By J. Lyn Carl, GalleryWatch.com
Austin, TX –
It was known as the "anti-discrimination" amendment, and Rep. Yvonne Davis (D-Dallas) tried repeatedly, although unsuccessfully, to get it added to the contentious "telecom bill," whose goal is to further competition in the communications industry.
Davis offered her amendment, which seeks to prevent discrimination among potential residential communications subscribers on the basis of either income or geography, when the bill, HB 13, came to the House floor Tuesday. Her amendment was eventually tabled, and Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherford) pulled down his bill when he was informed that the Senate was in the process of passing the companion bill on that side of the rotunda.
With Senate passage of SB 5, King brought the companion bill to the House floor Wednesday. He noted that most of the amendments considered by the House already were addressed in the Senate version.
That did not include the Davis amendment.
When King brought the bill forward, Davis did not offer her amendment. After the bill finally passed the House on third reading, Davis rose to offer a personal privilege speech.
The Dallas Democrat said she wanted her fellow House members to know why her amendment was not offered when the House took up the companion telecom bill. She said her amendment could have been adapted to the Senate companion, but added she was "not given the opportunity" to present it. She warned fellow members that whether they agreed or disagreed with the crux of the amendment, she is hopeful that the House has not gotten to the point where the leadership will not even entertain the notion that an amendment could be offered.
Addressing the lobby, who she said "has driven this bill" at the expense of people who represent their districts, Davis said it is "certainly disingenuous to tell us you are a company of great reputation and represent good government" when the result is that members are denied the opportunity to argue on behalf of their constituents.
"The question is why are we running so rampant that we won't even give people the right to present their amendments?" asked Davis.
The Dallas lawmaker said she wanted members to know she was denied the opportunity to present her amendment "procedurally," even though it was made known that her amendment was being adapted to SB 5.
"This body should stand very firm against discrimination," said Davis, and "should not waiver on that issue in any form or fashion."
Davis said she had received calls today questioning why she was against the bill. "This is not against an industry," she explained. "It is for constituents and people who live in different areas in cities of this state.
"For those who stood against discrimination in the State of Texas, I'm sorry you didn't have the opportunity to vote today to show you're committed to the people." She said the legislature should "never send the message" that it is all right to "pick and choose when you redline, cherry pick or discriminate."
"I'm sad today that we are in such a rush to do such damage to our communities," she said, noting the citizens that members represent "do not have a voice here."
Davis said the fundamental issue is "to treat people fair." If all were treated fairly, she said, every member would be able to be heard on the House floor. "To be run over and ignored ought to be unacceptable in this House."
In a rare move, House Speaker Tom Craddick (R-Midland) responded to Davis' personal privilege speech. "It has never been the chair's intent to ever deny anyone," he said. "She (Davis) did not have an amendment up here and she did not even talk to me about it." Craddick said Davis only talked to the House Parliamentarian about her amendment. "She never even mentioned it to me."
Rep. Jim Dunnam (R-Waco) asked Craddick if Davis not being allowed to offer her amendment was truly just an oversight, could a motion be offered to "back things up" so the amendment could be offered.
Craddick responded that would require a motion to reconsider the vote on third reading, which he said he would entertain, and take a two-thirds vote.
No such motion was offered.