Translation: The people DO and CAN have power.
-Patricia
by Morgan Smith | Texas Tribune
May 20, 2011
Just past midnight, at the close of a 14-hour day last week on the floor of the Texas House, state Rep. Rob Eissler stood joking with reporters.
“I’m going to move my desk up to the front mic,” Eissler said, “so I can watch every bill that goes by.”
After failing on three separate occasions to pass his signature education bill for the session and running out of time on a fourth, the Woodlands Republican was describing his plan to attach the legislation as an amendment to other bills that are still working their way through the House.
The widely liked, pun-spinning Eissler has led the House Public Education Committee since 2007, and this session he has a Republican supermajority to back him. Yet even with 66 co-sponsors, he stumbled with the bill bundling several measures to relieve school district mandates required by the state — including removing the 22-to-1 student-to-teacher ratio in kindergarten through fourth grade, minimum salary requirements for teachers and contractual obligations dealing with layoffs.
The clash over the measure, House Bill 400, has been cast as teachers versus administrators, labor versus management. But in a session characterized by extreme partisanship, the legislation is notable for what it is not: Republican versus Democrat. While it has handed Democrats a rare strategic victory this session, it has drawn opponents from the left and the right.
“Education is not a partisan issue,” Eissler said. “Not everybody in one party is completely sold on one approach.”
In the months before the Legislature convened, there were many calls to free school districts from “unfunded mandates” at the state level to help them cope with the consequences of the impending deep financing cuts. Education leaders in both chambers — Eissler; Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano; and Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston — introduced separate legislation taking aim at state mandates. But even after budgets that reduced public education financing by $7.8 billion in the House and $4 billion in the Senate overwhelmingly passed, the bills have proven a tougher sell.
His joking aside, Eissler’s proposal has an uncertain future as an amendment to other legislation. And in the Senate, which requires a two-thirds vote to bring bills to the floor for consideration, mandate-relief proposals have stalled — though they could also potentially live on as amendments, at least until the session ends on May 30.
“When there is a big piece of legislation that draws lots fear and concern and opposition from significant players, that can cause members to delay or stall or wait to act until the end, or find less controversial ways of dealing with it or passing it,” said Sandy Kress, an architect of Bush administration education policy who is now an Austin lobbyist.
Lawmakers who philosophically endorse reduced spending can balk at what that means practically: teachers losing jobs, getting paid less and managing larger classes. “There’s an ugliness to a lower-funded environment that people don’t like to face,” Eissler said.
Confronting that ugliness makes legislators from both parties skittish, particularly those who represent rural districts, where schools can be the largest employers — and where the lines between labor and management are much less defined.
“With Republicans, we could say, ‘Well, surely they’ll side with management over labor,’” Kress said. “But if you’re from a small district, you don’t necessarily think unions and management if it’s the teacher you know and the school where your kid goes.”
Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman, said “there’s a tension” in his party about how to handle mandate relief. He led the charge against HB 400 from the right with an amendment that would have made any measures temporary, kept the class-size ratio intact and applied salary reductions and furloughs to administrators as well as to teachers.
“Those of us who represent districts that are smaller, it’s different than maybe those big-city districts where it’s much more a business,” Phillips said. “For our school districts, it’s not a business but teaching kids.”
The state’s teachers associations have opposed the legislation in stronger language. They view the bill as an ideological attack on essential, hard-won contractual rights. For them, it represents an opportunistic use of the fiscal crisis to enact changes that the education community would not accept otherwise.
“These are management issues that shouldn’t be discussed when the Legislature is talking about way underfunding public education,” said Lonnie Hollingsworth, a lobbyist with the Texas Classroom Teachers Association, adding that the bill could be described as a “divide-and-conquer strategy.” Hollingsworth said the legislation had strained his group’s relationship with Eissler.
“I think they thought they could win HB 400 with 101 Republicans in the House, and they didn’t think they had to compromise,” he said.
Eissler said the fierce opposition from teachers groups has contributed to resistance to the bill. But he said that observing the groups’ deliberations on mandate-relief legislation in the Senate discouraged him from seeking their input.
“There were weeks and weeks and weeks of negotiations with the Senate,” he said. “Am I going to get a better deal than the Senate?”
Though Eissler’s legislation has exposed a fracture among House Republicans, it is Democrats — galvanized by the teachers associations — who can claim responsibility for derailing it. They have pummeled it to the ground with parliamentary tactics, including one from Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, after four hours of debate during the bill’s second appearance on the floor.
Martinez Fischer said he had teased his Republican colleague about the bill’s travails. “I’ve said that if this bill ever makes it to the floor again, I want you to wear a cat suit,” he said. “Because House Bill 400 has had more lives than any legislation I’ve seen in my 12 years of service.”
Cat suit or not, Eissler vowed that his measure would return to the floor — and pass. He also said his relationship with teachers associations was not in danger.
“I’ve always gotten along with the teacher groups, and I still do,” he said. “Other than this.”
Showing posts with label HB 400. Show all posts
Showing posts with label HB 400. Show all posts
Friday, May 20, 2011
Friday, May 13, 2011
Teachers, Democrats Win Fight on Major Education Bill, But What Now?
Bills like HB 400 aren't pretty for teachers, but when you want to cut huge amounts from public education, the results are bound to be ugly.
by Abby Rapoport
Friday, May 13, 2011
Despite weeks of coverage and contention, House Bill 400 never got a pithy title from the press like the "guns on campus" bill or the "pork chopper" bill. But after Thursday night, the school reform legislation, which would have allowed districts to fire teachers more easily, as well as furlough them and cut their pay, may now be remembered by another moniker: the session's first Democratic victory.
When the clock hit midnight Thursday night in the Texas House, marking the deadline for passing bills the first time on the floor, HB 400 had not made it through. The contentious bills had already been postponed three times in the last couple weeks, based on different technical points of order raised by Democrats. The bill then got postponed a couple other times as its author, Public Education Committee Chair Rob Eissler, R-Woodlands, fought for support from his colleagues. In the end, it never made it back to the floor Thursday night.
That doesn't mean the effort is dead—Eissler has vowed to try to attach the measure as an amendment to every education bill he sees—but the Democrats undoubtedly scored a victory. Teachers groups have fought the measure intensely, and successfully lobbied many members, including Republicans, to oppose the bill.
The problem is, however, that the state is still planning to cut billions from public education—and without this bill, school districts have fewer options for cutting costs. The House budget includes almost $8 billion in cuts to districts. The Senate budget cuts $4 billion. Either way, most school districts are going to feel some pain—and some school districts will feel quite a bit of pain. HB 400 offered districts options like furloughs and pay cuts to deal with the impending fiscal crisis. Without such a measure, layoffs will be one of the only options left for cutting costs.
In many ways, teachers groups had to oppose HB 400—it weakened safeguards within teacher contracts, allowing for options like pay cuts. Senior teachers wouldn't get the extra job protection they've enjoyed for years. And it made all these changes permanent, rather than letting them expire. In some ways, it fundamentally changes teachers' status as a protected class of workers. The commissioner of education speculated that if bills like HB 400 passed, it could open the door for more widespread unionization efforts.
With or without HB 400, districts are going to face tough cuts. And without it, there may well be more teacher layoffs. "I'm trying to save teachers' jobs," Eissler has said repeatedly.
But many Republicans were hesitant to support his bill. Earlier, Republican Rep. Larry Phillips tried to defang the bill with an unsuccessful amendment that garnered support from 18 GOP votes. Had Eissler had the full support of his party, he could have simply suspended the rules (with a two-thirds vote) and passed the bill without points of order. Instead, Republicans who eagerly supported the budget and its accompanying cuts to education found themselves opposed to a bill that outlines the consequences of such a cut.
Democrats can enjoy their consistency. They did not vote for the budget, so why should they vote for a bill that will weaken teacher contracts?
Still, districts need some options for these next couple years, so they don't have to fire as many people. In both the House and Senate, the main vehicles are stalled. Senate Bill 12, a softer version of Eissler's bill, doesn't have the votes to come up for debate, and many speculate that it's dead. School finance bills—which would set out the system for how cuts will get distributed to school districts—also face bleak futures. Much like HB 400, the House school finance measure only has a future as an amendment. It never even made it onto a House calendar (their version of a to-do list) and its prospects as a stand-alone bill died Thursday night as well.
No one likes bills like these—school finance bills that show just how much each district is going to lose, bills that cut teacher pay. But oddly enough stripping funding from public education is bound to have some ugly consequences, for teachers, schools and even state legislators.
by Abby Rapoport
Friday, May 13, 2011
Despite weeks of coverage and contention, House Bill 400 never got a pithy title from the press like the "guns on campus" bill or the "pork chopper" bill. But after Thursday night, the school reform legislation, which would have allowed districts to fire teachers more easily, as well as furlough them and cut their pay, may now be remembered by another moniker: the session's first Democratic victory.
When the clock hit midnight Thursday night in the Texas House, marking the deadline for passing bills the first time on the floor, HB 400 had not made it through. The contentious bills had already been postponed three times in the last couple weeks, based on different technical points of order raised by Democrats. The bill then got postponed a couple other times as its author, Public Education Committee Chair Rob Eissler, R-Woodlands, fought for support from his colleagues. In the end, it never made it back to the floor Thursday night.
That doesn't mean the effort is dead—Eissler has vowed to try to attach the measure as an amendment to every education bill he sees—but the Democrats undoubtedly scored a victory. Teachers groups have fought the measure intensely, and successfully lobbied many members, including Republicans, to oppose the bill.
The problem is, however, that the state is still planning to cut billions from public education—and without this bill, school districts have fewer options for cutting costs. The House budget includes almost $8 billion in cuts to districts. The Senate budget cuts $4 billion. Either way, most school districts are going to feel some pain—and some school districts will feel quite a bit of pain. HB 400 offered districts options like furloughs and pay cuts to deal with the impending fiscal crisis. Without such a measure, layoffs will be one of the only options left for cutting costs.
In many ways, teachers groups had to oppose HB 400—it weakened safeguards within teacher contracts, allowing for options like pay cuts. Senior teachers wouldn't get the extra job protection they've enjoyed for years. And it made all these changes permanent, rather than letting them expire. In some ways, it fundamentally changes teachers' status as a protected class of workers. The commissioner of education speculated that if bills like HB 400 passed, it could open the door for more widespread unionization efforts.
With or without HB 400, districts are going to face tough cuts. And without it, there may well be more teacher layoffs. "I'm trying to save teachers' jobs," Eissler has said repeatedly.
But many Republicans were hesitant to support his bill. Earlier, Republican Rep. Larry Phillips tried to defang the bill with an unsuccessful amendment that garnered support from 18 GOP votes. Had Eissler had the full support of his party, he could have simply suspended the rules (with a two-thirds vote) and passed the bill without points of order. Instead, Republicans who eagerly supported the budget and its accompanying cuts to education found themselves opposed to a bill that outlines the consequences of such a cut.
Democrats can enjoy their consistency. They did not vote for the budget, so why should they vote for a bill that will weaken teacher contracts?
Still, districts need some options for these next couple years, so they don't have to fire as many people. In both the House and Senate, the main vehicles are stalled. Senate Bill 12, a softer version of Eissler's bill, doesn't have the votes to come up for debate, and many speculate that it's dead. School finance bills—which would set out the system for how cuts will get distributed to school districts—also face bleak futures. Much like HB 400, the House school finance measure only has a future as an amendment. It never even made it onto a House calendar (their version of a to-do list) and its prospects as a stand-alone bill died Thursday night as well.
No one likes bills like these—school finance bills that show just how much each district is going to lose, bills that cut teacher pay. But oddly enough stripping funding from public education is bound to have some ugly consequences, for teachers, schools and even state legislators.
Monday, May 09, 2011
Attempt to Lift Class Size Ratio Stumbles Again
by Morgan Smith | Texas Tribune
5/6/2011
Lawmakers in the House took a second swing at state Rep. Rob Eissler's school mandate relief bill late Friday night. And once again, they whiffed.
A point of order from parliamentary mastermind state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, is being considered overnight after almost four hours of debate on the floor.
As the debate kicked off, an impassioned state Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, delivered a speech that Democrats — and some Republicans, like state Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman — echoed all night as they detailed their opposition to the bill's proposal to eliminate minimum salary requirements, lift the 22-1 class size ratio, authorize unpaid furloughs and remove termination notification requirements.
"We are dealing with HB 400 because we are unwilling to pay the tab for public education for children to get a higher quality education," Turner said, "HB 400 is a consolation bill that shows we're willing to compromise and dumb down education in Texas."
But Eissler, R-The Woodlands, demonstrated he came ready to deal when he offered an amendment from the floor that kept the 22-1 class size ratio for kindergarten through fourth grade but made it significantly easier from districts to get a waiver exemption as long as they maintained a 22-1 district wide average. And teachers' groups scored a victory when Eissler agreed to make the bills' measures temporary — something he previously said he would not do.
"As much as I hate weakening our 22-1 law at all, all I'm saying is that if we have to do it, we should sunset it," said state Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin, the author of the amendment.
Eissler initially said he believed making the measure temporary would be "creating havoc" in school districts. But after a few moments of deliberation, he approved the amendment.
None of those concessions were enough to stop Democrats from deploying their favorite tactic of the session, however— which proved successful when the parliamentarain sustained it the next morning.
The House is set to take up the bill for a third time on Monday.
5/6/2011
Lawmakers in the House took a second swing at state Rep. Rob Eissler's school mandate relief bill late Friday night. And once again, they whiffed.
A point of order from parliamentary mastermind state Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer, D-San Antonio, is being considered overnight after almost four hours of debate on the floor.
As the debate kicked off, an impassioned state Rep. Sylvester Turner, D-Houston, delivered a speech that Democrats — and some Republicans, like state Rep. Larry Phillips, R-Sherman — echoed all night as they detailed their opposition to the bill's proposal to eliminate minimum salary requirements, lift the 22-1 class size ratio, authorize unpaid furloughs and remove termination notification requirements.
"We are dealing with HB 400 because we are unwilling to pay the tab for public education for children to get a higher quality education," Turner said, "HB 400 is a consolation bill that shows we're willing to compromise and dumb down education in Texas."
But Eissler, R-The Woodlands, demonstrated he came ready to deal when he offered an amendment from the floor that kept the 22-1 class size ratio for kindergarten through fourth grade but made it significantly easier from districts to get a waiver exemption as long as they maintained a 22-1 district wide average. And teachers' groups scored a victory when Eissler agreed to make the bills' measures temporary — something he previously said he would not do.
"As much as I hate weakening our 22-1 law at all, all I'm saying is that if we have to do it, we should sunset it," said state Rep. Mark Strama, D-Austin, the author of the amendment.
Eissler initially said he believed making the measure temporary would be "creating havoc" in school districts. But after a few moments of deliberation, he approved the amendment.
None of those concessions were enough to stop Democrats from deploying their favorite tactic of the session, however— which proved successful when the parliamentarain sustained it the next morning.
The House is set to take up the bill for a third time on Monday.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
Technicality Slays House Bill on Class Sizes — for Now
by Morgan Smith | Texas Tribune
4/26/2011
The House was set to debate a bill that would scrap a 27-year-old law mandating a 22-to-1 student-teacher ratio in kindergarten through fourth grade today — but before it got the chance, state Rep. Borris Miles, D-Houston, derailed the legislation with a point of order.
HB 400 from state Rep. Rob Eissler, R-Woodlands, would replace that ratio with a hard cap of 25 students per classroom.
Miles challenged the bill because the analysis did not match up with the text of the bill. It now returns to the Public Education Committee, which Eissler chairs, which must pass it out once again. It could hit the House floor for the second time as early as Friday. In an interview after his point of order was sustained, Miles called eliminating the class size ration "ridiculous" and said that it pitted teachers against administrators. He said that when it returned to the floor, he would continue to challenge it.
"There's other points of order on HB 400 that need to be addressed," he said.
Outside the House chambers, Eissler emphasized that his bill was about protecting teachers' jobs and expressed frustration that it had been delayed on a technicality. "We're in the cat-and-mouse game now; that should tell you how badly they don't want this to pass," he said.
In 1984, the Legislature passed an extensive school reform package, which included a requirement that prohibited schools from going above a 22-to-1 student-to-teacher ratio in elementary grades. Teachers associations have fought hard to keep that in place, saying the detriment to students' educational experience that removing the ratio would bring isn't worth what they believe will be a marginal benefit. They also question whether it would actually help reduce costs. Districts can already apply for a waiver if they lack the space or qualified teachers to create a new class — and they say the Texas Education Agency already grants the vast majority of such requests.
Eissler's bill also contains provisions that eliminate minimum salary requirements for teachers, authorizes unpaid furloughs and removes the 30-day period for districts to notify teachers of their termination. It also scraps the 10-to-1 student teacher ratio for remedial classes.
In the upper chamber, state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, has similar legislation pending in committee. SB 443 changes the 22-to-1 class size cap to a 21-to-1 district-wide average. But it prohibits districts from having any class sizes larger than 24 — and does not provide a waiver.
4/26/2011
The House was set to debate a bill that would scrap a 27-year-old law mandating a 22-to-1 student-teacher ratio in kindergarten through fourth grade today — but before it got the chance, state Rep. Borris Miles, D-Houston, derailed the legislation with a point of order.
HB 400 from state Rep. Rob Eissler, R-Woodlands, would replace that ratio with a hard cap of 25 students per classroom.
Miles challenged the bill because the analysis did not match up with the text of the bill. It now returns to the Public Education Committee, which Eissler chairs, which must pass it out once again. It could hit the House floor for the second time as early as Friday. In an interview after his point of order was sustained, Miles called eliminating the class size ration "ridiculous" and said that it pitted teachers against administrators. He said that when it returned to the floor, he would continue to challenge it.
"There's other points of order on HB 400 that need to be addressed," he said.
Outside the House chambers, Eissler emphasized that his bill was about protecting teachers' jobs and expressed frustration that it had been delayed on a technicality. "We're in the cat-and-mouse game now; that should tell you how badly they don't want this to pass," he said.
In 1984, the Legislature passed an extensive school reform package, which included a requirement that prohibited schools from going above a 22-to-1 student-to-teacher ratio in elementary grades. Teachers associations have fought hard to keep that in place, saying the detriment to students' educational experience that removing the ratio would bring isn't worth what they believe will be a marginal benefit. They also question whether it would actually help reduce costs. Districts can already apply for a waiver if they lack the space or qualified teachers to create a new class — and they say the Texas Education Agency already grants the vast majority of such requests.
Eissler's bill also contains provisions that eliminate minimum salary requirements for teachers, authorizes unpaid furloughs and removes the 30-day period for districts to notify teachers of their termination. It also scraps the 10-to-1 student teacher ratio for remedial classes.
In the upper chamber, state Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, has similar legislation pending in committee. SB 443 changes the 22-to-1 class size cap to a 21-to-1 district-wide average. But it prohibits districts from having any class sizes larger than 24 — and does not provide a waiver.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)