I was thinking of titling this post “Libertarian Crackpots Take Charge of School Funding in New Hampshire” but decided to bite my tongue.
Garry Rayno, a writer for InDepthNH.org, reports that the Koch-funded plan to defund public schools in New Hampshire is a “success.” Not because most parents want to put their children in private or religious schools, but because the overwhelming majority of students using the new education freedom accounts are already enrolled in nonpublic schools. Thus, public funds are now underwriting private education. At some point, the public schools will shrink to be just one among many choices even though the people of New Hampshire never voted to abandon their community public schools. This is a theft of public dollars for private use.
By GARRY RAYNO, InDepthNH.org
The new education freedom account program is a success judging by the number of students participating in the first year.
More students are expected to participate in the second year and state education officials predict it will continue to grow into the future.
One of the most expansive school choice programs in the country, it was sold as a way for students and parents to find the best educational avenues to fit their student’s individual learning needs.
That would be wonderful and would fulfill the education department’s long-standing goal of individualized student pathways, but that is not what happened for a majority of students.
Instead the program has increased the state’s education spending while few students changed their learning environment.
The vast majority of students — around 85 percent — participating in the first year, did not attend public schools the year before. Instead they were in private or religious schools, or home schooled, or too young for school.
That does not change the learning environment for that 85 percent of students.
What did change under the program was the parents’ financial obligations, which were reduced thanks to the influx of state taxpayers’ money.
Department of Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut, a program advocate, told lawmakers the first year of freedom accounts would cost the state’s Education Trust Fund about $300,000 and the second year about $3.2 million. Instead the cost was close to $9 million this year.
Why the increase? Edelblut’s estimates were for students leaving traditional public schools to participate in alternative programs, not for those already in other programs applying for state help to cover the costs of private and religious schools, or home schooling.
Essentially most of the state money flowed through the parents to private and religious schools and for homeschooling costs all previously paid for by the parents or religious institutions.
When the program was first debated this term, the nonpartisan Legislative Budget Assistant’s office estimated the state’s exposure could be as high as $70 million if all the students in private or religious schools applied for grants.
The program provides grants to parents of students who earn no more than 300 percent of the federal poverty level or about $80,000 a year for a family of four.
You only have to qualify once, so if the next year your family makes $125,000, you still qualify and if you double that the next year, you still qualify.
Grants range from about $4,500 to $8,000 per student with the average the first year a little under $5,000 per student.
The money can be spent in any number of ways, for tuition, books and instructional programs, supplies, computers, individual instruction on a musical instrument, etc.
The money to pay for the freedom accounts comes from the Education Trust Fund established more than 20 years ago when the state overhauled its funding system after the Claremont II Supreme Court decision saying the then current system of relying on local property taxes with widely varying rates to pay for public education was unconstitutional because it violated the proportional and reasonable clause of the state constitution.
For most of its early years, the trust fund ran a deficit and state general fund money had to be added to meet the state’s education aid obligations.
In recent years the fund has had a surplus including this biennium. The state budget passed last year estimates a $54.4 million surplus at the end of last fiscal year June 30 and a $21 million surplus at the end of the 2023 fiscal year.
The surplus at the end of last fiscal year is much larger than that as the overall state revenue surplus is more than $400 million, but most of that has already been spent through legislation this year such as the $100 million settlement fund for the children abused at the Youth Detention Center.
The law establishing the freedom accounts has a provision if the education fund does not have enough money to cover the cost of the grants, the needed money will be withdrawn from general fund revenue without any action needed from the legislature or the governor.
Such a provision is extremely rare as lawmakers like to be able to determine how general funds are spent.
The number of students participating in the program the first year would probably not be so large if not for the American for Prosperity, an “education organization” funded by the Koch network and other like thinking libertarians who have longed advocated that public education tax money also pay for private and religious schools, homeschooling and charter schools.
The New Hampshire affiliate had a campaign ready to go when the freedom account legislation passed as part of the budget package last year. The group helped parents enroll their students in the program, many who were in private or religious schools or home schooled.
Last week the same organization held an “education fair” for parents to meet representatives of some of the organizations and groups approved to other alternative education programs under the freedom account program.
The fair was promoted by Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut who tweeted a photo from the fair, and the department had a booth there to promote its 603 Moment campaign on social media.
Others touting the fair included members of the House freedom caucus and others in the free state/libertarian wing of the GOP.
The fair is intended to help grow the program, meaning more state money will be drawn from the Education Trust Fund and ultimately the state’s general fund.
This is a well planned operation that only required the state to agree to a school choice program with few guardrails to begin taking the state down the road to greater educational “freedom” and less traditional public education.
The Koch network has recently developed a proposal to “reform” public education with one of its officials calling public education the “low hanging fruit.”
The reform would look a lot like what the freedom account program looks like and would shift resources as it does away from traditional public education to alternative pathways.
As the freedom account program grows, observers of the legislature know what will happen eventually.
As more and more education trust fund money is allocated, there will be pressure to reduce the amount of money going to traditional public education and, depending on which party is in control, to charter schools.
That is how public education becomes the low hanging fruit.
The education commissioner and others talk about the achievement gap between students from well off areas and minority students and those from low-income families.
Edelblut maintains that gap has not changed in 50 years despite numerous efforts on the federal and state level and says that is why education needs to change.
He downplays what the recent education funding commission made the centerpiece of its work, that the achievement gap is due to the resources available to students.
Students from property poor communities perform below students from property wealthy communities.
The economic disparity gap between students from property wealthy and property poor communities is larger now than it was when the Claremont lawsuit was filed 30 years ago.
Proponents of alternative education programs say it is not about spending more money, and the education funding commission said the same thing.
But the commission said the resources needed to be distributed differently, while the advocates for freedom accounts say it is about finding the right fit for a student.
Those advocates are saying the issue is not economic disparity.
Ultimately their goal is to make government smaller and they can accomplish that by disrupting traditional public education with lower cost, less regulated alternative programs.
Eventually traditional education will be small enough to be just one more alternative pathway for students among many.
That is why public education is the low-hanging fruit and freedom accounts are just the beginning.
The promoters of sending kids to private and charter schools with public funds define success as shifting students away from public schools not better outcomes for students.
“Eventually traditional education will be small enough to be just one more alternative pathway for students among many.” The actual corrected quote: Eventually traditional education will be small enough to be drowned in a bathtub of boiling sulphuric acid.
Libertarian Crackpots. Ha, ha, ha, how droll. Libertarian crackpot is a redundancy, it’s like saying crackpot crackpot. Libertarianism is a pathology, libertarians don’t believe in a commons or common good. It’s every man, woman and child for himself/herself, sink or swim, no soup for you and social Darwinism on steroids. If you want your kids educated in libertarian world, then homeschool or pay for your own kids’ educations at a religious or private school. To hell with publicly funded schools open to all the children at all times throughout the school year.
The attachment of money to parents in these accounts will benefit the burgeoning home school industry. Perhaps this is the ultimate goal of its purveyors.
Recently, a good friend raised the question:
“Why do people want to home school their children?”
This question was recently raised in a conversation. The answer has been so long in the making that it has not been a stable answer during the past 50 years I have encountered it.
I first encountered home schooling among the sick and mobile. When a kid had an illness that kept him out of school for long periods of time, the family often opted to do the job themselves. So also with the children of performers or the situation in which a child was in acting or musical performance that required travel.
Then I began to encounter those who had come to the view that the world was based too much on militarism. These pacificists often complained that their experience, especially in public schools was simply a preparation for the military. They complained that saying the pledge masked the horrors of Vietnam. They suggested that Marching bands rather than music without the marching was a subterfuge for training military people, and that the songs chosen by marching bands glorified martial behavior. They wanted their children out of this pernicious stew.
Then the rise of Christian fundamentalism got itself into the next generation. Students were schooled at home to avoid “humanism” and other catch phrases that painted public schools as cruel to fundamentalists. School prayer was forbidden. Students were taught evolution. Teachers were overtly hostile to Christians. The list went on.
Along the way was constant complaint that the schools were not teaching their own children at a high level. “My kid never has any homework.” became the rallying cry for other home school people.
I wonder what other reasons people give today for pulling their kids out of the school experience.
Sounds wonderful. If you want the people to agree with your point of view, and you have the money, you can pay them to agree with you. Good plan if you have the money.
Not sure the word libertarian fits. Sounds more like controlitarinism.
So, I’m a little confused by this; I’ll study it more closely. But when I was growing up in NH in the 70’s there was no state income tax. Nearly, if not 100%, of school revenues came from property taxes alone and as a consequence there was really only one school district, the interstate NH-VT school district where I grew up around Dartmouth College, that had any $ and any formidable school system at all.
I’m told a decade or more ago there was a concerted effort to conscript “libertarians” to literally, explicitly move to NH and take over the state. Which is amusing since the state always was “libertarian”, just in the northern=NE sense of the word and not in the western-states sense of the word. They’re quite difference. Be that as it may, there has been an extremely “manual” cadre of folks working for a long time to consciously and explicitly change the social and political culture there. It’s a small state and has always been fundamentally libertarian as in no-gov-is-too-much-gov.
So … I’m confused as to this being somehow a “takeover” of the public education setup in NH when it essentially was non-existent and entirely there for the taking for a long time now. It’s the private-school capital of America, best I can tell (that’s just a snarky comment I don’t know the statistics).
So anyway. ::sigh::. I agree this isn’t “libertarian”, certainly not as it used to be understood in northern NE. It’s just like Roy T says, “controliarinism”. It’s actually just insurrection. Cooptation. A literal coup of an entire state… that was available for taking for a long time anyway.
BTW, a lt has happened in the 50 years since I left so I bow to better-informed explanations. When I was a kid there NH was “ranked”, whatever that means, as 49 of 50 states in spending and “excellence” schools-wise. The governor, Meldrim Thompson, considered out school district part of “Bedlam City” and at one point refused to sit foot there (The HS girls wore miniskirts and showed what was beneath and that upset him. Lol.)
OK, having read the article more closely I see it references a court case against that former long-standing, 100% property-tax funded setup of NH’s education system. And that subsequently the “achievement” gap between that interstate, Dresden school district, has grown only larger. Not surprising. The state always was, and then was consciously pushed even more so to be, centered around essentially private schools. What happened is the Koch-libertarians formulated a plan to pay for that private schooling with public dollars, thereby leaching the public coffers.
My point is only that this has been being setup for years and years and years. It was essentially that way and pre-setup before the setup began. The real question is why the legislative analysts were so incredibly unaware* of this as to have estimated takers in the program would be the few, desperately poor kids that populate the public system as opposed to the preponderance of everyone else, many of whom moved to the state in explicit anticipation of this. Where on earth were they??
Also important to note is that the state legislature that would have been voting on this, is largely comprised of the very families who are self-benefiting from it. Basically, every third person in NH is in the state legislature. And that will mean a significant number of this program’s beneficiaries. Can you say self-dealing?
*Maybe because staff analysts are perhaps, as is often the case here in California, young things without kids and unaware of this dynamic from the outset? Maybe? ==pure speculation and not intended as a slam on any given legislative analyst….
When charters were first proposed, it was to help POOR children that the public schools were failing. This has NOT been the case – they are spending the money on students that are already in private schools and not failing. We should prioritize sending the students who are having the most trouble in the public system to these schools who are “so much better” Oddly enough, they don’t want these students! We hear that they don’t want any special needs children because they don’t have those programs. Fine. The special needs programs can be moved to the private schools, and they can support the mainstreaming and inclusion programs into their classrooms. Once they have proven their point about how much better they do, we can start getting more money for more students. People wanting government money should go through yearly qualifications and paperwork. My brother is in temporary need of the SNAP program. In order to get about $200 per month in food stamps, we had to have a social worker help us through all the paperwork and red tape. With her, we waited on hold 2 hours twice to get some of the application process handled. I feel that this is the LEAST that these parents should be able to do each year. We can understaff the application procedure to help with this. They should also fill out several pages of paperwork for each and every expenditure – computers? the public kids aren’t getting those! NO services that are not provided to those in the public schools should be paid for non – public students – Also it is a travesty that this money is being taken without giving the citizens the opportunity to vote.