Pre-filed amendments to budget bills set the stage for culture wars on spending
The next several days of Texas House budget debate may be as much about the culture wars as state spending.
Pre-filed amendments to the three budget-related bills before the House contain limitations on private school vouchers, funding for Planned Parenthood and directives to higher education to fund centers for traditional family values if they provide funding for support centers for gay students. Debate is set to begin Thursday on House Bill 4 to erase a deficit in the current budget and on House Bill 275 to take $3.2 billion out of the state’s so-called rainy day fund. Debate is set for Friday and into the weekend on House Bill 1, a bare bones spending plan for the next two years.
Some of the pre-filed amendments may never be debated because there is a possibility that they are not procedurally proper for an appropriations bill. But they do show state spending is about more than just spending – or in this case cutting.
Among the hundreds of amendments, those by Democrats would appear to have little chance of passage. Mostly they take money from one program and give it to another.
For instance, one would reduce state funding for Attorney General Gregg Abbott’s child support collections division by about $34 million a year and give the money to the state’s public schools.
Democrats are trying to add poison pills to the effort to take $3.2 billion from the rainy day fund to cover a deficit in the current budget year.
The amendments by Reps. Joaquin Castro of San Antonio, Scott Hochberg of Houston and Craig Eiland of Galveston essentially say that if the 2012-2013 state appropriations bill does not continue funding for Texas Grants, the Foundation School Program and Medicaid at levels approved by the Legislature in 2009, then the bill to tap into the rainy day fund is void.
What might make that interesting is Republicans can vote for the amendments, knowing they will be removed by the Senate or in conference committee. But it would give the GOP lawmakers some cover for when they take a final vote cutting those programs. The risk would be that if a two-year budget is not passed in regular session, then the House would have to take another vote approving the removal of the poison pills.
The culture war takes place in the amendments to the budget, House Bill 1.
At least three proposed amendments would prohibit funding of any organization that provides abortion services or refers pregnant women to facilities that provide abortion services. This is clearly aimed at Planned Parenthood.
Texas Conservative Coalition Chairman Wayne Christian has one to require universities to provide traditional family values centers if they support “a gender and sexuality center” for gay and lesbian students. Another of his would require universities to dedicate at least 10 percent of their courses for undergraduates to the study of Western Civilization.
Austin Democrat Eddie Rodriguez is offering up an amendment that prohibits any state spending on private school vouchers, pilot project or otherwise.
In the realm of state employees in the crosshairs, several Republican proposals would cut state employee pay. Rep. Ken Paxton is proposing a five percent pay cut over the next two years. In the current supplemental bill, House Bill 4, Rep. David Simpson, R-Longview would cut five days pay from employees earning more than $50,000 a year except public safety employees.
BY R.G. RATCLIFFE
Tagged: abortion, conservative coalition, craig eiland, gay, joaquin castro, Ken Paxton, Planned Parenthood, scott hochberg, state budget, state employees
Big Time says:
Thank God for Wayne Christian! We need a strong leader to combat the Gay Agenda. We’ve become WAY too tolerant here — we need more hate.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
March 31st, 2011 at 11:13 am
What we really need is less stupidity– a goal that will be facilitated by fewer posts such as the drivel contained in the previous post by Big Time.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
same as it ever was.
Reply »
Pat says:
Those liberal elite universities, like US News #45 University of Texas and #63 Texas A&M, do nothing but brainwash our youth. We should be mandating expensive Family Values Centers even though we have $27 billion deficit. And those liberals elitists don’t teach enough about Western culture. We should risk the rankings and accreditation of our top universities by mandating that 10% of all courses be Western Civ topics. Its ridiculous to make medical schools teach Western Civ, but we have to do it. Otherwise gay terrorist Illegal immigrant godless Muslims will conquer Texas.
Reply »
texun Reply:
March 30th, 2011 at 9:59 pm
This just has to b e over-the-top humor!
Reply »
Pat Reply:
March 31st, 2011 at 12:05 am
I’m just trying to think from Wayne Christian’s point of view.
At some point the less government mantra of the Tea Party has to butt against the social regulation dogma of the evangelicals. Probably in the 2012 Republican primaries. When an unstoppable object meets an immovable force…
Reply »
Pat Reply:
March 31st, 2011 at 12:06 am
Wow. Unstoppable force v. immovable object. Time to sleep.
Kenneth D. Franks says:
Maybe Wayne Christian needs a few more classes in Western Civilization. I taught them for years on the high school level along with every social studies, civics, and history class offered by the state of Texas from grade 12 down to the 5th grade.
Reply »
nona says:
Paul -
Pull your head out of the sand. Christian was removed as President (not Chairman) of the TCC over a month ago. I know you hate to give press to conservatives, but if you are going to cover them, don’t you think you should do some basic homework first?
Reply »
Prince Royal says:
What if 90% of the 10% was to focus on gay culture in Western civilization?
Reply »
No Paul says:
Nona, as long as people are pulling their heads out, why don’t you check the byline of the post? Burka didn’t write that.
Reply »
Harold Cook says:
nona -
Pull your head out of the sand. Burka was removed from being the author of this post over an hour ago. I know you hate to give attention to blogs, but if you are going to comment on them, don’t you think you should do some basic homework first?
Reply »
Narse says:
Can someone make a really good argument against having a program based around the family or traditional values if you’re going to fund the center for gay/lesbian/questioning/queer/transgender/pansexual/etc/etc centers?
Reply »
Leesa Reply:
March 31st, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Yes, people are lining up to be gay because it is such an easy lifestyle.People never make gay jokes anymore and all straight people are switching their sexuality. Give me a break. Traditional values are not at stake unless you are talking about heterosexual divorce rates. We are not threatened by gays and lesbians. They are not taking over the world.
Reply »
Pat says:
A: Yes.
First of all, UT does not have a “Gay Center.” Its the Gender and Sexuality Center under the Division of Diversity & Community Engagement. It is a student-driven partnership between UT student government and their regulatory overlords, Student Affairs. It was created to provide a respectful environment for discussion and organizing around issues of gender and sexuality. There is no rule or person precluding a discussion, organizing event, or other expression of traditional family values through the GSC. It was established to foster exactly those types of discussions.
As for a new program, the first obstacle is the $27 billion deficit. Your next is legislating student activities. Student activities is a competition for resources, and Student Affairs is there to slow you down at every turn – often with good reason. Third, you have an issue of conflicting purpose. The GSC was established as a vehicle for discussion of issues surrounding LGBT status through engagement of people with different viewpoints. How does family values not fit into that discussion, and why does it merit its own center? Finally, UT students demanded and established the GSC. If UT students wanted a Family Values Center as well, they could get one on their own – it doesn’t take an act of the legislature.
This bill is one legislator’s expression of their failure to understand that the GSC is there to serve their viewpoints, too, combined with reading a little too much Acts of the Apostles books 6-7 the night before.
Reply »
Narse says:
K, well Pat, in case you were confused, filling paragraphs with with PC gobbledygook about “foster(ing) discussions” while ignoring the fact that the money is spent on one specific “community” is not a good explanation. It’s more like a big target, explaining why they need to go, or have their wings clipped.
Reply »
texun Reply:
March 31st, 2011 at 10:51 am
Then, again, you could just break down and actually read Pat’s comment, rather than dismiss it so thoughlessly as PC.
Reply »
R.G. Ratcliffe says:
As they say, to err is human. I feel really bad that I called Wayne Christian “chairman” of the Conservative Coalition when his real title was”president.” But I’m told that his change of status to “immediate” past president is pretty new, occurring during my hiatus from the Capitol, and he is still listed on the coalition’s Web site as president. But his current title is “immediate past president.” No new president has been elected. I try to stay as informed as possible, but I’m still working on that ultimate reporting skill: omniscience. Thanks for pointing out my error.
Reply »
Leesa says:
Hope they furlough the governor for 5 days of pay also.
Reply »
Pat says:
Looks like the Christian amendment re: Family Values Centers succeeded, although it is limited to universities where “state funds” are used to support GSCs. With a little bit of creative budgeting, most colleges and universities should be exempt from the requirement.
Reply »