Wallace B. Jefferson - State of the Judiciary - Presented to the 82nd Legislative Session - Austin, Texas - February 23, 2011

He saw judicial elections as a threat to an impartial judiciary and advised against them. The legislature seemingly disagreed.

- Click here for the address.

All that I have discussed depends on an impartial system of justice overseen by the judicial branch. We lost one of that branches greatest leaders, Joe Greenhill, less than two weeks ago. He told me once that he regretted that Texas has continued to elect judges on a partisan basis. I regret it, too. A justice system built on some notion of Democratic judging or Republican judging is a system that cannot be trusted. I urge the Legislature to send the people a constitutional amendment that would allow judges to be selected on their merit.

If we do not reform it completely, judicial elections can at least be changed. And so my final call to action is that we consider common-sense solutions to the problems that plague partisan election of judges. First, I would eliminate straight ticket voting that allows judges to be swept from the bench ... not for poor work ethic, not for bad temperament, not even for their controversial but courageous decisions – but because of party affiliation. We saw this in Dallas County four years ago and in Harris County in the 1990s, in 2008 and just last year. Hordes of judges replaced for no good reason.

Let’s extend terms for state judges, from four years to six for district court judges, and from six years to eight for appellate courts judges. This will avoid some of the overhaul that occurs each election cycle, and drastically slows down the system. And let’s bring sense to the process to allow a judge appointed to an unexpired term to serve a full term before having to face the voters. That will give her or him experience and – this is important – a record to run on. We can do this, if not more.

The Texas Supreme Court hears arguments on the constitutionality of the cuts to public school financing in Texas

The story begins with $5.4 billion in cuts made by the 82nd legislative session in 2011. It's just now getting to Texas' top civil court.

The case is titled:

Michael Williams, Commissioner of Education, et al. v. Texas TaxPpayer and STudent Fairness Coalition et al., Calhoun County Independent School District, et al., Texas Charter School Association et al,. Joyce Coleman et al.

For links:

- State lawyers defend broad attack on school finance.
- Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Most Epic School Finance Showdown Yet.
- State Asks Supreme Court to Drop School Finance Lawsuit.
- Texas Supreme Court to again hear that state is shortchanging schools.

For a look at the oral argument click here.

The state is trying to get the case thrown out of court.

This is a list of the principle issues presented to the court:

Whether the district court correctly denied the state's request to dismiss the constitutional claims on grounds that they are not capable of judicial resolution, the plaintiffs do not have standing to bring them and the claims are not ripe. The state argues in essence that financing schools is a policy consideration reserved to the Legislature and, even if the claims are justiciable, the school-district plaintiffs by seeking to enjoin the state from operating an unconstitutional public-school system do not have standing and the claims are not ripe because the Legislature has constructed a more-demanding system that is only in its beginning stages and cannot be evaluated yet.

Whether the school-finance system is inadequate as a whole under the state constitution's Article VII, section 1 adequacy requirement and particularly whether it provides adequately for educating so-called English language learners – ELL students – and economically disadvantaged students. The state responds that the trial court's inadequacy ruling is based on financial "inputs" and not student performance – outputs – the standard it argues the Court has used in previous school-finance cases to evaluate adequacy.

Whether the state's school system is constitutionally unsuitable under Article VII, section 1's suitability requirement. In response the state argues that suitability, the means to achieve a constitutionally adequate school system, is satisfied if the system is adequate. But the school-district plaintiffs contend an adequate school system can be unsuitable if the state fails to finance it sufficiently to meet the state's educational goals – they insist funding is not sufficient – and by the state's alleged failure to calculate the costs of providing an adequate education.

Whether the school system fails the constitutional requirement that it be financially efficient. The state maintains that the gap between what so-called property-poor districts can raise by taxes and what property-wealthy districts raise has narrowed from when the Court held in the last school-finance decision that the school system was efficient.

Whether the trial court erred by rejecting charter schools' particular claims that their state financing is inadequate, unsuitable and inefficient and that the state's provision for charters is unequal, relative to public schools'.

Whether the trial court erred by denying intervenors' claims that the school system is "qualitatively" inefficient – that is, they argue among other factors, that mandated class sizes, limits on available charter schools and state teacher certifications breed waste, limit competition and further inefficiency.

Whether the state's school-finance scheme imposes an unconstitutional statewide property tax. The standard for a statewide ad valorem tax, as the Court determined in the last school-finance decision, is whether essentially the state imposes a tax "cap" that leaves school districts with no meaningful discretion in raising and spending money

The fight over education funding in Texas

K-12 is constitutionally mandated, but there is debate over what is means to provide suitable provisions for its funding continue to rage. Quorum Report highlights a handful of recent article on the subject. The question about whether cuts made to public education in the 82nd legislative session are still being hammered out in the court.

Here's background:

- A Timeline of Texas' 30 Years of School Finance Legal Fights.
- 2011 Budget Cuts Still Hamper Schools, Data Shows.
- Critics scrutinize Texas’ unusual high school dropout rates.
- Texas Supreme Court to again hear that state is shortchanging schools.

A look at the 2012-2103 Texas budget process.

For 2306's, as we position ourselves to look at the Texas budget.

From the Texas Tribune: Handicapping the High Court on School Finance

The Texas Tribune looks at the road ahead for the lawsuits against school funding in Texas. The authors points out that the Texas Supreme Court is likely to hear the case around the time that the Texas primary will be held, and that three of the Justices will be up for election:

Parties involved in the litigation estimate that with a direct appeal, it would take the high court about a year to reach its final decision, sometime in spring 2014 — either right before or right after the primaries. There are three justices up for re-election then: Chief Wallace Jefferson, Jeffrey Boyd and Phil Johnson. A special session would likely take place that fall. If the legal process were more drawn out, the final decision could land just before 2015, leaving lawmakers to consider it during the 84th regular session.

In a previous decision in 2005, the justices argued that there was evidence that the public education system was unlikely to improve - to be adequate as required by the Texas Constitution - unless funding was increased. Funding as we know has been cut since then. So does this suggest that the court will agree with the district judges who argued that the education cuts were unconstitutional? Not necessarily. Governor Perry, who supports sustaining the cuts has appointed the bulk of the new members of the court:

The two-thirds of schools districts suing the state believe that reaction has not taken place, and that what the court originally saw as an impending constitutional violation has turned into a real one.

But there has been high turnover among the justices who considered that case. Four who participated in the decision remain on the bench: Nathan Hecht, who wrote the opinion, Jefferson, Johnson and Paul Green, who were all in the majority. Don Willettrecused himself.

Since then, four new justices have joined the court: Debra Lehrmann, a former Fort Worth family court judge; Eva Guzman, a former Houston appellate judge; Boyd, Gov. Rick Perry’s former general counsel; and John Devine, a social conservative activist and former Houston trial court judge. Perry first appointed all of them except Devine, who won a primary against incumbent David Medina.

Week Seven Written Assignment - GOVT 2301 / 2306

I want to use this assignment to turn attention to the redistricting process in the state of Texas, and more specifically, how redistricting occurred in the 82nd of the Texas Legislature. As with previous assignments This is intended to provide background for the 1000 word written report due later this semester, in addition to giving you an inside look at the redistricting process in the state.

Using the links below, I want you to outline how districts are redrawn in Texas, and how US House, Texas Senate and Texas House districts were in fact redrawn in the 82nd session. I want you to pay special attention to the role the legislature played in the process.
You can use the links below for your information - but other sources can work as well.

- Legislative Redistricting Board.
- Redistricting Timeline.
- Ballotpedia: Redistricting in Texas.
- SB22: A bill to create a citizens redistricting commission.
- HB150: A bill to redistrict the Texas House.
- SB31: A bill to redistrict the Texas Senate.
- SB308: A bill to redistrict congressional districts.

Keystone Pipeline v Texas Property Rights

The Canadian company that want to build the portion of the Keystone XL pipeline through Texas has to do so through a lot of property. It is hopeful the courts will see things its way and allow it to declare eminent domain in order to allow it to build.

But it is finding some obvious resistance. Striking the right balance between private proerty rights and the right of a company to provide "common" benefit to aquire property to do it.

StateImpact reports on the curent controversy and the difficulty that lies ahead in resolving it. Texas courts and at least one committee in the legislature are tackling the issue.

Texas Tribune weighs in as well. 

Local debt increases in Texas

Here's a story from Quorum Report about the rising debt in local governments (local jurisdictions they're called in the story) in Texas. It amount to an increase of 36% to a total level of almost $193 billion.

The details are contained in a report issued by the Texas Bond Review Board, as presented to the Pensions, Investments and Financial Services Committee. Part of the problem is that the state has shifted financial burdens to local governments and still uses "antiquated state funding formulas" to determine what level of funding is required by the state to local jurisdictions.

Here's the full story:

Jurisdictions across Texas now carry debt on the books of almost $193 billion, an increase of a third over the last five years and a total that keeps the state pegged as having the second heaviest local debt load in the country.

The Texas Bond Review Board, bowing to public interest, has published its first report on that debt. Executive Director Bob Kline told the Pensions, Investments and Financial Services Committee the increasing debt load is the results of local jurisdictions that moved forward with debt at the height of economy.

“Local debt has increased by 36 percent over the last five years, to $193 billion,” Kline said. “That’s a lot of local debt issuance.”

According to a report issued by the Texas Bond Review Board in May, debt issues by local jurisdictions breaks down as roughly a third to school districts, a third to municipalities and the balance to various other jurisdictions. The total debt per capita has risen from $4,359 in 2002 to $7,507 in 2011.

No jurisdiction has teetered on the brink of bankruptcy in Texas, as they have in other states, but Kline still sees the stressors on local jurisdictions. On the other hand, cities and school districts have steeply increased bond re-fundings. In most cases, the re-fundings bring down interest costs on outstanding bonds.

“That’s a positive out of this,” Kline said. “I think the concern is that the erosion of the tax base and the ability for the debt service to occur.”

Former Superintendent Joe Smith, who tracks school bond and tax rate elections over at the website Texas ISD, agreed that school districts are under additional stress to repay bonds out of current revenue. Despite those limits, many school districts strapped for cash have turned to bonds to pay for items that once came out of operating expenses, such as district-wide technology upgrades.

“I see the stress on funding, even on the operating side,” Smith said. “School districts oftentimes are funding things off of bonds that they once funded off of maintenance and operations.”

The state also has failed to keep up its end of the bargain when it comes to sharing the cost of bond issues, Smith said. The rate for equalizing debt hasn’t been changed in more than a decade, and because it’s equalized to 1999 levels of property wealth, fewer districts qualify for the state subsidies.

“That rate hasn’t changed since 1999, and so more of it is falling on the districts, and the districts don’t have any avenues for meeting the need except for bond issues and tax increases,” said Smith.

Growth hasn’t stopped in Texas, Smith said, but the number of bond issues that have been called in recent years has declined steeply. Putting together a plan to pay off bonds is tough, especially for property poor districts, which typically have much longer bond terms than their property wealthy counterparts, Smith said.

From the AAS: Public-sector job cuts leave mark on Texas, Austin economies

Something to hit harder in 2306 when we discuss the Texas budget and the bureaucracy. Public sector employment has decreased substantively in the state due to cuts made in the 82nd session of the legislature.

Are we witnessing a changing philosophy concerning governance in the state?

7 - Written Assignment GOVT 2306 #7 and Summer 2 GOVT 2301 Assignment #2

Last week, attorneys from the state of Texas had to defend the voter ID law passed by the Texas Legislature last year during the 82nd Session before a federal court. Opponents to the law have argued that the law violates the 1965 Voting Rights Act by establishing a procedure that will affect eligible minorities more than Anglos. If the court agrees then the case will be appealled to the Supreme Court, but probably not before the election, so there's a good chance that the law will not be applied this election cycle regardless.

As a way to understand this conflict, I want you to look through avalaible news and outline the process (how the case got to this point?) and the debate (what arguments is each side making about the impact of voter ID laws?)

What can you tell me about the court that is hearing the case?

Here are a few links to get you going:
- Chron: Trial set to begin today in Texas’ battle with feds over state Voter ID law.
- Fox: Texas' attorney faces tough questions from judges on final day of voter ID case.
- NextGen: The Politics of Voter ID Laws.

- Lone Star Project (look for transcripts of the argument at the bottom of the page)

Feel free to add what you wish.

The latest crop of articles on Voter ID

Fuel for the fire:

- A panel of federal judges is reviewing Texas' Voter ID law to see if it violates the Voting Rights Act. The law is argued to have a disparate impact on the ability of minorities to vote.

- Politifact says that Greg Abbott's claim that there have been 50 election fraud convictions in Texas is half true, many were not actually convictions, but were granted deferred adjudication.

- The Texas Attorney General claims Voter ID is necessary to fight voter fraud and submitted a list of those accused. The US Justice Department argues there is little evidence of wide-spread, organized fraud.

- Are these laws simply a means of influencing the 2012 election by making it more difficult for groups that vote Democrat to vote than groups that vote Republican?

- The US Attorney General thinks Voter ID laws are a type of poll tax: "Holder charged that many voters would be forced to travel “great distances” to obtain a government-issued photo ID and that many minority voters would “struggle” to pay for the required paperwork. “We call these poll taxes"

- Politifact says it is mostly true that more African Americans than Whites lack government issued photo IDs.

- The Austin American Statesman reports that the bill passed last year requiring that voters show photo identification was rushed through the legislature and the debate over it was racially polarized.

Texas House Committee Membership

The Texas Tribune has an interactive feature that highlights the districts of the members of different House Committees. Its a good look at how power and influence is distributed geographically in the state.

Texas "Voter ID" Timeline

I stumbled accross this useful page in the Texas Legislative Library. It walks through the major events in the life of Texas' recent voter id law. This should be helpful for any research projects students might wish to pursue.

Members of the House Public Education Committee hold hearings on STARR tests

And it doesn't seem to have been a pleasant meeting:


There is a growing frustration among parents and educators — and apparently legislators — with the new State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness, known as STAAR. Many say the sheer volume of high-stakes tests and how those tests affect students have become hugely problematic.

"The only people that are being hurt this school year are children," said Wanda Bamberg, the superintendent of the Aldine Independent School District.

Superintendents from across the state testified that the number of high school dropouts could skyrocket in the coming years because almost three-quarters of the students who failed the exams this spring were already considered at risk of dropping out.

File this under oversight, among other things.

District analyses

I mentioned in class that you can get analyses of the Texas House and Senate districts by going to their respective websites - specifically the pages with lists of each member. Here are direct links to them:

- Texas House Members.
- Texas Senate Members.

Look for "district analyses." It should be sufficient to help you address the second written assignment.

Texas political maps have been accepted (I think) and the primary has been set for May 29

A brief story in the Houston Chronicle. Minority groups still claim the plans dilute minority group representation, so the story might not be over.

All maps can be found on District Viewer. Click on select plans then look for Court Ordered Interim Congressional Plan, House Plan, and Senate Plan.

New Texas House District Map - Incumbents likely safe

Now that a federal court has overthrown the map the Texas Legislature drew for the Texas House in the spring, it has drawn a new one.

Related stories:
- First Reading: Map points to smaller GOP majority in Texas House.
- Texas Dems could gain seats under revised voting maps.

Ross Ramsey points out that, as with previous maps, this one is drawn to protect incumbents and guarantee that the winner in November will be the member of a specific party. The general election really doesn't matter that much in Texas:
. . . if recent political history is your guide, you know that a large number of incumbents won’t draw serious opposition even in a redistricting year. They’ll effectively be elected when filing closes. And unless the judges do something shocking to the election recipes (as opposed to some limited surgery to make the maps legal), most of the political districts will remain toxic to candidates from one party or the other.

Most of the Republican districts — nearly two-thirds in the maps drawn by the Legislature — are configured to be nearly impossible for Democrats or Libertarians or anyone other than Republicans to win. It’s the same with the Democratic districts — there are just fewer of them.

The people who represent those districts will effectively be chosen in March, in the party primaries. The November election will hold some surprises. It always does. But the real decision-making in Texas politics increasingly happens in March.

From the Huffington Post: Federal Court Rejects Texas Redistricting Plans

Back to square one?

More analyses of the proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution

For review in class:

- The Texas Legislative Council.
- House Research Organization.
- League of Women Voters.

A few stories about the proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution

The Forth Worth Star-Telegram makes its recommendations. They oppose 6 and 9. Proposition 6 allows money from the General Land Office to be spent rather than be invested in the Permanent School Fund. Proposition 9 makes it easier for people to have their criminal records cleared. They also recommend voting for the two propositions related to water - 2 and 8.

Representative Scott Hochberg lists pros and cons for each amendment.

Eastex News has background on Proposition 3 - which provides for more funding for student loans (more opportunity for student debt!). Here's background on Proposition 10, which would adjust the rules related to when one has to resign in order to run for public office.