
Poor results could invite primary challenges: Analysis shows more than half of those who voted for Scott Turner for Speaker were only able to pass zero or one of the bills they filed
At this point, Quorum Report readers are well aware that this was one of the least productive sessions in years – at least if you count how many bills were passed. There is, naturally, a legitimate debate about whether it is positive or negative for fewer bills than usual to be passed into law.
Those who closely observe the process understand that both good and bad pieces of legislation die due to procedural moves or failure to jump key hurdles before critical deadlines. In fact, when the second reading deadline approaches in the Texas House, you can hear members of the lobby alternately sighing or cheering as it becomes apparent certain bills won’t live another day.
If members file bills in good faith, any objective analysis must assume that those lawmakers at least wanted those bills to become Texas law and made an effort toward that end.
There has been much talk here in the pages of QR and elsewhere about which Republicans will face primary challenges because of their support for Speaker Joe Straus. Some of them have already drawn challengers and the forces backed by Midland oilman Tim Dunn are hard at work each day trying to undermine them.
But, the inverse deserves examination as well. Specifically, which members might deserve a primary challenge because they surrendered the ability to be effective voices for their communities at theTexas Capitol?
By choosing to take a futile vote when it was already clear who would be running the House, 19 Republicans not only put themselves at odds with the leadership but also largely insulated themselves from those who would be in the governing coalition. After the vote for Speaker, rare was the vote for a leadership priority that didn’t enjoy the support of roughly 130 members or more.
In total, the 19 Republican lawmakers who voted for Rep. Scott Turner, R-Frisco, filed 382 bills. 22 of those were passed to Gov. Abbott’s desk for a passage rate of 6{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}. When looking individually at the passage rate of those members’ bills, they ranged from 0{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} up to 16{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}.
The communities that were underrepresented in 2015 in Austin in this fashion were concentrated in the usually mighty Metroplex and East Texas.
House members who passed none of their bills to the governor were Jonathan Stickland of Bedford, freshman Dustin Burrows of Lubbock, freshman Matt Rinaldi of Irving, Matt Schaefer of Tyler, freshman Matt Shaheen of Plano, freshman Molly White of Belton, the aforementioned Scott Turner of Frisco, and freshman Stuart Spitzer of Athens.
Those who passed a grand total of one bill each to Gov. Abbott’s desk were Bill Zedler of Arlington, freshman Mark Keough of The Woodlands, Scott Sanford of Plano, and freshman Tony Tinderholt of Arlington.
Collin County was particularly poorly represented as Scott Turner, Jeff Leach, Sanford, and Shaheen only passed three bills all told. Two of those were authored by Leach and one was by Sanford.
Some credit should probably be extended to Republicans who voted against the Speaker and still managed to achieve comparatively higher passage rates for their bills.
Rep. Bryan Hughes of Mineola did the best of the bunch, passing 16{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of his bills. Rep. David Simpson, who will be running against Hughes for the Texas Senate seat being vacated by Sen.Kevin Eltife, managed to pass 12{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of his bills. Rep. Matt Krause of Fort Worth passed 10{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of his bills and Rep. Rodney Anderson of Grand Prairie was able to pass 14{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of the legislation he filed.
(Editor’s note: This column, written by Scott Braddock, first appeared on the Quorum Report titled “Those who voted against Straus had a rough time representing their communities” and is reprinted with permission.)
I find it curious, if one seeks an objective opinion, to not point out that the Speaker and his leadership team had an effect on this as well, don’t you think? The author did not delve into the quality of the bills authored by the various legislators, which admittedly would have been difficult to do, but what if the bills authored by those who voted against Straus were better than the average bills authored by those who voted for him? What if Straus and his team purposely punished these legislators for representing their constituents, who wanted them to vote the way they did for Speaker of the House? After all, aren’t legislators sent to represent their constituents and reflect THEIR will? This Braddock person seems very arrogant to me, and this article is quite one sided and vapid.
In my region voting against Straus is ensured re-election.
That is patently false and is an asinine statement. Mr. Pratt is an avowed Straus basher who’s radio program is sponsored by Michael Quinn Sullivan’s organization. In other words, he is a shill.
Next week parts of Fort Bend County will ask Rep Rick Miller about his vote against the First Amendment and press competition.
Rating a freshman legislature on the number of bills he got passed is not only wrong it is deceptive. Go run all the freshman legislators and then compare them to each other.
There has been much talk here and elsewhere about which Subjects will face His Majesty’s displeasure because of their support for those Traitors in Boston. Some of them have already drawn the attention of Lord Howe and the forces backed by Suffolk Peer Earl Cornwallis are hard at work each day trying to undermine them.
But, this deserves examination. Specifically, which Subjects might deserve to forfeit their positions in the General Assembly because they surrendered the ability to be effective voices for their communities at the State House?
By choosing to take a futile position when it was already clear who would be Sovereign of the Kingdom and the Colonies, 56 Subjects not only put themselves at odds with His Majesty but also largely insulated themselves from those who would be in the governing coalition in His service.
This comment may or may not have had merit, but the analogy became so tedious that the actual content was utterly lost.
The reps who voted against Straus were filing bills that were often more conservative then the Straus leadership team was going to allow to pass. For example, Constitutional Carry by Stickland was deemed to conservative by Straus, so it was not going to pass. A less devoted man would not bother filing the bill, but Stickland acted as a patriot and made the attempt anyway. This makes his bill pass rate look bad, but it is only because he was fighting for the people.
On the other hand, my state rep, Ana Hernandez, who supported Straus (as did her fellow demcrats) had 10 of her 33 bills passed.
I don’t anticipate her getting a primary challenger, but do think she’ll have a republican opponent in 2016.
Good to know they are going to spend money on studying whether we need to replace mile markers on the highways!
I’m Tom Zakes, and I approve this message.
The bills passed or didn’t passed show that there’s an establishment problem. Those that voted against Strauss were going along with the GOP plan. Strauss and the boys lied and didn’t do what they said. I.will they’re not really Republicans there politicians with a letter R next to their name.
Strauss and his ilk are like the great cancer of the GOP. Just like Speaker Boehner and his equally despicable counter part in the Senate McConnell. They are the turn coats of our generation. When they ask why America and Texas fell you can say because of men like them.
The fact the author would rather point out the failure of those honoring their oaths and keeping their campaign pledges rather than showing those impeding on liberty are truly the root of the problem shows that they’d rather write about Nero fiddling while the Capitol was burning and say they got the story rather than helping show light on the problem.