80th Legislature: Appropriations Committee OK’s Spending Cap Bust With No Public Comment

The House Committee On Appropriations today approved SCR 20, the resolution to allow the Legislature to bust the constitutional spending cap by $14 billion dollars.  They did so without allowing any public comment.

SCR 20 passed out of Appropriations on on a party-line vote, with 18 Republicans voting for it, and two Democrats against it and nine more “present but not voting.” Chuck Hopson (D-Jacksonville) and Rick Noriega (D-Houston) were the two “no” votes.

How was Appropriations Chair Warren Chisum (R-Pampa) able to get the bill out of his committee without even a single public comment? By convening the committee in a “formal” meeting as opposed to a “public” meeting. Though the agenda for the meeting doesn’t say one word about this, it was done.

Why was it done? Because Chisum declared that SCR 20 was “procedureal” and related to interpretation of House Rules, and internal House matters are traditionally debated sans public comment.

The problem? SCR 20 hasn’t a single word about “rules.” It is about busting the constitutional spending cap without having even seen a serious attempt at a budget or spending the $14 million surplus. To boot, Chisum had also tried to have the committee meet in a much smaller room rather than the Appropriations Committee room itself!
And, though the Appropriations Committee Room is wired for webcasts (unlike the place Chisum wanted to have the meeting in the first place), because the meeting was a “formal” meeting, there wasn’t one, shutting off Texans from even being able to view it via the web.

From QR, check out what State Rep. Rick Noriega (D-Houston) had to say about this::

“We should discuss other needs of the state before voting to bust the cap,” he said. With the cap resolution being passed before the budget is debated, “I think all of these other important needs of the state will be fighting for the scraps.”

Of course, Republicans turn it all around and make it about the bogus concept of “tax relief:”

Republican Linda Harper-Brown (R-Irving) said she could not understand why legislators would object to following through on the promise of property tax relief made last year in the special session on school finance. The Ogden resolution, she argued, was simply the mechanism to make that legislative intent a reality.

Or, as Chisum explained to a reporter this morning, “We’re about get ‘er done.”

/Paging Larry The Cable Guy to the Annex…

House Democratic Leader Jim Dunnam (D-Waco), noting that the process slammed the door on open government, railed against House Speaker Tom Craddick’s hand-picked appropriations chair and decried the use of “political shields” tied to a constitutional amendment that would have let voters decide the issue:

“Monday of this week, Republicans were stating fairness required a vote by the public on a Constitutional Amendment for them to exceed the spending limit,” said House Democratic Leader Jim Dunnam (D-Waco). “Today, they said the public could not even be heard on the matter.”

For the last month Republicans have stated they intended to bust the spending cap via a Constitutional Amendment.  The Senate filed SJR 13 to accomplish this goal, pairing the issue with an unrelated senior tax cut measure in an effort to obtain political cover on the spending limit vote.  Seniors and groups like AARP reacted negatively to the pairing, stating they were being used as “human political shields.”

Yesterday, the Senate filed and passed SCR 20 on the same day without one word of public input and without respecting the Senate 2/3rds rule, claiming the issue was “procedural only.”

“How a measure can warrant a constitutional amendment one day, and then not warrant public input the next, boggles the mind,” stated Rep. Dunnam.

Indeed it does! The issue is neither “procedural” nor unsubstantive! Yet, Republicans are using these tactics to get SCR out of the senate, received by the house, referred to committee and voted out of committee in less than 24 hours without any public input whatsoever.

More on the debate:

In a parliamentary inquiry from the House floor, Rep. Dunnam asked Speaker Craddick to recognize him on a motion to require that Rep. Chisum’s House Appropriations Committee take public testimony on SCR 20, the resolution authorizing the Legislature to bust the spending cap and spend an estimated $161 billion.  Speaker Craddick responded clearly against the interest of open government by stating, “I will not.”

The Appropriations Committee then proceeded to meet without even the House TV camera rolling and vote out SCR 20 without public input.  All Democrats on the committee voted Nay or Present Not Voting.

Democrats in the House were quick to point out that there is, in fact, no need to move so quickly on a measure that requires only a majority vote. Earlier in the week, the move to bust the spending cap via a proposed constitutional amendment had a deadline of February 21.  But the deadline was only needed because of the election requirements associated with amending the state constitution.  In committee, when asked if SCR 20 was needed in order to pass property tax cuts, Rep. Chisum said it was not.

“We should have discussion on any measure that authorizes the biggest budget in state history and exceeding the spending limit for the first time ever.  There is no reason why this had to be done so rapidly today.  Yesterday the Republicans said a vote by the general public on a constitutional amendment was necessary to exceed the spending limit, now they say they won’t even give the public an opportunity to testify on it.  That may be the fastest flip-flop in history.” said Rep. Dunnam.

There was speculation regarding Speaker Craddick’s motives for shutting the public out of this crucial debate.  One possible explanation is that he may feel pressure from fiscal conservatives in the Republican party weary of having to explain a vote to exceed the spending limit while delivering no real reforms for public schools or other state priorities.

Boom. Exactly! Except, not only are there no real reforms for public schools, to say nothing of CHIP, etc.

Bookmark It