Archives for category: Nebraska

Yesterday, I posted Peter Greene’s post about the voucher battle in Nebraska. Republicans in the state legislature really want vouchers. Voters really don’t want vouchers. I no as recent referendum, Nebraska voters overturned the state’s voucher program. That shoukd have been the end of the story, but it wasn’t. The Republican Governor and legislature decided to ignore the voters and participate in Trump’s voucher plan.

But then Peter discovered the battle was not over.

He wrote an update:

As we noted last week, some Nebraska fans of taxpayer-funded vouchers tried–again–to get enact vouchers, this time through the sneaky technique of putting them in the budget. Instead of getting their vouchers, they raised a controversy that sank the entire budget.

State Sen. Rob Clements of Elmwood, Appropriations Committee chair, removed the $3.5 million of voucher money, meant to bridg the gap between the end of the state’s voucher program that was repealed by voters, and the beginning of the federal voucher system that Governor Pillen opted into (the voters get no say on that one). And lots of people were upset, as reported by the Nebraska Examiner.

Arguments for the voucher money were baloney. Sen. Christy Armendariz of Omaha argued that the vouchers were needed to protect poor kids who might be “kicked out” of public school. State Sen. Brad von Gillern of the Elkhorn area expressed frustration toward opponents, calling it hypocritical to oppose the measure when many of the same senators argue the state isn’t doing enough to help the poor.

“Shame on you,” von Gillern said. “If you make a pitch for poor people for any other reason, and you can’t support this, you’re a hypocrite.”

Except that vouchers are used mostly by wealthy, already-in-private-school students, and it’s the private schools that get to pick their students, not vice versa. It is telling that the voucher crowd did not have anecdotes of poor children who had been kicked out of public school and had been rescued by vouchers. The program ran all this year, so those stories, if real, should have been easy enough to locate.

Sen. Myron Dorn of Adams, the only Republican on Appropriations to oppose the $3.5 million in vouchers, criticized focus on this one issue, and also criticized the whole sneaky business of trying to slip this policy into the budget when there is no bill or law behind it. 

Said Tim Royers, president of Nebraska State Education Association–

This standoff is exactly why you don’t try and pass policy through the budget, especially when that policy is to extend an incredibly unpopular program that was repealed by voters in the most recent election. … We hope enough can come together and negotiate a path forward that keeps vouchers out of the budget.

So Nebraska voucherphiles managed to sink the state budget over a program that voters had already voted down. That’s a bold stance to take and one can hope that Nebraska voters will deliver the reward they so richly deserve. It’s yet another reminder, in a backhand way, that no matter how hard voucherphiles insist to the contrary, supporting taxpayer-funded school vouchers is not actually a winning political issue.

Peter Greene retired after 39 years of teaching, and now is the best-informed and most prolific writer about misguided and sometimes malicious efforts to “reform” public schools.

Peter has his own blog–Curmudgucation–and also writes a column about reform frauds for FORBES.

In this post, he tells the remarkable and unsavory story of vouchers in Nebraska. Nebraska is a solid red state, but its voters don’t want vouchers. Rural legislators–even Republicans–know it’s a waste of money and are sure to defund their public schools.

But the voucher-pushers keep looking for clever ways to bypass the voters, who have made it clear that they don’t want vouchers.

Peter Greene writes:

Nebraska’s voucher fans are bound and determined, like legislators in many states, to get around the voters so they can get vouchers installed.

In May of 2023, Nebraska’s Governor Jim Pillen signed into law LB 753, creating tax credit vouchers for subsidizing private schools.

The concept has been floated in Nebraska before, notably turning up more than once in 2022’s session. In 2023, it finally progressed through the legislature. But NSEA political action director Brian Nikkelson told the Nebraska Examiner that the public did not support the vouchers, and if the bill was passed, there would be a petition drive to force the bill to go on the ballot for voters to decide.

And so there was. It was a heck of a battle, with the pro-voucher forces have attracting a mountain of money, some of it from outside the state. Paul Hammel at the Nebraska Examiner reported that big money contributors include C.L. Werner, an Omaha-based trucking company executive ($100,000), Tom Peed and his son Shawn of a Lincoln publishing company ($75,000 each), and former Nebraska governor U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts ($25,000). Governor Pillen himself has contributed $100,000 to the campaign to save vouchers from a vote.

At the same time, Hammel reported, the American Federation for Children, the school choice advocacy group founded by Betsy DeVos, has contributed $103,000 in in-kind services and $583,000 in cash to the campaign.

It didn’t matter. Support Our Schools needed 60,000 signatures to force a referendum. They ended up with about twice that number (that’s roughly 10% of all eligible voters in the state). So this November, the voters of Nebraska were supposed to have their say. So you’d expect that voucher fans, who keep telling us how much everyone loves vouchers, would just sit back, secure in the knowledge that their program would win the referendum handily.

Well, no.

Instead, legislators cooked up LB 1402. This bill proposed to repeal the Opportunity Scholarships that were created under LB 753, and then to replace them with a new version of Opportunity Scholarships. This version would have been an education savings account (ESA) style super-voucher that hands over taxpayer money to send a student to a private or parochial school. It was more sketchy than last year’s bill because it appropriates state funds (rather than tax-credited contributions) to pay for the vouchers.

But mostly what it did it render the petition drive moot, because it repealed the version of vouchers that the public was going to vote on. “Ha,” they apparently thought. “That’ll stop those damned voters.”

In 67 days, the coalition of opponents gathered the necessary signatures—again. That repeal passed in November 2024, with 45 out of 49 legislative districts voting to repeal, and Nebraska’s voucher law was toast. The voters had sent a clear and unequivocal message.

Surely the state’s leaders would say, “Well, the voters have spoken, so that’s that.”

Fat chance.

Voucherphiles were back with a new proposal in January 2025. “I’m not dissuaded by the fact that it was defeated at the ballot box,” said freshman State Sen. Tony Sorrentino of Omaha.

To nobody’s surprise, Governor Jim Pillen was first to jump on the as-yet-rule-free federal school voucher proposal. Okay, it was a small surprise, because Nebraska is not known for grabbing federal dollars, but hey– this is Free Federal Money for private schools. In fact, U.S. Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., helped Congress usher the tax credits provision onto President Donald Trump’s desk, even though his home district was among those shooting down vouchers in 2024.

Pillen’s new idea is to sell vouchers for the “gap” year, the year between the time when Nebraska’s vouchers are required to end and the time when the federal vouchers are supposed to kick in. The proposal is being sent through the state’s Labor Department rather than the Department of Education because that would skirt the requirement for any sort of hearing or debate, probably because voucherphiles have a pretty good idea of how that would go.

Nebraska is one of those states where rural Republicans have opposed all attempts at vouchers, and they aren’t sounding any friendlier about this one. Zach Wendling at Nebraska Examiner talked to State Sen. Tom Brandt of Plymouth, a Republican who opposed Linehan’s previous proposals; he said he is opposed to using any public money for private school choice. He’s still waiting to see how the federal tax credit program includes public schools (because, remember, there are no actual rules yet attached to the federal voucher program).

“The referendum simply eliminated that. Period, end of story,” he continued on the state policy. “There’s no other interpretation you can draw from that.”

The gap funding would cost about $5 million for around 2,500 students. Of course, with no rules in place, it’s possible that not all of Nebraska’s current voucher students would qualify for federal vouchers. Nor can we predict what slice of the federal money pie Nebraska would be entitled to. If it comes to that, we could expect voucherphiles to argue that more gap funding is needed to cover new gaps, or maybe to expand above and beyond the federal offerings.

Nebraska voucher fans are making a lot of “think of the children” noises, but families have plenty of time to look for new arrangements (i.e. finding the student a new school or going back to paying the full tuition with their own money).

This is the same story we’ve seen over and over again. Vouchers never win when voters have a chance to be heard. Every single taxpayer-funded voucher program in this country has been created without giving the taxpayers a say or ignoring the say they had already said. Taxpayer-funded vouchers are all the result of legislators backed by deep-pocketed voucher fans deciding they are going to inflict these on the taxpayers. Nebraska’s taxpayers just happen to have a few more tools to fight back with, but Nebraska’s voucherphiles just keep looking for a way to avoid that whole pesky democracy thing.

Robert Kuttner, editor of The American Prospect, reported this shocking story:

President Trump stunned Nebraskans today with his demand that the state change the name of its capital, Lincoln, or lose federal funding.

“Lincoln was the original DEI president,” Trump said on his site Truth Social. “Not only did he give racial preferences to former slaves in his land grab program of forty acres and a mule. He sent the Union Army to occupy the South to prohibit most white people from voting and sponsored birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, which has been abused ever since.”

“I never really liked the guy,” Trump added. “Race relations were fine in the South until Lincoln started a totally unnecessary Civil War. If he understood real estate, he could have made a deal.”

Trump proposed that the name of the state capital be changed from Lincoln to Hayes, in honor of Rutherford B. Hayes, the president who ended Reconstruction in the corrupt Compromise of 1877. “Hayes was a truly great man,” Trump said. “He worked with leaders of both parties to prevent discrimination against white people.”

The reaction of Nebraska leaders was guarded. “We love President Trump,” said Gov. Jim Pillen, a Republican. “But folks around here kind of like the name of our state capital.” In the 2024 election, Trump beat Kamala Harris in Nebraska by a margin of 59.6 to 39.1 percent.

Lincoln Mayor Leirion Gaylor Baird, a Democrat and a graduate of Yale and Oxford, pointed to the odd timing. “This is April Fools’ Day,” she said. “This has to be a spoof.”

I just made a donation to The American Prospect to keep it thriving as a powerful voice against fascism.

Voters in Nebraska voted against using public funds to pay for private schools.

LINCOLN — Voters on Tuesday resoundingly rejected Nebraska’s new school voucher or scholarship program, steering public dollars spent to public schools.

Supporters of using state tax dollars to offset the costs of a private K-12 education have argued that families unhappy with their public schools need more options.

But rural and urban supporters of public schools, the Nebraska State Education Association and private foundations supporting public schools won the day.

Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, said he was proud to see right- and left-leaning counties agree that vouchers were the wrong choice.

“It confirms what we knew, the majority of Nebraskans don’t want public dollars going to private schools,” Royers said. “What really stood out to me is the consistency.”

Royers hopes state senators move on

Royers said he is hopeful that state senators will follow the will of the voters and move onto other more pressing issues in education that teachers and parents can work on together.

Support Our Schools argued that diverting even small amounts of public money toward private K-12 schools with a scholarship program or vouchers risked long-term support for public education.

They pointed to the experiences in other states with voucher programs, including neighboring Iowa, which has seen the national rankings of its public schools slide since that program began.

They argued that school choice programs typically end up largely benefiting the people already making the choice to send their children to private schools.

And they said such programs risked creating greater concentrations of poverty in some schools by draining them of students who often act as stabilizing force

I have been puzzling over this question since the Democratic National Convention.

Like most people, I didn’t know much about Kamala Harris when she became Vice President. Now that I have seen her speak, now that I saw her debate Trump, I feel very energized to support her campaign for the Presidency.

She is smart, well informed, experienced, committed to the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law. She is thoughtful and composed. She laughs, she smiles, she seems like a kind and thoughtful person. She is well prepared for the presidency, having won election as the District Attorney of San Francisco, as Attorney General of the State of California, as U.S. Senator from California, and as Vice-President of the United States since Joe Biden and she were elected in 2020.

Her opponent is a bundle of equal parts narcissism and hatred. He likes men. He likes white men. He likes to play tough guy. He looks on women as sex objects and feather heads. He doesn’t respect women.

He is crude, vulgar, without a shred of the dignity we expect from a president. The language he uses to ridicule and insult others is vile.

He is a racist, a misogynist, a xenophobe, and a Christian nationalist (without being a practicing Christian).

He is a sexual predator. He is known for not paying people to whom he owes money for services rendered. He has gone through six bankruptcies.

He is ignorant. His former aides say he has never read the Constitution. He is driven by his massive ego. He wants everyone to say he’s the best, the greatest, and there’s never been anyone as great as him.

He is a convicted felon, convicted on 34 counts of business fraud in New York. He was found guilty by a jury in New York of defaming E. Jean Carroll, who accused him of sexually assaulting her many years ago. He was ordered to pay her more than $90 million for continuing to defame her. That judgment is on appeal.

Other trials are pending.

When he lost the 2020 election, he refused to accept his defeat. He schemed to overturn the election by various ploys. He summoned a mob of his fans to Washington on January 6, 2021, the day that Congress gathered for the ceremonial certification of the election. Trump encouraged them to march on the U.S. Capitol, “peaceably….(but) fight like hell.” They did fight like hell. They battered their way into the Capitol, smashing windows and doors, beating law officers, vandalizing the building and its offices, while hunting for Vice President Mike Pence and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The outnumbered law officers held them off to protect the members of Congress. Many of them were brutally beaten. Some later died. What if the mob had reached the members of Congress? What if they had captured Pence and Pelosi?

It was the most shameful day of our national history. A President encouraging a mob to sack the Capitol and overturn the Constitution.

Ever since that disgraceful day, Trump has reiterated that the election was stolen from him, even though it wasn’t close. He has undermined faith in the electoral process, faith in the judiciary, faith in the law.

These are the two candidates: Kamala Harris and Donald Trump.

Why is this election close?

This is quite a remarkable story. Samuel Freedman wrote in the New York Times in 2008 about a social studies teacher in Alliance, Nebraska. He wrote about a world geography class in 1993 where students learned about genocide. Their teacher was Tim Walz.

After studying the circumstances that set the climate for horrific mass murder, Mr. Walz gave a final exam in which the students identified a country where genocide might happen. They picked Rwanda. Mr. Walz was a good teacher.

The story in 2008 begins:

In 1993, when Travis Hofmann was a freshman of 15, he had traveled little beyond the sand hills that surrounded his hometown, Alliance, Neb. He was the son of a railroad engineer, a trumpeter in the high school band, with a part-time job changing the marquee and running the projector at the local movie theater. 

In Travis’s class in global geography at Alliance High School, however, the teacher introduced the outside world with the word and concept of genocide. The teacher, Tim Walz, was determined that even in this isolated place, perhaps especially in this isolated place, this county seat of 9,000 that was hours away from any city in any direction, the students should learn how and why a society can descend into mass murder.

Mr. Walz had already taught for a year in China, and he brought the world into his classroom in the form of African thumb pianos and Tibetan singing bowls. For the global geography class, he devised something far more ambitious than what the curriculum easily could have been — the identification and memorization of capitals, mountain ranges and major rivers. It was more ambitious, too, than a unit solely on the Holocaust of the sort many states have required.

“The Holocaust is taught too often purely as a historical event, an anomaly, a moment in time,” Mr. Walz said in a recent interview, recalling his approach. “Students understood what had happened and that it was terrible and that the people who did this were monsters.

“The problem is,” he continued, “that relieves us of responsibility. Obviously, the mastermind was sociopathic, but on the scale for it to happen, there had to be a lot of people in the country who chose to go down that path. You have to make the intellectual leap to figure out the reasons why.”

So Mr. Walz took his students — Brandon Bell, the wrestler; Beth Taylor, the cheerleader; Lanae Merwin, the quiet girl always reading some book about Queen Elizabeth; and all the other children of mechanics, secretaries and a town dentist — and assigned them to study the conditions associated with mass murder. What factors, he asked them to determine, had been present when Germans slaughtered Jews, Turks murdered Armenians, the Khmer Rouge ravaged their Cambodian countrymen?

“It was different and unusual, certainly not a project you’d be expecting,” Mr. Hofmann, now 31, of Phoenix, remembered recently of the class. “The biggest part was just the freedom to explore things. No matter how abnormal or far-fetched an idea might sound, you can form an opinion. Instead of just going in and having a teacher say, ‘Here’s information, learn it, know it, you’ll be tested on it,’ it was, ‘Here’s an idea, run with it.’ ”

For nine weeks through the winter and early spring that school year, through the howling blizzards and the planting of the first alfalfa on the plains, the class pored over data about economics, natural resources and ethnic composition. They read about civil war, colonialism and totalitarian ideology. They worked with reference books and scholarly reports, long before conducting research took place instantly online. 

Most, like Mr. Hofmann, had spent their entire lives in and near Alliance. A few had traveled to Washington, D.C., with the school marching band. A few had driven four hours to Denver to buy the new Nirvana CD. Mostly, though, the outside world was a place they built, under Mr. Walz’s tutelage, in their own brains. 

When the students finished with the past, Mr. Walz gave a final exam of sorts. He listed about a dozen current nations — Yugoslavia, Congo, some former Soviet republics among them — and asked the class as a whole to decide which was at the greatest risk of sliding into genocide.

Their answer was: Rwanda. The evidence was the ethnic divide between Hutus and Tutsis, the favoritism toward Tutsis shown by the Belgian colonial regime, and the previous outbreaks of tribal violence. Mr. Walz awarded high marks.

Then summer arrived and school let out. The students did what teenagers did in Alliance over the summer. They water-skied at the reservoir, swam in the Bridgeport sand pits and mostly “cruised the Butte,” endlessly driving up and down Box Butte Avenue.

THE next April, in 1994, Mr. Walz heard news reports of a plane carrying the Rwandan president, Juvenal Habyarimana, being shot down. He told himself at the time, “This is not going to end up good.”

It did not. Over the next three months, militant Hutus killed 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus. The reports reached even The Alliance Times-Herald, the local daily newspaper. Mr. Walz’s students, now juniors, saw their prophecy made into flesh and blood.

“It was terribly chilling,” Lanae Merwin, now 31, of Hastings, Neb., recalled in a recent interview. “But, to us, it wasn’t totally surprising. We’d discussed it in class and it was happening. Though you don’t want a prediction like that to come true.”

Mr. Hofmann remembered having a similar reaction. “It was just strange to know that something was discussed not too long before that could actually happen,” he said. “Just a surreal feeling. To everyone else, it’s 8,000 miles away — no one cares. How can you grasp it? But to us, it was, we talked about it. For us, it was something that reached us directly.”

Years have passed. Mr. Walz left Alliance and moved to his wife’s home state, Minnesota; he is the only active teacher now serving in the United States Congress. His former geography students have moved as adults to Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and New York. Ms. Taylor lived in Poland for a while.

Now, in 2008, April has come again. It is, among other things, the month for genocide remembrance — the month when Rwanda was convulsed, when the Khmer Rouge conquered Cambodia, when Armenians commemorate what they call the Great Catastrophe, when Yom HaShoah, Holocaust memorial day, almost always falls. (Though this year, because of the Jewish lunar calendar, it will be observed on May 1.) The lessons of a classroom in Alliance 15 years ago still matter.

“You have to understand what caused genocide to happen,” Mr. Walz said, with those grim anniversaries in mind. “Or it will happen again.”

In a short period of time, friends of public schools in Nebraska collected enough signatures to get on the November ballot. That is, if a hostile state official doesn’t kick off enough names to render their petition invalid, as happened in Arkansas. Voucher pushers are terrified of referenda; vouchers always lose—by big margins.

Public school supporters surpass signature goal to put repeal of LB1402 voucher scheme on the November ballot


LINCOLN – They had only 67 days – the shortest timeline for a petition drive in the state’s history – and Nebraska public school supporters rose to the occasion, again.


The Support Our Schools Nebraska coalition needed to collect 61,621 signatures to let voters repeal or retain a bill that spends millions of public tax dollars to pay for private schools. Today, the coalition submitted more than 86,000
signatures to the Nebraska Secretary of State to ensure the issue will appear on the November ballot. The group also exceeded the 38-county requirement with 5% of voters signing the petition in more than 60 of the state’s 93 counties.


“Since last summer we’ve collected more than 200,000 signatures from Nebraskans who believe voters should decide whether public funds should be used to pay for private schools,” said Jenni Benson, Support Our Schools Nebraska
sponsor and president of the Nebraska State Education Association. “The incredibly short timeline was a huge challenge, but Nebraskans wanted to sign this petition – many were appalled that LB1402 was passed to block citizens from voting on the issue and to impose a costly new voucher scheme on taxpayers.”

This is the second time Support Our Schools Nebraska has collected enough signatures to ensure voters have a say on a legislative bill that diverts public tax dollars to pay for private schools.


Last summer, the group gathered 117,415 signatures in 85 days to put the repeal of a previous voucher bill, LB753, on
the November 2024 ballot. Even after the Secretary of State certified that the LB753 petition met all statutory and
constitutional requirements to put the issue on the ballot for voters to decide, the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Lou Ann Linehan tried to have the Secretary of State take it off the ballot. When her attempt failed, she introduced LB1402, a bill that
denied Nebraskans their right to vote on LB753’s voucher scheme while imposing a new costly voucher plan on Nebraska taxpayers.


“Despite attempts by a few politicians and some wealthy special interests to ignore the will of the people, Nebraskans have once again affirmed their support for public schools. This direct democracy effort is a testament to the resolve of
the people of Nebraska and highlights the immense importance of public schools in our communities,” said Brad Christian-Sallis, Director of Power Building, Nebraska Table.


“Our Nebraska neighbors have made two things very clear: they expect that the state of Nebraska will make responsible investments with their tax dollars, and they love their public schools. That’s why they have turned out once again to have the chance to vote to repeal this legislation in November,” said Dr. Rebecca Firestone, Executive Director of OpenSky Policy Institute. “They have seen costs for similar programs balloon across the nation, like in Iowa, where the
cost of the program is expected to triple, reaching $345 million in just two years, or Arizona, where the cost of its universal voucher program has exceeded budget projections by 1,346%.”


“The underestimated anger among voters about being denied their earlier chance to vote is palpable. I heard this sentiment frequently, often unsolicited, as voters lined up to sign the petition,” said Cynthia Peterson, president of the
League of Women Voters of Lincoln-Lancaster County and representing the League of Women Voters of Nebraska.


“Nebraskans deserve the opportunity to vote on school vouchers—yes or no. Recently, even a nun signed our petition, jokingly acknowledging potential consequences but steadfast in her belief that voters should have the final say. Every
Nebraska voter has a voice in our system of government. This referendum petition all boils down to letting the people decide.”


“Today, the people of Nebraska have once again exercised their constitutionally protected right to referendum, ensuring that their voices will always be heard. This moment stands as a testament to the deep and unwavering love Nebraskans have for their public schools, which remain the heart and soul of our communities. In this defining moment, we celebrate the power of democracy and the enduring spirit of our great state,” said Dunixi Guereca, Executive Director of
Stand for Schools.


“PTA’s mission is to make every child’s potential a reality by engaging and empowering families and communities to advocate for all children. We value collaboration, commitment, diversity, respect, and accountability. Nebraska PTA is
proud to stand with the Support Our Schools Nebraska Coalition. We align with the National PTA in advocating for the improvement of public education for all children and to guarantee that public funds are not diverted to any private
school choice proposal and/or voucher systems,” said Christine Clerc, Executive Committee of the Nebraska PTA. “Public dollars must remain invested in public schools for the benefit of all students and the future of our nation. We are
so grateful for all the individuals who have signed the petition and collected signatures so that we might continue the Nebraska tradition of strong public schools in every corner of our state.”


“Public Education is the great equalizer in ensuring that all children regardless of geographical or social location have
access to learning, growing, achieving and giving back in service,” said Rev. Dr. Karla Cooper, LPS Foundation Board of Directors.


“The overwhelming success of the Support Our Schools campaign falls in line with what the majority of Nebraskans believe and support. According to the Institute’s 2023 public opinion poll, 64 percent of Nebraskans said they oppose
using public dollars to subsidize private, religious, or charter schools. Simply put, state lawmakers should respect the will
of the people and support our public education system, instead of undermining our community’s interests and priorities,” said Hadley Richters, CEO of the Holland Children’s Movement.


“Nebraskans have wisely rejected public funding of private institutions at the ballot box three times previously and we need to do so again,” said Tim Royers, a sponsor of Support Our Schools Nebraska and president of the Millard
Education Association. “All we have to do is look at states with similar voucher programs. Those states and their taxpayers are struggling with the skyrocketing cost of these programs, as well as with the lack of transparency and
accountability. Arizona’s voucher program is a fiasco with the governor there saying it will likely bankrupt the state, that it does not save taxpayers money, and it does not provide a better education for students. Our neighboring state of Iowa passed a voucher program last year. It led to a huge spike in private school tuition while the cost to state taxpayers far exceeds the initial estimates, growing to nearly $180 million for this coming year. We can avoid those problems by
voting to repeal LB1402’s voucher scheme at the ballot box this November.”


This year’s sprint to collect signatures was a grassroots effort from a broad base of nonprofits supporting public schools.

The effort included more than 2,800 volunteers who circulated petitions and coordinated more than 800 signing events. More than 1,300 individuals have donated to the effort with an average donation of $42.


The Secretary of State will forward the petitions to local election officials, who have 40 days to verify the petitions and the signers’ information. Once all petitions have been reviewed and requirements met, the Secretary of State will certify the measure for the November 2024 General Election ballot.


For more information on the effort to repeal LB1402’s voucher scheme, please visit:


Website: https://supportourschoolsnebraska.org/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SOSNebraska
Twitter: https://twitter.com/SOSNebraska
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sosnebraska/


Contact: Karen Kilgarin at 402-432-7776 or Kelsey Foley at 308-643-7268

Nebraska voucher advocates are trying to head off a referendum because they know they will lose. Senator Lou Ann Linehan has introduced a bill intended to fund vouchers and block a referendum, thus preventing Nebraskans from voting on whether they want vouchers.

Senator Linehan is working with Betsy DeVos’s advocacy group American Federation for Children.

Of course, they don’t want to let the public decide! Vouchers will lose!

In every state referendum on school vouchers, they have always been defeated. The public wants public tax dollars to go to public schools! The public does not want to subsidize the tuition of students who attend private and religious schools. In every state that has vouchers, most are claimed by students who already attend non-public schools. Worse, as Michigan State’s Josh Cowen has demonstrated, students who leave public schools with vouchers fall far behind their public school peers.

And of course, vouchers drain funding from public schools, attended by the vast majority of children.

From: Brooke @ Stand For Schools<info@standforschools.org>
Date: Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 5:05 PM
Subject: The Fight Continues: LB 1402

Dear Friend,

 LB 1402, Senator Linehan’s private school voucher bill, passed through general and select file debate last week. With that, LB 1402 could become the first bill in Nebraska’s legislative history to overturn a law with a referendum on the ballot for November, bypassing your right to vote. 

We urge you to please contact your Senatorand tell them NO to LB 1402 and to let Nebraskans vote on public funds to private schools in November!  

Contact Your Senator!

Instead of sending public dollars to private schools, which are under no obligation to serve all children, tell your Senator you support the public schools that 9 out of 10 Nebraska students attend, and so should they.

Contact your Senatorand tell them NO LB 1402 and that you support public education!

Contact Your Senator

Thank you for your continued support of Stand For Schools and Nebraska public education! 

 The Stand For Schools Team  

Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
LinkedIn

Follow us on social media for legislative updates, Nebraska public education stories, and more!

Donate

Stand For Schools
211 N 14th Street
Lincoln, NE 68508
United States

Nebraska will have a voucher referendum this fall unless courts keep them off the ballot. Friends of public schools gathered way more than enough signatures to get a state referendum. The top state election official certified that they met the qualifications.

But Republican leaders are desperate to kill the referendum because they know it will pass. NO VOUCHER REFERENDUM HAS EVER PASSED.

Nebraska’s top election official has ruled that voters will get to decide this year whether to repeal a law that gives taxpayer money for private school scholarships. 

But both Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen and state Sen. Lou Ann Linehan, who authored the school choice law and sought to have the repeal effort kept off the ballot, acknowledge that the courts will likely ultimately decide if the repeal question makes it onto November’s ballot.

Evnen said in a news release late Thursday that he consulted state law and previous state attorney general opinions before concluding that the referendum question is legal and will appear on the November ballot “unless otherwise ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction.”

In the Public Interest is an excellent source of information about privatization in every sphere of life, wherever privatizers see a chance to turn a public service into private profit. Its latest post is about the citizens’ fight to overturn a new voucher plan in Nebraska.

Open the link to see the cost of vouchers in Arizona, New Hampshire, North Carolina, and Ohio. Count on costs to go up every year, as legislators expand eligibility and raise income limits.

In early 2023, the Nebraska legislature passed LB753, which created a new private school tax-credit voucher program. The bill allows a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to individuals and corporations that donate to a scholarship granting organization (SGO), which would issue the vouchers to families to pay for private school. Eligibility requirements are broad, allowing, for example, any child entering either kindergarten or 9th grade at a private school, or any student who has spent at least one semester in a public school to apply for a voucher. The bill would divert up to $25 million annually from the state, but that figure could go up to $100 million.

The bill includes a standard “hands off clause,” which prevents the state from exercising any authority over the school and how it operates.  It’s basically a license to discriminate.

Shortly after the bill was passed, public school supporters launched a referendum petition drive to put repeal of the new law on the November 2024 ballot. In fewer than 90 days, the repeal campaign gathered nearly double the number of required signatures from across the state. The effort was led by Support Our Schools Nebraska, a coalition that includes, among others, the Nebraska State Education Association, OpenSky Policy Institute, Parent-Teacher Association of Nebraska, Stand for Schools, League of Women Voters of Nebraska, Omaha NAACP, ARC of Nebraska, Nebraska Farmers Union, and the Nebraska Civic Engagement Table.

In Nebraska, 84% of private schools are religiously affiliated. Many, if not most of these schools are legally permitted to discriminate against applicants based on their gender orientation, religious affiliation, or other characteristics. The Nebraska OpenSky Policy Institute has estimated that state aid distributed to public schools could decrease by almost $12 million in response to the new voucher program.

Forces aligned against the repeal include the usual suspects, like the American Federation for Children, founded by anti-public-education zealot Betsy DeVos, which donated $583,000 along with $103,000 of in-kind services to the pro-voucher effort, on top of money DeVos spent to influence Nebraska state senate races in the last cycle. The Nebraska Catholic Conference, whose coffers stand to gain from LB753, has also thrown its weight and reach behind the anti-public education side. Jeremy Ekeler left his job as associate director of education policy at the Conference in November to become the executive director of Opportunity Scholarships of Nebraska, a state-approved scholarship granting organization helping to implement LB753. They’re not only working to defeat the ballot measure, they’re trying to keep it off the ballot entirely, following a playbook the right has used to subvert a variety of citizen-led, petition-driven initiatives around the country.

As we have pointed out before and as the chart above illustrates, vouchers bleed public school districts of needed funds, allow for discrimination, lower educational standards (by not necessarily having many), and lead to resegregation.

As if that weren’t enough, they turn out to be budget busters for states.

In the Public Interest will keep an eye on this fight because it may be the clearest indication that, while conservative politicians have thrown their support to various schemes that divert public funds from public schools, the public opposes these efforts and will show up at the polls to make their feelings felt.