80th Legislature: HB 1 Liveblogging

We’re going to try to liveblog the debate on HB 1 to some extent today.

This part of the budget process (before questions and amendments) is always terribly dull. Check back frequently for updates (you may need to use the refresh function on your browser).

11:27 a.m. POO withdrawn.

11:24 a.m. Gallego raises a point of order against further consideration of this amendment.

11:22 a.m.: Gallego has a point of order. Says that the ruling by the chair on the Enterprise Fund question hasn’t come out and is asking when it will come out.

Craddick says as soon as this is finished and the correcting amendment is done, they will lay out the amendments that aren’t appropriate and will then lay out the ruling.

11:15 a.m.: Chisum’s perfecting amendment, Amendment 1. Changes some appropriations to higher ed institutions. Transfers $1.3 million from a junior college welding program to TWC and more…

11:21 a.m. Appropriations vice Chair Guillen, Gattis and others are having a pow-wow with Chisum at the front mic.

11:19 a.m.:PITTS has a question.

PITTTS: You are going to tax a bed in a nursing home to draw down federal dollars?

CHISUM: That is correct.

PITTS: How much goes back to the nursing homes.

CHISUM [Isn't sure. Possibly 3-1, some won't qualify].

PITTS: Are we going to give all the money back to the nursing homes? Is that the intent of the quaw? [What's a "quaw"?]
CHISUM: Yes.

11:01 a.m.: Coleman up for a question:

COLEMAN: In the budget that’s here on the floor today, you have an appropriation for Medicaid that in the first year of the biennium, you have an amount and in the second year there is a smaller amount. Can you tell us why that is set up this way?

CHISUM: I’d probably get Rep. Davis up here to do that…One thing we did was restore Medicaid rates to the ‘03 levels and a 10 percent raise for doctors and a 15 percent raise for dentists.

COLEMAN: (talking about various years’ decreases)

Coleman points out that part of the reason for the federal lawsuit was that providers were leaving the program…

COLEMAN: (in asking why there was a difference) You may be rolling the dice on a bunch of poor people dying, I don’t know.

Gattis is up now to answer Coleman:

GATTIS: The total amount we budgeted for Medicaid in 08 is slightly lower than 09, is that what you’re asking?

COLEMAN: I’m trying to understand the calculation for that and see why you have the decline in the number of people served under the Medicaid program. I suppose the dollars are reflecting that decline in the number of people served while on the other hand you have rates increased.

GATTIS: As you know, with Medicaid being an entitlement program, we have to serve the people who show up. One of the issues we deal with every year is what is the caseload growth going to be within Medicaid or within CHIP. Typically we can predict that number a year out fairly accurately…and, the other number, that never gets figured in by LBB is estimated increase in cost growth (in healthcare). What we’ve done in year 08 is we’ve tried to be as conservative as we can, to make sure that we take care of the expectated [is that a word?] cost…so we figured the commissions’ expectation of cost growth into our 08 number so we put enough money to deal with what our estimated case growth and cost growth is, the Commission’s but not the LBB’s because theirs is higher. Where we get into funny numbers and funny math is 09 because we don’t know what is going to happen. As we get closer to the end of this session, we’re likely to adjust those numbers, but typically what we try to do is have the best number for 08 but in 09 we’ll be back to deal with any shortfalls on those lines.

COLEMAN: And I do understand that, but the state is lapsing CHIP funds this year. Appropriated but not spent, is that correct?

GATTIS: Yes, because we didn’t have as many on CHIP as we expected…we had an expectation of what we had on CHIP and didn’t have that and had dollars left over.

COLEMAN: That’s not how it works. I remember someone standing int hat same position at that front mic telling us there would be a rider in appropriations to make sure those children were covered. Maybe it’s because all the eligible children showed up and there weren’t enough orm aybe it is because the system was faulty and they couldn’t get in. So, the question is, is there some intent in not funding the caseloads appropriately because you believe you won’t need it, is tehre some intent in business practices on CHIP or Medicaid that says we won’t need it, what is…

GATTIS: I think I can answer your question. That number difference, there is no secret plan to kick a bunch of people off Medicaid or put bureaucratic things in the process to keep people off. We are looking at forecasting. 12 months is one thing but 18 months and out is fuzzy and we often come back here to deal with that shortfall.

10:56 a.m.: Chisum: asks for applause for the subcommittees. He has an author’s perfecting amendment. Hochberg has a question, first.

HOCHBERG: Mr. Chairman, you know we fought for the last four years over whether or not we were adequately funding the public schools…

CHISUM: We went through some tough years and you’re exactly right, we didn’t do our fair share.

HOCHBERG: In this budget, are we not going down this same path again? My understanding the only increase is in the second year…and the only real increase to the districts other than a categorical increase is the second year of that.

CHISUM: That’s true, Scott, but public and higher education is 55.1 percent of our total budget and that doesn’t include the property tax relief. I think we’ve come a long ways.

HOCHBERG: But in this budget, we’re not going forward with the districts, if they want to keep up with inflation, that’s going to come out of local property taxes isn’t it?

CHISUM:…well, they’ve got the four pennies…

HOCHBERG: In order for them to stay up with inflation or give teacher pay raises, that will be local dollars?

CHISUM: Yes, and they’d have to use those four pennies to do that. The golden pennies…There are people out there who would like to give more of a pay raise and I’m ok with that.

HOCHBERG: But we’re not doing it in this budget?

CHISUM: No we’re not…

10:55 a.m.: TYC and TDCJ guards will get raises of about 4 percent in addition to a 2.5 percent raise for all state employees.

10:54 a.m.: I missed this earlier, but it seems a bunch of amendments have been killed becuase it has been ruled that any amendments pulling money from Governor Perry’s Enterprise “slush” Fund would be out of order. Damn, what’s up with that?
10:53 a.m.: Now, it gets a little more interesting. Dukes is talking about employee compensation for state employees.

10:51 a.m. Now, Dukes is up. She’s talking much faster than everyone else, thankfully, because I suspect half the Lege isn’t listening to any of this as they prep their amendments.

10:46 a.m. Now Drew Darby (R-San Angelo) is talking about the Board of Plumbing Examiners, the Board of Podiatrist Medical Examiners and the Racing Commission…so interesting.

10:45 a.m. Wait, that may not have been Governor Perry. Maybe it was Patrick Rose? Maybe it was Perry. His back is to the camera now and he had his arm around Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston) a second ago.10:41 a.m. Menendez is up talking about the Texas Medical Board. “What’s interesting here is that $1.8 million of the increase is to expand the board’s licensing division.” Personally, I do not find that terribly interesting, though it may be important. Oh, god, we’re down to the Board of Dental Examiners. I need coffee. But wait, there was a performance issue tied to part of their appropriation, but I didn’t catch it all.

10:44 a.m.: And now the board of Nurse Examiners….

10:43 a.m. Ohhh, I see Governor Deep Breath on the floor!!! Alert the Media!

10:39 a.m.: Nope, it’s Larry Taylor, who is talking about the thrilling appropriations for the Board of Chiropractic Examiners. Dukes has now walked off. You can see how dry this part is, because we’re actually paying more attention to what people are doing in the background than what they are saying.

10:40 a.m. Oh, the Funeral Services Commission is getting an extra $49,000. Yawn. Board of Professional Geoscientists? What’s that? They’re getting a small increase, too.

10:38 a.m.: Looks like Dawnna Dukes is about to speak now. She’s standing up there.

10:34 a.m.: More bla bla bla about increases for various regulatory agencies. System Benefit Fund….raising additional revenue from licensing fees (again?!?). I just noticed the House Parlmientarian has a very cool looking translucent blue glass she’s drinking out of in the background of the debate…that’s the most exciting thing right now. Looks like something that would have come from Target.

Right now, it looks like the bill is being laid out.

Speaker Pro Tem Sylvester Turner (D-Houston) is laying out part. Now Carl Isset (R-Lubbock) is speaking on Article VI and VII.

Bookmark It