By J. Lyn Carl, GalleryWatch.com
Austin, TX – "It is what it is," said Rep. Sylvester Turner (D-Houston), of House rules that came under scrutiny Wednesday during discussion of a bill posted for Thursday's calendar in the House.
But to some members what it is ain't what it was.
As the House moved through its calendar Wednesday evening, Turner (who had been tabbed to wield the Speaker's gavel) announced to members a 10 p.m. deadline for pre-filing amendments to HB 1606, an ethics bill by Rep. Steve Wolens (D-Dallas).
Most members were taken by surprise. Turner explained to members that the bill is sunset legislation for the Texas Ethics Commission and House rules stipulate that all sunset legislation must have amendments pre-filed 12 hours prior to the legislation being debated.
The problem was, according to several members, the bill in its original form was not sunset legislation. It was after it was substituted that it became sunset legislation and thus most members did not realize the rule regarding pre-filing of amendments would apply.
One asked what members were to do if they were having amendments drafted by Legislative Council and they were not ready by the 10 p.m. deadline.
Rep. Dawnna Dukes (D-Austin) asked if the legislature can sunset an agency that has been created by the Constitution. Turner responded that the agency is subject to sunset review but cannot be abolished. Dukes also asked if the House could reconsider the vote by which it passed the rule affecting pre-filing of amendments to sunset bills. "The rules can be suspended," said Turner.
Turner said the chair had an inquiry from a member (whose name he no longer remembers) regarding the pre-filing of amendments for HB 1606. He said the rules stipulate that when the chair is asked about the rules, the chair is obligated to respond. The chair is not, however, obligated to share that information with the entire House. "But we thought it would be wise to let the entire body know," he said. "It was not an attempt to create confusion."
But create confusion it did, to the point that Rep. Senfronia Thompson offered to the chair, "Would you recognize me for a motion to sine die?"
Bill author Wolens said two bills were combined into a substitute because they were so closely tied together - one dealing with ethics issues and one dealing with the sunset of the Ethics Commission. He noted that last Thursday, he sent House members a 13-page summary of the 71-page bill, in anticipation of the bill being taken up soon on the floor.
Wolens said to avoid the confusion he would offer a motion that the bill set for Thursday's calendar be postponed until Monday, May 5, at 10 a.m. "Whatever amendments you want to bring, bring them," he said, noting "everyone then would know there would be an ethics/continuation of the Ethics Commission bill."
Parliamentary inquiries were a dime a dozen as the debate continued.
Speaker Tom Craddick finally came back to the chair for the vote on Wolens' motion. The motion passed and the bill will be set for Monday.