The Texan Podcast - Weekly Roundup - June 28, 2024

Episode Date: June 28, 2024

Take our survey for a chance to win a free hat or t-shirt of your choice: https://form.typeform.com/to/cehHQka0Show off your Lone Star spirit with a free "Remember the Alamo" hat with an annual subscription to The Texan: https://thetexan.news/subscribe/ The Texan’s Weekly Roundup brings you the latest news in Texas politics, breaking down the top stories of the week with our team of reporters who give you the facts so you can form your own opinion. Enjoy what you hear? Be sure to subscribe and leave a review! Got questions for the reporting team? Email [e-mail] — they just might be answered on a future podcast.This week on The Texan’s “Weekly Roundup,” the team discusses:Supreme Court Rules Against Plaintiffs Suing Federal Agencies Over Alleged Social Media Censorship5th Circuit Requires Unnamed Texas Agency Staff to Testify in July Grand Jury Proceeding Following Investigation of Paxton Ally Nate PaulTravis County DA Jose Garza's Challenge to Daniel Perry Pardon Dismissed by Texas Court of Criminal AppealsAppeals Court Affirms Dismissal of Texas' In-State Suppressor LawsuitCruz Questions ‘Selective Prosecution’ of Child Gender Modification Whistleblower at Texas Children’s HospitalERCOT Grid Reforms Taking Shape as Texas' Population, Business Footprint BoomsLt. Gov. Dan Patrick Pledges to Pass Ten Commandments Bill After Louisiana Passes LawTexas A&M to Co-Manage Nation’s Nuclear Arsenal Facility in AmarilloTexas State University Will No Longer Host Presidential Debate

I say that because I've seen so many A&M fans that are friends of mine on social media absolutely freaking out. And the things they're saying, I mean, it's hilarious, right? Like, this man should never be able to set foot in College Station. This man should never be able to set foot in Texas again. This man should never have anything good happen to him or his family ever again. Like, that's something that somebody said on my feed. So like a friend of mine who's typically a very rationally solid human being. So I'm just, we'll talk about it. Lots of reactions. I have lots of thoughts. Well, howdy folks and happy Friday. Welcome back to the Texans Weekly Roundup Podcast. I'm Mackenzie

DeLulo here with Brad, Cameron, and Matt. As per the usual, gentlemen, how are you guys doing today? Why do you add the word the in as per the usual? I've always wondered that. It doesn't make any sense. I think it's just a more playful way of using a very old phrase, turn of phrase, and I enjoy it. It makes my skin crawl. But that might be more you than anyone else. I'll be very interested to hear how that portion of our podcast turns out.

We spoke the same insult over each other, so that will be delightful. Gentlemen, I, Brad requested I update on the River Seine and the protest happening in Paris. I'll do that quickly before we jump into everything. If you have missed a couple of episodes of our podcast, there was a protest going on in Paris ahead of the Olympics by Parisians who were very unexcited about the Olympics coming to their hometown and in protest

decided that they would defecate in the river Seine in an attempt to ensure that the cleanup effort instituted by the French government for over a billion dollars would even be met with more difficulty. And so when both the president and the mayor of Paris decided, hey, let's swim in the river to show our cleanup effort has been successful, folks organized a protest to say, hey, we're going to dirty the Seine even more. Well, the swim got delayed. I can't remember if I said that to you guys. But the swim by the French officials got delayed to early July. I think it's July 7th. I could be wrong.

So we'll see. But the protest supposedly still happened last week. And I don't know that anyone actually took part. Nobody really seems to know based on what I found in news articles and on social media. So we'll see. Maybe they're waiting until the swim actually happens, but that's the latest that I have on that front. They got to commit to the bit if they're going to do this, you know,

go big or go home. Well, I said when I talked about it, a bunch of Tex-Mex food, drink a bunch of coffee. Yeah. Bradley, that's enough. That's absolutely enough okay well on that unsavory note folks i apologize on behalf of bradley johnson there we're gonna go ahead and jump in the in the podcast in the first place this is your fault you brought it up you asked me before we started recording to talk about it so don't even come at me. This would not be a thing on the podcast if you didn't talk about it.

I talked about it ahead of the podcast I initially talked about this on, and you said you have to talk about it. You told me that. We're going to have to roll the tape on it. Throw the flag. But we don't have footage of that because it was before we were recording, but Brad just admitted to it, so we're on record. We're good. Cameron. Let's talk some news, shall we? Let's come to you.

The U S Supreme court has been issuing opinions this week and should, this should go into next week, likely as well. On a variety of high profile cases, you covered one pertaining to social media. Tell us about it. Yeah. So in a six to three decision, the U S Supreme. Supreme Court ruled in Murphy v. Missouri that the plaintiffs did not have the legal standing to seek an injunction against the Biden administration over its involvement with social media platforms.

Some background on the case, multiple plaintiffs ranging from doctors, epidemiologists human rights advocates academics they were claiming that on a variety of different fronts that federal agencies and officials had engaged in censorship by targeting certain topics that were kind of right-leaning conservative leaning speech on these social media platforms such as voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election, COVID-19 origins, mask and vaccine efficacy, and the Hunter Biden laptop story. The plaintiffs were arguing that the defendants used public statements and threats of regulatory action, such as reforming Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to induce social media platforms to suppress content in these alleged violations of the plaintiff's First Amendment rights. The states of Missouri and

Louisiana were also alleging harm due to infringement of their citizens' free speech rights. And an example of a plaintiff in this case was Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. He was an outspoken person pushing back against some of these COVID-19 policies. He was someone who signed on to the Great Barrington Declaration, expressing concerns with the impacts of the COVID-19 policies. And that's just one example. There was a long list of individuals like him who were plaintiffs in this case. Just for some brief background on how we got here, in 2023, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an injunction restricting how the government can communicate with social media companies stemming from a louisiana district court judge who issued an

initial ruling barring administration officials from communicating with social media platforms there were the majority opinion that was delivered by justice am Coney Barrett. I will read from an example here in the dissenting opinion by Samuel Lito. He said, quote, if the lower court's assessment of the voluminous record is correct, this is one of the most important free speech cases to reach this court in years. Just putting an emphasis on how important free speech on social media platforms is, and we're still waiting for the net choice challenges to both the Florida and Texas social media laws. Those have yet to be released as recording here on June 27th. That could either come down on Friday,

the day of the release of this podcast, or possibly even next week. So we'll keep an eye on all that happening. Lots happening at the U.S. Supreme Court. Gentlemen, before we move on, I do want you guys to give listeners a little bit of insight into how these Supreme Court opinion drop days affect workflow, what you're specifically looking for, like give a little bit of behind the scenes as to how you're tweeting out and sharing and reporting on these different opinions that are coming out. Matt, I might start with you here, since this is very like the judiciary at large is very much your wheelhouse. How does this all work in actuality? Well, the first thing that I do procedurally is I follow some of the U.S. Supreme Court

press corps. So these are the credentialed reporters with the U.S. Supreme Court who are there present at the courtroom for release days. And they usually give little heads up and understand little procedural nuanced things that signal what the court is or isn't going to do. For example, you know, ordinarily at the end of its term, spring term, which is the last day of June, you know, they try to have all the cases out and they'll usually signal when they have released opinions, whenever they're only going to have one more day to release opinions. And a lot of people were thinking tomorrow since Friday, the 28th is a decision release day that today we would we would get to get another batch of opinions on Monday and probably into July, which is rare. It's not without precedent. It's happened before. We've had SCOTUS finish up their spring term in early July in the past, but I think only like on two occasions in recent history. So it's unusual for them to go this late in the session. The things that I do directly is I go to the U.S. Supreme Court

website and have a calendar there where they note what the court's business is. And usually within a week, they update the calendar, sometimes within a couple of days, and they will notate that today decisions may be released. And it's usually a pretty good sign if they have a lot on their docket, a lot of cases that we know that are coming out that even though it's discretionary, they don't paint themselves in a corner, they say may, you know, because we know they have so many cases that they have to release and they typically don't try to drop them all in one occasion. We know there's a good chance there's going to be cases coming out. Some of the heads up that we get on Twitter

from the press pool are things like how many boxes do the clerks bring out whenever they're about to release opinions right before 9 a.m. Central. Like today, they only brought out two boxes. So we knew there was only a handful of cases coming out, like maybe three to four decisions, which is what we got today. And yeah, you know, at nine o'clock, we all start clicking refresh frantically and try to overload the Supreme Court servers. And the first decision hits and we really quickly disseminated. I check it against I keep a little cheat sheet of pending cases with synopsis on what they're about, etc.

So, you know, I know that generally the titles are the ones that I'm watching for that I intend to report on. So I usually recognize those titles really quickly. Sometimes I don't recognize the title and I have to consult my little chart that I make and see what is this case about? You know, like a good example was the Idaho abortion law today. I didn't immediately recognize its title, but whenever I referenced my chart, I saw what that was about. And it's a very interesting decision. I'm actually considering writing on it right now because it's just a it's kind of a it was a very unusual route for the court to take you know they granted certain case very early on and decided oops we we took this case too early so we're going to dismiss the cert and um and then we're going to write a bunch of angry dissents yelling at each other

uh and uh so yeah it was a really interesting opinion to try and sift through not your ordinary here's the opinion of the court here's a couple of dissents from the the angry minority and you know as scalia would say water over the bridge um so yeah that's uh and then we once we tweet out a synopsis of what that opinion says uh we usually have another opinion that drops and we quickly rush to that one to try and disseminate, dissect the high points. And hopefully one comes out that we want to report on, then we turn to that one in greater detail. Absolutely. Great synopsis, Matt, Brad, Cameron. I think Matt hit the major points there, but anything y'all want to add before we move on with our stories here? Just got to be able to read through the opinions pretty quickly and get the gist of whatever it is that the court is ruling on that and run with it.

Yeah, and I'll just add for the average listener, I'm like you. I probably don't have a law degree. There's lots of legalese that are being used in these court cases. So I really do rely a lot on Twitter followers, ex-followers, like Matt was mentioning, for people to break down what is actually being said in many of these cases. So, yeah, find some people you trust on X who have a legal background who will break down these cases for you because I rely on them as well. Twitter, Cameron, Twitter. I know that we are in an internal battle here about whether we call it X or whether we call it Twitter, but I think we all just found out where you lie, Cameron. I'm taking note. I would add, functionally speaking, that there's two ways to really quickly communicate to people what just happened with the court, and that is, one, there's the actual

question presented to the court, which is usually just a sentence or two. So something really easy you can communicate. And secondly, the first page or two of the brief usually has the holding of the court. So here's what the question was. Here's the holding. And if it's a really big case that has been talked about a lot, that's usually all the information anybody needs to have to know what's happening. And there certainly is a lot of legalese, just like Cameron was saying, but there are also fun nuggets where you come across when you're reading an opinion from different justices, either slamming another justice or using some sort of quirky or fun

turn of phrase. So they actually can be very fun reads as well. Absolutely very heady and full of legalese, but fun regardless. Thank you, gentlemen, for that. Brad, we're going to come to you. A quietly released appeals court decision likely means the office of the Attorney General Brass will testify in front of a grand jury next week. What are the details? So unnamed agency staff will be required to testify in front of a federal grand jury next week, July 2nd, in what's understood to be a case focused on the long-running corruption and abuse of office allegations against Attorney General Ken Paxton involving business developer Nate Paul.

The unnamed agency claimed attorney-client privilege in asking the appeals court to halt the grand jury proceedings at the lower court, but the court denied that request. It rejected the DOJ's claims that government attorneys have no attorney-client privilege, but found that an exception in cases of alleged criminal wrongdoing, and that's where they found this here. They specifically cite the criminal allegation exception. And it sounds like reading the case that the Fifth Circuit at least believes there's something there to look into more. And, you know, obviously none of these allegations are new.

We've heard this for years. It first started in October 2020 when now former members of the Office of the Attorney General went to the FBI with allegations of abuse of office, most of which in connection with Nate Paul, allegations against Paxton. And that started the ball rolling on this. Last year, a grand jury was assembled in San Antonio to consider these allegations that were first brought to the FBI by those employees. This has gone off into many different strands of situations. Nate Paul has been indicted and is facing trial on wire fraud and loan fraud charges in a case totally unrelated to Paxton. This one

is understood to involve both of them. And then, you know, there's the whistleblower case in state court going on right now. That's a civil lawsuit. Of course, you had the impeachment during which Paxton was acquitted on all these charges, you know, many of which involved Paul himself or connections, alleged connections to Paul. So, you know, this this is a story that never ends. And, you know, next week we'll just have another another chapter in it. Explain how we know that this involves Paxton. So the opinion released was very vague. It didn't name anyone specifically.

It just said the agency, referring to a state agency in this regard. And specifically what makes it clear that this is about the Paxton investigation is that the Paxton investigation is that the timeline the court talks about in this, the request for an investigation brought to the FBI in October 2020, subpoenas served two months later in December. Obviously, the Attorney General served with a subpoena in December 2020, two months after the allegations were brought to the FBI, and that was reported to be a subpoena for Paxton himself. But that's generally the reason. And we've known this has been going on, this federal investigation, for years now. Now we're almost to the end of year four of this.

And there's really no other example, no other case that this fits. So it is pretty clearly the Texas Attorney General's office impacts it himself. What this means going forward, it could mean, you know, indictments handed down next month. It could mean something as soon as that. You know, obviously, whenever a grand jury is brought up, you must bring up the fact that, you know, grand juries are very easy to get indictments from. That doesn't mean conviction is guaranteed or even probable. We've seen a lot of back and forth in various venues on this story for a while now. There's really no telling if Paxton is indicted on these allegations.

First of all, what happens in the final ruling on it, and then how long it takes to fully be adjudicated, no way of knowing. And frankly, it would go well past the November election, and that has its own implications because Paxton has an eye on being the next U.S. Attorney General under Trump, should he win. And Trump has stated that he's considering Paxton for that. Interesting to watch. This will add more fuel to the fire if we get to that point of a Senate confirmation hearing. It's just, you know, there's so much to this. It's a wild story. And, you know, of course, also, through this whole situation, Paxton is maintained he's innocent.

So, he hasn't been convicted of anything yet. What's the phrase about the idiom about the ham sandwich? A grand jury would indict a ham sandwich? Yeah, you could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich. That's the, that's the same. That's all I could think about after you said that, but regardless, I almost said it. I just decided not to belabor the point on it, but

well, I'm a little hungry. So maybe after this, I'll go get a ham sandwich. Bradley. Thank you, Cameron. I'm going to come to you. There's been an update additionally, and another big story here, the pardon of Daniel Perry. Tell us what's going on. Yeah, so the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has dismissed Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza's attempt to challenge the recent pardon of Daniel Perry, which was granted by Governor Greg Abbott. The court's decision was made without issuing a formal opinion. Following Abbott's pardon, Garza said he would be filing a writ of memorandum with the Court of Criminal Appeals in an effort to overturn Abbott's pardon. Garza had called Abbott's pardon of Perry, quote, a mockery of our legal system.

Doug O'Connell, who is Perry's defense attorney who defended him in his trial, called Garza's attempt to overturn the pardon, quote, political theater. And what's also worth mentioning is the day after the conviction was handed down of Daniel Perry, Abbott called the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to, quote, expedite a pardon recommendation for the governor's immediate approval. And that pardon did end up coming through. So just an update there for people who have been following this Daniel Perry case. We have extensive coverage of all the trial, everything that's happened in the aftermath on the Texan.News. Absolutely. Cameron, thank you.

Matt, coming to you, so much judicial news today. A federal appeals court has sustained the dismissal of a lawsuit seeking to exempt Texas-made suppressors from federal law. Matt, explain why the courts decided against allowing the claim to proceed. A federal appeals court has sustained the dismissal of a lawsuit seeking to exempt Texas-made suppressors from federal regulations. The Texas Suppressor Freedom Act by Representative Tom Overson was passed by the Texas legislature in 2021 and provides that a Texan who wishes to manufacture their own firearm suppressor and keep it entirely within the state of Texas may ask the Office of the Texas Attorney General to first obtain a

federal court order on their behalf preventing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, or ATF, from enforcing the National Firearms Act against them, that is, failing to register a suppressor and pay the $200 tax that the federal government requires, which, if you fail to register your suppressor, pay the tax, and go through the process, it can lend you a hefty fine and up to a 20-year prison sentence. The law seeks to, one, set up a case that will revisit the law on Congress's power to levy tax and regulate intrastate commerce, and secondly, make firearm suppressors easier to obtain for otherwise law-abiding, gun-owning Texans. The first case lawsuit came along under the new law last year, and the Attorney General's Office filed a lawsuit against the ATF. However, last year,

a federal district judge dismissed the case for lack of standing. To make a long story short, the federal courts have strict rules about not hearing cases that present hypothetical situations. You have to show a strong case that you fear the government is going to take action against you, and that in doing so, they will likely violate your rights. The problem is, in this case, the plaintiffs seemed to simply fail to say the magic words in their own sworn statements, so to speak. They said they plan to manufacture suppressors, but as both the district and the appeals court noted, that in and of itself is not a crime. They did not say that they were not going to register the suppressors in accordance with the NFA, or that they were not going to pay the tax or something along those lines that could trigger a legitimate fear of prosecution by the federal government. The plaintiffs appealed and the dismissal was sustained by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals last week,

who added that they failed to see where the state of Texas could articulate a legitimate standing to intervene on the plaintiffs, who are private citizens, behalf. Texas argued it was in the interest of the state to litigate the NFA issue, which often makes it difficult for citizens to timely obtain NFA-regulated weapons, saying suppressors protect a person's hearing, and the protection of hearing protects the health and safety of the citizenry, and thus the state had a bona fide reason to intervene. That argument didn't work with either the trial court or the appeals court. Now that the case has been dismissed, it's not entirely the end of the road for the challenge. The plaintiffs could go back to the trial court and amend their complaint, or they could refile a new case. Whatever they decide, we'll be watching and updating the story as it continues. see a subscriber survey. We will be looking through those answers. We care about what you

think. We really want to know just the state of the union with our listeners, with our subscribers, our readers, just folks who engage with our content. So keep an eye out for that as an incentive to participate. Both a subscriber and a non-subscriber will be raffled to win a t-shirt or hat of their choice from our store. And we've got some pretty awesome merch. So make sure to go and fill that out. At the end, there will be a question that says, do you want to enter a raffle for a free merch item? Click yes. Absolutely. And you'll be entered to win. Make sure to go do that. The survey will be going out very soon. So keep an eye on your email inboxes. Now I've done my duty for Daniel. Thank you, folks, for listening to this ad.

Cameron, we're going to come to you here. Senator Ted Cruz questioned what he called the selective prosecution of a Texas Children's Hospital whistleblower. Give us the details. Texas Children's Hospital and multiple whistleblowers now in regard to Texas Children's Hospitals continuing to treat children with, quote, gender-affirming care, despite them saying they've shut down that clinic. And in this letter from Cruz was addressed to the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Texas, where he questions the, quote, selective prosecution and the weaponization of the Department of Justice against political opponents. And this letter was in regard to one of the whistleblowers, Ethan Haim, who is a former general surgeon at TCH, who, after blowing the whistle on some of the things I just

mentioned, he was visited by federal agents and Christopher Ruffo at the Manhattan Institute has done extensive reporting and putting out the information about these whistleblowers. He stated that, quote, two federal agents that say they're with Health and Human Services then came to his door saying, quote, they are investigating a case regarding medical records. In Cruz's letter, he's requesting information from the U.S. Attorney General regarding the alleged HIPAA violations and if this U.S. Attorney General communicated with anyone outside the U.S. Attorney General or the U.S. Attorney's office before charging him. Additionally, Cruz is seeking

information on why the alleged HIPAA violations are being pursued as felony charges rather than misdemeanors. And the HIPAA violations are for felony counts of violating the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, that's HIPAA. And what's interesting to mention is the medical records that were released as part of this whistleblower report, Cruz mentions in his letter that the names are redacted on those whistleblower documents. And they're alleging that personal information was leaked alongside those documents. So some conflicting information there. We'll see what happens in regards to the story.

But like I mentioned, there's been multiple whistleblowers coming out as of now. And then also Texas Attorney General Kim Paxton has reportedly launched an investigation into the issue regarding Medicaid fraud. People can check out our reporting on that because the second whistleblower is from Texas Children's Hospital. The second whistleblower is alleging Medicaid funds were used in the child gender modification treatments that were continuing at Texas Children's Hospital. So lots of information there for our listeners. I break it all down in the variety of different articles I've written about it. And certainly worth going down a rabbit hole at the texan.news to read all the coverage and make sure you're up to speed on everything. Yeah, well, it is a deep rabbit hole because there's pending Texas Supreme Court cases in regard to SB 14. I covered that extensively. There's different information people can read

up on in our articles about the WPATH guidelines. Lots of information out there. So I won't belabor the point. People can go check it out. Absolutely. Cameron, thank you so much. Bradley, coming to you, the legislature just had two lengthy hearings in the interim here on the ERCOT grid reforms that are being implemented. Where do these things stand? So all of these more market focused reforms of, you know, of course, in 21, they issued more of the physical reforms like weatherization of plants. But now we're in the second phase, implementing the market reforms that were passed last session. There's various notable ones on this, on the plate of state regulators right now. First off, you have the Texas Energy Fund.

That was Lieutenant Governor Patrick in the Senate's big item. That's low-interest loans for the construction of power plants to try and get more energy, more production, more generation on the grid to cope with rising demand and demand from population boom and from the business boom. There were, earlier this summer when the application period opened up, there were many notices of intent filed that accounted for about 55,000 megawatts of generation. Now, not all of that will be constructed. Not all of that will be chosen to receive these loans. The state has $5 billion to allot in these loans, so they're going to have to pick and choose who gets it here.

But that application process is beginning, or it's in the middle of it, and eventually the state will narrow it down to see who exactly gets these loans. None of these reforms are going to change much in the short run. It's still going to be a tight summer, especially with how hot it's looking to be, and couple that with setting new records all the time in terms of peak demand, but that's chiefly because the state is growing in terms of population and business footprint.

So, of course, we're going to set new records constantly, and that will continue to happen. Another item here is the performance credit mechanism. This was the point of highest contention during the legislature last year. It is a, it was kind of the brainchild of Peter Lake, the former PUC chair, and Abbott, Governor Abbott endorsed it, pushed it during the legislative session. It was slid into the PUC sunset bill and it will, it would create this performance-based financial incentive for generators. The idea was to get them to increase their plants, their plant capacity to take advantage of these additional credits.

Now the reason it was such a big fight last session was the generators wanted that because they saw an opportunity to see actual return on investment or a better return on investment, something they haven't had for years, because federal subsidies have undercut that ability by prioritizing renewable power. And then on the other side, though, the loads, especially large loads who pay very large utility bills, see it as an increase in their utility payments. So they opposed it. It looks to be dead right now. It is very much on the back burner.

PUC officials said that as much during the hearings. So if that even gets implemented ever, it's not looking good. But it's certainly not going to be something pushed forward in the short run. Another thing is they're tweaking the reliability standard. They're creating a reliability standard, a new way by which to gauge the preparedness of the grid in tight situations and that will just give state officials and grid regulators a new way of looking at how prepared the grid is a new metric to use essentially so that's being hammered out as well and then of course you have the thing that really caught a lot of

attention was Bitcoin miners. Apparently, half of the large loads coming on in the state in the near future, half of that capacity comes from cryptocurrency miners, chiefly Bitcoin, and AI, artificial intelligence data centers. So they use a lot of electricity. They're massive operations. And that, along with just general population growth, is going to stress the grid. So they're trying to figure out what to do about that. Lieutenant Gunnar Patrick said something about addressing it down the road. You can see what the Bitcoin miners said in response to that. Lieutenant Gunner Patrick said something about addressing it down the road. You can see what the Bitcoin miners said in response to that in my story on the website.

But that's going to be a point of contention going forward. So overall, they're still working their way through, but they are making progress. And we'll start to see some actions here soon. Quickly, with the summer in full swing in Texas and heat waves certainly being a part of the conversation and the media narrative, talk to us about what this means for summer. So it's going to be tight. There's going to be problems, but problems don't mean catastrophe, right? So I will keep shouting this until I'm in my grave.

Rolling blackouts themselves are not that bad. They're a nuisance. The problem is when rolling blackouts stop rolling and become prolonged. So as long as that's avoided, there will be nothing even close to what happened in 21 that was a legit catastrophe. But that doesn't mean there aren't problems that come from it. So chiefly, politically, you know, if rolling blackouts are implemented, that's a big problem politically for the grid officials and the politicians in the state. But, you know, it's going to be hot, and we will again see tight conditions frequently in the late hours of the evening as the sun sets, solar drops off, and wind hasn't kicked up yet.

That was the same situation last summer. We're going to see that again. And the grid regulators and the industry are hoping that they can bridge the gap. And Texas is not the only state that experiences tightening of their grid. When I was living in California, we'd have brownouts. So it happens across the country during summer. And it was funny when I was living in California, there is a big push for electric vehicles and at one point um governor newsom like put out this huge press release about the use of electric vehicle chargers and then later that day he issued a warning about brownouts so on the same day a push for electrical vehicle charging which uses electricity and

could potentially stress the grid and then also warning about brownouts. It's like, that's California for you. Well, you know, on this with everything, there's tradeoffs. And, you know, if you are among those pushing for the increased electrification of all kinds of things, but especially vehicles, that comes with stressing the grid further. And there is no, you cannot have a perfect grid if you wanted. If you tried to get a perfect grid, you would not want to pay for it because it's just impossible to protect against literally everything.

You know, as far as things go, the ERCOT grid's pretty good, despite that one very horrible incident. It doesn't mean there aren't issues with it or problems, there are cut grids pretty good despite that one very horrible incident. It doesn't mean there aren't issues with it or problems but price for electricity traditionally has been very low compared to other states and that is despite having a massive economy far bigger than what we see in those other states that are even lower on the utility price for electricity but then you saw in 21 when things really become a problem and spiral out of control that comes with cost and we're still

litigating the the fallout financial fallout from that with a lot of bankruptcies in the industry and whatnot. So, yeah, I mean. It's a complicated issue. It is. But the amount of, you can just say freak out that happens online, you know, what you're saying, it's probably not as warranted. There is stress on the grid, but there's no need to catastrophize what's going on yep well done boys couldn't have said it better myself a great end a great end to a great segment

thank you both on that note also i want to plug um send me some stuff y'all's podcast uh we came out with a new episode this week, so folks, go listen to it. Brad, what was your favorite story from Send Me Some Stuff? What was my favorite? I don't remember what we talked about. Cameron, what was your favorite? I'll plug two things. I'll plug

a real story. We had a really in-depth conversation about the different abortion bans and how that's been carried out in some different states. But probably my favorite part was how we started off the podcast talking about Justin Timberlake's arrest. And if you want to listen, because the officer that arrested Justin Timberlake didn't know who he was. Sounds like Scotty Scheffler. Yeah, except one guy was driving drunk and one guy was just driving to work.

Well, so me and Brad went through the billboard, like, top 20. And we went back and forth to see if we were able to recognize the person because these are okay these are artists like like pop music artists not neither of us really listen to so if we were the officer would we have known who shaboozy is okay my husband loves shaboozy's big song we had no idea who shaboozy is most people know that so it's like um i forget what the song is called but it's a very popular song on social media like tiktok instagram all of that andrew just found it on some Spotify list and it's hilarious, but regardless. Okay. We're going to move on here, Cameron. Let's go ahead. But folks, go listen to Send Me Some Stuff. Definitely go check that out. Cameron, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick's in the news again after Louisiana

signed into law a bill that would post the 10 commandments in school classrooms. Some Texas lawmakers are promising to do the same. Tell us about it. Yeah, so just a little bit of background here. Louisiana became the first state to require the Ten Commandments to be posted in school classrooms after Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry signed the legislation into law. Louisiana will require the Ten Commandments to be displayed with a, quote, context statement alongside it describing the Ten Commandments and its historical role in American public education. Something that I think is worth mentioning that I've seen missed in some other reporting about what's going on, there's going to be other historical documents that are also going to

be displayed, the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence. So it's not just the Ten Commandments, it's other documents as well. Shortly after the law was signed, the ACLU and some other organizations actually put out a joint statement saying they would be filing a lawsuit challenging this new law in Louisiana. And like you mentioned at the top, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick, he posted a statement on social media about Texas's previous attempt to pass a similar bill. And so during the 88th legislative session, SB 1515 would have required every school district in the state to display a copy of the Ten Commandments in every classroom in order to teach students, quote, the importance of a fundamental foundation of America in Texas law. The bill was passed in the Texas Senate before making its way through the House Committee

on Public Education before being placed on the House calendar where it was not taken up on the floor. And the post from Dan Patrick said, quote, it will, or I'll start that again. He said, quote, I will pass the Ten Commandments bill again out of the Senate next session. So just some interesting developments, not just in Louisiana, but Dan Patrick signaling that he will do the same again here in texas there you go cameron thank you so much for your coverage brad coming back to you texas a&m will now be oh my gosh in the nuke business what's the scoop bradley what's the scoop days before their fan base would go nuclear over their baseball coach being stolen by the Longhorns, the Texas A&M University System announced it had been awarded a contract to manage the Pantex Nuclear Weapons Facility in Amarillo.

Quite the get if you can get it. Worth up to $30 billion, $1.5 billion annually, the contract's length lasts two decades and it begins with initial five-year run there are three additional five-year options that may be exercised by the department of energy and its national nuclear security administration chancellor of the texas a&m system john sharp said it is a privilege to be part of the management of another component of the country's nuclear deterrent. We take our national security responsibilities seriously and will bring the same level of care and expertise to Pantex as we have done for the

past several years to Los Alamos. Los Alamos, of course, is the site where Oppenheimer and his team of nuclear physicists built the atomic bomb back during World War II. And so there's still a laboratory there. I think it's the top nuclear laboratory in the country, at least in terms of operations as it stands. A&M also is involved in caretaking and managing that. So they're extending their nuclear footprint, and they seem to be pretty good business, $30 billion. It's not just them. There are other companies involved as well that are tied into this,

part of this LLC that is awarded the contract. But, yeah, pretty big news for A&M. If you were an A&M fan, Brad, and what happened with the coaching situation happened to your team, how would you respond? Well, this was actually my tweeter-y topic, so we can put a pin in that until then if you want, or I can... Oh, that's a good idea. Yeah, we can save it. I say that because I've seen so many A&M fans that are friends of mine on social media absolutely freaking out. And the things they're saying, I mean, it's hilarious, right? Like, this man should never be able to set foot in

College Station. This man should never be able to set foot in Texas again. This man should never have anything good happen to him or his family ever again like that's something that somebody said on my feed so like a friend of mine who's typically a very rationally solid human being so i'm just we'll talk about it in a little bit lots of reactions i have lots of thoughts so well i'm ready for him thank you bradley uh cameron coming to you last story here texas state university will no longer be hosting a presidential debate in September. Tell us what happened. Yeah, the Commission on Presidential Debates released the four remaining college campuses from their debate hosting contracts, which includes, like you mentioned, Texas State

University, which was slated to host a debate in September, some, uh, spokespersons from this commission on presidential debates said, quote, that given the letter dated May 15, 2024, campaign chair for the Biden Harris campaign in which the Biden Harris campaign informed the commission that president Biden will not agree to debate under the sponsorship of the commission during the 2024 general election campaign. There has been some reactions from the Texas State president who said the cancellation is quote disappointing. We've reported on previously

that in November last year Texas State was announced as one of the four participating campuses that were going to host a presidential debate. As I mentioned, that has now changed, and there will be a debate this week, the day of our recording, between President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump, and we'll get into some more details into that because that will be my Twitter-y section. So we can talk about that during the Twitter-y section. But if people want some more information, they can check out my article on the Texan.News.

We've got some good Twitter-y section topics this week. I'm excited to jump into them. Well, thank you, Cameron. Appreciate it. Matthew, we're going to start off with you, with your tweeter-y this week. What you got for us? Well, I thought I would highlight a post today from my favorite historian and constitutional scholar, Tara Ross. If you haven't heard of her before, I highly suggest checking her out and ordering some of her books. But she always has an interesting post, especially on early American history. And today, I thought it would be appropriate to highlight her post, since we're coming up on Independence Day of the 4th of July.

And she has a great post detailing the life and history of Betsy Ross, who produced the first American flag slash Star Spangled Banner. And it just has a very interesting, detailed history on Ross. A lot of things that I didn't know. But she posted on all of her social media accounts, Facebook, Twitter, X, and Instagram, etc. So definitely go check it out. It's a very interesting character in American history and a very interesting background. I'm excited to go check that out, Matthew. Thank you for highlighting that. Gentlemen, also, I just Googled because I remember seeing a, I think it was the flag

that inspired the Star Spangled Banner, but I was just Googled and they're like the Betsy Ross flag doesn't exist anymore, but you can see a replica in Pennsylvania which I think that's sad it doesn't exist anymore um okay I don't know who to begin with here but Brad well yeah let's do let's do Bradley and then we'll end with debate night Bradley let's uh let's let's chat through what we already know you're check. So I have it labeled lost in the schloss, referring to Schloss Nagel, the coach in question here. The Aggies were in the College World Series final. They won the first game, lost the last two to Tennessee, so they did not win the championship, but it was a great season.

They're a hell of a team, and I watched them throughout the year, including against Texas. But a day after they lost, the University of Texas swooped in and scooped up Schloss Nagel as their coach, and they had previously, a few few days prior maybe a week earlier fired david pierce who had been the coach for a while like almost a decade but now they get their number one target and interestingly enough he is good friends with really good friends apparently with chris del Conte the athletic director and well

you're leaving out a big piece here which is the A&M coach was asked if he would right and he was vehemently against saying he would take that job like no I'm I'm here with texas a&m and then the next day yeah wasn't it he took the job yes after making those comments yes and so a&m fans are po'd because he said you know he dismissed a question on this very topic about the ut opening and basically said I'm insulted you'd even ask. And the next day he signs a contract with the Longhorns. And there's a story about how, not wanting to make his presence known in College Station, Del Conte waited by a cemetery, I think outside College Station, until the baseball team made it back to to College Station then he

went over to Schloss and Eagles house and they hashed it out and they got the deal done so I was interesting Texas fans are very excited they've been especially this year down on the direction of the baseball program and it's one of the top jobs in the country. It has been for a while. And I think UT, if they don't have the most College World Series appearances, they're up there. But, you know, you can understand why the Haggies are mad.

Totally. Their coach just got stolen from under them. And, you know, he chose to leave. So he has some agency, a lot of agency in this too, and a lot of the anger is directed at him. So that's fair. But this is a rivalry. This is pure hatred on both sides.

So I'm not too surprised that this ruffled feathers. Nobody should be surprised by that. But it is a wild situation, and the fact that UT and A&M fans live together, work together all the time, that makes this even more personal, especially because the term little brother gets thrown around quite a bit,

usually from UT fans at A&M fans. And I saw one post on Texags, the fan comment section or whatever it is, for the Aggies. Someone said, man, we are the little brother. And I saw a UT fan put that on a shirt just now oh my gosh don't you think there's added sweetness that comes with it though for texas fans that uh considering where they poached this coach from oh yeah no doubt yeah i mean that's got to be a huge part of it right is like not only that they get somebody that they're excited about as a coach, but considering that this person is also the former A&M coach,

has got to just add this level of sweetness and this rivalry that also makes it so sour and awful for A&M fans. Well, it kind of reminds me of, this was long before I was born, but Michigan versus Ohio State, which is the best rivalry in the country, hands down. A&M, UT is up there, absolutely. But that doesn't even, I don't think, compare, at least right now, to the Red River game. But anyway, the famed coaches in the Ohio State-Michigan rivalry,

Woody Hayes at Ohio State, Bo Schembechler at Michigan. Schembechler coached with Woody. I think it was at – it might have been at Ohio State or Miami. Regardless, Schembechler was like a protege. Michigan got him, started the 10-year war, massive rivalry. But this kind of made me think of that. Just personal hatred on both sides but i mean i would be i would be mad if i was an aggie fan i would also be elated if i was a texas

fan so it's absolutely it's the way the world sometimes turns and the memes um memes from this are just amazing you You should send me some. I haven't seen that many. There was one of the dog. What's the dog's name? Aggie's mascot. The Border Collie. The Collie?

Yeah, the Border Collie decked out in UT gear as the next transfer. That's actually really sad. Schwoznegel is like recruiting A&M players to come to Texas through the transfer portal. So it's a mess all around. Yeah. Brad, of the Austin staff, and we'll loop Matt into this because he was once an Austin staffer, who cares about sports the least?

Oh, Rob. Okay. Even less than Daniel? I'd have to agree because at least Daniel will push for having sports stories on the website because clicks they get clicks so he's sort of involved that's a good I see does Rob hate I don't know does Rob not like when we publish sports stories or is he just apathetic I mean my impression is Rob is the kind of sports hater that uses the term sports ball.

Yeah. That sounds familiar. Brad and I recorded our episode of Smoke Filled Room this week, the next episode. And one, it's awesome. And Brad killed it and did a great job. And see how nice I'm being? My gosh. What came over me?

It just loses it all, though. If you compliment yourself on how nice you're being. And then secondarily, Lord in heaven, I'm just trying to finish a sentence here. And then secondarily, Rob is lambasted by Bradley on this podcast for his lack of sports enthusiasm or care. So definitely check it out. If campaign finance and the behind the scenes of the campaign world does not interest you, maybe Brad lambasting Rob might. It's an enjoyable hobby, I should say.

Yeah. We have something for everyone is all I'm saying. Bradley, thank you. Cameroneron let's go to you debate tonight what you got so it's going to be a 90 minute debate these there there's lots of things that were agreed to you know it's going to be at podiums there was a coin toss to determine at which podium the candidates will be standing at. Biden chose the podium since he won the coin toss, giving Trump will have the last word in the closing statements. But what's interesting is microphones will be muted while the opposing candidate speaks in no pre-written notes or they include no props either will be allowed.

And there will be no studio audience. And what's 2015, 2016, he really gained a lot of traction because of his rebuttals while other candidates were speaking. So, and this is going to be the first time we've seen Trump on a stage against someone in a long time. I just don't know how these dynamics are going to work with him not having his microphone on. I've seen people say the microphone issue is going to be a win for Biden because Trump won't be able to jump in. But I've also seen people say this is actually a win for Trump because of the issues surrounding Biden's trailing off as he speaks. And this, him having all the eyes and attention on him for two minutes while he's speaking on a point, and let's say he goes off on a tangent or, off, like I mentioned, could be bad optics.

So I just think it's going to be interesting. It's going to be fun. I think the no studio audience as well, it's going to be a weird energy. And I don't know. I'm going to be tuning in. Are you guys going to be watching? Well, Cameron, quickly, can you explain, and this might be something I'm just not wrapping my brain around correctly,

why there's a preference on which podium you have, right? It's right or left, correct? Yeah. Which is the preferred podium, I guess. I don't know. I don't know. That doesn't make much sense to me i i'm not sure um you know you can you can choose your favorite conspiracy theory why that's happening i don't know interesting matt's really thinking hard about his answer to my question here

if he's going to be watching he's's debating it in his head, contemplating. Matt does look very deep in thought right now. Oh, he jolted right away. There he is. There he is. Matt, are you watching the debate tonight? I don't know. I have a mock torts class tonight, so i might have to forego all the presidential

going ons um i don't know but depends on how long the class lasts so um i suppose if it's over beforehand i might i might tune in and um try to tolerate it. There you go. It'll be the middle of the night for me, so I will not be able to watch, but I will be thrilled to wake up to all sorts of coverage and clips and footage. So it'll be fun. Brad, are you watching? I already know the answer.

Oh, you are? Okay, cool. Well, I will be in the presence of a tv with it on how much i watch that's a different question there we go that makes more sense ideally with a stiff drink in my hand that's that's the ideal three guarantees in life. Death taxes and Brad being excited about a stiff drink during an event he does not want to be engaging in. Hey, well done. Way to use my line. Yeah. Thank you.

Brad, we're being so kind to each other. Makes up for how much we weren't on the SFR pod. Yeah, it's true. Although we did both say that the other made our skin crawl as our first opener on this episode. So we're just, you know, forgetting that very quickly. Our memory sucks. Well, folks, we appreciate you tuning in to the weekly roundup.

And I will encourage you to, if you have not tuned into the other podcasts we recently launched, whether it's Send Me Some Stuff, Smoke-Filled Rumor, or our daily rundowns, I'd certainly encourage you to do so. We've heard a lot from listeners that they are very loyal to our weekly roundup. We so appreciate that. Branch out, check them out. We have a lot of fun on our other podcasts and talk about a lot of really in-depth issues. And read our newsletters. We got... Subscribe. Subscribe. We got all sorts of offerings. That's right. This is the only way you can get access to our fancy schmancy awesome newsletters is

to subscribe to the Texans. So make sure to go do that. It's a great deal. And you're supporting an organization that's doing its absolute best to provide the best news in the state. Thanks for listening to My Shameless Plug. Well, folks, thanks for listening to this weekly roundup episode, and we'll catch you next week. Thank you to everyone for listening to Mushroom and Wills Plug. Well, folks, thanks for listening to this weekly Roundup episode, and we'll catch you next week.

Thank you to everyone for listening. If you enjoy our show, rate and review us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen to podcasts. And if you want more of our stories, subscribe to The Texan at thetexan.news. Follow us on social media for the latest in Texas politics. And send any questions for our team to our mailbag by DMing us on Twitter or shooting us an email to editor at thetexan.news. Tune in next week for another episode of our weekly roundup.

God bless you and God bless Texas.