Ken Paxton's Senate run, state budget, and Texas DOGE: TWITP
The Brief
Big topics this week: Ken Paxton's Senate run, a new state budget, and Texas DOGE
FOX 7 Austin's chief political reporter Rudy Koski and our panel of analysts discuss the big stories from This Week in Texas Politics
AUSTIN, Texas - Texas House members worked into the early morning hours to finalize their version of a new state budget.
The marathon debate capped off an intense week.
FOX 7 Austin's chief political reporter Rudy Koski and our panel of analysts discuss the big stories from This Week in Texas Politics.
Local perspective
RUDY KOSKI: Big votes and some big decisions dominating This Week in Texas Politics. Let's get the headlines from our panel, and we'll start with Philip Jankowski with the Dallas Morning News. Philip, what's your headline for the week?
PHILIP JANKOWSKI: Yeah, Paxton's Senate run sets off party battles.
RUDY KOSKI: Political analyst Karina Kling, what's your headline for the week?
KARINA KLING: I'll stick to that same theme. Get ready for a nasty Senate primary between John Cornyn and Ken Paxton.
RUDY KOSKI: Brian Smith with St. Edward's University. Give me a headline.
BRIAN SMITH: Not going to change much. Attorney General Ken Paxton wants to be your next senator.
RUDY KOSKI: Early Friday morning, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick announced that he doesn't plan on changing jobs he's running for reelection. But another high-profile Republican is trying to change jobs, Attorney General Ken Paxton, as expected, announcing that he will challenge Senator John Cornyn for the GOP nomination for chair. Philip, no surprise, this one, as everyone's mentioned, has gotten ugly fast.
PHILIP JANKOWSKI: Obviously, no love lost between these two. I can remember a tweet, I think we all can remember this one that John Cornyn put out when Ken Paxton was needling him and Cornyn said, essentially, hard to run for Senate from prison, Ken.
RELATED:Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick announces Trump-endorsed re-election campaign
BRIAN SMITH: I think the key to the race though is, who does Donald Trump support?
RELATED:Ken Paxton announced bid for Senate; John Cornyn responds
KARINA KLING: I think that it's interesting because Trump needs him. Cornyn's trying to get his agenda over the finish line there in the Senate and moving that agenda. He's got the support of national Republicans coming out in support of him early on for Cornyn. And I think when Trump does endorse, it's not going to be until late in this primary.
RUDY KOSKI: The Texas House worked into the early morning of Friday, plowing through its big budget bill. There were a lot of amendments, more than 400, and a lot ended up in a trash can called Article 11. There was talk about defunding the lottery, taking money away from the economic development and tourism office in the governor's office. Brian, was there anything in the debate that surprised you?
BRIAN SMITH: I think the commitment to fund border security is something that I was surprised survived because I thought Texas was going to try to move that to the federal level and get reimbursed for the money.
RUDY KOSKI: Ah, but we did have a little political drama before that budget debate began and a little political nose tweaking. It involved Representative Brian Harrison. He put up a motion to unseat Speaker Burrows and he only got two votes. Philip, certainly an embarrassment for Harrison, but does this solidify the position for Burrows?
PHILIP JANKOWSKI: Yeah, I think it does solidify his position, or at the least shows that everybody's moved on past this. An embarrassment. Maybe in the Chamber, people think Brian Harrison is an embarrassment. But Brian Harrison pretty much got what he wanted.
RUDY KOSKI: Well, it looks like legislation to create a new Texas Regulation Oversight Agency will be the first major bill that's going to be sent to the governor's desk for his signature in this session. But, Karina, the Republicans have been in control of state government for a very long time. Is this just an indictment against them that they've blown management?
KARINA KLING: I noticed, you know, we were talking about Brian Harrison and speaking of him, he was the only Republican to vote with Democrats against this. And he was saying just what you're mentioning there, that it's a power grab and expands government. So it's going to be an interesting kind of the give and take on this moving forward.
RUDY KOSKI: Let's circle back now to Ken Paxton's bid for the Senate. His decision means that he's not going to seek reelection as Attorney General. Republican John Bash is the first Republican to jump in. Karina, this creates an open seat, open opportunity for the Democrats.
KARINA KLING: Yeah, I mean, this is going to be a competitive primary in Texas for sure. It could really reset Republican politics here in Texas.
RELATED:Former U.S. Attorney John Bash announced bid for Texas Attorney General
PHILIP JANKOWSKI: They are teeing up, what could be a pretty, you know a pretty contested election with a Trump, you know Mid-Term election coming up.
BRIAN SMITH: There's going to be a lot of pressure for the Democrats to put their best top candidates at the top of the ticket. But I think if they really focus on the AG position, this is how they could get their foot in the door.
RUDY KOSKI: You can see the full discussion on the FOX 7 YouTube page and also on FOX Local, but let's wrap things up with one word for the week, and we'll start with Karina. What's your word for the week?
KARINA KLING:Sleep.
RUDY KOSKI:Brian, what's your word for the week?
BRIAN SMITH: Budget.
RUDY KOSKI: Philip, give me your word for the week.
PHILIP JANKOWSKI: Oh man, I think I said Tariffs last week, so this week I'll say Terrified.
RUDY KOSKI:And that is This Week in Texas Politics.
The Source
Information from interviews conducted by FOX 7 Austin's Rudy Koski and previous coverage
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
15 minutes ago
Democrats slam military parade as Trump's multimillion-dollar 'birthday party'
Congressional Democrats and at least one high-profile Republican are slamming the multimillion-dollar cost of the Army 's 250th anniversary parade on Saturday that President Donald Trump has long sought to celebrate the military. Trump has said the cost -- projected to be as much as $45 million for the Army alone, not counting security and other expenses -- will be "peanuts compared to the value of doing it." However, his critics argue the money could be better spent elsewhere. "If it was really about celebrating military families, we could put $30 million toward helping them offset the cost of their child care, food assistance and tuition," Sen. Tammy Duckworth said on X. "But it isn't. Trump is throwing himself a $30 million birthday parade just to stroke his own ego." The Army said it has accounted for spending between $25 million and $45 million on the parade, which will include 6,700 troops and dozens of tanks, military fighting vehicles and aircraft staged on or near the National Mall. "Money should be put in medical defense research instead of wasted on some pomp and circumstance for the president," Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday. "This is not consistent with what the men and women in uniform deserve." Saturday's parade also falls on Trump's 79th birthday, and when it ends near the White House, the Army's Golden Knights parachute team will present him with an American flag, after which he'll administer the constitutional oath to Army enlistees. "We all like to enjoy a nice birthday party," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., posted on X. "But most of us don't celebrate with a $45 million taxpayer-funded military parade. "Save taxpayer money. Have a birthday cake and blow out a few candles," he said. "Don't shut down the capital and roll out 60-ton tanks through the streets." "I wouldn't have done it," Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul said. "We were always different than, you know, the images you saw in the Soviet Union and North Korea. We were proud not to be that." Some Democrats echoed that criticism. "It's outrageous," Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Ariz., said. "This is something that would happen in North Korea, not the United States of America. Donald Trump thinks he's a king. He's not. He was elected as president of the United States, and he should act as such." Army spokesman Steve Warren defended the parade, saying, "It is a lot of money, but I think that amount of money is dwarfed by 250 years of service and sacrifice that American soldiers have given this country. "We're looking at this as an opportunity to really strengthen the connection between America and her Army," he added. "So, yeah, it's a lot of money, but it pales in comparison to what we're selling." The White House this week also requested a flyover by the Air Force Thunderbirds. When asked Thursday what he hopes the public will remember about the parade, Trump said, "How great our country is, very simple, and how strong our military is." "We have the strongest military in the world," he added. The White House has not responded to requests for a total cost estimate that would include money spent on security and other arrangements. Several Republicans say they're skipping the parade due to prior commitments, including House Speaker Mike Johnson. Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said she would attend and defended the display. "Washington D.C. is the safest it's ever been!!" she wrote. "I wish our great military men and women could just stay here. I am so excited for the parade celebrating the 250th anniversary of our United States Army!!" Protests of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown are planned across the country to counterprogram the parade, with the flagship "No Kings" protest occurring in Philadelphia. Nine small protests are also expected in Washington, according to the Secret Service and local officials. Trump has warned protesters will be met with "heavy force." On Friday, he disputed the characterization of him as a king. "I don't feel like a king. I have to go through hell to get stuff approved," he said, adding, "No, no, we're not a king. We're not a king at all."
Politico
17 minutes ago
- Politico
White House looks to freeze more agency funds — and expand executive power
The Trump administration is working on a new effort to both weaken Congress' grip on the federal budget and freeze billions of dollars in spending at several government agencies, people familiar with the strategy told POLITICO's E&E News. The strategy: order agencies to freeze the spending now — then ask Congress' approval, using a maneuver that allows the cuts to become permanent if lawmakers fail to act. The move would ax billions of dollars beyond the $9.4 billion in White House-requested cuts, known as 'rescissions,' that the House approved Thursday. The Office of Management and Budget late last week directed several agencies to freeze upward of $30 billion in spending on a broad array of programs, according to agency emails and two people familiar with the plan. The architect of the freeze directive, OMB Director Russ Vought, has long lamented the limits placed on the president's ability to direct federal spending. His latest gambit — first reported by E&E News — appears designed to test those boundaries. The agencies targeted by the newest freeze include the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation and the departments of Interior and Health and Human Services. E&E News granted anonymity to the two people familiar with the strategy so they could speak freely without fear of reprisal from the Trump administration. OMB's targets include NSF research and education programs that operate using funding leftover from 2024. Also on the list are tens of millions of dollars for national park operations as well as more than $100 million in science spending at NASA, which includes climate research. While the president has some measure of control over how federal agencies spend their money, the power of the purse lies primarily with Congress under the U.S. Constitution. Put another way: Lawmakers set the budget. Vought is trying to turn that principle on its head. The order to freeze some funding at more than a dozen agencies comes in advance of a budget spending 'deferrals' package that the White House plans to send Congress. Spending deferrals allow the executive branch to temporarily prevent authorized dollars from going out the door — but only if lawmakers sign off on the move. Freezing the spending before making that request seems to fly in the face of Congress' constitutional power and the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, said Joseph Carlile, former associate director at OMB in the Biden administration. 'There is a right, a legal way, for the administration to rescind things and I guess they're pursuing this because they don't have their stuff together or don't care about the law,' said Carlile, who also worked previously on budgetary oversight on the House Appropriations Committee for 13 years. 'This is consistent with an administration that believes that they have broader powers around budget and spending than any other administration has ever been able to find,' Carlile added. White House officials did not deny the new strategy when asked about it. Rather, they described it as a way to lock in spending cuts prescribed by the Department of Government Efficiency, a cost-cutting outfit championed by Trump donor and entrepreneur Elon Musk. Yet the White House has worked to keep the effort quiet, said one person in the administration with direct knowledge of the strategy. The person said the White House directive was communicated largely to agencies over the phone to avoid creating a paper trail. Vought has said repeatedly he disagrees with the impoundment act, a Nixon-era law that limits the president's ability to block spending for political reasons. Democrats and legal scholars have said Trump already has violated the law. 'We're not in love with the law,' Vought told CNN in an interview on June 1. The separate $9.4 billion rescissions package that the House approved Thursday would permanently cut funding for NPR and PBS as well as foreign aid. Vought has said he expects to send more rescissions packages to Congress. Vought's multipronged strategy also is likely to include a 'pocket rescissions' strategy, by which the White House intentionally runs out the clock near the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year. If the president introduces a recissions package then, Congress has a limited time to act — and if it does not do so, the funds slated for elimination are automatically canceled. The White House may use the pocket rescissions strategy if the $9.4 billion rescissions package does not pass both chambers of Congress, the administration person said. And it could pursue another pocket rescissions strategy centered on Labor Department spending. The deferrals package is a third strategy — and it comes ahead of an expected congressional fight on lifting the debt ceiling before the end of the summer. It would essentially pause or significantly slow funding intentionally, until it can be crafted into a separate pocket rescissions package that can run down the clock and be made permanent. Under the impoundment law, the White House can ask Congress to defer some of its budget spending authority 'to provide for contingencies' or 'to achieve savings' through efficiency gains. The White House is planning to argue that hitting the debt ceiling — a borrowing limit imposed and periodically raised by Congress — is such a contingency. The nation is expected to reach the debt ceiling by the end of August. The White House strategy is to delay or block funds now, then craft an additional rescissions package later in the year that would make such cuts permanent. 'OMB is hard at work making the DOGE cuts permanent using a wide range of tools we have at our disposal under the ICA [Impoundment Control Act] and within the President's authority— just like the first rescissions package that was sent up to the Hill this week,' OMB spokesperson Rachel Cauley said in a statement Monday. 'As a part of that process, we are constantly checking in with agencies to assess their unobligated balances.' The latest effort may be more comprehensive than other blocks on federal funding that Vought has enacted, according to the person with direct knowledge of the move. It could also be a 'trial balloon' to see whether the White House can unilaterally block future spending if Trump administration officials object, said another person at an agency that would be affected. The move appears to be a significant escalation of Vought's efforts to test the boundaries of the Impoundment Control Act. Vought's strategy is to rely on Section 1013 of the act, which grants the president the authority to freeze spending if the administration explains its actions to lawmakers. The act originally allowed one chamber of Congress to reject presidential deferrals, a power that courts rejected. As a result, the law was amended in 1987 to limit how long presidents could delay spending and under what conditions. 'It does not appear that any measures to disapprove a deferral have been considered since these amendments were made,' the Congressional Research Service said in a February report on the impoundment law. Vought has long argued that impounding some congressionally appropriated funding is constitutional, and he has said he wants the Supreme Court to validate what would be a significant weakening of congressional oversight of the federal budget. The deferrals package the White House plans to send Congress would temporarily stop agencies from spending unobligated funds that remain at the end of the government's fiscal year on Sept. 30. The broad-based deferrals package is highly unusual and could be part of his strategy to take his fight for greater executive power to the Supreme Court, said Philip Joyce, a professor at the University of Maryland's School of Public Policy and author of the book 'The Congressional Budget Office: Honest Numbers, Power, and Policymaking.' 'It is a novel approach, but I think in the end, they really want this to go to the Supreme Court,' Joyce said. 'They think they know how the Supreme Court is going to rule and once the Supreme Court opens the door, you know, it's kind of high noon for the separation of powers, which is what they want.' Last week, OMB officials reached out to federal agencies to tell them to enact the spending freeze. Some agency officials were 'shocked' at the move, according to the administration official with direct knowledge of the plan. The head of the National Science Foundation's budget office didn't know what to make of the directive, according to an email obtained by E&E News. OMB is targeting the agency's research and education 'accounts for a deferral package,' NSF Budget Director Caitlyn Fife wrote last Friday in a note to top officials. 'I imagine you will all have questions, as do we,' she said. 'However we are immediately focused on pulling the funds back to ensure there are no further commitments or obligations.' An NSF official briefed on the spending freeze said offices relying on previous-year funding could see their 'programs gutted.' The official also predicted that if OMB's ploy succeeds, it will use deferrals to impound any congressionally directed spending the administration opposes. That means the deferrals package strategy is likely the start of a significant and questionable push to expand executive power, said Carlile, the former OMB associate director. He said the White House is essentially seeking to subvert the Constitution, which grants Congress spending authority, in such an extreme way that it threatens the nation's democratic structure. 'I think it upends a fundamental check and balance contemplated in our Constitution, and I don't understand how you subordinate Congress' power of the purse,' Carlile said. Federal spending decisions are 'a deal between the executive and the legislative branch as institutions,' he added. 'And this all starts to unravel real quick if our budgetary framework really actually meant nothing.'
Eater
18 minutes ago
- Eater
Everything to Know About the Los Angeles Immigration Sweeps and Anti-ICE Protests
On Friday, June 6, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents began a series of large-scale immigration sweeps across Southern California, targeting undocumented immigrants. Early reports indicated agents were raiding the parking lot of a Westlake Home Depot, as well as making arrests in the Fashion District at two locations of Ambiance Apparel. The people of Los Angeles responded quickly to the sweeps, with protesters gathering around Ambiance Apparel and later at the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building in Downtown Los Angeles, located near Little Tokyo. On the second day of protests, June 7, President Trump federalized California's National Guard, deploying 2,000 troops to Los Angeles, a move that California Gov. Gavin Newsom called 'purposefully inflammatory' in a post on X. On June 10, amid expanding sweeps and continuing protests, the Pentagon deployed 700 Marines to Los Angeles, and LA Mayor Karen Bass instituted a curfew for Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods. As of June 12, the curfew remains in effect, with no set end date. Businesses in the affected area have adjusted hours and shut down in the evenings to comply with the order. Food and restaurant workers are statistically likely to be impacted by raids. The American Immigration Council estimates that immigrants make up 22 percent of all U.S. workers in the food service industry, and according to the Center for Migration Studies, about 45 percent of U.S. agricultural workers are undocumented. On May 31, San Diego Italian restaurant Buona Forchetta was raided by ICE, and on June 10, the Los Angeles Times reported that ICE agents were raiding farms and packing house distribution centers in Ventura, Kern, and Tulare counties. Following the most recent sweeps, President Trump put out a statement on Truth Social promising changes. 'Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long-time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' he wrote in the post. The administration has not shared further details regarding the changes. Multiple publications report that amid the ongoing sweeps, workers are afraid to go to work, and some green card holders are concerned about going to the grocery store or running errands. Trump administration 'border czar' Tom Homan has said that the immigration sweeps will continue, with ICE expected to be in Los Angeles for at least 30 days. Where is ICE conducting immigration sweeps? The first sweeps were spotted on June 6 in Los Angeles's Fashion District and at a Westlake Home Depot. Since then, ICE has been spotted at car washes in Westchester and Culver City, at farmland north of Los Angeles, and at both commercial businesses and residential neighborhoods in the area. Locals have been sharing ICE sightings with the crowdsourced map People Over Papers. The bulk of the protests remain in Downtown Los Angeles, centered around the federal building. Satellite protests have popped up at sites of ICE raids, and in neighborhoods like Koreatown and Westlake after the curfew was implemented Downtown. During the first week of protests, LAPD deployed less-than-lethal munitions and tear gas against protesters. What happens with businesses in the curfew zone? Businesses in the curfew zone — which includes Downtown LA, Chinatown, Little Tokyo, and the Arts District — are required to close at 8 p.m. Some, like Camelia, the Mermaid, and Sampa, are pivoting to daytime hours from their usual dinner shift. The Los Angeles Times reports that the Mermaid had initially opened for regular service on Monday, June 9, but had to close after an hour, following an incident in which protesters were pushed in their direction. The bar is running hours from 12 p.m. to 7 p.m., until the curfew is lifted. Here are the restaurants currently affected by the curfew, and their adjusted hours: Camelia— Running daytime hours starting Friday, June 1,3 from 12:30 to 6:30 p.m. Ki— Temporarily closed as of June 11 Sampa— Adjusted daytime hours; open until 7 p.m. Death and Co.— Temporarily closed as of June 11 Sonoratown— Downtown LA location closing at 6:30 p.m. Everson Royce Bar— Temporarily closed Father's Office— Temporarily closed Steep— Operating adjusted hours from 11:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. through June 15 See More:
