By J. Lyn Carl, GalleryWatch.com
Ausitn, TX – One size doesn't fit all in the Texas Senate.
A proposed motion in the Senate today on pre-filing of amendments to the government reorganization bill (HB 7) was amended on the floor to conform to layout rules followed during the 78th Regular Session.
Not so for the upcoming hearing on HB 3, the congressional redistricting bill.
The debate began when Sen. Steve Ogden (R-Bryan) offered a motion to require that all amendments to the government reorganization bill (HB 7) be pre-filed by 5 p.m. today, with his intent to bring the bill to the floor on Tuesday. He was amenable to an amendment by Sen. Ken Armbrister (D-Victoria) after Armbrister noted that in previous sessions, a one-day layout on the Senate Intent Calendar was required for a bill reported from committee before it could be taken up on the floor. His amendment changed the deadline for pre-filing of amendments to the government reorganization bill to noon Tuesday, with the bill to come to the floor on Wednesday. His amendment and the amended motion were passed.
That set of a flurry of questions from Senate Democrats, asking if the same layout time would then apply to the upcoming congressional redistricting bill.
Sen. Royce West (D-Dallas) pointed out that the information in the Senate Agenda booklet for today noted that suspension of the regular order of business in the Senate requires a four-fifths vote of the members. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst said today's agenda was printed on a template from the 78th Regular Session, and that the rules from the regular session do not apply during the special session.
"Rule 514...to suspend the intent...the four-fifths rule is not applicable," said Dewhurst. "It only applies during the regular session."
Sen. Mario Gallegos (D-Houston) said since there was no notice of intent on HB 3, the House version of the congressional redistricting bill, "Wouldn't an amendment be in order for HB 3?"
"We're not discussing HB 3 at the present time," said Dewhurst, refusing to recognize Gallegos further.
However, it wasn't long before Sen. Todd Staples (R-Palestine) offered a motion on HB 3. His motion - like the original motion on HB 7 by Ogden - requires that all amendments to HB 3 be pre-filed by 5 p.m. today, with his intent to bring the bill to the Senate floor on Tuesday.
In his motion, Staples stipulated that 35 copies of each amendment to HB 3 be pre-filed with the Senate Calendar Clerk and include the amendment text, statewide maps with any proposed district changes and the standard reports generated by Legislative Council's Red Apple application regarding population of districts, etc.
He said requiring that all amendments be drafted by Legislative Council is an attempt to ensure that all legal requirements necessary on the redistricting bill are property processed by Legislative Council "because the redistricting bill is a legal document and certain criteria must be met." He said a uniform format will allow the senators to "compare apples to apples."
Staples noted that this information was transmitted to each senator's office Friday afternoon in a letter from the lieutenant governor, and that staff of Legislative Council were available over the weekend to assist them in drawing up amendments. Sen. Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio) noted her concern that some of the members might not have seen the letter because her e-mail copy came into her office after regular business hours on Friday.
Despite the debate, the motion was passed and the redistricting bill will come to the Senate floor tomorrow.
(To view the letter from Dewhurst to the senators regarding taking up the redistricting bill and Sen. Staples' motion in writing regarding pre-filing of amendments to the bill, and Sen. Ogden's original motion that was later amended, click on the link at the bottom of this page.)
A confab at the lieutenant governor's podium prior to Staples' amendment included Dewhurst, the Senate parliamentarian and Sens. West, Ogden, Van de Putte, Staples, Kyle Janek (R-Houston), Elliott Shapleigh (D-El Paso) and Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo).
Following the discussion, Zaffirini questioned the relationship between the Senate Intent Calendar and the Regular Order of Business. She questioned if now in lieu of an Intent Calendar, the Regular Order of Business listing would be followed "so that anything printed in the Regular Order of Business will be treated the same as if it were on the Intent Calendar?"
Dewhurst said that is correct and it is his intent to "bring up the different bills in the order they are received out of committee."
Ogden earlier explained why he was seeking pre-filed amendments to the government reorganization bill.
"I believe the Senate and every senator will be in a better position to evaluate what's on this bill," he said, if the amendments are all pre-filed. He said that would give members "plenty of time" to review proposed amendments and "hold down the chaos and reduce the amount of mistakes that tend to get made around here when amendments get made at the last minute.
"I'd like to see an orderly flow of business on the Senate floor."
Van de Putte complained that the committee printing of the bill was not online this morning for review and that the committee printing sometimes differs from the original bill as far as page and line numbers are concerned. Ogden assured her the only difference in the two versions has to do with the section on Teacher Retirement System retirement. "All other sections remain the same," he said.