Page 3


increase in the franchise tax, and he was expected to fight both the gas tax and the sales tax on alcoholic beverages. And Barnes seemed equally unhappy with the House bill. “They must be smoking pot,” he cracked when he first heard of the House’s all-consumer package. Neither the House nor Senate tax bill contained enough revenue to pay for their appropriations bills. In order to put the final bill in effect by October, the earliest possible date to start collecting new taxes, both houses would have to pass it with a two-thirds majority, a feat neither house had accomplished first time around. K.N. Hilary Doran’s Crusades Austin State Rep. Hilary Doran of Del Rio is establishing a reputation as a man who is concerned about the finer points of legislative activity. During the regular session earlier this year he entered a standing objection to any House member’s request to change his vote. Then, duriiig the special session, he has taken two additional steps that have raised eyebrows and apprehensions among some of his colleagues. Most important is a resolution Doran introduced that would dock Dallas Rep. Jim Clark, Jr. for every day Clark missed during the special session. Clark had announced to the Dallas press that he would not seek reelection and added that he might not participate in the special session. He has become disillusioned with the Legislature, which he characterizes, after having served two terms, as the “greatest time-wasting machine yet devised by man.” Clark decided to participate in the votes on the House tax bill, flying in that morning to be on hand. Asked by the Observer about Doran’s resolution, Clark said, in wry derision, “Doran’s just the conscience of the Legislature.” There is some worry here among some legislators that Doran has raised a question best left dormant. If attendance is to be a criterion for receiving pay, the checks of a number of legislators other than Clark are in jeopardy of being cut. As Doran admitted, during a committee hearing on his resolution last week, “The only real difference between Mr. Clark and those who have been absent is that [Clark] held a press conference and stated that he would be absent.” Clark didn’t attend the hearing but sent a letter saying he has been present for all votes during the special session except those in which he had a conflict of interest and had missed no committee meetings, as the committees of which he is a member had not met. Clark pointed out that a number of other legislators were absent the same days as he, when no business was before the house this summer \(the appropriations and tax bills being the only he intends to deduct his travel expenses between Austin and Dallas from his $12 per diem as a legislator and remit the balance to a “recognized charity.” He adds that “there is no more reason for withholding my salary … than that of other members of the House who were absent. Hilary Doran may have a point but it should be required to be applied to all members who were absent. . . .” Fellow Dallas Rep. Dick Reed appeared before the committee in Clark’s behalf, complaining about selecting Clark for sanctions when others are, he said, also guilty of absenteeism. “What we really are upset about is not Jim Clark’s conduct in the special session but the fact that he blew the whistle on things that , are highly improper down here,” Reed said. The Doran resolution, Reed went on, “attempts to penalize a member who is honest.” He added that if the Doran resolution came to the floor he would introduce statistics on the absenteeism of other House members. REP. DICK CORY, Victoria, chairman of the House Rules Committee, took exception to Reed’s remarks. Cory said Reed’s comments had put the reputations of the 149 other House members “under a cloud.” Reed’s remarks were, Cory said, “an irresponsible statement that casts doubt on every member. … The only thing that we can lay it to is your inexperience,” Cory told the freshman from Dallas. He asked Reed to apologize or retract his comments. Reed refused. The State Constitution provides that deductions may be Made from the salaries of officials who “may neglect the performance of any duty . ..” But this question has largely been left untended, it generally being considered best left so; otherwise there might be some NI EANWHILE, Johnson and Land Cmsr. Jerry Sadler continue their war of words, much to the amusement, delectation, and, at times, weariness of the Capitol press corps. Austin reporters are, coming to view the matter largely as a farce that is being over-dramatized by both Johnson and Sadler. Some serious note is taken of the matter by the Texas press, however, in calls on editorial pages for Gov. Preston Smith to extend the call of the current special session to consider passage of an antiquities act that would provide a procedure for recovery of archeological treasure. The embarrassing charges and countercharges, if a literal interpretation of dereliction of duty be adopted as the Doran resolution has begun to demonstrate. Yet another Doran interest is the presence on the House floor of John Cutright, a member of the staff of Rep. Jake Johnson, San Antonio. Doran has placed another standing objection before the House objecting to the presence of Cutright on the House floor. Evidently Doran’s concern about Cutright came up last spring, when the two representatives nearly came to blows during a party for Capitol secretaries. Cutright, who ran for one of San Antonio’s legislative places last year, is considering another race in 1970. He and Guy Floyd, a San Antonio representative whom Cutright might oppose next year, began exchanging words at the party, attracting Doran’s attention. Both Doran and Floyd then began expressing their displeasure at Cutright’s presence at the party. No blows were exchanged but Doran and Cutright have been at odds since. Cutright, asked by the Observer about Doran’s formal objection to his presence, said he had not been on the House floor in recent days, having been busy in Johnson’s Capitol office. He indicated he would not let the objection prevent him going onto the floor if he were needed there to assist Johnson. Johnson said the Observer’s inquiry of Cutright was the first he, Johnson, had heard of Doran’s formal objection. Houston Post and Corpus Christi Caller -Times, among other dailies, have urged editorially the governor to take up the matter this month. But indications are that Smith will remain adamant that other matters not be considered by lawmakers until the tax and spending bills are passed. This makes it rather unlikely that an antiquities law could be passed, though such a measure is ready in both the Senate and the House, as are other bills that would discourage repetitions of the current sunken treasure situation. Some House members are considering what to do about Sadler’s attack on August 29, 1969 7 Antiquities Scandal Still Simmers