A conversation with Gromer Jeffers, Jr., about the steep challenges facing Democrats nationally and in Texas

[00:00:33] Jim Henson: And welcome back to the second Reading podcast. I’m Jim Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin. I’m happy to be joined by a special guest today, Gromberg Jeffers Jr.

Writes about politics for the Dallas Morning News, and at this point has a senior position in the Texas Press Corps, especially for such a young man. Gruer, thanks for being here. Really happy to see you.

[00:00:56] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, j Gentlemen, happy so fast, man. I, I, I remember being here and. There were so many, you know, other grizzled veterans, but you’re right.

You know? Yeah. I’m glad I started this when I was eight years old.

[00:01:09] Jim Henson: There. You, I would never, I would never describe you as grizzled, but though I think we probably have some of the same people in mind. Exactly. Uh, at, at the time, groomer, you had a, a great piece on the Dallas Morning News this weekend.

Congratulations on it. Uh, the title says a lot. The headline, uh, at least on the internet, is Democrats need a new attitude message in Leaders and they know it. And that’s a packed headline. And, but then when you read it, there’s actually a lot more than that in there that really comes out, I think, directly and by implication.

So, you know, let’s start with you telling us about what you kind of got out of the piece, what you were trying to convey, and, and then we’ll kind of move into. Some of the implications of that.

[00:01:54] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, I, I mean, Jim, you know, parties lose elections all the time, of course. But this is one of those watershed elections where it really, really took the air outta Democrats, both nationally and locally.

You know, sometimes it’s not about losing, but how you lose and when you lose and losing nationally to Donald Trump. And then taking the step back that they did in, in Texas with the Ted Cruz calling all races and actually making no gains in the legislature, actually taking, uh, some small losses that sort of hurt.

And there’s always just introspection and, you know, what do we need to do in terms of the party that lost? What do we need to do? How do we climb back? And what struck me is that. Democrats, while they all say they need to change their message, appeal to average Americans more, you know, than not be, you know, the party of cultural elites.

They really don’t have a cons, a consensus on how to get there. That’s one thing. And the other thing is they don’t know how on a national and on a state level. To be the opposition party yet to, to be the, the, the, the resistance, um, that sort of is, is proving difficult for them nationally and in Texas.

And in Texas. You know, that’s the sort of significant because of what’s going on in the legislature, the past couple of cycles and, and how they share power now.

[00:03:31] Jim Henson: You know, I’m really struck, uh, in the article and in the way that the things you highlighted there by the degree to which. There’s this, the Democrats are at this moment where the manifestation of the lack of consensus you’re talking about hides what feels to me like an even deeper problem.

And what I mean by that is, on one hand, as you, as you said, and there were good quotes in the article from a prominent Democrats. This idea that Democrats have to move away and they’re addressed. They described this in various degrees of explicitness or covertness from niche issues and elite intellectual interests, et cetera.

And then there’s a sense of, I think there’s a quote in the piece of, you know, we need to go back to where we used to be, kind of our old issues. But I think that feels to me to be not the answer substantively. And it’s not clear what, what the third way is to use the phrase that’s out there a lot.

Generally, usually that’s reserved for talking about Democrats and Republicans and polarization. But I think that that problem exists within the Democratic party too. I mean, I, that, that, that seems to be lurking in the piece.

[00:04:46] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, they’re, they’re trapped in a sense. Uh, and, and they will concede this, um, they try to be a big tent party.

Lies some of the problem, but they’ve kinda lost a sense of themselves. Uh, you know, what does it mean to be a Democrat anymore? I mean, can they really tell you, and the, you’re right about looking to the past, the Clinton era. I think one of the Miguel Sise, the former school board member, Dallas mayoral candidate, talked about how.

Democrats were in this position in, in 92, in the runup of the 92 election after years of Reagan, and then George HW Bush. And along comes Clinton, sort of redefining what it meant to be a, a Democrat at least. Uh, at least, at least in a, in a great part of the party. Right? Because there, at that time, there were still moderate Democrats.

Liberal Democrats and, and conservative Democrats. But, um, and he, he, he suggested going back to that model where you, you find out who you are and then, you know, be in the middle, so to speak. But this is a modern era in politics and kind of an error of Trump. And you really have to position yourself in different ways, reach voters in different ways, have different kinds of messaging.

And it seems like Democrats are increasingly behind in that. Uh, and and that’s kind of surprising.

[00:06:16] Jim Henson: Yeah, I mean, I, I, I think as, as we, I’m gonna rummage around in here. What occurs to me is that I. The old fight is, there’s still remnants of the unresolved perpetual fight in the Democratic party between, you know, the centrist, the left of center, more centrist faction and the progressive faction.

But I don’t think anybody has any idea what that middle is, and I’m not sure that that model of looking at the array of interest in the party is actually serving anybody anymore.

[00:06:49] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah. And let me give you an example of the problem. I, I, I agree with you. What is the middle anymore, right? And I consider this Jim, like they say they want to get away from the niche issues, the smaller issues, and really focus on kitchen table and what matters to, to most voters.

But what does that look like? How do you do that? So what happens in the next election, Jim, when. There are all kinds of Republican commercials on the transgender issue again, and, and, uh, transgender athletes in women’s sports. What does a Democratic party candidate say in the primary and in the general election about that issue?

Because they’re gonna be asked about, and what will be the impact about of it? I mean, can a Democrat dare say, uh, take a position that. Uh, that resembles a Republican on that issue and survive in the primary? I don’t know. We don’t know yet. Right. But this is a problem for it. Just because you say, let’s focus on these issues doesn’t mean you have to, you can’t ignore the other issues.

So how do they answer those questions and what kind of positions do they actually take and that’s gonna be a problem for them?

[00:08:07] Jim Henson: Yeah, I mean, I, I think one of the, you know, I think that’s really. If that really cuts to the core, particularly on the way that in the last cycle the transgender issue was used against Democrats.

I mean, without taking a position on the issue. Either way, you can still and, and it’s still playing out. I mean, Gavin Newsom tried to yes. Retreat or reposition, put it this way, tried to reposition himself and you know, which was clearly read as a retreat by progressives and I, that’s not gone very well for him within the party in the short run.

[00:08:40] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: No, and progressives will not allow you. And, and if they really believe in their stance on those issues, you can understand why they will not allow you to retreat on those issues. And so you still have to run in a Democratic primary party primary and what happens, and not just the transgender gender issue, other issues as well.

And so, you know, we’ll, we’ll see how that plays out. Uh, of course. And this is. Republicans used to have this problem as well, and probably still do in some states. You know, they have to go through a primary process too, where if they’re pushed too far to the right, then maybe they’ll pay a price. Not so much in states like Texas anymore, but there’s still some swing states where, where that’s an issue.

So Democrats have to think about that and as they. Figure things out. One other thing, Jim, um, remember in the nineties, in the Clinton era, Republicans responded, uh, with new grich and the sort of the contract for America and all of that, it was a stunt, right? But what are, what are the Democrats all about?

Why shouldn’t they develop some sort of plan? Wouldn’t that be a way to talk to voters right now? They seem to be on the defensive all the time.

[00:10:04] Jim Henson: Yeah. I mean, I think that points to a capacity problem with the Democrats, which I wanna talk about one, you know, one more sort of, sure. Rev on this theme though, is that I think part of the issue right now is that for all of the, you know, mainly Texas Democrats you talk to who are articulating a desire to reset or you know, kinda recalibrate the.

Party’s messaging in some ways and, and their approach, you know, the energy in the party and this, and then this is, and in this way it’s a little bit similar to the Republicans is with the progressive wing.

[00:10:43] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yes.

[00:10:44] Jim Henson: I mean, without doubt, whatever you say about the numbers or what, where they are in line with public opinion on, you know, their issue set.

That, that’s where the energy is. I mean, you look at Jasmine Crockett in, in the US house, you look at, you know, where the messaging is strongest. And I think most consistent it is the progressive wing and that that is putting some of this other, these other more pragmatic spokespeople at something of a, at a significant disadvantage, I think because the progressive wing is better at doing the things you’re talking about.

[00:11:18] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: That’s a great point. And if you remember in the, in the 2020 election, 2016, also, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and the Progressive Wing drove the conversation in the Democratic Party about issues. Remember, uh, uh, Medicare for all and, and universal free tuition, and. All of that. Yeah. All the issues that came up driven by the progressive wing.

You know, that doesn’t happen in other sections of, of the party. It, it is just more of a status quo kind of thing.

[00:12:01] Jim Henson: So, uh, you know, uh, when you stepped out of this or you stepped away from this, you know, you finished the copy, you hit Cindy, or editor what. What were you thinking about? What you, what you really learned here, because we’ve had conversations about a lot of this, and I think you really fleshed it out in the piece a lot.

I’m wondering if it moved your thinking forward much and in what ways? And the, your answer may have just confirmed what you knew. I don’t, but I’m curious.

[00:12:27] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: It, it confirmed what I knew, but it also, I, I also stepped back and, and thought about is there a little bit of overreaction nationally? To their predicament.

Yeah, losing it was a bad loss, but you can also point to Joe Biden and being stuck with Joe Biden and not being able to move off Joe Biden in time. And of course, the, the, the campaign that Kamala Harris won, we, we know now that it wasn’t such a good campaign at the time, you know, beforehand it looked like she was doing okay.

But I, I think on a national level, and this is what I thought, on a national level, there’s an opportunity with the midterms coming up because historically the party out of power in power loses, takes losses during the midterms. We’ll see what Trump’s performance is like the, the margin in the house, us house is such where I, there’re gonna be 40 swing district races in the house, so Democrats.

Can make gains in 2026. And so there may be a few adjustments needed, but their predicament is not as bad as say as Texas Democrats. And that was my immediate, the immediate thought was that, you know, on a national level. The pendulum may swing back a little quicker. There’s a lot more work to do in Texas.

[00:14:00] Jim Henson: Yeah. Uh, I, I obviously, for obvious reasons, we wanna move on to Texas, but I, you know, one last note on the national beat is that I think it’s, we’re in a very difficult moment to read, you know? Vastly understate the case.

[00:14:16] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah.

[00:14:16] Jim Henson: What the impact of na, you know, what the, how much the traditional expectations in national politics are going to hold.

So as you’re saying, you know, and I think very reasonably based on precedent with 2026 is going, the Democrats should be in a structurally advantageous position given what we know about what. That midterm looks like is the out party, all of that that people are familiar with. And yet at the same time as we’re recording today on Thursday morning, the Democrats are in a real difficult position in terms of shutdown politics.

Yes. At the national level, which you know not to. Be the boy who cried wolf or anything, but really, you know, has the potential to scramble our expectations of that midterm election, given that somehow, and there’s no somehow here, it’s because Mike Johnson has been unusually effective with Trump’s support at holding house Republicans to together on this continuing resolution and on the budget.

His ability to do that has inverted what we’ve seen in the past in budget and shutdown politics, where all of a sudden it seems as if the Democrats are gonna be responsible for shutting down the government. Because of the politics in the Senate. Again, because Johnson has been successful in the house and because of the disruptive, I, you know, I think this disruptive impact of the Musk Doge effort where, you know, the, there’s no winning solution here for the Democrats in the Senate from, from one perspective, which is if they hold the line like a lot of the Democratic activists want to, and which one could make an argument for, given the content of the budget.

They’re gonna get the blame for shutting down the government. Arguably, if they don’t hold the line and they go along with it and say, Hey, we weren’t gonna shut down the government, now you have to live with Republican politics. Well, the content of that resolution and the approach being implemented is gonna put them at a significant disadvantage as this reshaping of the federal workforce, the regulatory model, all takes place.

So all of that seems to me. To have really scrambled the normal politics of that. And I’m wondering what the implications of that for 2026 are and our expectations of that.

[00:16:51] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: You are absolutely right. And what it shows you, again, this the era of Trump politics for, at this point for Republicans, they have the Democrats on the defensive most of the time and, and when you look at this, it goes back to.

How to respond, how to resist Trump, and he has the ability to make it so that you’re right. They could get blamed for shutting down the government, which in their minds would be a reasonable option or a reasonable path to take. That’s how you fight against this. But the reality is, you’re right, it could be a bad decision shutting down the government and their resistance to Doge.

He’s gonna cast him, Trump and, and Republicans are gonna cast him as being for the status quo, for bloated government and all of that. And so he’s able to take a shield and everything they throw at him, he just, it just goes right back at him. And that’s what they’re gonna have to figure out. And that’s why I think it’s essential for them to come up with a plan.

Because if they make the argument. What should be, what the role, what should be the role of government? And nobody’s really talking about this. They’re talking about the impact of the cuts and, and all of that. But, but they haven’t expressed Democrats what their view of the role of government should be, and that’s hard to do.

Right? But if you’re just on the defensive and if you’re just responding to something that Trump did. He takes you out of your comfort zone where you’re now the party that’s shutting down government and doing all of this, then you’re, you’re right, it’s gonna reshape things and the historical norms, right, Jim?

Because we seeing all the norms being changed or bent with the party out of power, having the advantage, uh, it may flip.

[00:18:54] Jim Henson: Yeah, I think you’d, yeah, add, add another busted norm and pattern to the big pile that’s sitting here that we’re, that we’re accumulating.

[00:19:03] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: But Trump is, he’s a problem for, for Democrats.

He, he really is. I mean, on the surface it, it looks like, yeah, we can run against his guy. All the felonies, all the background, and no, he’s a problem for him,

[00:19:17] Jim Henson: you know? And I think that gets to something I hope to use as a transition to the state stuff. But. Something else that stuck out to me in your piece is, and as I’m listening and you know, listening to Democrats and we’re hearing a lot of the same refrain, which is.

And, and, and this is, I’m gonna be a little bit unfair here ’cause there are other ideas, but there is this sustained through line. As Democrats try to think about what they’re doing in Texas and nationally as they attempt to respond to Trump is like, you know, we need to get a better message. We need to message more effectively.

We need to get better at social media and podcasts. We need to do all these things in the way that we’re doing outreach. But really underestimates that it having. A substantive answer to this that attracts people to your party and to your candidates. Yes, messaging is of course important, but what is feeding into the message is still very apt.

You know, it’s unclear, you know, to your point about what does it mean to be a Democrat, you have to have a better sense of that before you can then go and start developing memes or writing messages, right, or putting out memos. And I just think there’s a, Trump has really made it difficult for Democrats to do that.

[00:20:37] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, without a doubt.

[00:20:39] Jim Henson: Yeah, he really has. Now that brings us to, to Texas to some degree. Okay. So as we talk about what the, the relationship between substance and message and political success and positioning and you know, at the end of the day, political power circles, it brings us back to your earlier comparison that.

Was made as an aside in the national discussion, but is important here is yeah, Democrats nationally are in trouble. I mean, not as much trouble as Texas Democrats, you know? Let’s talk about where the Democrats are and, and let’s, let’s travel the distance from the kind of big view that we’ve talking, that we’ve been talking about nationally to.

The main game in Texas politics at this moment, which is what’s going on in the legislature in other forums, and you’ve written about this, we’ve, we’ve talked a bit about where the Democrats are in the legislature, in the wake of the resolution of the fight over who was gonna be speaker of the house in which the institutional power, granted Democrats in the Texas house was a big, if not the biggest issue.

Dustin Burrows got elected with a minority of the Democratic caucus, substantial democratic support that was crucial to his success. As we all, you know, as it was on the table at the time, it has become more apparent. Uh, when we saw the house rules, once the house got underway and the, the speakers fight was over, was that Democrats no longer had chairmanships, but they were granted vice chairmanships, some chairmanships, and some subcommittees.

And in a more transactional, mundane sense, those vice chairmanships came with funds and staffing as we’re watching the legislature unfold and things, as we were talking before we started recording, as things really heat up and we start getting that point of the session where there’s more velocity than you can keep up with and the big issues are beginning to get aired out and to move through the committee system, you know?

What do you think Democrats got out of this? I. How do you think it changes the, the balance of power significantly in the house to the Democrat’s advantage?

[00:22:59] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: No, I don’t think it changes the, the power to their advantage. You have an, a personal advantage if you are a vice chair. You, you get, you know, staff money and, and all of that.

It’s, it is kinda like a Washington model for the minority leader, but. Committee chairs are powerful and, and democratic committee chairs of yesteryear in the past enjoy significant power. And, and that’s gone now. You know, vice chair, I mean, the chair is where the, the game really is. Uh, so I don’t, I don’t think they’re better off.

And then when you look at the deal with boroughs, there really doesn’t seem to have been a concession on any issues either. I. Which is very important because the Dems are in a fight on several issues, uh, facing the alleged, alleged this session. And it doesn’t appear that they got any concessions from the speaker on, on issues.

So they lost chairmanships. It doesn’t appear that they went to the speaker and said, Hey, we, we want satisfaction on this issue, whether it is vouchers or something else. When you strip it all away, it appears more and more. Now the fight really is inside the Republican caucus and Democrats, you know, have, uh, parliamentarian procedures or moves to make.

But Republicans can pass anything they want and, um, and I think that’s more true today than it was in previous sessions. Especially since Republicans face outside pressures and a Lieutenant Governor and a Senate that are really pushing them to get in line with a, an agenda that is coveted by those, uh, to the right of say somebody like Abbott or some house members.

[00:25:03] Jim Henson: Well, it, it’s good. It’s interesting that you raise Abbott. So I was gonna add to that is it also seems to me that part of. What limits the potential of any gains that the Democrats might have gotten for this from this deal is that they made this deal with somebody that is now, though shown much more alignment with the governor and the lieutenant Governor.

[00:25:27] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah.

[00:25:29] Jim Henson: Yeah. That’s a, that’s a pretty hard trade off.

[00:25:32] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah. Long way from Joe Straus, remember?

[00:25:35] Jim Henson: Oh,

[00:25:35] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: yeah. I, that was a, a masterclass for, for Democrats in how to impact and use your power and impact state politics. Not a different time, right? But they pretty much elected the speaker and were able to get some concessions out of them through the years.

Now, Strauss wasn’t the greatest of speakers. For Democrats, but he was much, much, much better than what they’ve gotten after. So it’s, it’s interesting that they really took a step back with this and they had nego, you can argue that they had negotiating power, but then again with, if the alternative was David Cook, the former Mansfield Mayor.

Who got the most votes in the Republican caucus? Maybe with Cook being the alternative. They didn’t have a, a lot of places to go, but if I’m a Democrat, maybe I try to find a Republican that will cut a better deal than Burroughs did.

[00:26:39] Jim Henson: Well, it’s interesting if you go back and think about the conversations we were having about this six months ago, say more or less, I think it was reasonable at that time to say that Dave Phelan was probably about the best deal they were.

Right to get. And once the feeling candidacy became non-viable, it was almost inevitable that they were gonna get less than. And as, as we’ve been talking about this, I’ve been wanting to stop and say, if I was a Democrat listening to this, I would probably be frustrated and say. You know, what the hell were we supposed to do?

Yeah. We basically got the best deal we can. So how about easing off on the fact that we’re not, we’re not getting much done. I mean this, this is just a bald recognition of where we are at in the state and what the balance of power is like, particularly as the center of politics and the Republican party has moved further to the right.

There was no way that was gonna be a better negotiating position for Democrats. They were bound to get less than.

[00:27:52] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, uh, absolutely. And you’re right. I mean, our conversation is more about the harsh reality of, than, than, than, you know, then sort of an indictment on their political skills. It, it kind of is what it is.

It’s really interesting though. I remember when, when feeling first emerged and the activists were, were Republican activists were pushing him about Democratic party chairs. And he was like, look, guys, name me one thing that we haven’t gotten because of Democratic party chairs stopped it one major thing and in the room they couldn’t, and then maybe, maybe some others could.

But look, it didn’t take long. For the chair issue to become a driving issue in the ledge. And that’s what’s so fascinating is that an issue that was on the fringe quickly became something that Republicans had to deal with and it led to Democrats having to cut the deal that they cut that and, and feeling, feeling sort of falling out of favor because of other issues that the.

The move to Impeach Paxton and all of that. Right, right. I mean, that all played a role in it, but you’re right, the, the friction, the power struggle in Republican politics basically led to Democrats being in a, in a more vulnerable and less powerful position.

[00:29:29] Jim Henson: I, I think another dimension of that, that I’ve become increasingly interested in.

I think I, frankly, I probably should have been more interested in it earlier, is the degree to which this discussion around the Democrats merged very usefully with. The borough’s opponents, the people that were most vocal about changing norms and practices in the house around democratic chairs, among other things, right?

The transparency, right, and the operation of the house, right? The position and the power of the speaker’s office. The centralization, you know, centralization versus decentralization in the house in that you have. Now a core of and a and a big core of people in the Republican caucus who very straightforwardly and sincerely view themselves as reformers.

Now, I don’t want to. It seemed gullible. Yeah, I wanna be naive about that. Everybody’s self, you know, the Texas house, everybody, the legislature, everybody’s self-interest is running around in here and, and active. But nonetheless, I, I’ve been really struck as I’ve talked to some of the cook supporters in the house, some of whom are very new, and some of whom have been around a while, who.

Are very earnest in saying that one of the things they want is to reform the house and that they think the house is, you know, could be run better and could be run in a, in a better if you want, if you will. More ethical, more effective way. I mean, you have, it’s not just a talking point. I think for some of these members, for example, to say that, why is the house always moving so slow?

You and I have seen this, it’s Kabuki theater every session on one hand for members of the house, right, for members of the Senate. They go, oh, the house is waiting too long. We’re already moving, and the house is slow and they suck. And why? You know, the fact that now there are house members saying we should change that.

And that’s not a rules change, that’s a constitutional change ultimately. Yeah. In terms of changing the rules about how quickly you can move in the house, and I think. In terms of talking about the Democrats, it puts the Democrats in yet another, a new, a new world of bad positioning, and that the Democrats are seen as part of an old, creaky, corrupt order in cooperation with the power centers in the Republican party that are being opposed by these self-styled reformers that do generally seem to be coalesced.

Ideologically on the further right of the party. But that’s also a very difficult thing for Democrats. They’re now lumped in as part of this old, corrupt way of doing things that nobody wants to change.

[00:32:27] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, same, similar nationally to being lumped in to, you know, not wanting change, not wanting a more efficient government and all of that.

You’re right, and, and noticed that there were more Republicans. Really interested in being part of the reform movement. Not so much Freedom Caucus or anything like that. Yeah. But when you said reform Yeah. They, it’s institutional that Exactly. That was popular and, and when you look at the Senate now, it’s a different dynamic because Dan Patrick is Dan Patrick, the Lieutenant Governor, but they move much quicker and they’re much more efficient.

With the passage of bills, I mean, look at, it’s just warp speed compared to what’s what typically goes on in the ledge. And, and you’re absolutely right about that. And the, the speaker’s race was much more than boroughs versus cook. It was about the way the house operates and, and, and I think that’s not gonna end.

There’s still gonna be fundamental change. And for Democrats now there are some Democrats who, who make the point that. You know, part, being a party chair and, and the party out of power isn’t that important because party chairs, they don’t fight the same way they should fight if they’re in the opposition party, and they, the congressional model is appealing to ’em because they’re not beholden to the, to the leadership.

Now, what I say about that is, the problem with that is that as bad as it may appear. Texas and alleged for, for a Democrat, local Democrats can, there’s still a level of bipartisanship where you can go and you can get, if you’re in, in Dallas, if you represent Dallas, something from for, uh, Southwestern Medical Center or some education initiative or something going on where you need funding in Dallas or Houston or wherever, you can still cut that deal if you are on appropriation or ways and means.

Committee or on some committee you can still work with Republicans and get things. We don’t write about that a lot, but that’s still a reality in Texas. Not so much in Congress, but it’s a reality in Texas.

[00:34:51] Jim Henson: Yeah. That intersection of representation and distributive politics is still there.

[00:34:55] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Exactly, and that’s what you have to fight if you are a Democrat to preserve.

[00:35:01] Jim Henson: Right.

[00:35:02] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: You don’t wanna be totally shut out.

[00:35:04] Jim Henson: And there’s another interesting dimension to this and we’ll, we’ll close out pretty quick here, but I was having a conversation with former Republican high ranking staff member at the, in the executive branch at a. Function the other night, we’re having a high level, well, it started as a low level conversation about all this stuff, as these things often do.

Right. But one of the things that this operative said to me really struck me, and, and it, and it also made me feel once again, like, why didn’t I think about this earlier? And he, and we were talking about the reform movement, the way that the things that, the way that the. A party is operating in the legislature and in the state right now, and he, this operative made the point that it’s interesting to see Republican elected officials arguing.

That the legislature should be able to do more and that the house should be moving faster. I mean, this argument that, you know, why are we lagging behind? Why aren’t we more forceful and able to move and push things through From a partisan point of view, I. This doesn’t sound like a party of limited government anymore.

This sounds like a party that is really aggressively and straightforwardly and not very covertly, wanting to use government to their ends, setting aside whatever the ends are. And the reason it made me feel silly is because, you know, I die. I dine out in my professor educational hat on reminding students that the legislature is designed not to do a lot.

I mean, this is not, this is part of the Texas ethos, if you will, and the theory of the case of government. It’s not an accident that the, these provisions are in the constitution.

[00:36:54] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah.

[00:36:54] Jim Henson: Yeah. The underlying goal here is for government to impeded, to not act very much. We know that, of course, government. 1 0 1 at the national level, but it’s even more true in Texas and it’s another sign that we’re seeing that there is an underlying fundamental shift going on that is accompanying the Republicans long incumbency in government and their response to what is going on around them.

And, and it’s fascinating to think about it in those terms. Because then it speaks to this larger conversation about what we really mean by conservative. The idea of being a literal conservative institutionally has really changed in the state.

[00:37:39] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, I totally agree. And look, Texas is a a, a big, huge, complex state, so there are things that you’re gonna have to do, but if you look at what they’re passing.

A lot of it isn’t essential stuff, right? The session is 140 days for a reason. It’s because it is, it’s designed to do what? Pass a budget. That’s the only thing that they required to do via constitution is to pass a balanced budget. After that, everything else, I wouldn’t say is non-essential, but. Because it’s just 140 days.

It, it’s not

[00:38:20] Jim Henson: required though.

[00:38:20] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: It’s not required, but because it’s just 140 days, you know, the idea is to get back to your ranches or your farms or Yeah, wherever you’re going, wherever. When you go home, whatever you do, and, and do only the things that the government needs. And you’re right, that has gone out the window because not just the party in power, but as the state has grown and as politics has changed.

These activists want more now, you know, they’re looking at Fox or, or, or on social media and say, Hey, why don’t we have this kind of ordinances? They’re at their, their, uh, local Republican meetings or activist meetings and they’re coming up with all these things that they need 10 commandments in school as a, as another issue.

I mean, do you really need to pass that? Yeah. I don’t know. I mean, but it’s all these things that they want now. That, uh, that’s on a wishlist of everybody and they have to use the session to, to pass those things, and I don’t know that that’s necessary.

[00:39:25] Jim Henson: Well, you know, I, I, I, I think to achieve those things you requires something of a shift in the theory of government, I guess is what I’m.

What I’m getting at because yeah, it used to be a very conservative talking point that we’re gonna do the budget, that’s what we’re supposed to do, you know, to the way you articulated it and everything else should be thought very carefully about, and we should do as little extra stuff as possible. I think it was Democrats arguing for years that that was not, it was the, it was a, it was a more democratic left of center argument to constantly be reminding people, Texas is bigger, it’s more complex.

We’re an urban state. We’re all, you know, we’re bigger and more economically developed. Government has to do more Well, from a very different perspective. We’re hearing that more from Republicans now.

[00:40:13] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah. And, and the role of government from a Republican standpoint. It, it, it is changing. It is, and it is more like government can do these things as long as it comes from a conservative perspective.

That’s what it’s beginning to, to seem like. But you, you can also go that route, Jim, with the, the local control thing. I mean, it, it was used to be a Republican or conservative thing. Leave government alone, you know, state fed, local. That’s changed as well.

[00:40:50] Jim Henson: Yeah, that’s over I, I would say. Yeah,

exactly. So. All

[00:40:53] Jim Henson: right.

I promised I’d let you get outta here, but I wanna do a last hot minute on just sheer politics. Alright. Gimme your thoughts on. Controller Glenn Hager being named the sole finalist for the a and m Chancellor gig. The line I’m referring, I rely on a lot for that, is if as is expected, he is, you know, he ascends to that job or moves over to that job, he’s then out of the field for 2026.

Yeah. And taps into a lot of pent up demand among Republican Pol elected officials and Republican political figures to move up in the world and to get into executive politics, to or to move up in the executive branch. What are you making of all this quickly?

[00:41:40] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah. I mean, you are, you’re absolutely right.

Republicans are getting restless. We haven’t had a major shake up since the 2014 election. Ushered in the Republican executive branch, most of what you see today. So they’re, they’re raring to get going. Uh, in terms of moving up and the shake up and higher office, this is the first step toward that. I mean, Hagar is going into a really, really nice gig.

Before this, he even wanted to move up to some place, Lieutenant governor or go. That’s not gonna happen for him. But yeah, you, you already have a couple of candidates, Christy Cratic from the Railroad Commission, former state Senator Don Huffines in Dallas, who was a candidate for governor last time. And, and there’ll be more, you know, you hear some senators, uh, you know, we’ll see what’s in the big court out of Houston.

Does. But this is the first step and people want more, Republicans want more movement as well, and we’ll see if Abbott and, and Patrick indeed does run for reelection. But I anticipate a crowded feel for this June. A crowded feel and a domino effect when, when people moving from the ledge or wherever they’re moving from to buy for this office.

[00:43:00] Jim Henson: Yeah, I, I think, you know, this is one shoe that’s dropped. The Attorney General’s, if you’ve been follow, if you follow the Attorney General on social media, the other shoe is untied and already kind of the, he’s already off the foot in terms of Attorney General Paxton, challenging John Cornyn. So that’s gonna open up another very coveted spot in the ags office.

So once again, 2026 is gonna be a wild one, I think, on both sides.

[00:43:28] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yeah, it would be one to watch. Uh, it is all, all of the elections are fascinating and they always. I always say this is the most consequential election in our lifetime each. Each one. Right. But for Texas 2026 will be very revealing. Very revealing.

[00:43:45] Jim Henson: Whether it’s a life changer or not, it’s gonna be busy.

[00:43:48] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Yes. That’s good for us.

[00:43:51] Jim Henson: Gromer, thanks so much for being here. I’m sorry I kept you a little late, but

[00:43:55] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: it’s always good to be here, man.

[00:43:56] Jim Henson: It works like this. I, I love talking to you and I really appreciate you taking the time. You take care.

[00:44:01] Gromer Jeffers Jr.: Alright, you too.

[00:44:02] Jim Henson: All right. Thanks as always, thanks to our guest, groomer Jeffers, Jr. Thanks to our excellent audio production team in the development studio in the College of Liberal Arts here at the University of Texas at Austin. And thanks to our listeners for tuning in. It should all go according to plan. It’s spring break next week, but we’ll have a couple of guests that we’re lining up right now, so we’ll have a podcast next week.

Check on the Texas Politics Project website at Texas politics dot u texas.edu. If you’re not on our emailing list, join that. You can join that at the website as well, and we’ll keep you updated on what’s coming up. Including polling, writing, and all of the other content we have at the Texas Politics Project website.

So until then, thanks again for listening and we’ll be back soon with another second reading podcast. The second reading podcast is a production of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin.