There are some damn good elements in this bill. It raises equity significantly for poor schools districts (from 73 percentile to 88 percentile, and then some more in enrichment tiers); it ends an aspect of recapture - giving those whining Highland Parkers one less thing to bitch about - and use as leverage - in the 80th. It gives teachers a pay raise. Sorry it's not $3k, but it's more than many get for other "noble" professions.

No, it's not a perfect bill. But hell, they had to deal with Shapiro. Cut some slack for the guys and gals who've been slaving away over this - and don't get any of the credit. Not everyone elected to the Senate sucks.

The debate/amendments fixed a lot of this:

Zaffirini's amendment ended the sunset of the health care stipend. While health care is not funded past next year, it's not ended, either.

The fourth Monday start date is generally supported by many in the school community, as well as the camp community. While not the ideal (local control), it's not as bad as post-Labor Day.

Public districts were added to the privatization provision by Shapleigh tonight, so that good public districts are on equal footing to pick up reconstituted low-performing schools.

The election dates are municipal, not partisan, per Brimer's amendment. So that's wrong, too.

The September election date is critical the first year. ISDs need the money, and quickly, to get the job done.

Health care stipend is no longer required to be funded for the support staff. It's up to the discretion of the local districts - which means lots of school districts can't afford it.

If I missed the election date change to municipal dates only, then I'll fix that. But last I saw, it was the November/May option. If you take into account that many smaller school districts can't afford the separate election dates b/c it costs so much to program the electronic voting machines, I'd expect most elections to be in November. But - again - if that change has been made, then I apologize and will correct that once I can see the actual amendments. I'm mostly just going by what I saw on the floor - I wasn't allowed into the backrooms and leaked information like some other folks. I only had to see what happened on the floor --- like the rest of the state.

The pay raise is chopped up into so many pieces -- some of it the health care stipend pass-through, almost half of it an incentive pay increase that plenty of teachers will enver see -- that it amounts to little more than lip service. The state could afford a $3,000 teacher pay raise. The Senate just flat-out decided that, no, that extra 20 cents of property tax cuts is more important. In my opinion, that's bad public policy - why not do both?

Your last point is the most important, Kimmy. ISDs do need money, quick - which is why we shouldn't have blown so much on property tax cuts. The two most critical problems with HB 1 are the first two points in my analysis - $350 million broken promise to public schools, and a $1.00 tax rate that is impossible to afford w/o cutting critical state services (re: health care, public safety, criminal justice, et. all).

Also, until tonight, Shapiro had planned on cutting math textbooks for elementary textbooks. She eventually said, "no, let's go ahead and give them money," and then everyone started treating her for being some brilliant, fair-minded, compromising person.

Why the hell would you want to cut the textbook money in the first place? I'm not congratulating anyone for begrudgingly coming around to the obvious decision.

But they aren't cutting textbook money. They want to overhaul the process and the elementary math textbooks got caught in the cross-fire. I didn't think it was a good idea, of course, but I think your characterization is in the ballpark, but not quite accurate.

If you want to get into a discussion of tax cuts versus new ed spending... well, that's a lengthy discussion. Certainly the ed community feels some frustration over this one.

It is a lengthy one, and it's one we should have had this session. Instead, the House was never allowed to so much as offer an amendment about education, the Senate created whatever the hell kind of education policy they wanted, and now the House just has to swallow it.

There was no full discussion about public education policy. And most of the pub ed decisions were made behind closed doors over the last three days. To me, that's just plain and utter bullshit.

Here here, Phillip. It floors me that they think they can "reform" public education yet never understand it to begin with. They have absolutely NO idea what is happening with kids these days. Trying to keep teachers in the classroom when they can have less headaches and make more money elsewhere is a battle. The pay raise was very important for this, and they let teachers down again. More broken promises with the health insurance stipend just adds to the misery. If they want to know what is happening in the classroom, they need only ask teachers. Oh, that's right. They are not allowed in the back room meetings either.

Kimmy, not all senators are bad. with a unanimous vote on HB1, though, they have all apparently lost their manhood.

I don't mind giving you your due and say that there is much to be said for more debate, discussion and a good focus on education that respects input from those in the trenches.

But I tend to see points on both sides, rather than simple partisan bashing. (That's my job, I guess.) Republicans are not always wrong and Democrats are not always right. And it's rarely black-and-white. That's what makes the creation of policy interesting around the Capitol.

Shapiro is not Grusendorf. Her proposals are far different from the HB2 of prior special sessions. I think the mere fact, alone, that we are ready to commit serious study to the issue that students who graduate high school are not ready for college is a significant step forward in education policy, even if the Rs and Ds and ed community disagree about how we get there.

The state funding for the health care supplement is ended for everyone, effective in 2007. Now it's up to the employee to elect to defer a portion of income for health care expenses. It was replaced with a $500 wage increase to full-time staff and a $250 increase to part-time staff that is permanent. That wage increase replaces amounts they were receiving under current law; though it is a reduction from the amounts received under the original program as it passed in the 77th. They amended the support staff sunset last night (Zaffirini).

Right.
Shapiro wants to get out of the health care business.
I think, given rate increases, TRS should be rolled into ERS health care plans, but ERS doesn't want them.
But great health coverage...

The ERS issue was an issue from the start. You put that many people in one group and you would get some killer pricing, but the special interests would get in the way of that (see Patrick Rose's car insurance amendment that died).

I also agree that this should not be a partisan issue. But the leadership made it just that. There are good folks on both sides of the aisle. But this bill, while better than Grusendorf’s, still leaves way too much out that needs to be in there. Promises have been broken, and hopefully teachers will remember that come Election Day. Some have already paid the price for their stupidity. Let’s hope more are on the way out.

By the way, Shapiro has no interest in listening to teachers. What was her comment about teachers being at the Capitol to lobby? It was something about somebody teaching the kids and teachers being unprofessional for being there.

You can argue that we need more money for ed, but the Lege is working under a spending cap this session. And maybe you want to argue that the tax break should be less and the ed spending more, but as the tax rate drops b/c of increased state spending, the equity of the system rises. So tax drops are not all bad.... because one leads to the other. Or, at the least, a shift in who pays for ed.