It took 2 hours. See my post “The Poison Pill” in which I predicted that within a few hours, Rep Stan Gerdes would tell you that he banned Dem Chairs, but he wouldn’t tell you “the rest of the story”. And, that’s exactly what he did.
He did not tell you about Permanent Standing Committees and the other Dem-favorable provisions of these Rules. He did not tell you he voted to shut off all debate, to not allow any amendments, shutting off representation of the people. Rep Lowe stated “I am disgusted that the process of fair debate was eliminated in an effort to concede power to the minority party.” Rep Gerdes voted “yes” to eliminate debate in an effort to concede power to the minority party. (See page 116 of the 1/23/25 Journal. See also Rep Pierson’s relevant comments on why he voted “no” on page 118 of the 1/23/25 Journal.)
Gerdes did not tell you that he knew of this strategy when he voted against the GOP Caucus choice, violating the rules of the Caucus. Yet he did. And, he did not tell you what he’ll get in return for his votes. A chairmanship of one of these subcommittees? Again, we’re watching and time will tell.
Here’s the text message his consultants sent just 2 hours after adjournment.
Don’t believe Stan Gerdes sent this text. He did not. His consultants did.
Don’t be duped or played. Consultants who are given access to (and often design) elected official communications put out these texts and social media posts.
This morning at 4AM while most of us were sleeping, including many of our TX House Reps, the 232 page Texas House Rules bill dropped. That’s right, 4AM. I’m writing this at 4PM the same day and that package was adopted by the Texas House just an hour ago. No amendments were allowed.
Exactly as predicted, it allows chairs of committees to only come from the majority party. So, yes, Dem Chairs aren’t allowed. But all vice chairs must be from the minority party. And, much more benefiting Democrats is in the rules.
These rules create twelve “Permanent Standing Subcommittees” (a new category of subcommittee) to which the Speaker shall appoint chairs (of either party), may refer bills, will choose members. These committees will hold separate meetings from the committee to which they report…. In other words, through these rules, subcommittees have been permanently established that will, in essence, act as full committees.
Clearly, “Permanent Standing Subcommittees” have been established to circumvent the rules, especially that rule requiring chairs from the majority party. And, should a new Speaker be appointed, that Speaker is not allowed to change the make-up of the committees appointed by the prior Speaker during this entire session.
🚨Rep @brianeharrison and I explain the betrayal of Texas voters that just happened as RINOs joined the Dems to silence conservatives and give the Democrats more power than they’ve ever had in the recent history of the state of Texas!!!
This is the first of things Democrats will get for their votes putting Dustin Burrows in the Speaker’s position, the majority of votes that put him there by the way.
What else will Speaker Burrows give away during this session to the renegade Republicans who thwarted GOP voters, our platform, our legislative priorities and their own rules? He’ll give away “Permanent Standing Subcommittee” chairmanships to those who joined with Democrats to keep the Austin Swamp in power.
We’re watching and wondering. I’m wondering how long it’s going to take Stan Gerdes’ consultants to post on his Social Media that he voted to ban Dem chairs. Probably a few hours…. But, I’ll bet he doesn’t tell you about Permanent Standing Committees, and the other Dem-favorable provisions of these Rules. I’ll bet he doesn’t tell you he voted to not allow any amendments or to shut off all debate. We’ll see.
I’m off to the Texas Capitol tomorrow (Tuesday) for the very important vote for TX Speaker of the House. Will Democrats with a few Republican votes pick our Speaker when EVERY statewide position is in Republican hands, the TX Senate has a Republican majority, and oh yeah, the TX House has a Republican majority (88 / 62)?
Yes they will because of a few power-grabbing Republicans who won’t follow the rules (my Rep included), who would rather throw their lot in with Democrats than to support the GOP Caucus choice, who would rather slap those Republicans who supported them with time and money, who would rather get in bed with lobbyists than support their Republican voters.
I hate getting up early but will do so tomorrow at 5:45 AM in order to get the bus at 8AM. This is very, very important to the Great State of Texas, and to the United States as a whole. So goes Texas, so goes the Nation.
(Apologies for a very lengthy blog post. The issue is complex.)
I’ve always said that politics is the world’s largest chess game. Anyone good at it has to think multiple moves ahead and has to analyze a variety of actions that could be taken by others. And, it requires understanding the law, policies and rules.
It’s the strategy of politics that I find incredibly fascinating.
Let’s take, for example, the issue of “No Dem Chairs”. The grassroots have been trying to stop Texas House Speakers from handing committee gavels to the Democrats for several sessions. Why would a Republican Speaker do that? After all, Republicans have a sizable majority.
Remember the old “smoke filled room”? Well, the only difference is that today there’s no smoke. Smoking not allowed. But the deals still are cut and not in public. Some deals are to bring members to a certain side of an issue. Some deals are to put opponents in an untenable position: damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Some deals are a win-win. Some deals are a win-lose.
Think about the last CR in Washington. You know, that 1500 page spending bill that caused voters to go nuts. A laundry list of added spending was slipped in, hoping voters wouldn’t notice. A day later, it was 116 pages with things like Congressional salary increases removed. People were still unhappy and calling their legislators. A day later, after significant negotiations, it was finally passed.
On December 7, the Texas House Republican Caucus met to select its candidate for House Speaker. There were two candidates: David Cook & Dustin Burrows.
There are rules about what percentage of the caucus a candidate must receive on each ballot: 75% on ballots 1 and 2; 60% on ballot 3. No one got 75% on the first two ballots and then 26 members of the Caucus walked out, including Bastrop County’s HD17 Rep Stan Gerdes. David Cook won on the third ballot.
“Cook clinched the GOP endorsement 48-14 during the voting’s third round, but over a dozen Burrow loyalists abstained from the vote by walking out of the chamber. While caucus rules mandate that all 88 House Republicans support the party’s nominee during January’s official speaker vote — support that would push Cook well over the 76 vote threshold to secure the Speaker seat — Burrows has maintained that a pieced-together coalition of rogue Republicans and Democrats will be enough to ensure his victory.”
Speaker Candidate David Cook has agreed to “No Dem Chairs”. Speaker Candidate Dustin Burrows has not. He says he’ll leave it to the entire House.
It’s important to know that the Speaker appoints the committee chairs. Thus Speaker of the Texas House is a very powerful position. And, as such, putting the issue of “No Dem Chairs” to the entire House, in my opinion, is abdicating the Speaker’s most important responsibility for the success or failure of GOP Legislative Priorities.
The formal vote for Speaker is on January 14, day one of the 89th Texas Legislative Session. Republican House members are expected to vote for the Caucus choice. Those are the rules. If all Republican legislators stick together and follow the rules, that would give David Cook the win. A David Cook Speakership would give grassroots Republicans the win. “No Dem Chairs” would finally be a reality in Texas.
But not so fast……
Remember those 26 “walk-outs”? If they break Party caucus rules and don’t vote for David Cook, Dustin Burrows (who has probably by now negotiated all or a majority of Democrat votes) will likely be the Texas House Speaker. The GOP/Dem split is 88/62. It takes 76 votes to become Speaker.
Simple math: 76-62=14 So if 14 Republicans vote with all the Democrats, Burrows is Speaker. Which 14 Republicans bill break the rules? Will Bastrop County’s HD17 Rep Stan Gerdes be one of them?
Let’s say Burrows wins. When he takes the gavel, how will he put his opponents in their place? How will he show his power to those in the Republican Caucus who didn’t vote for him. Ahhhh…… the Rules Packages.
The day after the vote for Speaker, when all the grassroots Republicans have gone home, the Texas House will vote on both Housekeeping and Permanent Rules packages.
Rules are critical to the function of the Texas House and they are extensive. In 2023, the House Rules, HB4 and amendments, were 199+ pages…. a lot of items with which to negotiate. Plenty of places for “poison pills”.
What is a “poison pill”? A “poison pill” strategy is used in business to prevent a hostile takeover. In politics, it’s used to force opponents into a no-win voting dilemma.
This happens when opponents of a bill put something in it that makes it impossible for supporters of the main topic of that same bill, to vote for it. The bill could contain language that supporters have wanted for years. So what do they do? Vote for that which they’ve worked so hard to accomplish and, in the process, vote for something they adamantly oppose? (This is exactly why conservative Republicans in Washington are pushing so hard for “one subject” bills.)
No matter how they vote, their opponents will use it against them. They’ll be accused of voting against the very thing they’ve worked hard for. Or, they’ll be accused of voting for the thing they adamantly oppose. (So much for not using public resources for political purposes. See Chess Move #5.)
This happens all the time in politics. It’s a common strategy to get items, unfavorable to the majority, passed by the minority. Stick the unacceptable thing into a bill the majority desperately wants passed. Think Ukraine funding.
So, back to the Burrows Permanent Rules Package.
It may contain language that, if passed, will result in “No Dem Chairs”. But it may also contain “poison pill” language that is unacceptable to most conservative Republicans.
Chess move #4 forces members in support of “No Dem Chairs” to vote for the “poison pill” as well. Dems get what they were promised in the non-smoke filled room and Republicans get “No Dem Chairs”.
OR, conservative Republicans vote against the “poison pill” and in the process, also kill the “No Dem Chairs” provision.
From my experience, when that happens, most of the public won’t understand and will just hear (or see in campaign literature) how Rep So-and-so voted against “No Dem Chairs”. And, those members who put Burrows in as Speaker will claim they voted for “No Dem Chairs” but alas, conservative Republicans killed it.
In the 2023 Legislative Session, Dade Phelan was elected Texas House Speaker. After multiple attempts to get “No Dem Chairs” included in the Rules package, it was killed through procedural moves. The premise used to kill “No Dem Chairs” was that having chairs from one political party would violate a rule they had just adopted stating that House resources could not be used for political purposes. (FYI, this was a new Housekeeping rule in 2023 leading one to wonder if it was added for just this purpose.)
Proposed rule: “If, at the time the speaker announces the membership of committees, the members of one political party constitute a majority of the membership of the house, the speaker shall designate a member of that party to serve as chair of each committee.”
Result: The above Amendment to the rules (House Journal, January 11, 2023 page 139) was killed by a point of order that stated “The Housekeeping Resolution adopted by the House earlier today codified the constitutional rule that House resources may be used only for public purposes and may not be used for political purposes.”
They said that ensuring a Committee Chair was from the majority party was the same as using “House resources […] for political purposes.” Odd, the United States Congress operates with the chair of each committee from the majority party and they have a similar, very stringent rule about using public resources for political purposes.
the next chess move
Bastrop County’s HD17 Rep Stan Gerdes was one of the 26 who walked out of the Republican Caucus. He refuses to publicly state his support for David Cook or answer whether he’ll break the Caucus rules and vote for Burrows. He has, though, posted on Facebook on January 5, “I’ll be voting to ban Dem chairs.”
If that’s the case, it would seem he plans to break Caucus rules. (Shame on him.) And, then, knowing what happened in 2023, he can confidently vote for “No Dem Chairs” while watch it go down in flames. One week from now, we’ll know his next move.
I’m off to the Texas Capitol tomorrow (Tuesday) for the very important vote for TX Speaker of the House. Will Democrats with a few Republican votes pick our Speaker when EVERY statewide position is in Republican hands, the TX Senate has a Republican majority, and oh yeah, the TX House has a Republican majority (88 / 62)?
I’ve always said that politics is the world’s largest chess game. Anyone good at it has to think multiple moves ahead and has to analyze a variety of actions that could be taken by others. And, it requires understanding the law, policies and rules.
Let’s say Burrows wins. When he takes the gavel, how will he put his opponents in their place? How will he show his power to those in the Republican Caucus who didn’t vote for him. Ahhhh…… the Rules Packages.
Bastrop County’s HD17 Rep Stan Gerdes was one of the 26 who walked out of the Republican Caucus. He refuses to publicly state his support for David Cook or answer whether he’ll break the Caucus rules and vote for Burrows. He has, though, posted on Facebook on January 5, “I’ll be voting to ban Dem chairs.”