37 Attempts At A Repeal Of The ACA And Still No Jobs Bill

House Speaker John Boehner

The fiscally responsible Republican party is always looking for ways to reduce government waste.  They search for any ‘fraud, waste and abuse’ inside the federal government in an effort to reduce the budget.  Even after they make statements about how we need to become more focused on jobs in Washington, they once again vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act.  This makes attempt number 37 for those counting.

“This vote was a waste of New Hampshire taxpayers’ time and money,”  Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter said.

The act of voting on this repeal has already cost the taxpayers over 60 million dollars (37 votes times 1.75 million in cost per vote equal 64.75 million).  I wonder what 60 million dollars would do to help some of the programs the sequester is cutting.  In fact the money wasted on repealing the ACA is more than enough to cover the cuts made to the meals on wheels program (41 million).  I wonder if this $60 million would be enough to keep the 70,000 kids in the head start programs that they are being forced out of.

Wasting our time and money aside the ACA is a good start.  According to the White House, the ACA will help over 30 million Americans who do not already have healthcare.  Right now over 86 million Americans have added protections to their healthcare coverage thanks to the ACA.  They can no longer deny you for a pre-existing condition. They can no longer charge different amounts for women or men.  They have helped millions of seniors save an average of $600 a year by closing the prescription drug ‘donut hole’.  These are just of a few of the benefits we Americans are gaining thanks to the ACA.

Congresswoman Annie Kuster stated after the vote:

“I am extremely frustrated that House leadership is more interested in refighting old political battles than actually solving problems. Instead of wasting more time and money on another vote to repeal the Affordable Care Act, both parties should be focused on growing the economy, helping create jobs and opportunity, and strengthening the middle class.

Congresswoman Shea-Porter chastised the House leadership in her statement.  “Instead of voting 37 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, Republicans should listen to the American people who want Congress to help create jobs and end sequestration. Republican House Speaker John Boehner should stop political posturing and put a jobs bill on the floor.”

Congresswomen Kuster and Shea-Porter are exactly right. They have voted 37 times to repeal the ACA and wasted 15% of their time in Washington in a futile attempt to repeal the law.

Congresswoman Kuster continued, “voting to undo these vital reforms will do nothing to improve our health care system, and only serves to reinforce peoples’ worst assumptions about Congress’s willingness to put politics ahead of middle class families.”

I want to see Congress do something to help the working families in America by pushing for a comprehensive jobs bill, not another repeal attempt.  Almost all of the people in Washington ran on creating new jobs and yet there has not been one vote on a jobs bill.  And you wonder why the Congressional approval rating is so low.

An Update On School Vouchers From Bill Duncan (@ANHPE)

Bill Duncan

Now the Senate has two voucher repeal opportunities

The House yesterday passed its budget.  Item 58 says, “Repeals the education tax credit against the business profits tax and the business enterprise tax.”  That means that your advocacy with senators for voucher repeal does double duty.  You are asking them to support voucher repeal as a free standing bill, HB 370.  But if HB 370 fails, you are also giving your senators reasons to accept voucher repeal as part of the inevitable horsetrading that will happen in June on the budget.  So even if you are talking to a senator who will surely not vote for HB 370, be not deterred!  Make the many reasons for voucher repeal clear and know that those factors will carry weight when the time comes.

And what are those factors?  Many of the issues were discussed at the very successful Senate Health, Education and Human Services Committee hearing, where supporters of voucher repeal greatly outnumbered supporters of vouchers.  Lack of business and public support has led to very low donations, even with a dollar-for-dollar subsidy from the tax credits.  Advocates blame that on the controversy but I say they brought it all on themselves.  Lack of oversight has made program administration an embarrassment.  And you must see Kathy Sullivan’s funny and hard hitting piece in the Union Leader about how bad the participating schools are.  Here is more fodder for discussion with your senator.

Funding for new charter schools is uncertain

There has been much coverage of the moratorium on new charter schools, leaving four new ones in an uncertain status.  Here is a good NHPR report summarizing the status.  And here is more background on the role of charters in New Hampshire.  The House Education Committee and the House Finance Committee have both established subcommittees that will review the role of charter schools in New Hampshire over the coming months.  The process is healthy and will enable New Hampshire to resume authorizing charter schools within a clear policy framework.

Final action on funding of new charters will now not be settled until the budget negotiations are complete in June.

New Hampshire’s pull-back is part of the national rethink on private school vouchers (@ANHPE)

Bill Duncan

As we move toward repealing the ill-conceived New Hampshire voucher program, a pseudonymous commenter toward the bottom of this Patch thread encapsulated the debate this way:

 All this focus on having “choices” makes me ask: why do taxpayers who are already providing a structure to educate every child in a given community need to also pay for additional choices based on nothing but the desire of the parent? I distinctly recall those who put this law in place two years ago telling us that churches and charities were the proper way to fund programs for “the poor.” Why is this different?

New Hampshire is one piece, but an important piece, of the national debate on privatization of public schools.  Here is today’s New York Times on the occasion of the Indiana Supreme Court decision upholding the state’s voucher program, reviewing the national state of play in the push for vouchers in Republican dominated states:

“This movement is doing more than threaten the core of our traditional public school system,” said Timothy Ogle, executive director of the Arizona School Boards Association. “It’s pushing a national policy agenda embraced by conservatives across states that are receptive to conservative ideas.”via States Redefining Public Schooling – NYTimes.com

But public school privatization is trench warfare on a state-by-state basis.  Here is Kansas, turning back a voucher program, with each side making the familiar arguments:

 The Kansas House defeated legislation on Monday that would create a school choice scholarship program funded by corporate donations.

….
“We are sacrificing their future because we are protecting a system,” said Kelley, an Arkansas City Republican.

“What we’re really talking about is diverting public funds to private or parochial schools,” said Rep. Nile Dillmore, a Wichita Democrat opposed to the measure.

And, under the headline, “Idaho lawmakers dump private school tax credits:”

A Senate panel ended hopes of private and religious schools that were pushing for Idaho to extend a tax break to people who donate to scholarships meant to defray the cost of tuition.

“The donor is going to profit off making this donation at the cost of the public,” Hill said. “That’s just not fair.”

Private, religious school officials who flew to Boise from northern Idaho for Tuesday’s hearing argued these scholarships would boost school choice for more students who wanted an alternative to the traditional public school classroom, but didn’t hail from families with the financial means to foot the bill.

Vouchers advance in lopsided Republican legislatures and are defeated in more balanced legislatures.  We need to correct the errors our last Legislature.

Reposted from ANHPE Blog

Rep. Mary Stuart Gile’s Senate testimony on her voucher repeal bill, HB 370

NH House

“Good afternoon. For the record, I am Mary Stuart Gile and I represent Merrimack District 27, which includes Concord Wards 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, & 7. I am the prime sponsor of HB 370-FN, an act repealing the education tax credit program. There are multiple reasons for doing so. Mine are as follows:

1. Constitutionality, The NH Constitution (Part I-Art 6 and Part II-Article 83) specifically prohibits public funds from going to religious schools. The Education Tax Credit program as enacted is dependent on revenue intended for the general fund as Business Profit Tax (BPT) or Business Enterprise Tax, (BET) and diverting it through an intermediary, non-profit, scholarship organization, to be used as tuition to private schools, out-of-district public schools and possibly religious schools. Currently, the constitutionality of the education tax credit/voucher is before the Superior Court with a decision anticipated in mid-April.

2. Fiscal impact – 3.4 million this year; 5.1 in 2014 and up to 135 million in a decade, given our current fiscal constraints, can NH communities afford this? And the $2500/student scholarship may sound tempting to parents but it falls far short of tuition for secular schools, which range from $5000/student to $25,000/student in NH.

 

3. Research – Studies over twenty years show no statistical difference in student achievement between students attending private school on vouchers and those in public schools. In fact public school students in Milwaukee, Cleveland and Washington, DC outperformed students with vouchers when test scores were weighted to reflect socioeconomic level, race and disability. Further, in a 2011 audit report on Milwaukee‘s parental choice program, which is the nation’s oldest, established in 1990, little difference was found in the achievement scores between students in the City‘s private school voucher program and a matched sample attending Milwaukee‘s public schools. But the voucher program cost more per pupil.,

4. Accountability -Prior to the Education Tax Credit/voucher legislation, the BPT and BET went into the State Education Trust Fund and General Fund and were accountable to NH tax payers. There is absolutely no educational or fiscal accountability plan in the 2012 Education tax credit statute for any of this money to anyone!

5. History: The education tax credit is risky education policy and a poorly conceived piece of legislation that was initiated in 2011 by the Network for Educational Opportunity, (NEO), formerly known as the ‘Alliance for the Separation of Schools and State.’

The Alliance or NEO was incorporated in California in 2000 as a non-profit organization and its current board of directors all reside outside of NH. NEO’s stated purpose is ‘provide and support a variety of educational programs and promulgate publications designed to increase public understanding and acceptance of school systems independent of government funding and control.’ Many of the Proclaimations asserted by NEO or the Alliance are particularly inflammatory regarding our Nation’s public schools. The legislation creating NH’s education tax credit was crafted in collaboration with NEO and introduced and passed in both the House and the Senate in 2012 .

After the legislation passed, NEO registered as a non-profit in NH in August, 2012 and is the only non-profit scholarship organization that has applied so far. Beyond their stated purpose, NEO’s goals are to discredit and preferably dismantle public education. In their literature, this is because public schools are controlled by the government and subject to all the ills of government bureaucracy and power, including the ‘use of force to secure their audience,’ (their language, not mine).

Obviously, NEO was unfamiliar with the fact that NH is a local control state, that while local, state and federal funds provide support for educational programs, decisions about accepting such funds, curriculum, teacher evaluation, student activities etc are all made by local school boards made up of community folks who dedicate their time to ensure that their students have the best education possible. Often at the same town meetings that have just been held around NH. Hardly big government

NEO/ Alliance promotes parent choice. NH parents already have choices…publicly funded charter schools, including the Virtual learning Academy School which is a model for the country, home schooling , open enrollment schools, public schools and any combination of these. All of these opportunities are inclusive to students of all income levels, and learning styles and abilities. Public schools unlike private schools are not selective

NEO may also have been under the impression that NH students are behind others in the nation which is far from the truth. NH students in the most recent NAEP tests scored in the top ten in the country in mathematics and reading. NH is not a Mississippi, or Alabama or even a Louisiana.

Of Course there’s always room for improvement, but 20 years of research and data do not support vouchers or education tax credits as the way to improve student learning.

The education tax credit legislation was created by an organization from California that knew nothing about our education system, How it was funded or how it worked. They proposed a plan that disregards our commitment to funding an adequate education for every NH child and includes targeted funds for children receiving free and reduced lunch, and that students who meet specific criteria receive the support that they need.

And the irony in all of this is, as a non-profit organization registered in NH, there is nothing to stop NEO from raising funds and establishing a foundation to provide scholarships to anyone. It would take more time and the scholarships might be much smaller in amount, but they could do it, without taking money from NH’s general fund and Education Trust Fund. There would be no limitations on how the scholarships were distributed and many of the religious schools could benefit.

In closing, I have served in this House for 17 years. In December, 2012, I was appointed chair of the House Education Committee, which tells you that my primary concern is Education Policy in NH. I have been an educator for over 45 years, including 17 years in the classroom, preK-college, (all income groups); 16 years as a consultant with the NH Dept of Education in ECE and Title 1,ESEA; ( state-wide responsibilities and parent involvement); 6 years as VP for Education and Development for the AAS (gifted and talented)and chair and professor of Early Childhood Education at NHTI, Concord’s Community College. I have three degrees including a doctorate in Educational Leadership from Vanderbilt University. I am also a Mother of 4 adult children and 2 adult grandchildren, (all graduates of Concord’s public schools, with some private school and home schooling as well). I am a parent, an educator and an advocate for public education. History has proven that with all its challenges, our Nation’s commitment to public education is what has made America, the greatest Nation in the World.

Lastly, our primary responsibility as legislators is to ensure that our public schools and the students who attend them are receiving the best education that we can provide and the financial assistance as required by current law, which includes adequacy funding, catastrophic aid, vocational education tuition, transportation and building aid. These are our priorities. It does not make sense to continue a program where we voluntarily decrease state revenue collection in business taxes. We cannot ask our local communities to absorb any more loss of funding and we should not continue a program that so far has proven of no educational value.

Madam Chair, and Honorable Senate Colleagues, the education tax credit is bad legislation that we simply cannot afford. I hope you will support the House of Representatives majority vote of OTP on HB 370. Thank you

Reposted from ANHPE

There are more statements on the ANHPE site

1. http://wp.me/p2OKqy-BA

2. http://wp.me/p2OKqy-Br

3. http://wp.me/p2OKqy-Bm

Voucher Repeal (HB 370) Passes NH House. An ANHPE Update From Bill Duncan

Voucher tax credit

Repeal The New Hampshire House passed HB 370, repeal of the voucher tax credit, yesterday by a vote of 188-151.  It was almost a party-line vote, with a few switches on each side and a lot of absentees.  See how your representative voted here.  The schedule from here is not set.  It could go to the Senate as late as March 28th.  When it get’s there, it will go to the Senate Health, Education and Human Services Committee, Chaired by Sen. Nancy Stiles (R, Hampton).  The committee will hold a public hearing at some point in April and then decide what to recommend.  Voucher repeal is also part of the governor’s budget, so that could affect the committee’s action.

Court Case The hearing (it is called a hearing, but it is really the trial) will be at 11:00 AM at the Strafford County Courthouse on April 26.  The whole trial will be on this one day and Judge Lewis will issue his opinion at some point after that.   There is no need for a show of numbers here, but the trial will probably last only several hours so it would be easy to attend if you are interested.  Here is our court challenge.  And here is a mapshowing the courthouse location.

There’s more about voucher repeal here.

Charter Schools

NHPR’s The Exchange broadcast today was on charter schools.  The program was notable for the consensus expressed in support of charter schools done “the New Hampshire way,” as Scott McGilvray, president of the National Education Association of New Hampshire, put it, The New Hampshire way, in this context, was seen as establishing charters that serve specific needs supplementing what the traditional public schools already do.  Governor Hassan had supported that idea in her budget address, saying that the she would give the New Hampshire Board of Education authority to “prioritize new charter school approval to underserved communities.”  Sen. Stiles, House Education Committee Chair, Rep. Mary Gile, Board of Education Chair Tom Raffio and NEA NH President McGilvray all sounded supportive of the governor’s approach but also felt that this was a good juncture at which to step back, review charter and public school performance and clarify state charter school policy.

There is more about charters here.

Bill