Despite looming deadlines, the House postponed on Monday a vote on Senate Joint Resolution 1, which would allow voters to decide whether to set up a fund for water infrastructure projects. The budget deal conferees reached on Friday hinges on that legislation, which must be approved by the House on Tuesday.

Here’s more about where the fault lines are:

As House Appropriations Chairman Jim Pitts expressed optimism that the Legislature would approve a budget in time to avoid a special session, others were still expressing uncertainty as a pair of critical votes were set to take place Monday.

The 2014-15 deal that budget conferees reached Friday hinges on the approval of Senate Joint Resolution 1, which would ask voters to create a fund for water infrastructure projects, and House Bill 1025, a supplemental appropriations bill for the 2012-13 budget. SJR 1 is on the House’s Monday calendar, while HB 1025 is on the calendar in the Senate.

“I didn’t hear any outcry of negative attitude,” Pitts, R-Waxahachie, said Monday afternoon after a House Republican Caucus meeting on the budget deal. He expressed confidence that the Legislature would avoid a special session on the budget.

“I said if you’re not going to vote for it, please let us know and we’ll try to clear up any questions,” he said.

The House will need 100 votes to approve SJR 1, which means the measure will need support from some Tea Party Republicans and Democrats.

“We committed to being for it, but we’re not sure where we are right now,” said House Democratic leader Yvonne Davis of Dallas. She said Democrats are still working to confirm that their request to add $200 million to public education has been met, before they’ll confirm whether they’ll vote for SJR 1.

Some Tea Party legislators also expressed concern about the deal.

“I am opposed to the infrastructure and water plan, not because I’m against water — because who could be against water? — but because I am concerned about investment in commercial banking,” said state Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview. He warned that the $2 billion could be doled out “based on political corruptions.”

“I have not seen [the budget] completely, but I am very concerned. We’ve spent too much money across the board,” said state Rep. Jonathan Stickland, R-Bedford. “I want to make sure there’s no budget gimmicks, that’s a big part of my platform.”

Pitts said the budget conferees have worked to wean the Legislature off “budget gimmicks,” by stopping the diversion of $400 million in dedicated revenue to certify the budget.

In other words not much has changed, and the votes still need to be taken. We can only assume that if they knew they had the votes yesterday, they would have taken the vote. The DMN sheds more light on the situation, Texas budget negotiations stumble amid questions on tax cuts, school funds.

House and Senate leaders struggled Monday to protect their complicated deal on the two-year state budget.
The two chambers’ budget chiefs clashed over whether a tax-relief package should rely heavily on rebates of a fee on electricity bills.

House Democrats demanded assurances that extra money for public schools will be added to an emergency spending bill.

And a leading conservative group urged House members to reject a constitutional amendment creating a structure for a new infrastructure bank that would help finance water projects.

“This is a very complicated and interrelated puzzle,” said Rep. Drew Darby, R-San Angelo, referring to about a half-dozen or more bills that comprise the budget deal.

House Republicans went behind closed doors for a Q-and-A session on the deal during Monday’s lunch break.

[...]

On Friday, Senate budget chief Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, said giving back about $630 million of the electric fees was “a very important component” of the budget deal.

On Monday, though, Pitts, R-Waxahachie, called that “a deal that [Williams] made with two House members that were not” part of the group that negotiated the budget compromise. Budget leaders later met with Williams, who has made a priority of the proposed rebates of the fee, known as the System Benefit Fund. [Emphasis added]

House Democrats held their own private huddle. Afterward, caucus leaders said members want assurances that the Senate will add a last dollop of money the Democrats won for public schools, $200 million, to one of the must-pass bills.

Democrats’ only leverage to influence the budget negotiators lay in their ability to stop a constitutional amendment creating the water fund and a draw down of rainy day money, both of which needed two-thirds approval.

But never discount politics as a sticking point, Is the road back for Democrats paved with education dollars?

When they prevailed, Democrats didn’t crow, pointing out that the public school funding still was short of the amount cut. They also gave Republicans their due.

“It’s not perfect. It is significant. It does represent what can happen when both sides are willing to listen to each other and work together,” said Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio. “Republicans and Democrats are putting their best foot forward.”

Of course, budget dealing isn’t over. With a week to go in the special session and details still to be worked out, it all could fall apart.

Still transportation, Texas highway funding gets crumbs in budget deal, and the uninsured, House Gives Early OK to Medicaid Expansion Ban, are getting stiffed.  More from the Statesman, Budget stalls; tax ‘relief’ mired in legislative confusion.

It’s probably still more likely then unlikely that a budget gets done, but what the final product will look like is still in flux.

Interview questions spark criticism, possible legal action

This is a pretty damming report, Interview questions spark criticism, possible legal action. Here are a few excerpts:

When applying for work, jobseekers generally aren’t aren’t asked about their political, religious, or moral beliefs.

In most cases employers know they can’t ask those sorts of questions under the U.S. Constitution and equal employment opportunity rules. But Williamson County commissioners don’t believe those rules applied when they appointed a new constable.

After Williamson County Precinct 3 Constable Bobby Gutierrez retired, commissioners had to appoint a new constable. They interviewed five candidates. And the questions they asked those candidates during the interviews raised eyebrows.

“Was I for gay marriage or against gay marriage?” former candidate Robert Lloyd said he was asked. “The next question was, what was my thoughts on abortion? Was I pro-life or pro-choice?”

“I knew the question was coming about church because in the realm of the questions that were being asked,” Lloyd continued.

Lloyd has more than 27 years of law enforcement experience. He was one of five candidates interviewed for the constable post which pays a taxpayer funded salary of $71,785 a year.

Other candidates have also confirmed to KXAN they were asked about their religion, their stance on abortion and their views on gay marriage. But the Williamson County Commissioners don’t see anything wrong with it.

“In general, this is a process that is different than a normal employment interview, because it is an elected position,” said County Commissioner Valerie Covey.

[...]

The decision on who got the job was made solely by the four commissioners and County Judge Dan Gattis.

Critics say the law is clear: Questions about religion, abortion, and gay marriage during job interviews are off limits.

“There’s no semantical dance out of this one,” said Jim Harrington of the Texas Civil Rights Project. “You can’t ask religious questions. You can’t ask associational questions. The only questions you can ask are job-related, specific questions.”

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is clear and so is the Texas Constitution.

Article 1 of the Texas Bill of Rights states, “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office, or public trust, in this State”

And the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, or the EEOC rules state “An employer may not base hiring decisions on stereotypes and assumptions about a person’s race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability or genetic information.”

“We’ve crossed this bridge decades and decades ago, you know, that we don’t do this type of discrimination,” said Harrington. “This is really gross malfeasance with respect to the taxpayers money.”

“They don’t understand why they were asked, how it pertained to the job at all. They’re not happy about it,” said former constable candidate Barry Simmons.

Simmons has nearly three decades of law enforcement experience, including many years in the Precinct 3 Constables Office.  In the last election he received more than 48 percent of the primary vote.  But he didn’t get an interview when the commissioners were seeking a replacement for Gutierrez.  Simmons says he plans to run again in the next election.

[...]

After asking about gay marriage, abortion and religion, commissioners unanimously appointed Kevin Stofle, a former assistant chief with the Georgetown Police Department.

Stofle does have decades of law enforcement experience, but he also has family ties to the commissioners court. His brother-in-law, Hal Hawes is the commissioners’ attorney. Hawes’ wife is still registered as the creator of the website www.kevinstofle.com.

But Commissioner Covey says that had nothing to do with the decision to appoint Stofle.

“Mr. Hawes was not involved in the process at all,” said Covey.

[...]

“We made several attempts to contact all Williamson County Commissioners to find out how questions on gay marriage, abortion, and religion could possibly have anything to do law enforcement experience and qualifications for being a constable. All but Valerie Covery said they were too busy to go on camera. But a couple of them did weigh in via emails.

Precinct 2 Commissioner Cynthia Long said the constable was appointed through a statutory process

that is political by nature. And she said that because the constable is normally an elected position, to not include those types of questions would have been naive.

Judge Dan Gattis said in an email that a variety of questions were asked that were relevant to someone being appointed as an elected official.

Precinct 1 Commissioner Lisa Birkman said she was in meetings and a workshop for the week and too busy to respond.

Precinct 4 Commissioner Ron Morrison and Constable Stofle did not return calls or emails.

Don’t we take issue with foreign governments do stuff like this?  It’s as if the commissioners think that since a member of the GOP resigned they must find one for the job.  And therefore party platform type questions are warranted.  But they’re not.  If candidates were excluded because of their answers to those questions, and not their qualifications for the job – and there may be no way to get the truth about that, since the decision was made in “executive session” – then that’s against the law.

A couple of points are easy to see. This is not being denied, so it happened, and they don’t seem to mind that they violated the constitution or employment law.  It’s looks bad that almost all of them don’t want to talk about it.  And they don’t think they did anything wrong.  Also, obviously constables do not legislate and will never have to vote on matters of marriage, abortion, or religion.  A constable is a “public servant”.  A servant of all the people and not a servant of the “right” kind of people.

But this is the same old story that’s been going on in Williamson County for some time.  When everyone in the county government is of the same religion party, it makes it very insular and secretive.  It certainly looks like they wanted to hire someone who was very much like them – not an outsider.  And the only way to do that was to ask those kinds of questions.  Not to mention the questions of conflict of interest.

This is the kind of government the voters of Williamson County continue to support on election day.  It’s frustrating as hell, but it will continue until more people who believe a government like this is wrong start showing up to vote and elect some different people.

This was the best news last week, via Kuff, Michael Morton Act signed into law.

Under SB 1611, prosecutors will be required to turn over evidence to defendants accused of crimes and to keep a record of the evidence they disclose. The landmark 1963 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Brady v. Maryland already requires prosecutors to give defendants information that is “material either to guilt or to punishment.” The Morton Act requires disclosure of evidence regardless of its materiality to guilt or punishment. It is the first significant reform to Texas discovery laws since 1965.

Let’s hope it helps anyone else from having to suffer through what Michael Morton, and so many other Texans who were innocent of the crime they were convicted of, had to suffer through.

And maybe the second best news last week, the 5-pack of beer bills passed to second reading on Friday.

The Texas House of Representatives just voted to approve a 5-pack of bills that would make significant changes in the way beer is sold across the state.

There was audible applause from the gallery, where Scott Metzger, Rick Donley and other interested parties were watching the proceedings.

If approved on third reading — either later today or Monday — and signed into law by Gov. Rick Perry, Texans could soon buy and drink a beer at their local brewery and purchase brewpub beers at the store.

The package of bills is considered the most significant legislation affecting the beer industry since 1993, when the state authorized brewpubs that could make and sell their own beer on site.

Long overdue.  Let’s hope they make it to Perry and he signs them.

Looks like Texas Attorney General Gregg Abbott is trying out his gubernatorial voice, Abbott to GOP lawmakers: “Don’t pack your bags”. A bit presumptuous, maybe this is the first real sign that Perry won’t run again. Here’s a little on the timing.

If Perry does call a special session, he’s likely hoping it will be swift and sure because the maps are already in place. While there is certain to be a minority push for better representation, the truth is everyone in the Legislature got there last November running in those districts.

With a filing deadline for offices coming in early December, the Legislature would have to get the maps to the court by late August to give adequate time for review, Li said. That’s cutting it pretty close.

More likely in June. But there’s also another deadline looming: Perry is expected to become a grandfather for the first time around June 20. Bets are he won’t want to be dealing with a special session when he’s got something more special going on.

Something is rotten at ABC news, Jay Rosen sums it up nicely here, Jon Karl got played by a confidential source and now ABC News has a big Benghazi problem.

After thinking about it some more, here’s the problem for ABC:

If a reporter for your network tells the public he has “exclusively” obtained evidence he has not in fact obtained, causing other reporters for the network to repeat that untruth, and part of his report turns out to be wrong, in a way that a.) is politically consequential and b.) would have been avoided if the evidence was actually in the reporter’s possession… what is the proper penalty?

ABC’s current position: The reporter has to say that he regrets the misreport, and apologize for not being clearer, while benefitting from the confusion he created across multiple reports by sometimes being accurate (that he had summaries of emails read to him) and sometimes misleading us with the claim that he had “obtained” the originals. (Link.) Also see Josh Marshall’sanalysis at Talking Points Memo. #

Can that stand? We will see this week, I guess.

It also might be some of that ‘ol conservative media bias, This was written in 2011, A Right-Wing Mole at ABC News. Let’s face it, if a purported liberal would have done something like this (see Dan Rather) they would be fired.  Here’s more about conservative media bias, Charlie Cook, Karl Rove’s consigliere.

The GOP’s plan to keep Congress dysfunctional.

Here’s a good read for some context on what happened at the IRS, How the IRS’s Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional. Or as Digby says:

I’m all for “reform” and “streamlining” but in my personal experience in the corporate world that inevitably just meant making one person do the job of three. Or four. For the same money. They call this “enhanced productivity” and on paper it looks really great. But for anyone who’s on the job, most often it’s clear that morale tanks and the work suffers.

Naturally the spending jihad during these decades of conservative political dominance meant that government would go the same way.

Yes, cutting back on government in the wrong places can cause serious problems. (see also banking regulation).

Off the Kuff comments on another Battleground Texas story, and what it says about how the organization is doing so far.

The state has plenty of money, and the GOP is still gutting government. That’s why WCNews at Eye on Williamson says that this is a golden opportunity for them, The oath or a pledge.

McBlogger asks if it’s a good idea to ask the ‘rich’ to forego Social Security.

Angelina Jolie’s killer boobs, the walking dead in the Texas Lege, and Ted Cruz killing off the Republican party. PDiddie at Brains and Eggs wonders if Dia de los Muertos came early this year.

At TexasKaos, Libby Shaw gives us the big picture on Texas and national party politics. Check out Texas is One BF Deal.

====================

And here are some more posts of interest from Texas blogs.

Open The Taps explains what they did not get accomplished this session with the craft beer bills, but which they plan to address again next session.

Letters from Texas says we need less judgment and more truth in the matters that are now dominating the news headlines.

Texas Clean Air Matters warns that it is too soon to remove Texas City from the air pollution watch list.

Juanita laments that some political endorsements just aren’t worth what you’d think they might be.

Nonsequitesue has some role models for charity.

Texas Leftist reconsiders Houston Mayor Annise Parker as a role model for GLBT rights.

Texpatriate looks forward to Rick Perry peeing in a cup.

Amy Valentine discovers that Amazon has a strange definition of “erotica”.

Jason Stanford connects the dots between high-stakes testing and cheating scandals.

BOR writes that Big Tobacco is on the verge of snuffing out its smaller competitors in Texas.

The Bloggess reminds us that we don’t need a giant corporation to teach our kids what strong women look like.

While I agree with what BOR said about the budget deal for Democrats.

Today was a huge win for the Democratic members of our Texas Legislature: they held firm in budget negotiations and restored $3.9 billion in funding to public education.In 2011, the Republican supermajority slashed $5.4 billion from our public schools, resulting in teachers losing their jobs and school children being unable to gain a competitive education. Restoring those funds has been a priority for Democrats this session. Today, Democrats held firm and struck a deal that restores $3.9 billion, which is the best that 55 Democrats in the House and 12 in the Senate can realistically do.

Pragmatically, this is the best we can do with Republicans in charge of our state who still seek to shortchange our children, and represents practically the highest dollar amount discussed to be restored to public education this session.

Of course $3.9 billion is better then $2.4 billion in education. And the Democrats deserve much credit for sticking to that. But the truly sad part is that a state with so much money right now, is hoarding so much of it while there are still so many in need. Millions without health care, so many hungry and suffering. It’s likely that we’ll start next session with a surplus too, another low estimate for this biennium from the Comptroller.

No matter how much money Texas has next session, we’re likely to be further behind two years from now.   Because our state elected leaders continue to neglect funding what can truly make a state better off for all.  Education, infrastructure, health and the welfare of those in need.  Instead they will focus on tax cuts and keeping taxes low for those who have so much.

Dave Montgomery has a good summary of what’s in the budget, Lawmakers make a deal to boost school funding.

With time running out, legislative negotiators on Friday forged a two-year spending plan that includes an additional $3.9 billion for education, offsetting deep cuts imposed in public school funding two years ago.

The spending package, spread over three pieces of legislation, also calls for a total 3 percent pay increase for state employees as well as commitments to $2 billion in long-range water funding and at least $1 billion in tax relief.

Members of both Houses have just over a week to ratify the 2014-15 budget before lawmakers draw the curtain on their 140-day legislative session on May 27.

Gov. Rick Perry, who has threatened to call members back to work in special session if lawmakers don’t meet his demands on water, transportation and tax relief, is reserving judgment on the budget until it passes the Legislature, said a spokesman.

“We will take a look at the bill and make a decision on it once the Legislature sends it to us in its final form,” said deputy press secretary Josh Havens.

[...]

Rep. Chris Turner, D-Grand Prairie, the number two member of the House Democratic leadership, called the budget a “a good compromise.”

“I wish the Legislature would fully restore the money that was slashed two years ago but this is a compromise and a positive development and I believe I can support this budget,” said the Tarrant County House member. “While it’s not perfect, it’s a big improvement.”

In contrast to the 2011 session, this year’s proposed budget reflects a statewide economic rebound that gave lawmakers a robust $101 billion in tax revenue, money used to at least partially roll back the cuts from two years ago.

Williams said the budget also calls for a “very significant increase” of about 8 percent for public-funded colleges and universities and about 16 percent for health-related institutions. Community colleges will get a “richer funding formula” under the proposal, Williams said.

Cuts in taxes and fees will total “just north” of $1 billion, Williams said. Perry outlined tax relief as a major priority in his State of the State Address in February, calling for a total package of $1.8 billion.

The plan would also restore reductions in the popular Texas Grants student assistance, providing enough money to reach about 83 percent of eligible students, said budget writers.

Under the proposed salary package, the nearly 220,000 state employees will get a 1 percent pay boost in 2014, followed by a 2 percent increase in 2015.

As part of the multi-faceted budget process, members of the House Appropriations Committee approved a constitutional amendment that, if ratified by voters, would create a revolving bank to fund local projects under the state water plan.

The $2 billion to capitalize the fund would come through a drawdown from the state’s nearly $12 billion rainy day fund, proposed in a supplemental budget that will be considered next week.

The commitment to water salvages what appeared to be a doomed effort to fund the 50-year state plan to help Texas confront what planners say is a looming water shortage in the nation’s second most populous state. A water funding bill was killed by a point of order in the House and reviving the proposal was a top priority of budget negotiators.

Leaving $10 billion in the ESF while so many needs still go unmet is wrong.  If budgets are moral documents then this one is still wanting.

Democrats are standing firm on an infusion of $3.9 billion for public education, Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, said Thursday, accusing Republicans of moving the goalposts in the budget debate.
“We have never changed,” Turner said.

Turner, speaking after Democrats caucused Thursday, said the agreement with House GOP leadership was that schools would get $2.5 billion in general revenue in the House version of the state budget for the next two years.

In addition, he said, the agreement was that schools would keep $1.4 billion that otherwise could be re-routed by the state due to higher local school property tax revenues.

Schools are funded by a combination of state, local and federal money. When local revenues rise, the state obligation decreases. The amount that could be freed in state general revenue in this way is $1.4 billion, money that has come into play in budget negotiations.

Turner said that Democrats in return would give their support toward the two-thirds vote needed to spend money from the rainy day fund for water infrastructure and for a proposed constitutional amendment to dedicate the money, allowing Republicans to avoid breaking the spending cap.

In addition, Turner said, Democrats weren’t going to break the deal when Republicans said they’d re-route another $500 million that the House had agreed to give schools in the current fiscal year, potentially to roads in energy-boom areas like the Eagle Ford Shale.

Turner, however, said Republicans have sought to change the deal because of apparent dissension within their own ranks.

He said that word came from House Speaker Joe Straus’s office that Gov. Rick Perry was saying it was too much money for education and that the most they could do was $3.2 billion, plus $300 million to help school districts with Teacher Retirement System costs.

Perry spokesman Josh Havens denied Wednesday night that Perry was telling lawmakers this.

“What else is new?” Turner said, steely. He said Perry should put out a clear, public statement indicating how much education revenue he supports, if that’s the case.

Turner also said that Democrats had been threatened that if they don’t agree to the GOP position, that they would face a special session in which Republicans would also find it easier to pass now-stalled anti-abortion legislation. He said the sentiment expressed, with Straus in the room, was, “If you don’t accept this deal, it will only get worse for you in the special session.” But Turner said Democrats are willing to risk that because of the important of education.

Straus spokesman Jason Embry didn’t have an immediate comment.

The House has the votes to pass the budget that was agree to earlier. The problem is the deal changed, as Burka details, and we’re supposed to believe that’s the Democrats fault? BS!

Williamson County Elections Administrator Rick Barron is headed to Atlanta, Georgia after the Fulton County Commission voted 5-0 Wednesday to offer him the top elections official position.

Barron submitted his official resignation letter Wednesday afternoon after learning of the decision. While he is looking forward to the new challenges that lie ahead, he is going out with what he calls the most successful election held in Williamson County during his tenure.

A couple of interesting parts of the article

Barron attributes the change in position to always looking to move ahead in his professional career, salary and things that have happened in the recent past during his time in Williamson County.

He was quick to note that the last two reasons accounted for very small factors in his decision.

“I had ambitions to move up for a couple of years. I always look around. Not that I’m always actively pursuing anything but I’ve always looked around. I’ve always looked for an opportunity to move up and do something on a larger scale and the challenges and opportunities that come along with that,” he said. “Maybe 10 percent of it is things that have happened in the past but I pretty much moved on from that.”

[...]

“I think there needs to be some stability and leadership there that they’ve been lacking. It’s the same kind of thing that I walked into in Williamson County–a revolving door of leaders. It’s also kind of exciting to live in this city. It seems like a pretty exciting place to be,” Barron added.

“I think it will provide a lot of opportunities for growth and working with some people that are really experienced.”

He said his staff and Williamson County’s leaders have made his time in the county enjoyable.

“I enjoyed my job. I have a lot of respect for Judge Gattis as the head of the elections commission and I think that he has always handled things well. He always provided good advice. He was a thoughtful individual and the rest of the commissioners with one exception, would always let me know if they had a concern. They would pick up the phone and call and ask questions or email me with questions. I always felt like I had an open line of communication with everybody,” he shared. [Emphasis added]

Hopefully the Elections Commission will be able to find a stable qualified replacement like Rick Barron.

For those who bankroll our politicians the status quo is just fine.  We have a political system that’s beholden to the corporations and the wealthy – a plutocracy.  And in a plutocracy the people’s needs get pushed to the side and to keep them there we get “scandal” and the status quo.  In other words if Obama, or any President going back to Nixon, was busy doing the people’s business, they wouldn’t need to be worrying the media, outside groups, and terrorism.

If Obama would have come into office and started using his power to save people’s homes, investigate the bankers, and threw some of their asses in jail, there never would have been a tea party.  But since the bankers bankrolled his campaign he was unable to do that.  And now we are where we are.  That’s a very, very simple explanation of why we are where we are but we really don’t get much in depth discussion of why we are where we are nowadays.  See what I mean, here and here.  (BTW I really like the name Tiger Beat on the Potomac).

If a president get’s into deep shit, and I don’t think Obama is in any serious trouble (yet), the only thing that can save him is the people and/or a really strong economy.  So, Mr. President, get busy taking care of the people and right the economy, and you’re second term will be a tremendous success.

Under the agreed upon approach, the House will move forward with a proposed constitutional amendment to create the water fund — though not amendments to fund transportation and schools. But the decision to appropriate $2 billion from the rainy day fund will be made by legislators, not the voters, Pitts said.

The $2 billion will be added to a supplemental budget bill, House Bill 1025, currently awaiting Senate action. That money would be transferred to the new water fund if voters approve the constitutional amendment.

Dollars dedicated by the state constitution are not subject to the spending cap, which could appease some Republicans who had previously objected to efforts to use the rainy day fund money.

“I’m happy to see that part is solved. I’m still concerned that we haven’t addressed our state’s transportation needs. We’re still working on that,” said Williams, R-The Woodlands.

The two chambers were still discussing adding $3.2 billion to the budget for public schools, which would make a significant down payment toward restoring the $4 billion reduction in state aid made in 2011.

That amount would be more than what either chamber had approved in school money in Senate Bill 1, the two-year budget bill for 2014-15.

But that is still not enough new education money in the eyes of some Democrats, who say talk of a deal is premature. Democratic votes would be necessary to cross the 100-vote threshold required to access the rainy day fund.

“We have not signed off on any agreement, and there are 55 Democrats in the Texas House,” said state Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, a member of the conference committee negotiating the budget. “We’re interested in water, transportation and public schools, and I think it’s important for us to dance together or we just don’t dance at all.”

Even so, Pitts seemed confident that he could muster 100 votes, perhaps by getting more Republicans on board.

“You will see probably when the Senate sends (House Bill 1025) back to the House, it will include $2 billion in the rainy day fund for water, and we will pass it,” Pitts said.

In other words to get at the money in the Economic Stabilization Fund, it will take, one way or another, the House to reach the 100 vote threshold to get it passed. Getting to that number is proving to be a bit of a puzzle. The tea party members won’t vote for it at all, and the more the ESF is involved the less GOP support it gets. Democrats want transportation and education money, and to get to the right number the ESF must be involved.

As we learned earlier, the House will strip transportation and education spending of rainy day money from the constitutional amendment. And it won’t specify a dollar amount allocated for the water fund, Pitts said. Separately, the two chambers will have to vote to tap the rainy day kitty for $2 billion to start the water effort, he said.

One big question, though, is whether House Democrats will accept the budget negotiators’ decision to restore $3.2 billion of the $5.3 billion in cuts to public schools made last session. They clearly don’t like it. But will they use their only leverage, blocking the two-thirds vote needed to spend money for water from the rainy day fund?

“We need 100 votes,” Pitts said. “I’ve really been working on the floor. You saw me talking to Yvonne” Davis, the Dallas Democrat who is her party’s leader in the House.

For a time Tuesday afternoon, Gov. Rick Perry met with House members who are pushing for inclusion of $500 million in the budget to repair damage to roads caused by a flurry of oil and gas drilling activity.

“They’re close,” Perry said of budget negotiators trying to wrap up a mega-deal and avoid his threat to keep them in Austin for a special session.

Rep. Jim Keffer, one of two House energy-policy writers who along with Speaker Joe Straus met with Perry, said he hopes oilpatch roads get the $500 million — presumably, out of general-purpose state revenue.

“It’s not just the roads, it’s the whole damn economy,” said Keffer, R-Eastland.

And there are still some that haven’t given up on some money for roads. (Despite the study below, it’s likely we still need some new roads in the near future.)

It’s still more likely they get a budget done, then they don’t.  The only question left is what it will and won’t include, and whether that will be enough to satisfy the Governor.  One of the questions left unanswered is what happens in November if the constitutional amendment fails? It’s likely MIchael Quinn Sullivan and his tea party friends will spend a considerable amount of money trying to kill that amendment.

Maimonides, the 12th century Jewish philosopher defined hope as, said, “Belief in the plausibility of the possible as opposed to the necessity of the probable.” Now let me say that again. That to be a realist is to recognize that the world is not a domain in which the probable always happens. I mean, Goliath is more likely to win. But, you know what, sometimes David does, you know?

And this one from Why Poverty? Park Avenue: money, power and the American dream.