The Week in the Rearview Mirror

In a letter sent this week to supporters, U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison vows to stay in federal office until the health care debate is over."The U.S. Senate is now debating legislation that would dramatically expand federal government control over our health care system," she writes. "It's important that you know I will not leave this fight. I will remain in the Senate this fall to help lead opposition to any government takeover of one-sixth of our economy." The timing of the letter roughly coincides with Hutchison's comments on a radio show (Mark Davis, WBAP-AM) last week, when she was vague about when she might leave the federal job to concentrate on her challenge to sitting Republican Gov. Rick Perry. She said a few months ago — to reporters in general and on that same radio show in particular — that she would resign in October or November. October looks unlikely now. And the timing of a congressional vote on health care might be best left to bettors and political consultants. The Texas primary is four-and-a-half months away. While she says she'll stay in office, she throws several spears in Perry's direction in the letter, saying the state has a highest numbers of uninsured citizens, that property taxes are the highest in the nation, that "our highways are lagging and TxDOT is broke," and that "our children are quitting school at alarming rates." Hutchison says "14 years of one-man rule is too long." Later in the letter, she calls herself a reformer: "Quite frankly, I believe the lobbyists and insiders in our state capitol could use an infusion of new, conservative thinking and new ideas — a cleanup of business as usual in a city that badly needs it." Here's her letter:

Bloggers are still burning over news reports concerning Gov. Rick Perry, the Forensic Science Commission and the execution of Cameron Todd Willingham. They're also talking about courtroom proceedings, dollar signs and constitutional amendments. Wrapping it up is the President's trip to Aggieland and other news.

* * * * *

Can I Get an Amend?

Ag Commissioner Todd Staples is heading a pro-Prop 11 PAC called, "PAC off! It's my land!" (winning our Headline of the Week Award). The group includes folks representing Realtors, the Texas Wildlife Association and cattle raisers. NewspaperTree.com blog has a news release. Texans for Fiscal Responsibility likes 2, 3, 5, 7 and 11; dislikes 1, 4 and 8; and are neutral on 6 and 10, relays Blue Dot Blues, who also has a video by the Young Conservatives of Texas against Prop 4.

Blue Dot Blues waxes in favor of Prop 11, against Prop 4 and for Props 2 and 3. Meanwhile, Edinburg Politics reports on Prop 8 supporters in the Rio Grande Valley. And Off the Kuff, who isn't completely sure about Prop 11, links to opposing views on Prop 9 (Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson for, attorney J. David Breemer against.)

* * * * *

On Perry's Case

The Willingham imbroglio forms the main topic of "Political Parlor Podcast", the joint project between KUT's Notes from the Lege and the Austin American-Statesman's Postcards, formerly known as "Political Babble On." Postcards says Perry is trying to direct attention away from his shakeup of the forensic science commission and toward what a bad guy Willingham was. Postcards remarks that Perry never met Willingham, but felt comfortable calling him a "monster" anyway. (The Houston Chronicle's Texas Politics has audio of Perry's assertion.)

Texas Politics passes on a "pointed email exchange over innocence versus science" between a crime victim advocate and TFC Chair Sam Bassett. In the Pink skewers Willingham's trial lawyer David Martin after his appearance on CNN. "For one, Martin is wearing a cowboy hat that's about to fall off his head. And two, the guy's drunk as a Honduran skunk," she says. Martin doesn't fare any better in Defending People, a blog written by a criminal defense lawyer.

In a Texas Politics podcast, former Gov. Mark White says it's time to consider replacing the death penalty with another option, such as life without parole. GOP gubernatorial candidate Debra Medina issues far harsher criticism of Perry over the issue than anything we've seen so far from main rival U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, via Texas Politics. And the Texas Observer's The Contrarian is keeping tabs on the whole to do. Check it out here, here, here, here and here.

Dog Canyon reports that Texas Supreme Court Justice David Medina, who was Perry's general counsel when Willingham was executed, later saw his own wife helped out of an indictment by the same sort of arson experts whom Perry is now discrediting. And Grits for Breakfast reports at length on the first meeting of the Timothy Cole Advisory Panel on Wrongful Convictions.

* * * * *

At the Bar

Texas Watchdog had a busy week. A top-level Harris County attorney resigned after that outfit started asking questions about a possible conflict of interest. Turns out, the attorney was moonlighting, which, as he reminds the Watchdog, is legal in Harris County. The web story jumped to print when Houston Chronicle columnist Rick Casey cast doubt upon Watchdog's claim that they were the attorney's raison d'exit. Watchdog opened their reporter's notebooks and issued a rebuttal on their blog. Not directly related but interesting anyhow: They moved into a new office in downtown Houston.

Tex Parte reports that various entities, including the City of Pflugerville, are conspiring to create a new challenge to the Texas Open Meetings Act. The same blogger attended a State Bar of Texas public hearing, where attorneys testified that they shouldn't have to tell clients whether or not they have professional liability insurance. And Tex Parte says that incarcerated billionaire R. Allen Stanford said goodbye to his public defender.

Letters from Texas eulogizes Judge William Wayne Justice, whom he had met a couple of times. And Potomac says that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear an appeal from former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling.

* * * * *

Cash Flow

Burnt Orange Report is impressed by U.S. Rep. Chet Edward's $1.1 million in cash. They're pleased with the $800,000 in the kitty for Jack McDonald, a Democratic challenger to U.S. Rep. Michael McCaul. They're disappointed with the fundraising performance of Democrat Lainey Melnick, who's challenging U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith. (Melnick has $2,435; Smith has a cool $1 million.) Elsewhere, Ellis County Observer mentions Sen. Kip Averitt, R-Waco, as a possible congressional contender if Edwards retires.

After looking at a Texans for Public Justice report, Eye on Williamson is glad to see differences between House Speaker Joe Straus's big financial supporters and former House Speaker Tom Craddick's. Meanwhile, Potomac takes note of successful fundraising by two protégés of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul who are running for U.S. Senate seats. Paul's son Rand Paul has $1 million in Kentucky, and Paul's ex-aide Peter Schiff $1 million in Connecticut.

* * * * *

Presidential Gig

Potomac posts remarks at Texas A&M by Pres. Barack Obama, here and here. The Dallas Morning News' Trail Blazers reports on the President's visit here, here, here and here.

Refuse the Juice pledges to defeat Rep. Norma Chavez, D-El Paso, if she runs for the seat vacated by Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, E-El Paso. "I would be there to stop her and believe me, I can stop her," the blogger claims.

The Texas Cloverleaf received a lengthy statement from Hutchison on health care policy. And the blogger behind Signals in the Noise did not win a position on the Employees Retirement System Board of Trustees. Condolences.

This edition of Out There was compiled and written by Patrick Brendel, who hails from Victoria but is semi-settled in Austin. We cherry-pick the state's political blogs each week, looking for news, info, gossip, and new jokes. The opinions here belong (mostly) to the bloggers, and we're including their links so you can hunt them down if you wish. Our blogroll — the list of Texas blogs we watch — is on our links page, and if you know of a Texas political blog that ought to be on it, just shoot us a note. Please send comments, suggestions, gripes or retorts to Texas Weekly editor Ross Ramsey.

* * * * *

Can I Get an Amend?

* * * * *

On Perry's Case

* * * * *

At the Bar

* * * * *

Cash Flow

* * * * *

Presidential Gig

Potomac posts remarks at Texas A&M by Pres. Barack Obama, here and here. The Dallas Morning News' Trail Blazers reports on the President's visit here, here, here and here.

by Brandi Grissom, The Texas Tribune Rep. Joe Pickett, D-El Paso, said today he decided not to run for the Texas Senate seat being vacated by state Sen. Eliot Shapleigh."I'm just going to cool my jets," said Pickett, who had floated the idea last week. The chairman of the House Transportation Committee said he is happy with his position in the lower chamber. And, he doesn’t see a move to the Senate as a step up. "I don’t need to run for the Senate," he said. "I'm in a really good spot for El Paso." Asked whether he'd support any of the current candidates who have expressed interest in the El Paso Senate seat, Pickett said he was keeping his powder dry for now. When Shapleigh announced Friday that he would not run for re-election to the Texas Senate, several prominent El Paso politicos started talking about making a bid for the rarely open seat. The loudest talkers so far have been state Rep. Norma Chavez, D-El Paso, and El Paso County Attorney Jose Rodriguez, a close friend of Shapleigh's. Shapleigh hinted heavily that he has plans to run for higher office, potentially a statewide position, but he said he won't reveal his designs for another two to three weeks. On a side note, Pickett said he and fiancée Shannon Wiggins are planning a wedding for next spring. They had planned to get hitched sooner, but discovered the planning takes a bit more time. "I didn't realize what a big deal it is," Pickett said. The nuptials are tentatively set for April 2010, and will probably take place in Austin. bgrissom@texastribune.org

by Brian Thevenot, The Texas Tribune Some 30,000 "highly qualified" Texas public school teachers don't actually meet the federal definition for that standard — which could jeopardize their jobs and will certainly cause bureaucratic headaches for them and their school systems. [TEA's original estimate is suspect, as explained here.] The teachers in question did not take a required general knowledge exam, but rather believed — on the advice of the Texas Education Agency — that a specific subject knowledge test would suffice.

The snafu, apparently due to a miscommunication between state and federal bureaucrats, was disclosed in a letter from the Texas Education Agency to school systems obtained Wednesday by The Texas Tribune. Districts across the state seek to have 100 percent "highly qualified" staff to meet federal standards under the No Child Left Behind Act — meaning many of the teachers in question might not have been hired in the first place, said Texas Education Agency spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe.

The agency stressed in its correspondence, however, that it has asked federal authorities to review the matter, and that many teachers may be able to complete the requirements and gain the "highly qualified" designation. The 30,000 figure is just a guess — based on typical turnover in a state with 600,000 teachers, Ratcliffe said.

The term "highly qualified" comes from the federal No Child Left Behind Act and generally has replaced state certification standards. The problem here stems from differing interpretations by the Texas and U.S. education departments over qualifications to gain the credential.

Federal monitors who visited the agency last month, however, disabused them of the notion that subject-specific tests would suffice for elementary teachers, who teach multiple subjects. They sent the state a ruling, which it forwarded to districts. The state has asked for federal leniency in the matter, but as it told districts in the letter: "there may be little or no flexibility" from U.S. education officials on the designations.

"It's a significant concern," Ratcliffe said. "Sometimes it can take months to get an answer (from the feds), and in Texas, if they want to non-renew a contract, they have to tell the teacher by March. And of course they have to start hiring by then.

"It has all kinds of implications," she said.

In addition, according to the TEA letter, school systems will have to ensure that those teachers who don't qualify are not being paid by federal grants funds, such as the Title I program, which aims to improve education for children in poverty. And Texas has tens of thousands of public school students in those programs and can get the federal funds if their teachers meet the federal standard, Ratcliffe said.

Further, school systems would have to mail potentially tens of thousands of letters to parents statewide informing them that their teachers don't meet the federal standard, a logistical and public relations nightmare.

"We're hoping that we will get some flexibility on this issue," she said. "But we're just not sure yet."

bthevenot@texastribune.org

by Reeve Hamilton, The Texas Tribune Early voting is under way, but Texans — at least those who do this kind of thing — will vote on 11 proposed amendments to the Texas Constitution on November 3.

(Some already started; early voting began this week and runs through October 30.)

Experiencing significant crossfire is a cluster of amendments (2, 3, and 5) dealing with property tax appraisals. All three stem from House Joint Resolution 36.

Prop. 2 stops a home from being appraised based on its value as commercial property — or its "best use." Some wonder why, if the money a big box store could pay a homeowner for their land is real, the communities shouldn't consider that when procuring much needed tax dollars for their school district. Others, like Rep. Ralph Sheffield, R-Temple, feel that burdening select citizens with higher taxes is "wrong and it's time to make it unconstitutional."

There would be uniform statewide standards for property appraisal if Prop. 3 passes. If Sen. Jeff Wentworth, R-San Antonio, is right, this is that "rarity when there is no opposition to an issue related to state government." This ignores vocal opposition from local control advocates who prefer counties enforcing standards themselves. Colorful agitator Linda Curtis of Independent Texans calls it "truly rotten" and "the Trojan Horse of this election."

The runt of this litter, Prop. 5, allows separate appraisal districts to combine, with legislative approval. Rural districts could benefit because they have trouble staffing their review boards. The Austin Chronicle called this "entirely trivial" — as opposed to the merely "trivial" Prop. 3 — and then endorsed both.

What crossfire? A chain e-mail that mislabels these as "propositions 1, 2, and 3" has made its way around the state claiming, "If you own a home, and these laws are passed, you will be taxed by the State." Rep. John Otto, R-Dayton, one of the bill's coauthors has been scrambling to assure voters that's "blatantly false." The Texas Constitution prohibits a state property tax. Otto, along with Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, has launched a new website (under the auspices of STAR PAC) that Williams says, "anyone confused or concerned about the effect of these propositions should visit."

Elected officials are climbing over each other to endorse the Prop. 4 plan to devote state funds to developing more Tier One universities. Gov. Rick Perry already voted for it. Sen. Kirk Watson, D-Austin, calls it "a big deal — a once-in-a-generation opportunity to super-charge our economy, help our universities and create a lasting inheritance for future generations." Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Schieffer and Sen. Dan Patrick, R-Houston, are on board. Despite prominent Republican support, Young Conservatives of Texas came out against the measure in a YouTube video calling for a wiser investment.

The final amendment in the spotlight is Prop. 11, which limits the state's eminent domain authority. This is the first time Texans will vote on the issue since the 2005 U.S. Supreme Court Kelo v. New London decision. Rivals U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison and Gov. Rick Perry have both made a show of their support for this protection of private citizens. On the other hand, it may be unnecessary. On his website, Rep. Scott Hochberg, D-Houston, explains, "The Legislature has already passed a law providing protections against abuse of eminent domain authority."

Also being considered is Prop. 8 proposing a state fund to help veterans' hospitals. Some say it's a federal issue, but State Sens. Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa, D-McAllen, and Eddie Lucio, Jr., D-Brownsville, and Democratic U.S. Senate candidate John Sharp say people should vote early because, when it comes to veterans, "a 'yes' vote... is too important to risk waiting."

Prop. 9 writes access to public beaches into the state constitution. Unfazed by arguments that private property rights might be infringed upon, Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson opined, "Can you imagine driving your family to the beach for summer vacation only to find a high fence covered with 'no trespassing' signs?"

Tax dollars could go to buy up land for buffer zones around military bases if Prop. 1 passes. Empower Texans, a conservative PAC, fears it allows "local entities to incur debt and raise property taxes in attempts to keep federal installations that may no longer be necessary to the military's mission or performance." But, if those bases are lost, supporters fear for the security and economy of the surrounding communities.

Prop. 7 grants members of the Texas State Guard an exception to an arguably antiquated law that says civil servants can't hold two government positions. It has the support of bipartisan coalition of Rep. Phil King, R-Weatherford, Rep. Dan Flynn, R-Van, Rep. Aaron Pena, D-Edinburg, and Rep. Ryan Guillen, D-Rio Grande City.

Prop. 6 lets the Veterans' Land Board issue bonds to help veterans with home loans and land purchases. Prop. 10 extends term limits for state-elected emergency services districts from two years to four. Voters' passions aren't coalescing on either side for these two.

rhamilton@texastribune.org

The Texas Education Agency might be revising the number of "highly qualified" teachers who didn't actually earn that qualification. On Wednesday, TEA said the number of teachers affected could reach 30,000, but that number was called into question Thursday when the Houston and Austin systems — which educate ~~more than a quarter~~ about six percent of the state public school population — reported that less than 30 of their teachers would be affected. Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott repeated the 30,000 figure in an interview Thursday. Later, when told of such small numbers in large districts, TEA spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe said the figure she had supplied a day earlier was a “worst-case scenario” and that the agency had not yet done enough research to determine the true number. Given the Houston and Austin totals, the number could be “much lower,” she said. bthevenot@texastribune.org

by Brian Thevenot and Abby Rapoport, The Texas Tribune Annoyed at a recent federal ruling that could nullify the credentials of thousands of public school teachers, Texas education advocates want Washington to waive a technicality they say would cause teachers and districts needless headaches.

At the same time, the Texas Education Agency's original estimate this week that 30,000 teachers would be affected now appears way off — on the high side. And a federal spokeswoman signaled that the state would be given little leeway.

At issue are the credentials of many newly hired elementary teachers, who were told before the school year they met the federal requirements to be considered "highly qualified." But the TEA confirmed Wednesday that U.S. education officials may require that the teachers be stripped of that credential because they didn't take a "generalist" test, in addition to the subject-specific test they passed. The affected teachers likely will have to pay $120 to retake the test before being rehired for next school year.

TEA spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe gave the estimate of 30,000 teachers on Wednesday, and state Education Commissioner Robert Scott repeated that figure in an interview Thursday. But spot checks with the Houston and Austin school systems yielded less than 30 teachers affected in the two districts, raising questions over the true figure.

Ratcliffe acknowledged Friday that the agency lumped what likely is thousands of secondary teachers into the estimate, when only elementary teachers are affected by the new federal interpretation. The agency still can't say exactly how many teachers are affected because school systems have not yet delivered data on employment for this school year, Ratcliffe said.

The original estimate erred in including every teacher in ten different job classifications last school year, classifications that included teachers in grades four through eight, and six through 12. Moreover, the agency suspects school systems may have had far less teacher turnover this year because of the slumping economy, which could lessen the figure even further because only newly hired teachers are affected.

As they tried to sort out the practical effect of the dustup, Texas union officials ridiculed the new federal interpretation of the rules as rigidly bureaucratic. They cast the episode as one of many examples of the forest-for-the-trees nature of federal No Child Left Behind legislation, which can mire teachers in make-work regulation — making it harder to achieve the law's academic standards.

"This is the kind of thing that drives teachers crazy," said Linda Bridges, president of the Texas arm of the American Federation of Teachers. "... But it's like you've run a race, broken through the ribbon, and then somebody comes to tell you they've moved the finish line."

Asked if having the teachers take and pass the test would make a difference in their classroom performance, Bridges said: "Not really."

Scott, in a brief interview after attending Gov. Rick Perry's speech at a Del Valle high school Thursday morning, said the feds "changed up the rules."

"We disagree with it, and we're asking them to reconsider," Scott said.

Texas school systems, like most nationwide, strive to have all their teachers achieve the highly qualified credential, and often won't hire those who don't. That's in part because of a federal rule that requires schools to send letters to parents of any students taught by a teacher who doesn't meet that standard — letters that may now go out to tens of thousands of Texas parents.

Moreover, the feds require the designation for any teacher hired and paid under certain federally financed programs, including Title I grants aimed at bolstering the education for the underprivileged. In an October 19 federal monitoring report that spotlighted the issue to the TEA, regulators wrote that the agency must submit a plan to ensure "parents are notified... that all teachers hired for Title I positions are highly qualified" as well as those teachers paid with federal class-sized reduction funds.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Education Department said she did not have all the details of the situation Thursday, but cast doubt on whether the feds would grant any leeway to the TEA — or the Texas teachers and school districts most affected.

"I was told this is not a new requirement, that we always told them they had to pass a general state test to be highly qualified," said Jane Glickman. "It's the law. We can't just say, 'Eh, it's not worth it.' Congress makes the laws. We implement the laws."

Several education observers credited the TEA for taking an educationally sound approach to implementing federal guidelines. The reason they didn't require a "generalist" test was simple: The affected teachers are not generalists.

The federal interpretation affects only teachers who teach older elementary students, often in departmentalized situations where the teacher teach only one subject or type of student. According to the TEA, the interpretation affect only fourth- through eighth-grade teachers in math, science, social studies and reading, and teachers in all grades teaching art, music, theater or special education.

The TEA's approach made sense, and the agency obviously did not intend to run afoul of federal rules, said Joe Bean, spokesman for the Texas State Teachers Association.

"Clearly they want to have 'highly qualified' teachers, for PR if nothing else, but also for the good of students ... This results from a not-so-small army of bureaucrats at 'U.S. Ed.' spending many hours every day complicating the definition of what makes a good teacher."

Officials at both unions, however, said they believed that teachers' jobs would not be in immediate jeopardy, and that they would be rehired next year provided they take and pass the test.

Said Bridges: "All it does is take 120 bucks out of their pocket."

bthevenot@texastribune.org

by Brian Thevenot, The Texas Tribune State Commissioner of Education Robert Scott this afternoon said his agency will press federal education officials to reverse a decision that could strip credentials from thousands of teachers and cause districts administrative headaches.

"The real issue here is, you don't do something like this after school starts," Scott said in an interview this afternoon. "And you don't just decide it in a letter or an email... They leave themselves open to criticism and litigation when they do something outside the rule-making process."

When U.S. Department of Education monitors ruled recently that some newly hired elementary teachers had not met federal requirements to be considered "highly qualified," they essentially made a new rule without going through the standard process or collecting input from Texas. The teachers in question had not taken a general education exam, but rather subject-specific tests.

TEA officials insist the federal interpretation creates new law; a federal spokeswoman disagreed earlier this week, saying Texas simply had not followed existing rules.

The state's policy had been the same during a previous federal monitoring visit, in February 2006, and the monitors never raised an issue, TEA officials said. Scott said he generally understands the federal reasoning in requiring all elementary teachers to take the general test — but it should only apply to teachers hired next year, not those who already met the existing standard.

His office planned to send a letter today to Washington to make the request formal.

"We're just asking them not to make it retroactive," Scott said.

Cathie Adams is the new chair of the Republican Party of Texas. Adams, who as head of the Texas Eagle Forum endorsed Gov. Rick Perry, said while she was running for this post that she'll now stay neutral in that race. She succeeds Tina Benkiser, who left the RPT to work for Perry. And both Perry and U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison publicly offered her congrats and support. Adams will give up her spot at the Eagle Forum. She's the national committeewoman from Texas — a job she has held since 2008. Melinda Fredricks, a State Republican Executive Committee member from Conroe (also a Perry supporter), was also in the hunt. One difference: Fredricks wanted to serve Benkiser's term. Adams wanted the stub term and also plans to run for a full term at the GOP's state convention early next summer. The entire party elects its chair at a biennial convention. But this was a smaller election, with just the members of the SREC voting. Adams won, 36-25.

In This Issue

Best-Laid Plans

The Week in the Rearview Mirror

Political People and their Moves

Quotes of the Week