Here’s a quick recap of what happened over the last week:
House Issues Interim Charges
I sent you all the interim charges issued yesterday by Texas House Speaker Dustin Burrows. These are the topics that will be studied by each committee to begin preparations for the next regular session beginning in January. These will be the priority issues to be considered as legislation next year.
The issues include a focus on reducing property taxes, identifying ways to reduce fraud and wasteful spending in government agencies, streamlining regulations on data center development, enhancing oversight of water usage and resources, prohibit Sharia law, cracking down on immigrant truck drivers, and study the effects of conflicts in the Middle East on the state’s oil and gas industry.
Committees will likely begin to meet in the coming weeks, and I will update you all regularly on scheduled committee hearings.
A full list of the interim charges can be found here: https://www.house.texas.gov/pdfs/speaker/F-Interim-Charges-3.25.pdf
Senate Revises Committee Assignments
On Tuesday, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick released new committee assignments for members of the Texas Senate. Five members of the Senate – four of which are standing committee chairs – have either already left the Senate or chosen not to seek reelection to the Senate in 2026. To facilitate what is likely to be an aggressive interim leading up to the regular session beginning in January, the Lt. Governor needed to assign the new committee chairmanships to members that are returning so the Senate can begin preparations and crafting of legislation for consideration. While there were several changes in committee chairmanships, the general membership of each committee remained basically intact.
Senator Brandon Creighton – chair of Education K-16 – has resigned to become chancellor of the Texas Tech University System. Senator Kelly Hancock – chair of Veterans Affairs – resigned last June to become interim Comptroller – Senator Brian Birdwell – Chair of Natural Resources and Border Security – not seeking reelection, has been appointed as a Deputy Defense Secretary, Senator Robert Nichols – chair of Transportation – not seeking reelection, and Senator Mayes Middleton chose to run for state Attorney General.
Lt. Governor Patrick split the Education K-16 committee and named Sen. Paul Bettencourt of Houston as chair of Higher Education and named Sen. Donna Campbell of New Braunfels as chair of Education. Campbell chaired the Nominations Committee for the last two sessions. Sen. Phil King of Weatherford moves from chair of the Economic Development Committee to chair of the new Select Committee on Border Security. Sen. Angela Paxton of McKinney will now chair the Economic Development Committee. Sen. Tan Parker of Flower Mound will now chair the Transportation Committee, and Sen. Adam Hinojosa of Corpus Christi will now chair the Nominations Committee. And finally, Sen. Kevin Sparks of Midland takes over as the chair of the Natural Resources Committee.
Newly elected Sen. Taylor Rehmet of Fort Worth – a Democrat elected in a special election to replace the outgoing Republican Kelly Hancock – was not assigned to any committees and let Patrick know of his disappointment. Rehmet called the move “petty politics” and accused the Lt. Governor of trying to silence the constituents of the district. But Patrick swung back saying that he and Rehmet had a conversation about the upcoming appointments after his election and Rehmet was well aware he would not be receiving any appointments. Patrick explained that other members of the Senate – both Democrats and Republicans – that had won special elections during the interim period were not appointed to committees. Patrick assured Rehmet that if he won election to the full term in November, he would be appointed to committees just like all other members of the Senate.
New Poll Shows Paxton Maintaining Lead
Change Research – a San Francisco based polling firm started by former Linkedin CEO Mike Greenfield – released a poll earlier this week on the Republican US Senate runoff. The poll of 807 likely Republican primary voters conducted from March 17th-19th shows Paxton with a slim 42% to 39% lead over incumbent John Cornyn. The main takeaway from the poll that benefits Paxton is his large lead – 48% to 36% – among those who identify as “strong” Republicans and his even bigger lead – 54% to 35% – among “MAGA” Republicans. 16% of those polled claim to still be undecided.
This bodes well for Paxton since runoff elections historically draw only the most partisan and loyal party voters. The only category in which Cornyn led was among self-identified “not strong” Republicans, where he holds a 49% to 27% lead. Paxton also leads among Evangelicals, independents that lean Republican/conservative, non-college graduates, urban voters, and rural voters. Paxton also leads among voters that supported Wesley Hunt in the primary by a 46% to 33% margin.
Impact Research Poll Shows Talarico Leading Over Both Republicans in the General Election
An internal poll conducted by Washington based Impact Research from March 12th-17th showed Democratic nominee James Talarico leading both major Republican contenders, Ken Paxton and John Cornyn, on the general election ballot. Specifically, Talarico leads Cornyn 43% to 41%, and Paxton 44% to 43%. The survey was conducted among approximately 900 likely general election voters and has a +/- 3.3% margin of error. Regarding the Republican runoff, this poll also showed Paxton leading Cornyn, but by a wider margin than the poll referenced in my previous segment. According to the Impact Research poll, Republican primary voters are significantly favoring Paxton over Cornyn, with Paxton receiving the support around 53% compared to 37% for Cornyn.
The poll highlights notable negatives for both Republican candidates, however. Attorney General Ken Paxton’s unfavourability is higher than his favorability, with a net negative rating. John Cornyn has an even larger net negative rating, indicating a weak general election appeal among broader voters beyond the GOP base. Independent, sometimes even moderate voters – often crucial in statewide races – have shown significant unfavourability toward both Republican candidates in this survey. With these low ratings among an important voting bloc, convincing swing and independent voters may be difficult for the eventual Republican nominee.
Earlier polls in late February showed Talarico and Jasmine Crockett in competition before the primary, with contradicting leads for the candidates. Since the primary ended and Talarico secured the nomination, the March data offers the first general election snapshot – with Talarico competitive against both major Republican options. His narrow leads against both Cornyn and Paxton make the Senate race appear competitive statewide, a noteworthy development for Texas, which has not seen a statewide Democratic win in decades. The general election poll indicates that which candidate emerges from the Republican runoff will be crucial to how tight the fall race becomes. One advantage the Republican nominee will have in his favor is the advantage in infrastructure and overall organization of the Republican Party. The vastly superior organization of the Republican Party in Texas cannot be underestimated regarding the ability to inform, energize and ultimately turn out its voters on election day.
Both Cornyn and Paxton show weakness in broader statewide favorability, meaning that even a Republican nominee could be vulnerable if Democrats consolidate support. Paxton’s stronger position within the GOP primary voters suggests he could definitely enter the general with an energized base, which he most likely will, but the broader electorate’s negative views of both options could influence turnout and crossover support. Turnout patterns and a (possible) Trump endorsement could also shift momentum in that runoff.
As November approaches, additional polling will likely clarify whether Talarico’s advantage persists, narrows, or disappears depending on who the GOP nominee will be and broader national trends.
Plyler v. Doe Discussion Highlighted at The White House, Texas Republicans Comment
I want to first provide some context and the legal background on this issue before recapping the current discussion. Plyler v. Doe (1982) is a US Supreme Court Decision that ruled states cannot deny children free public K-12 education based on their parents’ immigration status and found that such discrimination violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. The case originated from Texas legislation and school district policies that sought to charge tuition or deny enrollment to undocumented students, and it has shaped immigration-education policy for over four decades.
Last week, Plyler v. Doe was referenced and discussed at a White House event attended by state political leaders, including state Rep. Andy Hopper (R-Decatur), who described the experience as a “great day” at the White House. While Hopper’s comments did not detail policy language in the post itself, the gathering’s inclusion of this topic suggests that the case is increasingly a subject of national political and policy conversation, particularly among conservative officials looking to revisit or critique federal court mandates.
In Texas political circles, there has been an ongoing interest among some Republican leaders in revisiting or challenging the case – they view the decisions as imposing a “federal obligation on states that redirects local education resources and restricts state flexibility on immigration-related education policy.”
Simultaneously, the US House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited Government held a hearing titled “Immigration Policy by Court Order: The Adverse Effects of Plyler v. Doe.” Key features of that hearing included testimony from several conservative legal and policy experts criticizing the mandate as an imposition on education systems. Witnesses included representatives from groups such as the Federation for Immigration Reform and the Texas Public Policy Foundation, claiming that the decision has adverse effects on public schools and state budgets.
At the same time, numerous civil rights and child advocacy organizations – such as First Focus on Children and the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) – filed testimony and statements defending Plyler as a crucial protection that ensures educational access and promotes individual opportunity. They argue that overturning the case would harm children’s welfare and the broader future workforce. The federal hearing is not just revisiting legal issues; it is politically charged, part of broader debates on immigration status and states’ rights.
In social media posts, Rep. Hopper celebrated the connection between state leadership, signaling that Republican state leaders are aligning on thoughts of Plyler as part of broader immigration and education reform priorities. Conservative critics such as Rep. Jared Patterson (R-Frisco) have argued that Plyler imposes an unfair burden on public education, and that states should have the authority to limit access if resources need to be preserved. This feeds into ongoing efforts by Republican lawmakers to challenge federal mandates and reassert state control.
There is strong opposition to such statements from educators, civil rights advocates, policy experts, and children’s advocacy groups, who warn that undermining the mandate would lead to a denial of basic education to children based on circumstances beyond their control. The move is seen by many as detrimental to both individuals and society. It has quickly become a flashpoint in ongoing debates. Overturning Plyler would represent one of the most significant educational civil rights shifts in law in decades – potentially allowing states to deny basic education on the basis of immigration status.
Texas Gas Price Tracker
Gasoline prices in Texas have risen sharply over the past month as a result of the ongoing conflict involving Iran and will continue to climb. Statewide averages have now reached roughly $3.54/gallon, an increase of nearly $1.00/gallon over roughly ten days.
Houston area drivers are reporting significant pump price increases; the local average recently reached about $3.61/gallon for regular gasoline, and diesel well above that. Houstonians are feeling the pinch as prices have increased significantly within the past month. Rising fuel prices are influencing broader living costs – from grocery prices to transportation costs – as producers pass increased fuel and shipping expenses onto consumers
Rising US gas prices are tied both to global oil market disruptions from the Middle East conflict as well as crude price volatility as traders react to supply uncertainties. Since late February, US gasoline prices have increased more than 30%. This means that Texans are paying more at the pump, with some local prices climbing faster than the national averages depending on refinery capacity, distribution logistics, and regional demand patterns. Higher fuel prices ripple into other cost categories – food, flights, freight, etc. – putting additional pressures on household budgets.
These ripple effects will extend well beyond the pump as mentioned before. The world runs on fuel, meaning that airline operating expenses will increase = expensive airfare and baggage fees. Shipping and freight costs will rise, driving up prices on groceries, household items, and online purchases. Small businesses that rely on transportation will be affected and pass that cost onto customers. Over time, sustained fuel price increases can contribute to broader inflation pressures, as the US dollar is backed on oil. Household budgets will be squeezed through everyday essentials.
Trump Deploys ICE Agents to National Airports to Aid in TSA Staffing Shortages
President Donald Trump has ordered federal immigration agents from the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to be deployed at major US airports to assist TSA, amid severe staffing shortages due to a partial federal government shutdown. Hundreds of ICE personnel have been pulled from their normal duties to assist TSA agents. The redeployment has also raised questions about whether core ICE enforcement activities are being slowed while agents assist TSA operations.
Airports with confirmed ICE presence include the following: Atlanta (Hartsfield-Jackson), New York (JFK & LaGuardia), Houston’s William P. Hobby and Bush Intercontinental, Philadelphia International, Phoenix Sky Harbor, Newark Liberty, Pittsburgh International, and Cleveland Hopkins. Not all airports are participating, however. Officials, such as Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, have defended the deployment. He claims that ICE agents are trained and capable of supporting airport security functions during the staffing crisis.
Trump’s directive has now placed ICE agents at airports to help with “general security, crowd control, and checking IDs”. The goal is to allow TSA agents to remain focusing on passenger and baggage screening, and ICE agents are not intended to replace TSA agents in those core roles. However, hours-long security lines and travel disruptions are still occurring nationwide. On top of this, several airports have temporarily closed or consolidated TSA security lanes and checkpoints due to the staffing shortages. In some major hubs, like the Bush International Airport, security checkpoints have reduced from up to 9 checkpoints, down to two.
The Department of Homeland Security has been partially shut down for over five weeks, resulting in TSA agents working without pay. The prolonged DHS funding lapse has now shown in reports that indicate hundreds of TSA officers have resigned or retired since the shutdown began. They are facing severe financial hardship, low morale, and exhaustion. Unpaid agents have reported having to donate plasma to get by, using foodbanks, or taking second jobs. Others have been evicted from their homes and forced to live in their cars in airport parking lots. The shutdown has left them unable to pay for childcare, fuel to get to work, and damaged their credits. Estimates indicate over $1 billion in federal paychecks have been delayed or unpaid across DHS agencies. It goes beyond long wait times for TSA clearance at airports, the funding lapse has significantly impacted the wellbeing of agents now forced to go without pay.
However, a positive development came late last night when President Trump announced he would sign an executive order instructing the Department of Homeland Security to immediately pay TSA agents, as Congress continues their ineptitude and cannot reach an agreement to budget the money to pay the TSA personnel. Details of the executive order were not immediately available, but this will hopefully begin to see airports fully staffed again and alleviate the chaos at the nation’s airports.
Critics say the move is very problematic, and opposition voices that ICE agents lack the specialized aviation security training, their presence at airports could intimidate travelers/escalate tensions within immigrant communities and will not solve the root problem of the shutdown. Even after ICE arrival, airports have still reported significant security waits, and some travelers express concern seeing immigration officers in airport terminals.
This development has underscored two overlapping national issues. The partial DHS shutdown has left TSA agents without paychecks, which are now affecting travel for millions and prompting extraordinary steps like ICE deployment. ICE’s presence at airports highlights how immigration policy and border enforcement debates are intersecting with domestic travel and federal workforce disputes. Given its controversial reputation and ongoing political debates for its role, these actions have become a flashpoint in the broader budget and immigration policy fight.
Department of Homeland Security to Install 536 Miles of Floating Water Barriers at Rio Grande River
The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have announced a major initiative to install floating water barriers along 536 miles of the Rio Grande River. This deployment represents one of the largest physical water-border barrier efforts in US history. The project calls for floating obstruction systems placed directly into the Rio Grande – these barriers are not solid walls, but buoyant structures designed to slow or impede crossings by boat or wading. The effort will target locations identified by federal agenda as high-traffic illegal entry zones on the river, particularly near urban areas and crossing hot spots.
The 536 miles of riverbank slated for barrier installation is nearly half of the 1,250-mile stretch of the Rio Grande that serves as the international boundary in Texas. The initiative represents a massive infrastructure expansion beyond isolated trial segments previously in place. DHS/CBP contractors will progressively install the barriers, with construction anticipated to take several months to over a year depending on river conditions and weather. DHS has pointed to a large number of river crossings in sectors like the Del Rio, Eagle Pass, Laredo, and Rio Grande Valley areas as justification for expanded physical measures.
The plan has sparked intense debate among policymakers, border communities, and advocacy groups. Supporters say that border enforcement requires physical measures, barriers can reduce dangerous crossings, and slower entry improves agent response time to reduce deaths on the river. Critics warn against environmental impacts, property rights concerns, effectiveness questions, and humanitarian concerns. These come from the Rio Grande supporting diverse wildlife and sensitive ecosystems. Ecological concerns include disruptions of river flow/sediment patterns, blocked movement for fish, and impacts on habitats used by birds/mammals.
This announcement does come at a politically charged moment, with border policy a key issue in national and state campaigns. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are using the development to advance contrasting policy goals; Republicans highlight stronger border security and Democrats emphasize addressing humanitarian and legal pathways issues. The floating barrier plan is likely to become a campaign talking point in Texas and other border states.
Texas House Administration Committee Considering Fines for Quorum Breakers
The Texas House Administration Committee is expected to take up a proposal that would impose financial penalties on members who break quorum, reviving a politically charged issue that has surfaced in multiple recent legislative sessions. The renewed discussion over fines comes directly in response to the most recent quorum break when Democratic House members left the state last summer to block Republican leadership’s mid-decade redistricting plan. GOP leaders had advanced a rewritten congressional district map, arguing it was necessary to reflect population shifts. Democrats argued that the move was politically motivated and designed to solidify partisan advantage.
Under the Texas Constitution, the House cannot conduct official business without a quorum – defined as two-thirds of the 150 members – meaning that 100 members must be present. In past sessions, minority-party lawmakers have left the state to deny quorum and block legislation, most notably during high-profile fights over election laws and other Republican priorities. When quorum is broken, the House can issue civil arrest warrants compelling absent members to return, but enforcement has often proven complicated. Previous sessions have also seen efforts to withhold pay or daily per diem from absent members.
Therefore, the House Administration Committee is reportedly reviewing options that would:
- Impose monetary fines on members who intentionally break quorum
- Potentially deduct fines directly from legislative pay or per diem
- Establish clearer enforcement procedures for quorum-related absences
The details are still being discussed and finalized, but the discussion signals renewed interest in deterring walkouts before they occur instead of responding after the fact.
Quorum- breaking has historically been used by minority parties– in recent years primarily Democrats– as a last-resort tactic to block major Republican-backed legislation. Supporters of the fines argue that walkouts halt the legislative process, salaries should not be paid when members refuse to appear, and stronger deterrents are needed to preserve institutional function. Opponents argue that quorum-breaking is actually a constitutional tactic, financial penalties could slow legitimate protest, and the move is designed to strip any leverage from the minority party.
If adopted, fines would represent a structural shift in how the Texas House enforces attendance and quorum rules. The proposal could reduce the likelihood of future walkouts but also escalate partisan tensions and prompt legal challenges regarding legislative authority/compensation. With major policy debates ahead this session, the question of quorum enforcement has resurfaced as both parties assess their leverage and procedural tools.
Political Notes
Vice-President JD Vance was in Austin this week to attend a high-dollar fundraiser benefiting the Republican National Committee. The dinner was hosted by Austin billionaire Joe Lonsdale, founder of software company Palantir. Contribution levels started at $50,000 per individual or $100,000 per couple. Those who wanted a picture and handshake with the Vice-President were asked to contribute $250,000.
AG Ken Paxton – also running for US Senate – has called for the removal of acting Comptroller Kelly Hancock. In a social media post, Paxton called Hancock “an incompetent loser” and an “embarrassment” to the office. The two have been political adversaries for years, and Hancock was one of only two Republican Senators to vote to impeach Paxton in his 2024 impeachment trial. This latest dustup relates to a disagreement over how – or if – to include Islamic schools in the state’s new private school voucher program. Paxton has called on Gov. Abbott to remove Paxton and replace him with Republican Comptroller nominee Don Huffines. Hancock is a former state Senator from Fort Worth who was appointed by Abbott last June when Comptroller Glenn Hegar resigned that position to become Chancellor of the Texas A&M System. Hancock finished a very distant third to Huffines and Railroad Commissioner Christi Craddick in the March primary. No word from Abbott on whether he is considering making a change.
The Corpus Christi city council passed a resolution this week to begin the process of removing Mayor Paulette Guajardo due to allegations of misconduct involving the awarding of tax incentives for a new downtown hotel. The allegations include the altering of the application of the flood plain to where the hotel is to be built. Corpus police conducted an investigation and found no reason to proceed with criminal charges. Nonetheless, the council is moving forward with removal proceedings and will have an initial hearing on April 14th. The Council will act as judge and jury in the impeachment proceedings, with a simple majority vote needed for her removal.
Aaron Reitz – who was endorsed by current AG Ken Paxton in the race for the Republican nomination for AG – has endorsed state Senator Mayes Middleton in the runoff. Reitz finished last with only 14% of the vote in the four-candidate field and gives his nod to Middleton over Congressman Chip Roy.
What’s Next??
The Senate Business and Commerce Committee has scheduled a meeting for April 1st to discuss improving security surrounding the state’s electric grid, specifically as it relates to threats from foreign entities such as China, Russia, and Iran.
Now the campaigns for the runoffs begin. The runoff election is Tuesday, May 26th.