By Jennifer Bendery, GalleryWatch.com
Austin, TX –
Several House Democrats today gathered outside of the House chamber during the floor debate on HB 2, the school finance bill, to dismiss suggestions by Republicans that the bill provides teacher pay raises and that HB 3, the revenue portion of education reform, provides tax equity for all Texans.
Rep. Scott Hochberg (D-Houston) criticized an amendment to HB 2 by Rep. Rob Eissler (R-The Woodlands) that calls for a mandatory $3,000 teacher pay raise without providing additional dollars to school districts. Hochberg said he has had "a hard time" getting numbers from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) regarding school districts' 04-05 M&O revenue to determine how such pay raises would be funded.
"Most districts won't get anywhere near the $3,000" proposed in Eissler's amendment, he said. "Instead of using new money for teachers," funds would have to be drawn from other school programs. The Houston legislator said a mandatory pay increase is in direct conflict with rapidly growing student populations. Fast-growth districts "are going to be hurt" by this amendment, he said.
In addition, Hochberg said it appears that pay raises will be taken away if a district loses students. "That's the problem with an unfunded raise mandated on districts," he said. "Where are you going to get the money?"
Eissler's amendment "is a total sham," said Rep. Jim Dunnam (D-Waco). Republicans only supported the amendment "because they had to have something they could call an across-the-board teacher pay raise," he said. The Waco legislator said he tried to analyze revenue numbers to see how a mandatory pay raise could work without new dollars, but it made no sense.
The rationale used by Republicans for supporting the amendment was to "move the process forward," said Dunnam. But this is something legislators say when "they can't say anything about the merits" of a bill, he said. Still, the worst part about Republicans saying a vote for the amendment moves the process forward is that it is only March, said the Waco legislator. Usually legislators quickly try to push bills through in late May, he said, when the session is almost over and time is running out to pass bills.
Dunnam added that most Republicans would say they are "not real proud" of supporting the amendment if they were asked about it off the record.
HB 2 "leaves 90 percent" of Texans behind and HB 3 "takes care of the other 10 percent," said Rep. Pete Gallego (D-Alpine). "This is certainly not accidental." It was "a policy decision" to leave 90 percent behind in one bill and tax that 90 percent in the other bill, he said.
Gallego said that "it shouldn't surprise anyone" that HB 3 makes lower- and middle-class Texans pay more taxes and benefits people at the high end of the tax bracket. He anticipates seeing "people like rats on a sinking ship" when HB 3 is taken up on the House floor because currently there is "not a lot of support" for the bill.
In addition, House Speaker Tom Craddick (R-Midland) imposed a rule that amendments may not be filed for HB 3 unless they are revenue neutral. House members "have never had a rule like this on a tax bill," said Gallego. While some Democrats will offer amendments, the rule makes it "exceedingly difficult" to offer any, he said. As a result, House members are "giving the Senate a blank check," said the Alpine legislator. This is "very bad public policy."
Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston) said GOP leaders not being open to a personal income tax "is a missed opportunity" for Texans since it can adequately meet the needs of the state. Texans should be able to consider this tax and "intelligently vote" on whether there should be one or not, she said.
Hochberg noted that HB 3 reflects "a very conscious goal" among GOP leaders to give tax breaks to businesses over homeowners. Dunnam said one thing that surprised him about the bill is that the House leadership thinks "the way to move the Texas economy forward is to tax jobs."
Dunnam reminded that amendments not accepted on HB 2 are not dead and gone. Anything can be reintroduced when the TEA Sunset bill is brought up on the House floor, he said, and that should be soon. As long as future amendments don't have "the exact same letters, commas or periods" as amendments filed for HB 2, they can be presented again, said the Waco legislator.