One of the purposes for our representative government is so that we can go on with our lives without having to study out each and every issue—and have it decided on by whatever the media persuades the majority to believe. But going on with our lives—leaving the elected officials unmonitored—is too dangerous today. Constant vigilance is required of us.
floor of the Texas Senate from a tour in 2018 |
Today’s post is Texas legislation information. But it may be
of instructive interest to others. Here are just a few issues I’ve been paying
attention to this session.
Just to remind, the Texas Legislature meets mid-January
through May every other year. We’re approaching 3 ½ months in. A rule of thumb
is, if a bill can’t get voted out of committee in its originating chamber by
the end of April, it’s dead. There’s not enough time to get through the remaining
steps before the end of the session. So there’s a lot that really needs to
happen immediately.
School Choice
I’ve been working, along with many others, to pass a bill in
the Texas Legislature on school choice. The bill is titled the Family
Educational Relief Act. I wrote about it here, and did a shorter op-ed
published here.
This bill takes no money away from public schooling; in fact,
it adds funding sources. But it is a way for low-income families to escape
failing schools.
Opponents will do practically anything to keep kids in
failing schools. One tactic, last Thursday, was to put the following amendment
in the budget bill (the budget is pretty much the only requirement of the
legislature during the session):
Prohibition on Use of Appropriated Money for School Choice
Programs. Money appropriated by this Act may not be used to pay for or support
a school voucher, education savings account, or tax credit scholarship program
or a similar program through which a child may use state money for nonpublic
primary or secondary education.
The amendment (slightly longer) was pre-introduced by
Republican Rep. VanDeaver, then removed on a point of order, but replaced by
this one by Democrat Rep. Herrero.
Beside the basic fact that I disagree with the intent, there
are some major problems. This is a policy issue; putting it in the budget does
a skirt around the committee process and prevents public discussion. For that
reason it is likely to be stripped back out during reconciliation with the
Senate. (The bill, SB 1, originated in the Senate, got loaded up with amendments in the House, and then
has to go back to the Senate, where changes will be made until there is
agreement on what should be in the budget bill.)
When you talk with opponents of our school choice bill, they
say they could never take money away from public schooling—which shows you they
have not read the bill.
The vote was 115 in favor of the amendment; 29 opposed (5 not
voting, including the speaker during the vote). All of the Democrats voted for
the amendment, of course. The problem is, of the 83 Republicans, only 29 voted
against it. Two were absent, so that means 52 Republicans voted to keep children
in failing schools without a way out under any circumstances.
The Texas Constitution (Article VII, Sec. 1) requires that
students be educated:
A general diffusion of knowledge being
essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it
shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and make
suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of
public free schools.
The Republican Party platform has some 340 planks, including
unequivocal support of school choice, but the platform starts with 10 constant
principles—which Republican officeholders are required to agree with. Principle
7 is We believe in:
Having an educated population, with parents having the
freedom of choice for the education of their children.
In addition, at the Texas GOP Convention, the delegates
voted on 8 top legislative priorities, and one of these is school choice:
School Choice for All: Empower parents and guardians to
choose from public, private, charter, or homeschool options for their
children’s education using tax credits or exemptions without government
restraint or intrusion.
In speaking against the amendment, Rep. Toth presented the
polling data: all over Texas, among every demographic and party, no less than 70%
approve of school choice.
In Florida, a voting bloc of black mothers who wanted school
choice made the deciding difference in electing Gov. DeSantis.
Someone wryly said to me, “If only we could get a Republican majority next session—Oh, wait!”
We’ve had a Republican majority in the House
and Senate, plus the governor, since 2002. And yet we can’t seem to get the
will of the people done.
Here is the vote count on that amendment:
My representative, Hull, voted against the amendment (so, on the side of school choice), as did local representatives Swanson, Oliverson, and Murphy. Schofield, who is usually very reliable, was absent, so at least he wasn’t a wrong vote. Rep. Harless voted in favor of the amendment. I have been thinking he’s more conservative than his wife was, who held the seat before him and was frequently unreliable, what we call “squishy.” Maybe he isn't better. His constituents ought to call him and ask what he was thinking.
Where does the opposition come from? Teachers’ unions.
Teachers unions are not about better education for students. They are not even
about better pay or conditions for teachers. They are about power for teacher’s
unions. And they’ve been accruing that power for a long time. They control the
message—in the media, among teachers. Politicians are afraid of them. We need
to let the politicians know we are the voices they should be listening to.
Call to Action
We believe we have enough support among Republicans in the State
Senate. So here’s an immediate call to action for anyone in Texas:
Call the following and ask for an immediate public hearing
for the Family Educational Relief Program, SB 1968, as well as a vote in
committee followed by a floor vote so it can be sent to the House:
·
Governor Greg Abbott: 512-463-1782, email
·
Lt. Governor Dan Patrick: 512-463-0001,
and email ltgov@senate.texas.gov, info@danpatrick.org
or here.
· Senate Education Committee Chair Larry Taylor, phone: 512-463-0111, and email here.
Constitutional Carry (permitless carry)
screenshot from here |
Another legislative priority worth discussing is Constitutional
Carry. I think when people use that term, they’re talking about the US
Constitutional 2nd Amendment right to self defense “shall not be
infringed,” which means people ought to have the right to carry a firearm
without government interference. Texas—while very pro-gun—has allowed concealed
carry only with a license. A concealed weapon would be a handgun, so handguns
were handled differently from hunting rifles or shotguns.
What this bill is really about is permitless carry. That is,
as long as you’re following all the rules a concealed carry permitholder would
abide by, you can carry a concealed handgun without a permit.
There are multiple bills trying to accomplish this. As
always in the messy legislative process, some get enough attention to move, and
others don’t. Thursday, April 15, the House held a hearing on two of these: HB
1927 and HB 1911. HB 1911 was left pending in committee (no vote was taken),
but HB 1927 passed out of committee and passed on the House floor, so it was
sent to on to the Senate.
The problem is, HB 1927 is not a good bill. I heard from my
son shortly afterward it passed the House. He’s a prosecutor and has been
working on a case for quite some time now of a gang leader who was charged with
illegally carrying a firearm. It is possible to have a permit and still be
illegal—because violent gang members are not legally allowed to carry, for
obvious reasons. This bill removes the ability to charge violent gang members
with illegally carrying a firearm; it facilitates their use of firearms as they
carry and deal their drugs through the Texas corridor.
Political Sphere had contacted his representative before the
bill’s hearing, but got no response. So I contacted my state senator’s office
to see if there was something they could do by way of an amendment during the
Senate hearing on the bill. I had met with my senator’s district director in
early February. She’s new with the senator this session. She has a background
in police work and told me to contact her on issues related to criminal
justice. She and the senator had already noticed that problem with the bill.
She asked for contact info for my son, and he reports they had a good, long
conversation.
Meanwhile, there’s a huge pressure campaign to get HB 1927 passed in the Senate. Any resistance is
dealt with as being outright anti-2nd-Amendment.
Stuff is happening. HB 1927 was referred to the
Constitutional Issues special committee, with a public hearing on April 29.
Meanwhile, a new bill, SB 2224, was given special permission to be filed (way past the deadline for filing,
which was March 12). It has been referred to Administration, which isn’t a
normal committee. I believe it is intended to replace HB 1927. It was long, and
time was short, but Political Sphere plowed through it, and he’s very pleased. Here’s
what he wrote to his state senator:
As a big proponent of Constitutional Carry, I have been
following the various bills that have been presented. Unfortunately, the House,
in HB 1927 has passed what seems to be an impossibly broken attempt at
Constitutional Carry. It is rife with contradictory sections and a completely
unworkable framework. As a lawyer who will have to deal with these if it
passes, I cannot support this version of Constitutional Carry.
While HB 1911 dealt with many of these issues, I was much
more impressed with SB 2224. I was worried that such a rushed bill would have
some major problems, but, while there were still a few things missing from my
ultimate wish list, I did not find any major problems.
I want to express my utmost support for SB 2224. Please do
what you can to see this version of SB 2224 passed by the Senate. Please do not
pass HB 1927. As much as I want Constitutional Carry, I want it to have a
framework that will hold up through court. That means it would be best to have
SB 2224 pass, but would, unfortunately, be better to go without Constitutional
Carry than to pass HB 1927. Thank you for your consideration.
Go ahead and use what he says as a pattern, and contact your
state senator.
If SB 2224 passes, I think it will then have to go through
the House, from scratch, since it’s not just an amended existing bill. People
think this is game playing to keep “constitutional carry” from passing. But it
isn’t. It is an attempt to keep a self-contradictory and badly written bill
from becoming law and affecting criminal justice in ways the public would not
intend.
Call to Action
·
Contact your state senator and ask him to
support SB 2224, to replace SB 1927. Find contact info here.
·
Submit testimony for Thursday’s hearing on SB
1927 to oppose it, so that you can support real Constitutional Carry in SB
2224.
o To
testify in person, follow these
instructions.
o To submit written testimony, use this form.
Electric Grid
image from here |
After the disastrous freeze we had in February, there was a flurry
of legislation attempting to prevent future power failures. Some of these are:
·
HB 14: Creating the Texas Electricity Supply Chain Security
and Mapping Committee, which will be activated to improve coordination and flow
of energy during power disasters.
·
HB 1520: Authorizing the Railroad Commission to obtain securitization
bonds during power disasters to protect consumers from being saddled with high
electric bills.
·
HB 1572: Closing a regulatory loophole to ensure that facilities
purchasing temporary emergency generators are not subject to power generation
facility regulations.
· HB 3648: Directing the Railroad Commission to designate "critical natural gas facilities" during disasters, exempting them from load-shedding requirements and ensuring a consistent flow of natural gas.
These all look to be good and useful bills. All of them passed
the House on April 20, and were moved along to the Senate but have not yet been
assigned to committee. But they’re at a good stage so far for the session.
I asked a friend, Fred Reitman, who is usually up on electric
grid issues, what news he had for me. While he approves of the bills above, he
is looking at what he refers to as “pre-February grid issues.”
We’ve been working on the electric grid since long before the
freeze. Multiple legislative sessions. The concern is a solar flare (natural)
or EMP strike (terrorism or war attack), which could take down the electric
grid. (Read here—better yet read this book.) Fortifying it is a relatively
inexpensive solution to prevent utter long-term disaster, and could be passed
along to consumers fairly painlessly, without undue burden on electricity
providers.
So, on that kind of electric grid issue, here’s Fred’s update:
The
most important bill is Sen. [Bob] Hall's SB 1606, and [Rep. Matt] Shaheen's
companion bill HB 3792. Those are getting nowhere.
SB
1606 has 23 authors, five of whom are on the Business and Commerce Committee.
The problem, once again, is Committee Chair Hancock. The committee needs to
vote. Hancock is holding that up. And over on the House side similarly
Shaheen's bill was assigned to committee a month ago but no hearing yet
scheduled. Go figure.
The Senate Business & Commerce Committee Chair is Sen. Kelly
Hancock. In his bio he claims all kinds of conservative bona fides. While this
ought to be a bi-partisan issue, it’s a wonder yet again why these elected
officials aren’t listening to the people.
Call to Action
·
Call
and ask for the SB 1606 to be voted on in committee and sent on for a floor
vote:
o
Senate Business & Commerce Committee
Chair Kelly Hancock, 512-463-0109, email
·
Call
the Business & Commerce Committee members and request that they vote to
pass SB 1606 and move it to a floor vote.
o Committee members listed here. Find their names, and then go to their member page for contact info.
That’s a good day’s work you’ve just been assigned. Do what
you can. Get better at it. And then learn to do more. Because, for those of us
who love freedom, free market, and civilization, the odds of getting and/or
keeping those things are against us—even in a Republican/conservative-led state
like Texas.
No comments:
Post a Comment