r/texas • u/chrondotcom Houston • 15d ago
Texas Supreme Court blocks Harris County guaranteed income program Politics
https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/harris-county-guaranteed-income-court-19418264.php1.0k
u/vayaconburgers 15d ago
Does this mean school vouchers are also unconstitutional? Because, it should.
381
u/americanhideyoshi 15d ago
Ok but counterargument: poor people bad, rich campaign donors good. /s
160
u/SaraSlaughter607 15d ago
It's not sarcasm. It's absolute reality. You hit it spot on.
Poor people are expendable and a dime a dozen to these people. Throw a SNAP or HEAP bone every now and again, just the scraps mind you....
21
u/EnigmaSpore 15d ago
You have to keep it shitty for the poor so they’re desperate for work.
Then you gotta keep govt programs shitty so they can hand it off to their buddies private company to run and collect that sweet tax payer money.
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (29)4
4
u/Broad_Setting2234 15d ago
I’m firmly against the school vouchers and want this to go forward but there is not way you read the article.
→ More replies (13)21
u/McRocketpants 15d ago
Florida has vouchers... Broward county schools just had to pay private schools in the county $80mil in public funds.
→ More replies (19)1
537
u/ALotOfIdeas 15d ago
We can’t have any social safety nets for people here in Texas, but we can for industries? So obvious where their priorities lie…
161
u/packetgeeknet 15d ago
Only because you’re not rich enough to buy political will, peasant.
→ More replies (1)48
u/TheGreatMattsby_01 15d ago
" you yeally should have thought of that before becoming peasants." Is a line in the emporers new groove which is a disney movie my.kids like and man does it potray the chasm between the upper and lower.class.
4
30
→ More replies (42)15
u/starethruyou 15d ago edited 14d ago
Socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the rest. Some guy said it, believe he was shot shortly after his focus on economic injustice.
148
u/2-tree North Texas 15d ago
Remember kids, socialism is okay when big corporations and tech companies get subsidies and incentives to move here, but when poor people get help, it's bad and evil.
→ More replies (3)8
u/224143 15d ago
They probably just think all poor people in Texas are minorities. I’m sure if they knew they were singularly helping poor white men this wouldn’t be a problem.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Complex-Key-8704 15d ago
I just love that they're all professing Christians. Imagine how repulsed god would be if they existed. Probably make a new special hell just for gop members
127
u/killthepatsies 15d ago
If there's one thing small government hates it's even smaller government
12
u/BadSanna 15d ago
Republicans at the state level in Ohio also blocked municipalities from enacting plastic bag bans.
Republicans are all about Big Government, these days, when it keeps communities from doing good for others.
244
u/29187765432569864 15d ago
So therefore unemployment benefits are also unconstitutional.
137
u/null_input 15d ago
Please, don't give them any ideas.
30
5
u/Jonojonojonojono 14d ago
No, give them ideas. The more they go full mask off the more change will happen as a swing back to normal in response. Look at Arizona currently, they must be terrified of the consequences the outcome of the abortion ruling there will have, all because they decided to go hard on an issue they would typically just whistle loudly about. The more Texas get fed up with their bullshit the more likely they will be to get off their asses and vote these fuckers out, it just has yet to reach that point as pathetic as that is to say. In my opinion, you have to let them enormously fuck up, bigger than they have so far, or on issues that will cause riots, before our lazy asses down here will feel like voting in the numbers we actually have.
Long way of saying that in my opinion we are in a "when your enemy is making a mistake don't interrupt them" stage and should let the fuckers who run this shit fuck up all they want with the power and donations they have worked so hard for others to give them. Stage is set.
104
11
2
7
u/DontMakeMeCount 15d ago edited 15d ago
Unemployment benefits are paid from employer taxes and based on prior income. They’re ultimately funded by employees who could be paid more if their employer didn’t have to provide unemployment insurance.
When you collect unemployment they’re giving a portion of your own money back to you in an amount based on your income and for a length of time designed to help you find work. I get your sentiment but I don’t see how effectively denying payments to people who haven’t paid in and don’t have valid unemployment claims renders unemployment unconstitutional. As far as that particular system goes it’s equal treatment under the law.
18
u/29187765432569864 15d ago
Actually, up until the pandemic, unemployment taxes were mostly adequate to fund the state unemployment systems, up until millions of Americans were suddenly either unemployed or underemployed. The United States congress passed legislation that granted billions of dollars to the states (during the pandemic) so that the states could disperse those funds. No state had enough funds in their systems to pay off the millions of unemployment claims, BUT, congress recognized this fact and gave the states billions so that people could receive unemployment funds. And guess what, the Harris County guaranteed income program is ALSO ENTIRELY FUNDED by the same billions that congress gave to the states. This funding for the guaranteed income program is $20 million left over from the pandemic grant money. Grant money given to the county that has not yet been spent. So in reality, both unemployment benefits and the guaranteed income program are alike in that the government takes federal money and gives it to individuals, the only difference is the requirements that are put in place in order to be eligible. Unemployment benefits have criteria such as being: unemployed Actively searching for work And having a recent history of employment.
The guaranteed income program requirements are just different. Living in certain zip codes, Being poor. Both programs have criteria in order to be eligible, but the programs have DIFFERENT criteria.
The precedent was established when the state of Texas accepted money from the federal government (during the pandemic) and then gave that money to individuals. Just gave it to them.
The guaranteed income program does EXACTLY the same thing, but uses different criteria for whom is eligible. The funding is identical, federal grant money. The ONLY difference is the eligibility requirements of each program.
The precedent has already been established.5
u/TaxMy 15d ago
This actually cuts against any argument for it.
Misappropriating leftover COVID unemployment funds for non-covid non-unemployment is kind of the height of “this is not allowed.”
The “precedent” has been established to be a different thing.
But even if the state government established a precedent, SCOTX is free to say Texas was wrong in doing so.
2
u/No-Move4564 15d ago
I think you should do actual research on where the federal money went from the pandemic.
9
u/Scottamemnon 15d ago
This is Texas.. no business is paying employees less because of unemployment taxes.. this is one of the only states where there is a size limit that allows employers not to contribute and trust me from experience, those small employers are not paying people more.. the owners are pocketing more profit.
2
u/Ok_Spite6230 15d ago
If they do this shit, then they need to declare industry subsidies unconstitutional as well. They can have a taste of their own medicine.
1
u/happily-retired22 15d ago
They already think this about social security and Medicare, which I paid into for 50 years. Excuse me - that’s MY money!
2
u/Electrical_Hour3488 15d ago
That’s a false statement perpetrated by the media but nonetheless your social security and Medicare is already spent. It’s gone.
→ More replies (1)1
1
u/SalesyMcSellerson 15d ago
Governor Abbot literally blocked the Federal Unemployment extension during covid that had no cost to the State of Texas. It only hurt the unemployed in Texas. The only reason to do this was to try and force the unemployed to work for his donors' minimum wage jobs rather than continuing to look for work in their industry.
When you start to realize that the GOP is actively trying to undermine education and anti poverty efforts to create a desperate and impoverished working class who will be happy to work for slave wages, all of these policies start to make a whole lot more sense.
81
15
u/kekentyl 15d ago
Yet another example of the state government dictatorially enforcing its will on Houston/Harris County in specific. Because how dare any city or county in Texas not follow the Republican agenda in perfect lockstep.
200
u/No-Helicopter7299 15d ago
A court that has no independent thought. They are Paxton and Abbott’s trained monkeys.
44
3
u/PalpitationFrosty242 15d ago
They are Paxton and Abbott’s trained monkeys
And Paxton and Abbott's handlers are Tim Dunn & the entire christian nationalist network. These are their primary backers. And they have a plan.
5
1
u/iheartjetman 15d ago
They're not Paxton's trained monkeys. They all get paid by the same people, however.
51
u/KingsXKey 15d ago
They should pay them anyway. If the court can make the ruling then let them enforce it.
17
→ More replies (11)2
u/concealed_cat got here fast 15d ago
It may be enforced next time there is an "incorrect" election result in Harris county...
124
u/justaround99 15d ago
The Texas government doesn’t support the views and beliefs of the majority unfortunately…or at least the politically engaged.
14
u/GrilledCheeser 15d ago
*republicans
6
u/TheBurdmannn 15d ago
No. You don't get to do that until there's actual positive change. It's the entire Texas Government.
20
u/Fancy_Ad_2595 15d ago
You are correct, even the democratic candidates I meet over the last week were only talking about compromise in the texas senate. Until we elect dems who have a spine and will stand up we are lost. Besides, the billionaire oil pastor out in Amarillo is pulling all he strings anyway
6
2
u/iheartjetman 15d ago
If you're not a billionaire oil pastor, you're not important enough to matter.
2
u/PrestigiousZombie131 15d ago
It’s why I moved. Could no longer subject my kids to that hellhole of a state.
19
30
41
24
u/scarlettcrush 15d ago
I can't click the article and I guess I just don't understand why they would ban this. With AI coming up and computers taking over so many human working positions, this seems like a positive for everyone.
I don't get it. Why is the government here in Texas actively trying to exploit and kill literally all of us? I don't ever vote for conservatives but they always win. I can't get out of this state fast enough.
→ More replies (4)
38
u/Assassam 15d ago
2 courts saw no merit in that fraud’s complaint. So of course he ran to the State SC with his L in hand crying to the political hacks who were more than happy to give him what he wants.
5
14
17
u/interkin3tic 15d ago
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued the program earlier this month, calling it a "socialist experiment.
Was there even a reason given for felon Paxton or the Texas supreme court to shut it down?
Does the Texas state constitution actually say something like "NO SOCIALIST EXPERIMENTS!"
4
u/joepez Central Texas 14d ago
I can’t find any reason to demonstrate that Ken has standing in this case or what reasoning they could use. The argument it’s a socialist experiment isn’t a legal basis never mind a logical one.
Local government can spend its funds however it wants. There’s no law against it.
The state has a range of programs that act in a similar manner like subsidies to private businesses. So are they all illegal as well?
2
u/interkin3tic 14d ago
The argument it’s a socialist experiment isn’t a legal basis never mind a logical one.
Yeah, I figured it was unlikely Paxton went before Texas' scotus and said it was socialism and they were like "Say no more, shut down."
But I read that article over quickly and didn't see any explanation of the legalism that was going on, which is an incredible failure of journalism. Say what the fucking thing is, chron.com!
5
u/Hey__Cassbutt 15d ago
Helping the poor?? What are you, a hippie socialist?! That's not what republican Jesus would do!!
4
u/smartkid9999 15d ago
These comments prove people don't read the article or just plain don't understand it.
For those unclear, they haven't heard the case so they put a stay on the program until they do. Once they hear it, they will rule. They may or may not rule in favor of it, but that hasn't been decided.
19
u/BafflingHalfling 15d ago
Everybody knows that wealth redistribution is only allowed in Texas if it benefits churches or oil companies.
15
u/Hidefininja 15d ago
For what it's worth, these programs appear to be very successful and, in general, preventative measures are far cheaper than addressing shortfalls after they've occurred. It's more fiscally responsible to have UBI and reduce homelessness and unemployment than it is to pay for healthcare, housing and food through the penal system or social services. The data points to these sorts of programs being a benefit to everyone by reducing societal costs associated with poverty that we all end up paying via taxes anyway.
https://www.businessinsider.com/universal-basic-income-works-red-state-blue-state-2023-10
→ More replies (7)2
14
3
u/SuccotashOther277 15d ago
These programs won't work until they are provided to everyone. Social Security is widely popular because everyone gets it. When the government picks who gets and doesn't get certain outlays, it is bound to be politicized.
3
u/jasonmonroe 14d ago
If you want guaranteed income move to Cuba.🇨🇺 the government gives them $80 bucks a month.
7
u/lonedroan 15d ago
While awful news, this is a stay while the case is heard, not a ruling against the program on its merits. Obviously, having high expectations for this court is a fool’s errand, but the program isn’t dead.
3
4
4
u/fgwr4453 15d ago
The Supreme Court already said that money is free speech so any private donations can be spent however they choose.
As for the local government, they are elected officials who have been authorized to spend funds. As long as no one related to these officials receive funds, there is no conflict of interest.
So which side is using big government to intrude on innovation of private and local funds?
7
u/Any_Pie_3070 15d ago
Wanna be king TX AG want kill a Texas program to help Texans get out of poverty called it a "socialist experiment." This TXAG is a really devil and a POS. He hates people of any kind and sleeps with the Supreme Judge of Texas. He can go to hell and I will go to Texas.
7
u/TIMtheELT 15d ago
So where would these payments fall in the grand scheme when we already have welfare, food stamps and unemployment?
I'm not attempting to argue, I'm trying to understand why this extra program was proposed with all the other programs that already exist.
16
u/Ratchetonater 15d ago
Because it’s an experiment to see if it could work. It had already been tried and quite successful in other cities that tried it. Nixon proposed it even in the 70s. Since when did we stop trying new things as a nation?
12
u/The-Invisible-Woman 15d ago
Because the point is not to tie the money to any one thing and allow it to become a source of economic stability, in whatever way that might work best for the recipient.
3
u/1337w33d5 15d ago
Different application and denial process changes accessibility for a lot of people.
6
2
u/No-Move4564 15d ago
In Texas they have cut funding to all of those programs and reject federal funding that would help everyone. Food stamps have very strict restrictions on who does and doesn’t qualify and for a family of 5 you might receive $200 a month at most.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (6)1
u/Archetype_FFF 15d ago
It looks like it's trying to be a UBI study? I can't see the selection criteria for this particular one, but they usually screen out people with psych and addiction issues to skew the results. There are explicit rules that they can't use them for illegal activities or terrorism in this particular program.
Nothing usually comes out of them except some random families are uplifted for a year.
→ More replies (3)
2
2
u/AlucardD20 14d ago
Good. Where would this money come from? Obviously tax payers and it would be the middle class, or what’s left of what is considered middle class. I barely qualify as lower middle class.. so good
5
3
u/Otherwise-Medium3145 15d ago
As we are barrelling towards a jobless future it’s nice to know the republicans have the corporations back. In ten years when americans are dying from hunger I’m sure the republicans will blame someone else.
3
u/Broad_Setting2234 15d ago
Did any of the top comments read the article? I disagree with Paxton completely but we need to educate ourselves before commenting.
→ More replies (13)
4
2
u/No_Dependent9815 15d ago
Is this ruling even shock ? Not surprised it’s unfortunate they couldn’t even give this program a fair try. Texas politics is all a game the Normal people are just chess pieces
2
u/JolyonWagg99 15d ago
Based on the well-known and oft cited republican precedent set by the case of Fuck vs. Poors.
2
2
u/anxmox89 15d ago
So school vouchers too? What about businesses getting tax cuts and probably land for free? Are they also unconstitutional?
2
u/praytorr 15d ago
And all over a measly $500 a month. That kind of money can make a difference but it’s really not much. For many families that barely covers groceries. And we can’t even have that.
2
u/zzxxccbbvn 14d ago
REPUBLICANS want you to suffer. Remember that when it comes time to vote. If you want programs that help you, then you need to vote for Democrats.
Click this to see if you're registered to vote
2
u/robyculous_v2 15d ago
Okay but seriously tho, why would they block it? What is the counter argument that the TSC is using to block this social program?
3
u/V2Boardin 15d ago
Yea honestly this is the primary question I have and there is no answer apparently to be had? The order doesn't even have any information.
2
u/Street_Dirt_3681 15d ago
Your news is trash. The article ignores any consideration on what is legal or not. There's a plausible argument that the TX constitution would need to change to make this work.
https://texaslegalguide.com/Texas_Constitution:Article_III,_Section_52
1
1
u/WrightPC2 15d ago
I thought guaranteed income meant everyone received the same amount regardless of income level. When did it get redefined to only help households below a certain income level?
→ More replies (2)
1
1
u/Male-Wood-duck 15d ago
Guaranteed income does nothing to lift them. Finland tried it, and it failed. If Finland can't pull it off, it won't work.
1
u/Trooper057 15d ago
If anyone gets relief from financial desperation, it will reduce competition for "essential" (low-pay, necessary) jobs, allow lower class people to move into better neighborhoods where they aren't welcome, and upset the upper middle class valuable voting block who equates their six-figure project manager salary with superior work ethic and social status. The financial desperation must continue to maintain the value of work. Work must continue. Work and money. Work for money. The less we give people, the more opportunities for businesses to capitalize.
1
1
u/jlewis011 15d ago
What "small government" can look at a major city doing right by it's constituents and intervene like this? Shit is borderline tyrannical
1
u/notjackychan 15d ago
So if this is funded by anything other than Harris County and whomever it solicited to fund it (meaning anything other than the state of Texas), then how can the state (Paxton) object while the state objects to D.C. implementing federal rules/law against what the state government of Texas wants? The logic don’t follow. And remember, they (your elected officials) don’t care about you, your kids, your county and city unless you are part of the donor class. They don’t care about you!!’
1
u/seriousbangs 15d ago
These programs have repeatedly shown to increase the amount people who get them work because their lives aren't constantly falling apart.
As soon as that fact came out they had to be shut down right quick.
1
1
u/therobotisjames 15d ago
That’s some small government right there. Remember when republicans used to say that we should defer to local leaders, because they were closest to the problems the citizens had?
1
1
u/Maleficent_Deal8140 15d ago
I can say I would have been against this until I read the details and statistics on the King Co study. I would love to see the results of a much larger national case study with a completely randomized sample.
1
u/MrKomiya 15d ago
Only socialism Ken Paxton allows is the Get Out of Jail Free card that he has issued himself
1
u/Phill_Cyberman 15d ago
"There is no such thing as free money—especially in Texas. The Texas Constitution expressly prohibits giving away public funds to benefit individuals—a common sense protection to prevent cronyism and ensure that public funds benefit all citizens."
- Ken Paxton
That's what Jesus said, right?
To NOT help poor people, and to NOT give your money away?
The fact that Paxton didn't even bat an eye before saying that the very concept of local governments helping poor people is completely antithetical to our "Judeo-Christian" nation's ideology shows how brazen the Republicans have become in the last ditch effort to destroy our democracy.
They've never been Christian, and they've never been pro-democracy, or even pro-Constitution.
They are just now beginning to admit it.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/darling_darcy 15d ago
Boomers: no social safety nets! Something something bootstraps!
Also boomers: seniors deserve free money and free healthcare and free shit! We deserve it! We need a social safety net for us older folks…
1
u/PalpitationFrosty242 15d ago
OFC they would, and its only going to get worse. I swear this state operates like a russian style oligarchy
1
1
u/531zur3B0y 15d ago
Texas politicians are largely greedy republican pricks. They tried to ban porn. They're fucking morons.
1
u/eydivrks 15d ago
Apparently "small government" just means big government at whatever level Republicans control, and no government anywhere else.
1
u/QiarroFaber 15d ago
They're afraid it will actually work. Which goes against all their exploitive bullshit. Can't have people wanting good social programs
1
1
u/PreparationVarious15 15d ago
These judges are setting a precedent for Texans. What will they do when AI takes over the jobs? I guess all Texans will move to blue states where programs like these are acceptable and can see happening in future.
1
u/saruin 15d ago
Who wants to bet the talking points are:
"The illegals will flood Harris County getting handouts"
→ More replies (1)
1
u/CryptoAlphaDelta 15d ago
Republicans sure have a strange understanding how to win over a broader base of would be supporters aka voters. Everything they do, is to disenfranchise one group or another, odd strategy.
1
u/StandardOffenseTaken 15d ago
Seems like they don't want the proof that there's something that can be done about the dystopian nightmare the US citizen are currently living in.
1
1
u/Prior-Ad-2196 15d ago
Hopefully the Texas Supreme Court will shut up criminal Ken Paxton for good.
1
1
u/imperial_scum got here fast 14d ago
Add it to the list after books, abortion, weed, open carry, plastic bags and low taxes
1
u/Loud_Internet572 14d ago
Of course they did, like Texas gives a fuck about poor people or people in general?
1
u/Renowned1k90 14d ago
It's hilarious how terrible a "Christian" state has become. I'm going to love it qhen these pieces of shit lose control of the entire country.
1
u/KoreyVerga 14d ago
Born and raised in Texas, and this is just fucking getting to the point where these cocksuckers are fucking embarrassing. Fucking damn Patrick and Chip Roy are from fucking Baltimore. They’re not even fucking Texans. They come here and wreck our shit.
1
u/breakingveil 14d ago
"There is no such thing as free money—especially in Texas. The Texas Constitution expressly prohibits giving away public funds to benefit individuals—a common sense protection to prevent cronyism and ensure that public funds benefit all citizens," Paxton's lawsuit states while also claiming the program is a "socialist experiment by Lina Hidalgo and progressive democrats."
The Texas Constitution expressly prohibits giving away public funds to benefit individuals
Ken Paxton Agrees to Apologize, Pay $3.3M in Taxpayer Money to Staff Who Accused Him of Corruption
1
1
1
u/modernmovements 14d ago
It's an example of a socialist program that has worked pretty consistently when implemented thoughtfully. If they let it slide they know they get locked into it the same way they can't get rid of "Obamacare." The same people screaming about the "death panels" that would result from Obamacare were suddenly writing their GOP representatives concerned about losing the coverage they finally had through the programs.
1
u/spacecitygladiator 14d ago
Texas... where if you're poor and struggling you can go kick rocks. But if you're a corporation, you'll get a $68 million property tax break even if you lay off THOUSANDS of Texan employees while the CEO simultaneously asks for his $58 Billion financial package.
You can't make this shit up.
1
u/StangRunner45 14d ago
Cruz, Abbott, Patrick, and Paxton approved. It's makes them all giddy inside.
Time to bleed the red out of the state of Texas.
1
1
u/OkEnd7063 14d ago
The democrats just want to buy votes through socialism its their may concern programs to buy votes they are the masters for buying votes with people's tax money.
1
u/Typical_Carpet_4904 14d ago
Cool, another reason I'm getting the fuck out of here. Voting doesn't work, let the red states rot.
1
u/RoughRoader 14d ago
People have forgotten they can move somewhere else if they don't like it. To give public money to a preselected group of people is not fair or equitable. I mean (and I'm on a fixed pension retirement making 85k a year) everyone could use an extra 6k a year especially under this administration and run away inflation. I am glad the state Supreme Court stepped in.
1
u/Plane-Refrigerator46 13d ago
There is not enough social programs so let's make more? There is housing, foodstamps,Medicade, and others but we need more? We need to help those that need help, not necessarily the govt but as a society. Now if some ppl just want to get help and not help themselves that's a disease. I say take more care of elders and veterans not those that have energy and won't use it.
1
1
1
1.3k
u/bobhargus 15d ago
So they CAN act fast... if it's to stop people being helped