James Talarico Questions David Spiller On Inhumane SB4

Gentlemen, yield for some questions. >> Mr. Spiller, would you yield? I will. >> Thank you, Representative Spiller. This past summer, the Houston Chronicle published an article on Governor Abbott's border policies. Are you aware the Houston Chronicle reported that DPS troopers were quote ordered to push small children and nursing babies back into the Rio Grand? Uh, I heard some news uh reported, I mean some things some time back, but I couldn't tell you specifically what that was. >> Are you aware of the Houston Chronicle reported that troopers were quote told not to give water to asylum seekers even in extreme heat? >> Yeah, I don't even think we get the Houston Chronicle in Jack County. So, I probably haven't read that, but uh but I have heard something about it. Are you aware the article reported a pregnant woman quote having a miscarriage was found caught in razor wire doubled over in pain? >> Yeah, I I don't recall. >> Are you aware one of the troopers was quoted as saying quote I believe we have stepped over a line into the inhumane. >> I'm I'm really I really don't recall that particular article. Represent Spiller, when you previously brought this bill to the floor, you accepted an amendment from me prohibiting anyone from ordering troopers to push a child into the Rio Grand, deny a child access to drinking water, or deny a child urgent medical care. Is that correct? >> Well, I think what I did was I offered my own amendment to my perfecting amendment that included some language that you had uh that you had done. That is >> and that's a fair characterization of the language in that amendment. >> Correct. But now that language has been taken out of the bill. Is that correct? >> It is. >> So you removed language prohibiting anyone from ordering troopers to push children into the Rio Grand. Is that correct? >> I removed it from that from that draft that as you know that bill died uh when it got to the Senate. So we didn't, you know, but we did look at it uh that night. Uh there were there was a long night. >> That gentleman's time is expired. >> Mr. Speaker, >> Mr. Terrier. >> I move to extend the gentleman's time. >> Is there any objection? >> This is the first extension of time. >> It's the first extension of time. >> Go ahead, Mr. Spiller. >> So, Representative Spiller, you removed language prohibiting anyone from ordering troopers to deny a child drinking water or deny a child urgent medical care. Is that correct? We're this we came up with a new draft and I worked with Senator Perry and we came up with a new draft that that that had several changes to it. Some of those were things that were suggested by members of this body that I thought were good ideas and and we did and we kept those in there and Senator Perry is great to work with. We were able to do that. The Senate passed it in that format. And so I'm comfortable that there are the protections that we need to have in the bill. some of those things. Um, you know, I was told as far as the provision that you're speaking of, that's already the law. We don't, you know, we're not in the business of pushing children down or pushing children in the water or or uh denying children water to drink. >> Respectfully, Representative Spiller, that is the business we're in. The Houston Chronicle reported that just months ago, those inhumane, monstrous practices were happening on our watch on the southern border. Do you not consider banning those inhumane practices one of the good ideas that should have made it into this draft? >> I think it's always a good idea to make sure that children are protected, but I don't draft legislation in response to what with all due respect to the Houston Chronicle with what they decide to report. >> Represent Filler, it's not the Houston Chronicle. The Houston Chronicle is just reporting what our own troopers have told us. Do you not believe our troopers that these inhumane practices are happening on our border? >> Right. And I've been assured that that's not happening and won't happen. It's against the law already and so it would be duplicious to contains to contain it in this >> assured by whom? >> I've I've visited specifically with the with the language that you discussed with uh representatives with DPS, the governor's office, uh the attorney general's office. We've looked at all those things. So I guess my question is if it's not happening, what is the problem with codifying in state law that these practices that according to our own troopers were happening just months ago will never happen again on our watch. >> It's it's duplicious. We we it's already in law. Um those type things shouldn't happen. They're against the law to happen in Texas. They don't really need to be part of this bill in my view. >> Where in law does it say troopers can't be ordered to push children into the Rio Grand? There are laws that that deal with with children and children in custody. >> Can you statute where this is prohibited >> right now? No. I could research it for and get it to you if you need it, but I don't have it right now. >> Bill, this is this is your bill, not my bill. >> You agreed to language when this was on the floor a few weeks ago prohibiting any trooper from being ordered to push children into the Rio Grand. When you accepted that language, you said on the House floor, quote, "This should go without saying, we're all about protecting children." But now you've removed that language from the bill. So, I guess my question is, are you saying now you're no longer all about protecting children? >> I think I'm still for protecting children, and that's not the purpose. I, you know, we were trying to get the bill passed that night and we did, and I appreciate your efforts and your concerns. You've been very diligent in that and I respect that. But I don't think it needs to be in this bill. I think it should go without saying none of us want children hurt or harmed in any respect. And so I don't think it needs to be in the bill. >> You're saying none of us want that, but you're actively taking out language in the bill that would prohibit that from ever happening. >> Why remove that language if we're not trying to keep the door open to these inhumane practices continuing on our southern border? We've we've worked the bill together and our work with Senator Perry and we've improved it uh and and made it as strong as we can but clear as we can. And so I I believe that all those concerns have been addressed and I've been reassured that those provisions are already against the law in Texas and would be improper. And if the things that happened, if the things that happened that you are relaying uh that were reported by the Houston Chronicle, if that happened that was wrong and they shouldn't have happened, but that's not part of this bill. >> Yeah. So, if it's wrong, then why is it not part of the bill? >> Well, there are a lot of things that are wrong that aren't part of this bill. But, uh, >> repres you accepted this language just weeks ago. you thought it was a good idea to put this language in the bill to make sure these inhumane practices that our own troopers say are happening on our southern border never happen again. You said it goes without saying we're all about protecting children when you accepted the language. Now you're standing up here a few weeks later because you had conversations with someone and that language has been taken out. The only the only way I can make sense of that is if someone is trying to keep the door open to these practices continuing. >> I don't know. I can talk to a lot of folks. I've talked to a lot of folks about the bill and the drafting of the bill, working on the bill. I haven't talked to anybody that wants to harm children. Uh we're all on the same page on that. I don't think it's proper to include that in this bill if we don't need to because I've been assured and I've looked at it that that uh it's prohibited under the law anyway. >> But repres you can't tell us where >> I don't have it right here. No. No. So, you are comfortable taking the risk that we are opening the door to these inhumane practices continuing? >> Well, you're assuming it's a risk, but if you But I'm comfortable with the language that's in the bill now. But I I don't believe that there's any risk, and I don't believe that my bill opens the door to children being hurt or harmed. That's not what SB4 is about at all. >> Representative Spiller, you're my friend. You're an honorable man. This is beneath you and it's beneath Texas, >> right? and I I appreciate your perseverance, >> Mr.