Brittany Black
Additional Information from ATPE
Won the Democratic primary for Texas House District 61 and will be on the November 2026 general election ballot.
Voting records currently not available. Please check back later.
Survey Responses
RESPONSES TO THE 2026 ATPE CANDIDATE SURVEY:
1. If elected, what are your top priorities for Texas public education?Please describe any specific goals or legislative initiatives you would pursue to strengthen the state’s public education system.
My top priorities are fully funding neighborhood public schools, keeping schools open and accessible, and ensuring every student has the resources they need to succeed.
I will focus on stabilizing school funding to prevent closures and overcrowding, reducing the financial burden placed on local taxpayers, and investing in proven supports like early literacy, special education, mental health services, and career and technical education. I also believe strongly in local control, transparency, and evidence-based policy—not political experiments that weaken public schools (I.E. vouchers).
Texas has the money. What we’ve lacked is the political will to put students, teachers, and families first.
2. Public Education Funding:
The 89th Legislature passed an $8 billion school funding bill, HB 2. However, despite years of unanswered “inflationary challenges, a large majority of that funding was earmarked to specific programs and did not supply districts with significant flexible funding, leaving the majority of Texas students in districts with deficit budgets and other significant funding challenges. Do you believe Texas public schools should receive additional funding? If so, how should the state pay for it, and should that funding be earmarked at the state level or provide districts with flexible dollars?
Yes. Our public schools need additional funding, and it must be structured to give districts real flexibility, not just narrowly earmarked programs. HB 2 was a start, but it failed to meaningfully address inflation, rising operating costs, and structural deficits that districts are facing. Most districts need unrestricted funding to cover basics: teacher pay, utilities, transportation, classroom materials, and keeping campuses open.
I support increasing the basic allotment and using a portion of the state’s budget surplus and Rainy Day Fund to stabilize school funding. Dollars should follow students into classrooms, not be locked into rigid state mandates that don’t reflect local needs.
Education savings accounts (ESAs) redirect public funds to private or home schools. How do you believe Texas should fund public schools, traditional and charter, alongside ESA vouchers? How should ESA spending be held accountable to taxpayers?
I oppose ESA voucher programs that divert public dollars away from neighborhood public schools. Public funds should be used for public education that is transparent, accountable, and serves all students—including students with disabilities and English language learners. Vouchers weaken public schools, particularly in fast-growing districts like ours, while offering little accountability for how taxpayer money is spent.
If any public funds are used outside traditional public schools, they must meet the same transparency, academic standards, and financial accountability requirements as public schools. Texas should fix and fully fund public education before siphoning resources away from it.
Under HB 2, passed in 2025, all educators in core content courses (math, English, science, and social studies) must be certified by 2030. While this is a good start, more can and should be done to ensure high-quality teachers continue to enter the classroom. What are your suggestions to improve the quality of the new teacher pipeline?
Certification requirements are important, but they are only one piece of the pipeline. To attract and retain high-quality teachers, Texas must:
- Raise base pay and provide cost-of-living adjustments
- Reduce unpaid administrative burdens
- Expand paid student-teaching and mentorship programs
- Create clear career pathways that allow teachers to advance without leaving the classroom
We cannot recruit our way out of this crisis without also fixing the conditions that are driving educators out. Supporting teachers means respecting their professionalism and giving them the tools to succeed.
The 89th Legislature passed legislation creating a new mechanism to provide only classroom teachers with tiered raises based on early years of service and their district’s student enrollment. While the raises were significant, they did not apply to all campus educators, and the program created a significant negative funding stream at the district level due to unfunded increased costs for non-salary compensation tied to payroll, such as TRS retirement contributions. Do you support a state-funded across-the-board pay raise for all Texas educators? How would you ensure that compensation keeps pace with inflation and remains competitive with other professions?
Yes, I support a state-funded, across-the-board pay raise for all Texas educators, not just classroom teachers. While recent raises were meaningful for some, they excluded many campus professionals—paraprofessionals, counselors, librarians, nurses, and support staff—while simultaneously creating unfunded cost increases for districts through payroll-linked expenses like TRS contributions. That approach shifted financial strain onto districts and undermined long-term sustainability.
Texas must fully fund educator compensation at the state level. That means increasing base pay for all educators, covering associated benefit costs, and tying future adjustments to inflation and regional cost-of-living data so pay does not fall behind year after year. Competitive, predictable compensation is essential to retention and respect for the profession.
The high cost of health insurance for active and retired educators continues to reduce take-home pay, with educators shouldering the vast majority of their ever-increasing heath care costs. How would you address the affordability and sustainability of educator health care, particularly the TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care programs?
Educator health care costs are out of control and are effectively erasing pay raises. I support increasing the state’s contribution to TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care so educators are no longer forced to shoulder the majority of rising premiums and out-of-pocket costs. Texas has consistently underfunded these programs, shifting costs to educators and retirees who often have no alternative coverage options.
We must treat educator health care as a core responsibility by stabilizing funding, improving plan affordability, and ensuring long-term sustainability. No educator should have to choose between quality health care and staying in the profession.
Do you believe the Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) should remain a defined-benefit pension plan for all current and future members? If not, what is your plan to provide a secure retirement for Texas educators, particularly considering that state law has been set up such that most districts do not participate in Social Security?
Yes, the Teacher Retirement System of Texas (TRS) must remain a defined-benefit pension plan for all current and future members. Because most Texas educators do not participate in Social Security, TRS is their primary retirement security. Any move away from a defined-benefit system would expose educators to unnecessary risk and destabilize the profession.
I support strengthening TRS through responsible state funding, protecting cost-of-living adjustments, and ensuring long-term solvency without increasing the burden on educators themselves. A secure retirement is a promise Texas made to its educators—and it must be honored.
The Legislature has passed a new “through-year” multi-test model under HB 8. What role should standardized testing play in evaluating students, teachers, and schools? Should test results continue to determine A–F accountability ratings or teacher pay?
Standardized testing should be one tool among many, not the sole driver of high-stakes decisions. While assessments can help identify learning gaps, over-reliance on test scores distorts instruction, increases student stress, and unfairly penalizes educators working with high-need populations. I do not support using a single testing model to determine teacher pay or to label schools with A–F ratings that fail to reflect real progress or community context.
Accountability systems should incorporate multiple measures—student growth, graduation outcomes, access to advanced coursework, and school climate—while ensuring testing supports learning rather than undermining it.
Recent legislative debates have focused on “parental rights” in education. In your view, what is the appropriate balance between accommodating the often conflicting wishes of individual parents while maintaining policies that reflect the broader community’s educational priorities and still providing consistency and an appropriate level of professional deference to educators?
Parents are essential partners in education, and their voices matter. At the same time, public schools serve entire communities, not individual preferences alone.
The right balance respects parental engagement while maintaining consistent, inclusive policies shaped through transparent, local decision-making. Educators should be trusted as professionals, and policy decisions should be grounded in evidence, educational expertise, and the best interests of all students, and not political pressure or one-size-fits-all mandates. Strong schools are built through collaboration, not conflict.
HB 3 (2023) imposed new school safety requirements but did not fully fund them. Although the 89th Legislature increased the School Safety Allotment, many districts continue to face substantial unfunded staffing and facility costs associated with school safety laws. How would you make schools safer and ensure the state provides adequate funding to meet safety mandates?
School safety is a shared responsibility, and the state must fully fund any mandates it imposes. I support a comprehensive approach to safety that includes adequate staffing, secure facilities, and mental health supports, not just physical infrastructure. Too many districts are struggling to meet safety requirements with insufficient funding, forcing cuts elsewhere.
Texas must fully fund school safety mandates at the state level and give districts flexibility to implement solutions that reflect their unique needs. An unfunded mandate is not a safety plan.
What do you believe is the proper role of the State Board of Education, the Texas Education Agency, and local school districts in setting curriculum standards and selecting instructional materials?
The state’s role should be to set broad academic standards, not to micromanage classrooms. The State Board of Education and TEA should establish clear, evidence-based expectations, while local school districts—working with educators and parents—should retain authority over curriculum selection and instructional materials. Local control allows schools to respond to community needs while maintaining statewide consistency in educational quality.
Education works best when decisions are made closest to students and classrooms.
State law allows educators and other public employees to voluntarily join professional associations such as ATPE and have membership dues deducted from their paychecks at no cost to taxpayers. Do you support or oppose allowing public employees to continue exercising this right? Why or why not?
Yes, I support the right of educators to voluntarily join professional associations such as ATPE. These memberships are paid by educators themselves and cost taxpayers nothing. Professional associations provide critical legal protection, professional development, and a collective voice for educators navigating increasingly complex classrooms.
Educators deserve the freedom to advocate for themselves and their profession. Protecting that right is a matter of fairness and respect.