Brittany, of the student blog Blue Blogger Brittany has written a commentary piece about Governor Perry's recent attempt to reverse a piece of legislation that in 2009 granted transgendered Texans the right to legally marry. Brittany made some great ethical points in her article. She is right, transgender discrimination is appalling. Most other states don't view transgendered marriages as same sex marriages, because the states have recognized the individual's sex as legally changed after (in most cases) an operation to sex organs. So if the state agrees that an individual is a woman, they will not restrict any rights based on the fact that she was considered male previously. Not Texas, Perry wants to treat the transgendered as if they are playing dress-up, and play time is over when you want to get married. When asked to discuss the issue, a republican senator, Tommy Williams insisted the proposed redaction was to simplify things for the county clerks who handle marriage licensing. His goal with that statement was to seem less offensive, but he failed. How disgusting to not acknowledge that marriage, which lasts a life time, is much more important and significant than a county clerk having to learn a new way to file a marriage license.
I absolutely agree with most of Brittany's points. She does say at on point that, "To go back on something that was put in place two years ago is absurd" and I feel it is important to remind everyone that mistakes happen in legislation often, though I don't feel this bit should be considered a mistake, I do think that revising legislation and admitting to over sites is in general a positive thing.
On a more personal note, I am married. My husband and I married in Texas and got to experience the applying for a marriage license process first hand. It consisted of going to the county clerks office with our driver's licenses and took all of 10 minutes. No one asked if I was biologically female, no one asked my husband if he was biologically male! No one asked for birth certificates or anything that alludes to my sex past the "F" on my license. There are plenty of oddities in the Texas marriage laws that should be dealt with before they even think of attacking transgendered couples. Texas allows marriage by proxy, that's right! You don't even have to be at your own ceremony or ever see your own marriage license in the state of Texas!
Sunday, May 1, 2011
Friday, April 29, 2011
Flirting with Secession
Recently I was made aware that some portion of the country, and the world is under the impression that Texas wants/is hoping to secede from the Union. I was surprised, since I am a Texan and don't have any interest in seceding. My friends, family, co-workers, classmates, and even casual acquaintances have never expressed any feeling of wanting to secede, so I thought,"Why would anyone take that seriously?" Turns out Governor Perry brought it up in 2009 during and after a speech addressing Tea Party types at the capital. Referring to secession as a reasonable consequence of continued federal budget problems, he brought the issue from the fringes to the forefront and gave a tint of credibility to an otherwise ludicrous topic.
So now I'm wondering... is it feasible? Regardless of what I would choose for the state (I would not choose secession, so you know), is it possible? If Texas could secede would they be able to make it with out federal funding? What would happen at the border with no one to keep Perry in check? With the public schools already considered sub-standard by the nation and obviously not a priority for Perry, what would happen to the already crappy education standards?
Apparently Texas utilizes more federal funding than it pays in federal taxes, just this month Perry asked for federal funding to help cover the cost of tornado damage to the state (wait, didn't Perry say that's what the Rainy Day Fund is for? Didn't he just turn down federal aid ear market for the schools that would save teacher's jobs, because he doesn't want handouts?) So it looks like... no. Texas needs federal funding now, there is no reason to think seceding would magically clear up our budget problems less the aid.
Then we need to know, is secession even possible without some sort of civil war? The Texas Nationalist group says it should only be a matter of gaining interest in the Legislature and passing a Bill declaring Texas as independent from the US. Others say no, that when Texas re-entered the Union the option to split into as many as 5 five states was given, but the option to secede was taken off the table. I'm pretty sure starting a civil war would only add to Texas' budget woes, and then where would Perry find the money to build that giant wall he wants at the border?
So it sounds like talk of secession is a solid bluff. Thank goodness, when I say I'd like to spend time in another country I really don't mean Oklahoma!
So now I'm wondering... is it feasible? Regardless of what I would choose for the state (I would not choose secession, so you know), is it possible? If Texas could secede would they be able to make it with out federal funding? What would happen at the border with no one to keep Perry in check? With the public schools already considered sub-standard by the nation and obviously not a priority for Perry, what would happen to the already crappy education standards?
Apparently Texas utilizes more federal funding than it pays in federal taxes, just this month Perry asked for federal funding to help cover the cost of tornado damage to the state (wait, didn't Perry say that's what the Rainy Day Fund is for? Didn't he just turn down federal aid ear market for the schools that would save teacher's jobs, because he doesn't want handouts?) So it looks like... no. Texas needs federal funding now, there is no reason to think seceding would magically clear up our budget problems less the aid.
Then we need to know, is secession even possible without some sort of civil war? The Texas Nationalist group says it should only be a matter of gaining interest in the Legislature and passing a Bill declaring Texas as independent from the US. Others say no, that when Texas re-entered the Union the option to split into as many as 5 five states was given, but the option to secede was taken off the table. I'm pretty sure starting a civil war would only add to Texas' budget woes, and then where would Perry find the money to build that giant wall he wants at the border?
So it sounds like talk of secession is a solid bluff. Thank goodness, when I say I'd like to spend time in another country I really don't mean Oklahoma!
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Education for Inmates Should Stay a Priority
Texas' budget crisis has recently been a favored topic of discussion for political blogs across the country. A large part of my blogging has focused on the ways public education will be affected by the budget short falls. I have been entirely concerned with primary to high school and the children that will be dealing with larger classes and the potential lack of art class. I had no idea that I was overlooking another form of state funded education; The Windham School District is the district set up to provide college education and degree programs for Texas' prison system. This district is potentially losing funding as part of the budget cuts that are stripping Texas of all that makes it glitter(okay, maybe that's a little dramatic.)
Pat Culpepper of Texan Affairs, a student political blog, has written a great commentary in favor of keeping funding for The Windham District. Culpepper states that the average year long stay for a Texas inmate costs the state $18,000. The percentage of inmates that return to prison within three years drops drastically for those that attain associates degrees during their time in prison, at a cost of $4,000 (figure based on community college tuition) per degree. The tone of the article is reasonable and firm, with well placed supporting facts and nicely organized over all. Culpepper has a fantastic and hard to argue with defense for Texas to continue to support efforts to provide college educations to inmates. I agree with all points and appreciate having my attention drawn to a subject that before today, I had no idea existed!
Pat Culpepper of Texan Affairs, a student political blog, has written a great commentary in favor of keeping funding for The Windham District. Culpepper states that the average year long stay for a Texas inmate costs the state $18,000. The percentage of inmates that return to prison within three years drops drastically for those that attain associates degrees during their time in prison, at a cost of $4,000 (figure based on community college tuition) per degree. The tone of the article is reasonable and firm, with well placed supporting facts and nicely organized over all. Culpepper has a fantastic and hard to argue with defense for Texas to continue to support efforts to provide college educations to inmates. I agree with all points and appreciate having my attention drawn to a subject that before today, I had no idea existed!
Friday, April 1, 2011
The Rainy Day Fund: Intended for Long Slow Drizzles or Tsunamis?
The House is voting today on a bill that would use $3.2 billion of the $9.4 billion in Texas'
Rainy Day Fund to close the budget gap for this fiscal year. Governor Rick Perry is publicly against the use of the Rainy Day Fund for what he calls "recurring expenses", which amounts to anything budget related. Perry is insisting that the Fund is for emergencies more on par with the natural disaster sort, and referenced Japan's recent tragedy. He seems to be forgetting that the Rainy Day Fund's real name is The Economic Stabilization Fund. It was created for precisely this kind of situation.The recession slowly starved the state of sales tax that normally would supply the funds for a balanced budget and The Economic Stabilization Fund is meant to help the state meet basic needs during times of down turned economics. The basics are not being met and I think this long slow drizzle counts as a rainy day.
Perry also stressed that he wanted every budget chopping option exhausted before considering the Fund.
I see what he is saying, Texas is facing a $15-27 billion dollar deficit for next fiscal year. The current fiscal year is more than half way through so if they can't figure out how to close a less than 4 billion dollar gap now, how will they do it for the five times larger deficit they will be facing in a few months?
Well, there are a few things that should be considered when discussing Texas' budget crisis. First thing is that Governor Perry refuses to accept $830 million in federal aid. Perry won't take it because he would have to agree to put it towards education, and only education. Last time he was given a stimulus package ($3.2 billion) meant to go to schools and improving education standards he used to to cover other budget gaps he felt were more urgent. It isn't too late for him to accept the aid, and $830 million would take a nice chunk out of the existing deficit. The second thing to consider is the still changing number placed on the deficit. The comptroller originally placed it upward of $7 billion. A number of things have shifted that figure. Just this month the comptroller was able add another $300 million in funds for the budget from unexpected sales tax revenue. That means people are spending again,at a rate the state didn't predict, which makes it more difficult to accurately predict what funds will be available next fiscal year. Oil prices have also been on the rise, which historically means good things for Texas, and again, makes it difficult to predict the budget deficits. Perhaps if Perry accepts the federal aid and (goodness forbid!) raises taxes and some state fees we could continue to support Texans, get through a fiscal year on budget and not need to touch The Rainy Day Fund.
As it stands, Perry would rather cut teacher's jobs, college grants, and medicaid benefits than be told how to spend *free* money. I don't think we can count on this man to recognize a rainy day even if he were drowning in a puddle.
Rainy Day Fund to close the budget gap for this fiscal year. Governor Rick Perry is publicly against the use of the Rainy Day Fund for what he calls "recurring expenses", which amounts to anything budget related. Perry is insisting that the Fund is for emergencies more on par with the natural disaster sort, and referenced Japan's recent tragedy. He seems to be forgetting that the Rainy Day Fund's real name is The Economic Stabilization Fund. It was created for precisely this kind of situation.The recession slowly starved the state of sales tax that normally would supply the funds for a balanced budget and The Economic Stabilization Fund is meant to help the state meet basic needs during times of down turned economics. The basics are not being met and I think this long slow drizzle counts as a rainy day.
Perry also stressed that he wanted every budget chopping option exhausted before considering the Fund.
I see what he is saying, Texas is facing a $15-27 billion dollar deficit for next fiscal year. The current fiscal year is more than half way through so if they can't figure out how to close a less than 4 billion dollar gap now, how will they do it for the five times larger deficit they will be facing in a few months?
Well, there are a few things that should be considered when discussing Texas' budget crisis. First thing is that Governor Perry refuses to accept $830 million in federal aid. Perry won't take it because he would have to agree to put it towards education, and only education. Last time he was given a stimulus package ($3.2 billion) meant to go to schools and improving education standards he used to to cover other budget gaps he felt were more urgent. It isn't too late for him to accept the aid, and $830 million would take a nice chunk out of the existing deficit. The second thing to consider is the still changing number placed on the deficit. The comptroller originally placed it upward of $7 billion. A number of things have shifted that figure. Just this month the comptroller was able add another $300 million in funds for the budget from unexpected sales tax revenue. That means people are spending again,at a rate the state didn't predict, which makes it more difficult to accurately predict what funds will be available next fiscal year. Oil prices have also been on the rise, which historically means good things for Texas, and again, makes it difficult to predict the budget deficits. Perhaps if Perry accepts the federal aid and (goodness forbid!) raises taxes and some state fees we could continue to support Texans, get through a fiscal year on budget and not need to touch The Rainy Day Fund.
As it stands, Perry would rather cut teacher's jobs, college grants, and medicaid benefits than be told how to spend *free* money. I don't think we can count on this man to recognize a rainy day even if he were drowning in a puddle.
Friday, March 11, 2011
More on Austin Public Schools
In my first blog post I shared that I have two young children, and that my oldest will be starting pre-k this fall.I've been keeping close tabs on AISD and its wonky budget for a while now, long before either child was conceived. AISD has problems. Has had problems for a very long time. They aren't unusual problems, most medium to large cities deal with these same problems every school year.
The problems are as follows: everyone wants to go to Casis Elementary. Maybe not Casis specifically, maybe Mathews, elementary schools in great neighborhoods (Clarksville, Tarry Town) with low crime rates, schools with high test scores and a very active PTA. So everyone wants a great school for their kid, if you aren't zoned you transfer right? Okay, you transferred! (Maybe not to your first choice because 36-53 schools are currently on transfer freeze, but lets say you went with 2nd or 3rd choice) Once you transfer from your failing school what happens? Well, the school fails further! A little less funding goes their way, and a highly motivated student and potentially 2 very interested and active parents are not around to rally support for the school. You won't have been the only student to transfer out, and odds are there won't be a student transferring in to take your place.
So the school fails a little bit more every school year until... what?
An opinion piece from the Austin Statesman suggests fixing the problem,perhaps by changing the transfer policy. It suggests that Austin's policy of allowing transfers without a specific reason is leaving some schools without a fighting chance.That is an interesting idea. This article though, doesn't actually offer a suggestion for specific change to the transfer policy. The author (who I couldn't find a name for?) doesn't even seem aware of the yearly transfer freezes that have been happening for the last 6 or more years. The piece seems motivated by wanting to avoid having the failing schools be shut down as part of an attempt to cover the massive budget shortfall. Keeping the schools open won't save the district any money though.
The author ends up back tracking on the suggestion to restrict transfers, reminding us that it wouldn't be right to limit a child to attending a school they might not feel safe or supported in. The author then suggests that if all the schools were created equal children wouldn't have to transfer, which of course is true, not an arguable point really. Again though, not being very budget mindful for someone that seems to be aware of all the trouble the budget crisis is causing.
In summary, I think this writer means well and is probably taking a stab at a tough issue that affects the lives of our little ones. I can see how it's difficult to draw a hard line when that line might take away someone's school. Someone will have to do it, soon.
The problems are as follows: everyone wants to go to Casis Elementary. Maybe not Casis specifically, maybe Mathews, elementary schools in great neighborhoods (Clarksville, Tarry Town) with low crime rates, schools with high test scores and a very active PTA. So everyone wants a great school for their kid, if you aren't zoned you transfer right? Okay, you transferred! (Maybe not to your first choice because 36-53 schools are currently on transfer freeze, but lets say you went with 2nd or 3rd choice) Once you transfer from your failing school what happens? Well, the school fails further! A little less funding goes their way, and a highly motivated student and potentially 2 very interested and active parents are not around to rally support for the school. You won't have been the only student to transfer out, and odds are there won't be a student transferring in to take your place.
So the school fails a little bit more every school year until... what?
An opinion piece from the Austin Statesman suggests fixing the problem,perhaps by changing the transfer policy. It suggests that Austin's policy of allowing transfers without a specific reason is leaving some schools without a fighting chance.That is an interesting idea. This article though, doesn't actually offer a suggestion for specific change to the transfer policy. The author (who I couldn't find a name for?) doesn't even seem aware of the yearly transfer freezes that have been happening for the last 6 or more years. The piece seems motivated by wanting to avoid having the failing schools be shut down as part of an attempt to cover the massive budget shortfall. Keeping the schools open won't save the district any money though.
The author ends up back tracking on the suggestion to restrict transfers, reminding us that it wouldn't be right to limit a child to attending a school they might not feel safe or supported in. The author then suggests that if all the schools were created equal children wouldn't have to transfer, which of course is true, not an arguable point really. Again though, not being very budget mindful for someone that seems to be aware of all the trouble the budget crisis is causing.
In summary, I think this writer means well and is probably taking a stab at a tough issue that affects the lives of our little ones. I can see how it's difficult to draw a hard line when that line might take away someone's school. Someone will have to do it, soon.
Friday, February 25, 2011
That Guy is my President!
I voted for Obama! I did. I was excited and proud in the months leading up to elections.I saw in our future a truly amazing change and was thrilled to be a part of it.
Flash forward to now, 2011 end of February. I am still thrilled to have helped start the ball of of change rolling!
Because of my enthusiasm I'm finding it hard to stomach some of the latest approval polls. It seems quite a few of those who voted for President Obama aren't quite as excited as I am. It seems to me that a huge sticking point has been Obamacare/Affordable Care Act. Not actual Obamacare/AFCA though, the perception of Obamacare/AFCA. It seems like a lot of people are not really sure what is going on.Conservatives seem to think it's encroaching on their right to... rack up thousand of dollars in debt because their pre-existing condition that wasn't covered by their health insurance became an issue? I'm not exactly sure why they're upset. The unhappy liberals really wanted the universal health care to happen, but I feel like the first round of reform went really well and a lot of the changes make good sense for everyone. I don't feel let down in the slightest.
Still though, there are many people like me. I think President Obama is going a great job. Every good leader is capable of balancing the best of intentions with the realities of compromise.
I found a columnist that has similar thoughts on this issue. Louis Black from The Chronicle has done an awesome job of breaking down the whos and whys behind those polls. He starts out with a pretty easy to relate with experience of people being coy about their general positive feelings about Obama and his progress so far. Black then breaks down some of the misconceptions that some groups had/have concerning promises from Obama and general misguides disappointment and where it might have stem from.
His ideas seem well informed and not overly angry, just annoyed and expressing it with some humor.
I really enjoyed this column and I'm looking forward more of Black's views!
Flash forward to now, 2011 end of February. I am still thrilled to have helped start the ball of of change rolling!
Because of my enthusiasm I'm finding it hard to stomach some of the latest approval polls. It seems quite a few of those who voted for President Obama aren't quite as excited as I am. It seems to me that a huge sticking point has been Obamacare/Affordable Care Act. Not actual Obamacare/AFCA though, the perception of Obamacare/AFCA. It seems like a lot of people are not really sure what is going on.Conservatives seem to think it's encroaching on their right to... rack up thousand of dollars in debt because their pre-existing condition that wasn't covered by their health insurance became an issue? I'm not exactly sure why they're upset. The unhappy liberals really wanted the universal health care to happen, but I feel like the first round of reform went really well and a lot of the changes make good sense for everyone. I don't feel let down in the slightest.
Still though, there are many people like me. I think President Obama is going a great job. Every good leader is capable of balancing the best of intentions with the realities of compromise.
I found a columnist that has similar thoughts on this issue. Louis Black from The Chronicle has done an awesome job of breaking down the whos and whys behind those polls. He starts out with a pretty easy to relate with experience of people being coy about their general positive feelings about Obama and his progress so far. Black then breaks down some of the misconceptions that some groups had/have concerning promises from Obama and general misguides disappointment and where it might have stem from.
His ideas seem well informed and not overly angry, just annoyed and expressing it with some humor.
I really enjoyed this column and I'm looking forward more of Black's views!
Friday, February 11, 2011
AISD plans to cut 1,000 positions for the 2011-2012 school year?!?!
I am the mother of two young children. My oldest will be starting Pre-K this coming fall.So I probably don't have to say that public school is on my mind, has been on my mind since before he was born.Austin is a tricky place for schooling.There are plenty of well run schools with dedicated teachers and attentive students with oodles of parent interest to keep everything running smoothly...and then there are the rest. You might say, "Just transfer! No big deal!" but you would be wrong! AISD has been on a transfer freeze for several years leaving concerned parents without the income to support a move to re-zone their child for a decent school with very few workable options. Those options are about to shrink quite a bit more.
AISD is preparing for a cut of 1,000 positions for the 2011-2012 school year. The superintendent is splitting that between 771 campus positions, which seemingly will include teachers as well as "secondary" staff and 246 to the central office staff, that includes a lot of different administrative type positions.They are also planning to close several schools and move the students to near by schools. The superintendent says,"Make no mistake: reductions of this magnitude will have a fundamental effect on public education as we know it today in Austin. But as we restructure, the District will make the most effective use of our more limited resources, and we will continue our efforts to improve student achievement.”
I personally am both horrified and curious about how they plan to make this work. There is just no way I will let my children be a part of that experiment.
AISD is preparing for a cut of 1,000 positions for the 2011-2012 school year. The superintendent is splitting that between 771 campus positions, which seemingly will include teachers as well as "secondary" staff and 246 to the central office staff, that includes a lot of different administrative type positions.They are also planning to close several schools and move the students to near by schools. The superintendent says,"Make no mistake: reductions of this magnitude will have a fundamental effect on public education as we know it today in Austin. But as we restructure, the District will make the most effective use of our more limited resources, and we will continue our efforts to improve student achievement.”
I personally am both horrified and curious about how they plan to make this work. There is just no way I will let my children be a part of that experiment.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)