TexasCHLforum.com

srothstein wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:50 pm

clarionite wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 2:09 pm

puma guy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 1:23 pm A questions for the legal minds here. Would an individual or group have legal standing to sue the missing Democrats for fraud by taking payment while not performing the duties for which they are being paid? Just curious.

I think a few changes need to be made. Redefine the rules of quorum as whatever percentage needed for passage out of those members that bothered to show up during session. So they couldn't block things by leaving. And second, those that leave should be removed from office and not permitted to hold office again. And of course, those that leave to keep from performing their duties should be stripped of their pay also, and possibly a fine.

I think that we could change the quorum to be a simple majority of the elected members , as in 50% +1. This would be the same as the Democrats eliminating the filibuster as it lets the majority party do what it wants.

But I do want to point out that this could really bite us later. Republicans will not always be the majority party in Texas. We need to be very careful of the changes we make to stop them from being used against us in the future. The Republicans did this with nominations after the Democrats removed the filibuster on them. I have never understood why the Republicans did not raise the filibuster back up to 67 for everything when they had the votes to do so. And that raises the real problem with us changing the quorum. It is written in the Texas Constitution (Article 3, Section 10). The filibuster is just a Senate rule that can be changed any time by a vote of the Senate. It takes a lot more to change the quorum rule for Texas.

puma guy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 22, 2021 1:23 pm A questions for the legal minds here. Would an individual or group have legal standing to sue the missing Democrats for fraud by taking payment while not performing the duties for which they are being paid? Just curious.