Emails, Matt Welch, April 6, 2017

From: Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin)

Sent: Wednesday, April 05, 2017 9:39 AM

To: 'Matt Welch'

Subject: Following up

Matt:

For our fact check, you said Tuesday that the expert panels weren’t randomized, but other witnesses including Sara Stevenson were.

Who would I contact to review the witness cards? Is there a way to independently confirm when cards were turned in?

You also said that because the chairman’s legislation was being heard, Sen. Lucio was responsible for the order of witnesses. Is that right?

Thanks again.

G.

On Apr 5, 2017, at 3:26 PM, Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin) wrote:

I bet you’re busy.

I might head to the Capitol soon to chase down details. If you can help on such including clarifying comments from the senator or senators, fire at me.

I don’t know why someone who says she submitted a witness card early in the day was called to testify around or after sundown.

g.

8:23 a.m.

April 6, 2017

I think you may have paraphrased my comments a bit.  What I recall saying is that, generally speaking, the sequence of witness testimony is at the discretion of the committee chairman.  The Senate rules state that "by majority vote, a committee may fix the order of appearance and time allotted for each witness at a public hearing.”  During Senator Taylor’s tenure as Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, there has never been a vote to fix the order of appearance for witnesses.  The Senate Education Committee rules do not stipulate an order of witnesses nor is there a requirement that witnesses testify in the order of their witness card submission.  

Regarding the witness cards and confirmation etc, I would refer you to the Secretary of the Senate for input on those questions.

I don’t recall saying Lucio was “responsible.” What I recall saying is that it is a common practice when a committee chairman is introducing his own bill before a committee on which he or she serves as chairman, control of the hearing is handed over to the committee vice chairman or another committee member.

Best,

Matt W.

On Apr 6, 2017, at 9:52 AM, Selby, Gardner (CMG-Austin) wrote:

Please let Sen. Taylor know I’d like to interview him today  by phone about the reader’s claim.

As mentioned, I also want to review the committee materials including witness cards.

In our phone visit, I asked if witnesses were randomized as Sara Stevenson asserted.

You replied that generally the order of witnesses is at the discretion of the committee chairman.

Because that hearing concerned Taylor’s proposal, you said he wasn’t the chairman in that hearing, Lucio was.

You said that after the break for the Senate to go to the floor, witnesses were arranged in rotated panels of four, two witnesses for the proposal, two against. “I don’t think anybody lost a” witness “card,” you said.

“I don’t think it’s correct to say the whole hearing was randomized,” you said. “Part of it was randomized, part of it was not.”

Asked to elaborate on that, you presented a different account, saying: “The experts were called not at random up front.”

“Then,” you said, “based on the order that cards were submitted, people were called to testify, an indication of not randomizing, if I read right.

You declined to say where you got all this information which makes it difficult for me to share it in a fact check. We don’t rely on anonymously sourced information.

G.

10:26 a.m.

Please let Sen. Taylor know I’d like to interview him today  by phone about the reader’s claim.

I’m happy to let him know.

As mentioned, I also want to review the committee materials including witness cards.

As I mentioned in my reply below, I am referring you to the Secretary of the Senate with regard to this request.  

In our phone visit, I asked if witnesses were randomized as Sara Stevenson asserted.

You replied that generally the order of witnesses is at the discretion of the committee chairman.

Because that hearing concerned Taylor’s proposal, you said he wasn’t the chairman in that hearing, Lucio was.

Again, please see my response below on this particular inquiry.  

 You said that after the break for the Senate to go to the floor, witnesses were arranged in rotated panels of four, two witnesses for the proposal, two against. “I don’t think anybody lost a” witness “card,” you said.

“I don’t think it’s correct to say the whole hearing was randomized,” you said. “Part of it was randomized, part of it was not.”

Asked to elaborate on that, you presented a different account, saying: “The experts were called not at random up front.”

“Then,” you said, “based on the order that cards were submitted, people were called to testify, an indication of not randomizing, if I read right.

You declined to say where you got all this information which makes it difficult for me to share it in a fact check. We don’t rely on anonymously sourced information.

i would again refer you to the Secretary of the Senate.