The new accountability standards

Here’s the TEA press release about the school accountability ratings for 2013, which came out on Thursday.

The Texas Education Agency today released the 2013 state accountability system ratings for more than 1,200 school districts and charters, and more than 8,500 campuses. The ratings reveal that almost 93 percent of school districts and charters across Texas have achieved the rating of Met Standard.

Districts, campuses and charters receive one of three ratings under the new accountability system: Met Standard;  Met Alternative Standard;  or Improvement Required. School district ratings (including charter operators) by category in 2013 are as follows:

RATING DISTRICT CHARTER TOTAL PERCENT
Met Standard/Alternative 975 161 1,136 92.5%
Met Standard 975 126 1,101 89.7%
Met Alternative Standard N/A 35 35 2.9%
Improvement Required 50 30 80 6.5%
Not Rated 1 11 12 1.0%
TOTAL 1,026 202 1,228 100.0%

“A transition to a new accountability system comes with a great deal of uncertainty,” said Commissioner of Education Michael Williams. “The 2013 ratings confirm that the vast majority of districts and campuses are meeting the state’s standards and providing a quality education for our students.”

The 2013 ratings are based on a revised system that uses various indicators to provide greater detail on the performance of a district or charter and each individual campus throughout the state. The performance index framework includes four areas:

  • Student Achievement – Represents a snapshot of performance across all subjects, on both general and alternative assessments, at an established performance standard.
    (All Students)
  • Student Progress – Provides an opportunity for diverse campuses to show improvements made independent of overall achievement levels. Growth is evaluated by subject and student group.
    (All Students; Student Groups by Race/Ethnicity; English Language Learners; Special Education)
  • Closing Performance Gaps – Emphasizes improving academic achievement of the economically disadvantaged student group and the lowest performing race/ethnicity student groups at each campus or district.
    (All Economically Disadvantaged Students; Student Groups by Race/Ethnicity)
  • Postsecondary Readiness – Includes measures of high school completion, and beginning in 2014, State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR®) performance at the postsecondary readiness standard.
    (All Students; Student Groups by Race/Ethnicity; English Language Learners; Special Education)

Districts and campuses with students in Grade 9 or above must meet targets on all four indexes. Districts and campuses with students in Grade 8 or lower must meet targets on the first three indexes (excluding Postsecondary Readiness).

Under the 2013 state accountability system, campus ratings (including charter campuses) by category and school type are as follows:

RATING ELEM MIDDLE HS MULTI TOTAL PERCENT
Met Standard/Alternative 4,062 1,511 1,338 295 7,206 84.2%
Met Standard 4,062 1,504 1,156 264 6,986 81.7%
Met Alternative Standard N/A 7 182 31 220 2.6%
Improvement Required 477 133 129 39 778 9.1%
Not Rated 73 62 280 156 571 6.7%
TOTAL 4,612 1,706 1,747 490 8,555 100.0%

For eligible campuses that achieve the rating of Met Standard, distinction designations in the following areas have also been assigned: Top 25 Percent Student Progress; Academic Achievement in Reading/English language arts; and Academic Achievement in Mathematics.

Approximately 3,600 campuses that achieved the Met Standard rating earned some type of distinction. More than 750 campuses earned distinctions in all three potential areas. These distinction designations are based on campus performance in relation to a comparison group of campuses. Distinctions earned (by campus type) in 2013 are as follows:

DISTINCTION(S) EARNED ELEM MIDDLE HS MULTI TOTAL
Top 25% Progress & Read/ELA & Math* 385 182 152 40 759
Top 25 % Progress 326 94 117 16 553
Top 25% Progress & Reading/ELA 186 88 34 11 319
Top 25% Progress & Math 209 93 48 10 360
Reading/ELA 547 183 63 28 821
Reading/ELA & Mathematics 164 81 147 32 424
Mathematics 133 122 84 24 363

* Denotes campus received Met Standard rating plus all three possible distinctions under the 2013 state accountability system.

“Under the new accountability system, these designations recognize outstanding work at the campus level that would not be acknowledged in previous years,” said Commissioner Williams. “Despite the many positive numbers, I am confident school leaders across our state share my concern for the number of campuses where improvement is still required, especially at the elementary level. If we can target our efforts in those grade levels today, the state will see improvements for all students in the years ahead.”

Commissioner Williams noted that while the four components of the new accountability system are in place, future adjustments will be made based on district and stakeholder feedback. In addition, House Bill 5 (passed by the 83rd Texas Legislature) requires stronger measures of postsecondary readiness to be added to the system

To view the 2013 state accountability ratings for districts, charters and campuses, visit the Texas Education Agency web site at http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/account/2013/index.html.

That last link will take you to the accountability system overview page, which has all the explanations and summaries of the numbers. All district and individual campus ratings can be found here. HISD schools begin on page 80. As the Chron reported, HISD has some work to do.

Terry Grier

Terry Grier

More than 20 percent of campuses in the Houston Independent School District failed to meet the state’s tougher academic standards this year, according to data released Thursday.

Across Texas, 10 percent of schools fell short in the new rating system, which for the first time holds them accountable for results on the state’s more challenging standardized exams that launched last year.

Most districts in the Houston region fared well. Every campus in Cypress-Fairbanks, the second-largest local district, met the standards. In Fort Bend ISD, which ranks next in size, one school fell short.

Aldine ISD struggled, with 27 percent of its schools missing the mark.

[…]

In HISD, the largest district in Texas, 58 of the 268 rated campuses – or 21.6 percent – received the “improvement required” label.

Unlike last year, HISD fared worse than the Dallas school district, which has similar demographics and ranks second in size. About 15 percent of the Dallas campuses missed the standards.

Superintendent Terry Grier said he was pleased that most schools did well on a measure that looks at test scores across all subjects and grade levels.

“At the same time,” Grier said in a statement, “these ratings clearly highlight areas where we must focus our resources to ensure every student in every neighborhood is prepared to succeed in college and in the workforce.”

Half of the 20 schools in Grier’s signature reform program, Apollo, earned the “met standard” rating. The multimillion-dollar effort, which started three years ago, includes specially hired tutors and increased class time.

All of the schools in North Forest ISD missed the standards, except for one run by a charter school.

HISD’s press release on the accountability standards is here. One point to note:

HISD campus results for each of the four indexes were:

Student achievement: 251 out of 268 rated schools (94 percent) met standard
Student progress: 235 out of 263 rated schools (89 percent) met standard
Closing performance gaps: 232 out of 265 rated schools (88 percent) met standard
Postsecondary readiness: 42 out of 46 rated schools (91 percent) met standard

That sounds a little better than “21.6 percent of HISD campuses failed to meet the standard”. Not meeting any one of the four standards gets you the “improvement required” label. What that suggests is that most of the HISD schools that were classified as “improvement required” met at least one of the three or four indexes. A look through the HISD schools on the master list confirms this – only Wheatley High School and Hartsfield Elementary School struck out completely. That may make bringing them up to standard a little easier. On the other hand, four of the eight non-charter North Forest schools (see page 126) rated Needs Improvement in each index. HISD definitely has its work cut out for it there. Everyone is still figuring out what the new system means, and it will get tougher over time, but HISD has budgeted money to improve the schools that failed to satisfy one or more index. We’ll see how much progress they make next year.

Posted in School days | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The new accountability standards

Two ways to deal with a problem you don’t want to solve

First, deny there is a problem.

It's constitutional - deal with it

It’s constitutional – deal with it

Attorney General Greg Abbott said Thursday he would never give up the fight against Obamacare, but the front-running candidate for Texas governor declined to embrace a temporary shut-down of the federal government — one of the key strategies promoted by U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz and other Tea Party-backed Republicans in Washington.

Obamacare, officially known as the Affordable Care Act, was the topic of conversation at a campaign event Abbott staged at a business in north Austin. (As it turns out, the company is one of Abbott’s campaign contractors).

Employing the town hall format, with questions from an audience packed in advance with supporters, Abbott highlighted his efforts to fight the federal law in court and said its financial burdens on employers would kill jobs in Texas.

“The flaws and false promises of Obamacare are now being exposed,” Abbott said. “Obamacare is the wrong prescription for American health care and I will never stop fighting against it.”

[…]

Though Abbott warned of massive financial and regulatory burdens of the federal health care reforms, he said he supported two of its major provisions — one that bans insurance companies from putting lifetime caps on insurance policies and another that bars them from refusing coverage due to pre-existing conditions. The attorney general said those two provisions should be adopted in the law as stand-alone measures.

One reporter noted that Texas has the highest number of uninsured people in the nation and asked Abbott what he planned to do about it. Abbott expressed support for permitting insurance companies to sell policies across state lines but also suggested the problem isn’t as bad as some suggest.

“Just because someone may be uninsured does not mean they don’t have access to health care,” Abbott said. “The percentage of people in the state of Texas with access to healthcare is in the mid- to high-90 percent range. People still have access to quality health care in the state of Texas.”

Tell you what, Greg. How about you and everyone on your staff give up that nice health insurance package that you have that we taxpayers provide for you, and spend the next four or so years paying for your own health care, and going to the local emergency room as an indigent patient when the cost gets to be too much for you? Then you can talk about having “access to health care” in a more authoritative way. What say you, is it a deal?

The other way to deal with a problem you don’t want to solve is to lie about it.

One reason that Abbott gave for fighting the law came in response to a doctor who asked him from the audience about what Texas could do to keep the federal law from interfering with doctors’ judgment about the best way to treat their patients.

“You’re raising one of the more challenging components of Obamacare, and a hidden component in a way, and that is government is stepping in between the doctor-patient relationship and trying to tell you what you can and cannot do, interfering with both your conscience and your medical oath to take care of your patient,” said Abbott, who is campaigning to succeed Gov. Rick Perry.

That is similar to arguments raised against tighter abortion restrictions approved in special session, including a ban on the procedure at 20 weeks, along with stricter regulations on clinics and abortion-inducing drugs.

Asked the difference afterward, Abbott said, “The difference is that in the law that was passed in the state of Texas … what they’re trying to do is to give a woman five months to make a very tough decision, while at the same time get involved in trying to protect the unborn.”

That doesn’t even make sense. I guess I didn’t expect internal consistency, but you’d think by now he’d at least have a better rationalization prepared. This is little more than “Because I said so”.

Anyway. All of this was in part because Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was in the state trying once again to tempt Texas with a deal to expand Medicaid. Which our Republican leaders won’t do because they don’t care about solving the problem of people not having insurance. They care about the potential for increased paperwork under the Affordable Care Act, and they care that some business owners might have thinner profit margins, but they don’t care that the fatter profit margins those business owners now claim to enjoy come at the expense of their employees. Because why should they care? They have insurance. It’s not their problem, and they’re not interested in solutions.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Two ways to deal with a problem you don’t want to solve

Better bats

Technology marches on.

As part of new MLB regulations, manufacturers use ink to test bats’ stability. If the dot bleeds more than a quarter inch, indicating low density, that wood isn’t major-league caliber.

Thanks to that practice and more implemented since 2008 when bat breakage has been studied by the U.S. Forest Service, the rate of shattered maple bats has decreased 50 percent, according to results of the study released Friday by the United States Department of Agriculture.

Referred to as “slope of the grain,” the straighter the wood appears along the bat, the less likely it breaks and hits other players or fans. Regulations put in place because of the study call for three degrees or less slope on the wood — essentially a straight line — for use in MLB.

The changes have affected half of Louisville Slugger’s bat production, as MLB’s leading bat manufacturer still produces half of its bats from ash.

[…]

In the five-year study, experts with the U.S. Forest Service and MLB examined every broken major-league bat from July through September of the 2008 season and found inconsistency in the wood’s makeup caused maple to splinter on contact.

Data collection isn’t over, though, as the USDA team will continue recording and analyzing video of every broken MLB bat since 2009, including some from the new-regulation bats in 2013. The goal is to keep bats with potential to fracture out of players’ hands — and away from fans.

This is a safety issue, since splintered bat fragments flying all over the place are an obvious hazard. It’s also a cost issue, especially for college baseball programs. The reason college programs used aluminum bats for so long is that aluminum bats hardly ever break, and thus can last a long time without needing to be replaced. Now that college teams are required to use wood bats, making sure those bats are less likely to break will be a boon for their budgets. On the down side, it probably means no one will ever again get a Chair of Broken Dreams like the one that Mariano Rivera recently received. But then that was likely the case anyway.

Posted in Baseball | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Better bats

Saturday video break: Twist And Shout

Song #7 on the Popdose Top 100 Covers list is “Twist And Shout”, originally by The Isley Brothers and covered by The Beatles. Here’s the original:

Dave Barry has written about how much he prefers this version to the Beatles’ version – he called it the kind of song that if it comes on the radio while you’re driving, “if you turn it up loud enough, [it] can propel you out of the car to dance with toll-booth attendants”. That was the column that ultimately led to his famous Book Of Bad Songs, after numerous readers strongly objected to his disparaging remarks about Neil Diamond. Oh, and see here for the excellent Jeff MacNelly cartoon that accompanied that column. How’s that for a digression? Now here’s the Beatles:

The ratio of song groovability to stiffness of the singers is just off the charts, isn’t it? Of course, if you’re of a certain age, you can’t help but associate that song with this movie:

I guess that proves Dave Barry’s point about dancing. I saw that in the theater back in the day with my college roomie and best friend Greg. Not long after, I wound up at Rice, in The MOB, where an arrangement of that was one of our staples. Yes, we danced, and sang the AAAAAAAH part, and we got everyone at Notre Dame’s football stadium to do it along with us in 1988, and it was all kinds of awesome. So yeah, positive memories with this song.

Posted in Music | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Saturday video break: Twist And Shout

School superintendents for Early To Rise

From the press release:

(Houston, TX) Today Harris County Superintendents participated in a press conference for the Early to Rise campaign, which is seeking to create a dedicated funding stream to improve the quality of early childhood education through a ballot measure in November. Representing over 400,000 students and their families, the superintendents gave comments on the program. In attendance were Dr. Terry Grier Superintendent of Houston Independent School District, and Dr. Wanda Bamberg Superintendent of Aldine Independent School District. Dr. Mark Henry Superintendent of Cypress Fairbanks Independent School District, Dr. Guy Sconzo Superintendent of Humble Independent School District and Dr. Duncan Klussman of Spring Branch Independent School District, were unable to attend but provided comments.

This campaign has garnered the approval of over 145,000 of our fellow Harris County citizens who have signed a petition to place this important initiative on the November ballot, making it the largest petition drive in the history of Harris County. The Early to Rise campaign will help to raise the standards, training and educational outcomes for young children up to age 5 so that they can begin Kindergarten excited, curious and ready for school.

All representatives felt that making this kind of investment in early childhood education is absolutely critical to the region’s social progress and economic vitality. The first steps toward prosperity begin in the early years and this innovative effort is supported by extensive research.

That’s an impressive number of signatures. I presume they will turn in the petitions next week, to be followed by someone filing a lawsuit, because that’s what I’ve expected all along. As with Sheriff Garcia, it makes sense for school supers to support this. It’s very much in their interest for kids to show up for kinder as prepared for it as possible.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on School superintendents for Early To Rise

The exchanges are coming

Texas can resist all it wants, the health insurance exchanges will be here in 2014, with signups beginning in October, whether Rick Perry and Greg Abbott like it or not.

It's constitutional - deal with it

It’s constitutional – deal with it

The federal Health Insurance Marketplace at www.healthcare.gov is scheduled to open on Oct. 1 — two months from now. Enrollment will be open until March 31, though those who sign up before the end of the year can start getting coverage on Jan. 1.

For a little over half of Texans, health insurance will remain a job benefit. People who get health insurance through their employer won’t need to use the new insurance exchange. It is meant for people who buy insurance on their own, or who don’t have health insurance.

“The plans are going to be affordable, but we really haven’t seen what the prices are going to be yet,” said Mimi Garcia, Texas director of Enroll America, a nationwide campaign to get people to take advantage of insurance made available under the Affordable Care Act. The group has strong ties to President Barack Obama’s administration and to the health care industry.

Bert Marshall, president of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas, said recently that premiums are going up for individuals, but the cost will depend on subsidies keyed to a person’s income.

The Society of Actuaries (professionals who analyze the financial consequences of risk) took a detailed look at the cost of individual and small group insurance policies marketed across the country, and projected how the Affordable Care Act would change that landscape. In Texas, they estimated the monthly premium for the average individual policy would go from $249 in 2013 to $333 in 2014 under the Affordable Care Act.

The study also estimated that the uninsured rate in Texas would fall under the law from 27.1 percent of the population to 10.2 percent.

Federal health official Hash said premiums have come in lower than expected in several states that have announced average rates, such as California, New York and Montana.

[…]

Currently, the state’s individual insurance market, where people buy coverage for themselves with no help from an employer, serves only about 5 percent of the population. The market is unavailable to or prohibitively expensive for people with chronic health conditions, said former Texas Medicaid official Anne Dunkelberg.

“The current individual market includes few older or sicker people — they are either denied or priced out,” said Dunkelberg, associate director of the Center for Public Policy Priorities, which supports the federal law and advocates for low- and moderate-income Texans.

“Only the sickest and those who can afford it get [state] risk pool coverage,” she said, referring to a subsidy program for 23,000 Texans, including nearly 2,400 in Dallas County and 1,400 in Collin County.

It is scheduled to cease operations when the federal law’s ban of denying a person coverage for a pre-existing condition takes effect Jan. 1.

“Average rates must increase when we move to a world where no one is denied,” Dunkelberg said.

[…]

This year, thousands of individual insurance policies were available in Texas with annual premiums ranging from $363 for a single, nonsmoking man under 30 to $8,387 for a single 30-year-old woman who smokes. The plan costing the least — $30.25 a month — is a catastrophic care policy that doesn’t provide insurance until after the policyholder spends $10,000, and then only picks up half the tab until the policyholder has spent $17,000.

The most expensive policy — at $698.92 a month — provides insurance once the policyholder has spent $500. It picks up 80 percent of the cost of healthcare until the policyholder has spent $3,000, and then absorbs all of the cost.

The variety of plans won’t necessarily end once the Obamacare marketplace goes into effect. But unless the plans meet the requirements of the new law, purchasers could still face the penalty for not buying insurance. In 2014, that penalty will be $95 or 1 percent of income, whichever is greater. The penalty increases in 2015.

Cigna’s Smithberger said premiums in Texas could go down as well as up, depending on the buyer. The Affordable Care Act limits the difference insurers can charge because of a person’s age, for example. That could mean higher premiums for young people, but lower premiums for someone older.

“I would venture to say even in Texas some people may be seeing significant premium decreases based on their age and health status,” he said.

You can find that Society of Actuaries study, which was released in March, here, with the data here. Note that in a previous post I said that full participation in the exchanges could lead to Texas’ share of uninsured people to drop from 27.1% to 14.9%. The DMN story says 10.2%, which I believe is a mis-reading of the data. That lower figure is what the uninsured population would be if Texas also expanded Medicaid. In the absence of Medicaid expansion, which is the situation we are dealing with, the higher figure applies. The tables from which I get this are S1 and S2 on pages 7 and 8.

Note also that when one talks about the cost of policies under the Affordable Care Act and the insurance exchanges, it’s policies on the individual market that we’re talking about. If you get your insurance through your employer (or your spouse/partner’s employer) or some other group, that’s not a part of this calculation, as those policies are not part of the exchange. This is a point that Kaiser Health News attempted to clear up:

Q: Does the study predict health insurance premiums will go up 32 percent by 2017?

No. First, it’s only forecasting the individual insurance market. That’s where millions of Americans newly covered under the ACA are expected to find policies. The report says nothing about costs for employer-based health insurance.

Equally important, the 32 percent forecast is for medical expenses paid by insurers, not what insurers will charge in premiums, and not what consumers will pay.

Q: But if medical claims go up, shouldn’t insurance prices also go up? How much difference could there be?

A: In the individual market designed under the health law, quite a bit, say supporters. The ACA limits insurer profits and also gives government regulators oversight of rate increases, both of which could hold premiums down.

Even if sticker prices rise, an important feature of the health law is subsidies for people to buy insurance, through tax credits for those with lower incomes. So what many newly-insured people actually end up paying themselves won’t be the same as what the insurance company bills.

Thanks partly to subsidies, “many people buying individual coverage today will see decreases in costs,” said Larry Levitt, senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation. (Kaiser Health News is an editorially independent program of the foundation.)

Insurers who end up signing lots of sicker members will also be partly reimbursed for several years by a reinsurance pool designed to lower their risk. That will lower their expenses, and it wasn’t accounted for by the SOA study.

Q: Does it matter where I live?

A: Yes. The report found huge variability, based on geography. While the estimated increase would be 62 percent for California by 2017, in New York state, the report estimates claim costs would drop by almost 14 percent.

Q: Will health plans offer the same coverage in 2017 that they do now?

A: That’s another reason the 32-percent headline could be misleading. Thanks to ACA minimum coverage requirements, benefits will be more generous starting next year. So what insurers pay in claims can expected to be higher, too.

“The number of people who are underinsured has grown dramatically over the last decade,” said Sara Collins, a vice president at the Commonwealth Fund. “One reason claims might be a lot lower now is the benefit package is so crummy.”

The health law was intended to shift spending into the commercial insurance system that is now outside it: high out-of-pocket costs for those in low-benefit plans; uncompensated emergency-room care; patients paying in cash, and so forth. Moving those costs under the insurance umbrella increases insurance-based spending.

Q: The idea of the insurance exchanges is to create competition, isn’t that supposed to lower costs?

A: Yes. The idea behind state health exchanges is that insurers will compete for business by pressing providers for discounts and passing part of the savings to members. The actuary study didn’t account for that kind of competition.

“Every insurer I’ve talked to says they’re building lower-cost networks that they plan to use for their exchange plans,” said Levitt.

It’s a complex situation with a fair bit of nuance, which means that it’s ripe pickings for all manner of liars, hucksters, and shameless partisan hacks who want to see this fail because they care more about their ideology than a bunch of uninsured people. The bottom line is that unless you are currently uninsured, you are almost certainly not going to be directly affected by this. If you are currently uninsured, you will have the ability to buy an affordable health insurance plan that actually covers things. You’ll have to make some decisions about how much you want to spend for varying levels of coverage, but the choices you’ll have will be realistic and worthwhile. Keep all that in mind when you see some apocalyptic warnings in your inbox or on your Facebook wall. Consider the source, because there’s going to be a lot of propaganda and misinformation out there. Thankfully, as of October, we’ll have some hard facts. Hang on till then.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

A reduction in funding for women’s health leads to fewer women getting health care

Shocking, I know.

Right there with them

Right there with them

The number of claims filed for medical and family planning services in the new state-run Texas Women’s Health Program has dropped since the state ousted Planned Parenthood from it and set up its own program without federal financing, according to figures from the Health and Human Services Commission.

Stephanie Goodman, a spokeswoman for the commission, wrote in an email that the program is “running at about 77 percent of the number of claims this year compared to last year.” She added that the agency expects to “see a similar trend with the number of women served,” though those numbers are more difficult to calculate.

“We expected to see a drop-off in the number of claims when we moved to the state program because we knew some women wouldn’t want to change doctors,” Goodman said. “We’ve been able to find new doctors for women who call us, and we’ve got the capacity to increase the number of women we’re serving in the state program.”

[…]

While Planned Parenthood continues to provide services with community donations and other revenue, Danielle Wells, a spokeswoman with Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas, said many patients have expressed frustration “that politicians are telling them where they should and should not go for their health care.”

“We’re still hearing from patients who were in the program and were unable to locate a provider or schedule services in a timely manner,” she said. The exclusion of Planned Parenthood requires many women to travel farther to find an available provider, she said, and to make “tough decisions about paying out of pocket for care or simply putting off vital care that could potentially save lives.”

Amanda Stevenson, a research associate at the University of Texas at Austin’s Texas Policy Evaluation Project, a three-year study evaluating the impact of the 2011 women’s health policy changes, said determining whether women still have adequate access to care is complicated. While the health commission is working hard to enroll new providers to replace Planned Parenthood, she said women may delay care because they do not know which providers are available or end up paying out of pocket costs by continuing to seek services at a Planned Parenthood clinic.

“We’re seeing obviously that access is diminishing in places, particularly [those] that rely heavily on Planned Parenthood providers,” she said. But other areas of the state have not been as affected by the policy changes, she added, referencing a data application created by the researchers that shows how the 2011 policy changes and funding cuts have affected women’s health services regionally.

She also noted that more data is necessary to determine whether the percent reduction in claims represents a persistent trend.

“If things were getting better then we would expect consistent reduction in that proportion, but it’s not happening,” Stevenson said. “There might be a trend, and we might see it, but it’s not enough here to say that it is.”

To be as fair as I can to something that doesn’t deserve fair treatment, Planned Parenthood had previously served forty percent of the Women’s Health Program clients, but the decline in participation is now only about 23% of the pre-cutoff total, which means that at least some of the women who were directly affected by this bit of ideological bloodletting have since found an acceptable alternative. Hooray for small victories. Of course, they were all still forced to change doctors, and we have no way of knowing how much less convenient or more expensive these new arrangements are for them. And Lord knows the people that brought you this little catastrophe aren’t interested in finding out the answer to that. But again, as I said before, even if you could reasonably claim that access to health care is no worse than it was before, hundreds of thousands of women had their access to health care disrupted, for no good reason. And a lot of legislators plus our state leaders count that as a victory.

In related news, that ballyhooed restoration of family planning funds this session is less than meets the eye.

The Texas Women’s Healthcare Coalition has raised concerns that a bipartisan effort to restore access to family planning services by expanding a state-run primary care program isn’t shaping up as planned.

During hearings in the regular legislative session, David Lakey, the commissioner of the Department of State Health Services, told lawmakers that 60 percent of the $100 million allotted to expand the primary care program for women’s health care in the 2014-15 biennium would be used to provide family planning services and contraception. But the forms created by DSHS for health providers to apply to take part in the program do not explicitly state that 60 percent of providers’ services must go toward family planning.

In a letter sent Monday to DSHS and lawmakers, the coalition — which counts the Texas Medical Association, Texas Academy of Family Physicians and Texas Association of Community Health Centers among its 39 members — argued that the proposed rules don’t ensure that the program will achieve lawmakers’ intent of restoring access to family planning services.

“We’re concerned that this was really like a bait and switch,” Dr. Janet Realini, chairwoman of the coalition, said in an interview. Although she does not believe DSHS has intentionally disregarded the legislative intent to increase family planning services, she said, “the system to do that is missing an essential piece of direction for the contractors.”

Carrie Williams, a spokeswoman for DSHS, said the department received the coalition’s letter and is working to clear up misunderstandings about the program.

“We’ve been very open in developing and talking about this program, so it was disappointing to see these inaccuracies being promoted as fact,” Williams said in an email to the Tribune.

She added that family planning services are emphasized throughout the department’s materials on the program, but that the program does not exclusively provide family planning services.

“The 60 percent target for family planning was what we have been proposing all along. While that threshold is not explicitly stated in the materials, it has long been the plan and we have never indicated otherwise,” said Williams.

In its letter, the coalition recommended that the department explicitly prioritize family planning services by setting specific targets and performance measures for contractors. The state could save money and avert unintended pregnancies, the coalition argues, by setting performance targets for family planning services and giving funding priority to contractors that have demonstrated the ability to provide these types of services.

“I think putting it in the materials to let contractors know what you’re looking for is important,” said Realini.

In the private sector, we call that setting metrics. Metrics reflect goals and values. You can draw your own conclusions.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on A reduction in funding for women’s health leads to fewer women getting health care

Chron for Uber

The Chron editorializes in favor of Council approving a change to city ordinances that would allow Uber to set up shop here.

Uber, a car service software company, wants to start operating in Houston so that folks can reserve Town Cars via their smart phones. Unfortunately, city ordinances place strict prohibitions on how taxi, Town Car and limousine services operate within city limits. This is a great policy if you’re a taxi company trying to avoid competition. But, as with most regulatory capture, it doesn’t really benefit anyone else.

Houston is supposed to be fertile ground for entrepreneurs and a prime example of a free market. City Council should live up to that promise and update Chapter 46 of the City of Houston Code of Ordinances to let businesses like Uber operate in Houston.

In dozens of cities (including Dallas), Uber allows people to use a smart phone application to arrange rides with otherwise unoccupied Town Cars. Think of it as an Orbitz or Expedia for car service companies. Riders can even use the app to review specific drivers and get an estimate on a trip’s cost before riding, which is tracked by GPS.

Houston’s regulations prevent Town Cars from charging less than $70 and require that rides be arranged at least minutes in advance. So if you wanted to use Uber to book a ride from a Mont-rose restaurant to the Theater District, the city would require that you overpay and wait 30 minutes, even if there is a car around the corner.

These restrictions serve no purpose but to force Houstonians to take taxis, and unless you’re in downtown or at a hotel, taxis may as well not exist in Houston. Sure, you could reserve a pick-up, but at that point they’re not really acting as cabs. They’re acting as inexpensive Town Cars, but for the guaranteed pick-up and quality of service.

See here and here for previous blogging on the subject. I don’t have much to add at this time, but as you know I am generally in agreement with the Chron on this. The taxi folks have set up a meeting for several of us local bloggers to present their perspective on things, as I noted in my last entry, and I’ll be sure to report on that afterward. In the meantime, two points to note. One is that there is already an app to hail a cab in Houston. I couldn’t tell you the last time I took a cab in Houston, so I have no experience with this. Have you ever used it? Also, in the course of my normal Internet surfing I came across this account of using Uber by Mark Evanier. Executive summary: He really liked it. Make of that what you will.

Posted in Planes, Trains, and Automobiles | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Friday random ten: Climb every mountain

We’re back from a family wedding in Colorado, which included a trip to the top of Pike’s Peak, where the girls got to see snow falling. That’s my inspiration for this week’s Friday Random Ten.

1. Ain’t No Mountain High Enough – Extreme Party Animals
2. Big Rock Candy Mountain – Harry McClintock
3. Fire On The Mountain – Big Medicine
4. Go Tell It On The Mountain – Christmas On The Border
5. The King Of My Mountain – Trout Fishing In America
6. The Mountain – Heartless Bastards
7. Mountain Town – Asylum Street Spankers
8. River Deep, Mountain High – Ike & Tina Turner
9. Rocky Mountain Way – Joe Walsh
10. Skullcrusher Mountain – Jonathan Coulton

If you’re in Colorado and want to ride the old-fashioned train to the top like we did, go here to reserve your tickets. You can drive or hike up as well – go here for more information. The view from the top is spectacular, definitely worth the visit.

Posted in Music | Tagged , | 1 Comment

More on FreedomWorks as anti-BGTX

Texas Monthly takes a look.

Texas Democrats have, as we all know, been flailing over the past few decades. They are the minority party in both houses of the Lege and haven’t won a statewide race since 1994. Underdogs, we might call them. And even if they’ve been showing signs of life over the past few months, many observers remain unimpressed: if Democrats don’t start announcing campaigns for the 2014 elections, they won’t even win the Participation Award.

But Matt Kibbe doesn’t scoff at underdogs.

Kibbe is the president and CEO of FreedomWorks, a nonprofit group headquartered in Washington, D.C., which supports grassroots conservative efforts around the country. In June, Kibbe and Co. announced a new campaign to keep Texas red called “Come and Take It.” Its budget is nearly $8 million dollars. Its goal is to send out 250,000 conservative volunteers on the ground around the state.

And its motive is mostly respect, Kibbe said, for the idea that Democrats can actually make some headway in Texas. Whitney Neal, the Director of Grassroots for the campaign, says the plan was originally crowdsourced from activists in Texas who, fearing a blue takeover, called on FreedomWorks for help. Kibbe pointed specifically to Battleground Texas, the progressive nonprofit that set up shop earlier this year, vowing to “turn Texas blue.”

“I take [Battleground’s] threat very much seriously,” Kibbe said in a phone interview with Texas Monthly . “I think we’ve got a greater ability to out-organize the establishment Republican efforts, and if we don’t help the activists do that, I’m just afraid it won’t get done.”

[…]

The two major ticket items that “Come and Take It” is pushing are education reform—greater school choice, that is—and economic opportunity. And the whole abortion thing? Out of the picture, according to Kibbe, who said that social issues have never been on FreedomWorks’ agenda and never will be.

In fact, Kibbe insists that the “Come and Take It” campaign is nonpartisan and won’t endorse any specific candidates. “It’s not about electing Republicans,” he said. “This is about creating a constituency for economic freedom and opportunity and real choice of education. And if we do that, the political problems really resolve themselves.” If Democrats were pushing those two principles, he later added, he’d want them to get elected.

Most Democrats might roll their eyes at the idea of finding common ground with FreedomWorks, and some would point out that, despite all the commotion about Battleground Texas, it wasn’t until this summer that the people of Texas showed any unusual interest in the Democratic Party—and the issue at hand was reproductive rights, not jobs. But Kibbe may be right that the “Come and Take It” campaign will appeal to many voters. Texas has always been a small-government state. Its Democrats tend to be more fiscally conservative than their national counterparts, and, for that matter, it would be unlikely for either party to win a statewide campaign by focusing solely on social issues. Regardless of the political activism in Austin, the state of Texas is bigger than the Capitol grounds.

That’s exactly why Texas’s conservatives have been so dismissive of groups like Battleground Texas, with their dreams of turning Texas blue—and it’s why it’s so striking that FreedomWorks, at least, is worried that they’re not just dreaming.

See here for more. I note that original story, in Politico, had a bit about FreedomWorks “hiring 10 to 20 field directors”, which is quite a bit less ambitious than finding a quarter of a million volunteers, who might require a bit more management than that if they can be found. As for the claim that FW will not be Republican-specific, forgive me if I’m a tad bit cynical about that. It’s either a dodge to maintain the veneer of nonpartisanship needed for 501c3 status, which means donor anonymity, or it’s just blowing smoke. But hey, maybe they’ll prove me wrong. In the meantime, I remain unworried about this.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on More on FreedomWorks as anti-BGTX

Astrodome referendum headed for the ballot

If you’ve been waiting for the chance to vote on the fate of the Astrodome, your wait will soon be over.

Commissioners Court next Tuesday is expected to approve a measure asking voters to authorize the county to spend as much as $220 million to transform the vacant stadium, County Budget Chief Bill Jackson said Wednesday.

County engineering staff, with the help of hired consultants, determined that the conversion project the Harris County Sports and Convention Corp. proposed in June will cost $217 million. The sports corporation, which runs Reliant Park, had estimated its plan to turn the decaying structure into an energy-efficient meeting hall dubbed “The New Dome Experience” would cost $194 million.

Engineers also determined that it would cost $20 million to demolish the Dome and create an open space and identified $8 million worth of additional work – including asbestos abatement and selective demolition – that needs to be done no matter whether the structure is revamped or torn down.

The last demolition estimate, released in March by the NFL’s Texans and Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo, showed it would cost $29 million to implode the structure and build a 1,600-space parking lot.

Jackson said the county may be able to come up with other kinds of revenue to offset how many taxpayer dollars would have to be spent.

[…]

Harris County Judge Ed Emmett said he not only wants to see the plan on the ballot but that he will vote in favor of it – even if it means a tax rate increase – because it will generate revenue.

“Would I build that building today? No, but it’s an iconic structure, it’s a part of our history, I think we can put it to use,” he said. “We can make Reliant Center, and Houston in general, a unique destination for exhibits and special events, and I think that’s worth doing just for the money that will come our way.”

Whether a bond would pass is debatable, court members and county staff say.

Commissioners Court had previously authorized the budget office to give the HCSCC plan the once over. If Harris County winds up borrowing the full $220 million, there could be an increase in the county’s property tax rate of up to a half of a cent. Because there could be a tax rate increase, you can be sure that there will be some opposition to this, though at this point it’s unclear which of the usual suspects will take the lead. Given that the county spends $2 million annually on Dome maintenance, no one really disputes the need to do something. The question is whether people will openly advocate for demolition, which is the alternative and the much cheaper price tag to renovation. Commissioners Court is set to approve this item on Tuesday, so we’ll get a better idea of the politics of this after that.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

The buried lede on sexism in the Legislature

PDiddie thinks that the real shocker in that Observer story on sexism in the Texas Legislature wasn’t given the prominence it deserved.

Even the most powerful women in the Legislature experience it. When I started interviewing women lawmakers, they all—Republican and Democrat, House and Senate, rural and urban—said that being a woman in the statehouse is more difficult than being a man. Some told of senators ogling women on the Senate floor or watching porn on iPads and on state-owned computers, of legislators hitting on female staffers or using them to help them meet women, and of hundreds of little comments in public and private that women had to brush off to go about their day. Some said they often felt marginalized and not listened to—that the sexism in the Legislature made their jobs harder and, at times, produced public policy hostile to women.

Big-Bad-Wolf-Sees-Red-Hot-Riding-Hood

Emphasis added by PDiddie. My takes on the story were here and here, though I didn’t mention this aspect. PDiddie correctly notes that getting caught surfing porn at work is very high on the list of things that tends to get one fired. That’s especially the case for government employees using government computers to do said surfing. Now, Senators aren’t government employees and they can’t be fired except by the voters, but I’m pretty sure that being caught visiting HotNakedLobbyists.com or whatever while supposedly conducting the people’s business would not be helpful for one’s re-election prospects.

Of course, we don’t know exactly what happened here. The information is presented in passing as an unsourced allegation, which could be exaggerated, mischaracterized, misremembered, or otherwise not quite what it looked or sounded like. The person in the best position to find out the specifics is story author Olivia Messer – and let’s face it, if there really was one or more Senators or their staffers actually surfing porn on the floor of the Senate, it’s news – but even if this turns out to not be what it was cracked up to be, there are some questions to be answered. Do legislators and their staff use a different network than reporters and other visitors? It must be the case that some form of proxy servers are used, so the next question is what sort of filtering is used, and how long are server logs kept? If someone had credible evidence that Legislator X visited Website Y on thus and such a date, what exactly would one need to do to get one’s hands on the details? I certainly don’t have a problem with people surfing to naughty websites – we’re all grownups here – but do it on your own time, and your own computer or tablet or smartphone. This is not anything that people living in the current century should be confused by. If that turns out to be too much to ask of one or more of our august lawmakers, we ought to know about it.sexism

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Unfair pay

Patricia Kilday Hart uncovers some skulduggery in one of Rick Perry’s vetoes.

State Rep. Senfronia Thompson

State Rep. Senfronia Thompson

Gov. Rick Perry vetoed a bill that would have let victims of wage discrimination sue in state court after receiving letters against the measure from the Texas Retailers Association and five of its members, mostly grocery stores, according to records obtained by the Houston Chronicle.

Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, who authored HB 950 mirroring the federal Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, said she unaware that the group and the businesses opposed her bill, or that they sought a gubernatorial veto.

Among the businesses advocating for a veto was Kroger Food Stores.

“I shop at Kroger’s for my groceries,” Thompson said. “I shopped there just last week. I’m going to have to go to HEB now. I am really shocked.”

Also writing to seek a veto were representatives of Macy’s, the Houston grocery company Gerland Corp., Brookshire Grocery Company, Market Basket, the Texas Association of Business and the National Federation of Independent Businesses.

Here’s HB950, which received 26 Republican votes in the House on third reading. I take no pride in noting that I predicted the veto, though I did so on the usually reliable grounds of Rick Perry being a jerk. I had no idea that he had help in that department this time.

Two other prominent business groups – the Texas Association of Business and the National Federation of Independent Businesses – also wrote Perry urging a veto, but those groups opposed publicly during committee hearings. Thompson said she heard “not one time” from any of the retailers.

In his veto proclamation, Perry did not mention the opposition of any business groups, but cited Texas’ positive business climate as a reason to oppose the bill: “Texas’ commitment to smart regulations and fair courts is a large part of why we continue to lead the nation in job creation. House Bill 950 duplicates federal law, which already allows employees who feel they have been discriminated against through compensation to file a claim with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”

In his request for a veto, Ronnie Volkening, president and CEO of the Texas Retailers, said the bill was “unnecessary, in that existing law provides adequate remedies against employment discrimination; and harmful, in that it undermines opportunities for timely resolution of employment dispute in favor of fomenting expensive and divisive litigation.”

[…]

The retailers complained to Perry that under HB 950, the statute of limitations would be reset every time a worker received a retirement check. Not so, said Thompson, who said she rewrote the bill to exclude retirement benefits to win Republican support in the Texas Senate.

“They didn’t read the bill or someone get them the wrong information,” she said.

Gary Huddleston, Kroger’s director of consumer affairs, said he relied on the retailers association for his information on the bill. “I regret that Representative Thompson is upset and I am sure Kroger, along with the Texas Retailers Association, would like to discuss the issue with her,” he said.

Yo, Gary. You think maybe the time to “discuss the issue” with Rep. Thompson might have been during the session, when the bill was being written, heard in committee, and voted on? Because at this point, Rep. Thompson would be fully justified in discussing the issue of putting her foot up your rear end.

Let me refer once again to Nonsequiteuse for the reasons why this bill was a good idea and a necessary law.

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, a federal law, doesn’t mandate that women should receive equal pay for equal work, and it doesn’t make it illegal to discriminate (another law takes care of that). It is a more technical law that deals with the amount of time someone has to file a lawsuit if they discover that they are facing pay discrimination.

The law used to be that you had a relatively short period of time from the first time you were paid unequally. So, you are hired for a job on January 1st, and get your first paycheck on the 5th (I know, bear with me), and it turns out you are being paid less than a man doing the exact same job. Before this act, you were presumed to know that and to have only 180 days to file a lawsuit to remedy it. If you didn’t discovery the discrimination until the following January (or even the following October, or whenever 180 days is from January 5th), you were out of luck.

Realistically, of course, we all know that no one walks around on day 5 of a new job comparing paychecks. People are socialized not to talk about salary, and some companies (and I’ve always wondered if this is legal) explicitly tell you not to talk about salary.

The outcome, of course, was that if you didn’t learn early in the game that you were being discriminated against, you were out of luck, and your employer got away with it.

The Lilly Ledbetter Act changes the game, and says the statute of limitations starts afresh with each discriminatory paycheck. So, as long as you’re getting a discriminatory paycheck, you have a cause of action.

In other words, as long as the employer is violating your rights, you have a chance to remedy the situation in court.

Seems fair, doesn’t it? I mean, nowhere in life do we say that if you break the rules long enough without anyone noticing that you get a free pass, so why would we do it with discriminatory pay?

Note that this law isn’t a guarantee that you’ll be able to prove discriminatory pay. It merely extends your time frame for filing a lawsuit.

The allowance to file in either state or federal court is important, too. State courts are less expensive and easier to access–consider that every county has a courthouse, but few have federal ones (just 29 places for federal courts to meet in Texas).

It’s about making it just a tad bit harder to screw the little guy. I’m not surprised that Rick Perry couldn’t care less about that – he has a long and established record of not caring about that sort of thing – and his heir apparent Greg Abbott has a similar record of indifference. While I can’t say it’s surprising that these business interests would go skulking about under what they hoped would be the cover of darkness to maintain their unfair advantage over their workers, it is nonetheless shocking and appalling, and it deserves to come with a price tag attached. To that end, there is a push to boycott Macy’s and Kroger until they reverse their stance on this. Rep. Thompson and Sen. Sylvia Garcia have already canceled events at Macy’s having to do with the annual sales tax holiday as a result of this. I never know how much to expect from this kind of action, but I fully support making sure people know what the businesses they support are up to when they think we’re not looking. The long term answer is of course to elect better legislators and especially better Governors, which is much harder to do but will reap much bigger rewards. In the meantime, go ahead and heap all the shame you can on the retailers that pushed for this veto. They deserve every bit of it. BOR, Stace, PDiddie, Texas Leftist, and Progress Texas have more.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

How much does it cost to really live in Houston?

Good question.

So what does it cost to secure an “adequate but modest living” in the Houston area?

According to the Economic Policy Institute, it requires an annual income of $63,600 for a family of two adults and two children.

Health care takes up the biggest chunk – $1,380 each month to pay for insurance premiums and out-of-pocket costs – while child care is the second-biggest expense at $961 each month.

Other big monthly expenses for Houston-area residents include $945 for housing, $754 for food and $577 for transportation costs, according to the report based on a variety of government and private data.

“It’s not going out to restaurants,” said Natalie Sabadish, a research assistant at the Economic Policy Institute and co-author of the report released earlier this month. Or money for vacations, savings accounts, Internet, cable and cellphones.

“It’s being able to make ends meet month to month,” Sabadish said.

The nonprofit institute that focuses on the financial situations of low- and middle-income workers calculated what it costs for families to reach a decent living standard in 615 communities and in six types of family configurations. (See the accompanying list to see what the institute believes it takes for a variety of family sizes in the Houston area. For a family of two – one adult and one child – it’s an annual income of $46,540.)

The institute made the calculations to demonstrate what it believes is inadequacy of federal poverty measures. For a family of four, the national poverty threshold is $23,283; Sabadish said that isn’t enough to cover the basics.

The federal poverty line doesn’t take geography into account when it makes its calculations, said Sabadish. It’s the same for a family living in high-cost New York City as one living anywhere else in the nation.

You can read more about the EPI study and its methodology here, and you can play with its budget calculator yourself.

The EPI Family Budget Calculator overcomes many of the shortcomings of the federal poverty line and the Supplemental Poverty Measure by illustrating the income required to afford an adequate standard of living for six family types living in 615 specific U.S. communities. As will be explained in greater detail shortly, that the budgets differ by location is important, since certain costs, such as housing, vary significantly depending on where one resides. Geographical cost-of-living differences are built into the budget calculations by incorporating regional, state, or local variations in prices (depending on item). This geographic dimension of EPI’s family budget measurements offers a comparative advantage over using poverty thresholds, which only use a national baseline in their measurements (e.g., the federal poverty line), or which use a geographic component only for measuring home prices (e.g., the SPM).

Basic family budget measurements are also adjustable by family type because, as illustrated in the following section, expenses vary considerably depending on the number of children in a family and whether a family is headed by a single parent or two parents. The six family types include one or two parents with one, two, or three children.

Out of curiosity, I checked its numbers for some other parts of Texas. These were the results:

Austin = $66,812
Dallas = $64,704
El Paso = $59,890
Fort Worth = $64,456
San Antonio = $61,345

That puts Houston squarely in the middle for Texas’ major urban centers. Note that all of these calculations (and others for Texas – they really covered the state) are based on the entire metropolitan areas, defined either as an MSA or a HUD Metro Fair Market Rent Area, so they cover much more than just the named city. I haven’t done more than just scan all this stuff so I can’t offer a detailed critique of it, but I will say that within any of these metro areas you will find a great deal of variation in the cost of living. It might make more sense to offer a range for these areas rather than a single figure, but that would also likely take a lot more time and effort to determine, and might not be that much more accurate. The point of this study is to make people realize that the federal poverty line is a really low number, one that offers at best a scratched-out, hand-to-mouth existence that is far removed from what those of us in the middle class expect, and that the real cost of living can be much more or much less than any single nationally calculated number. For that, at least, I hope you find this to be thought provoking.

Posted in Elsewhere in Houston | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on How much does it cost to really live in Houston?

Sheriff Garcia endorses the Early To Rise campaign

It makes sense that he would.

The group attempting to get a 1-cent tax hike on the November ballot to bolster early childhood education programs got a hearty endorsement from Harris County Sheriff Adrian Garcia on Wednesday, and announced it had cleared the first major hurdle in putting its initiative to voters this fall.

James Calaway, chairman of the so-called Early to Rise campaign, said the group – using volunteer and also paid canvassers, according to its campaign finance report – has collected more than 140,000 signatures on its petition, nearly twice the 78,000 signatures it says it needs to force County Judge Ed Emmett to place the initiative on the ballot. The group will turn the petition in early next week, and promised that a sufficient number of the signatures will be valid as they are from registered voters.

Calaway made the announcement on Wednesday across the street from the main county jail at 1200 Baker Street, where the county’s top lawman hosted a news conference to endorse the program, saying it would help keep kids out of trouble with his deputies and is “far cheaper” than incarceration.

“This is truly an issue of investing now,” Garcia said.

The 1-cent tax hike, which would be levied by the Harris County Department of Education and administered by the private non-profit School Readiness Corporation, would generate $25 million a year for teacher training, school supplies and other supplements at low-performing childcare centers in the county serving children up to age 5.

While several members of the Department of Education board of trustees said recently they would not support the plan unless they are able to have more immediate oversight – including appointing a member to the School Readiness Corporation board – Calaway said the group is working up a “multi-page agreement” with the agency and expects it to endorse the plan.

See here, here, and here for the background. I’m glad to see that Early To Rise is working out an agreement with the HCDE on oversight, because that was the biggest concern I had with this. HCDE should have some direct responsibility here. I look forward to seeing what that agreement has to say.

A press release announcing the Sheriff’s endorsement is here. The reason why I say that it makes sense for Sheriff Garcia to endorse this can be summed up in the following comment he made in that release:

“This is truly an issue of pay me now, or pay me later. We either need to pay for better early childhood education now, or we will end up paying for more inmates later, we either help our youngsters succeed when they’re 4 or we have to pay for the consequences when they’re 24”.

Surely no reasonable person disputes that. The main dispute over this campaign has been an existential one of process.

The third hurdle may not be so easy to clear, though: County Judge Emmett is still saying he thinks the law dictating the petition process does not apply, and has asked for opinions from the county attorney’s office and the state attorney general.

“I’ve said from the beginning I don’t think this law is really applicable,” Emmett said this week. “I’ve always assumed they’re going to turn in signatures.”

Lisa Falkenberg, who has explored this disagreement before, continues that exploration.

On Monday, Emmett requested an opinion on the petition from Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. He asked if the old law under which the petition was devised is still in effect and, if so, whether Emmett has the authority to reject the petition if it doesn’t “substantially follow” the language of the statute. Of course, Emmett has already decided that the petition’s language doesn’t follow the statute closely enough.

There’s only one problem with Emmett’s request. As county judge, he is not one of the officials authorized by Texas statute to request an opinion from the attorney general.

A technicality? Yes. But shouldn’t a guy holding others accountable to the sometimes inane technicalities of Texas law be holding himself to the same standard?

[…]

Jonathan Day, former Houston city attorney and an Early to Rise board member, said he doesn’t understand Emmett’s focus on hyper-technical aspects of the petition.

“I’m just perplexed that he filed the request himself,” Day said. “I think the statute is very straightforward. It doesn’t require a law degree to determine that he’s not an official who under the law is authorized to ask for an opinion.”

Day maintained that the petition is on firm legal ground and called Emmett’s nit-picking arguments “illogical.”

I’m nowhere near qualified to arbitrate this one, so go read Falkenberg’s column and see what you think. I don’t have a big problem with Judge Emmett asking for the AG’s opinion, even if he’s technically not supposed to, but if he really is technically not supposed to then I fully expect that the AG will reply by telling him to follow the rules as written. That is the “conservative” thing to do, right? Be that as it may, I fully expect this to wind up in court one way or another, and I won’t be surprised if the issue surfaces again in 2015 when the Lege reconvenes and another bill to abolish the HCDE gets filed. As Judge Emmett is a supporter of that effort, that could be an issue in his re-election campaign as well. We’ll see what happens with this election first.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Whitmire draws a primary opponent

Damian LaCroix

Texpatriate notes that 2010 judicial candidate Damian LaCroix is mounting a challenge to Sen. John Whitmire in SD15. This directly concerns me, as I was redistricted into SD15 in 2011 after having been in SD06 since moving to the Heights. His website is here, his Facebook page is here, and LaCroix did a judicial Q&A with me for the 2010 primary, which he ultimately lost to Cheryl Thornton. His priorities page is pretty thin right now – I don’t disagree with anything he’s saying, but there’s nothing there to indicate why SD15 would be better off with a rookie Senator than one with approximately a thousand years of seniority who was recently given national recognition for his work on juvenile justice reform.

New blood is essential, to be sure – I talked about this in the context of SD06 when there had been talk about Sylvia Garcia challenging the late Sen. Gallegos in the 2012 primary. That never happened, but as things turned out Garcia is now Sen. Garcia, having won a special election to succeed Sen. Gallegos after his passing. In any event, while I’m as ready for a “next generation of leaders” to step up as anyone, there needs to be some rationale for any given target. I’m not always Sen. Whitmire’s biggest fan, but offhand I see no reason to replace him. Unlike some other Senators I could name, replacing Whitmire isn’t a surefire upgrade. What is the argument that Damian LaCroix, or anyone else for that matter, will be better for me, for the Democratic Senate caucus, and for Democratic priorities overall? I’m open to hearing such an argument, since no one is entitled to a seat, but it has to be made. LaCroix had not yet begun to make it.

On a side note, SD15 has the third highest concentration of African-American voters of any Senate district:

Dist % Black % White % Hispanic ======================================= 13 58.2 17.6 17.1 23 49.7 24.1 23.3 15 28.1 41.3 24.4 10 19.1 60.7 15.7 01 17.9 75.0 5.2 06 16.9 23.8 56.3 04 14.9 71.9 10.2

Percentages are all CVAP. Districts 13 and 23 are the only two Senate districts currently held by African-Americans, Sens. Rodney Ellis and Royce West. I had wondered when I first looked at this if the 2011 redistricting had substantially changed the racial and ethnic composition of the district, but a look at the data from the previous plan suggests not. Those numbers are VAP and not CVAP, so they’re not a straight apples-to-apples comparison. I’ll bet the much higher Hispanic number from before 2011 would drop considerably, and the Anglo and African-American numbers would rise accordingly, if CVAP were used. What that says is that 1) on the face of it at least, Sen. Whitmire is no more vulnerable to a primary challenge than he was before, and 2) LaCroix can make some headway appealing to African-American voters, but probably not enough to win. He’ll need a broad coalition, which gets back to my earlier point about making the argument why he would represent an upgrade. He will have his work cut out for him.

Posted in Election 2014 | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Texas blog roundup for the week of August 5

The Texas Progressive Alliance thinks that the Legislature is once, twice, three times a fiasco as it brings you this week’s roundup.

Continue reading

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged , | Comments Off on Texas blog roundup for the week of August 5

Interview with CM Jack Christie

CM Jack Christie

CM Jack Christie

CM Jack Christie is serving his first term on Council in At Large #5, becoming one of only four people in the term limits era to defeat a sitting incumbent when he nipped former CM Jolanda Jones in a runoff. Previously, he had narrowly lost to Jones in a runoff in 2009, and removed himself from the running for what was then the open seat in AL5 in 2007 after residency issues came up. He served two terms on the State Board of Education in the 1990s – it turns out he was my SBOE representative, something I came to realize last year as I looked into the history of that SBOE district. He also served on the Spring Branch ISD Board of Trustees. He serves on several Council committees, including Budget & Fiscal Affairs and Public Safety. Here’s what we talked about:

Jack Christie interview

You can see all of my interviews as well as finance reports and other information on candidates on my 2013 Election page.

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Chron wants multiple multi-candidate debates

Don’t know if they’ll get what they want, but it can’t hurt to ask.

For the main show, mayoral candidate Ben Hall has called for six one-on-one debates with Mayor Annise Parker, albeit with three debates after early voting begins. Parker has rejected Hall’s proposal, agreeing only to one debate featuring multiple candidates.

Houston’s future is too important to limit the mayor’s race to one debate, and we’re far too diverse to restrict debates to an incumbent and a self-funded millionaire challenger. Putting multiple candidates on stage will provide a panoply of perspectives and a constructive conversation about our city’s needs. Municipal issues don’t always make for the most exciting discussions, but the horse-race atmosphere of elections provides a more compelling backdrop for topics like the city budget.

While we hope Ben Hall will use the debates to explain why he is spending his personal fortune on an uphill battle to unseat the mayor, the time for one-on-one debates is during a runoff. The general election should provide voters with multiple options for what our future will look like. Whether the race for mayor, controller or city council seats, voters are best served when candidates debate the issues and define what it means to be a city that is building forever.

See here for the background. It’s hardly clear to me that having candidates beyond Mayor Parker and Ben Hall in a debate will yield a “constructive conversation”. The candidates not named Parker or Hall would have to be running constructive campaigns for there to be some chance of that happening, and so far the evidence for that is lacking. The principle of democracy argues in favor of inclusiveness, but the principle of imparting useful information to as many voters as possible argues for limiting the debate to those that have something useful to say. Let whatever organizations that want to sponsor debates make their own decisions about who they want to invite, let Parker and Hall agree to abide by their decisions, and leave it at that. Campos has more.

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Texas really needs Obamacare

We’ve always known that Texas would be a huge beneficiary of the Affordable Care Act because of our huge volume of uninsured people, but this quantifies it in a way that really brings it home.

It's constitutional - deal with it

It’s constitutional – deal with it

Texas is home to more than two-thirds of the nation’s 30 counties most in need of expanded health insurance coverage, according to a liberal group.

The Center for American Progress Action Fund ranked 22 Texas counties – including Dallas — as among the “30 worst” in the country, citing residents’ lack of insurance and poor health outcomes, such as heart attack deaths.

In a report released Thursday, the advocacy group said many Republican U.S. House members “are doing everything they can to torpedo” the federal health law despite having many constituents who would benefit from new state health marketplaces that will open on Oct. 1.

Dallas County, with 31 percent of residents uninsured, had the 14th-worst rate of health coverage among U.S. counties with more than 25,000 people, the report said.

Forty-five percent of Dallas County’s young adults — ages 18 to 39 – lacked insurance in 2011. Nine percent of all county residents have diabetes, which is a rate 13 percent higher than the national average, the group found. Nearly 15 of every 100,000 county residents die each year from stroke. That rate is 26 percent higher than the national average.

“There are just enormous human and economic inefficiencies from [having] a large number of uninsured persons in any county,” Tom Perriello, the group’s chief and a former Democratic congressman from Virginia, said in a media conference call.

While several of the Texas counties on the worst list are along the U.S.-Mexico border, the 22 were scattered in all regions of the state.

The report is here and the summary of it is here. What they did was rank the counties on six different factors:

  • Highest overall percentage of uninsured individuals under age 65
  • Highest percentage of uninsured women under age 65
  • Highest percentage of uninsured individuals ages 18 to 39
  • Highest percentage of uninsured young men
  • Highest percentage of uninsured people of color
  • Highest percentage of uninsured working-class individuals

The “bottom 30” list was then taken from the counties that did the worst overall on all six factors. Harris County scored among the worst on “Highest overall percentage of uninsured individuals” (#19, 29.9%); “Highest percentage of uninsured women under age 65” (#18, 28.8%); “Highest percentage of uninsured individuals ages 18 to 39” (#40, 43.1%); and “Highest percentage of uninsured working-class individuals” (#9, 34.2%), where that is defined as “individuals between 18 and 65 earning between 138% and 400% of the Federal Poverty Line”.

The good news is that despite the Republicans’ staunch refusal to do anything about this problem (with some honorable exceptions including county leaders and a few legislators like Rep. John Zerwas, who detailed his frustrations in this interview with the Observer that you should read), Texas will still get a great deal of benefit from the insurance exchanges. According to a report by the Society of Actuaries, Texas’ uninsured rate could drop from 27% to just under 15% if all eligible people take advantage of the exchange and the subsidies available to them; expanding Medicaid would have dropped that number to 10%, with the remainder basically being undocumented immigrants. This requires that people know about the exchanges and the subsidies, and fortunately there are various efforts underway to make that happen, since the state of Texas isn’t doing anything to help. If all goes reasonably well, many Texans could be a lot better off in another year.

Of course, there remain those who hope that nobody is any better off after the ACA kicks in.

Conservative analyst John Davidson of the free market-oriented Texas Public Policy Foundation said the liberal group – and writers of the federal law – ignore Census Bureau data showing that nearly 1 million of Texas’ 6 million uninsured residents make more than $75,000 a year.

“They have the means” to buy coverage, he said. “They don’t see the value in it.”

He said the Affordable Care Act’s success hinges on whether young, healthy adults will be prodded to buy coverage, which will “subsidize older, sicker people. Proponents of the law are going to be surprised how few young people are willing to take that deal,” Davidson said.

Yes, I’m sure that a privileged old guy like John Davidson knows exactly how people with whom he has nothing in common and for whom he has no empathy will behave. He’s just rooting for his preferred political outcome. Let’s see how good he is at making predictions after we get some data on this, shall we? Progress Texas, Health Zone, the Trib, and Kaiser Health News have more.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Changing the culture

Nonsequiteuse looks at the big picture.

OffendedOpinion

Let’s talk about changing the culture of the Texas legislature. What needs to happen, who needs to do it, what are the consequences, and how do we move forward.

The first suggestion that always comes up is that we should elect more women. I’m all for that.

I would expand that sentiment and say that we need a legislature that represents the great diversity of our state. Not just more women, but people of all races, all genders, all orientations, all religions, all levels of physical ability, and all socio-economic backgrounds.

That’s the long game, though, and we deserve more immediate answers and action. But what works when you’re facing institutional sexism? There are two things that will/have always made it tough to combat institutional discrimination, and, in this case, sexism:

There are those who will say it is the women’s responsibility to expose (or police, educate, train, or censure) the men.
There are those who will tell the women that we risk too much by exposing the offenders.

To to the first point: in some ways, and on a small scale, that one-on-one policing happens. Sen. Van de Putte is quoted in the article:

“At times. You know, [pornographic images] on their personal iPads or something. You just say, ‘Gentlemen, don’t bring that to the floor… Just do that at home.’”

Realistically, however, when sexism is endemic, one-on-one peer counseling and education places too great a burden on the group suffering from it while absolving those in power from responsibility. And let’s not even get into how unrealistic it is to expect a 23-year-old aide to call out a 6-term representative on gray area behavior like telling someone she looks nice today.

To the second point: if women start naming and shaming, women will be blamed for the consequences of that calling out, and, in may ways, punished more than the people being called out. Punished personally, and punished at a policy level. Because while it would be lovely if the ultra-conservative right wingers who vote regularly to abridge women’s rights were caught viewing porn or propositioning reporters, this behavior isn’t happening on only one side of the aisle.

In a time when progressives need every vote we can get, the question will be can we afford to lose an ally “just” because he (or she) participates in or tolerates sexist behavior?

In other words, when men vote to protect women’s rights or treat women equally to men at the policy level, women get told we have to put up with their bad behavior at the personal level, because collectively, we can’t risk losing their votes.

There is no quick answer. Many things need to happen.

She is writing about that Olivia Messer article in the Observer. I’m sorry to say that I took the easy way out by wishing that more women would call out the kind of behavior detailed in that story. I know better than to say stuff like that. It is of course everyone’s responsibility, first and foremost to not be the kind of person that engages in the appalling behavior Messer documents, to call it out ourselves when we see it regardless of whether it was aimed at us or not, and to support those who do call it out. We Democrats need to be asking the male legislators we’ve been voting for what they have experienced in the Legislature and what they are doing to combat the problem that their female colleagues have experienced. We also need to be prepared to perform electoral interventions on those that turn out to be part of the problem. We can’t say we didn’t know about the problem, or that we didn’t know it was that bad. It’s on all of us, and that most certainly includes me, to work to end this behavior. Human nature being what it is, it will never fully go away, but we can make it clear that it is unacceptable and comes with a high cost. I promise to do my part.

The good news is that the mainstream media appears to have taken notice of Messer’s article as well. Here’s Sharon Grigsby in the DMN:

I contacted two young women who have worked in different capacities in the Legislature — and both of whom I knew would tell me the truth. Both had the same reaction to my question about the “Sexist Little Secret” story: Yes, it’s accurate. One told me of being warned along the lines of, “You better watch out or you’re going to find yourself pregnant before the session is up with all the lawmakers walking around.” The other, despite being a well-educated policy specialist, spent a lot of her time “cutting cakes and being the office housekeeper.”

I’ve sent the Texas Observer article around to everyone on our staff to read, and I hope our editorial board will decide to write on this topic. Too often, when I finally gathered the courage to report the incidents I experienced as a young woman in the workplace, my stories were met with disbelief. “You must be exaggerating. XX wouldn’t do that” was the common feedback.

No one has any excuse for making that statement any more. Let’s keep that light shining.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Yet another wacky poll about Latino voting in Texas

Just when I thought I was out…they pull me back in.

Not Ted Cruz

Not Ted Cruz

Sen. Ted Cruz lost the Hispanic vote in Texas by about 20 percentage points, but out-performed GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, according to post-2012 election polling shared with the Washington Examiner.

Cruz defeated Democrat Paul Sadler last November by nearly 16 percentage points on his way to garnering 56.5 percent of the vote. Romney bested Obama by nearly 17 percentage points while garnering 57.2 percent of the vote. But a survey taken about six weeks after the election and made available by the Republican senator’s political team, shows Hispanics favored Sadler over Cruz 60 percent to 40 percent and Obama over Romney 59 percent to 33 percent.

The survey offers a unique window into voting patterns of Hispanics, the nation’s fastest growing voting bloc, in conservative-leaning Texas, where exit polling is hard to come by given its reliable Republican voting record in statewide races and the high cost of gathering data in such a large state. With Cruz, son of a Cuban immigrant, exploring a 2016 presidential run, the poll could shed light on how the senator compares with other Republicans when it comes to winning Hispanic votes.

[…]

The poll, conducted by Cruz pollster Wilson Perkins Allen Opinion Research, surveyed 601 Texas Hispanics who voted in the 2012 general election, and has an margin of error of 4 percentage points.

I don’t know if this horse is dead yet, but if it isn’t it’s definitely in the ICU. A few basic observations, which I will try to keep fresh, since even I’m getting tired of this:

– There’s no polling data available for inspection, so it’s that much harder to do any intelligent analysis of this. Wilson Perkins did a Presidential poll in September and released all their data for it, so it’s not like they have a track record of secrecy. Yes, I know, polls commissioned by candidates/officeholders often have proprietary information in them, but they’re also often released in this manner to advance an argument. Mike Baselice does this a lot. I’m not saying this makes a poll automatically suspect, but you are ultimately taking the pollster’s word for it, and when a pollster has been hired by a partisan, that partisan has an interest in what is taken away from the information provided. Caveat emptor, is what I’m saying.

– That claim that the Latino vote divided 60-40 between Cruz and Sadler is suspicious for several reasons. For one, I’ve never seen a poll result where the totals for two candidates added up to 100%. Even in a runoff situation, there will be some “don’t know” and “refused/no answer” type responses. In addition, as we have seen many times before, the percentage of people who have expressed a preference in the Cruz/Sadler race was considerably less than the percentage that expressed a preference in Romney/Obama. It beggars belief that literally everyone picked either Cruz or Sadler. This number alone makes me want to disregard the entire poll.

– As I have pointed out before, claims about Latino voting in Texas can be checked against actual results, and deviations from the Latino Decisions poll last November can generally be shown to be suspect based on that. It’s also worth noting that claims about a certain level of preference for Latino voters affects what the numbers would have to be for Anglo voters as well. For example, if you assume that the racial/ethnic breakdown in Texas was 70% Anglo, 20% Latino, and 10% African-American, then to say Ted Cruz got 40% of the Latino vote implies he must have gotten about 68% of the Anglo vote in order to get 56.5% of the vote overall. Note that back in September, Wilson Perkins claimed that Mitt Romney was polling at 77% among Anglo voters in Texas. How do they explain that disparity? Everyone agrees that Cruz did a little better than Romney did among Latino voters in Texas, which therefore implies that Romney did a little better than Cruz among Anglo voters – you can see that in the data if you compare the county by county results for each – but not nine points better. Which one of their polls would Wilson Perkins say was inaccurate?

– It’s not quite as easy to draw conclusions about the Anglo vote in Texas from precinct or county results, but a look at the most Anglo State Rep districts in Texas suggests that Cruz did better than 68% overall among that demographic:

Dist Anglo% Cruz Sadler Cruz% Sadler% ================================================ 2 81.4 43,359 13,782 73.9% 23.5% 19 80.7 48,200 15,964 73.4% 24.3% 21 80.0 46,050 17,057 71.5% 26.5% 58 80.4 41,720 12,225 75.0% 22.2% 60 84.7 51,821 11,081 80.1% 17.1% 61 85.8 54,602 11,591 80.2% 17.0% 62 82.2 38,182 14,041 70.8% 26.1% 98 80.9 56,907 17,802 73.9% 23.1%

You get into fuzzy math very quickly, so I don’t want to spend much time on this. The Anglo% is Voting Age Population, which is likely to be less than Citizen Voting Age Population, and is also likely to be less than the share of the actual electorate. Unlike Latinos, who voted fairly consistently for Democrats, there are a couple of places in the state that are heavily Anglo but not very Republican – specifically, much of Austin and some place in Houston like Montrose and The Heights. HD48, for example, is 69.5% Anglo VAP, but voted only 37.9% for Cruz. (See the election numbers here and population figures here.) There’s also a lot more Anglo voters than there are Latino voters, so you can’t get nearly as big a total by looking at the most heavily Anglo districts. All that said, there’s nothing here to suggest Cruz got only 68% of the Anglo vote, and as such there’s nothing here to suggest he got as much as 40% of the Latino vote.

– Along the same lines as above, the cited figure of 32% Latino support for Romney is reasonably in line with other data, and implies a level of Anglo support in the 71-72% range, which strikes me as being plausible. I could buy 35% for Cruz – bearing in mind that some number of people thought Cruz was the Democrat in the race – but 40% is just a stretch. I’ll say it again: Show me the math if you want me to believe. Link via Burka.

Posted in Election 2012 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Davis narrows her choices

Governor or re-election, no other options.

Sen. Wendy Davis

Sen. Wendy Davis

State Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, said Monday that she will either run for re-election or for Texas governor, and that she’s working hard to make her decision.

Speaking at a National Press Club luncheon, Davis said those were the only two options, and that she’s not considering joining the lieutenant governor’s race. She did not indicate when she’ll make up her mind.

“People do feel we need a change from the very fractured, very partisan leadership we’re seeing in Texas right now,” she said.

[…]

In her speech on Monday, Davis painted Texas Republicans as being driven by party politics, criticizing Perry in particular for his job-luring trips to New York and California and his veto of equal work-equal pay legislation. Davis tried to portray herself as above party interests, saying she had worked on “issues people don’t usually associate with Democrats” such as transportation and water funding.

“I will seek common ground because we must,” Davis said. “But sometimes you have to take a stand on sacred ground.”

Davis also spoke out against the restrictions on abortion clinics lawmakers recently passed and previous cuts to family planning in Texas, saying she relied on free and low-cost women’s health care as a young woman. “Partisan legislation on top of years of significant budget cuts has cut that access for tens of thousands of women across the state,” she said.

Following her address, Matt Angle, a senior strategist for the Davis campaign, said he expects her to make a decision on her political future before Labor Day.

There had been some speculation that perhaps Lite Guv was a better spot for Davis, since no one has as loaded a campaign warchest as Greg Abbott, and Davis would likely get to go up against either David Dewhurst or Dan Patrick, both of whom would be perfect foils for her. I thought there was some merit to that, but it not surprisingly generated some pushback, most eloquently from Harold Cook. I don’t know if the Davis-for-Lite-Guv thing was ever an actual thing or just something that we talking heads dreamed up to keep ourselves busy in between actual bits of news – and hey, I am fully aware of my own role in this – but whatever the case, it ain’t a thing now. I wish Sen. Davis all the best in making up her mind, and I do not envy her that choice one bit. Texpatriate and Texas Leftist have more.

Posted in Election 2014 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

And that’s a wrap on Special Session 3

Hallelujah.

Finally no more sequels

The Texas Legislature adjourned its third special session since May on Monday night after passing a measure estimated to increase transportation funding by $1.2 billion annually if Texas voters approve it next year.

“Let’s adjourn this mutha,” said state Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, after the Senate had sent House Bill 1 back over to the lower chamber for final passage.

It was the third try by lawmakers since the end of the regular session to pass a measure to boost funding for the cash-strapped Texas Department of Transportation without raising taxes or fees.

Gov. Rick Perry praised both chambers for “increasing funding for transportation without raising taxes, which sends an incredibly strong message that Texas is committed to keeping the wheels of commerce turning, while protecting taxpayers.”

[…]

The latest version is estimated to raise $1.2 billion a year for TxDOT, a fraction of the more than $4 billion TxDOT has said it needs in additional annual funding to maintain current congestion levels as the state’s population grows.

The plan now requires the Legislature to vote in 2025 to continue the diversion or it would stop. It also requires TxDOT to find $100 million in “efficiencies” over the 2014-15 biennium and put that money toward paying the agency’s multibillion-dollar debt.

“They’re a $20 billion a year agency and a lot of us believe that they can tighten the belt,” said state Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso and the author of HB 1.

A repeated sticking point on the plan has been whether and how to create some sort of minimum balance, or floor, for the Rainy Day Fund’s balance below which tax revenue could not be diverted to transportation. The version passed by both chambers Monday will require a select joint committee of legislators to recommend a minimum balance before each regular legislative session. Then members of both chambers will be given a chance to vote in favor of that minimum balance or a different balance. If a majority of both chambers can’t agree on one by the 45th day of the session, then the committee’s recommendation will be enacted.

That final provision drew the support of several House Republicans who had been wary of the plan beforehand.

About damn time. For all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth that led to this “what took them so long?” compromise, it’s still little more than a Band-Aid that leaves most of the problem un-addressed and hostage to ideology. I doubt it will lead to other states to cease their badmouthing of Texas’ inadequate infrastructure as a way to undermine its appeal to businesses. But it did accomplish the task of getting everyone the hell out of town before any further wingnut wish list items could be added to the agenda. For that alone, kudos all around. The item will be on the 2014 ballot, not the 2013 ballot, so don’t look for it this November. I’m sure you’ll hear about it again before you get to vote on it.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

On PACs in city elections

Houston Politics looks at something we haven’t seen much of in city elections – PACs that are candidate-specific instead of being centered on a referendum.

BagOfMoney

Among the topics bandied about last week was why [Ben] Hall and District A candidate Brenda Stardig (who is seeking to regain the seat she lost in 2011 to current incumbent Helena Brown) had formed specific-purpose political committees, or SPACs, as part of their campaigns.

There was speculation that Hall, in particular, may have fallen afoul of city ordinance by his PAC spending more than $10,000 in coordination with his campaign (Stardig’s had only spent $1,300 as of June 30, thus under the $10,000 limit).

The city’s rules are similar to federal guidelines on this: If a PAC coordinates with a candidate, it is capped at $10,000. If it just sends the check and doesn’t help decide how to spend it, the support can be limitless. City Attorney David Feldman said he planned to contact Hall and Stardig’s campaign treasurers to discuss the issue, given that there was clear evidence of coordination in both camps: The PACs, for instance, carry the candidates’ names (as opposed to the typically vague variety, such as Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS or satirist Stephen Colbert’s Making a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow).

Jerad Najvar, an election lawyer Hall consulted, and Susybelle Gosslee, who works compliance for Stardig, said there really isn’t any intrigue here.

Najvar points to Section 18-2 of the city code, which states, “To the extent that any candidate elects to receive contributions or make expenditures through a (SPAC) … then the (SPAC) shall be regarded as the agency of the candidate, and the actions of the (SPAC) shall be deemed to be actions of the candidate.” These actions explicitly include, ”The soliciting or accepting of a campaign contribution or the making of a campaign expenditure.”

But perhaps these candidates were seeking to get around the $5,000 limit on individual contributions, or around the limits on the amount of personal loans candidates can repay themselves using campaign cash: $75,000 in the mayor’s race, $15,000 in an at-large race and $5,000 in a district race?

No again, said Najvar and Gosslee.

“You either file a report that says ‘Ben Hall,’ personally, or you file a report that says ‘The All for Hall Committee.’ Substantively the law is no different,” Najvar said. “Filing an SPAC does not allow you to get around any contribution limits or any other limits. When you’re a candidate, you have a campaign account: It’s either filed on a COH (individual) report or an SPAC report, and it doesn’t matter which one.”

“No candidate benefits financially from having an SPAC,” Gosslee agreed.

For what it’s worth, this sort of thing is common in county and state politics, especially with Republican candidates and officeholders. Search for the finance reports for numerous Republican incumbents and you’ll find that all the action is in their “Texans For” or “Friends Of” PACs. Most of them also have regular candidate finance reports, but usually there’s little to them. I’m okay with this arrangement in city elections as long as everything gets disclosed and there are no contributions bigger than $5K from an individual or $10K from a PAC. I don’t see it as altering the dynamics of city races, but I suppose we’ll find out.

Posted in Local politics | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on On PACs in city elections

Interview with CM Ed Gonzalez

CM Ed Gonzalez

CM Ed Gonzalez

Council Member Ed Gonzalez is serving his second term in District H. He’s actually already four full years into his service, as he was the winner of the 2009 special election to succeed former CM and now Sheriff Adrian Garcia. Like Garcia, Gonzalez is a former HPD officer who made a successful entry into politics after retiring from that career. Gonzalez currently serves as the Chair of the Public Safety committee on Council, and serves as Mayor Pro Tem after having been Vice Mayor Pro Tem in his first term. Even though I got moved into numerous other districts in 2011, he remains my district Council member after the Council redistricting effort that created two new seats. District H contains some of the more attractive-to-developers neighborhoods in the city, as well as the new North Line light rail extension. Those were some of the many things we covered in our conversation.

Ed Gonzales interview

You can see all of my interviews as well as finance reports and other information on candidates on my 2013 Election page.

Posted in Election 2013 | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Interview with CM Ed Gonzalez

Yeah, they’re still working on a transportation funding bill

The committee hearings will continue until morale improves.

Same hair and same amount of crazy as Rick Perry

After consulting with members from both the House and Senate, state Rep. Joe Pickett decided to make some minor changes to his latest transportation funding proposal. On Thursday — the third day of the third special session — a House committee gave his altered proposal its endorsement.

Pickett added a provision to the plan that would require the Texas Department of Transportation to find $100 million in “efficiencies” over the 2014-15 biennium and put that money toward paying the agency’s multibillion-dollar debt. Paying off that much debt early would save the agency $47 million in debt service payments, Pickett said.

“I wanted a buy-in by the agency,” Pickett said. “I wouldn’t propose it if I didn’t think they were up to the challenge.”

In a 6-1 vote, the House Select Committee on Transportation Funding approved House Joint Resolution 1, with state Rep. Senfronia Thompson, D-Houston, voting no. The committee voted unanimously in favor of the related House Bill 1.

The House is expected to try to pass the plan again early next week. Because it involves amending the Constitution, HJR 1 needs support from 100 members of the 150-member House. A similar plan failed 84-40 on Monday, a day before the end of the second special session. Pickett and others said they believe the measure failed because 23 members were absent that day, not because there aren’t 100 members of the House who support the plan. A version of the legislation also failed in the first special session.

I would argue that the bill didn’t fail in Special Session 1, the bill was failed by David Dewhurst, who chose to play politics rather than let it come to a vote before Sen. Wendy Davis’ filibuster. Perhaps enough members will show up for the floor vote this time around, or Rep. Pickett’s changes will get enough Republicans to support it, so that it doesn’t meet the same ignominious fate as in Special Session 2. And good Lord will I be happy to get a break from blogging about special sessions.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Yeah, they’re still working on a transportation funding bill

Fighting for Obamacare

Bring it.

It's constitutional - deal with it

It’s constitutional – deal with it

Obamacare supporters are launching a new war room operation to stick up for the law, mobilizing liberal groups to talk up its benefits and pound Republicans for trying to cut off its funding.

The new effort — to be headed by Americans United for Change, an all-purpose liberal advocacy group, and Protect Your Care, which focused on Obamacare — will include rapid-response messaging and town halls to try to change the conversation over the health care law, its organizers tell POLITICO. They’ll start next week, during the August recess, but they’re promising to stick around during the massive effort to sign people up for Obamacare this fall.

Their goal: Get Democrats and liberals off of defense, and make the Republicans defend trying to take away benefits like health coverage for pre-existing conditions, which will become available to all Americans when the main parts of the law take effect next January.

“This is about being on offense, not being on defense against the repeal crowd. They’re on the wrong side of this now,” said Brad Woodhouse, the former Democratic National Committee spokesman who’s now president of Americans United for Change. “You know what? Obamacare is the law of the land. Hands off my health care.”

Getting off of defense has been the big problem for the Obama administration and its supporters all along. Past efforts by liberals have fallen short, outgunned by the resources of conservative interest groups and the passion of the Tea Party activists who want to wipe the law off the books.

But this time, the pro-Obamacare groups say they’ll have the resources and the firepower to give the White House backup in critical states — and to give groups like Enroll America the “air cover” they need to focus on signing people up for health coverage, according to Eddie Vale, a spokesman for Protect Your Care who’s based at American Bridge, another liberal group that’s ramping up its opposition research on Republican candidates.

They’ll have the backing of Stephanie Cutter, the veteran of President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign and past Obamacare messaging efforts, and Paul Tewes, another Obama veteran who helped run the Democratic attacks that defeated President George W. Bush’s Social Security plan in 2005.

And they’re hiring Democratic consultants to help them organize events and rapid-response campaigns in 10 key states, including Texas and Florida, two of the three states with the highest numbers of uninsured people, as well as swing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania. The others are Wisconsin, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, and North Carolina.

It’s that last bit about bringing the fight to Texas that made me blog this. Lord knows, we need to have as strong a countervoice to the rebel faction that pervades our state. It also fits in nicely with a campaign against Greg Abbott. I don’t know what this will mean in practical terms, but I look forward to it whatever it is.

Posted in Show Business for Ugly People | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

State Bar seeks sanctions against Ken Anderson

Seems reasonable to me.

Arguing that a trial is no longer needed, the State Bar of Texas has asked a judge to summarily rule that former Williamson County District Attorney Ken Anderson engaged in professional misconduct by hiding evidence in the murder trial of Michael Morton, who was exonerated after spending almost 25 years in prison.

Such a ruling would allow the State Bar, which oversees lawyer discipline, to proceed directly to a state district court hearing on sanctions against Anderson, who could be disbarred, temporarily lose his law license or receive a public reprimand for his handling of Morton’s prosecution in 1987.

A lawyer for Anderson, now a state district judge in Georgetown, said he will oppose the bar’s motion and plans to move for a dismissal of the State Bar’s lawsuit.

The civil lawsuit is separate from criminal charges that are also pending against Anderson, but both cases rely on the same accusations – that Anderson hid evidence that could have raised questions about Morton’s guilt, then lied when he assured Morton’s trial judge that he had no favorable evidence to turn over to the defense as required by law.

Morton served almost 25 years in prison for the murder of his wife, Christine, before he was exonerated in 2011.

In its motion for summary judgment, the State Bar’s Commission for Lawyer Discipline argued that a Sept. 30 trial wasn’t necessary because its allegation – that Anderson violated his duties as a lawyer – had already been proved in a court of inquiry that examined Anderson’s handling of Morton’s prosecution.

[…]

The criminal case against Anderson is still in the early stages, and Anderson’s legal team has filed an appeal arguing that the charges are improper because the statute of limitations had passed two decades ago.

Anderson’s lawyers believe the State Bar’s lawsuit also is barred by the statute of limitations and plan to file a competing motion for summary judgment asking that the lawsuit be dismissed, lawyer Eric Nichols said.

In its motion, the State Bar argued that Anderson mounted a vigorous defense during a weeklong court of inquiry hearing in February and isn’t entitled to retry the facts after losing that case.

The law “prevents relitigation of particular issues that were litigated and decided in a previous lawsuit,” argues the motion from Linda Acevedo, the commission’s chief disciplinary counsel.

Nichols disagreed, saying the court of inquiry didn’t result in a final decision or judgment against Anderson, who insisted he did nothing wrong, and operated under looser rules of evidence, providing a questionable result.

As noted in the story, the judge in the court of inquiry issued an arrest warrant for Anderson in April, charging him with tampering with physical evidence and tampering with a government document. I can see Anderson’s point that this wasn’t a normal courtroom procedure and the standards of evidence may have been different, but he got to put on a defense and it’s hard to see how things would play out differently in civil court. Unless some of the previously introduced evidence was suppressed via a successful motion by his attorneys, which would add a layer of irony to the whole thing that I’m not sure any of us could handle. The statute of limitations argument completely fails to impress me. It may be technically right if we are forced to start the clock when Michael Morton was tried, but under the much more sensible interpretation that the limitations period began when the crime was actually discovered there’s no leg to stand on. I say Anderson has had his chance to prove that the misconduct allegations were meritless. The Bar has a responsibility to act, and it should be allowed to do so.

Posted in Crime and Punishment | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Weekend link dump for August 4

Soon, your car will need anti-virus software, if it doesn’t already.

Same for your house, too.

And your yacht, too. Is nothing sacred anymore?

I’m sure the fine people at FreedomWorks will drop their own insurance coverage in solidarity with those they are trying to convince. Right?

Benedict Cumberbatch is available to officiate your wedding. The line forms to the left.

I’m sorry, but the phrase “Madison Square Garden receives an eviction letter” just makes no sense to me.

Apparently, Grover Norquist thinks that not earning money is a rational response to paying taxes.

“The story of Ippo’s birth reads like the equine equivalent of a romance novel. The father is a zebra that was adopted by the animal reserve after he was rescued from a failing zoo. The mother is a Donkey of Amiata, an endangered animal species.”

From the “If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit” department.

It’s hard to get ahead if you work in fast food.

You still need your wallet, even if you’re carrying a smartphone.

What would be the idiomatically correct collective noun of your favorite literary characters?

“Jim Crow with a smile and a request for an I.D. is still Jim Crow.”

What modern medicine might have done for some historic sports injuries.

The best Anthony Weiner joke I’ve seen so far.

“As an owner, as a member of the Player Relations Committee, as head of the Executive Council, as acting commissioner, Bud Selig has done more to violate [the Conduct Detrimental or Prejudicial to Baseball clause of the Collective Bargaining Agreement] than Alex Rodriguez, as a player, ever could.”

“Dancing to bring the rain, sacrificing a goat to get the sun to rise – it turns out these are a lot like pressing the button at the crosswalk over and over again.”

Drink ’em if you got ’em, New Yorkers.

RIP, Patricia Lyons Simon Newman. You raised a fine son, madam.

RIP, Eileen Brennan, versatile actor from “The Last Picture Show”, “Private Benjamin”, “Clue”, and many more movies.

Congressional Republicans can’t even govern on their own terms.

“It’s like me walking into a restaurant, ordering and enjoying a meal, and then when I finished just tearing up the check and saying that I was ‘digging in my heels’ about whether I should pay.”

While I totally agree with the premise of this, I must point out that I personally know people whose real actual names are Sparky, Corky, Speedy, and Merrily. All of them are successful, normal adults. That said, what he said about the letter Y.

“I’m sure that if Jack had seen you play he would have been proud to have his number worn by you, although he probably would [have] wished that it was for a team other than the Yankees,” says Rachel Robinson to Mariano Rivera.

Send Rachel to Russia!

A handy guide to things that look like feminism but aren’t.

OK folks, scandal’s over. Move along, nothing to see here.

The helium cliff is another one of those things you didn’t know you needed to be worried about.

Happy first birthday to the contraceptive mandate.

Posted in Blog stuff | Tagged | 1 Comment

County prevails in redistricting lawsuit

This came out on Friday.

Commissioners Court interim map

Activists failed to prove that a Harris County redistricting plan illegally diluted Latino votes in the only Latino-opportunity commissioner precinct, a federal judge has ruled.

In a long-anticipated decision filed late Thursday, U.S. District Judge Vanessa Gilmore said the plaintiffs, led by Houston City Councilmen James Rodriguez and Ed Gonzalez, were unable to demonstrate that a map adopted two years ago by the Harris County Commissioners Court was unconstitutional or that race was the predominant factor in the design of the plan.

“There is no convincing evidence indicating that the Commissioners Court drew the district lines for the purpose of diluting plaintiffs’ voting strength,” Gilmore wrote in her ruling.

The plaintiffs, however, did raise valid concerns that impediments to equal opportunity to participate in the political process do exist, the judge said.

[…]

The lawsuit, which went to trial in November, was filed in 2011 as the Commissioners Court prepared to adopt a map with precinct boundaries based on the 2010 census.

As part of that process, the county added a bloc of reliably conservative voters in the northeast portion of the county in Precinct 2 and slightly reduced the concentration of Hispanic voters.

See here for the last update. The original map that was drawn in 2011 will now go into effect. There was an interim map used in 2012 that was a bit different than the original map, but since Precinct 2 Commissioner Jack Morman was not on the ballot it was no big deal. The interim map was slightly friendlier to Democrats in Precinct 2, and the 2012 election results showed that Precinct 2 would be very competitive in a high-turnout year. The Commissioners’ map was intended in part to shore up Morman’s re-election chances, and right now no one knows what the turnout model will be in 2014. No one knew about Battleground Texas or the #StandWithWendy phenomenon back when all this was being litigated. Point being, Precinct 2 should still be the marquee race around here next year. Commissioner Morman has the advantages he was given, and we’ll see how it shakes out from there.

I have a copy of Judge Gilmore’s ruling here. It’s long, technical, and detailed, and I mostly zipped through it. I want to quote from the conclusion, however, since it captures the main points and suggests that however things are now, they won’t be that way forever.

In conclusion, the Court finds that Plaintiffs have not established that the County’s Plan was unconstitutional. Plaintiffs did not prove that the County adopted the Plan intending to discriminate against Latinos nor did they prove that race was the predominant factor in the design of the Plan. Moreover, because Plaintiffs have not established the first Gingles factor, they cannot prove that, under the totality of the circumstances, Latinos have been denied an equal opportunity to participate in the political process and to elect candidates of their choice. See Growe, 507 U.S. at 40-41; Fairley, 584 F.3d at 667; Valdespino, 168 F.3d at 852.

Nevertheless, Plaintiffs “have raised serious and valid concerns that hindrances to equal opportunity to participate in the political process are present.” Perez, 958 F. Supp. at 1230. Indeed this Court is troubled by evidence of the range and prevalence of voter suppression tactics employed against members of the Latino community. While some members of the Supreme Court imagine that barriers to voting have been eradicated, see Northwest Austin Municipal Util. Dist. No. 1 v. Holder, 557 U. S. 193, 204 (2009) (noting that “things have changed in the South”), the record here is replete with evidence to the contrary. While, to be sure, the County has taken some strides toward voter equality, it is clear that more can be done to ensure that all citizens have a full and fair opportunity to participate in the political process.

Although Plaintiffs have not carried their burden today, the evidence presented leads to the inescapable conclusion that a Latino opportunity district will be possible in Harris County in the foreseeable future. The sleeping giant is waking and those standing in its path would be wise to move out of the way. The writing on the wall is clear: “the times, they are a changing’….”

It’s possible they will have changed enough by 2014 to be a difference maker, but that won’t happen without a lot of effort. Nonetheless, I think the odds of Commissioner Morman serving as long on the Court as some of his colleagues are slim.

Morman, who faces re-election in 2014, was pleased with the outcome and said his precinct remains competitive.

“It’s the only competitive precinct of the four, so whether it’s me or whoever is a county commissioner for Precinct 2, (we are) going to have to continue to do a good job to be elected,” he said.

And hope that a partisan wave doesn’t wipe you out anyway. I look forward to seeing what happens next year. Texas Redistricting has more.

Posted in Legal matters | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

On sexism in the Legislature

Just go read Olivia Messer’s story in The Observer about that great bastion of good-ol-boyism, the Texas Legislature. It’s appalling, but sadly not unexpected, nor unsurprising. I’ve heard way too many stories like it, from way too many women, in way too many contexts, to claim otherwise. I don’t have a good answer other than “we need to elect more women”, but I do want to note one facet of Messer’s story:

OffendedOpinion

At a certain point, after enough of these run-ins—which included male staffers from both chambers, some of whom I knew to be married, hitting on me, making comments about my physical appearance, touching my arm—it finally occurred to me that, when I was at work, I was often fending off advances like I was in a bar.

What surprised me was how many women who work in the Capitol—legislators, staffers, lobbyists, other reporters—felt the same way. Everyone, it seemed, had a story or anecdote about being objectified or patronized.

Even the most powerful women in the Legislature experience it. When I started interviewing women lawmakers, they all—Republican and Democrat, House and Senate, rural and urban—said that being a woman in the statehouse is more difficult than being a man. Some told of senators ogling women on the Senate floor or watching porn on iPads and on state-owned computers, of legislators hitting on female staffers or using them to help them meet women, and of hundreds of little comments in public and private that women had to brush off to go about their day. Some said they often felt marginalized and not listened to—that the sexism in the Legislature made their jobs harder and, at times, produced public policy hostile to women.

Yet, despite their strong feelings, women in the Capitol rarely talk about, except in the most private discussions, the misogyny they see all the time. It’s just the way the Legislature has always been.

[…]

When I asked why other women don’t speak up about the atmosphere, [Rep. Senfronia] Thompson cited political ambition. “Everybody who comes here, they’re looking at, ‘Can I go higher politically?’” she said. “To some degree, political office and winning is so important and imperative to us that we are willing to turn our heads and tolerate things that wouldn’t uphold the dignity of a woman. I’m not sure if we contribute to that. And it bothers me.”

She added, “I’m just not sure right now we have enough women who are willing to [speak up].”

I totally understand why more women don’t want to speak up about this – one need only look at some of the vicious things that have been said about Sen. Wendy Davis since her filibuster to comprehend why – but I wish they would anyway. Not as a first resort – it’s always best to speak to the offender directly, because some people do learn and some people really do mean no offense – but for the frequent flyers, many of whom fly beneath the radar on this. There ought to be some cost to being a pig. Some day, when stuff like this costs someone re-election, maybe that will have a more permanent effect. I sure hope so, anyway.

On a completely unrelated note, the fact that Janet Yellen is a woman is considered a factor in her candidacy to be Chair of the Federal Reserve. Because of course it is. BOR has more.

Posted in That's our Lege | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Don’t count on that federal testing waiver

It could happen, but don’t expect your high-scoring kid to spend less time taking tests going forward.

A plan to reduce testing for higher-performing elementary and middle school students was one of the feel-good bills of the 2013 legislative session. But several experts believe it will never see the light of day in Texas schools.

The measure was passed with much fanfare, as parent groups and school districts urged lawmakers to scale back high-stakes testing across the board.

Legislators responded by sharply reducing the number of tests high school students must pass to graduate, from 15 to five exams. That measure will take effect.

But a follow-up bill, to exempt high achievers in lower grades from math and reading tests in grades four, six and seven, needs a sign-off from the federal government.

That’s unlikely, based on the federal agency’s record in enforcing the No Child Left Behind Act. The law requires annual testing in reading and writing of all public school students in grades three through eight.

But no state has been able to get that requirement eased, even as dozens have gotten waivers from other parts of the law since former President George W. Bush signed it in 2001.

“I have not seen a waiver granted on that particular requirement,” said Elaine Quisenberry, a spokeswoman for the education department, referring to the testing mandate.

Diane Rentner, deputy director of the Center on Education Policy, a Washington, D.C.-based research group, agreed.

“That has never been done, to my knowledge,” she said. “It would seem to violate the mandate that all students in those grades are to be tested every year under No Child Left Behind.”

[…]

In addition to the fact that no state has been exempted from the testing requirement, Texas is also handicapped by its record of resistance to the Education Department’s initiatives under Duncan.

And the law could have a major unintended consequence. If high-performing students could skip the STAAR in three grades, some fear their schools’ state and federal annual performance ratings could suffer.

See here for the background. Amused as I am by the irony of it all, this is one place where I’d support pushing back against the federal requirement. Exempting the students who are near-certainties to pass makes sense, and would allow schools to focus more time and effort on the students that need the most help. That needs to be a debate in Washington, but there’s no reason it can’t start someplace else. Too bad Texas doesn’t have much credibility on that score. We’ll see how the feds respond and we’ll go from there.

Posted in School days | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Don’t count on that federal testing waiver

LA goes big on iPads in schools

I feel like we’re still on the tip of the iceberg, but that a lot more of this is coming soon.

Students in the Los Angeles Unified School District will receive 31,000 free iPads this school year under a new $30 million program launched by the district. The goal is to improve education and get them ready for the workforce with new technology skills they are not getting at home.

The first 31,000 iPads are only the initial phase of the program, which plans to buy and distribute iPads to all 640,000 students in the nation’s second-largest school district by late 2014, Mark Hovatter, the chief facilities executive for the LAUSD, told CITEworld.

“The most important thing is to try to prepare the kids for the technology they are going to face when they are going to graduate,” said Hovatter. “This is phase one, a mix of high school, middle school, and elementary students. We’re targeting kids who most likely don’t have their own computers or laptops or iPads. Their only exposure to computers now is going to be in their schools.”

The first deployment phase is underway now in 49 of the district’s 1,124 K-12 schools. Each student is receiving an iPad pre-loaded with educational applications and other programs that will be used by the students in their studies. By the official beginning of the new school year in August, all of the students in the first phase of the project will have their iPads and won’t have to share them, said Hovatter.

The project came about because educators realized that workers today in every field, including construction and automotive education, require skills with computers and related technologies, said Hovatter. “We are making sure that everyone is able to take a test electronically. Even in construction, you can’t do those jobs now without having some familiarity with computers. Whatever jobs kids want to have, technology is likely involved. You’re just not going to be able to do well in society if you don’t have some experience.”

It’s an interesting point about how even students in a “vocational” path instead of a college-bound path need to be comfortable and familiar with computers. With all the fuss over HB5 and the legitimate concerns that graduation requirements were made too loose, perhaps a commitment to ensuring that all students get a sufficient exposure to current technology would be in order. Some school districts here already have plans for iPads or laptops for their students. I hope that this becomes standard issue for all in the near future. If nothing else, there are now enough school districts experimenting with these tools that we should begin to have a pretty good idea of how best to use them going forward.

Posted in School days | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on LA goes big on iPads in schools