Mediaboss Marketing

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

The Texas House voted Tuesday to send law enforcement to track down Democrats who left the state a day earlier in protest of Republicans priority elections legislation under warrant of arrest if necessary.

More than 50 House Democrats left Monday for Washington, D.C., to deny the chamber a quorum the minimum number of lawmakers needed to conduct business as it takes up voting restrictions and other GOP priorities in special session.

The impact of the House move is unclear since Texas law enforcement lacks jurisdiction in the nation's capital.

Meeting shortly after 10 a.m., the House quickly established that it lacked the two-thirds quorum required to do business, with only 80 of 150 members participating in a test vote.

Then Rep. Will Metcalf, R-Conroe, chair of the House Administration Committee, moved to issue what is known as a call of the House to try to regain quorum. That motion passed 76-4. Metcalf offered another motion, asking that the sergeant at arms, or officers appointed by him, send for all absentees under warrant of arrest if necessary. That motion also passed 76-4.

Metcalf's motions were opposed by four Democrats who were present on the House floor Tuesday morning: Reps. Ryan Guillen of Rio Grande City, Tracy King of Batesville, Eddie Morales Jr. of Eagle Pass and John Turner of Dallas.

After Metcalf's motions passed, Rep. Tony Tinderholt, R-Arlington, sought to move to strip absent Democrats of their committee leadership posts if they do not return by noon Wednesday. The motion did not immediately get a vote, and in a subsequent exchange with Rep. Morgan Meyer, R-Dallas, House Speaker Dade Phelan, R-Beaumont, said committee chairs and vice chairs cannot be removed from their positions under the current chamber rules.

Earlier Tuesday morning, Gov. Greg Abbott said in a radio interview that any Democrats who fled the state should lose their committee leadership posts.

See the rest here:
Texas House Republicans vote to track down absent Democrats and arrest them if necessary - The Texas Tribune

Sign up for The Brief, our daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

Democrats in the Texas House of Representatives left the state Monday afternoon en route to Washington, D.C., in a bid to again deny Republicans the quorum needed to pass new voting restrictions with 26 days left in a special legislative session called largely for that purpose.

Upping the ante in both the legislative fight at home and the national debate over voting rights, most House Democrats boarded two planes out of Austin headed for the U.S. capital without a set return date. At least 51 of the 67 Democratic representatives the number needed to break quorum were in the process of leaving Monday afternoon, most arriving at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport Monday to board chartered flights that departed around 3:10 p.m.

The House is set to reconvene Tuesday morning, but the absent Democrats would mean there will not be enough members present to conduct business under House rules.

Today, Texas House Democrats stand united in our decision to break quorum and refuse to let the Republican-led legislature force through dangerous legislation that would trample on Texans freedom to vote," Democratic leaders said in a joint statement released Monday.

With the national political spotlight on Texas efforts to further restrict voting, the Democratic exodus offers them a platform to continue pleading with Congress to act on restoring federal protections for voters of color. In Texas, the decamping will mark a more aggressive stance by Democrats to block Republican legislation further tightening the states voting rules as the GOP works against thinning statewide margins of victory.

Ultimately, Democrats lack the votes to keep the Republican-controlled Legislature from passing new voting restrictions, along with the other conservative priorities on Gov. Greg Abbotts 11-item agenda for the special session.

Some Democrats hope their absence will give them leverage to force good-faith negotiations with Republicans, who they say have largely shut them out of negotiations over the voting bill. Both chambers advanced their legislation out of committees on party-line votes after overnight hearings, passing out the bills Sunday after hearing hours of testimony mostly against the proposals and just a few days after making their revived proposals public. The bills were expected to hit the House and Senate floors for votes this week.

The House and Senate proposals resemble failed legislation, known as Senate Bill 7, from the spring regular legislative session the demise of which Texas Democrats used last month to make their pitch on Capitol Hill for action on voting rights.

On Monday, Democrats indicated they were renewing their calls for Congress to pass far-reaching federal legislation that would preempt significant portions of the Texas bills and reinstate federal oversight of elections in states with troubling records.

We are now taking the fight to our nations Capitol," the Democrats said in their statement. "We are living on borrowed time in Texas."

The Democrats convened at a local plumbers union building and boarded a bus that transported them to a private airport terminal. They arrived at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport shortly after 2:30 p.m., driving straight onto the tarmac.

Lawmakers did not speak with the media before they left. Terminal staff kept reporters off the premises and on the street outside. By 3 p.m., several supporters of the legislators were gathered outside the terminal, holding signs that said, "Let my people vote," and, "Thank you for fighting voter suppression."

The bulk of House Democrats arrived in Washington, D.C., around 7 p.m. Central time Monday.

Even if Democratic lawmakers stay out of state for the next few weeks, the governor could continue to call 30-day sessions or add voting restrictions to the agenda when the Legislature takes on the redrawing of the states political maps later this summer.

Mondays mass departure follows a Democratic walkout in May that kept Republicans from passing their priority voting bill at the end of the regular legislative session. For weeks, Democrats had indicated that skipping town during the special session remained an option as Republicans prepared for a second attempt at tightening the states voting laws.

House Speaker Dade Phelan, R-Beaumont, said in a statement later Monday that the chamber "will use every available resource under the Texas Constitution and the unanimously-passed House rules to secure a quorum..."

Gov. Greg Abbott, meanwhile, panned Democrats over the move, saying it inflicts harm on the very Texans who elected them to serve.

As they fly across the country on cushy private planes, they leave undone issues that can help their districts and our state, Abbott said in a statement Monday afternoon. The Democrats must put aside partisan political games and get back to the job they were elected to do.

According to House rules adopted at the beginning of the regular session, two-thirds of the 150-member chamber must be present to conduct business. When the House is in session, legislators can vote to lock chamber doors to prevent colleagues from leaving and can order law enforcement to track down lawmakers who have already fled.

If a quorum is not present when the House convenes Tuesday, any House member can move to make whats known as a call of the House to to secure and maintain a quorum to consider a certain piece of legislation, resolution or motion, under chamber rules. That motion must be seconded by 15 members and ordered by a majority vote. If that happens, the missing Democrats will become legislative fugitives.

All absentees for whom no sufficient excuse is made may, by order of a majority of those present, be sent for and arrested, wherever they may be found, by the sergeant-at-arms or an officer appointed by the sergeant-at-arms for that purpose, and their attendance shall be secured and retained, the House rules state. The house shall determine on what conditions they shall be discharged.

Its unclear, though, what options Phelan may have to compel Democrats to return to the Legislature if theyre out of state.

The House voting bill as passed by committee over the weekend would rein in local voting initiatives like drive-thru and 24-hour voting, further tighten the rules for voting by mail, bolster access for partisan poll watchers and ban local election officials from proactively sending out applications to request mail-in ballots.

The Democrats departure also calls into question other items included on Abbotts special session agenda, including legislation to provide funding for the Legislature. Last month, Abbott vetoed a section of the state budget that funds the Legislature for the two-year budget cycle that starts Sept. 1. He did so in retribution for Democrats walkout in May. If the Legislature does not pass a supplemental budget before the new cycle begins, more than 2,100 legislative staffers and individuals working at legislative agencies could be impacted.

Patrick Svitek contributed to this report.

Read more here:
Texas Democrats attempt to block voting bill by fleeing state - The Texas Tribune

Democrats including President BidenJoe BidenPoll: Biden approval on coronavirus slips 2 percentage points Overnight Defense: Top US commander in Afghanistan departs | US sends delegation to Haiti after request for troops | Senate Dems propose .3B for Pentagon in Capitol security bill Protests escalate US-Cuba tensions MORE are grappling with what to do about the slowing pace of COVID-19 vaccinations.

The sharpest debate right now is centered on whether private businesses, federal workplaces and educational institutions should require proof of vaccination.

If the White House encouraged such requirements, it would likely nudge some Americans who have not yet gotten vaccinated to do so.

But it would also open the president and his party up to accusations of overreach and nanny-statism on an issue that has become deeply partisan.

In a new poll released Wednesday from The Economist-YouGov, 77 percent of Democrats said they were fully vaccinated, and only 4 percent of Democratic respondents said they would not get vaccinated at all.

But 31 percent of Republicans said they would not get vaccinated and so, crucially, did 22 percent of independents. Those figures suggest there would be a political price to pay for a strong push toward vaccine requirements.

The political dilemma is clear, however. There could be a far steeper penalty over the medium term if the virus makes a comeback something that has become more likely amid the spread of a new delta variant, which is now the dominant strain in the U.S.

The issue is one that can be easily demagogued, too.

A government mandate that all Americans must get vaccinated in all circumstances is not being suggested by anyone in the mainstream. Such a blanket requirement would likely be unlawful and certainly unenforceable.

But public health experts, worried about the sluggish rate of new vaccinations, say there is plenty else the Biden administration and elected officials could do. One option would simply be to issue expressions of support for private employers, medical facilities and school boards that impose vaccine requirements.

There has been none of that from the White House and the timidity is sparking growing frustration.

My wish is that we would see more mandates at the federal or national level but Im a realist and I know were not going to see that, said Kavita Patel, a nonresident fellow at the Brookings Institution who is also a practicing physician. At a minimum, I would love to see words of support. These hospitals that are doing it are brave and should be applauded. They shouldnt feel like they are on an island.

Lawrence Gostin, a professor at Georgetown Law School and a public health expert, was even more vigorous in his criticisms.

The Biden administration has been far too hands-off regarding vaccine requirements, he said. They could do a lot more. Once it is fully licensed, which it will be soon, they could recommend that schools and businesses have vaccinations as a condition to going back into that environment.

We are hearing nothing from the CDC or HHS or the White House, he added, referring to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Department of Health and Human Services.

More ripples were created on the issue when Kathleen SebeliusKathleen SebeliusFauci: 'Horrifying' to hear CPAC crowd cheering anti-vaccination remarks The Memo: Biden and Democrats face dilemma on vaccine mandates Inside Biden's pragmatic approach to coronavirus rules MORE, who served as Health secretary during the Obama administration, told The New York Times that she was in favor of mandates.

Im trying to restrain myself but Ive kind of had it, Sebelius told the Times in a story published Tuesday evening. Were going to tiptoe around mandates. Its like, come on. Im kind of over that.

Sebelius, as a veteran of the wars over the Affordable Care Act (ACA), knows that Democrats have been vulnerable to charges of overreach, whether justified or not.

Conservatives sought to stop the passage of the ACA a decade ago over concerns about death panels and health care rationing. They were unsuccessful, but the legislation was a political liability for Democrats for several years, only winning widespread popularity more recently.

When it comes to vaccine requirements, Republicans and their allies in the media are warning about infringements on personal liberty.

According to a USA Today report in late April, more than 40 states at that point had introduced legislation banning vaccination mandates. One Republican state-level lawmaker, Rep. John Jacob of Indiana, told the newspaper that a mandate would be considered a gross violation of the individual freedom of people in his state.

Conservative media commentators including Tucker CarlsonTucker CarlsonCNN: Tucker Carlson 'furious' at Fox News execs for not defending his NSA spying claims Rand Paul requests probe into allegations NSA spied on Tucker Carlson Trump, DeSantis lead CPAC straw poll MORE of Fox News have stoked skepticism about vaccines.

And governors in several states have signed executive orders banning vaccine mandates, so-called vaccine passports or both.

Included among their ranks are high-profile names who may have presidential ambitions such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantisRon DeSantisPompeo on 2024: 'I want to continue to have an impact' Five takeaways from the CPAC conference in Dallas Noem hits fellow GOP governors over COVID-19 mandates MORE (R) and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R).

Some Democrats acknowledge that polarization around COVID-19 has become so severe that more assertive rhetoric from Biden on the issue risks a counter-reaction.

Dave Mudcat Saunders, a veteran Democratic strategist based in rural Virginia, told this column that if Joe Biden were to come out and tell people to take the vaccine, it would only make these people around me more likely not to take it.

Saunders argued that there is enormous distrust on the issue, fueled by polarization, media hyperbole and a general cultural shift that has deepened divisions between rural conservatives and what he terms the Metropolitan Opera wing of his own party.

Saunders reflected ruefully that the one thing he believed really could make a difference in his community would be if former President TrumpDonald TrumpOvernight Defense: Top US commander in Afghanistan departs | US sends delegation to Haiti after request for troops | Senate Dems propose .3B for Pentagon in Capitol security bill Fauci and Birx warned Scott Atlas was 'dangerous' Report: RNC chief counsel called 2020 Trump legal efforts 'a joke' MORE were to more forcefully urge people to get vaccinated.

The Biden administration has stuck resolutely to its laissez-faire stance on vaccine requirements, even as the president has continued to urge people to get their shots for their own good and out of a sense of patriotic duty.

Were going to leave it up to them to make these decisions, White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiOvernight Health Care: FDA adds new warning to J&J COVID-19 vaccine | WHO chief pushes back on Pfizer booster shot | Fauci defends Biden's support for recommending vaccines 'one on one' COVID-19 case count spikes hit almost every state Haiti is 'tinderbox' foreign policy challenge for Biden MORE said Tuesday, referring to the role of schools, universities and private institutions in deciding whether to impose vaccination requirements.

The studied neutrality is just not good enough in the view of health experts like Gostin.

Gostin is scornful of the idea that the president or his party should retreat in the face of charges of nanny-state behavior.

People talk about the nanny state, but this isnt the nanny state, he said. The nanny state is telling you what you must do for your own health and safety. What we are doing here is telling you to get vaccinated yes, for your own health and safety but also because otherwise you pose a risk to others."

Its a classic argument, he added. This is not a question of libertarianism or freedom because nobody has the freedom to harm others. You only have the freedom to harm yourself.

The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage.

Read more:
The Memo: Biden and Democrats face dilemma on vaccine mandates | TheHill - The Hill

WASHINGTON As Gov. Greg Abbott tries to raise cash so the state can pick up building former President Donald Trumps border wall, Texas Democrats are trying to keep him from tapping into more than $15 billion in COVID relief funding the federal government is sending to Texas.

Every Texas Democrat in Congress signed a letter on Monday urging Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen to take steps to block Abbott from using COVID relief funding on border barriers, asking her to issue a formal rule making clear that recovery funding cannot be used for a border wall, fence, or similar installation. They also say the Treasury needs to make rules ensuring the money cant be used to replenish state funding spent on a border barrier.

Its the latest in an ongoing battle over record numbers of migrants crossing the border and encountering border patrol a fight in which Abbott seeks to lead the GOP on a national level as he pushes to have the state of Texas finish the border wall and begin arresting migrants. Abbott also moved to revoke state licenses from shelters housing migrant children as he declared an emergency in counties along the border earlier this month.

APPROVAL GAP: Texans agree with Gov. Abbott over Biden on border response, poll finds

The governor who will tour parts of the border with Trump this week on Monday tweeted out a video of a tractor clearing brush, declaring that building the border barrier has begun.

But Democrats point out that Abbott has so far identified just a fraction of what it would cost to fill the gaps of the border barrier, and they fear he plans to use federal money to reimburse state funding hes already started to pull for the project.

With no Republican support, we approved $350 billion in the American Rescue Plan for eligible state, local, territorial, and tribal governments to assist local leaders, who confronted pandemic challenges, and to assist with economic and job recovery, the 13 Texas Democrats in Congress wrote in a letter to Yellen. We are concerned by the prospect of Texas Governor Greg Abbotts potential misuse of these funds to continue the misguided plans of President Trump to extend a wall along the border between Texas and Mexico.

A spokeswoman for Abbott said he still plans to call a special legislative session in the fall for lawmakers to decide how to dole out the $15.8 billion in COVID relief Texas is set to receive so the entire Legislature can participate in the allocation process in a way that best serves all Texans.

The governor will work with the Legislature during that special session to determine the most effective use of those federal funds to address the needs of Texans, Renae Eze said.

Abbott has directed that $250 million be taken from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice as a down payment for the wall and his office reported raising $450,000 in private donations as Abbott has stressed crowdsourcing will be key to funding the effort. Abbott said the $250 million will go toward hiring a project manager, who will eventually provide a full cost and timeline for the project.

The former administration devoted about $2.8 billion to build or replace barriers along portions of the border in Texas, completing just 55 miles of new wall, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Trump officials had planned to add some 280 miles to the wall in the state. Biden stopped construction on the wall and the White House said earlier this month that some portions of the wall cost the Trump administration $46 million per mile.

[Abbott] has failed to raise enough money to construct more than a few yards, U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, a San Antonio Democrat, said in a statement. With so many needs in Texas, spending for a useless wall is truly outrageous. With Abbott having already wasted millions on his pseudo-border security effort, we are determined to restrain him from robbing the recovery funds to misuse for this boondoggle.

It isn't the first time congressional Democrats have asked the federal government to keep a close eye on Texas' stimulus spending decisions.

During the first round of COVID funding last year, Congress allocated $1.3 billion to support public education in Texas, but officials cut state commitments by the same amount and moved the money into the general fund.

Congress later passed another two rounds of stimulus funding that included billions more in public school money. Democrats wrote a similar letter to federal leaders in April, asking that they ensure Texas only use the cash to supplement existing funding commitments, rather than replace them.

IN-DEPTH: White House to Congress: Leave border wall funding to Texas, at up to $46M a mile

The letter comes as recent public polling in Texas shows that Abbott, running for reelection next year, has earned the approval of substantially more Texans than Biden has on the issue.

Forty six percent of Texans approve of Abbotts handling of immigration and the border, according to the survey from the University of Texas and the Texas Tribune, while just 37 percent disapprove. Just 27 percent of Texans approve of Bidens handling of the issue, meanwhile, and 57 percent disapprove.

The online poll of 1,200 residents found Texans are deeply divided on the issue along party lines as well as racial and ethnic groups. Notably, Abbott has a slight edge on the subject among Hispanic Texans, who both parties are trying to woo. Thirty nine percent approve of his handling of the border, compared to 34 percent who side with Biden.

Biden, meanwhile, has said he is working to build a more humane immigration system as his administration deals with a surge in encounters with migrants that began under the Trump administration and reached record levels this spring. The White House has focused its efforts on standing up shelters to house a record number of unaccompanied children arriving at the southern border, an effort that could soon be complicated by Abbotts move to revoke state licenses from shelters housing many of them.

Abbott, who has not ruled out a run for president, has remained laser-focused on the border as he heads into a more immediate gubernatorial primary field in which at least one challenger, former state Sen. Don Huffines, was already campaigning on a border wall.

Abbott has Trumps endorsement, but Huffines has continued to hammer him over the border, saying in a statement last week that Abbott stole his wall idea and calling his plan unacceptable and impractical.

Abbotts plan also includes directing state troopers to begin arresting migrants, a move that immigration experts say is legally dubious after the Supreme Court stopped Arizona from a similar effort in 2012, ruling that only the federal government can enforce immigration law.

Cayla Harris contributed reporting from Austin.

ben.wermund@chron.com

Read the original:
Democrats try to block Gov. Abbott from using COVID recovery funds on border wall - Houston Chronicle

Jim Hartman Courtesy Photo

Judge Amy Barrett will overturn the Affordable Care Act. So declared Vice President Kamala Harris last fall.More from Harris then:President Trump made it clear that he had a litmus test for Supreme Court justices destroy the Affordable Care Acts protection for people with preexisting conditions and overturn our right to make our own health care decisions.... Republicans are desperate to get Judge Barrett confirmed and millions of Americans will suffer for their power play.Joe Bidens official statement on the Supreme Court nomination of Barrett last year mentioned her name once . It mentioned Roe vs. Wade once. It had eight sentences alluding to the pending case on the Affordable Care Act claiming Americans would lose their health insurance.There were other similar false demagogic messages, including from Sen. Chuck Schumer that Barrett clearly said shed strike down the Affordable Care Act.Nancy Pelosi charged that Barretts nomination threatens destruction of life-saving protections for 135 million Americans with pre-existing conditions together with every other benefit and protection of the ACA.Progressive zealot , Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, opined: Confirming Amy Coney Barrett will be the end of the Affordable Care Act.All wrong totally wrong. Will all the Democratic Party luminaries who claimed Barretts confirmation would mean the end of ObamaCare now apologize?Democrats actually knew last year that ObamaCare was in no real threat of being overturned.On June 17, Barrett very predictably joined the U. S. Supreme Courts 7-2 majority upholding the law.During Barretts confirmation hearings, Democrats absurdly claimed that placing her on the court was to assure that the ACA would be invalidated. But Barretts record, in addition to her answers to Senate Judiciary Committee questions, made it a near certainty that she would not vote to toss out the statute.Two important lessons should be learned never underestimate Democratic Party politicians cynicism, and, that conservative justices dont decide cases based on their policy preferences.Texas and 17 other states with Republican attorneys general, along with two individual plaintiffs, in California vs. Texas, challenged the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act, after Congress zeroed out the penalty for not carrying health insurance in the 2017 tax reform.Plaintiffs dubious argument was that the entire ACA became unconstitutional when Congress zeroed out the individual mandate the mandate having been the basis on which the court in 2012 had earlier upheld the statute. Most judicial experts expected plaintiffs to lose.As a matter of law, the plaintiffs contention that the mandate was not severable from the rest of the ACA, therefore invalidating the entire voluminous statute, was untenable. In addition, plaintiffs did not have standing to raise their claims.In the end , six (Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Thomas, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh and Barrett) joined Justice Breyers opinion in declining even to reach the merits and held instead that plaintiffs lacked standing.Under court precedents, plaintiffs must suffer an injury in fact, The courts seven vote majority found that neither the individuals nor the states could show they would be harmed by the zeroed-out penalty. Justices Alito and Gorsuch dissented.The decision underscored that the court, even with recent additions of more conservative justices, is still able to find broad coalitions supporting middle-ground outcomes in controversial cases.Progressives treat the Supreme Court as just another policy-making body and court justices as politicians. They claimed Barretts confirmation would result is a series of far-right legal victories. But the conservative justices are demonstrating a diversity of legal views that are neither uniform nor radical.Health-care policy needs to be addressed, but that remains a task for Congress. The Roberts Court, with a now stronger conservative majority, intends to defer to Congress.It should never be the Supreme Courts responsibility to re-write health care law.Jim Hartman is an attorney residing in Genoa. Email lawdocman1@aol.com.

Continued here:
Jim Hartman: Democrats' 'Obamascare' proven wrong | Serving Carson City for over 150 years - Nevada Appeal