Danny Norris

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.

If elected, my top priorities for public education are to repeal the HISD takeover law (HB 1842) and restore local control, increase the state funding share to 50%+ with recurring revenue to close per-pupil gaps and fund teacher raises without restrictions, overhaul punitive A-F ratings with holistic measures like Pre-K enrollment and fine arts, and block vouchers/privatization that divert funds from public schools serving HD-142's majority Black and Latino students. As a former trustee, I'll deliver equity and excellence for our kids—no more stagnation.

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, Texas public schools need additional, recurring funding beyond HB 2's $8.5 billion in 2025 (mainly targeted allotments and one-time revenue), as per-pupil spending remains approximately $4,000 below the national average and ranks Texas 39th-42nd nationally. In HD-142, underfunding hits the majority of Black and Latino students hardest amid 20% poverty. The state should pay through sustainable sources, such as closing corporate loopholes and reforming franchise taxes—not by increasing reliance on property taxes or through Rainy Day raids. Funding should be flexible dollars (raise the basic allotment without restrictions) plus targeted allotments for high-need areas, giving districts local control to address inflation, teacher pay, and student services effectively. Recurring investment closes long-term gaps—our kids deserve it.

3. ESA Vouchers:

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?

Texas should prioritize robust and equitable funding for traditional public schools, which serve the vast majority of students and are held to high accountability, transparency, and accessibility standards. Charter schools, while publicly funded, must also be held to the same accountability measures as ISDs to ensure a level playing field and equitable access. Education savings accounts (ESAs) divert taxpayer dollars to private institutions that are not subject to the same public oversight, testing, curriculum standards, or open admissions policies, often leading to discrimination and inefficiency. If ESAs continue, there must be strict accountability: comprehensive reporting on how funds are spent, transparency in admissions and academic outcomes, and a requirement that participating private schools follow civil rights and disability laws. Ultimately, any public dollar spent should be traceable, accountable, and used in a way that upholds the constitutional obligation to support a quality public education for all Texas students.

4. Teacher Recruitment and Retention:

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?

Texas should not fund ESAs with public dollars—they divert resources from public schools that serve 90% of students and subsidize private choices with no accountability. I'll oppose all ESA expansions and repeal the current program, redirecting funds to support public education through recurring state aid for teacher fully raises, smaller classes, and high-need students in HD-142. If ESAs persist, spending must be subject to full taxpayer accountability, mandatory audits, standardized testing, nondiscrimination policies, and bans on profit-taking—public money demands public oversight. Public schools are our future—I'll keep dollars there.

5. Educator Pay and Benefits:

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 strongly support a state-funded across-the-board pay raise for all Texas educators—teachers, aides, bus drivers, cafeteria workers, and support staff. Texas ranks near the bottom in educator pay (~$10,000 below the national average), forcing one-third to work second jobs amid shortages that hurt HD-142's majority Black and Latino students, who face 20% poverty. HB 2's targeted raises were insufficient; I'll fight for recurring increases, fully state-funded by closing corporate loopholes, to reach national averages and keep up with inflation. All educators keep schools running—they deserve competitive, dignified pay without local tax burdens.

To ensure educator compensation keeps pace with inflation and remains competitive, I'll advocate for recurring, inflation-indexed state-funded raises fully funded by sustainable revenue, such as closing corporate loopholes, not one-time boosts that increase net pay. In HD-142, where teacher shortages hit majority Black and Latino schools hardest amid 20% poverty, competitive pay retains talent. It attracts the best—our kids deserve educators who aren't forced to second jobs.

6. Educator Health Care:

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?

To address the affordability and sustainability of educator health care in TRS-ActiveCare and TRS-Care, I’ll fight to dramatically increase the state’s contribution—unchanged at $75/month since 2002—to cover meaningful premiums and family plans, funded recurringly via closed corporate loopholes. One-time boosts like 2025's $369 million aren't enough; premiums eat raises, forcing retirees and active teachers into impossible choices. In HD-142, where educators serve majority Black and Latino students amid 20% poverty, this crisis drives shortages—I'll prioritize preventive care, mental health, and culturally competent options to retain talent and ensure no educator chooses between health and livelihood. Sustainable funding means dignity for those who built our future.

7. Retirement Security:

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) should remain a defined-benefit pension plan for all current and future members. TRS provides a guaranteed, stable retirement income for educators, especially critical given that the majority of Texas school employees do not participate in Social Security and have no other reliable retirement safety net. A defined-benefit structure protects retirees from market volatility. It ensures predictability, whereas switching to a defined-contribution or hybrid model would place the burden of investment risk entirely on individuals. Texas educators have devoted their careers to serving our children, often for modest pay, and they deserve the financial security a defined-benefit pension provides. We must honor that promise and resist efforts to weaken or privatize TRS.

8. Accountability and Assessment Reform:

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 play a diagnostic role in evaluating students, teachers, and schools—identifying strengths/weaknesses to inform instruction and support, not high-stakes punishment that narrows curricula and stresses kids. HB 8's through-year model adds unnecessary burden without fixing underfunding or inequities. Test results should not continue determining A–F ratings or teacher pay, as they're invalid for individual performance (per American Academy of Sciences) and ignore poverty, ELL, or special needs in HD-142.

9. Parental Rights and Community Voice:

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?

The appropriate balance between parental rights and broader community priorities in education is strong parental involvement, professional deference to educators, and community consensus on core standards. Individual parents should have input on their child's learning (e.g., opt-outs for sensitive topics with alternatives) and access to transparent curricula. Still, policies must reflect the district's diverse needs—ensuring inclusive, evidence-based education for all students without allowing one family's wishes to restrict others' access to honest history, science, or equity topics. In HD-142, where the majority of Black and Latino families value truth and opportunity, I'll protect educator expertise against politicized bans (e.g., book restrictions) while fostering parent councils for collaboration—not division. Educators know best how to teach; parents know their kids—together, with community guidance, we build schools that serve everyone.

10. School Safety:

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?

To make schools safer and ensure the state provides adequate funding to meet safety mandates, I support a multifaceted approach that prioritizes prevention, mental health, infrastructure, and clear accountability. This includes increasing funding for licensed school counselors, social workers, and school-based mental health services to address issues before they escalate proactively. The state should also fully fund the implementation of security upgrades, such as secure entryways, communication systems, and emergency response plans, rather than mandating expensive requirements without providing the necessary financial support. School safety must also involve regular training and coordination with local law enforcement and first responders. Importantly, any safety strategy should maintain a nurturing school climate and avoid over-policing or criminalizing student behavior. Adequate and equitable state funding is essential so that all school districts, especially those in underserved areas, can implement safety protocols without diverting resources from academics or student services.

11. Curriculum and Local Control:

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 proper role of the State Board of Education (SBOE) is to establish broad curriculum standards that reflect core academic knowledge and skills all Texas students should master, ensuring consistency and quality across the state. The Texas Education Agency (TEA) should implement those standards by providing guidance, technical support, and oversight, and by vetting and approving a range of instructional materials aligned with them. However, local school districts must retain the authority and flexibility to select the instructional materials and curricula that best fit their students’ needs, priorities, and community values. This balance ensures statewide academic rigor while respecting local control and educational diversity.

12. Educator Rights and Professional Associations:

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?

I support allowing educators and other public employees to join professional associations like ATPE voluntarily and have their membership dues deducted from their paychecks. This right empowers employees to participate in professional organizations that provide valuable training, legal support, and advocacy, without any cost to taxpayers. It’s a matter of freedom of association and workplace fairness. Preventing payroll deductions for membership dues would be an unnecessary government intrusion into the voluntary decisions of public servants, and it would undermine the vital role these associations play in supporting our educators and strengthening public education.