Top 10 Texas House Members on LGBT Issues

The 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature has come to an end. It was perhaps the best legislative session for queer Texans ever with not one, but two anti-bullying bills passing and the HIV Medication Advisory Committee's future protected by statute. Multiple bills and amendments targeting the community were introduced but were all defeated. Although we didn't get everything we needed, and are still waiting for the Governor's signature on the three bills mentioned above, all in all it was a very good session for LGBT issues.

We here at Legislative Queery have crunched the numbers and ranked the 150 members of the Texas House based on their votes and authored legislation from the 82nd regular session, the rankings do not take into consideration past votes or legislation or public statements by the elected officials, you can read how we arrived at the rankings HERE.

#1

Garnet Coleman (D-Houston)

Score: 126 points Grace: A+ Coleman's district includes about half of Houston's historic "gayborhood" of Montrose, so it's no surprise that he voted in the best interests of the queer community for all nine of the record votes considered in these rankings. What put him over the top was authoring seven pro-LGBT bills or amendments this session including HB 1386, his teen suicide prevention bill and HB 2229 which makes permanent the Texas HIV Medication Advisory Committee, both of which passed out of the Legislature and await the Governor's signature. Coleman also authored legislation that would equalize the current hetro-only defense to prosecution for indecency with a child if the contact is consensual and the partner is within 3 years of age and a bill that would would add gender expression and identity to current list of attributes bias against which can trigger hate crimes prosecution. Additionally he joint authored a bill that would have required School Health Advisory Councils to issue reports on bullying.

#2

Elliott Naishtat (D-Austin)

Score: 101 points Grade: A+ New York native Naishtat's district includes the University of Texas at Austin, which may explain the bill he's introduced for the last several sessions to allow Texas Universities to remain competitive by offering health benefits to the unmarried partners of professors and their children. Naishtat was the author or co-author of five additional pieces of legislation that would benefit the LGBT community including HB 1942, the "super" anti-bullying bill; both the House and Senate versions of legislation that would require School Health Advisory Councils to issue reports on bullying and HB 2229,which makes permanent the Texas HIV Medication Advisory Committee.

#3

Carol Alvarado (D-Houston)

Score: 100 points Grade: A+ Alvarado was the principle author of HB 130, the elegant approach to fighting bullying that would have created a statewide anti-bullying hotline (the bill unfortunately died in the House Human Services Committee). She also has the distinction of joint and co-authoring more LGBT friendly bills than any other member of the House including 4 designed to combat bullying and its effects (HB 24, HB 224, HB 1386 and HB 1942).

#4 (tie)	Dawnna Dukes (D-Austin)
	Score: 97 points Grade: A Dukes carried both the House and Senate versions of a bill that, in its original form, would have required Local Community Health Advisory Councils to create recommendations on the anti-bullying portions of health class curricula. Unfortunately that portion of the bill was removed before the House voted on it (the bill, SB 736, now awaits the Governor's signature).

#4 (tie)

Jessica Farrar (D-Houston)

Score: 97 points Grade: A Farrar is chair of the House Democratic Caucus, but her duties don't stop her from being a passionate advocate of the LGBT community. Farrar is the author of legislation that would have finally removed Texas' unconstitutional law against "homosexual conduct." She also joint authored Coleman's teen suicide prevention bill, playing a pivotal role in its passage. During the Equality Texas Lobby Day back in March, Farrar personally welcomed citizen lobbyists to her office offering them snacks and telling them they were "wasting their time" at her office, since she was already such a committed supporter.

#6

Mark Strama (D-Austin)

Score: 96 points Grade: A This session marked Strama's third attempt to pass anti-bullying legislation. Although he was unsuccessful in passing his HB 224, major elements of the bill were included in HB 1942, of which he was a co-author. Although the legislation does not include any specific reference to sexual orientation or gender identity and expression Stama's advocacy on behalf of the victims of bullying is laudable.

#7	Armando Walle (D-Houston)
	Score: 95 points Grade: A Walle was coauthor of Coleman's teen suicide prevention bill, SB 1386. He also joint authored an excellent piece of legislation by Raphael Anchia (D-Dallas) that, if it had passed, would have allowed adoptive parents in same-sex relationships to receive accurate birth certificates for their children by allowing both parents names to be on the certificate.

#8 (tie)

Eric Johnson (D-Dallas)

Score: 93 Grade: A Tied for highest ranking freshman on the list (and the highest ranking Dallas-area rep), Johnson has proved himself an able ally. His district includes a small sliver of the historic "gayborhood" of Oaklawn which might explain why Johnson co-authored both Strama's anti-bullying bill (that included sexual orientation) and the eventual compromise "super" anti-bullying bill HB 1942.

#8 (tie)	Ron Reynolds (D-Missouri City)
	Score: 93 points Grade: A The only member of the top 10 not based in a major metropolis, Reynolds, who's tied for highest ranking freshman on the list, proved himself to be a keen ally in the fight to end bullying. He co-authored both Strama's anti-bullying bill (that included sexual orientation) and the eventual compromise "super" anti-bullying bill HB 1942.

#10 (tie)

Lon Burnam (D-Fort Worth)

Score: 91 points Grade: A Burnam is a sleeper ally, known for being willing to fight for what's right (even when it's politically unpopular), Burnam knows that his reputation as the most liberal member of the Texas House means that sometimes his early support for legislation can scare off more moderate members. This is why he waited until late in the process to add his name as a co-author to anti-bullying "super" bill HB 1942. (full disclosure: the author is a former aide to Burnam)

#10 (tie)	Joe Farias (D-San Antonio)
	Score: 91 points Grade: A Farias has served in the House since 2007 and is on the powerful Local and Consent Calendars Committee. Although not the most vocal member of the House his co-authorship of anti-bullying "super" bill HB 1942 and his quiet habit of consistently voting in the best interest of the LGBT community make him a valuable ally.

#10 (tie)	Borris Miles (D-Houston)
	Score: 91 points Grade: A Miles is plain spoken and known for fighting hard for what he believes, attributes that have served him well in the 82nd legislature. he was a co-author on HB 1942 the anti-bullying "super" bill and can be counted on to consistently vote in the best interest of the queer community.

#10 (tie)

Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston)

Score: 91 points Grade: A The only member of the top ten to not score perfectly on the nine votes included in the rankings, Thompson made up for it by authoring HB 905 which would have allowed people legally recognized as un-married to enter into gestational agreements with surrogate mothers (currently only married people may) and by carrying SB 205 in the House, which would have expanded and clarified the anti-bullying requirements of school's student codes of conduct. Thompson's one errant vote was on anti-bullying "super" bill HB 1942 and likely had more to do with amendments added by Rep. David Simpson than with any objection to the bill.

That's the top ten, well thirteen. We'll publish the rest of the list soon, but in the meantime take a look at how LQ arrived at the scores and tell us what you think. Any ranking system like this naturally involves the biases of the people compiling the list. LQ welcomes comments, suggestions, rants and criticisms regarding the rankings.

UPDATE: The list of the Worst 10 Texas House Members on LGBT Issues is up.

Day 84: Hearings set for Hate Crimes, "Homosexual Conduct" bills

Today is the 84th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The House reconvenes at 1 pm, the Senate at 1:30.

Tomorrow, the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee will hear House Bill 2227 by Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston). The bill would add gender identity and expression to the list of characteristics covered by the state’s hate crime law. Currently, Texas law allows prosecutors to seek tougher penalties for crimes motivated by bias against certain characteristics (or percieved characteristics) of the victim. These characteristics include the race, color, disability, religion, national origin or ancestry, age, gender, and “sexual preference” of the victim, but not the gender identity or expression. Because gender identity and expression is not currently included prosecutors are unable to pursue hate crimes charges if the victim is targeted for being transgender or for behaving in a way that the perpetrator considers gender inappropriate (such as a man being “sissy” or a woman being “butch”).

Coleman has offered this bill in previous sessions, but it never makes it out of committee. Inevitably representatives from far right-wing organizations like the Texas Eagle Forum or the Liberty Institute testify against the bill, claiming that it creates "special rights" for some people that are not enjoyed by others. This opposition seems to miss that, with the exception of "disability," the attributes listed in the current statute are universal. Everybody has a race, everybody has a nation of orgin and everybody has a sexual orientation (even if that orientation is "asexual"). The idea that the hate crimes law create "special rights" is ludicrous. It protects all people from being targeted due to immutable characteristics.

Gender identity and expression belongs in this list. Everyone has a gender identity (even if that identity is non-gendered), and everybody has a gender expression. Additionally, like the other attributes listed GI&E has historically been a reason individuals have been targeted for hate crimes. For the state of Texas to not include it is shameful.

During the same hearing the committee will also hear another one of Coleman’s bills: House Bill 2165, as as well as an identical piece of legislation, House Bill 604 by Rep. Jessica Farrar, D-Houston. The bills would remove the crime of “homosexual conduct” from the Texas Penal Code. The law prohibiting homosexual conduct was declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003, making it unenforceable. Only the Texas Legislature has the power to remove the law from the books and lawmakers have, thus far, been unwilling to do so. Similar legislation has been filed every session since the Supreme Court ruling, but has always failed to pass.

Two weeks ago, Criminal Jurisprudence member Wayne Christian (R-Shelby, Nacogdoches, San Augustine, Sabine and Jasper Co) (who on Friday passed an amendment to the budget requiring "family and traditional values centers" for state universities that have gender and sexuality centers), told the Austin American-Statesman that having the law on the books “better reflects the views of a lot of citizens.” Christian’s statement is not surprising considering that last year the Republican Party of Texas (of which he is a member) voted to add renewing enforcement of the homosexual conduct law to its platform. Even Farrar, one of the bills’ author, is pessimistic about its chances, but said that it was important to file the legislation to encourage conversation on the topic: “If nobody files the bill, then nobody talks about [the bill]” she told the Statesmen. “That’s the value of filing bills that may be unpopular because over time you can change peoples’ minds and their hearts.”

Day 44: Between the Conception and the Creation Falls the Education

Today is the 44th day of the regular session of the 82nd Texas Legislature. Both the House and Senate will reconvene at 10 am.

The House Public Health Committee meets today at 8 am for it's "organizational meeting". Chairwoman Kolkhorst will discuss her priorities for the session and get a feel for where other committee members want to go. HB 415 by Anchia (D-Dallas) has been referred to the public health committee.

Under Texas law adoptive parents may petition the court to have a new birth certificate that reflects the adoptive parents names. This is standard practice and is done to make easier for those parents to prove their relationship to the child. Unfortunately the law specifically prohibits two men or two women from being listed as parents on a birth certificate (despite it being perfectly legal for two men or two women to adopt a child). HB 415 would fix this problem.

Anchia has filed this bill before and it's always received an emotional hearing in committee, but has never been voted out and on to the House floor. I'm hopeful that it may be better received in committee this session (read Legislative Queery's Day 38 post for more information).


Last night I sat on the Panel for 'Issues & Answers - Bullying' in Houston with Rep. Jessica Farrar and Houston Independent School District Trustee Juliet Stipeche. Farrar indicated that HB 1386 by Coleman (joint authored by Farrar) may be referred to the Public Health Committee as well. HB 1386 is similar to HB 224 by Strama (the big "Bully Bill") but far more comprehensive and inclusive, going well beyond just bullying issues in schools to require training on suicide prevention awareness for almost all state employees who interact with youth. The hope is that since HB 1386 deals with the broader issue of suicide that it will be considered a public health issue and not just a public education issue.

The Speakers office has broad latitude in referring bills, but Speaker Straus has a reputation for respecting members wishes so it's quite possible that HB 1386 will go to the Public Health Committee. If that happens we may see two committee hearings on a very similar topic in the next month or so. This is good. The 82nd Texas House is almost 2/3 freshmen and sophomores. Although bullying legislation has been filed ever session for over a decade many of the current members of the House may never have been in a hearing when a parent described the heartbreak of their child's experience, or a teacher talked about the frustration of not having the tools they needed to address the problem. There is value in Committee Hearings, even when bills never make it out of committee, because it educates members.

This is the challenge of changing the law: the slow, torturous process of educating lawmakers on experiences that they have never had. It's a slow process, two steps forward and one step back, but it's how our system works. Before this idea that being tormented by other students should not be a part of any student's reality takes root and is born full-fledged as common wisdom, amidst all the struggle and pain, the conjouling and convincing we must educate, we must tell our stories and insist on being heard.

Day 43: This is the Dead Bill, This is the Cactus Bill

Today is the 43rd day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The House will reconvene at 10 am, the Senate at 11.

The House Committee on Criminal Jurisprudence meets today at 10:30, but will not be considering either HB 604 (repeal of the offense of homosexual conduct) or HB 172 (study of the effectiveness of the James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Act). This is how bills die slow deaths - if hearings are delayed (either because the chair does not wish to schedule a hearing or the bills sponsor is not prepared for a hearing at the time or, simply, that all concerned place higher priority on other legislation) they can get so far behind in the process that they can never catch up. That's what happened to last sessions version of the hate crimes study bill, it passed committee, but did so late in the game and never made it to the House floor.

In 77 days all bills will be required to have had their "second reading" on the House floor (this is the first opportunity for the entire House to discuss and vote on a bill), if that hasn't happened they die. Between now and then both of these bills will have to have a public hearing, been voted on by committee, the committee report submitted to calendars (the calendars committees set the schedule for the House floor) and then put on a schedule for second reading. The clock is ticking.

Please call the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee and encourage Chairman Pete Gallego to set these two bills for public hearing at the committee's meeting next week. The number is (512)463-0768.


I'll be sitting on the panel tonight for "Issues & Answers - Bullying" cosponsored by the Harris County Democratic Party and Houston Stonewall Young Democrats, joining me will be Houston Independent School District Trustee Juliet Stipeche and, via skype, State Representative Jessica Farrar. The panel starts at 6:30 pm at the HCDP Headquarters at 1445 North Loop West, Suite 110 in Houston.

HB 1386: The Best Solution to Teen Suicide (That Will Never Happen)

HB 1386 filed by Rep. Garnet Coleman (D - Houston) is a compassionate, well thought out, reasonable approach to the issue of teen suicide, (a problem that has recently captured the nation's attention in the wake of a string of suicides by LGBT young people, including Asher Brown of Houston) and it doesn't have a chance in hell of becoming law.

The bill, co-authored by Rep. Jessica Farrar (D - Houston) would create a statewide training program to help, not only teachers, but also police, nurses, social workers, counselors and school administrators and staff recognize children at risk of suicide and give them tools to provide assistance. HB 1386 also contains a non-discrimination policy for Texas public schools that includes both sexual orientation and gender identity and expression with a provision requiring schools to regularly train their employees on how the non-discrimination policy applies.

Similar to Rep. Strama's HB 224 and Sen. Davis' SB 245, HB 1386 would require schools to compile annual reports of instances of bullying e and would allow bullies to be transferred to different campuses or classrooms (currently the victim may be transferred, but the bully may not). HB 1386 would also allow administrators to address instances of cyber-bullying, but unlike HB 224 and SB 245 it does not contain a provision specifically allowing administrators to address off-campus cyber-bullying.

The single biggest difference between HB 1386 and every other bullying bill filed this session is the non-discrimination policy. HB 1386 has the audacity to suggest that it is wrong for queer kids to be discriminated against in public schools -- that's what's going to keep it from becoming law. The far right in this state has a hard time accepting that teenagers have any sort of sexual orientation, let alone that that orientation might, even on occasion, be towards people of the same sex. Just look at our paleolithic sex education programs that refuse to teach kids how their bodies work or the actual mechanics of how someone might get pregnant. Conservatives don't want to believe that there are queer kids, so it's nigh on impossible for them to believe that those kids need to be protected.

If, perchance, a right winger is able to wrap their head around the concept of queer kids the next argument thrown up is than enumerated non-discrimination policies (policies that list sets of attributes that are protected) amount to a kind of "reverse discrimination", that protecting something like race or gender identity means that white, cisgender kids aren't being protected. This argument is, perhaps, the single most revealing statement ever made by the right: the assumption that white, male, straight, christian, native-born American, cisgender people do not have race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, nation of origin or gender identity. Under this assumption white, male, straight, christian, native-born American, cisgender people are "normal" and anyone who doesn't posses those exact attributes is a deviation from the norm who wants special deference for being different.

Despite it's chances of being passed approaching zero I'm extremely happy to see HB 1386 filed. By presenting an alternative approach to addressing the issues of teen suicide and bullying Reps. Coleman and Farrar have made the Strama and Davis bills appear to be the middle ground that they are. This will hopefully give political cover to moderate Republicans who might otherwise be reluctant to support HB 224 and SB 245.

It's too bad that the bolder, more comprehensive approach seems so distasteful to the right, because, if passed. HB 1386 would save lives, maybe even lives dear to those right wingers.

-------------
UPDATE: Coleman has refiled HB 1386 as HB 2343 - the language is identical with the exception that the bill has been named "Asher's Law" in honor of Asher Brown, the 13 year old Houston area boy who committed suicide after enduring prolonged vicious bullying at school.

Day 30: The Governor's Earth Moving Equipment

Today is the 30th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The House reconvenes as 10:00 am, the Senate at 11:00 am.

Yesterday's "State of the State" address by Gov. Rick Perry was a pro forma "government is bad, regulation is bad, business is good" diatribe. If you can stomach reading the full text it is available HERE. In an irony no doubt lost on the man who has repeatedly tried to prevent queer people from talking about their relationships in public, Perry opened by thanking his wife Anita. He then went on to praise the Boy Scouts for making him who he is, so now we know who to blame.

Perry blamed the states 27 billion dollar budget crisis on everyone but the Republican controlled legislature who passes the budget, including: President Obama, Congressman Lloyd Doggett, the Environmental Protection Agency and illegal immigrants. All this while asking for more money for his personal "economic development" funds. State Rep. Jessica Farrar, president of the House Democratic Caucus, summed it up nicely "The first rule to being in a hole is stop digging. Perry traded his shovel for a backhoe,"

Still no movement on any of the bills we're watching. The Senate Education Committee (which has the Senate version of anti-bullying legislation) has not scheduled a hearing this week. The House still does not have committee assignments (no committee assignments = no committee hearings = no legislation) . A capitol staffer told me that the rumor mill has suggested that Speaker Joe Straus (who makes committee assignments) is waiting until the final report from the House Election Contest Select Committee to issue assignments.

The Select Committee was appointed to report on the contested election of Rep. Donna Howard (D-Travis County) in House District 48. Howard's opponent, Dan Neal, has been challenging her election (which was won by a narrow 16 votes), since November - charging that ballots where improperly counted. Howard has maintained her narrow lead after every recount. The report from the Select Committee is expected on Friday. If the rumors about the reason for Staus's tardy assignments are true, that means it may be next week before we have committee assignments.

Day 11: Friday Call Day

Today is the 11th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. Both the House and Senate will reconvene on Monday at 1:30 pm. The Senate is expected to begin what is certain to be an impassioned debate on voter suppression legislation. The House may finally adopt rules.

Senate committee assignments are also expected which means bills should start being referred to committee. Of particular interest is SB 245 by Sen. Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth) which proposes comprehensive and inclusive anti-bullying measures. We'll be watching that carefully and will let you know as soon as it's referred to committee.

Today is Friday, which means that most of the representatives and senators are back in their district offices in your cities and neighborhoods. Fridays are great days to call your local office and ask for support from the people elected to represent you. This is particularly important if you know that your elected officials are not supportive of the queer community.

To find the phone number for your representative and senator's district offices go HERE. Put in your address and press enter, then scroll down the page until you see the listing for state senator and state representative and find the phone numbers for their district office. Now put those numbers in your phone's address book so you don't have to keep looking them up!

For a suggested script for your phone call read Legislative Queery's post from Day 4.
You can call about any topic that's important to you. For lists of bills that have been filed this session check out the tabs at the top of this page.

I suggest calling your representative about HB 604 by Farrar, which would repeal the state's unconstitutional ban on "Homosexual Conduct". Ask them to "co-author HB 604". Equality Texas has an excellent fact sheet on the bill HERE.

Sen. Davis has been unabashed in her support for anti-bullying legislation. I want to thank her by reiterating my suggestion from last week to call your senator and ask them to "co-author SB 245". The Equality Texas fact sheet is HERE.

HB 604: Repeal the State Sodomy Law

HB 604 by Jessica Farrar (D-Houston) would remove the crime of "homosexual conduct" from Texas' Penal Code as well as several rules based on that law that require Texas school children to be taught that "Homosexuality is not a valid lifestyle choice".

You may recall that in 2004 the Supreme Court of the United States declared the Texas sodomy law (which is Penal Code 21.06) unconstitutional in Lawrence v. Texas. What many people do not realize is that the law, although now unenforceable, is still on the books. While it might seem a simple matter of housekeeping to remove it thus far most state lawmakers have seemed too afraid of being accused of being "pro-sodomy" to do anything about it.

Last session Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) filed this exact bill (word for word) (HB 3028). It was sent to the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee which referred it to a sub committee. When a committee has a large number of bills to consider the chair may, at their discretion, appoint sub committees - which usually look at groups of bills on similar topics and then make recommendations to the whole committee.

The Chair of the Criminal Jurisprudence committee last session was Pete Gallego who has a solid record of voting for the best interest of the LGBT community. Gallego referred HB 3028 to a subcommittee - who then did nothing with it.

It's tempting to blame the subcommittee (which did include virulent homophobes Wayne Christian and Debbie Riddle) and it's tempting to blame Gallego for referring it to subcommittee, but the real culprit is the calendar.

The legislature meets for 140 days every other year. In that 140 days all of the business of the state must be completed. Anything left undone on day 141 must wait another two years. In addition there are many deadlines along the way. One deadline is the 60th day of the session: the last day to file new bills - which in 2009 fell on March 14. HB 3028 was filed just four days before the deadline, on March 10. After a bill is filed it must be read on the House floor and referred to committee, because of the shear volume of bills this takes a few days. HB 3028 was read and referred on March 17.

But it's not like HB 3028 was the only bill the Criminal Jurisprudence committee had to consider. By this point in the session there were hundreds of bills waiting in the committee for the chair to refer to subcommittee. Chairman Gallego referred HB 3028 on March 30, which is actually pretty fast in legislative terms. By this time another major deadline was looming, the 120th day of the session on May 14, which was the last day for bills to be considered on the House floor.

Between the subcommittee and the House floor were several additional steps the bill would have to surmount to meet the May 14th deadline: hearing in subcommittee - report by subcommittee to committee - hearing in committee - vote in committee - committee report filed with "calendar" committee (which decides the order bills will be considered on the floor) - placement on the House schedule and then waiting in line behind every other bill for consideration on the floor of the House. With only 6 weeks to go before the deadline there was not much point in the subcommittee pursuing the bill, especially not with all the work on other bills that lay before them.

Which is why I'm happy to see that Farrar has taken over this bill and decided to file it today, on the 2nd day of the session. Getting a bill towards the front of the line is a huge step in getting it passed.

It's still by no means a sure thing, there are at least 37 incumbent members of the House who have historically voted against anything that is good for the queer community, and with 34 first-time representatives in the 82nd legislature it's hard to predict how bills will do. There is hope, however, that this year this tiny little bit of housekeeping may finally be accomplished.

GLBT Caucus Volunteer Attacked at Polling Site

The GLBT Political Caucus (of Houston) has released a statement that one of their volunteers was attacked by a volunteer for the Fernando Herrera campaign.

"Francisco Valle is well known by poll workers at West Gray for holding signs and waving to voters as they turn in to the parking lot.This afternoon he was doing just that when a volunteer from the Fernando Herrera campaign confronted him, just because he didn't like his Bill White sign.But Francisco refused to stop waving his sign and that's when things got out of hand. The man grabbed Francisco and began trying to yank the sign from his hands.Luckily the police arrived and Francisco was unhurt..."

Herrera is running against Rep. Jessica Farrar - one of the greatest allies to the queer community in the Texas House. This incident underscores the importance of voting for pro-equality candidates in the Texas Legislature. The violent thugs who are supporting candidates like Herrera will only grow emboldened if their candidates are elected.

Today is the last day of early voting in Texas. If you have not done so already - please vote.

Bullying IS a Criminal Matter - That's the Problem

Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee held a local federal hearing on bullying last Monday at Houston City Hall. Rep. Al Green; Houston City Council members Bradford, Jones, Adams and Houng; a representative of HISD; State Senator John Whitmire and State Reps Alma Allen and Sylvester Turner also attended (State Reps. Jessica Farrar and Garnet Coleman (Who have filed legislation in the past to address the issue) were unable to attend and sent their regards).

There was moving testimony from children, parents and community members (including Equality Texas Board Member Rob Scamardo), but the concern repeatedly raised, particularly from Sen. Whitmire and and Rep. Allen, was a fear of criminalizing childish behavior. Whitmire spoke at length about his fear that a legislative solution to bullying would send troubled children to prison or juvenile hall, creating angry, bitter and uneducated adults whose behavior would be yet more troubling.

They're right. Simply marching bullies away from school in handcuffs is not a solution, we must teach our children that bullying is unacceptable. Which is why a legislative solution to the problem is so desperately needed. Because right now, in many cases, the only solution available to administrators is to treat children as criminals.

For instance, if a child set up a fake Facebook profile from home purporting to be another child, and posting pictures and statuses denigrating of that other child the only solution currently available would be to charge the offender with online harassment (Penal Code 33.07) , a third degree felony. Few adults want to create a felon out of child who made a cruel decision, and so fake social networking profiles continue to be used by bullies. School administrators are unable to do anything to address the issue because the actions take place off of school campus.

What about a child that, on school campus, daily threatens to attack another child? They could be charged with making terroristic threats (Penal Code 22.07), but school administrators often fear overreacting, so they tell the terrified victim to avoid the bully, or at most offer to transfer the victim to another class or school, because, frankly they don't have many other options.

Of course a bully who physically attacks another child could be charged with assault or with any number of other offenses, but experience shows us that administrators rarely call the police, but will, at most, suspend the bully, so that the victim must face an enraged bully again in just a few short days. Again, even the option of suspension is only available if the attack took place at school, otherwise administrators hands are tied.

This lack of action, this fear of reporting crimes to the police, is particularly shocking considering that teachers and administrators are bound by law to report any abuse or neglect of a child, regardless of who commits the abuse (Family Code Chapter 261). The law includes in the definitions of abuse "mental or emotional injury to a child that results in an observable and material impairment in the child's growth, development, or psychological functioning" - which would certainly encompass bullying. So strong is the compulsion to not criminalize children that teachers and administrators routinely open themselves to legal liability through their lack of action.

So if creating crimes that would prevent bullying is not working - what is the solution?

Several common sense ideas were introduced last session - none of which became law:

Rep. Mark Strama's HB 1323 would have allowed school administrators to address bullying that took place off campus, so long as it affected the education environment, required schools to notify both the parents of victims of bullying and the parents of the bully, allowed administrators to transfer bullies to other schools or classrooms, and would have created a statewide reporting requirement, allowing for better tracking and understanding of bullying.

Rep. Garnet Coleman's HB 3746 would have created a non-discrimination policy for public schools covering "actual or perceived ethnicity, color, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, disability, religion, or national origin" that would apply to both students and employees of public schools. It would have also required school district to offer regular training to staff and would have creating a statewide reporting system for instances of bullying.

Rep. Jessica Farrar's HB 2923 would have created a similar nondiscrimination policy.

If people like Sen. Whitmire are concerned about the fight against bullying turning children into criminals then they should be supporting solutions like these. Under the current law administrators and teachers rarely have non-criminalizing solutions to the problem of bullying, and they seem unwilling to pursue criminalizing solutions, to their own peril. We must give teachers and administrators the tools and education they need to address this issue, or suffer a generation of queer youth lost to depression and suicide.

State Department Makes Changing Gender Markers Easier, But What About Texas?

The State Department announced new guidelines today that will make it easier for Transgender Americans to have passports that reflect their gender identity. Under the new guidelines someone who is applying to change the gender marker on their passport must present “a certification from an attending medical physician that the applicant has undergone appropriate clinical treatment for gender transition”. Previously, applicants were required to present proof of genital surgery (usually called sexual reassignment surgery (SRS)).

Many trans identified people choose not to have genital surgery. There are a number of reasons for this choice ranging from the costs of surgery, to concerns about its efficacy, to simply not needing the surgery to bring their bodies in line with their gender identity. This is a very personal decision and it’s great news that the federal government has decided to butt out.

But what about in Texas? Technically it is not legal in Texas for a transgender person to have their birth certificate altered, although a few brave judges have been known to issue the order. Changing the gender marker on driver’s licenses requires sexual reassignment surgery, similar to the old passport guidelines. (Again, there are some judges who will issue the order without proof of SRS, but this requires hiring a lawyer who knows which judges to go to - something that many transgender people can not afford.)

During the last two legislative sessions Rep. Garnett Coleman has introduced legislation that would create guidelines very similar to the new passport guidelines for changing both birth certificates and driver's licenses (81st session HB 4297, 80th session HB 1761). Representatives Alma Allen, Raphael Anchia, Lon Burnam and Jessica Farrar have all supported those efforts but the bills have never gotten out of committee (in fact they’ve never gotten a hearing).

One reason is that the Public Health Committee, who would hold the hearing on this bill, is currently chaired by Republican Lois Kolkhurst, and was formely chaired by Republican Diane White Delisi. Neither or whom were particularly inclined to grant a hearing.

The other reason is that the bills sponsor, Garnett Coleman, is a very busy man. Coleman has a reputation for filing more bills than average (he filed 118 last session). Coleman has a wonderful agenda of pro-LGBT bills, but he files so many bills that the vast majority do not get a hearing, let alone make it out of committee.

Most legislation gets passed as an amendment. Staffers watch the bills that are debated on the House floor and look for ones that cover similar subject material to a bill their boss is carrying. Then they point it out to their boss so it can be amended onto the bill being debated. I’m certain that Coleman’s staff does the same thing, but with 118 bills to watch out for it’s simply not possible for them to catch every opportunity.

How do we fix this? The queer community needs to make it clear to our allies in the legislature that this bill, and other pro-LGBT bills, need to be a priority. We have to stop being satisfied with simply having our bills introduced and insist that they be fought for.

The recent change in the State Department Guidelines provides an ideal opportunity to bring this issue up with our representatives. Please call or write your representatives (or better yet, make an appointment to go see them) and tell them that state law should reflect federal when it comes to gender markers.