Tag Archives: lieutenant governor

Guest Post: 239,517 Children Trapped in Political Rhetoric

Moak Casey logofrom Moak, Casey & Associates
Dec. 12, 2016

In an effort to solicit support for his voucher plan, the lieutenant governor recently told a group of education and business leaders in Dallas that 239,517 children attend a “failing public school in Texas.” (Source: The Dallas Morning News). Advocates of choice and vouchers often say that students are “trapped” in failing schools. The phrasing takes advantage of an accountability system that is designed to identify at least 5% of all schools in the state as “failing,” regardless of how well the schools, or the students enrolled in them, performed. Perhaps a better assessment is that students are trapped in the political rhetoric around school choice and/or school vouchers. (“School choice” is considered to be a broad term that subsumes vouchers and education savings grants, either or both of which take taxpayer dollars away from public schools and shifts them to the private sector.)

Education Commissioner Mike Morath recently told the TASA/TASB convention audience that, “We get beaten up for what we do, but our public schools are doing as well as they’ve ever done.” The same can be said for the parents and teachers of children in schools that have high educational risk factors. What do the numbers really tell us about Texas students and the accountability system that shadows their daily walk in Texas public schools?

  • During the 2015-16 school year, Texas public schools enrolled 5,284,252 students. That means that over 5 million (5,044,735 or 95%) students were enrolled in campuses that received a TEA rating of Met Standard.
  • In fact, 7,667 out of 8,673 or 88% of Texas public schools in 2015-16, inclusive of charter schools,received a Met Standard rating. When charters are excluded, the figure rises above 89%. (Source: TEA 2016 Preliminary Accountability System State Summary, as of September 14, 2016.)
  • The number of schools not meeting standards has declined each year since 2013, when the count stood at 768 Improvement Required (IR-rated) campuses compared to the most recent count of 467 IR-rated campuses — even as the accountability system has become more rigorous.

Those who indiscriminately cite the 239, 517 figure for shock value fail to tell the REST of the story. While it’s true that 239,517 students are enrolled at one of the 467 public and/or charter schools that received a TEA rating of Improvement Required for the 2015-16 school year, that does not mean that the students, or their schools, are “failing” as some voucher advocates state. Here are the numbers behind the rhetoric that tell the REST of the story.

  • Over half of the IR campuses (259 out of 467 or 55%) were rated IR for the first time. (Table 2)
  • Over half of the 239,517 students (52%) are enrolled in a campus that was rated Improvement Required (IR) for the first time. (Table 2) Historically, Year 1 IR campuses quickly improve and are removed from TEA’s IR list faster than other IR campuses.
  • 72% are enrolled at a Year 1 or Year 2 IR campus. (Table 2)
  • 51 campuses missed only one – out of four possible – index target. (Table 3)
  • Only 35 out of 8,673 campuses missed all 4 index targets. (Table 3)
  • 25,218 students are enrolled in one of the 68 charter schools with an IR rating. (Table 1) To our knowledge, no students are required to attend charter schools.
  • Out of the 467 schools rated in 2016 as Improvement Required, 102 graduated a total of 10,558 students in SY 2014-15. Of those, 8,349 or 79% of the graduates had completed rigorous programs of study, including Recommended High School Plan, Distinguished Plan, Foundation Plan with Endorsements, or Foundation Plan with Distinguished Level of Achievement.
  • The phrasing, “trapped in failing schools” paints a picture of “no way out.” In fact, all 399 IR-rated non-charter campuses were subject to Public Education Grant (PEG) requirements to offer choice options to each one of their enrolled students. Over 1,100 more schools that were not rated as Improvement Required in 2015 also were subject to PEG requirements, due to IR ratings in either of the prior two years and/or performance criteria distinct from state ratings. None of this takes into account any other forms of choice available within the districts right now.

And finally, those who disparage public schools fail to point out that in Texas, at least 5% of the schools will be designated by TEA as “failing” simply by virtue of the accountability system’s design.

  • The current accountability system (based largely on STAAR tests) is designed to identify at least 5% of schools as missing standards, or “failing” – because the targets it uses are built on a quota established in federal law.
  • That means that we can reasonably anticipate that at least 264,000 (5% of Texas enrollment) students will be enrolled in low performing campuses – even if their campuses performed better than they did the year before; and even if their local communities rate them as Exemplary, Recognized or Acceptable on the Family and Community Engagement Ratings that are required by state law.
  • The shift to an A-F rating system, in which both D’s and F’s are statutorily required to signify “unacceptable” performance, automatically ensures that more students will be enrolled in “failing schools” if the bottom 5% of campuses are given F’s and the next 10% are given D’s. This predetermined outcome will feed right into a fresh, new round of rhetoric from “school choice” advocates, even though the “increase” is simply a function of the system’s design.

The original intent of our state’s accountability system was to foster, inform and support continuous improvement efforts in teaching and learning. That seemed to be a universally accepted premise. Having a predetermined failure threshold in the current system seems to 1) subvert that original, positive intent, 2) reinforce a biased narrative about the state of public education, and 3) perpetuate the notion that schools must be punished before improvements will take place. At best, it seems unwise to put faith in a system that generates predetermined results with regard to “failing” schools. Before any school is labeled as a “failure,” we need to critically reconsider the rhetoric (and the hidden agenda) of voucher advocates in using an accountability system to create a certain margin of schools as “failing” the students, parents and communities that they serve.

This article originally appeared at https://www.moakcasey.com/articles/viewarticledoc.aspx?AID=16390&DID=12732 and was reprinted with permission from Moak, Casey & Associates. 

Guest post: Special education issues facing the 85th legislature


Janna Lilly

by Janna Lilly, Director of Govermental Relations
Texas Council of Administrators of Special Education (TCASE)

Special education issues are once again expected to be hot topics in the upcoming Texas Legislative Session including vouchers, special education identification, and (yes, again) cameras.


The lieutenant governor has been very vocal that passing voucher legislation is one of his key priorities. TCASE opposes subsidizing private schools with public funds through vouchers or voucher-like programs such as taxpayer savings plans or scholarship credits. Vouchers are particularly harmful for students with disabilities. Private schools are not required to accept or even appropriately serve students with disabilities. Private schools are not required provide the legal protections mandated by federal and state laws to protect the rights and interests of students with disabilities.

Special education identification

Currently the state’s Performance Based Monitoring Analysis System (PBMAS) gives districts a grade or performance level based on an 8.5 percent standard that has come under recent scrutiny in the media. As a result, at least one bill has already been filed to prohibit the Texas Education Agency (TEA) from evaluating districts based on their percentage of students with disabilities.

TCASE recommends TEA continue to provide districts with identification data in PBMAS, but remove the 8.5 percent standard and the corresponding performance level assignment. This would provide necessary information to the state and districts without the reality or perception of a punitive system.

While there are a multitude of state systems designed to gather data on special education, minimal statewide data systems exist to identify the often extensive interventions provided with general education supports only. TCASE recommends the agency develop further statewide data systems to acknowledge these efforts and identify the potential impact on student growth and achievement.


Senate Bill (SB) 507 passed last session requiring cameras in certain special education classrooms. The TEA asked the Texas Attorney General (AG) for clarification on several pieces of the law. The AG issued his opinion strictly interpreting the bill, primarily saying one request means cameras must be installed in all eligible classrooms across the district regardless of the bill’s authors stating their intent was that one request applied to one classroom. The AG told lawmakers they would need to change the bill in the next session if they meant something different from what was passed. Lawmakers are drafting bills expected to address some of the concerns including clarifying that one request triggers a camera in a single classroom versus the entire district. Currently, some districts are installing cameras in single classrooms, while some are reporting installing cameras or equipment in all eligible classrooms. Districts are also reporting significant costs associated with the law’s six-month archiving requirement. Community advocates are expected to want some changes of their own, like expanding venues for disagreement beyond the school board including potentially even the ability to file suit. TCASE believes the bill’s current grievance remedies are sufficient, one request should apply to one classroom, and that next legislative session should appropriate funds to cover this unfunded mandate.

Lieutenant governor issues interim charges to Senate Education committee

Today, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) released his list of interim charges that the Senate Education Committee is expected to study and report on before the next regular legislative session begins in January 2017. The subject matter includes predictable issues such as school choice and expanding charter schools, as well as monitoring legislation that passed earlier this year. Here is the full list:

Senate Education Committee Interim Charges

  • School Choice: Study school choice programs enacted in states across the nation, examining education savings account and tax credit scholarship programs in particular. Examine the implementation process used in other states and what impact these programs have had on student academics and state and local district budgets. Make recommendations on which choice plan could best serve Texas students.
  • Charter School Approval, Expansion, Revocation: Study the approval, expansion, and revocation of public charter schools in Texas, including the implementation of SB 2 (83R) and other legislation. In particular, examine the issues surrounding the disposition of state property when charters are revoked, non-renewed, or cease to operate. Make recommendations regarding policies to ensure an efficient and effective transfer and disposal of state property that preserves state interest while ensuring that certain investment capital and the bond market supporting charter construction remains robust. In addition, make recommendations if needed to clarify policies regarding expansion of existing high-quality charter schools in Texas. Additionally, examine facility funding for charter schools in other states and make recommendations on facility funding assistance for charter schools in Texas.
  • Teacher Preparation, Retention, Shortages: Study teacher shortage and retention issues in Texas and evaluate educator preparation programs to determine if these programs are preparing educators for the rigors of the 21st century classroom. In particular, examine the shortages of ELL, special education, and STEM educators across the state and identify the issues creating a shortage. Make recommendations to improve educator preparation throughout the state and increase certification rates. (Joint Charge with Senate Higher Education)
  • Efficiency/Productivity Review: Conduct a comprehensive performance review of all public schools in Texas, examining ways to improve efficiency, productivity, and student academic outcomes. Study performance-based funding mechanisms that allocate dollars based upon achievement versus attendance. Identify any state mandates which hinder student performance, district and campus innovation, and efficiency and productivity overall.
  • Broadband Access: Evaluate digital learning opportunities in classrooms and examine existing barriers to schools’ ability to provide a digital learning environment. In particular, study the availability of affordable broadband access to school districts across Texas. Examine different options for improving access to broadband service in all areas of the state, for districts and student homes. Make recommendations on a statewide plan for building the necessary infrastructure to provide a competitive, free-market environment in broadband service.
  • Teacher-Student Relationships/Student Safety: Study the recent rise of inappropriate teacher-student relationships, the impact of social media interaction between teachers and students, and examine the current efforts by the Texas Education Agency, schools, law enforcement, and the courts to investigate and prosecute any educator engaged in inappropriate relationships. Determine what recommendations, if any, are needed to improve student safety, including increasing agency staff, adjusting penalties, and strengthening efforts to sanction educators’ certificates for misconduct. Study and address the issue of prevention through training and education of school employees.
  • County School Systems: Examine the structure and performance of the two remaining county-based school systems, Harris County Department of Education and Dallas County Schools. In particular, study the efficiency of these entities and determine whether those services are duplicative with education service centers or could be absorbed by education service centers.
  • School Board Governance, Low-Performing Schools: Examine current school board governance policies and practices and make recommendations that could improve the focus, attitudes, and outcomes of Texas school boards, districts, and students. Study existing board training requirements for public schools and make suggestions to educate school board trustees of policies that could achieve better student outcomes, particularly within the framework set for low-performing schools in House Bill 1842 (HB1842)(84R).
  • Monitoring Charge: Monitor the implementation of legislation addressed by the Senate Committee on Education and make recommendations for any legislation needed to improve, enhance, and/or complete implementation. Specifically, monitor the following: 1) Legislation establishing state intervention procedures for public schools with academically unsuccessful ratings of at least two consecutive school years; and providing school districts the ability to be designated as a district of innovation; 2) Initiatives to build a high-quality pre-kindergarten grant program; 3) Legislation to raise standards of teacher preparation programs and establish a more consistent, high-quality accountability system; 4) Program to require the placement and use of video cameras in self-contained classrooms or other settings providing special education services to students; 5) Legislation to address training support for counselors, and advising courses for middle school students; and 6) Legislation to establish criteria for alternative measures of assessments to meet high school graduation requirements.

ATPE looks forward to working with Senate Education Committee Chairman Larry Taylor (R-Friendswood) and other members of the committee to study these issues over the next year.

Senate Education Committee to discuss private school vouchers on Monday

Before taking the oath of office as Texas’ new Lieutenant Governor in January, Sen. Dan Patrick continues to promote his pro-private school voucher agenda as chair of the Senate Education Committee. Patrick has scheduled a Nov. 17 committee hearing to discuss two interim charges as well as issues relating to school facilities funding.

Senate Interim Charge #3 calls for the committee to review school choice programs in other states, examine the potential budgetary impact of voucher-related tax credits, and review parent trigger and Public Education Grant program laws already on the books in Texas. Under Senate Interim Charge #4, the committee will discuss the implementation of last year’s comprehensive charter school legislation, Senate Bill 2. View the full agenda here and stay tuned to Teach the Vote for updates following Monday’s meeting.

On a related note, three well-known voices in Texas politics penned a recent article criticizing school privatization efforts. The authors, former Lieutenant Governor Bill Ratliff, current State Board of Education member Thomas Ratliff, and current State Representative Bennett Ratliff, opine that arguments in favor of privatization are based on the myth of students being “trapped in failing schools.” The Ratliffs also lay out reasons that private school vouchers would not be beneficial to teachers or students in Texas. Read the article here.

General Election Results: By the numbers

In the Nov. 4 general election for Texas Governor and Lieutenant Governor, the following is a breakdown of the votes cast and corresponding percentages with 98.98% of precincts reporting as of Nov. 5:

Greg Abbott (Republican)            2,778,461 (59.29%)
Wendy R. Davis (Democrat)        1,821,494 (38.87%)
Kathie Glass (Libertarian)                 66,045 (1.40%)
Brandon Parmer (Green)                  18,369 (0.39%)
Sarah M. Pavitt (Write-In)                   1,155 (0.02%)

Lieutenant Governor
Dan Patrick (Republican)                2,707,566 (58.18%)
Leticia Van de Putte (Democrat)    1,799,505 (38.66%)
Robert D. Butler (Libertarian)            119,076 (2.55%)
Chandrakantha Courtney (Green)      27,544 (0.59%)

Here are the outcomes by percentage of all Texas State Senate races that were contested on the Nov. 4 general election ballot:

Senate District 2
Bob Hall (R) with 83.6% defeated Don Bates (L) with 16.4%. Hall defeated incumbent Sen. Bob Deuell (R) in a primary match-up earlier this year.

Senate District 3
Incumbent Robert Nichols (R) with 90.6% trounced Tyler Lindsey (L) with 9.4%.

Senate District 5
Incumbent Charles Schwertner (R) with 65% won over Joel Shapiro (D) with 31.2% and Matthew Whittington (L) with 3.8%.

Senate District 7
Paul Bettencourt (R) with 71.8% defeated Jim Davis (D) with 26.3% and Whitney Bilyeu (L) with 1.9%. This is the seat being vacated by Sen. Dan Patrick (R) who was elected Lieutenant Governor last night.

Senate District 8
In the seat currently held by Ken Paxton, who won last night’s race to become Attorney General, current State Rep. Van Taylor (R) earned 79% of the votes to convincingly defeat Scott Jameson (L) with 21%. A Democratic candidate, Jack Ternan, withdrew from the race.

Senate District 9
Incumbent Kelly Hancock (R) with 65.1% defeated Gregory Perry (D) with 34.9%. A Libertarian candidate, Nicolas Wallace, withdrew from the race.

Senate District 10
Konni Burton (R) earned 52.8% to defeat Libby Willis (D) at 44.7%, Gene Lord (L) at 1.8% and John Tunmire (G) at 0.6%,

Senate District 14
Incumbent Kirk Watson (D) beat James Strohm (L) by a hefty margin of 80% to 20%.

Senate District 15
Incumbent John Whitmire (D) with 59.2% defeated Ron Hale (R) with 38.5% and Gilberto Velasquez, Jr. (L) with 2.4%.

Senate District 16
Don Huffines (R) was declared the victor after his opponent, Mike Dooling (L), apparently withdrew from the race. Huffines previously defeated incumbent Sen. John Carona (R) in a primary contest back in March.

Senate District 17
Incumbent Joan Huffman (R) with 63.3% defeated Rita Lucido (D) with 33.9%. George Hardy (L) earned just 2% of the vote while David Courtney (G) earned 0.7%.

Senate District 23
Incumbent Royce West (D) earned 79.4% of the vote to soundly defeat John Lawson (R) at 18.8% and Jonathan Erhardt (L) at 1.8%.

Senate District 25
Incumbent Donna Campbell (R) with 65.2% was the winner over Daniel Boone (D) with 31.8% and Brandin Lea (L) with 3%.

Senate District 30
Incumbent Craig Estes (R) with 86.7% defeated Cory Lane (L) with 13.3%.

Senate District 31
Incumbent Kel Seliger (R) with 90.4% easily prevailed over Steven Gibson (L) with 9.6%.

Below is the full list of results for contested Texas State House races in the Nov. 4 general election:

House District 3
Incumbent Cecil Bell (R) – 91%
Larry Parr (L) – 9%

House District 4
Stuart Spitzer (R) – 89.1%
Frederick Rick Stralow (L) – 10.9%
Spitzer defeated incumbent Rep. Lance Gooden in the March 2014 primary election.

House District 5
Incumbent Bryan Hughes (R) – 92.3%
Ron Walenta (L) – 7.7%

House District 6
Incumbent Matt Schaefer (R) – 87.8%
Joel Gardner (L) – 12.2%

House District 8
Incumbent Byron Cook (R) – 87.9%
John Wilford (L) – 12.1%

House District 14
Incumbent John Raney (R) – 68.1%
Andrew Metscher (D) – 28.5%
Bruce Pugh (L) – 3.4%

House District 16 (open seat formerly held by Sen. Brandon Creighton)
Will Metcalf (R) – 83.8%
Michael Hayles (D) – 13.7%
Bob Townsend (L) – 2.6%

House District 17
Incumbent Tim Kleinschmidt (R) – 64.6%
Carolyn Banks (D) – 35.4%

House District 20
Incumbent Marsha Farney (R) – 73.3%
Stephen Wyman (D) – 22.7%
Jarrod Weaver (L) – 3.9%

House District 21 (open seat)
Dade Phelan (R) – 74.4%
Gavin Bruney (D) – 25.6%

House District 23 (open seat)
Wayne Faircloth (R) – 54.6%
Susan Criss (D) – 45.4%

House District 24
Incumbent Greg Bonnen (R) was the winner after challenger Joseph Whittington withdrew from the race.

House District 25
Incumbent Dennis Bonnen (R) was the winner after challenger Randall Goodson withdrew from the race.

House District 26
Incumbent Rick Miller (R) – 69.7%
Amber Paaso (D) – 30.3%

House District 27
Incumbent Ron Reynolds (D) – 67%
David Hamilton (R) – 33%

House District 41
Incumbent Bobby Guerra (D) – 57.5%
Elijah Casas (R) – 42.5%

House District 42
Incumbent Richard Pena Raymond (D) – 88.4%
Nicolas Serna, III (G) – 11.6%

House District 43
Incumbent J.M. Lozano (R) – 61.4%
Kim Gonzalez (D) – 38.6%

House District 44
Incumbent John Kuempel (R) – 75.7%
Robert Bohmfalk (D) – 24.3%

House District 45
Incumbent Jason Isaac (R) – 72.6%
Jim Duke (L) – 27.4%

House District 46
Incumbent Dawnna Dukes (D) – 84%
Kevin Ludlow (L) – 16%

House District 47
Incumbent Paul Workman (R) – 73%
Scott McKinlay (L) – 27%

House District 48
Incumbent Donna Howard (D) – 78.1%
Ben Easton (L) – 21.9%

House District 49
Incumbent Elliott Naishtat (D) – 85.1%
Daniel Krawisz (L) – 14.9%

House District 50
Incumbent Celia Israel (D) – 58.7%
Mike VanDeWalle (R) – 37.1%
David Dreesen (L) – 4.2%

House District 51
Incumbent Eddie Rodriguez (D) – 87.3%
Arthur DiBianca (L) – 12.7%

House District 52
Incumbent Larry Gonzales (R) – 56.4%
Chris Osborn (D) – 38.5%
Irene Johnson (L) – 5%

House District 53 (open seat)
Andrew Murr (R) – 89.9%
Maximilian Martin (L) – 10.1%

House District 54
Incumbent Jimmie Don Aycock (R) was the winner; challenger Claudia Brown (D) withdrew from the race.

House District 56
Incumbent Charles “Doc” Anderson (R) – 83.3%
Clifford Deuvall (L) – 16.7%

House District 58 (open seat)
DeWayne Burns (R) – 80.4%
Greg Kauffman (D) – 19.6%

House District 61
Incumbent Phil King (R) – 83%
Matthew Britt (D) – 17%

House District 63
Incumbent Tan Parker (R) – 77.3%
Daniel Moran (D) – 22.7%

House District 64
Incumbent Myra Crownover (R) – 63.4%
Emy Lyons (D) – 33.8%
Braeden Wright (G) – 2.8%

House District 65
Incumbent Ron Simmons (R) – 64.3%
Alex Mendoza (D) – 35.7%

House District 66 (open seat)
Matt Shaheen (R) was declared the winner after Ian Santorella withdrew from the race.

House District 67
Incumbent Jeff Leach (R) – 78.5%
Patrick Peavy (L) – 21.5%

House District 76
Cesar Blanco (D) – 87.1%
Alexandro Lozano (L) – 12.9%
Blanco defeated incumbent Rep. Naomi Gonzalez (D) in the March primary.

House District 77
Incumbent Marisa Marquez (D) – 78.2%
Ben Mendoza (I) – 21.8%

House District 82
Incumbent Tom Craddick (R) was the winner; challenger Dan Anderson withdrew from the race.

House District 83 (open seat formerly held by Sen. Charles Perry)
Dustin Burrows (R) – 81.2%
Max R. Tarbox (D) – 18.8%

House District 84
Incumbent John Frullo (R) – 72.7%
Edward Tishler (D) – 27.3%

House District 85
Incumbent Phil Stephenson (R) – 66.6%
Cynthia Drabek (D) – 33.4%

House District 87
Incumbent Four Price (R) – 84.3%
Abel Bosquez (D) – 15.7%

House District 88
Incumbent Ken King (R) – 93.2%
Kerry McKennon (L) – 6.8%

House District 89
Incumbent Jodie Laubenberg (R) – 71.6%
Sameena Karmally (D) – 28.4%

House District 91
Incumbent Stephanie Klick (R) – 68.7%
David Ragan (D) – 28.2%
Felecia Whatley (L) – 3.1%

House District 92
Incumbent Jonathan Stickland (R) – 63.6%
Tina Penney (D) – 36.4%

House District 93
Incumbent Matt Krause (R) was the winner; challenger Jeff Owens (L) withdrew from the race.

House District 94
Tony Tinderholt (R) – 56.6%
Cole Ballweg (D) – 40.5%
Robert Harris (L) – 2.9%
Tinderholt defeated incumbent Rep. Diane Patrick (R) in the March 2014 primary election.

House District 95
Incumbent Nicole Collier (D) – 75.8%
Albert McDaniel (R) – 24.2%

House District 96
Incumbent Bill Zedler (R) – 80.7%
Quinn Eaker (L) – 19.3%

House District 97
Incumbent Craig Goldman (R) – 81.6%
Rod Wingo (L) – 18.4%

House District 100
Incumbent Eric Johnson (D) – 90%
Brian Chapman (L) – 10%

House District 101
Incumbent Chris Turner (D) – 84.6%
Carl Nulsen (L) – 15.4%

House District 102
Linda Koop (R) – 62.5%
George Clayton (D) – 37.5%
Koop defeated incumbent Rep. Stefani Carter (R) in the March 2014 primary.

House District 105
Rodney Anderson (R) – 55.4%
Susan Motley (D) – 42.7%
Carl Spiller (L) – 1.8%
Anderson defeated incumbent Rep. Linda Harper-Brown (R) in the March 2014 primary.

House District 106
Incumbent Patrick Fallon (R) – 70%
Lisa Osterholt (D) – 27.5%
Rodney Caston (L) – 2.5%

House District 107
Incumbent Kenneth Sheets (R) – 55%
Carol Donovan (D) – 45%

House District 108 (open seat)
Morgan Meyer (R) – 60.7%
Leigh Bailey (D) – 39.3%

House District 112
Incumbent Angie Chen Button (R) – 81.6%
Michael Binkley (L) – 18.4%
Kimberly Williams (D) withdrew from the race.

House District 113
Incumbent Cindy Burkett (R) – 59.4%
Milton Whitley (D) – 40.6%

House District 114
Incumbent Jason Villalba (R) – 81.1%
Thomas Griffing (L) – 18.9%

House District 115
Matt Rinaldi (R) – 57.1%
Paul Stafford (D) – 39.5%
Kim Kelley (L) – 3.4%
Rinaldi defeated incumbent Rep. Bennett Ratliff (R) in the March 2014 primary election.

House District 117
Rick Galindo (R) – 52.7%
Incumbent Philip Cortez (D) – 47.3%

House District 120
Incumbent Ruth Jones McClendon (R) – 82.3%
Gilberto Villela (L) – 17.7%

House District 121
Incumbent Joe Straus (R) – 82.1%
Jeff Carruthers (I) – 17.9%

House District 122
Incumbent Lyle Larson (R) – 85%
James Holland (L) – 15%

House District 123
Incumbent Mike Villarreal (D) – 86.3%
Paul Ingmundson (G) – 13.7%

House District 125
Incumbent Justin Rodriguez (D) – 76.9%
Daniel Behrman (L) – 23.1%

House District 126
Incumbent Patricia Harless (R) – 86.3%
Cris Hernandez (L) – 13.7%

House District 128
Incumbent Wayne Smith (R) – 90.7%
Ken Lowder (L) – 9.3%

House District 129 (open seat)
Dennis Paul (R) – 67.8%
John Gay (D) – 32.2%

House District 130
Incumbent Allen Fletcher (R) – 90.8%
Art Browning (G) – 9.2%

House District 132 (open seat)
Mike Schofield (R) – 66.1%
Luis Lopez (D) – 33.9%

House District 133
Incumbent Jim Murphy (R) – 74.6%
Laura Nicol (D) – 25.4%

House District 134
Incumbent Sarah Davis (R) – 61.2%
Alison Ruff (D) – 38.8%

House District 135
Incumbent Gary Elkins (R) – 65.9%
Moiz Abbas (D) – 34.1%

House District 136
Incumbent Tony Dale (R) – 54.2%
John Bucy (D) – 41.4%
Justin Billiot (L) – 4.7%

House District 137
Incumbent Gene Wu (D) – 57.9%
Morad Fiki (R) – 42.1%

House District 138
Incumbent Dwayne Bohac (R) – 66.8%
Fred Vernon (D) – 33.2%

House District 144
Gilbert Pena (R) – 50.7%
Incumbent Mary Ann Perez (D) – 49.3%

House District 146
Incumbent Borris Miles (D) – 91.9%
Morgan Bradford (G) – 8.1%

House District 148
Incumbent Jessica Farrar (D) – 60.3%
Chris Carmona (R) – 39.7%

House District 149
Incumbent Hubert Vo (D) – 45.1%
Al Hoang (R) – 54.9%

House District 150
Incumbent Debbie Riddle (R) – 73.2%
Amy Perez (D) – 26.8%

Here are the results of all State Board of Education (SBOE) contested races on the Nov. 4 general election ballot, showing the number of votes cast and percentages as of Nov. 5:

Member, State Board of Education, District 3
Marisa B. Perez Incumbent (D) – 128,118 (59.49%)
Dave Mundy (R) – 80,485 (37.37%)
Josh Morales (L) – 6,727 (3.12%)
Total Votes 215,330 (only 98.57% of precincts had reported)

Member, State Board of Education, District 4
Lawrence A. Allen Jr. Incumbent (D) – 158,252 (76.45%)
Dorothy Olmos (R) – 48,729 (23.54%)
Total Votes 206,981 (100% of precincts)

Member, State Board of Education, District 7
David Bradley Incumbent (R) – 225,960 (63.87%)
Kathy King (D) – 119,789 (33.86%)
Megan DaGata (L) – 7,984 (2.25%)
Total Votes 353,733 (100% of precincts)

Member, State Board of Education, District 11
Patricia “Pat” Hardy Incumbent (R) – 242,032 (65.12%)
Nancy Bean (D) – 116,582 (31.36%)
Craig Sanders (L) – 13,034 (3.50%)
Total Votes 371,648 (100% of precincts)

Member, State Board of Education, District 12
Geraldine “Tincy” Miller Incumbent (R) – 221,418 (61.37%)
Lois Parrott (D) – 127,145 (35.24%)
Mark Wester (L) – 12,172 (3.37%)
Total Votes 360,735 (100% of precincts)

Member, State Board of Education, District 13
Erika Beltran (D) – 172,285 (89.82%)
Junart Sodoy (L) – 19,510 (10.17%)
Total Votes 191,795 (100% of precincts)

Election Day is here!

Today is your last chance to influence the outcome of important races on the ballot here in Texas, from electing a new Governor and Lieutenant Governor and other statewide officials, to deciding other races further down the ballot, such as seats in the Legislature and on the State Board of Education (SBOE).

Here are a few last-minute tips for Election Day voters:

  • Polls are open until 7 pm tonight.
  • Unless your county has established a Vote Center for this election, chances are you must vote in your assigned precinct on Election Day. Click here to search for your assigned polling place.
  • Unlike the primary elections held earlier this year, on Election Day you can vote for any candidate on the ballot, regardless of party affiliation. Whether or not you show up at the polls is a matter of public record. However, there is no public record of which specific candidates you choose to support or oppose on today’s ballot. We encourage you to vote your profession and support candidates who will support public education.
  • Don’t forget your photo ID!
  • If you’re still undecided, use Teach the Vote to learn more about the candidates’ stances on major public education issues. View profiles of candidates for Governor and Lieutenant Governor here. You can also view profiles of all legislative and SBOE candidates here.
  • Follow @TeachtheVote on Twitter for election night updates.

The education community has the power and numbers to shape the future of public education in Texas through this election.

Your vote is your voice – make sure it is heard!Vote image

Watch candidates for Texas Governor and Lt. Governor debate next week

Learn more about candidates at the top of the ticket and where they stand on public education. Early next week, candidates for Texas Governor and Lieutenant Governor will debate each other in anticipation of Election Day, Nov. 4. Here are the debate details:

Also, be sure to check out ATPE’s statewide candidate profiles of the nominees for Governor and Lt. Governor. You can find those by clicking on their names above or by navigating to the Take Action/Resources tab.

Watch the speeches of Greg Abbott, Wendy Davis and Leticia Van de Putte from the 2014 ATPE Summit

The Association of Texas Professional Educators (ATPE) held its annual state event, the ATPE Summit, July 9–11, at the Austin Convention Center. As part of our effort to promote political involvement within the education community and informed voting in the November 4 general election, ATPE invited all of the Republican and Democratic nominees for Texas governor and lieutenant governor to speak to the more than 900 educators in attendance at the summit. (ATPE is a non-partisan association and does not endorse candidates.)

Both nominees for governor, Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott and Sen. Wendy Davis (D–Fort Worth), accepted our invitation, along with lt. governor nominee Sen. Leticia Van de Putte (D–San Antonio). The other nominee for lt. governor, Sen. Dan Patrick (R–Houston), declined our invitation to speak.

If you were not at the summit, you now have the opportunity to view the candidates’ speeches in their entirety and share them with your friends and family. Each candidate’s speech has been split into two parts due to restrictions on the length of videos that can be posted online for public viewing, so be sure to watch both parts. Here are links to the videos:

Attorney General Greg Abbott: Part I; Part II

Sen. Wendy Davis: Part I; Part II

Sen. Leticia Van de Putte: Part I; Part II

We encourage voters to learn where all of the candidates stand on critical education issues and to support pro-public education candidates this election year. Visit our 2014 Races page to search for profiles of all legislative and State Board of Education candidates. On our Take Action: Resources page, you can also view complete profiles of the two nominees for lt. governor; gubernatorial candidate profiles will be added soon.

Learn more about Patrick and Van de Putte

Election Day is now only 100 days away. Many important races will be decided on Nov. 4, including high-profile statewide contests for Texas governor and lieutenant governor. Be an informed voter by learning about the candidates’ viewpoints on public education. Teach the Vote makes it easy by providing you with background information, voting records, candidates’ survey responses and additional research compiled by ATPE staff.

Visit our Take Action: Resources page to view new profiles of the Republican and Democratic nominees for lieutenant governor, Dan Patrick and Leticia Van de Putte. Profiles of the gubernatorial nominees will be provided soon. Find profiles of all candidates for the Texas Legislature and State Board of Education on our 2014 Races search page.

Get to know the runoff candidates

Several important primary runoffs will be decided in late May. If you did not vote at all in the March 4 primary, you can vote in either the Republican or Democratic party runoff. If you voted in a specific party’s primary during the March 4 election, then you can only vote in that same party’s runoff in May; you cannot switch parties for the runoff alone.

Before you vote, get to know the candidates who made it to a runoff by viewing their profiles on Teach the Vote.



House of Representatives

Stay tuned to Teach the Vote for more election information as the runoff election date approaches. We’ll soon be featuring profiles of the candidates for Texas Governor and Lieutenant Governor, where there is also a runoff on the Republican side between incumbent David Dewhurst and challenger Dan Patrick.

For a discussion of all of the statewide runoffs that will be on the May 27 ballot, visit the Texas Tribune.