‘I am ready, willing and able': House Democrat says he'd break quorum to stop redistricting
Reynolds posted an op-ed called 'On Good Trouble Day, I Refuse to Be Silent,' early Thursday afternoon.
'They say everything's bigger in Texas, including the lengths folks will go to hold onto power,' Reynolds wrote. 'President (Donald) Trump recently called for Texas Republicans to deliver five new congressional seats, and they didn't hesitate. Not by earning more support or expanding their base, but by gerrymandering Black and Brown communities to secure an advantage. The message was clear: manipulate the maps, preserve the power, and silence the people.'
Earlier this week, President Trump said he's looking for 'just a simple redrawing picking up five seats,' in Texas to shore up a small Republican lead in the U.S. House. Currently, the Republicans have a 220-212 majority with three seats vacant.
Reynolds went on to say he's 'ready, willing and able to get into good trouble by breaking quorum when justice is on the line,' the strongest statement on the topic by a Democratic lawmaker so far.
What is 'quorum breaking'?
The Texas Constitution requires two-thirds attendance (a quorum) for their legislative chambers to conduct business. If they fall short, the chamber has to adjourn until a quorum is present.
Currently, Democrats control 62 of the 150 seats in the Texas House and 11 of the 30 Texas Senate seats (one seat is currently absent). While they don't have enough members to prevent lawmakers from passing legislation with unanimous Republican approval, they do have enough members to prevent any legislation from being brought to the floor — as long as they don't show up.
Democrats have already broken quorum over voter rights and representation multiple times this century. In 2003, Democrats fled the state multiple times to block a redistricting bill, falling short after months of delays. In 2021, Democrats fled to Washington D.C. to block a bill changing election laws, once again only delaying its inevitable passage. House Democrats see quorum breaking as an effective tool within the legal framework of the Texas Constitution.
'(In) a lot of legislative bodies, including the US Congress, a majority makes up a quorum. In Texas, it's two-thirds, and the people who wrote the Constitution back in the 1800s did that for a reason. That's to protect the rights of the political minority,' State Rep. Chris Turner, D-Arlington, said. 'It's a tool that's used sparingly, but it's one of those things that's always on the table.'
The downsides to breaking quorum
After the 2021 quorum break, the Texas House changed their rules to make it harder for members to fail to report for work. Now, members are fined $500 a day and a responsible for the costs incurred by the sergeant-at-arms to secure their attendance (they can find and forcibly bring members to the floor if they're still located within the state).
In addition, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has threatened to arrest Democratic lawmakers who attempt to break quorum.
'I'm not going to comment on conversations that we have internally within the Democratic caucus,' Turner said about a potential quorum break. The House Democratic Caucus confirmed national Democratic leadership has asked them to consider breaking quorum.
Republican leadership responds
In a statement, Gov. Abbott's Press Secretary Andrew Mahaleris said, 'While partisan activists focus solely on political issues, Governor Abbott is dedicated to delivering results on issues important to Texans, such as flood relief, property tax cuts, and the elimination of the STAAR test. The Governor looks forward to the legislature addressing these topics, along with other critical issues, during this special session.'
On July 11, Speaker of the House Dustin Burrows and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick released a joint statement.
'Working with the House, the Texas Senate will move forward on redistricting to pass a legal, constitutional congressional map,' said Lt. Gov. Patrick.
'Texans place their trust in the Legislature to uphold fairness in the redistricting process, and we will continue to work closely together to fulfill this legislative responsibility,' said Speaker Burrows.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
a minute ago
- Politico
Sarah McBride has a blunt diagnosis for her party's problems
'I do think that a voter asks two questions when they're considering who to vote for. The first question is, does this candidate, does this party like me? And by extension, do they respect me?' 'If you can't answer that first question to a voter's satisfaction, they won't even get to the second question, which is, what does this party think? What does this candidate think? And I think we lost that first question,' she said. Democrats around the country have been trying to figure out how to regain support from voters after Republicans won control of the White House and both chambers of Congress last year. Democratic leaders have conceded the party has a brand problem, but intraparty debates on party strategy have yet to produce a clear path forward. A Wall Street Journal poll released last week found that 63 percent of voters view the Democratic Party unfavorably — the highest level of unfavorability for the party in a Journal poll since 1990. McBride said she believes the party's brand going forward should focus on working-class people and protecting democracy and stressed again that a core tenant of the party's brand should be 'we're not going to be assholes to voters.' 'I do think that we have to basically create a tent that is united on three fundamental principles,' she said in the interview, which was taped Wednesday. 'One is working people need more support and help. Two, democracy and freedom are good. And three, we're not going to be assholes to voters.' McBride suggested that voters may be forming negative opinions of the party based on online discourse, rather than from party leaders, and that 'the loudest voices online' may be pushing voters away who might otherwise vote for Democrats. 'The reality in today's environment is that your party ecosystem is defined not just by politicians or the party, but also some of the loudest voices online that in voters' minds reflect and represent that broader coalition,' she said. 'When we have an environment where we've got some very loud people who are shaming and calling people who disagree with them — even in rhetoric — bigots, when we have those folks saying that to a wide swath of voters, including voters we could win, and we aren't explicitly stating something to the contrary, then a voter will then just paint us all with one broad brush,' she added. The full interview with McBride is available on Sunday's episode of 'The Conversation.'
Politico
a minute ago
- Politico
Laura Loomer runs ‘tip line' for Trump staffers eager to purge ‘disloyal' colleagues
Trump is famous for asking friends and outside allies for their opinions about his own staff. So much so that, during his first term, former chief of staff John Kelly tried to limit access to the Oval Office in an effort to exert some control over who was influencing the president. It backfired. Trump often refers to his current chief of staff, Susie Wiles, during Cabinet meetings as 'the most powerful woman in the world.' The now familiar riff almost always elicits chuckles in the room. But Wiles' power comes from not attempting to rein in the president's impulses or restrict his circle in any way. 'I know this from working for John Kelly, it's just impossible to control Trump this way. He has lots of different telephones,' said Kevin Carroll, a former CIA officer and lawyer representing intelligence officials fired by the Trump administration. 'He's just on some random cell phone…and it could be with Laura Loomer.' One of his clients, Terry Adirim, the former top doctor at the CIA, has alleged that Loomer played a key role in her dismissal. Adirim was terminated by the Trump administration earlier this year after some of the president's supporters criticized her for her role in the mandatory Covid vaccination of members of the military. This week, the White House requested that Congress delay a hearing for Brian Quintenz to head the Commodity Futures Trading Commission after cryptocurrency billionaires Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss urged Trump to dump Quintenz in a conversation last weekend. Also this week, Trump ordered the removal of the FDA's top vaccine regulator, Vinay Prasad, after just three months on the job. He did that despite opposition from Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary — and after hearing from Loomer. Loomer engineered a public backlash to Prasad that began with her labeling him on her website a 'progressive leftist saboteur undermining President Trump's FDA.' Other conservative voices, like former GOP Sen. Rick Santorum and The Wall Street Journal editorial board, piled onto the criticism of Prasad and his approach to rare disease therapies — a concern that Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) raised with the White House on Monday, a day before Prasad was fired. Also on Tuesday, Trump removed the National Security Administration's top lawyer, April Doss, after Loomer shared the conservative magazine Daily Caller's investigation into Doss, which called her a 'transparently partisan activist.' Carroll said Loomer's influence created a 'dangerous situation' with 'somebody outside the government, no national security experience, who's got hire and fire authority over some of these really, really important jobs.' In the White House, administration officials appear unwilling to overlook the disruption associated with frequent staff changes. And Loomer says she has strong relationships in the West Wing. 'It is not only appropriate, but critical for the Administration to recruit the most qualified and experienced staffers who are totally aligned with President Trump's agenda to Make America Great Again,' White House spokesperson Kush Desai said. Desai added that the administration's record of 'peace deals to trade deals' show that Trump 'has assembled the best and brightest talent to put Americans and America First.'
Time Magazine
2 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Tracking Trump's Tariffs
President Donald Trump's on-again, off-again approach to his signature tariff policy has taken global economies on a rollercoaster in just the first six months of his second presidential term. Trump slammed nearly every country in the world with tariffs as high as 50% on April 2, so-called 'Liberation Day.' A week later, he announced a temporary reduction that was meant to end July 9, during which time he said he'd negotiate '90 deals in 90 days' to re-balance U.S. trade relationships. But as that deadline neared, Trump announced a new deadline of Aug. 1 and began unveiling a slate of new tariffs on more than a dozen countries. Throughout this all, Trump has also announced sectoral tariffs on cars, steel, aluminum, and copper, as well as threatened countries appearing to align against American interests, like members of the intergovernmental organization BRICS, with additional tariffs. Read More: Trump's Trade Deals, Negotiations, and New Tariffs for Each Country On the eve of Trump's Aug. 1 trade deal deadline, the White House once again unveiled new tariff rates on much of the world, most of which will take effect Aug. 7. For countries with which the U.S. has a trade surplus—meaning that it exports more to those countries than it imports from them—the 'universal' tariff is 10%, which remains unchanged from April 2. For countries with which the U.S. has a trade deficit, the new baseline rate is 15%, which will apply to around 40 countries. More than a dozen other countries will face higher tariff rates, either imposed by Trump in a more recent announcement or obtained through trade agreements with the U.S. The U.S. has reached trade deals or framework agreements with a number of countries: the European Union, Indonesia, Japan, Pakistan, the Philippines, South Korea, the U.K., and Vietnam. The U.S. also reached an agreement with China, although the two sides are continuing to negotiate the details ahead of a later deadline of Aug. 12, which the White House has indicated could be extended. And Trump has granted Mexico a 90-day extension to facilitate further trade talks. The White House has bragged about raising more than $150 billion from tariffs over the past six months, while Trump has said 'tariffs are making America GREAT & RICH Again.' (A Monthly Treasury Statement from June shows that the government has collected around $108 billion in customs duties since October 1, 2024, while the Treasury Department reported the collection of upwards of $28 billion in duties in July.) Revenue from tariffs is likely to increase as higher tariffs for dozens of countries go into effect. Many economists, however, say tariffs are effectively a tax on American consumers and have warned that trade tensions could trigger a U.S.—or even global—recession. Here's a breakdown of all Trump's tariffs. Trump's 'reciprocal' tariffs Trump has said his tariffs are aimed at balancing the U.S.'s trade relationships with the rest of the world in two main ways: firstly, by pressuring countries to negotiate trade deals more favorable to the U.S., and secondly by incentivizing firms to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. The President has railed against the country's trade deficits with much of the rest of the world, though he's also imposed tariffs on countries that the U.S. has a trade surplus with, like Brazil. It's true that the U.S. imports much more goods from most countries than it exports, but economists have pointed out that that's a position many other countries are striving to be in. The U.S. exports mainly services—like banking services, software, and entertainment—while many poorer countries have much larger and lower-paying manufacturing sectors. Economists have also said tariffs aren't necessarily an effective way to address trade deficits and are instead likely to cause higher prices for American consumers, unsettle American businesses, and erode trust between the U.S. and its trading partners, leading trade and diplomatic partnerships away from the U.S. in the long term. Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs, imposed April 2, were 'reciprocal' based on what he said were tariffs and other manipulations against the U.S. by other countries, although economists have criticized his method of calculating those rates: each country's trade surplus with the U.S. was divided by its exports to the U.S. and then divided by two. It's not yet clear how the new rates, some of which Trump began announcing July 7 in 'letters' sent to each country and shared on his Truth Social platform, were determined. Trump has said they are based on countries' 'Tariff, and Non-Tariff, Policies and Trade Barriers.' For certain countries though he cited reasons unrelated to trade. The 50% tariff on Brazil, for example, is based partly on what Trump called a 'Witch Hunt' against the country's former President Jair Bolsonaro, a Trump ally who has been charged with attempting to launch a coup to stay in office in 2022. Other Trump tariffs Trump has also imposed tariffs on specific sectors, including a 25% tariff on cars and car parts and a 50% tariff on most foreign imports of steel, aluminum, and copper. Several more sectoral tariffs may be introduced pending Section 232 Commerce Department investigations, such as on semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, critical minerals, and commercial aircraft and engines. Imports subjected to section 232 tariffs do not always 'stack' on top of other tariffs. For example, a car imported from overseas will be tariffed at 25%, but will not be subject to tariffs on aluminum, steel, or other 'stacking' tariffs. Metals tariffs supersede country 'reciprocal' tariffs but both steel and aluminum tariffs can apply to the same product. Some trade agreements, like the U.S.-E.U. deal, also cap sectoral tariffs at a lower rate. For example, the 15% 'reciprocal' tariff on the E.U. also applies to cars and car parts. Some sectoral tariffs predate Trump's second term. Trump introduced tariffs on various sectors and countries in his first presidential term. In January 2018, he imposed tariffs on all solar panels, for which China is the world's largest producer, and washing machines. In June that year he also introduced 25% tariffs on over 800 products from China. Trump also imposed a 25% tariff on steel and a 10% tariff on aluminum from Canada, Mexico and the E.U. These tariffs set off retaliatory moves from the impacted countries, though most U.S. and retaliatory tariffs from Trump's first term eventually expired or were rolled back. The U.S. and China reached a truce in January 2020 after escalating tit-for-tat tariffs, but former President Joe Biden extended the solar panel tariffs in 2022. Some countries might also be subject to additional tariffs based on political reasons. Trump announced on July 6 that he would tariff countries aligning themselves with BRICS at an additional 10% rate. Among the countries whose new rates have been announced so far, that includes Brazil, South Africa, India and Iran. It's not yet clear whether it affects countries that the U.S. has cut a deal with, like China or Indonesia. Trump has also cracked down on what was known as the de minimis exemption, which exempted small shipments valued at $800 or less from customs duties and declarations. The tax provision, which was introduced in 1938, has largely benefitted fast fashion giants like Shein and Temu, which have sent millions of packages a day to the U.S. Trump closed the exemption for shipments from China and Hong Kong in an April 2 executive order, tariffing the low-value shipments from those exporters effectively at a 120% rate from May 2 (after tit-for-tat tariff hikes). He then reversed course with a May 12 executive order that eased levies on low-value imports. Then, he reversed course again with a July 30 executive order, ending the tariff exemption for all countries around the world.
