The Texan Podcast - Weekly Roundup - March 13, 2025

Episode Date: March 14, 2025

Show off your Lone Star spirit with a free "Remember the Alamo" hat with an annual subscription to The Texan: https://thetexan.news/subscribe/Learn more about the Data Center Coalition at: https://www.centerofyourdigitalworld.org/texasLearn more about The Beer Alliance at:https://beeralliance.com/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:House Public Education Committee Debates School Choice Bill in Marathon HearingTexas Congresswoman, 'Crimmigration' Lawyers Discuss Deportation Evasion at Virtual Town Hall200 New Illegal Immigration Federal Cases Filed in South TexasICE Arrests Over 500 Criminal Illegal Aliens in Week-Long Houston OperationTexas Legislature Weighs Options to Cope With Influx of Data Centers, Other Large LoadsTexas Senate Bill Would Prohibit Changing Sex on Birth Certificates to Conform to Gender IdentityTexas Senate Weighs Withholding Tax Dollars From Cities Not Enforcing Statewide Homeless Public Camping BanSenate Bill Would Grant Texans 'Exclusive Property Right' to DNAFormer Speaker Phelan Proposes Bill Prohibiting ‘Deepfakes’ in Political AdvertisingNew Bill Would Increase Public School Religious Release Times for Bible-Based Character Education

It reminds me of a show we watch. We both watch and both enjoy. Severance. Right. Totally different but same kind of wild wild stuff going on. Yeah separating your consciousness into two halves here. It's a very good show. One inside prison and the other one in Thailand. Where am I actually? Where am I in the cell or am I on a beach? I'm in the cell or I'm out of beach. Howdy folks, Mackenzie here with Brad Cameron and Mary Elise in another episode of the Weekly Roundup. Now this is kind of a bittersweet week in the office. We have a new team member joining on Monday, which will be so exciting.

We'll introduce him then. But Mazlin, who makes it all happen on the podcast every single week among 15 other responsibilities are part of her job description every single week is moving out of Texas. And we're all very sad. This is her last weekly roundup with us. And she's very reticent to get in front of the camera, but I think we've convinced her that today being her peer pressure on her. Yes. And by peer pressure, we mean Cameron made a very convincing argument that we all jumped on. So, Maz, why don't you come over here?

Now, Mazelon and I have been friends for a long time, and she then happened to work for the Texan. It's been amazing. I think it went in here. And, okay, over here? And then I just like, there you go. Come on down. Hello.

Mazelon makes it happen every single week for our podcast. I mean, you're the marketing and media manager, so there's a lot of other things that are part of your job description. But we thought we'd take this time, ask you maybe like an exit interview. You know? And I'm going to take this one.

I'm going to take this one. So I have a microphone, and if you're asking the questions, OK, this makes more sense. Well, this is going to be a group effort um camera camera why don't you start I have a lot of questions but I'll just I'll just do one do you have a favorite podcast interaction because you've edited every single podcast the send me some stuff smoke-filled room weekly weekly roundup, daily rundown. Is there a moment you can point to that is your favorite? That is a very good question.

I have edited so many things. Every video that we've posted, every Instagram clip. So if anyone knows Texas Podcasts, it's you. Aw. Guys, you're going to make me cry. I know this is supposed to be sweet and funny, but you're going to make me emotional. My favorite, I love a moment when we have a dog on camera. Winston is a guest, Pancho and Milo are both very good guests.

I think Trout's even made an appearance. So I love when a dog comes on the screen and especially when it's my dog and I get to edit him. I'm surprised you didn't say the Scotty Shuffler of it all. Oh my gosh. Oh my gosh Scotty Shuffler. Okay. Did we ever publish that montage? I think we put it on Twitter didn't we? Yeah I think so. Okay., we might repost it because it's so funny. And that is a very good moment. That's a highlight. OK, if we're really talking about this, it needs to be like a top five moment,

because it's too hard to pick a favorite. Yeah. They're all going to be in top five. Because I also, this was a more recent moment, but I love one of the more recent smoke-filled rooms when Mack was having just like a brain fart of a day. Oh my gosh. Yes. And I didn't realize, I thought that she was just being really funny. I thought that she was like doing it on purpose. And I had edited a compilation of just little funny moments and I said Mack you're on fire, this is so funny.

And she goes, like what are you talking about? I was like, I want on fire. Thanks. And then I go and watch it and it's just me fumbling over my words for like the first two minutes of the podcast, which was fair. So it's a, you're, y'all are a fun crowd. Funny moments. Guess who tees off in an hour and a half.

Scotty Scheffler. I didn't even know golf was in season. So glad that Scotty's back. It's also race week. Formula 1's back. Very exciting. Yes. I was watching a little bit of Drive to Survive and then Daniel Ricciardo overall. It made me really sad. Oh, tragic. It made me so sad. Who creates the most edits for you? Like who do you have to edit? Who, who creates the most headache for you in the backend when it comes to editing? Okay. I'm going to be really kind to all of you because I'm not going to say it's any of you. I'm going to say it is the stupid table.

This, I think I figured it out. That's a good answer. It is the table that every time someone touches the table, there is a catastrophic noise that happens that the microphones pick up. And I'm probably doing a really bad job now, because I'm holding the microphone in my hand, and it's probably going to be getting whatever noise

from that anyways. But yeah, I'm going to blame the table, because. That's really kind of you and generous. Yeah, and that's good to know. And that's really kind of you and generous. Yes. And that's good to know. And y'all maybe don't know this, but are like listeners, maybe don't know this, but like the weekly roundup, like it's not heavily edited in the way that like I'm not clipping together things.

Usually they're like very few at like y'all string the whole thing together, like top to bottom. And then like we're not clipping things together in that way. So for our listeners who maybe don't know like y'all y'all get it in one take like we don't need to edit in that kind of way. So it's easy in that sense. Any other questions for Madslin? Well I just want to thank you for dealing with my virtual podcasting for a good bit there because that was always a struggle bus.

We had many, many virtual hiccups. But it wasn't just you, Miss Italian Vacation over here. It was a heck of a time. Both y'all's virtual podcasts created some great moments of floating head interactions at the table. That was always fun. Yes, I loved even just workshopping that, trying to figure out how do we put in virtual guests when half of us are in person and we ended up with a monitor on the table.

It was literally floating heads, literally floating heads. Sometimes sideways floating heads. Sometimes, yes, yes. Sometimes the angle would just be sideways. Yeah, lots of really good memories, guys. I did not expect to feel this rush of emotion right now. Where are you going?

Wait, into the microphone, please. Where are you going? To our audience who does not know I'm going to Portland Oregon. Gonna go explore the Pacific Northwest and the gorgeous mountains and we move out at the end of the month. So this is my farewell to the Texan. I'm gonna leave the podcast before I start crying because if I still have to edit this thing there's no way I'm editing myself crying. Have fun guys. Off to Portland she goes. Off to Portland with a trailer full of beaver nuggets and Texas barbecue.

That's exactly right. Mazlin only mentioned you know the great sights and scenery but she did not mention the fact that she really loves joining a street mop. And she's actually joining the Chazz Chop. Yeah well that's in Seattle I don't know what they call it in there. They're constantly marching around That is Madslin's favorite favorite hobby, so that is a horrible gift to her as we end her tenure here at the Texan to make that Okay, well now we should probably get to the news. Cameron, we can start with you. Well, real fast, right before we started recording, Cameron, the

Lieutenant Governor released the last 15 of the Senate priorities, rounded out that list of 40 that he's teased for a while. Many bills we're already familiar with, but some new walk us through what was released. Yeah, a number of we were already familiar with like increasing teacher pay raise, banning lottery couriers. We were very attuned to that when they suspended the constitutional order to take that one up. Bail reform, that one's already been passed, but there's other pieces of legislation related to Life of the Mother Act. There's going to be another piece of legislation related to stopping squatters. Another one that would establish Homeland Security Division within DPS. So some, you

know, high profile issues that are going to be taken up here in the second half of the top 40 priority bills for the Senate. Probably gonna be digging into each one of these as the weeks go along here. So for everyone listening, just keep an eye out for future articles explaining each of these pieces of legislation. Can I say one that stuck out to me? No.

Oh. I think it's SB30, you got the list in front of you. Yeah, Kirby. The nuclear verdicts. Mack and I actually talked about that, I think it's SB 30. You got the list in front of you. Yeah. Yeah Matt can I actually talked about that on smoke-filled room that's going out Monday. So check that one out. That's something I've been watching for a while around 800 and bajillion gazillion between TLR and TTLA

It's gonna be a massive fight. So can you TLR and TTLA. It's gonna be a massive fight. So, there you go. Tortor form. TLR, Texans for Lawsuit Reform, TTLA, Texas Trial Lawyers Association. They're gonna be fighting over SB 30. Yes, because it's gonna be trying... Can you just give a quick explanation of why? So you've seen these ads about massive billions of dollars in jury verdicts and judgments. It's trying to set a cap on those, on what can be awarded in a personal injury lawsuit.

Trial lawyers hate it. The business owners, TLR, love it and so they're gonna have it out over that. Is the nuclear portion of that not related to nuclear? It's not nuclear. It's a description of how big these verdicts are. Right, right. So, okay. And then Mary Elise, one stuck out to you, right? Yes, what was that called? It was the Life of the Mother Act. Life of the Mother Act. And there's another... Highly anticipated. Yeah. Oh, go ahead. No, you go. I was just gonna say there's another piece of legislation here, stopping taxpayer funded abortion travel. So those two pieces working together in some way, possibly both related to abortion and

protecting women in these circumstances. So be interested to follow both of those. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. Absolutely. Okay. Well, let's move on Cameron then to the public education committee hearing that was certainly a huge topic of conversation this week in the House. The House's school choice bill, which was long awaited to see what the House would propose,

had its day in committee. Give us a rundown. Well, it was a long day, almost a full 24 hours of public testimony and Started at 8 a.m. You know I was listening to it all day Leave the office go home. It's still going go to bed wake up It's still going so it was a very very long day for people following this bill people who were given testimony, the lawmakers themselves,

because they were sitting behind the bench there listening to everything. But the conversation was regarding HB3, which is just one portion of this Texas two-step the House has proposed regarding their education plan. And this is their universal option for Texas families, the one billion dollar funding provision through the general revenue fund. And there was a big split between public testimony both those being opposed and supportive of the legislation. You know, I'll just give a little bit of what was said

early in the hearing. Rep James Tallarico questioned Buckley about capping the income of those eligible for the program, meaning billionaires and billionaires, Tallarico said, cannot take advantage of this program. We can do that, right? As a legislature. And Buckley responded, we can do whatever we want,

but the reality is you need a universal program that gives access, that is prioritized in a way that meets the needs of the most vulnerable. And we saw a lot of conversation surrounding that issue regarding how this program is going to be applied, who is going to be accepting the ESA public school versus private school. Really any argument that you can imagine was brought up over the course of this public hearing.

So I encourage everyone listening. They probably are already aware of some of the arguments that have been presented. But if you want to read what the lawmakers themselves said, I have a lot of their comments in the article. So I'd encourage people to go check it out. Absolutely. Go check it out. Cameron, thank you. Running through all the hubbub of this week. Mary Lee, let's talk about Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett, who held a virtual town hall this week about immigration with a few lawyers joining her. Tell us about the nature of the press conference.

Yes. So this was a virtual town hall held by Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett. And we all know she's not one immense worth. And so it was definitely a very interesting town hall to watch. She gathered with a few Texas immigration lawyers. So they were attorneys Christina Salazar, Angela Mata, and Kathleen Martinez. And Martinez was actually honored in a resolution on the House floor recently a few weeks ago. This is the lawyer that wears the pink. The pink, yeah. That's her brand is she and I think all of the women that work for her, they all wear pink. So at least they did on the House floor and that's kind of her social media brand. But so Jasmine, Congresswoman Crockett kicked off the conversation saying, look

at this as a conversation between a bunch of girl lawyers about this raggedy administration. So first she asked the lawyers a few different questions regarding immigration and they described themselves as criminal immigration lawyers. Say that five times fast. Oh gosh I can't. Martina's defined that as meaning that a lot of their clients have criminal history so their goal is to obtain green cards for clients and get them out of criminal proceedings and these are illegal aliens. She said we like to see how we can get

the government to forgive their criminal criminal past so that they can get a green card and one focus of this town hall was criticizing the Lake and Riley Act. They called it insane and stupid and as as we know, this passed the house in January of this year with bipartisan support. It was named after, of course, Lake and Riley, a college-age victim. She was abducted and murdered by a Venezuelan illegal alien, and that was in 2024.

So this act, this Lake and Riley Act, allows or requires ICE to detain illegal immigrants who are accused of certain criminal offenses and these include theft, murder, sexual assault and it passed with 263 votes for and 156 against. So that was a big focus of this town hall was talking about. The Lake and Riley Act, their main criticism of it was that it doesn't allow for due process. That was their concern. They were saying it totally negates due process for these illegal aliens.

Yeah, Martina said with this, she was talking about there's no due process with this act, and she said, obviously with this administration, the constitution is also not a thing, not something to be respected by them. So of course a lot of criticism for the current presidential administration I would recommend reading this article because it has a link to the video you can watch the video itself they talked about a lot of different things and one thing that Crockett brought up she asked the lawyer she said what's the legality surrounding okay you're an illegal alien, ICE shows up at your door, what do you have to do?

And Martina said, when it comes to your rights, you have the right to remain silent and you don't have to answer the door to ICE. So that was something she really emphasized, this lawyer was, you don't have to answer the door if ICE comes to your door. She said, you have the right to consult the lawyer, but know that the government isn't required to provide you one so definitely get in contact with one now so she was advising legal aliens to get in contact with the lawyer in case ICE contacts you at some point shows up on your doorstep Crockett asked the lawyers to explain if someone enters the country and they

don't do so legally is that criminal criminal or not? Martinez responded, and this is the lawyer we mentioned that has the pink brand. She has a huge social media following, I think it's a million, and was honored on the House floor. But she said, entering legally may be a federal crime, but being here unlawfully is not. It is a civil violation. And then she added, a person cannot be illegal, being illegal is akin to an action, and an action has to be akin to an actual crime, not just a crime that you make up on Facebook. So a lot of interesting quotes here, a lot of conversation about illegal immigration. Yeah, so that would be, I would definitely recommend our readers to go read the whole piece,

watch the video. Well, cuz from what I understand entering the country illegally is not a felony offense it's a lower level charge right civil offense I think that's yeah so yeah it's interesting I know other elected officials like AOC have done similar sort of town halls like them so and there's been lots of pushback on them for giving advice to these illegal aliens in this context of attempting to avoid interactions with federal agencies so it'll be it'll be something to watch if these sorts of town halls continue in the coming weeks, as we understand there's going to be ramped up. There's already ramped up enforcement of

illegal immigration, but I've read some stories, especially I just came across a story earlier this morning in CNN where they have sources that told them that Trump is expecting to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798. So increasing the federal government's authority to deport and first identify and then deport these illegal aliens. So the pressure is gonna be continuing to mount and we'll see how these Texas elected officials react in the federal government. Yeah, and I would imagine, I mean, folks like Congresswoman Crockett will probably also ramp up

these sorts of conversations as Trump ramps up his immigration efforts. So I'm curious to see if there will be any action taken against people who are giving advice to legal aliens on how to avoid ICE. Yeah, but as of now I haven't seen anything, any official backlash. Yeah, we have a piece up on the site right now that the Texas legislature has been increasingly focused on the border security efforts and coordinating between state and federal authorities.

There was a hearing in the Homeland Security Public Safety Veterans Affairs Committee where there was a number of bills presented that would add federal air marshals and certain Department of Defense police officers and detectives to the list of federal law enforcement officers granted state law enforcement authority for felony offenses. So bringing it back to what we just talked about with the Lincoln Riley Act allowing for these illegal aliens who have committed these heinous crimes to be detained, this would allow these federal officers to enforce these state laws in an effort to identify and detain these criminals behaviors that are being committed by the illegal alien.

So expanding the scope of these federal agencies within the state. So a lot of overlap here with what's going on with Jasmine Crockett and her town halls online with these lawyers, what the federal government and the Trump administration is planning to do and what state government and state elected officials are attempting to do with pieces of legislation.

So lots of overlapping issues here. Well, speaking of overlap, and Mary Elise, thank you for your coverage of that. Cameron, this is a perfect segue. Federal courts have opened a number of new illegal immigrant cases here in Texas. Tell us about it. Yeah, I came across this earlier this week

that the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Texas, they released some information about nearly 200 cases that have been filed regarding illegal immigration with almost 100 of those, including charges of illegal reentry into the U.S. And of those cases, many charged have previous felony convictions regarding narcotics, violent crimes, other immigration offenses. Others, over 80 cases face charges of illegal entry

and another 12 are charged with human smuggling. And I thought this was an interesting story to highlight, again, as border security and deportations is a large topic of conversation at the state and federal level. And I also included in this article for people who are unfamiliar that the CBP-1 app, which was used for individuals attempting to seek asylum, which was the asylum seeking definition was rather broad during the Biden administration.

So there was a lot of issues that Trump administration saw with this app. They shut it down. Once Trump was inaugurated, it's actually being reopened, but as a deportation app reopened but as a deportation app where they said that where Fox News has reported that This repurposing of the app is a way for illegal aliens to quote self-deport So second happened. They're gonna do that Well, I I think they're just trying to open up every avenue for tracking these numbers because obviously mass deportations was a campaign promise of the Trump administration. Tom Homan and Chrissy

Noem have been going around the country trying doing these deportation efforts on camera put in CBP have been posting numbers about deportations, and there's been lots of conversation that President Trump wants to see those numbers rise. And so I think this is just a way to better track those numbers of individuals who may not be identified and detained by federal agencies, but have just decided to leave themselves.

And so I think this is just a better way to track those numbers. There you go. Cameron, thank you. Yep. Appreciate it. Okay, we're gonna take a break and hear from an advertiser. Did you know data centers support 364,000 jobs in Texas

and contribute $3.5 billion in state and local taxes. These critical facilities boost the state's economy and power essential services. From video calls and online banking to health care and government operations, data centers are the backbone of our modern lives, driving economic growth and ensuring seamless communication across the state. With Texas households averaging 21 connected devices, the demand for data centers continues to grow. In today's rapidly advancing technological landscape

and with the state's booming economy, businesses are expected to generate twice as much data in the near future, making data centers a vital investment for the future of Texas prosperity. To learn more, visit centerofofyourdigitalworld.org slash Texas. We're back. Mary-Lise, we have more to talk about here with you. I just conducted another operation recently tell us about it. Yes so I conducted an operation in Houston that they just announced but it happened

February 23rd to March 2nd. So this took place in Houston that they just announced but it happened February 23rd to March 2nd. So this took place in Houston and they said that they arrested a total of 646 illegal aliens during this week-long operation. They collaborated with multiple state and federal agencies but they said that 543 of these were criminal illegal aliens, including seven gang members. And I am curious which gangs they were from. There's a few that we've seen frequent Texas,

but they did not specify. 34 of the criminal aliens were arrested for sex offense or child sex offense, such as aggravated sexual assault of a minor, possession of child pornography or rape. So that was 34 of these arrests and then 52 of them were based on illicit narcotic offenses, including drug trafficking, possession of a controlled substance, and then 38 of them were convicted of offenses dealing with unlawful carrying or other behavior, illegal behavior related to firearms.

And then like we said seven of these 646 arrests were documented gang members, I said. They commented on this and they said that in recent years some of the world's most dangerous fugitives, transnational gang members and criminal aliens have taken advantage of the crisis at our nation's southern border to illegally enter the U.S. They said that after illegally entering the country, many of these criminal aliens have gone on to commit violent crimes and reign terror on law abiding residents. So the departments that coordinated with ICE in this operation in Houston So the departments that coordinated with ICE in this operation in Houston included the FBI, ATF, Texas Department of Public Safety, US Customs Board of Protection, Diplomatic Secret Service, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and they said several other agencies that

were involved in arresting these individuals. And this was about three days after what you were just discussing, the numbers that were just announced by the United States Attorney's Office for Southern District of Texas. So yeah, definitely. I mean, it's just going to keep being ramped up. I think this is probably going to be normal for each week. We'll get an announcement from ICE,

oh, we just conducted an operation, I mean, we were just talking about Colony Ridge, what was it, last week or the week before, so. Yeah, absolutely, and these numbers will keep coming in and be very interesting to watch. We're really watching this kind of nexus of the federal and state enforcement of this issue right now,

which is just really interesting to see. Yeah, well, cause, you know, there really isn't a hard and fast number on the number of illegal aliens that are in the country, right? And so we see a number that is over 500, and it's like, wow, that's a lot. But it's potentially in the millions, you know, tens of millions of individuals. We have no idea the proportion. Yeah, so it's a large number, but like you just mentioned, by proportion, it's actually a rather small percentage. Yeah, absolutely.

Well, Mary-Lise, thank you. Bradley, long time no talk. I know, I've just been sitting here twirling my thumbs. Brad and I, before the podcast started, also had a little bit of a scuffle over whether or not we should both be silencing our phones so that there weren't just buzzing noises happening all podcasts and Brad had the audacity to say that his notifications were important I mean they are

true actually morally accurate morally accurate yes okay great the Senate advanced its priority bill addressing data centers. Do you want to tell us about it? I would love to tell you about it. That'd be really nice considering. Would you like me to elaborate? I would like you to tell me more. So SB 6 has turned into quite the fight.

It is legislation trying to basically regulate, set some guidelines around the influx of these new data centers which are very large loads. They require load in the electricity sphere meaning they require a lot of electricity. They're constantly operating, it's basically a warehouse of a bunch of computers and they're just constantly running 24-7. Another example of a large load is a crypto mining facility. Now they're slightly different because data center is inflexible while the crypto facility is flexible. Meaning it's pretty easy for a crypto center when the margin of supply and demand on the electricity grid tightens to curtail its operations because it doesn't have to be continuing to mine constantly.

Whereas the data center, they say they need to be online 24 seven because people need that service 24 seven. Every time you send an email or a text, it goes through the cloud. Exactly. Which is that server operating out that data center. Exactly. So this, but that comes with an already stressed grid that, you know, we have a rapid increase of electricity demand or expected electricity demand going from 110,000 megawatts

to 150 projected by 2030. Much of that increases from these data centers. And so the law, the proposed legislation, is trying to put some requirements on these data centers to ensure they have backup power, to pay for some of the transmission charges. A lot of this is already done, but this is trying to make it uniform for all data centers, whether they're a good actor or a bad actor, regardless, right? The Committee on Business and Commerce heard the bill at the end of February. They met this week in advance of committee sub-outs. A couple of the changes that they made that were debated during that hearing, eliminating, I believe they eliminated the remote

disconnect provision, which was requiring that there's a remote that you can disconnect the the data center from the grid so it's not taking electricity in a time of need. I think they altered it in some fashion. The big one was on the transmission charge, the original version required $100,000 study fee and transmission charges based on some complicated thing I'm not going to go into on the back end as like a constant thing. What they changed it to was a front end charge for interconnection. And so that seems to be more palatable to these these industry members now. we talked about this on Smoke Filled Room, but there's a huge

fight and even the Trump administration is getting pulled into this in an indirect way over whether this bill is sufficient or not. And the people who hate it want to say this bill would stymie economic growth and Texas becoming the data center capital of the country. Well there's been lots of incentives put in place to bring these data centers to Texas. Is that right? Yeah I mean nothing I don't think anything from the state incentive wise. The only the reason I bring that up is because I was just going through stories this morning just reading some stuff and I came across this Axios story that says, California, Texas,

Florida, New York, and Georgia collectively make up more than 40% of those being over 47,000 jobs. And Texas has seen a 38% increase in data center jobs from 2018 to 2024. So this massive increase in the number of data center jobs, meaning there's more data centers being built or expanded rather. And so the increased attention being paid to data centers with having the necessary energy for them, especially with the proliferation of artificial intelligence technology as well.

Was that discussed at all? Yes, that's a segment of these data centers, not all of it, but AI data centers are part of this as well, this influx, and I don't think there's anything specific to AI data centers in the bill, but just data centers as a whole. Yeah. Large loads specifically. It includes the crypto stuff.

But the crypto stuff, the data centers, the AI element of this, if AI is this sea change in how we're gonna be interacting with technology moving forward, it's gonna require massive amounts of energy for these data centers to operate. More and more people are going to be using AI, not just individuals, but companies, state

governments themselves. And so they have to have legislation to manage the necessary power. So one of the biggest problems with this is the state just not knowing what's all coming and what's, who's building backup power who's not so that's a big part of this is just making sure the state is alerted and is given notice about what what it is that's being built what amenities they have all that kind of stuff but the ancillary part of that is that there's a lot of projects that would move generation

behind the meter so either they're contracting with an existing generator or they're building their own and moving it behind the meter which means it's not the electrons are not running through a utility meter and so there's no real way to know either what is passing through these transmission lines or what's there for the grid to use in the case of an emergency. So a lot of these especially, there's this big hubbub about Bitcoin miners making tons of money in 23 when the grid was struggling. Well what that was was a demand response program where in exchange

for reducing their electricity use so that electricity can then be sent to residential areas or prioritize for them, they get credits, financial credits so that it's worthwhile for them to do it financially. They're business. They make financial decisions. That's what they do. They also have something similar with their local utility where they basically they buy electricity credits and they sell them back in a time of need so that the utility doesn't have to go buy electricity on the wholesale open market when the electricity price skyrockets. And so all of this is a delicate balance of incentives, financial signals, things like that, and the state

sees a problem here with these, especially if they, the data centers move behind the meter and there's stuff you can't account for and they're still pulling from the grid. Well and I think this is an interesting topic to cover as it works in conjunction with another big issue, not just the energy use, but the energy creation. And we're seeing now how state and federal governments are having to deal with a lot of the green energy policies that were instituted over the past four years, where because nuclear energy wasn't able to be created in a proper timeframe, oil and natural gas pipelines and energy generation that way was not ramped up to the level it might be necessary right now.

So now people are trying to react to that now that the space of energy creation has opened up under the Trump administration. People have to deal with not just the use with the creation. And this is all just a product of the rapid expansion of the state in many different ways economically population wise and the problems that come with that and problems that the state needs to address Which is a huge theme throughout this entire session And this is just one part. Absolutely. Thank you gentlemen. Cameron, we're gonna come to you. Let's talk about the Senate again, but Sex and gender continue to be a major topic for lawmakers Particularly in these last couple of sessions and the sessions no different. Tell us about this latest bill yeah, well there was a committee hearing in the Senate State of Affairs committee and there was a bill that was brought up Senate bill 406 which seeks to regulate how biological sex is recorded by prohibiting future changes to an

individual sex on Texas birth certificates. The term quote biological sex of a child is defined in the legislation as being determined by quote sex organs chromosomes or endogenous profile and the reason why I wanted to cover this piece of legislation is last September the Texas Department of State Health Services Changed its birth certificate policy, making court order documents no longer an acceptable form of documentation when seeking to change the sex marker. So there was, and that caused a bit of a stir among

activists and different organizations and especially now with the new Trump administration already issuing an executive order that recognizes only two biological sexes in the US law and also Governor Greg Abbott issuing a order directing state agency heads to quote comply with the law in the biological reality that there are only two sexes male and female. So as we've seen, not just with the Trump administration, but in state governments as well, executive orders being issued, but then backed up and enshrined through legislation. So this is just the next step of following through on an executive order through legislation. Absolutely. Watching

that happen a lot in Texas. It's so interesting how different a presidential, what kind of difference a presidential administration can make when it comes to political um simpatico approaches in the legislature. We'll definitely keep an eye on that piece of legislation. Let's continue talking about the Senate here. Brad, the Senate considered a bill to um well this is an issue that harkens back to 2019 I want to say, 2020, homeless camping policies. Walk us through it. The lawmakers are looking to add enforcement mechanisms to the state's public camping ban that was passed in 2021. One of those mechanisms is withholding tax remittances from offending cities or counties.

Senate Bill 241 by State Senator Pete Flores adjusts that state law and it reads, A local entity may not adopt or enforce a policy under which the entity prohibits or discourages the enforcement of any public camping ban and adds on to it, including prohibiting or discouraging the investigation or enforcement of violation of a public camping ban. This specifically aimed at Austin, not just Austin, but Austin, primarily, you know, the city has been accused of not enforcing Prop B, the 2021 adopted rescission of, no, reinstatement of the camping and lying ban that was rescinded by the city council in 2019. That's a mouthful. You did a great job.

There's been multiple suits about this accusing the city of not enforcing it. You know, you walk around downtown on, you know, Ladybird Lake, you see people camping and lying. It's still there. Now it is not nearly as bad as it was in 2019. That was awful. You know, you couldn't walk 20 steps without running into a homeless person, sometimes tweaking out on the sidewalk. You know, there were a lot of conflicts between just average passers-by getting attacked by these people. And of course, not every one of them, most of them didn't do that.

Most of them were running their own business, just laying there. They're causing, they're obstructing sidewalks, causing problems. And then you had the ones that were clearly not mentally there that were doing either horrible things or disgusting things. And that just was a massive problem for the city. So the state responded with their law.

This bill would require cities and counties to adhere to the law, to the camping ban, and where such encampments exist to clean them up and get rid of them. And then the main enforcement mechanism is if the attorney general judges that a city is not following, is not enforcing the camping ban, then they will direct the comptroller to withhold the state and local tax remittances that are given every month sales taxes from the state collection to these localities. And so that's a pretty big stick. No more carrots, there's a lot. Just all penalty here.

It could really hurt a city's budget if they don't do that. So it passed the Senate in 23, did not pass the House. Flores said of it, the burden of cleaning up these campsites has fallen to the state which results in significant costs for abatement efforts. Additionally, the Attorney General has found it difficult to seek injunctive relief under the existing statutory framework. This bill will specify that localities investigate and enforce violations of public camping following written complaints. So we'll see where that goes. We'll see where that goes. Bring it on. Thank you, Bradley.

Cameron, private property rights over DNA is a bill you came across this week. Very interesting debate surrounding this. Tell us about it. Yeah, you know, everyone's familiar with the conservative principle of private property rights. Well, that usually extends to fiscal items, you know, your house, your car, things of that nature. But we are seeing a greater emphasis being placed on people's biological privacy rights. And in this instance, we're seeing Senator Lois Kolkors introduce legislation explicitly stating

that a person has a quote exclusive property right over their DNA and actually sets criminal and civil penalties for unauthorized use. And so Texas actually already has a law on the books regarding these direct to consumer genetic testing companies. People are familiar with things like AncestryDNA or 23andMe, but with this it's much more explicit where they these companies would require informed and written consent for the collection testing and sale of personal DNA. So there is a caveat in this legislation where it says for emergency medical treatment or for law enforcement purposes informed written consent is not necessary. There's a number of states that have similar

privacy laws regarding DNA and so the reason why I wanted to bring this up is because there has been instances where these genetic testing companies have partnered with pharmaceutical companies, where these companies are working in conjunction to develop, whether it be new drugs or treatments, and they're using people's genetic information to develop these things. So there was also a data breach in 2023 of 23andMe where it affected almost 7 million customers. And so as not just our medical technology is continuing to be innovated on, but how people are tracking these things through our user devices, how state agencies are overseeing people's activities. This is explicitly stating that people need to provide

informed written consent to these direct to consumer companies if they're going to be collecting or selling your genetic information. So just expanding the scope of what is private property rights in this new era. This new era Absolutely. It's really interesting. It really is and I'd encourage folks to go read Cameron's piece because um, this will be something we'll continue to follow throughout the legislative session and curious if there's um, you know

how the house will approach this and they'll kind of move forward on this bill too. We'll see. Bradley, coming to you. Former Speaker Feelin's bill heard this week. Got a lot of attention, a lot of different details surrounding why it got attention. Walk us through it. This was quite the brouhaha. The Texas Legislature is an emphasis, Texas Legislature, this isn't just Feelin, is mulling legislation to outlaw the use of undisclosed altered images I think via AI Chad GBT I that's I don't know whatever it is called

Altered images in political advertising. It's filed by feeling At least one version his house bill 366, which Mac, why is 366 important? That's a good question. Makes me think back to primary season for some reason. It's just kind of... Just rattling around in my brain, yeah. Well, there might be a reason for that because it is the same number by which

Phelan won his runoff against David Covey. Oh, I didn't know that. And if you look at the filing dates, HB365 was filed, first day of pre-filing in November, HD367 was filed, first day of pre-filing in November, 366 was filed, I think it was in February or end of January. So you say it might be fair to assume that this number was held aside

Yes. Yes, and you know who was there I might could reserve that number Because they were speaker One day feeling There you go, it's some inside baseball on that. But the bill itself has been criticized quite significantly online. It reads specifically, a person may not cause to be published, distributed, or broadcast political advertising that includes an image, audio recording or video recording of an officeholders or candidates appearance,

speech or conduct that did not occur in reality, including an image audio recording recording, or video recording that is altered using generative artificial intelligence technology, would that encompass Photoshop? I don't think so, right, or would it? Absolutely. I think people, when they think of AI, so many of our software that we're interacting with on a day-to-day basis

is already using AI in some form or fashion. So when you are just using Photoshop and it automatically adjusts a picture to fit within a frame or whatever it may be, it's using AI to do that. And so it says, and continues, unless the political advertising includes a disclosure, indicating that the image, audio recording, or video recording did not occur in reality. So, when this bill was filed, there was a lot of fury online about, oh, he's coming for memes. Because Phelan has been subject of many memes,

both just comical and pejorative against him over the last few years while he was speaker. I knew immediately what this was about when it was filed. It was not about memes. It was about specifically a mailer that was run against him that photoshopped his face on Hakeem Jeffries body who was hugging Nancy Pelosi. And then his face on Rafael Anchia's House Democrats body in a photo they had when Democrats broke quorum in 21. Did it look legitimate? I mean, you could tell it was, it was not him,

but it also looked, I mean, it was well done. It's the impression. Okay, it was well done. It wasn't cheap clip art, you know? And it was well done it's the impression it wasn't cheap clip art you know and it was run by Club for Growth which came in heavy against Phelan and spent lots of money did not take him out but was pretty successful in a lot of other primaries. I'm sorry I was just gonna say what I think is interesting here is those mailers are physical images, right?

Yeah. Whereas people are interacting with these images also online. And it might be just a photo you come across on your X timeline where if you don't click on it, maybe it doesn't have that warning label or whatever it may be to identify it as an AI image. So it's hard to understand how it's going to be really policed. Yeah, you know. So I'll get to that more in a sec, but the bill carries with it a Class A misdemeanor penalty which is fine up to $4,000 and or a year in jail.

So you know that sparked the, he wants to put us in jail for memes, fight online. He addressed this in the committee hearing saying there are a lot of staffers in this building who operate anonymous Twitter accounts. I am not coming for your memes. If you like your memes, you can keep your memes. This has nothing to do with what's on social media. So the bill itself, and they kind of acknowledge this in committee, that it's either poorly written or there's a significant room for improvement from the perspective of people on the enforcement side, from the perspective of people who want this to pass. And it looked like the committee was very supportive of this.

I think the only one that said anything kind of negative was Richard Raymond. So I think ultimately this thing's going to pass their committee and we'll see how it goes on the floor. Um, feeling also mentioned though, not, he didn't mention the mailer against him, although he kind of referred to it. He did mention the robo call in New Hampshire that someone ran with Joe Biden's voice Yeah telling voters save your vote for the general don't vote in the primary. Yeah, and Who knows if it how much it worked. It probably worked for some people. I don't know but It's that those were the

Examples he used but he said in the hearing that this is not about memes. Now, it's more complicated than that. Yeah, so walk us through why it's not about memes or what the confusion might be centered on. Yeah, so it all comes down to what is political advertising? What counts? And when I first saw this, I looked up the Text Ethics Commission's definition of political advertising. They have a guide, like one, two, three, four step guide of Texas Ethics Commission's definition of political advertising, they have a guide, like one, two, three, four step guide of what counts,

and it's not really clear. You know, you read that and you could read it in a way that would look like a random meme on Twitter would be included in this. And in fact, when Phelan invited the Texas Ethics Commission general counsel to testify on the bill and he asked him would this encompass means and he's like well it kind of depends. So well there's if I could bring up an example there's actually precedent where Douglas

Mackey who created a meme in 2016 was actually jailed and fined for that meme because of election interference. In Texas? I don't believe he was from Texas. He grew up in Vermont. I don't know exactly what state, but he created a meme that was targeted at, I don't know exactly what state but he he created a meme That was targeted I Don't know if he actually created it or just posted someone else's mean, but he was jailed and fine for this

The me was Save your time vote from home. Okay. Yeah, I remember this. I remember this. Yeah. Yeah, so there this was a Huge issue. Yeah for those on the political right. And so there is instances where people have been put in jail for memes. Right. And the concern is very real. The concern is very real.

And so I understand why people are making a big deal out of something like this in the Texas legislature and especially if it's overly broad as written to the point where it's doing something that the author is not intending. Which we see all the time in legislative intent like this is something that we see all the time right where there's an unintended consequence to a piece of legislation that passes through either that's figured out in the courts or something has to be followed then in the next legislative session, but this happens all the time

Yeah, that they then have to go back and fix later on so in this hearing it looked like they're going to be supportive of this but there was a lot of talk about making the enforcement side of this civil not criminal and allowing an opponent to sue or a candidate who had this altered image sent out about them to sue the person who sent it, either their challenger or some outside group like Club for Growth, something like that. I think we'll probably see that. It switched to a civil mechanism.

But as written, the TC witness said, if you're going to look at this, the definition of political advertising could be addressed generally. And I think clarity there, if you're looking at ways to make sure the bill is perfectly tailored might be something to look at. So yeah. Matt gave me the hook. I was just because I was going to say so. It was like both of you, we're past the 50 minute past the 50-minute mark and we have two more stories.

On that note folks, we're going to hear from another advertiser. The Beer 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 hard-working Texans. 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, Mary Elise coming to you. Yes. There's been a bill proposed in the Texas Senate that would standardize Texas's implementation of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling from 1952. Yeah, we're going back to 1952 now. So this was a bill filed by Senator Phil King, it's Senate Bill 1049, and essentially it implements a statewide approach to religious release laws, which was ruled upon by the Supreme Court in 1952, allowing public schools to allow students to leave for a time of Bible-based character education as long as it meets certain requirements, so you can't use any sort of taxpayer funds

It has to be entirely funded by an outside entity and it cannot be on school property so this is Senate bill 1049 and Essentially what this would do it's acknowledging this ruling, right? but it would require school districts to establish a plan for exempting these students who want to districts to establish a plan for exempting these students who want to participate in these times of religious instruction because the way it is right now each district can decide on their own and it seems to be a little bit of a forgotten ruling it's not something that's discussed very much but this bill would implement okay the entire state has kind of a blanket approach to this. There was a poll

conducted with it was RMG research which was founded by pollster Scott Rasmussen not to be confused with Rasmussen reports. And this was in collaboration with Lifewise Academy and they're a nonprofit that essentially helps different individuals who want to provide these times of religious instruction outside of the schools. They help them establish that in their community, help them with logistics, things such as that. So this poll was collected from about 800 registered Texas voters in February and it found that 72% of the respondents think that behavior and discipline in general is getting worse these days in public schools and 42%

said it's gotten much worse. 30% said somewhat worse. All those all those details are in this story and then when they were asked if they would support a privately funded entity teaching character lessons and biblical values to public school students which is what this bill is related to, 63% said that they would. So this a majority said they would support a privately funded entity teaching public school students. And then they were asked specifically, these voters were asked about this 52 SCOTUS ruling, outlining the provisions. Okay, this is what the Supreme Court decided, this is the law, and then would you support Texas

school districts having this standardized plan for offering these lessons to the students? And 65% did respond positively, well 27% responded negatively. And then they were asked if they think it was constitutional, if they think providing these lessons would be constitutional, and 49% said yes, 31% said no, and then there was 20% there that was not sure. And I spoke to LifeWise Academy, they said that they're not surprised by the polls, this is what they're seeing all across the country. They said that people have a growing concern about student behavior in classrooms and an increased desire to see Bible-based

character education introduced or at least offered for public school students. So there's 14 states that have already implemented what Senator King's bill would seek to do. They have mandatory religious release times across all their public school districts and then there's similar legislation that's been introduced in Mississippi and Arkansas so we'll see where that goes if that's successful and then Ohio is implementing this come April so it'll go into effect in April so there's a few other states has been very successful and and we'll see we'll see how Texas feels about this because we haven't seen anything like this recently and I'm curious to see what the response is here. Absolutely. Very interesting. Go

read Mary-Lise's piece. Bradley, the wildfire thing. That's what you so eloquently... I didn't say that. You didn't put that there? What's in this House State Affairs priority package? So the House State Affairs priority package? So the House State Affairs Committee after the Phelan bill heard a package of wildfire reforms. This is a response to the Smokehouse Creek fire of 2024. There were a few others that happened along with it. It burned over a million acres, even stretched into Oklahoma. Apparently it burned 80% of Hemphill and Roberts counties.

That's insane. 80%? 80%, that's what the investigative report found. 15,000 heads of cattle were lost. Dozens of people lost their homes. Was the worst wildfire in Texas history. It was very terrible and the effects are still being felt. You know, obviously people lost their homes. We're going to see insurance premiums rise quite a bit in a time when we're already

seeing insurance premiums rise across the state. It's just a huge disaster. And so, Representative Ken King, who is from out there on the Panhandle from Canadian, he has authored this package to try and address the problems that occurred that caused this to happen. Now part of it was just natural. You had a very dry spell, you had a very warm a very dry spell, you had a very warm period of days, then you had high winds and it just created a tinderbox basically. But what sparked it was a

power line, the pole that it was on broke, it decayed and then snapped and broke the power lines which then contacted the ground, ground and ignited the flames. So a horrible set of circumstances but this package that King has introduced, they're all priority bills for the house. HB 13 would create the Texas Interoperability Council tasked with creating a statewide plan for and providing grants to carry out emergency communications between localities throughout the state. One of the problems they found was that while these simultaneous fires were happening or while parts of the same fire was spreading, localities and officials there did not have adequate

communications to tell where it was going to organize response to try and stop the fire from spreading. Another one, HP 143 requires Public Utility Commission and the Railroad Commission to coordinate in disconnecting or fixing freight power lines at well sites or other oil and gas operations. There's a huge orphan well problem in the state. The fire aspect of this is that you may have a power line connected to it that's no longer in use, just abandoned, that decays and gets you know frayed and causes sparks and so that can cause wildfires as well. HP 144 mandates electric companies establish and notify the state of a

utility pole replacement plan, tracking the utility poles, trying to ensure that the decayed ones are replaced. This is already common practice in the industry, but the state is trying to mandate it, make sure these utility companies are doing it, and not just implementing a plan, but following through on it to replace these. And then last one, HP 145, which may be the most significant, makes utility companies liable for wildfire damages caused by their equipment. I think maybe there was a debate about whether they were liable, but it underscores the fact it makes certain that they are liable for this stuff. So it's quite the package. I think we'll see some or multiple

companions filed in the Senate and we'll go from there. But you know this is something that I don't remember. Did Abbott make this an emergency item? I don't think so. He did mention it during his speech though. So this thing will sail through. It was just a question of what's in the details that were they were talking to Various stakeholders in the hearing getting feedback and I'm sure we'll see some adjustments made but overall this stuff is gonna move Overall, so we're at love it. Okay, let's do one of the tweeter section. We're already over an hour guys So we're gonna have to speed through this Cam what you got?

I'll just be quick then. I came across this really interesting story in The Guardian where they profile a California prison that's using virtual reality technology on their prisoners who are in solitary confinement and apparently these individuals are being taken through an intensive seven day program where these facilitators ask them to process emotions and they're viewing scenes from around the world, doing art exercises in these VR headsets. For us who have access to that. If you're listening, I go look it up because some of the photos included in the Guardian article are fascinating to say the least. If you are a fan of something like Black Mirror,

these images will look very familiar to you. But I just thought this was an interesting story where things, again, that happen in maybe novels or in television shows that are fiction somehow make their way into our reality. So just an interesting story. It reminds me of a show we watch. We both watch and both enjoy, Severance. Right. Totally different, but same kind of wild stuff going on.

Yeah, separating your consciousness into two halves here. It's a very good show. One inside prison and the other one in Thailand. Where am I actually? Where am I actually? Am I in the cell or am I on a beach? Mary-Lise, what you got?

Yes, so it looks like President Trump is wanting to implement no taxes for people who make less than $150,000 a year, at least that's what Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in an interview on CBS. So I'm curious to see if that actually happens and I think that's pretty pretty interesting. Yeah, very notable. Yeah, I'm not the biggest fan of it personally but I also understand there might be some strategy here that I'm missing but I don't like the idea of it, it gives less incentive to people to make more money. Yeah, it's interesting.

It's a face value. We'll see what happens. Trump could bring in more stuff to the table. Bradley, yours is in all caps. Do you want to say it in the tone in which you've intended? Hmm, no, I'll just say it calmly. Mac, what does shall mean? That's a great question.

It is. And it is a debate that is constant in the legislature whenever we're talking about directives to agencies, whatever it means, or whatever it is. There's always a debate over what all encompasses, what all is encompassed under the term shall. And you think that's pedantic and it doesn't really matter that much, but it is very important whenever you get into an actual legal dispute. So Cody Vassut filed HB 113, which attempts to settle that long-running debate about what all falls under shall. It says, it defines it in state code. Shall imposes a duty and

adds the use of shall does not indicate that an action is discretionary and it adds must imposes a requirement and either creates a duty or creates or recognizes a condition precedent. So generally this is trying to stop these debates about legislative intent and actually that's the next section. Intentionalism is prohibited. At the back of the mic you constantly see lines of questioning that are just to try and establish intent.

And if they hate the bill, usually they're trying to get the author to admit something that they don't want in the bill. That they don't want the bill to be used for. Or would harm the bill's potential of passing. And so this would basically strip that entirely, say that's rendered useless. It's not adhered too much in legal disputes anyway, but it can play into them as a factor. It reminds me of now Speaker Burroughs last session filed two bills, one of them became the Death Star Bill,

and that's the one that moved, then he filed the structuralism act or something like that, that basically tried to do this. I think it was a bit more robust, but I can't remember exactly. But basically it was, when determining what a law means, you have to use what is in code, the written language of this. And that, of course, harkens back to a constant legal debates philosophical debate over originalism strict constructionism

living constitutionalism all that stuff and this is probably not that notable to many people but I think it will create a pretty interesting floor fight whenever we get there no kidding I and such a pretty interesting floor fight whenever we get there. No kidding. And such an insider-y floor fight too. The debate over this will be so cool. And it has real implications. Absolutely. Like this will affect real laws that go beyond just, you know, basic code.

So it's very true. Well guys, thank you. Thanks for hopping on. I appreciate it. Cameron, you look like you're ready to bounce computers closed I'm out of here I'm at the tail end of the caffeine that I carefully positioned to hit right as the podcast started so I'm starting to come down starting to yeah come down the hill yeah okay well there you go well let's end before we're out of luck here.

Folks, thanks for listening 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 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.