Dan Branch protests too much on Texas Lege recorded votes half-loaf

Branch, a Dallas state representative, defended the Texas House's voting for a constitutional amendment that will only require a recorded version of final votes on bills. Votes on preliminary legislation, including amendments to the original bill, will remain unrecorded under this compromise. (The bill still has to go to the Senate, and then would go on the November ballot as a constitutional amendment for public approval.

Not all representatives thought it was a huge improvement:

Rep. Marc Veasey, D-Fort Worth, was among the legislators who said the measure didn't do enough because it only requires recorded votes on final passage, not preliminary passage, which is when most debate occurs and amendments are made to bills. Veasey described that as "the real meat and potatoes of any debate that we have.”

Branch, on the other hand, claimed this is what news media representatives wanted. Uhh, not quite:

The Texas Daily Newspaper Association views the proposed constitutional amendment as a positive compromise and a victory for open government, said Ken Whalen, executive vice president of the association.

“Compromise” doesn't mean “wanted” in my book. And, to call preliminary and amendment votes “inside baseball” is basically telling concerned citizens to “go get lost.”