A joint author of this session's major ethics bill was quite sanguine Friday, despite seeing a move to have his stalled legislation brought to the full House unceremoniously dumped by colleagues 24 hours earlier.

Rep. Todd Smith (R-Euless) said he had not entirely given up hope of passing legislation to stop millions of corporate dollars from pouring into political campaigns and preventing 11th hour anonymous attack ads.

"I think it is probably too early to say for sure that there is no hope of this legislation passing but it would certainly be a bottom of the 9th home run with two men out," Smith told QR.

House Bill 1348 reportedly had the backing of 63 Democrats and 30 Republicans. Those numbers meant nothing Thursday when, in one the most highly charged moments of the session so far, Rep.
Tommy Merritt (R-Longview) attempted a rarely used House floor tactic to resuscitate the bill from a slow death in the Elections Committee. Explaining his 'motion to report' and the importance of the legislation, Merritt said he had personal experience of concealed corporate contributions wrecking his election prospects.

The House voted 95-36 against Merritt's motion after Rep. Terry Keel (R-Austin) turned the issue into one of loyalty to Speaker Tom Craddick. In an emotional delivery, Keel said the motion was nothing less than a "partisan shot" at the speaker, drummed up by Rep. Jim Dunnam (D-Waco), the Democratic caucus leader. Keel said the maneuver would "drive a stake" through the heart of HB 1348, legislation the Austin Republican had previously signed onto.

Friday, Smith said it was perfectly reasonable for members to differ on whether a 'motion to report' was a legitimate tactic. However, he said he respectfully disagreed with his good friend Keel that the tactic effectively killed the legislation.

"I don't disagree with Terry that attempts to take bills from committees to the floor should be used very sparingly. I'm not going to criticize that aspect of his argument. I understand why it is that that procedure should be used only sparingly," Smith said.

"But I do not believe that what happened yesterday has any impact on the likelihood of the legislation passing one way or another. In fact, it may have provided a convenient excuse for those who were, in reality, against the legislation. They could blame it on what happened yesterday."

Smith said HB 1348 was still a good and moderate bill that would help clean up Texas' political system.

"The underlying principles of this bill are very clear and they are, in essence, very simple. Do you or do you not support disclosure? Do you or do you not support a prohibition on union or corporate contributions. If your answer is, I do support disclosure and I also support the ban on corporate or union contributions, then you must support this bill," Smith said.

"I think the election system today is corrupt. We have undisclosed and unlimited corporate and union contributions determining who is elected in this state. That is a corrupt system. What it means is that individuals on the floor who occasionally say no to wealthy, economic, interests are vulnerable. Those who do not are bulletproof. That is the bottom line."

Smith said he did not believe there would be any political paybacks by the House leadership for those that voted for Merritt's motion. "I think people respect the process. The arguments were made both ways and members got to vote," Smith said.

Smith also said he was dismayed by literature put out by the Texas Alliance for Life saying HB 1348 would prevent non-profit groups from issuing non-partisan voter guides, or newsletters, invitations, or radio spots that mention the name of a candidate.

"At the time this literature was distributed, they knew full well that the concerns addressed in the literature were going to be addressed by way of amendment," Smith said. "The notion that any elected official on this floor could possibly have intended, much less me, to pass a bill that would put a preacher in jail for saying pray for Representative Smith is absurd on its face. Nobody has ever intended to do such a thing."

In an April 26 letter to House members, Alliance for Life Executive Director Joe Pojman said non-profit organizations, churches and other religious institutions would suffer "broad and severe restrictions on free speech" under HB 1348.

"The effect of HB 1348 would be to drastically impeded our ability to educate our members and the public about issues that are important to us," Pojman wrote.

"In addition, we believe that HB 1348 raises grave constitutional concerns by limiting free speech in an impermissible manner."

Many House members received numerous telephone calls this week from many 'Right to Life' supporters urging them to vote "no" on the bill.