2015 UMW Monday Slides

Texas Legislative Session 2015
Texas Interfaith Center for Public Policy

Texas IMPACT
Getting Ready for the 2015 Legislative Session:

The show started January 13
History Lesson
2001-2011 Texas
added 850,000 K-12
students
Half of all K-12
enrollment growth in
US occurred in TX
= All the kids in MD!
History Lesson
2011 Deep,
Deliberate Cuts
25,000+ Jobs Lost
$5.4 Billion Cut
History Lesson
$1.00
$0.90
Restoration of
$4 billion in
cuts
$0.80
End of
Session
($3.4
billion)
2013 Partial Return

to Sanity
80% State Aid Restored
Stopped vouchers and

privatization efforts
Increased TRS funding

and won cost-of-living
raise for most retirees
the first in 12 years!
$0.70
$0.60
Mid
Session
$0.50
$0.40
$0.30
$0.20
$0.10
$0.00
Start of
Session
2015 Quality Counts report

Texas school nance grade: D
Texas rank among all states in per pupil
spending (taking regional cost variaKons into
account): 49th out of 50 states
Texas grade for student achievement: C-
(equal to average of all states)
Texas School-Finance System Ruled UnconsKtuKonal

(again)
State District Judge John Dietz ruled in August that the state
system of paying for schools violates the state consKtuKon
because it is:
Inequitable

Inadequate

In violaKon of the ban on a statewide property tax
2015 Unfinished Agenda

What Happens Next
Depends on Us
Still $600 per pupil below

2008.
Coordinated attack from
private/corporate
interests
2015 Legislative Agenda

Fund our schools!
Short term: $600 per pupil just to get
back to 2008 levelsthe state has more
than enough reserves built up to do it.
Long Term: New revenue from closing
huge loopholes and ending unjustified
special-interest tax breaks.
Example: Tax break for natural-gas
fracking wells, which are highly profitable
and dont require tax breaks, diverts more
than $1 billion a year from state treasury.
How far behind is school spending?

2008 total education spending averaged $10,220 per student
2014 -15 per student funding averages $9,609
$611 per-student drop
$18,330 less per classroom of 30 students
Need an additional $5.9 Billion to bring spending back to 2008
levels
How might Texas fund public educa7on?

General Revenue available to Legislature exceeds House proposed budget
by $14 billion. That money is currently available without raising taxes.
Economic StabilizaKon Fund (Rainy Day Fund) contains an addiKonal $11
billion that could be used to fund public educaKon
Long-term Tax Restructuring
Eliminate tax break for natural gas producKon
Expand the sales tax to services like accounKng, legal, etc.
Require commercial property owners to disclose purchase prices

Help our students succeed!
We want:
Universal pre-K.
Funding restored to help struggling students meet state
achievement standards.
Class-size caps that are enforced in K-4 and we want them in
pre-K and beyond grade 4, too.
Properly certified teachers in every class. An end to the
misuse of standardized tests, use better measures to gauge
success, and end top-down, punitive sanctions.
Community schools with wraparound services, with parents
and education employees teaming up to set goals and
establish community-based accountability.

A fight between two contrasting visions
In the 2015 session, this will be a fight
between two contrasting visions of the
future of education.
Their three-part strategy already clear:
underfund, declare failure based on
misuse of test scores; privatize.
Private School Vouchers

Vouchers are being proposed (again) despite two decades of
the Texas Legislature rejecKng privaKzaKon of K-12 educaKon
Vouchers are not popular with the public or with parents who
consistently express a desire for high-quality neighborhood
public schools
Voucher advocates are misrepresenKng both the
performance of public schools and the results of voucher
programs in other parts of the country
There is big money behind school privaKzaKon in Texas and
several key elected ocials are advocaKng for vouchers
Why Vouchers are Wrong for Texas
Vouchers eliminate public accountability

Vouchers divert dollars and commitment from public schools
Vouchers are not a way to raise achievement for all students
Vouchers waste taxpayer money
Vouchers leave behind students, especially those with special
needs
Vouchers give choice to private school, not to parents
How We Win
Legislative Work
Volunteer to testify at
key moments during the
legislative session.
Share your personal
story with Texas
Impacts leaders and
Government Relations
staff, so that we can
share it with legislators.
Educators
Parents
Faith Leaders
School Equity Advocates
School Boards
Community OrganizaKons
How We Win
Legislative Work
Reach out to natural
alliesparents,
community friends of
public education, the
labor family, and form
local coalitions.
Remember, we are not
in this fight alone.
Community engagement
is essential to our longterm success.
How We Win
Spread the word
A war against public education by
private and corporate interests that look
at students and schools and see dollar
signs.
Our contrasting agenda: fund our
schools properly, provide our students
with the resources (and freedom from
abusive testing!) they need to succeed,
and dont get sidetracked by voucher
schemes.
Easy Action
Steps You Can
Take Now!
Sign up for text messaging
Sign up for the Legislative Hotline
tinyurl.com/texasafthotline
Like us on Facebook:
facebook.com/texasaft
Follow Us on Twitter:
twitter.com/texasaft
Download our App:
Texas AFT at iTunes or Google Play
The 600,000
a primer from Texas Impact
Joshua Houston, Director of Govt Affairs
2010 vs. 2014 General Election Turnout

2010
2014
25.26 mil
Population
26.45 mil
18.79 mil
18.92 mil
14.03 mil
4.98 mil
Voting Age Pop.

(VAP)
Registered
Voters (RV)
Actually Voted
38%
% of RV
33.7%
27%
% of VAP
25%
13.27 mil
1/28/15
4.73 mil
Redistricting Example
HOUSE
DISTRICT 107
!
Dalrock Rd
d
R
ille
er
v
en
t
C
E
d
R
Rowlet
t Rd
d
R
a te
es
O
at
Lyo ns Rd
E
O
R ate
d
s
r
D
ad
a
Pr
la
Fe
r
r
D
D
Belt Line Rd
es
at
e
O
at
O
W
r
D
s
a te
lv
635
80
Sunnyvale
80
Ju
Rd
rig
ht
Be
a
Berry Rd
as
vd
Bl
ne
ar
tw
kc
ke
oo
La
Balch
Springs
t w ri g h t R d
Rd
so
nR
C ar
E S cy
en e
Eastglen Blvd
La
w
352
Clay Rd
S Peachtree Rd
W Bruton Rd
Fa
ith o
nP
Fa
th
Lu
on
ca
P
s
Lu
S
r
ca
sH
wy
Blv
d
W Kearney St
N Bryan Belt Line Rd
N P e a ch t r e e R d
Dr
Blv
e rs
st
Ma st
ne
a
N Masters Dr
12
'
(
352
N Pra irie Cree k Rd
Bruton Rd
Collins Rd
N Galloway Ave
st
N Belt Line Rd
rE
Pr
ad
aD
r
la P
ra d
aD
la
Big Town Blvd
Hatcher St
St
s
all
a
D
at
ch
To
To
w
N P ra irie Cre ek Rd
Do lp hin Rd
N Jim M ille r Rd
Lowe ll St
Av
e
b ia
ve
es
tA
Fo
r
Kirby Rd
S 1st St
Saturn Rd
ille
te
rv
en
C
W
d
R
n
gu
so
oc
k in
oc gb
k in ird
g b Ln
ird
Ln
M
E
Abrams Rd
t
sS
Ju n
iu
Av
e
n
as
to
G
m
olu
ai
n
Shiloh Rd
Jupiter Rd
E Lake Hig
hlands Dr
Ferndale Rd
il l e A ve
G r e e nv
Greenville Ave
Av
e
os
s
in
t
or
B lv
re s
t
Ea
Br
ar C
d
is R
Av
e
w
To
C la y Ma th
Scyene Rd
Av
e
2n
d
Rd
Bob town
Ce d
Rd
Av
e
Pioneer Rd
175
2n
ay
Heath
S Belt Line Rd
tD
r
e
S G a llo w ay Av
St
on
Ro
Pk
w
ow
es
Gross Rd
er
kD
r
ry
Military Pkwy
W Main St
ee
45
'
(
12
N Jim Miller Rd
lita
a ll
Mesquite
30
Mi
rth
w
ss
310
No
Town East Blvd
d
nR
352
Blv
Cr
ro
ck
St
o lm
Du
d
lv
ar
a lc
so
tB
as
rg u
as
so
352
py
La
S H a s ke l l A v e
om
St
!
S
1/28/15
wall
Th
Ex
Av
al
St
d
Blv
S to ne
Av
us
e
Av
d
lan
ak
tr
en
St
n
sto
Fe
e
Av
30
ry
gh
Av
e
ve
Ba
r
u
zh
1s
t
dA
ak
DALLAS
Oates Dr
78
2n
Ga
Fit
SC
345
ma s s o n R d
Dallas
E lm
St
le e
ay
12
'
(
!
S
d
nR
d
lv
B e
e r Av
St S P
e
re
lvd
yB
wa
on
N
N Mu
Co n g
h
ll e
Av
tt
e
ve
nA
mo
N N
Le m
H Pe
as a
ke k S
ll A t
ve
sT
ho
Av
e
zh
ug
No
rt
ad
Bro
st
et
t
Fit
ck
Ea
a St Brg
Ma tild
a
ltid
Ma
Du
Centerville Rd
Gu
Richmond Ave
Be
nn
E Northwest Hwy
Mille r Rd
Roa
244
'
(
Highland
Park
Garland
12
'
(
Lovers Ln W Lovers Ln E Lovers Ln

Lover Ln
Miller Rd
Rowlett
E Kingsley Rd
wy
tH
es
hw
'
(
12
Miller Rd
E Mille r Rd
Abra
ms
75
University
Park
W Kingsley Rd
Kingsley Rd
Rd
Walnut Hill Ln
Texas Legislative Council
E Miller Rd
Miller Rd
S 1st St
Kingsley Rd
78
W Miller Rd
S Jupiter Rd
E Miller Rd
Miller Rd
Wa lnu t H ill L n
12
'
(
Hillcre st Av e
lL
Plano Rd
Hillcre st Rd
Hillcrest Ave
Ro
ya
Audelia Rd
75
Sk
illm
an
S
S Shiloh Rd
Texas Legislature
PLANH358
Legislature in safe districts
1/28/15
Statewide Primary Turnout

March 4, 2014
Total
Republicans
Democrats
Voters
1,918,107
1,358,074
560,033
% of RV
14.1%
9.98%
4.12%
% of VAP
10.14%
7.18%
2.96%
1/28/15
Statewide Primary Runoff Turnout

May 27, 2014
Total
Republicans Democrats
Voters
954,063
752,780
201,283
% of RV
7%
5.5%
1.5%
% of VAP
5%
4%
1%
1/28/15
2014 Primary vs. Runoff Turnout

(Both Parties)
Primary
1/28/15
Runoff
1,918,107
Voters
954,063
14.1%
% of RV
7.01%
10.14%
% of VAP
5.04%
2012 Cruz v. Dewhurst

Total
1.1 million
Cruz
631,000
Dewhurst
580,000
Cruz 631,000 =
4.5% of RV
3.3% of VAP
2.4% of entire
population
1/28/15
2014 Patrick v. Dewhurst

Total
752,780
Patrick
489,586
Dewhurst
263,194
Patricks 489,586 =
3.6% of RV
2.6% of VAP
1.8% of entire
population
1/28/15
HD 53 = High Turnout District

HDs Population
170,000 avg.
HDs VAP
125,000 avg.
Total Voters
15,487
Murr
9,387
Henneke
6,100
1/28/15
10
HD 137 = Low Turnout District

HDs Population
170,000 avg.
HDs VAP
125,000 avg.
Total Voters
1,131
Wu
696
Smith
435
1/28/15
11
Growth in Dark Money
1/28/15
12
Dark Money: Texas 2014
1/28/15
13
The Utah Dark Money Scandal

Source: House State Affairs Interim Report
1/28/15
14
Rev. Anna Howard Shaw
15
Rev. Shaw on Democracy:

Democracy is not merely a form of
government; it is a great spiritual force
emanating from the heart of the Infinite,
permeating the universe, and transforming
the lives of men.
16
Thank You!
For more information, contact:
Joshua Houston, General Counsel
Texas Impact
(512) 4723903
17
Threats To
Funding Public Services
A 2016-17 Preview
Jan 26, 2015
Dick Lavine
lavine@cppp.org
Where Does the State

Get Its Money?
Source
2016-17 revenue
(in $billions)
Percent of total
revenue
Tax collections
109.0
49%
Federal income
72.9
33%
Licenses, fees, fines
16.8
8%
Lottery
3.8
2%
Interest, land income
7.3
3%
Other
11.1
5%
What Taxes Does the State Rely On?

Tax
2016-17 revenue
(in $billions)
Percent of total tax

revenue
Sales tax
61.5
56%
Motor vehicle sales
10.1
9%
Franchise (margins)
9.6
9%
Motor fuels
7.0
6%
Oil
5.7
5%
Insurance
4.3
4%
Natural gas
3.2
3%
Tobacco
2.6
2%
Alcohol
2.4
2%
Hotel, utility, other
2.5
2%
Proposal:
End Gasoline Tax Diversion
Texas Constitution requires of motor fuels tax to go

Available School Fund ($810 million in 2014)
Remaining is sent to State Highway Fund ($2.4

billion in 2014)
Proposal:
Highway Fund is to be used for acquiring rights-of-way,
constructing, maintaining, and policing such public
roadways, and for the administration of such laws as may
be prescribed by the Legislature pertaining to the
supervision of traffic and safety on such roads
Proposal:
So Legislature uses $800 million from Highway Fund to

fund
DPS - $475 million
Dept of Motor Vehicles - $49 million
Related activities
Proposal:
Argument for: Gasoline tax should be used only to

build and maintain roads
But: To continue funding DPS etc, must use General

Revenue that is currently funding other services
Proposal: Use Motor Vehicles Sale Tax

for Highways
Sen. Nichols has proposed constitutional amendment
to dedicate all motor-vehicle sales tax over $2.5 billion
a year to the Highway Fund
Would redirect $4-6 billion a biennium from General

Revenue to TXDoT.
Proposal: Use Motor Vehicles Sale Tax

for Highways
Argument for: Motor vehicle sales tax is paid by car
buyers, so should be used to build and maintain roads
But: How to fund services that are now paid for with
General Revenue from motor vehicle sales tax
Proposal: Repeal or Reduce

Franchise (Margins) Tax
Arguments for:
Franchise tax is difficult to calculate
Businesses owe tax even if dont make profit
At least raise small-business exemption from current $1
million to $5 million
At least maintain temporary rate cut
Proposal: Repeal or Reduce

Franchise (Margins) Tax
But:
Franchise tax will generate $9.6 billion in next
biennium
Money goes to General Revenue and Property Tax
Relief Fund
Would increase pressure to cut services
Proposal:
Lower the Appraisal Cap
Current law: Taxable value of homestead cannot
increase by more than 10% a year
Intended to prevent sticker shock in property tax bills
Proposal:
Proposal: Lower cap on annual increases from current
10% to 5%
Argument for: Rapid appreciation of property values

are raising taxes on homeowners faster than their
ability to pay them.
Proposal:
But:
Benefit of lower cap would go to higher-value homes,
which appreciate fastest
Protection of homeowners shifts burden onto renters,
businesses
Issue is really local tax rates, not appraisals
Proposal: Lower Rollback

Rate
Current law:
Cities/counties must calculate effective tax rate that

raises same amount of money as prior year. If
property values are up, tax rate goes down
If cities/counties raise effective tax rate by more

than 8%, voters can petition to rollback tax rate

Rate
Proposal:
Lower rollback rate from 8% to 4%
Make rollback election automatic, without need to

petition

Rate
But:
State is pushing responsibility for funding services onto

local governments
Proposed changes would make it harder for cities/

counties to raise revenue to support services
Use of This Presentation

The Center for Public Policy Priorities encourages you to reproduce and distribute these slides, which were developed for use in making public presentations. If you
reproduce these slides, please give appropriate credit to CPPP.
The data presented here may become outdated.

For the most recent information or to sign up for
our free E-Mail Updates, visit www.cppp.org.
Center for Public Policy Priorities

7020 Easy Wind Drive, Suite 200
Austin, TX 78757
P 512.320.0222 F 512.320.0227
2016-17 State Budget Outlook
@DeLunaEva
deluna.castro@cppp.org
Eva DeLuna Castro

Budget Analyst
Thursday, January 22, 2015
Outline
2014-15 Budget Developments
2016-17: Needs & Revenue
HB 1, SB 1, and Governors (?) Budget Proposals
forabettertexas.org
forabettertexas.org
Budget Changes since Dec. 2013

Supplemental need of $193 million in
General Revenue, $1.5 billion Other (mostly
federal, State Highway Fund)
Medicaid I.O.U. dealt with mostly through transfers of

already-appropriated General Revenue
State aid to preK-12 drops by $683 million because of

higher property taxes, slower enrollment growth
Nov. 2014 constitutional amendment gives TXDoT net

increase of $1.1 billion more for highways, roads
forabettertexas.org
How much is
needed to
continue state
services for a
growing
population,
budgeting for
medical cost
increases and
other inflation?
Sources: Legislative Appropriations Requests; HHS Consolidated Budget; Higher Ed.
Coordinating Board Formula Funding Recommendations.
forabettertexas.org
forabettertexas.org
$113 B in General Revenue Could

Support a $101 billion GR current services budget
for 2016-17 (keeps the cuts from 03 and 11 still in
budget, but makes no new ones)
Restore $8 billion in state aid to local school
districts, to return state aid to 2008 levels
Restore $4 billion in dedicated General Revenue to
its legally intended state budget uses (such as trauma
care, environmental clean-up, parks)
forabettertexas.org
HB 1 Makes 3.4% Cuts to Current Services, Doesnt Cover HHS

Cost Increases, Relies on $4.5 B School Tax Increases
forabettertexas.org
H.B. 1 also
Is $14 billion in General Revenue below pay as
you go constitutional limit
Is $8 billion below the spending growth limit
(11.68%) adopted by LBB in December 2014;
simple majority vote in House and Senate is
needed to go beyond $107 billion GR budget
Does not tap Economic Stabilization Fund
(could reach $11 billion by end of fiscal 2017)
forabettertexas.org
HB 1 School Funding Starting Point
forabettertexas.org
Local
government
spending
(and taxes)
in Texas
closer to
U.S. average
forabettertexas.org

The Center for Public Policy Priorities encourages you to reproduce and
distribute these slides, which were developed for use in making public
presentations. If you reproduce these slides, please give appropriate
credit to CPPP.
The data presented here may become outdated. For the most recent
information or to sign up for our email updates, visit our website.
CPPP
Austin, TX 78752
P 512.320.0222 F 512.320.0227
CPPP.org
2016-17 State Budget Outlook
@DeLunaEva
deluna.castro@cppp.org
Eva DeLuna Castro

Budget Analyst
Thursday, January 22, 2015
Outline
2014-15 Budget Developments
2016-17: Needs & Revenue
HB 1, SB 1, and Governors (?) Budget Proposals
forabettertexas.org
forabettertexas.org
Budget Changes since Dec. 2013

Supplemental need of $193 million in
General Revenue, $1.5 billion Other (mostly
federal, State Highway Fund)
Medicaid I.O.U. dealt with mostly through transfers of

already-appropriated General Revenue
State aid to preK-12 drops by $683 million because of

higher property taxes, slower enrollment growth
Nov. 2014 constitutional amendment gives TXDoT net

increase of $1.1 billion more for highways, roads
forabettertexas.org
How much is
needed to
continue state
services for a
growing
population,
budgeting for
medical cost
increases and
other inflation?
Sources: Legislative Appropriations Requests; HHS Consolidated Budget; Higher Ed.
Coordinating Board Formula Funding Recommendations.
forabettertexas.org
forabettertexas.org
$113 B in General Revenue Could

Support a $101 billion GR current services budget
for 2016-17 (keeps the cuts from 03 and 11 still in
budget, but makes no new ones)
Restore $8 billion in state aid to local school
districts, to return state aid to 2008 levels
Restore $4 billion in dedicated General Revenue to
its legally intended state budget uses (such as trauma
care, environmental clean-up, parks)
forabettertexas.org
HB 1 Makes 3.4% Cuts to Current Services, Doesnt Cover HHS

Cost Increases, Relies on $4.5 B School Tax Increases
forabettertexas.org
H.B. 1 also
Is $14 billion in General Revenue below pay as
you go constitutional limit
Is $8 billion below the spending growth limit
(11.68%) adopted by LBB in December 2014;
simple majority vote in House and Senate is
needed to go beyond $107 billion GR budget
Does not tap Economic Stabilization Fund
(could reach $11 billion by end of fiscal 2017)
forabettertexas.org
HB 1 School Funding Starting Point
forabettertexas.org
Local
government
spending
(and taxes)
in Texas
closer to
U.S. average
forabettertexas.org

credit to CPPP.
CPPP
Austin, TX 78752
P 512.320.0222 F 512.320.0227
CPPP.org
Ge$ng Texans Care:

Click to eTexas
dit M
aster
/ tle style
ACA
Update,
Texas Coverage Gap Advocacy
TEXAS UNITED METHODIST WOMEN'S 27TH ANNUAL LEGISLATIVE EVENT

Austin, Texas
Click to edit Master sub/tle style

Anne Dunkelberg, Associate Director dunkelberg@cppp.org
Monday, January 26, 2015

CPPP.org
1
Coverage Gap Advocacy

A diverse network of Texans and Texas
organiza/ons are working to help Texans
in the Gap Group tell their stories and
seeking inclusion of Texas working poor
in the ACAs health reforms.
For individuals:
www.TexasLeFMeOut.org
www.texaswellandhealthy.org
For organiza=ons:
www.covertexasnow.org
Coverage Gap Advocacy

Texas Impact
Texas Associa/on of
Community Health Centers

You can add these widgets to your
Other Key issues:

Womens Health
Extending postpartum care access
Consumer Protec/ons in Medicaid Managed
Care
Consumer Protec/ons in Private Insurance
(adequate provider networks, protec/ons
from surprise billing)
Texas Medicaid 1115 Waiver
Health Workforce; Scope of Prac/ce ;
Community Health Workers/Promotoras/es

The Texas Coverage Gap

Refers to U.S. ci=zen Texas
adults that have no aordable
op=ons for healthcare
coverage.
They make less than the poverty
level ($20,000 for a family of 3)
and are not oered healthcare
coverage through their job.
Texans below poverty are ineligible for nancial
assistance in the healthcare Marketplace.
The 1 million Texans in the Coverage Gap could ll the

city of Dallas
6
Texas Coverage Gap: Medicaid Hole in the ACA

Coverage System
States With
Texas - Without Medicaid
Medicaid (AR, NM) vs.
Expansion
Expansion
133% FPL
Marketplace
with Subsidies
Family Income
$25,975 for
family of 3

Marketplace
with
Subsidies
100% FPL
Medicaid
$0
Marketplace
with
Subsidies
Coverage
Gap
Coverage
Gap
19% FPL
Medicaid
Parents and
Childless* Adults
Childless* Adults
Childless includes parents with grown children.
$19,530 for
family of 3

Working Parents
$3,696 for
family of 3

The Coverage Gap

Single parent with
2 kids living on
$19K

per
year
Kids get Medicaid

Mom gets no
nancial help and
has no aordable
op/ons
Single parent with

2 kids living on
$20K

per
year

Kids get Medicaid
Mom gets sliding-

scale Marketplace
coverage for $33/
month or less
8
Majority of
Texans in the
Coverage Gap
are Working
Kids Do Befer when Parents also Get Coverage

Research When parents are covered, children are more likely to:
nds:
Get Enroll
Stay Enrolled
Receive more preven/ve care and other health care services

Parents health can aect childrens health and well-being

Parents who cant get rou/ne and ongoing care may be unable to work, or may end up with big
medical bills even when they do get care. This creates stressful home environments and nancial
consequences that have a big impact on children.
10
Support for Closing the Coverage Gap

o
Texas Associa/on of Businesses
Dallas Ci/zens Council
Chambers of Commerce across Texas
Arlington, Dallas, Fort Worth, San Antonio, Houston, El Paso, Waco, Beaumont (Lubbock, Longview, Huntsville)
o
Bipar/san County Judges
Harris, Tarrant, Dallas, Bexar, Travis, El Paso; Nueces
Hospitals, doctors, community healthcare centers
Editorial Boards
Aus/n, Corpus Chris/, Dallas, Waco, Ft Worth, Longview, San Antonio, Houston, Beaumont
11
Dollars, People, Jobs, Taxes:

Get the County- and State-level
Impact of the Coverage Gap at
www.CPPP.org
12
Current Status of State Medicaid Expansion Decisions

VT
WA
MT

OR
ID
NV

CA
ND
WY

MN
WI*
SD

CO
UT

AZ
NM
PA*
IL
KS
OK
MO
TX
OH
IN*
WV
KY
AR*
AL
VA

NH*
MA
CT RI
NJ
DE
MD
DC
NC
TN
MS

AK
MI*
IA*
NE
NY

ME
SC
GA
LA
FL
HI
Adopted (28 States including DC)

Adop=on under discussion (7 States)
Not Adop=ng At This Time (16 States)
NOTES: Under discussion indicates execu/ve ac/vity suppor/ng adop/on of the Medicaid expansion. *AR, IA, MI, and PA have approved Sec/on 1115 waivers; IN has a pending waiver to
implement the expansion. The PA waiver is set to go into eect on January 1, 2015, but the newly-elected governor may opt for a state plan amendment. NH has submifed a waiver to
con/nue their expansion via premium assistance. WI covers adults up to 100% FPL in Medicaid, but did not adopt the ACA expansion.
SOURCE: Status of State Ac/on on the Medicaid Expansion Decision, KFF State Health Facts, updated December 17, 2014.
hfp://k.org/health-reform/state-indicator/state-ac/vity-around-expanding-medicaid-under-the-aordable-care-act/
Red State Alterna=ves
Conserva=ve States, Republican Governors have Nego=ated Coverage
Ex: Arizona, Indiana,* Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio,
and Pennsylvania.

Texas can look to other red states for a menu of alterna=ve approaches
to insuring the Coverage Gap adults:
Benets for the newly-covered adults based on commercial & small business plan standards;
Personal Responsibility Provisions: Cost-Sharing for the newly-covered adults is allowed, including
premiums under 1115 waivers.
Financial incen=ves for wellness behaviors like check-ups, immuniza/ons, and par/cipa/on in
chronic disease management programs
Integra=on with Marketplace, maximizing use of private insurers and HMO-style managed care.
Some states combine Medicaid Managed Care below poverty, and Marketplace for adults
100-138% of the federal poverty line (FPL).
Flexibility Exists, but within Limits. Under federal law, 1115 waivers must further purposes of
Medicaid.
FAMILY BUDGETS

credit to CPPP.
CPPP
Austin, TX 78752
P 512.320.0222 F 512.320.0227
CPPP.org
15
Total health expenditure per capita, public and

private, 2009
U.S. spends far more per capita on health care than all other developed countries.
Total expenditure excluding investments.

Source: OECD Health Data 2011; WHO Global Health Expenditure Database.
US Health Spending
(CBO, The 2014 Long Term Budget Outlook , July 2014).

Texas Medicaid/CHIP: Who is Helped Today

CHIP, 405,654
Disabled,
426,267
August 2014, HHSC

data
Elderly, 373,835
Poor Parents,
147,013
Maternity
138,060
Medicaid
Children,
2,871,447
Total enrolled
8/2014:
3.97 million
Medicaid & CHIP:

(44% of Texas kids)

Source: Center for Public Policy Priori/es.
18

Income Caps for Texas Medicaid and CHIP, 2014
250%
200%
$40,174
$40,174
203%
203%
150%
$3,760
19%
Pregnant Newborns
Women
Income
Limit as
Percentage
of Federal
Poverty
Level
Age 1-5
$40,767
206%
138%
50%
0%
222%
$29,487 $27,310
149%
100%
$25,956
$8,892
76%
Age 6-18 Parent o f 2 SSI (aged o r Long Term

disabled)
Care
CHIP
Note: Annual income is for a family of 3, except

Individual Incomes shown for SSI and Long Term
Care
Source: Center for Public Policy Priori/es.
19
Nearly half of Texas Children Were Enrolled

in Medicaid or CHIP in March 2014
from a high of 77% to a low of 10%
Less than 36% (66 counties)

36% to 44% (68 counties)
44% to 50% (57 counties)
50% and over (63 counties)
Note: Includes children less than 19 years of age.
Sources: Medicaid: 8-Month Eligibility Databases, HHSC; CHIP: P10_dob_regular database , HHSC. Prepared by Data Quality & Dissemination,
Strategic Decision Support, HHSC. Children <19: Projections of the Population of Texas and Counties in Texas by Age, Sex and Race/Ethnicity for
2010-2050 (2000-2010 Migration (1.0) Scenario), UTSA, November 2014.
20
Controlling Medicaid and CHIP Costs

The Texas Legislature has aggressively
pursued cost-containment in Texas
Medicaid over the last 15 years.
When adjusted for ina/on, Texas is
spending less per Medicaid enrollee
today than the state did in 2001.
21
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Medicare and Medicaid Controlled Costs Better than

Private Insurance Over the Last Decade
Average Annual Growth Rate, 2000-2009
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
7.2%
4.6%
7.7%
5.1%
3%
2%
1%
0%
Medicaid Per Medicare Per

Beneficiary Beneficiary
Private Per Private Employer

Capita,
Insurance
Comparable
Premiums
cbpp.org
6
to Medicare
22
Title

Medicaid as a share of Texas State-Dollar Spending = 23.3%
Title
24
Texas Medicaid/CHIP nearly 100% Priva=zed

HMO-based Care
At least 85% of Texas Medicaid clients are already provided care through
Private-Insurer HMOs (managed care organiza=ons).
Expansions planned for the next few years will extend Private HMO coverage to
virtually 100% of Texans in Medicaid ($27+ billion/year for 4 million Texans)
Opportuni=es/challenges for home care, or hospice, providers:
Best prac/ces must be integrated into Medicaid Managed Care policy/

contracts
Consumer Assistance and protec/ons in Medicaid Managed Care
Afendant wages, health benets and the Medicaid Coverage Gap

25
United
Methodist
Womens
Legislative
Event
No Texas
One
Shall
Make
Them
Afraid
A Secure Texas For All
No One Shall Make Them Afraid

seeking a secure Texas for all
January 25-27, 2015 Holiday Inn Midtown Austin, Texas

presented by Texas Impact
Lobby Training
Using Lobby Visits to Build Relationships (Bee)
Using Your Legislative Visit Evaluation Form (Bee)
Lobby Day Logistics (Amy)
Lobby Visit Dos and Donts (Amy)
Understanding the Capitol Context (Beaman)
Talking About the UMW Legislative Agenda (Beaman)
Small Group Practice Session with Coaches
Building Community Through Advocacy
Dr. Kings Beloved Community:

the kind of society in which every person is valued
and where all conflicts
are reconciled
in a spirit of goodwill
and mutual benefit.
Civility
Civilusrelating to citizens
appropriate behavior for a citizen
Civility versus Community

Civility is what we
do individually
Community is what
we have together
Community
Com (together)

+ Munus (gift, exchange)

Share-together

Storytelling and Advocacy

Vocarevoice, summon help
For, not against
Story: Building a foundation

for policy
Sept. 24, 1935

Rev. A.F. Whitehurst, Kingfisher, OK
"I am particularly anxious that the new Social Security Legislation
just enacted, for which we have worked so long, providing for old
age pensions, aid for crippled children and unemployment
insurance, shall be carried out in keeping with the high purposes
with which this law was enacted. Your high calling brings you into
intimate daily contact not only with your own parishioners, but
with people generally in your community.
I am sure you see the problems of your

people with wise and sympathetic
understanding."
Using Advocacy to Build Community
Use your participation in public dialogue to build something,

not to get something.
Create a narrative about the kind of community you want to
live in with the other people.
Find out what kind of community other people want to live in.
Communication that Builds Community
Committing to be together even though we dont always agree

Respect for the others worldview
Describing how and why we hope the future can be better
Legislative*Visit*Evaluation*Form
5. Did'the'person'you'talked'to'make'any'commitments'to'you'that'you'wish'you'had'in
writing?
Name:&
Date&of&Visits:&_____________________________________________________________________________________
Legislative&Of5ice&Visited:_______________________________________________________________________
6. Did'they'ask'for'any'speci?ic'follow'up,'like'statistics?''If'so,'are'you'able'to'provide'those
yourself,'or'do'you'need'to'ask'
'to'provide'them?''What'timeframe'did you'
give'for'getting'the'following'up'to'the'of?ice?
Names&of&People&In&the&Meeting:_______________________________________________________________
Issues&Discussed:________________________________________________________________________________
Speci5ic&Requests&of&the&Of5ice&if&Any ________________________________________________________
Any&Follow up&Promised&by&You?&_____________________________________________________________
Any&Follow up&Required&from&
7. Did'they'give'you'any'new'information'about'the'topicfor'example,'did'they'tell'you
that'amendment'is'dead,'or'the'Chairman'said'he'would'bring'that'bill'up'as'soon'as
the'?iscal'note'gets'resolved?
?&________________________________________
Any&Follow up&Promised&by&Legislative&staff?______________________________________________
8. Did'the'new'information'create'any'new'deadlines'or'tasks'for'
1. What'was'your'goal?'(e.g.:'introduce'
'to'the'member;'?ind'out'the
members'position'on'an'issue;'lobby'a'vote;'ask'the'member'to'sponsor'an
amendment)
2. Did'you'get'what'you'came'for?''(Usually'the'answer'will'be'not'exactly,'but)
Yes' No' Not'sure,'and'heres'why:
3. What'did'you'learn'about'the'person'you'talked'to?''For'example:
a. Are'they'receptive'to'
told'them?
?''Did'they'know who'
b. What'level'of'authority'do'they'have?
9. Did'you'have'the'information'you'needed'to'have'a'successful'visit:
a. On'the'member
Yes'
No
b. On'the'issue
Yes'
No
c. On'the'status'of'the'issue'legislatively
Yes'
No
d. On'
Yes'
No
'position'on'the'issue
e. Other''__________________________________________
'before'you'
10. If'no'to'any'of'the'above,'what'additional'information'did'you'wish'you'had?
c. What'issues'are'of'most'interest'to'them?
d. How'much'do'they'know'about'the'topic'you'met'on?
4. What'did'you'talk'about'in'the'meeting?
11. Based'on'your'visit,'should'
'try'to'engage'the'person'you'met'with'in'any
way,'and'if'so'what'would'that'engagement'be?
Lobby Visit
Dos and Donts
and Final Logistics
The Legislative Context
UMW Legislative Agenda 2015

Healthy Texas
We urge the Legislature to advance policies for affordable
healthcare, including mental health and preventive health
services, for the broadest possible number of Texans. This
should include providing affordable insurance for working
Texans, and expanding Medicaid and other existing lowincome programs. We affirm our particular and historic
concern for the health of women and children. We
commend to lawmakers the role that social determinants,
especially access to affordable, healthy food and family
financial stability, play in health, and call on lawmakers to
consider comprehensive health solutions.

Quality Education
The Legislature should affirm its constitutional obligation to
provide high quality public education for the benefit of all
children in our state. Critical legislative actions include
restoring all cuts made in the last decade, providing state
funding for enrollment growth, increasing teacher
compensation to competitive levels, and providing full-day
pre-kindergarten in all school districts. We strongly reaffirm
our historic opposition to any movement toward allowing
the flow of public money to private schools, including the
establishment of any voucher programs.

Living Water
We urge lawmakers to prioritize our states water
infrastructure investments around the primary principle
of fair access to clean water for all Texans, and to take
strong action to protect Texans from potential threats
to the air, land and water that we rely on to live. We
affirm the inherent worth of all creation and call on
lawmakers to protect all of Texas natural resources.

Humane Immigration
We advocate for fair, humane policies toward
immigrants in Texas, including access to necessary
state permits (including drivers permits) and regulatory
structures to live and work and be educated in our
state. We insist that state officials respect the
appropriate boundaries of federal and state
responsibility concerning our national border security.

Criminal Justice
We call on legislators to guarantee fair treatment for all
Texans caught up in the states criminal justice system,
from arrest to re-entry. We have particular concerns
about the grand jury process, and we urge lawmakers
to lift restrictions on SNAP and other important
benefits for former drug felons.
Travel for Tomorrow

John Reagan
Building
T.W.C.
Building
15
16
14th Street
11
10
9
Sam Houston
Building
18
17
CAPITOL
7
H
H
H
13th Street
12th Street
San Jacinto Street
12
State Library
& Archives
Supreme
Cour t Bldg.
Tom C. Clark
Building
13 14
Brazos Street
14th Street
Colorado Street
T.W.C.
Annex
Brazos Street
Colorado Street
15th Street

2015 UMW Monday Slides

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2015 UMW Monday Slides

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Texas Legislative Session 2015

Texas Interfaith Center for Public Policy

Getting Ready for the 2015 Legislative Session:

2013 Partial Return

80% State Aid Restored

Stopped vouchers and

Increased TRS funding

2015 Quality Counts report

Texas School-Finance System Ruled UnconsKtuKonal

2015 Unfinished Agenda

Still $600 per pupil below

2015 Legislative Agenda

How far behind is school spending?

How might Texas fund public educa7on?

2015 Legislative Agenda

2015 Legislative Agenda

Private School Vouchers

Why Vouchers are Wrong for Texas

Vouchers eliminate public accountability

2010 vs. 2014 General Election Turnout

Voting Age Pop.

N Bryan Belt Line Rd

N Pra irie Cree k Rd

Big Town Blvd

Town East Blvd

Lovers Ln W Lovers Ln E Lovers Ln

Texas Legislative Council

Legislature in safe districts

Statewide Primary Turnout

Statewide Primary Runoff Turnout

2014 Primary vs. Runoff Turnout

2012 Cruz v. Dewhurst

2014 Patrick v. Dewhurst

HD 53 = High Turnout District

HD 137 = Low Turnout District

Growth in Dark Money

Dark Money: Texas 2014

The Utah Dark Money Scandal

Rev. Anna Howard Shaw

Rev. Shaw on Democracy:

Where Does the State

Licenses, fees, fines

Interest, land income

What Taxes Does the State Rely On?

Percent of total tax

Motor vehicle sales

Hotel, utility, other

Texas Constitution requires of motor fuels tax to go

Remaining is sent to State Highway Fund ($2.4

So Legislature uses $800 million from Highway Fund to

DPS - $475 million

Dept of Motor Vehicles - $49 million

Argument for: Gasoline tax should be used only to

But: To continue funding DPS etc, must use General

Proposal: Use Motor Vehicles Sale Tax

Would redirect $4-6 billion a biennium from General

Proposal: Use Motor Vehicles Sale Tax

Proposal: Repeal or Reduce

Proposal: Repeal or Reduce

Intended to prevent sticker shock in property tax bills

Argument for: Rapid appreciation of property values

Proposal: Lower Rollback

Cities/counties must calculate effective tax rate that

If cities/counties raise effective tax rate by more