Major tweaks to TOPS scholarships in Louisiana scrapped due to cost
The University of Louisiana Monroe library, photographed from Northeast Drive. (Greg LaRose/Louisiana Illuminator)
Louisiana lawmakers have advanced a new TOPS award for high-performing students, scrapping language from an original proposal that would have dramatically changed the popular scholarship program.
House Bill 77 by Rep. Chris Turner, R-Ruston, was amended Tuesday in the House Committee on Appropriations because it would have increased state spending nearly $50 million annually at a time when lawmakers are working under budget constraints. In its current state, Turner said his proposal comes with a $12 million cost that can be covered with unused TOPS awards.
Originally, Turner's bill would have created a flat rate for each level of TOPS award rather than a unique allotment for each school. The new rate would have meant students at LSU, its two medical schools and the University of New Orleans would pay more out of pocket, while students at other Louisiana schools would pay less.
The provisions drew the criticism of Phyllis Taylor, whose late husband Patrick F. Taylor was responsible for the creation of the Taylor Opportunity Program for Students, a merit-based scholarship program for Louisiana students who attend in-state schools.
With the new amendments, Turner's bill creates the TOPS Excellence award, which is available to any student with a 3.5 grade point average and a score of 31 or higher on the ACT. The scholarship will equal tuition and fees at the public university the student chooses or $12,000, whichever is less.
The new Excellence award would go to students who enroll in college starting in the upcoming fall semester or later.
Turner added amendments to his bill that incorporate language from House Bill 70 by Rep. Ken Brass, D-Vacherie. It would expand the number of students eligible for the TOPS Tech award, which covers up to two years of study in a skill or occupational training program.
The bill will next be debated on the House floor.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
White House backs major legislation to speed up deportations
EXCLUSIVE: The White House is backing legislation to expedite the timeline for executing removal orders for illegal immigrants. The Rapid Expulsion of Migrant Offenders who Violate and Evade (REMOVE) Act, led by senators Marsha Blackburn, Ted Budd and Ted Cruz would give the Department of Justice a quick 15-day timeframe to finish "removal proceedings" after the process has "commenced." "Under Joe Biden's failed leadership, we saw the largest wave of illegal immigration in our nation's history, forcing communities across Tennessee and America to bear the consequences," Blackburn said in a statement Thursday, when the bill was introduced. "With a record number of illegal aliens now living in the United States, President Trump must have every tool necessary to remove them quickly from our country. Our REMOVE Act would require these illegal aliens to begin removal proceedings within 15 days of a Notice to Appear being served," she added. Ice Touts Record-breaking Immigration Enforcement During Trump's First 100 Days Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff for policy, said the bill will help with the administration's deportation goals, adding the administration is aiming for 3,000 arrests daily. Immigration and Customs Enforcement broke single-day arrest records Tuesday and Wednesday with well over 2,000 arrests. Read On The Fox News App "Under the Biden Administration, the American people witnessed a full-scale invasion of our country that directly threatened our national security and sovereignty. With untold millions of illegal aliens in the U.S. due to Democrats' open-border policies, we must take strong, decisive measures to remove those who have been ordered to be removed from the United States," Miller, who's also a Homeland Security advisor for the White House, said in a statement. Vice President Vance Vows Trump Admin Will 'Use Everything' It Can To Increase Number Of Criminal Deportations "The REMOVE Act is critical legislation that will help us fulfill our mass deportation operation and get gang members, cartels, and violent criminals off the streets. Passing this legislation, in conjunction with the largest mass deportation investment in American history provided by our One Big Beautiful Bill, will ensure we permanently secure the border. Thank you to Senator Blackburn for her leadership." Millions of people were estimated to have entered the country illegally during the Biden administration, including through the southern border. 'Prompt Removal': Trump Dhs Expands Expedited Deportation Powers As Operations Ramp Up Federal authorities have stressed removing those with criminal convictions and ties to gangs like MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, which the administration designated as foreign terrorist organizations. Others have been encouraged to self-deport before facing a potential arrest, and the federal government will pay for their exit flight and provide $1,000 after their exit from the United States is confirmed. Click Here For More Immigration Coverage During Trump's first 100 days in office, over 65,000 illegal immigrants were removed from the country, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "Now, President Trump is stepping in to restore order. I'm proud to stand with Senator Blackburn and my colleagues to fast-track the removal of those who have been ordered to be removed. It's time we uphold the integrity of our immigration system to protect our nation," Budd stated. A Pew Research Center poll from March indicated the majority of American adults back deportations of illegal immigrants to at least some extent, including 32% who back the removals of all of them, regardless of whether another crime was article source: White House backs major legislation to speed up deportations
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Louisiana state employees could lose jobs under Civil Service amendment
Louisiana Senate chambers during the close of the 2023 legislative session on June 8, 2023. (Photo credit: Wes Muller/Louisiana Illuminator) Louisiana lawmakers are trying to change the state constitution to wrestle power away from the Civil Service Commission to eliminate state worker protections and allow for the quick firing of thousands of employees for any reason, creating fear among critics that some dismissals could be politically motivated. Senate Bill 8, sponsored by Sen. Jay Morris. R-West Monroe, is nearing final passage in the Louisiana Legislature, though voters will get the final say on a constitutional amendment on a ballot that could have significant consequences for how state government operates. Morris' proposal would give state lawmakers power that currently rests with the Civil Service Commission, a seven-member independent review panel that oversees the hiring and firing of 28,000 'classified' state workers. The commission hears complaints from classified employees and appeals from any who want to contest their dismissal or demotion, affording them due process when it comes to discipline and terminations. In an interview Tuesday, Morris said his bill would let lawmakers 'unclassify' state employees, removing them from the oversight of the commission. An unclassified employee does not have Civil Service protections and can be fired 'at will' for no reason. The bill's current version would also apply to local civil service workers such as municipal police and firefighters, but Morris said he intends to change his measure to exclude them and restrict it to only state employees. 'If you believe in democracy or republicanism — [because] we're a republic — then the Legislature should have some ability to alter how our civil service system works,' Morris said. 'Right now we can't do anything because the constitution prevents it.' Some Democrats have taken issue with the latest iteration of the ballot language in Morris' bill because it doesn't explicitly mention classified employees and could mislead voters into thinking the amendment doesn't affect those state workers who are currently protected under Civil Service. When asked about the proposal following Tuesday's meeting of the House Committee on Civil Law and Procedure, Rep. Wilford Carter, D-Lake Charles, said the ballot language doesn't align with what's in the bill. The ballot language states: 'Do you support an amendment to allow the legislature to remove or add officers, positions, and employees to the unclassified civil service?' Critics have pointed to other issues that have not been addressed or debated in any of the committee hearings on Morris' proposal. One of those is the vague use of the word 'remove,' which could be interpreted to mean 'fire' or 'terminate,' said Peter Robins-Brown, who opposes the bill on behalf of Louisiana Progress, which advocates for low and middle-income people. He said lawmakers have not drafted any kind of companion measure that would establish statutes or regulations to implement the specific necessary changes. 'No one has really been paying attention to the details,' Robins-Brown said. 'I'm not sure how the average voter will be able to figure it out, especially when the bill doesn't have a statutory companion to prove the goal of this exercise.' Gov. Landry fails to remove civil service protections from 900 state jobs Rep. Nicholas Muscarello, R-Hammond, who chairs the House Committee on Civil Law and Procedure, said the intent of the amendment is to give lawmakers the power to unclassify state employees, not fire employees. Hiring and terminating decisions would be left up to the executive branch, he said. The Civil Service Commission, a nonpartisan entity, has taken a neutral position on Morris' proposal. When asked about it Wednesday, commission administrators said they assume 'remove' means the act of changing an employee's classification status, but they pointed out the word is not actually defined in the bill. State Civil Service Director Byron Decoteau said Morris' civil service amendment amendment, if adopted, could technically allow lawmakers to simply 'remove' an unclassified job position with no intention of classifying it, leaving a current employee in a limbo with neither a classified nor unclassified status. Sherri Gregoire, Civil Service general counsel, said the lack of a clear definition invites different interpretations, including that the amendment gives lawmakers the power to remove governor's staff members, and creates a situation that would certainly end up in court. The more likely course of events, if voters decide to approve the amendment, would be that the legislature designates all future hires as unclassified employees — a move that would eventually end the classified civil service system altogether, Gregoire said. The Civil Service Commission, itself, would still exist under the constitution but would effectively become pointless because it would no longer have anything to oversee. 'Eventually you won't have any classified employees, so why do you need a commission?' Gregoire said. Morris said he doesn't yet have a vision for how lawmakers would exercise their new power if voters approve the amendment. Republican Gov. Jeff Landry has tried repeatedly to exert authority over the commission. In February, he tried unsuccessfully to revoke civil service classifications from 900 state jobs, mostly positions for engineers, shortly after President Donald Trump made a similar move at the federal level. The state Civil Service Commission rejected Landry's request in a 4-2 decision in February. Because unclassified workers can be subject to political punishment and coercion, removing such a large number of engineers from the classified service could create ethical conflicts and unnecessary risks to the public, the commissioners said. A similar version of Morris' bill stalled on the House floor last year, but some Republicans who likely would have supported the bill were absent when the final vote took place. Morris' bill is expected to earn final passage before the regular session ends June 12 and will be placed before voters on the Nov. 3, 2026, statewide election ballot. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Democrats can barely contain their glee over Trump and Musk's ‘big beautiful breakup'
Just in time for German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's visit to Washington, Democrats enjoyed a healthy helping of schadenfreude as President Donald Trump and Elon Musk's feud went nuclear in real time. 'The big beautiful breakup?' Rep. Sarah McBride asked in response to a question from The Independent Thursday about Trump and Musk's spat, a reference to the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill,' Trump's centerpiece legislation that seeks to extend the 2017 tax cuts, slash social spending and ramp up immigration spending. The first inklings of a crack in the partnership that started when the Tesla CEO bankrolled Trump's return to the White House and blossomed as he took on the DOGE role of slashing government spending, came on Tuesday, when Musk called Trump's bill an 'outrageous, pork-filled, disgusting abomination.' 'You ever see that meme of the guy's face, like, when the person, the worst person in the world, you actually agreed with?' Sen. Ruben Gallego of Arizona said to The Independent, in reference to a popular Clickhole article headlined 'Heartbreaking: The Worst Person You Know Just Made A Great Point.' 'That's kind of what I feel right now,' Gallego said. Sen Raphael Warnock of Georgia could not help but laugh. 'It is proof positive that even a broken clock is right twice a day,' Warnock said. Musk's words plunged Senate Republicans into chaos as they seek to pass the 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' Act after the House passed their version last month. But on Thursday, Musk went scorched earth, tweeting that Trump 'is in the Epstein files,' and saying that is why they had not been released. 'That is the real reason they have not been made public,' the Tesla billionaire tweeted. 'Have a nice day, DJT!' Musk turned up the heat even higher when he endorsed Trump's impeachment. Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, who led the second Trump impeachment, said he had missed Musk's tweet calling for Trump to be impeached. 'Well, he must know a lot more information,' about Trump's ties to Epstein, Raskin told The Independent. Democrats have spent the early months of the Trump administration depicting Musk as a shadow president who spent $290 million to elect Trump and whose Department of Government Efficiency slashed vital services. For a while, it seemed like Trump and Musk would be a perfect match, with Musk dubbing himself 'First Buddy,' wearing his 'Dark Ultra MAGA' hat and carting his son X around the Oval Office. But some Democrats said that the fallout was inevitable. 'It was always going to happen,' Rep. Maxwell Frost of Florida told The Independent. 'I didn't expect it to happen at the same time like it is now.' Musk became a villain in Democratic attacks in the Supreme Court race in Wisconsin, given that Musk's political action committees poured in millions. Shortly thereafter, Musk said he would refrain from giving money. But Musk did little to dispel the idea that he played a role in winning Trump the presidency on X. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,' Musk said. 'Such ingratitude.' Rep. Eric Swalwell of California, an outspoken critic of Trump, agreed with Musk. 'If Elon didn't help Donald Trump, he wouldn't be he wouldn't be president, he'd be in prison,' Swalwell, told The Independent. Progressives said that the fight between a president who largely ran on the premise that he was an incredibly wealthy businessman versus the world's richest man showed the dangers of wealth concentration. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the democratic socialist from New York, said that the fight validated the message she and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont had spread across the country in their 'Fighting Oligarchy' tour. 'I don't think that the whole state of the country should be with two should be concentrated in two guys with massive egos that are fighting with each other,' the progressive firebrand Ocasio-Cortez told The Independent. When asked if she enjoyed the feud, AOC said, 'I mean, it was a long time coming.' Trump has sniped back in kind, saying, 'Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave,' further saying: 'I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' For other Democrats, the fallout shows that Musk and Trump deserve each other. 'They both got what they paid for,' Rep. Melanie Stansbury of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the DOGE subcommittee to House Oversight, told The Independent. But Musk's impact on the Trump administration will last longer than the feud. As Stansbury descended the steps, she clutched a folder with the DOGE logo.
