, but are more likely to disapprove than to approve of expelling absent members from the state legislature.

About one-third (30%) of Americans strongly or somewhat approve of Texas state legislators’ plan to create five new Republican-leaning districts. About half (48%) disapprove of the proposal.

The vast majority of Democrats (85%) and about half of Independents (51%) disapprove of the plan, compared to only 6% of Democrats and 18% of Independents who approve. Republicans are far more likely to approve (66%) than to disapprove (11%) of the proposal. Republicans express less-passionate attitudes about the proposal than Democrats do: Only 38% of Republicans strongly approve of the plan, while 73% of Democrats strongly disapprove of it.

While few Americans approve of Texas’ redistricting plan, there is less consensus over whether legislators in the opposition are right to delay the vote by leaving the state. Americans are slightly more likely to disapprove than to approve of legislators leaving the state (41% vs. 37%). That difference is within the margin of error for this survey.

Democrats are much more likely to approve (62%) than to disapprove (25%) of the attempt to prevent a vote. Republicans are much more likely to disapprove (64%) than to approve (16%). Like with Americans overall, Independents are about evenly split: 34% approve and 34% disapprove.

About as good as you could ask for. The keys are the stronger numbers for Dems than for Republicans, as I’d take that as a measure of intensity, and a good majority of indies on our side. I still doubt this swings anyone’s vote, but if it gets Dems more fired up than Republicans while not alienating indies, that’s a win. Olivia Julianna and Lone Star Left have more.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

What the finally released Uvalde records tell us

It shouldn’t have taken this long. And there’s still a lot of stuff we haven’t seen because it’s still tied up in the courts.

New Uvalde school district records released late Monday provide more details about campus safety concerns raised before the deadly 2022 Robb Elementary school shooting — and reveal in a few teachers’ own words how traumatized they remained after the massacre.

The documents also indicate that the 18-year-old shooter had exhibited inappropriate school behavior, struggled academically and was often absent when he was an Uvalde Consolidated Independent School District student.

The materials — more than 200 megabytes — are part of the latest document disclosure by a government agency involved in the flawed response to the deadliest school shooting in Texas history. The release was part of a settlement agreement in a yearslong lawsuit news organizations, including ProPublica and The Texas Tribune, brought against state and local governments.

The records include messages from school district officers who responded to the shooting, in which 19 students and two teachers were killed. The documents reveal little new information about several law enforcement agencies’ failure to more quickly confront the gunman. ProPublica and The Tribune previously found that officers wrongly treated the shooter as a barricaded subject, rather than an active threat, and waited 77 minutes to confront him. No officer took control of the response, which prevented coordination and communication between agencies.

None of the school district police officers were wearing body cameras that day because the district had not issued them the equipment, so no new video or audio was released Monday.

In one email released Monday, a fourth-grade Robb teacher wrote to the district superintendent about how terrified she was during the shooting, as she tried to keep her students safe while bullets ricocheted around her.

According to a Texas House committee’s investigation into the shooting, the teacher was in a classroom across the hall from the adjoining classrooms where the gunaman killed all of his victims and was barricaded.

“I fell on the floor and began knocking desks over onto my legs so I wouldn’t make noise, but I couldn’t block the students from bullets,” she emailed the former district superintendent, who retired after the shooting. “I told my students I loved them. I told them to stay quiet, and I told them to pray.”

[…]

The Uvalde County Sheriff’s Office has also agreed to release body camera footage and other records, but had not done so by late Monday.

The Texas Department of Public Safety, which dispatched more than 90 officers to the school, has appealed a judge’s order to release hundreds of videos and investigative files. Prather said the media coalition continues fighting for the release of the state law enforcement agency’s records.

“Three years is already too long to wait for truth and transparency that could prevent future tragedies,” [Laura Prather, a media law chair for Haynes Boone who represented the news organizations in the legal fight for records] said.

ProPublica and The Tribune previously published 911 calls that showed the increasing desperation of children and teachers pleading to be saved and revealed how officers’ fear of the shooter’s AR-15 prevented them from acting more quickly. In a collaboration with FRONTLINE that included a documentary, the newsrooms showed that while the children in Uvalde were prepared, following what they had learned in their active shooter drills, many of the more than 300 officers who responded were not.

DPS spokesperson Sheridan Nolen wrote in an email Monday that the agency followed “its standard protocol in which it does not release records that will impact pending prosecutions.” Two former Uvalde schools police officers were indicted on child endangerment charges last summer over how they responded to the shooting. That includes Pete Arredondo, who was the district’s police chief during the shooting and has been widely faulted for the delay in confronting the gunman.

Uvalde District Attorney Christina Mitchell, who is leading the criminal investigation, did not return requests for comment. Spokespeople for the school district and county also did not immediately respond.

Former Uvalde mayor Don McLaughlin, now a Republican member of the Texas House, called it “ludicrous” that the news organizations had to launch a legal fight to obtain records. He added that DPS should also release its information so that the victims’ families could get much-needed answers.

“Maybe there’s something in there that we can keep this from happening again,” he said. “This was a costly mistake, and so I believe everybody should just release their records and give these families not closure, but at least another piece of what went on that day.”

McLaughlin said he repeatedly asked DPS about releasing the information since starting his term in Austin this year.

“I basically was told it was up to the lawyers what they could and couldn’t do,” he said. “I don’t know what could be top secret in these reports that could hinder them being released.”

See here for the previous update. There’s a lot more to this article, and there’s also the Pro Publica version, so read it all. And screw DPS, the useless Steve McCraw, and Christina Mitchell for everything they have done to prolong the pain and suffering that these survivors feel.

Posted in Crime and Punishment | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on What the finally released Uvalde records tell us

Let Sarah smoke

I admire a well-done political stunt.

Sarah Stogner

A West Texas district attorney may qualify for prison time after smoking a joint on TikTok this month in a legal gamble protesting a proposed state ban on THC.

On a TikTok live stream, Sarah Stogner — the district attorney of the state’s 143rd judicial district — said she traveled to New Mexico to buy cannabis before rolling it back in Texas. She challenged Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, head of the Texas Senate who has backed the ban, before making the likely illegal trip across state lines.

“You might want to guard the New Mexico border on Saturday,” Stogner wrote on X. “I’m going to a dispensary to buy a joint. And then I’m going to smoke it in my backyard at 4:20 pm. Come and take it.”

Stogner, who lives west of Odessa, later posted a selfie, captioned “Free the plant Dan,” with the joint between her lips. She did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

While cannabis is legal in New Mexico, Texas outlaws its possession as a Class B misdemeanor, which can lead to as many as 180 days in jail and up to a $2,000 fine. On the federal level, marijuana remains illegal. And though a legal expert — Dallas-based defense attorney Alison Grinter Allen — told the Chronicle it could be difficult to prove in court in this case, transporting marijuana across state lines is subject to federal prosecution with a potential five-year prison sentence or $250,000 fine, according to the Drug Enforcement Agency.

Penalties get harsher as the amount of transported marijuana increases in size, according to federal law.

While it’s unclear if Stogner will be prosecuted for apparently breaking the cannabis laws, she has told the New York Times she lined up a defense lawyer and notified the local judge.

Putting yourself at risk like that for the purpose of making a statement is worth admiring, especially at a time like this. Stogner is not a newbie when it comes to getting attention, so good for her. And as committed to that THC ban as Dan Patrick is, he can’t get anywhere as long as the House lacks a quorum.

Posted in Crime and Punishment | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Let Sarah smoke

Texas blog roundup for the week of August 11

The Texas Progressive Alliance stands with the quorum breakers as it brings you this week’s roundup.

Continue reading

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged , | Comments Off on Texas blog roundup for the week of August 11

Everything happens on Tuesday

Hey, remember when I said yesterday that there was still no quorum and not much had happened? That was then, this is now.

The Supreme Court will take its sweet time in deciding on those quo warranto filings to expel 13 quorum busters.

When House Democratic lawmakers left Texas to delay passage of a new congressional map, Gov. Greg Abbott took the unprecedented step of asking the Texas Supreme Court to expel their caucus leader from office. And he wanted it done quickly, asking the high court to rule just 48 hours after he filed.

On Monday, the court rebuked that proposed timeline, setting a three-week period of briefings from both sides. The schedule, which the court noted is expedited, anticipates final responses to be filed on Sept. 4, more than two weeks after the current special session is set to end.

Abbott touted this as a win, saying on social media that the briefing schedule brings the “ring leader of the derelict Democrats … closer to consequences.”

The high court consolidated Abbott’s suit against Houston Rep. Gene Wu, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, with a similar case from Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is asking to remove Wu and 12 other members. While Abbott and Paxton initially sparred over who had the legal standing to bring these suits, Paxton said Monday that he looked forward to fighting alongside Abbott to “hold these cowards accountable.”

[…]

Wu’s lawyers argue he is representing the will of his constituents by leaving the state to prevent legislation from passing that they oppose.

Wu “has not died and has not been expelled from the House by the constitutionally prescribed means: a 2/3 vote of the House,” his lawyers said in a brief. “His presence in another state is not a voluntary resignation — as his opposition to this petition makes evident.”

The Texas Supreme Court is made up entirely of Republicans and two-thirds of the members were initially appointed by Abbott. Two of them, including the chief justice, previously served as the governor’s general counsel.

“They have their own independent authority, of course, but it does put them in a tough political position,” Andrew Cates, an Austin-based attorney and expert on Texas ethics law, previously told The Texas Tribune. “They don’t want to be in the position of potentially biting the hand that initially fed them.”

Pardon my French, but if any of these Justices are afraid to make an honest ruling because Greg Abbott might be mad at them, then they have no fucking business on any bench anywhere. I would like to believe they have at least enough respect for the law, and for themselves, to do the right thing.

Elsewhere in the courts, Ken Paxton has turned it up to 11 against Beto O’Rourke.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton on Tuesday asked a Tarrant County judge to jail former U.S. Rep. Beto O’Rourke, in another escalation in Republicans’ broader effort to put an end to Texas Democrats’ walkout over a new congressional map.

Paxton sued O’Rourke and his political group, Powered by People, last week, arguing that the group was deceptively fundraising for and illegally supporting Texas Democrats’ walkout. Tarrant County District Judge Megan Fahey quickly granted Paxton’s request to temporarily block O’Rourke and Powered by People from fundraising for Democrats or spending money to cover their expenses.

On Tuesday, Paxton claimed that O’Rourke had violated that temporary injunction at a Fort Worth rally Saturday, when he told the crowd, “There are no refs in this game, fuck the rules.”

According to a video of the event, O’Rourke appeared to say that phrase after urging the crowd to support retaliatory redistricting in other blue states — not in relation to the injunction.

Paxton’s motion also cited social media posts by O’Rourke after the injunction came down, in which the Democrat said he was “still raising and rallying to stop the steal of 5 congressional seats in Texas,” and included a donation link.

The attorney general said O’Rourke “repeatedly solicited donations” at the Fort Worth rally by urging the crowd to text “FIGHT” to a number that would automatically respond with a link to a donation platform.

Paxton’s motion asks the judge to imprison O’Rourke for the duration of the lawsuit, and to fine the Democrat $500 for each violation of the injunction.

Putting aside the dumb misstatement of Beto’s declaration, is that even a thing? Like, does a civil court judge have the power to just lock someone up? What is even going on here?

O’Rourke filed his own lawsuit against Paxton Friday in El Paso district court, alleging that the attorney general was engaging in a “fishing expedition, constitutional rights be damned,” and asking the judge to block Paxton’s investigation into the organization’s practices.

“Paxton is trying to shut down Powered by People, one of the largest voter registration organizations in the country, because our volunteers fight for voting rights and free elections, the kind of work that threatens the hold that Paxton, [President Donald] Trump and Abbott have on power in Texas,” O’Rourke said in a statement responding to Friday’s injunction.

I still haven’t seen much detail in regard to Beto’s counter-suit, and I have not seen it reported anywhere when there might be a hearing or a briefing schedule, let alone a ruling. As such, I have no idea what to make of this.

Meanwhile, in other curious matters.

Republican state leaders have made a strong show of going after the Texas House members who are missing in action to block GOP redistricting, launching legal challenges to vacate their seats and dispatching state troopers and the FBI to track them down.

Over the weekend, Gov. Greg Abbott even posted “WANTED” flyers on social media with the faces of several runaway Democrats. “If found: Return to Texas State Capitol,” they read.

But for all the effort, officials have seemed unwilling to actually haul in absent Democrats who didn’t flee the state with the rest of the group – a hesitation that is starting to aggravate the party’s most hardline members.

“There are three in Houston,” state Rep. Briscoe Cain of Deer Park told the Texas Tribune last week about potential Democratic members on the run. “It just takes guts to go get them.”

“We need to bring in whoever we can find, wherever we can find them,” Cain added in an interview Monday.

House Speaker Dustin Burrows has issued civil arrest warrants that allow state troopers to compel the return of absent members found to be in Texas. None has been executed to date.

“The House has deputized dozens of officers and dispatched them across the state,” Burrows said Monday. “They are set up outside members’ homes, conducting surveillance, knocking on doors, calling their phones multiple times a day. So far, no one’s home. But the search continues, and it will not stop.”

[…]

Experts said Republicans are almost certainly reluctant to force Democrats back to Austin, especially since many of the missing members are elderly and include veteran lawmakers like Thompson, the first Black woman elected to the Texas House. The speaker typically calls for the House chamber doors to be locked to maintain quorum, meaning doing so would also present a number of logistical hurdles.

“The campaigns aren’t stupid,” said Bryan Gervais, a political science professor at the University of Texas at San Antonio who studies political communication. “Who are the type of voters that show up to midterm elections? It’s older voters. So the images of, even if they’re Democratic, legislators being dragged out, forced out, you know? That doesn’t play well.”

Gervais said political consultants are likely mulling the question of how to project confidence while also tempering that to ensure there’s no backlash from Republicans who may oppose them actually arresting members. Several Republicans are also actively fundraising off of the quorum break, meaning there’s an advantage to it going unresolved.

“We want to look tough. We want to look like we’re being aggressive here to please our folks in Washington,” Gervais said of the Republicans, “but at the same time, it’s (arrests are) probably a step too far where now you’ve created a bunch of attack ads that are going to play really, really well among senior citizens.”

Burrows and other top Republicans are in a difficult position, said a person familiar with GOP leadership discussions during the Democrats’ 2021 quorum break. They want to broadcast that they are in control of the situation, but at the same time, they don’t have a lot of options politically.

“Do you really want to put an elderly person in handcuffs?” said the person, who asked not to be named because they were not authorized to discuss internal GOP strategy. “And then once you get them to the Capitol, what are you going to do? Are you going to feed them? Where are they going to change their clothes? I mean, logistically, it’s impracticable.”

“No one’s being serious about arresting them,” the person added. “That’s what the grassroots wants, that’s what Twitter wants — it’s just not a reality.”

Reality walked out a long time ago. DPS may not be in the business of actually arresting anyone involved here, but that hasn’t stopped them from buzzing around some lawmakers’ homes and families. And it must be noted that the fundraising is abundant while the drama is happening.

Also happening:

The Texas Senate approved new congressional lines on Tuesday in a rare mid-decade redistricting effort that could aid Republicans in their effort to keep control of the U.S. House of Representatives after the 2026 election.

The vote was 19-2, with nine Democrats absent after exiting the Senate floor moments after the maps were taken up, a show of protest against what they framed as a “corrupt process.”

“This mid-decade redistricting isn’t about fair representation—it’s about politicians picking their voters instead of voters choosing their leaders,” the Senate Democratic Caucus said in a statement. “And it doesn’t stop here. If they can gerrymander now, they can and will do it before every election.”

The exit wasn’t enough to deny a quorum, as their counterparts have done in the Texas House. Dozens of Democrats in the lower chamber have decamped to Illinois and other parts of the country, bringing work in the House to a halt for a second week as the chamber continued to lack the minimum headcount needed to conduct business.

“We stand in solidarity with our House Democrat brothers and sisters,” said Houston Sen. Carol Alvarado, the Senate Democratic leader. “Our options here to push back and fight in the Senate are pretty limited, so we’re using every tool that we have.”

Getting two more Senators on board so there’s more than one quorum to break would be a more powerful statement. The fines that House Dems face are the result of a House rule, though obviously the Senate could adopt a similar rule…once they have a quorum again. And it’s not like Dems get to do much on Senate committees anyway.

So if there’s still no quorum on Friday – and barring anything super weird there won’t be – then Speaker Burrows will adjourn sine die and Greg Abbott will call special session #2. And we’ll see what happens from there.

Other ancillary items of note:

– I do not want to see Doggett versus Casar for the rights to the one Austin-centered district. I actually think that Doggett is right that Casar would be the stronger candidate to run in the gerrymandered CD35, which as previously noted would likely perform as a tossup. But that’s not Doggett’s call to make or even really to suggest, and from a “Democrats are too old and too protective of their older legislators” perspective is a terrible look. Which I’m sure the Republicans had in mind from the beginning – see also the possible Al Green versus whoever wins the CD18 special election matchup.

– There’s apparently a poll that says a “majority of Texas voters don’t support the Republican redistricting effort”. Which is nice, albeit more than a little vague. But let’s be honest, we’ve seen a million polls like this that suggests some Republican-favored position is similarly unpopular with Texas voters. That has yet to make any difference, as the voters have tended to prioritize other matters when they do vote. This is not to say that this will always be the case – this fight is as much about messaging as anything else – just that we would do well to keep some perspective.

– I will wrap up with this:

See you Friday, assuming nothing else of great interest happens with all this.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Republicans prepare to eat their own

Sometimes all you can do is stare in bug-eyed amazement.

The executive committee of the Republican Party of Texas was in Austin on Saturday to finalize its first-ever legislative review, outlining a list of censurable offenses that some within the Texas GOP want to use to block certain House Republicans from the 2026 primary ballot.

Those Republicans, made up of delegates chosen by county parties, want to use the list to hold their elected officials to the state party’s priorities. But others see it as an illegal effort to deny officials from the primary ballot if they don’t follow the most fervent conservative activists’ aims 100% of the time.

Texas GOP Chair Abraham George told The Blast that he and House Speaker Dustin Burrows, who spoke to members of the SREC at a separate meeting with Gov. Greg Abbott earlier Saturday morning, have not discussed the party’s censure effort, a new “accountability” mechanism the state party approved at its 2024 convention. Still, Burrows likely knew the SREC members would be approving a hit list that could be used to keep “RINOs” from the ballot.

[…]

The State Republican Executive Committee, or SREC, hunkered down in the Capitol auditorium and outlined censurable offenses that would apply to a majority of the GOP caucus, particularly Burrows’ top committee chairs.

The report itself doesn’t censure lawmakers. It’s a list of transgressions that county parties can use to censure their representatives and ask to bar them from the March primary ballot.

State Affairs Chair Ken King of Canadian, whose committee was a bottleneck for several GOP priority bills, was the subject of numerous censurable offenses. Even Public Education Chair Brad Buckley of Salado — who quarterbacked Gov. Greg Abbott’s No. 1 priority, school vouchers, across the finish line — was mentioned for not advancing a bill to deny public education to K-12 students who are in the country illegally, House Bill 4707.

The list of offenses include bills that failed to pass in the regular session that Abbott has added to the call for the special session.

A common theme throughout the meeting was that the report needs to be airtight because they may have to defend it in court, as George noted. Eric Opiela, an attorney helping several House Republicans with pending censures, was in the audience.

“We are talking about providing grounds for possibly keeping an office holder off the primary ballot,” said Rolando Garcia, an SREC member for Senate District 15 in Harris County. “If it looks like we’re really being shady and squirrely and multiplying violations just to provide grounds for keeping people off the ballot, that is very damaging to RPT.”

Can’t imagine why. I guess what I’d say is why bother with namby pamby watered down half measures like this? Just abolish Republican primaries all together and let the SREC pick the nominees for every office, to ensure they are all fully compliant with whatever the purity test du jour is. At least, until they inevitably get cold feet and stab you in the back. Betrayal is always just around the corner, after all.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Three perspectives on scooters

The Chron editorial board calls for regulation over a ban.

We’re feeling a bit of whiplash.

For a city that has for decades been desperate to get people out of their cars and into central neighborhoods, our leaders seem all too eager to slam the brakes on a phenomenon regularly delivering crowds: e-scooter rentals.

Mayor John Whitmire’s administration has proposed an outright ban on the zippy two-wheelers in downtown and surrounding neighborhoods — an act of regulatory overreach that undermines Houston’s pro-business reputation while ignoring the real dangers on our roads.

Yes, there is a problem of youths and families on electric scooters overcrowding Discovery Green at night. Pop-up vendors are illegally renting on the roads and sidewalks. Residents and business leaders have every right to complain about chaos.

That’s why City Hall needs to go back to the drawing board and come up with smart regulations that target the harms they want to prevent, not whole categories of transportation they don’t like. This means listening carefully to everyone involved: commuters, residents, businesses and even the kids looking to have some fun.

In fact, the brick-and-mortar companies that rent these scooters have already banded together and proposed regulations as an alternative to a ban. They point to geofencing, speed and age limits and even curfews as a way to promote safe habits and weed out the bad actors. This sort of informed feedback should have Houstonians asking why City Hall didn’t consider these ideas at the very beginning. Whatever the reason, City Council members have indicated that they’re open to compromise.

“I think that there’s a way to accommodate various interests,” said Houston City Council member Julian Ramirez, who chairs the Quality of Life Committee debating the regulations.

Permitting could also be a part of the solution. Unlike AustinDallas and San Antonio, which have permitting regulations, Houston doesn’t track how many rental scooters are on the street. That might be a step toward implementing rules that bring some order to the mayhem — and yes, there is mayhem.

[…]

Nor is City Hall fully considering the impact of a proposed ban on Houstonians who use scooters to commute to work or school.

Consider Claudia Vargas Corletto, a Third Ward resident who told the editorial board that she doesn’t own a car and uses her scooter to commute to her job in Montrose.

“For God’s sake, I’m a nanny,” she said. “This is how I get to work.”

See here for the background. We may have a city that has long wanted to get people out of cars and into alternate means of transit that don’t clog up the streets the way single-occupancy vehicles do, but we don’t currently have a Mayor who is interested in that. And yes, there are people who don’t own a car and get around on scooters. Maybe not that many, but they’re surely not causing any kind of major problem. Surely they deserve for Council to a way forward that doesn’t strand them.

To get some more perspective on the issue, the Chron sent one of their writers out with a video camera to see the mayhem for herself.

I showed up at Discovery Green on recent Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights to see what all the fuss was about.

I half-expected to see a dystopian scene out of RoboCop II. Instead, I saw a park packed with young adults and whole families riding a myriad of electric vehicles. Hundreds in their weekend getups zipping around, their vehicles glowing in the night. It was lively but also uncomfortably crowded.

All the scooter users tell me they follow the rules.

“We’re over here with our friends having fun on the weekend,” said Edwin Cruz, 21, of Aldine. “I ride on the street, we all ride on the street.”

Not long after, however, Cruz and others I’d spoken with sped away into the park.

For pedestrians and residents of the luxury One Park Place high-rise, the constant threat of collisions is real. They want the city to go after the people renting out the e-scooters.

“I’ve had cans and containers thrown at me by scooter riders for simply telling them they’re breaking the law,” said Richard Paulssen, a resident at One Park Place. To him, Discovery Green was “no longer a safe space” for parents and children — not with the “risk of being run down by multiple scooters tearing up the lawn.”

Vendors are quick to point fingers — at their rivals. The large brick-and-mortar scooter rental companies place the blame on pop-up vendors illegally renting on the roads and sidewalks. They say the illegal vendors give out unsafe scooters that operate at excessive speeds and they rent to minors without an adult present.

Abe Levitz is the founder of ERYD, the largest e-scooter vendor in the city. At Lamar Street alone – one of ERYD’s seven-plus Houston locations – they rent out more than 100 scooters on any given Saturday night. Levitz is organizing the brick-and-mortar vendors into a “Legal Scooter Coalition.” They want a compromise: namely, to crack down on vendors operating on private property without a valid lease.

“The illegal operators have no guidelines. They have nothing to lose. They’re fly-by-night,” said Levitz.

[…]

Most people who die on our roads are in cars, but we don’t ban automobiles. The real reason behind the uproar that I found was a different kind of fear — unease over crime.

Many residents and business owners believe that e-scooter riders are committing crimes or attracting them. Leadership at Discover Green pointed me to a news story from 2024 about an altercation and shooting involving two teenagers on scooters and a man that led to a downtown arrest.

Yet, HPD Capt. Melissa Countryman said at the hearing that most weapon arrests this year from January to March involved vendors who carried illegal firearms for protection.

Most of the scooter riders I spoke with are from greater Houston. The majority were Latino and Black. They, too, are looking for a safe place to enjoy an evening out, and they deserve one.

Lauren Jones, 22, and her friend Shaniyah Smith, 24, both from Houston, were returning their scooters to ERYD around 1 a.m.

“You get a better view of the city while on scooters. We went to Discovery Green. We didn’t get kidnapped, we didn’t get hurt or anything. I felt safe at Discovery Green,” said Jones.

Over three nights, I lugged thousands of dollars of camera equipment around and I felt safe as well, because of the crowds and the heavy police presence.

You’d think, with such a “heavy police presence”, there would be sufficient order. The capacity seems to be there to enforce existing ordinances, and any future ones that may get passed. I say again, why not give that a try?

Speaking for the opposition is the president of Discovery Green Conservancy.

Cities across America and abroad are restricting electric scooters after finding the promise doesn’t match the reality. Paris, France; Melbourne, Australia and Indianapolis, Ind. have all implemented bans or strict restrictions. Even scooter-friendly Austin created significant downtown limitations. Houston, it’s our turn to learn from their experience — and our own.

At Discovery Green, we’ve witnessed firsthand how electric scooters have transformed from a transportation solution into a public safety problem. Every weekend and most evenings, it seems, our 12-acre park becomes a high-speed playground for teens and young adults. Too many race across carefully maintained gardens, walkways and lawns with little regard for families, pets, elderly visitors or park safety rules.

The original vision was admirable: electric scooters as clean, efficient urban transportation. The reality in our downtown green space tells a different story. These aren’t commuters using scooters to get to work or appointments. They’re groups seeking entertainment, treating our public park like a private racetrack. Most concerning, groups of riders create grooves in our lawns through high-speed turns and stunts, causing damage.

Over the years, Discovery Green has invested heavily in trying to address this problem. We’ve spent hundreds of thousands on security personnel. My staff tells me that our guards and employees have faced verbal abuse and threats. When attempting to enforce park rules, riders have often responded with defiance. “No cop, no stop” has become a common refrain. When police arrive, the groups often scatter at high speeds, making enforcement nearly impossible.

The atmosphere of lawlessness that accompanies these large groups creates an environment that has become ever-more dangerous and violent. Discovery Green staff have witnessed fights break out among the teens and young adults on scooters. Some appear to take pride in their ability to damage property and “take over” the park, driving out others who are there for recreation. It’s created a culture that feels threatening to park visitors and staff.

I respect that they have had problems. I’m not convinced that a stricter regulatory regime plus actual enforcement from HPD would not ameliorate it. And if I’m wrong, in six months or a year, then we can ban them. Just, why not try the lighter approach first? I still don’t see a good reason not to.

Posted in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Three perspectives on scooters

Still no quorum

I’m sitting here waiting for the Supreme Court to take up those ridiculous quo warranto actions by Greg Abbott and Ken Paxton and have been hesitant to start writing something for fear that I’ll have to trash it and start over, but I guess I can only hold out for so long. The main news so far for Monday was the continued lack of a quorum.

Texas Republicans were unable again Monday to approve new congressional districts to meet President Donald Trump’s demands as California Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democrats urged Republicans to stand down and avoid a partisan brawl spanning multiple statehouses.

Texas Democratic lawmakers remained outside of Texas after leaving the state to deny their GOP colleagues the quorum necessary to vote on Trump’s aggressive redistricting play and push the stalemate into its second week. The president’s agenda also spurred Democratic governors, including Newsom, to pledge retaliatory redistricting efforts in their states — setting up the possibility of an extended standoff that could upend the 2026 midterm elections.

Newsom urged Trump in a letter Monday to abandon his scheme, telling the president he is “playing with fire” and “risking the destabilization of our democracy.”

I mean, that ship has sailed, but we do have to keep stating the fact of it, so here we are. This session gaveled in on July 21, so that means it should end next Wednesday, the 20th of August. Abbott can and almost surely will call another session right away, and as I’ve said before I don’t know how long the quorum breakers can hold out. Barring anything unexpected, such as a favorable to Abbott and Paxton ruling from SCOTx, I don’t expect anything to change before then.

The Republicans do have one other card to play.

Even though the Texas House is at a standstill, Texas Republicans are advancing legislation related to last month’s deadly flooding.

On Friday, both the House and Senate Committees on Disaster Preparedness advanced bills that were filed in response to the deadly July floods.

Democrats argue that the Legislature should focus on responding to the floods, rather than redistricting. The floods killed more than 130 people and caused billions of dollars in damage across Texas.

House and Senate lawmakers are looking to improve early warning systems, expand emergency management licensing and training and streamline volunteer response.

Several bills on those topics have advanced out of committee, including Senate Bill 1, which makes sweeping changes to the state’s emergency management framework.

[…]

The bills now head to the full Senate for consideration, but they will likely die in the Texas House, which has stalled. More than 50 House Democrats fled the state on Sunday to stop consideration of a proposed congressional redistricting map. At least 100 House members must be present for a quorum to be established, allowing the House to conduct regular business.

On Friday, a House panel advanced bills of its own dealing with disaster preparedness, relief, and warning systems related to the July floods.

Republicans claim that Democrats are blocking critical flood bills by not being present at the Capitol, but Democrats argue that Gov. Greg Abbott could act and allocate state funds towards these issues without lawmakers’ approval.

“We have an arrest warrant for us to go back to Texas for one bill only,” State Rep. Ann Johnson (D-Houston) said. “They don’t want us to come back for flooding. They are using those families as a distraction.”

We’re back to the messaging wars. The simple fact of the matter is that the Republicans put redistricting first – indeed, they rushed the bill to enact the new Congressional map to the floor, in part to make it harder for Dems to pull off a walkout – when they could have done flooding first. That was their choice. They could choose to put flooding first for Special Session 2 – heck, they could make flooding the only agenda item until it’s done, and then can add whatever afterwards as time permits – but it seems unlikely that they will. It’s their choice.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Lawsuit filed against land ownership ban

Good.

A pair of Chinese citizens asked a federal judge to block a new law banning Chinese nationals and people from a select number of other countries from buying or leasing property in Texas.

In a lawsuit filed July 3, Peng Wang and Qinlin Li, two Chinese citizens currently in the United States with visas, called Senate Bill 17 unconstitutional and racist.

The law bars noncitizens from China, Iran, Russia and North Korea from owning land in Texas. During the recent legislative session, the law’s supporters argued it would protect the state against spying and the influence of hostile countries.

U.S. District Judge Charles Eskridge indicated he plans to rule on the group’s injunction before it goes into effect Sept. 1.

The suit argues that the law discriminates against Chinese people based on race and ethnicity. The plaintiffs argue that the law’s threat of punishment creates fear of finding housing while living legally in Texas.

“Chinese people in this state of Texas will be terrified of so much as renting a place to live, because if it turns out this law does apply to them. It is a state jail felony, and they can end up in jail for up to two years,” said Justin Sadowsky, the lead counsel for the Chinese American Legal Defense Alliance, the group representing Wang and Li.

The lawsuit also argues the new law is preempted by federal processes that review real estate purchases that could affect national security.

Wang, one of the plaintiffs, has lived in Texas for 16 years and is pursuing a Master of Divinity degree at a seminary in Fort Worth, according to the lawsuit. Wang argued that he might be forced to leave the country if he’s not allowed to lease housing. Along with homeownership, the law bans Chinese citizens from entering long-term leases lasting more than a year. Wang argues most of the homes where he lives are leased for a year or more.

The other plaintiff, Li, is a recent engineering graduate from Texas A&M who already works for a private company designing wastewater treatment plants. She plans to obtain a work visa to remain in the United States, according to the complaint.

“Ms. Li would ultimately like to purchase a home because property ownership is the only way to ensure that homes are well maintained,” attorneys wrote. “But because her career will likely require her to spend time at multiple cities in Texas, she would like to buy a home at more than one location— which SB 17 prohibits.”

[…]

Eskridge in July denied a request for a preliminary injunction. This week he set arguments for Aug. 14.

The plaintiffs are seeking to turn their complaint into a class-action lawsuit representing all non-citizens targeted by SB 17.

I didn’t follow this legislation this year, mostly because I try to follow the Lege less closely, for sanity reasons. Here’s a press release that was sent out by Asian Texans for Justice upon SB17’s passage if you want to know a little more. As this story notes, a similar bill failed to pass in 2023. Multiple other states have bans similar to the one just passed, though this one seems excessive even by those standards to me. I would hope that it could be struck down on the grounds of being too broad. Not sure if the denial of the initial request for a preliminary injunction is a bad sign. We’ll know soon enough.

Posted in Legal matters | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Lawsuit filed against land ownership ban

The (driverless) trucks at night, are big and bright

I regret nothing.

Autonomous vehicle technology company Aurora has expanded its driverless freight operations to include nighttime travel on Texas highways, according to the company’s announcement Wednesday.

In late April, the self-driving 18-wheeler service was launched without a safety driver in partnership with Uber Freight and Hirschbach Motor Lines. The company’s vehicles have driven more than 20,000 driverless miles, and its fleet of driverless vehicles has expanded to three trucks. The trucks travel between Dallas and Houston at night.

“The progress propels Aurora and the freight industry into a new era,” said Chris Urmson, co-founder and CEO of Aurora, in the Wednesday business review call.

Aurora added that it completes two trips a day. With three trucks, it can now make 12 trips.

[…]

Aurora said that its autonomous vehicles, which don’t suffer from fatigue like human drivers, will improve the industry’s safety record. Texas led the nation in fatal large truck crashes between 2018 and 2022, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

Aurora will also continue to have an observer in the front seat of the three trucks, at the request of its long-time partner, design and manufacturing company PACCAR.

“While we added a front-seat observer at the request of a partner given certain prototype parts in their base vehicle, it’s crucial to note that the Aurora Driver remains fully responsible for all driving tasks, with no interventions needed,” Urmson said.

The company also plans to receive 20 Volvo trucks by the end of the year for testing.

“We’ll wait for (Volvo) to be comfortable announcing the timeline for us to launch initially with (the trucks) driverlessly,” Urmson said.

See here for the previous update. As I said then, I was surprised how small their fleet was initially. I had gotten it in my head that these things would be all over I-45, instead of basically making two total trips per day. They are ramping up, though, so your odds of spotting one have increased.

Posted in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The (driverless) trucks at night, are big and bright

Comparing the districts

As I write this on Sunday, there’s a lot we don’t know about how this saga ends. I feel confident saying that at some point there will be a quorum and a new map will be passed. Beyond that is anyone’s guess.

The purpose of this post is to assume that we’re going to get the map that is currently proposed, and to see how its architect squeezed out five possible pickups without endangering existing incumbents. Given that this map was constructed under the assumption that voting patterns witnessed in 2024 would persist, I also wanted to see what the numbers would look like in a more favorable environment for Democrats, namely those like we saw in the 2018 election. We can then hopefully see the effect of those 2024 assumptions.

To do this, I put the 38 Congressional districts into three groups: The reasonably safe but not overwhelmingly red Republican districts, the deep red districts, and the districts that were won by Democrats in 2024. I then took the election results from 2018 and 2024 for the current and proposed maps and made the tables below, with the Trump/Harris and Beto/Cruz numbers for each, to see how they shift.

2018 results, current districts
2018 results, proposed districts

2024 results, current districts
2024 results, proposed districts

Here’s the first group, the “normal” Republican districts:

Current map – Plan 2193


Dist    Trump24  Cruz18   Harris24  Beto18
==========================================
CD02      61.3%   62.0%      37.5%   37.3%
CD03      58.6%   57.5%      38.7%   41.7%
CD05      62.8%   59.9%      35.8%   39.4%
CD06      63.6%   61.5%      35.1%   37.7%
CD10      61.6%   58.4%      36.8%   40.6%
CD12      60.7%   57.7%      38.1%   41.4%
CD15      58.5%   43.8%      40.6%   55.5%
CD21      61.1%   59.8%      37.6%   39.3%
CD22      58.7%   58.4%      39.2%   40.9%
CD23      57.2%   50.5%      41.7%   48.7%
CD24      56.8%   56.9%      41.3%   42.3%
CD26      61.0%   59.6%      37.6%   39.6%
CD31      60.8%   59.9%      37.6%   39.0%
CD38      59.4%   59.8%      38.7%   39.4%

Proposed map – Plan 2308


Dist    Trump24  Cruz18   Harris24  Beto18
==========================================
CD02      60.3%    60.2%     38.4%   39.0%
CD03      60.3%    58.9%     37.0%   40.3%
CD05      60.1%    56.8%     38.6%   42.5%
CD06      60.6%    59.5%     37.6%   39.7%
CD10      60.5%    55.8%     37.9%   43.3%
CD12      61.3%    56.9%     37.5%   42.2%
CD15      58.5%    44.1%     40.6%   55.4%
CD21      60.2%    57.4%     38.5%   41.7%
CD22      59.2%    58.5%     38.5%   40.5%
CD23      56.9%    51.4%     41.9%   47.8%
CD24      57.1%    56.7%     41.0%   42.4%
CD26      61.2%    59.4%     37.4%   39.7%
CD31      60.1%    59.2%     38.3%   39.8%
CD38      59.3%    59.1%     38.9%   40.1%

Just so we’re clear, the dividing line between these and the “dark red” districts is fuzzy and vibes-based, so please hold your questions about why this district is here and that district is there. You can see how much care was put into the maintenance of the existing Republican districts. With two obvious exceptions that I’ll get to in a minute, none of these become noticeably less red. CDs 10 and 12 are the biggest mover among the rest of the districts, going from “solid” to “maybe on the fringe of competitiveness in a more favorable year than 2018 was”. Which is to say, not much to hang one’s hat on.

The exceptions are of course CDs 15 and 23, where the former goes from a solid Trump district to one won by Beto by 12 points, and the latter goes from solid Trump to tossup with a slight Republican lean. You have no doubt see the stories about how the Republicans are banking on the red shift among Latinos in 2024 being mostly permanent. These are the first, but far from the last, examples of what they are talking about. If Latinos vote similarly in 2026 to how they did in 2024 – it doesn’t have to be exactly the same, just enough of the same – then the Republicans will accomplish what they are aiming for with this map. That will also re-solidify Texas as a truly red state, not one that is trending towards or on the verge of becoming competitive at the statewide level. If everything is like 2018 again, then not only is Texas back to being a competitive state for the next Presidential election, Dems could break even or maybe possibly pick up a seat even under this map. No pressure, right?

I do think based on current polls and the normal behavior of midterm elections that some reversion to the previous norms are to be expected. The big question is by how much. In 2022, a year where the percentages were more or less the same in the non-15 and 23 districts above, Beto lost CD15 52-46 and CD23 54-44. 2024 was very different than 2018, but it didn’t happen all at once. A reversion to 2022 for Latinos will keep these districts red and likely still give the GOP that five-seat pickup. I really don’t know what to expect, and it’s mostly a fool’s game trying to draw conclusions from polling data this far out. There are reasons for optimism and reasons for caution. Just keep in mind that 1) reversion to 2018 is a big step, and 2) even then, the best we can probably hope for is to break even. If Trump starts polling consistently below 35% approval, then we can reassses.

Now here are the solid red districts:

Current map – Plan 2193


Dist    Trump24  Cruz18   Harris24  Beto18
==========================================
CD01      75.2%   72.5%      24.0%   26.9%
CD04      65.3%   62.7%      32.9%   36.6%
CD08      66.3%   62.8%      32.4%   36.5%
CD11      72.2%   69.2%      26.8%   30.0%
CD13      73.3%   71.5%      25.6%   27.8%
CD14      66.5%   62.6%      32.5%   36.7%
CD17      64.0%   60.5%      34.8%   38.7%
CD19      75.3%   71.5%      23.7%   27.8%
CD25      67.5%   64.5%      31.2%   34.7%
CD27      64.3%   59.6%      34.7%   39.7%
CD36      67.8%   64.4%      32.3%   35.0%

Proposed map – Plan 2308


Dist    Trump24  Cruz18   Harris24  Beto18
==========================================
CD01      74.3%    71.4%     24.8%   28.0%
CD04      61.2%    59.0%     36.6%   40.3%
CD08      61.9%    56.0%     36.7%   43.3%
CD11      66.5%    63.4%     32.2%   35.7%
CD13      72.5%    70.7%     26.4%   28.5%
CD14      63.5%    60.5%     35.3%   38.8%
CD17      59.9%    56.5%     38.5%   42.5%
CD19      75.3%    71.5%     23.7%   27.8%
CD25      61.4%    56.6%     37.4%   42.6%
CD27      60.0%    58.0%     38.7%   41.2%
CD36      66.2%    61.8%     32.6%   37.6%

Ultimately, if you want to squeeze more Republican districts out of the current Congressional map, you have to move some amount of Democratic voters out of districts that you would like to target for flips, and some number of Republican voters in to replace them. The natural place to do this is in the districts that are the most heavily Republican to begin with, as they have the greatest capacity.

The biggest shifts are in CDs 08, 17, and 25, all of which shift between eight and 12 points towards Dems at the Presidential level from the current map to the proposed one. That doesn’t make any of them competitive under 2024 conditions, but as they also have a similar shift from 2024 to 2018, they’re as competitive as anything from the first group in the 2018 environment. This is also a function of many districts becoming more Latino – the “2024 voting patterns are the new normal” assumption is baked in at multiple levels. If we are in a situation where Trump has mostly lost what he had gained among Latino voters, and his approval ratings are in the dumps, then we are going to want to have recruited decent candidates in these districts. That will almost certainly require a bet on our side, as the filing period for next year will likely be too far out to have any confidence in that kind of projection. Whatever we’re focusing on now, we should be thinking ahead as well.

I will also note that CD11 has a similar shift at the Presidential level, and CD36 has one from 2024 to 2018, but the net effect of both still leaves them as comfortably red. I honestly expected there to be a bigger effect in the deepest red districts, but for the most part it was within the same bounds as anywhere else that was red to begin with.

The real big shifts are in the districts won by Dems in 2024. That’s a tautology to some extent, as these were the districts that were expressly targeted for Republican pickup opportunities, but it’s still shocking to see the effects.

Current map – Plan 2193


Dist    Trump24  Cruz18   Harris24  Beto18
==========================================
CD07      38.1%   37.7%      58.8%   61.5%
CD09      27.2%   20.3%      71.2%   79.2%
CD16      41.3%   25.3%      57.2%   74.1%
CD18      29.4%   22.4%      69.1%   76.9%
CD20      38.7%   30.0%      59.9%   69.0%
CD28      53.1%   40.2%      45.8%   58.9%
CD29      39.2%   23.2%      59.6%   75.7%
CD30      25.8%   19.5%      72.6%   79.9%
CD32      36.7%   32.5%      60.3%   66.6%
CD33      31.9%   20.8%      65.6%   78.5%
CD34      51.8%   34.1%      47.3%   65.3%
CD35      32.3%   22.9%      65.8%   76.2%
CD37      24.2%   21.1%      73.2%   77.8%

Proposed map – Plan 2308


Dist    Trump24  Cruz18   Harris24  Beto18
==========================================
CD07      36.5%    30.9%     60.5%   68.4%
CD09      57.1%    48.7%     41.9%   50.7%
CD16      41.1%    25.1%     57.4%   74.3%
CD18      22.2%    16.0%     76.3%   83.5%
CD20      35.0%    26.4%     63.5%   72.7%
CD28      54.8%    33.5%     44.4%   65.8%
CD29      34.0%    24.0%     64.7%   75.4%
CD30      25.7%    19.6%     72.7%   79.8%
CD32      57.7%    53.9%     40.0%   45.2%
CD33      32.6%    23.9%     65.2%   75.4%
CD34      54.6%    44.2%     44.5%   55.0%
CD35      54.6%    49.7%     44.2%   49.4%
CD37      20.6%    15.7%     76.8%   83.3%

The good news is that under 2018 conditions, only one of the five targeted districts would be a clear underdog for Dems, that being CD32. CDs 09 and 35 would be tossups, with the former slightly favoring Dems and the latter slightly favoring Republicans. CDs 28 and 34 would be solidly and reasonably blue.

But boy it’s hard to look at these numbers and not be stunned by the degradation in Democratic performance from 2018 to 2024. CDs 16 and 28 are almost not the same district from one cycle to the next, while CDs 29, 33, and 34 have double-digit shifts, with several others right behind. Only CD35 is affected to the same degree as some of the deep red districts. It’s absolutely mind-boggling.

Let’s be clear that this kind of motion in the numbers isn’t the result of a drop in turnout or more effective voter suppression or whatever comforting rationales we want to indulge in. Sure, there were people who voted for our team in 2020 who didn’t show up in 2024. I’ve written about it, and I’m sure to this day that the voter data supports that. But you can’t explain these numbers without accepting that some number of people changed who they voted for. It’s the mirror image of what we saw in districts like the old CD07, when a bunch of people who were Mitt Romney Republicans in 2012 were now voting for Democrats. Those people have largely stuck with us – indeed, they’re more Democratic now – through multiple subsequent elections. If they can shift and stay shifted, why can’t these voters?

One answer to that is that they’re not getting what they voted for, if what they voted for was lower prices and more focus on deporting criminals. We have polling data to back that up. They’re still going to need to be persuaded, and there’s still going to be a ton of money spent to spread lies and fear and disinformation to them, which we will have to counter. It won’t be easy. But the upside for doing it is huge, and it’s not like we have a choice. This is what the playing field is probably going to look like. When the fight stops being about preventing this map from happening – and it will, and we all know that it will – this is what the fight needs to be about. Keep fighting to prevent the map, but be ready to move on when the time comes. We can still get what we want out of this.

Posted in Election 2026, That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 9 Comments