State Records Shed Light on Texas’ Early “Illegals”

Photo courtesy of Spencer Selvidge, The Texas Tribune / Flickr

The undocumented immigrants had crossed the river in defiance of the law, then escaped capture by sneaking past armed patrols in the dark. They did not have the required paperwork and were ordered to leave, but the authorities suspected the immigrants would probably defy them.

It is a scenario that happens every day on the Texas-Mexico border. But in this particular incident, the immigrants were white, English-speaking Americans who were looking for a better life in Texas. And the authorities who were trying to keep them out were Mexican.

This is one those historical ironies that offers some modern lessons:

The year was 1830, a few months after Mexico had passed a law banning almost all immigration from the United States and provided for military garrisons along its border to enforce it.

Col. Jose de las Piedras, writing a letter (in Spanish) to Stephen F. Austin, the “father of Texas,” reported that he had encountered the immigrants east of the Trinity River heading west in what was then Mexico toward Austin’s colony, not far from modern-day Houston. He checked them for passports, but they had none, so he ordered them to leave Mexico pursuant to the new immigration law. They talked the colonel into letting them tend to some business in the colony, though, by promising to return and then exit the country within 20 days.

“But in contempt of the laws of the country and of its authorities and a total disregard to my orders which they promised to obey, availing themselves of the obscurity of the night and unfrequented roads, they took off [with] their families and are now on their way to your town, as I am informed by Col. Bean, who met them on that side of the Trinity” River, Piedras wrote in the letter, which now resides at the Texas General Land Office.

“As they have come into this country contrary to law and have disrespected the authorities,” he continued, “I think they ought not to be admitted.”

It is hard to know for sure what happened to these immigrants, though some of their names match those of families who got land in an independent Texas. What is known is that thousands of immigrants defied Mexican laws in coming to what is now Texas before the Anglo settlers declared independence from Mexico and formed their own nation, which later became the 28th state.

Today there are long stretches of the U.S.-Mexico border with fences and high-tech surveillance, not to mention thousands of Border Patrol agents. In the 1830′s Mexico didn’t have the resources to keep out the hordes of Americans pouring into Texas.

“The Mexican government was very lax. It allowed to let things get out of hand,” said Jesus F. de la Teja, director of the Center for the Study of the Southwest at Texas State University. “Since the colonists had gotten a pretty good chunk of the loaf, they wanted the whole thing.”

Their stories can be found among thousands of yellowing documents at the Land Office, where Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson — a Republican who has already announced his intention to run for lieutenant governor in 2014 — gains inspiration for his moderate views on immigration reform.

Long before President Obama’s re-election, after which prominent Republicans said their party needed to show Hispanics a gentler position on immigration reform, Patterson used Texas history to promote a softer and more nuanced view of what to do with people who have come here without work papers.

At Republican clubs around the state, he tells them that the first immigrants were white Americans — and that many of them were here illegally.

“We have a long tradition of immigration and illegal immigration, and the first illegals were folks who look a lot more like me than they did some native Tejano,” Patterson said. The commissioner, who favors an international guest-worker program, said all the issues that divide many Texans and Mexicans today — such as amnesty, cultural and linguistic assimilation, and deportation — divided them back then. But their roles are now reversed.

“The simplistic bumper sticker immigration policy is not in the best interest of the United States and we have a history that proves up that absolutes don’t necessarily work,” Patterson said.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/immigration-in-texas/immigration/back-when-americans-were-illegals/. Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Death Row Population at Its Lowest Since 1989

The population on Texas’ death row is at its lowest in more than 20 years, and the number of new death sentences, though slightly up in 2012, continues a downward trend even in the nation’s busiest death penalty state, according to a report released Wednesday by the Texas Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty.

As they have nationally, death sentences in Texas have declined over the last decade. The state has seen a 75 percent drop in death sentences since 2002. And according to the coalition, the Texas death row population, at 289, is at its lowest point since 1989. According to the coalition’s report, juries in the state issued nine new death sentences in 2012, a slight increase from the number issued in each of the two previous years.

But the distribution of new death sentences is uneven, the coalition reported. For the third time in five years, there were no new death sentences out of Harris County, which once sent more people to death row than any other Texas county. Meanwhile, the Dallas-Fort Worth area accounted for four of the new death sentences in 2012, and Dallas County alone contributed nearly 20 percent of death sentences in the last five years, according to the report. Dallas County also led the state in executions: Five of the 15 Texans executed in 2012 were from there.

“While most of Texas is moving away from the death penalty, the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex was a major outlier both in new death sentences and executions this year,” said Kristin Houlé, executive director of the coalition.

A spokeswoman in the Dallas County district attorney‘s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Although Texas is using the death penalty less, Kathryn Kase, executive director of the Texas Defender Service, said it is still used disproportionately on people of color. “This is a recurring problem, and Texas’ failure to fix it demonstrates how broken its capital punishment system is,” Kase said.

Seven of the nine new death row inmates are black, and according to the coalition, nearly 75 percent of death sentences imposed in the last five years were on people of color. Of the 15 men executed in 2012, seven were black and four were Hispanic.

The coalition said the executions also raise questions about punishment of those who are mentally ill. This year, while the executions of Steven Staley and Marcus Druery both were stopped because of questions over their mental competency, the execution of Jonathan Green proceeded despite reports that he was schizophrenic.

Texas executions accounted for more than a third of the total performed in the U.S. in 2012, nearly three times more than any other state. Six inmates who were scheduled for death received reprieves, and three execution dates were withdrawn.

Houlé urged Texans and lawmakers to reconsider the efficacy and cost of the death penalty as a means to achieve justice.

But few expect a halt to the death penalty in Texas. A University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll this spring found significant support for the death penalty among Texas voters. More than 70 percent said they were either somewhat or strongly in support and only 21 percent opposed the punishment. And more than half of the respondents said they believed the death penalty in Texas is fairly applied.

“They’re pretty strong proponents of the death penalty,” Daron Shaw, a UT-Austin government professor and co-director of the poll, said when the results were published

State Rep. Harold Dutton, D-Houston, has already filed a bill that would abolish the death penalty in Texas, but such proposals have failed in recent legislative sessions.

And during his failed presidential bid last year, Gov. Rick Perry emphasized his support of the “ultimate justice,” saying during a debate that he had lost no sleep over the more than 200 executions that have occurred during his tenure.

“The state of Texas has a very thoughtful, a very clear process in place,” Perry told the crowd at the debate. “When someone commits the most heinous of crimes against our citizens, they get a fair hearing, they go through an appellate process, they go up to the Supreme Court of the United States if that’s required.”

Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/texas-dept-criminal-justice/death-penalty/death-row-population-its-lowest-1989/.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Business Leaders Favor Tweaks to Student Testing System

Photo courtesy of iStockphoto

Texas business leaders said Wednesday that they would now support modifications they had previously opposed to graduation and testing requirements in the accountability system implemented this spring. They also put forth a plan that provides multiple pathways to graduation, including one that focuses on business and industry.

Calling their plans a constructive response to widespread criticism of the state’s new student assessments, leaders from the Texas Association of Business, the Texas Institute for Education Reform and the Texas Business Leadership Council recommended letting local school districts determine how end-of-course exams factored into students’ final grades, reducing the number of exams they must pass to graduate and providing different ways to earn a high school diploma.

Despite its high-profile backers, the proposal does not have the full support of the business community. Missing from Wednesday’s conference was the Austin Chamber of Commerce. Senior Vice President Drew Scheberle said the new proposal reduces the already low expectations students must meet to get high school diplomas — something he said would threaten their ability to compete for top-quality jobs.

“It’s trying to solve the wrong problem,” he said. “The problem I’m hearing from parents is too many tests, poor communication, not enough flexibility in courses. You can solve those problems and not sacrifice preparing kids for college and career.”

The leaders present Wednesday acknowledged the announcement represented a change from the position they took at a news conference six months ago, when they emphasized their opposition to any changes to the system that was established by House Bill 3 in 2009. Texas Association of Business President Bill Hammond said then that they would “vigorously oppose additional money for the public school system” until they were certain that the current accountability system would be maintained. During the last legislative session, an attempt by outgoing House Public Education chairman Rob Eissler, R-The Woodlands, to make some of the changes now supported by the three groups failed in the Senate with the opposition of the business community.

But on Wednesday they laid out a plan that Texas Institute for Education Reform Chairman Jim Windham said was the result of a six-month-long “listening tour” across the state where they heard the concerns of educators, business leaders and elected officials.

“HB 3 quite honestly overdid it a little bit,” Hammond said. He added that the new proposal maintained the high standards in the legislation that would ensuring the state’s students would be prepared for the workforce.

The announcement comes after high-level support for doing away with a rule that required new end-of-course exams count for 15 percent of high school students’ final grades. Gov. Rick Perry, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, Texas Education Agency Commissioner Michael Williams and Senate Education Committee Chairman Dan Patrick all came out in favor of either delaying its implementation or eliminating it entirely. Patrick has filed legislation that would permanently leave the decision up to local school boards.

The rollout of the new assessment system this spring produced widespread confusion among school districts and concern from parents and lawmakers about the logistics of its implementation. In response to the backlash, more than 400 school boards have passed a resolution against high-stakes testing, saying that it is “strangling our public schools.”

This week, during testimony in the school finance trial against the state, a TEA official said that the agency is recommending lowering the performance threshold on the state standardized tests that students must reach to be considered college-ready. To be finalized, the state’s commissioner of higher education must also agree on the change.

Only 3 percent of ninth grade students who took the English I end-of-course exams — and 17 percent who took the Algebra I exams — for the first time this spring met the current “advanced” standard to be college-ready. Under the new rule, students who meet the “passing” standards will be considered prepared for college by the state’s definition, which determines whether they must take a placement exam evaluating whether they need remediation before entering college.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/texas-education/public-education/business-leader-changes-testing-standards/. Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

George W. Bush: “Benevolent Spirit” Can Guide Debate

U.S. Navy photo by Senior Chief Photographer's Mate 2nd Thomas Coffelt

DALLAS — During his opening remarks Tuesday at a daylong conference on immigration and the economy, former President George W. Bush urged the nation’s leaders to debate immigration reform with compassion and kindness.

In a brief appearance at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, Bush did not advocate for a specific solution. But his statements indicated he supports policies similar to those he championed during his presidency, when immigration reform was last debated in Congress.

“America can become a lawful society and a welcoming society at the same time,” Bush said at the event, which was organized by the George W. Bush Institute and the Federal Reserve Bank. “As our nation debates the proper course of action on immigration reform, I hope we do so with a benevolent spirit and keep in mind the contributions of immigrants.”

Those contributions include “new skills and new ideas,” he said, adding that immigrants “fill a critical gap in our labor market.

“Not only do immigrants help build the economy, they invigorate our soul,” he said at the gathering of students, scholars and economists.

Bush did not take questions following his remarks. But his introduction appeared to set the tone for the panelists, whose focus was more on reform and its potential boon to the economy and less on law enforcement and border security.

Analysts said after last month’s general election that Republicans, including those who espoused hard-line views on illegal immigration, should recognize the growing voting power of the country’s minority population, including Hispanics who champion immigration reform, and find a solution.

Clint Bolick, a lawyer and the director of the Goldwater Institute‘s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation, warned of what he said were poorly thought-out schemes by state legislatures to fix immigration within their own borders. If the trend persisted, he added, the problem would be too few immigrants to perform low-wage labor as opposed to too many.

“Alabama tried a nifty way” to address immigration with a disastrous result to the state’s GDP, he said, referring to the state’s recently passed bill that allows law officers to check immigration status. Portions of the bill are currently unenforceable and tied up in federal courts but the state’s agriculture economy suffered resounding labor losses after the bill was signed.

As far as immigrant youths, the focus of President Obama’s deferred action policies that grants legal status and a reprieve from deportation to certain younger undocumented immigrants, Bolick said the country needed to move more quickly than the DREAM Act. That legislation would provide a path to citizenship for millions of undocumented youths who meet certain guidelines. Bolick said the immigrants, who he said are American for all intents and purposes, should be given citizenship sooner than what the proposed legislation would allow.

Last week, outgoing U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, introduced the Achieve Act, which would create a new visa for undocumented youths who attend college or serve in the military to receive legal status and a work permit. It does not, however, allow for a pathway to citizenship.

At its conference last weekend United We Dream, an immigrants’ rights group whose affiliates include the University Leadership Initiative based at the University of Texas at Austin, reiterated its demand for Congress to pass the DREAM Act. The group also decided to push for reform beyond the DREAM Act.

“The DREAMers are leaders within their communities and their families.  They know firsthand the sacrifices their parents made to provide opportunities for their children,” Lynn Tramonte, the deputy director for the progressive America’s Voice Educational Fund, said in a prepared statement. “They are incredible spokespeople for their families, and will once again transform the immigration debate.”

According to a fact sheet released by the Bush Institute, immigrants accounted for more than half of the country’s labor-force growth from 2003 to 2012. Of the 8.4 million new workers, 4.4 million were immigrants. The center also said that in 2011, 11 percent of the country’s immigrants earned a graduate or professional degree, 1 percentage point higher than the country’s native-born residents.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/immigration-in-texas/immigration/george-w-bushbenevolent-spirit-can-guide-debate/. Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Texas Posts Top High School Graduation Rates, But Why?

Photo courtesy of iStockphoto

With witnesses in a school finance trial testifying daily on the challenges facing public education in the state, and with a chorus of state leaders citing the failings of traditional public schools in calling for reform, some may be surprised to hear that by one measure, Texas schools appear to be doing quite well.

Preliminary data released by the U.S. Department of Education this week shows that Texas — along with five other states — ranks fourth in the nation for its four-year high school graduation rates. With an overall rate of 86 percent in the 2010-11 school year, the state follows Iowa, with 88 percent, and Wisconsin and Vermont, both at 87 percent.

Though the statewide average has climbed steadily in the past five years, that has not always been the case. The last time the Texas Supreme Court ruled on the state’s school finance system, in 2005, it warned of a “severe dropout problem,” calling the lagging graduation rates of blacks and Hispanics “especially troublesome.”’

In 2006, research from Harvard University, the University of Texas at Austin and Rice University showed that the state was inflating its graduation numbers by allowing districts to avoid counting students who left school for a variety of reasons, including to take the GED. The state began using the federal definition from the National Center for Education Statistics to measure dropout rates that year, a formula that all states must use now.

Michael Williams, the Texas education commissioner, attributed the achievement to the state’s strong accountability system.

“This state-by-state comparison confirms what Texas educators have been saying for a long time,” Williams said in a statement. “Our public schools are delivering a high quality education and our students are having great success.”

Despite the struggles in its past, the state’s recent success shouldn’t be greeted with disbelief, said Lili Allen, a policy director at Jobs for the Future, a Boston-based nonprofit that funds research on college and career readiness for low-income students.

Allen pointed to a 2012 report released by a coalition of national education research organizations that showed Texas had made a dramatic reduction in the number of “dropout factory” schools — defined as graduating less than 60 percent of their students in four years between 2002 and 2010. The state eliminated the number of those schools by more than half, making a larger decrease than any other state.

“Texas has really invested pretty heavily in really reinventing the high school experience for students,” she said. It’s been under the radar as an engine of high school reform that has been pretty impressive from our perspective.”

Allen also credited the state’s early college high school initiative, which allows students to take a higher number of dual-credit courses earlier than their peers at traditional high schools, as an example of innovation.

But some critics say the federal definition, while an improvement, still allows states and districts to mask true graduation numbers. School officials report student withdrawals with more than a dozen different “leaver codes,” only some of which count toward graduation rates. If a school codes a student as returning to a home country, or entering home school, for instance, that student does not factor into the school’s four-year graduation rate.

The leaver code system can make gathering accurate numbers for graduation rates a challenge — especially because a low graduation rate holds ramifications for everyone involved in tracking student achievement, from principals and school leaders to state lawmakers. In the past, the TEA has audited districts for misuse of the codes, which have also drawn criticism from advocacy groups in the past.

The codes provide too many opportunities for school districts to artificially boost graduation numbers, said Bill Hammond, the president of the Texas Association of Business, which advocates on education policy in the state.

“The fact that we are trying to say that we are doing really well and everything is hunky-dory in Texas with regard to dropouts is unfair to the future students in our workforce,” he said. “And I think it’s doing a disservice to tout these inflated numbers as if everything is okay.”

The rate reported by the state tends to show better performance than other national formulas used to track graduation. In 2009, the latest year graduation statistics are available in the federal data used by the Cumulative Promotion Index, a different method of calculating graduation rates, put the state at 72 percent, compared with the TEA’s 80 percent that year. But the state’s rate has improved over the years on that index as well — the percentage of students graduating on time has increased more rapidly than average, up by 11 percentage points since 1999 compared with 7 percentage points nationally — though it still lags behind the national average by about 2 percentage points.

Texas’ improving graduation rates reflect a trend across the country, which anecdotal evidence suggests is partly due to efforts to keep students in school on the state and district level. But it is also difficult to measure the effect of external factors like the poor economy — which tends to keep students in school because they feel the pull of the job market less — and shifting state accountability requirements.

The latest report released by the U.S. Department of Education marks the first time all states — except for three, which were granted deadline extensions — used the same definition to report graduation rates. In the next few months, researchers will be conducting analysis to determine what factors led to the success of some states over others, said Colleen Wilber, a spokeswoman for America’s Promise Alliance.

But for now, Wilber said the current data stood as the best yet reflection of how states shake out in terms of their graduation rates.

“It’s as close to apples-to-apples comparison as we’ve had,” she said.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/texas-education/public-education/texas-high-school-graduation-rates-climb-why/. Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Texas Districts, Charters Advance in Federal Contest

Photo illustration courtesy of Todd Wiseman, The Texas Tribune

By the end of the year, a few Texas school districts may have access to millions in funding that Gov. Rick Perry had passed on two years ago because of concerns about federal intrusion into Texas classrooms.

Since Texas refused to participate in Race to the Top at the state level in 2010, the Obama administration has rolled out a new version of its signature education program to allow districts to apply individually for a separate pot of about $400 million in federal money. Administration officials announced the new round of competition that would emphasize data-driven personalized student learning plans in 2011, after three phases of the state-based contest.

That objective has produced a variety of proposals from Texas districts and charters. Galveston Independent School District is competing for $20 million that could mean more staff responsible for closely adapting its curriculum to the needs of students. Dallas-area Uplift Education, which has applied for $17 million in grants, wants increased access to college-level courses for its students and more resources to dedicate to parental engagement.

The two are among 61 national finalists announced this week by the U.S. Department of Education, which received 372 applications representing more than 1,100 districts and charter schools — 117 in Texas — for the grants. Despite the high number of applicants, the program’s critics extend beyond the governor.

The Texas American Federation of Teachers, which also opposed participation in previous versions of Race to the Top because of what it viewed as the overly rigid testing and teacher evaluation measures promoted by the competition, has raised concerns about the amount of input educators had in the application process.

Linda Bridges, president of the Texas AFT, said the lack of communication between educators and administrators in developing proposals had been disappointing. “Most of these plans have been developed by a superintendent or administrators and taken out to teachers to sign onto,” with limited input from educators beforehand, she said.

In response to such criticism, the Obama administration required teachers unions to sign off on district proposals for this round of applications, which caused turmoil in states that, unlike Texas, have a strong union presence. But Bridges said that had little practical impact on collaboration in school districts.

Winners are eligible for four-year grants ranging from $5 million to $40 million depending on their student population. The federal Education Department — which said finalists were chosen to represent a range of rural and nonrural districts — expects to select 15 to 25 winners from the finalists by Dec. 31.

Finalists in Texas include three charters: Idea Public Schools, Uplift Education and Harmony Public Schools. Traditional districts that made the final cut include McAllen, Galveston, Dallas, Aubrey, Burkeville, Newton and West Hardin. (The latter three applied as a group through their regional education service center.) Several large Texas school districts did not make it to final consideration, including Houston, Spring Branch and Austin ISD.

In previous versions of the program, the Department of Education evaluated states’ applications based on 19 criteria, including adoption of the “common core” standards developed by the National Governors Association in conjunction with the Obama administration in 2009. Implementation of common core curriculum standards — which wasn’t a prerequisite for applying, but it put the states that hadn’t adopted them at a competitive disadvantage — became the primary reason behind Perry’s decision not to apply for the money during the first competition.

Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for Perry, said he maintains his concern that districts receiving the grants would be “saddled with additional burdens required by the federal government on top of having to continue adhering to state education standards.” By allowing schools to circumvent state governments in applying for the federal program, she said, the administration has “made it clear that it would go to any lengths to undermine our 10th Amendment rights and refused to accept the fact that Texas has no interest and no need to subscribe to its misguided, one-size-fits-all policies.”

For this latest round of grants, available to schools made up of at least 40 percent low-income students, adoption of common core standards is not weighed as a factor. Applicants are instead judged on their plans to personalize student learning and implement performance evaluation systems for teachers, principals and superintendents, and their commitment to career and college ready-standards.

Administrators at both Uplift and Galveston ISD said their applications were natural extensions of the work they had been doing on their own.

“We are constantly looking for ways to meet our essential goal, which is access and success in order to close the achievement gap,” said Michael Terry, a spokesman for Uplift. “For us that means pursuing every available resource possible from the best people, from funding sources private or public. It makes sense for us because of the way the Race for the Top request was structured, it asks for what we do.”

Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/texas-education/public-education/texas-schools-advance-federal-contest-perry-reject/.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Texas High School Graduation Rates Among Highest in U.S.

Graphic courtesy of Todd Wiseman

New preliminary data released by the U.S. Department of Education shows that Texas — along with five other states — ranks fourth in the nation for its four-year high school graduation rates. With an overall rate of 86 percent in the 2010-11 school year, the state follows Iowa, with 88 percent, and Wisconsin and Vermont, both at 87 percent.

It’s the first time all states have used a common measure that the department developed in response to federal regulations passed in 2008.

The state’s graduation rates also fared well compared to others across most student demographics. For African-American students, it tied for first place with Montana at 81 percent. When it came to Hispanic students, Texas reported an 82 percent graduation rate, making it second in the country, behind Maine. The state was near the national median in graduating students with limited English proficiency, ranking 25th, with a 58 percent graduation rate.

The new numbers come after several years of steadily climbing graduation rates. In August, the Texas Education Agency reported that the state’s on-time high school graduation rate had reached an all-time high, increasing 1.6 percentage points to 85.9 percent for the class of 2011. Though anecdotal evidence suggests the success is partly due to a variety of programs on the state and district level, it is difficult to measure the effect of external factors like the poor economy — which tends to keep students in school because they feel the pull of the job market less — and shifting state accountability requirements.

In the past, the state has faced criticism for its method of reporting graduation rates. After research from Harvard University, the University of Texas at Austin and Rice University showed in 2006 that the state was inflating its graduation numbers in several ways, including the exclusion of students who left school to take the GED. But since then, the state has used the federal definition from the National Center for Education Statistics to measure dropout rates.

“This state-by-state comparison confirms what Texas educators have been saying for a long time,” Texas Commissioner of Education Michael L. Williams said in a statement. “Our public schools are delivering a high quality education and our students are having great success.”

Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/texas-education/public-education/us-dept-ed-texas-has-3rd-highest-graduation-rate/.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Hutchison Files Immigration Bill That Focuses on Minors

Photo courtesy of the U.S. Department of Defense

Outgoing U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, introduced a bill Tuesday that would provide legal status for immigrants brought to the country illegally as minors.

The bill, called the ACHIEVE Act, is co-authored by U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Arizona. It would create a new visa system affecting “young people who intend to pursue a technical or college degree, or serve in the U.S. military,” according to a statement on Hutchison’s website.

Hutchison, who will leave Washington next year after serving in the U.S. Senate since 1993, concedes that the legislation is not comprehensive immigration reform but says it is nonetheless a “step forward in addressing a time-sensitive issue.”

The bill is evidence that the Republican Party is becoming more focused on working toward a solution on immigration following this month’s general election, which analysts have said favored Democrats due, in part, to the GOP’s harsh stances on immigration. Hutchison made clear, however, that the proposal does not guarantee citizenship.

“Many young people in this country are here illegally through no fault of their own. Relegating a potentially productive portion of the population to the shadows is neither humane nor good economic or social policy,” the senators said in a joint statement. “Only individuals who have abided by our nation’s laws, while residing within its borders, would be eligible for continued legal status, and there is no automatic path to citizenship.”

The bill has similarities to the current “deferred action” policy put in place by President Obama this year, but it’s not clear how the proposal would work along with that policy.

Under the deferred action, immigrants who arrived in the country illegally before they were 16 and who were younger than 31 as of the June 15 announcement may be granted relief from deportation proceedings and a two-year work permit. They must have graduated or be enrolled in school, have earned a GED or have been honorably discharged from the military. They must have also lived in the country since June 15, 2007, and have never been convicted of a serious misdemeanor, three misdemeanors or a felony.

Under the Kyl-Hutchison proposal, applicants must have lived in the country for five years; entered the country before the age of 14; have not have committed a felony, more than one misdemeanor or a crime of moral turpitude; and must not have a final order of removal pending. They must also know English and have a working knowledge of the U.S. government, according to Hutchison’s website.

Approved applicants would receive a new W-1 visa, which would require them to check in with the Department of Homeland Security every six months and would not allow access to welfare or federal benefits, including student loans. They would then be eligible for subsequent visas that allow them to continue to work and eventually apply for a permanent nonimmigrant visa.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/immigration-in-texas/immigration/hutchison-files-immigration-bill-minors/. Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

If There’s a Way, There’s a Will to Regulate Tuition

Photo illustration courtesy of Todd Wiseman

The 2013 legislative session will mark the 10th anniversary of a decision by Texas lawmakers to deregulate college tuition, giving the authority to set tuition at public universities to the institutions.

Since deregulation, the average total of tuition and fees at the state’s public universities has increased by 90 percent, according to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Some lawmakers are hoping the upcoming session provides an opportunity to regain control of the price-setting process.

“It’s past time for the Legislature to stop abdicating its responsibility and instead make some tough decisions on tuition,” said Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston. He was in the minority when he voted against deregulation in 2003, but he believes the tide may be turning.

Of the 181 members of the state’s 83rd Legislature, more than 50 have voted at least once to advance efforts to end tuition deregulation, while fewer than 20 have consistently voted to uphold it. Many have never voted on the issue, and more than 40 members are freshmen.

“With the number of fresh faces in both houses this upcoming session, I think enough members are willing to explore new ideas on how to keep the cost of higher education affordable for Texas families,” Ellis said.

Sen. Tommy Williams, R-The Woodlands, the new chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, called his approval of tuition deregulation “one of the two worst votes I ever cast in my legislative career.”

Talk of ending deregulation is certain to meet resistance from universities, and not all lawmakers feel it should happen.

Sen. Judith Zaffirini, D-Laredo, until recently the chairwoman of the Senate Higher Education Committee, reluctantly voted for deregulation in 2003. “It was the right thing to do at the time,” she said.

Zaffirini said that the tuition issue should be considered in relation to state financial support for higher education institutions and financial aid. Neither is expected to increase in the 2013 session, and tuition increases help universities make up for that in their budgets.

Rising tuition has also been on Gov. Rick Perry’s mind. His higher-education initiatives heading into the session include locking a student’s tuition in at a flat rate for four years and instituting degrees that cost $10,000.

Catherine Frazier, a spokeswoman for Perry, said he still supports deregulation but hopes it is not a rubber stamp to arbitrarily increase tuition every year.

Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, the chairman of the House Higher Education Committee, said that legislators have encouraged universities over the years to keep tuition increases manageable.

Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, who replaced Zaffirini as the Senate Higher Education Committee chairman, is open to discussing tuition.

“One question that has got to be asked is: What should tuition be?” he said, adding that he would prefer universities to come up with a satisfactory answer without legislators stepping in.

But some lawmakers are already at that point.

“Ever since it passed and we saw those first tuition increases, I’ve been trying to put the genie back in the bottle,” Williams said. “We haven’t been able to turn it around, but maybe this will be the session.”

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/texas-education/higher-education/if-theres-way-theres-will-regulate-tuition/. Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Perry, Dewhurst Back Drug Tests for Welfare Applicants

Photo courtesy of Robert Byron and iStockphoto

Out of the more than 250 bills filed Monday, the first possible day to file legislation for the 83rd session, one measure — concerning drug testing for welfare applicants — is already drawing the support of the state’s top lawmakers and the criticism of civil liberties advocates.

Senate Bill 11 would require applicants to the Texas Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to undergo a drug test. If applicants fail the test, they would not be eligible to apply again for a full year, unless they attended a substance abuse treatment program. The bill was written by state Sen. Jane Nelson, R-Flower Mound, and several other Republican lawmakers.

“This will help prevent tax dollars from going into the pockets of drug abusers,” Gov. Rick Perry said Tuesday at a news conference. He said that the goal of the bill is to “empower every Texan to reach their potential,” because “being on drugs makes it harder to begin the journey to independence.”

“It is a legitimate function of government to help people that are not able to help themselves,” added Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. He said that because “virtually every” business he has encountered uses random drug testing on employees, it’s a good idea for the state and will lead to reduced unemployment by proving to employers that the people they are hiring have been certified by the state as drug-free.

“We owe it to all Texans to structure our welfare and unemployment programs in a way that guarantees that recipients are serious about getting back to work,” he said.

“This is not all about punishment,” Perry added. “This is also an incentive to get people off of these drugs.”

But critics of the bill say the bill is needlessly punitive and will mainly harm innocent children, whose parents are found to have even a minor amount of drugs. “The purpose of TANF was really to help children,” said Terri Burke, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Texas. “If you don’t give the moms the money, then the children lose out.”

She pointed specifically to the bill’s provision that would require the Texas Health and Human Services Commission to report applicants with drug abuse problems to Child Protective Services. “Now we’re going to take the child of a parent who has smoked a couple of joints and give them to CPS,” she said. “If there’s a genuine concern about drug abuse, let’s do something about it. There’s no evidence that poor people abuse drugs more than other folks, but we keep coming up with bills that target poor people.”

“Adding insult to injury,” Jim Harrington, director of the Texas Civil Rights Project, said in a press release, “is that Perry would pay for the drug testing out of the very TANF funds that should go to provide assistance to people. In other words, he’s taking about $350,000 worth food and assistance from all families from the general TANF grant just to try to find a few violators.  This is simply callous and perverse.”

Here is video of Perry’s remarks Tuesday:

Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at http://www.texastribune.org/texas-legislature/83rd-legislative-session/bill-would-require-drug-testing-state-aid/.

Enhanced by Zemanta