By GARRY RAYNO, InDepthNH.org
From proposed new rules on minimum education standards to alternative educational opportunities, the state Legislature and the executive branch seem to have their priorities upside down.
Call it the culture war, call it the public education war, or whatever you want, but about 3 to 4 percent of the state's school-age students, most of whom are in private religious schools or home-educated. ) is receiving more attention. Approximately 24 percent of food insecure public school students do not receive similar accommodations.
While there is ample evidence that hungry students are not fully focused on their studies and are less likely to succeed academically than those who do not come to school hungry, the House of Commons last week , by a narrow margin, said: He said children could go hungry due to food insecurity in one of the wealthiest states per capita in the country.
Supporters of House Bill 1212 were willing to cut costs by lowering the income limit from 350 percent to 250 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $17 million per year from the Education Trust Fund instead of $50 million. .
However, this failed to garner enough support from Republicans, and the bill was removed from the agenda on a near-partisan vote, effectively killing this year's bill.
The Republican majority also would spend $150,000 in federal pandemic relief funds to hire coordinators to help approximately 1,500 homeless students who are ineligible for state homeless services because they do not live with their parents. I didn't want to.
Many of our 1,500 students identify as LGBTQIA+ community.
Many of the same people who don't want to use state and federal funds to feed the hungry and help homeless children and youth also support increased restrictions on abortion or claim to be “pro-life.” ing.
What they want to say with their votes is, we want you guys to have babies whether you want to or not, whether you can afford them or not, but once the kids are born That means it's your responsibility to take care of the baby without our help. .
“Pro-life” may not be the best word for abortion opponents who voted not to feed hungry children or help them find housing.
But two hearings were held this week on a bill to expand eligibility for the education free account program, now in its third year and each year its budget has significantly exceeded its budget.
The Senate Education Committee will hold a hearing on House Bill 1665 at 9:20 a.m. Tuesday.
The bill would raise the program's income cap from 350 percent to 500 percent of the federal poverty level ($156,000 for a family of four and $102,000 for a two-parent household, based on federal 2024 numbers). .
Under current tax rates, household income would be capped at $109,200 for a family of four and $71,540 for a family of two.
Since its inception, the cost of the program has steadily increased from $8.1 million in the first year to $15 million in the second year to $25 million in the current academic year.
The bill narrowly passed the House, and the House Finance Committee chairman said that even though it would cover many more students, it would still cover far more than 50 percent of New Hampshire households and would cost significantly more. Despite the increase, the chairman of the House Finance Committee waived fiscal review of the increase. Democrats launched a new attack on the bill.
Funding for this program comes from the Education Trust Fund, which also provides adequacy grants to public schools and larger grants to charter schools, along with special education, construction assistance, and other education activities. doing.
A hearing on Senate Bill 442 will be held at 11 a.m. the same day before the House Education Committee.
The bill would increase the income threshold from 350 percent to 400 percent, making the threshold for a family of two $81,760 and $124,800 for a family of four.
Reach Higher Education estimates the increase will cost $53.4 million next year.
This represents about a quarter of the Education Trust Fund's current surplus.
The ultimate goal of EFA program proponents is to ensure that all families in the state qualify, either by universal eligibility or by placing no income limits, and private schools and religious If all students in schools, homeschool programs, sought and received certification, it would cost between $90 million and $100 million. Subsidy.
About 10 states have universal or near-universal voucher programs, but the two that have received the most attention for their impact on state budgets are Arizona and Ohio, both here in New Hampshire. The cost is also significantly higher than the estimated cost.
The plan is bankrupting Arizona, and the Democratic governor is trying to limit its scope, but the Republican-controlled Legislature refuses to comply.
Ohio is facing a lawsuit alleging that its program harms public schools, but the majority of new participants are students already attending private schools, religious schools or homeschooling programs.
It's a familiar sound.
As one Texas senator said when Gov. Greg Abbott was pushing for school aid, “It's nothing but subsidies for the wealthy.”
And there are new rules regarding state minimum standards for public schools.
Two public hearings were held in the past two weeks, and the proposed rules were completely defeated by near-universal testimony, and State Board of Education Chairman Drew Klein said they were presented to the Board of Education in February. Although he criticized those who focused on the rules, a newer updated version is expected to be released. The latest proposal, which is expected to go before the board soon, has not been made available to the public.
The rule is intended to clarify and add detail to the state's competency-based education model, but it also lowers existing minimum standards, eliminates class size limits, and makes many standards optional rather than mandatory. , has also been criticized for no longer requiring certification. teachers and professionals.
Another concern was that the proposal would abolish the local control that characterizes state public education, move toward privatization of education, and away from what some have called “public education” the great equalizer.
Over the past few sessions, Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut has proposed legislation that would eliminate many of the current standards and focus only on the core subjects of English, math, and science, but without much success in the Legislature. I couldn't.
Many saw the plan as a way to reduce the state's share of education costs and make alternatives to public schools more attractive to students and parents.
He is tenacious about his opinions on Edelblut and public education.
States are at a crossroads in determining what public education will look like over the next decade and whether they are willing to ensure that the most vulnerable populations can fully participate in it.
The end of the 2024 session, and ultimately the next election, should give New Hampshire and its children a vision for the future.
Garry Rayno can be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.
