East Texas districts react to senate's approval of school choice bill
LINDALE, Texas (KETK)- In a historic move for Texas, the $1 billion school choice bill, SB 2, was approved recently. The decision left some of East Texas districts such as Lindale Independent School District, disappointed.
'They call it school choice, but it's really not school choice, it's a voucher to give money, most of the money, whatever it ends up being, 60, 70, 80% or higher, to students already in private school,' Lindale ISD superintendent Stan Surratt said.
The first version of the bill made it through the Senate at the beginning of February. Then amendments were added by House lawmakers, who sent their final version to the Senate last week, before approving it on Thursday.
'I think it's going to provide opportunities for parents and students right now where they don't believe that they are financially capable to choose a different education option,' State Rep. Brent Money said.
Surratt said he believes several of the East Texas lawmakers changed their votes from no to yes due to political pressure.
'They didn't want the governor to campaign against them and, of course, use his political clout to support another candidate and basically primary them out during the primary elections,' Surratt said.
Bullard ISD said they disagree with the decision, and now they hope the governor will stop holding public education hostage and do what is needed and fully fund public schools.
'I encourage the governor. He needs to be more wise and be more supportive of public education for all children and listen to the taxpayers and Texans because most of us are against vouchers,' Surratt said.
Lindale ISD added that they won't see a huge difference in student numbers from the approval of SB 2, but said that doesn't mean they have to support it. Governor Abbott is expected to sign SB 2 into law, though it won't take effect until September.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
From celebrating Juneteenth to the erasure of Black history: Charles M. Blow on America today
The political analyst and former New York Times columnist Charles M. Blow shares his thoughts about our nation's newest federal holiday, Juneteenth: Last month I visited Emancipation Park in Houston, a park established in 1872 by the formerly enslaved as a space to celebrate Juneteenth, the day in 1865 that the news of emancipation was proclaimed in Galveston, Texas. Ramon Manning, the board chair of the park's conservancy, told me that his corporate sponsors had grown skittish about supporting Juneteenth-related activities and anything with words like "culture," "heritage" or "Black History" – words nearly impossible to omit in this park. This, for Manning, is a bit of a whiplash. Four years ago, in the wake of the massive protests following the killing of George Floyd, and in a Senate riven by partisanship, the bill to make Juneteenth a national holiday passed unanimously. Biden signs bill making Juneteenth a federal holidayWhat is Juneteenth? Learn the history behind the federal holiday's origin and name A year before that, in the closing months of his reelection bid, Donald Trump himself had proposed making it a national holiday in his so-called Platinum Plan for Black America. In fact, in 2019, Trump's statement commemorating Juneteenth ended by saying that on Juneteenth, "... we pay tribute to the indomitable spirit of African Americans." Now, the mood of the country has shifted. Pluralism and racial justice have been demoted in the zeitgeist, as Trump has returned to office on a mission to purge the government, and much of society, of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) efforts. Trump administration threatens public schools' federal funding over DEI initiativesTrump's DEI undoing undermines hard-won accommodations for disabled peopleCompanies could face Trump repercussions over DEI This has spurred an erasure of Black history and Black symbols in some quarters, a phenomenon that I call "The Great Blackout" – from an executive order condemning the direction of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture, to the National Park Service removing - but being forced to restore - Harriet Tubman's image and quote to a page about the Underground Railroad. There are, unfortunately, countless examples. That chill is having a dampening effect on the upcoming observation of Juneteenth, far beyond Emancipation Park, as multiple cities have cancelled Juneteenth celebrations altogether. 2025 Indianapolis Juneteenth parade canceled San Luis Obispo Juneteenth event canceled In this sad new reality, America's youngest national holiday is now caught in the crossfire of America's raging culture wars. For more info: Charles M. Blow on Instagram Story produced by Robbyn McFadden. Editor: Chad Cardin. See also: Passage: The story of Juneteenth ("Sunday Morning")Decades after a mob destroyed her house, Opal Lee is returning home ("Sunday Morning") Dad says son "may never be the same" after alleged hazing Nature: Mating grebes From celebrating Juneteenth to the erasure of Black history: Charles M. Blow on America today
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Trump ally stands firm against 'big, beautiful bill' despite pressure: 'It'll completely backfire'
EXCLUSIVE — One of the leading opponents of President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" declared not even the commander in chief will be able to deter him from speaking out against what he sees as a bill that falls short of Republicans' goal of cutting government waste. "It'll completely backfire on him," Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., told Fox News Digital of any attempts by Trump to sway him on the current legislation. Johnson has become a prominent voice of opposition against the House GOP's offering to the budget reconciliation process. Senate Republicans finally began the tedious process of parsing through the bill this week. Lawmakers in the upper chamber, Johnson included, are determined to make changes to the bill, with most wanting to make reductions to Medicaid and food stamps more palatable. Trump has made it clear his bill must pass but has acknowledged the Senate will need to make a few changes. Trump's directive has been to deliver a bill that can survive the razor-thin majorities in both chambers. Johnson, however, wants to see spending returned to pre-pandemic levels, cuts that are trillions of dollars deeper than what House Republicans could stomach. And he is ready to vote against the bill unless he sees the changes he wants. And he believes that a pressure campaign from the president against him and other like-minded fiscal hawks will fail. He said a better approach would be to work with lawmakers and fiscal hawks like him to gain a better understanding of the reality of the country's fiscal situation, a reality that "is grim," he said. Johnson has been up front about his disdain for the bill but has so far avoided public retribution from Trump. In fact, the two have spoken twice this week, once on Monday and later during a Senate Finance Committee meeting at the White House Tuesday. The lawmaker has told Trump he's in Trump's corner and that he wants "to see you succeed," but he has been steadfast in his position that the bill does not go far enough to tackle the national debt. And the debt continues to climb, nearing $37 trillion and counting, according to Fox News' National Debt Tracker. The House's offering set a goal of $1.5 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade, which lawmakers in the lower chamber have pitched as a positive step forward to righting the country's fiscal ship, an offering Johnson panned as falling drastically short of the GOP's promises to cut deep into government spending. "What's so disappointing about what happened in the House is it was all rhetoric. It's all slogans," Johnson said. "They picked a number. Literally, they picked a number out of the air." Johnson views this attempt at the budget reconciliation process as a rare opportunity to "do the hard things" when it comes to spending cuts, but others in the GOP have been more hesitant to cut as deep. Johnson said a main reason Republicans have so far fallen short of meeting the moment for the most part is that lawmakers don't understand just how much the federal government shovels out the door year in and year out. The lawmaker recalled a moment roughly three years ago during a debate over another year-end omnibus spending bill, when each of the dozen appropriations bills is crammed into one, bloated package that is universally reviled and almost always passes. He asked his colleagues if they really knew just how much the government spends, and no one "volunteered to answer." "Nobody knew. I mean, think of that. The largest financier in the world. We're supposedly, in theory, the 535 members of the board of directors, and nobody knew," he said. "Why would they? We never talked about it." Johnson has been busy trying to better educate his colleagues, putting together his own charts and graphs that cut out the "noise," like the latest nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office report that found the legislation would add $2.4 trillion to the national debt over a decade. The GOP has universally panned that projection. "We can't accept this as a new normal," Johnson said. "We can't accept — you can take pot shots of CBO, but you can't deny that reality. [It] might be off a little bit, but that is the trajectory, and that's undeniable."
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump's palace coup leaves NASA in limbo
When President-elect Donald Trump nominated Jared Isaacman to become NASA administrator, it seemed like a brilliant choice. Business entrepreneur, private astronaut, Isaacman was just the man to revamp NASA and make it into a catalyst for taking humanity to the moon, Mars and beyond. Isaacman sailed through the confirmation process in the Senate Commerce Committee, chaired by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), by a vote of 19 to 9. He was poised to be confirmed by the full Senate when something so bizarre happened that it beggars the imagination. The White House suddenly and with no clear reason why, pulled Isaacman's nomination. After months of a confirmation process, NASA was back to square one for getting a new leader. Ars Technica's Eric Berger offered an explanation as to why. 'One mark against Isaacman is that he had recently donated money to Democrats,' he wrote. 'He also indicated opposition to some of the White House's proposed cuts to NASA's science budget.' But these facts were well known even before Trump nominated Isaacman. Trump himself, before he ran for president as a Republican, donated to Democrats and was close friends with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Berger goes on to say that a source told the publication that, 'with Musk's exit, his opponents within the administration sought to punish him by killing Isaacman's nomination.' The idea that Isaacman's nomination is being deep-sixed because of Musk runs contrary to the public praise that the president has given the billionaire rocket and electric car entrepreneur. Trump was uncharacteristically terse in his own social media post. 'After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA,' he wrote. 'I will soon announce a new nominee who will be mission aligned, and put America First in Space. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' CNN reports that Isaacman's ouster was the result of a palace coup, noting that a source said, 'Musk's exit left room for a faction of people in Trump's inner circle, particularly Sergio Gor, the longtime Trump supporter and director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, to advocate for installing a different nominee.' The motive seems to be discontent about the outsized influence that Musk has had on the White House and a desire to take him down a peg or two. Isaacman was profoundly gracious, stating in part, 'I am incredibly grateful to President Trump @POTUS, the Senate and all those who supported me throughout this journey. The past six months have been enlightening and, honestly, a bit thrilling. I have gained a much deeper appreciation for the complexities of government and the weight our political leaders carry.' The idea that a man like Isaacman, well respected by the aerospace community, who was predicted to sail through a confirmation vote in the full Senate, could be taken down by an obscure bureaucrat in White House intrigue, motivated by petty spite, is mind boggling. Even Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who has not been fond of Trump's space policy, was appalled. He posted on his X account that Isaacman 'ran into the kind of politics that is damaging our country.' 'Republicans and Democrats supported him as the right guy at the right time for the top job at NASA, but it wasn't enough.' NASA is in for months more of turmoil and uncertainty as the nomination process gets reset and starts grinding its way through the Senate. The draconian, truncated budget proposal is certainly not helpful, either. Congress, which had been supportive of Trump's space policy, is not likely to be pleased by the president's high-handed shivving of his own nominee. Whoever Trump chooses to replace Isaacman as NASA administrator nominee, no matter how qualified, should face some very direct questioning. Trump's NASA budget proposal should be dead on arrival, which, considering the cuts in science and technology, is not necessarily a bad thing. China must be looking at the spectacle of NASA being mired in political wrangling, a leadership vacuum and budget uncertainty with glee. Beijing has its own space ambitions, with a planned crewed lunar landing by 2030. It's possible that the Chinese will steal a march on NASA, with all the damage that will do to America's standing in the world. It didn't have to be this way. Isaacman could be settling in as NASA administrator, deploying his business acumen and vision to lead the space agency to its greatest achievements. Instead, America's space effort has received a self-inflicted blow from which it will be long in recovering, Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled 'Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?' as well as 'The Moon, Mars and Beyond,' and, most recently, 'Why is America Going Back to the Moon?' He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner.
