Did The AG Ask Denise Davis What She Thinks About Coming Craddick Ruling, Too?
By Vince Leibowitz on Jul 24, 2007 in 2009 Speaker's Race, 80th Legislature
I read with interest several items here and there about more “briefs” being submitted to the Texas Attorney General in relation to the request for opinion made by a pair of legislators relating to removing the Speaker of the Texas House of Representatives.
And then, I thought, “wait a minute!”
I don’t recall it really being proper protocol for interested parties to submit “briefs” as part of the AG Opinion process. After all, the AG’s word is the final say (save the Lege and the Courts), and, presumably, with the resources of that office, such ‘briefs’ are unnecessary. On that topic, though, I turned out to be wrong:
Once requested to write an opinion, the Attorney General must interpret existing law in accordance with all applicable statutes and the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Texas. This process frequently involves extensive legal research by the group of assistant attorneys general known as the Opinion Committee. In addition to researching the law, the Committee solicits briefs from persons and groups that it deems likely to be affected by the opinion. The Committee welcomes additional briefs and any written commentary from the public, but the attorneys involved in the process do not engage in dialogue or explanation with interested parties or with the public. The draft opinion is reviewed by the Attorney General and the First Assistant Attorney General and signed by the Attorney General before it is issued. The written opinion when issued speaks for itself. [emphasis added]
The reason I bring all of this up is because House Parliamentarian Terry Keel was solicited for an commentary by the AG’s office (note the last line in his letter brief).
So, my question now is this:
Did they also solicit comment from former Parliamentarian Denise Davis? I sure hope they did. If they didn’t, they sure were remiss in not doing so.
[Ed. Note: Hat tip to Off The Kuff & Vaqueros & Wonkeros, the EPT blog]
The AG requested input from 29 different individuals, including Terry Keel and his assistant Ron Wilson. Noticeably absent from the list of people were Denise Davis and Chris Griesel, the former assistant. While everybody from Warren Chisum to Jodie Laubenberg were allowed input, two of the most knowledgeable and experienced people involved in the matter were left out.
Judging from the list of people who have submitted briefs, it seems the argument is fairly one-sided in favor of making Texas unique by ignoring common law and creating a leadership position that lays in the gray area between the constitution and parliamentary procedure. Sounds a lot like Dick Cheney and his new position outside the executive and legislative branch.
Joe,
It stands to reason they should have asked Denise, Chris, and previous parliamentarians and even previous speakers of the House. I’m sure Gib Lewis’ parliamentarian would have had something interesting to say.
They are indeed trying to make this a political football by ignoring common law.
Vince