Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislative Process Calendar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senator Smitherman presses Senate leadership over special-order calendar and minority bill inclusion
Summary
Senator Rodger Smitherman used extended floor time to criticize the special-order calendar process and to press for more minority-originated bills to be placed on the special-order calendar; the calendar itself was adopted by the Senate earlier in the day.
Senator Rodger Smitherman devoted extended floor time to objecting that the special-order calendar did not include bills from the minority caucus and to pressing leadership for assurances that minority-originated measures receive meaningful consideration.
Smitherman said he had attempted to raise the issue with the rules process and requested that at least one-third of bills on special order reflect minority sponsorship; he argued the rules committee and calendar-setting process should not exclude minority items. The remarks ranged beyond procedure into themes of representation, historical inequities and the expectation that leadership would honor prior understandings about calendar composition.
At the earlier rules report, the Senate adopted a special-order resolution that named bills to be considered as a special and paramount order of business. The clerk announced the special-order calendar adoption on the long roll with 23 ayes and 5 nays. Smitherman later used floor time when SB70 (veterans center) was before the Senate to press for amendments and for assurances from the bill sponsor about representation and budgetary oversight; those amendments were adopted.
Why it matters: Smitherman’s floor statements highlight an ongoing, procedural tension about how the Senate selects bills for priority consideration and how minority-party members can secure floor time and calendar placement. He framed the complaints as a request for procedural reciprocity and transparency rather than an objection to any individual bill’s merits.
Outcome: The special-order calendar was adopted by the Senate (clerk announced 23 ayes, 5 nays). Smitherman’s floor intervention produced at least one concrete result — a floor amendment to SB70 to add minority leader designees — and public airing of the minority’s concerns about access to priority calendar slots.
What’s next: Smitherman asked colleagues to consider procedural adjustments and to work with minority members on calendar transparency; Senate leaders did not announce a rule change on the floor during the session.
