ustxtxb_obs_1965_02_19_50_00004-00000_000.pdf

Page 11

by

of board control over legislation. “Why not leave it out?” Eckhardt asked. “I’ve studied the bill the way it is,” Cory said. “I don’t want to take it out and take the chance of messing up a good bill.” The House tabled one Eckhardt amendment on this subject, 107-25, and another by voice vote. An amendment by Rep. Neil Caldwell, Alvin, made it clear that the legislature can act on a new school without the board’s prior approval. Cory explained the bill’s specific exclusion of working educators from membership on the board: “If a man is engaged in full-time teaching, he cannot put in enough time to serve on this board.” Rep. Dick Cherry, Waco, a professor at Baylor, proposed to require that six members be educators and six others be engaged in the arts; this was shouted down. Rep. Travis Peeler, Corpus Christi, tried simply to remove the prohibition against educators serving on the board while they are employed. This was defeated by the House, 95-47. Rep. Rayford Price, Frankston, sought to limit the number of educators \(not receiving any remuneration as educavoted down, 82-50. Concerned, he said, that the board could reclassify a college as a university, Rep. Reed Quilliam, Lubbock, tried to strike out its power to define the role and scope of Austin Putting aside until next issue the mass of detail about legislation of many kinds pending in the Texas legislature now, here for the nonce is a sketch of other major controversies that are emerging: While Rep. Bill Heatly, Paducah, chairman of the House appropriations committee, has said the spending bill for the state \($3.574 billion, compared to $3.643 billion as early as March 12 and that this would be a record for earlyness in the session, the bill was laid out this week, and that means it might be debated even earlier. As always it is an enormously complicated measure, and totals and subtotals do not inform one about its contents, the import of which is conveyed by line items, many hundreds of which have interesting stories behind them. The oil industry’s major companies and the independents organized under TIPRO, the Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Assn., have united behind a forced pooling bill under which the Railroad Cmsn. can require small tract owners to pool their land with adjacent owners and can prohibit these small tract owners from drilling except in such a forced drilling “unit.” The bill was presented Senateside as a sweetness-and-light measure designed to help the small tract owners, whom recent court decisions have deprived of Railroad Cmsn. rules that let them extract oil from producing wells quicker than other producers can. The bill was 4 The Texas Observer institutions. The House turned back his amendment, 103-28. The clause on creating minimum standards of tenure and academic freedom brought a cry of pain from Bill Hollowell of Grand Saline. “We should not give some board appointed by the governor the power to establish tenure in this state. I think this government belongs to the people of the state, and we don’t need six hearings and three appellate hearings to get rid of a rotten egg. What do you mean by academic freedom? Is this the power to riot, or what? They’ve had some academic freedom out in California. Do we want that?” Hollowell’s motion to amend the provision was tabled by a vote of 123-17 after Clayton had asked Cherry, “Would you rather that the faculties develop their own standards of academic freedom, or would you rather a group of businessmen handle it?” If the Senate does not work major changes on the bill, Gov. Connally will have the kind of board he wants. Rep. Jim Markgraf of Scurry, one of the four who stood against the bill in the House Tuesday, said, “I think we’re creating a monster, don’t you? If my best friend were the governor of the state of Texas, I think I’d vote against this bill.” voted against in the Senate by just four senators, Patman, Colson, Rogers, and Blanchard, after the lieutenant governor had called for a voice vote and it had passed in that manner. The storm gathered, as it usually does on forced pooling, rather slowly, but a thunderhead had formed by the time of the House hearing. The gist of testimony against the measure House-side was that it is designed to strip small tract owners of the right to make the best deal they can and to prevent them from drilling wells the majors don’t want them to wells that often lead to the majors drilling offset wells nearby. The point was also made that major importing companies are not anxious for new wells to be drilled in Texas. Despite signs of more trouble as when Rep. John Allen, Longview, asked in the House hearing where the little people were if the bill was supposed to help themthe coalescing of the majors and TIPRO for this legislation makes its passage most likely. What the bill actually will do if passed may not be known for years, not only because its terms are complicated, but also because its administration would be. “Sin bills” are spicing up the session’s agenda. Rep. Maurice Pipkin, Brownsville, a venerable legislator, has introduced the bill to legalize local option horse race gambling with fool-proof machines that The Texas Racing Assn., a “blue-ribbon” lobby group of big-name Texans, is propagandizing for it; church groups are on the march. The tone of the church opposition was typified by three Methodist bishops’ statement that legalized gambling creates “a climate in which vice and evil flourish and poverty and misery follow.” The Texas Restaurant Assn. has chosen this very session to push for its plan to legalize selling miniature bottles of hard liquor, which buyers can then mix on their own. The booze people and the vice fighters have been able to agree on closing package stores at 8 instead of 10 p.m., at least so far this session, but the betters and boozers are not expected to be converted on the main sin bills by session’s end. Gambling is not given much chance; midget bottles of liquor are. Mention re-districting around the Capitol, you invite a horse-laugh. The legislature has approveddespite a disgusted 33vote protest in the House by city members the first American constitutional convention since the Republic was formed for the purpose of preserving the election of one chamber of the state legislatures on a basis other than one-man, one-vote. Redistricting bills Senate-side have been tossed despairingly to a sub-committee, with Sen. Chick Kazen, Laredo, dutifully noting that the courts have given the legislature only until Aug. 1. The speaker of the Oklahoma House stopped in at the Texas House long enough to tell the representatives they’d better do their own redistricting or the courts might use a computer on them. Arguments of a desultory kind can be monitored in the Capitol on whether to increase the number of legislators, carve up the big counties in single-member or several-member districts or continue to elect their delegations county-wide, deviate from absolute interdistrict population equality by as much as 15%. The women are back, asking their constitutional amendment to give them equal legal rights. With Rep. Jim Cotton, Weatherford, out of the way, \(he having been defeated after blocking the way of Senate committees have approved versions of the plan, and the Senate has approved Teachers and Taxes The legislature’s most controversial subject so far is what kind of raise to give the school teachers and how much. Citizens are being deluged with charts of pay scales and barrages of claims and charges; legislators are being deluged with letters from teachers. The legislature will not act on this subject until the appropriations bill is passed. Upon the outcomethat is, upon whether the legislature passes Gov. Connally’s “ten-year plan” emphasizing merit pay raises or the Texas State Teachers’ Assn.’s “$45 in ’65” depends on the sales tax issue. Revenue plans that are now seriously being considered in the legislature could not pay for “$45 in ’65,” the enactment of which would turn most conservative legislators’ minds toward a higher sales tax rate or the repeal of the grocery exemption from the present 2% sales tax. Details on this subject will follow in the Observer. Other Developments