WATCH: Legislators Speak at Dedication of Montrose Remembrance Garden

Texas Senators John Whitmire, Mario Gallegos and Rodney Ellis and Representative Garnet Coleman spoke last night at the dedication of the Montrose Remembrance Garden in Houston. The Garden is the brainchild of the Aaron Scheerhoorn Foundation for Change, made possible by the generous support of local business owner Charles Armstrong and the help of the Montrose Counseling Center.

All four spoke at length about the decade-long fight that led Texas to pass hate crimes legislation in 2001, and about the anti-bullying and teen suicide prevention bills passed this session by the legislature. Only Garnet Coleman mentioned Texas' hate crimes statute still excludes the transgender community (an omission he has tried to correct).

The Aaron Scheerhoorn Foundation was created in response to last December's brutal murder of Aaron Scheerhoorn, just blocks from the garden's location. Scheerhoorn was attacked in the Houston "gayborhood" of Montrose. Bleeding from stab wounds, he ran to a nearby bar to ask for assistance. According to witnesses the bar's bouncer refused to allow the dying man access. Scheerhoorn left to seek assistance elsewhere when his attacker caught up with him, finally delivering the fatal blow just feet from the bar's door.

In dedicating the garden organizers made it clear that it was not just in memory for Aaron Scheerhoorn, but in memory of "all victims of violence, victims of hate crimes, and those who were subjected to bullying." The event ended, as the sun set, with a candle-lit reading of the names of dozens of victims of violence and hate from the Houston area, followed by a release of hundreds of white balloons (watch the reading of victims names here).

Top 5 Texas Senators 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 31 Texas Senators 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

Rodney Ellis (D-Houston)

Score: 99 points Grade: A Ellis's district includes the historic "gayborhood" of Montrose in Houston as well as most of the district of Rep. Garnet Coleman, LQ's top ranked member of the House. It's largely his sponsorship of Coleman's HB 1386 (teen suicide prevention) and HB 2229 (making permanent the HIV Medication Advisory Committee) that elevated Ellis to the top of this list. His perfect voting record and authorship of the Senate version of HB 2229 (SB 1821) didn't hurt either.

#2

Wendy Davis (D-Fort Worth)

Score: 98 points Grade: A It seems unfair that Davis is number two and not number one: she filed the only piece of Senate legislation this session to even mention sexual orientation and gender identity and expression (her comprehensive anti-bullying bill SB 242) and was on the forefront of every anti-bullying effort in the Senate this session, co-authoring Whitmire's SB 205 (expanding and clarifying anti-bullying portions of student codes of conduct) and co-sponsoring HB 1942 (the anti-bullying "super" bill). It's only Ellis' sponsorship of Rep. Coleman's House bills that inched Davis out of the number one spot. Davis previously held the Fort Worth City Council seat currently held by Joel Burns (of "it gets better" fame) and is outspoken and passionate in her support of the LGBT community.

#3

Judith Zaffirini (D-Larado)

Score: 96 points Grade: A Zaffirini's anti-bullying legislation didn't get much press this session. She filed two excellent bills: SB 42, which would have included cyber-bullying in the statutory definition of bullying; and SB 66, which would have closed a loophole in the Education Code that prevents students who have been transferred in the last year from being sent to alternative school, even for egregious or violent behavior. Zaffirini is known for her strong work ethic. In 23 years of service in the Texas Senate she has never missed a vote. She applied that dedication to the issue of school bullying this year, supporting every anti-bullying bill that came to the Senate floor.

#4 (tie)	Leticia Van de Putte (D-San Antonio)
	Score: 95 points Grade: A Van de Putte was a co-author on Davis' comprehensive anti-bullying bill SB 242 and eventually sponsored anti-bullying "super" bill HB 1942 in the House. A pharmacist, Van de Putte is known for her passionate advocacy for children, both in the House where she served for 10 years and in the Senate where she's served since 1999.

#4 (tie)

John Whitmire (D-Houston)

Score: 95 points Grade: A Whitmire spoke last fall at a public hearing on bullying about the need to address the issue without creating laws that turned children into criminals for making stupid or cruel choices. He put his money where is mouth is this session by filing SB 205, which carefully laid out guidelines for the anti-bullying provisions of student codes of conduct school districts are required to adopt. Unfortunately the bill died in the House Public Education Committee, but some of its ideas were incorporated in anti-bullying "super" bill HB 1942, which Whitmire co-authored. The longest currently serving member of the Texas Senate, Whitmire carries significant influence among his peers which this session he chose to use in defense of the victims of bullying.

That's the top five. We've already published the Top 10 House Members and the Worst 10 House members and will get the rest of the list up soon including the Worst 5 Texas Senators, 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.

Day 134: Last Day For Senate Bills in the House

Today is the 135th day of the 82nd session of the Texas Legislature. The House reconvenes and the Senate returns from recess at 9:00 am.

It was a red-letter day for Equality Texas yesterday. Two of the bills on their legislative agenda, HB 1942 by Diane Patrick (R-Arlington) and HB 1386 by Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) were passed by the Senate. Both bills are designed to give schools tools to combat bullying and teen suicide. The House must now concur with changes the Senate made to the bills. HB 1942, which passed first, is on the "items eligible" calendar in the House, a list of bills passed by the Senate on which the House must take action. House rules require that members have 24 hours to review Senate amendments before the vote to concur takes place. Since the amendments to HB 1942 were distributed to House members late last night it is not eligible for consideration until 9:20 this evening. The amendments for HB 1386 have yet to be distributed, that will likely happen today.

Today is the last day the House can consider Senate Bills on second reading. The state constitution requires that bills be "read" on three separate days in both the House and Senate. (they don't actually read the whole bill, just the bill number and a short description called the "caption.") After first reading in the House the bill is referred to one of the House committees. If the committee likes the bill and recommends it to the House the bill is then read a second time, after which the entire House may debate it and vote on it. If the bill passes it is then read for the third time, debated and voted on again. (There's an exception to today's deadline - bills on the "local and consent calendar," a list of noncontroversial bills that received unanimous support in committee, don't have to be considered on second reading until tomorrow).

Unfortunately SB 205 by John Whitmire (D-Houston) is not on the schedule for today, nor is SB 66 by Judith Zaffirini (D-Laredo). SB 205 would have expanded and clarified the requirements of school districts student codes of conduct in relation to anti-bullying policies. SB 66 would have closed a loophole that prevents school districts from expelling students who transferred to the district in the same academic year, even for egregious behavior problems. Portions of SB 205 were included in HB 1942, but it's a shame to see these two bills die so close to the finish line.

Wayne Christian (R-Center), who previously amended HB 1 (the budget) to include a provision requiring Texas universities that have LGBT resource centers to equally fund "family and traditional values centers," is rumored to be looking for a Senate bill he can similarly amend. Christian's amendment to the budget was removed by the Senate. He prefiled an identical amendment, and one that would prohibit LGBT resource centers from being housed in state buildings, to SB 1811, one of a series of "fiscal matters" bills that compliment the budget. SB 1811 was debated by the House last Friday, when the debate went past midnight Simpson and several other members withdrew amendments dealing with education on the assumption that they could be added to SB 1581, another fiscal matters bill that deals specifically with education funding. Yesterday SB 1581 came up on second reading in the House but was killed by a "point of order" (an objection that the bill was not considered win accordance with the rules of the House).

If Christian is looking for another vehicle for his amendments SB 8, which is on today's schedule, may be his last chance. It's one of the last "fiscal matters" bills still waiting for House approval, but it deals with Health Care - a very different subject than education. If Christian offers his amendments to SB 8 they should be very susceptible to a point of order based on House Rule 11 Sec. 2 which requires amendments to be on the same subject as the original bill.

Day 107: The Senate, or how to ignore the rules while following them

Today is the 107th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The House reconvenes at 10, the Senate at 11. Several good pieces of legislation passed both bodies yesterday, but contentious bills under consideration today will undoubtedly slow the process and make for a late evening for lawmakers. LQ's analysis of the day in House is HERE, this is what's going on in the Senate:

The Texas constitution requires bills to be "read" in each chamber on three separate days, but the Senate notoriously disregards this requirement: After first reading bills are sent to committee then, if the committee approves, they are sent back to the whole Senate and placed on one of several "calendars," lists of different kinds of bills to be considered on second reading. The senate has a rule requiring bills to be considered in the order they are voted out of committee, however Senators may place their bills on the "intent calendar," a list of bills to be considered out of order if 2/3 of the Senate agrees to set aside that rule. After the 2/3 vote the bill is then debated, potentially amended (within certain limits) and then voted on again.

Then, and this is where things get interesting, the Senate routinely votes to set aside the constitutional requirement to read bills on three separate days and goes ahead and takes the vote on third reading the same day. So that's four votes (bring up out of order, vote on second reading, vote to set aside three day requirement, vote on third reading) in quick succession, all on the same bill.

Yesterday the Senate passed on second and third reading SB 205 by Sen. John Whitmire (D-Houston), making it the first anti-bullying bill of the session to get out of the chamber it originated in. The bill specifies requirements for the anti-bullying portions of the student codes of conduct that school districts are required to create(read LQ's original analysis of SB 205).

SB 205 was on the intent calendar, so it needed the support of 2/3 of the Senators to pass the first of the four votes. All of the Senators except Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury) and Jane Nelson (R-Flower Mound) voted to bring the bill up out of order. There was no debate on SB 205 and no Senator wished to amend it so the vote to pass it on second reading was taken and it passed, 30 to 1 with only Nelson voting against. That's 2 votes down, 2 to go.

Next the Senate voted to set aside the constitutional requirement to read bills on three separate days. Both Birdwell and Nelson voted against setting aside the rule as did Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio). Wentworth, however, has a long history of consistently voting against bypassing the three day reading requirement. It's easy to understand why. While capitol insiders view the Senate's routine ignoring of a constitutional requirement as a matter of course, just the way business is done; outsiders are often shocked to hear that the constitution could just be ignored. Wentworth explains it this way:

"Because in my judgment no circumstance exists in this case to justify the extraordinary act of suspending a requirement of the Texas Constitution. The suspension of this Constitutional Rule has the direct and immediate effect of denying the people of Texas knowledge and notice of the passage of this measure until it has already been finally passed on third reading. Were we to have followed the requirement of the Texas Constitution, third reading and a vote on [SB 205] would have occurred on the next legislative day, allowing for Texans to have learned through news reports of our second reading vote exactly what we had tentatively passed. Third reading and a vote on the next legislative day would also have allowed our professional staff an opportunity overnight to make sure any amendments passed on second reading are technically correct."

Wentworth's objection to setting aside a portion of the constitution should not be read as opposition to the bill or indifference to the victims of bullying.

After the vote to dispense with the three day rule (vote 3 of 4) SB 205 passed on 3rd reading, 29 to 2 with both Birdwell and Nelson voting "nay." The bill now goes to the House where it will likely be sent to the House Committee on Public Education, which two weeks ago approved HB 1942, the big anti-bullying compromise bill that contains provisions similar to those in SB 205 (read LQ's analysis of HB 1942).

The Senate is expected to take up the state appropriations bill (HB 1) either today or tomorrow, including it's requirement, added via amendment by Rep. Wayne Christian (R-Center), that state universities which have a LGBT resource center equally fund a "Center for Family and Traditional Values." The American Independent has an interesting analysis of the Christian amendment, stating that since almost all LGBT resource centers, including those at Texas A&M and UT Austin, are funded by student fees, not state funds, the mandate to equally fund family and traditional values centers would not apply. A spokesperson for the UT Austin Gender and Sexuality Center confirms that their funding comes from student fees.

SB 723, the anti-trans-marriage bill, still sits, like an unexploded ordinance, on the Senate's schedule but is unlikely to be voted on this week.

Day 107: The House

Today is the 107th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The House reconvenes at 10, the Senate at 11. Several good pieces of legislation passed both bodies yesterday, but contentious bills under consideration today will undoubtedly slow the process and make for a late evening for lawmakers. Here's what's going on in the Senate, this is what's happening in the House:

The Texas constitution requires bills to be "read" in each chamber on three separate days (the whole bill isn't read, just the bill number and a very brief description, called the "caption"). After the first reading bills are sent to committee for consideration. The second reading is the first opportunity for members to debate or amend the bill on the floor, after which it is voted on. Continued debate is allowed after the third reading but amendment of the bill requires a 2/3 vote. After debate on third reading (and potentially amendment) the whole chamber votes on the bill again. If the bill passes on third reading it is then sent to the other chamber for further consideration.

HB 1666 by Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-San Antonio) expands the states current law against posting on social media sites with the intent to "harm, defraud, intimidate or threaten another person" to include non-social media sites like youtube and blogger. The bill sailed through the House on third reading yesterday, 141 to 1. Freshman Rep. John V. Garza (R-San Antonio) was the lone "nay" vote as even David Simpson (R-Longview), who opposed the bill on second reading voted "yea." It now goes to the Senate for consideration.

HB 2229 by Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) passed the House on second reading after initially being tabled. The bill makes permanent the Texas HIV Medication Advisory Committee. Texas has a program that provides medication assistance to low-income HIV-positive people. The Advisory Committee is made up of people who are on the ground dealing with the day-to-day functions of the program and is designed to provide real world input. Earlier this year the committee was dissolved when Department of State Health Services Commissioner, Dr. David Lakey, failed to renew it. It has since been reformed after public outcry. Coleman's bill seeks to prevent future commissioners from doing something similar.

HB 2229 seemed poised to pass until an amendment was added by Rep. Ruth Jones McClendon (D-San Antonio) creating a pilot needle exchange program. Texas has had needle exchange programs in the past and they are a proven way to reduce the transmission of HIV and other blood born diseases. However many House Republicans oppose such programs arguing that, by providing clean needles to IV drug users, the state is condoning drug use. The House voted on HB 2229 and it failed to pass, 53 to 89.

After talking with their colleagues Coleman and McClendon struck a compromise. A motion was made to reconsider the vote, McClendon withdrew her amendment, and the vote was taken again. This time HB 2229 passed on second reading, 104 to 36. It is on the schedule to be considered on third reading to today.

Also today, the House is scheduled to begin debate on the contentious issue of redistricting. The state constitution requires that the legislature redraw the House and Senate district borders every ten years in response to the U.S. census. HB 150 by Burt Solomons (R-Carrollton) will redraw the House borders. Solomons' proposal seeks to solidify the current Republican super-majority in the House. The committee hearings on the bill have been heated, with representatives of Hispanic and African American groups claiming that Solomons has purposefully divided their communities and lessened their voting power. The current House borders also dived the historic the "gayborhoods" of Montrose in Houston and Oaklawn in Dallas (Read LQ's Texas House Districts Divide Queer Main Street).

It should be a prime day for House floor watching, if you're so inclined you can watch the whole thing unfold HERE.

Day 106: Cyber-Bullying, HIV Medication and Unfunded Mandates

Today is the 106th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. Both the House and Senate reconvene at 11 am. Today marks the beginning of the final fourth of session. With just five weeks to go the already harried pace of session is only going to accelerate.

In the broad conversation on legislation designed to combat cyber-bullying HB 1666, by Rep. Joaquin Castro (D-San Antonio) has largely stayed under the radar. By law created in 2009 it is illegal in Texas to create a fake profile on a social network site with the intent to "harm, defraud, intimidate or threaten another person." HB 1666 would expand this prohibition to include other, non-social networking, sites. The original legislation creating this law was written by former Republican Representative Brian McCall and passed with broad bi-partisan support, mostly due to McCall's descriptions of little old ladies being taken in by MySpace scams. But the law might also make schoolyard bullies think twice before setting up fake web pages or profiles designed to humiliate their peers and the logical expansion of its reach to non-social networking sites is welcomed. HB 1666 is scheduled to be debated on the House floor today.

Also scheduled in the House today is HB 2229 by Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston). HB 2229 would make permanent the Texas HIV Medication Advisory Committee. Texas has a program that provides medication assistance to low-income HIV-positive people, which is managed by the Texas Department of State Health Services. The Advisory Committee is made up of Doctors, Pharmacist, Nurses, Care Providers and low-income HIV-positive people in the program. It's designed to provide input from people who are on the ground dealing with the day-to-day functioning of the program.

Earlier this year the Department of State Health Services Commissioner, Dr. David Lakey, declined to renew the Advisory Committee when the rule creating it expired. After a massive outcry from Texans he eventually reappointed the committee and they had their first meeting on April 1st. Coleman's bill is designed to prevent future commissioners from taking similar steps and simply creates in the statute what is already happening. HB 2229 was voted out of committee with only one member objecting (Rep. Van Taylor (R-Plano)). Continuing to do what is already being done doesn't cost the the state anything extra, and allowing people who are directly affected by a program to have input in how it functions makes since.

Over in the Senate SB 205 is on the Intent Calendar (a list of bills Senators intend to bring up for a vote), as is HB 1:

SB 205, by Sen. John Whitmire (D-Houston) is one of several anti-bullying bills filed this session. Currently school districts must create student codes of conduct which are designed, in part, to discourage bullying. Whitmire's bill specifies requirements for the anti-bullying portions of those codes, while still allowing a great deal of leeway for the district (read LQ's original review of SB 205).

HB 1 is the budget. Each regular session versions of the budget are filed in both the House and the Senate as HB 1 and SB 1. The two bodies alternate whose version eventually winds up being the "real" budget, but both have an opportunity to edit and change it. This is a House budget year so HB 1, in some form, will likely become the budget for the State of Texas for the next two years.

When the House was creating the budget Rep. Wayne Christian (R-Center) stuck an amendment on it that requires public universities that have GLBT resource centers to also create, and equally fund, a "Center for Family and Traditional Values." (read LQ's analysis of the floor debate on the amendment). The student Senate at Texas A&M has already passed a resolution supporting funding its "Center for Family and Traditional Values" by cutting the GLBT resource center's budget in half. Given the tight budget at public universities and that Christian did not provide and additional funding as part of his mandate, it is likely that, if the amendment becomes law, other schools will be forced to similarly defund, or eliminate completely, their GLBT resource centers. Which, I'm certain, was Christian's intention. (The full text of the budget is HERE, the Christian amendment is on page 459)

The amendment must be removed in the Senate, which will likely tackle HB 1 this week, or it will become law. After the Senate passes it's version of HB 1 a "conference committee" made up of House and Senate members will meet to hash out compromises between the two bodies' versions of the bill. The conference committee is only permitted to make changes to portions of the budget that are different between the two versions. So if the budget passes the Senate with the Christian amendment still intact the conference committee will be unable to do anything to remove it. This is the last chance, at least for the next two years, for Texans to defend this important campus resource from an unfunded mandate designed to deprive queer college students of one of the few places on campus specifically designed to meet their needs.

You can find the contact information for your Senator HERE.

SB 723, the anti-trans-marriage bill, is still on the Senate's General Calendar, but it is unlikely that it will be voted on this week.

Day 101: It's Still Yesterday in the Senate, Coleman Removes Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Expression from Asher's Law

Today is the 101st day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The House is recessed until 8:00 am, the Senate until 9:00 am. That both houses are "recessed" is interesting, it means than, technically, when they reconvene they will still be on the previous legislative day.

When the Senate recessed yesterday neither SB 205 by Sen. John Whitmire (D-Houston), which would clarify and expand the student codes of conduct that school districts must adopt (Read LQ's analysis of SB 205); nor SB 723, Sen. Tommy Williams (R-The Woodlands) which would effectively ban marriage between two people of the opposite sex if one of the partners is transgender (Read LQ's explanation of SB 723) had reached the floor. Since the Senate will be on the same legislative day when they return from their recess this morning they could, potentially, bring up those two bills.


HB 1386 (Asher's Law) by Rep. Garnet Coleman (D-Houston) was heard in the House Public Health Committee last night; well, technically this morning. The Public Health Committee hearing went into the wee small hours of the morning, and by the time Coleman's bill was brought up it was 4:10 am. Coleman told the committee that he was working on a "committee substitute" which was not yet available. The filed version of HB 1386 requires that school districts not discriminate against students on the basis of "the actual or perceived ethnicity, color, gender, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, disability, religion, or national origin of the employee, student, or student's parent." Coleman indicated that his committee substitute would remove the enumerated list from the non-discrimination policy in his bill, but did not indicate if the entire non-discrimination requirement would be removed. LQ is working to get a copy of the committee substitute.

Day 95: Bullies and Tommy Williams (is that redundant?)

Today is the 95th day of the 82nd regular session of the Texas Legislature. The Senate reconvened at 8 am, the House will reconvene at 10 am.

SB 205, by Sen. John Whitmire (D - Houston) will be heard this morning in the Senate Education Committee. Currently school districts must create student codes of conduct which are designed, in part, to discourage bullying. Whitmire's bill specifies requirements for the anti-bullying portions of those codes, while still allowing a great deal of leeway for the district (read LQ's original review of SB 205).

Equality Texas reports that SB 723 by Sen. Tommy Williams (R-The Woodlands), was voted out of the Senate Jurisprudence Committee at a quick meeting at Sen. Harris' desk yesterday. SB 723 would eliminate a court ordered "sex change" from the list of identifying documents acceptable for applying for a marriage license. The bill is a blatant attack on the trans community. The next step will be for the bill to be placed on the intent calendar (a list of bills the Senate "intends" to vote on). Before that happens Williams will want to be sure he has the support of two thirds of the Senators. Because of a quirk of Senate Rules at least two thirds of the Senate must vote to begin debate on a bill. Currently the Republican majority in the Senate is one vote short of having two thirds of the seats. This means that for SB 723 to advance at least 1 Democratic Senator will have to support it.

If you believe that transgender people deserve the same dignity and respect as the cisgender population please call these Democratic Senators and tell them to oppose SB 723:

Mario Gallegos (512) 463-0106
Wendy Davis (512) 463-0110
Rodney G. Ellis (512) 463-0113
Kirk Watson (512) 463-0114
John Whitmire (512) 463-0115
Carlos I. Uresti (512) 463-0119
Juan "Chuy" Hinojosa (512) 463-0120
Judith Zaffirini (512) 463-0121
Royce West (512) 463-0123
Leticia R. Van de Putte (512) 463-0126
Eduardo A. (Eddie) Lucio, Jr. (512) 463-0127
José R. Rodríguez (512) 463-0129

SB 205 - Require Schools to Create Anti-Bullying Policies

SB 205 by Sen. John Whitmire would require all public schools in Texas to adopt a comprehensive anti-bullying policy. The bill is exhaustive in the detail it prescribes for the policy, but does allow each school district to tailor its policy to the specifics of its students.

The bill lays out 13 things that each district's policy must address, the policy must:

• prohibit bullying, cyberbullying, harassment, and intimidation
• describe the behavior expected from students
• lay out the consequences of bullying - specifically allowing counseling or referral to anti-bullying services
• include a procedure for reporting bullying, including anonymous reporting
• encourage students and employees to report bullying
• layout a procedure for investigating bullying
• describe how a school district will respond to confirmed bullying
• prohibit retaliation against people who report bullying
• have a rule against intimation of witnesses and victims of bullying to prevent reporting
• describe how a school district will respond to retaliation for reporting or intimation of witnesses or victims
• specify how the policy will be publicized
• specify that publicization of the policy must state that it applies both on campus and at off campus school sponsored events
• identify which school officials are responsible for implementing the policy

I like this bill. However, it doesn't go nearly as far as SB 245 by Davis (which also requires schools to adopt anti-bullying policies). Davis' bill includes a host of other anti-bullying solutions, like a reporting requirement and permitting schools to transfer bullies to other classes or campuses (currently only the victim can be transferred), but the level of detail in Whitmire's policy requirement will make it difficult for recalcitrant districts to wiggle out of the requirement.

The best solution would be for Whitmire's policy requirement to be amended onto Davis' bill. Most of the time each half of the legislature (House and Senate) only sends one bill on a topic to the other for consideration. Since these two bills were introduced in the Senate it would be best if they were combined in the Senate. Senators Davis and Whitmire will need to work together to create the best synthesis of the two.

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.