|
TEXAS AFT LEGISLATIVE HOTLINE--WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4,
2009
- Call Congress Tomorrow for Real Health-Care Reform!
- School-Board Election Results Show Impact of Texas AFT
Members in Dallas, Houston
- State Education Chief Claims He's Lifting Cap on Charter
Schools: A Reality Check
Call Congress Tomorrow for Real Health-Care
Reform! In football terms, tomorrow begins the fourth
quarter of the national battle to provide affordable health care
for all. We're marking the occasion by kicking off a new
campaign of phone calls to members of the U.S. House, who are
poised to begin voting on the big health-care overhaul as early
as Friday.
We urge all Texas AFT members to call their representative in
the U.S. House tomorrow via the toll-free line to Congress
provided by the national AFL-CIO, 1-877-323-5246, or on the
American Federation of Teachers' toll-free number,
1-866-327-8670. Just ask the operator to put you through to your
representative. (Not sure who represents you? Go to
www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us and plug in your street address to
find out.)
Your message should be quick and to the point: Just ask your
member of the U.S. House to support: Vote for real health-care
reform now!
Real health-care reform means:
- full access to affordable health care for all Americans,
including those with pre-existing conditions;
- reduced health-care costs;
- a strong public option to inject real competition into the
system; and
- a funding mechanism that treats working Americans and their
families fairly, with no tax on middle-class health
benefits.
School-Board Elections Show Impact of Texas AFT Members
in Dallas, Houston: Candidates strongly backed by Texas
AFT's locals in the state's two largest school districts
yesterday fought their way into runoffs to be held next
month.
In Dallas ISD, members of our Alliance-AFT affiliate made
unprecedented volunteer efforts in school-board races that had
been delayed by six months thanks to a failed attempt by
incumbent board members to extend their own terms.
Alliance-AFT's endorsed candidates made good showings in three
races, taking the lead going into two runoffs and coming in a
strong second in a third contest against an entrenched
incumbent.
In Houston ISD, members of the Houston Federation of Teachers
and the Houston Educational Support Personnel Union, our two
HISD affiliates, teamed up to mount a forceful campaign, pushing
the board president into a runoff for one seat and vaulting
their endorsed candidate into the lead going into the runoff for
an open seat.
Upcoming hotlines will report additional results of yesterday's
election from around the state, including the outcome of
tax-rate ratification elections that have been required since
2006 when school districts want to increase their tax rate above
a low threshold rate set by the legislature.
Education Chief Claims Authority to Lift State Cap on
Charters: Texas Commissioner of Education Robert Scott
has a history of trying to stretch the scope of his authority
beyond limits established by the legislature, and he's at it
again. This time he claims the authority to waive a state cap on
the number of charters that can be issued by the State Board of
Education to operate charter schools.
The cap is fixed at 215 by Texas Education Code Section
12.101(b), and legislation to change it was defeated in the
Texas legislature just five months ago. But Commissioner Scott
now contends that an "informal" advisory letter he has secured
from the state attorney general backs the claim that Scott can
waive the statutory cap at his own discretion.
Texas AFT has obtained a copy of the letter, and it is a slender
reed indeed for the commissioner to rely upon in attempting to
depart from the plain language of state law. Clearly the
commissioner has his own doubts; yesterday, after asserting this
purported waiver authority, in his next breath Scott said he
would hesitate to use it until the legislature has a chance to
review the issue in its next session in 2011.
In the meantime, though, the commissioner intends to change the
way he handles requests from holders of some of the existing
charters to expand their operations--and this too he refers to
as "removing the cap" on charters. In this case, though, there
is no cap to lift. State law already allows holders of charters
to seek a revision of their charter to create additional
campuses operating under the same charter, subject to the
commissioner's approval.
Hence this second version of "removing the cap" announced by the
commissioner yesterday sounds more like a decision on his part
to grant blanket approval, in advance, to expansion plans of
charter operators whose existing schools meet his definition of
"high performance." However, the commissioner may still be
constrained more than he thinks by requirements of existing law
that govern the alteration of existing charters. It's worth
noting here that last May the bill to ease charter expansion
failed in part because it included a controversial amendment to
state law authorizing charter holders to expand without prior
approval of the commissioner.
One motivation for the commissioner's awkward attempts to remove
limits on charter expansion is clearly coming from the federal
level. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan has proposed
rules for issuance of so-called "Race to the Top" grants that
would make states ineligible if they have caps on the number of
charter schools.
Texas AFT has objected to that proposed eligibility requirement,
as has our national affiliate, the American Federation of
Teachers, because the weight of the evidence tilts strongly
against the idea that charter proliferation delivers educational
improvement. Only a minority of charter schools nationwide have
excelled; a large percentage, nationally and in Texas, have
performed less well than traditional public schools.
If Commissioner Scott feels the need to tell the feds that Texas
should be eligible for "Race to the Top" grants because the
state doesn't cap charter schools, he doesn't really have to
twist words in state law to do so. He can just point out his
power to approve additional campuses operated by holders of
existing charters. And he can point out that there really is no
limit at all under state law on the number of one kind of state
charter--namely, charters held by public institutions of higher
education. The cap of 215 does not apply to these.
|