Weight for it

Strange that the Senate still files bills on paper. Eleven legal-size copies of every bill. E-filing would be more convenient, of course; and then there’s all that wood pulp… But I must admit there’s something satisfying in signing real paper, with a real pen, and carrying a heavy stack to be filed – a sort of physical sense of the weight of our work.

The heaviest lift (sorry) was SB 117, the “Live Well Texas Program”, a non-partisan bill to expand health insurance coverage in Texas by drawing down federal Medicaid dollars at a 9:1 ratio (video excerpt of the announcement here). It’s expected to result in insurance coverage and healthcare for a million Texans, while preserving state control and generating positive net revenue for the state budget. On the lighter side (by weight), I also filed bills addressing criminal justice, taxation, business and the environment, good government and effective democracy, impediments to social progress, and a wide range of health initiatives.

If you’d like to know more about the legislation I’ve filed so far, please see my early-filing press announcement here. We’ll be exploring these and other matters of importance to the coming legislative session at my Virtual Town Hall on Tuesday, January 19 at 7:00 p.m.  Click here to receive a link to attend.

Thankfully the election is at last over (yes it really is over). We can concentrate on why we have elections, which is to make good policy. This SNJ Journal volume’s Policy Spotlight looks at one of the policy areas that holds great promise for bipartisan effort: criminal justice reform. Please read the full discussion below.

As always, thank you for reading, and for being engaged in state politics. 

Around the District:

Texas Woman’s University, Texas A&M Commerce, and the Dallas County Community College system all shared inspiring news about expanding the services they offer to the many Texans who seek to better their knowledge, skills, and prospects. With the increasing demand for higher education, the visits were especially timely.

The State of Reform Leadership Series invited me to serve as the opening day keynote speaker, for a conference in which leaders in health care discussed and debated some of the most important health policy issues we face today. Click the image below to watch the video.

The Hope Supply Company is a DFW-area non-profit that serves as a clearinghouse for donated supplies, assisting the entities who are providing care to individuals who need it most. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, they’ve seen a 300% increase in the need for diapers. In response, my staff and I held a diaper drive for the many families in need. We’re still accepting donations, so if you’d like to participate, you can order something from our Wish List or email us at District16.Johnson@senate.texas.gov to schedule a supply drop-off.

Every ten years, the Texas Legislature redraws our state’s electoral maps based on our recent U.S. Census data in a process we call “redistricting” (known less fondly as “gerrymandering”). The 2021 redistricting process is already underway in the Texas Legislature. As part of that process, the Senate Committee on Redistricting has invited the public to submit comments and attach documents for the senators to review and consider before they begin drawing the new maps. If you’d like to submit thoughts, observations, or other information related to the redistricting process, please do so here.

Policy Spotlight: Watching the Detectives

Investing in investigations may be the next step towards a better criminal justice system.

In the mid-1960s crime in the United States rose at a shocking rate. Murders doubled while violent crime overall tripled. Property crime of all types – larceny, burglary, auto theft — became commonplace. It would take 30 years to subside.

Responding to the demands of (understandably) fearful citizens, lawmakers made what were, in hindsight, a pair of catastrophic errors.

First, they ratcheted up criminal penalties across-the-board. Second, police departments and courts emphasized prosecution of small-time drug users and dealers, imposing harsh criminal penalties for non-violent activity. To accommodate all the shift, America built one of the largest systems of incarceration in modern history. Over two million Americans remain incarcerated in 2020. 

Crime began to drop dramatically in the 1990s and now sits at half of its peak. Does mass incarceration – notwithstanding all the injustice and social destruction and budget-breaking costs it imposed – get the credit? It’s important to ask the question, but the answer is No. Modern studies indicate that only a small fraction – perhaps 10% (see, e.g., this study by the Brennan Center) – of the decline in crime is attributable to mass incarceration. The rest owes to myriad other factors that have nothing to do with harsh penalties and inequitable application of the law. They include higher employment rates and rising personal income, declining alcohol consumption, and an aging population. Consider also the increasing academic interest in and support for the “lead-crime hypothesis” (as in leaded gasoline), which is that the damage to intelligence, self-control, and sociability resulting from childhood lead exposure has a causal link to 30-50% of the 30-year crime wave. (The environment is important, folks. Interesting and chilling article here.)

For its meager benefits, mass incarceration has imposed immense social and fiscal costs.

• Direct costs add up to $182 billion annually, according to the Prison Policy Initiative.

• Permanent criminal records have reduced the total male employment rate by 1.5-1.7%, causing $57-$65bn in annual lost economic output, according to CEPR.

• Kids with an incarcerated parent are twice as likely to become homeless and far more likely to have social, academic, and behavioral problems.

• Prisons reinforce rather than rehabilitate criminal tendencies. Texas’ state jail system, originally intended as rehabilitative alternative to prison, actually has higher recidivism rates for those released. (TCJC study)

• The damage of misguided crime policy has fallen disproportionately upon communities of color, exacerbating the enduring problems of racial inequity.

• Surveys in high-crime areas show low trust in police (Urban Institute). This trust has been destroyed by drug enforcement and other punitive laws and practices. Without trust, residents and police can’t – and demonstrably haven’t been able to – work together to reduce crime.

I’m working on legislation to roll back some of our most counterproductive, unjust, and often cruel criminal laws and penalties, including laws regarding state jail parole, cannabis concentrates, automatic license suspension, and marijuana possession.

But though undoing bad policy is important, crime prevention remains the primary goal of the criminal justice system. We need more good policy on preventing crime. The U.S. Department of Justice concludes that the certainty of being caught and punished has vastly more deterrent power than the severity of punishment. So, we can best deter crimes by solving crimes.

In 2019 Texas solved or “cleared” only 58.7% of murders, 23.3% of reported rapes, 18.4% of robberies, 39.6% of assaults; and 8.5% of burglaries, 14.1% of thefts, 10.9% of motor vehicle thefts. Neither the police nor the public are, or should be, satisfied with this. To solve more crimes law enforcement needs (1) resources, and (2) time. Pursuing non-threatening activity subtracts from both.

By correcting the policy mistakes of the past – those policies that distract police and command their resources, that drag down communities and families, that even raise levels of crime – we can make available additional resources and time for law enforcement to more effectively protect people and property. It’s beyond the scope of this Policy Spotlight to prescribe measures for local law enforcement. But it’s fitting to observe that thoughtful, objective crafting of state policy can facilitate more just and effective law enforcement, along with the great social benefits it would bestow to all of us.

“All Politics is Local” – is it really?

Don’t cry over spilt Topo Chico. 

The air conditioner stopped cooling. The dryer stopped heating. Couldn’t hang the wet clothes outside because it started raining. And oh yes, my phone stopped working. Not a great weekend.
But I didn’t dare complain. Given the persistent gloom and anxiety these days, it’s worth a mental effort to note each little moment of good fortune, however small and fleeting. So when I accidentally knocked over a bottle of Topo Chico, and the toppled Topo fell to floor and didn’t break, it seemed like a pretty good start to the day. I’ll take it.

Having been spared the glass cleanup and a $1 or so of fizzy water, I thought of course about sales tax revenue (even though bottled water is exempt from sales tax), which made me think of city budgets, which reminded me of the absurd partisan political charade transpiring right now over the proper scope of state and local authority and responsibility. Read more in the Policy Spotlight below.

Some interesting things:

DFW-area mayors meet routinely to share insights and observations, discuss challenges, and explore ideas for how best to address those things that so directly affect each of us every day. I joined them recently for an important conversation about meeting increased needs in a time of decreased revenues. Recognizing that – by design – cities carry the burden that the state does not and often cannot, I aim to work with, rather than against, local government in my district. That’s not a universal attitude among legislators.

I’m not done with my efforts to discourage and reduce illicit sales of vaping products to minors, and to that end I met with various anti-tobacco advocates and health experts, members of the Tobacco 21 Coalition. Last session, my bill on this subject had a strong majority of support in both the Senate and the House. But hostile forces (not mentioning names here) managed to kill the bill on a hyper-technical and patently meritless procedural point of order in the House. They didn’t win, though. My new version of the bill will be stronger and more comprehensive, and we will pass it.

Yes, I’m still working on Medicaid expansion in Texas. In addition to several meetings, I spoke one-on-one with WFAA’s Jason Whitely as part of the Texas Tribune’s annual TribFest. Broad in scope, we covered what Medicaid expansion could do for Texas, the changes in the political environment that affect viability of expansion (including growing support from the business community), and the social, economic, and political consequences of passing – or not – a Medicaid expansion law. The case for TXMedX keeps getting stronger. Please take a look at my TXMedX page, where you can check out recent compelling studies on how Medicaid expansion would affect our state economy, state budget, and county health systems and finance.

Policy Spotlight: The Politics of Local Control

The thing about cities is that most people live in them. And they’re pretty happy with their city governments. So why, for the last few legislative sessions, have state leaders been so hostile to local government?

The anti-city crusade reached a new high (or was it a new low?) recently, when state lawmakers publicly announced their intentions to throttle local revenue for any city that would dare reduce its law enforcement budget – even during a revenue crunch. With sad irony, this comes when the state itself is making significant cuts to support for local law enforcement. Really. They even criticized the City of Dallas for proposing to trim police overtime, even though the City actually proposed an overall increase in police funding.

Having thus dispensed with the question of sincerity, let’s consider the call to ban cities from contracting with professionals to fix traffic lights. Wait that’s not it. Lawyers? No. Engineers? No. But many state leaders have called for legislation that would ban cities and counties from contracting with professionals to perform an essential function of local government: advocating in the state Legislature. Those professionals are called “lobbyists”. Companies hire them. Non-profit advocacy groups hire them. Individual projects hire them (e.g., the bullet train). And cities large and small hire them too. Always have. Should they? Maybe, maybe not. That’s a question of local, not state, policy. It is for you and your city councilmembers to assess whether hiring a lobbyist for a particular issue serves the interests of local citizens.

What we have here is politics driving policy. That’s bad. The idea that state government would review city budgets should scare any skeptic of big government. That the state would actually take over law enforcement at the local level … whoa (who’s going to pay for that, anyway?). Banning cities from contracting with legislative advocates is akin to banning companies from hiring outside lawyers, or banning homeowners from hiring tax consultants to help with protests. The whole narrative undermines the spirit of 100+ years of successful local control.
Pitting state government against local government is just bad policy. It results in an over-stretched state government that’s ill-equipped to handle local issues consistent with local needs and character. It tempts state lawmakers to blame local officials for state failures (like rising property taxes). And it raises serious questions about racial equity, as representation in cities and counties tends to be more reflective of local demographics.

We can’t have it both ways. The state doesn’t have the resources or expertise to run local affairs. If the public wants state government to manage everything, we’re going to need a bigger state government. I don’t think that’s what Texans want. I know I don’t.

The Anxiety of Uncertainty – Back to School (Sort of)

Remember the excitement of getting a new lunchbox at the start of the school year? My 1976 Bicentennial aluminum lunchbox featured a cartoon of a guilty-looking kid standing next to the noticeably cracked Liberty Bell, hiding a slingshot behind his back. My own kids generally lost their lunchboxes pretty early in each school year, so we resorted to paper lunch sacks. That brought up the paper-waste environmental issue. It’s a discussion we’re not having this year. This year it’s in-class or virtual, when, how, and how often.

For a closer look, see the back-to-school Policy Spotlight below.

In the news:

• WFAA News 8 invited me to share my reaction to the most recent spectacle of state overreach into local authority: threatening to interfere with the constitutional power and obligation of cities to manage their own budgets – including for law enforcement, which the state neither funds nor has authority to govern. This news segment presents a balanced look, in an area where the hubbub contains a lot of hyperbole.

• In mid-July Fox News asked me back, to talk more about COVID-19 shutdowns, taking care of people, revenue, jobs, and health insurance. You can catch my (exceedingly brief) remarks here. (Had the other guy not eaten up my time, I would have brought attention to the sad fact that, as one of the few remaining non-Medicaid expansion states, Texas is ill-equipped to deal with the COVID job-loss fallout.)

In and around the District, virtually, in May:

• The elections must go on. Anticipating a shortage of people to staff the polls, local high school student Sydney Watson contacted me regarding her initiative – Students Step Up ­– to recruit other students to train and serve as election workers for the November 3rd General Election. Way to go Sydney! It’s a serious need. Many perennial poll workers are in the age range of high vulnerability to COVID-19, and are understandably reluctant to serve again this year. Interested in helping? Here are links to information for students and information for adults, or contact my office for details. Applications due September 29, 2020.

• Our Virtual Food Drive benefitting the North Texas Food Bank exceeded our goals, bringing in food and supplies for a great many people in need. Sincere thanks and appreciation to all who supported the effort.

Back at the office:

• With less than five months until the start of the 2021 legislative session, policy meetings are in full swing. Over the past month I met with UT Dallas faculty about wind energy, the Texas Criminal Justice Coalition about reform proposals, and regional pioneers about Texas’s IT infrastructure and regulatory regime. On the public health front, UT Southwestern convened regional legislators for an overview and explanation of their research project to better understand, contain, and treat patients with COVID-19.

• Earlier this year I helped strengthen the cooperation between One Man’s Treasure, a North Texas non-profit, and the State Department of Corrections. The organization works directly with men who are exiting the state prison system, providing professional attire and help with job interviews and networking opportunities. More recently I had the opportunity to donate 500 masks for use in their clothing site (along with some of my gently used suits) in appreciation of and support for their continued service. They do good, kind work.

Policy Spotlight: resuming school with the anxiety of uncertainty.

Who’s running the back-to-school-in-a-pandemic effort this Fall? School districts? The Texas Education Agency? The Attorney General? The Governor? Local health authorities?

Yes. And no. Over the past few weeks the TEA and state officials have issued various guidelines deadlines opinions requirements abatements enhancements restrictions and qualifications applicable to how independent school districts can “independently” run school districts. Meanwhile there is no resounding consensus among policy makers, educators, and the public. Confusion abounds and anxiety hangs in the air, for parents, teachers, and even – perhaps especially – school districts, as students prepare to head back to school either virtually or in-person or both.

Granted, this stuff is hard. There’s no manual. But let’s not let that stop us from complaining. It would be helpful if leadership and the TEA would:

• confirm that schools that close in response to objective health criteria developed in close consultation with public health officials, and that are providing virtual learning, will receive full formula funding;

• gather and disseminate efficacious and promising practices from schools and daycare providers around the state;

• commit to devoting personnel and resources to identifying and overcoming barriers to distance learning, most prevalent among disadvantaged groups and English language learners.

Meanwhile, here’s the status on some of the bigger issues:

School funding and finance. But whereas last session we had a surplus of cash, we now face a dire budget shortfall. Will the Legislature maintain the 86th session’s commitment to increased education funding?I think most legislators aim to preserve education funding (I certainly do). The question is, how? In the past the Legislature has responded to shortfalls with spending cuts and increased reliance on local property taxes. The latter option was rightly terminated by HB3. So if we don’t cut, we’ll have to find revenue. It’s going to be a scramble, and it’s far from predictable. Perhaps we’ll be rescued by federal dollars (not holding my breath), or we’ll manage to craft a combination of additional state revenue, programmatic efficiencies, and budget realignments (i.e., taking from one purpose and giving them to another). Can’t wait.

As for the present current fiscal biennium, rest assured that the formula funding for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years remains unchanged. (Yes, the TEA used federal pandemic funding to supplant the state’s current education funding obligations, but the amount that schools receive has not been altered.)

School start and COVID protocol. There is money available for pandemic costs. The state allocated (largely from federal COVID dollars) about $400 million to reimburse school districts for expenses incurred last Spring (up to 75% of total COVID-related expenses), $200 million to support distance learning (including the purchase of home internet devices for students who need them), and $100 million for PPE. Educators should stay engaged to ensure that the funding is properly disbursed and deployed.Since the beginning of July we’ve gone from:

• mandatory daily on-campus instruction as a precondition to state funding(!), to

• local health orders to keep campuses closed through Labor Day, to

• a TEA statement that that (above) is just fine, and that ISDs and local health authorities will have authority over when and how on-campus classes start, to

• the Texas Attorney General issuing a “non-binding” opinion letter (which in practical effect is pretty binding after all) stating that local health authorities do not have authority to close schools absent an on-campus COVID outbreak, to

• the TEA reversing its previous position (above) and declaring that it won’t provide funding to schools that close in response to public health orders.So we’re kinda back to where we started, except, since the Texas COVID experience isn’t going so well, the start of on-campus instruction will be delayed and funding will be preserved during the delay. Most schools will be conducting distance learning through Labor Day. After that, they can continue virtually, in-person, or as a hybrid, for up to eight more weeks (but more than four more weeks requires TEA approval).

STAAR stakes. To the great relief of a great many, the Governor temporarily waived the STAAR test for purposes of promoting kids from 5th-to-6th and 8th-to-9th grades. This reprieve from high-stakes testing will help educators give much needed attention to the many new challenges of this school year.

Closing thoughts. The tornados took 3,800 trees from various parts of Dallas. The Texas Trees Foundation is hard at work planting replacement trees. But it will take a long time for the majesty of a mature tree canopy to grace those neighborhoods again. Trees grow only as fast as trees grow.