Joe Holley:Texas sues feds over education money

[Winehole23]

Texas sues feds over education money

Governor says state needs the $830 million to keep teachers

By JOE HOLLEY
HOUSTON CHRONICLE

Sept. 23, 2010, 9:06PMg



A tussle between the Republican governor and a Democratic lawmaker escalated to the courts Thursday when Gov. Rick Perry announced that Texas is suing to get its $830 million share of federal emergency funding allocated to prevent teacher layoffs.


Texas has been blocked from its share of the $10 billion package because of legislation sponsored by U.S. Rep. Lloyd Doggett, D-Austin, that requires the governor to promise to keep state school funding at its current level through 2013. Doggett said his amendment was designed to prevent the governor from using federal stimulus money to supplant rather than supplement state education spending. No other state had to make such a promise.


Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott filed suit in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit despite assurances from Education Secretary Arne Duncan that Texas eventually will get its share of the money. Duncan spokeswoman Sandra Abrevaya said Texas will have until September 2012 to reapply and that the funds will not be spent elsewhere before then.


Abbott said the immediate goal of the legal action is to get the funds before next summer, likely the earliest the money could show up in state coffers once the legislature has set school funding levels in the next two-year budget.


Perry argued that he cannot comply with the Doggett requirement without violating the state Cons ution, because the governor cannot appropriate money or obligate a future legislature.


"Texas taxpayers are footing the bill for the education jobs fund, and Texas' hardworking teachers deserve their share of that money," the governor said.
$18 billion cloud

Doggett noted that Texas used about $3.2 billion in federal stimulus dollars last year to help balance its budget.



"Thanks to the governor, (Texas school districts) get no money now, and had there been no such amendment, any money they got would have likely been subtracted from state aid," Doggett said.


The legislature convenes in January under the cloud of a budget shortfall estimated at more than $18 billion.


The education jobs bill would have meant more than $130 million for Houston-area school districts.



On the campaign trail in recent months, Perry has criticized education initiatives from the Obama administration. In his primary race against U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, he said that the $4 billion education reform initiative called Race to the Top "smacks of a federal takeover of public schools."
Too many strings?

Texas could have received as much as $700 million, but Perry refused to compete, saying too many strings were attached. He also said the state's share was a pittance compared to the $32 billion Texas allocated to public schools in the 2010-11 budget.


Bill Miller, an Austin-based political consultant who advises both Republicans and Democrats, noted that most politicians don't worry a whole lot about consistency.


"Taking money from the federal government last spring was not a good idea, because he was running against a candidate from Washington. Now he's not," Miller said. "No matter what a politician thinks of a funding source, philosophically, they always want money. It's kind of like, 'I don't like you, but if you've got money I'll be nice to you.' "


The campaign of Perry's Democratic opponent, Bill White, accused the governor of "theatrics" and "partisan sparring."


"Just when it looked like the dollars for Texas students were headed our way and the political games were over, Perry decided he wanted to keep playing and filed another lawsuit to create a circus," White spokeswoman Katy Bacon said.

[Blake]

Bill Miller, an Austin-based political consultant who advises both Republicans and Democrats, noted that most politicians don't worry a whole lot about consistency.

"Taking money from the federal government last spring was not a good idea, because he was running against a candidate from Washington. Now he's not," Miller said. "No matter what a politician thinks of a funding source, philosophically, they always want money. It's kind of like, 'I don't like you, but if you've got money I'll be nice to you.' "

[CosmicCowboy]

Lloyd Doggett was just grandstanding and trying to score political points against Perry. I hope it bites him in the ass. His district is probably the most liberal in Texas but hopefully his cons uents are paying attention.

[Drachen]

Lloyd Doggett was just grandstanding and trying to score political points against Perry. I hope it bites him in the ass. His district is probably the most liberal in Texas but hopefully his cons uents are paying attention.

You don't think that if there is an organization with a history of misappropriating funds that needs more funds, there should be a system put into place to stop said misappropriations of future funds?

That being said, the law should have made the rule for all states, not just Texas even if it was aimed at Texas. Did any other state steal money like Texas did?

[CosmicCowboy]

You don't think that if there is an organization with a history of misappropriating funds that needs more funds, there should be a system put into place to stop said misappropriations of future funds?

That being said, the law should have made the rule for all states, not just Texas even if it was aimed at Texas. Did any other state steal money like Texas did?

You're kidding, right? All the states used the stimulus money to help balance their budgets. Where did you get that they were "stealing" the money?

[Drachen]

It was my understanding (from the articles I have read on this subject) that there was a portion from the stimulus that was to go to education which was used instead to balance the budget, and that this was the motivation for the "Texas clause". I will admit, I may have misunderstood, is that not the case?

[MannyIsGod]

It was my understanding (from the articles I have read on this subject) that there was a portion from the stimulus that was to go to education which was used instead to balance the budget, and that this was the motivation for the "Texas clause". I will admit, I may have misunderstood, is that not the case?

Ok, so they direct part of the stimulus money to education then take money from the education fund and use it in other areas of need as well.

[CosmicCowboy]

It was my understanding (from the articles I have read on this subject) that there was a portion from the stimulus that was to go to education which was used instead to balance the budget, and that this was the motivation for the "Texas clause". I will admit, I may have misunderstood, is that not the case?

No. This was a preemptive political strike trying to control how Texas deals with it's anticipated deficit in 2011. When a state runs a deficit the politically neutral way to deal with a deficit is an across the board percentage cut (example..everyones budget goes down 2%) to make up the shortfall. Doggett tried to use Federal law to influence the state budget process in direct violation of the Texas Cons ution.

[Drachen]

Ok, so they direct part of the stimulus money to education then take money from the education fund and use it in other areas of need as well.

This is how I understood it. They directed part of the stimulus that was earmarked to go to education then took money the state earmarked for education and used it elsewhere. Effectively this takes money from the fed. government that was supposed to go to ed and sent it elsewhere. Am I right?

[MannyIsGod]

I don't see why that would even be a violation unless they stipulated that you spend that money on education without a reduction in current spending levels.

[Drachen]

I don't see why that would even be a violation unless they stipulated that you spend that money on education without a reduction in current spending levels.

That is what has been done in this bill.
It wasn't a violation of the stimulus law, but a great example of using the letter of the law to defeat the intent.

[MannyIsGod]

Eh, I'd argue that the intent was to prevent cuts from the status quo and not actually expand services. It wasn't an education bill, it was a stimulus package. The way they package the items are merely meant for political purposes of the legislatures who pass them (I can now say I voted for education blah blah blah) but one of the biggest tasks of that bill was to prevent states from going broke.