By J. Lyn Carl, GalleryWatch.com
Austin, TX – School finance is a contentious issue in Texas. It was just as contentious in the Texas Senate Tuesday, and procedures were a little different, too. You almost had to have a scorecard to know who was talking about what - and when.
Sen. Florence Shapiro brought her SJR 1 to the Senate floor - legislation that provides increased financial support for public education through an expanded sales tax base and an increased motor vehicle tax rate. The legislation also promises to reduce property taxes for Texas property owners.
After eight amendments to SJR 1 were offered, Shapiro offered her own amendment, then withdrew it temporarily. After a long conference with other members, Shapiro said she wanted to delay further consideration of her amendment until after HB 5 was considered.
Shapiro then brought up HB 5 for consideration, which brought Sen. John Whitmire (D-Houston) to his feet with a point of order. Whitmire's point of order sought to suspend further consideration of the bill, alleging violation of Senate rules as well as Constitutional rules because he alleged the substitute being considered was not germane to HB 5. His point of order was overruled by Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst.
This all came after things got contentious early during consideration of SJR 1, with Sen. Todd Staples' first amendment to the legislation. His amendment would put the proposed 10-cent cap on school enrichment funds in the Constitution. He told members if they were seeking property tax relief with "a lasting impact, you'll be in favor of this amendment."
Shapiro said she understood philosophically where Staples was coming from but putting it in the Constitution could cause numerous problems. She said the legislature should avoid putting so many things in the Constitution that the legislature will have to come back in the future to change back. "If we're constantly doing that, we're not abiding by the good faith we put in that document," she said.
However, the 75 cents per $100 valuation tax rate cap is being put in the Constitution by the legislation and Staples wondered why that should be in the Constitution and not the 10-cent cap on enrichment.
"Constitutions should be basic instruments establishing the structure of the state government," said Sen. Bill Ratliff (R-Mount Pleasant). "They should not be used to make law. What you're saying by trying to put this in the Constitution is, 'I don't trust future legislatures. I'm going to put it in the Constitution and make it almost impossible to change.' Don't clutter the constitution...trust future legislatures to have as much sense as you do. This doesn't belong in the Constitution."
Sen. Troy Fraser compared this issue to the income tax issue. An income tax is prohibited by the Constitution and the Staples amendment would put the cap on enrichment in the Constitution just like the income tax prohibition. "We're taking off the table the ability to increase that enrichment unless the public tells us it's a good idea to do that," he said.
"Do you truly believe this Texas Senate would be voting for an income tax if it were not prohibited by the Constitution?" Ratliff asked Fraser. "This doesn't belong in the Constitution."
Putting that enrichment limit in the Constitution may be good perception-wise, said Sen. Ken Armbrister (D-Victoria), but he urged members to be cognizant of all aspects of schools, not just academics. A Constitutional cap on enrichment could well result in schools eventually having to cancel non-academic programs.
Staples said the Senate is asking the taxpayers of Texas to "enter into an arena that is not current law" with an expansion of sales tax on services that are not in current law. In return, he said, the state will give property tax relief and the alternative of raising taxes in another arena that is more equitable to all.
"We have the opportunity by general law to expand the sales tax and lower property tax," said Staples. "We know the voters expect accountability. We're closing the front gate and leaving the back gate wide open." Staples said if the Senate really wants to give taxpayer relief, this will force the legislature to not throw the responsibility back to the local level to provide funding but force the state to continue its funding responsibility.
Staples' amendment was adopted.
After a second amendment was offered by Sen. Eliot Shapleigh (D-El Paso) that puts figures relative to school finance equity in the Constitution, Shapiro warned members that putting all components of school finance in the Constitution would not allow for flexibility. "This sounds good in theory, but not in practice," said Shapiro. She instead urged those stipulations be put into statute instead and discussed every two years by subsequent legislatures.
But when it came to her own amendment that puts in the Constitution the 75 cents per $100 valuation cap on property taxes in the state, Shapiro said, "Members, THIS belongs in the Constitution."
Sen. Jane Nelson (R-Flower Mound) brought concerns from constituents that if Texas starts collecting taxes at the state level, schools might lose their autonomy. She cited another state that did something similar and then every school superintendent was required to submit his or her school district's budget to the state for approval. She asked if further steps would be taken to ensure local autonomy.
"I want the school boards and the superintendents to know loud and clear that the state does not want to govern local school districts," said Shapiro.
More than 50 amendments were offered to HB 5 before it was finally passed to engrossment.
Then from somewhere in some long-forgotten memory, SJR 1 resurfaced, hours after Shapiro left it - and her amendment to it - hanging. Sen. Steve Ogden (R-Bryan) asked if the Senate shouldn't take up SJR 1 and its remaining amendments before passing HB 5. He questioned if some of the amendments yet to be offered to SJR 1 might affect HB 5.
Shapiro told him he should take it up with the president (Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst), since the procedures had already been set.
Ogden, in frustration, gave up his argument and HB 5 was finally passed from the Senate.
Back to postponed business and SJR 1...
The dangling Shapiro amendment was withdrawn and the bill was passed out of the Senate.