Yesterday was the first day to file bills in the Texas legislature. These bills represent the highest legislative priorities for the officials who filed them. There were 156 bills and 1 concurrent resolution filed in the Senate and 198 bills filed in the House. I haven't yet read through all of the legislation but here are some highlights from today:
SB 42 - allow victims of cyber-bullying to be transferred to other classes or campuses
HB 16 - voter ID bill - bad for Texas, good for Trans community
HB 24 - allow cyber-bullies in alternative school
HB 130 - create a statewide bullying hotline
HB 169 - allow schools to force bullies into JROTC programs
HB170 - create a 300 foot safe zone around school campuses
______________
Most legislation gets passed by being amended onto other bills, so it's important to look out for legislation that is on similar topics. Here are some bills that were filed that have the potential to be improved by adding queer friendly amendments.
SB 29 - would allow grad students at state schools to be eligible for health benefits. Currently state schools are prohibited from offering health benefits to the domestic partners of staff. This bill could be an opportunity for that legislation.
SCR 1 - teabagger nonsense about states rights. (SCR stands for Senate Concurant Resolution, in this case it won't accomplish anything or change any laws if passed, it's just an opportunity to pontificate) It goes on - at length - about the 2nd, 9th and 10th amendment. There is an opportunity, if this bill makes it to the floor, for someone to attempt to amend a reminder of the 16th amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law, specifically as it should apply to marriage equality and employment protections.
HB 22 - would require public schools to report how many non-citizen students they have. This is another one of the Debbie Riddle anti-immigrant bills. What's interesting is that it says that schools should report this information in a way that would not discriminate based on "race, color, disability, sex, religion, age, or national origin". There is an opportunity to add to this list "Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity an Expression. The more times this enumerated list appears in the code the better.
HB 82 - revises the way that the state informs 18 year old men that they are required to register for selective service. The precise wording of the notice could be amended to also notify people of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.
______________
Another interesting bill that some people may not recognize will benefit the queer community.
HB 38 - stiffens penalties for graffiti on certain structures - including community centers that provide medical, social, or educational programs. This would include most LGBT community centers and may be helpful in countering the hate graffiti that they often have to contend with.
______________
There are many bills that still need to be read - we are seeking additional contributors to help us work through them please e-mail legislativequeery@gmail.com to volunteer.
A Texpatriate attempting grad school in Chicago
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Monday, November 8, 2010
First Senate Anti-Bullying Bill of the Session
SB 42 by Sen. Judith Zaffirini would expand to include bullying by electronic means the portion of the Texas Education Code that allows the victim of bullying to be transferred to another class or school.
This is a common sense approach, but one that does not go nearly far enough. Texas desperately needs to give school administrators to tools to transfer bullies. Under the current law an administrator can only transfer the victim, which can cut them off from any faculty or social support they have. Although not the intent, transferring the victim can feel like a punishment and can worsen self esteem issues that bullying victims often face.
It's a good bill, but I wish it went further.
This is a common sense approach, but one that does not go nearly far enough. Texas desperately needs to give school administrators to tools to transfer bullies. Under the current law an administrator can only transfer the victim, which can cut them off from any faculty or social support they have. Although not the intent, transferring the victim can feel like a punishment and can worsen self esteem issues that bullying victims often face.
It's a good bill, but I wish it went further.
Is 1-800-Bullying Taken?
HB 130 by Rep. Carol Alvarado would create a statewide hotline and website to allow students to report bullying if the bullying takes place on school campus or at school events. Reports of bullying would be forwarded to the students school principal, or if the bully is not a student to the local police.
Makes sense to me. This bill would allow students to report instances of bullying without having to face their teachers and faculty. I am concerned, however, that the bill does not create a requirement for school administrators to follow through on the reports and that it only applies to bullying on campus or at school events.
Cyber-bullying in particular is committed off campus most of the time. It's the internet age, we must give school administrators modern tools to address modern problems. Any legislation that does not permit administrators to address off-campus bullying will fail to protect Texas school children.
Makes sense to me. This bill would allow students to report instances of bullying without having to face their teachers and faculty. I am concerned, however, that the bill does not create a requirement for school administrators to follow through on the reports and that it only applies to bullying on campus or at school events.
Cyber-bullying in particular is committed off campus most of the time. It's the internet age, we must give school administrators modern tools to address modern problems. Any legislation that does not permit administrators to address off-campus bullying will fail to protect Texas school children.
HB 170: the 300 Foot Bully Leash
HB 170 by Rep. Richard Raymond would allow school administrators to place students who engage in verbal, written or physical behavior that is designed to distress another student, is distressing to another student, or would be distressing to most people, into an alternative school if the behavior took place on school property, within 300 feet of school property, on a school bus, at a school bus stop, or at a school-sponsored event.
This is such a basic, simple, obvious response to bullying it is shocking that it is not already an option.
The only thing in this bill that is likely to draw opposition is the 300 foot provision. The ACLU of Texas testified against anti-bullying legislation last year because of their concern that allowing school administrators to address off-campus bullying would impinge on the the free speech rights of bullies. It will be interesting to see if the paltry 300 foot "safe" zone this bill creates will raise their ire or not.
This bill should already be law. If it, or some version of it, does not pass the members of the 82nd Texas legislature have failed the people of Texas.
This is such a basic, simple, obvious response to bullying it is shocking that it is not already an option.
The only thing in this bill that is likely to draw opposition is the 300 foot provision. The ACLU of Texas testified against anti-bullying legislation last year because of their concern that allowing school administrators to address off-campus bullying would impinge on the the free speech rights of bullies. It will be interesting to see if the paltry 300 foot "safe" zone this bill creates will raise their ire or not.
This bill should already be law. If it, or some version of it, does not pass the members of the 82nd Texas legislature have failed the people of Texas.
Rep. Raymond's Solution to Bullies - Give Them Guns
Rep. Richard Raymond (D - Webb County) has a 'unique' solution to the problem of bullying - he would like to give school administrators to power to force students to enroll in Junior ROTC programs. (ROTC stands for "Reserved Officers Training Corps" - it's a paramilitary program designed to recruit officers for the U.S. military)
HB 169 would allow students who violate a schools student code of conduct (which is designed to counter bullying) to be forcibly enrolled in the school's JROTC program.
It's kind of an interesting idea - my personal misgivings about the military aside - the discipline and rigor of a JROTC would seem a good response to the issue of bullying. The problem is that JROTC programs are subject to the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" provisions of the uniform code of military justice. So rather than teach bullies who target queer kids that their intolerance is unacceptable this bill would enroll them in a program that re-enforces the idea that LGBT people are not as deserving of respect and dignity as other people.
What's more, queer kids who violate a school's student code of conduct would not be able to participate in a JROTC program and so would be subject to more severe punishments like suspensions and alternative school.
This solution to bullying is poorly thought out at best. It's been introduced in previous sessions and never seems to go anywhere. Let's hope forced military service continues to be off the table as a punishment option.
HB 169 would allow students who violate a schools student code of conduct (which is designed to counter bullying) to be forcibly enrolled in the school's JROTC program.
It's kind of an interesting idea - my personal misgivings about the military aside - the discipline and rigor of a JROTC would seem a good response to the issue of bullying. The problem is that JROTC programs are subject to the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" provisions of the uniform code of military justice. So rather than teach bullies who target queer kids that their intolerance is unacceptable this bill would enroll them in a program that re-enforces the idea that LGBT people are not as deserving of respect and dignity as other people.
What's more, queer kids who violate a school's student code of conduct would not be able to participate in a JROTC program and so would be subject to more severe punishments like suspensions and alternative school.
This solution to bullying is poorly thought out at best. It's been introduced in previous sessions and never seems to go anywhere. Let's hope forced military service continues to be off the table as a punishment option.
Guillen Files First Anti-Bullying Legislation of the Session.
Rep. Ryan Guillen (D-Starr, Duval, Zapata, and southern Webb counties) has filed the first anti-bullying legislation of the session.
HB 24 would allow schools to place students who engage in electronic harassment in alternative school if the communication was sent from school grounds or the communication was received on equipment that is school property.
The bill includes as electronic harassment making obscene proposals; threatening to harm the recipient of the communication, their family or their property; and repeatedly contacting the recipient when they do not wish to be contacted.
It's a step in the right direction, but is very narrow in its scope. The kind of electronic harassment it covers is already illegal (Class B misdemeanor), but as I previously wrote such crimes are rarely prosecuted, so giving school administrators another way to deal with the issue is a good idea.
More concerning is that the bill limits the type of harassment it covers to on-campus activity or communication received on school property. It's very hard to tell exactly where someone was when they made a Facebook post - or posted to their Tumblr - so how are administrators going to prove that the communication was sent from school grounds? (maybe we are supposed to hope that foursquare will develop an app for that).
Rep. Guillen has probably tried to make this so narrow in scope to avoid some of the opposition that Rep. Strama faced to his anti-bullying legislation last session, most vocally from the ACLU of Texas who were concerned that allowing school administrators to address off-campus bullying would violate the free speech of the bullies.
I worry that in trying to so narrowly focus the legislation he has created a useless tool, but I applaud his efforts and sincerely hope that some version of this legislation will pass this session.
HB 24 would allow schools to place students who engage in electronic harassment in alternative school if the communication was sent from school grounds or the communication was received on equipment that is school property.
The bill includes as electronic harassment making obscene proposals; threatening to harm the recipient of the communication, their family or their property; and repeatedly contacting the recipient when they do not wish to be contacted.
It's a step in the right direction, but is very narrow in its scope. The kind of electronic harassment it covers is already illegal (Class B misdemeanor), but as I previously wrote such crimes are rarely prosecuted, so giving school administrators another way to deal with the issue is a good idea.
More concerning is that the bill limits the type of harassment it covers to on-campus activity or communication received on school property. It's very hard to tell exactly where someone was when they made a Facebook post - or posted to their Tumblr - so how are administrators going to prove that the communication was sent from school grounds? (maybe we are supposed to hope that foursquare will develop an app for that).
Rep. Guillen has probably tried to make this so narrow in scope to avoid some of the opposition that Rep. Strama faced to his anti-bullying legislation last session, most vocally from the ACLU of Texas who were concerned that allowing school administrators to address off-campus bullying would violate the free speech of the bullies.
I worry that in trying to so narrowly focus the legislation he has created a useless tool, but I applaud his efforts and sincerely hope that some version of this legislation will pass this session.
Debbie Riddle - Trans Advocate?
Today was the first day for filing legislation in the Texas legislature - 64 days until the start of the 82nd session.
Rumor is arch-conservative Rep. Debbie Riddle of Harris County camped out in front of the filing office so she could be first in line. Her camp-out was successful and her block of 6 anti-immigrant bills will be some of the first out of the gate when the legislature convenes.
HB 16, the first of these*, is a voter ID bill - one of the favorite rallying calls for the anti-immigrant crowd. Under current law voters can present either their voter registration card or state issued ID at the poll to prove their identity. Many anti-immigrant activist (including Riddle) are convinced that undocumented immigrants are forging voter registration cards to vote illegally (despite a study by the republican state Attorney General Greg Abbot that could not find a single instance of voter fraud at in-person voting locations). The anti-immigrant activists want to require a state-issued voter ID be presented in order to vote.
The populations least likely to have a state issued photo ID are low-income and predominately African-American or Hispanic: groups that are more likely to vote for Democratic candidates. So it's no surprise that Republicans love this idea. Attempts to get similar legislation to pass last year caused the legislative session to grind to a halt.
Hidden in HB 16 is an uncharacteristically decent bit of legislation from Rep. Riddle - who is perhaps best known for her fear of terrorist babies and calling children's health care programs a plot from the "depths of hell".
HB 16 would create a two tier system for voter identification. Voters would either have to present a photo ID, or preset two forms of non-photo ID. With-in the delineated list of acceptable forms of non-photo ID is this:
The ability of Texas courts to issue a legal sex change is at the core of the Nikki Araguz case currently being fought in Warton County (Mrs. Araguz's firefighter husband was killed in the line of duty - his ex-wife is suing Mrs. Araguz for the widow's benifits claiming their marriage was invalid because Mrs. Araguz was originally legally recognized as male by the State of Texas before receiving a court ordered change of sex).
This is a vitally important issue for the Transgender community in Texas. The ability to be legally recognized as their gender of identity is crucial to obtaining employment, housing and navigating the legal system. An additional recognition of the ability of courts to issue that legal document would benefit the community tremendously.
There will likely be several versions of voter ID legislation filed this session. It is probable that some elements of each will be included in the final version of the bill - which will likely be carried by a major player in the Republican Party. Riddle is a little too extreme for the Republican leadership, it seems unlikely to me that she would carry the final version.
The question now is - how long before Riddle discovers what she, almost certainly accidentally, filed; at what point will she or someone else try to remove it from the bill and will anyone have to guts to try to stop them?
_____________
*bills are numbered in the order they are filed except for the first 15 bills which are reserved for the budget and the speakers priorities - so HB 16 is the first bill filled.
Rumor is arch-conservative Rep. Debbie Riddle of Harris County camped out in front of the filing office so she could be first in line. Her camp-out was successful and her block of 6 anti-immigrant bills will be some of the first out of the gate when the legislature convenes.
HB 16, the first of these*, is a voter ID bill - one of the favorite rallying calls for the anti-immigrant crowd. Under current law voters can present either their voter registration card or state issued ID at the poll to prove their identity. Many anti-immigrant activist (including Riddle) are convinced that undocumented immigrants are forging voter registration cards to vote illegally (despite a study by the republican state Attorney General Greg Abbot that could not find a single instance of voter fraud at in-person voting locations). The anti-immigrant activists want to require a state-issued voter ID be presented in order to vote.
The populations least likely to have a state issued photo ID are low-income and predominately African-American or Hispanic: groups that are more likely to vote for Democratic candidates. So it's no surprise that Republicans love this idea. Attempts to get similar legislation to pass last year caused the legislative session to grind to a halt.
Hidden in HB 16 is an uncharacteristically decent bit of legislation from Rep. Riddle - who is perhaps best known for her fear of terrorist babies and calling children's health care programs a plot from the "depths of hell".
HB 16 would create a two tier system for voter identification. Voters would either have to present a photo ID, or preset two forms of non-photo ID. With-in the delineated list of acceptable forms of non-photo ID is this:
"court records of the person's adoption, name change, or sex change;" (emphasis added)Currently Texas law only recognizes a court issued sex change in one other area, in the family code where a court record of sex change is listed as an identifying document for applying for a marriage license. In fact the list of identifying documents in HB 16 is almost identical to the list currently in the family code. I suspect that the drafter of this bill simply copied the list over, probably without realizing its significance.
The ability of Texas courts to issue a legal sex change is at the core of the Nikki Araguz case currently being fought in Warton County (Mrs. Araguz's firefighter husband was killed in the line of duty - his ex-wife is suing Mrs. Araguz for the widow's benifits claiming their marriage was invalid because Mrs. Araguz was originally legally recognized as male by the State of Texas before receiving a court ordered change of sex).
This is a vitally important issue for the Transgender community in Texas. The ability to be legally recognized as their gender of identity is crucial to obtaining employment, housing and navigating the legal system. An additional recognition of the ability of courts to issue that legal document would benefit the community tremendously.
There will likely be several versions of voter ID legislation filed this session. It is probable that some elements of each will be included in the final version of the bill - which will likely be carried by a major player in the Republican Party. Riddle is a little too extreme for the Republican leadership, it seems unlikely to me that she would carry the final version.
The question now is - how long before Riddle discovers what she, almost certainly accidentally, filed; at what point will she or someone else try to remove it from the bill and will anyone have to guts to try to stop them?
_____________
*bills are numbered in the order they are filed except for the first 15 bills which are reserved for the budget and the speakers priorities - so HB 16 is the first bill filled.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)