Sunday, March 6, 2022

OKLAHOMA'S SECONDARY EDUCATION SYSTEM NEED REFORMATION- SB #1647 IS NOT THE VEHICLE!

 Weekly Opinion Editoirla


DEBATE & DEFEAT THE BILL!

by Steve Fair

     Oklahoma Senate Bill #1647, authored by President Pro Tempe of the Senate Greg Treat, (R-Edmond), would create the Oklahoma Empowerment Act.  If it is passed and signed into law, it would give parents more control over their child’s schooling dollars.  Parents would be allowed to take $3,517 per year (the amount the state spends a year on a public-school student), put it in a saving account held by the state and use the money toward a private school education if they so choose. 

     SB #1647 passed the Senate Education committee by a vote 8-7 two weeks ago.  Four Republican Senators joined the Democrats and voted no; Dewayne Pemberton, Muskogee, Tom Duggar, Stillwater, Brenda Stanley, Midwest City, and Blake Stephens Tahlequah.  Three of the four Senators are retired public school educators. 

     On Wednesday, SB #1647 passed the Senate Appropriations Committee 12-8.  Treat revised the bill to place a cap on income for eligibility, removed allowing the money to be used for homeschooling and added some audit provisions.  Five Republican Senators voted no: Duggar and Pemberton joined by Darrell Weaver, Moore, Roland Pederson, Burlington, and Darcy Jech, Kingfisher.  The bill now moves to the full Senate. 

     Governor Kevin Stitt supports SB #1647.  He made school choice a priority in his State of the State address.  Speaker of the House Charles McCall, (R-Atoka) opposes SB #1647 and has vowed to not hear the bill in the State House.   If McCall holds firm, SB #1647 is dead on arrival.  To apply some pressure, McCall’s constituents are getting mailers from school choice advocacy groups trying to convince him to hear the bill.  Critics of the bill include both Republicans and Democrats and it appears the dividing line on the R side is urban and rural legislators.  Three observations about SB #1647:

     First, the money is taxpayer money.  It doesn’t belong to the legislators.  It doesn’t belong to the public schools.  No legislator or elected official funds a program.  Taxpayers fund programs- legislators appropriate funds.  Senator J.J. Dossett, (D-Owasso) said about SB #1647: “It’s not a good idea to send public dollars off the grid.  Public dollars belong in public schools.”  Dossett, a former teacher and coach in Owasso, is wrong.  No public funded entity is automatically entitled to any taxpayer money.  Every appropriation involving taxpayer dollars should be performance based.

     Second, Oklahoma’s education system is in need of major reform.  The Sooner state has too many school districts.  The state spends too much money on buildings, buses, and administration.  For years, lawmakers have said they were working to get more money to the classroom, but they have failed to address the real issue:  the large number of secondary school districts in the state(535). 

     Third, McCall should allow SB#1647 to be heard in the House.  He can certainly oppose it’s passage, debate against it, point out it’s flaws (there are plenty), and use all his influence to defeat it, but the job of the Speaker is not to weed out legislation they personally oppose.

     McCall, as Speaker, is the political and parliamentary leader of the House, responsible for maintaining decorum and enforcing the rules.  He designates the number of committees and appoints committee leadership and membership on the committees.  His duty does not include expunging or snuffing out legislation that has wide spread support. His role is not that of a dictator, but a facilitator.

     SB #1647 would not radically reform education in rural Oklahoma.  There are currently not enough options for students in rural Oklahomans outside of public schools, but SB #1647 deserves a debate and then it should be voted down. 

1 comment:

James L. said...

To address your points, the first one contains the line, "No public funded entity is automatically entitled to any taxpayer money." That has to be the most unhinged, out-of-touch sentence in your entire post. Could you elaborate on that? I'm getting mixed thoughts from my own mind trying to decipher what exactly you meant here. Doesn't public funding go to public programs ? I am at a loss here.

On your second point, I agree that reform is a necessary step, but what kind of solution is decreasing the number of school districts? You say it will help, but you don't explain why. The tone of your post makes it seem like you feel public education in Oklahoma needs defunding, but that contradicts your own words.

On your third point, I completely and wholeheartedly agree. Legislation on that scale should always get a vote, whether we approve it or not. That's what our legislators are paid for. If only our federal government in recent years would've put measures to a vote instead of letting the paperwork pile up on Mitch McConnell's desk, the US Congress might have made more progress than just cutting taxes for the rich and separating parents from their children at the Mexican border, but I digress.