Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to the Texas Tribune trip Cast for Monday,
Speaker 1: June twenty third. We are coming to you with an
Speaker 1: emergency trip cast because less than twelve hours ago, as
Speaker 1: all of us were getting ready to go to bed
Speaker 1: and get ready for the week, Greg Abbott vetoed the
Speaker 1: Texas THHC band and ordered a special session for July
Speaker 1: twenty first, later next month. We are throwing out our
Speaker 1: trip cast plans and talking about this because it's the
Speaker 1: big story in Texas politics. And I am joined this
Speaker 1: week by politics reporter Kayla Gwow. Hello, Kayla, I Kayla.
Speaker 1: We were talking before went to sleep around three point
Speaker 1: thirty last night after all that news, so I want
Speaker 1: energy from all of this. And then Jasper Sharer, Hello, Jasper,
Speaker 1: good to be with you.
Speaker 2: Guys.
Speaker 1: I know you were watching the NBA Finals last night,
Speaker 1: So is there at least a little bit of you
Speaker 1: that was happy that he waited until that was.
Speaker 3: Over a little bit?
Speaker 1: Yeah, And it was.
Speaker 3: It was kind of overall just like a rude welcome
Speaker 3: back from my vacation where I was wistfully, you know,
Speaker 3: not paying the usual attention of this kind of stuff.
Speaker 3: But here we are.
Speaker 1: I'm back in the game here we are. Indeed, I
Speaker 1: for one, was very happy that the NBA Finals game
Speaker 1: was starting at seven o'clock. It meant I was gonna
Speaker 1: be able to go to sleep at a reasonable hour.
Speaker 1: And then I'm brushing my teeth and I think it
Speaker 1: was you, Kyla who dropped in our slack channel Abbott's
Speaker 1: vetoed SB three and that blew up everything. Let's just start.
Speaker 1: Oh and by the way, Eleanor Clemenov, you may have
Speaker 1: heard of her. She's the co host on the show.
Speaker 1: You may remember a couple of weeks ago when I
Speaker 1: was in Aspen and I knew I was it's too important.
Speaker 1: I got to join the trip Cast as a zoom. Anyways,
Speaker 1: I don't want to disappoint our listeners. Eleanor also now
Speaker 1: an Aspen, and she didn't care at all. She was like,
Speaker 1: I'm skipping it. I'm hanging out in the mountains, so
Speaker 1: you know, e clipping off at text tribute dot com.
Speaker 1: If you want to email your disappointment, we're here. The
Speaker 1: true trip Cast stands giving you the information that you
Speaker 1: need to know. But anyways, anything y'all want to say
Speaker 1: mean about Eleanor before we move on, I mean.
Speaker 3: Come on, Yeah, just the worst timing she could have
Speaker 3: possibly picked, obviously pre engineered.
Speaker 1: So all right, well, it was a wild night last night,
Speaker 1: so let's just start, Kayla. Can you just sort of
Speaker 1: like walk us through what happened last night to get
Speaker 1: us to the point we were in here.
Speaker 2: So we got an earlier round of vetos earlier in
Speaker 2: the evening of twenty five bills total, including a couple
Speaker 2: from earlier in the session, and that was it. I
Speaker 2: don't think I didn't feel off the hook yet at
Speaker 2: that point, but I had sort of prepped for two
Speaker 2: opposite outcomes if the governor vetoed it or let it pass.
Speaker 2: And then I think it was around eleven fifteen that
Speaker 2: the SB three veto on its own sort of quietly
Speaker 2: came out.
Speaker 1: Fifteen, which is forty five minutes before the deadline to
Speaker 1: beat veto bills.
Speaker 2: Yeah, forty five minutes before the deadline eleven forty five
Speaker 2: on it or eleven fifteen on this Sunday night. And
Speaker 2: that was that. So we rushed to get that up.
Speaker 2: And then, in a really strange twist, Governor Abbott responded
Speaker 2: to a tweet by our friend John Moritz of the
Speaker 2: Austin American Statesman, in which Moritz had said that a
Speaker 2: bill by Simpronia Thompson had been vetoed and Abbot rushed in.
Speaker 2: This is just minutes after the SB three veto, says
Speaker 2: there was a flaw in miss Te's bill and he
Speaker 2: put it on a special session, which was our first
Speaker 2: indication that maybe we were heading to a special session.
Speaker 2: But it was bizarre because it was in reply to
Speaker 2: eight reporters tweet, so minutes after that then her, I
Speaker 2: guess it was more like thirty minutes after that, around
Speaker 2: midnight or just after midnight, after the veto deadline passed,
Speaker 2: Abbot officially announced a special session, with SB three at
Speaker 2: the top of the list.
Speaker 1: Right, Yeah, I think I can confidently say that this
Speaker 1: is the first time a special session has been announced
Speaker 1: in a reply to a tweet and an Austin reporter. Pretty wild,
Speaker 1: I what I'm struggling to even come up with a
Speaker 1: question here. What do we think explains Abbot waiting until,
Speaker 1: I mean almost literally the last minute to do this.
Speaker 1: We've known about this bill for weeks. Why did he
Speaker 1: wait until you know everyone was going to sleep on
Speaker 1: Sunday night to act on this?
Speaker 3: I think some it was genuine indecision about how to
Speaker 3: handle this kind of a hot potato politically. I mean,
Speaker 3: I think he I don't know if that explains fully
Speaker 3: why he waited until forty five minutes before the deadline,
Speaker 3: but at least you know that there were some other
Speaker 3: bills that he vetoed, you know, much earlier on that
Speaker 3: were just obviously clearer calls for the governor.
Speaker 2: And I know.
Speaker 3: His you know, folks on his his team have said
Speaker 3: he was he really didn't, at least initially know how
Speaker 3: he was going to handle the veto versus you know,
Speaker 3: sign decision. And I think you know, you also saw
Speaker 3: that his veto proclamation was unusually long and detailed, sort
Speaker 3: of laying out you know, both his his reasoning and
Speaker 3: sort of a you know, I think the governor had
Speaker 3: previously said like he was going to put on his
Speaker 3: judicial hat to kind of decide this, you know, harkening
Speaker 3: back to his time as a text of Supreme Court justice,
Speaker 3: and you you know, his part of his his proclamation
Speaker 3: kind of read like a legal decision where he was
Speaker 3: saying like he didn't think that SB three would you know,
Speaker 3: stand up to legal scrutiny or at least it would
Speaker 3: get tied up in the courts. And then he even
Speaker 3: went as far as to suggest, you know, kind of
Speaker 3: the regulatory framework that he'd be okay with when you know,
Speaker 3: when he calls lawmakers back in July to sort of
Speaker 3: reconsider an amended version of SB three. So I think
Speaker 3: kind of the combination of like indecision and then wanting
Speaker 3: to have as bulletproof of a explanation as possible to
Speaker 3: kind of make clear, look, you know, I still want
Speaker 3: to do something on this, but you know this, I
Speaker 3: think he went to great lengths in his proclamation to say,
Speaker 3: you know, it was sort of targeted at Dan Patrick
Speaker 3: to me in some ways. I think he was like, look,
Speaker 3: you know, I'm kind of with you on this to
Speaker 3: an extent. I just I'm trying to help you not
Speaker 3: get your your top priority tied up in endless litigation.
Speaker 1: Right, Let's let's actually step back and do a little
Speaker 1: bit of a history of how he got here. Right,
Speaker 1: So Dan Patrick had been calling for this thhe ban, Well, actually,
Speaker 1: let's sit back even farther than that. Right, These THH stores,
Speaker 1: these products have been available in gas stations, you know,
Speaker 1: all over the place for the last couple of years
Speaker 1: after the action taken both by the federal government and
Speaker 1: the state government to legalize him. Right, This creates a
Speaker 1: situation where these sort of like marijuana like substances that
Speaker 1: can get people high are now essentially legal, almost by accident.
Speaker 1: I think everyone sort of agrees that was not the
Speaker 1: intent of the original law. So Dan Patrick comes into
Speaker 1: this session and says he wants to ban these substances.
Speaker 1: These are dangerous for folks. The measure passes the Senate,
Speaker 1: but the House sort of like significantly amends the bill
Speaker 1: in committee, right, Kayla, basically saying, you know, we're not
Speaker 1: going to ban this, we're going to regulate it. Then
Speaker 1: what happens, Kayla, Well, the House.
Speaker 2: The House has this bill, They've been through committee. It's
Speaker 2: Chairman King's Bill out of State Affairs, obviously a very
Speaker 2: powerful committee. That bill is, you know, it contains a
Speaker 2: lot of what Abbott ultimately recommended in his proclamation explaining
Speaker 2: his veto have barred sales to minors. It would have
Speaker 2: barred marketing to miners and put some more restrictions in
Speaker 2: testing and bolstered law enforcement, all those things. It was
Speaker 2: a pretty substantial regulatory framework and then drama happens on
Speaker 2: the floor. We saw Representative Tom Oliverson, who is an
Speaker 2: anesseciologist and also Dan Patrick's neighbor, introduced an amendment to
Speaker 2: substitute the regulatory framework for the full out band that
Speaker 2: the Senate had passed months before. We saw kind of
Speaker 2: a hodgepodge of people sign on to that, some Democrats
Speaker 2: in addition to a bunch of Republicans, and the House
Speaker 2: managed to do that. And at the same time all
Speaker 2: this was happening, there were some negotiations about school finance.
Speaker 2: Speaker Burrows has said that you know, they were independent
Speaker 2: and there was no hostage taking, and the school finance
Speaker 2: package was just a tough, big, complex piece of legislation
Speaker 2: to put together. But I think there was definitely some
Speaker 2: criticism after the fact that school finance and THC got
Speaker 2: tied up together and we saw the House pass this
Speaker 2: full on ban and that is what ended up making
Speaker 2: it through the legislature, in addition to an expansion of
Speaker 2: the medical marijuana program.
Speaker 1: Right, and so then there were all these calls for
Speaker 1: Abbot to build. People upset about the economic impact, people
Speaker 1: pointing to maybe the use of these substances by veterans
Speaker 1: dealing with various issues. Abbot kind of remains completely silent
Speaker 1: on this until this happens. So Jasper, are you surprised
Speaker 1: by Abbot's decision here?
Speaker 3: You know, I would say I am. I mean I
Speaker 3: sort of from the beginning was that he would he
Speaker 3: would rather than sign or veto it, just kind of
Speaker 3: let it take effect. But you know, at the same time,
Speaker 3: if you just think of kind of the volume, the
Speaker 3: pitch of the opposition to this, you know that was
Speaker 3: coming from I mean, really the key is that that
Speaker 3: was coming from the right, which is you know what
Speaker 3: just you know, dictates a lot of the decision making
Speaker 3: by by Republican lawmakers who are running the state right now.
Speaker 3: It's it's is this how is this issue going to
Speaker 3: play out in upcoming primaries in you know, I think
Speaker 3: Governor might have sensed a you know, potential political liability
Speaker 3: for you know, folks in his own party. So I
Speaker 3: think it's he just saw that like they kind of
Speaker 3: needed to not go back to square one, but just
Speaker 3: like sort of reset and come up with a version
Speaker 3: of this that might be less politically toxic. When you know,
Speaker 3: the march in May primaries roll around I'm not sure
Speaker 3: if this would have really been like a political killer
Speaker 3: at by itself as an issue, but so, you know,
Speaker 3: I'm surprised based on like what I expected at the beginning,
Speaker 3: but just given the kind of the volume of the
Speaker 3: chatter over the last few weeks and just the intensity
Speaker 3: of the pressure on the governor, you know, it sort
Speaker 3: of makes sense in retrospect.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I've said this on the podcast before, but it's
Speaker 1: it's one of those things right where it's just very
Speaker 1: easy to draw a direct line to lawmakers decisions and
Speaker 1: impact on people's lives. Right, Like, these these products are
Speaker 1: available kind of all over the place. There's these stores everywhere,
Speaker 1: whether in like city downtowns or you know, small towns
Speaker 1: and everything like that, and they're going to be gone,
Speaker 1: right or they were going to be gone before this veto,
Speaker 1: And you know, people were upset about that, and they
Speaker 1: knew who to blame. It's not like one of those
Speaker 1: situations where you're having to kind of wade through and
Speaker 1: point fingers and explain like the complexities of school finance.
Speaker 1: Right it's like, this isn't going to be here, and
Speaker 1: it's because of these lawmakers that this happened, and maybe
Speaker 1: that has something to do with the decision. The question
Speaker 1: now is what will happen next, Kayla. Governor Abbott was
Speaker 1: pretty prescriptive in terms of what he wanted to see
Speaker 1: from lawmakers on this issue. Tell us a little bit
Speaker 1: about what he laid out for wanting to see.
Speaker 2: He got about a long list of possible regulations. He
Speaker 2: suggested that lawmakers consider an approach similar to the way
Speaker 2: alcohol is regulated, with a particular agency looking over at
Speaker 2: certain rules, like again baring the sale of THHC products
Speaker 2: to miners, barring marketing and packaging that is meant to
Speaker 2: attract miners. I think he had, you know, something about
Speaker 2: not having stores in your schools, requiring testing at every
Speaker 2: phase of manufacturing and processing, you know, funding extra funding
Speaker 2: for law law enforcement to be able to enforce all
Speaker 2: these rules. So he has a fairly comprehensive list of
Speaker 2: proposed rules, and there are more than what I just listed. Again,
Speaker 2: a lot of them overlaped with what was in ken
Speaker 2: Kings Bill. But yeah, I guess they'll come back July
Speaker 2: twenty first, and this is the first thing on the agenda.
Speaker 2: I will have to see how open damp over clearer
Speaker 2: that it was a ban or bus throughout the regular session,
Speaker 2: you had forced to threaten a special if you didn't
Speaker 2: get his way if lawmakers did pass a regulatory bill.
Speaker 2: So they're gonna have to work through that.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I will say, just jumping in real quick on
Speaker 3: Cayla mentioned the fact that it's on the table to
Speaker 3: you know, ban the sale to minors of these products.
Speaker 3: I think the fact that that needs still needs to
Speaker 3: be done for this industry really underscoes how it's kind
Speaker 3: of a free for all, you know, ad hoc system
Speaker 3: that's you know, that's been operating over the last six years,
Speaker 3: and why there has been kind of this clamor for
Speaker 3: something to get done this session. Just the fact that,
Speaker 3: you know, they passed the bill that ultimately allowed for
Speaker 3: this industry to proliferate, intending to boost the agriculture industry,
Speaker 3: so they didn't even bother to set you know, an
Speaker 3: eighteen or twenty one age limit. I think that just
Speaker 3: underscores how, you know, how much you know, regulatory clamor
Speaker 3: there is. And it also if we're thinking about what
Speaker 3: might come next, you know, I think even Democrats generally
Speaker 3: have been pretty on board with doing like some sort
Speaker 3: of regulation and the debate has really just all along
Speaker 3: been about the band versus regulation conversation.
Speaker 1: Yes, but as Kayla kind of waived that there is
Speaker 1: another very influential and powerful statewide leader who will have
Speaker 1: a say in this, and out of course is Dan Patrick.
Speaker 1: You said in your story last night or I guess
Speaker 1: early this morning, Kayla, that he had listed this is
Speaker 1: what one of his top five bills of his career
Speaker 1: in terms of most important. He you know, called a
Speaker 1: press conference in which he was really blasting the media
Speaker 1: and other folks for you know, what he perceived as
Speaker 1: being critical of this bill. How is he going to
Speaker 1: react to this? Do you think how has he reacted already?
Speaker 2: He seems pretty mad. Yeah, I don't think he's thrilled. Yeah.
Speaker 2: I mean he put out a pretty blistering statement immediately
Speaker 2: on Twitter last night after the Veto came out, called
Speaker 2: it a quote unquote late night Veto that he argued
Speaker 2: would leave law enforcement and people whose loved ones have
Speaker 2: been affected by high potency TC products leaving them feeling abandoned.
Speaker 2: So he's clearly disappointed. Some of his allies, like Tom
Speaker 2: ulliverson have come out with other statements saying they're disappointed.
Speaker 2: I'll be headed to his press conference in about an
Speaker 2: hour and a half from when we are speaking right now,
Speaker 2: and I think one of the main things we'll be
Speaker 2: looking at is just measuring like just how mad he is.
Speaker 1: Well, you know, be careful. We all know that he
Speaker 1: threw some products that reporters the last press conference, so
Speaker 1: you know, just keep your head on a swivel as
Speaker 1: we go from there. I mean, it does seem though
Speaker 1: jasper like Dan Patrick might be unhappy about this, but
Speaker 1: he's going to be fixed with the decision of no
Speaker 1: regulation at all or regulation more aligning with what Governor
Speaker 1: Gravig Abbott does. So I mean, you know, he is
Speaker 1: not one who's afraid to play a game of chicken
Speaker 1: with the governor, but it does seem like the governor holds,
Speaker 1: you know, the most leverage in this situation.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think, I mean, it's going to be fascinating
Speaker 3: to see how he handles the situation, how Dan Patrick does,
Speaker 3: just because he has I think found success in the
Speaker 3: past kind of playing hardball on these seemingly intractable disputes,
Speaker 3: like if you think about the the property tax debacle
Speaker 3: after the twenty twenty three legislative session, that was kind
Speaker 3: of the only other real example of Governor Abbott and
Speaker 3: Lieutenant Governor Patrick really being publicly and very directly at
Speaker 3: odds over like a you know, a major policy issue.
Speaker 3: I can't I think of another example that really comes
Speaker 3: close to the THHD situation here, you know. But to
Speaker 3: your point, Matthew, like, it's you know, if tenant Governor
Speaker 3: Patrick comes out guns blazing and you know, just trying
Speaker 3: to take down Abbott over this issue, he risks you know,
Speaker 3: getting less of what he wanted you know, in the
Speaker 3: first place. So I think it's and he's a crafty politician,
Speaker 3: he's no doubt like considering you know, the stuff that
Speaker 3: we're talking about here. So I wouldn't be surprised if
Speaker 3: he comes out with, you know, at least by by
Speaker 3: the Dan Patrick standards, maybe a little bit more of
Speaker 3: a measured tone, just trying to you know, express his disappointment,
Speaker 3: but saying, you know, like he still does have another
Speaker 3: chance to you know, try to move the ball on
Speaker 3: this issue in you know, a month from now. So
Speaker 3: I don't think he's going to want to you know,
Speaker 3: establish a you know, kind of needlessly antagonistic relationship with
Speaker 3: the Governor heading in if it's only gonna you know,
Speaker 3: sour his chances.
Speaker 1: Well, by the time most people are hearing this, that
Speaker 1: press conference will likely have happened. So check out text
Speaker 1: tribute dot or Kayla will have her story on it
Speaker 1: and you'll find out what happened there. It might be
Speaker 1: horribly wrong, who knows. Yeah, we'll see, we'll see. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, Jasper, I believe the last time you were
Speaker 1: on the podcast, you and I both predicted there would
Speaker 1: be no special session, and I think maybe even kind
Speaker 1: of rubbed it in with Eleanor that she predicted otherwise.
Speaker 3: And I don't know what you're talking about.
Speaker 1: Yes, we were wrong, and maybe it's for the best
Speaker 1: that Eleanor couldn't couldn't make it to this podcast. I mean.
Speaker 1: The other thing that sort of caught my I and
Speaker 1: I'm sure a lot of other people's eye about Abbot's
Speaker 1: announcement last night was the word initial when he said
Speaker 1: the initial list of agenda items. I guess first before
Speaker 1: we go on whether something might be added, Kila, did
Speaker 1: anything jump out to you about other things that will
Speaker 1: be on that initial list?
Speaker 2: Not particularly, I don't think you know some of them.
Speaker 2: Looking at the veto statements there were just flaws in
Speaker 2: the bill or you know, some sort of tweaks that
Speaker 2: could be made. And I mean overall, there was a
Speaker 2: bunch of criminal justice bills that he vetoed entirely that
Speaker 2: are not on the special agenda yet, but you know,
Speaker 2: like none of them were major, major, major bills that
Speaker 2: anyone any of us have been following throughout the session.
Speaker 2: But like you said, that's an initial list. I think
Speaker 2: I wouldn't be super surprised if we saw something like
Speaker 2: bail pop up on there, or taxpayer funded local municipality
Speaker 2: or government lobbyer, and maybe redistricting. So I think we'll
Speaker 2: we'll see, and one of the means.
Speaker 3: One of those Vito proclamation is nodded at that, Kayla, right,
Speaker 3: the possibility of a bail special session item. You know,
Speaker 3: he was kind of citing the failure of one of
Speaker 3: his bail priorities as you know, something that needs to
Speaker 3: happen first before one of those bipartisan criminal justice bills
Speaker 3: could get through.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I think the big thing people are going
Speaker 1: to be wondering and talking about between now in July
Speaker 1: twenty first though, is what you mentioned, Kayla, redistricting, Right,
Speaker 1: It has been reported by US and others that there's
Speaker 1: been some pretty strong pressure from the White House to
Speaker 1: consider a mid term redistricting, specifically redrawing the congressional lines
Speaker 1: in an effort to maybe help Republicans nationwide hold on
Speaker 1: to the House. That is not on the list, but
Speaker 1: maybe it will be. Jasper, what do you think the
Speaker 1: state of play is there right now?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: I think well, first of all, you know, baseline understanding
Speaker 3: here is like the governor can add an item to
Speaker 3: the special session call at any point. You know, these
Speaker 3: things can last up to thirty days, sometimes less. But
Speaker 3: you know, this very much is not that's not necessarily
Speaker 3: the end of the agenda. I think, you know, it's
Speaker 3: been pretty clear that Abbott is kind of waiting to
Speaker 3: take his cues from what however, you know, kind of
Speaker 3: the Trump political team and the Texas Republican delegation in
Speaker 3: DC kind of how they work out this situation. You know,
Speaker 3: I think the Governor has kind of been signaling you know,
Speaker 3: you guys handle this and I'll just go with the
Speaker 3: sort of the way the winds are blowing. And what
Speaker 3: we have seen is that the Texas Republicans are you know,
Speaker 3: not super jazzed about the idea. They are worried about
Speaker 3: spreading them their districts too thin ahead of you know,
Speaker 3: it could be a tough mid term cycle. So it's
Speaker 3: you know, but we've also gone some medication that you know,
Speaker 3: they might not be thrilled about it, but they're still
Speaker 3: likely to go along with it if if Trump the
Speaker 3: Trump folks stand their ground, which is kind of I
Speaker 3: don't know a microcosm of how most of these congressional
Speaker 3: White House relations play out, so all you know, kind
Speaker 3: of the the expectation right now is that this is
Speaker 3: going to happen and that it probably would get added
Speaker 3: to the special session call, you know, at some point.
Speaker 3: But you know, it's also possible that this is done
Speaker 3: in a separate session. You know, we had what four
Speaker 3: of them last year and earth and then three of
Speaker 3: them the year before, so it's this could just be
Speaker 3: the first of multiple I don't want to jinx us,
Speaker 3: but it's always a possibility. Yeah.
Speaker 1: It's just such a fascinating dynamic because I can't say
Speaker 1: that I've spoken to any Republicans rely who think this
Speaker 1: is a particularly good idea for the Texas delegation. Right
Speaker 1: many look back at last decade. We wrote a story
Speaker 1: about this back at the time about how, you know,
Speaker 1: Republicans got really ambitious in the Texas House, trying to
Speaker 1: hold on and expand their majority by drawing a bunch
Speaker 1: of seats in Dallas County that were attractive to them.
Speaker 1: But what they did was they spread out their voters
Speaker 1: so much that by the end of the decade, Democrats
Speaker 1: had essentially won every seat in that county. They got
Speaker 1: a little bit overly greedy when they redrew the lines
Speaker 1: this past time. For the current district lines, they really
Speaker 1: emphasized longevity and you know, as opposed to adding more seats,
Speaker 1: and that was a conscious decision to avoid being put
Speaker 1: in a tough position at the later part of the decade.
Speaker 1: But I think the big question is, right, when the president,
Speaker 1: who clearly controls so much and has so much influence
Speaker 1: over your voters, is asking something, can you say no
Speaker 1: to them? I'm very excited to see. I think the
Speaker 1: other question here is, you know, how would Democrats participate
Speaker 1: right because they still have the ability to do a
Speaker 1: quorum break. I was in San Antonio last week interviewing
Speaker 1: some members of the San Antonio delegation. I asked them
Speaker 1: about this possibility. Senator Menandez, I'm quoting him. He said,
Speaker 1: I don't know why any Democrat would show up to
Speaker 1: a special session where that's what you would do. Speaking
Speaker 1: of the redisserting Representative Ray Lopez coyly saying, I've been
Speaker 1: known to leave before when the issue is a BS issue,
Speaker 1: when democracy is at stake, you cannot put a penalty
Speaker 1: on me that will keep me from exercising my voice,
Speaker 1: and if that means walking away, not showing up, and
Speaker 1: then he sort of tailed off. But I mean, pretty
Speaker 1: strong signals that they would not be interested in playing
Speaker 1: a game. But it's interesting because now they need to
Speaker 1: come back to deal with some of these issues. So
Speaker 1: I think there will be an interesting little game to
Speaker 1: be played here about you know, who shows up, when
Speaker 1: do you disappear? If you add it to the call,
Speaker 1: When do you add it to the call? We don't know,
Speaker 1: but it's going to be incredibly fascinating to watch.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you could easily see some of those congressional Republicans,
Speaker 3: you know, going along with this because they don't want
Speaker 3: to upset the Trump administration. Then almost kind of hoping
Speaker 3: or banking on the Democrats, you know, holding out in
Speaker 3: Austin so they don't have to worry about it. And
Speaker 3: it's also interesting that like for example, Pete said, you know,
Speaker 3: you were talking aboutthew about past examples of Republicans stretching
Speaker 3: themselves too thin, like Eat Sessions is one of the
Speaker 3: kind of the more seasoned Republicans in Congress from Texas,
Speaker 3: and one of the leaders is MI understanding of, you know,
Speaker 3: in some of these talks, and he is like a
Speaker 3: prime example of somebody who lost his seat in twenty
Speaker 3: eighteen to call it all read after that, you know,
Speaker 3: in a district that radically changed from you know, reach
Speaker 3: from when the lines were drawn at the beginning of
Speaker 3: that decade. So, you know, I think there's there are
Speaker 3: some fresh memories in the delegation about you know, Lizzy
Speaker 3: Fletcher beating John Colberson as well. I think they're trying
Speaker 3: to avoid those situations.
Speaker 2: He saw Hakeem Jeffries, who's the Democratic Minority lea leader,
Speaker 2: also sort of he wasn't necessarily bullish, I think, but
Speaker 2: he pointed out, you know, like this could actually potentially
Speaker 2: benefit Democrats if they're not careful enough, and you know,
Speaker 2: you create situations where Democrats do have an edge and
Speaker 2: possible opportunity to win.
Speaker 1: Right exactly. It's really both sides will have their own
Speaker 1: kind of like, you know, how much do you want
Speaker 1: to gamble on this decision to make? If indeed they
Speaker 1: go through with that, there will be plenty of time
Speaker 1: to talk about that if they do. Lots of everyone's
Speaker 1: favorite topic, redistricting that you know, few things can cause
Speaker 1: someone to buck their president or you know, decide not
Speaker 1: to show up more than you know the lines that
Speaker 1: determine whether they get to keep their seats or not.
Speaker 1: So that'll be a fun one. This THC fight will
Speaker 1: be a fun one. I'm sure we will see other
Speaker 1: fun things coming up in the meantime, but we will
Speaker 1: talk about those later because Kayla's got to go cover
Speaker 1: a press conference. Thank you Kayla for joining us, and
Speaker 1: thank you Jasper. Thank you to our producers, Rob and Chris.
Speaker 1: We will hopefully be back to our regular schedule next
Speaker 1: week and hopefully we will not be working until three
Speaker 1: am the night before. Talk to y'all next week.