The Texan Podcast - Paxton Announces, Harrison Denounces, and Budget Bounces: Smoke Filled Room Ep. 15

Episode Date: April 14, 2025

In the latest episode of Smoke Filled Room, Senior Editor McKenzie DiLullo and Senior Reporter Brad Johnson talk Paxton v. Cornyn, a long budget night, and more!Listen to more Smoke Filled Room podcasts from our team wherever you get your podcasts. If you like what you hear, subscribe and leave us a review.

Howdy folks, welcome back to another episode of Smoke Fill the Room. We definitely were not up until 3 a.m. last night watching The Budget and are definitely well rested and able to form coherent sentences. Brad, how tired are you? I am in the Jackson Browns, so running on empty? I also want to say Brad has like yelled at every person in his office pretty merciless. Okay within the last hour Yes, I don't mean it though. I Know but at a certain point. It's like just a mass onslaught where even if you don't mean it anymore. It's just Exhausting well hopefully I don't yell at you on this and if I do, well, we'll just do it live. DO IT LIVE!

I'll write it and we'll do it live! Anyway, so yeah, I was there until, I was at the house until very late and they went till what, 2.30 in the morning? No, it was like 3. 3? 3 in the morning to pass the budgets. It was like 315 like yeah 330 You know I was I was planning on if it was even Out if we were out at a regular time

I was playing on you know running to a local watering hole and Having a drink to decompress, but it was so late that everything was closed. As one does, particularly if your name is Bradley Johnson. Yeah, and you had already left, so you weren't gonna join me, but you wouldn't have joined me anyway, because reasons. But you wanna make an announcement on the podcast right now? Other than you being a fuddy-duddy, of course.

Right, for sure. Yeah, no, I'm pregnant, and I'm six months pregnant. I've been pregnant for a long time And Brad really wanted to know Because this is about me, okay He's been talking about this for how many days like three days? Oh, yeah Did that but I feel like that was pretty anti-climatic how you we didn't planning this. Did that but I feel like that was pretty anticlimactic how you we didn't, Brad wanted to rehearse this and yeah the delivery. I'll just chalk it up to me being tired but you know we do have me your husband and our friend Micah do you

have a plan to you know when the child is born yes to you know take her to the to the bar and just hang out and you know just I don't know. I'm sure there's no angle for you there whatsoever. No definitely not. No got no angle there. No angle at all just a bunch of boys hanging out with a baby at a bar. Yeah yeah you know if there are things that come from that. You're the only single one. Yeah yeah if there are things that come from that, then that's just gravy, right? And we know I love gravy. That's true. That's very true. Well, thank you for announcing. So congrats. Yeah, thank you. Cats out of the bag. We figured we should announce at some point so I'm not just gone one day. That's what it came down to. I didn't do this on my own. I didn't just wing it. I did have your permission. You had my permission, but you did do it on your own.

I would not have done that without your blessing. No, but that's where, okay, let's talk about this. On the weekly roundup a couple of weeks ago, you were talking about our March Madness bracket titles, like the names of our March Madness brackets, and mine had to do with my pregnancy for my secondary bracket, and Brad almost completely outed that,

and basically set it up so that I could announce it if I wanted to and I just looked at him like you crazy person. Accurate. I did almost slip up but I caught myself. Yeah that's very true. So there you go. How much worse has it been having a boss or co-worker who's pregnant while on the job. I don't know, you haven't inconvenienced me yet, but you will when you go on maternity leave. So I'm banking all the Brownie points and the bill will come due, just so you know.

Yeah, no, I'm fully aware, yes. I think my schedule along the office has been the most high maintenance in the last year and will only continue to be. You are a very high maintenance person. If there's one thing I know about you, it's that. Yeah, it's very true. It's very true.

Well, we actually, we always say this, but we have a lot to talk about. We do. Quick rundown of what we're going to chat through today. We have obviously Paxton and Cornyn. That's a huge, that seems also like that happened two weeks ago and that happened what, like three days ago, um, really wild. And then budget night last night, obviously the house went very late talking about the state budget.

So we have more than we expected to talk about on that front. I think a lot of folks expected it to be a little bit less dynamic and fun than it was. I, for one was really hoping that it was as fun as it was and then once it got to 3am I was like maybe I hoped a little too close to the sun. But it was still great. And then we'll talk about the Harrison and Burroughs of it all and how this week went. You love that phrase. That is your favorite phrase.

Of it all? Yeah. Yeah, I think it wraps. You gotta bank some more sayings in there. Okay, you and all the hate emails I get tell me the exact same things. So maybe I really should listen to them It's almost like I'm on something. It's a occasionally Well, should we start with Paxton? Yeah, let's do it. Okay, the thing that ruined my Tuesday night. Thanks

Thanks. I love how we truly do make the coverage of the news about us I love how we truly do make the coverage of the news about us. Me saying I really want budget night to go late like I was opining on Twitter about how back in my day budget night used to be something that went actually through the night people were I think it resonated with a lot of folks who've been around the building for a long time but at the same time once it like you know beggars can't be choosers and it was hilarious that of course then I went to 3 a.m. which was the latest it's gone for a long time which I loved but well it's funny you say back in my day

because we just had an experience with this right right but we are at that age now where we can actually say that was some ground to stand on because I made a reference earlier that will play later in this episode that Jayden who's now editing our podcast did not know and it was a very famous internet meme from the mid-2000s and I just could not believe that someone did not know the reference. Well I didn't either. Okay but you don't count. I'll also say Brad is really... You're an uncultured swine. That's true. Brad has also put a lot of effort into producing this particular podcast from the pregnancy announcement which again he took it upon himself to grace the world with that information as well as having multiple clips he wants edited in this podcast

that he will find ways to siphon in and by him I mean Jaden who has to edit all of this. Yeah. On a Friday. To be good production. To be ready for Monday. Yeah. Sounds about right. Part of the gig. Okay well let's talk Paxton. So Tuesday night as we said you know it ruined your Tuesday night. Next time we'll make sure that statewide officials consult you before they make big announcements. Yeah. But this was the Attorney General going on Fox. We've heard from him for so long Regarding his interest and intent really to run for this Senate seat against Senator John Cornyn and he announced on Fox How do you do it? He announced on Fox. Yeah, I know We're gonna we're gonna really try our best to be coherent. So he

He tweeted out. I knew you were gonna do that. Yeah. Well, it's almost like we know each other I teach you I teach you up you did And by the way, the six-year It's a union of the Texan is reunion Anniversary anniversary of the Texan is coming up later this month. So I think it's the 29th. Oh The Texan is coming up later this month. So I think it's a the 29th. Oh Yes, yes correct, yeah, it's just an alert for us to prepare today, yes, it's the 29th I know that by heart What am I doing? Anyway, so really we're trying to get to Paxton. So he we're trying people he tweeted out I'm gonna have a big announcement on Laura Ingram show. Everybody knew what that was. Yeah, right

Well, he didn't he did he done it a couple of times and we're like here it comes and then it wasn't it and of course, you know, we talked about this on the weekly pot while ago He kind of prefaced this foreshadowed it with an interview with Punchbowl News saying if I can get 20 million dollars of commitments by June ish I will jump in and I'll run against John Cornyn well, he popped off a little sooner than we thought and jumped in the race

telling... It was very brief. It was a very brief segment. He comes on. He Ingram first asked him about some, I think it was a border policy from the Trump administration, some legal situation. And then she goes, oh, I hear you have an announcement. He goes, yes, I'm here to announce I'm running for US Senate against John Cornyn. He gives his line about Cornyn not being a good senator who stands up for, stands by Donald Trump enough,

you know, that kind of thing. So Paxton immediately jumped into, of course, right, the messaging, this is how he's gonna make his pitch to voters about him being the right option for this Senate seat. It was brief and then his campaign put out a statement going in more in depth on the general theme of Cornyn is anti-Trump and that Paxton is pro-Trump. Would it be fair to say that the messaging for either candidate had already been pretty much figured out? Yes. Oh, yes. Very much so, even in the lead-up to this announcement.

Yeah. So, but immediately it subsumed all of politics, even national, because everyone had been expecting this this is going to be one of the biggest if not the biggest Republican primary race in the country I would say and yeah I mean it right off the bat hand acres were thrown we're being thrown you know both of them were rhetorically elbowing each other and I think it's gonna be that way the entire time that's like one of your favorite words is rhetorically elbowing each other and I think it's gonna be that way the entire time. That's like one of your favorite words is rhetorically. Well because they're not actually physically elbowing each other. I'm just letting you know. Okay so we're critiquing each other. Yes. Okay fair enough I did it to you first.

So there's that. Cornyn's team came out with a statement. Uh, they sent it to me. It was. This was a heck of a statement. Oh yeah. Yeah. First, the first paragraph was basically a pitch of how Cornyn is pro-Trump and is Trump's guy in DC and has stood by him and helped negotiate the tax cuts in 2017, that kind of thing. Uh, but then he went, then the spokesman just laid into Ken Paxton saying, the first line of the second paragraph was Ken Paxton is a fraud.

And then mentioned the Hidalgo, the OAG withdrawing their lawsuit against the staffers of Lena Hidalgo for, what was it, like various things a COVID-19 contract that had been essentially allegedly very much handed off to somebody even though the contract was scored far for for this Democratic strategist who was well connected to the staffers and now I can tell you probably Hanson is great reporter go check it out right now I can tell you that there's a lot of disagreement about that at the time it still is between the the legal guys the lawyers and the political side And it is gonna be a problem politically for him during this race huge and I saw it I don't recall exactly what he said, but I saw he was trying to he did address it and he was You know giving his his spin on it, right?

And so he'll have to continue doing that because this is one of the big things that Cornyn's gonna hit him on it. This is out of the gate, the first thing he mentions as a hit on Paxton. This is gonna be a theme. It's not just gonna be a theme, it's gonna be a feature. Yeah. So.

And also interesting because though there have been pieces written about this, folks have talked about it, it certainly is a huge deal in Harris County. Lena Hildago is certainly someone that Republicans across Texas criticize heavily and have a disdain for. So it's not like it's some far-fetched punch at the attorney general, but it has not been, again we're not in campaign season necessarily, it's not been utilized. We've not seen this screen for the rooftops like this yet. So it'll be very interesting to see how it actually does move the needle. Quarantine was clearly keeping their powder dry until he actually jumped in. Like for example,

I asked them for comment when Paxton gave the interview to Punchbowl and they said, we'll wait till he gets in if he gets in. And boy did they. So now they're off. These two, we've talked about this before, of course there's no love lost between these two. They do not like each other. Back when the impeachment was going on against Paxton, Cornyn tweeted something like, hard to run from prison, Ken. This has been brewing for a while, and the writing was on the wall for a while, for a long time. Although there's some interesting backroom fights going on over this and whether Paxton should run or not. And clearly he was not convinced not to run. He's in the game.

And now we'll see how it shakes out. But there's a long way to go between now and then. In reply to the statement, Paxton said, you know, I'm not going to respond. We only respond to attacks by campaigns who aren't down 25 points. And then in the campaign memo or campaign statement, they talked about a memo and linked to it, the polling memo of saying Paxton's up 25 points on Cornyn. So keep in mind, it is an internal poll. Meaning it's coming from Paxton's up 25 points on corny so keep in mind it is an internal poll meaning it's coming from paxton's camp and it's one that they're putting out themselves i'm not saying it's wrong like we've seen some other polls that have shown a pretty big gap between them i don't think it's 25 points right at least right now uh no ads have been run but

notable regardless of the incumbent senator is certainly quite vulnerable according to polls we're seeing absolutely right point. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. And we've talked, I think we mentioned this before on a previous one, when you look at the, up until this point, there hasn't been much head to head. So you have to judge based on fave on faves and Paxton's, the intensity of Paxton's support among Republicans is very high. But the negatives are also high, higher than coordinates. And so the

question is which ceiling is higher here in order to get the votes. And how this messaging works. Right. Like this is gonna be a very interesting, because again we're talking to Republican primary voters for this challenge. This is gonna be an entirely different bucket of folks that come out for this than they do in November. But it's gonna be very interesting to see how that works. And that certainly plays I think in Paxton's favor. regardless this is gonna be this is gonna be a tough one yeah and there's gonna be a lot of money spent in this probably gonna be the most expensive Republican primary did you mention the mistress line oh I did not

yeah that's like that necessary so after the Hidalgo thing they went on to mention the stated basically Paxton uses. Here, I'm going to read it. Yeah, go for it. Let me pull it up here. Cause I think that's what, it was like a one-two punch, right? Yeah.

So I mentioned the Hidalgo of it all. I think there were three things, but this was the third, yeah. Yeah. So, okay, Ken Paxton, I'm just going to read this paragraph. This is the paragraph that really got folks talking and you'll see why. Ken Paxton is a fraud.

He talks tough on crime and then lets crooked crooked progressive Lena Hidalgo off the hook. He says his impeachment trial was a sham but he didn't contest the facts in legal filings which will cost the state millions. He says he's anti-woke but he funnels millions of taxpayer dollars to lawyers who celebrate DEI. That was the second prong. And then third, and Ken claims to be a man of faith but uses fake Uber accounts to meet his girlfriend and deceive his family. So big throwback to the impeachment of it all. And from a campaign side, you do not come out swinging like that unless you feel threatened as an incumbent. You know, look at what Greg Abbott did in 22. He ignored

Don Huffinds and Alan West. Act acted like they weren't even in the race and That was the right decision because they had no Ultimately, it's an entirely different ballgame 100% Right. Yeah, this is a formidable challenge The likes of which Cornyn has not been through ever I think I don't think he's been in a primary this contentious, yeah You know, he's been in a primary this contentious yeah you know he's won primaries before and won them by a lot a lot most of them were though

were against non-entity candidates so and to your point right that's something you usually don't do is the incumbent I kind of interrupted you there but that's if you are being challenged by someone and you're like okay this is not necessarily the threat I think we need to go negative on this person or even mention my opponent that is typically the road taken by incumbents I've seen I'm not even gonna mention my positive messaging positive messaging and a poll start to get closer If it becomes more contentious, there's a lot of money thrown behind or the race gets closer That's when you'll see the messaging change on behalf of the incumbent It's already

change on behalf of the incumbent. It's already... My point, we're already there. Yeah. You know, I just wanted that for dramatic effect. Well, it scared me. Yeah, yeah, we were there and we're gonna be there the whole time. This is gonna be just... the Cornyn statement said we look forward to a spirited campaign that is the understatement of the century this is not just gonna be a spirited campaign is gonna be nasty brutal they're gonna start biting each other you know this is a this is a backstreet brawl yeah and I'm excited for it so it's gonna be wild and wild. And of course, we knew it was coming, but there were so many different conversations

we were hearing about. You were hearing about behind the scenes. So it was like, OK, when is this happening? Is it happening? But when it was announced, I think it was a little bit faster than we expected. And that Fox News hit, Quick, Albeit, was still one where he was like, I'm going to go on that.

It was not some tweet. It was not some video that was released. It was a national media hit to say hey real fast I'm on Fox News folks can see me on their screens. I'm running for USN on the biggest platform for Republican primary voters. Absolutely Yeah, yeah, he didn't give the scoop to us. Yeah So yeah Also, you know, let's talk about run through endorsements a bit. So Right after packs announced he got a couple of notable endorsements.

There was a lot from the online right expected, right? They hate Cornyn and they have forever. But Congressman Troy Nels and Lance Gooden have both endorsed Paxton in this. I think as far as elected officials go, those are the two biggest that we've seen so far. I'm sure more will come. Cornyn, meanwhile, has gotten the endorsement of the National Border Patrol Council, the union for the Border Patrol agents. Notable there, they also endorsed George B. Bush in the 2022 Attorney General race, right? Then also he's been backed, Cornyn's been backed by Tim Scott,

who's running the Senate Republican Caucus Fund. Also John Thune, Senate Majority Leader. And it's clear that the money is gonna be on Cornyn's side and it's gonna have to be to make up the deficit here, right? You know Paxton, he can fundraise, but it's not like he's in the echelon of Greg Abbott or Dan Patrick. He's never been there. Or Cornyn. This is a whole different ballgame. And Cornyn is going to have a ton of money to spend and spent on his behalf.

and Cornyn is going to have a ton of money to spend and spent on his behalf. Also notable, a non-endorsement, Senator Ted Cruz is staying out of it. He's not going to back either candidate, he said in a statement, that he's friends with both of them and he's going to let the voters decide. Yeah. His statement was literally verbatim that, essentially. Like, I'm friends with John, I'm friends with Ken, first name thing, throwing that out there. And I think that's what we'll see from most Texas statewide Republican officials.

Yeah, and because this is a Republican primary, this is an internal fight. It is different than like Cornyn endorsing Cruz for a reelection last year, right? So Cruz does not wanna take a crap from a great height on whoever his next colleague is from the Senate whether it's Cornyn again or Paxton right so he's gonna stay out of it I'm sure Cornyn is disappointed by that but expected it right we kind of knew this is where I'd say the same for Paxton in a

lot of ways even though it's more understandable maybe from a 30,000 foot perspective that he would not endorse against his literal other half in representing Texas in the Senate. Yep, absolutely. So the other big thing is Trump. Where does Trump go? That is going to have a lot to do with who wins this primary. And he's not endorsed yet. Uh, we, uh, I read this morning in Politico, they reported that the reason Ken Paxton jumped in as early as he did was to preempt John Thune's push for

Trump to endorse Cornyn and Cornyn has been making the appeals a lot. Their goal was to try and keep Paxton out of the race by getting it, the Trump endorsement early. Didn't happen and keep Paxton out of the race by getting the Trump endorsement early. Didn't happen, Ken Paxton's in. So they they were trying to preempt that. I think they were also trying to preempt Wesley Hunt getting in the race and it remains to be seen if he's gonna jump in but the talk about that has been ramping up a lot lately. Hunt has been running ads throughout the state or at least the PACs supporting him.

Not just in his district. Yes. So there's that. Hunt also is close with Trump. He probably thinks he has a shot at getting the Trump endorsement. Otherwise, he wouldn't really be looking at this, I don't think. But regardless, you know you know it's he might jump in and that will be another factor to watch. How do you think that complicates things? What's the breakdown there of overlap between Paxton and Hunt and Cornyn? I think that's the sector the party would attempt to be vying for. Yeah yeah I think you're you're Well, you know, Hunt has some crossover appeal on both sides.

I think he could pull votes from both. Yeah. Or he could just not get any votes whatsoever. But in a primary, where are you gonna be heading? Right, and if he jumps, I think the biggest effect for Hunt is if he jumps in, that makes the likelihood of a runoff a lot higher. And a runoff in Texas is not kind to incumbents.

So from Cornyn's perspective, he probably wants Wesley Hunt to stay out or anybody else of any significance to stay out. But make no mistake, this is not if Wesley Hunt were to enter the race, it would not be some coordinated effort on Paxton and Hunt's part to say, hey, let's really get the senator into a runoff. Well, I I mean I think you can make the argument that Paxton would like to see Hunt get in because that would make it more likely that Cornyn is pushed to a runoff right? Maybe. But that's not necessarily the same thing. I mean yes on paper but I don't think this is yes. But they're considering that right? For sure. You know if they're back channeling hey hey wink wink nudge nudge Wesley you should jump in

That will help both of us take out Cornyn and whoever wins that wins it you know You know that stuff definitely happens. There's the consultants are talking to each other Which brings me to actually I should mention the consultant side of this yeah And I wrote this in fourth reading this week, you can read more about it there. It's pretty interesting because Paxton has Axiom Strategies, that's Jeff Rose firm, and one of the largest Republican consulting firms in the country. They're massive. And they have a growing, a large and growing footprint in Texas.

And certainly already have Senator Ted Cruz as one of their. Yeah. And I actually I think I wrote this newsletter way back last year. It's an interesting example of strange bedfellows because Paxton and Axiom, I believe, were on the opposite sides of that

really nasty Senate race between Angela Paxton and Philip Huffins. Wow. Okay. Yeah. And so... I think you're right. They've made up, they've made up, clearly like Paxton has them. He's been paying them. And this is not new. He's had them as his, they were his consultant in the 22 AG race, right? And they've been consulting for him ever since. They were handling comms during impeachment for him. So this is not a new thing, even though some in the national media acted like it was new. Now the thing that is interesting and new is that, I think it was Axios reported that Jeff Roe was

telling people he's not involved in this. And the big reason that that is notable is because Jeff Rowe was He ran Ron DeSantis is super PAC last year and For president and so he pissed off a lot of people in the Trump world And that has come back to bite them in some ways, you know You have people in Trump world who hate them, who are advising everyone against doing business with Axiom because of that. How much of an effect is it having? I don't know.

Axiom just went through layoffs. Axiom's spin on it is we were responding to kind of market changes. Like everyone's hurting. Not just everyone's hurting, not just that, but also like the way you conduct campaigns, especially with AI is changing. So you need less workforce. I think there's something to that, but you can also-

There's 30 people. Right, you can't divorce it, I don't think, from entirely from- Or reportedly 30 people. Right, you can't divorce it entirely from that factor, right? Especially when you have one of the biggest names in Republican consultant politics right now, Chris LaSavita, just dancing on Jeff Rose Grave constantly. I'm sure he is back channeling all kinds of opposition to Roe in all these business angles.

But guess who John Cornyn has hired? Who Brad? Chris LaSavita. Huh, interesting. You know who had Chris LaSavita in Texas in the 2022 cycle? Who Brad? George P. Bush. Oh my gosh. Axiom and LaSavita are fighting it out again with Paxton again in the mix only this time it's John Cornyn that has hired LaSaveta. So that statement that was put out by the Cornyn spokesman that is a LaSaveta ad or a messaging. Yeah. Just the severity of the criticism right? Right. That is elicited through and through. Going for the jugular.

He is going to empty the clip. It's not like Ken Paxton's messaging has not also been very, very strong, but he's been messaging the whole, this whole time and in preparation, in anticipation of entering the race, we've just been waiting, right? So him talking about Cornyn in these ways is not foreign to us. Like you said, Cornyn was the one who was like, I'm waiting till he gets in. So when that statement dropped, it hit hard because it was just like you said, it went right for the regular. Yep. Yep. So that will also affect the Trump stuff. You know, there are those in Trump world pushing hard for Ken Paxson to get the Trump endorsement.

There are those pushing against it very hard. Do you think there's a world in which Trump stays out? Honestly, I think it's pretty likely Trump stays out. Yeah. And I think you can tell that by Ken Paxton's statement to Mark Davis this week that he doesn't expect a Trump endorsement, really for anybody in this. Now, my galaxy brain theory is, and this is Dark Horse, I'm not saying this is likely, but another name that has been bandied about for jumping in this.

What? Bandied about. Bandied about. That is the term. I've never ever, ever heard it. Well, I put it in multiple of my newsletters that you have read and obviously. Well, obviously it didn't pay enough attention, yeah.

Classic, classic Mac move. So, the other name, and this is someone who has been also running ads outside of the district they represent, Ronnie Jackson. What does Ronnie Jackson have over everyone else in this discussion? Are you talking about taking care of his literal health time and time again? Yeah. Yeah. Nobody has a more personal relationship with Donald Trump in this group of people we're talking about than Ronnie Jackson. Of course, Ronnie Jackson, current Texas congressman. Up in the pain handle. He was very involved, I know, in the cabinet pick process, vetting process, like somebody that the Trump camp very much takes

seriously as part of their their crew Yeah, and was of course the the doctor for the president. Yes, and you know When the Paxton jumped in I spent basically after we got the pizza I spent the rest of the night on the phone with consultants because they all wanted to talk about this One of them said to me other than Dan Patrick And maybe even more than Dan Patrick, Ronnie Jackson is the one that holds the most sway with Donald Trump. Which goes under the radar because he's a congressman and not statewide elected official. And you can bet he's looking at this.

He's considering it. Does he do it? I don't know. But this is very much something that he is thinking about. And we've heard his name far less than somebody like Wesley Hunt. So he's been less active. Wesley Hunt has been very active in running ads, right? Yeah. Jackson has run ads but he's been less active in that. Yeah. So which also I mean when Cornyn, because Cornyn officially announced, hey I'm going to

run, right? That was last week? Or when the time this comes out, it will have been two weeks. Yeah. Yeah. Two weeks. And his first, I mean, this tells you the Trump of it all and how I think it is so apparent that Cornyn has been in every way possible sidling up to the Trump side of the party in ways like he's finding ways to do this, both that are very legitimate and saying, Hey, I've actually worked with the president on a lot of these things and changing some of the messaging that we

haven't been as familiar with from somebody like Cornyn and his first ad I helped ours in turn with this we partnered on this President Trump president like that's the messaging yeah so it'll be very very interesting yeah by the way Scottie Scheffler just teed off on the first hole for the second round of the Masters he is I think in like third so how bitter are you that the Masters is going on right now? I didn't get to watch almost any of it yesterday because of budget day. Yeah. But I will be spending the lion's share of this weekend watching the last two rounds. Part of why Brad was yelling earlier when I said that he was yelling at different numbers

of our team, you know, intermittently. One particular instance was him yelling at Rob to get the Masters on. So Rob was just fumbling with the remote. And it wasn't Rob's fault it wasn't working. No, it definitely wasn't, but did that prevent you from, you know... I did it in a joking manner, okay? Rob was actually very happy with the way in which I spoke to him earlier. I'm sure, yeah, absolutely. Did we hit everything on that? I do want to say that the statewide implications for elected officials on this race

are far more interesting than folks. Because I think it's very fair to say we don't expect Dan Patrick or maybe Governor Abbott to jump in and say anything about this race, right? Just like Senator Cruz is saying, I'm not jumping in, I'm not talking about this, I'll let the voters, what do you say, I trust the voters of Texas to make that decision. I think that's the case because it also goes under the radar sometimes how often or infrequently these guys talk, right? You have your statewide

slates who are involved in state politics here, the lieutenant governor, the attorney general, the governor, and then you have your federal guys who are elected to represent the state on the federal level. And certainly some talk more than others, but there's kind of two camps, right? The federal guys and the state guys. I remember at the convention last year, we were standing at our booth and Senator Cornyn was walking through, which, you know, certainly not his, a crowd that's particularly excited to see him on any given day.

We know, we've heard, we've talked about the booths that he's withstood going up in front of a crowd at the Republican Party of Texas convention. But he was there walking around checking out the booths and the lieutenant governor came up and I think he was about to interview at our booth and they were talking in front of... Which, by the way, I spent the entire interview looking up like this. came up and I think it was about to interview at our booth and they were talking in front of Which by the way, I spent the entire interview looking up like this Why Brad? Because I am not nearly as tall as he is Well, both of them are pretty tall pretty tall guys. Yeah, but they it was in so interesting because obviously this was

Not too far removed from the impeachment effort, right? This is... hold on. It wasn't. It was last year's convention. Yeah, it was right after the impeachment effort of the attorney general, which again, and I think it's worth stating as well, which we haven't, that he was acquitted of all 16 charges or 16 articles, right? He certainly got out of that. So that's gonna be a defense in all this, right? Absolutely. Like there's nothing to charge me there. But they were standing in front of the booth and they started talking about Paxton. I couldn't hear anything they were saying.

Did you catch any of this? I caught some of it, but I don't want to miss it. It's been a while. But essentially it was just like Senator Corden and Dan Patrick talking about this and wild to watch and of course they were also, which I also thought was very interesting that that was the venue in which they decided to have this conversation because a crowd gathered. Folks were around and were standing there as members of the press and Dan Patrick's about to join you for an interview and

we have hot mics like 10 feet away but they were talking about it and certainly in hushed tones and very close together trying to chat through it, but it appeared that that was one of the first if not the first conversation that they had had about that. And of course Senator Cornyn's like, you know what the Attorney General has eyes on, it's me. And losing the governor saying, well hey here's what happened in the trial. Very interesting to watch that go down. But again these relationships that these guys have Don't often play out in any authentic way where we can watch it We don't know how they will how great their relationship is or not great their relationships how frequently they talk how infrequently they talk

Very interesting to watch that go down like right in front of us And of course you have staff for both elected officials standing there like, oh gosh, this is the venue they're choosing to talk about this, but. Talk about a soap opera playing out in slow motion. Oh, we were like salivating. It was awesome. Yeah. Okay, so let's talk the down ballot effects of this. So obviously that opens an AG slot. I'll just say quickly, you know, there's a lot of speculation that Dan Patrick wouldn't run again or at least there has been for a while and it it Was heating up a while ago and then it kind of dropped off and then recently it was heating up again. Well

That's put to bed. He's running for reelection. Donald Trump endorsed him He this morning on Friday put out his own statement saying I'm running for reelection. Donald Trump endorsed him. He this morning on Friday put out his own statement saying I'm running for reelection. So like if he hasn't been clear enough yet, I think it's pretty clear now that he is running for reelection. You know, always put the stipulation on there. Things can change. But right now he's in and I don't see any sign indicating otherwise. But that takes a potential vacancy off the table, right? And so we've talked, we did that one, the draft episode, we reference it more than any other episode. And the question was, you know, what would happen when the dam breaks at the top of the ticket? Abbott stay and put, Patrick stay

and put, but you have these two openings right now. Big openings. Big openings, and so all these members who have, politicians, many of them legislative members who have been waiting their turn, they're antsy, they wanna run for something. They've been angling for a while. And so now we have an opening in attorney general, which historically is a really good springboard to higher office, especially the governor's office. You know Abbott was attorney general.

I was going to say we've seen that happen before. Yeah, right. Cornyn was also attorney general right before he became senator. Which is easy to forget because he's been in the senate now for so long. Yeah, that was 25 years ago. So that opens. We have one candidate declared so far. John Bash, an attorney from Texas.

He was a Trump-appointed district attorney in the first administration. He's also Elon Musk's lawyer. And from what I heard, he saved Musk $6 billion in some lawsuit. So the pockets are going to be pretty deep for this guy. I think Elon Musk is going to give him anything he wants really. And also that will give Musk a top ally in one of the most pivotal positions in the state, particularly at a point where Musk is ramping up his presence in Texas, not just business wise but politically, right?

So that's nobody knew I never heard of this guy. Nobody really knew who this guy was. But this is not a candidacy to just overlook. Yep. This guy is going to have backing. He's got the pedigree. Also guess that I don't know if I said that. Guess who his consultant is. Who, Bren? Axiom. I don't know if I said that. Guess who his consultant is? Who, Brad? Axiom. Interesting. Yep.

I did not know that. Yep. So that's an interesting play. Well, that complicates. Yeah. Okay. Interesting. So especially for people who are floated as potential candidates who are not

currently. And then, you know, you have the question of so Trump Trump endorsements the biggest endorsement in the state in every Republican politics period across every office but in this case there's arguments we made the second biggest one is Ken Paxton himself what does he do you know his consulting firm is running this guy's race there Which means something and nothing. Yes. It's both. There are two top allies of Paxton that are being talked about in relation to this opening. That is Mitch Little, newly elected

representative from DFW area. he was of course one of the attorney impeachment attorneys for PACS and that's where he made his debut that's where he exploded on the scene resulted in him being in office and now we see it playing out him in the house which has been interesting to follow we'll talk about that a bit more so that name is talked about he was on Mark Davis this morning and basically said I'm thinking about it the other one that I've heard is Aaron Wrights ran for state house in 2020 for that Goodwin seat I think he finished fourth out of five. Yeah finished fourth out of five. It was a very blue or not very blue but at

that point at that point it was it was there's a chance yeah then it got redistricted and it made safer for Goodwin and she's not gonna lose that seat so he ran that but then he joined Paxson's office as one of the top assistants I think for legislative strategy that was his his lane so he went there then he went to be Ted Cruz's chief of staff. He was that for a year and a half, maybe two years or so, whatever it was. Actually I think he left right before impeachment and then let... or before... Paxton was impeached. Oh, oh, right. Or maybe it was in the Attorney General's office. Yes, and then went to Cruz's office as chief of staff. I can't remember the timing of that. Yes, and then went to Cruz's office as chief of staff.

I can't remember the timing of that though. He was there until late last year after Cruz won when he got appointed to the Trump administration. He's an assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice. When folks talk about Texans appointed to different positions in the Trump administration, obviously you think about a lot of the big positions,

but certainly, of course. But Aaron Rice is up there, absolutely, in terms of the big positions, but certainly, of course, but Aaron writes is up there. Absolutely. In terms of the names that are talked about, he is someone whose profile has been raised quite a bit significantly. Yes. Um, so he is, his name is being talked about.

He's considering it. I don't know if he's gonna do it, but now everyone you've also mentioned, it's very interesting to note have not been on a statewide ballot, right? So these are people who now Mitch little has won his race in his house district. So he's been on the ballot in his in his own area, but that is an entirely different ballgame and he's a freshman, right? So there's not a ton of time that he's had in front of voters. And then John Bash, not somebody that the electorate is familiar with.

That may not have been elected. Like his name came up when he announced and I was like, who is this? Yeah, and now that may not be a problem, depending on how support coalesces behind him. And if the tea leaves turn out to be correct, there could be, that could not be a problem. But the same goes for Aaron Reitz. So these are all candidates who have quite the pedigree for this position and certainly amazing connections, lots of support, but not folks that have the same familiarity among the electorate as potentially other people that you and I have talked about wanting to run for this position. And in terms of their closeness with Paxton, I would think those two...

Little and Wrights. Yeah, personally would be more... it had the inside track to getting the Paxton endorsement. Now Paxton has said he's probably gonna stay out of it. He's not gonna get involved. So I think he said that to Mark Davis as well. So right there it sounds like he's not gonna... he's gonna stay out, right? He's got his own race to run down to. That was kind of his point. So little rights bash. I guess next we'll talk, I'll mention Matt Rinaldi is thinking about it.

There's been a lot of push from especially the more activists, right? And the Republican party for him to run. Former state representative, former Texas GOP chairman. Yeah. Yeah. So attorney. Yeah, obviously. He told me that... Well, you don't have to be an attorney to be the attorney general. No, you don't. No. He told me he's he's thinking about it. You know, he... A lot of these guys out there with their names,

you know, spinning around for this position are would all be pulling from the same pool of support. So it really just comes down to who can get it first. Right. And then you throw in things like little cannot run from cover, meaning he would give up his house seat if he ran for this. Rights can't, rights would give up, have to give up his new appointment to the Trump administration Bash basically has free run like he's not anything right we're an Aldi as well He's not in anything. You wouldn't lose anything if you've decided to run for the seat

Now the two other very interesting ones that have been talked about and these are names that have been mentioned constantly Mays Milton State Senator that was one of your choices when we drafted. I think I had him for Governor. Yeah, I had him for governor. Oh, did I have him for AG? Maybe I had him for AG. Maybe you did. So that then Brian Hughes who has long wanted this. His name has been talked about for years. Yes. Middleton's more, he's newer on the scene, right?

But he's a fast riser. He's deep pockets, personally deep pockets. So self-funding there would give him a leg up, or at least put him on equal footing with John Bash, who presumably, let's say, has all the Musk money, right? Then you had the fact that Middleton is a frequent and prolific donor to Donald Trump and has been in these, you know, personal meetings with him, right? So that's the size of the check that

this guy can write. That's an advantage to get the Trump endorsement. Middleton is a fast riser. He definitely has his sights on higher office. Question for him is, do I wait for, let's say when Dan Patrick or Greg Abbott decide to call it quits and go for a position that I want more than AG, or do I go for AG and get statewide name recognition now? And I believe

Milton can run for cover from cover on this by running for cover. It means he's not on the ballot in 26 I think he looked at for me while I thought Middleton not a little time. I think he was elected last last year for your terms for the Senate, so He can keep his Senate seat if He decides to run for this in 26 and loses, right? So that's another advantage. So he's up in 2026. Oh, then I'm wrong. So he cannot. He would have to give up his seat. Can you look up Hughes as well? Yeah. So Middleton has a lot to look for in this position.

And 20-26? OK, both of them. Neither of them can run from cover. So Hughes has been wanting this for a while. Can you explain the run for cover thing really quickly? Yeah, so if Middleton or Hughes had been elected last year for the four-year term, they can run safely without having to lose their seats, give up their seat. The reason why a house number couldn't is because they're up

every two years, where senators are four, so you have a 50-50 shot of being able to. Right, absolutely. So there's that and they are, you know, they would have to give up something to do this. It's not a safe run. Hughes has been wanting this for a while. His name's been mentioned in relation to AG whenever the dam broke for years. And he clearly wants it. And, you know, I think in terms of just personal credentials in terms of political presence in the state, he and Middleton being state senators probably have the highest floor just

from that angle, right? Before you include any of this other stuff. When we were mentioning earlier, hey, these guys who've been floated don't necessarily have the electorate as familiar with them as other names that have been floated. These are the other names that we were talking about who have a little bit more familiarity or a significant portion more familiarity with the electorate. So there's that... Still district seats, but regardless. You know they have what, 950,000 constituents, right? So it's a lot

more just base level name recognition than a House member or someone who's never been on a ballot about anything. And again if we're talking about a Republican primary we're talking about folks that Republican primary voters in the state, the most engaged portion incredibly familiar with. Yeah. So there's those two and the reason I put them together, both of them are not gonna run. It's not gonna happen. One of them is gonna decide to run, the other one's not. Oh I didn't mention when I was talking about Middleton, he was considering running in 2022 and at the time he was a state rep, right? Yes. Yes.

No. No, he's a senator? Yeah, he was a senator. Because he was... No, he won in 22, didn't he? For Senate. Yeah. Yes. Yes, so he decided to run for Senate instead of AG while Matt Krauss ran for AG. That's right. Talk about pulling from the same pool. That was kind of the discussion. They're both allies in the house. They were in the Freedom Caucus They decided they were they were deciding between themselves who was gonna do it mazes up in the the Senate Now the reason those two are linked they have the same consultant Jordan Barry at least right now, you know Maybe that changes maybe doesn't Barry cannot if they both jump in Barry's can't do both of them, right? He'll have to pick one.

But they're not, they're simply not gonna jump, both jump in. So they're gonna have discussions behind the scenes. Who are we gonna run with here? Who has to sit and wait their turn? Middleton has the money, right? I don't know. I don't know. I don't have any insight on that right now, but I know that they're gonna have to figure that out. I've heard the name Eva Guzman tossed in. She of course ran 22. She had the TLR backing then. How big do you think this field gets? We're talking to a lot of people. A lot of these people are not going to enter to run I Think if Middleton jumps in he has at least the chance to clear more of the field than anyone else because of the money because of the Relation to Trump in that regard. I think bash announcing early gives him a really

Far better chance than he would have if he would have waited considering he has no name recognition the other side of this is none of these legislators can raise money until the session's over with. And then if we're in special sessions, which hopefully not, there are prohibitions then too, right? So all this stuff is being considered by these guys. Yeah, we'll see what happens. I think we beat the AG thing to death, right?

We could talk about this for a while. I don't even know what minute we're on. How long have we been going? Around 50 minutes. Wow, it's going to be a long one, but I think it's worthwhile. Yeah, we're going to have to deal with the cameras, so we're going to have to speed it up a little bit. Okay, so let's run through the others real quick.

Comptroller, Don Huffine's in, Chrissy Craddock in, does someone else get in? I think the big question here is a third candidate, does Greg Abbott appoint a holdover once Hager's resigns and goes to be A&M Chancellor or does he try and give someone a leg up electorally by giving them more name IDs statewide by putting them in that spot? The name I've heard talked about for that is Kelly Hancock of late especially. Other names have been mentioned in relation to this Paul Benton Court, Joan Huffman. They all have the same problem with they can't raise money until after. Now Hager's not residing until June anyway so that lines

up perfectly. But what does that do here does he want to try and prevent Don Huffines who seems to have at least the endorsement wise the momentum right now and self-funding capability ran against a ran against habits he want that guy to be in that spot because he does absolutely does it's hard not to in politics right absolutely yeah no question I don't know if somebody who doesn't. You know, especially when well the personal attacks are levied in a campaign, which for sure everyone does it, right? But also I'd say bridges can be amended as we've seen in the consultant ward where you know where

there's... I don't see the bridges being mended between Huffines and McCracken. Certainly, certainly. But the other notable aspect of this, I wrote a piece on this on the website, you know, Huffines has gotten more the elected official activist lane of The other notable aspect of this, I wrote a piece on this on the website, you know, Huffines has gotten more of the elected official activist lane of endorsements. Chrissy Crack announced her endorsement list and the top names on it were all top donors and all top donors to Greg Abbott. Javi Danwar, Brent Ryan, Code Campbell, various people. So they found their two lanes but there is a third lane and does someone fill it or is this just a two horse race?

I don't know. The other opening that we'll mention just very quickly, the Supreme Court Justice Jeff Boyd announced he's not going to receive reelection and so that'll open that. Another Abbott, traditionally with that, Abbott has appointed the person that he wants to be there and run for it. It's not a holdover. He's appointing the person he wants to be, the Supreme Court Justice for good there.

He did that with Evan Young. I think he'll probably do the same thing here. Who that is, no idea. You can probably bet some attorney that's been a big ally to Abbott. So I haven't heard any names, but we'll see. Great. So there you go. Period. Yeah. Amazing. Well, on that note, we're going to take a short break and hear from one of our sponsors. The Bear Alliance of Texas is proud to support its members

who help deliver an annual economic impact of $35 billion and provide over 200,000 jobs to hardworking Texans. From local tax revenue to direct economic investment to charitable contributions, their members are heavily invested in the success of our communities and our state. The Beer Alliance is dedicated to ensuring the safe distribution of alcohol throughout Texas. For more information, visit BeerAlliance.com.

And we're back. We're back. Okay. 3 a.m. last night. We were going, we were going. Let's talk budget night. How was it? I had fun. I had a lot of fun. Finally, we have something really happening on the House floor. And when people talk budget night, they mean the House. Right. They do not mean the Senate. Senate had one amendment. That's nothing, right? Yeah. Meanwhile, the House had 393 amendments filed.

Like hurting 150 cats. Yes. And so the question was going into this how are they going to expedite the process? They're not gonna hear all 393 amendments. They're just not and frankly if they did that based on how these members were acting they were gonna be there until 7 p.m. today Saturday which also to be fair they started acting that way which we'll get into right after a bunch of stuff happened and grudges start to be levy. So they get off the supplemental calendar on Thursday, then things stop. And they say, we'll reconvene at 1045. Well, 1045 comes, they don't reconvene.

1145 comes, they don't reconvene. I think like 30 minutes later. They stood at ease. Yeah, 30 minutes later, they finally reconvene I think like 30 minutes later. 30 minutes later they finally reconvene. What was happening during that time is leadership was negotiating deals about how to you know throw a huge chunk of these amendments into Article 11 get them off the plate we're not gonna talk about it we're not gonna debate it just get them through. Article 11 being essentially the graveyard for a lot of these amendments just stick them on the back burner yep so they they do that they come up with this article 11 list in the suspense list something that I haven't seen before a suspense list most of those but that was just amendments they're suspending discussion on there's putting

in the budget most of those were article 11 but not all of them there were some that were other parts of the budget they were just like I will throw it in well hash out in conference we'll figure it in. We'll hash out in conference. We'll figure it out. We don't want to be here till 2 a.m. Well, they were here till 3 a.m. Dinner time, dinner time, dinner time was what everyone was saying as far as an end time.

Bold predictions there that turned out to be not true. Now I will say, I think initially they were on track to get out of this fairly early. Maybe not dinner time but nine o'clock. Absolutely. And then things hit the fan. So first amendment comes not much to it. I forget who was whether it was Trey Martinez, Fisher, or Bonin. I can't remember. Then Mary Gonzalez proposes an amendment. Democrat from El Paso. Who is very high

ranking on the approach committee I think she's vice chair she's vice chair has a lot of sway but has been part of the appropriations process for many sessions yes so she comes up with a very nondescript amendment you can look at like it it doesn't look very notable but then she has an amendment to the amendment and that amendment to the amendment would amend her original amendment with some significant changes. Specifically, it's zeroed out the budget of the Lottery Commission and, sorry, the Texas Lottery, not the Lottery Commission, and the trustee offices of the

governor. Why is that important, Brad? Because when these members are filing amendments to the budget, there's a put and take rule. If they take money from some place, they have to put it somewhere and vice versa. And so a lot of the places that these members take money from are those two spots, especially this session with how much the lottery is getting shellacked publicly. It was

very popular among the amendments to take it from there and to put it to whatever it is you want. Right? It could be a palatable place to pull money from. Absolutely and the trustee offices of the governor is always that. Now it never ends up staying in right? This is a strategic ploy and it was very strategic it was very clever. Nobody realized it. Now, when Mary Gonzalez laid out the amendment to the amendment, she said, oh, this is just a technical correction or something like that. Did not explain what the heck it is. I think clarifying language may have been used. Technical was in it.

Technical, technical something. Okay. Um, uh, but yeah, nobody knew what the heck it was. Which typically on the house floor, you just, you hear that and you're like, okay. Members are so used to hearing that from other members. Yep. And I think 26 or so, 25, 26, members voted against the amendment after it was amended, putting it in the budget. But nobody really knew at the time. I think it was, I think her, the amendment to the amendment was just adopted without objection. It was acceptable to the author, Greg Bonnen, which is important. So that comes on. No, we thought

anything of it until we get to Mitch Little's amendment to give OAG staffers a pay raise and it was taking money to do that I believe from the the trustee offices of the governor now with the put-and-take rule you have to have money to take but because of that with tacked on there was no money to take to under the current budget as proposed right as amended as amended and like all of this is kabuki theater because they're just gonna decide what the budget looks like in conference, right? Conference committee aware members of the House and members of the Senate come together and say hey

we have two different bills that our chambers passed let's come together and find the version we will put forward. But all of this is Kabuki theater and it's designed to just get test votes on things or talking points for, you know, voters say I can go then go back to their constituents and say hey I voted for this I tacked this under the budget even though it didn't stay on there. So that went down by point of order because there was no money, the Vlittle amendment. Now much of the opposition members, the right-wingers in the caucus, many of their amendments were taking money from these places. And so basically half,

three-quarters, whatever it was, of their amendments was just shot through. Was just sidelined, yep. And it was a very clever maneuver. And I think it's pretty clear leadership knew about it, particularly because Bonin, it was acceptable to him, right? Now, the other side of it is, that's a move to protect members from having to take bad votes that will be used against them in the primary. One member specifically... Bad votes meaning controversial votes. Right.

That's what we're talking about. Things that primary opponents will use against them in the election. One member came up to me and said exactly that. Which is the whole point of the members trying to offer these to is be like, hey, let's make people take these stances. Exactly, exactly. It's a game of chess, right? Move, counter move. And so that... When they were on track to be fairly quick earlier in the day when that happened,

no shot in hell. It's over with. We're going to point of order everything. In our docket, I say, pooing on the house floor. There was a lot of pooing on the house floor. Point of order is, yeah. I don't think you need to explain that for this crowd. Maybe not. But I hope somebody clips that pooing on the house floor up and uses it, hint, hint, three several days. So, that threw everything off kilter and just went poof.

How'd that go? Poof, so there, all the right wingers were pissed. And you know what, I would be pissed too if that was my goal to put these votes up, to try and make these reforms. Well oftentimes you'll find that the House rules or the budget or some of these big discussions and debates on the House floor provide members with those opportunities to potentially get these you know hot button issues on the floor and have members take votes they

wouldn't otherwise because maybe the bill won't make it to the floor maybe leadership is trying to say hey we don't want members to have to face this vote and other members are saying we should face these votes so these are typically the opportunities where you know folks try and ferry those conversations through the process. And another notable amendment from Little that was gonna get a lot of attention that came up was to pay Ken Paxton his back pay from when he was suspended for impeachment. I was so ready for that That was put in article 11 during the initial thing I mentioned

By leadership, so it's not dead. It can be revived and the Senate might push for that. It is in the budget It's just in the section that usually gets scrapped and thrown in the trash bin so that'll be a fight in conference committee something to watch there, but This happened thrown in the trash bin. So that'll be a fight in conference committee, something to watch there. But this happened, then the points of order started coming left and right. Briscoe Kane, who is, you know, in a bit of an ornery mood lately because of the speaker's race, like he's, he was opposition, he lost and now he's from Deer Park. Yep, now he's rearing for a fight and boy is he fighting. He looked way back into precedent and found a way to point of order riders, not just amendments. So when we talk about points of order usually in the budget stuff, it's against amendments

that are proposed. No, he found a way to tank things that were already in the budget itself or at least the committee substitute and it worked At least as far as I was watching he killed two out of the three Provisions that he attempted and then other members started doing it to yep Democrats started doing it back so you have this tit-for-tat and That was what prolonged this process in addition to spending 45 minutes to write a ruling on the on the points of order and reason, a couple of reasons for that, there's only one parliamentarian right now, Hugh Brady, is not on the floor doing this stuff in the moment.

Also, it's just Sharon Carter. Also, these members are, especially the ones that are doing these points of order, that are the rules guys. Aaron Zwiener in the Democratic caucus, Tray Martinez-Fisher, some still, but mainly it was Zwiener. On the Republican side you have Cody Vesute, Briscoe, Kane. And they were handing these kinds of points of order to a lot of freshmen, getting them involved saying, hey let's cut your teeth. I saw Zwiener hand a point of order, I don't know if it was ever called to Raphael and Chia and he was looking at it. That was happening

with Briscoe shopping it around. Then you had something I thought that was interesting. You have on the Republican side in the opposition, Mitch Little, Brent Money. They're the guys that are being trained by namely Briscoe, Cain, Vasutin on team leadership right now as a chairman even though he's still involved in defending Republicans on the points of order they're being trained to do that and so that it was fun watching them in real time learning the ropes learning what works what doesn't and most people don't give two rips most members don't give two rips about this parliamentary stuff

but it matters if it affects a lot of stuff. Oh my gosh. And it is so much fun standing in the press bullpen listening in or just watching the body language. It's awesome. It's one of my favorite parts of this job. I love seeing who talks to who. Yeah. It is fascinating. And I'm not just talking about the parliamentary stuff.

It's like, you'll see people up on the mics, front and back mic, Republican, Democrat, going at it against each other, making their political talking points. And then you'll see them afterwards just like elbowing each other and talking very casually on the side of the rail like nothing else. Oh yeah, Zwener and Vasut and Briscoe will afterwards be like well good battling with you I didn't mention John Bryan John Bryan does a lot of this too yes on the Democratic side they'll be like hey got you on that one you know like they're having fun with it and it's not personal even though they're like

really pushing for their side. Yeah. Right? And it can be personal for sure, but oftentimes, yeah. With them, like they know the game. Yeah, yeah, yeah. They know how it works and it is a competition. It's like sports. I told another reporter on the floor,

you know, I don't really get to play sports anymore. And this is like my engagement in competition here. So that's because I'm old and decrepit. If you were in the house, would you be a point of order guy? Oh, absolutely. I mean, if I could wrap my mind around it, I don't know if I could do that, but I would love it. That would be fun.

So that was happening. You're having this long drawn out process to write up judge or rulings because these guys want precedent from which to base To base their arguments down the road when things actually matter when you're actually debating whether a bill dies or survives That's why they're doing this And they're trying to feel out the parliamentarian how she's gonna rule on things Is she more susceptible to one kind of argument versus another that's what they're doing and it's fun to watch it in real-time play now

so Fast forward 3 a.m. we get to the budget. You had multiple members speak against Michael Cot and notably he had three or four members behind him from that flank of the Republican caucus backing him up. Then you had Brian Harrison. Nobody stood behind him and he got up and talked about how the budgets, you know bloated liberal all the stuff He's been saying that we talked about on the podcast a lot most liberal in history. Yeah Which old caught also was like, you know, dr Greg Vaughn in the appropriations chair who deals with the budget ferries it to the process certainly giving him his flowers and he worked Very hard on the bill, but I'm still not personally supporting it and I think taxpayers deserve a BNC. Yeah and

big thing for him was not enough property tax relief. Yes that was his talking point. So Harrison gets up there, nobody's behind him then we get to Gina Hinojosa and John Bryant they had kind of the same theme Democrats they opposed it because of the ESA provision the billion dollars going to that Not surprised, you know, they're on the progressive wing of their party And you know their constituents don't want this right really So all that makes sense then you had Donna Howard get up a Democrat from Austin defend it She said this is not perfect also involved in the appropriations process Yes, and by the way, one of the smartest people on the finance stuff that I've ever met.

Absolutely. It's amazing to talk to her about that stuff. The point she makes about the surplus, and like, you know, it's really rudimentary to just say, oh, $24 billion surplus, when really you have all these other, you have unexpended balances, you have promises that weren't, like, things that were passed last session that weren't paid for because enabling legislation didn't pass. So she knows her way around that stuff really well and explains it very well. Neal and Alan Trotzclair Republican get up and also kind of hit the same theme only from her side of things like I wish this could be

better but you know this is this is good this is this is worth voting for. Trotzclair and Howard both saying I support the budget. Yes yes And so then you had Bonin close, finally had a vote. There were 26 votes against. It's a mix of progressive Democrats and the conservative Republicans on the right flank of the party. And that was it. Other than that, you know, you had 118 members support this. It went through pretty easily other than, you know, the 14 hours leading up to this. Yeah. There was a much question that this was going to pass but I will say this is more members we have vote against the budget than we've seen in a while. So that's how that ended and we go from

there. Now goes conference committee they'll hash it out with the Senate. It'll probably be a little while before we see the budget come back to the House after conference with the conference CUNY report. Okay, we have one more topic, but before we get into it, we're going to take another break and hear from a sponsor. Do you want insights on the policies that impact your wallet? Economist and fellow Texan Vance Gann here. Texans work hard for their money, but bad policies can take it away and risk future prosperity. On the Let P.L. Prosper show, I break down economic news that impacts your income, job and future in a way that you can understand.

I also invite top voices in politics, policy and economics to discuss solutions that unleash America's potential. As a former Trump White House chief economist and now policy entrepreneur and more than 20 influential organizations, I find my calling in driving forward policies that let people prosper. Get insights that can help you get ahead by subscribing to my Let People Prosper Show podcast wherever you get your podcast.

For more information, go to VanceGann.com. God bless you and have a prosperous day. And we're back. Bradley, ready to hit the final topic of our discussion? Okay. God bless you and have a prosperous day. forward a resolution to vacate the chair in the Texas House, essentially removing the speaker from the dais. What was it like on the floor when this was all going on? It was... We also knew this was coming. We knew it was coming, yeah.

Because he had filed the resolution the night before and then the rumblings happened about, you know, there's going to be a vote. We're going to do this. going to be a vote we're going to do this and it was kind of a that was kind of burrows calling Harrison's bluff on whether there was any motion movement behind actually vacating him as speaker and we'll talk I'll talk about how they kind of maneuvered around that indirectly but anyway so he files this as a resolution of course earlier than the than the last, the week before Burroughs had told Harrison, go file a resolution on it. And we're not going to do this as like a, just from the back mic, an off the cuff kind of situation.

So he does file it. They get to it. We get to, uh, whatever, what day was that? Tuesday, I think. whatever, what day was that? Tuesday, I think. And then you have the speeches. Harrison gets up, gives his speech, you know, criticizing the way Burroughs has been running the House, saying Democrats run the House. Then he said, this is not about Brian Harrison, this is about reforming, changing the direction of the House.

To that and to the Democrats around the House thing, you had a lot of laughter and jeers. That got a reaction from folks. I would say the mood on the floor was, solemn is not the right word, irritated, people were not having this. Ultimately the vote was very clear. There was only one person that voted with Harrison. Now I should stop and say how it went down. So instead of actually having a vote on the resolution, there was a motion to table it. Cody Harris got up, called this a ridiculous waste of time and then moved to table so they

have the vote on the table record vote there were only two that voted against 141 to 2 I think it was there were handful of white lights which for progressive Democrats white lighted one Republican Mike Schofield that was interesting so but other than that it it was Harrison, David Lowe, and, uh, nobody else that, that voted against, against tabling this in support of vacating the chair, including all of the members, all the other members who voted with reform and, uh, for David Cook for speaker. Um, that was kind of a halfway measure between having

an actual referendum on Burroughs' speakership because they could say oh we move to table it this is not the right time to do this and for Burroughs from his perspective solidifying his membership his majority and I think there's an argument to be made that after that he either got really close or now has a Republican majority in the house, which he didn't have when he won the speakership. 36 Republicans joined all the Democrats, or not all the Democrats, but however many Democrats it was to get 85 votes. And so that's a millstone that's been hung around his neck throughout this entire

session that owes a democratic majority. I don't think that's true anymore and you can chalk that up to members not wanting to deal with the drama, not wanting to to disrupt things. I think there's a lot to be said about that absolutely. Then you have other members who are like well I've come around on boroughs more. That's the people that we're talking that you're talking about here. Yes. In terms of getting into that majority. It's not the people who are like, now's not the time, like, annoyed with it, maybe annoyed with the speaker still, but not fully in support of his leadership. There are other members, though, that would probably have switched that side. And that's who you're talking about.

Mostly. I think you can also add the people who are like, some of them who are saying, it's not, this is a waste of time, let's not do this right now. The jury's still out. Yeah, I think there are different flavors of all of this. There are members who are very much against Burroughs as speaker who voted to table this because in their mind, and Tony Tinderholt said this, this is theater, this was, and he said this, it's not my word, this is his, this was Brian Harrison doing something about himself.

This was his effort to try and make a big spectacle to raise his profile more. And so... And that criticism is coming from inside the house, right? Like that is... inside the house right like that is that is inside the house somebody that is typically politically aligned but it's a very different session at this point but not just inside the house Abraham George had a current Texas GOP chair had a sub tweet he didn't say it explicitly as Tinderholt did but it was along the same lines it was this is dumb

stop this there are ways he said strategy matters the way you do things as Tinderholt did, but it was along the same lines. It was, this is dumb, stop this. There are ways, he said strategy matters, the way you do things, actions matter, the way you do things matter. And that's kind of the case of these members like Tony Tinderholt and Mitch Little, Luther, all these people who are very much against Burroughs as speaker. They don't want him to be speaker, but they're trying to mount a coordinated opposition in strategic ways, like what they did on the budget stuff, right? Um, and they saw Tinder or what Harrison did as just political theater and nothing more.

One member came up to me in that sect, sect of the caucus and said, you know, this is basically the Leroy Jenkins meme. We don't take them down quick. I think it's a pretty good plan and we should be able to pull it off this time. What do you think Abdul? Can you give me a number crunch real quick? Yeah, give me a sec. I'm coming up with 32.33 repeating of course percentage of survival

it's a lot better than we usually do oh my god he just ran in that clip is just played and that is the comparison that they're making. They see this as him going out his own just for his own desires and purposes. And talking to members, okay so when I said for the call coming from inside the house, that was a turn of phrase, not the Texas house. So like coming from inside of that group, right? Inside of that group of reformers, of folks who've been critical of the speaker, you know that right flank of the caucus, right? Inside of that group of reformers, of folks who've been critical of the speaker, you know, that right flank of the caucus, those are the people I'm talking about. So if you are receiving criticism from inside of your

own house, that's what I'm talking about. And that's what we're talking about when it comes to Tinder Holt and, you know, other members who are saying, hey, I don't like how this is being done. Now I've also heard from members in that group that they're saying, we weren't approached about this is being done now I've also heard from members in that group that they're saying we weren't approached about yes So like we weren't even part of the conversation about this. We do not know is being brought up This was very much a rogue move by Harrison, which is part of the criticism Yeah, like at least lupus and let's have a discussion about this overall teammates political teammates on this Let's actually act like he basically just said I filed the resolution go join it

Otherwise, you know tough luck right? Right. The argument you just said was a statement literally a statement put in the journal by Daniel Alders, Shelley Lutheran, Katrina Pearson. Carissa Richardson also put out her own thing. So that was the criticism from there and And everyone knew it was going to fail. Everyone did. This had no shot. And I mean, you look online and Harrison has a following and, um, people that had no, they, they want boroughs out at all costs. Um, people who are not in the house, I mean, their vote on this vote on this, they can have their say,

but they're not the ones voting on this, right? And there's still a lot of grudges held from how the Speaker's race went down, right? Saying, hey, what about the caucus vote? What about this? What about that? And that is all still very deep-seated resentment within Republican Party activists circles. So there is a crowd that is supportive of these measures, absolutely, in this move by Harrison. That's very interesting though to watch the inter-dynamics at the House, Circles so there is a crowd that is supportive of these measures. Absolutely. Yes moved by Harrison Yeah, that's very interesting that I watch the inter dynamics at the house where you have members who are aligned on these kinds of issues Being like hey, what's going on? Yeah, there's also

Trepidation and criticism about what's not passed yet, right and is the house moving slow? You know David Lowe who was the only one that signed on to Harrison voted with him he put out a statement that was kind of a half-hearted you know vote of support with Harrison and he's like basically I don't like the way the house is going I don't think Burles should be speaker and so that's why I voted for this voted with Harrison on this but I'm not interested in doing this again. Unless there's 76 votes to remove the speaker. So even there, the one person that was with him is a half hearted vote of support with them. Like, Hey, yeah, in theory, this is where I'm at, but let's make sure we're

organized next time because why take, you, why take the swing? If you know, you're going to miss that's basically it, you know, the old saying come with the King, you best you're gonna miss. That's basically it. You know the old saying come with the king you best not miss, right? And so you had this happen you know from what I understand there was kind of a olive branch offering to all the reform members even the ones who are still very much anti-buros you vote against this and all is forgiven. Now that's not going to say that. We move forward. That's not going to say they're not going to fight.

They're going to fight, right? But we're going to bury the hatchet, basically. And I think if that happens and if you have more of those members on the right flank of the party there in leadership affecting decision-making You know, you could actually have more of a Republican majority governing this than we saw at the beginning You know, maybe not who knows there's so much left to play here and all the action in session is Remains right Bills dying bills, all this stuff.

So, you know, I think that also the case that people like Abraham George were making is there's gonna be a lot of time to, for post-mortem after this to see. Like we haven't passed the budget yet. Right. So we haven't even had a school choice. Like there are a lot of discussions about, we haven't touched these issues that folks are already criticizing the boroughs speakership and leadership over. Well, let's get to those, see how that all turns out, and then let's have a conversation.

And I think you can insinuate based on comments by Dan Patrick, Burroughs knows that what's going to, he's going to be judged on what passes and what fails, and he's going to have to get things across the line. Otherwise, he's going gonna be in the same spot that Dade Phelan was. Now, from what I'm hearing, he's managing things a lot better than Phelan did in the chamber

on these kinds of things. First and foremost, he doesn't have Dane Patrick at his throat yet, or maybe not at all, we'll see. Patrick is increasing his trepidation about the way things are going in the house. Like I'm still optimistic, but they're going to have to get their act together and pass stuff, right? Otherwise we're going to be here for specials and then he's going to go, you

know, boss the walls against, against the speaker, like he has done the last couple of sessions. So, um, which the criticisms here could be, you know, from that side, from the Harrison sect of the party could be, okay, well, we moved slowly on A, B and C. Yeah. Like that's where, but the other folks saying we haven't had these policy debates yet are also correct. Right.

We have no way to tell what will be passed. I think the way this played out went about as well for boroughs and leadership as it possibly could have. Maybe the only thing you could have gotten more is David Lowe not voting for with with Harrison so that Harrison's literally the only person. Um, but David's little statement says now like Harrison's on his own. David Lowe's not in his camp on this and I think you saw when I mentioned earlier the statements on the budget. David Lowe was not standing behind Harrison he was standing behind Michael Cot. Those things are

subtle but there's a reason they do this right and you know during the budget debate Tony Tinnerholt's going around with and votes constantly guess who wasn't talking to anybody Harrison he was talking on his phone constantly. Um, no, I mean like, I don't know who he's talking to. He's probably talking to strategy, but it was noticeable how much he was on the phone, not talking to his colleagues, talking to somebody. Um, also filming videos of himself, uh, criticizing the way the budget's going. So he's very much a lone wolf right now. And, um,

you know, I think I I heard, I think it, he has unified the House by doing this in a way that wasn't gonna happen before. Now, there's still fights to be had. As we saw yesterday. Yeah, people like Mitch Little are not behind Burroughs as Speaker, other than just, let's not introduce this chaos in the House of having to pick a new speaker because also keep in mind if they remove Burroughs they then have to

have a speaker's race right there who the hell do they pick on this right that's just I would love to see that happen just from the sheer spectacle of it all yes from the entertainment but yeah so so I think Burrows is very happy with how that went and We'll see what the opposition does how they regroup but you know when When you have people saying people being people on the internet, the Twitterati calling Tony Tenderholt a rhino, I think you've kind of jumped the shark. And that's, that is quite the situation we're in. And I don't know.

It's a wild time to be watching this particular flank of the party interact with each other. And I think, you know, two roads can only diverge for so long before there's a big break. And what will that look like? Yeah. Very interesting. Yeah, jam-packed episode. Jam-packed for sure. Bradley, thank you. Well done. Are you going to be sleeping as much as possible this weekend, or are you going to be watching the Masters?

I will be watching the Masters and doing my worst Masters impression by playing golf on Saturday and probably sucking. But it is what it is. Well, I've heard you're not that bad of a golfer. I am not that bad, no. There are worse, including my buddies that I play with. We'll see if they listen to this. Maybe they do, maybe they don't.

I doubt it. Any other final thoughts? No. A couple of months left to session, and now we're in the home stretch and where everything's going to happen. So I look forward to the deadline calendars. I look forward to Sinyi Dai.

Yeah, thanks everyone for following along. Hope you enjoy these episodes as much as we enjoy making them. They're a blast. Well folks, thanks for listening. We'll catch you next time. Alright, chums up, let's do this. Leroy Nagan!