|
| ||
|
ELLIOT
WERK IDAHO
STATE SENATE |
The 2011 Legislative Session Ends | |
|
April 29, 2011 Volume 6, Number 4 | ||
|
In This Issue
Handy
Web Links Visit
the Legislative
Web Page
at
http://www.legislature. Visit
the Secretary
of State – Elections Page
at http://www.idsos.state. Contact
Me Phone:
658-0388 Legislative
Messages: 332-1000 Snail
Mail: 6810
Randolph Dr., Boise, ID 83709 |
I have delayed releasing a final legislative report in the hopes that some distance would bring a new perspective on this session. Something positive that came out of the three months spent in the statehouse. Unfortunately, it has been hard to generate any enthusiasm for the session. I can say that I have a great respect for the Senate Local Government and Taxation Committee. They are a thoughtful and judicious group. I very much enjoyed my work with them on a variety of issues. I also appreciated the steady hand of the new President Pro Tempore of the Senate - Senator Brent Hill. I find Senator Hill to be an honest, calm, and helpful individual. I appreciated his guidance and counsel during the session. Even though I disagree vehemently with the direction of state government and with the decisions and actions of our legislature, I want to be clear about one thing. This is a body that deserves our respect. The people that serve sacrifice family and income to do a very difficult job under harsh public scrutiny. Most have the best interests of the state in mind (even if I do not agree with their ideas). If you wish to see the direction of the legislature change I suggest that you get active in the 2012 election. Every legislative seat is up for election and 2012 could result in profound changes. Think about it!
Rapist Rights Last week the Senate considered and passed S 1165. This legislation would
prohibit abortions at or after the 20th week of
post-fertilization age.
Regardless of your stance on abortion (and mine is that government
should not be involved in this decision), this bill had some fundamental
and objectionable provisions that resulted in my very strong debate in
opposition to the bill. First, the bill is clearly unconstitutional because the United States Supreme Court has determined in every decision since Roe v. Wade in 1973 that an abortion can occur during the time that a fetus is not viable as determined by the physician. The restriction on
abortions arbitrarily at the 20th week violates the current
standard. As I have said in the past, I will not support obviously unconstitutional legislation since it results in costly lawsuits that drain money from critical services like public schools. This bill will likely cost the state upward of $500,000 in legal fees (including payment of the fees for those that successfully sue us). At a time of revenue crisis and unacceptable cuts to public schools I find it offensive that the legislature prioritized lawyers over students. Second, the bill provides a means for the "father" to sue the provider of an abortion that is performed after the 20th week of pregnancy. While on its face it might seem reasonable to provide a cause of action to a "father", the bill provides no limitation on this. The Idaho attorney general's office confirmed that this provision means that if the "father" is a rapist, or pedophile, or incest perpetrator, whether in jail for the crime or not, they can sue for damages for the abortion! This provision is so abhorrent, so against my values and the principals that I hold dear, that I debated very strongly against the bill. I ended my debate by stating, "I heap my scorn on this bill!"
I believe that we must undo this in the next election! Final Thoughts on 2011 I want to again stress my deep respect for the Idaho Legislature. Even though I disagree with much of what is done, it is an institution that deserves our respect as do the people that serve. To some final thoughts. I have come to think of the State Senate as the more reasoned body in the Legislature. While this is still true, the reasoning ability of the Senate has been deeply eroded. I'll illustrate this with two issues that surfaced this year. First is the rapist rights bill described above. I do not believe that the 2003 Senate that I entered would have allowed consideration of this bill - let alone pass it overwhelmingly. Second are the nullification and health exchange issues that illustrate the bash the federal government at any, and all, costs mentality that has infected the Senate (and runs rampant through the House). Nullification came back three times during the session. In debate about the final nullification bill in the Senate we had a Senator in the span of two minutes mention death panels (plainly debunked) and then compare some of the home health programs included in the federal legislation to programs the Nazi's instituted to take children from their homes. This "debate" went unchallenged by the majority and so deeply offended me that I did not trust myself to respond (knowing that proper decorum is necessary in the chamber). False and unreasoned debate became commonplace - rather than the outlier that it has been in past years. Ultimately nullification was vetoed by the governor because of some profound impacts in our state that were not heeded or considered during debate. These included the loss of all health-related federal grants for our colleges and universities (many millions of dollars) and a prohibition on setting up an Idaho health insurance exchange to help citizens purchase affordable insurance. The debate against accepting over $2 million in federal funding to set up a health insurance exchange (something all rational individuals agree is beneficial to our citizens) was also instructive. Many in the Senate debated against accepting the federal money because it was associated with the federal healthcare legislation. Under the federal legislation our state is required to set up an exchange and that is why the grant was available to Idaho. By rejecting the federal grant (as the House ultimately did) we punched ourselves in the nose to somehow spite the big, bad federal bully. Ultimately this move will cost Idaho taxpayers an extra $2 million as we set up the exchange without the federal grant. In the Senate I entered in 2003 this issue would have passed without debate or dissent. It passed this year on a 20-15 vote. I believe that the move to the extreme right in the Legislature is based partly on the take over of the Republican Party by the extreme right that resulted in the defeat of a few moderates in the last election. And party by Republican passage of taxpayer funded, closed party primary elections. These elections will require public political party registration to cast a vote. In a closed Republican Party primary the candidate that is farthest to the right will prevail. Many (not all) legislators in the Republican caucus, reading the tea leaves, are positioning themselves as far right as possible to avoid or overcome a primary challenge. Heaven help us as this trend continues and accelerates in the 2012 legislative session!
Thank you for signing on to my legislative newsletter list. I hope that these newsletters have been helpful to you. If you have any suggestions about the newsletter please respond with an email. My aim is to inform as best I can. If you see ways for me to accomplish this more effectively I would love to hear from you! As always, you can contact me at elliotwerk@gmail.com.
| |
|
| ||
|
|
Legislative
News Fighting for our Schools | |
|
February 27, 2011 Volume 6, Number 2 | ||
|
In This Issue
Visit the Legislative Web Page at
http://www.legislature. Visit the Secretary of State –
Elections Page at http://www.idsos.state. Contact Me Phone: 658-0388 Legislative Messages: 332-1000 Snail Mail: |
What I can tell
you was not done was to meet
with all interested parties, seek out the best peer reviewed studies to
see what has worked in enhancing student achievement elsewhere in the
country/world, select districts to pilot some of those ideas, and provide
the school districts with whatever flexibility is needed to use limited
funds. Public
education is so important that it is mandated in our state constitution.
It is far too important to throw major changes into the system without the
benefit of documented success and buy-in from all stakeholders (bottom-up
not top-down). Our kids can't
repeat 2nd grade if we get it wrong. High school students
forced to take online classes that will not count toward college entry
cannot simply take the classes elsewhere before college. And most
critically, students cannot be expected to achieve if we do not provide
proven tools. Last week the
Idaho Senate passed two of Mr. Luna's education bills while sending a
third back to committee for reworking (that means that the Republicans
could not muster sufficient votes to pass the bill). Let's take a
look at the three bills in the context of what happened in the Senate last
week. Taking
a Stand in the State Senate Last
Thursday Senate Democrats made a stand to show our frustration with Mr.
Luna's bills and the overall process by slowing down the Senate and
debating passionately against SB's 1108
and 1110.
Our fight held the Senate in session from 10:00 AM to 3:00 PM without a
break. Our
decision was made because the Luna plan had been concocted behind closed
doors (the genesis of the plan is the target of Freedom of Information
requests), ran completely contradictory to Mr. Luna's election
representations, is overwhelmingly opposed by the public (my mail is
running over 95% opposed), and is being
rushed through the legislative process We also object to a plan that will
actually impede student achievement. To
slow the process, Senate Democrats first required that each bill be read,
in its entirety, before the Senate took up the bill for consideration.
Normally a sponsor asks for consent from the Senate to dispense with
reading the bill. The reading of SB 1108
took about an hour while reading SB 1110
took about 20 minutes. We
then moved to indefinitely postpone debate on 1108 (that would kill the
bill for the year). This resulted in debate on our motion before a party
line vote (7-28) ensued. This
was followed by hours of passionate debate with our caucus leading the way
attacking provisions like stripping due process for vulnerable educators
and a merit pay bonus plan that mandates funding while neglecting to
identify a source (meaning that funding of the bonus plan could require
cuts to textbook, technology, and classroom
funding). The
votes to pass 1108 and 1110 on to the House were identical - 20-15
with eight Republicans joining our unanimous caucus (some of the
Republican debate in opposition was wonderful). The bills now move to the
House education committee where they will hold public hearings this coming
Tuesday and Wednesday. You can contact the House education committee
members by going to http://legislature.idaho.gov/about/contactbycommittee.cfm. The
Luna Bills - What Do They Really Do? Much
has been written and said about the Luna plan. Unfortunately there is
little about the plan that is covered in detail. Mr. Luna's statements
offer little to rely on since he is simply advocating his position (and
usually citing suspect and biased research). Please
understand that there are provisions in each bill that represent positive
steps forward. Unfortunately the main provisions of the bills will lower
student achievement and lead to the flight of teachers from Idaho (with
good reason). Let's
take a look at the legislation to get a better idea of what is being
proposed. SB
1108 (http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2011/S1108.htm) This
bill is aimed at removing any power from the teachers association and
vesting all authority with the school district trustees. The provisions
are wide-reaching and will likely result in many labor actions (like
strikes) in coming years. The bill ignores years of upheaval and history
that led to enactment of our current law that protects vulnerable teachers
from arbitrary and politically motivated firing (as was common before
1971) and results in collaboration on contractual
issues. Here
are the basic provisions:
A
peer reviewed study published by Harvard University shows that in states
where collective bargaining rights have been stripped (as 1108 does)
graduating high school seniors have the lowest SAT and ACT test scores.
The study also shows that in states that have strong teacher unions their
students score best in these tests. So
much for the goal of improved student performance. SB
1109 (http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2011/S1109.htm) SB
1109
was withdrawn to the education committee because Mr. Luna could not gain
enough support to pass it on the Senate floor (Senators did not buy Mr.
Luna's assurances that increased class sizes would not harm student
performance). This
is the bill that eliminates about 800 teachers, increases class sizes,
provides computers to students, mandates online classes, makes districts
pay for college level classes, and includes a host of other provisions.
The money saved by eliminating teachers in this bill was to be used to
fund the costly elements in the other bills. It will likely be rewritten
in closed door meetings then heard as a new bill in committee. If a
compromise cannot be reached on this bill it will leave the fate of the
others in doubt (especially SB 1110). SB
1110 (http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2011/S1110.htm) This
is the merit pay bonus bill. It includes elements of a deal negotiated
with the teachers association a few years back. However, it also imposes a
few other elements that had either been rejected or never
discussed. Here
are the basic provisions:
I
hope that you will take the opportunity to review the
bill,
find out what impact they will have on your district, and contact your
local legislators to voice your opinion to them. You can contact your
legislators by going to http://legislature.idaho.gov/howtocontactlegislators.htm. Thanks to new
technology available at the Statehouse you can view the Senate Education
committee hearings live online by going to http://www.idahoptv.org/leglive/legBody.cfm?pubPoint=WW02AUD
and selecting the link for View Stream. You can get to the general
Legislature Live web page at http://www.idahoptv.org/leglive/.
These links allow you to view or listen to all of the Legislatures
activities. As always, if you have any concerns, questions, comments, or ideas please contact me at elliotwerk@gmail.com.
| |
|
| ||
|
|
Legislative
News | |
|
February 7, 2011 Volume 6, Number 1 | ||
|
In This Issue
Handy Web
Links Visit the Legislative Web Page at
http://www.legislature. Visit the Secretary of State –
Elections Page at http://www.idsos.state. Contact Me Phone: 658-0388 Legislative Messages: 332-1000 Snail Mail: |
Parent Teacher Rally for
Education Monday (February 8th) beginning
at 5 PM on the front steps of the
Capitol. Senate Education Committee Public
Hearings Tuesday and Wednesday, Feb. 8-9,
beginning at 3 PM in the West Wing
Auditorium I know that many of you live outside the Treasure Valley and
cannot attend these events. Thanks to new technology available at the
Statehouse you can view the Senate Education committee hearings
live online by going to http://www.idahoptv.org/leglive/legBody.cfm?pubPoint=WW02AUD and selecting the link for View Stream. You can get to
the general Legislature Live web page at http://www.idahoptv.org/leglive/. These links allow you to view or listen to all of the
Legislatures activities. The Ever-Changing State
Budget When the governor delivered his state of the state
address he presented a budget with a deficit of $35 million – meaning he
had only to cut $35 million to balance the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 budget.
His projections were surprising considering that prior to the beginning of
the session the deficit was estimated at up to $350 million because of the
loss of federal monies & state reserve funds, and deferred and
increased costs. It seemed like a pretty big
disconnect. Four weeks into the legislative session we are now
learning slowly that the governor's projections were inaccurate, as was
the potential $350 million deficit (based on costs for state employee
salary increases, healthcare costs,
etc.). To begin with, revenues for December 2010 came in
at $11 million below projections while January revenues look like they
will be about $15 million above projections. The governor had assumed that
for this fiscal year he would have a $53 million surplus to add to next
year's budget. This ignored the economic realities of our economy and the
need for additions to last year's budget of about $8 million. So that
alone is a loss of $47 million from his
budget. In addition, for the state of Idaho to fully
implement the Obama-Republican tax deal will cost between $35 and $60
million this year - if the legislature agrees to conform to the
federal tax code changes. As I write this the House tax committee passed a
bill to conform to only a portion of the federal tax code changes. If this
bill becomes law it will cost the state around $10 million this
year. The state was taken by surprise by sales tax
rebates for renewable energy projects that will total around $29 million
this year (we have an incentive program that provides a renewable energy
sales tax rebate). The governor's financial office did not account for
these rebates. Various and sundry other oversights and
miscalculations bring us to our current potential deficit of about $135
million. Remember that this number is subject to change. If
the economy picks up between now and July (the end of FY11) and we run a
surplus, this can be used to lower that deficit. If the economy grows
faster in FY12, that added revenue would also alleviate some of the
deficit (although too late for next year's budget since we are setting
that right now). If the current deficit holds we can expect another
$35 to $55 million in cuts to public schools. This would render Mr. Luna's
education proposals almost meaningless unless he removes another $35 - $55
million worth of teachers to save the rest of his
program. I'll keep you posted about the ongoing saga of the
budget. The Future of Our Public
Schools? During the first week of the session
Superintendent Luna and the governor proposed a plan to revamp our public
schools amid shrinking budgets. It's called Students Come First (a name
that implies that they do not
already). The refreshing part of the plan is an admission
that the governor and the legislature do not have the will to adequately
fund public education. That is the basis for their proposal - how to
meet a much lower budget number (cuts of between $235 and $255
million/year) with more students and increasing
costs. Please be aware that Mr. Luna's plan is based on the governor's inaccurate initial budget projection as described above. Facing another $35 to $55 million in public school cuts arising from the growing deficit I am not sure that his plan is tenable (unless he, the governor, and the Legislature are willing to eliminate that many more teachers and increase class sizes much, much more).
The basic elements of the plan include:
I believe that there is some merit in the plan.
Providing access to college credit classes is great, merit pay bonuses (if
done properly and fairly) can be a positive thing, and consolidating
services can save money (although districts will lose
flexibility). Other
elements of the plan present problems.
Two bills were introduced last week. You can see them at
http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2011/S1068.htm and at http://www.legislature.idaho.gov/legislation/2011/S1069.htm. I
hope that you will take the opportunity to review the proposals, find out
what impact they will have on your district, and contact your local
legislators to voice your opinion to them. You can contact your
legislators by going to http://legislature.idaho.gov/howtocontactlegislators.htm.
As always, if you have any concerns, questions,
comments, or ideas please contact me at elliotwerk@gmail.com.
| |
|
| ||
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |