Coleman: ‘Put It In The Rules’
December 19th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
The recent opinion issued by Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has once again got people thinking about just how to make sure a Texas House Speaker’s fate is not decided by the Texas Senate.
Abbott basically said he believed a court would likely conclude that the Speaker is a state officer and therefore subject to impeachment — a process which would begin in the Texas House and end in the Texas Senate. Plenty of observers and interested parties agree that having the upper body determine the leadership of the lower body is in no way what the Texas Constitution intends.
In footnote 22 on page 23 of Abbott’s opinion, it is noted that “The Speaker contends that ‘nothing in the Constitution requires an impeached Speaker to be tried by the Senate.’… The Speaker’s assertion does not comport with article XV or chapter 665 of the Government Code…”
I’ll admit I’m pretty dazed and confused by much of the legal mumbo-jumbo, but it sure seems to say here that an impeached Speaker would be tried by the Texas Senate (and who in hell decides exactly what these maniacs decide to capitalize anyway?)
Of all the smart people that have weighed in on what Abbott’s ruling means, I found a statement from Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) to be the most instructive so far.
It turns out that the one area on which Abbott (wisely) refused to speculate involves the Rules of the Texas House — their interpretation as they stand, and how they should have or could affect a speaker’s removal.
“If you want different rules, then you need a different speaker… If members want the ability to remove their presiding officer for cause… pass rules that say that is the case,” Coleman said. “That’s what I would recommend to members.”
There’s a weirdness to this post-opinion debate. The players are all still arguing about the same issues. Nothing is resolved, while Craddick declares victory.
The real fight over whether Craddick has the right to ‘absolute authority’ over recognition will play out at the beginning of the 81st Legislature — in January 2009 — when the House chooses a speaker and when members adopt the House Rules.
Meanwhile, QR reports Jim Dunnam (D-Waco) is questioning why the AG’s office said the opinion would be issued in the early evening Friday and ended up being issued at roughly 10:15 p.m. I suggested it was just a shameless attempt to deflect press attention, but Dunnam seems to think there may have been some last-minute edits — and he says he’s asking for all documents and correspondence between Craddick and Abbott’s offices. Craddick’s spokeswoman said the speaker would make the material available to Dunnam.
December 25th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
The Mean Texas Love of Little Tommy Cryindick
Frustrated so was petty Tina Endkisser.
Evan Smitten saying her beau would no longer trade spit with her?
Angering the pouting swain - the ultra vain little Tommy Cryindick.
Reaction by him was really quick.
Aghast at that darn rumored suitor Billy D. Gust.
No way little Tommy Cryindick would allow his lust.
Demanding that Evan Smitten take it back.
Lowering himself to such a mean attack.
Overcome with seething emotion.
All seemed to be involved in the verbal commotion.
Taunting also naive Bobby Mentwell.
Hollering, stomping and even at him began to yell.
Into such a foul fray.
Noticeably bad words from little Tommy Cryindick began to spray.
Gosh darn that troublemaker Evan Smitten.
Innocent he - not a false word actually spoken or written.
Nastier by the minute was little Tommy Cryindick.
Motivated to action beyond the sick.
Improper words spewed about Evan’s virginal sister.
Dastardly to even make Evan’s ears begin to blister.
Loud that little Tommy Cryindick and typically vain.
Abstain or risk the ultimate ‘double dog, super duper triple’ pain.
Noxious to the extreme was petty Tina Endkisser’s deplorable plan.
Daring to reveal hapless Evan was not a native Texan but a transplanted New York City man!
Love West Texas Style?
and
A Merry Christmas to Y’All!
Hubert Wilson