January 12, 2021 – 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

[0:00:17 Speaker 1] 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 on

[0:00:34 Speaker 0] Welcome Back to the second reading podcast for the week of January 11th 2021. I’m Jim Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin. Today marks the podcast returned from a holiday winter break hiatus and, not coincidentally, I should say, the return of the Texas Legislature as lawmakers gather in Austin today to kick off the 87th Texas Legislature. I’m joined this week by Josh Blank, research director of the Texas Politics Project. Welcome back, Josh.

[0:01:06 Speaker 1] Thanks for having me back. Are

[0:01:08 Speaker 0] you excited about the beginning of the Legislature?

[0:01:10 Speaker 1] I’m always excited about the beginning of the Legislature. You know, get we’ll see the question. Really is. I think from now on you should ask me, Are you still excited about the Legislature? We’ll try that question later.

[0:01:26 Speaker 0] I think the funny thing about that is that, you know, as is, I think kind of universal and people that are engaged with this, you know, you get kind of cranked up to the beginning of it, even if you’re jaded and cynical, and then nothing happens for a long time, which I think will be probably talking about, you know, if not by next week. Certainly by the week after

[0:01:46 Speaker 1] we have this conversation, it seems I mean, it’s always like around these transition periods. But like, you know, when the Legislature starts, I’m pumped for the Legislature. I get less and less pump. This time goes on. I get disgusted at a few points, scared, but that it ends. And then I thank God I can’t wait for elections to start, and then we get to the elections by the end of the election, like God, could we just get to the Legislature? So it’s sort of this back, and it’s a whipsaw effect, but for brief periods of time, I’m very excited. This is one of them.

[0:02:14 Speaker 0] Yeah. You know, I think what I’ve learned at least about myself over time is that, you know, I have a lot more sustained interest in the legislature. Probably I do in elections by the time elections air over, I’m really ready for elections to be over, even though there is that that bit of, you know, excitement and curiosity about how it’s actually gonna turn out, which, you know, elections actually have going for them, but nonetheless, usually by about mid October. I just can’t wait for it to usually about the about the time early voting starts. Some kind of like, Yeah, this could just be over now. I wish there was voting today. Um, So speaking of elections, a lot has happened since our last podcast of 2020 in mid December, most notably the violence of the U. S. Capitol the day of the ratification of the Electoral College vote, which, as we record this was last week. Well, no, That talk about that some since is one of the more consequential things of our lifetimes. Um, but we do want to start and kind of frame this discussion, um, with the context of the Legislature and the factors and forces that we expect a loom over the politics off the legislative process is it unfolds at least initially. Over the next 240 days, though I think there’s universal anticipation of special at least one special session for redistricting, which will we’ll touch on. So I think we begin where we begin. So many of these discussions, which is with the partisan polarization and the fragmentation in the political system in Texas, which is, you know, really now to some degree overshadowed by by what’s going on nationally but nonetheless has has been present in Texas for a long time, as shaped legislative politics for for quite some time. Um, and I think is looming over the opening of the Legislature today. I think, you know, in some ways most directly and you know, the fact that there is as we go into this, uh, there has been a lot of concern about whether there would be, uh, protests unr est outside the legislature. Um, you know, given what we know about apparent threats toe all 50 state capitals in the wake of what happened in the national capital last week, at least thus far today. Knock on wood. While there have been, you know, some protesters present at the opening of legislature There doesn’t seem to have, you know, been much of a materialization of ah ah, big protests. But nonetheless, the polarization is is really hovering over this, and partisan politics are really hovering over this. I mean, you know what? What comes to mind for you, Josh, And you think about what? What we’re expecting on

[0:05:14 Speaker 1] that. Yeah. I mean, I think, you know, there’s two things that I’ve been thinking about in the context of polarization, you know, in the legislature right now. I mean, I think one is you know, how quaint is the idea that the Texas Legislature is a little bit different? I mean, you prefaced it with the fact that, like, you know, look partisan polarization is a part of politics at this point. It always is. Um, you know, in some ways there’s a little bit, you know, like everything Texas related. There’s a certain amount of of Texas pride, you know, justified or not around the fact that Texas, you know, does things a bit differently but differently that you know what they’re usually what people are usually saying. This is like they say, Well, it is less partisan then you know, they point to The fact that you know they’ll be Democratic Committee chairs in the Republican controlled House is an example. There might be Democratic vice chairs in the Republican controlled Senate. Is again is another example. And then the thing that you know, I’ve been thinking about a lot that people bring up so consistently is that, you know, I think the now speaker feeling brought up in his interview with Ross dreams are not with words with Evan Smith. Yesterday, the Tribune was this short. Well, it’s not first of all between the two of us here, with one of us being very tall and one of us being not. I’m gonna defend. I’m gonna defend Evan in that and say, Evan is average. Just like that time Josh defended Evan Aziz being average. Yes, but But But Speaker feeling brought up yesterday, this idea that I’ve heard a lot, which is, you know well, there’s a lot of issues that don’t really fall along partisan lines, you know what people usually refer to is is uh, you know, issues that fall on urban rural lines. And I guess one of the things I’m wondering going to this session is like, you know, how much is that really going to be the case? I mean, there’s there’s a really basic logic to that. My mind is usually an education, but it’s really also about resource allocation. Ultimately, you know, if you have a highway funding formula transportation plan, you have a water plan. You have education funding formulas. Ultimately, you know, geography and access is gonna have a bigger impact on partisanship on issues like that. Um, but, you know, I wonder as we head into this session, you know, and as and also is the parties are becoming so clearly associated either with being urban or not. And has that become so sort of suffused in the politics? I wonder how easy it is to maintain its that sort of the first thing I’m thinking about in terms of the effective polarization on the legislative session.

[0:07:33 Speaker 0] Yeah, I mean, I think that’s you know, that’s kind of always and everywhere been kind of dependent on the agenda. And there’s a certain we’ve seen a certain rhythm to that in in the last few sessions in which, um, you know, there, there there have been periods where people have felt like it was going very well. And, you know, there wasn’t a lot of, you know, there wasn’t a lot of partisan conflict or it wasn’t. It was at least kept to manageable levels and predictable. And, you know, depending on how far back you know, you go, It could be something like, you know, Oh, look, everyone’s getting along on water or, you know, in the last session, everybody’s focused on education and wants to move the ball forward. But, you know, I find that that is always precarious. All you really have to do is bring a sanctuary cities bill to the floor or an abortion bill to the floor. Or, you know, in this sense, you know, we’re gonna be talking about that, will, you know, and it will be muted. But I think that hovering over this session will be redistricting, which is a swell, you know, a hornets nest of self interest, partisanship. And as we wrote in a piece today, race and racial politics. So you know all of these things are always, you know, So so they’re a bit dependent on on what the agenda is. And you know what’s what’s getting attention at the moment? And I think that the, you know, the you know, this is gonna sound like we’re kicking the Republicans around. But it could be It’s been true of Democrats, I think, in the past. And, you know, kind of the previous party system in this state. And, you know, the the kind of bomb throwers on each side. No, this bond. So you know, when you find issues that air divisive a lot of time or or you you find open conflict in the House or the Senate a lot of time, it’s because it’s because it’s being driven by people that are trying to push an agenda that is disruptive. And so I think that’s one of the big questions that we’re gonna have going for this time is, well, that will continue or not. Well, who will you know who will who will shape the agenda to some degree?

[0:09:51 Speaker 1] Yeah, there’s a who will shape the agenda, but the other piece of it is something you know, an aspect of this which is, you know, with the and we’ll get to this probably. But with the revenue estimate out yesterday and essentially about the same amount of money available, this time is last time, which essentially means less money due to population growth. And, of course, the increasing needs associate ID with covert and the economic fallout. Um, you know, the sort of, let’s say polarization. Uh, you know, softening that usually seems to occur around resource allocation around the state. Ultimately, there’s not gonna be resource is to allocate. This isn’t a year in which you’re going to see a big water bill or a big transportation bill or a big education bill. What you’re going to see is, ah, lot of people trying to make things less bad than they could be. But also speak to your thing, which is, you know, if you’re looking ahead to the 2022 elections, which ultimately everybody you know who’s in politics is, even if they say they aren’t, it’s these sorts of issues that you’re bringing up the divisive abortion bill, some sort of sanctuary cities bill, something to do with gun access or, you know, going through whatever that comes that that members put forward to be able thio achieve political goals that ultimately in a session where they’re not gonna have a lot of opportunities

[0:11:02 Speaker 0] well, and and they are harder to, you know, they are harder to, you know, engage in kind of divisible politics in the way that financial issues are. You know, I mean, and fiscal issues at the end of the day, whether there’s a lot of money to hang a handout or finances air tight when it comes down to the final, you know, crunch. I’m trying to put together winning coalitions. If you need to do that, or to disincentivize disruptive forces you know who try to use, you know, if you will, the legislative weapons of the weak to scuttle or thwart majorities. You know, it’s just easier to do that when you were talking about, you know, fiscal issues that are ultimately divisible, you know, it’s it’s, you know, it’s it’s it’s hard to engage in distributive politics and in, you know, horse trading when you are sort of trying to when you are trying to balance issues of racial justice, shall we say,

[0:12:06 Speaker 1] shall we say, for example, you

[0:12:08 Speaker 0] know. So So you know. So let’s let’s, you know, we might as well since you started that we might as well just stick without a little bit. So, in terms of the budget, I mean

[0:12:16 Speaker 1] can just do one other thing on polarization real quick. Yeah, sure, one other. The other thing I’ve just been thinking about, you know, that was an internal consideration, right? I mean, the way in which the Legislature either does or does not, like, sort of foment this, you know, polarization elsewhere. You know, the sort of external looking thing that I wonder about going forward, which is, you know, when you look at polarization at the national level, I mean, we had this conversation about this earlier in the week. It’s really remarkable how devoid of content it is. I mean, actually, I mean, there’s some very big, you know, the sort of issues we’re talking about. Some big issues, like gun control, social. Just just avoid a policy conduct. Yeah, I mean, but I mean, but for the most part, you know, the main thing that seems to dry polarization of the national level is really negative partisanship, right? It’s it’s really about negative attitudes towards the other side. Real or imagined, right? I mean, whether you know, again, it’s Z either whether justifiable or based. You know, holy on, a very you know, it’s a contained media environment. Ultimately, it’s this negative partisanship that’s really driving things in a way that makes it so that you can’t have compromise. You can’t work on policy. I mean, like, it’s a good example, like, everybody wants infrastructure at the national level. We can’t have compromise between the parties, is what it seems at this point. The question is, you know what I worry about is to what extent that suffuses the Texas process as time goes on. You know, it’s the first day of session and everybody’s real happy and everybody’s back slapping. You can watch the Legislature, but you know, how much do you keep insulated from some of these outside pressures? That air exploded in really ugly ways at the national level.

[0:13:47 Speaker 0] Yeah, I mean I mean, I guess I would think two things about that. I mean, I think you know one and, you know, I don’t know if this is my own crankiness about this or my own. You know, you know, you know, you know, the mood to be, you know, that the impulse to be contrary about Texans abuse of themselves sometimes I mean, I’ve always kind of felt like, you know, this idea that, well, Texas is just so different because we have some democratic chairs and, you know, it is a little bit overstated, you know, to the extent that you know, the policy result of that has not been, you know, his, you know, in the last decade or 15 years, history of great bipartisan policy making, or or, you know, ah, compromise in the composition or in the in the in the content of public policy or political discourse in this state. And so, you know, well, that’s all well and good. And I think that it, you know it It does reflect the consensus on some of the fundamentals in the policy realm in this state, that doesn’t have a whole lot to do with the great comedy that everybody feels or you know. So I mean, so there’s that or comedy. Um, so I mean, you know, so you know there’s that, and then, you know, to the other point of You know, I think there is this sense and this is kind of, um, you know, one of the underlying drivers of the peace we posted today, One of the things that is so, uh, troubling about the kind of hyper partisanship and polarization and the sorting of the parties that we’re seeing at the national level right now. Is it that And now, because of some of the reasons you talked about the media environment, etcetera, it’s almost like it’s a structural force unto its own.

[0:15:48 Speaker 1] And that’s the concern. I mean, that’s why I wonder the extent to which we start to see a little bit mawr, you know, I mean, nothing that’s unfamiliar in Texas politics. I mean, ultimately, you know, you are gonna have you know someone’s gonna fight. Let me just someone’s gonna file a constitutional carry build decision if they haven’t already right. And you know that zero. So So this is part of part of part of the process has always been. But the question is, you know, does the group you know who is demanding? Let’s say absolute fealty either on the left or the right honestly, is that group grow in this is because we’ve kind of observed overtime is sort of the group of the the discontents within the let’s say within the governing majority has actually been shrinking, right. But, I mean, until we actually see a session take place and actually cease, um, you know, some votes hard to really suss out what? How big that group is.

[0:16:38 Speaker 0] Yeah, And I guess is I think about this session, you know, that we’re looking at right now, you know, there are, you know, there are two factors that help, you know, I think, um, you know, work counter to this. You know, the growing structural force of hyper partisanship and polarization, you know, And one is just the realities of the legislative process in which people work over multiple sessions over a period of time over a period of conditions, Um, on the on big public policy issues, or even on just their own issues to get things done. I mean, I think you know, you think about the progress on public education last night. Last time. Now, on one hand, we’ve sort of been a little snotty about people patter. I have people patting themselves on the back for making progress, but you know it not exactly being a game changer per se. And so one thing I think we’ll be watching. You have to watch this time. And this is very much out in the ether, you know, in the advocacy in the public interest world. But I think from an institutional perspective is you know, if we can hold the line on education and you know, if not and and we see some continuity from the last session in trying to do better on not just the amount of money going into public education but in, you know, the structure of the funding process and just improving the way the jury rigged public education funding system in this state works well, then, you know, that’s a sign that that’s something pretty good is going on. Um, in a sign that you know, the deeper rhythms of the legislative process can continue, Um, you know, and I think you know, you could watch a whole range of other smaller issues on that, whether it’s it’s transportation which have been looking at more closely do people begin toe, you know, continue to chip away at some of the structural issues and transportation, particularly maybe some of the process things that aren’t related or don’t require a ton of money. Do they continue to hold the line on the progress that was made? A few such, you know, a few sessions ago on transportation. Um, even at the smaller level, you know, you know, does does the marijuana decriminalization and legalization fight. And I hate to even mention that because it makes people all, you know, starry eyed. But do you see a little more incremental movement on that? That suggests that the process is kind of working, you know, in the incremental way. And I don’t mean, like, you know, and I certainly don’t expect any big moves on on marijuana legalization per se as long a stand. Patrick his lieutenant governor. Um, but, you know, does the list of medical uses get slightly expanded? Do we see a little more progress on D cream? So all those things I think are kind of going on underneath in the legislature while we’re thinking about these big forces of polarization, and I think that those big forces are troubling and influential, and as we wrote today and color everything but their own counter forces out there. E. I don’t think those counter forces air because Texas is special. I think the counter forces and I think it’s important in the moment aren’t come from the way that Democratic legislative politics work. However, in perfect they are.

[0:20:07 Speaker 1] Well, I mean, you raised the point, you know, in the offset statement, the right that most of what the Texas later Legislature is dealing with is about business versus business issues. And these aren’t necessarily monetary issues. I mean, for the Legislature, these air about regulations, these air

[0:20:22 Speaker 0] monetary for the stakeholders directly, indirectly, well, they’re not school issues. They’re not fiscal issues. They’re

[0:20:29 Speaker 1] not fiscal issues for government, right? And so I mean, ultimately, you bring the fact that that is a big part of this. And I think, you know, part of the uncertainty and all this I think that a lot of people are facing right now is, you know, is there e think it’s safe to assume that all that stuff is going to keep happening, right? I mean, there’s I mean, there’s a lot of bills filed, a lot of things going on, but I think you know we’re seeing here at the beginning of the session. You’re thinking like, Well, there’s not gonna be a lot of access to committee hearings, You know, there might be a limited agenda. And then the other piece to this, which is, you know, floating out there is, I think, is the question is, does something kind of derailed this?

[0:21:02 Speaker 0] Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, and there’s a lot of something’s out there right now.

[0:21:06 Speaker 1] Exactly. So what are some of these other? Some things, I guess, right.

[0:21:09 Speaker 0] Well, you know, we kind of skipped over a little bit the co vid pandemic, and I think you know that that skipped over. But we haven’t gotten to that yet. And I think that, you know, in a lot of ways, that covered pandemic is looming extremely, you know, large over the legislature. Although, you know, opening day, you don’t get any kind of substantive indications or you get very few. They’re all heavily coated. And we saw, you know, a few references to the difficulties you know of last year from the speaker and from the governor. Um, but not a lot of specifics. And again, I don’t wanna put too high a burden on what is essentially a ceremonial day. But I also think that, you know there is going to be a fundamental, uh, confrontation at the Legislature at some point between people that are, if not denying it are you know that we call the movie, you know, they’re going to be Republican elected officials, for the most part, who have to manage part of their constituency that are polling has shown. And we’ve talked about multiple times on this podcast and imprinted everywhere have become, you know, less and less convinced that the pandemic is a serious public health matter of been a serious policy matter, Um, and the reality that it remains a threat. And I think the you know that that is going to be out there. And I think that the the presence of a vaccine now you know, complicates this in ways that you know ultimately, really unfortunate. Obviously not that the presence of a vaccine is unfortunate. It’s it’s great she’s calculate pretty monumental way. But the fact that you know the vaccine is not something that we can snap our fingers and you know, the human and physical and economic costs of the pandemic are just going to go away. And that’s the timing of that. With the Legislature being in session, I fear gives Republican elected officials a way of avoiding conflict with a substantial minority of their base by waiting it out. And I think the cost of waiting it out actually pretty awful.

[0:23:34 Speaker 1] What I’m going to see is is whether the emphasis in terms of how the Legislature dresses Cove because remember they haven’t had a chance to really play a part in the state’s response at all. Up until this point, and what I’m really curious about with respect to this is you know how much is the emphasis of the legislation focused on? You know, Let’s say, you know, it’s a fixing problems in terms of the state’s response going forward and how much of it is about correcting perceived missteps that have already taken place and that could go in any direction, right? But but in particular, what I’m thinking about here mostly is E. I think there’s gonna be a lot of interest in keeping you know, local officials from overstepping some, you know, arbitrary threshold. In response to the pandemic. I think we’re going to see a lot of that. And that’s a way actually that, you know, legislators without while waiting out the pandemic can also address it. But in a way that’s not really gonna actually make the state more prepared going going forward, it’s actually just gonna be I think I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lot of hand tine of local officials at this point.

[0:24:34 Speaker 0] Well, right. I mean, I I think what that speaks to is that, you know, I mean, that is going to be, you know, there is going to be a bucket of kind of institutional policy responses and implementation responses that are going to be, I think, probably all things being equal, uh, emanating mostly from the Republican Party in terms of the kinds of you know, they’ll be builders clarifications. But the kind of you know, hamstringing of local authorities that you’re talking about, and also then from a from a smaller subset of Republican officials, but also some Democrats efforts to shall we say, clarify the limits of executive power, uh, in response to public health emergencies and emergencies writ large, and we have been bills introduced. There’s already all kinds of bills file in both of those areas. And then there will be another, you know, bucket of bills. That will be about familia rating the effects and thinking mawr about public health policy and social policy in terms of the impact of the pandemic that will speak to, you know, if possible, you know, the terms of funding and the structure of public health delivery and public health services. Public health authorities. Um, I think that will be mostly and that will be mostly in the realm of Democrats. Andi, I would expect, you know, just given the structure of of of the Legislature that that first group of institutional measures is going to get much mawr attention from this legislature than that that latter group of social policy, you know, I mean, not toe over elaborate the obvious. But I think that but But I also think that some of that is going to be a little bit contingent on the pace of vaccination and the path that the pandemic continues to take. Um, you know, and I think that’s one. You know, it’s one of the reasons that it’s both, you know, good policy and good politics for the governor and and, you know, the Republican led executive branch right now to be doing everything they can to accelerate vaccination and, you know, move this issue off the table.

[0:26:57 Speaker 1] Well, it’s not a

[0:26:58 Speaker 0] bloodless about it.

[0:26:59 Speaker 1] Yeah, and it’s not as though, you know, we’re still here predicting that you know the emphasis of legislation. Just talking about some of the possibilities I would add, You know, if after today’s you know, Opening Day festivities, it turns out that a bunch of legislators come down with co vid right or even in the next few weeks. That’s gonna certainly, obviously, in addition to throw the legislative session into, you know, a certain complicated maneuvering space going forward. It also could affect the policy process going forward just right, although,

[0:27:31 Speaker 0] you know, I think we can. Sometimes, you know. I mean, you know, we can sometimes overestimate the degree to which people’s individual experiences then shape there.

[0:27:40 Speaker 1] I mean, I don’t at

[0:27:41 Speaker 0] least in terms of Cove it, but

[0:27:43 Speaker 1] I don’t think there may be a discussion. It’s the public discussion. It’s the idea of, you know, you’ve got a legislature. Well, let’s say 20 people come down with cove it in a couple weeks, period. You know, it changes the discussion about how they’re behaving so

[0:27:55 Speaker 0] well. And I think the other, you know, unknown factor there is. You know, how does how does the coded policy discussion change in Texas is a result of the change in presidential leadership, you know? And I think, look, you know, there are again forces pressing in opposite directions in that in that way, on one hand, Donald Trump has been a powerful purveyor of, you know, minimizing of minimizing the pandemic and minimizing the impact of the code and seriousness of the pandemic. You know, he will not have the bully pulpit he had before you. And, you know, he will not have his Twitter account. Interestingly enough, a

[0:28:43 Speaker 1] big change. A I mean, he’s already displayed a lack of interest, but ultimately, once, it’s not his responsibility,

[0:28:49 Speaker 0] his lack of it. I mean, but the thing is, his lack of it yeah, his lack of interest was a presidential signal. His lack of interest will no longer be a presidential signal, So yeah, um, s So there’s that, but there may, you know, But then we’re also gonna have to see how the relationship between, you know, rhetoric in Texas and and rhetoric at the national level. You know how they how they collide. I mean, if you know, if the Biden administration, you know, comes in and really, you know, pushes hard on on states and localities on, you know, public health policy. And the read in Texas is that pushback is called for. Then Trump’s absence gets sort of, you know, balanced by the fact that, you know, you know, Texas political leadership, you know, reverts to the expected form and, you know, basically says the opposite of everything coming out of Washington, D. C.

[0:29:49 Speaker 1] Well, that’s the other big, you know. One of the other big contextual factors here, right is that, you know, we’ve gone from from Republican control of the presidency in the Senate to unified Democratic control in Washington and a zero we wrote today. It’s It’s not too long ago that Governor Abbott was Attorney General Abbott, saying that he wakes up every day and sues the Obama administration that that was his job. Ultimately, you know, we should expect an orientation back of that. We already brought up this idea. You know, I think of the relationship between the legislature and the cities, which is, you know, I think generously could be described as contentious at this point. Um, you know, mostly under democratic control. And, you know, I think you are bringing this sort of overarching superstructure, which is the state’s position. Visa vee. The federal government here is related to cove it if the government takes a strong position on co vid how reflexively our Texas political leaders just gonna push back. Right? Um, you know, and the effect that’s gonna have actually on fighting the virus is gonna be interesting, right? Because at least when Donald Trump was in office, even if he was minimizing the virus, it was still in everybody’s interest. Especially, I would say, especially Republican executives around the country to do a good job containing the virus and to really, you know, work even if quietly to try toe, try to do the best they could under the circumstances. Now, you know, they’ve got basically ah, fraction. You know, I’m a fraction say a faction within the party, right that denies the reality of co vid, but also they’re going to be hearing public health advice coming almost uniformly from from Democrats. And I mean really from a democratic administration. So it really makes actually containment mawr complicated, you know, within the party. Yeah. Okay. We agree that way.

[0:31:29 Speaker 0] Get that worked out way dook. Yeah. No, no. I mean, I think that another facet of the as we move forward on co vid and fighting the pandemic under these new conditions with Donald Trump absent, seen in a unified federal government under Democratic Control or Democratic leadership, anyway, um is the template of race. Um, you know, race has been, you know, the discussion of race that emerged in the summer around policing criminal justice and the killing of George Floyd in the protest afterwards. And we’ve written a lot about that. We wrote about it again today. Um, that’s also been a big factor in that the covert pandemic, given the disparate impact on communities of color. But it’s also something that, unfortunately, you know, reinforces to some degree the cleavage because of sorting of the partisan cleavage and and partisanship because of the distribution, the racial composition of each of the parties on dso you know, race and and you know is going to be hovering over this session. I mean, it’s intrinsic to politics in this state, but I I think it is going to be one of those things, and we kind of glancingly touched on this earlier. That is also going Thio to be present in the session and is going to be probably impossible to downplay, even though I think that, you know, obviously the majority party is going to want to do that.

[0:33:13 Speaker 1] Maybe I e not least in. I mean, look, you know,

[0:33:18 Speaker 0] other than the policing agenda,

[0:33:20 Speaker 1] Well, that’s exactly but that’s But that’s the issue here, right? I mean, there’s sort of two, you know, fundamental problem. I mean difficulties with this issue in Texas and elsewhere. But, I mean, it’s really clear in Texas, right? Which is, you know, for Democrats who overwhelmingly see problems between the relationship problems with relationships between police in the communities of color that they serve well. Republicans don’t view that or don’t view. This is a problem, and furthermore, Democrats were clearly much more likely also to sort of see, you know, social justice issues more broadly than policing. Ultimately, to the extent that you know, Democratic legislators feel, you know, really beholden to their constituents, if not the moment to make you know, good faith efforts to improve social justice After, you know, basically everything that happened over the summer in the year and the protests in the movement. Well, you know, Republicans just spent much of the fall campaigning on supporting police officers. And so, you know, those things don’t mean like those things don’t need to be at odds with each other. I mean, you know, I want to say that because it’s true, but ultimately they’ve been constructed in such a way so that they are on DSO. You know, it’s it’s hard, You know, I think even as much as it’s easy said, Well, maybe you know people who want to keep, you know, let’s say, keep cool around this area or not let it boil over. It’s just it just seems like an air issue, which it’s gonna be hard for. You know, I would say it’d be hard to have a cease fire at this point on this

[0:34:48 Speaker 0] issue. Yeah, I mean, I think it is at a basic level. You know, Republicans, you say Republicans campaign. Many Republicans, particularly the Legislature, campaigned on especially suburban supporting the police on, but have already been many bills filed that are important to many Democrats about very different vision of, shall we say, police reform. Mhm, um, as well as you know, other issues that are related, you know, there, you know, you know, that raised the issue of race public monuments, you know, other things. But also, frankly, again, health care delivery in response to Kobe because of the disparate impact on communities of color. So I think, you know, you know, I just I should probably, you know, you know, revise my remarks and that it’s not that nobody you know, that people are not gonna want to raise the issue, they’re not gonna want it. They’re gonna Everyone’s gonna have a dip Such a fundamentally different view of how the issue plays out. And can you really find the some kind of, you know, discourse where you can you can implement policies in this way or even debate them in a way. But

[0:36:00 Speaker 1] that Z, that’s the real challenge, right? Because I mean ultimately, you know, I mean, I think the last couple days there’s you know, there’s announcement by the by administration about how they would, you know, think about distribution of resource is. And it mentioned race and gender as a particular factor for small businesses. And much of the response, you know, on the right was that’s racist. Setting aside that claim the point being that, you know, for most Democrats looking to advance social justice, whether in policing or otherwise, you know, generally the modern sort of take on this is that you can’t be race neutral anymore. You have to acknowledge where there are disparities and you have to address them head on. But the reality is that within the Republican Party, the response to that is, Well, that approach is racist. Not a lot of room, not a lot of room to maneuver there.

[0:36:49 Speaker 0] Yeah, and And so I think that you know that you know that that discourses just lurk. You know, that discursive kind of conflict, which is a really also very material political conflict, are both kind of lurking out there and just waiting to be activated in this in this legislative session. And they’re the kinds of, you know, the kinds of, you know, issues that are that are going to be hard to avoid given, you know, the sense of urgency here. Given the fact that you know, this is not this is not your regular legislative session. The shortfall may only be about a billion dollars and not four or five as we heard from the controller this week, Um, but it’s still going to be, you know, that that’s a pretty relative judgment, Andi. And it is still going to be, uh, a tense session. And you know, there are. There are a lot of there are a lot of issues that are very fundamental to the kind of cultural identity of state. And that brings us, really, you know, also for cultural politics in the state. And that really brings us full circle to where we started in what has been going on in Washington because, you know, at at the end of the day, when you look at, you know, the ground forces that were invading the capital and the composition of those groups, there is a racial component to that that is undeniable and is bubbling under into, you know, the most discontented elements that are refusing to accept the transition and that are, you know, for the time being located mawr or less either within or adjacent to the Republican Party. And that’s why you know, that’s why you know, we saw Ted Cruz take the leadership he did and questioning the results of the election. That’s why we saw more than half of the Republicans in the Texas, you know, congressional delegation also voting to to object to the Electoral College results and to end taking place in that and in for many of them in their public performances. You know, being, you know, for lack of a better term, as Trump ius possible and repeating the notion that it thes their constituents had been robbed. And there is a you know, there’s a racial component to that that is fueling a lot of this that has to do with some of the fundamentals in both American politics. But in state politics, for which, you know, we started by talking well, this urban rural divide e mean urban rural divide is in part about a kind of, you know, cultural positioning or a cultural different cultural will use. But it’s also very much about race.

[0:39:44 Speaker 1] Well, you know, I’m reluctant to say this, but you know, it’s one of these things that you studied political science, and for whatever reason, race and politics is sort of ITT’s very somewhat separate. I mean, it’s a subset of American politics is a different thing. But, I mean, I think, you know, in the last few years, if not in all of American history, I keep finding myself coming back to the notion. Isn’t all American politics about race and politics?

[0:40:07 Speaker 0] Well, yeah. And you know, I mean, there’s been a lot written in recent years about the fact that, you know, the fact that we separate the discussion of race and politics from quote unquote political science or mainstream political science is actually an artifact of what we’re talking about.

[0:40:26 Speaker 1] O E. Right. You know, one thing that you said that relates to this conversation. I just wanna I wanna make sure you hit It is also and redistricting.

[0:40:35 Speaker 0] Yeah, well, and yeah, and and redistricting again. Fundamental. You know, two things about redistricting, you know, that that you raised right one. It’s basically fundamental to everybody. It’s fundamental to the electoral process. There’s some really good language about that, um in Steve Bicker staffs posthumously published review of redistricting that I’ve been reading that and, um, you know, but it’s, you know, but the two points he makes are, you know, there’s really it’s really the way that district lines were drawn or a fundamental aspect of democratic representation and to the effect, to the extent that we tolerate gerrymandering were tolerating compromises of Democratic representation and then the second point being that in almost all instances, race is fundamental to gerrymandering and redistricting, particularly in Texas. Given our demographics,

[0:41:34 Speaker 1] I have to say, we’re like that we’re tolerating compromises of Democratic representation. Sounds so quaint in the moment we’re sitting in.

[0:41:41 Speaker 0] Yeah, well, yes, it is. And since you know that the underlying fundamentals are being have been questioned right now, uh, they announced today that the Legislature that the two chambers will have organizational on rules meetings over the next couple days. House, I don’t hear this on the Senate, but houses adjourned, I think until January 26th, at least for now. I will, you know, we will see if even that they hit that date. Depending on as you say, what happens with you know everybody being together today and what happens out in the environment given the pandemic eso we’ll have a chance to return to some of these issues. Uh, thanks for being here. Thanks to our crew in liberal arts development studio in the College of Liberal Arts, University of Texas at Austin, we had some some mid show technical difficulties that I bet none of you will even notice because these guys are guys and gals are so good. So thanks for listening. And we will be back next week with another second reading Podcast. Be safe and be well, second Reading Podcast is a production of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin