Day 50: Here We Go Round the Committee Chambers, at Two O'clock in the Afternoon (or whenever)

Today is the 50th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas legislature. The House reconvenes at 10 am, the Senate at 11.

Three House committees will hold hearings today on bills that could improve the lives of queer Texans:

• The Criminal Jurisprudence Committee will hear HB 172 by Veasey (D-Fort Worth), which would require the state to study the effectiveness of the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act, at 10:30 am or when the House finishes their business for the day. More info HERE.
• The Human Services Committee will hear HB 130 by Alvarado (D-Houston), which would create a statewide bullying hot-line, at 2:00 pm or when the House finishes their business for the day. More info HERE.
• The Public Education Committee will hear HB 24 by Guillen (D-Duval, Starr, Webb and Zapata counties) which would allow school administrators to address cyber-bullying and HB 224 by Strama (D-Travis county), which proposes a four-fold approach to fighting bullying (requiring training for teachers, staff, volunteers and students; allowing for the transfer of bullies from their victims classes/campuses; allowing school administrators to address cyber-bullying and requiring schools to compile reports on bullying), at 2:00 pm or when the House finishes their business for the day. More info HERE.

If you would like to watch any of these hearings you may do so on the House website HERE. Be forewarned, the House Administration Committee apparently thinks it's 1998 and so broadcasts committee hearings using RealPlayer, which is notoriously buggy. Expect your window to crash on a regular basis. (I suppose this is an improvement over the House Human Services Committee which seems to think it's 1898.)

The bills will be "laid out" in committee: Each bills author will get up, explain what the bill does, and say why they think it should become law. Members of the public will then have a chance to tell the committee why they think the bill should or should not become law. Finally the bill's author will get to make a closing statement on the bill and the bill will be left "pending" in committee until the committee chair decides to call for a vote. Committees rarely vote on bills the same day they are heard, usually waiting at least a week to take a vote.

The Dallas Voice reported yesterday that Rep. Strama will offer a committee substitute to HB 224 (read Legislative Queery's response HERE). House committees are charged with studying bills and making recommendations to the whole House about whether those bills should become law. The recommendation is called a "committee report". A committee substitute replaces the proposed bill with another bill on the same topic. It is included in the committee report which is then sent to one of the House's five "calendars committees" (different calendars committees handle different kinds of bills). The calendars committee then places the bill on the House schedule for consideration. If there is a committee substitute when the bill is brought up for discussion on the House floor the first order of business will be to approve the committee substitute as a replacement for the original bill. It is not until the whole House votes to "take up" the substitute that it officially replaces the bill.

Chuck Smith, Deputy Director of Equality Texas, posted a link to the proposed committee substitute in the comments section of the Dallas Voice article. He writes that:

"ALL members of our Texas Safe Schools Coalition support the committee substitute language, including Equality Texas, Transgender Education Network of Texas, and the GLBT Issues Committee of the National Association of Social Workers-Texas. "

The Texas Safe Schools Coalition is a group of lobbying and community organizations that have come together to advocate for legislation designed to address bullying.

Hate Crime Study Bill to Recieve Public Hearing

HB 172 by Rep. Marc Veasey is scheduled for public hearing on Tuesday, March 1st at 10:30 am (or whenever the House is finished with its business for the day, which will likely be a little later than 10:30). The bill would require the state to conduct a study on how the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act is being used.

The James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act allows for increased sentences for crimes committed because of the victim's real or perceived "race, color, disability, religion, national origin or ancestry, age, gender, or sexual preference". Over 1,800 potential hate crimes have been reported to the Department of Public Safety since the Texas hate crimes statute went into effect in 2001. Fewer than a dozen have been prosecuted as hate crimes according to Equality Texas.

HB 172 will be heard in the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee. Veasey filed this bill last session as well (HB 616) and the committee approved it with 8 members for, 1 against and two absent. Unfortunately only two of last session's members are back this session: Chairman Pete Gallego and Wayne Christian. While Gallego is supportive of this bill Christian opposed the creation of a Hate Crimes Statute in the first place so his opposition to anything that might make the Hate Crime statute more effective is virtually guaranteed.

The committee has 7 new members this session: Vice-Chair Hartnett, Aliseda, Burkett, Carter, Davis, Rodriguez and Zedler. Hartnett and Davis both supported the creation of the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crime Act. They both have excellent records of supporting the queer community and it's very likely that both of them will support HB 172. Rodriquez wasn't a member of the House when the Hate Crimes Statute was created, but he has an excellent voting record and will very likely support Veasey's idea. Zedler is an old-school conservative, the kind of person who thinks that non-discrimination policies must in some way work to his disadvantage. I would be shocked if he voted for this bill.

The other three new members, Aliseda, Burkett and Carter, are freshmen, swept in with the teabagger hysteria of the fall. Burkett is a teabagger's teabagger, she was one of only 15 house members to vote against Joe Straus for Speaker (the Teabaggers had encouraged house members to elect a "good Christian" speaker, as opposed to Straus, who is Jewish). The chance of Burkett (or Christian or Zedler, who also voted against Straus) supporting HB 172 is very slim. Aliseda and Carter's lack of experience (or stunning display of antisemitism) makes their vote hard to predict.

In a November 14th Fort Worth Star Telegram article Veasey was not optimistic about HB 172's chances:

"I'm going to try it, but quite frankly it's not going anywhere," Veasey said. "A lot of these folks that got elected were elected on opposition to the president and probably feel that being for anything pro-civil rights would hurt them in their political careers."

Looking at the make-up of this committee it seems more than likely his prophesy will come true.

------------------------------

If you would like to contact the members of the Criminal Jurisprudence committee and ask for their support the contact information is below.

Pete Gallego -Chair
(512) 463-0566
(512) 236-9408 Fax
pete.gallego@house.state.tx.us

Will Hartnett - Vice Chair
(512) 463-0576
(512) 463-7827 Fax
will.hartnett@house.state.tx.us

Jose Aliseda
(512) 463-0645
(512) 463-0559 FAX
Jose.Aliseda@house.state.tx.us

Cindy Burkett
(512) 463-0464
(512) 463-9295 Fax
Cindy.Burkett@house.state.tx.us

Stefani Carter
(512) 463-0454
(512) 463-1121 Fax
Stefani.Carter@house.state.tx.us

Wayne Christian
(877) 839-2709
(512) 463-5896 Fax
Wayne.Christian@house.state.tx.us

Yvonne Davis
(512) 463-0598
(512) 463-2297 Fax
Yvonne.Davis@house.state.tx.us

Eddie Rodriguez
(512) 463-0674
(512) 463-0314 Fax
Eddie.Rodriguez@house.state.tx.us

Bill Zedler
(512) 463-0374
(512) 463-0364 Fax
Bill.Zedler@house.state.tx.us

Day 43: This is the Dead Bill, This is the Cactus Bill

Today is the 43rd day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The House will reconvene at 10 am, the Senate at 11.

The House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence meets today at 10:30, but will not be considering either HB 604 (repeal of the offense of homosexual conduct) or HB 172 (study of the effectiveness of the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act). This is how bills die slow deaths - if hearings are delayed (either because the chair does not wish to schedule a hearing or the bills sponsor is not prepared for a hearing at the time or, simply, that all concerned place higher priority on other legislation) they can get so far behind in the process that they can never catch up. That's what happened to last sessions version of the hate crimes study bill, it passed committee, but did so late in the game and never made it to the House floor.

In 77 days all bills will be required to have had their "second reading" on the House floor (this is the first opportunity for the entire House to discuss and vote on a bill), if that hasn't happened they die. Between now and then both of these bills will have to have a public hearing, been voted on by committee, the committee report submitted to calendars (the calendars committees set the schedule for the House floor) and then put on a schedule for second reading. The clock is ticking.

Please call the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and encourage Chairman Pete Gallego to set these two bills for public hearing at the committee's meeting next week. The number is (512)463-0768.


I'll be sitting on the panel tonight for "Issues & Answers - Bullying" cosponsored by the Harris County Democratic Party and Houston Stonewall Young Democrats, joining me will be Houston Independent School District Trustee Juliet Stipeche and, via skype, State Representative Jessica Farrar. The panel starts at 6:30 pm at the HCDP Headquarters at 1445 North Loop West, Suite 110 in Houston.

Veasey Refiles Hate Crime Study Bill

HB 172 by Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Tarrant County) would require the state to conduct a study on how the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act is being used.

The James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act allows for increased sentences for crimes committed because of the victims real or perceived "race, color, disability, religion, national origin or ancestry, age, gender, or sexual preference".

Over 1,800 potential hate crimes have been reported to the Department of Public Safety since the Texas hate crimes statute went into effect in 2001. Only 12 have been prosecuted as hate crimes according to Equality Texas.

There are different ideas about why the Hate Crimes law is not being used. One excuse often given by District Attorneys for not attaching the Hate Crimes enhancement is that crimes like assault already carry a maximum penalty of life in prison. Attaching the Hate Crimes charge would not increase the maximum possible sentence and would create more work for the DA, since they would have to prove the motivation for the crime.

Another theory about why the Hate Crimes enhancement is not being used is that prosecutors are not properly educated about how it works and are reticent to prosecute what they do not understand.

The hope is that a study of the effectiveness of the law would help lawmakers better understand its faults and that legislation could then be passed that would amend the law to make it more usable.

Veasey filed this same bill last session (HB 616). That bill made it through subcommittee and committee hearings but ran out of time and never received a vote of the full house. HB 172 was filed on Monday, the first day to file bills. I'm very happy to see Veasey file this so early, it shows that he is serious about it. The lower bill number will mean that the bill is referred to committee earlier in the session and will have more time to work through the legislative process.

The next step for Veasey is going to be convincing a State Senator to file a companion bill. Bills must be passed by both the House and Senate before going to the governor to sign. Bills originating in the house bills are "read" on the house floor and then referred to a committee. The committee then holds public hearings on the bill. If the committee likes the bill and votes "yea" on it it's then referred to the "Calendars" committee which places it on the schedule for the whole house to consider. When its scheduled spot on the calendar comes up the bill is then "read" a second time and the whole house has an opportunity to debate it and then vote on whether it should become law. The bill is then "read" a third time (usually the day after the 2nd reading) and must be voted on again.

After passing on third reading the bill then goes to the Senate and starts the process again (1st reading, referred to committee, public hearing, voted out of committee, calendars, second reading, third reading). Then, if the Senate amended the bill so that it is different from the House version 5 members of the House and 5 members of the Senate get appointed to meet in a "conference committee" which hashes out a compromise between the two versions. The conference committee's version of the bill must then go back to both the House and the Senate and be approved by majority vote. Only then can the bill go to the Governor to be signed into law.

(The process for Senate bills works in the same way, only starting with the Senate and going to the House.)

But wait! There is a short cut! If a Senator introduces the same bill in the Senate as a House member introduces in the House then they can both work their way through the system at the same time. Then, if the House bill passes on third reading before the Senate bill does the House bill can simply take the place of the Senate bill at whatever stage of the process it's in.

(So if, when the House bill passes on third reading, the Senate version has already been put on the schedule by calendars the House version can skip first reading and committee hearings in the Senate and just take the place of the Senate version on the schedule).

Most bills that eventually become law are introduced in both a House and Senate version. If Veasey is serious about the study taking place he needs to start talking to State Senators about carrying a Senate version.

-----------------
To read a detailed, day by day account of one bills journey through the legislative process read Anti-Bullying Legislation in Texas