Latest news with #JoséMenéndez
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Long-awaited raise for Texas judges in limbo over legislative pension clash
Long-awaited pay raises for Texas judges are stuck in a legislative limbo as the clock winds down and lawmakers battle over the future of their own retirement plans. Senate Bill 293 would give judges their first raise in over a decade, increasing base pay 25% to $175,000 a year from $140,000, addressing what both chambers and parties have deemed an emergency in the state. But now they are at odds over a change the House made to the bill that would keep lawmakers' retirement plans flat, while the Senate wants to see their pensions increase alongside judicial pay. Despite several hurried meetings Saturday among representatives and senators involved in this issue, they did not put forward a report harmonizing the disagreement by the midnight deadline, narrowing the chances that raises are approved before the session ends Monday. While lawmakers earn just $7,200 a year for their part-time legislative service, those who serve more than eight years are eligible for a pension when they turn 60 (or when they turn 50 if they've served 12 years.) Rather than basing that payout on their meager legislative salary, it's tied to the base salary for a district judge, a benefit that allows some of the longest-standing lawmakers to earn annual retirement payments of $140,000 a year. The House amendment said these pensions would remain tied to the current judicial salary of $140,000, rather than increasing their retirement benefits alongside judicial pay. 'I do not believe, speaking for me, that this is the right way to consider increases to our legislative retirement,' said bill sponsor Rep. Jeff Leach, a Plano Republican. The Senate disagreed. On Friday night, less than 72 hours before the end of an unusually smooth legislative session, Sen. José Menéndez, a San Antonio Democrat, called a point of order, saying the legislative pension amendment was not germane to the bill and should be removed. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick upheld Menéndez's challenge, a shocking procedural development for the upper chamber. While bills sometimes fall victim to a point of order in the House, senators rarely bring these procedural challenges. When the House gaveled in on Saturday afternoon, it became clear members had no intention of backing down on their amendment as the Senate had requested. House Speaker Dustin Burrows said under House rules they were 'not authorized' to remove just one amendment, and there is 'certainly no rule or precedent' that allows the Senate to amend House amendments. 'To your knowledge has anything like this ever been done before?,' Rep. Joe Moody, an El Paso Democrat asked. 'Not to my knowledge, no,' Burrows responded, noting that the traditional way these sorts of disputes are resolved is in conference committee, where a group of members from both chambers negotiate the final disagreements over a bill. Sen. Sarah Eckhardt, a Democrat from Austin, told The Texas Tribune on Saturday that the senators felt Leach and bill author Sen. Joan Huffman had agreed to the decoupling without the full support and knowledge of the chambers. She said they 'have to get to a yes' on this, but she is 'pro-public servant' and wants public officials to be appropriately compensated. Lawmakers often try to plan their legislative tenure based on these pension timelines — eight years of service gets you vested in the retirement system, and they earn more each additional year they serve. Some are worried that removing the judicial pay connection will make it harder to argue for an increase to the pension program going forward. Meanwhile, judges are panicking about their pay raises. Judges earn less in Texas than almost any other state, and this 25% raise will still leave them far behind where they would be in the private sector. 'Most law students … going into the first year at a law firm are making more than the starting salary of our judges,' Leach said Saturday. There are still paths to pay raises for judges, but it would likely require the Senate adopting the House version, or both chambers suspending the rules, which takes a three-fifths vote in the Senate and a two-thirds vote in the House Lawmakers said they've been deluged with calls from judges urging them to resolve this snag, with some judges telling them they'd only stayed on the bench because of the promise of raises on the horizon. On Saturday, Supreme Court of Texas Chief Justice Jimmy Blacklock sent a letter to all lawmakers, proposing amended language that kicks the can to next session. 'At this critical juncture, if either legislative chamber insists on its favored solution to the legislator-pension question, I fear we will end the session without any increase in judicial pay,' Blacklock wrote. 'If that happens, it is not the judges themselves but our Texas justice system — which should be the envy of the world — that will suffer most, along with the thousands of Texans who seek justice in our courts every day.' First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
Yahoo
7 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Texas will require state documents to reflect sex assigned at birth
In the middle of the night, the Texas Senate approved a bill strictly defining man and woman based on reproductive organs on a 20-11 party line vote. The bill has already passed the House and will go now to the governor's desk. House Bill 229 says a woman is an individual whose biological reproductive system is developed to produce ova, while a man is someone whose reproductive system is developed to fertilize the ova. The bill would require that this definition be used across state statute, with potentially wide-ranging consequences for trans and intersex people who would see their gender identity reverted back to the sex they were assigned at birth in state records. The bill, called the 'Women's Bill of Rights' was authored by Rep. Ellen Troxclair and carried by Sen. Mayes Middleton. Supporters of the bill say it's about preserving single-sex spaces, like bathrooms, locker rooms and prisons, and opportunities, like athletic competitions, which they feel have been threatened by men masquerading as trans women. Middleton said on the floor of the Senate on Wednesday that this was common sense legislation that aligned with state and federal executive orders declaring there are only two sexes: male and female. 'Your birth sex is your birth sex, period,' Middleton said. Democrats argued against this claim, echoing concerns from trans people and their allies who say it's an oversimplification of sex, gender and the spectrum of human experiences. San Antonio Sen. José Menéndez said it was a 'form of state-sponsored discrimination.' 'If a law forces non-binary Texans, who are real people, into categories that don't reflect their lived experiences or identities … that would actually become discrimination in practice,' he said. Many trans people have gotten court orders allowing them to change the sex listed on their birth certificate, driver's licenses, school records and more, and fear that those would be invalidated or reversed by this law. Heather Clark, an Austin woman whose wife is transgender, testified to a Senate committee earlier this month about the impact of her wife's documents being reverted to a male gender marker. 'Anytime that she is required to show her driver's license, she could be compelled to explain why her appearance doesn't align with her documentation,' Clark said, adding that could happen anytime she flew, took money from the bank, applied for a job or voted. 'That creates ample daily opportunities for discrimination, and that would make living in Texas untenable.' The bill does not create a criminal or civil penalty, but rather defines the terms wherever they are used in state law. The ripple effects may take time to sort out as state officials reverse engineer where and how these definitions must be applied. As Menéndez and Houston Sen. Molly Cook pressed Middleton on why this bill was necessary and what its implications would be, Middleton dismissed the legislation as merely a 'definitions bill,' noting that it has no criminal or civil penalties attached. But he also acknowledged the bill's potentially wide-ranging reach 'We have male and female, woman and man throughout our state code. It's in there hundreds of times,' he said. 'We never thought we needed to define that until recently.' First round of TribFest speakers announced! Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist Maureen Dowd; U.S. Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-San Antonio; Fort Worth Mayor Mattie Parker; U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California; and U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Dallas are taking the stage Nov. 13–15 in Austin. Get your tickets today!
CBS News
24-05-2025
- Business
- CBS News
Record spending increase for public schools passes in the Texas Senate, heads to the House
The Texas Senate unanimously passed House Bill 2 on Friday, allocating billions more for the state's public schools. Lawmakers in the upper chamber voted 31-0 just before 7 p.m., with Republicans and Democrats united in approving the $8.5 billion increase over the next two years — $500 million more than initially agreed upon last week. Texas Capitol at sunset on a cloudy day Getty Images/iStockphoto The measure includes $4.2 billion for pay raises for teachers with more than three years of experience and for non-administrative staff. There is also additional funding for special education, full-day pre-K, and school safety. Republicans say this new funding is four times the usual increase in school spending. Sen. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, said on the chamber floor: "I believe this will be the most transformative education package in Texas history. It surpasses every major school finance effort before it and reflects months of collaboration, tough conversations, and a shared commitment to our students and teachers. I want to be clear: this is historic funding, but it's not a blank check." Sen. José Menéndez, D-San Antonio, said: "I believe we can be proud of a lot of things in this budget. I want to thank you for the commitments you've made—first and foremost, the investment that's going to make a difference in our communities and our schools." While there was widespread bipartisan support in the Texas Senate on Friday evening, some Democrats in the Texas House, including Rep. James Talarico, D-Austin, have been critical of school spending, arguing this new funding is still not enough. Talarico told CBS News Texas on Thursday that he is not impressed by the $8.5 billion increase. "People see a big number and think it sounds pretty good, and it is better than nothing. But Texas is a big state, so the numbers are going to sound big." The legislation now returns to the Texas House, where it is expected to pass. In a statement, Gov. Greg Abbott said the bill will put "Texas on the pathway to be the best state in the nation for education." The legislative session wraps up on June 2. Watch Eye On Politics at 7:30 a.m. Sunday on CBS News Texas, on-air and streaming. Follow Jack on X: @cbs11jack
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Yahoo
Lyle and Erik Menéndez have been resentenced with parole, bringing them a step closer to release. What to know about their murder case.
Lyle and Erik Menéndez have been resentenced to 50 years to life in prison with parole. The resentencing came months after Netflix released a hit true crime drama about the brothers' '90s trial. Here's what has happened with their case since. Erik Menéndez and Lyle Menéndez could be one step close to being released from prison after they were resentenced to 50 years to life with parole on Tuesday. The brothers were sentenced to life without parole in 1996 for murdering their parents, José Menéndez and Kitty Menéndez, in 1989. Their story resurfaced in the public discourse after Netflix released a documentary and a true crime drama series about the case last year. The drama, "Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menéndez Story," became an instant hit and stayed at the top of Netflix's most-watched chart for two weeks, while the documentary, "The Menéndez Brothers," which came out days later, featured new interviews with the siblings. A title card at the end of the documentary briefly mentions that the brothers filed a habeas corpus petition in May 2023 to vacate their murder convictions. But both Netflix projects leave out most details about the brothers' attempts to appeal their sentences. The brothers admitted to killing their parents before their first trial, so the jury was tasked with understanding why. While the prosecution argued the pair wanted their parents' money, the brothers said that they acted in self-defense because their father physically and sexually abused them, enabled by their mother. They said they feared their father would eventually kill them. The brothers' first trial ended in 1994 with a hung jury. In the second trial, Judge Stanley M. Weisberg limited testimonies related to the brothers' abuse claims and removed the jury's option of voting on a manslaughter charge. The jury chose that the brothers were guilty of murder in the second trial. The brothers petitioned an appeal in 2023, which journalist Robert Rand, who has reported on their case since the '90s, shared on X. The petition included a letter Erik Menéndez sent to his cousin Andy Cano a year before the murders, where he writes that he is avoiding his father and alludes to being afraid of him. The petition also includes a declaration from Roy Roselló, a former member of the boy band Menudo, who was signed to the record label where José Menéndez was an executive. He said José Menéndez drugged and raped him when he was a teenager, and made him perform sexual acts on two other occasions. The brothers' attorney hoped this would prove they were defending themselves against abuse to get the lesser charge of manslaughter. This new evidence was released partway through the production of "Monsters" and "The Menéndez Brothers," which may explain why it wasn't included. "The Menéndez Brothers" producers Ross Dinerstein and Rebecca Evans told The Hollywood Reporter in October 2024 that they worked on the documentary for four years and wrapped shooting in 2023. Evans said: "The habeas was filed in 2023, and so for us, when we were making the documentary, we felt like, we're not here to litigate a case. We're not here to present evidence, or new evidence in that way, alongside the attorneys. Our feeling was that this was a story that took place then, and this was all of our research on it." "Monsters" was also likely written before May 2023, even though the production was delayed due to the writers' and actors' strike in 2023. "Monsters" co-creator Ryan Murphy told Variety in September 2024: "I believe in justice, but I don't believe in being a part of that machine. That's not my job. My job as an artist was to tell a perspective in a particular story." He added that the series was "the best thing that has happened to the Menéndez brothers in 30 years" because it rekindled public interest in their case. But Laurie L. Levenson, a law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, told Business Insider in October 2024 that a true crime series must present solid evidence to make a difference in a courtroom. "In terms of it being the best thing that ever happened, only if it leads to evidence to actually overturn the case, which I still think is a real upward battle," she said. On October 3, 2024, George Gascón, the Los Angeles County District Attorney, told a press conference that his office was reviewing the brothers' case. Later that month, the LA County District Attorney's office told Business Insider in an email that the "process was already underway" before "Monsters" premiered, and a hearing was set for November 29. On October 24, 2024, Gascón told a press conference that he had moved the decision date because his office was "flooded with requests for information" after "Monsters" premiered. "I decided to move this forward because, quite frankly, we did not have enough resources to handle all their requests, and one of the things that I thrive to do in this office is to be very transparent in everything that we do," he said. Gascón said that he would recommend the brothers be sentenced to 50 years to life and be eligible for parole immediately. "I came to a place where I believe that under the law, resentencing is appropriate, and I am going to recommend that to a court tomorrow," Gascon said. Gascón said it was right that the brothers were convicted of murder, but that he believed they had been rehabilitated in prison. In a resentencing memo filed on October 24, 2024, deputies in the DA office's resentencing unit wrote that the Menéndez brothers "have demonstrated they no longer present a public safety risk" and that their "current sentence is no longer in furtherance of justice." The resentencing is separate from the brothers' petition to vacate their sentences, meaning they'd still have to appear before a parole board to argue their case before being freed. The same day, Gascón told CNN that he disagreed with the petition's argument and thought resentencing was more appropriate. "I think that the conviction was appropriate given what was there," Gascón said. In October 2024, Gascón also supported the Menéndez brothers' petition to Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, for clemency, which was separate from the court hearings. Newsom has full power to reduce their sentence or grant a pardon, which means the brothers now have three paths to freedom. Gascón wasn't re-elected and the resentencing hearing was pushed back to allow the new DA, Nathan Hochman, to review the evidence. In February, Hochman told a press conference that his office asked the court to deny the Menéndez brothers' habeas corpus petition. He said he believed the evidence they presented wasn't new, wasn't relevant to their self-defense claims, and did not meet the legal standards for petitioning. The Justice for Erik and Lyle Coalition, an initiative that includes the brothers' family members and is advocating for their release, told ABC News at the time that Hochman's comments dismissed the brothers' abuse. "We are profoundly disappointed by his remarks, in which he effectively tore up new evidence and discredited the trauma they experienced," the coalition said. "To say it played no role in Erik and Lyle's action is to ignore decades of psychological research and basic human understanding." In March, Hochman told a press conference that his office was motioning to oppose the brothers' resentencing, saying they had not fully accepted responsibility for their crimes because they continued to say they acted in self-defense. Hochman also said the brothers have made 20 lies before and during their trial and only admitted to four of them. The judge, Michael Jesic, denied the motion, so the court continued the resentencing hearings. Amid the drama, Newsom also requested the brothers' parole board in February to carry out a "comprehensive risk assessment" investigation into whether the brothers pose "an unreasonable risk to the public" if they are released. A hearing was held on May 9 to discuss the parole board's risk assessment. ABC News reported that the assessment found that the brothers pose a moderate risk to the community if released because they broke multiple rules in prison. But on Tuesday, Jesic approved the brothers' resentencing, meaning they can now appeal to a parole board to be released. This process can take years, but the brothers continue to pursue the petition and clemency cases, which could speed up their release. ABC News reported that the brothers' hearing for the clemency case is on June 13. Read the original article on Business Insider
The Hill
16-04-2025
- Politics
- The Hill
Ahead of pivotal vote, Texas leaders share unfiltered thoughts on future of education
AUSTIN (Nexstar) — This week, a two-and-a-half-year saga over the future of Texas education may come to an end. Two consequential pieces of legislation are expected to be taken up on the House floor. Most eyes are on Senate Bill 2, which would create an education savings account (ESA) program to allow families to help pay for private school with taxpayer dollars. In conjunction, the House will likely vote on House Bill 2, which increases funding for public schools. However, many critics say HB 2 does not fund public schools enough, and it would instead be beneficial to put money earmarked for an ESA program into public school finance. Here's your ultimate guide to ESA legislation, which supporters often refer to as school choice, as it heads to a vote. What does the Education Savings Account bill do? SB 2, which will likely head to the House floor this week, has changed dramatically since the Texas Senate passed it as its first bill of 2025. For those who get admitted to the program, the initial version of SB 2 would give them $10,000 a year to a student who attends an accredited private school in Texas. The bill would provide $11,500 for students with disabilities and $2,000 for students who are homeschooled. The initial version also prioritized including as many middle-class families as possible by only having one 'low-income' requirement. To be classified as low-income under the Senate's version of the bill, households would have to make less than five times the Federal Poverty Line (FPL). Using 2025's FPL, a family of four making under $160,750 would be eligible to qualify as 'low-income,' putting themselves in a lottery with all other 'low-income' families and families of students with disabilities. The first round of families admitted to the program would draw from this lottery until 80% of the funds are disbursed. The last 20 percent of funds would be drawn from a lottery available to all students. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median Texas family made $76,292 a year between 2019 and 2023, less than half the amount a family of four would need to be qualified as 'low-income' by the FPL. 'Is there any other program in the state where we define low income as 500 percent?' state Sen. José Menéndez (D-San Antonio) asked during the floor debate of SB 2 in the Senate. 'I don't think we want to remove the middle class from an opportunity to be able to have a fighting chance,' state Sen. Brandon Creighton (R-Conroe) and the bill's author, replied, adding that the threshold roughly works out to the income of a family of four, with the parents working as a teacher and a firefighter. In House Bill 3 (HB 3), which was initially considered by the Texas House Committee on Public Education before tabling it for an amended version of SB 2, the funding amount and eligibility requirements were vastly different. Instead of giving families a flat rate, HB 3 would award admitted families with 85 percent of the estimated amount of funding each public-school student gets if their child enrolls in an accredited private school. According to the Legislative Budget Board's (LBB) fiscal note, this amount would likely equal $10,330 per student in 2027 — increasing to $10,899 per student in 2030. Admitted home school families would also be eligible for up to $2,000, while students with disabilities enrolled in private school would be eligible for more funding not to exceed $30,000. HB 3 is also geared a lot more towards low-income families, setting four prioritization buckets. The first bucket would be families who make under five times the FPL whose student has a disability. The second bucket would be families who are at or below two times the FPL, or $64,300 a year for a family of four. The third bucket would be for families between two times the FPL and five times the FPL, and the last bucket is open enrollment. Under HB 3, everyone who applied for bucket one has to be admitted before funds can start being given to bucket two, and so on. The amended version of SB 2 sent to the Texas House floor took both the funding and eligibility formulas from HB 3. If the House passes SB 2 without amendments, the House and Senate will have to come together to find middle ground on those issues. Priority Ranking Requirements in old SB 2 Requirements in new SB 2 1 Lottery for students with disabilities OR whose family income is at or below 500% of the Federal Poverty Line (FPL). Lottery ends when 80% of funds are dispersed. Students with disabilities whose family income is at or below 500% of the FPL. 2 Lottery for all students until the remainder of funds are fully dispersed. Students whose family income is at or below 200% of the FPL. 3 Students whose family income is above 200% and below 500% of the FPL. 4 Students whose family income is above 500% of the FPL. The House amended version of SB 2 also added a couple of temporary provisions to counter some of their opponent's strongest criticisms. In the first two years of the program, the Comptroller would be required to prioritize students who were in enrolled in public school or a charter school for at least 90 percent of the previous school year. The first two years would also cap the amount of people eligible from bucket four (above five times the FPL) from making up more than 20 percent of the program. How much would the Education Savings Account program cost? According to an estimate from the LBB, costs for the ESA program would start at $1 billion (a hard cap) over the next two years but quickly balloon. In the 2028-29 budget, the LBB estimates the program would cost the state more than $6 billion, including the projected $750+ million the state would save by having fewer children enrolled in public schools over the same time period. Fiscal Year Net Cost to the State 2026 $10,825,625 2027 $989,174,372 2028 $3,072,974,229 2029 $3,171,753,190 2030 $3,981,223,839 The LBB estimates paint a larger picture about how the program might be used. They estimate half of all students currently enrolled in private school will apply, increasing five percent every year. However, these are all just projections, and the true cost of the program (past the first two years) will depend on the program's demand. 'One size does not fit all' — Abbott's support for Education Savings Accounts 'Texas ranks No. 1 for economic development for 13 years in a row,' Gov. Greg Abbott (R) said when asked about his primary motivation. 'I have a responsibility as governor for Texas to rank number one for education for 13 years in a row, and so I will continue my mission until I achieve that goal.' Abbott said he believes ESA legislation is the way to get Texas to the number one spot in education. In a previous interview with KXAN, he cited Florida, which has its own ESA program, as a model. 'They have the largest school choice program in America, and yet they also have the number one public school system in the United States,' the governor said in an exclusive interview. 'You can achieve both, and that's what Texas wants to do.' U.S. News & World Report's education rankings have Florida at number one overall (including higher education), and number 10 when isolated to Pre-K-12 education. The same list has Texas at number 29 in overall education and number 28 in Pre-K-12 education. Abbott said he has a mandate to start these programs based on his conversations with parents across the state. 'They have a hunger and a need for school choice for their children,' he said. 'The reality is one size does not fit all when it comes to education. There are families that have two or three or four kids, and a public school may be right for one, but a private school may be right for another. Home school may be right for a third, and no one knows better what's right for their child than their own parent.' He also highlighted families for whom ESAs would be lifechanging. Shannara Morrison homeschooled her son Gavin in North Carolina before moving to Texas four years ago. 'We started to have issues,' Morrison said. 'We went to three different schools, from charter schools to public schools, and it just didn't work. I had to move to another district in order to find him a school.' With Gavin leaving elementary school this year, Morrison said she needs him to be in a school where he's comfortable. 'It's unfortunate to see your kid go somewhere where you're trusting him in the hands of somebody else, and he comes back and he has issues: whether it's with students, whether it's with the curriculum, or whether it's with the teacher,' she said. 'So, we need the option.' 'Not school choice, it's the school's choice': Talarico's opposition State Rep. James Talarico (D-Austin) has become a recognizable face in the Democratic opposition to school vouchers and support of public school funding. A former public school teacher, Talarico taught 'in a school so underfunded we didn't have enough chairs for all the kids,' his campaign website read. 'Private school vouchers are a scam that will take our tax dollars out of our underfunded public schools and give those tax dollars to unaccountable private schools that primarily serve the wealthy few,' Talarico said. He said he's concerned low-income families the program is intended to support will be left on the outside looking in. 'I think all of us are for school choice, but this is not school choice — it's the school's choice,' he said. 'Private schools can deny admission to any kid for any reason they want. So how is it choice when the private school has all the power? How is it choice when a majority of counties in the state of Texas don't have a single private school in them? How is it choice when private schools don't have to provide special education services or transportation?' According to Talarico, truly low-income families may also be barred from participation because many private schools' tuition cost more than the estimated $10,000 the program would provide. 'If you gave my former students on the west side of San Antonio a $10,000 voucher, there's still no way they could afford a $20,000 a year tuition bill,' Talarico said. 'But here's the catch — that wealthy family that is already sending their kid to a $20,000 a year private school. They're eligible for this program, too, and so they're going to get a discount — a $10,000 discount — at our expense. That's why I call vouchers 'welfare for the wealthy.'' 'I serve students experiencing homelessness and in foster care, and my biggest opposition is my students that I serve now will never benefit from this bill,' Bree Rolfe, an employee with a Texas public school district, said. 'Parents have choices already, but what about the students whose parents can't make choices for them, or who don't even have enough money to put food on the table and in our public schools?' Talarico and other Texas Democrats said they believe the program will blow a massive hole in the public education budget. 'Go look at the other states that have tried these private school voucher scams,' he said. 'They tried it in Arizona, and it blew a giant hole in their state budget. It grew in cost year after year, and it bankrupted their public education budget. They did it in Florida, and 70 percent of the users were wealthier families who already had their kids in private school. They did it in Indiana, and the private schools just raised their tuition and profited off the taxpayers. So, we don't want this scam in Texas.' Arizona passed universal school choice in 2022. Dave Wells, the research director for the Grand Canyon Institute (GCI) in Arizona, a nonpartisan think-tank, previously told Nexstar the school choice program contributed to a state budget deficit. Former Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, who was in office when the legislation passed, previously said the deficit happened after he left office and blamed irresponsible spending by the current legislature. The program in Arizona is different than the proposals in the Texas legislature. Arizona does not put a cap on how many students can be in the program, while both Texas proposals cap the spending on the program to $1 billion. Abbott fundamentally disagreed with Democrats' concerns, saying he's committed to fully funding public education. 'We're going to have separate pots of money: one for public schools, one for school choice,' Abbott said. 'We're not going to take a single penny from public schools to pay for school choice.' 'I don't know what the governor is talking about,' Talarico said in response. 'This is all from general revenue, which is all taxpayer funds. It's all coming from the same pot of money, and I have confirmed with the author the bill that $1 billion that we're putting toward private school tuition for wealthy families could be going to our underfunded neighborhood schools, and I just think that's an unconscionable, immoral decision when our schools are struggling to stay open as we speak.' 'I am in it to win it': How we got here Abbott has made ESA legislation one of his top priorities for more than two years. To start the 2023 regular legislative session, Abbott declared ESA legislation an 'emergency item,' allowing lawmakers to take up the issue quicker than normal. However, the Texas House of Representatives repeatedly thwarted ESA legislation, even after Abbott called lawmakers back for multiple special sessions in late 2023 to start an ESA program. In the end, 21 House Republicans joined Democrats to stop the establishment of an ESA program. Instead of continuing to try and convince the 88th Legislature to pass ESA legislation, Abbott shifted his focus to the 89th Legislature. 'I will continue advancing school choice in the Texas Legislature and at the ballot box, and will maintain the fight for parent empowerment until all parents can choose the best education path for their child,' he said in a statement after the final failed vote. 'I am in it to win it.' He funded the campaign for 15 challengers to Texas House Republicans who voted against ESA legislation, successfully ousting 11 incumbents. Most of the Republican opposition came from rural lawmakers who have few private schools in their districts, citing concerns the program may reduce public school funding. Abbott said he doesn't agree with their concerns. 'People may be concerned, 'Oh gosh, school choice is going to decimate our public schools and destroy them.' Nothing could be further from the truth,' Abbott said. 'One, we're going to fully fund public schools this session, providing more funding than ever before, and a higher teacher pay raise than ever in the history of our state, because we want the best teachers in our classrooms and our public schools.' Abbott also claimed parents in all areas of the state benefit from school choice. 'Another falsehood is, 'Well, there's rural regions in the state of Texas where this simply is not available,' and that's untrue in so many regions of the state of Texas that are rural,' he said. 'Athens has a population of about 11,000 or 12,000 people, and yet, they have a private school that parents needed to take their child out of public school because the child at first grade was coming home from school repeating four-letter cuss words,' the governor continued. 'Parents knew at that time it violated their values, and they wanted to move their child into a setting that reached his values. And there was a private school like that. They're in Athens, Texas and Alpine, Texas and small little towns across the state. There are many opportunities for school choice for parents.' What does the school finance bill do? While HB 2 passed out of committee 13-2 with bipartisan support, some who voted in favor did so begrudgingly. 'We need another $1,340 per student just to deal with inflation since 2019,' State Rep. Gina Hinojosa (D-Austin) said two days before voting HB 2 out of committee. 'This doesn't get us there in a time where our school district, our community is looking at school closures and cuts that would be devastating to communities, it's very disappointing that it is so low.' According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) website, Hinojosa's estimate is conservative. In June 2019, Abbott signed the bill to increase the per-student allotment to $6,160. BLS estimates that's now equivalent to $7673.62, meaning schools would need an extra $1,513.62 per student to catch up with inflation. Instead, HB 2 increases the basic allotment by $395 and ties future increases to the growth of property values. 'I do think this bill can be a good step forward — heck I would vote for a $1 increase for public education funding,' Talarico said while discussing HB 2 in committee. He also voted in favor of HB 2. 'I want to be careful that we don't overpromise our constituents because we said that this was a historic school funding bill, but our schools are in a historic hole and this bill does not even catch us up to 2019 funding levels.' State Rep. Brad Buckley (R-Salado) serves as chair of the House public education committee and said the basic allotment number is nothing more than a talking point. 'If we had a little math class, we'd say, 'I bet funding goes up $395 per kid,'' Buckley said. 'The reality is the way the system works, it doesn't. You could put $1,000 in the basic allotment and still have a district that gains $200 a kid. That's the level of complexity we're dealing with.' Overall, the bill dedicates $7.7 billion to public education in Texas. It also dedicates specific funds to be used for teacher pay raises as well as increases the bilingual education allotment and the teacher incentive allotment.
