What is The Office of Personal Management?

- From Wikipedia. 

The United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is an independent agency of the United States government that manages the United States federal civil service. The agency provides federal human resources policy, oversight, and support, and tends to healthcare (FEHB), life insurance (FEGLI), and retirement benefits (CSRS and FERS, but not TSP) for federal government employees, retirees, and their dependents.

- What is the Office of Personnel Management? Trump is relying on this agency to reshape government.

Created in 1979 under President Jimmy Carter, the OPM is the equivalent of the government’s human resources department. It helps manage the civil service, including pay schedules, health insurance and pension programs. The U.S. Office of Government Ethics was spun off from OPM in 1989.

As the OPM website notes, the agency’s roots go back to 1883 with the Civil Service Act. That law established merit-based hiring for many government workers, replacing a system that was previously prone to political patronage. Trump has argued that the bureaucracy in its current formation is not responsive enough to his agenda, leading him to want to install federal officials who will implement his plans as instructed.

. . . Trump is using all kinds of federal agencies to rework the bureaucracy, not just OPM.

The White House Office of Management and Budget issued a memo on Monday requiring federal agencies to pause loans and grants, creating turmoil and lawsuits as to the directive’s legality and scope. That order was rescinded Wednesday after it sparked widespread confusion.

Trump has ordered the General Services Administration to make sure it promotes “beautiful federal civic architecture” as the president dislikes styles that are less traditional.

He also gave an order changing the name of the U.S. Digital Service — which handles tech issues — to the Department of Government Efficiency, Trump’s cost-cutting initiative known as DOGE.

For UH - 3/17/25

Where we've been
- US Chapter 1: American Political Culture
- TX Chapter 1: Texas Political Culture
- US Chapter 2: Founding and Constitution
- TX Chapter 2: Texas Constitution
- US Chapter 3: Federalism
- TX Chapter 3: Federalism
- US Chapter 4: Civil Liberities
- US Chapter 10: Campaign and Elections
- TX Chapter 5: Campaign and Elections
- US Chapter 9: Political Parties
- TX Chapter 4: Political Parties
- US Chapter 11: Groups and Interests
- TX Chapter 6: Interest Groups and Lobbying

Where we are headed: 
- US Chapter 8: Political Participation and Voting
- US Chapter 7: The Media
- US Chapter 6: Public Opinion
- US Chapter 5: Civil Rights
- TX Chapter 11: Public Policy
- TX Chapter 11: Public Finance
- TX Chapter 13: Crime, Corrections, and Public Safety
- TX Chapter 14: Texas Public Policy

For Today - 3/17/25

- Political Culture.
- Texas Legislature Online.
- - Elections
- Texas Fiscal Size-Up.
- All of the Trump Administration’s Major Moves in the First 56 Days.

How Mail Delivery Has Shaped America

 https://daily.jstor.org/how-mail-delivery-has-shaped-america/?utm_term=How%20Mail%20Delivery%20Has%20Shaped%20America&utm_campaign=jstordaily_03132025&utm_content=email&utm_source=Act-On+Software&utm_medium=email

 https://youtu.be/ZoZfz_yJKCs?si=44jz0MuLp1AXSpHm

Some major points for Module 3

Separated Powers

The Rule of One

Monarchies / Republics

Notable dictators 

How did Mussolini Consolidate Power?

How did Julius Caeser Consolidate Power?

Fed 51: TO WHAT expedient, then, shall we finally resort, for maintaining in practice the necessary partition of power among the several departments, as laid down in the Constitution?

The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack.

Will of their own

Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place.

Grievances in the Declaration of Independence

Governing Institutions in the US Constitution.

Governing Institutions in the State Constitution.

Local Governments

Check each institution has over the other two.

The workforce

Spoils system v Merit system

 

 what is a brownfield

ChatGPT said:

A brownfield refers to a piece of land that was previously used for industrial or commercial purposes but is now underutilized, abandoned, or vacant. These sites may have contaminants or pollutants, such as hazardous chemicals, that were left behind from the previous activities.

The term is often used in the context of urban redevelopment, where efforts are made to clean up and repurpose these sites for new uses, such as housing, parks, or commercial developments. Brownfield redevelopment can help revitalize communities and reduce urban sprawl by making use of already-developed land rather than developing on greenfield sites (undeveloped land).

You said:

what is a superfund site?

ChatGPT said:

A Superfund site is a contaminated location in the United States that has been designated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as needing long-term remediation to clean up hazardous material contamination. These sites typically contain pollutants like heavy metals, chemicals, or other toxins that pose a risk to human health or the environment.

The Superfund program, established by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) in 1980, provides funding for the EPA to clean up these sites. The law also holds responsible parties accountable for the cleanup costs. Superfund sites are often former industrial sites, landfills, or locations where hazardous waste was improperly disposed of. The goal is to protect public health and the environment by restoring the land for safe use again.

You said:

what superfund sites exist in the Houston area?

ChatGPT said:

The Houston area is home to several Superfund sites—locations identified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as requiring long-term remediation due to hazardous contamination. Notable examples include:

• Brio Refining Superfund Site: Situated near the intersection of Beamer Road and Dixie Farm Road, this 58-acre site was historically used for copper recovery and petroleum re-refining between 1957 and 1982. Unprocessed petroleum and waste materials were stored in large earthen pits, leading to contamination of soil and groundwater with substances like vinyl chloride and benzene. The EPA added Brio to the National Priorities List in 1984 and removed it in 2006 after remediation efforts, including soil excavation and groundwater containment.

  Wikipedia

• San Jacinto River Waste Pits: Located near the Interstate 10 bridge over the San Jacinto River, these pits contain dioxins and furans, highly toxic compounds. Declared a Superfund site in 2008, the cleanup has faced delays due to engineering challenges and coordination with infrastructure projects. Ongoing efforts aim to remove the toxic waste while minimizing risks to the community.

  Houston Chronicle

• Fifth Ward Creosote Contamination: In Houston's predominantly Black and brown Fifth Ward, historical industrial activities, particularly at the former Houston Wood Preserving Works, have led to soil contamination with carcinogens like creosote and dioxin. Recent EPA findings revealed dioxin levels at a community center, sparking community concerns and calls for swift remediation.

  Houston Chronicle

These sites highlight the ongoing challenges of addressing environmental contamination in urban areas, emphasizing the need for continued vigilance and remediation efforts to protect public health and the environment.

 https://oll.libertyfund.org/quotes/john-adams-on-how-absolute-power-intoxicates-those-who-excercise-that-power-1814


You say, sir, that I have gravely counted up several victims “of popular rage, as proofs that democracy is more pernicious than monarchy or aristocracy.” This is not my doctrine, Mr. Taylor. My opinion is, and always has been, that absolute power intoxicates alike despots, monarchs, aristocrats, and democrats, and jacobins, and sans culottes. I cannot say that democracy has been more pernicious, on the whole, than any of the others. Its atrocities have been more transient; those of the others have been more permanent. The history of all ages shows that the caprice, cruelties, and horrors of democracy have soon disgusted, alarmed, and terrified themselves. They soon cry, “this will not do; we have gone too far! We are all in the wrong! We are none of us safe! We must unite in some clever fellow, who can protect us all,—Cæsar, Bonaparte, who you will! Though we distrust, hate, and abhor them all; yet we must submit to one or another of them, stand by him, cry him up to the skies, and swear that he is the greatest, best, and finest man that ever lived!”

Links 3/12/25

- How state lawmakers are trying to crack down on illegal immigration.

- SB 8.

- Texas Legislature - Bills By Subject - General Subject Index: Aliens.

- Debate on House’s school voucher bill centers on a question: Should wealthy Texans be included?

- SB 2.

- Texas Senate panel sends message to Trump: Get our water from Mexico.

- Supreme Court Ruling Rejects the Promise of Miranda Rights.

- LII: Miranda Rights.

- Amistad Reservoir.

- Amistad Dam.

- Elephant Butte Dam.

- Gov. Abbott could delay setting special election in Houston to help D.C. Republicans.

- Star Chamber.

- City and County of San Francisco v. Environmental Protection Agency.

- SPF Hearing: The State of U.S. Shipbuilding.

From the Houston Chronicle: Artificial intelligence is in a financial bubble. The coming bust could cost Texans

Texas is ready to invest heavily in AI and crypto currency. 

The author suggests that it shouldn't, or at least be realistic in its expectations. 

- Click here for the article. 

Artificial intelligence is overhyped and overvalued in a classic financial bubble, experts at the South by Southwest Conference and Festivals warned, setting the stage for a tech bust that could wipe out tens of billions of dollars in investments.

Texas elected officials and government regulators should think twice about committing taxpayer and consumer dollars to promote and power the AI industry, lest they waste billions in public funds.

Over three days at SXSW, I heard venture capitalists, electric grid experts and data scientists question whether artificial intelligence services can live up to the hype. More importantly, AI business people warned that potential customers are unwilling to pay what it costs to generate AI.

“There hasn’t been a really good sign or even a really good objective proof of a good sustainable product that a consumer is willing to spend the amount of money that developers are actually spending to build that product,” explained roboticist Kartik Tiwari, co-founder of Andromeda Surgical, who has worked on developing AI for medicine and self-driving trucks.

Investors have a long history of pouring money into new technologies in hopes of making a fortune. The venture capital industry is built on turning promising innovations into commercial products.

Raising money requires enthusiastic marketing, and dumb money frequently chases the newest shiny objects creating a financial bubble. The subsequent bust often triggers economic recessions.

The most famous is the dot-com bubble around web-based businesses that started in 1995. When it burst in 2000, the tech-heavy Nasdaq crashed 77%, destroying billions of dollars in savings.

The hype around AI has created a similar bubble, with associated companies attracting astronomical valuations and eye-watering stock prices. Cheerleaders promise it will add $15.7 trillion to the global economy by 2030. However, so much money has moved into AI-associated businesses experienced venture capitalists are getting nervous that company earnings cannot keep up with expectations.

James Wang, a general partner at venture capital firm Creative Ventures, said many VC-backed companies are lowering valuations and taking losses because the companies are earning lower-than-expected revenues. He warned that earnings at companies traded on stock markets are losing money when adjusted for inflation.

- Related: Crypto-mining and artificial intelligence could raise Texas electricity prices 70% by 2030.

For more: 

- Texas Legislature - Bills By Subject - General Subject Index: Artificial Intelligence.

- HB 1709: Relating to the regulation and reporting on the use of artificial intelligence systems by certain business entities and state agencies; providing civil penalties.

From USA Today: Bill proposed in Texas could charge transgender people with 'gender identity fraud'

The bill would create a new felony.

- Click here for the article.

A bill proposed in the Texas legislature could charge transgender Texans with a state felony if they commit what proponents call “gender identity fraud.”

Republican state Rep. Tom Oliverson, who represents a part of Houston in District 130, introduced House Bill 3817 that would amend the Texas Penal Code to add a new form of fraud related to gender identity.

According to the bill, “gender identity fraud” would be commuted if a person “knowingly makes a false or misleading verbal or written statement to a governmental entity or the person’s employer by identifying the person’s biological sex as the opposite of the biological sex assigned to the person at birth.”

The penalty if someone were to commit "gender identity fraud" would be a state felony, which could land a person in prison for up to two years and a $10,000 fine. The bill is not expected to pass, according to the Texas Legislature tracker, as it has no co-sponsors and has not moved to any committees.

Oliverson did not immediately respond to USA TODAY’s request for comment on Monday.

The bill, if passed, would essentially ban transgender people in the state from sharing their gender identity with employers, but could also apply to interactions with police or applications for government benefits.

This latest proposed bill is not the only anti-transgender policy in the state. In August 2024, the Texas Department of Public Safety ordered its employees to stop allowing transgender people to change their gender on their driver's licenses and state IDs.

“The Department of Public Safety has a responsibility, as stated in its own name, to keep all Texans safe. This policy does the opposite,” the ACLU said of the change. “Not having accurate driver's licenses jeopardizes trans people's health and safety — by potentially outing us and exposing us to discrimination, harassment, and violence.”

Then less than a month later, the state stopped allowing people to change the sex listed on their birth certificates, according to the Texas Tribune.

- Click here for HB 3817.

- Dear ChatGPT: What is gender identity fraud?

Gender identity fraud refers to the act of intentionally misrepresenting or falsely claiming a gender identity that is not one's own. This can involve someone pretending to be of a particular gender, typically in a context where such an identity is used to gain some sort of advantage, access, or privilege. This term is often controversial and can be used in discussions around legal, social, or political issues involving gender identity.

For instance, it might be raised in debates about trans individuals, where some argue that individuals might falsely claim a gender identity to access spaces or benefits intended for those who genuinely identify as that gender. However, it's important to note that many people in the transgender community face significant challenges and discrimination, and the term "gender identity fraud" can be seen as stigmatizing or harmful.

The concept is complex, and there are ongoing debates surrounding it, especially regarding the rights of transgender people, gender recognition, and the intersection of gender identity with legal and societal structures.

 

Dear ChatGPT: How can organized crime infiltrate government?

Organized crime can infiltrate government through various methods, often using corruption, coercion, and manipulation to gain influence or control over political processes and decision-making. Here are some ways organized crime groups may infiltrate government:

1. Bribery and Corruption
- Bribing Officials: Organized crime groups may offer financial incentives, gifts, or favors to government officials in exchange for favorable treatment, such as protection from law enforcement, immunity from prosecution, or approval of illegal activities.
- Political Campaign Contributions: Criminal organizations may make donations to political campaigns to gain influence over candidates or officeholders who may later protect or promote their interests.

2. Coercion and Threats
- Threatening Officials: Criminal groups may use threats of violence or harm to coerce government officials into supporting their illegal activities or passing laws that benefit them.
- Blackmail: They may gather compromising information about politicians or civil servants and use it to extort them into compliance with criminal interests.

3. Control Over Elections
- Vote Manipulation or Rigging: Criminal groups may use their influence or resources to tamper with elections, rig votes, or intimidate voters and officials to ensure the election of candidates who will serve their interests.
- Candidate Support: In some cases, organized crime groups may run candidates who are sympathetic to their cause or install puppets in key government positions to exert control from within.

4. Money Laundering Through Government
- Use of Government Entities for Money Laundering: Organized crime may use government contracts, state-owned enterprises, or public infrastructure projects as a cover to launder illicit funds.
- Front Companies: Criminal organizations may create or take over businesses with government ties, using them to disguise the origin of their illegal profits.

5. Infiltrating Law Enforcement
- Corrupting Police or Investigators: By bribing or threatening law enforcement personnel, organized crime groups may reduce the effectiveness of investigations or avoid detection altogether. Corruption within law enforcement can provide criminal groups with protection and insider information.
- Weakening Criminal Justice: Criminal organizations might work to influence or infiltrate the judiciary by bribing judges or prosecuting attorneys, ensuring that charges against them are dismissed or reduced.

6. Influence Over Legislation
- Lobbying for Favorable Laws: Organized crime can exert influence over legislators to pass laws that allow them to operate more freely or provide legal cover for their activities.
- Regulatory Capture: Criminal organizations may attempt to place sympathetic individuals in regulatory agencies that oversee industries in which they are involved, such as gambling, construction, or labor, to create favorable conditions for their illegal operations.

7. Facilitating State Capture
- Complete Control of Government Functions: In more extreme cases, organized crime can exert control over an entire government or key sectors of it, leading to a state of "state capture" where public policy, laws, and government resources are directed toward the interests of criminal groups.

8. Money Flow and Economic Influence
- Economic Dependence on Criminal Enterprises: Criminal organizations may create economic dependence by controlling critical sectors of an economy, such as construction, transportation, or natural resources. This economic leverage can be used to influence or control government decisions and policies.

Consequences and Impact:

When organized crime infiltrates government, it undermines the rule of law, weakens public institutions, and perpetuates a culture of impunity and corruption. It can prevent effective governance, harm economic development, and erode public trust in the political system. Tackling this problem requires strong anti-corruption measures, independent law enforcement, and transparency in government operations.

In some countries, organized crime groups have managed to infiltrate the highest levels of government, making it a particularly challenging issue to combat. International cooperation, transparency, and robust legal frameworks are essential to combating the infiltration of organized crime in government.

 https://www.youtube.com/shorts/caeGQXwt07o

From the New York Times: Firm Targeted by Trump Over Clinton Campaign Work Hires Top Litigators

An example of the use of government power to punish political enemies. 

- Click here for the article. 

Perkins Coie, the law firm that President Trump targeted for punishment with an executive order last week for its role representing Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, has hired an elite Washington firm, Williams & Connolly, to fight the order, according to four people briefed on the matter.

The decision to hire Williams & Connolly — which is considered among the most aggressive and skilled firms in fighting the federal government — marked a significant escalation in the fight between Perkins Coie and Mr. Trump.

There were concerns in the legal community that no firm would step forward to represent Perkins Coie. But now Mr. Trump’s Justice Department will be forced to face off against some of the top litigators in the country to defend what legal experts consider one of his most direct attacks on his perceived enemies, and the American legal system.

The executive order Mr. Trump signed on Thursday essentially crippled Perkins Coie’s ability to represent clients dealing with the federal government by stripping it of access to government buildings and officials. The president said he was taking the action, in part, because of Perkins Coie’s role in hiring another firm that helped create a dossier on Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia.

. . . Legal experts and top Washington lawyers said the order targeting Perkins Coie was among Mr. Trump’s most troubling maneuvers since returning to office. Not only did it appear designed to destroy the firm, they said, it seemed intended to have a chilling effect on the entire legal profession, signaling that firms could face major consequences for simply representing an adversary of Mr. Trump.

The lawyer who served as Perkins Coie’s point person on the Russia dossier, Marc Elias, ran the firm’s political law group and served as the top lawyer for the Clinton campaign. He left the firm in 2021 to start his own firm specializing in election and voting rights law, taking with him dozens of Perkins Coie lawyers and becoming even more vocal in his criticisms of Mr. Trump.

While Perkins Coie maintained its political law practice, that is dwarfed by its work representing major corporations that generally seek to avoid political controversies of the sort generated by the dossier and Mr. Trump’s attacks.

In the hours after Mr. Trump signed the order, top Perkins Coie lawyers hurriedly strategized about how to respond, according to three of the people. Several other firms declined to represent Perkins Coie, fearing that they, too, could become targets of Mr. Trump’s ire, according to three of those briefed on the matter. All spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be publicly identified speaking about confidential discussions.

Committee hearings in the U.S. Senate on 3/11/2025

- Click here for the page. 

9:30 AM – SD-G50
Armed Services
Hearings to examine stabilizing the Military Health System to prepare for large-scale combat operations.

10:30 AM – SR-418
Veterans' Affairs
Hearings to examine S.124, to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for disciplinary procedures for supervisors and managers at the Department of Veterans Affairs and to modify the procedures of personnel actions against employees of the Department, S.201, to provide for a study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine on the prevalence and mortality of cancer among individuals who served as active duty aircrew in the Armed Forces, S.275, to improve the provision of care and services under the Veterans Community Care Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs, S.410, to amend titles 10 and 38, United States Code, to improve benefits and services for surviving spouses, S.478, to amend title 38, United States Code, to prohibit the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from transmitting certain information to the Department of Justice for use by the national instant criminal background check system, S.607, to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish an integrated project team to improve the process for scheduling appointments for health care from the Department of Veterans Affairs, S.610, to expand the VetSuccess on Campus program of the Department of Veterans Affairs, S.611, to amend title 38, United States Code, to improve and to expand eligibility for dependency and indemnity compensation paid to certain survivors of certain veterans, S.654, to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish an external provider scheduling program to assist the Department of Veterans Affairs in scheduling appointments for care and services under the Veterans Community Care Program, S.702, to require a study on the quality of care difference between mental health and addiction therapy care provided by health care providers of the Department of Veterans Affairs compared to non-Department providers, S.787, to amend title 38, United States Code, to establish a commission to review operations at the Veterans Health Administration and submit to Congress reports with respect to that review, and for other programs, S.831, to amend title 38, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to improve telephone communication by the Department of Veterans Affairs, S.892, to amend title 38, United States Code, to improve the repayment by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs of benefits misused by a fiduciary, an original bill entitled, "Veterans' Claims Act of 2025", and Servicemembers and Veterans Empowerment and Support Act".

2:00 PM – S-219
Printing
Business meeting to consider committee rules of procedure for the 119th Congress, and to designate the Chair and Vice Chair.

2:30 PM – SD-226
Judiciary
Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism
Hearings to examine the STOP CSAM Act

2:30 PM – SR-328A
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
Hearings to examine risk management, credit, and rural business views on the agricultural economy, focusing on views from the field.

Committee hearings in the U.S. House of Representatives on 3/11/2025

10:00 am
 "Water Infrastructure Financing: WIFIA and the Clean Water State Revolving Fund"
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment

10:00 am
Antitrust Law and the NCAA: Examining the Current Climate
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust

10:00 am
Shifting Gears: Moving from Recovery to Prevention of Improper Payments and Fraud
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Subcommittee on Government Operations

10:00 am
Member Day
Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

10:00 am
Restoring the SBA: Putting Main Street America First
Committee on Small Business
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Regulations

10:00 am
Hearing Entitled: Navigating the Digital Payments Ecosystem: Examining a Federal Framework for Payment Stablecoins and Consequences of a U.S. Central Bank Digital Currency
Committee on Financial Services

10:00 am
Regulatory Harm or Harmonization? Examining the Opportunity to Improve the Cyber Regulatory Regime.
Committee on Homeland Security
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection

10:00 am
The State of U.S. Shipbuilding
Committee on Armed Services
Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces

10:15 am
"Education Without Limits: Exploring the Benefits of School Choice"
Committee on Education and Workforce
Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

10:15 am
"Maximizing Opportunities for Redeveloping Brownfields Sites: Assessing the Potential for New American Innovation."
Committee on Energy and Commerce
Subcommittee on Environment

10:15 am Legislative hearing on: H.R. 1820 Rep. Ciscomani Federal Lands Amplified Security for the Homeland Act or the FLASH Act.
Committee on Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Federal Lands

10:15 am
Legislative Hearing on: H.R. 913 Streamlining Aviation for Eligible Veterans Act of 2025 H.R. 980 the Modernizing the Veterans On-Campus Experience Act of 2025 H.R.1364 the Automotive Support Services to Improve Safe Transportation Act of 2025 H.R. 1458 the Veterans Education and Technical Skills Opportunity Act of 2025 H.R. 1960 the Simplifying Veterans Assistance Act of 2025 H.R. 1527 the Reforming Education for Veterans Act H.R. 1793 the Veterans Readiness and Employment Transpar
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity

10:30 am
Innovative Techniques in Military Construction
Committee on Appropriations
Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies

2:00 pm
Organizational Meeting of the Joint Committee on Printing
Committee on House Administration

2:00 pm
After the Hospital: Ensuring Access to Quality Post-Acute Care
Committee on Ways and Means
Subcommittee on Health

2:00 pm
Reauthorizing the U.S. Development Finance Corporation
Committee on Foreign Affairs
East Asia and Pacific Subcommittee

2:00 pm
Arms Control International Security and U.S. Assistance to Europe: Review and Reforms for the State Department
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Europe Subcommittee

2:00 pm
Eliminating Waste Fraud and Abuse at the Department of Homeland Security: Addressing the Biden-Harris Administrations Failures.
Committee on Homeland Security
Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations, and Accountability

2:00 pm
Enhancing Federal State and Local Coordination in the Fight Against Criminal Illegal Aliens
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement

2:15 pm
Organizational Meeting of the Joint Committee on the Library
Committee on House Administration

2:15 pm
Legislative Hearing on:
Discussion Draft Standardizing Treatment and Referral Times Act; Discussion Draft No Wrong Door for Veterans Act;
Discussion Draft Providing Veterans Essential Medications Act;
Discussion Draft Veterans Supporting Prosthetics Opportunities and Recreational Therapy Act; Discussion Draft To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Comptroller General of the United States to report on certain funding shortfalls in the Department of Veterans Affairs; H.R. 217 CH
Committee on Veterans' Affairs
Subcommittee on Health

3:00 pm Full Committee Markup on Various Measures
Committee on House Administration

Links - 3/10/25

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/usurp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mock_trial

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court

https://www.texastribune.org/2025/03/06/texas-countywide-voting-polling-locations-legislature/

https://www.texastribune.org/2025/03/04/texas-senate-housing-crisis-solution/

https://capitol.texas.gov/Reports/Report.aspx?LegSess=89R&ID=enablinglegislation

https://www.amha.org/

https://library.municode.com/tx/pearland/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=CH

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_Mussolini

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutilated_victory

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisville,_Kentucky

Vote For Pedro

Ponies are Dwarf Horses

Comments?

 

Dear ChatGPT: How did Benito Mussolini consolidate power?

 Benito Mussolini consolidated power in Italy through a combination of political maneuvering, intimidation, and strategic use of force. Here’s a breakdown of the key steps he took to solidify his control:

1. Formation of the Fascist Party (1919-1921)

• Mussolini first founded the Fasci Italiani di Combattimento in 1919, a nationalist and paramilitary group. It attracted former soldiers, nationalists, and disaffected Italians who were unhappy with the outcomes of World War I.
• In 1921, Mussolini rebranded the movement as the National Fascist Party (PNF), giving it more political legitimacy.
• He used the discontent over Italy’s post-war situation (economic hardship, social unrest, and the "mutilated victory" narrative) to garner support.

2. Use of Violence and Intimidation (Squadristi)

• Mussolini’s Fascists, known as the Blackshirts, used violence and intimidation to suppress opposition groups, especially socialists and communists.
• The Squadristi, Fascist paramilitary groups, attacked socialist offices, trade unions, and left-wing activists, creating an atmosphere of fear.
• The government at the time, led by liberals, was either unwilling or unable to stop these actions, allowing Mussolini to present himself as a strongman who could restore order.

3. The March on Rome (1922)

• By 1922, Mussolini had significant popular support, especially from the middle class, industrialists, and the army, who feared a socialist revolution.
• Mussolini organized the March on Rome in October 1922, a show of force in which thousands of Fascists marched towards the capital. While the march itself was largely symbolic, it pressured the government into action.
• King Victor Emmanuel III, fearing civil war and seeing Mussolini as a strong leader who could bring stability, invited Mussolini to form a government. On October 29, 1922, Mussolini became Prime Minister.

4. Consolidation of Power (1922-1925)

• Once in power, Mussolini moved quickly to consolidate his control:
  • Dissolving Political Opposition: Mussolini passed laws that dismantled political opposition. By 1923, he had implemented the Acerbo Law, which allowed the party with the most votes in an election to receive two-thirds of the seats in parliament. This helped the Fascists secure a parliamentary majority.
  • Control over the Media: Mussolini took control of the press and used it as a tool for propaganda. He portrayed himself as a savior of Italy and suppressed critical voices.
  • Repression of Rivals: Mussolini’s regime used violent tactics to suppress opposition. Communists, socialists, and other political rivals were arrested, exiled, or killed.

5. The 1925 Dictatorship

• In 1925, after a failed assassination attempt on a prominent Fascist leader, Mussolini declared himself Il Duce (the leader) and began to rule by decree. He dismantled Italy’s democratic institutions and established a totalitarian state.
• Political parties other than the Fascists were banned, and Mussolini centralized power in the hands of the state.
• Mussolini also created the Corporatist State, in which the economy was organized into state-controlled syndicates, reducing the power of trade unions and industrialists who were not aligned with the Fascists.

6. Cult of Personality

• Mussolini built a strong personal cult, presenting himself as a strong, decisive leader capable of restoring Italy to greatness.
• Propaganda, art, and public displays promoted Mussolini as the embodiment of Italian strength, often comparing him to historic figures like Julius Caesar and Napoleon.

In essence, Mussolini consolidated power through a mixture of political savvy, strategic alliances, manipulation of public opinion, and the use of force. His ability to exploit the political instability in Italy and create a narrative of national revival helped him maintain control throughout his reign.

 https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/we-live-like-royalty-and-dont-know-it?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0BMABhZGlkAAAGEK9SGJcBHV3uHaf3lHeqjcRkeJxixbn9objEG8imlrBXqHVLbrmqJ3CDNjQEsoSz1A_aem_JfId-ebSUNi1Onk_qVAozA&utm_medium=paid&utm_source=fb&utm_id=6668725138239&utm_content=6668725138439&utm_term=6668725138639&utm_campaign=6668725138239

Grievances listed in the U.S. Declaration of Independence

They all boil down to an attempt by the king of England  to consolidate governing power, which createsa dictatorship.  

- Click here for the document.
- Click here for the Texas Declaration of Independence.

The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his governors to pass laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his assent should be obtained; and, when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of representation in the legislature, a right inestimable to them, and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved representative houses repeatedly, for opposing, with manly firmness, his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the legislative powers, incapable of annihilation, have returned to the people at large for their exercise; the state remaining, in the mean time, exposed to all the dangers of invasions from without and convulsions within.

He has endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migration hither, and raising the conditions of new appropriations of lands.

He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers.

He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, standing armies, without the consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the military independent of, and superior to, the civil power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our Constitution and unacknowledged by our laws, giving his assent to their acts of pretended legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us;

For protecting them, by a mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states;

For cutting off our trade with all parts of the world;

For imposing taxes on us without our consent;

For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury;

For transporting us beyond seas, to be tried for pretended offenses;

For abolishing the free system of English laws in a neighboring province, establishing therein an arbitrary government, and enlarging its boundaries, so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these colonies;

For taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable laws, and altering fundamentally the forms of our governments;

For suspending our own legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated government here, by declaring us out of his protection and waging war against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burned our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large armies of foreign mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation, and tyranny already begun with circumstances of cruelty and perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow-citizens, taken captive on the high seas, to bear arms against their country, to become the executioners of their friends and brethren, or to fall themselves by their hands.

He has excited domestic insurrection among us, and has endeavored to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers the merciless Indian savages, whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions.

In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms; our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Power, Class & The Downfall of Bismarck in Imperial Germany 1878-1890

Compare these two

According to James Madison in Fed 10, it would be more difficult for a permanent majority to form in the top nation, than the one on the bottom.

You can see why if you think it through.

 

From Americana Corner: Thomas Jefferson, the Virginia Barrister

I found this story interesting, especially what it says about the judiciary in Virginia. 

Notice that Royal Governors could shut down the state legislature of they objected to its activities.

- Click here for the article. 

In 1765, Parliament passed the Stamp Act, the first internal tax on the American colonies, and thus began a decade of missteps by the British. Their miscalculations would take their country and their colonists on a direct path to Lexington Green and Concord Bridge on April 19, 1775. During this same year, Thomas Jefferson was concluding his time studying law under George Wythe and began to turn his eye towards the world at large and, more specifically, politics in the Colony of Virginia. The timing would prove to be most fortunate for the country as Jefferson would lend his considerable skills to the political maelstrom that was about to be unleashed.

The Stamp Act placed a tax on virtually all printed paper goods used in the colonies, items such as newspapers, playing cards, almanacs, diplomas, pamphlets, legal documents, and insurance policies. Prior to this Act, the colonies had been permitted to determine internal taxation policies in accordance with their founding charters, while the Crown had determined taxes on external matters such as custom duties on imported goods.

Not surprisingly, the reaction by the colonists to this encroachment on their established liberties was immediate and widespread across all the colonies. On May 29, Patrick Henry rose in the House of Burgesses in Williamsburg to make a protest speech against the Stamp Act. Forewarned of the speech by Henry who stayed with Jefferson whenever Henry visited Williamsburg, Jefferson walked down Duke of Glouster Street with his friend and fellow law student, John Tyler (the father of John Tyler, Jr. our country’s future tenth President) to take in Henry’s theatrics.

Henry lived up to his advance billing and shocked his fellow Burgesses with his words declaring that Parliament’s usurpation of taxation authority “has a manifest tendency to destroy British as well as American freedom” and implying resistance to the measure. Cries of “Treason, Treason” filled the hall, and Henry famously replied, “If this be treason, make the most of it.”

Jefferson was moved by Henry’s delivery and his message. In his autobiography, Jefferson stated the oratory was “such as I have never heard from any other man.”

More importantly, Henry’s speech planted the revolutionary seeds in Jefferson’s mind that he was an American, rather than a British subject. These seeds would germinate and be reaped in 1776 in Jefferson’s masterpiece, the Declaration of Independence.

But that was ten years in the future, and for now Jefferson settled into his life as a newly minted attorney. In colonial Virginia, there were two levels of courts, the county courts and the General Court of Virginia. The county courts were scattered throughout the colony and the attorneys practicing their art in them tended to be less educated and less sophisticated than those that practiced at the General Court in Williamsburg. Additionally, while county court attorneys were fairly numerous, in 1767 only eight lawyers practiced before the General Court.

The common practice was for new lawyers to get their experience and initial fees in the county courts and then possibly try to get admitted to the General Court, the true legal elite of Virginia. Jefferson opted to bypass the county courts and try for admittance to the General Court right away believing that it to be the only place where law as a “science may be encouraged.” He was accepted and, at age twenty four, joined a small group of attorneys much older than Jefferson and considered the best the colony had to offer, men such as George Wythe, Edmund Pendleton, Peyton Randolph, John Blair, and Richard Bland.

Being the only attorney from western Virginia practicing before the General Court, Jefferson headed west from Williamsburg looking for clients who needed a lawyer to bring their case back east to the General Court. Over the course of the next seven years, Jefferson crisscrossed the colony on horseback visiting courthouses in nearly every county, developing a broad clientele, and, more importantly, establishing a reputation as one of the most respected barristers in Virginia. Jefferson was not afraid of hard work and handled as many as five hundred cases a year, representing some of the wealthiest men in the colony.

The recognition Jefferson gained by his hard work paid dividends in 1768 when the twenty five year old Jefferson was elected to the House of Burgesses, filling the seat his revered father, Peter, had once held. Jefferson entered the assembly at a time of mounting emotions in both Virginia and the other colonies, in large part because of the Townshend Acts of 1767. These measures imposed additional taxes on the colonists and further encroached on American liberties.

There was also growing concern in the colonies about the habit of Crown officials to dissolve colonial legislatures whenever they refused to comply with Parliamentary acts with which they disagreed. The New York assembly had been dissolved in 1768 when it refused to adhere to the Quartering Act and pay to house British troops stationed in the colony. In response, the Massachusetts House sent out a circular letter calling for a united response from all colonies in support of New York; as a result, the Massachusetts House was suspended by its Royal Governor.

In May 1769, the House of Burgesses passed resolves drafted by George Washington, George Mason, and Richard Henry Lee which stated that all taxation authority rested in colonial legislatures and called for a boycott of all British goods until Parliament reversed course. Jefferson, the new Burgess from Albemarle County, took his first steps down the road to revolution when he signed these provocative resolves, aligning himself with what the Governor called the “young hotheads.”

Even though he signed, Jefferson felt the demands did not go far enough in that he believed Parliament did not have the authority to impose any taxes, internal or external, on the colonies. Lord Botetourt, the Royal Governor, angered by the resolves, immediately dissolved the Assembly. Parliament’s acts were unwittingly turning thirteen disparate British colonies into a unified American confederation. That probably would not have happened were it not for their heavy handed methods which gave the Americans a rallying point around which to coalesce.

Questions for ChatGPT:

What federalist papers dealt with the legislature?
What federalist papers dealt with the executive?
What federalist papers dealt with the judiciary?

Dear ChatGPT: Can you own a lake but not the land around it in Texas?

An interesting question for a student at Turner. 

I had no idea.

Yes, in Texas, it is possible to own a lake (or a body of water) but not the land around it, but it depends on the specific circumstances. The ownership of lakes and the surrounding land is influenced by a mix of property rights and water rights, and the situation can vary based on whether the lake is navigable or non-navigable, as well as the lake's location (private land vs. public access).

Here’s how it generally works:

1. Non-Navigable Lakes (Private Lakes):

- Private Property: If the lake is on private land (non-navigable), the owner of the land under the lake typically has the rights to the water within the lake as well. This means that if you own a lake situated entirely on your land, you own both the water and the surrounding land.

- Water Rights: While you may own the water, Texas law has water rights regulations governing the use of water. So, even though you can own the water, it doesn’t mean you have unrestricted rights to use or divert it in any way.

2. Navigable Lakes (Public Access):

- Public Ownership of the Water: In Texas, navigable waters (those that are suitable for navigation by boats, barges, etc.) are considered public waterways. If a lake is navigable, the water itself is considered a public resource, and you cannot exclusively own it, even if the land around it is privately owned.

- Riparian Rights: If you own land along a navigable lake, you may have riparian rights (rights related to the use of water), such as the right to access the water and use it for certain purposes like recreation or irrigation. However, you do not own the water itself, and the state retains authority over its management and usage.

3. Exceptions and Special Cases:

- Lakebed Ownership: In some cases, you may own the lakebed (the land beneath the water) but not the water itself. For example, if you own land that includes the lakebed but the water is navigable, the state still controls the water.

- Water Contracts: You might be able to own the land around the lake but have a contract or agreement with the state or a water authority for certain water rights, such as irrigation or industrial use. This doesn’t grant you ownership of the water but allows you to use it for specific purposes.

4. Practical Example:

If you own a non-navigable lake on your property, you can own the lake and surrounding land. If it's a navigable lake, the lake water is public, and the state controls its use, but you can own the land around the lake.

For example, a lake like Lake Travis near Austin is a navigable lake, so the state of Texas controls the water, but adjacent landowners around the lake have property rights over their land.

Summary:

Yes, you can own a lake without owning the land around it in Texas, particularly if the lake is navigable. However, the ownership and use of the water depend on whether the lake is public or private, and the surrounding land is subject to riparian rights if it’s a navigable body of water. Non-navigable lakes generally allow you to own both the land and the water.

From the Houston Chronicle: Electricity grid companies fight over potential profits from Texas Legislature’s proposals

The article regards Senate Bill 6

- Click here for it. 

And mentions the Texas Energy Fund.

- Click here for that.

- Click here for the article.  

Texas lawmakers are trying to improve the state's electric grid, deciding how much we’ll spend on transmission lines, energy efficiency, natural gas plants and renewable energy. They will need the wisdom of Solomon to navigate the male bovine droppings that lobbyists are spreading in Austin.

The stakes are high: Hundreds of people died during the 2021 blackouts during the coldest nights in a generation. Political futures ride on preventing another outage. Billions of consumer dollars will flow to those who twist the energy markets in their favor.

The trouble begins with defining the problem. How much electricity will we need, how many miles of new transmission lines are necessary and should the state dictate how electricity is generated?

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas warns that corporations have proposed adding enormous amounts of new load to the grid, potentially double the electricity used today. But no one knows how many crypto mines, artificial intelligence facilities, data centers and new oil and gas projects will get built, because 80% have historically dropped out before construction.

Even more difficult to answer is whether high electricity prices, improved technology or greater efficiency will reduce forecasted demand. Some proposed data centers expect to use as much electricity as Waco. New technologies could slash that demand in half, while next-generation solar panels could double output.

The biggest problem today is getting power to where it's needed. Wind and solar energy in South and West Texas often get wasted because there are not enough transmission lines. The Senate Business and Commerce Committee declared it would not turn away companies looking to tap into Texas’s grid.

“Texas is open for business … especially data centers and AI,” Sen. Phil King, R-Weatherford, said.

The trick is maintaining reliability and reasonable consumer prices without ruining the climate.

King’s Senate Bill 6 is a gift to transmission companies such as CenterPoint, Oncor, AEP and TNMP. King has long pushed legislation favorable to these regulated utilities, even intervening to support CenterPoint’s disastrous $800 million investment in backup generators.

SB 6 would allow the PUC to authorize hundreds of miles of new power lines and pay for them with surcharges on consumer electricity bills. The bill would require data centers and some other large-load customers to pay for transmission costs, even if they have their own power plants and don’t use transmission lines. Oil and gas companies get special treatment, of course.

Large loads could no longer save money on transmission costs by cutting their usage during the four hottest days of the year, King said. Generators that want to take power off the competitive wholesale market and sell directly to large loads would have to ask transmission companies first.

Becuase SB 6 would shift costs onto large loads and limit generators’ options, lobbyists for manufacturers and generators are mobilizing to water it down. They want more money spent on generation and energy efficiency.

The Legislature created the Texas Energy Fund to subsidize natural gas power plants in 2023, and the PUC is trying to disburse $5 billion in low-interest loans. But generators are dropping out, the latest because it couldn’t find the necessary turbines. There is a global shortage of electric grid equipment.

PUC Chairman Thomas Gleeson told senators that companies are struggling to meet the fund’s December deadline and warned that new power plants will not be generating electricity until 2026-2029. He wants the authority to extend deadlines.

 

- How Spread Out Is the U.S. Population?

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilling_effect

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2025/03/04/justices-again-reject-case-against-bias-response-teams#:~:text=%E2%80%9CBias%2Dresponse%20teams%20are%20the,ideas%20that%20make%20them%20uncomfortable.%E2%80%9D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobbs_Act

https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-economy/2020/june/spread-out-us-population

https://www.oyez.org/cases/2024/23-1300

Texas Tribune: U.S. Supreme Court takes up Texas nuclear waste disposal case

- Click for it. 

From the Texas Tribune: Texas House and Senate lawmakers have laid out their property tax cut proposals. How do they compare?

- Click here for it. 

Dear ChatGPT: Outline the Iron Triangle Surrounding the Hemp Industry

The "Iron Triangle" refers to a close and mutually beneficial relationship between three key actors: government agencies, interest groups (such as lobbyists), and legislators. These relationships are characterized by the idea that these groups form a "triangle" of influence, with each of the three parties benefiting from cooperation with the others. In the context of the hemp industry, the Iron Triangle can be applied to the interactions between the government (at the federal and state levels), hemp-related businesses or lobbyists, and legislators who enact laws related to the hemp market.

Here’s how the Iron Triangle applies to the hemp industry:

Government Agencies:

- The U.S. government, through agencies like the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA), regulates hemp production, processing, and commercialization. These agencies establish policies and regulations regarding hemp cultivation, testing, and distribution.

- With the legalization of hemp through the 2018 Farm Bill, the government agency’s role has expanded to ensure compliance with regulatory frameworks for things like THC levels and quality control.

Interest Groups (Lobbyists & Industry Associations):

- Hemp industry groups like the Hemp Industries Association (HIA), National Hemp Association (NHA), and other lobbyists work to influence government policies and push for legislation that benefits hemp growers, processors, and product manufacturers. These interest groups often advocate for less restrictive regulations, subsidies, or tax incentives to support the hemp sector.

- They often fund research or provide expert testimony to shape the direction of hemp legislation or regulation.

Legislators:

- Elected officials play a key role in crafting laws that either support or restrict hemp cultivation and its associated markets. They act as the bridge between government agencies and interest groups.

- Lawmakers in states like Colorado, Oregon, or Kentucky, for instance, have played a significant role in advancing hemp legalization and ensuring that favorable laws are enacted for growers, manufacturers, and consumers.

Key Interactions:

- Regulation & Legalization: In the early 2000s, the push from hemp lobbyists and industry groups led legislators to legalize hemp in certain states, setting the stage for broader national legal reforms.

- Policy Advocacy: Interest groups regularly lobby legislators to craft laws that favor their business interests. For example, they might advocate for less restrictive federal rules on how hemp can be grown or sold.

- Supportive Legislation: Legislators, especially those with hemp-growing constituents, often sponsor bills that favor the expansion of the hemp industry, offering incentives like tax breaks for hemp farmers or legal protections for hemp-derived CBD products.

- Challenges & Criticisms: One potential downside of an Iron Triangle in the hemp industry could be the close-knit, potentially non-transparent relationship between lobbyists, legislators, and government regulators, which can sometimes result in policies that favor corporate interests over public health or environmental concerns.

- Balancing the Market: As hemp becomes more commercially viable, the influence of large agricultural corporations could overpower smaller, independent farmers or processors in the sector.

In summary, the "Iron Triangle" in the hemp industry involves the strategic collaboration between the hemp industry (interest groups), government agencies, and legislators to shape policies and regulations that benefit the expansion and growth of the hemp market.

For more ask: Outline the Iron Triangle Opposing the Hemp Industry.

From the Texas Tribune: Hemp industry pushes back against Senate bill to ban THC

- Click here for the story. 

Six years after Texas lawmakers inadvertently triggered the state’s booming consumable hemp market, one chamber of the Legislature is pushing to shut down the industry by barring products that contain tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC.

Yet even with the backing of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, the powerful Texas Senate leader, the proposal to ban THC faces uncertain prospects in the House, where the hemp industry is bullish about getting lawmakers to tighten regulations rather than quashing most of their products altogether.

In the lower chamber, efforts to ban THC products have failed to gain traction, and this session no House lawmaker has filed anything akin to Senate Bill 3, which would outlaw products containing any amount of THC. House leadership has avoided weighing in on the matter, including Speaker Dustin Burrows, R-Lubbock, who did not respond to a request for comment.

Mark Bordas, executive director of the Texas Hemp Business Council, said his group is “cautiously optimistic” that House lawmakers will forgo a ban and accept “thoughtful regulations” such as restricting THC products to Texans 21 and older, requiring tamper-proof packaging, and barring sales within a certain distance of schools. Some have also proposed tighter and more consistent testing requirements to ensure hemp products do not contain excessive levels of THC.

- Click here for the bill.

- Fiscal Note.

- Bill Analysis.

- HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE - CHAPTER 443.

- Texas Senate Committee on State Affairs.

Due Process cases before the U.S. Supreme Court

From ScotusBlog.

- Glossip v. Oklahoma.

The court has jurisdiction to review the judgment of the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals; the prosecution violated its constitutional obligation to correct false testimony.

- Barrett v. United States.

Whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment permits two sentences for an act that violates 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and (j).

- Speech First, Inc. v. Whitten.

Whether university bias-response teams — official entities that solicit anonymous reports of bias, track them, investigate them, ask to meet with the perpetrators, and threaten to refer students for formal discipline — objectively chill students’ speech under the First Amendment.

 

Links - 3/3/25

- How a chance meeting helped Texas become the nation’s top beekeeping state.

- A surge in bee deaths is hurting Texas beekeepers — and could affect the price of produce.

- Wait, does America suddenly have a record number of bees?

- Mike Morath.

- Texas Health and Human Services org chart.

- HHS Executive Commissioner Cecile Erwin Young.

- TACC: Community College Day.

- When a smoke shop opened near a Montrose school, parents took action. Now the Lege is involved.

- Alex Azar.

- District of Columbia v. Heller.

- Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Mexico.

- Tariff.

- BRIEF FOR AMICUS CURIAE NATIONALSHOOTING SPORTS FOUNDATION, INC.,IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS.

- At Supreme Court, Mexico to Offer Culprit for Cartel Violence: Gun Makers.

- Texas Cemeteries and Crematories Association.

- Death care industry in the United States.

- Self-Evaluation Report - Texas Funeral Service Commission.

- History of the Coroner System.

- Coroner.

- pharmacy benefits manager

- Anti-Kickback Enforcement Act.

- Tobacco Politics.

- Space and Aeronautics Subcommittee Hearing - Step by Step: The Artemis Program and NASA's Path to Human Exploration of the Moon, Mars, and Beyond.

- what iron triangle surrounds the school voucher movement in Texas?
- what iron triangle surrounds opposition to the school voucher movement in Texas?
- what forces in the Texas legislature oppose school vouchers?
- what iron triangle surrounds policies involving cemeteries in Texas?
- What iron triangle exists surrounding the National Rifle Association?

 

Laugh Track Sound Effect | Soundboard Link 🔽🔽

Gun Cocking Sound Effect

Dear ChatGPT: What do we need to know about lobbying in Texas?

Lobbying in Texas plays a significant role in shaping the state's policies and laws. It is an important part of the political landscape, as interest groups, advocacy organizations, businesses, and individuals seek to influence lawmakers on a wide range of issues, from education to healthcare to taxes. Here’s what you need to know about lobbying in Texas:

1. The Role of Lobbying in Texas

• Influencing Legislation: Lobbyists aim to influence the actions of legislators by providing information, offering expertise, and advocating for or against specific bills or policies. Lobbying is seen as a way to ensure that lawmakers are aware of the interests and concerns of various stakeholders.
• Building Relationships: Lobbying often involves building relationships with legislators, their staff, and other key decision-makers in government. This can include meetings, testifying at hearings, and providing research or data that supports a particular stance on an issue.

2. Who Can Lobby in Texas?

• Professional Lobbyists: These are individuals or firms hired by organizations to represent their interests before the Texas Legislature and other government agencies. Professional lobbyists are required to register with the Texas Ethics Commission (TEC) and report their activities.
• Corporate and Organizational Lobbyists: Many businesses, industries, trade associations, and nonprofit organizations hire lobbyists to advocate for their positions on issues relevant to their interests. For example, a healthcare association may lobby for changes in healthcare policy, or an oil and gas company may lobby for tax breaks.
• Grassroots Lobbying: While professional lobbyists are common, grassroots lobbying is also significant in Texas. This involves mobilizing ordinary citizens to contact their legislators, participate in campaigns, or testify at hearings in support of a cause. Grassroots lobbying helps show that there is broad public support for a specific issue.

3. Lobbying Laws and Regulations in Texas

• Registration and Disclosure: Lobbyists in Texas are required to register with the Texas Ethics Commission. They must disclose the names of their clients, the issues they are lobbying on, and how much money they are spending on lobbying efforts. This includes paying for travel, food, or gifts for legislators.
• Limits on Gifts: Lobbyists are restricted in the types of gifts they can give to lawmakers. Texas law limits the value of gifts that lobbyists can provide to state legislators, their staff, and other state officials. For example, the value of individual gifts is capped at $250 per year.
• Reporting Requirements: Lobbyists are required to file regular reports with the Texas Ethics Commission, detailing the money they have spent on lobbying activities, including expenditures for meals, travel, and entertainment related to lobbying.

4. The Texas Ethics Commission (TEC)

• Oversight and Enforcement: The TEC oversees lobbying activities in Texas, ensuring that lobbyists comply with state laws and regulations. It also provides transparency by making lobbyist registration and expenditure reports available to the public.
• Enforcement: If a lobbyist violates lobbying rules, such as failing to register or submit accurate reports, they may face penalties, including fines.

5. Lobbying and Political Campaigns

• Political Action Committees (PACs): Many interest groups and industries use PACs to influence elections by contributing to the campaigns of candidates who support their positions. These PACs often play a significant role in both legislative elections and in pushing issues before the legislature.
• Direct vs. Indirect Lobbying: Direct lobbying involves directly contacting lawmakers to influence their decisions. Indirect lobbying, or "grassroots" lobbying, involves mobilizing public support to sway lawmakers or other government officials. Both forms of lobbying can be effective in influencing policy.

6. The “Revolving Door”

• Former Legislators Becoming Lobbyists: The "revolving door" phenomenon refers to former legislators or state officials who leave their public service positions and then become lobbyists for organizations seeking to influence policy. This raises concerns about conflicts of interest and the potential for undue influence over the legislative process.
• Revolving Door Restrictions: Texas has some rules in place to limit the potential for conflicts of interest. For example, former legislators are prohibited from lobbying the legislature for a certain period after leaving office (two years for state legislators and one year for other state officials).

7. Lobbying Impact on Policy and Lawmaking

• Powerful Interests: In Texas, some of the most influential lobbyists represent major industries such as oil and gas, healthcare, education, and business. These groups often have the resources to exert significant influence on state lawmakers and push their preferred policies.
• Bipartisan Influence: Lobbying in Texas is bipartisan, with lobbyists working across party lines to influence the legislature. Many lobbyists focus on building long-term relationships with both Republican and Democratic lawmakers to ensure their interests are represented, regardless of party control.

8. Public Perception and Criticism

• Concerns About "Big Money" in Politics: One common criticism of lobbying is that it allows wealthy and powerful interest groups to have more influence over the political process than ordinary citizens. Critics argue that this creates a system where laws are made to benefit the well-funded few, rather than the needs of the broader public.
• Calls for Reform: There have been ongoing calls for more transparency and reform in lobbying practices, such as stricter limits on campaign contributions or stronger regulations on lobbying activities to reduce the influence of money in politics.

9. Recent Trends and Developments

• Increased Lobbying on Education and Healthcare: In recent years, there has been a surge in lobbying related to education and healthcare, especially with debates over public school funding, school choice, and Medicaid expansion. Various stakeholders, including teachers' unions, business groups, and healthcare providers, have been heavily involved in pushing for policies in these areas.
• Tech and Energy Industry Influence: Texas, being a leader in the oil, gas, and tech industries, sees significant lobbying efforts from companies within these sectors. Issues such as energy regulations, environmental policies, and tech innovation often attract intense lobbying.

Conclusion:

Lobbying in Texas is a crucial element of the state's political process. It is highly regulated, and professional lobbyists must adhere to strict registration and disclosure requirements. While lobbying is a tool for interest groups to influence legislation, it also raises concerns about the role of money in politics and the balance of power between public and private interests. Understanding the regulations, the key players, and the influence of lobbying is essential for anyone involved in or interested in Texas politics.