A Look At The Speaker’s Interim Charges

I’ve been taking a look at the two sets of Interim Charges for the 80th Texas Legislature (here, here).

I hadn’t even read the first page of Appropriations Charges and found a zinger, so I thought I’d better get to doing a full analysis, which follows. (Keep in mind, if Democrats control the House after 2008, what comes of these charges could be moot. But, looking at the charges tells you where the GOP leadership, especially Speaker Craddick, wants to take the House in the next session.

First, let’s take a look at the Appropriations Charges. Number 4 could be problematic:

4. Study state employee compensation and benefit packages and recommend
alternatives designed to attract and retain superior management personnel and
other areas of potential professional shortages. Review executive director
salaries, classification schedules, merit and bonus pay, pay ranges, and agency
flexibility.

A major issue here is “merit and bonus pay.” Setting up a schedule of merit and bonus pay for state workers could prove to very difficult and unfair, not to mention being bad public policy. How do you reward, for example, Health & Human Service Workers with bonus pay? While in a normal administration it might be based on how many applications they processed (something unfair to other workers) or the number of families they approved for programs, but under the present regime we suffer under in state government, it could be for how many applications staff members have found cause to reject. While state workers need raises and better benefits, bonus and merit pay shouldn’t be a consideration.

Another charge for Appropriations that sticks out like a sore thumb is one related to stem cell research. It should have gone to another committee, but evidently Craddick stuck it with Appropriations to ensure a Craddick Republican had control of the outcome on this one:

9. Assess the potential for clinical and economic benefits of the use of state funds for
current and increased adult stem cell research. Report on the collection and
availability of cord blood stem cells for treatments and research in Texas. Review
the current state of basic and clinical research using available types of adult stem
cells.

Of course, this charge gets to Appropriations via the use of the phrase “clinical and economic benefits.” Were it not for the word economic benefits, the charge would be wholly misplaced, which I believe it still is. We all know the result of this one: the Committee will report out that there will be no benefits, that stem cell research is “junk science,” and that the earth is flat. There is no way that Appropriations, under Chisum’s leadership, will report out anything favorable to stem cell research. This charge is misplaced and Craddick is playing politics with science.

The next appropriations charge worth examining is one that’s something you’ve seen me write about a lot on this blog: the Existing Debt Allotment and the Instructional Facilities Allotment:

10. Review the Existing Debt Allotment and the Instructional Facilities Allotment to
determine whether there is an ongoing need for two distinct programs.

I’ll admit: when I first read this charge, I misread it and thought it was geared toward elimination of both programs. It turns out, however, that it simply is going to examine combining the two programs. While the programs are similar in nature, they do serve two different needs. Combining the programs could be a hassle for schools already receiving the funding and such a combo could also shake up the Texas school bond market, which depends to some degree on schools issuing bonds with the expectation they’ll receive EDA or IFA funding and not end up sticking the entire bill to their taxpayers. We’ll keep a close watch on this one, as it could be dangerous–especially if the anti-tax wingnut crowd recommends dumping both programs.

Still more:

14. Examine regulatory agencies and programs to consider aspects such as call center
consolidation, strategies to allow access to greater revenue generated, and
communication of best practice alternatives across agency lines.

For one thing, this charge sounds like gobeldygook–two things that are barely related to each other. I haven’t a clue as to what the deal really is with this charge except that it is geared toward further reducing HHS and other government service call centers down to the bare minimum. Clearly, that’s not a good idea.

The next charge is a slap in the face to TxDOT and could very well cause some very rough relations between legislators and the state’s transportation agency:

15. Analyze the current financial condition of the Texas Department of
Transportation including but not limited to cash in bank, encumbered funds, use
of bond capacity and projected needs for various funds allocated to the Texas
Department of Transportation and their appropriation for major projects over the
last five years. This analysis should include a review of revenues diverted from
the State Highway Fund for non-transportation applications. Examine alternative
sources of revenue to sustain future transportation needs.

Translated into English, this charge means: find out of TxDOT is really as broke as it says it is, see how much is being diverted from road building to garbage like publicity campaigns, and look at toll roads, increased taxes, and public-private partnerships to see how we can fund the next 18-lane superhighway through Great Aunt Edna’s hay farm in Central Texas.

The next charge is a joint interim charge with Border and International Affairs & Public Health. It should be called a “joint charge” because the people working on it will have to smoke a few to get this one right (for reasons I’ll illustrate in a moment):

16. Study the state’s current and long-range need for physicians, dentists, nurses,
allied health and long-term care professionals. Make recommendations regarding
strategies related to both geographic distribution and barriers to recruitment of
high-need professions, especially for primary care providers and long-term care
professionals. (Joint Interim Charge with the House Committees on Border and
International Affairs and Public Health)

Basically, these three committees will be sitting around doing the work that the Texas Observer has already done. The Republicans want a couple of things to come out of this charge. First and foremost, they want to have it written on paper for all posterity that tort reform really worked. If lies were fire, the paper that sentence gets written on will erupt into flames faster than dog crap covered in diesel fuel and lit matches because we all know tort reform failed miserably. This brings me to the second reason for this charge: the Republicans need to make tort reform an issue in the next election because, quite frankly, it’s an old horse that’s worked for them before and Hans Klinger, et al evidently are hard pressed to come up with anything better. So, over the next few months, you’ll hear calls for more tort reform because, of course, the 2003 tort reform didn’t do enough to get doctors to areas in which no doctor has practices in 75 years anyway. Face it: you can end the ability of people to sue doctors and you’ll still be hard pressed to find an OBGYN to move to Cochran County.

Of the Business & Industry Committee Interim Charges, which weren’t too earth shattering, I did find one worthy of closer examination:

4. Study the problem of digital piracy and make recommendations for legislative
changes to address the problem facing movie producers and distributors, retailers,
book publishers, the music industry, universities, and other copyright holders of
creative content. This review should include an examination of the impact on
state and local government sales tax revenues.

Essentially, copyright and trademark infringment is a federal issue. In fact, to prosecute “piracy” in Texas state courts, you have to use a fairly rarely used section of the Business & Commerce Code. In particular, notice the key word, “universities.” Clearly, in crafting this interim charge, an intent to mirror the language in the federal Higher Education Act Reauthorization bill which ties federal education appropriations to making public colleges and universities the bitch of the Recording Industry Association of America, is evident. This is a no-go. Yes, piracy is a problem, but censoring the internet at colleges and universities and using filters and blocks is asking for disaster. Clearly, Speaker Craddick and his team think they won’t have to worry about education funding if they can cut off appropriations to the entire University of Texas System because some sorority chick downloaded Hollaback Girl using the school’s servers.

Charges for Culture, Recreation and Tourism were (as expected) a virtual yawn, so we’ll move on to Economic Development. Charge number one catches the eye right away:

Study the performance of the Texas Enterprise Fund, the Texas Emerging
Technology Fund, the Texas Economic Development Act, the Texas
Enterprise Zone Program, and other economic development tools in
promoting economic development in Texas, and recommend any needed
statutory changes.

Translated into non-legislative English, this charge means: go out and find something worthwhile that any of these funds have supported or done and let’s pimp it loud and large! As we know, to the present these funds have been slush funds at the governor’s disposal to hand out candy to his contributors, supporters, and the like–with limited return on investment or success. The reality is that these funds have served no purpose aside from a political one for the Republicans (and a diversion of funds from the poor and needy to corporate welfare) but that a glowing report is needed, along with recommendations for more spending to keep the shush slurring through the end of the decade.

The next interim charge for our consideration is very craftily written:

Review the overall history, goals, and implementation of the various funds
established by Article 5190.14, Vernon’s Texas Civil Statutes. Identify and
recommend any changes necessary to clarify or improve the statute.

“Now,” you may be asking yourself, “exactly what in the hell is VTCS 5190.14?” Unless you go to bed every night reading Vernon’s, chances are you have no clue. This is a fairly obscure statute which allows “organizing committees,” such as Dallas 2012, which was configured to attract the 2012 Olympics to Dallas (Houston had a similar committee) to be exempt from certain types of taxes. Expect your ultra-urban counties (Dallas, Houston) to raise serious hell over any changes here.

Nothing much caught our eye on Financial Institutions, but a few things for the Government Reform Committee are interesting:

3. Review authorized offices of inspector generals and assess the benefit of having a
statewide office of inspector general for all executive branch agencies.

Since an OIG is designed to stop corruption and waste, Republicans should have a field day trying to explain all the reasons we don’t need one.

Deregulation is all the buzz with the Insurance Committee’s Interim Charges:

1. Examine states that have made the transition from heavily regulated health
insurance markets to less regulated markets in order to assess the impact on
market competitiveness, prices, consumer satisfaction, and regulatory costs in
those states. Specifically, identify current barriers and possible enhancements to
flexibility in purchasing health insurance, including the purchase of health
insurance plans offered in other states. Review and evaluate state law and agency
rules related to the use of health savings accounts and health reimbursement
arrangements, particularly by small businesses. Review possible tax incentives
for purchasing private insurance.

Oh, isn’t that a great charge–because, if there is anything that needs less regulation, it’s the insurance industry, especially the health insurance industry. If the health insurance industry in Texas were any less regulated, it would be legal for underwriters to parade the halls of the State Capitol in the buff while smoking French cigarettes. And, don’t you just love the mention of “health savings accounts?”

Here is another that’ll make your head spin:

2. Study the practice of balanced billing by medical providers and determine which
portions of the cost out-of-network care patients, insurers and providers should
ultimately be responsible for paying.

Oh, they’ll be picking numbers out of hats all day long and the average Texan will still get screwed in the end.

The remainder of the charges in the pack for Day 1 were relatively tame, so we’ll take a look at Day 2 later tonight.

Technorati Tags interim charges

Bookmark It