August 25th, 2020 – Second Reading Podcast

[0:00:00 Speaker 0] Welcome to the second reading podcast from the University of Texas at Austin. The Republicans were in the Democratic Party because there was only one party. So I tell people on a regular basis there is still a land of opportunity in America. It’s called Texas. The problem is these departures from the Constitution they have become the norm. At what point must a female senator raised her hand or her voice to be recognized over the male colleagues in the room? Hello, And welcome to the second reading podcast for the week of August 24th. I’m Jim Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin. I’m joined again today by Josh Blank, director of research for the Texas Politics Projects. And today we want to talk a little bit of Texas Legislature. What do you think, Josh? I love Texas Legislature. I can’t wait. This is E always have these cycles. Where when I’m in the legislature like God, I can’t wait for elections. And then once I’m in elections, I’m like, I can’t wait for the legislature, and we’re gonna We’re in that point of the year where I’m I’m ready for the Legislature. All right, well, you know what we’ll do is we’ll thread the needle with both, but let’s go. Let’s let’s go deep deep into hashtag text ledge land. Put any of these things and we’ll start with talking a little bit about, you know, we talk about public opinion in this podcast a lot they were gonna talk about, You know, the opinions of a very narrow segment of the public that is theater opinion of House members in Texas. So a couple of weeks ago, Um, a little less than a couple weeks ago, the chairman of the House Administration Committee State Rep Charlie Garen from Fort Worth, released the results of a survey of House members attitudes about the operation of the house and and, by extension, the capital in response to the pandemic. And that survey had been distributed initially by corn report. They kind of made it public for their subscribers, but since then, it’s, you know, it’s been circulating. I think people had it. The questionnaire was made up of 38 questions, and it included 13 open ended items. The document that was circulating was a pretty rough output from Surveymonkey and so we took a look at that. We’re interested in it for a lot of the reasons you’re talking about job graphics. For most of the responses, including the open ended responses and the extent that we had, you know, probably the major value add that we could at least say We, we added, was that we coded those open ended responses when appropriate. And some of them are just general enquiries that made no sense to code on DSO. We then produced all those graphics. Put them on our website, and you’ll find that in our Blaga, Texas politics that you texas dot e d U. And if you just follow the link to the blogged, you’ll find it. And we’ll put a little flag on there when we get done. Recording this. Um, House members responded. At least 116 of 150 House members responded at least partially to the questionnaire, although not all of those 116 responded to all 38 questions just to clear the clear the through the underbrush there. And you know we don’t have any, you know, information like cross tabs. We don’t know what the party breakdown. Waas we don’t know. You know gender. You know any of this? So we wish we did. But we don’t. We don’t even really know how Maney chiefs of staff rather than legislators responded. Though it was kind of fun in the open end, it’s It sure felt like there were a lot of legislators that did their own because, you know, Charlie Garin got a lot of Well, Charlie, I think in the open ended responses, you’re saying you’re saying that a staffer wouldn’t have responded that way. I wouldn’t expect a lot of Hey Charlie from from staff members. Okay, so yes, yeah, but it’s good. So that’s good social science. That is an assumption, but I think it’s a pretty good one. Um, so, like, what does the survey tell us about thinking in the Legislature? Limited is the data are, although, you know, I’m saying that, you know, almost like being defensive, But this is actually a really unusually good glimpse into what’s going on in the house, I think because this came from house leadership and I know that they were pretty aware of this, obviously, in the speaker’s office, you know, I think that’s one of the reasons response rate was pretty high, right? Yeah. I mean, ultimately, you know, I mean, you were saying this is I mean, this is more than a just about how the capital, you know, should operate. The question is, how should the capital operate in the session that’s coming up in 2021. So this is actually very practical and really e very, you know, meaningful for members in a lot of ways. I mean, you’re right. We don’t know who didn’t respond versus who did and whether there are. You know, let’s say certain, you know, pockets of attitudes were missing because of the response rates. But the reality is is this what was what we call, you know, quote unquote in elite survey, right. This is a very select group of people and honestly, to have more than two thirds of them respond to most of the questions. Yeah, it may not be a perfect census, you know. Of what? Of what You know. Yeah, but it’s pretty good. I mean, ultimately, this gives you a sense of I mean, I think that gives you a sense of the broad patterns which is kind of what I think. You get out of this lesson. If you ever lesson you want to do this again, please have Charlie Garin send your poll out. So you know, you know, and I think it’s also like, as you kind of imply there. It also tells us something attitudinally, not just about the operation during this session and or in the capital, and some, some things kind of respond to right away. But most of it is about session, but also the underlying attitudes, particularly at a time when there’s a lot of discussion about what should be done in other institutional public spaces, like schools. And, you know, and you just kind of get into it. I mean, one of the, you know, at a basic level, there’s a lot of evidence of just a general acceptance of basic social distancing containment protocols, right? Yeah, that’s right. So, I mean, you look across the board here to sort of see what people favor opposed. They were asking together. As you said, there were about 30 some odd questions. A lot of them were closed ended, which means they were You know, you could say Yes, I support this. No, I don’t support this. And I did like that. There were a lot of just yes knows a lot of yes knows it’s fun, but basically, you know, we asked when when they asked whether, you know, for basically social distancing guidelines, whether members favor or oppose them, what you found was, you know, pretty widespread approval of imposing the kind of kinds of social distancing best practices that public health experts are suggesting. So 87% of the respondents favor temperature checks for entreated capital, designating member and staff entrances from public entrances requiring daily temperature checks requiring face masks. You get down to about 79% who say limiting floor access to essential staff only. That searches to get a little more complicated. We’ll talk a bit more about that, Um, but for the most part, you know, we think about these sorts of things. We expected people, you know, basically monitoring symptoms, keeping social distance, uh, wearing masks. There’s pretty much a broad embrace of that across the capital that may surprise some people because they might say, Well, they this is the most political of political institutions. But you know you and I have been talking about a lot. This is based on an idea that not wearing a mask is like some sort of broad based political state. But when the reality is in all the polling that we’ve seen both both our own in Texas, others in Texas, others elsewhere it’s a small, you know, it’s a minority of Republican voters who are kind of holding out against some of these social distancing protocols. But the inverse of that is also true, which is that it’s the vast majority of Republican voters who are saying yes to masks. Yes, the social distancing and you see that reflected in the membership to it. So it’s not, you know, again, I think, to the extent that these are surprising in terms of the embrace of social distancing, it’s only against maybe a set of expectations. That air, you know, not really supported right? The people that are standing outside buildings, you know, with signs screaming about not wearing a mask, are not very representative, not only of the population, but you know, almost certainly in our again our polling shows this even of Republicans. And I think you know one of the things I really noticed here. I mean, you know, three quarters, 73% favored requiring testing right, which is, you know, really gets right to the nub of it. In a lot of ways. Now, there was a little less agreement on the criteria for opening the more fully right and what the timing of that should be. Although overall, you know people, you know, a very small number of members or small share of members, we’re ready to just open it up. I mean, only 5% said the criteria the capital should be fully reopened when session starts. Um, you know, Onley. 8% said that it should. I’m sorry. 11% said that it should be open, but it reduced capacity. You know, most people, you know that that had a view of this wanted to wait for safety measures even though everybody wasn’t exactly on the same page. And this open ended item, this wasn’t a yes or no question. This is something that we had to code instead of. The important here is that people could provide multiple sort of criteria for when basically, the capital should be fully reopened. That’s the point here, it’s under What circumstances should the capital be fully reopened? So people would say, Well, you know, this and that and this or something. So for those people, you know, basically endorsing three things, right? And so the idea is, what are the things that people think are necessary? You’re right. I mean, what I think is interesting to sort of twofold. One is, you know, the most common thing that members said was, well, what safety measures were implemented, which is basically, say, to some extent, you know, you tell May right. I mean, if you’ve got good safety measures, open it up. And the assumption is that that’s I think the assumption kind of underlying that is that that’s gonna happen, you know? But going back to the previous discussion way, we’re just we just finished here, you know, 15% said it should be open right now, and ultimately that seems like a lot. But it’s also consistent with again what we were saying, which is that you know there’s about no matter what we ask. There’s somewhere around, uh, between eight and let’s say 15 to 20% pay on the question. Who basically take the position that either basically take a position is if the virus is not a factor. Let’s just put it that right, E. I think the best way to put that right, Yeah, I mean, within their with within then there’s a lot of there. There are some gradations. But, you know, I think it’s fair to say, you know, there’s some degree of denial in all of that, right? There is a lot of that position, right? But I should point out that also, I mean, a quarter of the response has said, you know, when the vaccine is available, right? You know, which is obviously much less clear. So I mean, even between those two responses, kind of at the top, that got the garner the most, you know, endorsement. Either either when safety measures or implement very vague right or when the vaccine is very is available very concrete and likely kind of distant. And so, you know, even I mean on both sides, it’s not like there’s even there’s not a widespread agreement here. I wouldn’t say looking at this item about exactly you know whether how the capital should be reopened, right, right and so you know, And so as we look at that, I think you know what it also points us to is a really, you know, kind of interesting universe of attitudes on access to the process, right? I mean, because, you know, there’s this general and we’ve been talking to be kind of moving through these attitudes about Well, you know, how close are the member? How close is the membership to public opinion? How are people thinking practically about this? But when you start looking at the internal management, you start looking at the access to the process. I mean, you go from attitudes, not just about, you know, it brings out attitudes, not just about the virus and the pandemic and the response, but also to you know, how you’re balancing that against the process and our expectations of transparency and access. And you see, I think more more division on that. Right? Well, I go for I’d say some degree. No, no, I go even further. I’d say, you know, you see this, This sort of you know, this friction between, you know, safety in transparency and access. But I think what I mean what I wonder about it. You can only speculate on something like this is also, you know, the extent to which members were trying to, uh you know, to some extent, handicap what? What the legislative session is going to look like, Which is a pretty constant discussion right now. You know, the Legislature gonna, you know, be laser focused on, you know, the budget and cove it and try to get out. Are they going to take on some of the other big issue? There’s obviously redistricting. And so to some degree, there’s almost already a bit of fatigue with the session before it’s even begun. Where some people are saying, Well, jeez, you know, we really can’t do much and this dovetails with that because I mean, what you’re talking about here ultimately is you know, what kind of access do members think? You know, on the one hand, are essentially, you know, let’s just say essential to the functioning of government, you know? Does that include people being able to physically come and be able to give testimony? The hearings On the one hand, you know, So there’s that aspect to it. On the other hand, there’s this you know, I think public safety ass or, you know, let’s just say member safety aspect of public safety acid, which is just, you know, you got a bunch of, you know, members coming to the capital from all over the state. You have a bunch of individuals and groups coming to the capital from all over the state and bringing all those people into a closed, not super well ventilated space for a long period of time might not be super safe, but safe. But I also say that the third aspect of this, which is, you know, this kind of You know what? You know we can’t know from this survey, but this overall idea of, you know, what do you think the session is gonna look like? And ultimately, you know, Is it gonna be, You know, I mean, I think there might be some sort of a question. Is it easier to get through what’s going to be a very difficult session if we limit access now again? I’m not Nobody’s saying that. Yeah, I mean, that’s yeah, but I don’t know, but call that from this, but I don’t have to call that from this either. But I think to the extent that you know, there’s a lot of uncertainty here, I mean, you know the idea between, you know, are you gonna allow Who are you going to allow on the floor when talking about, you know, press access, You know, Are you gonna allow people mill about in the lobbies outside the Legislature? Whoever happens to do that, Let’s look, let’s look at some of what they say, So I mean, you know, So basically, when we say, you know, when the survey asked, you know, to your 24 points to you favor opposed permitting visitor groups in the gallery if you limit their size and number. So you know, anybody that’s been around a session, you know, knows that there are huge. You know, people have lobby days and Capital Day, you know, they’re essentially lobby days, uh, during the session. And so you see these large groups of people on, you know, dressed in the same color T shirt or a shirt wandering on the capital. Then they get recognized in the gallery, while 63% favored letting people in the gallery if their size and number were limited. So they want to throttle this to some degree. Um, but there was another, more general question that asked whether members favor opposed permitting visitor groups in the gallery at all during sessions, Um, and 48% opposed it. 51% favored letting the groups in. That was one of the closest, you know, divisions in opinion in in the survey, which I thought was interesting, you know? So that’s kind of like a public access, you know, And, you know, then there was also, you know, a similar kind of, you know, question. But you look at it from the staff, and you also kind of, like, looked at this. Would you favor oppose limiting floor access to essential staff during the session? 79% favored that. And, you know, this gets us a little bit into kind of some of the inside baseball of you know who. You know how people are thinking about this. And, you know, we’ve talked about this a little bit off line that, you know, the media doesn’t media don’t really appear much in this survey at all. No, no, no. But this is, you know, the the matter of limiting floor access is in part about that now. Part of this is just straight public safety. We don’t wanna over over interpret the result. Part of this is just trying to keep the floor less crowded. No, but I think I think highlighting the importance of this result is key because I think, you know, when we looked at an open ended that at you know what practices and protocols you even necessary in order to safely conduct the legislative session and you look at some basically the things that came up most frequently, you know, it was the things you’d expect. 42% of people mentioned masks. 32% mentioned social distancing. 16% mentioned frequent testing, 16% mentioned like frequent sanitizing, including, like the microphone cover on the back. Mike right, following expert guidance. E think that would be pretty important. There’s a lot of yelling and emoting that goes on back, but right in the middle of all those you know, in between social distancing and frequent testing, 18% said, you know, limiting capacity or access to the capital now. I mean, ultimately, you know whether or not you have to wear a mask of the capital’s kind of a yes or no. Either thing people can understand. When you start talking about this question of limiting capacity and limiting access, it really raises a whole host of other questions about use access. What’s the capacity? You know, what are we talking about? You know, basically the floor we’re talking about committee hearings were talking about the entire capital and so ultimately raises a lot more questions really than it answers. And the fact that it’s so high on the list to me kind of indicates it’s an interesting area to see. You know how they handle this? Well, you know, in a macro level, that’s clearly what’s going on with the leadership there, kind of feeling out, you know, obviously, But they’re feeling out where where the points of conflict are gonna be is try to figure out what they’re gonna do, and particularly at a time when, you know, as with everything else, there’s a lot of uncertainty. I mean, who knows what this is gonna look like come January, when you have to adopt some rules Well, and I think you hit it on the head there, which is they’re trying to game out points of conflict. I mean, one of the sort of interesting things about the survey was, you know, even though there were, you know, there are a large number of open ended. They usually dealt with one topic. Maybe, but there were about three items that basically we’re meant to elicit from the members a sense of what? What the punishment process should be. Essentially, if we do adopt these rules and you know, a member or staff or a staffer decides not to wear a mask on the floor or not Thio, you know, socially distance or whatever. I mean, whatever it is e, there were three open ended questions. It basically said, How do you want me to handle that? Yeah, E speaking of points of conflict in which you could see and there was not a majority support for a very punitive effect e reality support, but not majority. No. I mean, basically, you know, I would say the most common attitude was something to the effect of. Well, you know how well, however you deal with that with with with any other situation in which a member breaks a house rule in what you’d kind of say. Okay, Sure. Although there was, you know, I mean, I was interested, though. I mean, there was a lot of that and, you know, I saw. But there’s also, you know, 43% did say, restrict their access. That is, to the floor to hearings to the building. So, you know, this would really like to see the tabs. Well, this is also where I mean, this is something where I think, you know, it’s It’s one of things about taking open ended and just coating them. I think you know that’s true, right? I mean, I think the easiest respond. I mean, I think the easiest response cognitively and practically say, Well, you restrict the floor access. But there were a number of people who either in that comment or another comment, said, You know, I don’t know if you could do that. You know, I don’t know if you can prohibit a member from participating in the process or if you want to, and I think that’s ultimately ultimately, that is the rub here, right? You know, Is the house going to go? You know, so far in terms of the enforcement of its rules that it’s gonna take members out of the process who, you know. I mean, when you put this way, it sounds crazy but endanger the safety of the body, you know? Are they going to do that? Well, clearly, that’s an open question. As of right now. And then there’s also, you know, there were, Ah, slew. They’re not a slew. But there was a little bunch of questions that also had implications for advocacy. You know, you know, think of it for various reasons. It’s the lobby. But there’s also, you know, larger kind of public access issues here. But, you know, about half said that they would limit visitors to their office, Um, you know, or or go to a kind of an appointment only system. Yet only a third said they limit food in the office, so well, I mean, you can’t change the whole thing. You can’t break the system here, um, which you know, all of which was pretty interesting. But all of which I think is causing a certain amount of, you know, not a certain a lot of discussion in the professional capital community about what access is going toe look like and And, you know, frankly how offices will use this to help, you know, increase the filter, who they have to talk to and who they don’t have to talk Thio, you know, and who you know who goes into a situation like that with an advantage and who doesn’t, Um, you know, And so I think you know, if you think about how advocacy works and what different people skill sets and networks are, and you know how they go into this, You know, I mean, if you’re sort of one of saying, you know, if you’re on a big lobby team and your job is entertainment, you know that’s not so good. Right? So if we’re talking about you know, you you you set this up nicely at the beginning by talking about how you were, you know, interested in, you know, sometimes pivoting like when it’s election time we get, you know, you said it. But I think both of us feel that way. You get kind of sick of elections. And then, at a certain point in the in the legislative process, I would say probably about early late march, maybe early was early April. That was Good God, because this could we just like to love to talk about something else. Um, but let’s talk about the intersection of this, the election in the Legislature and the big story on that front, you know? I mean, there’s two. There’s two big storylines going on here, one of which we don’t have time to get on today. But I think we’ll come back to pretty soon, which is three overall state of play. And you know, the big parlor game in the professional world about the chances of there being major partisan change most, most directly the House flipping from Republican to Democrat. But let’s focus in on something that ultimately gets us to that. You know, the big election story in the last week or so has been Senate District 30 which is gonna be vacated but is not yet as a result of Senator Pat Valens selection to be on the Republican ticket to run for the seat that John Ratcliffe has vacated. Now that on his second try, he will be director of national intelligence. And there’s now and there’s been a lot of people, kind of. I mean, there’s been a lot of speculation about this for quite a while. And so there’s three big contenders right now or three contenders, we think, and we’ll have a final read on this on Friday, which is the filing deadline. Um, you know most prominently in the capital community anyway, State representative Drew Springer, Um who you know, it’s been unopened secret that he’s been sort of strategizing to run for the Senate seat since it became clear there was there was likely to be movement. Um, Denton Mayor Chris Watts is kind of on the bubble. He said he’s going to do it. He resigned his Denton mayor, so it looks like he’s gonna do it. But well, I think that is yet to be confirmed. And I suspect there are a lot of people trying to talk him out of it and then, most dramatically, the one and only Shelly Luther of Salon, Ala Mode fame, who is looking to transition into Senate ala mode, I guess on D and Z citizen legislature. Yeah, this would yes. Yes, it is a citizen legislature. Um, and this is you know, she you know, she Shelley Luther, you know, was the proprietress of the salon. All the mode that defy, you know, was, you know, in a highly visible and and somewhat underwritten way defied early quarantine order and rose to, you know, sort of prominence, at least in this state and actually got some national coverage by, you know, very publicly saying that it was a violation of her liberty for her to not be able to do business under a quarantine order. Well, and Ulta And ultimately she got sent to jail for it. I mean, because essentially, the judge asked her to stop and or apologized, and she refused. So she got sent to jail at that point. And, you know, that became, you know, prominent. Mostly because of, you know, Greg Abbott and Dan Patrick and other, you know, prominent politicians taking up her cause. She gave Ted Cruz a haircut. She gives Cruz a haircut and not in the way the better of work. Almost did. Um, okay, you just gave him. Yeah, baby just gave him a trim. Yeah, they’re Ugo and and this is just, you know, but, you know, this is really rolled into a much bigger kind of issue. So, you know, I think there’s two things to look at here first, just the race itself, Um, you know, shaping up. You know, with with Mayor Chris watches, maybe just kind of an X factor. Drew Springer is being billed as the Insider, and I think with good reason Hey was obviously kind of ready for this. When, uh, Governor Abbott announced that the special election would be, you know, last week when he announced that special election would be held September 29th, Drew Springer was obviously ready his Twitter account, then rolled out a bunch of, you know, pre produced graphics with endorsements from, you know, a reasonably broad range of Texas legislators, and he was definitely ready to go. And then this week, hey was endorsed by Texans for Lawsuit for lawsuit Reform, which is a sign of, you know, Republican institutional support if ever there was one, Um, and Shelly Luther, then who has defied Greg Abbott kind of famously and and in a, you know, a knitter view a couple of weeks ago with Jonathan Tyler, he’s been a guest on the podcast. Multiple times, you know, was was pretty critical of Governor Abbott. I think it’s It’s fair to say and has been a thorn in his side since all of this kind of unfolded. And so when Greg Abbott called the special session for September 20 are the special election for September 29th. You know what that meant was that the filing deadline was, you know, a week away and early voting is gonna depend is gonna start on September 14th. This is widely seen as very advantageous for Jews Springer and very indicative of people’s on the inside and certainly in the governor’s office and in many corners of the Legislature. So we say their lack of interest in seeing Shelly Luther joined the upper body. Eso strategic is what you’re saying. It’s funny. I mean, you know, and you say you’re listening. Why are we talking about this? But it’s interesting. I mean, this is sort of there’s something about this, this little grace and everything. That’s kind of an interesting little microcosm. I mean, I think the discussion that we’ve been having a lot, you know, around sort of the pandemic is sort of the role of the executive branch headed by Greg Abbott. And the role of the Legislature are really the Legislature’s absence in any of the states, sort of response to the pandemic. And so, you know, we’ve been talking about this this a lot, and, you know, we’ve We’ve been thinking about it a lot, and I, you know, I’ve been in the war. I’ve been thinking about it. You know, there is sort of a sense on the one hand of, you know, there’s a discussion we had about whether the Legislature does or does not want to be more involved in that sort of a separate discussion. But then the question of sort of, you know, Abbot’s, you know, handling of it. Visa vee The Legislature is an interesting one, and in particular, you know, the argument for Abbott, maybe involving the Legislature. MAWR in the process of degree is, you know, for what it’s worth is to, you know, expand the coalition and also, uh, you know, distribute some of the responsibility for the state’s response a little bit. But ultimately, I think this race actually highlights some of the difficulty of that. On the one hand, you know, you just to set the Democrats 1st and 2nd. The Democrats been obviously very critical of the governor’s response. But you know, in a lot of ways, Shelly Luther is is an interesting representation not only of you know where there is pushback among some of the Republican coalition against basically public safety measures to fight the pandemic that Abbott has, you know, really been forced to engage in in a lot of ways, like requiring mask wearing and things like that on the one hand and said, Republicans on the other, who hang their hat on running good, efficient government is kind of the is there, sort of self described calling card of the party. I would say, you know, ultimately, the thing about this race, it’s interesting is that you know Abbott, you know, I would say Abbott created Shelly Luther, but he certainly gave her this opportunity to then be someone you know who’s basically part of the reason that Abbott doesn’t want to involve the Legislature in this I mean, to be quite honest, is that there’s a large you know, there’s a large enough one. E. Well, there’s one of many, but there’s a large enough coterie of Republicans in the House would already make a special session difficult in terms of if the goal is to be more proactive on the virus. Not to mention the fact that you know, in the Senate, the lieutenant governor has essentially, you know, e. I mean, it’s not taking. I mean, I think you know, there are two big problems. I mean, yeah, the the huge problem is the Senate. And you know, you’re giving the lieutenant governor forum If you were to call a special session again, Special session is such abstraction at this point, there’s also the problem of you know, what happens with speakership. Should you call a Should you call? Ah, special session And that Z, that’s also an issue. But I think I think you’re right and that it well, in the special session is just an abstraction of a way that you might involve what I mean. Yeah, it’s like how many angels air dancing on the head of that pin in terms of the possibility of a special session getting called by by this governor at this time. But I do think that, um, you know, you write to sort of point out I mean, for people that, like, follow this thesis, you know, brewing kind of, you know, model of the in terms of the Republican Party is, you know, riven by these factions and the kind of center, you know, the, you know, I don’t know what you would call it, you know, far, right versus the distance, right, kind of fighting over these things, you know, has been kind of scrambled in the last few months of the pandemic, even though it’s been brewing from the very beginning. And it’s bringing to the surface some of the things that were there all along as the governor was trying to figure out how to balance the politics of the pandemic response. And we’ve talked about a lot about that. I think it’s gonna be tempting for a lot of people to see this is a really bellwether heat check for that, given just how Republican that district is. I mean, you know, I mean, the the district, I think the last time you know, the Falun ran in that district. He won with 75% of the vote, so it’s kind of an interesting I mean, it’s tempting to see this is an interesting laboratory for Republican politics, although I think there’s a lot of qualification for that that I think we can kind of probably bring back as we put this in the context of the broader kind of struggle over the Legislature that’s coming up in in 2020 and then how that plays out in 2021 what those contingencies are. So I think with that, I’ll say Thanks for listening. We’ll be back next week. Well, you know, if you confined this podcast at all times on stitcher apple, podcasts and Spotify, uh, you can find lots of supporting data for this. If you found this podcast in one of those places, go to our website at Texas politics dot utexas dot e d u. You can look at the graphics for the data on the legislative survey, the House survey we talked about earlier, and all kinds of other data representations, blogged posts and other kind of goodies. If you’re interested in Texas politics and government, in particular the Texas Legislature, so thanks for listening, and we’ll be back next week. Second reading Podcast is a production of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin.