School 'fix' plan: Is it sufficient?
Experts see good step, but it may not satisfy court or long-term goal
12:00 AM CDT on Sunday, May 14, 2006
By CHRISTY HOPPE / The Dallas Morning News
AUSTIN – The school finance plan being stacked like so many term papers on the governor's desk beats the Supreme Court deadline and assures the schools will open in August. But the plan leaves enough unanswered questions that many experts believe the state could be back in court fighting another crisis in as little as two years.
The new state business tax doesn't raise enough money to pay for promised property tax cuts – in fact, it falls $5 billion short. Lawmakers are counting on a booming economy to make up the difference, but if it turns sour, the crisis could be more immediate.
Plus, the Supreme Court warned that current education funding levels were barely adequate.
But the Legislature is putting a modest amount of new money into education programs. Within a few years, the "drift towards constitutional inadequacy" warned of by the court could be pushed by the low tide of dollars in the plan.
And finally, as homeowners are again finding this month, property appraisals are spiraling in many parts of the state. That and gradual increases in the property tax rate could push the state back to the brink of homeowner revolt.
Despite all that, most experts gave an appreciative nod to the Legislature, which is expected to finish work on the historic tax-swap package Monday. The plan, they noted, taps new revenue sources – chiefly a new business tax and added tobacco taxes – that allow a one-third cut in school property taxes while achieving an historical level of funding equality among the state's 1,037 school districts.
"It's a very promising first step, and if it hadn't occurred, they couldn't have fixed anything else downstream," said John Brooks, a lecturer on education at the University of North Texas and a former superintendent in the Northwest and Bridgeport districts.
In that first step, the Legislature also has diminished the Robin Hood system, whereby property-rich districts were forced to give away their tax dollars to equalize the dollars given to poorer districts. In addition, teachers received a $2,000 pay raise and high schools will receive additional funding to beef up curriculum and lower dropout rates.
But downstream are whitewater questions about whether this step is enough to satisfy the state's constitutional mandate on education.
Most of the emphasis of the Legislature was on lowering property taxes to $1 per $100 valuation – a drop of one-third from the current cap. Most of that tax money will be replaced with a new state business tax.
But the Supreme Court also told the state that school districts had to have "meaningful discretion" in the money they could raise. To give them that discretion, the plan allows districts to raise their tax rate 4 cents the first year. If they want more, they must go to their voters.
"Is that enough?" Dr. Brooks asked. "The answer is no."
That money, over time, will not produce the "vibrant curriculum that most people want."
Scott McCown agrees. The director of the progressive Center for Public Policy Priorities, a former state district judge who presided over a key school finance lawsuit, said that the 4-cent range provided by the Legislature doesn't put sufficient money into the school system.
"It's like you took your son and said, 'You have meaningful discretion to drive the car whenever you want, but there won't be any gas in it,' " Mr. McCown said.
If voters in many districts start turning down requests for tax hikes, then any wiggle room to provide curriculum, additional teachers and technology starts to disappear, he said.
"The whole session has been about cutting taxes. This is a net tax cut of about $2.5 billion a year," Mr. McCown said. "There will be less money for education down the line, not more."
He expects that "adequacy, equity and meaningful discretion will all be back in play," he said. "I think they'll be back in court in a year."
David Thompson, a lead attorney for school districts in the lawsuit that resulted in the Supreme Court's ruling, said that the plan will definitely require monitoring on issues of adequacy and equity. Still, he said, the Legislature has "done something that is very significant, and I personally applaud them."
Currently, transportation, teacher pay and other costs – such as fuel and utilities – are underfunded, the Houston lawyer said, and school districts might have to use their "local discretion" dollars to pay for services the state should be providing. All of these things bear careful scrutiny, he said.
"But my initial reaction is that if the Legislature hasn't reached the ultimate destination, they've taken a significant step along the journey in the right direction," Mr. Thompson said.
Another attorney in the court case, George Bramblett of Austin, indicated he still has some major concerns and plans to meet with his client districts in the near future.
"Obviously, it helps, but it doesn't solve the problem," he said.
The state has been operating an unconstitutionally funded system for at least the past four years, based on court rulings, he said, and that will take time to correct.
"This might solve the property tax issue, but it does not solve the adequacy issue," Mr. Bramblett said.
He said he couldn't speculate on what might happen with future litigation.
Clayton Downing, whose Texas School Coalition represents 140 property-rich districts, said he believes the legislation has bought at least a year of breathing room on school finance. The problem, he said, remains whether districts have enough discretionary funding.
"It won't help the schools and the teachers," Mr. Downing said, but at the same time, "equity is going to be the highest it's ever been, ever. You're going to reduce recapture statewide."
Within two years, fewer than 50 school districts will probably be subject to giving up their tax dollars to Robin Hood, he said. "It's a great, great start," Mr. Downing said.
Wayne Pierce, director of the Equity Center, which speaks for 600 low- and medium-wealth school districts, said transportation, bilingual education, teacher salaries and other basics are not funded well enough by the state in this plan.
And yet, he said, "This is the best structure that we've had."
Still, it is only the framework, he said. If schools can't raise tax money, if the state doesn't provide the funding to keep the schools on equal footing, and if the business tax doesn't raise enough money, then the school districts might have to return to the courts to seek relief.
"When you're building a house, you have to get that foundation in good. You wouldn't put up the walls, floors, windows without that," he said.
The test, he said, will be raising the roof – providing more money for education overall.
"Now they have to look at teacher salaries and money for education programs," Mr. Pierce said.
E-mail choppe@dallasnews.com
Online at: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/politics/local/stories/DN-schoolfix_14tex.ART.North.Edition1.90acb7d.html
Monday, May 15, 2006
Rising number of schools face penalties
This should concern us. "About 1,750 U.S. schools have been ordered into radical "restructuring," subject to mass firings, closure, state takeover or other moves aimed at wiping their slates clean." We knew this was coming.... -Angela
By Ben Feller, AP Education Writer | May 9, 2006
WASHINGTON --Falling short of requirements under President Bush's education law, about 1,750 U.S. schools have been ordered into radical "restructuring," subject to mass firings, closure, state takeover or other moves aimed at wiping their slates clean.
Many are finding resolutions short of such drastic measures. But there is growing concern that the number of schools in serious trouble under the No Child Left Behind law is rising sharply -- up 44 percent over the past year alone -- and is expected to swell by thousands in the next few years.
Schools make the list by falling short in math or reading for at least five straight years.
In perspective, the total amounts to 3 percent of roughly 53,000 schools that get federal poverty aid and face penalties under the No Child Left Behind law.
"It's just a matter of time before we see upwards of 10,000 schools in restructuring," said Michael Petrilli, a former enforcement official at the Education Department.
"Unless all of these schools suddenly turn themselves around, or the states continue to find ways to finagle the system, you're going to see the numbers accelerate," said Petrilli, now vice president for policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, a school change advocate.
The Associated Press reported last month that schools were deliberately not counting the test scores of nearly 2 million students, mostly minorities, when they measure progress by racial groups. Those exclusions have made it easier for schools to meet their yearly goals.
Still, more than a quarter of the nation's schools have failed to make adequate yearly progress for at least one year. Many will keep moving along the law's penalty timeline. A district must choose an overhaul plan for a school by year five, then act on it in year six.
For example, in Tucson, Ariz., the Lawrence Intermediate School for five years has failed to show enough reading progress among its students. So the district has ordered a total overhaul. All employees, from the teachers to the janitors, must reapply for their jobs.
The school's plan also calls for a longer school day, expanded tutoring, and bonus pay for instructors deemed to be master teachers.
"It's actually a positive, something to be excited about," said Ross Sheard, a supervisor of principals for the Tucson Unified School District. "We're not being dictated to. We're being told, 'You come up with a solution.'"
Assistant Education Secretary Henry Johnson said he's not encouraged by the growing number of schools ordered to make a drastic change. But the trend also shows the law is working, he said, by identifying schools that have underserved their poor and minority kids.
When a school reaches the end of the line, its district has five choices:
-- Hire an outside organization to run the school.
-- Reopen the school as a charter school, with new leadership and less regulation.
-- Replace most or all of the school staff with any ties to the school's failure.
-- Turn operation of the school over to the state, if the state agrees.
-- Choose any other major restructuring that will fundamentally reform the school.
Most districts are opting for the last choice, a wide-open category. It allows for approaches that are easier to pull off than firing teachers or opening under new management.
"Most schools are not doing radical things," said Jack Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy, which has studied restructuring efforts in California and Michigan.
"They are offering professional development, rethinking the curriculum, bringing coaches in, and trying to improve the school without wiping the slate clean," he said.
In Michigan, many schools improved their test scores by using a mix of strategies, a good lesson for other states, Jennings said.
The Education Department monitors whether districts are restructuring schools and aims to help them assist. But it does not get involved in how they do it.
"I don't know that we have a preferred way," said Johnson, the Education Department official. "Whatever way that works is the preferred way."
Yet some see an enormous loophole. Free to choose "any other major restructuring," districts have opted for milder remedies that won't turn schools around, Petrilli said.
"This is a credibility issue," he said. "If parents get information that their school is failing for six straight years, and everyone keeps their job, how is that a restructuring?"
Maryland tried a get-tough approach. The state schools chief ordered a state takeover of 11 struggling schools in Baltimore, invoking the federal law. But Democratic state lawmakers halted the plan, then overrode the Republican governor's veto when he intervened.
The law requires schools to test students in reading and math in grades three to eight and once in high school. The schools must show overall improvement and yearly progress among poor children, minorities and other groups. Missing even one target means the whole school falls short.
Each year, the consequences grow, from letting students transfer to offering tutoring to installing a new curriculum or some other major step. Then comes the order to restructure.
Nationwide, the number of schools in the final penalty phase varies widely because states started the countdown at different times.
The law has been in effect for four school years. Yet some states list schools as failing for five or six years based on testing and data reporting that began before the law.
Seven states -- California, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania -- account for almost 70 percent of all schools ordered to restructure.
Eight other states and the District of Columbia list no schools in critical trouble. In many cases, their school systems do not have five straight years of test data, the amount needed to determine whether an overhaul is required.
Education Department officials caution that the current numbers are still being verified.
----
On The Net:
Education Department: http://www.ed.gov
© Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
By Ben Feller, AP Education Writer | May 9, 2006
WASHINGTON --Falling short of requirements under President Bush's education law, about 1,750 U.S. schools have been ordered into radical "restructuring," subject to mass firings, closure, state takeover or other moves aimed at wiping their slates clean.
Many are finding resolutions short of such drastic measures. But there is growing concern that the number of schools in serious trouble under the No Child Left Behind law is rising sharply -- up 44 percent over the past year alone -- and is expected to swell by thousands in the next few years.
Schools make the list by falling short in math or reading for at least five straight years.
In perspective, the total amounts to 3 percent of roughly 53,000 schools that get federal poverty aid and face penalties under the No Child Left Behind law.
"It's just a matter of time before we see upwards of 10,000 schools in restructuring," said Michael Petrilli, a former enforcement official at the Education Department.
"Unless all of these schools suddenly turn themselves around, or the states continue to find ways to finagle the system, you're going to see the numbers accelerate," said Petrilli, now vice president for policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, a school change advocate.
The Associated Press reported last month that schools were deliberately not counting the test scores of nearly 2 million students, mostly minorities, when they measure progress by racial groups. Those exclusions have made it easier for schools to meet their yearly goals.
Still, more than a quarter of the nation's schools have failed to make adequate yearly progress for at least one year. Many will keep moving along the law's penalty timeline. A district must choose an overhaul plan for a school by year five, then act on it in year six.
For example, in Tucson, Ariz., the Lawrence Intermediate School for five years has failed to show enough reading progress among its students. So the district has ordered a total overhaul. All employees, from the teachers to the janitors, must reapply for their jobs.
The school's plan also calls for a longer school day, expanded tutoring, and bonus pay for instructors deemed to be master teachers.
"It's actually a positive, something to be excited about," said Ross Sheard, a supervisor of principals for the Tucson Unified School District. "We're not being dictated to. We're being told, 'You come up with a solution.'"
Assistant Education Secretary Henry Johnson said he's not encouraged by the growing number of schools ordered to make a drastic change. But the trend also shows the law is working, he said, by identifying schools that have underserved their poor and minority kids.
When a school reaches the end of the line, its district has five choices:
-- Hire an outside organization to run the school.
-- Reopen the school as a charter school, with new leadership and less regulation.
-- Replace most or all of the school staff with any ties to the school's failure.
-- Turn operation of the school over to the state, if the state agrees.
-- Choose any other major restructuring that will fundamentally reform the school.
Most districts are opting for the last choice, a wide-open category. It allows for approaches that are easier to pull off than firing teachers or opening under new management.
"Most schools are not doing radical things," said Jack Jennings, president of the Center on Education Policy, which has studied restructuring efforts in California and Michigan.
"They are offering professional development, rethinking the curriculum, bringing coaches in, and trying to improve the school without wiping the slate clean," he said.
In Michigan, many schools improved their test scores by using a mix of strategies, a good lesson for other states, Jennings said.
The Education Department monitors whether districts are restructuring schools and aims to help them assist. But it does not get involved in how they do it.
"I don't know that we have a preferred way," said Johnson, the Education Department official. "Whatever way that works is the preferred way."
Yet some see an enormous loophole. Free to choose "any other major restructuring," districts have opted for milder remedies that won't turn schools around, Petrilli said.
"This is a credibility issue," he said. "If parents get information that their school is failing for six straight years, and everyone keeps their job, how is that a restructuring?"
Maryland tried a get-tough approach. The state schools chief ordered a state takeover of 11 struggling schools in Baltimore, invoking the federal law. But Democratic state lawmakers halted the plan, then overrode the Republican governor's veto when he intervened.
The law requires schools to test students in reading and math in grades three to eight and once in high school. The schools must show overall improvement and yearly progress among poor children, minorities and other groups. Missing even one target means the whole school falls short.
Each year, the consequences grow, from letting students transfer to offering tutoring to installing a new curriculum or some other major step. Then comes the order to restructure.
Nationwide, the number of schools in the final penalty phase varies widely because states started the countdown at different times.
The law has been in effect for four school years. Yet some states list schools as failing for five or six years based on testing and data reporting that began before the law.
Seven states -- California, Georgia, Illinois, Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania -- account for almost 70 percent of all schools ordered to restructure.
Eight other states and the District of Columbia list no schools in critical trouble. In many cases, their school systems do not have five straight years of test data, the amount needed to determine whether an overhaul is required.
Education Department officials caution that the current numbers are still being verified.
----
On The Net:
Education Department: http://www.ed.gov
© Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Two Setbacks for Exit Exams Taken by High School Seniors
By JESSE McKINLEY / New York Times
May 10, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, May 9 — In two setbacks for high school exit exams, a judge in Oakland said Tuesday that he was inclined to ban such tests as a graduation requirement in California and a Massachusetts school board voted to issue diplomas to students who had failed such tests despite a state law prohibiting that.
In California, Judge Robert Freedman of Superior Court in Alameda County said in a preliminary ruling on Monday that the exams, standardized math and English tests that high school seniors have to pass to graduate, discriminated against impoverished students and students learning English.
On Tuesday, as thousands of students took a late round of tests, Judge Freedman heard arguments in favor of them, but indicated the state's lawyers faced an uphill fight.
"The court is basically resolute in its original decision," the judge said. He said he would issue his final decision on Friday.
The tentative ruling shocked the state superintendent of public instruction, Jack O'Connell, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both favor the exams as a way to raise standards. California has the largest public school system in the country, with 6.3 million students, but mediocre rankings.
Mr. O'Connell said the state would immediately appeal any injunction.
"We're prepared for the long haul," he said in a telephone interview. "I'm convinced there will be some more turns in the road."
Officials said they had done everything they could to help students adjust to the requirement, including delaying the California High School Exit Exam for several years. The law was passed in 1999, but the class of 2006 is the first to have to pass it to graduate.
A ruling against the exams could allow nearly 47,000 seniors who did not pass — more than 10 percent of the class — to graduate next month.
Opponents of the exams, which more than 20 states require, hailed the developments.
"It is a major victory, both substantial and symbolic," said Robert A. Schaeffer of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, a watchdog group in Cambridge, Mass. "It sends a message to other states that they should reconsider one-size-fits-all graduation tests."
Such reconsideration is under way in New Bedford, Mass., south of Boston. On Monday, the school board there voted to issue diplomas to students who had fulfilled academic requirements but had not passed the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System, which evaluates math and English skills at the 10th-grade level.
Gov. Mitt Romney called the decision a "gross mistake" and illegal.
"New Bedford is going to take corrective action," Mr. Romney said, adding that the state could withhold more than $100 million in school money earmarked for the city.
Carolyn Marshall contributed reporting from Oakland, Calif., for this article, and Katie Zezima from Boston.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
May 10, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, May 9 — In two setbacks for high school exit exams, a judge in Oakland said Tuesday that he was inclined to ban such tests as a graduation requirement in California and a Massachusetts school board voted to issue diplomas to students who had failed such tests despite a state law prohibiting that.
In California, Judge Robert Freedman of Superior Court in Alameda County said in a preliminary ruling on Monday that the exams, standardized math and English tests that high school seniors have to pass to graduate, discriminated against impoverished students and students learning English.
On Tuesday, as thousands of students took a late round of tests, Judge Freedman heard arguments in favor of them, but indicated the state's lawyers faced an uphill fight.
"The court is basically resolute in its original decision," the judge said. He said he would issue his final decision on Friday.
The tentative ruling shocked the state superintendent of public instruction, Jack O'Connell, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both favor the exams as a way to raise standards. California has the largest public school system in the country, with 6.3 million students, but mediocre rankings.
Mr. O'Connell said the state would immediately appeal any injunction.
"We're prepared for the long haul," he said in a telephone interview. "I'm convinced there will be some more turns in the road."
Officials said they had done everything they could to help students adjust to the requirement, including delaying the California High School Exit Exam for several years. The law was passed in 1999, but the class of 2006 is the first to have to pass it to graduate.
A ruling against the exams could allow nearly 47,000 seniors who did not pass — more than 10 percent of the class — to graduate next month.
Opponents of the exams, which more than 20 states require, hailed the developments.
"It is a major victory, both substantial and symbolic," said Robert A. Schaeffer of the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, a watchdog group in Cambridge, Mass. "It sends a message to other states that they should reconsider one-size-fits-all graduation tests."
Such reconsideration is under way in New Bedford, Mass., south of Boston. On Monday, the school board there voted to issue diplomas to students who had fulfilled academic requirements but had not passed the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System, which evaluates math and English skills at the 10th-grade level.
Gov. Mitt Romney called the decision a "gross mistake" and illegal.
"New Bedford is going to take corrective action," Mr. Romney said, adding that the state could withhold more than $100 million in school money earmarked for the city.
Carolyn Marshall contributed reporting from Oakland, Calif., for this article, and Katie Zezima from Boston.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
They dare to dissent on education 'reform'
They dare to dissent on education 'reform'
By Joan Vennochi | May 14, 2006
NEW BEDFORD Mayor Scott W. Lang is unafraid to put unpopular thoughts on the table.
Good for him.
In defiance of state law, Lang and the New Bedford School Committee want to grant high school diplomas to students who have met all requirements of high school graduation but did not pass the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System test. Currently, students who fail one or both of the MCAS English and math tests are only entitled to a ''certificate of attendance." New Bedford wants to issue two types of diplomas -- a state-approved diploma for students who do pass the MCAS and a general high school diploma for those who successfully completed their course work but did not pass the MCAS.
The response is predictable and patronizing: How dare New Bedford challenge the sacred cow of education reform with a threat of civil disobedience?
Well, the president of the United States appears to be telling the country it's OK to selectively disobey laws. Why can't the mayor of New Bedford reach the same conclusion, in pursuit of a legitimate debate about public education?
Thousands of Massachusetts students already receive high school diplomas without passing MCAS tests. They attend private and parochial schools across the state. No one presumes they are undeserving or uneducated because they never had the privilege of being drilled in the art of taking a state-administered, standardized test. Yet, that is precisely the presumption in Massachusetts public schools.
In New Bedford, Lang is challenging that presumption. ''It comes down to this. Public school administrators and teachers are not trusted to accurately assess and pass a kid onto the next grade or course. The law is based on it," said Lang.
Always seeking the next easy headline to pitch to the national media, Mitt Romney is threatening to cut off $103 million in state funding if New Bedford pursues its plan to issue two types of diplomas. Frankly, the governor is irrelevant to this local discussion. He has no interest in understanding what is happening on the ground in Massachusetts classrooms. All he wants is the ability to tout Massachusetts ''ed reform," as he flies across the country on the presidential campaign trail.
As Lang notes, ''Bludgeoning New Bedford into submission doesn't solve the problem."
The problem is not a commitment to education reform. The problem is that too many politicians want to believe that education reform did everything necessary to ''reform" public education -- and now it's simply a matter of making sure students, teachers, and administrators get with the program, stay with it, and reform themselves. They don't want to get to the next level of debate -- how to close the achievement gap between mostly white, suburban public school kids and their counterparts in diverse, low-income, urban school systems.
Nearly 66 percent of students in New Bedford come from low income families versus 26 percent statewide. According to recently reported information, 91 percent of the 631 member senior class at New Bedford High had passed the MCAS.
But a third of New Bedford students drop out over the course of high school, compared with 13 percent statewide. Lang believes students decide to drop out when they fear they will not be able to pass the MCAS. What is more important, he asks, ''To be socialized and involved in a school community or to sit in a seat one day and go through a standardized test?" What about those kids who stay in school, pass the course work, but don't pass the MCAS? Should we just tell them, ''Thanks for coming, we appreciate it, take care?" asks Lang.
Several other Massachusetts communities, including Cambridge and Falmouth, tried to implement the same type of proposal as New Bedford. They backed down when threatened with the loss of state funding. Lang said he does not want to put New Bedford or the schools at risk; but he wonders why the law is considered sacrosanct and why politicians like Romney are so willing to hold money hostage to their definition of education reform. ''To say, 'We're not going to fund your school system,' is absurd," said Lang.
One size rarely fits all, in clothes or education. The challenge is figuring out how to tailor learning to children, wherever they live, whatever their family backgrounds. Public education is not ''reformed" until it is. Public officials who have the spine to point that out deserve praise, not condemnation.
Joan Vennochi's e-mail address is vennochi@globe.com.
© Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
By Joan Vennochi | May 14, 2006
NEW BEDFORD Mayor Scott W. Lang is unafraid to put unpopular thoughts on the table.
Good for him.
In defiance of state law, Lang and the New Bedford School Committee want to grant high school diplomas to students who have met all requirements of high school graduation but did not pass the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System test. Currently, students who fail one or both of the MCAS English and math tests are only entitled to a ''certificate of attendance." New Bedford wants to issue two types of diplomas -- a state-approved diploma for students who do pass the MCAS and a general high school diploma for those who successfully completed their course work but did not pass the MCAS.
The response is predictable and patronizing: How dare New Bedford challenge the sacred cow of education reform with a threat of civil disobedience?
Well, the president of the United States appears to be telling the country it's OK to selectively disobey laws. Why can't the mayor of New Bedford reach the same conclusion, in pursuit of a legitimate debate about public education?
Thousands of Massachusetts students already receive high school diplomas without passing MCAS tests. They attend private and parochial schools across the state. No one presumes they are undeserving or uneducated because they never had the privilege of being drilled in the art of taking a state-administered, standardized test. Yet, that is precisely the presumption in Massachusetts public schools.
In New Bedford, Lang is challenging that presumption. ''It comes down to this. Public school administrators and teachers are not trusted to accurately assess and pass a kid onto the next grade or course. The law is based on it," said Lang.
Always seeking the next easy headline to pitch to the national media, Mitt Romney is threatening to cut off $103 million in state funding if New Bedford pursues its plan to issue two types of diplomas. Frankly, the governor is irrelevant to this local discussion. He has no interest in understanding what is happening on the ground in Massachusetts classrooms. All he wants is the ability to tout Massachusetts ''ed reform," as he flies across the country on the presidential campaign trail.
As Lang notes, ''Bludgeoning New Bedford into submission doesn't solve the problem."
The problem is not a commitment to education reform. The problem is that too many politicians want to believe that education reform did everything necessary to ''reform" public education -- and now it's simply a matter of making sure students, teachers, and administrators get with the program, stay with it, and reform themselves. They don't want to get to the next level of debate -- how to close the achievement gap between mostly white, suburban public school kids and their counterparts in diverse, low-income, urban school systems.
Nearly 66 percent of students in New Bedford come from low income families versus 26 percent statewide. According to recently reported information, 91 percent of the 631 member senior class at New Bedford High had passed the MCAS.
But a third of New Bedford students drop out over the course of high school, compared with 13 percent statewide. Lang believes students decide to drop out when they fear they will not be able to pass the MCAS. What is more important, he asks, ''To be socialized and involved in a school community or to sit in a seat one day and go through a standardized test?" What about those kids who stay in school, pass the course work, but don't pass the MCAS? Should we just tell them, ''Thanks for coming, we appreciate it, take care?" asks Lang.
Several other Massachusetts communities, including Cambridge and Falmouth, tried to implement the same type of proposal as New Bedford. They backed down when threatened with the loss of state funding. Lang said he does not want to put New Bedford or the schools at risk; but he wonders why the law is considered sacrosanct and why politicians like Romney are so willing to hold money hostage to their definition of education reform. ''To say, 'We're not going to fund your school system,' is absurd," said Lang.
One size rarely fits all, in clothes or education. The challenge is figuring out how to tailor learning to children, wherever they live, whatever their family backgrounds. Public education is not ''reformed" until it is. Public officials who have the spine to point that out deserve praise, not condemnation.
Joan Vennochi's e-mail address is vennochi@globe.com.
© Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Bills for schools may slow spending
There's clearly going to be a hole in the budget that the next legislative session is going to have to address. A higher (and regressive) sales tax along with cutting other social services will end up making up for the shortfall. It's going to be hard just to buy down the promised property tax cuts. Also, Recapture (or "Robin Hood") is effectively "reigned in," meaning that the 10% of existing wealthy districts get to hold on to more of their money. This is a decision that this top 10 percent has made on behalf of the remaining 90%.
The editors of the Austin American-Statesman today expressed their on-going support for a state income tax. Click here.
Without this, we will keep relying on property and sales taxes to the detriment of the middle- and low-income families. -Angela
79th LEGISLATURE: SPECIAL SESSION
Bills for schools may slow spending
Newest tax cuts could force Legislature to trim Texas' finances
By Jason Embry, Laylan Copelin
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Sunday, May 14, 2006
A school finance proposal poised to emerge from the Legislature cuts more in taxes than it raises and restricts the use of some new dollars coming into the state, setting up a slowdown in government spending that many Republicans have long sought.
The plan has been criticized by some fiscally conservative Republicans because it raises taxes on many businesses. But the legislation may actually do as much to implement their vision of a slimmer state government as anything in years, starting with the need to reduce spending to pay for the property tax cuts. As it's gained momentum, talk of cutting services has returned in force to the halls of the Capitol, even as the state enjoys an $8.2 billion surplus and prepares to spend some of that on schools.
"It is almost as if the majority of the Legislature has mass anorexia," said Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso. "They look in the mirror and think they're too fat, when in fact Texas has enormous challenges in education and health that are being unmet every day."
Texas already spends less money per capita than most other states on services, including public education and health care.
The plan also limits growth in local tax bills caused by rising home appraisals and scales back the amount of tax revenue that property-wealthy districts must share with the rest of the state.
Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, predicts that the tax cuts will spur economic growth, and he said it's appropriate to be cutting taxes when there is surplus money available.
"I think it's an important commitment that we're not just going to increase spending as a result of this, that we're going to use the money for what we said we were — a tax cut," Williams said.
As for paying for the state budget in the future, "I have no doubt that we're going to be able to meet our essential services," he said.
Tuesday is the last day of the Legislature's 30-day special session that was called to respond to the Texas Supreme Court's order that lawmakers give local school boards more room to change their tax rates.
Gov. Rick Perry and lawmakers have set out to address the issue by cutting school property tax rates by one-third over two years and replacing that money with an expanded business tax, higher tobacco taxes, a revamped method of reporting sales taxes on used cars and money from the state's surplus. Most of those measures have been sent to Perry, and lawmakers are working out final differences on the others.
An overall tax cut
Though the business tax expansion was the most politically delicate piece of the puzzle coming into the session, it's House Bills 1 and 2 that could most affect how government operates.
House Bill 1 supplies the property tax cuts and boosts education spending by almost $1.5 billion per year, including a $2,000 teacher pay raise.
House Bill 2, which has been passed in similar form by each side, says money raised from the new taxes must go toward replacing lost property tax revenue until the one-third cut is achieved.
On the whole, the Legislature's plan is expected to cut taxes by $6 billion over the first three years, according to Perry's office. Once the tax cuts are fully phased in, the new taxes will raise about $2.5 billion less each year than what's needed to pay for the property tax cut, officials with the Legislative Budget Board told senators at a recent committee meeting. The state will rely heavily on surplus funds to implement the plan in the first year, before the tax increases take full effect.
Because the Legislature is cutting more taxes than it's raising, there may never be enough money from the tax increases to pay for the full one-third cut, which means the Legislature will have to use other state revenues to get there — or cut from other areas of the state's two-year budget, which includes $72 billion in state funds.
Some Democrats have warned that the only place lawmakers will be able to turn for new money is higher sales taxes, which they say disproportionately hurt the poor.
Dick Lavine with Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates more government spending on programs that aim to help low- and middle-income families, said supporters of smaller government will use deficits created by the plan as an argument to cut state services.
"The likely losers won't be just the usual victims — poor children who need health insurance," Lavine said. "It's going to run throughout state government. We could see more tuition increases, an inability to house prisoners, less money for higher education."
Before senators voted to cut taxes by a full one-third, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst expressed concerns about how quickly the state could pay for a reduction of that size.
"That's something we're going to be monitoring very, very closely, at the same time looking for any area in state government that's fat and that we can eliminate to go ahead and fund our priorities, which obviously include public education," Dewhurst said.
Even as the proposal seeks to limit taxes, it contains one costly provision that was key to drawing support from Democrats and some Republicans in the Senate.
House Bill 1 increases the minimum amount of money that each district is guaranteed for each penny in its tax rate, and it increases the number of school districts that will receive the same funding.The Legislative Budget Board estimates that it could cost the state $940 million per year by 2009 to make sure districts have largely the same per-student funding when their tax rates begin to inch back up.
"When I voted for that bill, I recognized that there could be some problems in the future beyond 2008," Senate Finance Committee Chairman Steve Ogden said. "But I thought that they would all be manageable in some way, and so I said, 'Let's go.' "
Giving voters power
Ogden touted three aspects of the bill: It shifts some of the burden of funding education from local school districts to the state; it cuts property taxes more than ever before; and it increases equity among schools.
Specifically, the legislation cuts school district tax rates for operations from $1.50 to $1.33 this fall and to $1 in fall 2007. School boards will be able to tack about 4 cents back onto their tax rates, and they can go higher than that with voter approval.
Local school boards have, for all practical purposes, been handcuffed in their ability to raise money for several years because they've had tax rates at or near the state's maximum rate. The Legislature's plan gives them more room to raise money by putting their tax rates well below the maximum.
But they'll need voter approval to access most of that money, which reflects an effort by lawmakers to prevent property taxes from shooting back up with rising appraisals.
"A lot of the Republican members of the Legislature — not all of them, but a lot of them — are truly committed to lasting property tax relief," said William Lutz, managing editor of the Lone Star Report, a newsletter that champions smaller government. "They believe that government should not grow faster than the economy grows, unless the voters give their permission for that growth."
House Bill 1 also reduces from about $1.8 billion per year to $1.1 billion the amount of money that districts with high property values per student must share with the rest of the state. The amount of money the Austin school district must share will decrease from $154 million per year to $66 million.
"Everything I campaigned on — reining in 'Robin Hood,' less reliance on property taxes, more money for schools — is happening," said Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas. "We've gotten into the red zone before, but we'd never crossed the end line."
jembry@statesman.com; 445-3654
Additional material from W. Gardner Selby
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/legislature/05/14finance.html
The editors of the Austin American-Statesman today expressed their on-going support for a state income tax. Click here.
Without this, we will keep relying on property and sales taxes to the detriment of the middle- and low-income families. -Angela
79th LEGISLATURE: SPECIAL SESSION
Bills for schools may slow spending
Newest tax cuts could force Legislature to trim Texas' finances
By Jason Embry, Laylan Copelin
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Sunday, May 14, 2006
A school finance proposal poised to emerge from the Legislature cuts more in taxes than it raises and restricts the use of some new dollars coming into the state, setting up a slowdown in government spending that many Republicans have long sought.
The plan has been criticized by some fiscally conservative Republicans because it raises taxes on many businesses. But the legislation may actually do as much to implement their vision of a slimmer state government as anything in years, starting with the need to reduce spending to pay for the property tax cuts. As it's gained momentum, talk of cutting services has returned in force to the halls of the Capitol, even as the state enjoys an $8.2 billion surplus and prepares to spend some of that on schools.
"It is almost as if the majority of the Legislature has mass anorexia," said Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso. "They look in the mirror and think they're too fat, when in fact Texas has enormous challenges in education and health that are being unmet every day."
Texas already spends less money per capita than most other states on services, including public education and health care.
The plan also limits growth in local tax bills caused by rising home appraisals and scales back the amount of tax revenue that property-wealthy districts must share with the rest of the state.
Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, predicts that the tax cuts will spur economic growth, and he said it's appropriate to be cutting taxes when there is surplus money available.
"I think it's an important commitment that we're not just going to increase spending as a result of this, that we're going to use the money for what we said we were — a tax cut," Williams said.
As for paying for the state budget in the future, "I have no doubt that we're going to be able to meet our essential services," he said.
Tuesday is the last day of the Legislature's 30-day special session that was called to respond to the Texas Supreme Court's order that lawmakers give local school boards more room to change their tax rates.
Gov. Rick Perry and lawmakers have set out to address the issue by cutting school property tax rates by one-third over two years and replacing that money with an expanded business tax, higher tobacco taxes, a revamped method of reporting sales taxes on used cars and money from the state's surplus. Most of those measures have been sent to Perry, and lawmakers are working out final differences on the others.
An overall tax cut
Though the business tax expansion was the most politically delicate piece of the puzzle coming into the session, it's House Bills 1 and 2 that could most affect how government operates.
House Bill 1 supplies the property tax cuts and boosts education spending by almost $1.5 billion per year, including a $2,000 teacher pay raise.
House Bill 2, which has been passed in similar form by each side, says money raised from the new taxes must go toward replacing lost property tax revenue until the one-third cut is achieved.
On the whole, the Legislature's plan is expected to cut taxes by $6 billion over the first three years, according to Perry's office. Once the tax cuts are fully phased in, the new taxes will raise about $2.5 billion less each year than what's needed to pay for the property tax cut, officials with the Legislative Budget Board told senators at a recent committee meeting. The state will rely heavily on surplus funds to implement the plan in the first year, before the tax increases take full effect.
Because the Legislature is cutting more taxes than it's raising, there may never be enough money from the tax increases to pay for the full one-third cut, which means the Legislature will have to use other state revenues to get there — or cut from other areas of the state's two-year budget, which includes $72 billion in state funds.
Some Democrats have warned that the only place lawmakers will be able to turn for new money is higher sales taxes, which they say disproportionately hurt the poor.
Dick Lavine with Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates more government spending on programs that aim to help low- and middle-income families, said supporters of smaller government will use deficits created by the plan as an argument to cut state services.
"The likely losers won't be just the usual victims — poor children who need health insurance," Lavine said. "It's going to run throughout state government. We could see more tuition increases, an inability to house prisoners, less money for higher education."
Before senators voted to cut taxes by a full one-third, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst expressed concerns about how quickly the state could pay for a reduction of that size.
"That's something we're going to be monitoring very, very closely, at the same time looking for any area in state government that's fat and that we can eliminate to go ahead and fund our priorities, which obviously include public education," Dewhurst said.
Even as the proposal seeks to limit taxes, it contains one costly provision that was key to drawing support from Democrats and some Republicans in the Senate.
House Bill 1 increases the minimum amount of money that each district is guaranteed for each penny in its tax rate, and it increases the number of school districts that will receive the same funding.The Legislative Budget Board estimates that it could cost the state $940 million per year by 2009 to make sure districts have largely the same per-student funding when their tax rates begin to inch back up.
"When I voted for that bill, I recognized that there could be some problems in the future beyond 2008," Senate Finance Committee Chairman Steve Ogden said. "But I thought that they would all be manageable in some way, and so I said, 'Let's go.' "
Giving voters power
Ogden touted three aspects of the bill: It shifts some of the burden of funding education from local school districts to the state; it cuts property taxes more than ever before; and it increases equity among schools.
Specifically, the legislation cuts school district tax rates for operations from $1.50 to $1.33 this fall and to $1 in fall 2007. School boards will be able to tack about 4 cents back onto their tax rates, and they can go higher than that with voter approval.
Local school boards have, for all practical purposes, been handcuffed in their ability to raise money for several years because they've had tax rates at or near the state's maximum rate. The Legislature's plan gives them more room to raise money by putting their tax rates well below the maximum.
But they'll need voter approval to access most of that money, which reflects an effort by lawmakers to prevent property taxes from shooting back up with rising appraisals.
"A lot of the Republican members of the Legislature — not all of them, but a lot of them — are truly committed to lasting property tax relief," said William Lutz, managing editor of the Lone Star Report, a newsletter that champions smaller government. "They believe that government should not grow faster than the economy grows, unless the voters give their permission for that growth."
House Bill 1 also reduces from about $1.8 billion per year to $1.1 billion the amount of money that districts with high property values per student must share with the rest of the state. The amount of money the Austin school district must share will decrease from $154 million per year to $66 million.
"Everything I campaigned on — reining in 'Robin Hood,' less reliance on property taxes, more money for schools — is happening," said Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas. "We've gotten into the red zone before, but we'd never crossed the end line."
jembry@statesman.com; 445-3654
Additional material from W. Gardner Selby
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/legislature/05/14finance.html
Friday, May 12, 2006
Standardized Testing Challenged in the Texas Legislature,
May 12, 2006 5:37 PM
IN PERSONAL PRIVILEGE SPEECH, CHERI ISETT DECRIES TRANSFORMING EDUCATION INTO LITTLE MORE THAN EXERCISE IN TEST TAKING
www.quorumreport.com
Refers to "tyranny of the standardized test"
Cheri Isett (R-Lubbock) is filling in for her husband Carl during this special session. Her husband is a naval reservist and has been called up.
This afternoon, the current Rep. Isett gave a personal privilege speech to the Texas House in which she praised the intellectual firepower of the membership but decried what she considered to be an over-reliance on standardized testing and mandated curricula.
She observed that other cultures can mass produce more technicians than can America, but she observed that what makes this country unique is the creativity, imagination and courage of its people.
Isett worried that we are crushing those values out of public education and subverting blossoming young minds in the name of checking off the right box in a standardized test.
She asked "Who gives merit to one body of knowledge over another" and who has the right to, "praise one kind of learner and condemn another."
She told her colleagues, "...Quit trying to cookie cutter students and let their God given excellence to flow out."
Although she varied somewhat from her prepared remarks, Isett's office forwarded a copy of her speech.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheri Isett's (R-Lubbock) Speech
I recognize that I am the most junior members of the House and for me to speak in this manner, I know, is highly unusual. However, this may be the only opportunity I have to address this body on a matter that I feel is of utmost importance and lies deep within my heart. In fact, what I’m about to say to you, I believe, is so important that I’m going to read it rather than speak freely as I’m accustomed to doing.
HB1 is a good bill. I am wholeheartedly behind reducing and restraining the growth on the egregious burden of property taxes in Texas. I was glad to vote for it. Carl stayed up way past his bedtime to watch the passage of HB1 and be a part of this historic legislation which you all have worked so hard on.
But there is something in this bill which grieves my heart. Something I believe we will pay dearly for in generations to come. That is the education reform measures which, although well meaning, will be to the detriment of Texas children. I am eager to see Texas children grow and increase in knowledge and education. My goodness, I have seven of them. I earnestly desire for the generation being raised up now to have greater opportunities than there were for the generation before them. But I believe we are on a misguided path with increases in standardized testing and mandated course work.
I know, we all know, the utter frustration from parents and teachers and students over increased regiments and standardized testing. I believe we would all agree that studying to a test and regurgitating is not a true education. We would all agree that the minds of Albert Einstein, Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Samuel Morse, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell would never have tolerated such infliction upon them. They would never have allowed their creativity and their courage to step into unknown territories to be held back by the boxes that we force our school children to conform into.
These children were created by God to be unique individuals with unique gifts and talents. They are aching to break free from the tyranny of standardized tests and curriculum “scope and sequence” and express those gifts and talents. But we have legislated them out. We have told the artist that he has to pull back and cut back on blossoming in his chosen art because he doesn’t have time. He has to take another math and science class. We have told the very, very bright entrepreneur that his pursuits are worthless because he is not a good test taker and pulls our school ratings down. We have told our teachers that they are not good teachers and don’t deserve merits for their efforts because the artists and entrepreneurs in their classes don’t deliver the goods in test results.
There is a whole world of knowledge and all of history to study. We could never impart all of it to every child. There’s just too much of it. So who has the right to determine what body of knowledge has merit. Who was it anyway that said “every seventh grader needs to know all the parts of the cell and their function.” Why is that more important than, say, the intricacies of weather systems. And why are either of those more important than any other body of knowledge which delights the heart of a child. Who gives merit to one body of knowledge over another. And yet, through our essential skills and standardized tests, we praise one type of learner and condemn another. We tell our classroom teachers that it doesn’t matter that you want to reach the heart of a child . We want you to mold his mind to conform to what we believe is a productive, college-prepped student.
I challenge you, Members, in sessions to come as you discuss these crucially important matters, to break out of the box. We can no longer afford to measure education success in terms of test results and rigorous curriculum. In that arena, countries like China clearly have us beat. They are disciplined, they are structured, they can produce multiples of what we can produce cheaper – not better, but more of it and cheaper.
The one thing other cultures lack which we possess and which we must fight to hold on to is creativity, imagination, and courage. These are the things which we must foster in education if our children and our nation are to survive. We need minds that are nurtured in discovery, not rote memorization. We need individuals who are able to muster the courage to go where others have never gone. We need to quit trying to cookie cutter every child in Texas schools and let the God given, God led creativity and excellence flow out. We need to trust teachers to do what they have been called to do and quit micro-managing them. When it comes to accountability measures in exchange for state funding, we need to hold school administrators responsible for their stewardship of those monies, not place the onerous burden of performance on the shoulders of those who at this point are victims in this debate, the students and their teachers. We need to quit telling parents that their child is a failure because he’s not raising our school’s ratings with his test results.
What I’m challenging you with will in itself require creativity and courage to do. In the sessions to come, I’m challenging you to trust that children are naturally curious and creative. Trust that if we as adults get out of their way, they will discover and grow in their world every bit as much between the ages of 6 and 18 as they did from birth to age 5. We need to give the teachers in their classrooms the support and discretionary funding to explore and discover with their students. Not funding for more bureaucracy, but funding to buy state of the art equipment to learn on, funding to backpack over Guadalupe Peak, funding to build a boat from scratch and sail it across a big lake. We need to appreciate the value of apprenticeships and accordingly, to loosen child labor laws enough to provide for them. We need to stop burdening children with standardized testing which we would all have to honestly agree is not the measure of a true education.
Members, this is a big challenge. I’ve seen more intellectual firepower in this room in the last three weeks than I’ve ever seen in one place before. For the sake of our children, for the sake of our nation let’s use that firepower to find a better, more creative, more productive way to approach education reform than the road we’ve been on.
Thank you for allowing me to speak from my heart.
Mr. Speaker.
IN PERSONAL PRIVILEGE SPEECH, CHERI ISETT DECRIES TRANSFORMING EDUCATION INTO LITTLE MORE THAN EXERCISE IN TEST TAKING
www.quorumreport.com
Refers to "tyranny of the standardized test"
Cheri Isett (R-Lubbock) is filling in for her husband Carl during this special session. Her husband is a naval reservist and has been called up.
This afternoon, the current Rep. Isett gave a personal privilege speech to the Texas House in which she praised the intellectual firepower of the membership but decried what she considered to be an over-reliance on standardized testing and mandated curricula.
She observed that other cultures can mass produce more technicians than can America, but she observed that what makes this country unique is the creativity, imagination and courage of its people.
Isett worried that we are crushing those values out of public education and subverting blossoming young minds in the name of checking off the right box in a standardized test.
She asked "Who gives merit to one body of knowledge over another" and who has the right to, "praise one kind of learner and condemn another."
She told her colleagues, "...Quit trying to cookie cutter students and let their God given excellence to flow out."
Although she varied somewhat from her prepared remarks, Isett's office forwarded a copy of her speech.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cheri Isett's (R-Lubbock) Speech
I recognize that I am the most junior members of the House and for me to speak in this manner, I know, is highly unusual. However, this may be the only opportunity I have to address this body on a matter that I feel is of utmost importance and lies deep within my heart. In fact, what I’m about to say to you, I believe, is so important that I’m going to read it rather than speak freely as I’m accustomed to doing.
HB1 is a good bill. I am wholeheartedly behind reducing and restraining the growth on the egregious burden of property taxes in Texas. I was glad to vote for it. Carl stayed up way past his bedtime to watch the passage of HB1 and be a part of this historic legislation which you all have worked so hard on.
But there is something in this bill which grieves my heart. Something I believe we will pay dearly for in generations to come. That is the education reform measures which, although well meaning, will be to the detriment of Texas children. I am eager to see Texas children grow and increase in knowledge and education. My goodness, I have seven of them. I earnestly desire for the generation being raised up now to have greater opportunities than there were for the generation before them. But I believe we are on a misguided path with increases in standardized testing and mandated course work.
I know, we all know, the utter frustration from parents and teachers and students over increased regiments and standardized testing. I believe we would all agree that studying to a test and regurgitating is not a true education. We would all agree that the minds of Albert Einstein, Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, Samuel Morse, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell would never have tolerated such infliction upon them. They would never have allowed their creativity and their courage to step into unknown territories to be held back by the boxes that we force our school children to conform into.
These children were created by God to be unique individuals with unique gifts and talents. They are aching to break free from the tyranny of standardized tests and curriculum “scope and sequence” and express those gifts and talents. But we have legislated them out. We have told the artist that he has to pull back and cut back on blossoming in his chosen art because he doesn’t have time. He has to take another math and science class. We have told the very, very bright entrepreneur that his pursuits are worthless because he is not a good test taker and pulls our school ratings down. We have told our teachers that they are not good teachers and don’t deserve merits for their efforts because the artists and entrepreneurs in their classes don’t deliver the goods in test results.
There is a whole world of knowledge and all of history to study. We could never impart all of it to every child. There’s just too much of it. So who has the right to determine what body of knowledge has merit. Who was it anyway that said “every seventh grader needs to know all the parts of the cell and their function.” Why is that more important than, say, the intricacies of weather systems. And why are either of those more important than any other body of knowledge which delights the heart of a child. Who gives merit to one body of knowledge over another. And yet, through our essential skills and standardized tests, we praise one type of learner and condemn another. We tell our classroom teachers that it doesn’t matter that you want to reach the heart of a child . We want you to mold his mind to conform to what we believe is a productive, college-prepped student.
I challenge you, Members, in sessions to come as you discuss these crucially important matters, to break out of the box. We can no longer afford to measure education success in terms of test results and rigorous curriculum. In that arena, countries like China clearly have us beat. They are disciplined, they are structured, they can produce multiples of what we can produce cheaper – not better, but more of it and cheaper.
The one thing other cultures lack which we possess and which we must fight to hold on to is creativity, imagination, and courage. These are the things which we must foster in education if our children and our nation are to survive. We need minds that are nurtured in discovery, not rote memorization. We need individuals who are able to muster the courage to go where others have never gone. We need to quit trying to cookie cutter every child in Texas schools and let the God given, God led creativity and excellence flow out. We need to trust teachers to do what they have been called to do and quit micro-managing them. When it comes to accountability measures in exchange for state funding, we need to hold school administrators responsible for their stewardship of those monies, not place the onerous burden of performance on the shoulders of those who at this point are victims in this debate, the students and their teachers. We need to quit telling parents that their child is a failure because he’s not raising our school’s ratings with his test results.
What I’m challenging you with will in itself require creativity and courage to do. In the sessions to come, I’m challenging you to trust that children are naturally curious and creative. Trust that if we as adults get out of their way, they will discover and grow in their world every bit as much between the ages of 6 and 18 as they did from birth to age 5. We need to give the teachers in their classrooms the support and discretionary funding to explore and discover with their students. Not funding for more bureaucracy, but funding to buy state of the art equipment to learn on, funding to backpack over Guadalupe Peak, funding to build a boat from scratch and sail it across a big lake. We need to appreciate the value of apprenticeships and accordingly, to loosen child labor laws enough to provide for them. We need to stop burdening children with standardized testing which we would all have to honestly agree is not the measure of a true education.
Members, this is a big challenge. I’ve seen more intellectual firepower in this room in the last three weeks than I’ve ever seen in one place before. For the sake of our children, for the sake of our nation let’s use that firepower to find a better, more creative, more productive way to approach education reform than the road we’ve been on.
Thank you for allowing me to speak from my heart.
Mr. Speaker.
From Rep. Garnet Coleman--HB1 Shortchanges Our Children's Schools
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Ben Hallmark
May 12, 2006 (512) 463-0524
HB1 Shortchanges Our Children's Schools
Gives Big Oil and Big Business a $400 Million Tax Holiday
(Austin)//-- State Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) said today that House Bill 1, which was approved today by the Texas House, cut $400 million in funds promised to Texas school children last year and used that money to pay for a tax holiday for big oil and big business. Under the tax plan, businesses will have their property taxes cut in 2007 but will not pay the new business tax until 2008, resulting in a windfall of $400 million for the big oil, insurance, and utility industries alone.
"Today, a Texas House majority sent Texas voters a message that giving a big tax break to Exxon is a higher priority than keeping a promise made to provide $1.8 billion for our children's schools," Coleman said.
"Fifty-eight House Members voted to send HB1 to a conference committee with the hope that we would put our children's schools first, but Exxon snagged a $400 million tax holiday almost as quickly as gas shot up to $3 a gallon," he added.
Coleman explained that last summer, the House voted for an Appropriations Bill that included a rider that locked away $1.8 billion for education. House Bill 1, as passed today, rescinded that $1.8 billion commitment and provided only slightly more than $1.4 billion for public education.
"Even with an $8.2 billion surplus and a $4 billion Perry tax plan, HB 1 cut $400 million from the amount the House promised to use for our children's schools just last year," Coleman explained.
Coleman explained that in 2003, the Legislature cut over $3 billion from proven educational improvement initiatives that prevent dropouts and enhance basic classroom instruction.
"Texans were told that this special session was about improving our children's schools, but instead, this session cut $400 million from education funds approved in 2005 and never bothered to address $3 billion that has been cut from education since 2003," Coleman said.
Coleman explained that schools and other critical state needs will suffer from the HB1 and HB2 tax scheme that will shoot a $5 billion "hole" in the budget for 2007-2208 and even larger potential deficits in the future.
"Our children's schools should be our highest priority, but this special session had everything to do with a tax cuts for the powerful special interests and gave our children's schools a little candy for one year while cooking up a recipe for long term starvation and failure," Coleman concluded.
May 12, 2006 (512) 463-0524
HB1 Shortchanges Our Children's Schools
Gives Big Oil and Big Business a $400 Million Tax Holiday
(Austin)//-- State Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) said today that House Bill 1, which was approved today by the Texas House, cut $400 million in funds promised to Texas school children last year and used that money to pay for a tax holiday for big oil and big business. Under the tax plan, businesses will have their property taxes cut in 2007 but will not pay the new business tax until 2008, resulting in a windfall of $400 million for the big oil, insurance, and utility industries alone.
"Today, a Texas House majority sent Texas voters a message that giving a big tax break to Exxon is a higher priority than keeping a promise made to provide $1.8 billion for our children's schools," Coleman said.
"Fifty-eight House Members voted to send HB1 to a conference committee with the hope that we would put our children's schools first, but Exxon snagged a $400 million tax holiday almost as quickly as gas shot up to $3 a gallon," he added.
Coleman explained that last summer, the House voted for an Appropriations Bill that included a rider that locked away $1.8 billion for education. House Bill 1, as passed today, rescinded that $1.8 billion commitment and provided only slightly more than $1.4 billion for public education.
"Even with an $8.2 billion surplus and a $4 billion Perry tax plan, HB 1 cut $400 million from the amount the House promised to use for our children's schools just last year," Coleman explained.
Coleman explained that in 2003, the Legislature cut over $3 billion from proven educational improvement initiatives that prevent dropouts and enhance basic classroom instruction.
"Texans were told that this special session was about improving our children's schools, but instead, this session cut $400 million from education funds approved in 2005 and never bothered to address $3 billion that has been cut from education since 2003," Coleman said.
Coleman explained that schools and other critical state needs will suffer from the HB1 and HB2 tax scheme that will shoot a $5 billion "hole" in the budget for 2007-2208 and even larger potential deficits in the future.
"Our children's schools should be our highest priority, but this special session had everything to do with a tax cuts for the powerful special interests and gave our children's schools a little candy for one year while cooking up a recipe for long term starvation and failure," Coleman concluded.
Sunday, May 07, 2006
Sorting out winners, losers in business tax plan
I hadn't posted this and it lays out who is affected by Gov. Perry's proposed business tax. The rub right now is with recapture (or "Robin Hood") with wealthy districts not wanting to share the wealth. Another problem is with some legislators wanting most or all of the funding from the business tax to go to lowering property taxes rather than to schools (see previous post). -Angela
79TH LEGISLATURE: SPECIAL SESSION
Sorting out winners, losers in business tax plan
Proposed changes would shift burden from capital- to labor-intensive industries
By Corrie MacLaggan, Jason Embry
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Sunday, April 30, 2006
In the past 13 years, prices on the menus at Maudie's Tex-Mex have risen just twice.
But items such as Skinny Sheryl's enchiladas ($6.50) soon could cost more at the five popular Austin restaurants because of a state business tax now working its way through the Texas Legislature.
The tax wouldn't automatically initiate price increases, but it would cause menu prices to go up sooner, said Joe Draker, owner-operator of Maudie's.
"You add this to the rising cost of energy . . . you tack a couple of these together, and you have to go up on prices," Draker said.
As legislators work on the details of the tax plan pushed by Gov. Rick Perry, some Texas businesses say the new tax penalizes them, while other businesses predict they'll come out ahead. The levy would replace the corporate franchise tax and require restaurants, retailers and wholesalers to pay one-half percent of most of their revenue; other businesses would pay 1 percent.
Capital-intensive industries such as oil and gas, manufacturing and utilities stand to benefit most because the new levy will be offset by large cuts to property taxes — a tax that has hit them particularly hard. Most major business organizations in the state are supporting the plan.
Labor-intensive businesses, such as law firms, engineering firms, hotels and barber shops, are more likely to pay higher taxes under the plan. And because the tax is based on total revenue, not profit, some owners of businesses with low profit margins fear it could hurt them.
"Frankly, there could be winners, and I've already heard from the losers," said Will Newton, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, whose 34,000 small and independent businesses in Texas are divided on whether to support the tax plan. "Small-business owners are starting to wake up to what's going on, and a bunch of people out there are really upset."
The business tax is part of Perry's larger effort to raise enough money to reduce school property tax rates by about one-third.
The plan, already approved by the House and sent to the Senate for consideration, is a response to the Texas Supreme Court's order that the Legislature give local school boards more leeway in the property tax rates they set.
The court has given lawmakers until June 1 to change the tax system or else it will cut off state money for schools; lawmakers are about halfway through a 30-day special session to respond to that order.
A higher cigarette tax and money from the state's budget surplus are also part of the plan.
A panel of business leaders from across the state wrote the Perry plan. Its supporters have never shied away from the fact that businesses, including some that actively lobby at the Capitol and support Republican candidates, had substantial input.
"Some of the language in the bill reflects the unique situation of certain industries," said Dale Craymer, a former official in the comptroller's office who is now with the business-backed Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. "But, generally, those provisions were to prevent the tax from being too burdensome relative to their profit level."
Craymer said the capital-intensive industries that would benefit from the plan currently pay about two-thirds of all business taxes yet represent about one-third of economic activity.
Extending tax's reach
Not all businesses would pay the new tax. Juan in a Million, for example, a Mexican restaurant in East Austin, would be exempt because it's a sole proprietorship.
General partnerships and sole proprietorships would be exempt, as would businesses that gross less than $300,000 a year. General partnerships and sole proprietorships do not receive lawsuit liability protection from the state, the common thread among businesses that would pay the new tax.
The plan would replace the state's corporate franchise tax, which exempts even more types of businesses. About 150,000 of the state's 2.4 million businesses pay that tax, and many more have restructured to avoid it.
About 50,000 additional businesses would pay the new tax, so about 2.2 million businesses would still be exempt, largely because they are small businesses and sole proprietorships.
Although some major corporations have organized themselves as partnerships to avoid the current franchise tax, that would be less likely to happen under the Perry proposal, Craymer said. Businesses that avoid this tax will lose some state protection from lawsuits, and Craymer said that protection is fairly valuable.
"This tax is so broad that the planning opportunities are few and far between," Craymer said. "There may be some small businesses that will convert to sole proprietorships, but those are not businesses that account for much of the state's economic activity. In general, this tax is going to capture over 90 percent of the economic activity in the state."
By comparison, he said, the current franchise tax applies to about 75 percent of economic activity.
Perry has vigorously touted the support of business groups — including those representing restaurants, nurses, airlines, retailers and manufacturers — as proof that his plan will not hurt the economy.
"You can't make a perfect tax plan," Perry said. "And to those that would criticize it for not being perfect, I guess we'll stand up and say, 'We are not perfect, but this is the closest to perfect that the vast majority of the business community and these legislators have ever seen.' "
Several large companies declined to discuss how the plan would affect their tax bill and instead spoke in general terms.
"We've long advocated a fair and broad-based tax, and we think the House bill accomplishes that," said Colleen Ryan, a spokeswoman for computer maker Dell Inc.
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. spokeswoman Lisa Elledge said, "We do realize more of a tax burden (under the plan). But at the same time, we realize it's important for the state to move in this direction."
From none to some
Maudie's, which has 240 employees, grosses about $10 million a year, Draker said. A tax on gross receipts (about $35,000 under the formulas laid out) probably would be considerably higher for the business than what it pays in franchise taxes now, he said.
Businesses such as Maudie's could pass the tax increase on to customers, but doctors don't have that option, said Dr. Bruce Malone, an Austin orthopedic surgeon.
Malone estimates that his six-doctor practice, Austin Bone & Joint Clinic, which currently pays no franchise tax as a professional corporation, would pay about $17,800 per year under the 1 percent tax that physicians would pay.
That would be an increase in overhead costs that the practice couldn't charge patients because insurance companies and government programs usually foot health care bills and set the rates, he said. To compensate, the practice could decrease employee benefits or put off buying computer equipment.
Doctors should pay taxes to support public schools, Malone said, but he wants to see exemptions for charity care — free care for uninsured patients — remain in the tax plan.
The clinic, which sees about 1,400 patients each month, provides about $40,000 to $50,000 in charity care each quarter out of a sense of community obligation, he said.
"Not many other professionals are required to give their products to people," said Malone, who used a calculator on the Texas Medical Association Web site to estimate his tax liability. "It's a little different if you're the Exxon Corporation and you have gasoline and in order for someone to take the product, they have to pay."
The Texas Medical Association initially came out against Perry's plan but then endorsed it after the governor tweaked it to allow doctors to exclude from their tax base the government money they get for uncompensated care, Medicare, workers' compensation and military insurance programs, as well as 150 percent of reimbursements provided under Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.
The version of the business tax that passed the House this week does not contain all those tweaks.
A shift with no change
Dry cleaners, barber shops, pest control or lawn services and other service businesses could see sharply higher taxes under the tax plan, Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn has said.
That's because those firms, unlike retail businesses, would pay the higher 1 percent rate and may own little or no property, so they wouldn't benefit from property tax breaks.
But Democrat John Sharp, a former comptroller Perry appointed to draft the tax plan, said he doesn't think such firms would see the tax increase Strayhorn predicted. "I've long ago since given up trying to figure out where the comptroller comes up with things," he said.
Bobby Jenkins, president of the ABC Pest and Lawn locations in Austin, San Antonio and College Station, said he's still calculating how the tax could affect his business but thinks his tax bill might be similar to what he already pays in the franchise tax. "On first blush, we're hoping it's going to be about a wash," he said.
Bob Landreth, an independent oil and gas producer who operates about 80 wells in West Texas, is a sole proprietor, so he would not be subject to the new tax. But he said many in his business who would pay the tax worry that the tax rate will increase in the future or that the property tax cuts will soon evaporate.
The House changed Perry's proposal to say any increases in the tax must be approved by the public in the future, but many have questioned whether that provision is legal.
Newton, of the National Federation of Independent Business, said his state group is asking lawmakers to add a provision protecting businesses in hard times. "They have to put in that if some business is going out of business that the tax liability is mitigated in some way," Newton said. "You don't want to kick a man while he's down."
As for Maudie's, Draker said he's "certainly willing to pay my share." But he's relieved that the full 1 percent tax won't apply since Maudie's, like other restaurants, has a relatively low profit margin.
If he had to pay the 1 percent tax?
"Oh, I think I'd have to get out of the restaurant business," he said.
cmaclaggan@statesman.com; 445-3548
jembry@statesman.com; 445-3654
Additional material from staff writer W. Gardner Selby.
Find this article at:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/shared/tx/stories/04/30biztax.html
79TH LEGISLATURE: SPECIAL SESSION
Sorting out winners, losers in business tax plan
Proposed changes would shift burden from capital- to labor-intensive industries
By Corrie MacLaggan, Jason Embry
AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF
Sunday, April 30, 2006
In the past 13 years, prices on the menus at Maudie's Tex-Mex have risen just twice.
But items such as Skinny Sheryl's enchiladas ($6.50) soon could cost more at the five popular Austin restaurants because of a state business tax now working its way through the Texas Legislature.
The tax wouldn't automatically initiate price increases, but it would cause menu prices to go up sooner, said Joe Draker, owner-operator of Maudie's.
"You add this to the rising cost of energy . . . you tack a couple of these together, and you have to go up on prices," Draker said.
As legislators work on the details of the tax plan pushed by Gov. Rick Perry, some Texas businesses say the new tax penalizes them, while other businesses predict they'll come out ahead. The levy would replace the corporate franchise tax and require restaurants, retailers and wholesalers to pay one-half percent of most of their revenue; other businesses would pay 1 percent.
Capital-intensive industries such as oil and gas, manufacturing and utilities stand to benefit most because the new levy will be offset by large cuts to property taxes — a tax that has hit them particularly hard. Most major business organizations in the state are supporting the plan.
Labor-intensive businesses, such as law firms, engineering firms, hotels and barber shops, are more likely to pay higher taxes under the plan. And because the tax is based on total revenue, not profit, some owners of businesses with low profit margins fear it could hurt them.
"Frankly, there could be winners, and I've already heard from the losers," said Will Newton, state director of the National Federation of Independent Business, whose 34,000 small and independent businesses in Texas are divided on whether to support the tax plan. "Small-business owners are starting to wake up to what's going on, and a bunch of people out there are really upset."
The business tax is part of Perry's larger effort to raise enough money to reduce school property tax rates by about one-third.
The plan, already approved by the House and sent to the Senate for consideration, is a response to the Texas Supreme Court's order that the Legislature give local school boards more leeway in the property tax rates they set.
The court has given lawmakers until June 1 to change the tax system or else it will cut off state money for schools; lawmakers are about halfway through a 30-day special session to respond to that order.
A higher cigarette tax and money from the state's budget surplus are also part of the plan.
A panel of business leaders from across the state wrote the Perry plan. Its supporters have never shied away from the fact that businesses, including some that actively lobby at the Capitol and support Republican candidates, had substantial input.
"Some of the language in the bill reflects the unique situation of certain industries," said Dale Craymer, a former official in the comptroller's office who is now with the business-backed Texas Taxpayers and Research Association. "But, generally, those provisions were to prevent the tax from being too burdensome relative to their profit level."
Craymer said the capital-intensive industries that would benefit from the plan currently pay about two-thirds of all business taxes yet represent about one-third of economic activity.
Extending tax's reach
Not all businesses would pay the new tax. Juan in a Million, for example, a Mexican restaurant in East Austin, would be exempt because it's a sole proprietorship.
General partnerships and sole proprietorships would be exempt, as would businesses that gross less than $300,000 a year. General partnerships and sole proprietorships do not receive lawsuit liability protection from the state, the common thread among businesses that would pay the new tax.
The plan would replace the state's corporate franchise tax, which exempts even more types of businesses. About 150,000 of the state's 2.4 million businesses pay that tax, and many more have restructured to avoid it.
About 50,000 additional businesses would pay the new tax, so about 2.2 million businesses would still be exempt, largely because they are small businesses and sole proprietorships.
Although some major corporations have organized themselves as partnerships to avoid the current franchise tax, that would be less likely to happen under the Perry proposal, Craymer said. Businesses that avoid this tax will lose some state protection from lawsuits, and Craymer said that protection is fairly valuable.
"This tax is so broad that the planning opportunities are few and far between," Craymer said. "There may be some small businesses that will convert to sole proprietorships, but those are not businesses that account for much of the state's economic activity. In general, this tax is going to capture over 90 percent of the economic activity in the state."
By comparison, he said, the current franchise tax applies to about 75 percent of economic activity.
Perry has vigorously touted the support of business groups — including those representing restaurants, nurses, airlines, retailers and manufacturers — as proof that his plan will not hurt the economy.
"You can't make a perfect tax plan," Perry said. "And to those that would criticize it for not being perfect, I guess we'll stand up and say, 'We are not perfect, but this is the closest to perfect that the vast majority of the business community and these legislators have ever seen.' "
Several large companies declined to discuss how the plan would affect their tax bill and instead spoke in general terms.
"We've long advocated a fair and broad-based tax, and we think the House bill accomplishes that," said Colleen Ryan, a spokeswoman for computer maker Dell Inc.
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. spokeswoman Lisa Elledge said, "We do realize more of a tax burden (under the plan). But at the same time, we realize it's important for the state to move in this direction."
From none to some
Maudie's, which has 240 employees, grosses about $10 million a year, Draker said. A tax on gross receipts (about $35,000 under the formulas laid out) probably would be considerably higher for the business than what it pays in franchise taxes now, he said.
Businesses such as Maudie's could pass the tax increase on to customers, but doctors don't have that option, said Dr. Bruce Malone, an Austin orthopedic surgeon.
Malone estimates that his six-doctor practice, Austin Bone & Joint Clinic, which currently pays no franchise tax as a professional corporation, would pay about $17,800 per year under the 1 percent tax that physicians would pay.
That would be an increase in overhead costs that the practice couldn't charge patients because insurance companies and government programs usually foot health care bills and set the rates, he said. To compensate, the practice could decrease employee benefits or put off buying computer equipment.
Doctors should pay taxes to support public schools, Malone said, but he wants to see exemptions for charity care — free care for uninsured patients — remain in the tax plan.
The clinic, which sees about 1,400 patients each month, provides about $40,000 to $50,000 in charity care each quarter out of a sense of community obligation, he said.
"Not many other professionals are required to give their products to people," said Malone, who used a calculator on the Texas Medical Association Web site to estimate his tax liability. "It's a little different if you're the Exxon Corporation and you have gasoline and in order for someone to take the product, they have to pay."
The Texas Medical Association initially came out against Perry's plan but then endorsed it after the governor tweaked it to allow doctors to exclude from their tax base the government money they get for uncompensated care, Medicare, workers' compensation and military insurance programs, as well as 150 percent of reimbursements provided under Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.
The version of the business tax that passed the House this week does not contain all those tweaks.
A shift with no change
Dry cleaners, barber shops, pest control or lawn services and other service businesses could see sharply higher taxes under the tax plan, Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn has said.
That's because those firms, unlike retail businesses, would pay the higher 1 percent rate and may own little or no property, so they wouldn't benefit from property tax breaks.
But Democrat John Sharp, a former comptroller Perry appointed to draft the tax plan, said he doesn't think such firms would see the tax increase Strayhorn predicted. "I've long ago since given up trying to figure out where the comptroller comes up with things," he said.
Bobby Jenkins, president of the ABC Pest and Lawn locations in Austin, San Antonio and College Station, said he's still calculating how the tax could affect his business but thinks his tax bill might be similar to what he already pays in the franchise tax. "On first blush, we're hoping it's going to be about a wash," he said.
Bob Landreth, an independent oil and gas producer who operates about 80 wells in West Texas, is a sole proprietor, so he would not be subject to the new tax. But he said many in his business who would pay the tax worry that the tax rate will increase in the future or that the property tax cuts will soon evaporate.
The House changed Perry's proposal to say any increases in the tax must be approved by the public in the future, but many have questioned whether that provision is legal.
Newton, of the National Federation of Independent Business, said his state group is asking lawmakers to add a provision protecting businesses in hard times. "They have to put in that if some business is going out of business that the tax liability is mitigated in some way," Newton said. "You don't want to kick a man while he's down."
As for Maudie's, Draker said he's "certainly willing to pay my share." But he's relieved that the full 1 percent tax won't apply since Maudie's, like other restaurants, has a relatively low profit margin.
If he had to pay the 1 percent tax?
"Oh, I think I'd have to get out of the restaurant business," he said.
cmaclaggan@statesman.com; 445-3548
jembry@statesman.com; 445-3654
Additional material from staff writer W. Gardner Selby.
Find this article at:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/shared/tx/stories/04/30biztax.html
Disagreement over wealth sharing could derail special session
By LIZ AUSTIN and APRIL CASTRO
Associated Press Writers
AUSTIN — Tempers are flaring. Negotiations are crumbling. Could it be the beginning of the end for the fourth special legislative session on Texas school funding?
Senate leaders say there's still time for compromise, but a raucous disagreement over wealth sharing Friday threatened to derail attempts to meet a court deadline to find another source of money for schools.
The day began with a meltdown in a Senate committee that had been set to approve a key component of the school finance plan. The bill, which would use part of the state's budget surplus to reduce school property taxes, ultimately was adopted by a 9-2 vote of the committee, with three present but refusing to vote. It next goes before the full Senate.
"We did not play well together today, and I would have preferred otherwise," said Sen. Steve Ogden, R-College Station, chairman of the Senate Finance committee. "But I think you need to appreciate the pressure that everybody's under ... sometimes people need to blow off steam."
A short time after the Senate rumble, the House rejected the Senate's version of another key bill that would dedicate most of the tax revenue generated from a new business tax system to property tax cuts.
Both bills are crucial elements in the Legislature's attempt to answer a Texas Supreme Court ruling that called the state's school funding method unconstitutional. Lawmakers are in the third week of a 30-day special session. The court set a June 1 deadline to fix the problem, or money to public schools would be frozen.
Sen. Florence Shapiro added education reforms, including a $2,000 teacher pay raise, to the surplus bill. But committee members argued over how much property-tax money wealthy districts should be required to share with poorer districts.
Shapiro and five other senators walked out after the committee's chairman wouldn't let her scrap the education reforms rather than accept a change, which would increase the amount of money poor schools are guaranteed from the state.
"What this amendment does is it takes that money from all the schoolchildren and it only gives it to a certain number of schoolchildren," said Shapiro, a Republican from Plano. "I'm opposed to that. That is not why we're here."
The amendment eventually was adopted, but Shapiro said she plans to block the measure from being considered by the full Senate.
"All this did was go through a meaningless process because it will not come up to the (Senate) floor," Shapiro said. "I have the votes to block it."
The committee also adopted a $1 increase in the cigarette tax, to take effect in 2007.
Earlier in the day, the walkout left Ogden without enough senators to vote on the legislation. So, he ordered the sergeant-at-arms to round them up and bring them back, a tactic that hasn't been used in the Legislature since the dramatic 2003 redistricting battle.
Ogden delayed the meeting for about an hour before any of them returned. All but one of the committee members were present when the meeting resumed.
Meanwhile, Republican House Speaker Tom Craddick ruled the Senate violated legislative rules when it changed the tax dedication bill to give a portion of future revenue to education, instead of keeping it all for property tax cuts, as the House had wanted.
The current 30-day special session ends May 16. Republican Gov. Rick Perry could call another session if necessary.
Perry's re-election bid this year could rest on the outcome of the special session. He has spent months working to round up support for a new business tax proposal.
"We're not dead yet," Ogden said. "At the end of the day, (school finance legislation) has to pass and cooler heads will prevail."
Find this article at:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/TX_XGR_School_Finance_Meltdown.html
Associated Press Writers
AUSTIN — Tempers are flaring. Negotiations are crumbling. Could it be the beginning of the end for the fourth special legislative session on Texas school funding?
Senate leaders say there's still time for compromise, but a raucous disagreement over wealth sharing Friday threatened to derail attempts to meet a court deadline to find another source of money for schools.
The day began with a meltdown in a Senate committee that had been set to approve a key component of the school finance plan. The bill, which would use part of the state's budget surplus to reduce school property taxes, ultimately was adopted by a 9-2 vote of the committee, with three present but refusing to vote. It next goes before the full Senate.
"We did not play well together today, and I would have preferred otherwise," said Sen. Steve Ogden, R-College Station, chairman of the Senate Finance committee. "But I think you need to appreciate the pressure that everybody's under ... sometimes people need to blow off steam."
A short time after the Senate rumble, the House rejected the Senate's version of another key bill that would dedicate most of the tax revenue generated from a new business tax system to property tax cuts.
Both bills are crucial elements in the Legislature's attempt to answer a Texas Supreme Court ruling that called the state's school funding method unconstitutional. Lawmakers are in the third week of a 30-day special session. The court set a June 1 deadline to fix the problem, or money to public schools would be frozen.
Sen. Florence Shapiro added education reforms, including a $2,000 teacher pay raise, to the surplus bill. But committee members argued over how much property-tax money wealthy districts should be required to share with poorer districts.
Shapiro and five other senators walked out after the committee's chairman wouldn't let her scrap the education reforms rather than accept a change, which would increase the amount of money poor schools are guaranteed from the state.
"What this amendment does is it takes that money from all the schoolchildren and it only gives it to a certain number of schoolchildren," said Shapiro, a Republican from Plano. "I'm opposed to that. That is not why we're here."
The amendment eventually was adopted, but Shapiro said she plans to block the measure from being considered by the full Senate.
"All this did was go through a meaningless process because it will not come up to the (Senate) floor," Shapiro said. "I have the votes to block it."
The committee also adopted a $1 increase in the cigarette tax, to take effect in 2007.
Earlier in the day, the walkout left Ogden without enough senators to vote on the legislation. So, he ordered the sergeant-at-arms to round them up and bring them back, a tactic that hasn't been used in the Legislature since the dramatic 2003 redistricting battle.
Ogden delayed the meeting for about an hour before any of them returned. All but one of the committee members were present when the meeting resumed.
Meanwhile, Republican House Speaker Tom Craddick ruled the Senate violated legislative rules when it changed the tax dedication bill to give a portion of future revenue to education, instead of keeping it all for property tax cuts, as the House had wanted.
The current 30-day special session ends May 16. Republican Gov. Rick Perry could call another session if necessary.
Perry's re-election bid this year could rest on the outcome of the special session. He has spent months working to round up support for a new business tax proposal.
"We're not dead yet," Ogden said. "At the end of the day, (school finance legislation) has to pass and cooler heads will prevail."
Find this article at:
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/TX_XGR_School_Finance_Meltdown.html
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Kids skip class to rally, be part of a life lesson
The discourse on these marches tends to frame matters in terms of legality/illegality. Democracy, or pro democracy could offer more affirming angle. I appreciate the voices of children in this account. -Angela
MARCH FOR IMMIGRATION RIGHTS: SCHOOLS
Kids skip class to rally, be part of a life lesson
By Stephanie Banchero and Diane Rado, Chicago Tribune staff reporters. Tribune staff reporters Hal Dardick, Mary Ann Fergus, Jamie Francisco, Deborah Horan, Jo Napolitano and Andrew Wang contributed to this r
Published May 2, 2006
Students across the Chicago area skipped school Monday to march for immigrant rights, taking lessons in a giant outdoor classroom that they say went far beyond anything they could learn from a book.
"I can sit in class and read textbooks all day, but I don't think I understood how America works until I came here," said Bianca Crespo, 17, a senior at Chicago's St. Benedict High School who joined marchers at Ashland Avenue and Division Street. "Now I see it's a melting pot and this is democracy."
Students said they came for their parents, who struggled to make a better life in this country, and for their own futures. And they spoke in awe of the unprecedented experience.
"This is the most important thing I've ever done in my life," said Daisy Lopez, 16, a sophomore at Blue Island's Eisenhower High School who rode a bus for 2 1/2 hours Monday morning to participate in the march.
Mainly Latino schools in Chicago reported 30 percent to 50 percent of students were absent. But at Farragut Career Academy and Benito Juarez Community Academy, about 80 percent of the high school students didn't show. Suburban schools also were affected.
Classrooms and lunchrooms were noticeably thinned out, and school hallways were unusually quiet.
Public and parochial schools alike considered the student absences unexcused, but most administrators took an understanding view, citing the rally's educational value.
"This is alive and real and in your face. You can see a movie or read a book, or you can participate," said Sandra M. Fontanez-Phelan, principal of Chicago's Kelvyn Park High School, where nearly all students are Hispanic.
Even schools with very young children saw significant drops in attendance. At the pre-K through 2nd grade Ortiz De Dominguez school in Chicago, about a third of the pupils didn't come in Monday, assistant principal Silvia Saucedo said.
Many children knew about a similar rally held in Chicago in March, she said, because their parents and siblings attended.
"A lot of people think because [the children] are so young, they don't understand, but they know what's going on," she said.
In Evanston, 111 children were reported absent at Washington Elementary School, more than 20 percent of the school population.
"I hope parents were able to turn it into a civics lesson for the kids, possibly a historic lesson," interim Principal Karen Evans said.
Absences rose in suburban schools with large Latino populations, such as Oak Terrace Elementary in Highwood and Round Lake District 116 schools.
About 400 students were absent from Romeoville High School and about 800 from Bolingbrook High School, more than 20 percent of the student bodies.
Students at the march said they understood the consequences; too many unexcused absences could mean detentions, suspensions or even worse, but that didn't matter.
Sarah Marabillas, a senior at St. Benedict, said skipping school might mean a drop in her grade and the possibility of not being able to walk across the stage and pick up her diploma.
"What is walking with your class vs. walking with your people?" she said. "I'd rather risk not being able to walk across the stage to support this cause."
Other students believed they could make a difference as well.
"I think it's good for kids to march because I think they will listen to us," said Erik Martinez, 11, who skipped 5th grade at Bateman Elementary School in Chicago. "We didn't do anything wrong, so maybe those men in Washington will listen to us and do what's good for us and all the immigrants."
For some children, the march was a personal mission.
"I'm afraid my mommy will get sent back home," said Arturo Vaca, 11, a 5th grader at Eli Whitney. "If they kick out the Mexican people, my mom will have to leave. I want to help her so she can stay here."
Arturo's 8-year-old brother, echoed those sentiments but said walking 3 miles from Union Park to Grant Park was a lot to ask of a little kid.
As he marched down Jackson Boulevard clutching a red flag, Diego Vaca said, "I want to help my mom, but I'm tired too."
----------
sbanchero@tribune.com
drado@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0605020115may02,0,6304922.story?coll=chi-news-hed
MARCH FOR IMMIGRATION RIGHTS: SCHOOLS
Kids skip class to rally, be part of a life lesson
By Stephanie Banchero and Diane Rado, Chicago Tribune staff reporters. Tribune staff reporters Hal Dardick, Mary Ann Fergus, Jamie Francisco, Deborah Horan, Jo Napolitano and Andrew Wang contributed to this r
Published May 2, 2006
Students across the Chicago area skipped school Monday to march for immigrant rights, taking lessons in a giant outdoor classroom that they say went far beyond anything they could learn from a book.
"I can sit in class and read textbooks all day, but I don't think I understood how America works until I came here," said Bianca Crespo, 17, a senior at Chicago's St. Benedict High School who joined marchers at Ashland Avenue and Division Street. "Now I see it's a melting pot and this is democracy."
Students said they came for their parents, who struggled to make a better life in this country, and for their own futures. And they spoke in awe of the unprecedented experience.
"This is the most important thing I've ever done in my life," said Daisy Lopez, 16, a sophomore at Blue Island's Eisenhower High School who rode a bus for 2 1/2 hours Monday morning to participate in the march.
Mainly Latino schools in Chicago reported 30 percent to 50 percent of students were absent. But at Farragut Career Academy and Benito Juarez Community Academy, about 80 percent of the high school students didn't show. Suburban schools also were affected.
Classrooms and lunchrooms were noticeably thinned out, and school hallways were unusually quiet.
Public and parochial schools alike considered the student absences unexcused, but most administrators took an understanding view, citing the rally's educational value.
"This is alive and real and in your face. You can see a movie or read a book, or you can participate," said Sandra M. Fontanez-Phelan, principal of Chicago's Kelvyn Park High School, where nearly all students are Hispanic.
Even schools with very young children saw significant drops in attendance. At the pre-K through 2nd grade Ortiz De Dominguez school in Chicago, about a third of the pupils didn't come in Monday, assistant principal Silvia Saucedo said.
Many children knew about a similar rally held in Chicago in March, she said, because their parents and siblings attended.
"A lot of people think because [the children] are so young, they don't understand, but they know what's going on," she said.
In Evanston, 111 children were reported absent at Washington Elementary School, more than 20 percent of the school population.
"I hope parents were able to turn it into a civics lesson for the kids, possibly a historic lesson," interim Principal Karen Evans said.
Absences rose in suburban schools with large Latino populations, such as Oak Terrace Elementary in Highwood and Round Lake District 116 schools.
About 400 students were absent from Romeoville High School and about 800 from Bolingbrook High School, more than 20 percent of the student bodies.
Students at the march said they understood the consequences; too many unexcused absences could mean detentions, suspensions or even worse, but that didn't matter.
Sarah Marabillas, a senior at St. Benedict, said skipping school might mean a drop in her grade and the possibility of not being able to walk across the stage and pick up her diploma.
"What is walking with your class vs. walking with your people?" she said. "I'd rather risk not being able to walk across the stage to support this cause."
Other students believed they could make a difference as well.
"I think it's good for kids to march because I think they will listen to us," said Erik Martinez, 11, who skipped 5th grade at Bateman Elementary School in Chicago. "We didn't do anything wrong, so maybe those men in Washington will listen to us and do what's good for us and all the immigrants."
For some children, the march was a personal mission.
"I'm afraid my mommy will get sent back home," said Arturo Vaca, 11, a 5th grader at Eli Whitney. "If they kick out the Mexican people, my mom will have to leave. I want to help her so she can stay here."
Arturo's 8-year-old brother, echoed those sentiments but said walking 3 miles from Union Park to Grant Park was a lot to ask of a little kid.
As he marched down Jackson Boulevard clutching a red flag, Diego Vaca said, "I want to help my mom, but I'm tired too."
----------
sbanchero@tribune.com
drado@tribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0605020115may02,0,6304922.story?coll=chi-news-hed
Rodriguez Calls for Long-Term School Finance
Unfortunately, not all of the sacred cows are on the table.... -Angela
Austin - In the opening hours of the latest
special session of the Texas Legislature, State
Representative Eddie Rodriguez (D-Austin) wasted no
time in filing a bill (House Bill 20) to create a
state Education Income Tax.
“This is the only proposal that resolves the
State’s legal issues, provides new funding for
education and promises a long standing resolution of
our school finance crisis,” said Rodriguez.
Most of the opening day was devoted to a dialogue
regarding the Governor’s Commission proposal. “Once
the rubber hits the road, it becomes ever more obvious
that this is a short term fix,” Rodriguez said. “Using
the surplus might work for this year, but we have to
make up that money in the very next year … and that
usually means an increase in sales taxes.”
According to Rep. Rodriguez, “Appraisals increase,
enrollments increase and the Governor’s plan actually
allows future increases in the property tax rate.
That’s not real property tax relief and it’s not a
solution beyond this year.”
“House Bill 20, the Education Income Tax, sets up
a simple and equalized source of revenue that will
grow with the educational needs of our state. It will
provide approximately $5 Billion in new funding for
classrooms and teacher’s salaries, and at the same
time it permanently cut the school property tax from
$1.50 to zero,” said Rodriguez.
“That’s a real solution and real property tax
relief.”
Eddie Rodriguez
State Representative, District 51
512-463-0674
Austin - In the opening hours of the latest
special session of the Texas Legislature, State
Representative Eddie Rodriguez (D-Austin) wasted no
time in filing a bill (House Bill 20) to create a
state Education Income Tax.
“This is the only proposal that resolves the
State’s legal issues, provides new funding for
education and promises a long standing resolution of
our school finance crisis,” said Rodriguez.
Most of the opening day was devoted to a dialogue
regarding the Governor’s Commission proposal. “Once
the rubber hits the road, it becomes ever more obvious
that this is a short term fix,” Rodriguez said. “Using
the surplus might work for this year, but we have to
make up that money in the very next year … and that
usually means an increase in sales taxes.”
According to Rep. Rodriguez, “Appraisals increase,
enrollments increase and the Governor’s plan actually
allows future increases in the property tax rate.
That’s not real property tax relief and it’s not a
solution beyond this year.”
“House Bill 20, the Education Income Tax, sets up
a simple and equalized source of revenue that will
grow with the educational needs of our state. It will
provide approximately $5 Billion in new funding for
classrooms and teacher’s salaries, and at the same
time it permanently cut the school property tax from
$1.50 to zero,” said Rodriguez.
“That’s a real solution and real property tax
relief.”
Eddie Rodriguez
State Representative, District 51
512-463-0674
School vouchers killed by one vote; senate majority leader asked to resign
Tue, May. 02, 2006
School vouchers killed by one vote; senate majority leader asked to resign
BY GARY FINEOUT AND MARY ELLEN KLAS
gfineout@MiamiHerald.com
TALLAHASSEE - In a stinging loss for Gov. Jeb Bush's education legacy, the state Senate narrowly defeated a plan to ask voters to protect and expand his voucher program that sends public money to private schools.
The Republican-controlled Senate killed the proposed constitutional amendment by a single vote, with four Republicans -- including Majority Leader Alex Villalobos of Miami -- rejecting a hard sell from the governor that the measure was needed to reverse a recent state Supreme Court decision that ruled his 1999 voucher program unconstitutional.
Villalobos, whose wife is a schoolteacher, paid a steep price: Senate President Tom Lee stripped him of his post as majority leader minutes after the vote, saying he no longer viewed the Miami senator as a team player.
The proposal before senators would have exempted vouchers from language in the Florida Constitution that bans using public money for religious education and from language that requires a uniform system of free public schools.
The measure needed a three-fifths vote -- 24 of 40 senators -- to go on the November ballot, but died when it could muster only 23.
It was the second time in as many votes that the Senate rejected putting an education amendment prized by the governor before voters. On Friday, six Republicans also broke ranks with Lee and the governor to kill a proposal to loosen the class-size caps voters approved in 2002. Among the six: Villalobos.
''Not only did I not get organized support, unfortunately at times I received organized opposition,'' Lee said of Villalobos. ``It's a very unpleasant thing for me. It's a very sad thing for me.''
Villalobos defended what he said was a vote of conscience intended to do what was best for his district.
''I never asked anyone to vote against the president and I never would,'' he said. ``I serve at the pleasure of the president. He giveth. He taketh away.''
Villalobos has been a pivotal player in internal Senate politics all session, after a group of disgruntled colleagues decided in February to remove him as the designated Senate president in 2008.
As Senate sergeants removed Villalobos' nameplate from his desk on the Senate floor late Monday and replaced it with that of the new majority leader -- Sen. Dan Webster, a Winter Garden Republican -- Villalobos' supporters crowded into his office to blast Lee's move.
''This is a shock and disappointment in the president,'' said Sen. Evelyn Lynn, a Republican from Ormond Beach. ``There has never been any question Sen. Villalobos has been a team player . . . I'm very disappointed in the action that was taken today. I never thought it would come to this.''
Webster, the sponsor of the vouchers amendment, said the Senate will immediately move to mend the damage for the governor and take up an alternative voucher bill today.
The bill, which does not require voter approval, attempts to protect vouchers for the 733 students using them in private schools by putting them into the voucher program paid for by corporate sponsors, which was not struck down by the courts. But senators are unsure that will pass legal muster. The high court ordered the private-school vouchers to end when the current school year is finished.
The vouchers -- called Opportunity Scholarships -- were offered to students in schools that received failing grades in accountability measures in two years out of four. The voucher could be used in another public school or a private one that would take it.
In a terse statement, Bush said it was wrong that voters would not get to decide the fate of voucher programs.
''I am disappointed that the citizens of Florida were not given an opportunity to be heard,'' Bush said, accusing ''individual senators'' of ''turning their backs'' on voters.
The vote late Monday capped a tense day when it was evident that Republicans were trying hard to muster the needed votes. Twice the Senate recessed as attempts were made to count votes.
Before the vote, Lt. Gov. Toni Jennings chatted with senators during a recess. The governor deployed top education aides to talk to senators. And Webster spent time talking with some of the Republican holdouts.
Amid the turmoil, some of Villalobo's GOP supporters and a number of Democrats began suggesting that Webster would be a better man to lead the chamber starting this fall than incoming Senate president Ken Pruitt. The Port St. Lucie Republican failed Friday to get colleagues to pass the governor's class-cap scale-back, which he had sponsored. It was a sign of weakness at the time he is supposed to be assuming the ultimate reins of power in the Senate.
On Monday, other voucher supporters focused on trying to persuade black senators, whose constituents, they said, benefit most from the voucher program.
Tampa venture capitalist John Kirtley -- a large contributor to the state GOP and a firm believer in vouchers -- and a group he helped found, Florida Committee for Educational Freedom, brought 65 parents, activists and educators to the Capitol on Monday to meet with at least six swing senators.
Kirtley said the campaign has raised enough to pay for radio ads in the predominantly black districts of two senators from Orlando and Jacksonville, which have the highest concentration of voucher schools.
''I wouldn't be against school choice when I have all those those kids and all those parents in my district who want school choice,'' Kirtley said.
Herald staff writers Evan S. Benn and Marc Caputo contributed to this report.
© 2006 MiamiHerald.com and wire service sources.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/email/news/breaking_news/14476228.htm
School vouchers killed by one vote; senate majority leader asked to resign
BY GARY FINEOUT AND MARY ELLEN KLAS
gfineout@MiamiHerald.com
TALLAHASSEE - In a stinging loss for Gov. Jeb Bush's education legacy, the state Senate narrowly defeated a plan to ask voters to protect and expand his voucher program that sends public money to private schools.
The Republican-controlled Senate killed the proposed constitutional amendment by a single vote, with four Republicans -- including Majority Leader Alex Villalobos of Miami -- rejecting a hard sell from the governor that the measure was needed to reverse a recent state Supreme Court decision that ruled his 1999 voucher program unconstitutional.
Villalobos, whose wife is a schoolteacher, paid a steep price: Senate President Tom Lee stripped him of his post as majority leader minutes after the vote, saying he no longer viewed the Miami senator as a team player.
The proposal before senators would have exempted vouchers from language in the Florida Constitution that bans using public money for religious education and from language that requires a uniform system of free public schools.
The measure needed a three-fifths vote -- 24 of 40 senators -- to go on the November ballot, but died when it could muster only 23.
It was the second time in as many votes that the Senate rejected putting an education amendment prized by the governor before voters. On Friday, six Republicans also broke ranks with Lee and the governor to kill a proposal to loosen the class-size caps voters approved in 2002. Among the six: Villalobos.
''Not only did I not get organized support, unfortunately at times I received organized opposition,'' Lee said of Villalobos. ``It's a very unpleasant thing for me. It's a very sad thing for me.''
Villalobos defended what he said was a vote of conscience intended to do what was best for his district.
''I never asked anyone to vote against the president and I never would,'' he said. ``I serve at the pleasure of the president. He giveth. He taketh away.''
Villalobos has been a pivotal player in internal Senate politics all session, after a group of disgruntled colleagues decided in February to remove him as the designated Senate president in 2008.
As Senate sergeants removed Villalobos' nameplate from his desk on the Senate floor late Monday and replaced it with that of the new majority leader -- Sen. Dan Webster, a Winter Garden Republican -- Villalobos' supporters crowded into his office to blast Lee's move.
''This is a shock and disappointment in the president,'' said Sen. Evelyn Lynn, a Republican from Ormond Beach. ``There has never been any question Sen. Villalobos has been a team player . . . I'm very disappointed in the action that was taken today. I never thought it would come to this.''
Webster, the sponsor of the vouchers amendment, said the Senate will immediately move to mend the damage for the governor and take up an alternative voucher bill today.
The bill, which does not require voter approval, attempts to protect vouchers for the 733 students using them in private schools by putting them into the voucher program paid for by corporate sponsors, which was not struck down by the courts. But senators are unsure that will pass legal muster. The high court ordered the private-school vouchers to end when the current school year is finished.
The vouchers -- called Opportunity Scholarships -- were offered to students in schools that received failing grades in accountability measures in two years out of four. The voucher could be used in another public school or a private one that would take it.
In a terse statement, Bush said it was wrong that voters would not get to decide the fate of voucher programs.
''I am disappointed that the citizens of Florida were not given an opportunity to be heard,'' Bush said, accusing ''individual senators'' of ''turning their backs'' on voters.
The vote late Monday capped a tense day when it was evident that Republicans were trying hard to muster the needed votes. Twice the Senate recessed as attempts were made to count votes.
Before the vote, Lt. Gov. Toni Jennings chatted with senators during a recess. The governor deployed top education aides to talk to senators. And Webster spent time talking with some of the Republican holdouts.
Amid the turmoil, some of Villalobo's GOP supporters and a number of Democrats began suggesting that Webster would be a better man to lead the chamber starting this fall than incoming Senate president Ken Pruitt. The Port St. Lucie Republican failed Friday to get colleagues to pass the governor's class-cap scale-back, which he had sponsored. It was a sign of weakness at the time he is supposed to be assuming the ultimate reins of power in the Senate.
On Monday, other voucher supporters focused on trying to persuade black senators, whose constituents, they said, benefit most from the voucher program.
Tampa venture capitalist John Kirtley -- a large contributor to the state GOP and a firm believer in vouchers -- and a group he helped found, Florida Committee for Educational Freedom, brought 65 parents, activists and educators to the Capitol on Monday to meet with at least six swing senators.
Kirtley said the campaign has raised enough to pay for radio ads in the predominantly black districts of two senators from Orlando and Jacksonville, which have the highest concentration of voucher schools.
''I wouldn't be against school choice when I have all those those kids and all those parents in my district who want school choice,'' Kirtley said.
Herald staff writers Evan S. Benn and Marc Caputo contributed to this report.
© 2006 MiamiHerald.com and wire service sources.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/email/news/breaking_news/14476228.htm
Senate sends tax bill to Perry
May 3, 2006, 2:38PM
SPECIAL SESSION
Senate sends tax bill to Perry
Lawmaker from La Porte stalls the measure after constituents call
By JANET ELLIOTT and R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN - The Senate voted 16-14 Tuesday to send a business tax bill to the governor, after a Houston-area senator jeopardized passage of the bill with last-minute opposition.
Sen. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, ended up casting the key vote that allowed Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst to bring the bill up for a final vote. Four hours earlier he had stalled action by voting against bringing the bill to the floor.
At issue was a Senate rule requiring two-thirds of senators present to allow a bill to be debated. The rule is designed to get bipartisan consensus on legislation being brought before the Senate.
Jackson said he has had hundreds of calls from his district and decided to vote against bringing up the tax bill for debate because he thought it would have little permanent impact on reducing property taxes while raising new taxes on businesses.
"I started looking at calculating how little people would receive from the first stage of this property tax cut," Jackson said. "If school districts were able to raise their property tax rate 6 cents without a vote and then we have appraisal creep ... you come out with a wash in the first year."
Jackson said he used his ability to block the bill to gain "concessions" from Gov. Rick Perry and Dewhurst on having language to limit growth in school district spending put into another bill.
He said the restriction should limit the growth in property taxes unless a school district holds a vote of the people.
Jackson voted against final passage of the bill.
Passage means that the state's Republican leadership may finally have come to a school finance agreement that has eluded them in four attempts over the past two years.
Last chance at leadership
Senate Finance Chairman Steve Ogden, who sponsored the business tax, said with a June 1 deadline set by the Texas Supreme Court, this is the last chance for the governor and legislative leaders to show the public they are capable of leading the state.
"This special session will not only be declared a success but will be viewed a success by the people of Texas," said Ogden, R-Bryan.
House Bill 3 is key to Perry's plan to cut local property taxes. It would generate about $3.4 billion in new funds when it is first collected in May 2008.
The Senate also gave final passage to two other bills. One dedicates most of the revenue from the business tax and other new taxes to property tax relief, and the other collects more sales tax from used car sales by basing the tax on 80 percent of the vehicle's blue book value.
The Senate made changes in those bills, so they will go back to the House, which can concur or ask for a conference committee.
The Finance Committee still has to act on bills hiking cigarette taxes and another using budget surplus for property tax cuts and teacher raises.
'Gold mine' for Strayhorn
Harris County Republican activist Steven Hotze, who has been working against the business tax, said passage of the bill was "disappointing."
He said it would be a "gold mine" for one of Perry's re-election challengers, independent Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn. He said Republicans in general will suffer at the ballot box after the business tax takes effect in 2008.
"I believe it's going to be a disaster and a calamity in the long run for the Republican Party," Hotze said.
Hotze denied rumors that he got Jackson to change positions by promising him the nomination for the congressional seat held by U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land. DeLay has said he plans to resign by June.
"I don't even live close to that district. I don't have any influence there," Hotze said. "There's no way I could promise anyone that I could help them."
Jackson said he is interested in running for DeLay's seat, but he said he and Hotze never discussed it in relation to the tax bill.
janet.elliott@chron.com
r.g.ratcliffe@chron.com
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3836573.html
SPECIAL SESSION
Senate sends tax bill to Perry
Lawmaker from La Porte stalls the measure after constituents call
By JANET ELLIOTT and R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau
AUSTIN - The Senate voted 16-14 Tuesday to send a business tax bill to the governor, after a Houston-area senator jeopardized passage of the bill with last-minute opposition.
Sen. Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, ended up casting the key vote that allowed Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst to bring the bill up for a final vote. Four hours earlier he had stalled action by voting against bringing the bill to the floor.
At issue was a Senate rule requiring two-thirds of senators present to allow a bill to be debated. The rule is designed to get bipartisan consensus on legislation being brought before the Senate.
Jackson said he has had hundreds of calls from his district and decided to vote against bringing up the tax bill for debate because he thought it would have little permanent impact on reducing property taxes while raising new taxes on businesses.
"I started looking at calculating how little people would receive from the first stage of this property tax cut," Jackson said. "If school districts were able to raise their property tax rate 6 cents without a vote and then we have appraisal creep ... you come out with a wash in the first year."
Jackson said he used his ability to block the bill to gain "concessions" from Gov. Rick Perry and Dewhurst on having language to limit growth in school district spending put into another bill.
He said the restriction should limit the growth in property taxes unless a school district holds a vote of the people.
Jackson voted against final passage of the bill.
Passage means that the state's Republican leadership may finally have come to a school finance agreement that has eluded them in four attempts over the past two years.
Last chance at leadership
Senate Finance Chairman Steve Ogden, who sponsored the business tax, said with a June 1 deadline set by the Texas Supreme Court, this is the last chance for the governor and legislative leaders to show the public they are capable of leading the state.
"This special session will not only be declared a success but will be viewed a success by the people of Texas," said Ogden, R-Bryan.
House Bill 3 is key to Perry's plan to cut local property taxes. It would generate about $3.4 billion in new funds when it is first collected in May 2008.
The Senate also gave final passage to two other bills. One dedicates most of the revenue from the business tax and other new taxes to property tax relief, and the other collects more sales tax from used car sales by basing the tax on 80 percent of the vehicle's blue book value.
The Senate made changes in those bills, so they will go back to the House, which can concur or ask for a conference committee.
The Finance Committee still has to act on bills hiking cigarette taxes and another using budget surplus for property tax cuts and teacher raises.
'Gold mine' for Strayhorn
Harris County Republican activist Steven Hotze, who has been working against the business tax, said passage of the bill was "disappointing."
He said it would be a "gold mine" for one of Perry's re-election challengers, independent Comptroller Carole Keeton Strayhorn. He said Republicans in general will suffer at the ballot box after the business tax takes effect in 2008.
"I believe it's going to be a disaster and a calamity in the long run for the Republican Party," Hotze said.
Hotze denied rumors that he got Jackson to change positions by promising him the nomination for the congressional seat held by U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land. DeLay has said he plans to resign by June.
"I don't even live close to that district. I don't have any influence there," Hotze said. "There's no way I could promise anyone that I could help them."
Jackson said he is interested in running for DeLay's seat, but he said he and Hotze never discussed it in relation to the tax bill.
janet.elliott@chron.com
r.g.ratcliffe@chron.com
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/3836573.html
Growing Unease for Some Blacks on Immigration
This is an interesting piece that appeared today. I would hope that rather than there being divisions between African Americans and Latinos, that a struggle premised on a shared sense of fate would exist. Although there has been throughout history great collaboration between the two communities, divisions have also occur--almost always around divide and conquer strategies. This article makes the excellent point that many African Americans were pleased with Chinese exclusion in favor of European-origin immigration. Yet, African Americans then suffered at the hands of the latter. These are important matters for all of us to discuss in our homes, schools, and churches. -Angela
May 4, 2006
Growing Unease for Some Blacks on Immigration
By RACHEL L. SWARNS
WASHINGTON, May 3 — In their demonstrations across the country, some Hispanic immigrants have compared the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s struggle to their own, singing "We Shall Overcome" and declaring a new civil rights movement to win citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.
Civil rights stalwarts like the Rev. Jesse Jackson; Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia; Julian Bond and the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery have hailed the recent protests as the natural progression of their movement in the 1960's.
But despite some sympathy for the nation's illegal immigrants, many black professionals, academics and blue-collar workers feel increasingly uneasy as they watch Hispanics flex their political muscle while assuming the mantle of a seminal black struggle for justice.
Some blacks bristle at the comparison between the civil rights movement and the immigrant demonstrations, pointing out that black protesters in the 1960's were American citizens and had endured centuries of enslavement, rapes, lynchings and discrimination before they started marching.
Others worry about the plight of low-skilled black workers, who sometimes compete with immigrants for entry-level jobs.
And some fear the unfinished business of the civil rights movement will fall to the wayside as America turns its attention to a newly energized Hispanic minority with growing political and economic clout.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/us/04immig.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
May 4, 2006
Growing Unease for Some Blacks on Immigration
By RACHEL L. SWARNS
WASHINGTON, May 3 — In their demonstrations across the country, some Hispanic immigrants have compared the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s struggle to their own, singing "We Shall Overcome" and declaring a new civil rights movement to win citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants.
Civil rights stalwarts like the Rev. Jesse Jackson; Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia; Julian Bond and the Rev. Joseph E. Lowery have hailed the recent protests as the natural progression of their movement in the 1960's.
But despite some sympathy for the nation's illegal immigrants, many black professionals, academics and blue-collar workers feel increasingly uneasy as they watch Hispanics flex their political muscle while assuming the mantle of a seminal black struggle for justice.
Some blacks bristle at the comparison between the civil rights movement and the immigrant demonstrations, pointing out that black protesters in the 1960's were American citizens and had endured centuries of enslavement, rapes, lynchings and discrimination before they started marching.
Others worry about the plight of low-skilled black workers, who sometimes compete with immigrants for entry-level jobs.
And some fear the unfinished business of the civil rights movement will fall to the wayside as America turns its attention to a newly energized Hispanic minority with growing political and economic clout.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/04/us/04immig.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Small Schools' Ripple Effects Debated
May 3, 2006
Small Schools' Ripple Effects Debated
As N.Y.C. and Chicago close failing high schools, district officials encounter criticism.
By Erik W. Robelen
Major initiatives in New York City and Chicago to close unsuccessful schools and create small schools in their wake are stirring criticism from some community activists, local politicians, and others.
Beyond the resistance that school closures often generate, some critics charge that the growing scale of the efforts is producing negative ripple effects on other schools in the cities.
Natalie Wagner, an English teacher at the new Bronzeville Scholastic High School, housed in the former DuSable High School building in Chicago, prepares her syllabus last September. The building now contains four small schools. Chicago opened 22 small schools last fall under its Renaissance 2010 initiative.
—File photo by Charles Rex Arbogast/AP
In Chicago, the chief concerns appear to be whether the policies are leading to a rise in school violence, as well as causing academic disruption for students shifted to other schools. In New York, two of the biggest complaints are that the move to small high schools has caused an influx of special-needs students to other city high schools and has exacerbated overcrowding in some schools.
District officials in both cities counter at least some of those charges. For instance, New York officials insist that the small-schools effort is now easing overcrowding, not increasing it.
Also, while achievement data on many of the new schools are still in short supply, advocates are quick to note one powerful indicator: The schools are getting more applicants than they can handle.
“Every new school we’ve opened has a waiting list,” said Arne Duncan, the chief executive officer of the 426,000-student Chicago school system. “[Families] are desperately looking for better options.”
Still, the reactions to the rapid pace of change in New York, the nation’s largest school district, and Chicago, the third-largest, present reformers with the challenge of building public support for the closures, observers say.
“To the foundation leaders and maybe district leadership, it looks like they’re saving people by shutting down their schools and replacing them with a privately managed charter school,” said Michael Klonsky, the director of the Chicago-based Small Schools Workshop. “To the people on the ground, it seems like something [is] being done to them. … But it’s not just a school they’re losing. The school is often the anchor in the community.”
James H. Shelton, an education program director at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which is supporting the small-schools efforts in both cities, said he is mindful of the central role schools serve, especially in low-income communities.
“If the institution is no longer preparing kids for life, then you’re contributing to the degradation of the community by leaving it in place,” he said. “When you change it, you have to do it respectfully, but you have to change it.”
Concerns About Violence
Earlier this year, a member of the Chicago City Council put forward a resolution—discussed at a hearing but never acted upon by the council—calling for a moratorium on further school closings in Chicago until the academic progress of all students whose schools were closed or reconstituted could be evaluated.
Some state legislators representing Chicago have challenged closings, and the Illinois House of Representatives passed a bill in March that would impose new requirements for public review before the district could close a school.
The city’s Renaissance 2010 initiative, unveiled in 2004 by Mayor Richard M. Daley, aims to create 100 small schools—both elementary and secondary—by the end of the decade. About two-thirds of the schools are to be operated by outside entities, either as charter schools or “contract” schools; the others will be district schools that receive some freedom from district rules.
Part of the effort involves converting the district’s underenrolled and low-performing elementary and secondary schools into new schools. Typically, such schools are closed for a year, so students must attend other schools, at least temporarily.
“We know transfers set children back academically,” said Julie Woestehoff, the executive director of the Chicago-based advocacy group Parents United for Responsible Education. “The problem is the payoff is not necessarily going to be a better school. Chicago Public Schools has just thrown the net out and pulled in every fish in the sea.”
The Chicago Teachers Union and other critics of the initiative cite a recent Chicago Sun-Times article noting increases in incidents of violence at some schools that had taken in students from schools closed under Renaissance 2010. Since they began admitting those students in the fall of 2004, all eight schools studied have posted an increase in reported violence that is at least twice the average for similar city high schools, the newspaper said.
“There is growing violence in the schools, particularly the high schools, that are receiving new students,” said Rosemaria Genova, a spokeswoman for the Chicago union. “Chicago Public Schools needs to quit experimenting” and focus its resources on improving existing schools, she argued.
But Mr. Duncan questioned the Sun-Times analysis, noting that overall incidents of school violence have declined by 5 percent this academic year.
Asked whether he saw any connection between the school transfers and violent incidents, he said: “On a balanced look, in some cases there was, and in others it’s gone down. … The issues are very, very complex.”
Spec. Ed. at Issue
In New York, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, a Republican, has been pushing an aggressive small-schools program for the 1.1 million-student district since 2003. Already, nearly 200 small schools have been opened, and another 100 such schools are expected over the next few years.
Given extreme limits on available real estate, the city’s department of education has opted to locate many of the new schools within existing ones, whether in large high schools that are being phased out or in separate schools that will remain open.
In March, the Citywide Council on High Schools, a parent-advisory board to New York City Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein, unanimously passed a resolution urging the district to “substantially delay” implementation of new small high schools.
“The main concern really has to do with how the small schools are impacting the general school system, and the students who aren’t in the small schools,” said David Bloomfield, a member of the council and vocal critic of the small-schools movement.
Sean Gibbs, 18, studies a tilapia fish during a class in aquaculture at Wingate High School in Brooklyn. The New York City school, which is sharing its building with four new, small high schools, accepted its last freshmen in 2002 and will be phased out after the class of 2006 graduate.
—File photo by Bebeto Matthews/AP
“That seems to be an area that the Gates Foundation and the New York City public school system didn’t think about when they were starting to scale up the small schools,” said Mr. Bloomfield, who heads the educational leadership program at the Brooklyn College campus of the City University of New York.
Specifically, critics say many high schools have seen their enrollments swell substantially as 16 large high schools are being phased out and replaced with smaller schools housed in those facilities and elsewhere. They suggest that, if one large school is replaced by several smaller schools in the same facility, it usually won’t accommodate as many students. Many existing schools also are feeling squeezed, they say, as small schools are added to their campuses.
But Garth Harries, the head of the city’s office of new schools, said the new small schools are actually easing overcrowding by adding 5,000 seats to the system.
“It’s an unfortunate conflation of separate factors to say that small schools have crowded existing schools,” he said. “If you look at the data, … the creation of small schools has added capacity, added seats to the school system.”
One development sure to help is the $11.2 billion in school construction aid approved last month by the state for New York City.
Critics also blame the small-schools initiative for what they say is an increase in the number of students with disabilities and those who are English-language learners enrolled in some regular high schools. The district grants the new, small schools a temporary waiver from having to accept students who require self-contained classrooms for the schools’ first two years of existence.
Jill S. Levy, the president of the Council of Supervisors and Administrators, which represents principals and other administrators in New York City, said the influx is a real problem. “They get clustered into the larger schools, and that has a huge effect [under] No Child Left Behind,” she said of special-needs students, “and on the kinds of services that the school has to gear up.”
The district agrees that the new, small schools are serving fewer students with disabilities and limited English skills than average, although they note those schools took in a higher proportion of such students this school year than the year before.
For this school year, 10.7 percent of high school students citywide were special education students, compared with 7.5 percent in the new, small schools. For English-language learners, the citywide average was 11.5 percent, compared with 10 percent at the new, small schools.
“Part of the problem we’re combating is the warehousing of those students in some of those large high schools,” Mr. Harries said. He argues that over time, the new, small schools will serve comparable proportions of special-needs students, and deliver them a far better education.
Mr. Shelton of the Gates Foundation said that while he’s found Gates-backed small schools are serving a proportionate number of low-income and minority students, the concern about special education students in New York was consistent with some of what he’s been hearing in other places.
“We’re disturbed by the fact that our special education representation is not as high as we would like it,” he said. “But over time, that’s going to normalize.”
Mr. Shelton noted that the foundation has begun making grants to help local groups raise awareness about new schools, including among parents of students with disabilities.
‘Getting Better’
Norm Fruchter, the director of the community-involvement program at New York University’s school of education, called the small-schools effort in New York “extraordinary, just in terms of its scale, scope, and timing.” But while applauding its goals, Mr. Fruchter sees reasons for concern, given the zeal for opening so many school so rapidly. One is finding enough skilled leaders to run them. Another is space.
“They’re sometimes forced into makeshift solutions,” he said, “which oftentimes don’t play out in a way that maximizes meeting kids’ needs.”
“You saw them put small schools into high schools that couldn’t handle them,” agreed Randi Weingarten, the president of the United Federation of Teachers, the city’s affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers. “Things are getting much better, but you still have a lot of schools saying, unless you have space, don’t create schools within schools.”
“I think that there’s been legitimate concerns expressed, but I don’t think there’s been a massive pushback,” said Robert L. Hughes, the president of New Visions for Public Schools, which has helped develop small schools in New York. “I think we’ve learned a lot. … We’re a lot more effective with community engagement. We can show people what the change is about.”
Coverage of district-level improvement efforts is underwritten in part by grants from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
Vol. 25, Issue 34, Pages 1,20
© 2006 Editorial Projects in Education
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/05/03/34backlash.h25.html?levelId=1000
Small Schools' Ripple Effects Debated
As N.Y.C. and Chicago close failing high schools, district officials encounter criticism.
By Erik W. Robelen
Major initiatives in New York City and Chicago to close unsuccessful schools and create small schools in their wake are stirring criticism from some community activists, local politicians, and others.
Beyond the resistance that school closures often generate, some critics charge that the growing scale of the efforts is producing negative ripple effects on other schools in the cities.
Natalie Wagner, an English teacher at the new Bronzeville Scholastic High School, housed in the former DuSable High School building in Chicago, prepares her syllabus last September. The building now contains four small schools. Chicago opened 22 small schools last fall under its Renaissance 2010 initiative.
—File photo by Charles Rex Arbogast/AP
In Chicago, the chief concerns appear to be whether the policies are leading to a rise in school violence, as well as causing academic disruption for students shifted to other schools. In New York, two of the biggest complaints are that the move to small high schools has caused an influx of special-needs students to other city high schools and has exacerbated overcrowding in some schools.
District officials in both cities counter at least some of those charges. For instance, New York officials insist that the small-schools effort is now easing overcrowding, not increasing it.
Also, while achievement data on many of the new schools are still in short supply, advocates are quick to note one powerful indicator: The schools are getting more applicants than they can handle.
“Every new school we’ve opened has a waiting list,” said Arne Duncan, the chief executive officer of the 426,000-student Chicago school system. “[Families] are desperately looking for better options.”
Still, the reactions to the rapid pace of change in New York, the nation’s largest school district, and Chicago, the third-largest, present reformers with the challenge of building public support for the closures, observers say.
“To the foundation leaders and maybe district leadership, it looks like they’re saving people by shutting down their schools and replacing them with a privately managed charter school,” said Michael Klonsky, the director of the Chicago-based Small Schools Workshop. “To the people on the ground, it seems like something [is] being done to them. … But it’s not just a school they’re losing. The school is often the anchor in the community.”
James H. Shelton, an education program director at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which is supporting the small-schools efforts in both cities, said he is mindful of the central role schools serve, especially in low-income communities.
“If the institution is no longer preparing kids for life, then you’re contributing to the degradation of the community by leaving it in place,” he said. “When you change it, you have to do it respectfully, but you have to change it.”
Concerns About Violence
Earlier this year, a member of the Chicago City Council put forward a resolution—discussed at a hearing but never acted upon by the council—calling for a moratorium on further school closings in Chicago until the academic progress of all students whose schools were closed or reconstituted could be evaluated.
Some state legislators representing Chicago have challenged closings, and the Illinois House of Representatives passed a bill in March that would impose new requirements for public review before the district could close a school.
The city’s Renaissance 2010 initiative, unveiled in 2004 by Mayor Richard M. Daley, aims to create 100 small schools—both elementary and secondary—by the end of the decade. About two-thirds of the schools are to be operated by outside entities, either as charter schools or “contract” schools; the others will be district schools that receive some freedom from district rules.
Part of the effort involves converting the district’s underenrolled and low-performing elementary and secondary schools into new schools. Typically, such schools are closed for a year, so students must attend other schools, at least temporarily.
“We know transfers set children back academically,” said Julie Woestehoff, the executive director of the Chicago-based advocacy group Parents United for Responsible Education. “The problem is the payoff is not necessarily going to be a better school. Chicago Public Schools has just thrown the net out and pulled in every fish in the sea.”
The Chicago Teachers Union and other critics of the initiative cite a recent Chicago Sun-Times article noting increases in incidents of violence at some schools that had taken in students from schools closed under Renaissance 2010. Since they began admitting those students in the fall of 2004, all eight schools studied have posted an increase in reported violence that is at least twice the average for similar city high schools, the newspaper said.
“There is growing violence in the schools, particularly the high schools, that are receiving new students,” said Rosemaria Genova, a spokeswoman for the Chicago union. “Chicago Public Schools needs to quit experimenting” and focus its resources on improving existing schools, she argued.
But Mr. Duncan questioned the Sun-Times analysis, noting that overall incidents of school violence have declined by 5 percent this academic year.
Asked whether he saw any connection between the school transfers and violent incidents, he said: “On a balanced look, in some cases there was, and in others it’s gone down. … The issues are very, very complex.”
Spec. Ed. at Issue
In New York, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, a Republican, has been pushing an aggressive small-schools program for the 1.1 million-student district since 2003. Already, nearly 200 small schools have been opened, and another 100 such schools are expected over the next few years.
Given extreme limits on available real estate, the city’s department of education has opted to locate many of the new schools within existing ones, whether in large high schools that are being phased out or in separate schools that will remain open.
In March, the Citywide Council on High Schools, a parent-advisory board to New York City Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein, unanimously passed a resolution urging the district to “substantially delay” implementation of new small high schools.
“The main concern really has to do with how the small schools are impacting the general school system, and the students who aren’t in the small schools,” said David Bloomfield, a member of the council and vocal critic of the small-schools movement.
Sean Gibbs, 18, studies a tilapia fish during a class in aquaculture at Wingate High School in Brooklyn. The New York City school, which is sharing its building with four new, small high schools, accepted its last freshmen in 2002 and will be phased out after the class of 2006 graduate.
—File photo by Bebeto Matthews/AP
“That seems to be an area that the Gates Foundation and the New York City public school system didn’t think about when they were starting to scale up the small schools,” said Mr. Bloomfield, who heads the educational leadership program at the Brooklyn College campus of the City University of New York.
Specifically, critics say many high schools have seen their enrollments swell substantially as 16 large high schools are being phased out and replaced with smaller schools housed in those facilities and elsewhere. They suggest that, if one large school is replaced by several smaller schools in the same facility, it usually won’t accommodate as many students. Many existing schools also are feeling squeezed, they say, as small schools are added to their campuses.
But Garth Harries, the head of the city’s office of new schools, said the new small schools are actually easing overcrowding by adding 5,000 seats to the system.
“It’s an unfortunate conflation of separate factors to say that small schools have crowded existing schools,” he said. “If you look at the data, … the creation of small schools has added capacity, added seats to the school system.”
One development sure to help is the $11.2 billion in school construction aid approved last month by the state for New York City.
Critics also blame the small-schools initiative for what they say is an increase in the number of students with disabilities and those who are English-language learners enrolled in some regular high schools. The district grants the new, small schools a temporary waiver from having to accept students who require self-contained classrooms for the schools’ first two years of existence.
Jill S. Levy, the president of the Council of Supervisors and Administrators, which represents principals and other administrators in New York City, said the influx is a real problem. “They get clustered into the larger schools, and that has a huge effect [under] No Child Left Behind,” she said of special-needs students, “and on the kinds of services that the school has to gear up.”
The district agrees that the new, small schools are serving fewer students with disabilities and limited English skills than average, although they note those schools took in a higher proportion of such students this school year than the year before.
For this school year, 10.7 percent of high school students citywide were special education students, compared with 7.5 percent in the new, small schools. For English-language learners, the citywide average was 11.5 percent, compared with 10 percent at the new, small schools.
“Part of the problem we’re combating is the warehousing of those students in some of those large high schools,” Mr. Harries said. He argues that over time, the new, small schools will serve comparable proportions of special-needs students, and deliver them a far better education.
Mr. Shelton of the Gates Foundation said that while he’s found Gates-backed small schools are serving a proportionate number of low-income and minority students, the concern about special education students in New York was consistent with some of what he’s been hearing in other places.
“We’re disturbed by the fact that our special education representation is not as high as we would like it,” he said. “But over time, that’s going to normalize.”
Mr. Shelton noted that the foundation has begun making grants to help local groups raise awareness about new schools, including among parents of students with disabilities.
‘Getting Better’
Norm Fruchter, the director of the community-involvement program at New York University’s school of education, called the small-schools effort in New York “extraordinary, just in terms of its scale, scope, and timing.” But while applauding its goals, Mr. Fruchter sees reasons for concern, given the zeal for opening so many school so rapidly. One is finding enough skilled leaders to run them. Another is space.
“They’re sometimes forced into makeshift solutions,” he said, “which oftentimes don’t play out in a way that maximizes meeting kids’ needs.”
“You saw them put small schools into high schools that couldn’t handle them,” agreed Randi Weingarten, the president of the United Federation of Teachers, the city’s affiliate of the American Federation of Teachers. “Things are getting much better, but you still have a lot of schools saying, unless you have space, don’t create schools within schools.”
“I think that there’s been legitimate concerns expressed, but I don’t think there’s been a massive pushback,” said Robert L. Hughes, the president of New Visions for Public Schools, which has helped develop small schools in New York. “I think we’ve learned a lot. … We’re a lot more effective with community engagement. We can show people what the change is about.”
Coverage of district-level improvement efforts is underwritten in part by grants from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
Vol. 25, Issue 34, Pages 1,20
© 2006 Editorial Projects in Education
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2006/05/03/34backlash.h25.html?levelId=1000
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
After Immigration Protests, Goal Remains Elusive
A reported 8,500 people marched in Austin, meaning according to some informal estimates, perhaps around 10,000. A lot of people stayed away because of recent scares of rumored roundups in such places at HEB (supermarket) and other work places. I heard from several teachers who said that children went to school crying out of fear that their parents would get deported. Lots of folks stayed home yesterday. I was happy to see a number of students and UT faculty out in the sun sweating it with the marchers. -Angela
May 3, 2006
News Analysis
After Immigration Protests, Goal Remains Elusive
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
WASHINGTON, May 2 — The nascent immigrant rights movement showed on Monday that it could build an organization, mobilize hundreds of thousands of people across the country and wield economic power.
But the protesters do not appear to have achieved their primary goal: changing votes in Congress. And some critics say the demonstration may have generated a backlash, hardening positions on Capitol Hill.
The protests, which began in March and resumed on Monday with a boycott of work, school and shops, have clearly grabbed the nation's attention when the issue of illegal immigration is high on the agenda in Washington.
The heightened attention will make it difficult for Congress to duck the question of what to do with the estimated 11 million to 12 million people living illegally in the United States. Although the outpouring has drawn comparisons to the civil rights movement of the 1960's, questions remain about whether the protesters can translate their passion into political results.
Some companies closed on Monday, yet it is too early to assess the economic effects of the boycott. The effects were diminished because many workers notified their employers ahead of time that they planned to take the day off.
"This was a one-day deal," said Randel Johnson, vice president of the United States Chamber of Congress, which supports bills to legalize immigrants. "If immigrants decided to abandon their jobs for two weeks, that would definitely have an impact."
Some advocates who support "comprehensive immigration reform," the idea that illegal workers should be put on a path to citizenship, say the protests have given that concept an important lift in the debate on Capitol Hill.
Even some immigrant rights backers say few if any minds were changed and called the marches a Rorschach test in which people simply saw their own view reflected in the sea of mostly Latino marchers.
"I have no effective data on this, but it has probably hardened positions and maybe done a little bit of wedging," said Gov. Jon S. Corzine of New Jersey, a Democrat and former senator who said he supported the protesters' cause. "I think that the people that were really fired up about this still are, and the position that they had to start with, they still carry."
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said: "The protest, I don't think, changes votes on the floor of the Senate. I think what changes votes is coming down, sitting down, talking about it, as opposed to students' staying out of school. I happen to think that students' staying out of school is counterproductive."
The protesters have discovered that there is a thin and potentially dangerous line between promoting national pride and pushing opponents' buttons. They used tactics — flying the Mexican flag, recording "The Star-Spangled Banner" in Spanish — that have left even some supporters feeling a bit queasy.
"I have a great respect for a lot of the people that did the protesting, but I think their message is all confused," said Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, whose sympathy dates from his childhood, when his mother, an Italian immigrant, was nearly deported. "The flag, the anthem, all that, it got everybody all mixed up. 'Take off work' — it sounded wrong to some people, right to others."
The public is deeply divided on illegal immigration. A survey in March by the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, found that 53 percent of respondents said people who were in the United States illegally should be required to go home and that 40 percent say the immigrants should be granted some kind of legal status that allows them to stay here.
"What buttons were pressed?" Roberto Suro, the director of the center, asked, wondering aloud about what Americans saw when they looked at the protesters. "Was it that there are so many people here outside of government control or was it the hard-working family types? I think that's really imponderable."
That divide is reflected among Republicans on Capitol Hill. The House opposes giving citizenship to illegal immigrants, and it has passed a bill aimed only at controlling the borders, while a more comprehensive Senate bill is backed by Republicans like Mr. Domenici, as well as Senators Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, John McCain of Arizona, and Mel Martinez of Florida.
Some say the protests have given the Senate approach a boost. "While you could never point to a specific vote, they moved the tone and the thrust where now a balanced bill has the upper hand, and it's in part because of the protests," Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said.
The Senate bill collapsed last month amid partisan bickering on procedure, but the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, says he wants to resume the debate this month. On Tuesday, the minority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, offered to limit the debate to 10 amendments a side. Mr. Frist did not accept that, and they continued talks. The Republican split is complicated because not just the immigrants are weighing in. Among their biggest allies are employers, large and small, who want assurances that they will continue to have that labor pool. Business groups are important for the Republican base, and many employers gave immigrant employees the day off on Monday in solidarity with the marchers.
With Republicans so divided, reaching consensus will be difficult.
"Obviously, there's tremendous pressure on lawmakers to fix the problem," said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, an advocacy group. "The marches in the street, the public opinion polls that show immigration is one of the top two or three issues in the country.
"But the crosscurrents of politics and policy are such that it's going to take a tremendous push from President Bush and from Democratic and Republican leaders to get this done."
It is clear that the protests have raised some hackles. After the March rally, Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, said he was deeply offended by marchers' waving the Mexican flag.
"I want to be sensitive to human concerns, why they're here and how they're here. But when they act out like that, they lose me," Mr. Lott said.
He suggested a risk of deportation and said, "We had them all in a bunch, you know what I mean?"
Julia Preston contributed reporting from New York for this article, and Rachel L. Swarns from Washington.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
May 3, 2006
News Analysis
After Immigration Protests, Goal Remains Elusive
By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
WASHINGTON, May 2 — The nascent immigrant rights movement showed on Monday that it could build an organization, mobilize hundreds of thousands of people across the country and wield economic power.
But the protesters do not appear to have achieved their primary goal: changing votes in Congress. And some critics say the demonstration may have generated a backlash, hardening positions on Capitol Hill.
The protests, which began in March and resumed on Monday with a boycott of work, school and shops, have clearly grabbed the nation's attention when the issue of illegal immigration is high on the agenda in Washington.
The heightened attention will make it difficult for Congress to duck the question of what to do with the estimated 11 million to 12 million people living illegally in the United States. Although the outpouring has drawn comparisons to the civil rights movement of the 1960's, questions remain about whether the protesters can translate their passion into political results.
Some companies closed on Monday, yet it is too early to assess the economic effects of the boycott. The effects were diminished because many workers notified their employers ahead of time that they planned to take the day off.
"This was a one-day deal," said Randel Johnson, vice president of the United States Chamber of Congress, which supports bills to legalize immigrants. "If immigrants decided to abandon their jobs for two weeks, that would definitely have an impact."
Some advocates who support "comprehensive immigration reform," the idea that illegal workers should be put on a path to citizenship, say the protests have given that concept an important lift in the debate on Capitol Hill.
Even some immigrant rights backers say few if any minds were changed and called the marches a Rorschach test in which people simply saw their own view reflected in the sea of mostly Latino marchers.
"I have no effective data on this, but it has probably hardened positions and maybe done a little bit of wedging," said Gov. Jon S. Corzine of New Jersey, a Democrat and former senator who said he supported the protesters' cause. "I think that the people that were really fired up about this still are, and the position that they had to start with, they still carry."
Senator Dianne Feinstein, Democrat of California, said: "The protest, I don't think, changes votes on the floor of the Senate. I think what changes votes is coming down, sitting down, talking about it, as opposed to students' staying out of school. I happen to think that students' staying out of school is counterproductive."
The protesters have discovered that there is a thin and potentially dangerous line between promoting national pride and pushing opponents' buttons. They used tactics — flying the Mexican flag, recording "The Star-Spangled Banner" in Spanish — that have left even some supporters feeling a bit queasy.
"I have a great respect for a lot of the people that did the protesting, but I think their message is all confused," said Senator Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico, whose sympathy dates from his childhood, when his mother, an Italian immigrant, was nearly deported. "The flag, the anthem, all that, it got everybody all mixed up. 'Take off work' — it sounded wrong to some people, right to others."
The public is deeply divided on illegal immigration. A survey in March by the Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research group in Washington, found that 53 percent of respondents said people who were in the United States illegally should be required to go home and that 40 percent say the immigrants should be granted some kind of legal status that allows them to stay here.
"What buttons were pressed?" Roberto Suro, the director of the center, asked, wondering aloud about what Americans saw when they looked at the protesters. "Was it that there are so many people here outside of government control or was it the hard-working family types? I think that's really imponderable."
That divide is reflected among Republicans on Capitol Hill. The House opposes giving citizenship to illegal immigrants, and it has passed a bill aimed only at controlling the borders, while a more comprehensive Senate bill is backed by Republicans like Mr. Domenici, as well as Senators Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, John McCain of Arizona, and Mel Martinez of Florida.
Some say the protests have given the Senate approach a boost. "While you could never point to a specific vote, they moved the tone and the thrust where now a balanced bill has the upper hand, and it's in part because of the protests," Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said.
The Senate bill collapsed last month amid partisan bickering on procedure, but the Senate majority leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, says he wants to resume the debate this month. On Tuesday, the minority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, offered to limit the debate to 10 amendments a side. Mr. Frist did not accept that, and they continued talks. The Republican split is complicated because not just the immigrants are weighing in. Among their biggest allies are employers, large and small, who want assurances that they will continue to have that labor pool. Business groups are important for the Republican base, and many employers gave immigrant employees the day off on Monday in solidarity with the marchers.
With Republicans so divided, reaching consensus will be difficult.
"Obviously, there's tremendous pressure on lawmakers to fix the problem," said Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, an advocacy group. "The marches in the street, the public opinion polls that show immigration is one of the top two or three issues in the country.
"But the crosscurrents of politics and policy are such that it's going to take a tremendous push from President Bush and from Democratic and Republican leaders to get this done."
It is clear that the protests have raised some hackles. After the March rally, Senator Trent Lott, Republican of Mississippi, said he was deeply offended by marchers' waving the Mexican flag.
"I want to be sensitive to human concerns, why they're here and how they're here. But when they act out like that, they lose me," Mr. Lott said.
He suggested a risk of deportation and said, "We had them all in a bunch, you know what I mean?"
Julia Preston contributed reporting from New York for this article, and Rachel L. Swarns from Washington.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company
Immigrants Take to U.S. Streets in Show of Strength
Check out the photos from the NYTimes website. This is historic indeed. -Angela
Immigrants Take to U.S. Streets in Show of Strength
Monica Almeida/The New York Times
Thousands of people marched on Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles. More Photos >
NEW YORK TIMES
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
Published: May 2, 2006
Truck drivers gathered in a park in Los Angeles, Calif. More Photos >
The demonstrations did not bring the nation to a halt as planned by
some organizers, though they did cause some disruptions and conveyed
in peaceful but sometimes boisterous ways the resolve of those who
favor loosening the country's laws on immigration.
Originally billed as a nationwide economic boycott under the banner
"Day Without an Immigrant," the day evolved into a sweeping round of
protests intended to influence the debate in Congress over granting
legal status to all or most of the estimated 11 million illegal
immigrants in the country.
The protesters, a mix of illegal immigrants and legal residents and
citizens, were mostly Latino, but in contrast to similar
demonstrations in the past two months, large numbers of people of
other ethnicities joined or endorsed many of the events. In some
cases, the rallies took on a broader tone of social action, as gay
rights advocates, opponents of the war in Iraq and others without a
direct stake in the immigration debate took to the streets.
"I think it's only fair that I speak up for those who can't speak for
themselves," said Aimee Hernandez, 28, one of an estimated 400,000
people who turned out in Chicago, the site of one of the largest
demonstrations. "I think we're just too many that you can't just send
them back. How are you going to ignore these people?"
But among those who favor stricter controls on illegal immigration,
the protests hardly impressed.
"When the rule of law is dictated by a mob of illegal aliens taking to
the streets, especially under a foreign flag, then that means the
nation is not governed by a rule of law – it is a mobocracy," Jim
Gilchrist, a founder of the Minutemen Project, a volunteer group that
patrols the United States-Mexico border, said in an interview.
While the boycott, an idea born several months ago among a small group
of grass-roots immigration advocates here, may not have shut down the
country, it was strongly felt in a variety of places, particularly
those with large Latino populations.
Stores and restaurants in Los Angeles, Chicago and New York closed
because workers did not show up or as a display of solidarity with
demonstrators. In Los Angeles, the police estimated that more than
half a million people attended two demonstrations in and near
downtown. School districts in several cities reported a decline in
attendance; at Benito Juarez High School in Pilsen, a predominantly
Latino neighborhood in Chicago, only 17 percent of the students showed
up, even though administrators and some protest organizers had urged
students to stay in school.
Lettuce, tomatoes and grapes went unpicked in fields in California and
Arizona, which contribute more than half the nation's produce, as
scores of growers let workers take the day off. Truckers who move 70
percent of the goods in ports in Los Angeles and Long Beach, Calif.,
did not work.
Meatpacking companies, including Tyson Foods and Cargill, closed
plants in the Midwest and the West employing more than 20,000 people,
while the flower and produce markets in downtown Los Angeles stood
largely and eerily empty.
Israel Banuelos, 23, and more than 50 of his colleagues skipped work,
with the grudging acceptance of his employer, an industrial paint
plant in Hollister, Calif.
"We were supposed to work," Mr. Banuelos said, "but we wanted to close
down the company. Our boss didn't like it money-wise."
The economic impact of the day's events was hard to gauge, though
economists expected a one-day stoppage to have little long-term
effect. In large swaths of the country, life went on with no
noticeable difference. But protesters in numerous cities, many clad in
white and waving mostly American flags in response to complaints that
earlier rallies featured too many Latin American ones, declared
victory as chanting throngs shut down streets.
Most of the demonstrators' ire was directed at a bill passed by the
House that would increase security at the border while making it a
felony for an illegal immigrant to be in the country or to aid one.
The marchers generally favored a plan in the Senate, for which
President Bush has shown signs of support, that would include more
protection at the border but offer many illegal workers a path to citizenship.
Still, the divide among advocates over the value and effectiveness of
a boycott resulted in some cities, including Los Angeles and San
Diego, playing host to two sizable demonstrations, one organized by
boycotters and the other by people neutral or opposed to it.
That split played out across the country. While many business owners
warned employees about taking the day off, many others also sought to
negotiate time off or other ways to register workers' sentiments.
Las Vegas casinos reported few disruptions, partly because many of
their owners announced their support for workers at a news conference
last week. On Monday, more than 40 casinos set up tables in employee
lunchrooms for workers to sign pro-immigration petitions.
Leaders of Local 226 of the Culinary Workers Union also urged members
to go to work. The union is Las Vegas's largest hospitality union,
representing 50,000 workers, of which 40 percent are Hispanic.
Smaller businesses in Las Vegas, where tens of thousands of
demonstrators gathered on the Strip, also took a hit. Javier Barajas
said he closed his family's four Mexican restaurants in Las Vegas
because members of his staff warned him they would not show up,
costing him more than $60,000 in revenue.
"I cannot fire anybody over this, but I would have liked to see some
other way to express themselves," said Mr. Barajas, who was once an
illegal immigrant from central Mexico but became a United States
citizen. "It's the small businesses that are hurt by this."
For many immigrants, however, it was just another workday.
At a Home Depot in Hollywood, day laborers as always crowded parking
lot entrances, hoping for work. At a car wash in the Echo Park
neighborhood of Los Angeles, employees buzzed, with workers vacuuming,
buffing and drying cars. People lined up at markets, though some
reported slower business.
"I was thinking about not buying things, but then I needed to buy
stuff," said Alex Sanchez, 28, a construction worker buying an
avocado, chilies and beer.
The boycott grew from an idea hatched by a small band of grass-roots
advocates in Los Angeles, inspired by the farmworker movement of the
1960's led by Cesar Chavez and Bert Corona. Through the Internet and
mass media catering to immigrants, they developed and tapped a network
of union organizers, immigrant rights groups and others to spread the
word and plan events tied to the boycott, timed to coincide with
International Workers' Day.
The Los Angeles organizers said some 70 cities held boycott activities.
The day spawned all manner of supportive actions here. A department
store chain offered space for lawyers to give legal advice to
immigrants; in Hollywood, the comedian Paul Rodriguez appeared at the
comedy club the Laugh Factory to promote a daylong health care fair
for immigrant workers.
In Chicago, there was solidarity in diversity, as Latinos were joined
by immigrants of Polish, Irish, Asian and African descent. Jerry
Jablonski, 30, said he had moved to Chicago from Poland six years ago,
flying to Mexico and then crossing the border. He now works a construction job.
"Poland is my old country," Mr. Jablonski said. "This is my new
country. I can make everything happen here."
Reporting for this article was contributed by Cindy Chang from Los
Angeles, Steve Friess from Las Vegas, Carolyn Marshall from
Watsonville, Calif., and Gretchen Ruethling from Chicago.
Immigrants Take to U.S. Streets in Show of Strength
Monica Almeida/The New York Times
Thousands of people marched on Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles. More Photos >
NEW YORK TIMES
By RANDAL C. ARCHIBOLD
Published: May 2, 2006
Truck drivers gathered in a park in Los Angeles, Calif. More Photos >
The demonstrations did not bring the nation to a halt as planned by
some organizers, though they did cause some disruptions and conveyed
in peaceful but sometimes boisterous ways the resolve of those who
favor loosening the country's laws on immigration.
Originally billed as a nationwide economic boycott under the banner
"Day Without an Immigrant," the day evolved into a sweeping round of
protests intended to influence the debate in Congress over granting
legal status to all or most of the estimated 11 million illegal
immigrants in the country.
The protesters, a mix of illegal immigrants and legal residents and
citizens, were mostly Latino, but in contrast to similar
demonstrations in the past two months, large numbers of people of
other ethnicities joined or endorsed many of the events. In some
cases, the rallies took on a broader tone of social action, as gay
rights advocates, opponents of the war in Iraq and others without a
direct stake in the immigration debate took to the streets.
"I think it's only fair that I speak up for those who can't speak for
themselves," said Aimee Hernandez, 28, one of an estimated 400,000
people who turned out in Chicago, the site of one of the largest
demonstrations. "I think we're just too many that you can't just send
them back. How are you going to ignore these people?"
But among those who favor stricter controls on illegal immigration,
the protests hardly impressed.
"When the rule of law is dictated by a mob of illegal aliens taking to
the streets, especially under a foreign flag, then that means the
nation is not governed by a rule of law – it is a mobocracy," Jim
Gilchrist, a founder of the Minutemen Project, a volunteer group that
patrols the United States-Mexico border, said in an interview.
While the boycott, an idea born several months ago among a small group
of grass-roots immigration advocates here, may not have shut down the
country, it was strongly felt in a variety of places, particularly
those with large Latino populations.
Stores and restaurants in Los Angeles, Chicago and New York closed
because workers did not show up or as a display of solidarity with
demonstrators. In Los Angeles, the police estimated that more than
half a million people attended two demonstrations in and near
downtown. School districts in several cities reported a decline in
attendance; at Benito Juarez High School in Pilsen, a predominantly
Latino neighborhood in Chicago, only 17 percent of the students showed
up, even though administrators and some protest organizers had urged
students to stay in school.
Lettuce, tomatoes and grapes went unpicked in fields in California and
Arizona, which contribute more than half the nation's produce, as
scores of growers let workers take the day off. Truckers who move 70
percent of the goods in ports in Los Angeles and Long Beach, Calif.,
did not work.
Meatpacking companies, including Tyson Foods and Cargill, closed
plants in the Midwest and the West employing more than 20,000 people,
while the flower and produce markets in downtown Los Angeles stood
largely and eerily empty.
Israel Banuelos, 23, and more than 50 of his colleagues skipped work,
with the grudging acceptance of his employer, an industrial paint
plant in Hollister, Calif.
"We were supposed to work," Mr. Banuelos said, "but we wanted to close
down the company. Our boss didn't like it money-wise."
The economic impact of the day's events was hard to gauge, though
economists expected a one-day stoppage to have little long-term
effect. In large swaths of the country, life went on with no
noticeable difference. But protesters in numerous cities, many clad in
white and waving mostly American flags in response to complaints that
earlier rallies featured too many Latin American ones, declared
victory as chanting throngs shut down streets.
Most of the demonstrators' ire was directed at a bill passed by the
House that would increase security at the border while making it a
felony for an illegal immigrant to be in the country or to aid one.
The marchers generally favored a plan in the Senate, for which
President Bush has shown signs of support, that would include more
protection at the border but offer many illegal workers a path to citizenship.
Still, the divide among advocates over the value and effectiveness of
a boycott resulted in some cities, including Los Angeles and San
Diego, playing host to two sizable demonstrations, one organized by
boycotters and the other by people neutral or opposed to it.
That split played out across the country. While many business owners
warned employees about taking the day off, many others also sought to
negotiate time off or other ways to register workers' sentiments.
Las Vegas casinos reported few disruptions, partly because many of
their owners announced their support for workers at a news conference
last week. On Monday, more than 40 casinos set up tables in employee
lunchrooms for workers to sign pro-immigration petitions.
Leaders of Local 226 of the Culinary Workers Union also urged members
to go to work. The union is Las Vegas's largest hospitality union,
representing 50,000 workers, of which 40 percent are Hispanic.
Smaller businesses in Las Vegas, where tens of thousands of
demonstrators gathered on the Strip, also took a hit. Javier Barajas
said he closed his family's four Mexican restaurants in Las Vegas
because members of his staff warned him they would not show up,
costing him more than $60,000 in revenue.
"I cannot fire anybody over this, but I would have liked to see some
other way to express themselves," said Mr. Barajas, who was once an
illegal immigrant from central Mexico but became a United States
citizen. "It's the small businesses that are hurt by this."
For many immigrants, however, it was just another workday.
At a Home Depot in Hollywood, day laborers as always crowded parking
lot entrances, hoping for work. At a car wash in the Echo Park
neighborhood of Los Angeles, employees buzzed, with workers vacuuming,
buffing and drying cars. People lined up at markets, though some
reported slower business.
"I was thinking about not buying things, but then I needed to buy
stuff," said Alex Sanchez, 28, a construction worker buying an
avocado, chilies and beer.
The boycott grew from an idea hatched by a small band of grass-roots
advocates in Los Angeles, inspired by the farmworker movement of the
1960's led by Cesar Chavez and Bert Corona. Through the Internet and
mass media catering to immigrants, they developed and tapped a network
of union organizers, immigrant rights groups and others to spread the
word and plan events tied to the boycott, timed to coincide with
International Workers' Day.
The Los Angeles organizers said some 70 cities held boycott activities.
The day spawned all manner of supportive actions here. A department
store chain offered space for lawyers to give legal advice to
immigrants; in Hollywood, the comedian Paul Rodriguez appeared at the
comedy club the Laugh Factory to promote a daylong health care fair
for immigrant workers.
In Chicago, there was solidarity in diversity, as Latinos were joined
by immigrants of Polish, Irish, Asian and African descent. Jerry
Jablonski, 30, said he had moved to Chicago from Poland six years ago,
flying to Mexico and then crossing the border. He now works a construction job.
"Poland is my old country," Mr. Jablonski said. "This is my new
country. I can make everything happen here."
Reporting for this article was contributed by Cindy Chang from Los
Angeles, Steve Friess from Las Vegas, Carolyn Marshall from
Watsonville, Calif., and Gretchen Ruethling from Chicago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)