A Texas Win

10 Comments for “A Texas Win”

  1. posted by Tom Scharbach on

    It seems to me, now having following the ins and outs too closely, that the bill failed primarily because (1) business interests came down on Texas Republicans over the bill like a box of rocks, and (2) Speaker Straus, “one of the last Bush-style moderate Republicans to hold a prominent post in a state increasingly dominated by the far right”, used his position to kill the bill with a procedural maneuver.

    From a NYT article that goes into the matter in more depth than the linked Washington Post article:

    The procedural moves in the House that killed the bathroom bill were led in large part by the House speaker, Joe Straus of San Antonio, one of the last Bush-style moderate Republicans to hold a prominent post in a state increasingly dominated by the far right. Mr. Straus and his allies in the House worried that enacting a bathroom bill would harm the state’s economy and its business-friendly image, in the same way that North Carolina was hit with boycotts and cancellations of sporting events and concerts after it passed a similar bill last year.

    The debate over the bill illustrated the increasingly rightward tilt of Texas politics in recent years.

    Mr. Patrick, Mr. Abbott and other Republican leaders pushed for the bill over the objections of many of the state’s corporate leaders and large companies. The state’s political and business leaders typically align on policy issues.

    The willingness of social conservatives to break with business interests on the bill showed how far to the right they want to push Texas, while the success of moderate Republicans in killing the bill showed that they still retain some power to pull Texas back toward the center-right.

    Business leaders played a pivotal role in persuading moderate Republicans to stand up to the lieutenant governor, the governor and other influential social conservatives. The Texas Association of Business mounted a large and well-financed lobbying campaign against the bathroom legislation, and released studies that forecast billions of dollars in economic losses if it were to pass. IBM took out full-page ads opposing the bill in major Texas newspapers, and corporate giants like American Airlines, AT&T and Texas Instruments warned Mr. Abbott in a letter that the bill “would seriously hurt the state’s ability” to attract jobs and investment.

    I don’t think that the story is over, to say the least.

    Reply
  2. posted by Tom Scharbach on

    Just out of curiosity, does anyone have any information about whether LCR had any effect on the issue? I can’t find any mention of lobbying or other efforts on the web/FB pages of the Texas LCR chapters.

    I did find this issues statement
    , though, at the Houston LCR website:

    HB 1923 – Religious Exemption for Providing General Services

    We at the Log Cabin Republicans of Texas fully understand the need for reform in this area of the law given recent attempts by the left to use non-discrimination state laws and local ordinances to infringe on legitimate First Amendment and property rights.  In fact, LCR of Texas has entered into a formal partnership with the Texas Young Republicans Federation and the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas to specifically address the real concerns and fears of those who believe they will be targeted because of their views on marriage.  As the father of the gay marriage movement made clear, no one should be persecuted or legally driven out of business simply because of their views on same-sex marriage – for or against.  However, this bill selects one specific viewpoint on marriage for a special protection not extended to other viewpoints, and unnecessarily violates the parameters of the Republican-passed Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Lastly, by singling out a specific viewpoint for this protection, the bill implicitly surrenders the right of refusal to enter into a contract for other reasons – likely leading to the very loss of freedom the bill claims to protect.  We at the Log Cabin Republicans of Texas stand ready and prepared to work with fellow Republicans to address the concerns of conservative Christians, Jews and Muslims who now fear the prospect of reverse harmful discrimination, making sure to address those concerns under the terms of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the principle of limited government of the Republican Party.  HB 1923 violates those terms, to the detriment of every citizen of our great state of Texas. Therefore, we oppose HB 1923, and call for a vote of ‘no.’

    LCR of Houston, apparently, understands that targeted, government-sanctioned special discrimination against gays and lesbians, and gays and lesbians alone, with respect to same-sex marriage is constitutionally impermissible and restricts, rather than enhances, religious freedom. I can only hope that Stephen and others of the liberio-Republican camp will actually think about the issue (instead of just repeating Tony Perkins’ talking points dressed up in “libertarian” whole cloth) and reach a similar conclusion.

    Reply
    • posted by Lori Heine on

      If you think that ANYTHING Tony Perkins says is “libertarian,” then God help you. Your critical thinking skills are so deficient that there’s no point in even attempting to reason with you.

      I certainly do hope that you know better than that.

      Reply
    • posted by Tom Scharbach on

      If you think that ANYTHING Tony Perkins says is “libertarian,” then God help you. Your critical thinking skills are so deficient that there’s no point in even attempting to reason with you.

      As always, Lori, I defer to your superior intelligence and unparalleled critical thinking skills.

      However, in this case you have it exactly backwards. I commented that it is the Republicans posing as “libertarians” who have been “repeating Tony Perkins’ talking points dressed up in “libertarian” whole cloth”. Not the other way around.

      And that is the only fair reading of what I wrote, particularly when I (1) used scare quotes around the word “libertarian” and (2) described the concoction cooked up by Stephen and his ilk as “whole cloth”. As you know, “whole cloth” means “pure fabrication” (Merriam-Webster).

      I certainly do hope that you know better than that.

      Of course I do. The questions is not whether I “know better” but whether you can read a simple sentence and make it from one end to the other when the sentence gets within 500 yards of the word “libertarian”.

      So read the sentence again (“ I can only hope that Stephen and others of the liberio-Republican camp will actually think about the issue (instead of just repeating Tony Perkins’ talking points dressed up in “libertarian” whole cloth) and reach a similar conclusion.“) and apply your superior intelligence and unparalleled critical thinking skills and see if you can get it right next time.

      No need to respond. As you say, “there’s no point in even attempting to reason with you”. You can take the “you” as a referent to either me or you, as you choose, but in either case further discussion is pointless.

      Reply
      • posted by Lori Heine on

        No, Tom, I can differentiate between one regular commenter here and another. You are not the one who dated a libertarian in high school and presumes yourself an expert on what libertarians “all” do or do not believe.

        You did use scare quotes. Thank you. I get that.

        Reply
  3. posted by david bauler on

    1. it’s good that the bill failed. The business community did the right thing. respect for human dignity and the bottom line, can play well together.

    2. The libertarian right has got people who are more then willing to jump into bed with the reactionary, right-wing GOP, as long as their is some talk about tax cuts and government being evil….when u make your bed….

    Reply
  4. posted by Kosh III on

    “and working with Republicans is seen as helping the enemy.”

    They are the enemy when they seek at every opportunity to deny people life, liberty, pursuit of happiness etc etc yada yada and so forth and so on.

    Reply
  5. posted by David Bauler on

    Working with elected Republicans, Democrats or Independents ain’t the problem (for anyone who understands American electoral politics).

    The problem is when people confuse “working with” with being a prison bitch.

    Reply
  6. posted by Wilberforce on

    Again, republicans do something halfway decent by mistake, and Stephen blames gay democrats for turning the GOP into a demonic cyclone bent on world destruction.
    The twisted logic is off the chart ridiculous.

    Reply
  7. posted by Dave S. on

    How fatuous to assume that the outcome on transgender legislation is a “win” for gay people. This has as much to do with gay people as the territorial dispute over the Spratly Islands. The only reason that you are celebrating this as if it is germane to your life is because some activists invented “LGBT” in the 1990s. They altered the language for the purpose of manipulating and channeling thought, to make LGB people assume unthinkingly that our interests are bound up with transgenderism and trans activism. It’s something Orwell wrote about and it works very effectively on folks with weak minds and weak character.

    Reply

Leave a Comment