Texas Senate Bill SB439

Texas 2017 - 85th Regular

Caption

Relating to the appointment by certain elected officials of students to receive a Texas Armed Services Scholarship.

Impact

The revisions proposed in SB439 include provisions for an alternate student for scholarship awards, thus ensuring that if appointed students become ineligible, there is a clear mechanism to replace them. The board is tasked with developing rules for the appointment process, ensuring that the scholarships reach deserving candidates and avoiding the wastage of funds designated for these scholarships. This change may enhance the overall allocation effectiveness of the Texas Armed Services Scholarship program.

Summary

SB439 seeks to amend the Texas Education Code concerning the appointment of students to receive the Texas Armed Services Scholarship. The bill allows the governor and lieutenant governor to appoint two students each, while each state senator and representative may appoint one student. This appointment process aims to streamline the scholarship allocation to eligible students who may require financial assistance in their pursuit of education related to armed services.

Contention

While the bill appears to encourage educational opportunities for students interested in armed services, it could prompt debates regarding the criteria for eligibility and the process for selecting alternate students. Questions may arise around who qualifies as 'eligible' and what determinants exist for maintaining satisfactory academic progress. These ambiguities might lead to different interpretations by appointing officials, requiring additional oversight or guidelines to ensure fairness in selection.

Notable_points

One notable aspect of SB439 is its potential to empower elected officials by involving them directly in the scholarship appointment process. This could enhance accountability, as public representatives may be more attentive to the educational needs of their constituents. However, this empowerment could also be perceived as political interference in academic decisions, raising concerns about the motivations behind appointments and whether they align with the best interests of students.