.png)
Blue Grit Podcast: The Voice of Texas Law Enforcement
2024: Ranked #1 Law Podcast
Host: Tyler Owen and Clint McNear discussing topics, issues, and stories within the law enforcement community. TMPA is the voice of Texas Law Enforcement, focused on protecting those who serve. Since 1950, we have been defending the rights and interests of Texas Peace Officers by providing the best legal assistance in the country, effective lobbying at state and local levels, affordable training, and exemplary member support. As the largest law enforcement association in Texas, TMPA is proud to represent 33,000 local, county and state law enforcement officers.
Blue Grit Podcast: The Voice of Texas Law Enforcement
#110- "Boots in the Rotunda" with John Wilkerson and Bryan Flatt
In this powerful legislative recap, John Wilkerson and Bryan Flatt return from the front lines of the 89th Texas Legislative Session to break down the wins, battles, and behind-the-scenes grit it took to defend and advance law enforcement interests at the Capitol.
From late-night negotiations to hard-hitting testimony, this episode dives deep into how TMPA’s legislative team doesn’t just push policy—they build trusted relationships that deliver results. Wilkerson and Flatt share candid reflections on key bills, political dynamics, and why simply showing up isn’t enough—you need boots on the ground, trust in the halls, and a team that refuses to back down.
💥 TMPA isn’t just present in Austin—we’re effective. And in this episode, you’ll hear exactly why.
email us at- bluegrit@tmpa.org
Line level officers across Texas is this is that just because you've got a D next to your name, you're automatically anti-law enforcement? I think the great testament that we can confirm that that's not the case is Whitmire right, he was in the Senate. Now I'm not saying that they're going to be as pro-law enforcement as some of the Republican state reps, but that's not the case at the Capitol. Welcome back, viewers, watchers, listeners. I'm your host. Tyler Owen we have our legislative liaison team on the last day of session is today coming to join us to give us an update and talk about the successes and everything that we have been doing at TMPA or they have been doing there at our state Capitol. John Wilkerson and Brian Flattrian flat man, welcome back, first and foremost. I'm sure you guys are, uh, probably getting tired of of monster energy drinks and advil for the foot pain and busting your ass there at our state capitol. So what y'all been up to?
Speaker 2:oh, you just said it that's at the state capitol you know, putting in a lot of steps no monster drinks just a lot of coffee well, I'm glad.
Speaker 1:I'm glad you don't drink monsters I. I cut that out. I'll have to tell you later on off camera why, but uh, anyway, welcome back, man. What's going on?
Speaker 2:yeah, well, uh, you know today is sunny day sunny without day yeah, so, uh you, it means that there's no end to today, but it's weird, yeah, yeah. Anyways, bottom line is the 89th session will be ending today, the regular session.
Speaker 1:So any kind of excited thought about a continuation? No Rumblings, because last session I believe we kind of knew going into the last day that it was going to be a continuation of that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, you know, coming into this session we knew that the governor and lieutenant governor they both had their priorities. The only one that was really talking about pushing a special session was lieutenant governor and that was if his Senate Bill 3, the THC synthetic ban didn't pass. The governor's big ticket items were school choice, which got passed, and then bail reform. Now the question is going to be out of the various bail bills that were filed I think it was SJR 87 was the one that we all kind of knew it wasn't going to pass. You have to have 100 votes in the House to get that and it's that super majority and we knew that that wasn't going to happen. So now the question becomes is the governor going to be okay with what was passed? I'm not hearing anything. Talking with AJ Lauderback the other day, he said that they're not hearing anything about a special session. So yeah, we're looking forward to a little vacation.
Speaker 1:Well, and for those that don't know, like you know, this session, with my role in communications, you know I work obviously a lot with our field reps and our training coordinators, but also with the ledge team. It's funny because they'll send me a text. It could be 10 o'clock at night, it could be 7 o'clock in the morning, me. It could be 10 o'clock at night, it could be 7 o'clock in the morning. Me and JW both share a. I wouldn't say it's a good quality, but it's a quality of life that we wake up stupid early in the morning, and so it's either me or J McClellan that wake up earlier than 6 am and so JW and me we have a lot of conversations in the morning time.
Speaker 1:But theyence committee or a pub ed committee, can you kind of look at us and make sure? And so what we do is we record those out, push it out and then try to highlight their hard work. And so it's been. Again, just from my perspective, the members really don't see you guys down there and you guys are kind of the quiet heroes and you guys have done a phenomenal job and I'm sure you guys are anxious for this session to kind of end so you guys can take off a little bit, be with your friends and family and enjoy some time much-needed time off.
Speaker 3:I will say that this morning I was planning on sleeping in a little bit, but apparently my body is used to getting up at 5 o'clock.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 3:So I woke up well before my alarm, understandably, understandably.
Speaker 1:That's precious. Hey, speaking of Brian Flatt, this is your first session. Brian, for those that don't know, was our training coordinator for many, many, many years. Retired police officer from up at the Panhandle, joined TMPA, and the great thing about TMPA at the Capitol it's so important is that if you don't understand law enforcement in general, how can you go to the Capitol and fight excuse me advocate for, for laws that are going to affect the many women who are actually on the front line? And so, uh, obviously you have the background to do it, uh, your presence, anybody that knows you. Uh, you can. You can talk with the best and and and you sound educated, at least when you talk, and so you're a great fit for the capital. This was your first session. How was it?
Speaker 3:it was interesting I imagine you know I had nothing to base it off of other than just like listening to jw uh from his past couple of sessions, and I had never truly followed the legislative process right uh, like I should have, like anybody in law enforcement should. And over the past couple of sessions, you know, like when we were teaching legislative updates and stuff, I would ask people how many people followed this last legislative process. And I followed it, but not near, obviously, to the degree I do now, and I think JW was the one that put it in my head a couple of years ago of you know, if you're not at the table fighting for this, you will be on the menu, and whenever you talk to law enforcement officers about that and you tell that to them, you know their eyes kind of open a little bit and it isn't a whole different ballgame.
Speaker 3:There are things that I would have never thought that we needed to have that discussion about at the at the state capitol, and they're yeah, absolutely back to the early morning stuff. A lot of early mornings and a lot of late nights, even at home, you know, maybe not getting home till six, seven, eight, nine o'clock at night. Uh, one night I got home at like 11, 30 you're welcome and yeah, and that day we walked.
Speaker 3:We walked into the building at 7 15, yeah, in the morning because I had a hearing at eight. Well, it went for a couple of hours and then they went into recess because they had to go hit the house floor. And then it started back up after they got through and I didn't walk out of that building till almost 10 45 well.
Speaker 1:What's crazy to me is that I think and correct me if I'm wrong and you're whenever you were training and your interactions with law enforcement. It's almost like when you start your career as a cop you understand the penal code and how the laws are kind of to enforce it. You don't know how to be a cop yet until you're actually on the streets. But then at some point, about five, 10 years after the fact, you start understanding oh shit, these laws that are coming out of the of the Capitol truly do affect how we do our jobs here on the street. And so then at some point from that point, people start tracking bills and understanding kind understanding how the legislative process works. At least that's how it was for me and that's kind of how I got involved with TNPH's legislative team before I came to work here.
Speaker 1:But it's a fascinating process and I forgot who said it. It might have been Mitch Landry, our Deputy Executive Director. Our system of government in Texas is designed and built to kill bills. It's not designed to promote the success of getting bills passed, which makes it difficult for lobbyists and other organizations to get stuff passed. But it's just a. It's a. It's a magnificent process to see from the outside, to be involved with it, to testify on the committees, and so I'm, I'm, I'm glad you're down there. A cop fighting for cops just makes sense, especially with you guys down at the Capitol, and so I greatly appreciate it.
Speaker 3:And it just makes sense, especially with with you guys now at the capitol, and so I greatly appreciate it. And it really is. Uh, early on, I think it was the organizational hearing for homeland, uh, homeland security, and they it was basically a hey, come up, tell us who you are, what you know, basically what, what are y'all here for? And several other groups had gone up before me and you know they basically laid out their bio of who they were in, the organization they were representing, and they might've been asked one question. And so I was like, okay, no big deal. Well, I ended up being up there for like 15, 16, 17 minutes Cause I was getting questions from everybody on that committee and at first I was like man, this is taking way too long.
Speaker 3:But then, the more that they were asking questions, I was kind of thinking for the most part, this committee right here is pretty much favorable to law enforcement, because they were basically just asking what is it that y'all need? What is it that y'all are looking for? What can we do as a legislative body to help the world of law enforcement? And so I I came away from that, you know pretty good, and that was one of my if I don't know if you can have a favorite committee, um, but it was uh. I was like, okay, at least if I have to come back in here for anything, you know there's a comfortable setting on there and you just always have to be ready for, you know, to get challenged upon. You know to get challenged upon, you know, on something. But for the most part it was a great experience and you know, I know, I know my wife is happy that this is.
Speaker 1:Oh yeah, I'm sure.
Speaker 3:Even at night, you know, at home still listening, especially the last several weeks, Right In particular. But even at night we'd be sitting there watching TV and not have my AirPod in my left ear. While we were watching tv and she's like what are you doing?
Speaker 1:I was like, well, I'm still listening to this stuff and, uh, I know one of the things that drives her crazy was the bell when it's time for the vote on the floor she's like if I hear that again and, uh, it was.
Speaker 3:it was a good session. Um, it was kind of a my my feet do still hurt, uh, because for some reason, this guy right here he's like a speed walker, he's like everywhere you go and I was like why are we in such a rush to go do this? And at times you are and there's a whole lot of walking and there's a whole lot of waiting.
Speaker 1:I do want to touch on something real quick because I think it's absolutely important and this being your first session, you can probably touch on this. The misperception or the misunderstanding of some of the line-level officers across Texas is this is that just because you've got a D next to your name, you're automatically anti-law enforcement? I think the great testament that we can confirm that that's not the case is Whitmire right when he was in the Senate. Now I'm not saying that they're going to be as pro-law enforcement as some of the Republican state reps, but that's not the case at the Capitol, I think majority, I think down there now the pendulum is swinging back and I think that you've got some state reps that are not exactly pro-law enforcement that do have a D by their name. But talk about your interactions with them and kind of it was an eye-opening experience for you from that aspect. Talk about your interactions with them and kind of it was an eye-opening experience for you from that aspect.
Speaker 3:I say that I mean kind of like echoing of what you just said as a whole. No, they're not. There are some things that they're just never going to agree with us on, and we know that we can still have the conversation with them. Just go to their office and say, hey, here's the stance of TMPA, representing about 34,000 Texas law enforcement officers, and we're still going to be professional about it. You know, in my mind I'm still like I don't see where they're coming from on this. This is an absolutely valid thing for the world of law enforcement. But as a whole, yeah, as long as you have that professional relationship going in there. Now there are some that you just know. It doesn't matter how good it is, they're not going to go for it, and you know that pretty quick. But again, we're going to be professional about it and go on.
Speaker 1:Well, and there's one state rep that and I'm not going to name who it is, but they've got I would consider it an anti-law enforcement door rug, or they did last session, I don't know how it is this session. But my point is is that when you talk to, again, line level employees or officers across the state, they're like there's no way I can speak to that individual, there's no way that I can have a conversation. And here's the reality. We can agree to disagree, but at the end of the day, there's a mission that you guys have to set forth and carry out and it's not good for the overall law enforcement objectives and mission for you guys just to write that office off. You have to have relationships in every single office, regardless of their political views, because it benefits us in the end.
Speaker 2:Yeah, I want to kind of take that a little bit further. So that particular rep, brian, and I actually did sit in that office and have a conversation this session. It was on a bill that was in criminal jurisprudence committee and if you weren't tracking that committee, I called it the Tannerite committee because it had all the right ingredients, right. You had the far right Republicans, you had some of the far left Democrats, you had some that were there in the middle and they were all part of this one committee. And I'm just thinking, man, just the right bill is going to shake this thing up and it's going to cause it to explode. We never got to see that. But you know, sometimes also what you're dealing with is you're dealing with misinformed, right. So I'll give you a great example.
Speaker 2:One particular state rep was working on a bill. He worked on it last session. We were opposed to the bill because it would in essence do away with class CRS. And so this session I just get done testifying, sit down and I get a text from the state rep to say I'd love to talk to you about my bill. So they finish a committee, go down to his office and it's the same bill that we opposed last session. I said we're still going to oppose this bill, sir, and he said, well, what's wrong with it? And I said you're doing away with class CRS. He says that's not my intent. I said, well, that's exactly what that's going to do. And he said can you show me where? And I said, yeah, right here. And he said, well, what if we just take that out? And I said, well, then we don't care about the rest, then it's not a bad bill.
Speaker 2:And so, anyway, it's come to find out that language was given to him by a special interest group and so he doesn't know, right, he's, he's not a state, I mean, he's not a, he's not a peace officer, he's a state rep. I forget what he does on his, on his private, uh, you know what his, what his private life is. I don't know, maybe a shop owner or attorney, something like that. Uh, so, having those, like you said, having those conversations, uh, being able to have those relationships, to pick up that phone and call them. You know another one you're talking about. You know, kind of the Republicans being pro-law enforcement, yes, but then you also have to think about some of those Republicans that are so far, and I don't want to say so far right, they're just they're kind of getting more towards the libertarian too much government, too big government, that kind of stuff and having to have conversations with those guys to say, hey, you know, this actually is a good bill and this is how we can make it work.
Speaker 1:Well, and I think that the word far right. I think what we're referring to is that they're so hyper-focused on being pro-Republican that sometimes it interferes or tangles up something that could be pro-law enforcement. In that regard, they're more committed to being pro-Republican than they are anything else, and so sometimes you know, those conversations need to be had of hey, this is not good for us and this is the reason why and you know, nine times out of ten, regardless if you're just completely anti-law enforcement or not, having a conversation with somebody is always going to be the best way to handle it.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and I just want to give another example, and this is why it's so important and I know I'm climbing up on this soapbox but yeah, law enforcement, you have to have advocates at the state capitol for you.
Speaker 2:So Dallas DA's office they had pushed a bill that would allow for, when a kid goes missing and you have a reason to believe that they're in danger, that you could contact a cell company and you could get the data off that phone, right, be able to track, see where they're at. And that actually came out of a case of a young girl that was in the Dallas area attending some kind of major event and she was human trafficked. They found her a couple of days later in Oklahoma, right. So they're trying to get this bill and it ends up in front of the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee. So in that committee you've got three Republicans that were just too much government is a bad thing, too much overreach, too much police power is a bad thing, got to find the right balance, et cetera, et cetera. So, anyways, they had major issues with that bill. They didn't want law enforcement having data without a warrant, et cetera, et cetera. So Dallas ADA that was working on it.
Speaker 1:And that bill would essentially wave kind of fall in line with exigent circumstances. Is that kind of what I'm reading?
Speaker 2:Yes, and on top of that, we would not be able to use any information for any criminal matter period, Right. But their issue was well, you still have access to it, right? So, anyways, you know, the ada comes up to me, says I don't know what we're going to do, we got to get this thing out of here. And I said, well, like why don't we just add language to it that says that you can only do this if there's a amber alert, clear alert, some alert issued, right. And she says well, I didn't get to change anything, we're already doing it. I said but they don't know that, right, right. And so I go to one of the state reps and say hey, if we, we put this language in there, what are you thinking? He says you put that in there, I'll sign off on it all day long.
Speaker 2:Go to another rep, hey, kind of, here's the deal. What do you think? He says put that in there. You got a deal, and I knew, if those two would go for it, that third one would go in line with them. Yep, right. So, just little things like that. And that's why you have to have folks. That's there at that Capitol, which is why we always preach, and you know we get up on that soapbox of our members have got to donate to the PAC. They have to. I mean, our PAC is so, so small because cops are like I hate politics. Well, like Brian said, you're either at the table or you're on the menu.
Speaker 1:Yeah, yeah. Well, talk how many comparison J-Dub. This is your third session, third yep, and there's been a lot of bills filed not as many as last session, but nonetheless there was quite a few bills filed. And talk about the comparisons of how they affect law enforcement, the ones that are pro-labor, pro-enforcement. Give us some numbers on that.
Speaker 2:Yeah, so just kind of give our listeners, viewers, watchers, whatever you want to call them kind of a breakdown of what happens.
Speaker 1:Yeah, voyeurs.
Speaker 2:So you know, Brian and I and the team, what we do is we sit there and we have a system that we use, an online system, and when a bill is filed, we read the caption on it and we ask a question could this in any way affect our members, whether it's affecting the way that they're doing their job or how they're treated by their employer, right? So we look at that and then we say, okay, is this germane enough that something could be tacked on there that could negatively impact our members? And if the answer is yes, then we click it and we put a tag on it TMPA tracked bills and you can actually go online to our website and you can see all the bills that we have tagged for tracking this session. So total bills filed this session was 11,373, which is a little bit. It's about 500, a little less than 500, less than what was filed last session. And then out of that, what we found is about found is is about 19, just under 2000. So it was like 1950 bills somewhere around there that we identified yes, this could impact our members. And then, basically, from there, you know and this is a lot of times to take a little pause here A lot of times our members will, you know, call us up or they'll send an email and they're like oh my God, you see this filed bill, this is bad. This is bad Like Whoa, whoa, whoa calm down man. And it's like you know. I mean it just just for simplicity. There was 11,373 bills that were filed, but yet only 4,900 of them made it to committee. And that's the first step, right? So not even not even half of them made it to committee.
Speaker 2:So once the bill comes up for a hearing and this is where Brian and I spend the weekend, right they push out the agendas. Typically by Friday, they're all pushed out for the following week. And so, brian and I, we spend a weekend going through and reading every single bill, and if it affects law enforcement, we do a complete bill analysis on it. This is exactly how it affects law enforcement. And then we make a recommendation for when we go to TLEC on Monday morning.
Speaker 2:And then, once we get to the office on Monday morning, guess what? We got to go back in and double check every committee to make sure that they didn't add a bill to that committee. And if they did, then we got to do a bill analysis on that bill. So we may be doing three or four bill analysis at six o'clock in the morning to add it to the list that we go in and talk about. So out of those we identified, out of the roughly 1,100 bills that would affect law enforcement, we were tracking about 14% of those affected labor. So talking, retirement, talking about- Civil service.
Speaker 2:Yeah, civil service talking about, like the pay parity that Harris County got. So that was about 14%. And then the other 86% were actually laws that we enforced, right, penal code changes, health and safety, code changes, that kind of stuff. And then from there we work them right. If it's our bill, if it's a bill that our members brought to us we had a couple of those then we work them, we try to get them a hearing, and then, when we get them a hearing, we try to make sure that we have somebody in line to testify in support of the bill, right.
Speaker 2:And then after the bill is heard in committee, then you're going around and you're talking to different offices. You're letting them know, hey, this is a good bill, especially the other committee members of that committee. That way you're whipping votes is basically what you're doing so you can say, yes, this is a good one, you got their vote on it. And then, after it gets out of there, then it goes to calendars and then now you got to go with the calendar committee and then from there it goes onto the floor and then, and then there it gets really busy, because now you're not just talking about these 11 members of this committee and then these eight members of this committee you're talking about 150 members yeah yep.
Speaker 2:So I guess it gets pretty, pretty busy down there, obviously, for you know, and that's just, you know one bill, and then you got to worry about amendments being tacked onto the bill. You got to worry about committee substitutes being tacked on in a committee and then, when it comes out of one chamber and goes to the opposite chamber, you got to repeat that entire process. So, yeah, it's, and then you're not just doing that on three or four bills, right, you know Brian was talking about I'm always walking in a rush. Part of that is is because you gotta, you gotta, you know, make these office visits. You gotta. They have to know who you are. And and you know, not only know who you are, but they got to have your cell phone number. You have to have their cell phone number. I can't tell you how many times on the floor when they're when they're talking about a bill, you know you'll have the floor when they're when they're talking about a bill. Um, you know you'll have, you'll have a state rep, you know that'll text you and say, hey, y'all stance on this bill. Text them back, uh, we're neutral on it. Or you know that's, we're supporting that. Uh, you know one, one great example, uh, of why it's so important to have these relationships.
Speaker 2:In a committee hearing one day and there's a new state rep and, uh, he's kind of one of these that well, he filed a bill to abolish or, excuse me to, to require a search warrant for game wardens to go on private property, right, also filed a bill to make it to where we couldn't make traffic stops in an unmarked vehicle. Okay, right, so that kind of gives you the caliber, right. So sent in committee. One day he sent up there on the dais and he texted me about a bill. Here we go, I text him back, we're in support. He texts me back a bill. Here we go, I text him back. We're in support. He texts me back. My team has this. I said no. I said well, your team's wrong. And he voted for it. And every bill that came up, I'm texting him what our position is. And he only went against us on one bill. That's the importance of building relationships in that building, yeah.
Speaker 1:When it goes back to exactly like we were talking about, is maintaining those relationships, far left or far right. It's a power struggle and it's about relationships and continuing that. Speaking of relationships for many years now I would guess five sessions. Tmpa is a part of a group that joined, just like John said talking about TLEC, and what it is is it's all the major stakeholders, law enforcement organizations, that they get together on Monday. Because here's the reason why let's say, hypothetically, that Brian Flatt is a state rep and he serves on two or three different committees and myself and John Wilkerson are with TMPA or DPA or you know, mp5, you know whatever. You're just a letter at that point.
Speaker 1:And so what T-Lag does is it joins all the law enforcement organizations together to where we can collectively walk in. And you may have a relationship with Representative Hefner's office, I may have a relationship with Representative Dean's office, john may have a relationship with this state rep, and so it unifies the voice across Texas to sit in one room, get these bills analyzed and say, okay, guys, are we pro or against these and how can we navigate through that Talk about? You were a chair of that committee, one of four, I believe Us. Dallas Police Association, houston Police Officers Union and Harris County Deputies Organization, correct, great relationships, longstanding relationships with TMPA Talk about what it was like chairing that, that, that that committee, but also the relationships that's built on top of that and the extended network now we have with unifying those organizations together.
Speaker 2:Right. So one of the things that you have to take into consideration is is all these legislators are elected by their local populace, right? And so having that, having that coalition, it could mean the difference between a bill dying or a bill passing. It could also mean the difference between a bad amendment coming on a good bill and, in essence you know, making the bill bad when it started off good, and so being able to tap into those resources you know. Take, for example, if it's a Houston-based bill or a rep from the Houston area and it's bad for law enforcement, being able to lean on Ray Hunt and say, hey, we really need you to put a little bit of pressure on this state rep or the senator, let him know why this is a bad bill, right? I can tell you a great example of one. One of the senators out of his area had good intentions on a bill that he filed but didn't understand the impact that it was going to have. And so, talking with Ray Hunt, you know, hey, this is where this bill is going to be bad for labor organizations, for associations, right, and basically, what it did is it cut out the ability to do payroll deduct on dues, and the bill was geared towards something else. He was not trying to come after law enforcement in the dues. The guy's been very pro-police, very pro-law enforcement the entire time he's been in that building, uh, but it's an unintended consequence and so being able to lean on the way and say, hey, here's this right, uh. But then also, uh, that works both ways, right, so there could be a local bad bill that's filed, uh. But maybe you know and I'm just going to throw an example, just a made-up example, uh, but let's say that there's a dallas area rep that has filed a bad bill, but maybe those reps sit on a vital committee that maybe the dallas folks are looking for good legislation to come out of, right, so them being able to tap into us and say, hey, we really need you to, to really help get this bill into the graveyard, uh, because they can't have their fingerprints on it kind of thing. And and that happens right, uh. So it's all part of the political world, so having having that relationship to where you have all those different uh functions and and it's not just you know, you mentioned the four chairs, but in that you also had the Police Chiefs Association, you had the Sheriff's Association of Texas. You had Justice of the Peace Constable Association, dallas, pd Proper, their representative, houston PD Proper had a representative in there. So you're getting to see that lens on this thing from not only the labor but also the management side. To see that lens on this thing from not only the labor but also the management side, uh, and and and.
Speaker 2:One thing, uh, that we've heard in the past is is well, do you really want the chiefs and sheriffs there? Well, why not? Right, right, you just have to be smart enough to know that there may be things that you don't need to be talking about in such a wide, open group. Right, if it's. You know, specifically labor. Uh, you know lessons learned the hard way in the past. But there's a lot of things that we agreed on, and I'll give you one great example of when you're able to bring everybody together, how powerful that is. So last session, fred Frazier and Senator Springer they both had a bill that was on to provide a less lethal defense to prosecution. So it was followed. It got passed out of the Senate straight down party lines and, unfortunately, by the time it came over to the House it was too late. The bill was dead. So this session, or during the interim, there was a particular senator that had a bunch of meetings, if that's what you want to call them, and, brian, how long was that last one that you attended? I don't remember.
Speaker 2:I mean, everybody that talked to you was they're like hours, yeah it took oh my god hours so um, another group got a little antsy and they took a bill to a piece of the bill to Senator Flores. Senator Flores is all about it. Senator Flores is former colonel of Parks and Wildlife. So Senator Flores says, ok, you know what this is good legislation, it's needed. He understands why it's needed. When you have some of these politically based prosecutors going after cops, you've got to have language like that, you've got to have bills like that. So he says, says, you know what? Uh tells this guy, send this out to the law enforcement group. And. And so he sends it out and we get it. And uh, tmpa, we, we coordinated a meeting with, with all the law enforcement groups. So you know, basically every law enforcement group that's consistently in that building was at the table when we sat down. We're like, okay, how about this, how about this, how about that? And you know there was a lot of language and and we were operating under the, under the presumption that the Senator wanted to go with that language. That was sent over to him. And then, once we got it clarified that that's not what it has to be, he's he's perfectly willing to file his own bill, even if it means it's going to trump this other bill that this other senator is working on. And so, hey, now that we know that, you know drafted up some language one day and ended up in the cafeteria and Sheriff Hawthorne with SAT.
Speaker 2:He calls me. He's sitting like four tables away from me. He calls me on the phone and he's like where you at, and I said, looking at the back of your head, so go over there, sit down at the table with him. He says, man, what are you thinking about this? I don't really like all this language in there, and so forth, so on. Well, I turned my iPad around and I said, what's your thoughts on that? And he says, well, I really like that. That's a lot cleaner. So it's a lot simpler, right, and? And so what the difference was with some of these other, some of these special interest groups that are anti-police? They wanted language in there on the less lethal defense to prosecution bill that says that it has to be immediately necessary, right, right, and no, it needs to be objectively reasonable is what it needs to be, yeah, and so he looks at it and he's like, oh, yeah, I like that.
Speaker 2:Well, about that time his phone rings that senator flores calling him in for a meeting on the less lethal bill and he's like, hey, you busy. I said, nope, he goes, come on. So ended up in his, in his, in his office, his office, and laid that out there to him. And the only other change that came after that? Well, there was another bill that was filed changing the definition of firearm. That way the Taser 10 could be more utilized, right. And I was a little bit concerned. If this bill passes and this other bill passes, it could potentially create two different definitions for less lethal projectile device, right. So what we did is we went into this other bill, stole that language out of that, put it into the less lethal bill that we were pushing, and and and got that across the finish line, and and so again the. The Senator said I want a piece of legislation that all groups are backing, yep, and so which is Yep, and so which is essentially what everybody wants all the time, right yeah.
Speaker 2:Yeah, Because the worst thing that can happen is is you know, you, you, you get in there, you're working on good legislation, and then now you have this one wayward group that's over there that says well, I don't like that, I want this instead. Right.
Speaker 3:You know that that turns off the senators and meeting that you were talking about, there was probably 30 people in there, uh, for that. And at one point we had six different versions of this bill and it got so convoluted and so confusing that people were like which? Which? Whose bill are we looking at, you know, and like it was, it was, it was just. I was like this is the epitome of dysfunction, right here.
Speaker 3:Um, you know, in my brain, like on the the trying to change the definition, I even told, uh, the Dallas County DA, I go, I just don't get this, because that Taser 10 is not a firearm, it's not. I get that that's what they're using for the definition. I go, but it's not, you know it, I know it, and he's still trying to work around things and everybody else and it was. It was so confusing and we, serig and I, walked out of there and I was kind of like what, what? What just happened, you know, and it. But whenever we met with senator flores, I mean he was very clear of I need all law enforcement to be in agreement.
Speaker 1:yeah, before I go forward, yeah, so well, and I'm glad that that y'all, y'all, y'all guys have to cross the finish line. Is there any key bills, senate bills or House bills that you guys can rattle off? I know they start kind of running together at the end of the session.
Speaker 2:The key takeaways, I guess, is what I'm saying yeah, this is the time of year where everybody that works in that building you end up having dyslexia. Yeah, because you get bill numbers crossed and everything else. So I mentioned there was a couple bills that our members brought to us. You know that we were able to get across the finish line. One of them deals with DWIs, tj Smetzer, one of our former board members. You know he had the bill brought up last session and I forget why it died last session, but it did. But this session we were able to get it across the finish line.
Speaker 2:Uh, it was real simple. It just struck out language in there talking about executing a blood search warrant. Under the current statute. It says that it can be, uh, executed in any neighboring county by an officer authorized to make an arrest, right? So when he called me about this, I'm like you are authorized to make an arrest, right. So when he called me about this, I'm like you are authorized to make an arrest. He goes well, no, the Dallas DA says we're not. I'm like, well, dallas DA needs to read the CCP and case law, right? I mean it's pretty clear. So, anyways, it just clarifies and it just strikes it out. So basically it says it can be executed in the county or any neighboring county by any peace officer. There you go, so easy, fix there another one. Uh, so you know, one of our big ticket items for the past couple sessions has been workers comp reform.
Speaker 2:Yep and uh, you know, last session we got a bill passed out of the house unanimously, got over the senate, died in the senate. Uh, this session we refiled the bill. Uh, it got a hearing and one of the major players uh, came out against the bill. That did not come out against the bill last session and unfortunately the bill never made it out of committee. But one thing that we picked up on last session was there was this one section in the bill that the insurance carriers didn't want, and I want to take a little bit of time to explain this particular issue because it it's really important. So the the issue that they didn't like is we were going to open it up to where, if you're denied your workers comp claim and now you've gone through your benefit review conference with tdi and now you're going to a soa hearing, part of the reason why a lot of members can't find an attorney to represent them is because they're capped on how much they can be paid by the state.
Speaker 2:And if the attorney you can go up to an attorney right now and say, look, I've got $5,000, I'll pay you to help me out If they're caught doing that, they can get fined by TDI and so the only way that they can make money is if it comes out of your benefits and then that's capped at 25% of your benefits. So a lot of them won't take cases because then they have to travel. So it becomes to the point where they don't want to. They don't want to take the cases because they they're not only going to not make money on it, but they're going to actually lose money. Yeah, so part of part of that is okay. If, if we can on the cases that need it, if we can get those hearings via Zoom, why not? Because now the attorney doesn't have to leave their office, they don't have to travel, they don't have to do any of that. So that opens up the ability for more of these attorneys to help out our members.
Speaker 2:And so the insurance carriers did not like that part of the bill. And it's not the carriers Carriers, I think. What the deal was is is they sent their lawyers to speak on their behalf. Yeah, well, their lawyers they they don't want that because that's taking away billables for them that they can build the insurance carrier, right.
Speaker 2:So, uh, what we did is, during the interim we worked with tdi, texas department of insurance, and we're like, hey, this is like a doge thing, right. This, this is like cutting out waste and fraud. And we got TDI to actually approach an office about carrying that bill. So that bill actually got passed and so, and that's, you know, that's one of those bills that is, it's not a big sexy bill, but it's something that's absolutely going to help out our members when they're fighting with the insurance carriers. So, definitely, definitely good on that. And then, of course, the less lethal defense to prosecution bill got passed. Austin Police Association was pushing a bill, a couple different bills. One of them was apparently I'm not going to say which county in Texas that has a prosecutor that loves going after cops Travis.
Speaker 3:Yeah, but we may or may not be here right now.
Speaker 2:Yeah, but you know, they were pushing a bill that would take away one of that prosecutor's tools that they like to use where they're like. Oh yeah, the officer got involved in the shooting and it just didn't look good to me. So now I need to go after this officer, or maybe, maybe my constituency is blowing me up. So now I need to go after the officer and I look at all the facts and I'm like, well, you know, we'll never get a conviction on him for ag assault with deadly weapon or murder, so you know, let's just go after deadly conduct. And so apa was pushing a bill, a bill to get that change where the prosecutors can't do it. Of course we backed them 100%, Went and had meetings, explained to different reps, whatever that. Hey, this is what the bill does and why it's designed to get there. And that bill made it across the finish line too. It got signed into law. Good good.
Speaker 1:Maybe that'll be the upward rebound for these Austin and county folks that that are in law enforcement here. That we know adds to the complexities of the retention and recruitment crisis right here in the capital city. Uh, is that that?
Speaker 2:that issue right there was with the travis county da, and so maybe we can get that corrected and and you know, another good thing that we got accomplished and it didn't didn't make it out of committee, but it's something really good that we got accomplished we opened the conversation at the legislature for the Brady list. Oh, okay, good. So we got a hearing in Senate criminal justice and we were pushing for an interim study on it, and we're still pushing for an interim study on it to try to there's no easy fix. We've been contacted by a lot of members and they're like well, you know, it is an easy fix, just do this.
Speaker 2:Well, what you don't understand is when you affect something here, it also affects something over here. Right, and the biggest issue with the brady stuff is the michael morton act, and the michael morton act is something that's that's needed, uh, but because of the, the provisions that was put into there, it it almost caused an overreaction by the prosecutors and so how do you fix that? Well, you have to open up that conversation in the legislature, because you don't go to any session and try to reverse Michael Morton. Oh, we can't.
Speaker 1:There's no way you can explain that. No, not in a pro-law enforcement way, for sure. Right, so maybe we're looking for some legislation next session, the 90th I guess, to address the Brady issue.
Speaker 2:Yep, hopefully so.
Speaker 1:Well, anything else we didn't cover.
Speaker 3:Brian real quick what JW talked about and kind of along the lines of the T-Light stuff and all the relationships in the building, like there's meetings in there and pretty much any hearing that there's going to be, you're going to have the other side of the table. You know that are basically against the law enforcement groups, the civil rights, the ACLU and things like that, while there's some that like there's one guy in particular on the civil rights side of things man, this is like the nicest guy, like he's not intimidating in any way, shape, form or fashion. He's very articulate, very professional, and I've sat there and listened to several conversations. I've had a couple of conversations with him and then and like he is like hey, here's. You know, obviously we're we're not in favor of this and you know he's very uh quick to explain why, right and but. But he's also receptive, uh, to one of the last conversations that I was there whenever JW was talking to him.
Speaker 3:But then there's those that are it doesn't matter what it is. There's one person in particular that it doesn't matter what it is. That person that's representing that organization is going to be there to oppose that bill because law enforcement's name is on it. And I kept joking and maybe if I see that person, uh, next session, uh, I'll, she'll be there, I'll. Actually I was.
Speaker 3:I was trying to avoid whether it was, uh, uh, he or she, but um, so to go up and just say, hey, look, let's just have this conversation, you know, um, you know why, why do you think this way Right? And whether that happens or not, I don't know. But then there's times that, like I was in one hearing and I can't remember which one it was, because you go to so many that one of the reps up on that committee was just this person treated this very non-hostile witness that was up there giving testimony and he treated her like trash and he became so irate basically because she was not able to answer the question the way that he wanted it answered. She was in no way confrontational whatsoever, she was very professional about it and it made him mad. And he was such a jerk to this, to this witness, that when I got home that night I told my wife I go, I pray that I'm never on a committee.
Speaker 1:Yeah.
Speaker 3:And that person tried to treat me like that. I mean, it was 100%, uh, disrespectful, yeah, In all ways, shape, form or fashion. Um, and then there, and then there were times where there was a rep up there that supposedly was former law enforcement and there was a large law enforcement presence in that hearing room and for the most part, everybody was at the back of the room, but there was easily 30-plus law enforcement personnel in there, because you had a lot of uniforms in there. And this rep made it a point to basically call out and I see all you law enforcement back there, and I know your stance on this, but this is my stance. You know All of this was and I've told my wife, I've told a lot of people the amount of unprofessionalism that is in that place was truly shocking to me. Yeah.
Speaker 1:And that goes back to, it seems, some people right, not all state reps and a very, very, very few, select few. Some of them remain more committed to the political affiliation or political party than more than what their constituents elected them to do, which is to be the representation of that of that district. Right and and? And politics is a weird game. But, just like you said, you can, you can have a seat at the table or you can be on the menu, but it's interesting to see it unfold and usually when that happens like that, the usual situations where you see a political person, whether it be on a local, state or even federal position, when they're like that, they've got higher ambitions to move up the ladder and be something bigger, and to me that's a problem. Stay true to who you are and do what's right when nobody's looking and there's not going to be any issue.
Speaker 3:Going off what you just said there. I was at a conference last year. I think he was the president of Oakland, California's POA, Isn't he an Irish?
Speaker 1:guy yes, yes, so you know what I'm talking about Great guy, yeah, and he was talking.
Speaker 3:He was talking about politicians, like true politicians, he goes. Politicians only worry about three things Number one, getting elected. Number two, getting reelected. Number three getting elected to a higher position. That is the only thing that they care about. And there were several times that I thought about that. Uh, I imagine Some like they're apparently kind of lifers down there, right, and I'm like okay, well, they're stuck here, they're not going to go anywhere else. But the part of some of this there was one night, and it was just one of those crazy days at the Capitol, and I got home and my wife asked me she goes, well, what happened today? And I go? You know, I'm not sure.
Speaker 3:I'm not really sure what took place today, because it was just so like the drone bill that first came out, oh yeah, and we knew, we heard, hey, it's going to get pushed, because it was Representative Hefner's bill, so it's going to be heard at the very last, and that day was, for that hearing was a whole lot of anti-communist countries and things.
Speaker 3:So, a lot of that this session. So then there were other. There was another bill on there that had to do with hostile country and we had been told that they had brought in two bus loads up there. So this was definitely going to be a late hearing and it was just bouncing back and forth, bouncing back and forth, and you know, finally got to get home late that night and that's when my wife asked, and I was just like I'm not really sure what I sat through today. It was just so back and forth.
Speaker 2:Yeah, and sometimes you get home and your spouse is like, well, what all happened? And it's on a standard day, especially closer to the end of session, just to give the listeners and viewers kind of an idea, you can walk into that building saying, all right, today I'm going to focus on getting this bill across the finish line. And you walk in there and you get a phone call from one of the state reps, says hey, meet me in the bull pit, which is where the legislators enter the chamber, right. So you get there and like hey, this, this, you know this. This rep has this bill filed and you know she's trying to get it across the finish line and there's some issues. We've got this other state rep that's got issues with it and this is what he's trying to accomplish. Write us up some language, get it to us so we can do an amendment.
Speaker 2:Right, and that bill was actually good. It got passed and this is another thing to take into consideration this was a Democrat bill that was designed to be harder on crime, right? A lot of folks don't understand that. They don't do that, right? Oh my God, yeah. So you had a Democratic bill that was designed to be harder on crime and you had a Republican that did not want the police targeted by using that same bill. And basically, what the bill did is and it passed. It basically says if you commit a violent offense and you're wearing body armor, there's going to be an enhanced penalty, right? So obviously, you know, we all observed the fact that, oh crap, now you're going to start seeing, you know, the Travis County DA enhancing charges on police officers because we're wearing body armor. Right, it's part of our job, so, anyway.
Speaker 2:So you know, we walk into the Capitol and we're like, okay, this is what we've got to get going. And and we're like, okay, this is what we got to get going. And then you get that phone call. So you got to run up to the bull pit. You're in the E1 level, right, the extension on the north side.
Speaker 2:Well, now you got to run back, go up, you know, to the floor, and this is the morning where the team was coming in behind me and I'm texting them where I'm at, and I think every two minutes I'm like I'm here, I'm there, I'm over here, and so you know, you're running back and forth and so that consumes about 45 minutes of your morning on that bill. And then you have this other bill that another office is calling you about saying, hey, we have a problem with this, can you come look at it? And then, while you're walking to that one to deal with that particular issue, you're getting another phone call on another bill maybe one of your priority bills and you're going to handle that one and then, as soon as that one's done, you're going back over here and then, when that one's done, you're going back over to the other one, and then now you have a fourth or fifth one that pops out right.
Speaker 1:It's like a Chinese fire drill.
Speaker 2:Oh, it is, it is yeah, especially there towards the end, it absolutely is. And so then, when you get home, you, I don't know, I wore the hell out of my shoes today. My feet hurt, my back hurt, yeah, no kidding.
Speaker 1:Well, I think it's important without going into detail of what specific bill I'm referring to or even the bill number, sometimes our ledge team has to answer for bills or testify against or for certain bills that our members may have some questions about. You may not always agree with TMPA's stance, and I think that when I've had conversations with members that have had this situation happen, I think that some people lose sight that TMPA is focused on serving the entire state, right, and so if you ever have any questions about a certain bill and why tmpa registered for, why we testified for, why we went against, you guys reach out. The reality is we, we work for you guys and uh, and that's that. That truly is an honor, and so if there's ever a situation where you want to question why we've done something, give us a call. Our ledge team is always available to answer calls and you can reach us at communications at tmpaorg and I can get you in touch with you guys.
Speaker 2:Yeah, we shoot our members straight. We tell them hey, here's exactly why we took this stance, or why we had to stay out of it. There's a couple times where you have two local associations, one's for this bill and the other one's against this bill, and so sometimes we just got to stay out of it because, no matter what path we take, we're going to end up upsetting some.
Speaker 1:Well, and the most absurd thing is for a member to call in and drop their membership without giving us, or allowing TMPA, the opportunity to at least explain the situation, explain the dynamics, explain the politics behind and the environment of whatever bill that you're upset or that you have questions about.
Speaker 1:You know just give us a call and it hasn't been that many. It rarely actually happens and up to this point we've had very few, two or three. So again, feel free to reach out to us if you guys ever have any questions about a certain bill or a certain situation, we'd be more than happy to talk to you, to talk and keep in mind.
Speaker 2:A lot of times, what we see is is and this is the bad part about the legislative system that we have you'll have a bill that's filed and I'll tell you you show me one piece of legislation other than a two-line house resolution. Right, you show me one piece of legislation that gets filed and that's the same piece of legislation that gets passed. Yeah, right, so what happens is you get a bill that's filed and then you know, especially there towards the end, everybody's in a rush Ledge counselor who actually drafts the bills they're running behind. So they'll go and file a piece of legislation and then they'll be working on the committee substitute behind the scenes. Sometimes we're helping them draft that committee substitute, you know, finding the right language for it, and then they'll go to the committee hearing and they'll lay out the committee substitute, but none of it's available online yet, and so a lot of times it's just simple miscommunication, right?
Speaker 2:Sometimes and I've had several calls from members, or you know, they'll email in and I'll call them. They're like hey, why didn't you guys support that? Like well, well, because we knew that there was a committee sub coming and what was in that committee sub. We had concerns with and we're working with the author to alleviate those concerns. Right, so, or vice versa, right, hey, how come you guys didn't oppose that? Well, because we went to their office and we said, hey, this is bad and we're going to have to oppose it if you don't do X, y and Z. And they're like, oh, we promise, just do us a favor, don't testify against it, don't register against it. Just if you want to be on it, be on it, and then that lets everybody know that you guys are tracking this and they're going to reach out to you. So that's, you know, there's different angles that you have to take. There's always a reason.
Speaker 1:Yes, there's always a reason for every single play and move that we do there at that building. Uh, I'm, I'm super excited for you guys to be able to kind of relax and uh, for the maybe week or two that you guys are uh, I greatly appreciate it, man.
Speaker 2:Yeah, it ain't happening because now. Now it goes on to building the legislative update class for our conference yep, and then legislative update for uh, tico tico, which I think you serve in that capacity too, and assist yeah.
Speaker 2:So part of our legend, excuse me, part of our responsibilities, uh, what the tmpa legislative team is is uh brian now gets to help out with that too is uh, we work with the committee at tico that puts together the legislative update training cool uh. And then we go out and we teach that class throughout the state and I will tell you uh, just you know, looking back at the uh evaluation course evaluations, brian and I have a way of making that class actually fun because we get to share with you the backstories of how this bill came about, which is fascinating.
Speaker 1:It's absolutely fascinating. I got to take a T Cole legal update from Shannon one time in Galveston, Texas and he does a really good job at that kind of giving the backstory and how this bill was passed. And some of that stuff can be kind of bland and vanilla and so if you don't have the back story, it just makes it fun and interesting and it makes it more ways for us to be involved and more informed.
Speaker 2:Speaking of which Brian and I. We've been living under a rock for the past several months. So, talk to us about the conference. What's going on with the conference?
Speaker 1:July 26th through the 28th. They're at Houston. It's going to us about the conference. What's going on with conference july 26th to the 28th there at houston? It's going to be at the hyatt regency downtown houston. Going to be a great time, as usual. Uh, we'll be there friday night, got dueling pianos after the opening ceremonies and then saturday is uh is a full slate to include spousal events. The purse bingo, like we usually do, painting of the twist is on sunday and it's just going to be a great time. The only concern that I've got is the parking and we're going to try to put some more information out to our members about how, how and where you can.
Speaker 3:You can accomplish those, man, it's going to be a good time, is that the one with the texas pool no, no, this is that's the uh.
Speaker 1:I think that's the marriott, but we're going to be at the hyatt regency and so, uh, gonna be a good time. Good time, and it's our 75th anniversary.
Speaker 3:It is.
Speaker 1:So we're going to be down there July 26th to 28th and I think you guys are doing a ledge update with some couple of elected officials.
Speaker 2:Saturday, whatever y'all tell us we're doing, yeah, they're going to be down there with us, with some local.
Speaker 1:I believe we're trying to get Mayor Whitmire. He's going to be one of our guest speakers, I think, on the opening ceremony. So it's just been a good time, as every conference is Good deal, good time to remind folks if you're not a member or not donating to the TMPA PAC, do so now. It's so crucial for you guys to be involved and to allow these guys the funding that's much needed. They're at the Capitol, at the state, federal, local level. So it's just $2 a month from every member. We would be setting pretty good within a couple months. So you guys, take care, stay safe. God bless you and, as always, may God bless Texas. We're out, Thank you. Thank you, we'll see you next time.
