Who holds the cards?
The answer is: Rodney Ellis. On the last day of the session, Ellis has become the key player, because he is effectively the minority leader of the Democrats–not just the Senate Democrats, but also the House Democrats. The nineteen Senate Republicans will need at least six Democratic votes to suspend the rules so that the Senate can vote on SB 1811, the school finance/fiscal matters bill, and unless something changes, they have one (maybe Hinojosa).
Republicans (and I assume this includes the light guv) have been warning the D’s that they can make the school plan worse, but the Democrats seem to regard this as an empty threat at this point. Any time that one side draws a line in the dirt, as the Democrats have done here, the question is: What is the end game? (See, Whitmire, John, Albuquerque 2003). The situation reminds me of a deadlock that took place in the House on the last night of 1999 session. Sylvester Turner was blocking (if I remember correctly), a tax cut sought by Governor Bush. For two hours everybody just stood around and waited for something to be resolved. Speaker Laney was walking around the floor as if he didn’t have a care in the world. I asked him what the situation was. “Well,” he drawled,” “they have taken the hostages, but they can’t figure out what to put in the ransom note.” That is the situation Ellis finds himself in today. He’s holding the Senate Republican majority hostage, but if negotiations follow, what, exactly, do he and the Democrats want–and is it attainable?
Tagged: Rodney Ellis, senate
MidnightRambler says:
The Democrats are giving Perry and the conservative base a gift by pushing for a special session on school finance. Why? It allows for another bite at the sanctuary cities apple.
The special session will likely end with an almost mirror image of the bill currently agreed upon for school finance, but the added bonus is immigration reform. Davis gave Perry cover…
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 2:50 pm
I expect that Sen Wendy Davis strong, proud recitation of the concerns of her constituents has caused the Republican majority to repent. I expect they will now fully fund schools. Indeed, I see them RAISING the amount sent out to schools to EQUAL the funding that DC schools get. $25,000 per pupil. They’ll pay for it by passing an income tax bill and work to get the people of Texas to vote for the Constitutional amendment it will take to implement an income tax. And as pentance for past sins, I expect they will throw out the “right to work” law and require union membership.
And the above has as much chance as voters returning this state to the leftist “democrat” party in the next 30 years.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Duh. TWIA & Congressional Redistricting already gave him a second bite at the apple. Davis just called the R’s bluff. Whatever happens next would’ve happened anyway.
Reply »
Capitol Observer says:
The problem is the Republicans know the school finance bill can’t get any worse….it is already bad enough. And the D’s know it.
The R’s don’t want another bite at sanctuary cities…but Perry being Perry is only thinking about himself and could care less about the other Republicans.
A special session on school finance will not be quick and easy….so anyone who thinks the legislature will be in and out in a few days is day dreaming.
Reply »
Don Q says:
Sanctuary Cities would have no real-world effect, but it would be a potentially potent turnout tool for the Ds. If the school finance formulas get worse, it might not pass either chamber.
So what did the Ds have to lose? A: Nothing
What could they get out of this? A: At least an opportunity to build a message about education.
Reply »
Julie says:
If school finance goes to a special session, Republicans again will get what they want but not without growing political heat.
A special session would be held when teachers and parents can blanket the Capitol to express their disgust with the cut in funding to an essential service, education.
Many of the unhappy parents likely would come from Republican territory like the Woodlands in Houston, Highland Park in Dallas, Lakeway in the Austin area, and so on.
Republican lawmakers would have a difficult time telling their constituents that legislators believe cutting education, rather than raising taxes, is a mandate from voters, especially since a multi-billion cut in education funding by the state would force school districts to raise their property tax rates or to raise their tax rates and fire teachers.
Putting school districts in a position where they have to consider raising property taxes is not a commitment by Republican legislators to avoid higher taxes. It’s a commitment instead by Republicans to blame someone else — school districts — for raising taxes.
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 2:39 pm
YES! Hopefully it will look like the teacher union riots in Wisconsin. Nothing is more important than having 200-300 screaming union types demanding their “rights” while occupying the Capital.
Reply »
anita says:
Ds also give the R’s a prime opportunity to overplay their hand, alienate moderates.
Reply »
Fiftycal Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 2:43 pm
You can’t “alienate moderates”. That would require them to make a decision. As is spelled out in “The Book of Great American Moderates”, they are moderates because they can’t/won’t make a decision until the last minute. Then they try and determine which way the wind is blowing and “go with the flow”.
Reply »
Ike's lawyer Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
There is another kind of moderate I think, the kind that treasures the American system of ordered liberty and believes politics and government in America brokers conflicts between freedom and responsibility, with the voters deciding through their elected representatives whether and when, depending on the circumstances, it’s best to act collectively through the government or best to leave room for people to act voluntarily.
We can be alienated.
When the sort of people who reflexively favor government action are riding high and in control, I’m glad there are people around willing to speak up for freedom. There’s an old saying that when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem eventually starts to look like a nail. Pretty much the only tool a legislature has is the power to pass laws (including laws about how much tax and fee money to raise and spend), so it’s natural for a legislature to think about responding to a problem by passing a law. And so it’s also good to arrange things so that passing a law is something that’s a little bit difficult to do, particularly the laws about raising and spending money, and I’m happy to have you watch that process like a hawk and speak up when you think you need to do so.
When the sort of people who reflexively criticize the very idea of government action are riding high and in control, I’m glad there are people around willing to speak up for the responsibilities we bear as members of society and to speak up for the fact that some things are best done collectively through government. (It would be nice if all collective action could be voluntary but I don’t think the world works that way.)
I won’t presume to speak for all moderates. Speaking for myself, in Texas today, I don’t feel like I’m in too much danger of some budding little Stalinist making me either join a union and do what some union thug tells me to do if I want to work for someone else or jump through a bunch of arbitrary and nonsensical expensive and time-consuming regulatory hoops if I want to work for myself. I also think we get and have long gotten a lot of bang for the buck from state and local government spending in Texas, though I take the point you have made from time to time that (as I would describe the problem in my own words) local control in education is expensive and I wonder if local control is worth the extra expense. But I do think that in Texas today there is a real danger of short-changing important areas where I think group action through the government is necessary and productive, like education, transportation, and health care.
On health care, by the way, I imagine we disagree on the level of government involvement that’s best. I think that many people on the Democratic left have ideas and attitudes about fairness in the health care system that are unworkable and unaffordable, but I do want a well and tightly regulated health insurance system (where you can’t get rooked out of your coverage as you get older or sicker) and I do support some level of health care subsidy (using government tax money raised from you and me) for the poor and aged.
To me this isn’t being unprincipled. It’s believing in both freedom and responsibility, realizing that this often leads to a conflict, and realizing that whether one comes down on the side of freedom or responsibility depends on what we’re talking about.
I also think that politics in America is broken today to the extent that there has come to be way too much of a disconnect between how much government people want and how much government people are willing to pay for. I blame both the left and the right for that, at least to the extent that they speak through their campaigning. When the right wants to cut taxes or keep them low I think they also need to identify and justify to the voters in their political campaigns the resulting cuts in services, and the right hasn’t done nearly enough of that in my view. When the left wants to keep or increase spending levels for a government service they need to justify and defend, in their political campaigns, the program and the fact that it’s worth the cost – and I don’t think they have done nearly enough of that.
In America today, I think that there has to be a conversation about how much government we want and are willing to pay for in political campaigns. We’re past the point, in America today, where those conversations can be limited to think tanks, legislative committees, board rooms, academia, and coffee klatches.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 9:26 pm
there is no such thing as a moderate. Moderates are democrats who just need to be told how to think by other democrats.
Harley N. says:
The end game seems simple enough. Use the Rainy Day Fund to properly fund public education in Texas, and call the governor’s bluff on a veto. If he vetoes it, the resultant school closings and teacher layoffs statewide means bye-bye supermajority, and a Democratic electoral resurgence.
Reply »
RDF says:
Harley:
Good plan. Except for needing 100 votes in the House.
Reply »
Harley N. Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 1:42 pm
100 to override a veto, but only 76 to pass a plan.
Reply »
Ike's lawyer Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 4:56 pm
You need 2/3 (or 3/5 in some circumstances) to tap the rainy day fund.
Reply »
WURSPH says:
I have mixed feelings about the Special Sesson. One one hand:
One development that might be favorable to the Democrats and those who want to spend more is that under the Constitution the Comptroller is required to produce a new Revenue Estimate for a special session. It is quite likely that Comptroller Combs will just re-date her last estimate and make no changes….BUT some veteran revenue counters feel that she has UNDERESTIMATED the revenues to be available both during the rest of this budget year and the next two years by many, many dollars. One speculated that today it looks like as much as $3 BILLION more than she has estimated will be available for the next two years. Should you increase her estimate above her earlier figures it could add real weight to the calls for spending more. HOWEVER, the reality is that Gov. Perry would be very upset at such a development and Combs likes to keep him happy. Plus, there is no legal or statutory way to challenge or even really question a comptroller’s revenue estimate. It is what it is….you have to live with it unless you have the four-fifths vote in BOTH houses required to override a comptroller’s failure to certify an appropriations bill. This means that there is nothing anyone can do if the Comptroller chooses not to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
While on the other, I tend to sympathize with what Oliver Cromwell said when he sent the Rump Parliament home:
“..You have been sat to long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of god, go!.”
Reply »
longleaf says:
Very bizarre reading here. It’s just totally delusional to imagine a “Democrat Party” electoral resurgence. These people have been extremely effectively dehumanized and demonized. They are called out Sunday after Sunday from the pulpits by tens of thousands of Southern Baptist and like-minded preachers as being the very spawn of Satan. There is only one viable party in this state, NO MATTER WHAT IT DOES. It is “God’s Own Party.” The only worry on the mind of ANY GOPer legislator in this state is a challenge from the right in the GOPer primary.
Reply »
Cow Droppings says:
why would Perry call him in for anything but an agreed to deal? And with no blocker vote, are they really going to leave the state.
If they play ball, and pas the bill(s) needed for the budget, maybe he will restrain himself and not add sanctuary cities and not veto the senate map.
Reply »
Kenneth D. Franks says:
The Emergency Sanctuary Cities bill is giving red meat to the base. It is strictly political. Perry could have gotten it in the regular session however in a special if he really wants it, he gets it. I would like to see the legislature do a congressional map. It is one of their duties to at least try to do one. The T.W.I.A. has still not been addressed. I doubt they will make more cuts to Education. Education is the Republican weakness if they cut even more. It well be interesting to say the least. With Perry being talked about nationally whatever happens will not just be a Texas story. As I said interesting.
Reply »
Fiftycal says:
And Perry’s run for national office will be greatly enhanced when he puts the campus concealed handgun carry bill on the call for the special session. This will eliminate one more victim disarmament zone.
As to school finance, the best thing to do is eliminate about 1,200 “independent” school districts and condense them into county districts. That would take out thousands of HIGH PAID educrats. And ban school district “police” departments. They cost too much and serve no useful purpose. Those items alone would “solve” the tiny 6% cut.
Reply »
Mr. Smith Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
50 cal. Try to put Highland Park ISD into a Dallas County condensed school district, and they’ll send a Democrat to Austin for the first time since the last Ice Age.
Reply »
Susan Reply:
May 31st, 2011 at 9:07 am
You are absolutely correct, Mr. Smith.
Reply »
Big D Reply:
May 31st, 2011 at 12:10 am
Fiftycal, it’s the Republicans who thought all school districts should “share the pain,” as Shapiro put it, so that those of us in lower-funded districts were cut as well as those in the higher-funded districts (hello Highland Park). We can’t afford any highly paid “educrats.” But they sure as hell can. And the wusses in the House, led by Eissler, thought across-the-board percentage cuts would be fair. They’re not fair, they’re just politically expedient.
Reply »
No reason to deal says:
Longleaf, the steroetypical Southern Baptist Texan is much less prevalent now than 20 years ago. Many of the suburbanites who generally support Republicans are socially moderate transplants.
Reply »
Jed says:
yes, the (few) republicans i know socially came from elsewhere and kept voting republican here reflexively. for while. then they started asking “what the hell …?”
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 9:30 pm
the red tide will continue.
Reply »
Mae's Spirit Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 10:06 pm
JBB,
I finally got it, JBB! You are a paranoid caveman. Explains so much. Keep whistling into the wind, there, boy. Maybe someone, somewhere, might actually value what you say. But those three people are not going to elect the next legislature.
A one party state does no good for anyone. This session proves that.
Be the political wannabe that you want to be. The bottom line is that this session was a disaster for the TP crazies. The ignorant will not inherit the 83rd.
As we say in West Texas, don’t go away mad. Just go away.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
May 31st, 2011 at 6:02 am
so TeaParties are ignorant for not seeing things as you democrats see them?
I’m afraid TP’s aren’t going anywhere but democrats seem to be shrinking.
Jed Reply:
May 31st, 2011 at 1:59 pm
“the red tide will continue.”
no doubt, thanks to the lack of any environmental enforcement.
or were you referring to another red tide?
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
May 31st, 2011 at 2:32 pm
“or were you referring to another red tide?”
Like the Alabama red tide? Quick someone tell the liberal the correct answer.
goober Reply:
May 31st, 2011 at 11:59 pm
Crimson Tide! JBB you appear to be dumb as mud.
JohnBernardBooks Reply:
June 1st, 2011 at 6:12 am
American Heritage-To make or become deeply or vividly red.
The crimson tide is sweeping Texas turning deeply and vividly red.
does that help?
I keep forgetting it takes the slower ones longer to get it.
Fiftycal says:
The current bizarre, complicated funding system is unsustainable. There are 3 ways to fix it. 1) Go to a statewide property tax system where everybody pays the same. Takes a constitutional amendment. 2) Go back to each district funding itself, with limited state involvement. Takes a constitutional amendment. 3) Give the parent(s) of each kid a voucher and let them decide where to send little Travis and Muffy, including homeschooling. Takes a constitutional amendment.
Anything else continues the tug-of-war and WASTE of billions of dollars.
Oh, BTW, why are dead tree skool books still paid for by the state? You could buy a kindle or reader for EVERY KID IN SCHOOL for the cost of ONE BOOK that will be outdated by the time it is shipped. Why not have the educrat geniuses in Austin write the books and give them to school districts. Then they could sell them to less enlightened states and MAKE MONEY for schools? I know the textbook makers send mucho dinero to bribe legislators to keep dead tree books on the market, but why? When did the stone table school books go out of favor?
Reply »
Jed says:
actually, in my experience, textbook companies would love to go electronic. lower costs.
turns out, testing thus far suggests that kids learn better from books. i know i do.
fiftycal, you mention constitutional amendment like that’s an argument against (anything). constitutional amendments in texas are easier than falling off a log. if the lege can propose it, the people will pass it.
state income tax.
Reply »
Ike's lawyer Reply:
May 30th, 2011 at 10:27 pm
I think it would be incredibly interesting to see what would happen if there were a strong push to get the legislature to propose a school finance constitutional amendment that (1) left completely untouched the constitutional “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” and did not threaten to override the court opinions about equity and fairness based on that language (as those opinions pertain to the instruction and care of students, see below for school administration); (2) provided that the state would pay for most costs related to the instruction and care of students and that the state portion of paying for the schools would come from a statewide property tax (or a state income tax or a combination of the two, but a state income tax is probably anathema in this state); and (3) provided that the state would pay only around half of the costs of administration but with a cap on the total amount (that could rise with inflation and with increased local population), with the legislature allowed by general law to come up with mechanisms by which local voters could decide whether they preferred more local control with smaller school districts and the resulting higher costs or various forms of consolidation with less local control but more administrative efficiency.
But I don’t think shepherding through that sort of constitutional amendment would prove as easy as falling off a log. I also think the support and opposition wouldn’t break neatly along party or ideological lines. Like the Texas House of old that Anita (I think) was remembering in a comment on this blog a few weeks back, I think rural vs urban vs suburban and relative comparative wealth would prove to be as powerful as party and ideology in predicting how people lined up in this particular fight.
Reply »
Jed Reply:
June 1st, 2011 at 10:49 am
all true.
to be clear, my point in calling amendments “easy” was not that *this* sort of amendment would be easy, but rather that the difficulty here has little to do with the need for an amendment, and more to do with the fact that those running the show don’t want this solution (or any solution, apparently), irrespective of what it would take to get it.
in other words, it wouldn’t be any easier to do the above if it only required a law, and not an amendment. the reason for the difficulty is not that an amendment is required, it is that not enough and not the right people want to actually solve the problem.
Reply »
Ike's lawyer Reply:
June 1st, 2011 at 12:57 pm
Agreed. I have long wondered why the legislature did not seem to seriously consider proposing a school finance constitutional amendment 5 or 10 or 20 years ago to provide that whatever they came up with at the time would be a relatively enduring solution. If my memory is correct, press reports during school finance sessions have stated that everyone knew the school finance formulas they came up with would over time grow back into unconstitutionality.
AreYouKiddingMe says:
You want an end to this financial mess? Two words: Income Tax. Do away with property taxes, or make them insignificantly low (to pay for county and city services). Only a small percentage of people (relatively speaking) own property in Texas. Tax everyone who gets a paycheck and your pool of money grows enormously, and the people who were paying property taxes will pay a whole lot less than they were. Somehow the word income tax is the boogie man to Repubs. Don’t know why, it is simple math. More people paying a little, is a whole lot more palatable than a few people paying a lot. Come on Repubs, get this ball rolling…
Reply »
Jed Reply:
June 1st, 2011 at 10:43 am
actually, i think the argument is the opposite (but then who am i to disagree with another voice in the wilderness?).
everyone pays property tax, as part of their rent. everyone pays sales tax. both are regressive.
an income tax could raise more revenue, while lessening the overall tax burden on most people, by taking more from the top couple percent.
that’s why we can’t get it. not because republican leaders need to wake up and do the math, but because they were awake first and did the math and didn’t like it, and then fooled all the sleepy-heads.
Reply »
JohnBernardBooks says:
there’s a new solution “income tax”.
Reply »
DougFac says:
How do legislators look in the mirror in the morning and not squirm? Didn’t they promise last session, or the one before that, that after the property tax cut for individuals that they bragged about, the revenue to public schools would be offset by the business tax. I guess that revenue was a ghost. Of course even their solution produced a permanent unequal distribution of state funds to school districts. And the robin hood solution was a joke. Why do we (the voters) continue to allow our reps to go to Austin and not do the real work that needs to be done?
Reply »