Tag Archives: sb 1569

Teach the Vote’s Week in Review: May 17, 2019

With major session deadlines hitting this weekend, here’s a look at this week’s legislative developments, courtesy of the ATPE Governmental Relations team:


ATPE Lobbyist Andrea Chevalier testified in the House Public Education Committee, May 14, 2019.

  The House Public Education Committee met once again on Tuesday to continue hearing bills already passed by the Senate. As reported by ATPE Lobbyist Andrea Chevalier in this blog post, much of the focus of Tuesday’s hearing centered on the  Accelerated Campus Excellence (ACE) turnaround programs proposed by Senate Bill 1412. While the bill contains some measures that ATPE supports, we testified against the bill due to its provisions for the forced ranking of teachers in a school district (which could possibly be based on student performance on standardized tests) and requiring districts to contract with third-party vendors to implement their ACE programs. Similar legislation has been moving through the Senate Education Committee, and related language is being considered as part of House Bill 3, the school finance bill that is pending in conference committee. Read more about that bill below.

Under mandatory session deadlines, this week marked the last week for bills to be heard by House committees in order for them to have a chance of reaching the House floor. The House Public Education Committee also met Thursday to vote out more of the pending bills.


Senate Education Committee meeting, May 14, 2019.

Like its counterpart in the lower chamber, the Senate Education Committee met twice this week on Tuesday and Thursday to hear its final bills of the session. Although the committee can still meet to vote out pending bills that have already been heard, the committee will not hear any additional bills or take testimony from this point forward. One such formal meeting is taking place this afternoon, where the committee is expected to vote on additional pending bills.

During this week’s earlier meetings, the Senate Education Committee voted to advance a number of bills supported by ATPE, including House Bill 165 enabling high school students in special education programs to receive endorsements and House Bill 2424 requiring the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) to establish and issue new micro-credentials for educators. The committee also approved HB 4205, which as amended is another of the ATPE-opposed bills pertaining to ACE campuses and the criteria under which teachers would be eligible to work on those campuses.

More on these Senate Education Committee hearings can be found in this week’s blog posts from ATPE Lobbyist Mark Wiggins here and here.


The most high-profile bills of the 86th legislative session pertaining to public education are being negotiated by conference committees appointed for the purpose of resolving differences between House and Senate versions of the same bill. Among those bills is the state budget in HB 1, which is the only bill required to be passed before time runs out. Fortunately, the conference committee for HB 1 is holding its last meeting this afternoon, signaling that a final budget deal is near.

This week the conference committee for HB 3 also continued its meetings on the school finance legislation, aiming to release a compromise bill next week. As negotiations progress, ATPE is hopeful that the bill’s final version will include an across-the-board raise for educators, although it is unclear what amount will be attached to that raise and how it will be structured. While the final bill will most likely contain some form of merit pay, there seems to be a desire among legislators to limit the use of STAAR test data in determining such pay. Additionally, we are optimistic that a final compromise on HB 3 will no longer include many of the controversial outcomes-based funding proposals and additional testing that the Senate included in its version. Even as these rumors are promising, ATPE urges our members to continue to contact your legislators to share your voice on HB 3 using our quick and easy tools on Advocacy Central.

Another bill that has been referred to a conference committee is SB 12, containing language to increase state contributions to TRS and provide retired educators with a 13th check. Since both bills deal with a substantial amount of state funding, a compromise proposal for the TRS bill is likely to be shared only once an agreement has been reached on the larger HB 3. For the latest updates on these bills, be sure to follow @TeachtheVote on Twitter.


Educators’ right to a political voice continues to be a subject of interest in the final rush of session, and bills that could have a negative impact on the education community remain active at various stages in the legislative process.

Unlike last session, this year no legislator filed a bill to limit the ability of educators to pay their voluntary membership dues to organizations such as ATPE through the convenience of payroll deduction. However, there are some legislators still hoping to pass a ban on payroll deduction as an amendment to another bill in these last few days of the session. One failed attempt came earlier this week when Rep. Phil King (R-Weatherford) floated a trial balloon during a House floor debate on a bill pertaining to the comptroller’s electronic funds transfer system. Recognizing that it was unlikely to succeed, Rep. King withdrew his amendment that was aimed at limiting payroll deduction options for certain public employees who receive payments electronically from the comptroller’s office, such as retirees’ annuities.

There is still a possibility that a similar payroll deduction amendment could be added to Senate Bill (SB) 29 by Rep. Mayes Middleton (R-Wallisville), which is a high-profile First Amendment-related bill that could come to the House floor this weekend. SB 29 has been described by its supporters as banning “taxpayer-funded lobbying,” but opponents say the bill is actually aimed at weakening the ability of locally-elected school boards, county leaders, and city governments to petition the state on matters of concern to local voters. In its current form, SB 29 proposes to prohibit such governmental entities from paying dues with taxpayer funds to organizations that lobby the legislature on certain issues. Notably, the bill’s anti-lobbying provisions would not apply to charter schools. The interest groups responsible for promoting SB 29 have a long history of fighting against public education and pushing bills aimed at weakening public schools.

Meanwhile, the clock is running out on other bills more directly aimed at educators. SB 1569 by Sen. Pat Fallon (R-Prosper) would outlaw certain political conversations between public school employees while on school grounds. This ATPE-opposed bill was left pending in the House Elections Committee, which has no further plans to meet this session. However this same committee did vote to advance SB 9 by Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola), which would increase the penalties associated with various prohibited election-related activities. While pitched as a way to protect the integrity of local elections, many of the provisions are written so broadly that they threaten to have a chilling effect and depress voter turnout in many cases. SB 9 also could be heard on the House floor as soon as this weekend.


Senate bills threaten to chill educator speech

Senate State Affairs Committee meeting, April 1, 2019

The Senate State Affairs Committee met Monday, April 1, and considered two bills that present serious concerns about free speech rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution — particularly when it comes to educators.

Both bills relate to the use of public funds for political advertising, which is already prohibited by state law. ATPE agrees with the current statutes and ethics rules that prohibit public resources from being used for political purposes. Electioneering on school time and with school resources should be illegal. However, the two bills heard by the committee Monday morning would criminalize behavior that is not only nonpolitical, but in some cases even required under state law. Together, they threaten to undermine all of the positive work the Texas Senate has done for public educators so far this session.

Sen. Pat Fallon (R-Prosper) filed Senate Bill (SB) 1569, which would dramatically expand the legal definition of electioneering solely as it applies to educators.

Electioneering is currently defined as advocating for or against a candidate, political party, or ballot measure. For example: A communication created on school district time or using school district money in support of Proposition X or Candidate Y clearly constitutes electioneering and an unlawful use of public resources. As filed, SB 1569 would include activity that advocates for or against “a political philosophy” or “a matter of public interest.” Neither term is defined in law or in Sen. Fallon’s bill, and ATPE contends that each phrase is subject to widely varying interpretation. For example, extolling the virtues of American democracy and our free enterprise system could be considered advocating for a “political philosophy” under this bill – despite the fact that both are required elements of Texas public schools’ curriculum. Likewise, a sign on a school bulletin board promoting a food drive for Hurricane Harvey victims could easily be construed as advocating for “a matter of public interest” if SB 1569 were to be enacted.

Perhaps even more troubling, SB 1569 would expand the definition of “political advertising” to include any political communication “directed to an individual person or multiple persons through any form of communication (emphasis added).” This could treat private conversations between co-workers as political advertising and subject to criminal penalties. As a whole, SB 1569 would impose a separate set of restrictions on the speech of public school employees that is far more expansive than restrictions imposed upon any other category of public employees.

Read ATPE’s written testimony against SB 1569 here.

SB 904 by Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola) aims to prevent third party organizations from sending political advertising to public e-mail addresses, subjecting the sender to a $100 fine per e-mail. This seemingly straightforward idea is complicated by a number of technical factors. First, most political websites allow a visitor to enter their e-mail address and receive automatic campaign updates. This simple process could potentially be abused, either intentionally or unintentionally through “bots” and e-mail spoofing, to rack up massive fines.

SB 904 also extends prohibitions against political advertising to include the use of public communications systems, including WiFi networks. This could have the absurd effect of criminalizing the act of accessing a campaign website from a personal mobile device while off the clock and sitting in a school parking lot. It could also jeopardize a majority of computer use in the Texas State Capitol, where visitors are offered free public WiFi and politics is a major topic of discussion.

Read ATPE’s written testimony against SB 904 here.

Public resources clearly should not be used for electioneering, but such activity is already expressly prohibited in state law. ATPE believes expanding current law in an attempt to broadly restrict the speech of educators as proposed by SB 904 and SB 1569 is unnecessary, discriminatory, and raises serious concerns about potential violations of the First Amendment. Taken together, these bills would likely have a severe chilling effect on educators’ speech.

We urge you to contact your state senator and ask them to OPPOSE SB 904 and SB 1569. ATPE members can use our simple tools at Advocacy Central to send a message to their legislators about these bills.

UPDATE (added 4/5/19): The Senate State Affairs Committee met again on Thursday, April 4, and voted to send these two bills to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation. The vote was 6-1 on both SB 1569 and SB 904. Sen. Judith Zaffirini was the only member of the committee to vote against the harmful bills. We urge educators to contact their senators and ask them to keep these bad bills from becoming law.