NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WTVF) — As Tennessee lawmakers prepare for a special session later this summer on gun violence in response to the Covenant School shooting, how much will the Republican supermajority control what's even debated?
That's the question raised by our latest "Revealed" investigation of how Capitol Hill really works.
Following the controversy over the expulsion of the Tennessee Three, NewsChannel 5 Investigates decided to analyze the debate from this year's historic legislative session. What we discovered is evidence that Republicans have enormous power to control the entire conversation on hotly contested issues or, as Democrats see it, to silence debate.
This year, Republicans forced through a change in rules to limit debate even further.
Watch part 1 in player above, part 2 below:
"We have to allow the minority to have a voice. When you stifle the minority's voice, you no longer have a democracy," said Rep. Bo Mitchell, D-Nashville.
Republicans, however, argue their use of their supermajority power is democracy at work.
"I do believe that the legislature is one of the last bastions of true freedom where individuals thoughts can be heard and are heard every single day," said House Majority Leader William Lamberth, R-Portland.
The story of the Tennessee Three was more than just a story about a protest over gun violence.
As the painful expulsion process unfolded on the floor of the state House, it would also reveal longstanding tensions over how the people's business is conducted by Tennessee's Republican supermajority.
Rep. Gloria Johnson, D-Knoxville, described her reasons for joining Reps. Justin Jones and Justin Pearson in a debate on the House floor.
"I stood with them because we all feel our voices are being silenced and something had to be said," she said during her expulsion hearing back in April.
Bo Mitchell told NewsChannel 5 Investigates that those frustrations helped fuel the blow-up on the House floor.
"It's the frustration of being cut off and debate being stifled on very important issues in this state," Mitchell said.
The Nashville Democrat personally experienced that frustration on the day of Nashville's Covenant School shooting in late March, when the House decided to dispense with normal business to honor the victims.
Mitchell had joined his assistant at the reunification center, where she and other Covenant families waited to learn if their children were dead or alive,
His emotions were raw.
"I didn't have one person to ask me for thoughts and prayers today. They asked me for courage to come down here and do something," Mitchell told his House colleagues during a portion of the proceedings normally described as "welcoming and honoring."
He continued, "So please don't say you're pro-life and then vote to put more weapons on the street."
At that point, House Speaker Cameron Sexton attempted to cut him off.
Mitchell called out, "Hey, I will speak."
At that point, Sexton muted Mitchell's microphone.
"Sir, you're under 'welcoming and honoring,' and you need to stay," the speaker said, angrily slamming his gavel as Mitchell attempted to continue to speak.
"Rep. Mitchell, you're out of order."
View Bo Mitchell debate below:
When his mic was turned on again, Mitchell continued, "I'll tell you one thing, there are six people I can't welcome and honor anymore into this, into this hallowed house."
His reaction now?
"Truth hurts sometimes, and they don't like to hear the truth. It probably struck a nerve."
Lamberth, who chairs the House Rules Committee, defended Sexton's reaction.
"It's not just open mic night at the legislature. Not everybody gets to jump up and say whatever they want to say anytime," the Sumner County Republican argued.
When protesters descended upon the Capitol just three days after the Covenant shooting, Lamberth said, there's a reason that Memphis Democrat Justin Pearson kept getting into trouble for trying to work gun issues into other debates.
"Every legislative body in the country - city, county, state, federal - if you are debating a bill, we are there to debate that bill, not make some political speech that's got nothing to do with that bill," Lamberth said.
NewsChannel 5 Investigates asked, "Should the majority be able to silence the minority though?"
"Never," Lamberth responded, "and we don't silence the minority."
Yet, in late April, Nashville Democrat Justin Jones was ruled out of order for saying that a bill to abolish Nashville's community oversight board was an insult to the voters who created it to monitor police activities.
"I hope that you'll see that this bill is insulting to the people, to the mothers, to the community here in Nashville," Jones said.
At that point, Sexton muted his microphone, telling Jones: "Out of order. You have to refrain."
View Justin Jones debate on oversight bill below:
NewsChannel 5 Investigates discovered another example in early March as Lamberth led a Republican effort to cut the size of Democratic Nashville's Metro Council.
Jones argued that Republicans were ignoring more pressing issues to retaliate against Nashville.
"One in five children live in poverty. We have real work today, and yet we are here playing political games."
Sexton cut him off.
"Representative Jones, can you stick to the bill? You're way, way off, sir."
Again, Jones was interrupted for arguing that Republicans were playing games.
View Justin Jones debate on Council bill below:
NewsChannel 5 Investigates asked Lamberth, "If Democrats want to say that Republicans, that you are playing political games, why should they be cut off?"
"Again, if they will stay to the topic of the bill that we are debating," he answered.
We noted, "They were on the topic. They were saying this was political gamesmanship."
Lamberth's response?
"Again, that's not what that bill does, and it's not."
"But why can they not give their opinion?"
"Well, sure they can. They can give their opinion."
"But it was cut off."
"As long as it's within the rules."
Lamberth argued that Democrats if they are cut off, could always appeal to their Republican colleagues for permission to continue.
But consider what happened when Republicans brought a bill on the last day of the legislative session to allow teachers to ignore trans students' preferred pronouns.
Justin Pearson challenged his Republican colleagues, saying their legislation would "dehumanize" trans kids.
"You bring legislation here talking about how you are doing things on behalf of children, but the actions of this body do not protect children," Pearson said.
At that point, Republican Rep. Monty Fritts from Kingston interrupted Pearson.
"I would object to the impugning of the motives of the members by suggesting that we might be trying to dehumanize children. That is an egregious statement," Pearson said.
Republicans voted that, as a result, Pearson would not be allowed to continue with his debate.
View pronoun bill debate below:
Lamberth joined his GOP colleagues in silencing the Memphis Democrat.
"What he says at the very beginning of that impugns the entire body. It says the entire body, the entire House is doing a certain thing," Lamberth said.
NewsChannel 5 Investigates asked, "But if that's his opinion, why can he not say it?"
"That has nothing to do with the bill that we are on," the House majority leader countered.
We noted, "He's talking about that bill."
"No," Lamberth claimed, "he's talking about the entire rest of the body that he serves with and making some sort of slight or insult toward other colleagues that he is serving with."
But not long after that moment, the Republican sponsor, Rep. Mark Cochran of Englewood, defended his bill by taking a swipe at Democrats.
"It does protect our teachers from bullying from some of the greatest perpetrators of the act in human history, the Woke Left," Cochran added, drawing jeers from Democrats and shouts of "objection."
Sexton acknowledged that Cochran's comment was inappropriate, but the sponsor's GOP colleagues voted to allow him to continue.
"That was a comment that was over the line, and he was called out of order on that," Lamberth said.
NewsChannel 5 Investigates noted, "Your colleagues voted that they had no problem with that, to let him continue."
"Again," the majority leader said, "he was called out of order and when he continued, he did not continue within that vein."
Bo Mitchell's reaction?
"Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and we're slowly getting a clear display."
All of that comes against the backdrop of a year where something fundamental changed about how the debate is conducted on the House floor.
If you look up House rules as far back as 1875, each member was allowed to speak for 15 minutes when first recognized, up to 10 minutes if called upon again. That's the way it had been for almost 150 years.
But this session, the Republican supermajority cut that time to just 5 minutes — on even the most complicated of bills.
"Five minutes and then if we get called on again you can have another five minutes," Sexton explained in an interview with NewsChannel 5 Investigates back in January.
We noted, "Your critics will probably say you are trying to limit debate."
Sexton answered, "We are trying to have more debate with more people than two people taking all the time."
Democrats were skeptical as the new rule was unveiled at the beginning of the session.
"I could ask a one-minute question and get back a four-minute response that doesn't allow me to have that back-and-forth," Gloria Johnson argued during a debate on the rules.
Lamberth countered, "If someone asks a one-minute question and gets a four-minute answer, they can just go back on the list for their next question and back on the list for the next question."
House Democratic Caucus Chair John Ray Clemmons scoffed at that argument.
"That whole 'you'll get another five minutes' is just nonsense. It doesn't happen that way," the Nashville Democrat told NewsChannel 5 Investigates.
Clemmons was there this session when one of the GOP drag-show bills came up for debate, and Johnson asked what appeared to be a simple question.
"Is there a definition in the law for 'female impersonator'?" the Knoxville Democrat asked the sponsor.
For more than two minutes, Republican Rep. Chris Todd of Jackson, re-read his summary of the entire bill.
And when Johnson tried to call out to reclaim her time, the House speaker gaveled her down.
"Representative Johnson, you're out of order," Sexton said. "You can allow him to finish, but we will not take shouting from the House floor."
Clemmons argued that the rule has fundamentally changed House debate.
"In the past when you had the 15 minutes you could have a running discourse or dialogue with the bill sponsor, and you generally didn't even take up five minutes," Clemmons said.
"But now you don't know if that one question is going to be your only question because of the strategy the Republicans have used to eat up the rest of that time."
View Gloria Johnson's debate on drag show bill below:
Lamberth dismissed those concerns.
"If you can't make your point in five minutes, you probably don't know what your point is."
Yet, during the expulsion debate, Lamberth had himself complained when he felt five minutes had not given him enough time to question Justin Pearson.
Sexton repeatedly apologized to his number two for having to cut him off.
"That's the rules," Lamberth said. "It allows us to move on to the next person so each person is heard."
Yet, we watched repeatedly as Republicans invoked what's called the previous question to use their supermajority power to cut off all debate so the opposition is not heard.
Last year, it happened on the governor's bill to completely overhaul how schools are funded.
Rep. Antonio Parkinson, D-Memphis, voiced the frustrations of his fellow Democrats.
"All of the amendments and discussion on this most important piece of legislation have just been cut off, is that what we're saying?" Parkinson asked.
"Is that what we're saying to the citizens of the state of Tennessee?"
And, this year, it happened repeatedly, including on a controversial bill to set up a mechanism for reporting college professors who teach so-called "divisive concepts."
"That was not debate," Clemmons complained to the speaker. "That is the direct result of a five-minute rule that limits debate."
Again, Lamberth downplayed such arguments.
"Let's be clear when a bill comes to the House floor, it's gone through weeks if not months of committee debate. It has been worked over. It has been out there in the public for weeks or months," he argued.
Still, that glosses over what our investigation uncovered about how Republicans have, in some cases, cut off Democrats in committee, even refusing to consider their amendments.
So how will this all play out when lawmakers convene this summer for that special session to deal with gun violence? Should Tennesseans expect more of the same?
"Probably, unless we just demand change," Mitchell said.
"Do we have that power? No, but I think more people are watching now. More eyes are on this state than ever before, and I think that's concerning to some in the majority party."
SPECIAL SECTION: Revealed
Do you have information for our investigation?Email us: investigate@newschannel5.com