Snake Oil

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.

Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings speaks at the anti-domestic violence rally Saturday.
Patrick Michels
Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings speaks at the anti-domestic violence rally Saturday.

dallas-domestic-violence-rally

Photos from Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings' rally to end domestic violence.
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_011

    Dallas Mayor Mike Rawlings invited men to join in his rally against domestic violence, to help end the attitude that family violence is a women's issue. (Patrick Michels)
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_100

    The crowd in front of Dallas City Hall Saturday was almost entirely men. (Patrick Michels)
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_064

    Dallas Cowboys greats Emmitt Smith and Roger Staubach joined in a conversation about men's roles in building a culture that doesn't tolerate domestic violence. (Patrick Michels)
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_111

    The crowd in front of Dallas City Hall Saturday was almost entirely men. (Patrick Michels)
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_085

    State Rep. Rafael Anchia (D-Dallas) emceed the rally. (Patrick Michels)
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_023

    Dallas City Councilman Dwaine Caraway, right, encouraged men to teach their sons domestic violence is wrong. Given a big stage, Caraway couldn't resist plugging a favorite cause of his own too, telling kids to pull their pants up. (Patrick Michels)
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_041

    A crowd of supporters from Mary Kay cosmetics waves after one of the company's officers gave his speech. (Patrick Michels)
  • 20130323_Michels_DomesticViolenceRally_113

    The crowd in front of Dallas City Hall Saturday was almost entirely men. (Patrick Michels)

 

In Dallas last year, 26 women were killed by their intimate partners, up from 10 the year before. The death of Karen Cox Smith—whose husband has confessed to shooting her in a parking lot in January—has become a rallying point for those hoping to reverse the trend. Mayor Mike Rawlings is a big part of that effort, becoming a high-profile advocate against domestic violence in the last few months, and urging Dallas men to speak up and take responsibility. Saturday, thousands of men joined Rawlings outside Dallas City Hall for a rally to end the city’s culture of domestic violence, joined by major figures in the city’s business, sports and faith communities.

State Rep. Rafael Anchia emceed the event, and Sen. Royce West and Rep. Jason Villalba joined him onstage at one point. Villalba had a message for domestic abusers: “They’re cockroaches, and Texas is gonna come after ‘em.”

You can read more about the rally from the Dallas Morning News and WFAA. The Dallas Observer‘s telling includes West’s messy connection, in his private practice, to the day’s big would-be redemption case, the Cowboys’ Dez Bryant. RH Reality Check parses the conflicting, at times counterproductive, messages from the stage Saturday, but says the main “message—putting the blame for domestic violence squarely on the shoulders of the perpetrators, not the victims—came across loud and clear.”

Piers Morgan and Dan Patrick
Dan Patrick talks guns with Piers Morgan earlier this year.

In the first days of the legislative session, within a month of the mass school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst floated the idea of state-funded specialized gun training for teachers.

“Eight hours of instruction and two hours on the range is not sufficient,” he said at the time.

Today in the Senate Education Committee, lawmakers got a look at a bill to set Dewhurst’s troubled mind at ease, from Houston Republican Dan Patrick. The bill wouldn’t necessarily mean more teachers carrying guns in classrooms. (A House bill by freshman Dallas Republican Jason Villalba would handle that; another by James White would create a gun class for kids.)

Since Sandy Hook, a handful of Texas school districts have added policies letting some teachers carry guns—Patrick’s bill is meant to make that decision safer, so heat-packing teachers know what they’re getting into.

“If anybody other than police are carrying firearms,” Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo) said today, “and they do not have that scenario-based training, the school district is negligent.”

Under Patrick’s proposal, the Texas Department of Safety would develop a new gun skills class for protecting children when a shooter is on the loose. DPS would offer the class free to two teachers from any school that doesn’t have full-time security or police of its own.

There’s no course quite like that already, but DPS Director Steve McCraw was on hand to detail what it might look like: 16 hours of training, he said, in “being proactive defending the kids” and letting police know, when they finally arrive, that you’re not the shooter they should be worried about. Texas would be the first state to develop such a class, but McCraw said that what DPS has in mind isn’t some John Woo fantasy camp.

McCraw said DPS would develop a course with a “stand and defend” approach, not “active shooter training” on how to go after a gunman. It’d be ”consistent with” training plans developed by Texas State University’s School Safety Center, he said.

Senators’ biggest sticking point this afternoon was the price tag—$9.3 million over the next two years, according to the estimate in the fiscal note. Patrick, and other senators, said that estimate is probably way off-base because it assumes teachers from all 8,500 schools in the state would take the class. There are 180 districts with their own police forces, for instance, that wouldn’t even be eligible for the free training.

Seliger, though, said the price tag was “probably pretty close.” Fewer teachers might go for the training, but the class McCraw suggested would be twice as long as the fiscal note’s estimate. Seliger said he’s taken similar classes, and they’re expensive.

“This will not be done on the cheap, with civilians expected to participate in an armed scenario in a public school. I’m not opposed to it, but I don’t think we ought to be misleading anybody in terms of the rigor of the course.”

Royce West, a Dallas Democrat, had a more basic concern. Next to all the state’s other duties to pay for education—from teacher pay to test prep for struggling students—West wondered about spending millions on this new continuing education for teachers. ”What’s more important?” he asked.

“Saving the life of a child, if there’s a shooter in the school with an assault weapon, is more important,” Patrick shot back.

Sen. Eddie Lucio Jr. (D-Brownsville) said he planned to offer an amendment to the bill, which would require the state to pay for the training “only if sufficient funds are available.”

“This amendment will potentially gut the bill,” Patrick said. He seemed to wonder, after all the favors he’d done as committee chair, what he’d done to deserve such a stab in the back.

“I’ve been very supportive of members on this committee, Senator Lucio, on programs that you have wanted. And if I had known that the decision was going to come down to a million or two for some programs that you wanted me to support—which i did—over protecting our students from a shooter…”

With Lucio and West interrupting him, Patrick trailed off. He left the bill pending in his committee, without any resolution on the bill’s price tag.

Tony Diaz and other 'Librotraficante' supporters
Patrick Michels
'Librotraficante' founder Tony Diaz at the Capitol Thursday.

A year ago, Houston-based writer Tony Diaz led the Librotraficante bus tour to Tucson, “smuggling” books back into a state that had just effectively banned Mexican-American studies classes in public schools.

This morning Diaz was on a similar mission, but much closer to home—outside the third-floor Capitol office of Houston Republican Sen. Dan Patrick, who filed a proposal last week to only count “comprehensive survey” courses toward undergraduate history requirements. Students interested in Latino, African-American, LGBT or women’s history, for instance, wouldn’t be able to count those classes against the requirement.

Those implications weren’t lost on the crowd of university students and activists waiting around to speak with Patrick’s staff—just days, coincidentally, after a federal judge upheld Arizona’s law. ”It’s the same target group, except it’s a different approach” under Patrick’s bill, Diaz explained. “It seems like Senator Patrick is auditioning to be the next Jan Brewer.”

Patrick’s bill (and a House companion by Southlake freshman Rep. Giovanni Capriglione) are the legislative response to a recent report from the New York-based National Association of Scholarspromoted by Austin’s own Texas Public Policy Foundation—claiming that the University of Texas and Texas A&M over-emphasize niche history courses at the expense of American and Western tradition. While the report may have come from New York, our own Bill Minutaglio noted another local connection: it was funded in part by D magazine publisher Wick Allison.

The report, “Recasting History: Are Race, Class and Gender Dominating American History?” answers that question for readers after just two paragraphs. In a neat trick, its list of recommendations closes with, “10. Depoliticize history.”

High time these academics quit thinking about history and just start teaching it. Surely there’s a dominant historical narrative to keep us all happy enough.

“There is an agenda to remove dozens of books out of the curriculum at a time,” Diaz said this morning. ”In a global economy, why would you want to build a border wall around American history?”

The bills have been referred to higher education committees in their respective chambers; neither has been scheduled for a hearing yet.

Bishop Oscar Cantu, State Sen. Dan Patrick and Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst
Patrick Michels
Sen. Dan Patrick (R-Houston), center, with Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst in December.

Update at 3:05 p.m.: Patrick has teamed up with Sen. Ken Paxton to co-author another bill filed Friday, which is exactly the same as the bill described here.

Looks like Dan Patrick wasn’t ready to let his fellow senators—like Tommy Williams, Ken Paxton and Eddie Lucio Jr.—grab all the headlines about voucher proposals.

Just ahead of today’s bill filing deadline, Patrick submitted a proposal on Thursday creating what he calls the Texas Equal Opportunity Scholarship Program. His SB 1410 would create the largest voucher program of any bill filed this session, offering private school vouchers for at-risk and low-income students, with a priority for kids in low-rated schools.

Businesses could take up to 15 percent of what they’d pay in franchise taxes, and donate it to the new scholarship fund instead. Patrick’s bill also offers a tax credit against the premium tax insurance companies pay the state.

Unlike a bill filed Monday by Sen. Ken Paxton (R-McKinney), Patrick’s bill only gives priority to students in low-scoring schools—if there’s enough scholarship money left, any low-income or at-risk student could get public money to spend on private school tuition. The bill’s family income cutoff is twice the federal free and reduced lunch program limit—about $71,000 for a household of three.

The vouchers would be worth up to 80 percent of the state’s average per-student spending. Patrick’s bill also doesn’t cap the size of his new scholarship program at a total dollar amount, as Paxton’s does.

Private schools that accept the scholarships could be religious and would have broad leeway in what they teach—under Louisiana’s voucher program, some private schools made great use of that freedom. Under Patrick’s bill, participating private schools would only have to give an annual test—either STAAR or a norm-referenced test like the Iowa Basic Skills Test.

The new scholarships could also cover pre-kindergarten or up to $1,000 for an afterschool program.

Before the start of the session, Patrick was enthusiastic about using public money to cover private school tuition—an idea that’s long been a tough sell in Texas. Voucher critics lined up to fight any proposal, including a “business tax credit,” that would spend public money on private school tuition, but in the last few months the “school choice” debate has focused on charter school expansion instead.

Voucher fever has caught on this week in the Senate, though, with a hearing on Sen. Tommy Williams’ (R-The Woodlands) voucher proposal for special needs students, and the filing of Paxton and Patrick’s voucher bills. Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst recently reiterated his commitment to passing a voucher bill out of the Senate this session—even if the proposals stop there. House education leaders like Speaker Joe Straus (R-San Antonio) and Public Education chair Jimmie Don Aycock (R-Killeen) still sound unmoved by the Senate’s enthusiasm.

The text of Patrick’s bill is below. I’ve highlighted some important sections, and you can click on those for more detailed notes. (Here’s a link to the annotated bill, too.)

Update at 2:12 p.m.: Along with SB 23, which Patrick and Paxton have co-authored, Paxton and New Braunfels Republican Sen. Donna Campbell also have another voucher bill, SB 1575, just filed Friday. Freshman Rep. Scott Turner (R-Frisco) has filed the first voucher bill in the House.