Archives for category: New Hampshire
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Will New Hampshire Undermine Its Public Schools by Expanding Vouchers?

By dianeravitch
January 22, 2025 //
5

Gary Rayno, veteran journalist in New Hampshire, reports on the Legislature’s pending decision on expanding vouchers. It is astonishing that any state is still considering universal vouchers, in light of what we have learned from the experience of every state that has done so.

We know now that the overwhelming majority of vouchers are used by students already enrolled in private and religious schools. In other words, they are for the most part a subsidy for families already able to pay tuition.

We know now that universal vouchers bust the state budget by offering to pay private school tuition.

We know now (see Josh Cowen’s recent book The Privateers) that when poor kids leave public schools for voucher schools, their academic performance declines, often dramatically.

We know now, based on state referenda, that the public opposes vouchers.

Gary Rayno writes about what’s happening in New Hampshire:

The advocates for opening the state’s school voucher program, Education Freedom Accounts, to all students in the state regardless of their parents’ income did a massive public relations and organization effort before the public hearing last week on House 115, which would remove the salary cap from the four-year old program.

While many parents with their children turned out for the public hearing that needed three rooms in the Legislative Office Building to hold the attendees, the people responding electronically —many posting testimony — on the bill were opposed by a more than four-to-one margin, 3,414-791.

Groups like the Koch Foundation funded by Americans for Prosperity sent out at least three email “urgent” messages to its followers encouraging supporters to attend the public hearing.

Department of Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut sent out a press release the day before the public hearing with the headline “New Hampshire’s cost per pupil continues upward trend,” indicating the state’s average per-pupil cost increased from $20,323 last school year to $21,545 this school year and noting the enrollment has been trending down.

In his press release he also noted the average national cost per pupil at $15,591, while noting that New Hampshire’s largest school districts were the cheapest with Manchester at $17,734, Nashua at $18,270, Bedford at $18,498 and Concord at $23,159, while rural Pittsburg, at the very top of the state, has the highest cost at $44,484.

“The taxpayers of New Hampshire have worked hard to support students, families and our public schools, increasing funding by more than $400 million since 2021, resulting in a record high cost per pupil,” Edelblut said. “New Hampshire remains dedicated to continuing efforts to expand educational opportunities and pathways to help every child succeed in a fiscally responsible approach. The persistent trend of declining student enrollment combined with rising costs creates substantial financial strain on school districts, taxpayers and communities, necessitating new and creative approaches to educating our children in a system that can be sustained over the long term.”

In other words these skyrocketing public education costs cannot be sustained, and efforts like the EFA program is the wave of the future for taxpayers and students, although the program offers no guarantees the state money flowing into the program is being used for what it was intended or wisely by parents.

He does not mention that New Hampshire is either 49th or 50th in financial support for K to 12th grade public education, while cities and towns are picking up over 70 percent of the costs of public education and yet their residents are the ones approving the budgets that increased per-pupil spending.

Edelblut also doesn’t mention that the state downshifted the obligation of hundreds of millions of dollars over the last 15 years to school districts, municipalities and counties when it stopped paying 35 percent of the retirement costs for employees, or that he has failed over the last five years to request additional money for the special education catastrophic aid program although costs have been rising substantially further downshifting millions more in costs to local school districts.

And the public hearing on the bill was held on one of the earliest days in the session, which says the Republican leadership wants to separate this bill from the state budget as much as possible.

A trend of declining revenues, the drying up of the federal pandemic aid and past surpluses, along with the elimination of the interest and dividends tax, which is a huge benefit to the state’s wealthiest residents, and business tax rate cuts will make difficult work for lawmakers and new Gov. Kelly Ayotte, who gives her first budget address next month.

The GOP leadership doesn’t want to discuss the $100 million in new expenses in HB 115 when budget discussions hit snags over what to fund.

During the public hearing, a number of parents brought their children with them to talk about the wonderful things they have been able to accomplish by using the state taxpayer money for alternative education settings.

Many also trashed public schools saying they failed their children although the public schools continue to serve about 90 percent of the state’s students.

Some of the parents noted public schools don’t align with their beliefs or political philosophies, which really says they do not want their children to be exposed to different beliefs or cultures.

David Trumble of Weare noted that some of the private and religious schools don’t take LGBTQ+, special education or English-as-a-second language students.

“There is nothing universal about universal vouchers. The only universal option is the public schools because they accept every single child and give every one of them a good education. That is why you have a constitutional duty to fund them. You have no obligation to fund the private schools,” Trumble told the House Education Funding Committee.

“Our first obligation is to fund the public schools.”

Under the EFA program, 75 percent of the students did not attend public schools when they joined the program, meaning that neither the school districts nor the state was paying for their education, their parents were.

In other states where universal vouchers have been approved almost all of the new money goes to families currently sending their children to private or religious schools or being homeschooled, which is a new expense to those states just as it would be in New Hampshire, where the potential for additional costs is over $100 million annually.

The money for New Hampshire EFA program comes from the Education Trust Fund which also provides almost all of the state education aid to public schools including charter schools.

The trust fund once had over a $200 million surplus, but ended the last fiscal year June 30, 2024 at $159 million, and is projected to drop to $125 million at the end of this fiscal year.

If the bill passes, it won’t be long before money is drained and the squeeze is on public education because of the new education system set up by the legislature that many told the committee last week lacks accountability and transparency.

Many of the people in opposition to the bill said the state first needs to meet its constitutional obligation to pay for an adequate education for the state’s children before setting up any new program costing hundreds of millions of dollars.

But universal vouchers are not only a priority for New Hampshire Republicans, it is a priority at the national level as well.

It continues a movement begun in the late 1950s and 1960s advised by James Buchanan, an economist from the University of Chicago, who was influenced by Frank Knight as was Milton Friedman.

The plan was to both develop more conservative Republicans through the education system and through state legislatures.

One of the targets was public education and reforming it into a private system where if you have the money you can receive a good education, but if you don’t, well too bad.

While the EFA program was touted as helping lower income parents find an alternative education setting for their children who did not fare well in a public education environment, it has essentially been a subsidy program for parents whose children were already in private and religious schools or homeschooled.

Many of the parents speaking in favor of expanding the EFA program said they wanted every child to experience what they experienced.

Rep. Ross Berry, R-Weare, told the committee why should the EFA program be means tested, when public schools don’t require wealthy parents to pay for their children to attend.

That was one of the catch phrases uttered several times during the hearing along with “support for the student not the system.”

Someone had distributed the talking points.

But several opponents noted the program would not help eliminate educational inequity, it would exacerbate it, because a lower-income parent would not be able to afford to send their child to one of the private schools where the average tuition is over $20,000 with a $5,200 voucher, while those already able to send their child to a private school will be able to cut their costs by the same amount.

Once again New Hampshire is a great place to live if you have money, if you don’t, not so much.

The EFA program is part of the push for individual rights over the common good. You see it in education where parents want to remove their child from those who do not have the same beliefs or philosophies, you also see in health care with the establishment of specialty and boutique practices where if you have the money you receive the best care, and in the judicial system where if you have enough money you never have to be accountable for your crimes.

If HB 115 passes, and it probably will, the legislature will have created a situation where the public schools including charter schools will face operating with less state aid, not more as the courts said the state needs, and that will impact many sectors including businesses who will not know if the state has a sufficiently educated workforce or not.

The state should not want businesses asking that question.

Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.

Distant Dome by veteran journalist Garry Rayno explores a broader perspective on the State House and state happenings for InDepthNH.org. Over his three-decade career, Rayno covered the NH State House for the New Hampshire Union Leader and Foster’s Daily Democrat. During his career, his coverage spanned the news spectrum, from local planning, school and select boards, to national issues such as electric industry deregulation and Presidential primaries. Rayno lives with his wife Carolyn in New London.

Categories Accountability, Bigotry, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Extremism, Failure, Fraud, Funding, Koch Brothers, Lies, New Hampshire, Privatization, Propaganda, Religion, Separation of church and state, Vouchers

New Hampshire: The GOP Legislature Refuses to Pay for Adequate Education

By dianeravitch
October 2, 2024 //
3

Garry Rayno is a veteran journalist in New Hampshire who covers the legislature for inDepthNH.org. His education reporting is excellent. In this post, he describes the Republicans’ refusal to fund public schools adequately, although they have launched a voucher program that is sure to drain the state imof hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

The latest round for education funding lawsuits enters the judicial ring this week in Rockingham County Superior Court and will be argued over the next two weeks.

The second half of the Rand suit goes before judge David Ruoff and — much like the ConVal suit — hinges on whether the state is providing ample money to provide an adequate education for its students, which is essentially the same question before the courts three decades ago with the Claremont suit.

Indepth Your Inbox

Get unbiased nonprofit watchdog news sent directly to your inbox.

Under the two Claremont rulings, the state is required to provide an adequate education to its students, define what constitutes an adequate education, pay for it with constitutional taxes and ensure school districts are providing  it.

That sounds pretty simple, but you have to dig a little deeper to understand why the issue has not been settled in the intervening 30 years.

As ConVal argued, the state believes currently that $4,100 per student is the cost of an adequate education, and the state largely pays that cost with the Statewide Education Property Tax, portions of existing taxes and Sweepstakes revenues.

According to the latest figures from the Department of Education the statewide average for educating a single student is $20,322, or $24,756 when all expenditures are included such as transportation, capital expenses and interest,  out-of-district tuitions, etc.

In the ConVal ruling, which is on appeal with the other half of the Rand suit to the Supreme Court, Ruoff set the state’s obligation for the cost of an adequate education at $7,356  and said it is probably closer to $9,900 per student.

In any event the lower figure is almost double what the state pays and would cost the state an additional $500 million.

In the Rand case, the plaintiffs also want the court to determine if the additional money school districts receive for higher costs for educating special education students, or from low-income households or do not speak fluent English, for example is enough to cover those costs as well.

In their suit, the plaintiffs claim the state funding is inadequate to cover those “differentiated aid” costs as well.

When the funding formula was originally developed in the late 1990s, many of the lawmakers sitting on the committee were from the state’s largest cities like Manchester, Rochester and Nashua and weighted the formula to help their communities and that has not changed much since as communities like Manchester, Nashua, Rochester and Somersworth receive a greater percentage of state aid than most other communities.

They are larger and have larger populations of children in poverty, with disabilities and children whose native language is not English, but other communities like Claremont, Berlin, Newport, Pittsfield, Franklin and Milan have problems raising money for education as well without the same percentage of state aid.

But that is not the crux of the Rand suit, which is by failing to pay all of its constitutionally obligated cost of an adequate education, city and town taxpayers have to make up the difference with local property taxes.

As most people know by now, there are property wealthy communities like Moultonborough, Tuftonboro, Wolfeboro, New Castle, Rye, Portsmouth, Hampton, Sunapee, New London, Newbury, etc. that collect more than they need through the Statewide Education Property Tax to pay for the state’s contribution of $4,100 per student and have money left over.

Ostensively all those communities and all the other communities in New Hampshire pay the same tax rate for the Statewide Education Property Tax.

But when the statewide tax receipts in a community do not cover the $4,100 per student threshold, local property taxes have to make up the difference, and those property tax rates vary from community to community.

If the communities have to pay for an adequate education, then the state is using local property taxes to satisfy its obligation, which would mean they are really state taxes.

And the constitution requires that all state taxes be proportional and reasonable and that is the problem, because widely varying tax rates do not meet the constitutional requirement.

And the other aspect of the lawsuit is that the cost of an adequate education is much higher than $4,100 and if that is true, and Ruoff has ruled once that it is, than the state has an even greater obligation, meaning most every community is using local property taxes to pay the state’s share of an adequate education.

The state aid to education totals $817.84 million for the current school year, while the total spent on public education from kindergarten to 12th grade is estimated to be about $3.8 billion for all education related costs, not just adequate education.

The federal government sends hundreds of millions of dollars to the state but there is no simple total of federal funds going to public education in New Hampshire to be found on the Department of Education’s website.

But if the state paid even half the cost of the total amount spent on public education, its obligation, given federal funds, is considerably more than what it currently pays and may be nearly double that amount.

The stakes are extremely high for the state at a time when state revenues are declining, exacerbated by years of rate cuts and repeals.

The state has steadfastly refused to approve any new money source for education outside the statewide property tax which was moving the same dollar from the local side of the property tax ledger to the state’s side although making it more proportional across the state.

However, that did little to reduce property taxes in property poor communities or increase the educational opportunities for students in the property poor districts.

The state has argued since the two Claremont decisions were written 30 years ago that the definition of an adequate education and how to fund it is up to the legislative and executive branches, which it is, except when fundamental rights are being violated.

Recently, the Attorney General’s Office spent a great deal of time arguing what the plaintiffs seek would violate the constitutional separation of powers provision.

The question is where do you draw the line?
Does the legislature in failing to address the inequities for property taxpayers and students exercising its rights to control the purse and set policies, or is it contempt of court?

Or does the court have the final say when fundamental constitutional rights are violated?

Before pondering those questions there are two weeks of arguments by the plaintiffs and the state. The state told the court last spring the plaintiffs have failed to “meet their heavy burden of demonstrating that the current funding formula is in clear and substantial conflict with the [sic] Part II, Article 83,” in seeking a summary judgement and asked not to go forward with this week’s hearings.

The court rejected that request quickly and there will be two more weeks to parse the fundamental issue of whether the state’s children have a fundamental right to an adequate education and how the state would pay for it to be on center stage in the public arena once again.

Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.

Categories Budget Cuts, Funding, New Hampshire, Republicans, Vouchers

Do Parents Always Know What’s Best for Their Children? NO.

By dianeravitch
September 15, 2024 //
24

Over recent years, we have heard again and again that parents always know what’s best for their child. And so we have vouchers and home-schooling because “parents always know what’s best for their child.”

No, they don’t.

Read this story and ask yourself whether this parent knew what was best for her child.

I wish I had saved the many stories of this kind that I have read over the past decade. Thank God, they don’t happen every day but they do happen.

Whenever I write about abusive parents like the one in this horrific story, I get inundated by angry letters from advocates for parents’ rights, especially homeschoolers. Let ’em write.

The state should have had someone to look after this boy. They should have had the authority to take the child away from his mother, who hated him, to save his life.

Categories Accountability, Childhood, Cruelty, New Hampshire, Parents

New Hampshire: Voucher Program Aims to Destroy Public Schools

By dianeravitch
August 5, 2024 //
12

Veteran journalist Garry Rayno wrote a passionate editorial about the destructive voucher program in New Hampshire, promoted by out-of-state billionaires. Ninety percent of the students in the state attend public schools, but Republicans have diverted taxpayer dollars to private and religious schools. Their goal is a universal voucher program, where every student in the state is eligible for a voucher, with no income limits.

Rayno wrote at InDepthNH.org:

America’s traditional institutions, the foundation for the greatest political experiment in history, are under attack from the social safety net to food regulations, and from the court system to environmental protection.

The drive to create doubt and even rejection of these long-standing pillars of our society is to eventually destroy the underpinnings of government to create a new order where the rich will flourish even more with all the advantages, while everyone else will fight over the crumbs of the plutocrats.

The current large target in this fight to turn democracy into an oligarchy is the public school system.

The first blow to the public school system in New Hampshire was the push for charter schools, which are still public schools but without the regulations and requirements traditional public schools must meet.

Charter schools have had to ask the state for more and more per pupil money to stay afloat, about double the per pupil adequacy grant amount for traditional schools.

The charter schools that found a niche have been successful, but many have fallen by the wayside over the years even with federal grant money approved during the Trump administration for start-ups and expansions.

And until recently, they have not strayed into the Christian Nationalist area that has been widely promoted by Hinsdale College in Michigan and adopted by some states.

Then came the voucher push sold as a way of helping low-income families find a more suitable education environment for students who do not do well in the public-school setting.

After several unsuccessful attempts, proponents, who include Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut and State School Board Chairman Drew Cline, lawmakers successfully approved the Education Freedom Account program as a rider to the 2022-2023 biennial operating budget after it failed to pass the House and was retained.

Since then attempts to expand the eligibility of parents by raising the income cap passed two sessions ago, but failed in the recently completed session.

Instead of helping the low-income families with educational options the program has largely been a subsidy program for parents with children who were already in religious or private schools and homeschooling. 

Only about 10 to 15 percent of the increasingly expensive draw on the Education Trust Fund have left public schools for alternative education programs.

What proponents ultimately seek is a “universal program” which would be open to any New Hampshire student regardless of his or her parents’ income, although a similar program has nearly bankrupted Arizona and put public education at risk in Ohio, where it is being litigated.

New Hampshire is not alone in the push to do away with public education as we know it.

A letter from many national figures seeking to privatize education like Betsy DeVos and Edward Bennett; the CEOs of organizations pushing for privatization; former federal and state governors; sitting governors from almost all southern states; two state education commissioners including Edelblut, and state elected officials most from Republican controlled states was sent to Republican Congressional leaders saying, “The task before the next Congress is clear and unambiguous: bring education freedom to millions of students across America who desperately need it!”

The letter also touts the GOP’s platform approved at its recent national convention “to cultivate great K-12 schools, ensure safe learning environments free from political meddling, and restore Parental Rights. We commit to an Education System that empowers students, supports families, and promotes American Values… Republicans believe families should be empowered to choose the best Education for their children. We support Universal School Choice in every State in America.”

The political meddling the platform contends is that “Lessons about American values have been displaced by political or cultural trends of the day,” without noting several states have recently required the Bible be taught in public schools. 

Children whose faith is Muslim or Buddhism or are Native Americans may believe those state’s Biblical requirement is political meddling.

What the proponents of universal vouchers seek is to have Congress do what some state legislators, including Texas, have failed to do and that is approve universal private or religious education on the public’s dime.

This push to do away with public education has attempted to tarnish what has always been the great equalizer, by saying schools are failing, teachers are indoctrinating students and withholding information from parents. 

You would think public schools are a far-reaching conspiracy to destroy family values, while ignoring the fact that 90 percent of students are in public schools and many are very successful.

New Hampshire public schools ranked sixth in the nation this year, down from the number two spots five years ago.

The number ranking was before the push to privatize education became successful with the help of Gov. Chris Sununu who put both Edelblut and Cline where they are, in charge of the public education system in the state, although both seek to diminish its reach.

Edelblut focuses on the learning disparity between well to do school districts and the poorly performing ones that lack the property values to support schools in the same way property wealthy communities do as the reason to seek alternatives.

Yet when the state education funding system is raised as a possible culprit for the disparity, Edelblut is quick to dismiss that as a different issue when it isn’t.

One of the major concerns about the Education Freedom Program, the Business Tax Scholarship Program and charter schools, is the lack of accountability.

How do taxpayers know their money is being used wisely if there is no way to determine those students are receiving “an adequate education,” as the state Supreme Court ruled?
Attempts to bring more accountability have failed in the Republican controlled legislature.

At the same time, Cline this week in his column “The Broadside” touts the state as doing pretty well for educational entrepreneurs according to a recent ranking.

“There’s more that can be done to make New Hampshire a freer state for education entrepreneurs looking to start small, decentralized, and unconventional educational environments, but so far the state is doing better than most,” according to Cline.

He cites the Education Entrepreneur Freedom Index released by the yes.every kid.foundation for the ranking.

It shouldn’t be surprising that according to Wikipedia,  “Yes. every kid. (YEK) is a 501(c)(4) advocacy group that is a part of the Koch Network. Launched by the Charles Koch-funded Stand Together in June of 2019, YEK supports the privatization of education. The organization is a proponent of the school choice movement, advocating for subsidized private school vouchers and charter schools.”
The Koch Foundation has long advocated for ending public education and installing a private education system where you pay for what you get. Not exactly the great equalizer.

Cline argues New Hampshire should be looking to encourage more private education.

“States with more relaxed homeschool and nonpublic school laws/regulations score higher, as entrepreneurs have an easier time getting started in these states,” he notes.

Cline and the Koch organization suggest relaxing state requirements for non-public schools and also zoning regulations to make it easier to locate educational facilities including child care businesses by allowing education in all zoning districts in a municipality.

“Though New Hampshire lost a point for rules requiring state approval for non-public schools, the state could become much more friendly to education entrepreneurs, the study’s authors conclude, primarily by relaxing some child-care rules and local regulations,” Cline writes.

Supporters of Education Freedom Accounts are fond of saying the best accountability is if parents are satisfied with the education their children receive, which you would hope is the case or why would you leave your child in an unsatisfactory educational environment?

But that is not what the state Supreme Court said in its Claremont I decision. It said the state has a responsibility to provide an adequate education to every student in the state and to pay for it. Parents have choices but the state defines an adequate education.

The state legislature has yet to live up to its responsibility and allowing a bypass through religious and private schools and homeschooling is not constitutionally fair to those children.

If you believe public education is failing in this state, you should begin looking at the top: the governor, the commissioner and to the state board of education chair.

Their priority is not public education.

Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Catholic Schools, Charter Schools, Corporate Reform, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Elections, Ethics, Extremism, Funding, Inequity, New Hampshire, Privatization, Religion, School Choice, Separation of church and state

New Hampshire: Why the GOP Is Determined to Destroy Public Schools

By dianeravitch
June 25, 2024 //
10

Every time I see New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu interviewed on CNN, he plays the role of the GOP “moderate.” Don’t be fooled. When it comes to education, he’s a clone of Betsy DeVos.

Veteran New Hampshire Garry Rayno pulls away the mask of “moderate” that Sununu wears in this article in InDepthNH.

This is an important article for everyone to read, no matter where you live. It explains succinctly the true goals of the privatization movement.

He writes:

Public education has been since its inception with the work of Horace Mann, the great equalizer.

Students from poor families have been able to compete with students from the other side of the tracks, maybe not in reality, but close enough to at least have an opportunity to excel.

Many of the founding fathers understood the need for an educated public if democracy was going to survive and thrive.

A responsible citizen is an informed citizen, and that appears to be the problem today. Too many people interested in power instead of governing don’t want a truly informed public. Instead, they want enough of the public spoon fed “alternative facts,” conspiracy theories, and outright lies to ensure they retain power although they have views that are both harmful to the majority of citizens and allow the tyranny of the minority to overturn the will of the majority.

At the heart of the minority’s transformation plan is the destruction of the public school system.

New Hampshire has had a front row seat to the war on education since Chris Sununu was elected governor and named his rival for the Republican nomination in 2016, Frank Edelblut, to be Education Commissioner, a man without any experience in public education, which was the first for someone holding that position in our lifetime.

If Sununu did not know what would happen when he put Edelblut in charge of this critical state department, shame on him, because Edelblut’s one term in the House was a roadmap for his actions during his two terms as commissioner, his second ending in March 2025.

Sununu has also packed the State Board of Education with school choice advocates instead of supporters of public education, so you have the two entities in the executive branch responsible for the state’s public education systems, maybe not anti-public schools, but certainly not advocates for the state’s public education system.

According to the statutes, the education commissioner “is responsible for the organizational goals of the department and represents the public interest in the administration of improving the effectiveness and efficiency of administrative and instructional services to all public schools in New Hampshire.”

Notice it says public schools, not private schools or religious schools, or homeschooling, or learning pods, or any of the other non-public entities that are approved vendors under the state’s Education Freedom Account program, some with questionable philosophies or intent.

An attempt by lawmakers this year to better define the education commissioner’s qualifications and responsibilities to the public school system was defeated this term by the same element that pushed to establish the EFA program and then to expand it, although this year’s attempt to increase the income threshold to participate in the program failed on the last day of the session to act on bills.

The outright attacks on public education began in New Hampshire about a decade ago but gained more warriors as FreeStaters/Libertarians swelled the ranks of the House and Senate Republican members.

The attack on public education here has been much the same as it has been in other states, mostly in the south and the west, with claims of the indoctrination of students by leftwing faculty members.

They have also attacked educators directly and have tried to pack school boards — without much success — to undermine curriculum, educators and slash budgets as happened in Croydon several years ago when the annual school meeting was poorly attended due to a snowstorm.

The Republican majority in the 2021-2022 legislature passed the state’s divisive concepts law forbidding teaching controversial subjects such as institutional racism.

The law was recently found unconstitutional by a US District Court judge.

That was the same term the EFA program was approved after earlier unsuccessful attempts.

Both the EFA program and the divisive concepts law were included in the state’s biennial budget package because they were not likely to pass on their own.

The same folks also tied education into the trumped out recent outrage over the LGBTQ community and sold it as an attack on parental rights.

The intent was to start a war between parents and educators, although parents already have many of the rights touted by the anti-public school advocates.

The theory touted was that educators were keeping information from parents about their students and their sexual identification and that educators were urging students to explore different sexual identities.

Then came the book banning other areas of the country experienced like Florida where some school libraries were stripped of books.

The red herring advocates touted here came from a national app that contains almost every book published that students could access both in schools and at home, and not on school library shelves.

Some tried to enlist town and city libraries in the surveillance of children and what they read and accessed, but that did not go very far.

All of this goes to create the appearance that schools are hotbeds of leftist politics and anti-parental values, some fueled by Edelblut in an op-ed he sent to media outlets.

And despite all this ginned up controversy, local public schools that educate about 90 percent of the school age children in the state remain very popular with parents and the public at large.

If that is true, you have to ask what is behind the push to demonize public schools like political candidates demonize opponents.

Keep in mind this attack on public education occurs at the same time when the superior court’s latest education funding decision says the state does not provide enough money to cover the cost of an adequate education for every student and the way it raises its biggest contribution to public education — the Statewide Education Property Tax — is unconstitutional.

Education is governments’ —not just state government’s — single biggest expense, costing about $3.5 billion a year.

If you are a Libertarian or Free Stater who believes “taxation is theft,” destroying public schools will shift the cost directly to parents, and you could keep a lot more of your money to spend as you see fit and not for the good of society.

And if you espouse the philosophy of the Koch Foundation or former US Education Commissioner, Betsy DeVos, you not only keep more of your money, one of the largest union-backed workforces in the country will be dismantled when certified teachers are no longer needed.

Without a public education system, a child would receive the education his or her parents could afford and for many, particularly minorities, and the historically poor, that may not be much beyond the time they turn 16 and have to go to work to keep the family treading the economic waters.

And then maybe they will work for a lot less than if they had a high school, or even a college education.

And without even an adequate education, how informed will the general public be or how capable of the critical thinking needed to realize all those folks touting their parental rights really do not have their best interests at heart.

Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.

Distant Dome by veteran journalist Garry Rayno explores a broader perspective on the State House and state happenings for InDepthNH.org. Over his three-decade career, Rayno covered the NH State House for the New Hampshire Union Leader and Foster’s Daily Democrat. During his career, his coverage spanned the news spectrum, from local planning, school and select boards, to national issues such as electric industry deregulation and Presidential primaries. Rayno lives with his wife Carolyn in New London.

Categories Accountability, Betsy DeVos, Budget Cuts, Charter Schools, Democracy, Disruption, Education Industry, Elections, Extremism, New Hampshire, Privatization, Vouchers

BREAKING NEWS: Federal Judge in New Hampshire Strikes Down “Divisive Concepts” Law

By dianeravitch
May 28, 2024 //
7

Good news in New Hampshire! Federal Judge Paul Barbadoro threw out the state’s “divisive concepts” law, which banned the teaching of anything that might be “divisive.” The same kind of law has been used in other states to ban the teaching of historical facts and literature about Blacks and gays. The judge declared it was too vague to be Constitutional and created confusion about what was and was not allowed in the classroom. In an ironic twist, the law that censors teaching and curriculum is titled “The Law Against Discrimination.”

Nancy West of InDepthNH.com wrote about the decision, which certainly must have upset State Commissioner Frank Edelblut and Governor Chris Sununu, as well as the state’s busybody Moms for Liberty.

West writes:

CONCORD – A federal judge on Tuesday struck down the state’s controversial ‘divisive concepts’ law, which had its roots in an executive order by former President Trump, that limited how teachers can discuss issues such as race, sexual orientation and gender identity with students.

The law, passed in a budget rider in 2021, created a chilling atmosphere in classrooms around the state with teachers unsure of what they could discuss about those issues without fear of being suspended or even banned from teaching altogether in the state.

The four banned concepts include:  That one’s age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, or color is inherently superior or inferior; that an individual, by virtue of age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color…is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously; that an individual should be discriminated against  because of his or her age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color; and that people of one age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color…cannot and should not attempt to treat others without regard to age, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, creed, color…., according to the judge’s ruling.

In New Hampshire it’s called the Law Against Discrimination and makes it unlawful for a public employer to “teach, advocate, instruct, or train” the banned concepts to “any employee, student, service recipient, contractor, staff member, inmate, or any other individual or group.”

U.S. District Court Judge Paul Barbadoro ruled the law is unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment because it is too vague.

In the suit filed against Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut and the Department of Education by the National Education Association of New Hampshire and the American Federation of Teachers of New Hampshire, Barbadoro sided with the teachers and granted their motion for summary judgment.

  “The Amendments are viewpoint-based restrictions on speech that do not provide either fair warning to educators of what they prohibit or sufficient standards for law enforcement to prevent arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. Thus, the Amendments violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution,” Barbadoro wrote…

The controversy escalated after Edelblut posted a page of the Department of Education website to file complaints against teachers for allegedly discriminating and a group called Moms for Liberty offered a $500 reward “for the person that first successfully catches a public school teacher breaking this law.”

Barbadoro wrote: “RSA § 193:40, IV provides that a “[v]iolation of this section by an educator shall be considered a violation of the educator code of conduct that justifies disciplinary sanction by the state board of education.

“An ‘educator’ is defined as ‘a professional employee of any school district whose position requires certification by the state board [of education].’ RSA § 193:40, V. Potential disciplinary sanctions include reprimand, suspension, and revocation of the educator’s certification.

“In other words, an educator who is found to have taught or advocated a banned concept may lose not only his or her job, but also the ability to teach anywhere in the state,” Barbadoro wrote…

Barbadoro was critical of Edelblut’s two op-ed pieces in the New Hampshire Union Leader.

“Despite the fact that the articles offer minimal interpretive guidance, Department of Education officials have referred educators to them as a reference point. For example, after showing two music videos to her class as part of a unit on the Harlem Renaissance, Alison O’Brien, a social studies teacher at Windham High School, was called into a meeting with her principal and informed that she was being investigated by the Department of Education in response to a parent’s complaint.

“Department of Education Investigator Richard Farrell recommended that Windham’s administrators consult Edelblut’s April 2022 opinion article to understand the context of the investigation against O’Brien, without otherwise explaining why O’Brien’s lesson warranted investigation. After witnessing her experience, O’Brien’s colleagues grew anxious about facing similar actions,” Barbadoro wrote.

What did she do wrong? She doesn’t know.

Edelblut, the state’s top education official, homeschooled his children. He was appointed by Governor Sununu. The governor likes to pretend he is a Republican moderate. Don’t be fooled.

Judge Barbadoro was appointed by President George H.W. Bush.

Open the link to finish reading the article.

.

Categories Bigotry, Censorship, Corruption, Cruelty, Curriculum, Democracy, Disruption, Extremism, Freedom to Read, Gender, History, Lies, Literature, New Hampshire

New Hampshire: GOP Leadership is Determined to Crush Public Schools, Ignore Hungry Children

By dianeravitch
April 16, 2024 //
3

New Hampshire reporter Garry Rayno says that the state legislature has its priorities upside down. Writing at IndepthNH.org, Rayno describes a Republican state government led by “moderate” Governor Chris Sununu that’s determined to destroy public schools while expanding vouchers eventually to cover all students’ private school tuition, including the children of the richest residents. Sununu appointed a homeschooling parent, Frank Edelblut, as the State Commissioner of Education. Edelblut is hostile to public schools and eager to divert funding from them.

The Republican legislature refused to renew a program to feed hungry children. As Rayno notes, they are “pro-life,” but don’t care much about living children.

Rayno writes:

From the new proposed rules for education minimum standards to alternative education opportunities, the state legislature and the executive branch appear to have their priorities upside down.

Call it culture wars, call it the war on public education or whatever you want, but much more attention is being paid to about 3 or 4 percent of the state’s school-age students — mostly in private and religious schools or home-schooled — while about 24 percent of public school students with food insecurity do not receive the same attention.

While there is ample evidence a hungry student is not a student fully focused on his or her studies, and is less likely to succeed academically than those who aren’t hungry when they come to school, the House last week by the slimmest of margins, said the food insecure kids could go hungry in this, one of the wealthiest per-capita states in the country.

House Bill 1212 supporters were willing to trim the cost by reducing the income cap from 350 percent of the federal poverty level to 250 percent or about $17 million annually from the Education Trust Fund instead of $50 million.

But that failed to induce enough Republican support to take the bill off the table where a near party line vote had put it, effectively killing it for this year.

The Republican majority also did not want to spend $150,000 of federal pandemic money to hire a coordinator to help about 1,500 homeless students who do not qualify for state homeless services because they do not live with their parents.

Many of the 1,500 students are in the LGBTQIA+ community.

Many of the same people who did not want to spend state or federal money to feed the hungry and help the homeless children and youths favor greater restrictions on abortions or are “pro-life.”

What they are saying with their votes, is we want you to have babies whether you want them or not or whether you can afford them or not, but once they are born, you’re responsible for taking care of them with no help from us.

Pro-life may not be the best term for anti-abortion proponents who voted not to feed the hungry children nor help find them a place to live…

Yet this week two public hearings will be held on bills to expand the eligibility for the Education Freedom Account program now in its third year, and every year well over its budgeted appropriation.

The bill would increase the income cap for the program from 350 percent of the federal poverty level to 500 percent which is $156,000 for a family of four and $102,000 for a parent and child household based on federal 2024 figures.

The current rate would limit family income to $109,200 for a family of four and $71,540 for a family of two.

The cost of the program since its inception has steadily increased from $8.1 million the first year, to $15 million the second and $25 million for the current school year.

The bill barely passed the House and the House Finance Committee chair waived fiscal review of the increase although many more students would be eligible — well above 50 percent of the families in New Hampshire and greatly increasing the cost, but bill proponents did not want to give Democrats another shot at killing the bill.

The money for the program comes from the Education Trust Fund which also provides the adequacy grants to public schools and the larger grants to charter schools, along with special education, building aid and other educational activities…

The bill will increase the income threshold from 350 percent to 400 percent with the threshold for a family of two $81,760 and a family of four at $124,800.

Reaching Higher Education estimates this increase will bring the cost for next school year to $53.4 million.

That is about a quarter of the current surplus in the Education Trust Fund.

The ultimate goal for supporters of the EFA program is universal eligibility or having no income cap so every family in the state would be eligible which would cost $90 million to $100 million if all the students in private or religious schools and homeschool programs sought and received some grants.

About 10 states have universal or near universal voucher programs, but the two states that have attracted the most attention because of their impact on state budgets have been Arizona and Ohio and both have gone well over estimated costs as they have here in New Hampshire.

The program is bankrupting Arizona and the Democratic governor is trying to limit its reach, but the Republican-controlled legislature has refused to go along.

Ohio faces a lawsuit over its program claiming it is hurting public schools while the vast majority of the new participants are students already in private or religious schools or homeschooling programs.  

Sound familiar.

As one Texas state senator said when Gov. Greg Abbott was pushing for school vouchers, “it is nothing but a subsidy for the wealthy.”

And there are the new rules for the state’s minimum standards for public schools.

Two public hearings were held in the past two weeks and the proposed rules were universally trashed by almost everyone testifying causing state Board of Education chair Drew Cline to chastise those focusing on the rules presented to the board in February while a newer, updated version will come before the board soon, although that updated proposal is not available to the public.

The rules are aimed at clarifying and adding details to the state’s competency-based education model, but they also have been criticized for lowering the existing minimum standards, removing limits on class size, making many standards optional and not mandatory, and no longer requiring certified teachers and professionals.

Other concerns were the proposal would do away with local control, a hallmark for public education in the state, and move toward privatizing education and away from what one person called the great equalizer “public education.”

Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut proposed bills in the last few sessions that would have eliminated many current standards to focus only on the core areas of English, math and science, but without much success with the legislature.

Many saw the plan as a way to lower the state’s share of the cost of education and to make public school alternatives more attractive to students and parents.

Say what you will about Edelblut and his opinions about public education, he is tenacious.

The state is at a crossroads that will determine what public education will be for the next decade and on whether or not the state is willing to take care of its most vulnerable so they can fully participate in that education.

The end of the 2024 session and ultimately the next election should provide a vision of the future for New Hampshire and its children.

Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, Childhood, Cruelty, Disruption, Education Industry, New Hampshire, Students, Vouchers

Wake-Up, New Hampshire! Koch and ALEC Import “Young Americans for Liberty” to Cancel Democracy

By dianeravitch
March 29, 2024 //
3

New Hampshire is under siege by Koch-funded libertarians who want to eliminate public services, government and democracy.

Former State Senator Jeanne Dietsch issues a warning about this invasion. New Hampshire already has a “Free State Movement” that promotes anti-government sentiment and elects representatives to the Legislature to oppose any government services.

Now comes Koch money and ALEC plans to advance the movement of selfish individualism.

Log on to Granite State Matters to watch a 17-minute video about the siege of New Hampshire.

In her newsletter, she reports:

“Wake Up NH” News Update

Teams are powering up! Will we alert enough people in time?

More people are waking up to the millions pouring into New Hampshire to buy our elections. Seats were full at all the “Wake Up” presentations in key swing districts. In its first two weeks, the Wake Up video has had hundreds of views. Over 500 copies of “NH: Battleground in the Fight to Dismantle Democracy” have already been distributed for reading and passing along. Five percent are in Spanish. Even as I am writing this, someone called asking for more books.

Many New Hampshire residents do not even know who the Free Staters are. Or they think they are just gentle, harmless hippies who want to smoke weed and shoot guns. They do not realize that FSP “movers” are urged to run for town office shortly after they arrive. As they move into positions of power in towns, they defund police, libraries and other town services. At the county level, they privatize nursing homes. Residents reliant only on Medicare or Medicaid are forced to leave. At the state level, they use tax funds for vouchers and deny taxpayers the right to audit or quality-control the recipients. All in the name of “Liberty.”

State Representative candidates used to spend less than $1000 on an average campaign even five years ago. Now, in swing districts, Young Americans for Liberty pays students to canvass, telephone and postcard for their priorities and their candidates; 25,825 doors, 118,800 phone calls and 21,755 mailers in 2022. One Democratic candidate reported that he raised $30,000, but his “liberty” opponent was given $70,000 in campaign funds.

Who are the ‘Liberty’ promoters?

The number of Free Staters and Liberty Alliance members in New Hampshire is small. At the annual NH Liberty Forum, fewer than 300 people attended, and some of those were from out-of-state. But the desire to turn New Hampshire into their model “Libertarian Homeland” is intense.

Walking into the Forum felt a little like walking into the Red Sox bleachers with a Yankees cap on. But almost everyone was very polite. The most common complaint was “Why didn’t you put me on your extremist list?” The ones already on the list sported yellow buttons proudly announcing the fact. I explained that they can apply through the signup button. A few have. They seem to believe that announcing they want to end democracy in our state will increase their popularity. The message is reinforced in their social media and clubs.

I found that FSPers love to discuss the reasons they detest majority rule by democracy. They seem unconcerned about the consequences of removing environmental regulations. They did not expect billionaires’ 10,000:1 spending advantage over the median American would be a problem.Turning NH into the ‘Wild West’

When asked to name an example of a Libertarian Utopia, Free Staters often cite the “Wild West.” Before becoming states, these territories had little formal law and even less enforcement. Survival of the fittest, or the best armed, ruled.

What they never mention, however, is settlers’ encroachment upon native people. These original residents were pushed out or moved onto reservations so settlers could have their “liberty.”

In Prospera, a flagship libertarian project in Honduras, poor, native Hondurans are being bought out. Peter Thiel and other VCs have bought a third of the island, now privately governed. A newly elected Honduran government is trying to get rid of them, but the billionaires have taken the nation to World Bank arbitration. 

Libertarians in New Hampshire want to push current residents out…

Everyone can do something to stop libertarians 

[Jeanne recommends actions here.]


We currently have 94 YAL members in the NH legislature. Whether you are housebound, shy or broke, you can still help wake up your friends, neighbors, communities and networks…

Still time for May 14 town meeting & ballot candidate filing

  • Ballot April 9 Towns Deliberative session & candidate filing past
  • Town Meeting May 14 Candidate filing, Mar 27-Apr 5
  • Ballot May 14 Towns Deliberative Mar 30 – Apr 6; Candidate filing Mar 27- Apr 5

May 14 meeting and ballot towns still have a chance to make sure you have trustworthy pro-democracy candidates for every seat. Even openings for Cemetery Trustee and Planning Board are important. Anti-democracy candidates are coached to start in innocuous positions to build name recognition before running for higher office. Preparing for State Elections

Candidates for state office register June 5-14. Now is the time to ensure that your districts have good options for electable pro-democracy candidates. Remind House candidates that if they have a majority, they can vote the first day of session to allow remote attendance at hearings. This can make a huge difference in the burden of serving. How to Identify Anti-democracy Candidates

How can voters identify those trying to thwart democracy? Watch for a candidate who wants to:

  • DEFUND, CLOSE, OR TOTALLY DEREGULATE what they’re elected to run. For instance, a zoning board candidate might point out a harmful zoning law and then conclude that all zoning regulations should be repealed.
  • HARASS OR THREATEN those managing the town, county, or other employees. For instance, they may demand extra reviews, audits, copies, meetings, or forms.
  • PROMOTE anti-intellectual and anti-scientific attitudes and policies, for instance, encouraging the legalization of inappropriate medications.
  • HIDE FROM TAXPAYER SCRUTINY the use or outcomes from taxpayer spending, such as educational vouchers.
  • MAKE ELECTIONS & VOTING MORE DIFFICULT by requiring hand counts, unusual documentation, complicating absentee voting and so on.

If you identify new candidates who meet these crtieria, please let us know so we can add them to the watch list.

*******************

News about Concord
Muzzle-the-people bill goes down in flames! 

A bipartisan majority of the NH House voted 211-129 to “indefinitely postpone” HB 1479. This was an ALEC look-alike bill being pushed across the nation to muzzle any state or local official from testifying. It would have barred any advocate from a membership organization, like NH Municipal Association, from testifying for or against laws that affected towns. It would have barred staff of any nonprofit that took a state grant from testifying on behalf of children, or mentally ill or whomever they represent.
     Sean Themea came to NH last week to speak at the NH Liberty Forum. Themea is COO of the Texas-based, Koch-funded Young 

Americans for Liberty, Texas resident Themea asked the NH audience to support HB 1479. He stated that the bill would keep lobbyists funded by NH DOT from asking to increase gas taxes. NH road maintenance funding has been flat over 12 years. But higher gas taxes eat into petroleum demand and profits.
  The bill’s impacts would have far exceeded petro profits. HB 1479 would have muzzled the voices of NH teachers, town officials, and activists not funded by plutocrats.
    This was not “Liberty” legislation. It was a pay-to-have-your-say bill. And the NH House defeated it, soundly, bipartisanly! The following people voted “Nay”, meaning they supported this look-alike bill put forward by plutocrats to muzzle those who oppose their interests:

Alexander, Joe, Hills. 29
Ammon, Keith, Hills. 42
Ankarberg, Aidan, Straf. 7
Aron, Judy, Sull. 4
Aures, Cyril, Merr. 13
Avellani, Lino, Carr. 4
Aylward, Deborah, Merr. 5
Bailey, Glenn, Straf. 2
Ball, Lorie, Rock. 25
Bean, Harry, Belk. 6
Belcher, Mike, Carr. 4
Berezhny, Lex, Graf. 11
Berry, Ross, Hills. 39
Bickford, David, Straf. 3
Boyd, Stephen, Merr. 10
Brown, Richard, Carr. 3
Burnham, Claudine, Straf. 2
Coker, Matthew, Belk. 2
Comtois, Barbara, Belk. 7
Connor, James, Straf. 19
Corcoran, Travis, Hills. 44
Cordelli, Glenn, Carr. 7
Costable, Michael, Carr. 8
Davis, Arnold, Coos 2
DeSimone, Debra, Rock. 18
Dolan, Tom, Rock. 16
Doucette, Fred, Rock. 25
Drago, Mike, Rock. 4
Dumais, Russell, Belk. 6
Dunn, Ron, Rock. 16
Erf, Keith, Hills. 28
Ford, Oliver, Rock. 3
Gagne, Larry, Hills. 16
Gorski, Ted, Hills. 2
Gould, Linda, Hills. 2
Granger, Michael, Straf. 2
Greeson, Jeffrey, Graf. 6
Griffin, Gerald, Hills. 42
Harrington, Michael, Straf. 18
Harvey-Bolia, Juliet, Belk. 3
Hill, Gregory, Merr. 2
Hoell, J.R., Merr. 27
Janigian, John, Rock. 25
Janvrin, Jason, Rock. 40
Kaczynski, Thomas, Straf. 5
Kelley, Diane, Hills. 32
Kennedy, Stephen, Hills. 13
Kenny, Catherine, Hills. 13
Khan, Aboul, Rock. 30
King, Seth, Coos 4
Kofalt, Jim, Hills. 32
Kuttab, Katelyn, Rock. 17
Ladd, Rick, Graf. 5
Lascelles, Richard, Hills. 14
Layon, Erica, Rock. 13
Leavitt, John, Merr. 10
Lekas, Alicia, Hills. 38
Lekas, Tony, Hills. 38
Lewicke, John, Hills. 36
Love, David, Rock. 13
Lynn, Bob, Rock. 17
Mannion, Dennis, Rock. 25
Mannion, Tom, Hills. 1
Mazur, Lisa, Hills. 44

McConkey, Mark, Carr. 8
McGough, Tim, Hills. 12
McGuire, Carol, Merr. 27
McGuire, Dan, Merr. 14
McLean, Mark, Hills. 15
Moffett, Michael, Merr. 4
Nagel, David, Belk. 6
Newton, Clifford, Straf. 6
Noble, Kristin, Hills. 2
Notter, Jeanine, Hills. 12
Nutting, Zachary, Ches. 11
Osborne, Jason, Rock. 2
Ouellet, Mike, Coos 3
Pauer, Diane, Hills. 36
Pearson, Mark, Rock. 34
Pearson, Stephen, Rock. 13
Perez, Kristine, Rock. 16
Peternel, Katy, Carr. 6
Phillips, Emily, Rock. 7
Phinney, Brandon, Straf. 9
Ploszaj, Tom, Belk. 1
Polozov, Yury, Merr. 10
Popovici-Muller, Daniel, Rock. 17
Porcelli, Susan, Rock. 19
Post, Lisa, Hills. 42
Potenza, Kelley, Straf. 19
Potucek, John, Rock. 13
Pratt, Kevin, Rock. 4
Prudhomme-O’Brien, Katherine, Rock. 13
Qualey, James, Ches. 18
Quaratiello, Arlene, Rock. 18
Reid, Karen, Hills. 27
Rhodes, Jennifer, Ches. 17
Roy, Terry, Rock. 31
Santonastaso, Matthew, Ches. 18
Seaworth, Brian, Merr. 12
See, Alvin, Merr. 26
Seidel, Sheila, Hills. 29
Sellers, John, Graf. 18
Sheehan, Vanessa, Hills. 43
Simon, Matthew, Graf. 1
Sirois, Shane, Hills. 32
Smart, Lisa, Belk. 2
Smith, Jonathan, Carr. 5
Smith, Steven, Sull. 3
Soti, Julius, Rock. 35
Spillane, James, Rock. 2
Spilsbury, Walter, Sull. 3
Stapleton, Walter, Sull. 6
Stone, Jonathan, Sull. 8
Summers, James, Rock. 20
Tenczar, Jeffrey, Hills. 1
Terry, Paul, Belk. 7
Thomas, Douglas, Rock. 16
True, Chris, Rock. 9
Tudor, Paul, Rock. 1
Turcotte, Len, Straf. 4
Ulery, Jordan, Hills. 13
Verville, Kevin, Rock. 2
Vose, Michael, Rock. 5
Wallace, Scott, Rock. 8
Walsh, Thomas, Merr. 10
Wherry, Robert, Hills. 13
Wood, Clayton, Merr. 13
Yokela, Josh, Rock. 32

Subscribe to this monthly newsletter

Share

Tweet

Forward

Share


Your questions and comments are always appreciated at admin@granitestatematters.org
Copyright © 2024 Granite State Matters, All rights reserved.

Categories ALEC, Billionaires, Budget Cuts, Citizenship, Dark Money, Democracy, Deregulation, Disruption, Education Industry, Elections, Extremism, Funding, Koch Brothers, New Hampshire, Privatization

Garry Rayno: New Hampshire’s Issues Go National

By dianeravitch
March 19, 2024 //
3

Garry Rayno writes about state politics for InDepthNH, a subject he has covered for the past three decades. Here he explains how the old adage that “all politics is local” has been reversed. Now, with the advent of big money, all local politics is influenced by national agendas. Read what he has to say about vouchers. As in every other state, most vouchers are claimed by students already enrolled in private and religious schools. There has been no mass exodus from public schools. In fact, there has been almost no decline in public school enrollment. Taxpayers are now subsidizing families who can afford private schools on their own.

Rayno writes:

CONCORD – You can expect partisan politics to play a larger role in the legislature during the second year of a two-year term.

It is an election year and both parties are hard at work appealing to their bases and defining the other party as the bad guy.

However, the ill-will appears to be growing over the last decade and there is a reason or two for what is occurring.

More and more state legislatures are put in the middle of national issues that once were the purview of the political professionals.

One of the major reasons for the national attention is the US Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision swinging open the doors of the Brinks Trucks to let millions of dollars of outside money pour into a small state like New Hampshire to sway the outcome of elections.

The $1.3 million of campaign funds spent in 2022 on the New Hampshire Legislature by groups affiliated with the Koch Foundation would have been unimaginable before the court’s decision giving corporations first amendment rights as if they were individuals.

The national parties are also reaping the rewards of the decision and in turn spend rigorously to elect their candidates.

All that money investment does not come free as the people contributing expect a hefty return on investment.

Consequently many national wedge issues find their way into the legislative agendas of both parties.

The last few sessions of the House this month reflect some of what there was little of in years past.

For example House Bill 1156, which targets the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control over their guidance during the pandemic and its future guidance coming in a couple of months on pandemics to come.

The contention is that the two organizations put the state’s sovereignty at risk while revisiting the shutdown and masking debates from the pandemic’s greatest impact.

On its own, given the political philosophy of the majority of the Republican House members, it does not appear to be unusual.

But if you Google state sovereignty and WHO and CDC you will see that many other state legislatures have similar if not identical bills before them this year.

The national battle over electronic vote counting machines made it all the way down to town meeting votes this year, although the ban was not very successful, the push has been ongoing since the “Big Lie” over voter fraud in the 2020 election.

The National Republican Party had touted “voter integrity” which really means disenfranchising as many voters as possible before the 2024 election.

House Bill 1569 would do away with the affidavit exemption allowing a person to vote if a registered voter forgot a photo Id or the proper paperwork for same-day registration. That in itself will disenfranchise thousands of voters, and essentially does away with same-day registration, which New Hampshire adopted so it would not have to have motor-voter registration under the Help America Vote Act. 

This change is likely going to court if it passes the Senate and the governor signs it.

The bill also expands the challenged voter provision, which puts the onus on the challenged voter to go to superior court to prove otherwise which means thousands more will be disenfranchised.

Other bills approved by the House last week would shorten the time period for voter purges from the checklist.

On the other side, the House killed House Bill 1364 which would have resulted in criminal charges if someone intimidated an election official, exerted improper influence over the election process or tampered with electronic ballot counting devices.

While that has not been an issue in New Hampshire as it has in some other states, mostly in the south and southwest, you have to wonder why the House killed the bill unless some of what would be illegal is planned for the next election.

Democrats also pushed a bill to have the state join the Election Registration Information Center, which has not interested the state in the past, and was killed last week.

Democrats proposed a series of House resolutions, which indicate the wishes of the legislature, but do not have the weight of law that included universal health insurance, and differentiating between individual and corporate rights (sound familiar).

Perhaps the most costly example of New Hampshire following a national agenda is the Education Freedom Account program, which began three years ago following other nearly identical programs in places like Arizona, Florida, Wisconsin and Louisiana.

A recent study by the Cleveland Plain Dealer of the program in Ohio which greatly expanded its program last year, noted that despite the number of new students in the program, the enrollment in the public schools did not decline, meaning most of the students benefiting from the expansion were already in private schools meaning it’s ultimately a subsidy for parents who already could afford to pay the tuition. 

The study found that about 65 percent of the total grants were private school grants and most were to religious schools.

Those numbers also reflect what the New Hampshire program has seen, that most of the students enrolling in the program were already in private or religious schools, or homeschooling when the program began with 1,635 students in the 21-22 school year and growing to about 4,500 students for the 23-24 school year.

The year before the program began there were 164,918 students in public schools, according to data on the Department of Education’s website, and the first year of the program there were 164,950 students in public schools, the second year, 163,681 and this school year 165,082. [Emphasis added]

That too would indicate that most of the students receiving EFA grants are not leaving public schools to join the program.

The program’s income cap is expected to increase to 500 percent of the federal poverty level, next school year — the House has passed the bill, it is expected to pass the Senate and the governor has said he would sign it.

Parental rights are another issue that has been targeted nationwide by Republicans while Democrats continue to push for raising the minimum wage, which is a national issue since the state did away with its own minimum wage in the 2011-2012 term and moved to the federal rate.

And transgender issues have been before the legislature, particularly for minors, as they have been in many other states.

All the same issues surfacing at the same time would certainly indicate that some groups or organizations are behind the efforts.

And the political parties are also using state legislatures to continue what they hope will be the dividing lines in the upcoming election.

Oh for the days of clashes over education funding and shoreline protection.

But we are still fighting over education funding, but it’s at least our own fight.

Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.

Categories Education Industry, Funding, New Hampshire, Privatization, Religion, Separation of church and state, Vouchers

New Hampshire: Republican Legislators Want to Lift Income Caps for Vouchers

By dianeravitch
February 10, 2024 //
3

Garry Rayno has been covering New Hampshire politics for decades. He writes in InDepthNH with a sense of astonishment about the Legislature’s eagerness to remove the income limits on the state’s recently enacted vouchers, noting that vouchers (called “Education Freedom Accounts”) are claimed mostly by families whose kids never attended public schools and that vouchers are likely to bust the state’s budget. The state’s education commissioner Frank Edelblut homeschooled his children, and he seems to view public schools with contempt. He was appointed by Governor Chris Sununu.

He writes:

…Two of the three bills would either remove any income cap or have a list of situations that automatically would qualify a student for the program, making both bills about universal vouchers with no limits on parents’ income.

The first year of New Hampshire’s EFA program, the income limit was 300 percent of federal poverty, and that was increased last session to 350 percent.

House Bill 1665 would increase the income cap to 500 percent of poverty or over $150,000 for a family of four, which is just over the state’s median income, which means slightly more than half the families in the state would qualify.

And yes the greatest use of the EFA program money continues to be for tuition at private and religious schools and homeschool programs for kids who were not in public schools when the EFA program began in 2021.

House Bill 1634 would remove any income cap from the program and House Bill 1561 has nine categories with automatic eligibility, which together, provide parents with an opportunity to successfully find a reason to have their student or students qualify.

Reaching Higher NH estimates if all the students in private or religious schools or homeschools qualify for an EFA, it would cost the state about $105 million, which is a far cry from the $300,000 Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut claimed would be the first year cost of the program.

But his estimate was much less than the real cost — $8 million — the first year, and $15 million the second year and as estimated $25 million this school year.

That is money that comes from the Education Trust Fund which is used for the adequacy grants to all school districts and charter schools, special education costs, building aid and transportation.

The fund currently has a $200 million surplus but that won’t last long if the program balloons to over $100 million a year…

To date about half the states have a voucher program of some kind, most not universal or as expansive as New Hampshire’s. A handful of states have universal programs.

If you wonder what can happen with these programs when they become universal, look at Arizona.

The state’s first school voucher plan using money that would have gone to public schools — like New Hampshire’s does — began in 2011.

A proposition for a universal plan was defeated by voters in 2018, but the Republican controlled Legislature approved a universal plan in 2022 and it was signed by then outgoing Gov. Doug Doucey.

Newly elected Democratic Gov. and former Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, tried to do away with the universal plan her first year in office, but was blocked by the Republican legislature. This year she wants some guardrails and transparency for the program, but the legislature is not likely to agree.

The Empowerment Scholarship Accounts program costs the state $1 billion annually and is the biggest driver in the state’s growing budget deficit of $400 million.

Criticism of the program includes using the state money for ski passes, piano purchases and other “luxuries.”

When the program expanded, about 75 percent of the new students were never public school students, much like New Hampshire’s experience.

Another universal program is in Florida where Gov. Ron DeSantis pushed through expanding their voucher program to universal last year as he prepared to run for the GOP nomination for president.

Among the complaints after the universal program began, ironically, was state money was used for tickets to Disney World.

Idaho and Utah also have universal programs and Indiana’s covers 97 percent of the state’s students.

Most states limit eligibility for the program to less than 300 percent so currently New Hampshire is more generous than any state that does not have universal voucher programs.

For example, Maryland limits participants to185 percent, North Carolina 133 percent, Ohio 200 percent, and South Carolina to Medicaid recipients.

There are several other bills dealing with the EFA program that will come before the Legislature this year including two that would allow any student turned down for a hardship placement in another school district would automatically qualify for the EFA program the next year.

Another bill takes aim at the organization that administers the EFA program. It would require the Children’s Scholarship Fund to establish an affiliate in New Hampshire as it has in every other state where it runs their voucher programs.

This push to move money out of public education and into private entities is not unique to New Hampshire.

The last several years, many states have had bills similar to the one that made it through New Hampshire in the 2021-2022 biennial budget, as it had trouble standing on its own.

There is a great deal of dark money behind this push coming from familiar places like the Devos and the Koch Foundation and it is not all about the quality of education as they would like you to believe.

One of the last healthy bastions of unionized labor is teacher unions and many involved in the push for school choice want to see that change.

There is one bill in the Senate and one in the House that would establish the position of part-time teacher, someone who works less than 30 hours a week and does not need Department of Education credentials.

The war on public institutions is not always what it appears to be, but you can be assured at the heart of it is big money, taxes and small government.

Categories Accountability, Budget Cuts, Education Industry, Funding, New Hampshire, Vouchers
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »