Floor Pass

Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock (R-Killeen)
Patrick Michels
Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock (R-Killeen) introduces his big testing and graduation reform measure, House Bill 5, Tuesday morning.

As of Tuesday afternoon, the Texas House is still hard at work debating Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock’s epic education bill, HB 5, which would retool Texas’ high school graduation requirements along with its testing and accountability systems.

But after a lengthy midday debate, lawmakers may have settled the most divisive question facing them today: should high school students should, by default, be placed on a pathway to college preparation? House members shot down that proposal by a two-to-one margin, signaling that they wanted a break from the college-prep focus in Texas high schools today.

Currently, Texas has a three-tiered path to graduation in which students are automatically placed on a path for college readiness, but kids who graduate with the minimum degree aren’t eligible for a four-year university. Aycock’s bill would flatten the degree options, so any Texas high school diploma would be good enough for a student to attend college.

Higher education leaders, minority student advocates and major businesses have worried Aycock’s bill would leave students less prepared for college, because it requires fewer courses commonly seen as signs of college readiness, especially algebra II.

An amendment by Reps. Mark Strama (D-Austin) and Dan Branch (R-Dallas) would have maintained a preference in the system for college readiness, suggesting students would default to a “distinguished” diploma path, which requires four years of math and science.

Under an amendment tacked onto HB 5 earlier in the day, students would need a parent’s signature to change their endorsement choice—and Rep. Joe Deshotel (D-Beaumont) focused on that scenario when he spoke up against Strama’s proposal. Deshotel asked lawmakers to consider how hard it could be for a student to tell their parents, “I can’t hack this, I have to drop down to a lower level.”

“If they don’t want to go to college, they shouldn’t have to get a permission slip signed by their parents if they want to do something else with their lives,” he said.

A long debate followed with a handful of lawmakers on either side, split not by party or urban-rural lines, but by disagreements over how to encourage students to attend college without creating a daunting system that leads to more dropouts.

Houston Democrat Sylvester Turner spoke up in favor of Strama’s amendment. “Let’s just be real,” he said. “If you set a low bar, many of our kids whether we like it or not are going to go for the low bar.”

Strama noted that under Texas’ current 4-by-4 program—which encourages all students to take four years of math, science, English and social studies—minority students are choosing the college-ready path at the same rate as white students.

Dallas Democrat Eric Johnson said that’s why he supported Strama’s proposal. ”I have a problem with the idea of taking a regime where we’ve seen African-American, Latino college participation rates going up … and undoing that,” he said. “I’d like to see them start in the pipeline. Put every child in the college pipeline initially and let them opt out.”

“This cuts to the chase almost to HB5′s premise. This is the big one here,” said Rep. Larry Gonzales (R-Round Rock), who joined Deshotel’s opposition. “How do you think Rep. Strama’s amendment differs from the status quo? It doesn’t change the status quo … what we have now isn’t working.”

Aycock finally stood to speak against Strama’s proposal. He said he was well aware of concerns about tracking minority students out of college, but his goal is to give students and parents control over what they learn in high school.

“I do not believe we should have an upper track, I do not believe we should have a lower track,” he said. ”If you want to create a pathway to failure, if you want to create a track, we have two right now. One is called ‘minimum plan,’ the other is called dropouts.”

With House members  yelling for a vote, Strama gave one last defense of his plan. Only students who graduate “distinguished” are eligible for automatic entry to a state university under Texas’ Top 10 Percent rule, he said, so there is, in fact, an upper track under HB 5. ”I don’t think we can argue that there’s not a difference in the pathways,” Strama said. “So the question becomes, what should be the presumptive expectation of children wehn they enter high school?”

Strama’s amendment went down 97 to 50. A diverse, bipartisan group supported Strama and Branch’s doomed proposal: Latino and African-American lawmakers mostly, but also such polar opposites as Fort Worth Democrat Lon Burnam and Tomball Republican Debbie Riddle.

We’ll have more later as the HB 5 debate continues.

At a brisk hearing this morning on the controversial Senate Bill 11 that would subject welfare applicants to drug screening, bill author Jane Nelson of Flower Mound seemed to understand that barring kids from benefits for life if their parent fails three drug tests is totally messed up.

“My intent is absolutely not to hurt the children,” Nelson said, which turned out to be policy everyone could get behind. Nelson was responding to testimony offered by Scott McCown of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, who praised the committee substitute Nelson offered today and said that, with a couple of tweaks, the left-leaning CPPP would even support it.

The new version of SB 11 focuses exclusively on drug-testing welfare applicants who have been identified as potential drug users by some fuzzy, as-yet-undesigned-but-definitely-constitutional screening process. (In a hearing on a similar bill, SB 21, which applies drug-testing to applicants for unemployment benefits, bill author and Grumpy Cat doppelganger Tommy Williams speculated that the screening would be a questionnaire that asked, for example, if the applicant was regularly late for stuff and/or used recreational drugs.)

The revised SB 11 would bar only adults from receiving benefits in the event of a failed drug screen—children would still be eligible for benefits. But it does retain the lifetime ban on entire families in the event of three failed drug screens, which is the main problem McCown still had with it. He proposed a “protective payee” program, by which benefits would be given to a non-drug-taking relative, like a grandmother, on the child’s behalf. McCown also asked if language could be included that would let benefits be restored to a child if that child leaves the drug-user’s custody, so that if the child were placed elsewhere and still eligible for benefits, the lifetime ban wouldn’t follow him or her. Nelson said, “I think we can do that.”

SB 11 is one of a spate of bills this session that have reintroduced the taxpayer-funded dope fiend to the roster of political scapegoats and distractions, where it joins the fraudulent voter and the job-stealing illegal immigrant. It’s a cynical bill, but this morning’s exchange was strikingly un-cynical.

McCown and Nelson compromised. McCown still has problems with the new bill, such as that it eliminates income for a troubled family without offering state-sponsored drug treatment, but he didn’t dig in his heels against it. Nelson’s original version of SB 11 proposed sweeping changes to work eligibility and benefit expiration that would have dropped thousands of families from the rolls, but she made drastic changes in response to public outcry.

When McCown suggested the protective payee program, Nelson graciously asked McCown to work with her on such language, saying, “We want to get it right.”

And McCown, when asked if he would actually support the bill if the protective payee component were included, laughed and then said warmly, “Sure.”

The Health and Human Services committee left SB 11 pending.

The Lead:

It’s a big day at the Capitol. Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock’s House Bill 5 goes to the House floor for debate today. This is one of the myriad of bills that proposes to lower STAAR testing requirements for high school graduation. As it is, thousands of students are currently off-track to graduate because of testing requirements, and lawmakers are expected to at least reduce the number end-of-course tests students must take to graduate. But pro-testing advocates have been pushing back lately. It should be quite the debate. House members have filed more than 160 amendments.

Not to be outdone, senators will be hearing a high-profile bill today too. Sen. Jane Nelson’s Senate Bill 11 will be debated in the Senate Health and Human Services Committee this morning. That’s the bill that would require drug tests for welfare applicants. Should be a fun day at the Capitol.

Yesterday’s Headlines:

1.The federal government announced its decision to take the Title X family-planning grant away from the state of Texas yesterday and award it instead to a coalition of providers,  the Women’s Health and Family Planning Association of Texas. The initial grant is for $6.5 million dollars to cover birth control, wellness exams and other family-planning services. After the deep cuts to family planning in 2011, the feds apparently decided the state wasn’t the best steward of family-planning funds.

1. The Senate Committee on Open Government approved a bill yesterday that proposes to set up public online message boards on which legislators can communicate between meetings, The Houston Chronicle reports.

2. Rep. Ron Reynolds was formally accused of barratry—otherwise known as “ambulance chasing.”

4. In other news, hosting an ex-president in Texas is apparently pretty expensive. Here’s looking at you, Dubya.

Line of the Day:

“We cannot continue to fund the same inefficient, unsustainable long-term care system and expect a different result.” —Sen. Jane Nelson in yesterday’s debate over Medicaid service, as quoted by The Texas Tribune.

What We’re Watching Today:

1. HB 5, one of this session’s major testing-reform bills, hits the House floor.

2. Some pretty heavy bills will be heard in the Senate Education Committee today, including bills that would aim to prevent cheating scandals, and a handful of charter school bills.

3. SB 11, which would require drug tests for some welfare applicants, will be heard in Senate Health and Human Services.

Texas State Capitol in Austin, Tex.
Patrick Michels

The Lead:

The Senate passed its version of the budget last week, and soon it’ll be the House’s turn. The House Appropriations Committee voted out its version of the two-year state budget late last week, but not before allotting $1 billion more to public education than the Senate-approved budget. That means the House version would add a total of $2.5 billion to public school budgets. That’s still a long way from restoring the $5.4 billion lawmakers cut from schools last session, but it looks downright spendy compared to the Senate. Lawmakers have time to mull it all over, though. The full House isn’t scheduled to debate the budget until next week.

As the budget debate unfolds, committees continue to chug along. Our favorite today: Sen. Glenn Hegar (R-Katy) is presenting a bill in committee that would require the attorney general to file an injunction against any local gun control laws. So much for local control.

Weekend Headlines:

1. The Senate approved a bill last week that would set term limits for statewide officeholders. The Dallas Morning News explains that things look better for the bill than they have in the past, but the big test will now be in the House.

2. The Dallas City Plan Commission rejected drilling permits for natural gas producer Trinity East. Apparently the city manager had a secret side-deal with the company. The Observer’s Priscila Mosqueda writes that the City Council didn’t know about the deal and some members, along with environmentalists, are fighting the fracking permits.

3. Here we go again, another Bush enters Texas politics—and another George Bush at that. George P. Bush, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s son, is pursuing the office of Texas Land Commissioner. Bush is playing it safe and gave a safe speech at Friday’s Texas Legislative Conference, as The Texas Tribune reports.

Line of the Day:

“He might be the most outside-the-box and creative person I’ve met in higher education.” —Rep. Eric Johnson (D-Dallas) told The Texas Tribune about Texas A&M University System Chancellor John Sharp.

What We’re Watching Today:

1. Texas Education Commissioner Michael Williams is up before the Senate Nominations Committee.

2. Sen. Kirk Watson (D-Austin) is presenting a bill to the Senate Open Government Committee that will clarify that certain emails between elected officials regarding official business should be public.

3. Katy Republican Sen. Glenn Hegar’s anti-gun control bill goes before the Senate Agriculture, Rural Affairs and Homeland Security Committee today.

4.  The House Appropriations subcommittee on Government Transparency and Reform is discussing the issue of misusing dedicated funds to certify the budget. A big example is the sporting goods tax, which doesn’t actually fund the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department for which it’s intended.

Texas State Capitol in Austin, Tex.
Patrick Michels

The Lead:

The Senate floor was all polite “thank-yous” and pats on the back yesterday, leading up to the vote on the Senate’s version of the budget, which the Lege is required to pass each session. That is, until Sen. Wendy Davis spoke her mind. Last session’s budget cuts deprived public education of $5.4 billion. This session’s budget puts back just $1.5 billion. Davis said that wasn’t enough. She offered an amendment that would force the state to spend more on schools and then promptly withdrew it, as the Observer‘s Liz Farmer reports. Davis’ withdrawal of her amendment protected Republicans and some Democrats from taking a tough vote on funding public schools. The budget passed 29-2.

And now it’s the House’s turn to pass its version of the budget.

Yesterday’s Headlines:

1. The Public Utility Commission Sunset bill—HB 1600—passed through the House, but not without some verbal brawling.

2. Rep. Drew Springer’s ban on plastic bag bans got a late-night airing.

3. The Texas Tribune reports that CPRIT—the Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas that’s been put under a moratorium while it undergoes investigation of potential grant fraud—got permission from House Speaker Straus, Lt. Gov. Dewhurst and Gov. Perry to move forward on grant negotiations that could bring more cancer researchers to Texas.

Line of the Day:

“We have a fiscal cliff here in Texas, it’s our highway funding.”—Sen. Tommy Williams during yesterday’s budget debate.

What We’re Watching Today:

1.The House Appropriations Committee will finalize the House’s budget version this morning.

2. More gun legislation is slated for the Homeland Security and Public Safety House Committee today. There’s more than a few interesting items on concealed handgun laws and background checks. And don’t forget about Dan Flynn’s HB 47 that would shorten the amount of training time it takes to obtain a concealed handgun license.

3. Dan Patrick’s bills on charter school expansion and gun classes for teachers are up for votes in the Senate Education Committee.

1 19 20 21 22 23 51