Shield law advances

A bill that would protect journalists from revealing confidential sources passed a Texas House committee Monday.

This is the third consecutive session a shield bill has been brought before the Texas Legislature.

In 2005, support was withdrawn after amendments on the Senate floor watered the bill down, said Ken Whalen, executive director of the Texas Daily Newspaper Association.

In 2007, it passed the Senate 27-4 and the House committee 8-0 before being killed on a "technical objection" near the end of the legislative session.

"It was a non-sustentative issue on the very last day," said Laura Prather, a legislative adviser with the daily newspaper association. "Literally, it was a last-minute effort to kill the legislation, and it was only because of the timing."

So this time, the item is being moved at a faster pace to avoid last-minute complications. Whalen said the bill could be introduced as early as Monday, making it among the first to be considered by the full House this session.

Rep. Tryon Lewis, R-Odessa, was the lone dissenter Monday in a 7-1 vote of the House Judiciary and Civil Jurisprudence Committee. The Free Flow of Information Act says reporters can't be forced to give up sources, notes or tapes unless a lawyer or prosecutor convinces a judge they are relevant to a case and the information can't be obtained any other way.

"Right now in Texas, there are really no standards for a judge to use when deciding whether or not to uphold a subpoena," Whalen said.

"This gives guidelines to use in determining whether or not to uphold a subpoena," he said. "Prosecutors or civil attorneys would have to make their case as to why they need that information."

Lewis said Tuesday that he supports a shield law, but the current version is "totally unclear."

Lewis said he voted against the bill because it could require prosecution or defense attorneys to show what efforts they've made to get information from sources besides journalists while in open hearings. He said that could give away crucial aspects of their cases.

"They would have to put that evidence out there for everyone to see," he said. "I could not support that."

Instead, Lewis said he would want requirements that such information be divulged in private.

Lewis also said the law should have exemptions in cases in which a reporter or media organization is a party to a lawsuit or a witness to a crime or action in a lawsuit.

Lewis said he plans to work later this week with people representing both prosecutors and journalists as part of a mediation process to come up with a bill he can support at a final vote on the House floor.

"I just thought that work should have been done before the committee voted and not after it," he said.

 "I have talked with him," Prather said. "I have pledged to him we will work with him to try to address his concerns. We are still going through the process of listening to the people who might have concerns without compromising the integrity of the legislation."

Prather said she would continue to reach out to Lewis and look at possible amendments.

Lewis said the idea of protecting the "intellectual property" of reporters is a good idea.

"It's ridiculous that journalists can have their work taken away from them by people who don't want to do their own work," he said.

Whalen said he likes the chances of Texas joining 36 other states and the District of Columbia with a shield law.

"The legislative process is obviously fraught with unknowns, but we feel pretty good about it," he said.

Lewis said he's not bothered about being the first representative to vote against the bill in committee in two sessions - it passed out of committee unanimously last session. He expects a bill to pass, but with amendments to address legal concerns, even if it were not as "short" and "succinct" as he'd like.

"I think we'll get it done," he said. "We'll come out with a shield law."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.