KTBB News, Weather, Talk

AUSTIN (AP) – Aspiring Texas psychologists hope to earn certification and start work faster under a new licensing examination that would be created by the state. The plan, which is catching the eye of other states, calls for Texas boards to conduct state certification tests, eliminating the need for more expensive and time-intensive national certification tests.

This year, the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists moved to begin researching the cost of a cheaper state exam instead of requiring applicants to take a new $450 “skills” test offered by the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards.

Sarah Lorenz, a licensed professional counselor in Texas, told the state board last month that Texas is facing a severe shortage of mental health providers and dropping an additional test will not do enough to help.

“We need to fix this provider shortage crisis,” Lorenz said, suggesting that the state might even need to lower the threshold for a passing score to get more people into the profession.

The health care industry overall is facing an issue with licensing as various studies have found the length and expense of certification have adverse consequences.

Psychologist applicants already take a required $800 knowledge exam from the national board. The national board approved the new skills exam in 2016, but it notified states last October that the skills exam would now be required to complete certification by the national body.

This additional skills test was designed to weed out applicants who lacked the skills to work in a clinical setting. However, the licensing board for Texas views this step as unnecessary.

“Show me the unqualified people, this avalanche of unqualified people entering the field, because that is not the case,” said John Bielamowicz, the presiding member of the state psychologists’ licensing board.

Texas is the first licensing board in the nation to consider an alternative to the national exam.

“We would prefer to keep things exactly as they are, but that’s not an option anymore,” said Bielamowicz, adding, “We didn’t have to do this. We don’t want to do this. And there is certainly a downside to it, but we have to do something.”

Currently, Texas licensed psychologists must have a doctoral degree and pass three exams: the $800 knowledge exam by the national testing board, a $210 jurisprudence test, and a $320 oral exam. This is in addition to the $340 a prospective psychologist must pay to do the required 3,500 hours of supervised work. Now the national testing agency wants to add a $450 skills test.

Any failure requires a candidate to retake an exam and pay the price again. A number of mental health providers testified to the board that they have spent thousands of dollars trying to pass the current knowledge exam, and said that adding anything else can be costly.

“Our legislators gave us a directive after Uvalde to reduce or eliminate unnecessary barriers and streamline the process to get more people into the mental health profession,” Bielamowicz said. “Adopting another test is the opposite of this.”

Bielamowicz said the relationship between the state’s licensing board and the national board – ASPPB – has degraded to a point where he can’t see it being mended.

“ASPPB has, with the benefit of hindsight, deliberately and strategically run the clock on us for maximum advantage,” Bielamowicz said. “They turned the screws on us and other states and put us in an impossible position. There has been so much trust broken.”

The Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council this summer sent a letter to the Federal Trade Commission saying the national board has violated federal antitrust laws by updating the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology to include a second skills test that will go into effect in 2026 without approval and input from the states.

The national board has denied these claims and stated that the allegations against it ignore the long development history and justifications behind the additional test, which is consistent with every other doctoral-level health service licensure examination in the United States and misunderstands antitrust law principles.

The new version of the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology test “is not a pretextual effort to drive revenue,” the national board said in a statement. “The development of the Part 2-Skills component of the EPPP is the result of a nearly 15-year, member-driven effort to ensure that the EPPP continues to effectively measure entry-level competence through the inclusion of skill-based assessment.”

However, organizations like the Oklahoma Psychological Association are also starting to join the fight against the national board’s additional test requirements.

“As advocates for psychology as a science and profession in Oklahoma, we believe the EPPP Part 2 for licensure would serve as a detriment and a deterrent to mental health services,” Joseph James, president of the Oklahoma Psychological Association, said in a statement.

James said the financial burden on trainees and the need for more research on an additional test should make states hesitant to accept this requirement.

“We have spoken with representatives from boards across the country and found that we are not alone in our concerns,” James said.

Bielamowicz confirmed that Oklahoma representatives have contacted Texas colleagues about their effort to create a new test and that he has been encouraged by some of what he has heard from other states about the latest test requirements. He said he plans to discuss their plans at their board meeting on Thursday.

“This issue has really united states that don’t necessarily have similar politics,” Bielamowicz said, mentioning he has heard public comments in New York against the additional test. “There’s a lot of passionate opinions that this is not the right course for a lot of states, not just Texas.”

Chanelle Batiste, a mental health provider in Louisiana and a representative of an equity advocacy group called Radical Psychologists, told the state licensing board last month that they are encouraging other states to take Texas’s steps.

“The damage that part two will do to getting a license needs to be discussed,” she said.

Bielamowicz said this potential collaboration between states is crucial.

“While Texas is leading the way,” he said, “Nothing about this effort says this is the Texas test, and it’s ours, and no one can have it. We have had a lot of conversations with state boards and leaders who are running training programs at various universities, who have shown a lot of interest in participating across state lines on what this test would look like and what would be on it.”

Bielamowicz said Texas’s creation of its test will come with a series of challenges that need to be addressed, including reciprocity and interstate portability.

“Those are solvable problems, so I’m not afraid of solving them,” he said, “but it certainly introduces some things we’ll have to tackle.”

The price tag for creating a test is also a hurdle, but Bielamowicz is confident lawmakers will provide what is needed if asked. He said he expects to tell lawmakers the situation for the first time during a Senate committee hearing for Health and Human Services.

“It will be legislators’ prerogative to tell us to stand down,” he said. “If they don’t think that we should do this, then they’re not going to fund it.”

UVALDE (AP) – U.S. Border Patrol agents who rushed to the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, in 2022 failed to establish command and had inadequate training to confront what became one of the nation’s deadliest classroom attacks, according to a federal report released Thursday. But investigators concluded the agents did not violate rules and no disciplinary action was recommended.

The roughly 200-page report from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Office of Professional Responsibility does not assign overarching blame for the hesitant police response at Robb Elementary School, where a teenage gunman with an AR-style rifle killed 19 students and two teachers inside a fourth-grade classroom. Nearly 200 U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers were involved in the response, more than any other law enforcement agency.

The gunman was inside the classroom for more than 70 minutes before a tactical team, led by Border Patrol, went inside and killed the shooter.

Much of the report — which the agency says was initiated to “provide transparency and accountability” — retells the chaos, confusion and numerous police missteps that other scathing government reports have already laid bare. Some victims’ family members bristled over federal investigators identifying no one deserving of discipline.

“The failure of arriving law enforcement personnel to establish identifiable incident management or command and control protocols led to a disorganized response to the Robb Elementary School shooting,” the report stated. “No law enforcement official ever clearly established command at the school during the incident, leading to delays, inaction, and potentially further loss of life.”

Customs and Border Protection said in a statement that investigators “concluded none of the CBP personnel operating at the scene were found to have violated any rule, regulation, or law, and no CBP personnel were referred for disciplinary action.”

Families of the victims have long sought accountability for the slow law enforcement response.

Jesse Rizo, whose niece Jacklyn Cazares was one of the students killed, said that while he hadn’t seen the report, he was briefed by family members and was disappointed to hear that it held no one accountable.

“We’ve expected certain outcomes after these investigations, and it’s been letdown after letdown,” said Rizo, a member of Uvalde’s school board.

Federal officials said the report aimed to determine if agents complied with relevant rules and laws, and if anything could improve their performance in the future.

The report catalogs an array of breakdowns and paints a scene of disorder.

One Border Patrol agent said he couldn’t determine who was in command because there were so many agencies. Another agent told investigators he was working an overtime shift when he rushed to the school and was allegedly told by a state trooper, “The chief is in the room with the guy.” He said that led him to believe it was a standoff, so he began directing traffic.

Some Border Patrol agents drove more than 70 miles (113 kilometers) to the school, which is located near the U.S-Mexico border. One agent told investigators the scene looked “like a Hollywood movie with all the lights and chaos.” Another supervisor said he looked for a command post but no one knew where it was.

According to messages between agents in the Border Patrol’s tactical unit, one agent wrote at 11:44 a.m., “Get everyone to Robb school in Uvalde. There’s a possble/shooting guy with AK/AR.” A minute later, an agent sends a message: “Barricaded subject is what their calling it.”

Among the findings in the report was that agents’ active shooter training had not addressed dealing with a shooter behind a locked door or assessing medical needs.

Nearly 400 local, state and federal officers responded, including over 90 state police officials. Multiple federal and state investigations have laid bare cascading problems in law enforcement training, communication, leadership and technology, and questioned whether officers prioritized their own lives over those of children and teachers.

Two of the responding officers now face criminal charges. Former Uvalde school Police Chief Pete Arredondo and former school officer Adrian Gonzales have pleaded not guilty to multiple charges of child abandonment and endangerment. Last week, Arredondo asked a judge to throw out the indictment. He has said he should not have been considered the incident commander and has been “scapegoated” into shouldering the blame for law enforcement failures that day.

Last month, the city released a massive collection of audio and video recording from the day of the shooting, including 911 calls from students inside the classroom. On Wednesday, Uvalde police said an employee was put on paid leave after the department discovered additional video that has not yet been made public. The city has not said what the video shows.

AUSTIN – CBS news reports that Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick has issued a second round of directives for the Texas Senate, asking lawmakers to consider legislation that could change how the state does runoff elections, prevent protestors from wearing face masks, and further eliminate any lingering D.E.I. policies that may still exist in higher education. Since the Texas Legislature only meets biennially, there’s a lot of work to be done before the start of a legislative session. In April, Patrick issued more than 50 directives, and on Tuesday he added 21 more. It includes a focused spread of items from state affairs and finance to criminal justice and education.

Of note, Patrick wants to see lawmakers “examine programs and certificates” within colleges and universities that still have Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies and “expose” them as being harmful to the state’s workforce interests. “It’s a signal from the lieutenant governor that he wants the Senate to look at these institutions and see if they’re following through and complying with legislation that was passed in 2023.” Dr. Jones said. Texas House Representative Brian Harrison says he applauds Patrick’s priorities. He wants to see the legislature use taxpayer dollars wisely. “They’re they are having to spend too much of their income in taxes, and the last thing we should be doing is forcing them to subsidize things that are not only against their values, but that do not help the workforce of tomorrow and do not help strengthen the economy.” Rep. Harrison said. Rep. Harrison says it’s a real concern that colleges and universities are skirting the law entirely, or just calling D.E.I. something else, and points to universities like Texas A&M or the University of Texas at Dallas. “They might have been a little bit too broad, and some of our higher education institutes might be exploiting that instead of educating students, using those tax dollars for liberal indoctrination, and we’ve got to make sure that that’s not happening.” Rep. Harrison said.

DALLAS – KUT reports that on a Sunday earlier this month, Pastor Robert Jeffress began his sermon at First Baptist Dallas with a sentiment that might resonate with everyone at this point in election season. “Today, we’re going to talk about politics,” said Jeffress. “Yuck!” Jeffress went on to tell his congregation, which has around 16,000 members, that religion and politics are inseparable. “Government is God’s creation. Genesis Chapter 9. After the flood God gave to Noah the building block of government,” said Jeffers. The connection between the two can be seen everywhere: We pledge allegiance to “one nation under God.” Most swearing-in ceremonies for public officials involve putting one’s hand on a Bible or another holy text. And a faith leader is usually invited to give an opening prayer or blessing before the Texas Legislature meets for a session. That connection goes beyond the ceremonial, with faith — most often Christianity — impacting actual policy decisions. Just this week, the Texas State Board of Education met to discuss a newly proposed elementary school reading curriculum that includes Bible stories.

A Texas law that went into effect last year now allows members of the clergy to volunteer or be hired as school counselors. Religion was also invoked by Texas’ Republican lawmakers backing a bill that banned gender-affirming care in the state. And Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick recently said he’d try, once again, to pass a bill that would require the 10 Commandments to be displayed in public schools. Those are just a few examples. Andrea Hatcher, a professor of political science at The University of the South, traces the GOP’s embrace of religion back to the 1970s. “The Christian right didn’t just happen organically,” said Hatcher. “It was a creation of religious elites and political elites that saw how religion could be leveraged by the Republican Party for political power to benefit them both.” Hatcher said that played out in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling overturning Roe v. Wade. “When you have six Catholics on the Supreme Court and then all of a sudden they vote a particular way that happens to align with their religious views,” said Hatcher. While one of those Catholics, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, voted against overturning Roe, Hatcher said the decision still leads “one to question whether that is individual religious beliefs affecting, shaping policy outcomes for a religiously pluralistic nation at large.”