Thread: TX: Border Representation Gripes

Clay Robison: Border is not represented on panel dealing with immigration

Web Posted: 02/04/2007 10:28 PM CST


San Antonio Express-News

AUSTIN — There is no pretense in the Texas Legislature that all committees were created equal. The reality is quite the contrary, which is why Speaker Tom Craddick, having quelled the recent uprising, had trouble pleasing all his loyalists with his committee assignments.
In the House, the budget-writing Appropriations Committee is king, with its members given a preferential role in doling out the tax dollars that determine priorities and slipping in the pork that feeds political friendships.


It is followed closely in the pecking order by the Calendars Committee, which has enormous procedural power over the fate of legislation, and the State Affairs Committee, which will be instrumental in passing or killing numerous bills dealing with major issues, such as abortion and immigration.

Immigration? Isn't that a problem the Border and International Affairs Committee will tackle? Isn't that why four of its seven members either are Hispanic or represent areas in South Texas or along the border?

No and no.

With no disrespect to its members, because it's not their fault, the Border and International Affairs Committee is more of a political gesture than a heavy lifter. Granted, the House is just now getting organized, but so far Craddick has assigned the panel only two bills, one naming a highway and the other dealing with cemeteries.

By contrast, the State Affairs Committee, stacked with conservative Anglo Republicans who live nowhere near the Mexican border, already has been assigned 24 bills, including six dealing with immigrants.

One is HB 28 by Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, which would deny education, health care and other public benefits to the Texas-born children of undocumented immigrants, despite a constitutional provision that makes people born in the United States citizens.

Another is Berman's HB 29, which would impose a fee on money wired to Mexico or Central or South America.

Immigration obviously has an impact throughout the state, and lawmakers who represent the border area don't have a monopoly on addressing those concerns. But it does seem absurd, as the Mexican American Legislative Caucus has pointed out, that the border is without geographic representation on the committee that will try to deal with the highly controversial issue.

What's more, the only Hispanic on the panel is Rep. Jessica Farrar, D-Houston. And Farrar and Rep. Marc Veasey, a black lawmaker from Fort Worth, are the only Democrats.

The other seven members are white male Republicans, including Chairman David Swinford of Dumas, which is in the Panhandle, and Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale of Houston.

It is appropriate that the panel include two members from Houston, the state's largest city as well as home to so many immigrants.

But San Antonio, which had two committee members last session — Democrats Mike Villarreal and Trey Martinez Fischer — was shut out. The two San Antonians sided against Craddick in the recent speaker's race. So did Farrar, but her seniority helped save her committee seat.

It is safe to predict that some form of legislation cracking down on undocumented immigrants will emerge from that committee, and Hispanics, Texas' emerging majority population, will have little voice in the deliberations.

***

Gov. Rick Perry will deliver his State of the State speech to the Legislature on Tuesday, but there may not be much suspense left, following a series of recent press events announcing his initiatives, including tighter revenue caps for local governments, changes in higher education funding and new spending restrictions on state government.

He also has been advocating more border security for months and, just the other day, let out the news that he may try to sell the state lottery to private interests.

What's left?

Stay tuned.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
clay.robison@chron.com

I normally don't condone any type of racial profiling or placement, except when it comes to security. Why do we have Latinos guarding our border? Chances are, they have relatives in Mexico, and they might just be willing to look the other way, if only for a select few. What next? Should we hire Iranians and Iraquis? I don't think that we should have anyone in a position that can potentially threaten the security of our nation.