The responses from Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick to their failures in the recently ended Special Session are telling. Both men are acting like the proverbial spoiled child after getting their asses handed to them by the Texas House under the leadership of Speaker Joe Straus.
Gov. Greg Abbott:
One day after the Texas House shut down the special session without completing action on the full agenda, Gov. Greg Abbott blamed Speaker Joe Straus for “dilly-dallying” on such initiatives as lowering property taxes and on the bathroom bill.
“The speaker made very clear that he opposed this (bathroom) bill and he would never allow a vote to be taken on it,” the governor told Houston radio station KTRH in an interview Wednesday morning. “He told me that in the regular session. And he told me during the regular session that if this came up during the special session, he would not allow a vote on it.”
In singling out Straus for thwarting his agenda, Abbott effectively joined forces with Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, whose verbal sparring with the speaker was one of the most enduring backstories of both the regular session of the Legislature and the 30-day special session that ended one day early late Tuesday.
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick:
And at a news conference after the Senate followed the House’s lead and ended its work for the session, Patrick berated Straus, saying he “walked off the job” with work still undone and one more day to do it. And then Patrick got personal.
“Thank goodness Travis didn’t have the speaker at the Alamo,” Patrick told reporters, referring to Col. William Barrett Travis, the leader of the Texas forces during the doomed battle against the Mexican army in 1836. “He might have been the first one over the wall.”
Speaker Joe Straus:
Straus countered that the House “worked diligently in the special session, passing legislation that was in the best interest of all Texans.”
…
“I want to thank Governor Abbott for working with the House on his very ambitious agenda in the special session,” the statement said. “We considered every idea carefully.”
(click to read Abbott joins Patrick in criticism of Straus’ leadership on TimesRecordNews.com)
One of those three sounds like a leader that wants what is best for the state. Two of those three sound like whiney hineys that didn’t get their way. I’ll let you decide which is which.
Observing from a purely Republican primary point of view, it seems like Abbott is still frightened that Patrick is going to run against him. He acknowledges that Straus told him before he called the special session that there would be no vote on the privacy protection act (i.e., bathroom bill) yet he put it on there anyway. Can’t let Patrick get to his right, right?
And while Abbott rails against the failure of property tax reform, the truth is that the bill proposed by the Senate didn’t save anyone any property tax money; it might have slowed the growth of a few political subdivisions but on the whole, it did nothing. The plain fact of the matter is that in blaming the House for the failure of property tax reform, he is blaming the wrong party. The House actually passed a bill before adjourning while Patrick adjourned without taking a vote on it.
Strengthened?
So how is Speaker Straus strengthened by all of this? Glad you asked.
First off, a lot more voters got involved in the special session because of Abbott’s decision to ignore Straus’ warning that there would be no vote on the privacy protection act. And their involvement gave them a chance to see how the process works and how the way the three leaders handle themselves on policy issues. It showed those new activists that Abbott is actually a very weak leader, swaying with the wind despite his campaign joke of having a spine of steel.
It also gave them a good look at how nasty and petty Patrick can be when he doesn’t get his way. Those of us that have followed Patrick through the years are well aware of this tendency and didn’t need the reminder but that crack he made about Straus at the Alamo was the bottom of the barrel as far as I’m concerned, especially given Patrick’s wearing his Christianity on his sleeve. A man of integrity would apologize for that. I guarantee you that the majority of the House members know that Patrick’s statement is far from the truth after seeing Straus take hit after hit and never backing away in his efforts to protect them from a vote that they didn’t want to make.
Second, it showed Straus’s constituency, the House members, that he truly does let the will of the House decide its course and the lengths to which he will absorb criticism to protect them. After a regular session in which I thought he had succumbed to ego and began believing the positive press about him, he corrected that course and started talking about ‘we’ instead of ‘I’. Those members aren’t going to forget that.
The question is, what does he do with the increased strength? What are his political options?
Governor
I had to laugh when I saw that Perry Dorrell suggested that in order to defeat Abbott, the Democrats would have to draft Straus. Bathroom-bill-itis must have blinded him to the bills passed under Straus’ leadership the past 5 sessions. The idea that Straus would switch parties is laughable.
So that leaves the Republican primary. Tough sell and I don’t think he’d make it but it would make it interesting. I’ve wanted for years to see what would happen if November Republicans turned out in the primary. I think you would see very different, much better leadership and policy. Unfortunately, they don’t and without that, Straus would be spinning his wheels and wasting money and throwing away his increased political capital. And if he did file, my guess is that Patrick would also join the race and win in a three way battle.
Lt. Governor
Now this would be a fun race but again, without those November Republicans, Straus couldn’t win. It would be fun because of the contrast that Allen Blakemore, Patrick’s strategist, would create. He’d position Straus as an ultra liberal while Patrick is the ultra conservative on a white horse. In truth, while Patrick was on the radio getting his testicles clipped or walking his dog Barney out of the studio to take a dump or arguing with former Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst in favor of emptying the rainy day fund to get taxpayers a check, Straus had already worked for President Ronald Reagan pushing his agenda. Who is the Republican again?
Speaker
This is the most obvious landing place and the place he can do the most good. The Oust Straus folks won’t have a chance to replace him and he can focus on finally getting school finance fixed. Obviously that will still be a mountain to climb with Patrick controlling the Senate but it would offer the best chance for a real solution. Folks, our school finance system is a mess. At some point, we need to put pressure on the big three to find a solution that at least mostly cleans it up. No one is going to get everything they want but something has to give. We can’t continue with some kids using 10 year old information technology textbooks while other kids get iPads to take home.
If you’ve managed to get this far, then you obviously have the fortitude to hold your elected reps accountable for your particular issues. And that makes me happy, even if you are on the ‘Oust Straus’ train. Mostly because I know your issue is going to go off the tracks but still, it’s good to see people involved.
I made it about halfway through. Your devotion to Strausss perplexes me. Meh, the majority of the gop perplexes me. Most stand for nothing at all but man do they ever campaign on great promises don’t they?
DanMan,
Well, it perplexes me why you choose not to spell the man’s name correctly. Seems like grade school level insults to me. Which is odd because you usually don’t do that.
Although I wouldn’t call it devotion, I do support Rep. Joe Straus for many reasons, the first being that he is a fiscal conservative in the Reagan tradition. And because he does the opposite of what you say perplexes you about the majority of the GOP. He doesn’t campaign on something and then do something different.
You know, it might serve you well to actually examine his record. But then again, you might have to read more than half.
Cheers.
DJ
Straus is horrible, and it is an affront to compare him to Reagan. He holds his power because the Democrats vote for him, fearing a far more conservative alternative as Speaker. Unfortunately, the Texas House is riddled with RINO’s like Straus and my rep, Charlie Geren, a Straus toadie. Hopefully, this open display of special interest denial of limited government bills like real tax reform, will result in a lot of money being poured into a primary challenge against Straus. It would be awesome if we could get a two-fer with the removal of Cook as well.
If Straus is a Reagan conservative, why hasn’t he proposed tax relief and reform?
Mr. Straus has done such a great job, 13 or 14 County Republican Executive Committees (including His own Bexar County) have voted NO CONFIDENCE in Him! Mr Straus WILL NOT be Speaker of the House in the next Legislative Session.
Actually, teh number is up to 34, with Dallas County one of the latest to reflect no confidence in the Speaker.
Straus may have a challenger in the primary. That is the time to work to change a situation that harmed Texas. For those who bitch about Straus, then put your time and money into electing another Republican from that District.
Loved your article, David.
Straus is the only one of the “big three” who isn’t playing to their radical right base and instead seems to be a true statesman who is trying to serve the best interests of Texans.
The “bathroom bill” is shameless” pandering to the far right. Leaders who really care about Texas’ future would be concentrating on education, uninsured children, and poor mothers who desperately need good prenatal care.
It is not pandering to the far right. It is letting our representatives know where we stand on the issue. Strauzzz believes he is protecting his fragile majority by not forcing them to vote on it. Those of us who actually care about protecting people’s privacy are going to put the blame where it ultimately belongs, as our humble yet pilloried blog host has preached. The responsibility is on the reps that keep voting this arch angel of the gop into leadership.
The Texas GOP has many liberal members. They don’t want to vote for this and they must be accepting many favors from those that support men in women’s bathrooms. And that support the status quo of letting property tax increases far outstrip inflation. They don’t want to deal with the impending collapse of the public pensions across the state. Having a guy that won’t force them to take a vote on these issues is what they want.
Houston is the gayest city in Texas and voted that mess down 60-40. That is saying something about the bathroom bill.
There is not a single confirmed case in Texas (or anywhere else of which I’m aware) of a man harassing women in a female bathroom. There are already laws protecting women against such behavior. The so-called “bathroom bill” is not necessary and is simply a means of striking out against gays and transgender people–which is a far right objective. The bill’s sponsors should at least be honest about their motives.
I’m new to this site, and I really like the civil, respectful, “let’s discuss our different perspectives” tone.
Don’t know what you’re a doctor of but awareness must not be part of your calling.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/07/convicted-sex-offender-leads-transgender-rights-effort-north-carolina/
http://sexoffender.ncsbi.gov/details.aspx?SRN=008345S1
Not only are they out there, they are very politically active.
The so-called “bathroom bill” is necessary and is simply a means of stopping the agenda of social justice warriors–which is a far left objective. The bill’s critics should at least be honest about their motives.
Good grief, DanMan! Don’t know what you do for a living, but don’t include “researcher” in your resume.
To prove the need for a “bathroom bill,” you referenced two articles. One of them shows the 1998 conviction of a man in North Carolina who “performed a lewd act on a child.” The second details another 1998 North Carolina conviction of an LGBT advocate who “molested a minor male.” Your “examples” are out-of-state and are almost 20 years old. And, neither example had anything to do with a transgender man molesting girls/women in a public female restroom.
This sort of false “evidence” proves my case. (I said that there’s” not a single documented case in Texas of a man harassing women in a female bathroom.”). The bathroom bill is not needed and is simply a cover for people who are morally offended because they think gays and transgenders have made a wrong gender-identity choice.
It’s not a choice, I defy anyone to say that they sat down at age 12 or 13 and made a conscious choice between being attracted by males or females. While environment does play a role, it’s DNA, brother. While I empathize with folks who look to the Bible for direction regarding the matter, we need to understand that Paul and others didn’t have access to the modern medical research that argues against our proclivity to persecute gays.
LGBT folks have to endure a hard life in our culture. We need to be exercising compassion, not judgment. That’s my motive in opposing the bill.
Not engaging in any more dialogue on the matter, DanMan. Go ahead and get in the last word, you great researcher, you! 🙂
um…er hehehe I guess comprehension is not your bailiwick either doc. The guy did have a conviction in his past and is CURRENTLY quite active in the politics of promoting same sex bathrooms.
The first article discussing his status as the guy who promotes bathroom hysteria is dated March 2016. It was a contemporary article when it was written 18 months ago because….wait for it…it was about N Carolina’s travails with your like minded travelers of such perversions. That roadshow moved to Texas for the same fight. That article contained the second link from the past crimes of the same guy.
I won’t tell if you don’t though.
This is a joke, right? There are prosecutors all over the State of Texas that have had these cases. They have been written about right here on Big Jolly.
https://bigjolly.com/mommy-man-restroom/
Dr. Of what?
So reading this I’m left with one question… WHY can’t Abbott allow Patrick to get to the Right of him? Could it be because the majority of the electorate want their representation to be “as conservative” as possible. And if that is the case, wouldn’t that mean that the Speaker is not providing the type of conservative leadership that the majority of Texans are looking for?
Like our gallivanting bloghost’s sarcastic take that Joe Strouse is the second coming of Reagan, consider the source of the Abbott/Patrick imbroglio.
DanMan,
Actually, I’ve never said that Speaker Straus was the second coming of anyone. It is a fact that he worked in the Reagan administration. See, I deal in facts and reality, not schoolyard taunts. I’m different that way.
DJ
Hey, Scott, long time no see.
You ask:
If you had qualified that with “Republican primary electorate”, I’d have to agree with you, as that is clearly the case. Well, clearly the case if you accept the redefinition of conservative that has occurred in the last 8 years.
Here is where it gets interesting. Do you really think that the majority of Texans support the ‘fight to get to the right’? I don’t. And I haven’t seen a single poll that would suggest that. It is true that given a choice between Republicans and Democrats in November, the majority of Texas voters vote for Republicans. But is that the same as saying that the majority of Texans support ‘the type of conservative leadership’ that Republicans are providing? I don’t think so. But as long as voters in Texas continue to turn out in non-Presidential statewide elections at a rate of about 35{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} (25{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} to Voting Age Population), perhaps the strategy of ‘fighting to the right’ will prevail.
DJ
“But is that the same as saying that the majority of Texans support ‘the type of conservative leadership’ that Republicans are providing?”
I can say I don’t appreciate the type of conservative leadership Baloney Joe, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan are schlepping. But even they are floating in rarefied air compared to any dem on the scene.
National Repubs have held the house since January 2011 and have yet to produce a real budget. I recall in about April of 2011 I saw a video of three Texas amigos that I believe were Pete Olson, Jeb Hensarling and Randy Neugebauer standing tall and saying “we don’t need to raise the debt ceiling, all we need to do is prioritize spending!”. I bet that video is hard to find because that summer was when Obama threatened to shut down the g’ment in late July/early August and they birthed the ‘sequester’ scheme. I believe the last two CRs authored by Ryan were passed with more dems than gopers. That’s party leadership!!! /
We have been rocking along with $500 billion deficit continuing resolutions ever since with no end in site.
But but Nazi!!111!!
I disagree with my good friend David. Straus has been on a suicide mission all session. He will not return as speaker. When you see Sylvester Turner and others not using and hiring other lobby firms other than the Johnson Bros., he is gone.
https://www.google.com/amp/www.houstonchronicle.com/news/politics/texas/amp/Debate-intensifies-over-Texas-cities-using-tax-11951361.php