Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MEMO - Responding To Jerry Patterson's Dishonest Letter To Progress Texas Members
MEMO - Responding To Jerry Patterson's Dishonest Letter To Progress Texas Members
MEMO - Responding To Jerry Patterson's Dishonest Letter To Progress Texas Members
Jerry Pattersons letter says Progress Texas is misleading our membership about two things: (1) Patterson argues that by approving Proposition 6 in the November 2011 constitutional amendment election, voters approved a transfer of money to the Available School Fund, but never $300 million specifically. This claim is absolutely false. Editorials across the state noted the $300 million associated with Proposition 6, and one even noted that Patterson had dropped his original opposition to the amendment. In fact, the official Journal of the Texas House notes that Patterson had agreed to release $300 million once the law went into effect. (2) Patterson also argues that by inverting the words to and from in the letter we asked members to sign we are purposefully misleading our members about this action. We own up to our mistake we did invert the two words in the letter but to suggest we purposefully misled our membership is a cowards play designed to distract from Pattersons lies in Point 1. Our language explaining the transfer of $300 million was accurate in the e-mail we sent announcing the action, in our blog post about the action, and in our The Facts section of our action page. Each of those points is addressed more fully below.
Point 1: Voters Knew $300 Million Was at Stake with Proposition 6 Patterson states that, If you read Proposition 6 that Texas approved in November 2011, youll find that Proposition 6 does not mention $300 million anywhere. This is true. However, as Commissioner Patterson is well aware, the technical language of a Constitutional Amendment is often vague. Thats why voter guides by third party groups and newspaper reports are so important to explain the language elected officials make purposefully vague. The following are just some examples of how clearly Prop 6 was about the $300 million. First, from the San Antonio Express News: The amendment also would allow the School Land Board to send as much as $300 million a year directly to the Available School Fund.
Additionally, our e-mail, action page, and blog post all pointed to the Texas Tribune story (Board Vote Means $300 Million Less for Public Schools) on the subject, which is how we learned about Pattersons action in the first place. From the Tribune story: Usually the proceeds from the sale and management of public school lands would go into a $26 billion trust whose revenue feeds into whats called the Available School Fund. Proposition 6 made it so the School Land Board, if it chose, could bypass that step and put money directly into the fund. We erred in our letter, and we apologize for the mistake. But for Patterson to seize upon this mistake one that was not present in any of our communications is grasping at the scrawniest of straws in order to distract from his documented lies earlier in the letter.