First is so the Lege could resubmit bills such as this passel vetoed by Gov. Helmethair, Rick Perry. (From the 2005 79th regular session; we do not have a full list of vetoes from this year yet.)
Second is as I mentioned in a newspaper column last summer, during the education funding crisis and multiple special sessions — you wouldn’t have monster craps like that being left on a special-session plate.
Third is so that well-meaning but somewhat badly written laws, under the press of time, wouldn’t get sent to the gov for likely veto.
Fourth and related is so that well-meaning but really badly designed bills wouldn’t get lost in a black hole for two years.
Fifth, and related to three and four, is that knowing a bill could come up again in a year, would allow more thought to be placed into it.
Sixth is knowing that someone like the Monarch of Midland, Tom Craddick, would be more accountable to the House with a session every year.
Seventh is that Texas, were it an independent country, would have one of the world’s 20 largest economies. Would you run a country like this?
Now, I know Texans will never sign off on a full-time legislature, though. But, take a lesson from the neighbors to the west, at least.
Be like New Mexico. Have a long-term session in odd-numbered years, and a shorter session, with a narrower focus, in even-numbered years. Say a 110-day session and a 40-day session, at minimum. That would be two more weeks than now, plus a slower pace over two sessions.
Governance would surely be more productive.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are appreciated, as is at least a modicum of politeness.
Comments are moderated, so yours may not appear immediately.
Due to various forms of spamming, comments with professional websites, not your personal website or blog, may be rejected.