FM Talk 1065 Podcasts
State Senator Chris Elliott - Jeff Poor Show - Friday 8-16-24
[music] Welcome back to the Jump Force Show. What F.M. Talk 10065. Thanks for staying with us on this Friday. Let's listen to this Friday. There's any more time left. We'll have time at the very, very end of your program, of this program, for your text. If you want to get in, 2513430106. But keep them pithy if possible. Joining us now on the line here. It's been a while, but our state senator, our returning champion. Chris Elliott joins us. Senator, good morning. How are you? I am doing great. It is a pretty day here in South Alabama. That's good to hear. I guess we're all in South Alabama too. I just need to get outside to experience it. Well, I don't know if you've been listening to the show today, but we're kind of in this, I got in on this tangent. I don't know if you saw yesterday, the joint committee, the ETF, the new equity funding, or what reform, I guess, is the word, formula for school systems, how much money they get from the state. And there was a dust-up between Superintendent Mackie a little bit and Danny Garrett, the House Chairman. What do you make of this to you? Do you get any of this at all? Yeah, I'm watching the closely senator or the ETF chairman and the senate that I have talked about this process as well as some other folks that are really heavily involved in it, both here locally and at the state level. And it's going to be one of those things where we really have to watch. I will tell you, I was pleased with Representative Garrett's comment with Superintendent Mackie early on. You know, just about not undercutting a process where we are trying to look and see, can we do this better? Is there a better way to do this? And too often the edgy cracks in the state don't want to change anything, don't want anything differently, and they just are status quo folks. And that's not always the best way to innovate and to do things better. Having said all that, I'm not sure that this is where we're headed is necessarily the right thing, either. But Peter is the Senator or Representative Garrett for putting this together to take a look at it and take stock and say, "Is there a different way to do this? Is it better?" And then, of course, the real thing is going to be, "Okay, now let's let every Senator and Representative apply this plan to their particular district or districts and see what the changes are from a funding standpoint and whether things get better or things get worse." Well, and this is just it. Like, it sounds like, to me, first off, the formula now is like per pupil of the system, and that's antiquated, but I don't really get like, if we're going to have to change the formula, then it does sound a little to me like you're going to take away from the haves and give to the have-nots. Am I wrong to think that? Well, that's certainly something I'm going to be keeping an eye on, and it's certainly something that's very relevant to Baltimore County as one of those districts that certainly is wealthier. A lot of the reason, though, that our schools are in good shape is because of local money. So, you know, the Baldwin County school system survives off of a large, large infusion of local tax revenue, and so, you know, our other school systems. As a matter of fact, Orange Beach doesn't receive any state foundation funding, per pupil funding, so, you know, for teachers. They don't receive any of us. The only school system that the foundation program completely fails to look at just because of what property values are and what their enrollment is. And so, you know, for that reason alone, I'm willing to kind of pop the hood on the foundation program and see if there are some improvements that can be made, but any attempt to play Robin Hood and take more resources from Baldwin County and spread them across the state is going to be something I'm going to, you know, vehemently oppose. That would be headed backwards in my opinion. Well, and that's just it, though. And when Mackie made those remarks, what he said, "Well, to do what they want to do, you're either going to have a $2 billion tax increase or just unprecedented economic growth decrease to ETF." Where was he? I mean, I know this undermines the process for him to say that, but let's just believe that aside. Where was he wrong? Well, I think what Dr. Mackie was trying to do there was shape the narrative ahead of the process even getting started. And I think that's what frustrated, understandably so, represented Garrett is you've got the state superintendent playing a little politics there. And that undermines a kind of free discussion of this process. Now, to your point, you know, the easy thing to do to make everybody happy on the educate side is just pile more money on. And so you have to figure out if you're paying more per student or if you're paying more for certain types of students, that money's got to come from somewhere. And so my question is and continues to be, does it come from somewhere else in the education budget? I can promise you a very small portion of the total education trust fund budget is actually the per student calculation, funding calculation. It is a very complicated budget, and there's a lot of money that is not allocated on the basis of the foundation program. So there may be ways to put some of that other money, maybe that's going through the state Department of Education directly, and, you know, realign that to local districts, which I think would probably be a good idea. So it sounds way too complicated than it should be. The education funding model is terribly complicated. There's only been actually one real significant change to the foundation program since its exception, and it's one that I made that dealt with growing school districts because our school districts in Baldwin County were always two years behind on their ADM, their attendance calculations, because we did everything two years in arrears. And so you had hundreds of students each year that weren't counted in the funding calculation, so we fixed that, but it is one of those things that is very difficult, very complicated, and this will likely be a long-term, you know, long process for everybody to get their arms around, but it is a crucial conversation to have and one that everybody should be watching. But it seems like one, just from my standpoint, sitting here in Baldwin County, like, I would think that Baldwin County would be one of the biggest losers here, since it's a big system, right? And potentially big losers. This is why you've got to really watch how this proceeds because we had Senator Glover on earlier, and he's always, well, you know, Jeff, that people do come down and stay in condos and pay into the system there, so it makes sense for a little bit to be taken off the top for Baldwin County, but, like, I mean, how many times money grubbing politicians in Montgomery would have that mindset to think, well, we'll just take even more from these guys. Yeah, unfortunately, I couldn't disagree more with former Senator Glover there. I think that's the absolute wrong way to look at it, and I'll just use the dark green city school system as an example, you know, the only system that gets no state foundation program money. I mean, come on, none. I mean, they're funding that entirely locally. The whole system, not another system, the entire state like that. And so I think that's where we can look at the foundation program to say that's a problem, and we need to figure out a way to fix that. That's something I'm committed to do, but look at that. That's something that happens on the county level as well, right? We have local taxes involved in county that are levied by a local law that was passed by the state legislature, and again, that's a good conversation to have there. All of that money in all of Baltimore County goes to the Baldwin County school system. None of it, even though it is tax-designed, in Gulf Shores and Orange Beach, goes to the Gulf Shores or Orange Beach school systems. And, you know, there's some fundamental fairness questions there that need to be addressed as well. So it'll be a complicated session dealing with education funding and those models. No question about it. Does that become the big issue for the shoe, you think? I think it likely will be. It is a big, weighty issue. I love that kind of stuff. I mean, you know, you get into details, figure out the funding models, and whether or not this is a good way to proceed. But yeah, I could see that being something and good. I'm glad. I'd much rather deal with that than more nonsense about gambling. As I say, how long until we hear? Well, if we just pass gambling, we wouldn't have the need for this discussion, but it's always going to be a fight over money, right? You know, the entire gambling conversation sucks all of the air out of the room. It just precludes the legislature from getting anything done. It ruins relationships and brings out the nastiest of lobbyists on both sides. I don't want to say it again. I'm not interested in it. We have tried and tried. I voted in favor of a lottery three times. This state is horribly -- and a horrible impasse and cannot figure out how to move forward. And I just -- it gets in the way of everything else that is good governance. I tell you what about the whole gambling talk? Like, we don't -- we have -- gambling is allegedly constitutionally illegal in Alabama. Yeah, buddy. I mean, it can really shut down the Alabama legislature. Oh, it sure can. I mean, and gets in the way of, again, good policy, good discussions, and it's unfortunate. Unlike almost any other issue that I've dealt with in the legislature, it really just brings out the worst in people. I mean, it is -- it is the very definition of greed. And I saw that in a way that I just -- Jeff, maybe not want to be in the legislature. I was there for a lot of it. It's just this dark cloud. And I mean, you had people just, like, hanging out in front of your office and other offices. And, you know, I can't imagine, like, everybody trying to get you to vote a certain way. Or if you -- because you didn't vote a certain way, you were castigated by the usual suspects in the media. I just -- I mean, you had a lot done last year. But way, way, way too much oxygen expended on gambling. I couldn't agree a more -- and that's going to be my argument moving forward, you know, in the next -- the rest of this quadrantium, the next two sessions is, you know, we have tried that yet again. We got closer than we ever got. And I just -- but it is at the cost of so many other real, meaningful conversations and real governance that we need to do. And I just -- I'm not interested in going back through that again. -Joy by State Senator Chris Elliott here on the program. I'll just get to spend any time at the BCA event last weekend. -I did. I did briefly. You know, within my district there at the Grand Hotel, and I feel -- I feel almost obligated to host and be there to, you know, welcome -- welcome folks to the district. That's the benefit and the curse of representing the district. It's got the Grand Hotel and Fair Hope and all of the pretty debitchers order in all of the beaches. You get to play host a good bit. But, you know, eventful and heard some interesting conversations there. Always a good networking event to kind of see, "Hey, what's going on before we get back into session?" -Well, that take from it was kind of that -- I mean, it sounds like BCA is at least rhetorically going to be more aggressive, but I think this is more of a -- like the precursor, a prelude, if you will. So, that could be kind of a crazy 26 cycle senator. And, I mean, you know, how many open seats are there going to be? Is the business council of Alabama laying down a marker right now? Who knows what's going to happen in the gubernatorial race? I mean, I think Ames works a pretty solid pick right now. But, like, does that get shaken up? What does 26 look like if Harris wins? If she wins, 26 is going to be a big Republican cycle. I mean, we won't have a repeat of 22, I'm convinced, that it will be a Republican cycle if not, and it will be sort of a milk toast Democrat cycle. I mean, a Democrat cycle nationally probably, but what does that mean for Alabama? And I don't know. There's a populist sentiment in the Republican party now. Are they looking ahead, a potential bumpy ride in 2026? Well, a lot to impact there. I mean, I think the most impactful thing that will happen at the statewide level in 2026 is going to be driven by what happens in November in the presidential election. As far as who does what, where and where those pieces may or may not fall. If we have a Republican in the White House, I think the likelihood that there's more movement statewide and more spots to move is probably good. And so we'll have to see how that works. And, of course, there's all those folks kind of jockeying for position right now and starting to talk, you know, here about two years out, but less than two years out now about what they may do. I will tell you, Lieutenant Governor Williams' work was in Foley on Wednesday and spoke to the South Mullen Chamber Leadership Series and "Man, the Life." That guy is on fire, and I hear me now. He's going to be the next governor of the state of Alabama, and I am so excited about the energy and tenacity and just the principles conservative approach he brings to the state. And, you know, he hasn't announced yet, but you can count that as an endorsement as far as I'm concerned. But he's going to be great. And then the question is what happens to all these other statewide offices? Who's running where and where some of those go? And that'll be interesting to watch. How that presidential race shapes up, too, is likely to define a lot of what happens in the next two legislative sessions, right? So if we have a Democrat president, which I sure hope we don't, but if we end up going to Kamala Harris wins, then I think, you know, your Alabama legislature will have to spend more time to ensure that we continue to fight liberal, you know, federal policies and stand up against those as opposed to when President Trump, you know, if President, we just didn't have to fight nearly as hard. And so that outcome in that presidential election could certainly direct what the legislative agenda is as well here in the state of Alabama. Let me sort of redirect the question, I guess. And I'm thinking more down ballot from the governor, but legislative-wise, 22, we didn't see a whole lot of turnover, saw some in the house, saw our buddy, Tom Watley, lose by a vote. But other than that, I mean, do you expect any wild fluctuations in legislative seats? I really don't. You know, the legislative seats are pretty stagnant. I mean, there are the occasional turnovers in primaries, but most Democrat seats are very heavily Democrat. Most Republican seats are very heavily Republican. So I don't see the opportunity for a lot of changes there. You know, just as hard. You know, most of the money that comes out of Montgomery goes to incumbents, honestly, I was encouraged to hear what they said at VCA about. They were going to make sure they supported, you know, those that support business. They should. And firefighters should support those who support firefighters, and farmers should support those that support farmers and their interests. But, you know, I do get a little frustrated that it just goes to incumbents all the time, no matter what they do. But having said all that, the likelihood is that we'll continue just very difficult, not impossible, certainly not. But it's very difficult to unseat and incumbent in the Alabama legislature. And that's just facts. I mean, it's just borne out by history. Center got to leave it there, but we always appreciate the time. And we'll do this again next week. Sounds good. I'll be here. All right. Stay centered. Chris Elliott, our returning champion there. We got to get a break in here. We'll be right back. This is the Jeff Porte Show at Fiptalk. 10065. I ain't got a dime, but what I got is my tight, rich, but Lord, I'm free. (upbeat music)