Texas GOP Poised To Pass Law To Outlaw All Abortions

Texas Republicans have complete control of the Texas legislature -- and they have gone crazy. They are passing new laws that most people in Texas do not want.

They are close to passing a law that would let anyone carry a handgun without a license or training. They are close to passing one of the severest voter suppression laws in the nation. 

But perhaps worst of all, they are close to passing a bill that would deny a legal abortion to a women -- denying her control over her own body and forcing her into seeking a dangerous back-alley abortion. This bill is obviously unconstitutional, but they are counting on the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade -- and with the new justices Trump put on the Supreme Court, that is a real possibility.

Here is how NBC News describes the new bill pending in the Texas legislature:

Like several other states have moved to do, Texas would outlaw all abortions once cardiac activity in the fetus can be detected. That usually occurs around six weeks — only two weeks past a missed period, and before most women even know they’re pregnant. It would function as a near total ban on abortion, making no exceptions for rape or incest. In some cases, doctors who need to resolve a patient's miscarriage might also be prevented from doing so.

But it’s the enforcement provisions that make the Texas legislation unique. Everywhere else, only a few public officials can prosecute this kind of law. This legislation goes much further by allowing any person other than a state or local official to sue an abortion provider or someone who “aids and abets” another person in obtaining an abortion, whether or not they were directly involved and whether or not they’re located in Texas.

In other words, if a Texan becomes pregnant as a result of rape and is provided information about how to obtain an abortion by a rape counselor, the rapist could sue that counselor if the survivor had what the state deems an “illegal” abortion. The rapist could also sue the doctor who provided the abortion and anyone else — like a family member — who supported them in getting the abortion.

Similarly, someone who provides funds for an abortion could be sued, even if they didn’t know that’s what the money was being used for. And since anyone who "intends to engage” in providing an outlawed abortion can also be held liable, it’s possible to imagine that the rapist or other party could sue the provider in advance of the procedure to stop it from happening, denying the victim the ability to have the abortion.

These are just a few scenarios. By allowing individual lawsuits as opposed to relying on the state to act against any abortion offenses, the measure unleashes an army of abortion opponents to sue and harass providers, counselers and activists. Once it’s signed, courts could be flooded with potentially frivolous and harassing lawsuits. . . .

Let’s be clear: Texas is about to pass a law that not only violates the U.S. Constitution as determined by Roe v. Wade, but also changes the very nature of enforcing laws — shifting them from state officials to the mob.

Essentially, the Senate and House bills create an almost unlimited potential for defendants, contradicting the Texas Constitution’s minimum requirements to bring civil legal action — i.e., to have standing — in the state. In doing so, they subvert core constitutional and democratic principles in a direct affront to our system of government.

Ball Is Back In Abbott's Court On Racist Capitol Plaque

(This photo is by John Jordan for The Texas Tribune.)

The plaque above has been prominently displayed in the Texas State Capitol for the last six decades. It should be removed. First, because it contains at least two obvious lies -- that the Civil War was not a rebellion (it clearly was), and that it was not fought to sustain slavery (it clearly was). Second, because the obviously racist plaque is offensive to many Texans (and visitors to the state) -- not just minorities, but all people who believe in equality and diversity.

But the Texas governor (Gregg Abbott) and the Texas Legislature (mostly Republican) have been playing a political game over who has the authority to remove the plaque. Abbott says it must be done by a vote in the legislature. The legislature says Abbott must remove it through the Texas State Preservation Board (which he controls).

Neither Abbott nor the Republican-controlled legislature wants to offend the racists in their party's base. The 2018 election scared them, and they don't want to run off any voters they might need to fend off the growing electoral power of Democrats in Texas.

A ruling by the state's Attorney General seems to have put the ball back in Abbott's court. The Attorney General published a ruling last Wednesday that said Abbott's Preservation Board has the authority to remove the plaque without legislative action.

The truth is that either Abbott or the legislature could remove the plaque -- and should do so as soon as possible. Will either do it? I doubt it. They love racist votes more than they honor truth and decency.

How much longer will decent Texans be shamed by that vile and odious plaque?

Texas Legislature Still Plans To Defund Planned Parenthood

In the last legislative session, the Texas legislature tried to completely defund Planned Parenthood (in spite of the fact that only 3% of what they do is abortion, and no government money goes toward providing any abortions). They were thwarted when President Obama threatened to cut off Medicaid funding for the state if they defunded Planned Parenthood.

But they no longer have that obstacle. With Trump about to be sworn in, there will be no one in the federal government to stop the defunding, and Texas legislators are already saying they will do that when they meet next month.

The only thing that defunding will accomplish is to deny health care to thousands of Texas women, especially poor women in the state. It won't stop a single abortion. But those legislators know that. This is just a sully bit of political theater meant to please right-wing fundamentalists (who hate Planned Parenthood).

At least one conservative newspaper has had enough of this nonsense. The editorial board of the reliably conservative Fort Worth Star-Telegram is calling for the legislature to abandon its war on Planned Parenthood. Here is their editorial:

Fighting Planned Parenthood isn’t worth the battle, but that doesn’t seem to stop officials from taking up arms.

In December 2015, Gov. Greg Abbott pledged to defund Planned Parenthood. Now, after a year, the state has issued a final notice to the healthcare organization. Planned Parenthood could lose its $3.1 million Medicaid funding.

The whole battle between the state and Planned Parenthood has been a frustrating, arduous ordeal — all over something that taxpayers don’t even pay for.

It’s all brought on by the abortion services provided by Planned Parenthood. That’s done by a separate entity from the Medicaid-eligible health programs, and no public dollars fund it.

The governor's office says Planned Parenthood is “no longer capable of performing medical services in a professionally competent, safe, legal and ethical manner” after allegations last year that the organization sold fetal tissue for research. 

Planned Parenthood has already filed a lawsuit. Federal officials warned the state that booting the healthcare provider from Medicaid could be illegal. Other states have failed in attempts to do the same thing.

So all this trouble could be for nothing.

We get that some state officials really don’t like Planned Parenthood, but couldn’t all the energy and taxpayer money in this fight be used somewhere else? Maybe to fix the broken Child Protective Services?

It would be a better use of state’s time and money.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article122318964.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/editorials/article122318964.html#storylink=cpy

Texas Budget - Smoke & Mirrors (& Lies)

If you listen to Texas Governor Rick Perry you might think the Texas legislature has just done the impossible. Perry says they have balanced the budget, closing a $27 billion budget hole for the next biennium, without raising any taxes and leaving $6 billion untouched in the state's "Rainy Day Fund". If that was true it really would have been an incredible feat -- worthy of a superhero. But it isn't. It's just an illusion performed with smoke and mirrors (although a trick any magician/bookkeeper would be proud of).

The state constitution requires a balanced budget, but the Texas budget for the next biennium is not truly balanced. The legislature just did some bookkeeping tricks and put off paying for billions in some programs. They just shoved some bills off on the next legislature which meets in 2013 (and is now assured of facing the same kind of debt this legislature did -- and refused to deal with).

First, let's look at that "untouched" $6 billion dollars in the Rainy Day Fund. Like it or not, that money is actually as good as spent. You see, the state couldn't figure out how to pay for Medicaid without either raising taxes or using the Rainy Day Fund, so they just left it out of the budget. This gives the illusion of a balanced budget and an unused Rainy Day Fund, but it is just an illusion. The Medicaid must be paid for eventually, and it will pretty much eat up all of that $6 billion in the Rainy Day Fund when it is paid (but this won't have to happen until after the 2012 election, so the GOP can go into that election with voters ignorant of this truth).

This is even admitted by some of the Republicans. Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherford) said, "The Rainy Day Fund is probably already spent with the Medicaid costs and public education." Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) said, "There's been a lot of misinformation out there that there's $6 billion dollars in the fund that's not been used. It's been used."

And then there are the games the legislature played with education funding. First, they funded education as though there would be no growth in the student population for the next biennium -- a physical impossibility since Texas is one of the fasted growing states in the nation population-wise.

Then, after outright slashing more than $4 billion from education funding, they voted to delay a $2.3 billion payment to the state's schools for the 2012-13 biennium until the first day of 2014. That means the new legislature meeting to find the 2014-15 biennium will have to come up with that money immediately -- before they can start planning the 2014-15 budget. In other words, they just kicked the can another two years down the road.

Just those little bookkeeping tricks with Medicaid and education means the budget is actually about $10 billion out of balance (assuming the growth in Medicaid and student population doesn't push it up even further).

As for not raising taxes, they isn't strictly true either. While the sales tax has remained at the same rate, the state has raised all kinds of "fees". They have also taken money the public was told had been dedicated for certain things (like specialty license plates that was supposed to feed money into cancer research) and put a huge chuck of the money into the general fund -- which is nothing short of legalized theft. And the huge cuts to education will probably force many school districts across the state to raise property taxes.

Governor Perry and his GOP cohorts can brag about the new budget all they want, but the truth is they did not balance the budget, they did use the Rainy Day Fund up, and they raised taxes. They have violated every pledge they made to the voting public.

GOP State Senator Disrespects Texas History & Culture

The Texas legislature is currently considering a rather stupid bill that would outlaw "sanctuary cities" in the state of Texas -- even though no one can name a single one (if they exist at all). The main thing the bill would do is to turn local and state police into immigration officers, giving them the authority to question those they stop who may not be citizens (Hispanics) and arrest them for violating federal immigration law.

This bill is nothing more than a political bone to be thrown to the brain-dead teabaggers who control the Republican Party in Texas. Anyone who thinks turning local and state police into immigration officials is a reasonable way to deal with the more than 11 million undocumented aliens in this country is not living in the real world. It would not only hurt farmers, ranchers and business people, but it would be physically impossible to actually arrest and deport any significant portion of that population.

But while it is just a false solution to the immigration problem, it could have a seriously negative effect on our communities -- especially in the area of criminal justice. That is why police officials in El Paso, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio, Ft. Worth, and Austin are opposing the bill. The police in these and other Texas cities have spent decades trying to form a trusting and workable alliance with the undocumented community, and their success in this has paid real benefits -- both in the reporting of criminal behavior and in helping police to catch the culprits and convict them. If these local police must act as immigration officers they will lose the trust and help of the undocumented community, making the state a more dangerous place for all citizens.

But this is already understood by many (except for the teabaggers who think complex problems must have simple answers). What I really wanted to discuss was something that happened as this bill was being considered in a Senate committee. Here is how the Fort Worth Star-telegram described it:

At one point, a man with the Austin Immigrants' Rights Coalition testified in Spanish with someone else translating his comments into English. The man mentioned he came to America in 1988. After about 2 minutes, Sen. Chris Harris, R-Arlington, interrupted him.

"Why aren't you speaking in English?" Harris asked.

The man, clearly flustered, explained that he was more comfortable testifying in Spanish, his first langauge, since it was his first time delivering testimony.

"it's insulting to us," Harris said. "It is very insulting. If he knows English, he needs to be speaking in English."

Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, was quick to add in that, just like witnesses, "Senators are also entitled to speak their personal point of view and may not be speaking for everybody as well."

The man finished his remarks in Spanish.

Frankly, I am shocked at the remarks of the GOP senator. He is obviously ignorant of Texas history and culture. The fact is that Spanish has been spoken in Texas since the mid-1500's, and it was not until nearly 300 years later that English-speakers began to populate the state. To question anyone's right to speak Spanish in Texas is simply ludicrous.

I know that some teabaggers would respond that the Texas War of Independence from Mexico changed that. But this was not a war of an English culture defeating a Hispanic culture. Many of those who died in the Alamo and many of those in Sam Houston's victorious army were Hispanics (and Spanish speakers). It was a war for independence -- not a cultural war. And both as a country and then as a state Texas has always had a significant Hispanic accent -- in culture and language. It is something that real Texans are proud of.

The gentleman testifying in Spanish before the committee did not insult Harris or any of his colleagues. But Sen. Harris did insult all the citizens of Texas (of all races, colors, and languages). And he showed no respect for the history and culture of the state he is supposed to represent. He should be ashamed of himself.

Texas Dems Nix Silly New Gun Laws

Senate Republicans in the Texas legislature tried to pass a couple of new (and very bad) gun laws in the current session of the legislature. I fully expected these laws to pass the legislature since the Republicans hold large majorities in both houses, but it looks like the Democrats have been able to kill one of the bills and take the worst part out of the other.

The first was a bill that would allow people with a concealed carry license to carry handguns on the campus of public colleges and universities. Senate Republicans loved this bill even though officials from nearly every Texas university testified that they opposed the bill because it would make their campuses far more dangerous places.

Democrats didn't have the votes in the Senate to defeat this bill outright, but they were able to keep it from coming to the floor for a vote, where it would surely have passed (since it takes more votes to bring a bill up for a vote than it takes to pass the bill). Undeterred, the Republicans approved the bill as an amendment to a Democratic bill regarding college financing matters.

I guess they thought attaching it to a Democratic bill would assure its passage. They were wrong. The sponsor of the bill withdrew her bill rather than send it up for a vote with the gun amendment attached. The Republicans finally were able to attach the amendment to another bill which finally received Senate approval and was sent to the House (where Republicans have a two to one advantage). It looked like they might finally get the gunlaw passed.

But that didn't happen. While the House Democrats couldn't vote the bill down, they could use House rules to defeat it. Democrats raised a point-of-order -- namely that the gun amendment did not pertain to the bill to which it was attached (a finance bill). That point-of-order excised the amendment from the bill and probably killed it for this session of the legislature (since there are less than two weeks left in this session).

The other bill regarded the legislators themselves. Senate Republicans took a bill that would allow people like District Attorneys and judges to carry concealed weapons (with a permit) into places where weapons are currently prohibited (schools, churches, bars, etc.). This gives them a right that other Texans (except for police) do not have. But it makes a bit of sense. These are law enforcement professionals who know and understand the law, and they may well have created some enemies while performing their job duties.

But the senators decided they should also have the privilege of carrying firearms in places where other Texans cannot, so they added legislators to the list of people who can carry firearms anywhere. That was a scary proposition considering some of the nut-jobs that have been elected to the legislature -- people that seem to have no idea of what the laws are or what the Constitution permits. But the Senate passed the bill and sent it to the House.

Once again they were disappointed. A House committee has removed legislators from the law, and it now looks like it will be passed without their inclusion. With the session so close to its end it is very unlikely they will be able to get themselves back into the bill. The general feeling of Democrats was expressed by Rep. Pete Gallego of Alpine, who said the legislators shouldn't have rights unavailable to other Texans.

The Democrats, because of their tiny numbers, have been unable to block many bad bills in this session including a bad redistricting bill, a voter ID bill, and a draconian financing bill that will cost thousands of teachers and state employees their jobs. But I applaud their efforts on these two gun bills. Texas is a little safer because of their efforts.

School Vouchers - The Monster That Won't Die

We already know that the Texas legislature is going to significantly damage Texas schools in this legislative session. This is a foregone conclusion. In spite of the fact that Texas already is near the bottom of all states in "per student" funding for its schools, the legislature is proposing that billions of dollars be cut from education funding. We don't know just how much yet, since the House and Senate have come up with different figures -- the Senate wants about $5 billion in cuts while the House wants about $9 billion (and it may take a special session this summer to hammer out the difference since this legislative session end in about two weeks).

Those proposals are devastating to Texas schools. The Senate plan could result in the lay-off of up to 50,000 teachers (and the House plan could double that number). This would have to result in bigger class sizes -- a move that would almost certainly exacerbate the state's huge drop-out rate (already about 30%). Anyone who thinks Texas schools could absorb these huge cuts without the quality of education being affected is living in a dream world.

But now the far-right anti-public education teabaggers in the legislature are proposing an amendment to the education funding bills that will take even more money out of public education. They want the state of Texas to issue vouchers that would pay for part of the expensive tuition at private religious schools (schools that currently get no state education funds).

Where would the money come from to issue these private religious school vouchers? It would come from the already depleted funds going to public schools! In other words, the public schools would have to pay for students to attend private religious schools (even though their own funding is being radically cut).

This is nothing less than a war on public education from those on the far right. And it must be stopped. These people don't believe every child has a right to a free public education. Like their mean-spirited stance on health care, they believe education is only for those who can afford to pay for it.

They will tell you the vouchers, now called "taxpayer savings grants", will allow poor and working class kids to get a private education. That is a lie! These vouchers will only pay a part of the cost of a private religious school education, meaning only those who already can afford this will get these vouchers -- while poor and working class students will be stuck in the financially-depleted public schools. This is nothing more than a tax rebate for the upper middle class and the rich.

The Texas legislature defeated voucher proposals in 2007 and 2009, but this monster refuses to die. And with more far-right legislators serving than ever before, vouchers have their best chance ever to be approved. The Texas Freedom Network has listed 8 reasons why vouchers would be a bad idea. I present them here for my Texas readers (who hopefully will pressure their representatives to once again kill this monster off):

1. Even a pilot voucher program would siphon hundreds of millions of dollars in public tax dollars out of neighborhood public schools to fund private and religious schools. Public schools are already struggling to pay for equipment and other resources they need to teach our children.

2. Vouchers don’t create ’choice’ for parents and kids; they create ’choice’ for private schools at taxpayers’ expense. The private voucher experiment in progress in Edgewood ISD confirms that private schools will use vouchers to recruit the most talented and academically motivated kids out of public schools at taxpayers’ expense, leaving behind the children who can’t get into private school.

3. Despite the loss of some students to vouchers, schools will not see a reduction in their bond debt, personnel and program costs. School boards would be left holding the bag-forced to make up their budget shortfall by raising the property taxes of local businesses and citizens.

4. The pro-voucher lobby’s promises are misleading. Elite private schools are very selective and a voucher would not cover tuition. Many private schools would refuse vouchers if state accountability tests or standards were required.

5. Due to the huge sums of tax money that would be newly available under a voucher scheme, fly-by-night schools would open, looking only to make a profit. The state would be powerless to prevent these unaccredited and unqualified schools from taking taxpayer funds.

6. Spending public tax dollars for religious schools violates the state and federal constitutional separation of church and state. Hundreds of clergy from across the state have decried the use of vouchers as an affront to our constitutionally guaranteed protections.

7. There is no credible evidence that vouchers improve the educational achievement of students who use them, while there is abundant proof that smaller classes, early reading intervention, a longer school year, and other reforms do work. Voucher schemes represent a billion dollar long-shot gamble with our children’s lives and our state’s future.

8. Vouchers would allow us to shirk our responsibility to provide a first class education for EVERY CHILD in Texas.

Texas Republicans Raise Some Taxes - Steal Others

Before the last election the Republicans running for office in Texas made a rather ludicrous promise to the voters. They said they could balance the budget and make up a $27 billion deficit in the next biennium without raising any taxes or severely hurting any services delivered by the state. If their current budget proposals (either the Senate or the House version) are passed they will break both of those promises.

It is obvious that services will be cut and will affect nearly all Texans. In education alone they are proposing to cut between $5 and $9 billion -- a move that would mean the layoff of as many as 100,000 teachers and other school employees. And that's just the start. Nearly every state agency will be cut, especially the social service agencies providing services for children, the poor, and the elderly. But that was to be expected, since Republicans love to cut programs that aren't needed by their rich donors.

A little more surprising, at least for those who actually believed the Republican campaign promises, is the fact that they are also raising taxes (even though they still claim they aren't). They have raised fees for services provided by many state agencies and other things. They would like voters to believe that fees are not taxes, but they are. The fact is that more money will be coming out of citizen pockets (and anytime the government takes money from a citizen for any reason it is a tax, regardless of what state officials want to call it).

And those aren't the only taxes that have been raised. They have also passed a bill that will insure internet retailers can't avoid charging a sales tax to their Texas customers. The Republicans will try to say this is not a tax raise since this tax was supposed to already be collected (according to the comptroller). But the point is that it hasn't been collected in the past and now will be. That's more dollars coming out of the citizens' pockets that wasn't prior to this legislative session, and you can bet that those who now have to pay it consider that a tax raise.

But these same legislators are doing something else that is even more dishonest and unethical than just lying about raising taxes. They are also stealing tax money dedicated for a specific purpose and using it instead to pay for their own incompetence in funding the general budget. The Texas Observer has written an excellent article exposing some of this theft and misuse of tax money by the legislature. Here is some of the fund misuse they discovered:

* Every electric customer pays a monthly fee of $0.65. This money is supposed to be used to help the poor and the elderly pay their electric bills. But this legislature has decided to steal three-fourths of that money to put into the general fund and help balance the budget. This is nothing less than stealing from the poor and elderly (so the rich can pay less taxes -- like the sales tax cut on yachts costing $250,000 or more).

* There is a sporting goods tax on items like hunting and fishing gear, camping equipment, and bicycles. This tax raises about $100 million a year and is supposed to be used to purchase parkland, improve existing parks, and pay for some conservation efforts. Legislators have decided to steal three-fourths of this money and put it in the general fund also.

* The state sells several specialty license plates where the public has been promised that the money would be used for projects at the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (including the Texas Wildlife Action Fund). But most of that money is now going into the general fund instead.

* There are also specialty license plates supposed to fund cancer prevention, veterans benefits, and advocates for abused & neglected children. At least half of this money has been taken by the legislature and put into the general fund.

* Then there is the Driver Responsibility Program that puts a surtax on Texas drivers who get traffic tickets. This program has not lived up to expectations, but still gathers $150 million a year -- which was supposed to be used to fund trauma care facilities and help pay for the medical care of uninsured patients. Guess where most of that money is really going. That's right -- the general fund.

* Then there's a tax on chewing tobacco (to help rural doctors pay student loans), a tax on heavy trucks (that's supposed to go into the state's clean air program), and a fee on CPA licenses (to help pay for student scholarships). All of these funds have also been raided by the legislature.

I seriously doubt these are the only funds being raided to cover for the incompetence of state Republican leaders. Personally I consider this use of dedicated taxpayer funds in a manner in which they were not authorized to be used an even greater sin than lying about raising taxes. And in its own way can be considered not only theft but a tax raise, since the funds are not being used as Texas citizens were told they would be used.

It would be bad enough that these Republican legislators lied to the public and raised taxes, but it is even worse to steal from the poor, the elderly, abused children, cancer patients, veterans, and many others. But while telling the truth doesn't seem to be a Republican value, lying to and stealing from the citizens certainly seems to be.

Texas Legislature Displays Its Misogyny

The Republican-dominated and male-dominated Texas legislature still hasn't solved its deficit problem, but it has taken time out to display its misogyny. After all, they can't have Texas women thinking they actually have control over their own bodies. That might cause them to think they should be equal to men and not second-class citizens (and no self-respecting Republican politician could ever allow that).

Both the House and the Senate have passed the "Sonogram Bill" and it will now go to the governor (who has already indicated he will sign it). This bill would force a doctor to give a sonogram to any woman wanting to have an abortion. Although the woman can't be compelled to view the sonogram, she would be forced to listen to a description by the doctor of what the sonogram shows (or what the doctor says it shows).

Proponents of this terrible bill said they wanted to "make sure women understand what an abortion entails." That has to be one of the most misogynistic ideas I've ever heard. It infers that women are stupid creatures that have no idea of what is going on in their own bodies. Frankly, anyone who thinks a woman is not fully knowledgable and hasn't given serious thought to the choice she is making in asking for an abortion is a complete and blithering idiot.

But this is not really about educating women -- it is about punishing them for disagreeing with the social views of right-wing fundamentalists. As Rep. Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth) said, "The purpose of this bill is to traumatize women who are seeking an abortion." No woman should be punished, humiliated or traumatized for exercising her constitutional right to control her own body.

The Republican legislators think they can shame women into having babies they may not be psychologically or financially prepared to have. And making matters even worse, these same legislators are currently in the process of cutting medical and social programs that would help a woman that chose to have a baby. While they are very interested in protecting a bit of protoplasm, they have absolutely no interest in helping real living women or children.

These legislators should be very ashamed of themselves. But that would mean they have a conscience and the capacity to feel shame -- neither of which seems to be true.

Texas Republicans And Their Gun Bills

The teabagger Republicans are running the state of Texas. They have their man in the governor's mansion and have fairly large majorities in both houses of the legislature. So it shouldn't surprise anyone that some new gun laws would be proposed -- and I don't mean laws that would restrict ownership or carrying of guns, but instead these would be laws loosening the gun regulations. The only real surprise is that no new gun laws have passed the legislature yet.

For a while it looked like they would pass a law allowing adults to carry concealed weapons on college campuses (even though most college presidents and officials lobbied hard against that bill). But a parliamentary procedure has kept that bill from coming to the floor of the senate for a vote. A bill cannot come to the floor unless at least 22 senators vote to allow it to come up for a vote, and the bill's sponsor (Sen. Jeff Wentworth of San Antonio) was only able to corral about 20 votes.

It looked like that bill might be dead, but NRA-type Republicans are nothing if not persistent. Wentworth found a bill that he thought could get to the senate floor (a bill to allow colleges more flexibility in funding rules) and tried to take his own bill onto it as an amendment. An amendment only needs 16 votes and he could easily get that many.

But he didn't talk to the bill's author, Sen. Judith Zaffirini of Laredo -- a Democrat who is opposed to Wentworth's gun bill. Sen. Zaffirini has withdrawn her bill and says she will kill it before she allows it to go to the floor carrying the college gun amendment. So it looks like Wentworth's second (and sneakiest) attempt to get his gun bill passed has also failed.

This doesn't necessarily mean he won't finally get the bill passed, but it's going to be a lot more difficult now that it has been stopped for a second time. After all, this session of the legislature has a lot of important bills they still haven't passed and time is starting to run out. They still need to finish redistricting, and they need to pass a budget (that makes up for an impending $27 billion deficit).

But while Wentworth's silly bill is having trouble in the Senate, an even dumber bill has just been voted out of a House committee. The Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety has approved a bill that would allow Texans to openly carry handguns. The bill would simply remove the word "concealed" from the current concealed-carry law in Texas. That means anyone who has a license (which any idiot with a few dollars and no criminal record can get) can wear a gun on their hip (or even two).

And there are plenty of Texans who will start wearing a gun. They all picture themselves as "Rambo" (but really more closely resemble their relative pictured above). They seem to relish a return to the old days when people had shootouts on Main Street instead of relying on law enforcement for protection. About the only good thing this would do is that people can see who's carrying a gun from a distance, and go another direction. Of course the criminals would be forewarned also and probably just shoot first and then rob their dead bodies.

As I have said before on this blog, the Second Amendment does guarantee citizens the right to own firearms. But it doesn't give them the right to be stupid about it, and it doesn't give the legislature the right to create an even more dangerous situation than already exists. Both of these are dumb bills and should never be allowed to become law.

Legislators - Cowards Or Just More Important Than The Rest Of Us ?

Once again the Republican-controlled Texas legislature proves that sanity is not one of its strongest points. Now they seem to think they are special and should have privileges that no other Texans have.

Bills have been introduced in both houses of the Texas legislature that would allow legislators (just them and no one else) to carry concealed weapons anywhere they want to -- even places where concealed weapons are barred by state law (like bars, churches, amusement parks, hospitals, schools, and sporting events). The legislators think they should be immune to the laws that cover everyone else.

Now there are only two possible reasons for this silly law -- they either think they are more important than other people, or they are afraid to mingle with their own constituents without being armed.

Rep. Lon Burnam (D-Fort Worth), who opposes the law and doesn't even have a concealed-carry license, said of the law, "I think its another example of legislators trying to live above the law. It sets a really bad example. It's embarrassing, frankly." Burnam is right. Far too often, both state and federal elected (and appointed) officials think they should be above the law they expect other citizens to obey.

I thought we had settled this question with the impeachment and resignation of Richard Nixon, and decided once and for all that no one, not even a president, is above the law. But then we had the failed presidency of George Bush where he and Cheney played fast and loose with the laws of this country (and international law). And they defended that by saying the things a president does (like torture and starting illegal wars) are not illegal because a president can't break the law (at least not a Republican one).

Now that same kind of thinking seems to have crept down to the state government level, where Republican officials now think they should be able to create special rules for themselves -- rules that wouldn't apply to anyone else. This kind of thinking needs to be stopped right now, because it has no place in a constitutional democracy (where all citizens are supposed to have equal rights).

But some legislators are counting on the "fear" option to get these special rights. Rep. Tim Kleinschmidt (R-Lexington) says, "It's a safety factor for elected officials who dedicate many hours of their lives to public service. You're afraid of that 1 in 10,000 or 1 in 100,000 that shows up and you are the target because you are in the public eye."

That's a ridiculous argument. The chances are great that if someone wants you dead then they will be able to do it (as long as they're willing to sacrifice themselves). It only takes a split second and won't matter whether you are armed or not. Think of the assassination of Robert Kennedy or the shooting of Rep. Giffords. The honest person would have to admit that the same thing would have happened even if they had each been armed.

If a legislator is too afraid to meet with his/her constituents in a place where guns are prohibited, then maybe it's time for that legislator to resign and let someone else take over that job -- someone who's not afraid to do it, and someone who will obey the same laws all Texans are expected to obey. There are plenty of people in both parties who can do the job without special privileges.

And one more thought. Considering the nuts many voters have sent to the legislature (in both parties), would you be comfortable having them toss back drinks in a bar and knowing they are carrying a loaded weapon? I wouldn't. Too many of them scare the hell out of me even unarmed.

This is just a very bad law and has no place in a constitutional democracy. It needs to be killed and never brought up again.

While Fires Rage, Republicans Want To Cut Firefighting Funds

If any more evidence was needed to show the ridiculous nature of the budget cuts being proposed by the Republican-controlled Texas legislature, this could be it. As you may know, the past couple of weeks has seen wildfires raging across large sections of the state (see above map for currently affected areas). And these are just the latest fires -- a few weeks ago the Panhandle area was also hit by fires and more than 50 homes were burned down near Amarillo.

The reason these fires have been so devastating can be traced to the incredibly dry conditions in the state and high winds -- two conditions that are not uncommon in Texas in most years.
And since drought conditions and windy days are pretty commonplace, one would expect the legislature to adequately fund fire prevention and firefighting measures throughout the state -- especially in rural areas where these fires can quickly cover large areas. Sadly, that is not the case.

In fact, while these fires are still raging, both houses of the state legislature have proposed budgets that would cut funds for the firefighting efforts by the Texas Forest Service (TFS) by nearly 40%. TFS currently has a budget for this of $42 million. The legislature wants to cut that budget down to only $25.8 million (61.4% of the current budget).

Texas relies heavily on volunteer fire departments to fight fires in rural areas, and lacking their own revenue sources, these volunteer departments rely heavily on state funds for new equipment purchases and fire prevention programs. The cuts to the TFS would eliminate much of the funding for this, leaving these departments ill-equipped and unprepared to fight the rural fires. And when these volunteer departments can handle the job, the TFS must ask for firefighting help from other states -- which costs four times as much money and delays the firefighting effort.

These cuts seem even more insane when compared to the budget deficit. Texas currently faces a budget deficit of about $27 billion for the next biennium (and the legislature is refusing to raise taxes or broaden the sales tax base). But the cuts to the firefighting efforts of TFS would amount to only 0.0006% of that budget deficit -- just a tiny drop in a large bucket. Considering the disastrous consequences the cuts will probably have, this legislative move just makes no sense at all.

But this is the kind of thing that happens when a political party puts teabagger politics ahead of common sense budgeting.

The Wish

One of the funniest (and most perceptive) bloggers in the Lone Star State is the inimitable Juanita Jean (owner of the world's most dangerous beauty salon, inc.). She is always worth reading, but every now and then she comes up with a gem that's just too good not to pass on. This little joke is one of those:

I met a fairy today, who said she would grant me one wish.

“I want to live forever,” I said.

“Sorry,” said the fairy, “I’m not allowed to grant wishes like that.”

“Fine,” I said, “then I want to die after the Texas Legislature gets their heads out of their butts.”

“Oh, you crafty witch,” said the fairy.

Another Bigoted Bill In The Texas Legislature

The person pictured above is State Representative Leo Berman (R-Tyler). He is probably the most bigoted person in the entire Texas Legislature -- a feat that's not easy to accomplish. His personal crusade is against Hispanics -- especially those who have immigrated to this country.

Berman has introduced many anti-immigrant bills in the Texas legislature -- most of them unconstitutional and so radical that even many of his Republican cohorts don't want to be associated with them. He has introduced bills that would deny birthright citizenship, force immigrants to live in designated areas of the state, deny immigrants access to higher education, and make English the state's official language (even though Spanish was spoken in Texas hundreds of years before English).

Now he has introduced a new bill aimed at Hispanics in general. His bill would put an 8% tax on any money order sent to Mexico or any other Latin American nation. He shows his anti-Hispanic bias by excluding Canada, Europe, Asia or African nations from the new tax on money orders -- it would only apply to the Latin American nations. Immigrants, legal or not, from all other nations would not be included (meaning this is strictly an anti-Hispanic bill and not an anti-immigrant bill). His bill would allow a citizen to get his/her tax refunded after he/she proved citizenship in Texas.

Berman says his new bill would produce about $60 million a year for the state. He wants the money designated to agencies that provide for indigent care. Texas Comptroller Susan Combs said it would be very expensive for her department, both to collect the tax, audit businesses supposed to collect it, and to verify citizenship and refund money to citizens. In other words there would be little, if any, positive revenue from the new Hispanic tax.

When asked why he was targeting the Latin American countries with his new tax, he came up with a couple of reasons. He claimed that Hispanic immigrants are bringing many illnesses to this country like polio and plague. He also said that 99% of those receiving indigent care are Hispanics. Both of these charges are not just bogus, but also ridiculous.

The fact is that the last case of polio in Texas was in 1995 (about 16 years ago) and was contracted by a citizen who traveled abroad. The only incident of plague in the last 10 years was contracted on a hunting trip to New Mexico in 2006. Outside of Berman's bigoted brain there is absolutely no evidence that Hispanic immigrants pose any kind of health danger in Texas (or any other state).

As for the other charge, that is patently ridiculous on its face, but let's examine it anyway. According to the latest census, the population of Texas breaks down this way:
White (non-Hispanic)...............11,397,345
Hispanic...............9,460,921
African-American...............2,886,825
Asian...............948,426

Also according to the census, the following percentages of each group are identified as living in poverty (which would be a requirement for receiving indigent care) -- Whites (9.4%), African-Americans (25.8%), Hispanics (25.3%), and Asians (12.5%). Assuming these figures are roughly the same for the state of Texas, then the following figures would qualify for indigent care:
White...............1,071,350 (24.75%)
Hispanic...............2,393,613 (55.30%)
African-American...............744,800 (17.21%)
Asian...............118,553 (2.74%)
Total...............4,328,316 (100%)

As you can see, the most that Hispanics could make up in the indigent care facilities is slightly more than 55% -- a long way from the 99% residing only in Berman's bigoted (but obviously small) brain.

This is a stupid tax to begin with (since it would cost as much to collect as it would raise), and is obviously a bigoted one. If the new tax is passed it should apply to all money orders -- not just the ones sent to Latin America. But this tax should never see the light of day. Hopefully, the Legislature will see that it doesn't even get out of committee -- like most of Berman's other silly bills.

It's Government Rape !

Republicans are very good at talking about freedom and equality but they seldom live up to their words, especially when it comes to women. They have fought for years to keep women as second-class citizens -- citizens who shouldn't even have the right to control over their own bodies. Now the Texas legislature is about to cross a line that should never be crossed. In their religious zeal they are about to mandate a physical intrusion inside a woman's body in an effort to deny that woman a choice on whether to have an abortion or not.

It sounds innocuous enough the way male legislators tell it. The proposed law would mandate a sonogram be performed on any women seeking a legal abortion -- a sonogram that she would most likely be forced to witness. But it is much worse than that, because this is no ordinary sonogram. Here's what State Rep. Carol Alvarado says about the procedure, "This is a trans-vaginal probe. Colleagues, this is what we're talking about. It's a very intrusive process; this is not the jelly on the belly that many of you are thinking about. This is government intrusion at its best."

At the early stages at which legal abortions are done the "jelly on the belly" sonograms would not produce the images these male lawmakers desire. No, they want to mandate a probe be inserted into a woman's vagina -- an unwanted invasion of both body and privacy. Isn't sticking an unwanted thing, no matter what that thing is, into any orifice of a woman without her permission normally called rape? Is it any less a rape when mandated by the government?

Now some of you may be thinking that this is different because it's not sexual in nature. That's ridiculous. Rape is never about sex -- it's about control and power. And that's exactly what this law is about -- control and power over another person's body. This may be government sanctioned, but it is rape nonetheless. It is just a way to humiliate and control a woman.

As far as I'm concerned this is just more sick and perverted behavior by the right-wing fundamentalist Republicans -- and it crosses the line of common decency. As a Texan I'm ashamed that other Texans can even consider such a vile law.

UT Chancellor Says NO To Guns On Campus

The United States leads the world in the number of firearm deaths that occur every year. Here in Texas, there are 11 people killed by guns for every 100,000 people in the state each year. In their infinite wisdom, the Republican leadership in the state has decided that the solution to too many gun deaths is to put guns in the hands of more people. They reason that if more people have guns, there will be fewer gun deaths. I know that doesn't make sense, but then Texas Republicans are not known for making sense.

Texas already has a concealed carry law that allows people over 21 to carry a firearm nearly anywhere (even into the State Capitol building itself). There are still a few places a gun cannot be carried -- like bars, schools, colleges, churches. But the state's Republican legislators are trying to fix that. There is currently a bill in the state legislature that would allow adults 21 and older to carry a concealed firearm on the campus of state colleges and universities, and it looks like it has a good chance of passage.

But not everyone thinks this is a good idea. University of Texas Chancellor Francisco G. Cigarroa believes it would just make his campus a more dangerous place. And in a last-ditch effort to stop the insane bill, he has written a letter to Governor Perry. Here is the text of that letter:

Dear Governor Perry:


As the legislature considers the important and sensitive issue of concealed handguns on campuses of institutions of higher education, I would be remiss in my duties as chancellor of the state's largest university system if I did not convey my concerns regarding this issue.


I greatly respect and value the authority of the legislature to make this important public policy decision, and I recognize the variety of opinions surrounding it. The University of Texas system has worked diligently to make our campuses safer, through the use of emergency notification systems and other measures. Yet parents, students, faculty, administrators, and institutional law enforcement have all expressed to me their concerns that the presence of concealed handguns on campus would contribute to a less-safe environment, not a safer one.


Additionally, further unease has been expressed by our campus mental health professionals, who know and deal with the reality of the emotional and psychological pressures of academic life, separation from family, relationships -- all pressures that contribute to the harsh reality that suicide is the leading cause of death among college students. There is great concern that the presence of handguns, even if limited to licensed individuals 21 or older, will lead to an increase of both accidental shootings and self-inflicted wounds.


Our law enforcement personnel, consisting of highly-trained professionals who work within these unique campus environments, are particularly troubled about the ability of our officers to differentiate between the bad actor and a person defending himself/herself and others when both have guns drawn. Furthermore, the high density of campus housing -- which includes both persons of age and persons too young to secure a concealed handgun license -- raises issues of how licensed individuals will be able to secure their weapons when not carried on the individual's person.


There is also unease that laboratories and hospitals, where chemicals and gases are not only present but often under pressure, create unique situations where the discharge of a firearm may have consequences well beyond what one may expect in other environments.


I must concur with all the concerns and apprehensions expressed to me, that the presence of concealed weapons, on balance, will make a campus a less-safe environment. I respectfully request that you and your colleagues will weigh these concerns, and the safety and lives of those on our campuses, as you consider this issue.


I realize this is one of many important decisions on the legislature's collective shoulders this session. Thank you for considering our concerns.


With great respect, 


Francisco G. Cigarroa, M.D.
Chancellor

Sonogram Bill To Be Toned Down

The state of Texas has some serious problems to address in this session of the legislature, like a $27 billion shortfall in the next biennium and a redistricting fight that is sure to be devisive (even among the majority Republicans, as each legislator fights to retain his own district intact as much as possible). But the governor has decided there are some "emergency" measures that must be taken care of before those serious matters can be dealt with.

Of course, what the governor considers to be an emergency and what a normal person would consider an emergency turns out to be vastly different. For instance, the governor thinks it is an emergency to pass a Voter ID bill -- which would make all voters show a picture ID in addition to their voter registration card before they would be allowed to vote. The measure is supposedly to prevent voter fraud -- even though there is no evidence that voter fraud is a problem in Texas. Everyone knows the real reason is to try and prevent many of the elderly and poor from voting (people more likely to vote for Democrats).

Another emergency the governor has demanded the legislature deal with is the "problem" of sanctuary cities (emergency bills declared by the governor must be dealt with in the first 60 days of the legislative session). Of course, nobody really knows if Texas even has any so-called "sanctuary cities" (or even what comprises a sanctuary city). This is just the governor playing to his xenophobic right-wing base.

But perhaps the most heartless bill declared to be an emergency by the governor is the sonogram bill. The U.S. Supreme Court has guaranteed women the right to choice regarding their own bodies, but the governor wants to put up as many roadblocks to that choice as possible. Acting on the governor's emergency declaration, State Senator Dan Patrick (R-Houston) introduced a bill that would make doctors perform a sonogram on any woman wanting a legal abortion (which you can bet the state will not pay for even though they mandate it).

Patrick (pictured above) made the bill a very intrusive one, demanding the doctor display the sonogram to the woman, describe what is on the screen to her, and play an audible version of a fetal heartbeat. It goes without saying that this is nothing more than an effort to punish and torture any woman who has the temerity to make her own decision about abortion. It is also insulting, as it assumes the woman hasn't thought long and hard about the decision she has made. It's just a bad and very mean-spirited bill.

Evidently someone finally told Patrick that Oklahoma tried the same kind of law and had it declared unconstitutional, because he has announced he is making changes to the bill. His new bill would give the woman the right to avoid seeing the sonogram, hearing the description and hearing the heartbeat. That is an improvement. It's still a bad and stupid bill (and a prime example of men wanting to deny women the right to control over their own bodies), but it's not quite as bad as the original.

I expect the bill will pass the legislature (which is controlled by Republicans). If there's one thing that white Republican men like even more than freedom, it's their own right to control the lives of other people.

Best Quote On Texas Budget Cuts

As you probably know by now, the Republican's best example of an economic success story, the state of Texas, is in deep financial trouble.   The state has a budget deficit of about $27 billion for the upcoming biennium, which must somehow be covered by the current legislature (since the state constitutionally must have a balanced budget).   In spite of what the Republican governor, Rick Perry, has said, Texas has been hit hard by the recession, and revenues have dropped precipitously.

Now there are a range of ways to solve this problem.   The legislators could raise the franchise (business) tax, tap the $9 billion "rainy day" fund, broaden the sales tax base, raise state fees, increase oil & gas taxes, institute a state income tax, legalize and tax marijuana or legalize casino gambling.   But the largely Republican legislature doesn't like any of these options.   The Legislative Budget Board, which makes budget recommendations to the legislature, has decided instead to make massive and hurtful cuts to state services.

They are recommending cuts to health & human services, education, higher education and nearly everything that actually helps ordinary Texans.   This ridiculous recommendation has resulted in a cacophony of protests from many quarters.   But the best (and most humorous) quote is from State Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-San Antonio).   Castro (pictured) said,   "We are 50th in per capita spending.   It's like asking an anorexic person to lose weight."

And he is absolutely right.   Texas lags behind nearly every state in funding nearly everything (except welfare for corporations).   It is among the stingiest in Medicaid coverage (and had to be forced by the federal government to cover poor children with health insurance).   The aid it gives to poor mothers (two-parent families don't qualify for anything -- no matter how destitute) leaves them far below the poverty level.   The per capita funds it provides for education is less than almost every other state.   The salaries paid to rank-and-file state workers is among the lowest in the nation.  

It is without a doubt one of the stingiest states in spending and services provided.   Instituting the recommended massive budget cuts would truly be like asking a starving person to go on a diet.   But then that's how Republicans are -- they only care about the rich.   And anyone who complains is accused of "class warfare".   It's truly shameful.

LBB Calls For Massive Cuts To State Services

Everyone has known for a while that there would have to be some cuts in the Texas state budget.   The state comptroller has said that a continuation of the current level of state services would result in a $27 billion shortfall.   About $7 billion in federal government stimulus funds would take care of some of that, but that still leaves about $20 billion to be made up somehow.

The state has nearly $9.4 billion in a "rainy day" fund.   The money was meant for situations like this where the state finds itself in a budget crunch (if it ain't raining now, it never will be).   Using that money would lower the budget deficit to around $11 billion.   A broadening of the sales tax base could take care of most of that (without raising the tax rate).   Doing both of those things would be an almost painless way to keep any state cuts to a minimum and maintain the current level of state services.

But that would make sense, and if there's anything Texas Republicans are loath to do, it is doing something sensible.   The Republican-dominated Legislative Budget Board (LBB) has decided that they shouldn't use the "rainy day" fund or broaden the sales tax base.   They recommend balancing the state budget by making massive cuts to state services -- cuts that will make life much harder for most ordinary Texans.

Texas schools are already in serious trouble, having to lay off teachers and staff.   Even though the state currently ranks nearly last among all states in the amount of money it provides schools per pupil, the LBB is recommending the state cut their already meager contribution by another whopping 13.1%.   This will certainly mean more layoffs and an increase in class sizes.   And it won't help a statewide dropout rate that is nearly 30%.

Then the LBB wants to cut 12.7% in criminal justice and public safety.   This would result in the closure of several institutions (prisons) in both the juvenile and adult systems.   Adding to the problem is the fact that they also want cuts in parole and community-based programs like probation.   This means criminals will have to be dumped back into the communities without the necessary supervision and/or help with jobs and treatment.

The LBB also wants to cut a massive 24.6% from health and human services programs.   This means less money to help the mentally retarded and mentally ill, both in institutions and community-based programs.   And it will mean less money for children's insurance and at least a 10% cut in Medicaid payments to doctors.   This will mean that even more doctors will refuse to accept Medicaid patients.   The state already leads the nation with over 26% of the population without health insurance, and that will just get worse now.   There will also be cuts in food stamps, child abuse programs, help for the blind, and elderly abuse programs.

Then we come to higher education.   Even though a college education is being priced out of the reach of many working and middle class students, the LBB wants to cut another 7.6% from state colleges and universities (and close at least four community colleges).   That means the colleges will have to raise tuition and fees even further, pricing many more out of an education.

The Republicans like to accuse liberals of engaging in a class war, but with these massive (and largely unnecessary) cuts they have declared war on ordinary Texas citizens.   They're not cutting any of the state's corporate welfare programs -- just the programs that are helping the citizens already hurt by this recession.   This is a stupid and mean-spirited approach to balancing the budget on the backs of the poor and working classes.

Let this be a warning to everyone who was thinking of moving to Texas because of the lies about the Texas economy being in good shape.   The Texas economy is in trouble, and this will only get worse as long as the Republicans are in charge.

A Tragedy Waiting To Happen In Texas

The Texas legislature opened its biennial session yesterday while the nation continues to mourn the tragedy in Arizona.   And while there is a lot of talk about a huge budget shortfall and redistricting for the state, the two biggest obstacles facing the legislature this year, everyone had to have security on their minds at least a little bit.   Could the dastardly actions of an Arizona madman be repeated in Austin, Texas?

The Department of Public Safety (DPS) tried to put everyone at ease.   They reminded the media and the legislators that they have increased Capitol security over the past few months.   They have assigned more officers to the Capitol Building and put in more security cameras.   They have also instituted airport-like entrance procedures for the building also -- making everyone go through metal detectors and searching purses, briefcases and packages.

That all sounds good, but there is a glaring hole in Capitol security -- a hole that the DPS can't do much about because of the extremely lax gun laws in Texas.   While all the unarmed people will be waiting in a long line to be searched before entering, there is another line for those who have a concealed-carry permit to have a firearm.   Anyone with that kind of permit can just flash it at a DPS officer and quickly get into the Capitol Building while carrying a loaded firearm.

This applies to both legislators and the general public.   The DPS says this does not present a problem because those people have "already gone through training and a background check."   That has to be a joke, because the training required to get a permit is minimal and anyone without a criminal record can pass the background check.   I don't doubt that even the Arizona shooter could have gotten a Texas concealed-carry permit.

Making things even worse is the fact that the concealed-carry permit does not even have to be a Texas permit, and there are other states that don't require either a class or demonstrated proficiency with a firearm to get a permit (in fact, the Texas Land Commissioner holds an out-of-state permit).  

The fact is that many people, both in the crowd and on the floor of the House and Senate, are carrying a loaded gun.   Many lawmakers got their permit so they wouldn't have to wait in the long line (with the unarmed people).   If some nut did start shooting inside the Capitol, there are enough loaded guns and poorly-trained shooters there to make the shootout at the OK Corral look like an elementary school fight.   It would be a bloodbath.

I know there are some that will say all the armed people in the building make it safer, but I don't buy that even for a minute.   Most of those armed people have never been in a crises situation and there's no telling how they would react or who they would shoot (perhaps unintentionally).

This Texas love affair with guns has created a crazy situation.   Politics is one of those things guaranteed to inflame passions, and just because a person hasn't committed a crime in the past doesn't mean they aren't going to go off half-cocked when they get upset.   And it isn't like it couldn't happen.   Just last summer a man fired several shots right outside the Capitol Building before being disarmed by the DPS, and it's just fortunate that the legislature wasn't in session and no one was hit.

This is just a tradegy waiting for a time to happen.