CAPITOL LETTERS

Wasn't the TDCJ Sunset bill still pending? I'm not sure but I think that one would have to be brought back in a special...

so does this mean that all the bills that werent able to go through second readings still have a chance?

The usual suspects have "walked out" before, so why should we think for a moment they'll do the right thing and show for work later today?

AFAIK, another casualty included the Sunset savings bill, which is intended to push back the clock (and nothing else) on any agency whose sunset bill does not pass. So either that or TDCJ has to come up, I think.

Oh, and P? Your bleating that this has somehow interrupted the business of the people conveniently ignores the absolute refusal of Craddick to meet late or on weekends all session, the flat mismanagement of the House calendar, and the countless opportunities wasted all session long by leadership.

As Krusee said in his speech (far less dramatic than Haggerty's and unlikely to receive the attention it deserves), attempts to paint this issue as partisan are reprehensible.

Annie--

You're ignoring chubbing by the Ds. If they were so concerned about addressing the important business of the state, maybe they wouldn't have tried so hard to slow the process, or continued asking Craddick the same questions. Plenty of blame to go around.

Whitmire's SB 909--the TDCJ sunset bill--is, indeed, on life support.

Annie -- Democrats and a handful of bitter Republicans chose not to suspend the rules at the start of session thus preventing the chamber from debating bills for the first 60 days. That is irresponsible.

Annie -- What the Democrats did at the beginning of session, with a couple of dissident Republicans, to not suspend the rules and prevent no debate on bills between the members on the House floor was disgracefully irresponsible.

Speakers always refuse to recognize at various times, but this time it has been magnified because the Liberals do not like A Rock Solid Conservative as Speaker, who has done nothing illegal.

This is partisan. Make no mistake about it.

P - find me a session in the past - when they did suspend the rules - where suspending the rules resulted in more bills being passed. You're just throwing out a red herring to distract from the leadership's gross mismanagement of the state's business.

Instead of a blanket suspension of all bills, any member who wanted to take up their bill could simply move to suspend the rules. For the record, every motion in the first 60 days to suspend the rules was successful and the House did take up bills.