February 2022

Is Jeb Bush Behind Oklahoma’s Plan To Insert The Benevolent Hand Of Government Into Homeschooling? It would appear so.

Few ideas for ‘big’ legislation DON’T come as boilerplate ideas from national think tanks. Many times, though they may work in other states, they are not appropriate for Oklahoma, yet legislators bring them into the capitol because of the hand that offered them.

[Position Statement: ROPE firmly supports Parental Choice in Education as personified by charter schools, online learning, homeschooling and private school. We also support tax credits and tax credit scholarships to help families who need assistance with finding the education that is right for their child/children. We do not, however, support vouchers – money provided by the state injected into the private solutions of homeschool and private school.]

During my daily research reading, I recently stumbled onto an article; “Alaska legislators’ education bills include one to give state funds to some students in homeschool and private school“. Here is a paragraph that interested me:

Another bill would provide public funding for students who are homeschooled or in private school. Students would be eligible for $5,930 per year in scholarships if they have disabilities, attend a “low-performing school” or have a parent in the military, among other criteria.

Followed by this:

Gillham said he got the idea for that bill from a summit he attended last November in Florida, held by ExcelInEd, an organization started by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

Here’s the ENORMOUS problem with this: Jeb Bush pushed Common Core throughout the nation and Oklahoma though it was a decided federal takeover of state schools. In fact, Bush’s Common Core Problem was thought to be but one of the reasons Bush fell so far behind former President Trump in the 2016 elections – well that, and his firm position as a member of the Republican establishment – the very team Trump was sent onto the field to beat.

THE JEB BUSH OKLAHOMA LEGACY

Throughout the tenure of former State Superintendent Janet Barresi, Bush was a prominent figure in Oklahoma education ‘reform’.

In 2013 Bush sent a letter to legislators (while ROPE, other organizations and parents worked hard to push back against the nationalization of state standards under one umbrella), saying:

“There is a lot of misinformation flying around about Common Core State Standards. Below is a roundup of recent articles, opinion pieces and posts by policy advisors, debunking Common Core myths and highlighting voices in the transition to these new standards. You’ll also find quotes from teachers weighing in on Common Core and see how state and business leaders are supporting the higher standards.”

Yes, what in the world do parents know Mr. Bush, when state and business leaders support Common Core? Ever the elitist, Bush has always been about POLICY over PARENTS – wining and dining legislators as he works to help ‘the little people’ he loves so much.

That same year, as a result of FOI requests by In The Public Interest, it was shown that Bush, Chiefs For Change and Governor Fallin’s office essentially colluded to ram Bush-driven policy down the throats of Oklahomans – many of whom were simply parents trying to protect their kids from having to dumbed-down standards that have now been shown not to have produced any meaningful increase in test scores in the states where the program was adopted.

During 2014 (though Common Core was repealed from state law that year), while Governor Mary Fallin was head of the National Governor’s Association and Superintendent Baressi was a member of Bush’s organization “Chief’s For Change”, Baressi, a State Board Member and then-Senator-turned-current-candidate-for-State-Treasurer Clark Jolley (a co-author of Oklahoma’s Common Core bill) all attended Bush’s National Summit in Boston. {Incidentally, as an aside, it is a bit interesting that Senator Treat’s SB1647, money is to be dispersed through a department inside the treasury…}

BUSH’S ORGANIZATION EMBRACES LEFTISTS RIGHT, AND WELL, LEFT

Granted, education policy should necessarily be bipartisan in a perfect world, but an organization who invites people like Melinda Gates, former Obama Education Secretary Arne Duncan (who attributed opposition to the Common Core to “white suburban moms” upset that their children weren’t as “brilliant” as they thought they were) and David Coleman (the author of the Common Core pictured below in a slide from one of my videos on Common Core) to speak at their conferences and colludes with states to override the will of parents on education policy, should NOT be in a position of INFLUENCE WITH OKLAHOMA LEGISLATORS.

Unfortunately, it seems as though we’re seeing near repeat of the Common Core battle here this session (2022) over Governor Stitt’s desire to increase school choice by offering vouchers (state money) to PRIVATE EDUCATION SOLUTIONS (home and private schools).

GOVERNOR STITT INVITED JEB BUSH TO SPEAK TO LEGISLATORS ABOUT EDUCATION REFORM

In May of 2021, Governor Stitt invited “his friend” Bush to visit with members of the legislature and others – including Robert Ruiz of Oklahoma’s Choice Matters and Secretary of State Ryan Walters, who is also the Executive Director of an organization called Every Kid Counts – about ‘education reform’.

Apparently, the feeling is mutual for the Governor’s friend, who touted the Governor’s recent State of The State Address on his ExelInEd website.

Here’s an even more frustrating thing. While visiting the ExelInEd website, I found a piece from late last year which says this:

Look at Oklahoma. The state stands out in the NAPCS analysis for having the largest growth in charter school enrollment by both percentage gains and by absolute number. The number of new charter students in Oklahoma alone accounts for 15 percent of all new charter students in the nation.

It then goes on to say this:

When families face huge challenges they don’t wait for solutions. Again, look at the homeschool numbers from the US Census Bureau. Families didn’t wait for policymakers to adjust the boundaries or enrollment caps in 2020. They created their own path forward. Such policies as arbitrary enrollment caps and exclusive school boundaries carry a heavy irony. By protecting a system that limits flexibility and mobility, policymakers encourage families to create their own solutions outside the system, thereby endangering the very system they are trying to protect.

WHAT? Maybe I’m reading this wrong, but it sounds to me like this policy article from ExelInEd basically says that LEGISLATORS SHOULDN’T WANT FAMILIES CREATING THEIR OWN EDUCATIONAL SOLUTIONS OUTSIDE THE SYSTEM because it endangers the choice systems they’re trying to create!?

WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?

So, let’s think on this. If the government infuses money into PRIVATE education solutions, the entire enterprise ceases to be private – homeschoolers (and private-schoolers alike) who ‘use’ state-provided money for homeschooling will – at a minimum – be pulled into the state data collection system when there’s likely NO DATA ON THEM IN THE SYSTEM PREVIOUSLY.

Gosh – to put the old tin foil hat on here – if the state’s elitists do away with ALL private education solutions by inserting the hand of government to the point where all students become part of the system like they began with Common Core – how close are we to the Great Reset and One World Government?

Yes, that was a leap, but let’s look at some facts:

Jeb Bush is a member of the BIG GOVERNMENT Bush “Legacy”. His father gave us Agenda 21 and his brother gave us The Patriot Act (government surveillance means nothing if you’re not doing anything wrong).
Bush has always stood firmly on the side of government-backed national standards (ie; Common Core). Just internet search “Jeb Bush and Common Core”. You’ll find pages and pages with the same theme.
Jeb Bush has a 10-year legacy with Michael Bloomberg, owner of Bloomberg media which is a partner in the World Economic Forum – the organization peddling the Great Reset.
And then there’s this: “The 3rd largest FEC fine in history was just levied and it’s against someone you might not expect. The Jeb Bush Super PAC that eventually morphed into a prominent Never Trump effort, “Right to Rise,” has been caught red-handed accepting an illegal $1.3M donation from a Chinese corporation.”

Truly, why in the world would anyone in Oklahoma government billing themselves as a conservative hear a word Jeb Bush has to say?

What does it say that Oklahoma legislators and elected officials seem to have such a love affair with this man?

Why would Oklahoma Republicans put ‘blinders’ on and go along with ANY bills/laws/ideas simply because ‘Republicans’ say it’s a great idea – especially without researching first?

Hopefully, these questions are really good wake up questions for us all to ask ourselves NOW.

February 27, 2022 0

Governor Stitt’s State of The State – Public Education – Where We Can And Can’t Agree

I would like to say this as an opener to this piece: This is not a rebuke of Governor Stitt – there are many things our Governor has done of which we all approve – but there is a sincere lack of agreement in the area of ‘School Choice’ that needs to be addressed. I am not criticizing to criticize, but to make points I think EVERYONE – especially Republicans – should think about before blind acceptance of the concept of state-sponsored ‘school choice’ through yet another voucher system.

Here is the transcribed version of Governor Stitt’s State of The State Address. I am only addressing the part of his speech regarding government education.

This is the section in which the Governor addressed Government Education – I have bolded the sections with which we take exception –

I have bolded and italicized the popular ‘buzz words’ used to create emotion around the topic of ‘school choice’ –

My comments are enclosed in parentheses.

(1.) We provided record funding for all public schools, including charter and rural schools.
These initial investments were good first steps for Oklahoma’s education turnaround, but there’s much more to do.
(1a.) Just 15% of Oklahoma high school graduates are ready for college in English, math, reading and science — less than one out of five. We can do better than 47th in the nation when it comes to our kids
(Democrats say this every time they want more funding for schools).
We’ve tiptoed around the edges for far too long. It’s clear the status quo isn’t working. We need to take bold steps. It will take courage, and it will take a desire to make a generational impact. This is our moment!
(There is always an emergency that requires government to act – Nancy Pelosi perfected this concept with ObamaCare.)
(2.) We know education is not one-size-fits-all, and I pledge to support any legislation that gives parents more school choice, because in Oklahoma, we need to fund students, not systems! ProTem Treat filed a bill called the Oklahoma Empowerment Act. It makes sure that money follows the student, and it would make us a national leader in school choice.
(Oklahomans were told this about the Lyndsey Nicole Henry Scholarship and our creation of charter schools, yet, we are STILL not apparently a ‘national leader in school choice’. When will that come? How many times will we be told this very thing?
Let me be clear: Oklahoma has a lot of great schools, but the results don’t lie. We need new ideas, more options, and higher standards for our kids
(Again, how many ‘new’ ideas are there? The more the government micromanages, the worse schools get because of the layers and layers of laws and rules).
This is just common sense.
(I’m missing the common sense part I guess.)
(3) We have a duty to make sure nothing stands in the way of an Oklahoma student achieving their full potential. There are roadblocks – literally. State law creates artificial barriers for school districts that don’t put our students first.
(Wasn’t this supposed to be solved that with last session’s bill to allow students to transfer to any school – even though the school to which the student would transfer has ways around taking them – all the way back to HB1017? No unintended consequences even today from that bill that just HAD to be passed to ‘fix’ Oklahoma 🙄.)
Our school transportation formula is outdated and broken. We desperately need to modernize it.
(What does ‘modernize’ mean? It is a word without definition in the government setting. Here, the word ‘modernize’ can only mean spending more money and/or ‘growing government’. Taxpayers should REQUIRE definitions for terms attached to their tax dollars.)
(4) Another roadblock in our current system keeps some of the best teachers out of the classroom. Right now, some talented teachers choose to leave the classroom to make more money as an administrator. Oklahoma students can’t be the best without the best teachers. That’s why I’m proposing matching funds so that our best teachers can make six figure salaries and stay in the classroom.
(What criteria will make a ‘best’ teacher? Will that require creation of a commission or other new expansion of government? Republican Governors have said this ad Infinium, yet the only thing developed to ‘grade’ teachers was Obama’s ‘Teacher/Leader Effectiveness’ program instituted by former State Superintendent Janet Barresi now shown to be a failure in every state in which it was implemented.*)
It’s the right thing to do for our teachers and for our kids!
(How do we know? What metrics are used to make this statement? Every year, Oklahoma continues and doubles-down on failed systems – stacking up laws and programs government schools should follow – yet we still languish at the ‘bottom’ of the NAEP – National Assessment of Educational Progress. This comment means absolutely nothing if not backed up by some kind of plan that doesn’t involve more failed government interventionist policies.)
Another way to support Oklahoma educators is to protect their paychecks from union bosses. The same unions that have pushed critical race theory and school closures intimidate new teachers into handing over part of their salaries. Liberal unions want to keep a stranglehold on their cut of teacher pay. Enough is enough! Every other profession lets you opt-in to health insurance and other benefits at work every year. Unions should be opt-in, not opt-out!
(ABSOLUTELY, but why – after years of lip service to this idea – has it NOT BEEN DONE?)

1. WHY DOES THE LEGISLATURE CONTINUE TO FUND FAILING PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

Seriously. Our Governor appears proud of all the funding poured into government schools but then directly follows that statement with DATA indicating that the majority of Oklahoma students are NOT READY FOR COLLEGE.

The obvious takeaway here then, is that the State Legislature is filled with people who either don’t see connections (more money doesn’t equal results) or are sadly politically weak-kneed and refuse to buck the bullies that run the Leftist indoctrination centers we call ‘public’ schools. If there was enough political will in our state capitol, the State School Grade Card (created because of strings to federal government funding) would be used to determine failing schools and some kind of monetary sanction would be determined and prescribed until the school improved the way they educate the pupils entrusted them, despite the kicking, screaming and fit throwing from the public school ed bullies, instead of growing government or transferring the process of taxpayer accountability for failing public schools to parents accepting state funds. Now THAT would be accountability!

2. PUBLIC OPTIONS BECOME POLITICAL FOOTBALLS.

If you know education isn’t a one-size-fits-all endeavor, why make all private solutions (private and homeschools) public ones by infusing them with taxpayer dollars?

Doesn’t that create yet another extension of an already-broken system?

One major talking point for the bill has been, “This is voluntary, no one has to take the money” yet Senator Greg Treat, during his defense of SB1647 in the Senate Education Committee (where the bill only passed 8-7 with Treat and Majority Floor leader McCortney’s extra-committee voting) said numerous times that ‘state’ (government) money necessarily has to come with strings and that we couldn’t be worried about what might happen in the future. Hmmm…isn’t that why we have SO MANY LAWS with UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES?

Oklahoma’s Lindsey Nicole Henry’s (LNH) voucher scholarship (signed in 2011) has been adjudicated in court NUMEROUS times because it became a political football for the Left to use against the Right to sabotage the program.

Most recently, former Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter issued an opinion regarding an attempt to force private schools taking students on LNH scholarships to add ‘sex’ to their state-required discrimination policy.

Oklahoma Council for Public Affairs writes:

However, several years after the passage of the LNH law—after State Superintendent of Public Instruction Joy Hofmeister became head of the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE)—officials at OSDE rewrote the regulations governing the LNH program to also bar discrimination based on sexual orientation and religious affiliation. Those revisions were then approved by the State Board of Education, which at that time consisted of Hofmeister and members appointed by then-Gov. Mary Fallin.
The revised regulations effectively required private religious schools that adhere to traditional Christian teachings to nonetheless hire atheists and abandon student code-of-conduct requirements regarding sexuality and marriage if they accepted LNH students.
In November 2020, the revised OSDE regulations led the State Board of Education—by that time consisting mostly of Gov. Kevin Stitt appointees who were not involved in the earlier revision process—to initially reject the application of one private Christian school that sought to serve LNH students.

So, if a REPUBLICAN-appointed board is going to apply Obama-orginated Title IX guidance to LNH-required anti-discrimination law (42 U.S.C. section 2000d), and a subsequent REPUBLICAN-appointed board acted on that change, what would happen under a DEMOCRAT Governor-appointed board?

Though AG Hunter’s opinion states that the State Board “lacked the statutory authority to impose additional requirements on participating schools” (among others) and Hofmeister said of the decision that the Board would “move forward in accordance with the opinion“, an opinion has only advisory effect – another Board may see things another way.

This goes for federal law as well. In 2016, the heads of the Department of Justice and the US Department of Education Office For Civil Rights sent a Dear Colleague letter to all state schools that they were adding transgender rights to Title IX law. Let’s not quibble about the fact that these Dear Colleague letters mean little to nothing, because states and schools have a history of following them like Supreme Court decisions. During his presidency, Trump rescinded this ‘guidance’ only to have Biden reinstate it not long after his inauguration. This introduced HUGE amounts of confusion into a system already generally overregulated and confused.

Other than being classified as extremists – which has virtually always been the case with citizens who buck existing systems and authoritarians – homeschooling in Oklahoma is conducted according to the Constitution with ZERO state administration of any kind, creating ZERO room for politicization such as this.

3. NO. GOVERNMENT CAN’T COVER ALL THE BASES IT WOULD TAKE TO MAKE SURE A STUDENT REACHES THEIR FULL POTENTIAL.

I understand the sentiment – I do. No one wants a ‘child left behind‘ but the amount of red tape we got when the Federal government tried to achieve that goal could circle the earth twice.

What ends up happening with this kind of thinking is not that the bottom gets elevated, but the top gets drug down. It’s like the ‘even the playing field’ idea – it’s a socialist notion.

You can’t continually take from others with more and give it to those who have less because eventually you have a society with no middle class (a CLASS-LESS society), which is what’s happening now.

If parents themselves won’t step up and take control over their child’s education, you can’t legislate or incentivize them to do so. I’ve written about this numerous, numerous times from the perspective of an education policy researcher and that of a former teacher.

We need to stop this kind of ‘equity’ thinking and concentrate on helping the majority of kids while letting non-profits and those who wish to volunteer their time (and there are lots of those thank goodness!) to help those that are – for whatever reason – not in a position to help themselves.

4. TEACHERS LEAVE THE CLASSROOM FOR A LOT OF REASONS, BUT MOSTLY BECAUSE ADMINISTRATORS WON’T ADMINISTRATE

How is government going to fix that? Administrators are already supposed to administrate, yet there are at least two bills I’ve seen in the legislature this year adding yet another law to Title 70 TO MAKE ADMINISTRATORS DO THEIR JOBS. How can adding yet another law fix that?

My contention has always been that the Conservative option is always the best – our state should stop writing school law, repeal a lot of existing school law and GET OUT OF THE WAY OF COMMUNITY CONTROL!

Why do you suppose charters aren’t working the way they were at the beginning of the charter movement? We legislated them to death too! I worked for a charter school that was GREAT when it started only to watch it get worse and worse every year to the point that it was no different than the neighborhood school.

In fact, I left teaching for MANY of the reasons given in this blog (none of which was money-related). Essentially, I had no control over my classroom anymore via ineffective administration, over testing and overbearing parents.

INSTEAD OF STATE-SPONSORED VOUCHERS, LET’S:

1. Cut Bureaucracy Don’t Add To It – as ROPE showed with Common Core, Turning Around Failing Schools, and all the other pillars of Obama’s Education Reform system – BUREAUCRACY DOESN’T WORK, it simply impedes the process.

Instead of ADDING laws, REPEAL laws relating to government education. Webs of laws entangle and confuse those they are meant to control.

Republicans talk endlessly about ‘local control’ but rarely REMOVE state laws and mandates to allow schools to function according to community needs as addressed by local school boards. Could this be part of the reason parents finally quit participating in the process until recently?

In fact, it could be argued successfully that part of the reason school boards stopped addressing (or listening to) the needs of parents is that parent desires are often stymied or take a back seat to the need (or drive) to receive funding by following state and federal laws – the latter of which are not even Constitutional. As Republicans say they believe – but rarely follow – THE LESS GOVERNMENT the MORE INNOVATION, POSSIBILITY and OPPORTUNITY.

2. Provide tax credits for parents wanting to use other systems – Instead of taking money from parents and then ‘giving’ it back to them with strings created by the need for the state to be accountable to the money it gives parents – simply DON’T TAKE IT FROM PARENTS IN THE FIRST PLACE.

This seems up front enough but then the argument becomes – “what about parents who don’t pay into the system”?

To take from others to give to those without is REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH – something, again, Republicans are ostensibly not for. It used to be that the poor were cared for by churches and communities – have churches shrunk because they have nothing to do now that the state does all their work for them?

Once the government got involved – thank you very much LBJ and your “war on poverty” – (More than 100 million people, or one-third of Americans, received some type of welfare aid, at an average cost of $9,000 per recipient. If converted into cash, this spending was five times what was needed to eliminate all poverty in the U.S.) the number of those in poverty skyrocketed because there was no reason to remove oneself from their impoverished circumstances if the government was simply going to ‘help’ you by giving you money.

3. Provide tax credit scholarships for taxpayers wanting a tax deduction and parents wishing to apply for a scholarship. Oklahoma has the Lyndsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for children with disabilities to attend schools other than their failing neighborhood school. Why not create another tax deduction scholarship for those who would like to pay in to ‘sponsor’ needy students?

4. Stop Funding Failing Schools – truly, what difference does it make if you take the money from the school to follow the kid when government schools STILL have no incentive to get better? Eventually – even with the benevolent hand of government guiding us – you’re eventually going to RUN OUT OF SCHOOLS TO RUN TO!

————————————

*The evaluation, Improving Teaching Effectiveness: Final Report (587 pages, PDF), found that while the sites succeeded in implementing new measures of effectiveness and used them to inform a range of personnel decisions, the initiative did not lead to an overall improvement in student achievement or graduation rates. Although interim evaluations as of 2013-14 had found small improvements in grades 3 through 8 reading scores at some schools, the final report concludes that, as of the spring of 2015, the initiative had had no significant impact on students’ reading or math outcomes. https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/gates-teacher-effectiveness-initiative-fell-short-study-finds

February 25, 2022 0

Legislation Watch 2022

SB 1108 Bergstrom: Adding items to be reviewed by School Finance Review Commission http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20ENGR/SB/ SB1108%20ENGR.PDF

SB 1125 Bullard: Directs school districts to post on their websites certain professional development information http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/ SB/SB1125%20INT.PDF

SB 1126 Garvin: Removes limits on school district general fund carryover; requires online posting of carryover amounts http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20INT/SB/SB1126%20INT.PDF

SB 1149 Bergstrom: Directing school districts and charter schools to post certain learning materials online http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1149%20INT.PDF

SB 1404 Daniels: Requires boards of education to direct a certain election to certify school employee organizations

http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/ SB/SB1404%20INT.PDF

SB 1471 Paxton: Educational Income tax credit—Provides a credit for qualifying educational expenses http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1471%20INT.PDF

SB 1592 Treat: Liability insurance—Creates the Educators’ Professional Liability Insurance Program requiring liability coverage for school employees http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1592%20INT.PDF

SB 1647 Treat: School Voucher/ESA’s—Creating the Oklahoma Empowerment Act http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20COMMITTEE%20SUBS/SCS/ SB1647%20CS.PDF

SB 1652 Jett: Higher education—Directs certain institutions to post certain budget information on their websites http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20INT/SB/SB1652%20INT.PDF

SCR 15 Dahm: Higher education—Requires the State Regents for Higher Education to submit a certain report by a certain date http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20INT/SRES/SCR15%20INT.PDF

SB 634 Daniels: Payroll deductions for public school district employees http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20COMMITTEE%20SUBS/HCSS/ SB634%20HCS.PDF

SB 962 Treat: School board elections http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20ENGR/SB/ SB962%20ENGR.PDF

SB 1142 Standridge: Obscene books in public schools http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/ SB/SB1142%20INT.PDF

SB 1141 Standridge: DEI curriculum in higher education http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/ SB/SB1141%20INT.PDF

SB 1174 Burns: “Action civics” in public schools http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1174%20INT.PDF

SB 1420 Dahm: School Voucher/Scholarships http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1420%20INT.PDF

SB 1402 Dahm: Professional teacher charter http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20COMMITTEE%20SUBS/SCS/SB1402%20CS.PDF

SB 1274 Dahm: OHLAP changes http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1274%20INT.PDF

SB 1119 Garvin: Adjunct teachers http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1119%20INT.PDF

SB 1144 Garvin: Substitute teachers http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1144%20INT.PDF

SB 1162 Merrick: School Scholarship—Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/ cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/SB1162%20INT.PDF

SB 1627 Pugh: Teacher quality http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1627%20INT.PDF

SB 1621 Pugh: Statewide charter school authorizer http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1621%20INT.PDF

SB 1403 Daniels: Part-time enrollment http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/SB1403%20INT.PDF

SB 1582 Treat: School board recall http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/SB1582%20INT.PDF

SB 1270 Standridge: Education Scholarship http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1270%20INT.PDF

Click to access SB1135%20INT.PDF

SB 1620 Pugh: Public school transportation http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20FLR/SFLR/SB1620%20SFLR.PDF

SB 1622 Pugh: Leasing school district property to charter schools http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/SB1622%20INT.PDF

SB 1675 Pugh: Higher education realignment http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/SB/ SB1675%20INT.PDF

HB 2967 Provenzano: Education—Mask mandates http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/HB2967%20INT.PDF

HB 2973 Olsen: Mental health—Parental and Family Rights in Counseling Protection Act http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20FLR/HFLR/ HB2973%20HFLR.PDF

HB 2980 Stearman: School districts—Prohibiting use of state appropriations to pay fees or membership dues http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/HB2980%20INT.PDF

HB 2985 Rosecrants: Education—Makes state tests voluntary http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20INT/hB/HB2985%20INT.PDF

HB 2988 Olsen: Education—Bars use of 1619 curriculum http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/ hB/HB2988%20INT.PDF

HB 3052 Hasenbeck: School freedom—Modifies program eligibility for Lindsey Nicole Henry scholarship http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/HB3052%20INT.PDF

HB 3063 Ranson: Extends the Open Meeting Act to student organizations at a public university or community college http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/HB3063%20INT.PDF

HB 3351 McCall: Taxation—Tax credit for donation directly to teachers http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20FLR/HFLR/HB3351%20HFLR.PDF

HB 3676 Wolfley: Superintendents—Limiting superintendent salaries http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/ cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/HB3676%20INT.PDF

HB 3431 Osburn: School Scholarship—Lindsey Nicole Henry scholarship; removing requirement that student spend the prior year enrolled in a public school http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB3431%20INT.PDF

HB 3482 Martinez: Digital Wallet for Education—Creating the Digital Wallet Program Act http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB3482%20INT.PDF

HB 3542 Caldwell: Higher education—Student and Administration Equality Act; disciplinary proceedings http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/HB3542%20INT.PDF

HB 3543 Caldwell: Higher education—First Amendment Training for Higher Education Administrators Act http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/HB3543%20INT.PDF

HB 3756 Johns: Education scholarships—Lowering household income for eligible student http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB3756%20INT.PDF

HB 4318 Stearman: Parents Bill of Rights—Right to attend meetings pertaining to education of a minor child http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB4318%20INT.PDF

HB 4328 Stearman: Schools—Requiring all public school library media program material to be available for public inspection http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20INT/hB/HB4328%20INT.PDF

HB 3084 Hilbert: Public school transportation http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB3084%20INT.PDF

HB 3086 Hilbert: Public school transportation http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB3086%20INT.PDF

HB 4387 Baker: Teacher quality http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB4387%20INT.PDF

HB 4388 Baker: Teacher quality http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB4388%20INT.PDF

HB 4389 Baker: Computer science in public schools http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB4389%20INT.PDF

HB 4208 Echols: Virtual charter students http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB4208%20INT.PDF

HB 3643 Dills: Charter school authorizers http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/ 2021-22%20COMMITTEE%20SUBS/HCS/ HB3643%20CS.PDF

HB 3099 Hilbert: Oklahoma’s Brightest Students Act http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20INT/hB/ HB3099%20INT.PDF

HB 4196 Echols: Higher education http:// webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2021-22%20FLR/HFLR/ HB4196%20HFLR.PDF

February 25, 2022 0

Oklahoma Conservative PAC Arguments For “Money Follows The Kid” (Voucher) ‘School Choice’ Option Are Wrong-Headed and NOT CONSERVATIVE

Being a conservative is often a lonely position. Asking people to take responsibility for THEMSELVES to prevent government intervention is not an easy sell in a world where all the creature comforts of human existence are but a moment away. After being attacked personally by OCPAC for an opinion Reclaim Oklahoma Parent Empowerment corporately holds, a rebuttal is in order.

In full disclosure, several members of ROPE met with OCPAC President Bob Linn February 8th to discuss our concerns with SB1647, during which time Mr. Linn admitted he had not read the bill.

Let’s be very clear: NO, ROPE does not support the movement of tax dollars (government money – vouchers) to private or homeschools.

Here are the ways ROPE SUPPORTS PARENT EDUCATIONAL CHOICE:

Individual and family tax credits for home or private school. Oklahoma doesn’t have this option currently, but there are several bills in the legislature this year to do so – SB1471 – and several modifications to increase the EOES (below)
Tax credit scholarships created by private individuals and corporations that make a donation to a scholarship set up for families in need to use for a tax credit (Oklahoma already has the Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship program that fits this bill.) The EOES supports both students in failing schools AND low income families.
Money following the child throughout the public (government) school system from failing schools (open transfers)
Creation of charter and other ‘extra’-public schools of which Oklahoma now has 30 (OSDE charter school report)

Here is the email sent by OCPAC on Valentine’s day 2022, to which I respond using quotes from the email.

“The passage of SB1647 is a must and will give authority to the parent to direct their child’s education.”

This is incorrect. Oklahoma parents have more authority to direct their child’s education than many other states. Parents in Oklahoma can:

constitutionally home school their children in any way they please
send their children to an Oklahoma private school – many of which provide scholarships for needy families on their own (Casady, Heritage Hall, Oklahoma Christian School, Holland Hall, etc.)
send their children to a public online charter school like EPIC, which provides tax dollars to parents who would like to school their children at home using EPIC’s curriculum
send their children to a brick and mortar charter school (link above)
begin saving their money in a state-sponsored 529 program when their children are born to use for either college or a private K12 school
use the EOES mentioned above to attend a private school
transfer to another public school – if allowed by the school to which the transfer would be made
use the Lindsey Nicole Henry scholarship (voucher) for students with disabilities to attend a private school

“Education dollars are fiduciary funds”

The term ‘fiduciary’ comes from the word ‘trust’. A ‘fiduciary’ responsibility imposes a restriction that money given (or taken) is used in good faith and in the best interest of the owner of the money. That’s all that means.

The government has no money it doesn’t forcibly take from citizens (people who don’t pay their taxes go to jail or lose their property), so all ‘government’ dollars are tax dollars, taken from the people. Yes, government has a fiduciary responsibility for those funds, but how many times have those been overlooked and money spent wastefully and fraudulently? Who is NOT familiar with wasteful government spending? Tom Coburn was.

Bob uses Social Security as an example. This is a sad example of ‘fiduciary’ funds. Though I’ve paid into the SS system, it has been raided over and over by government overreach to the point that few of us my age will have funds to use for retirement. What happened to the government’s ‘fiduciary’ responsibility there? Clue: GOVERNMENT DOESN’T CARE ABOUT ‘FIDUCIARY’ RESPONSIBILITY or public schools wouldn’t be the problem they are now. If government cared, they would have appreciated their fiduciary responsibility and made schools responsible for not educating students all along.

TJ Schmidt, an attorney with Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), does not agree with Bob’s assessment and says that, because all money comes from taxpayers, any government money taken from citizens but then given back – as in to home or privately school children (voucher) – comes with the need to make those funds ACCOUNTABLE to taxpayers.

Here is a PERFECT example from Arizona, a state where government money is given to homeschooling families. CLUTCHING PEARLS…how could it be that a government audit found $700,000 abused by ‘homeschooling’ parents?

When citizens are ‘incentivized’ to use government money to do something they don’t have the personal responsibility to do on their own, there will be fraud – it’s simply human nature.

In fact, my contention is that parents who want to homeschool do so to ESCAPE government entrapment and don’t want ANY government involvement. Parents who want government money to school at home use a system like EPIC where government money pays for curricula to be used at home. Data from Arizona indicates I’m correct.

Arizona has the Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (much like SB1647) allowing state money to go to numerous types of schooling including private or homeschooling. Please note several things:

parents funding private school OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETS were the happiest of all
though polling shows 29% of Arizonans would use private school and 14% homeschool, the actual numbers are MUCH LESS – 6% and 2% of Arizonans actually use the GOVERNMENT programs respectively and Arizona was one of the earliest adopters of ‘school choice’ programs

In fact, EdChoice tells us that 23% of Arizona’s students are eligible for vouchers and tax credit programs and 100% of students are eligible for a tax credit scholarship, but ONLY 7% OF ALL ARIZONANS USE ALL PROGRAMS TOGETHER and that’s the best record in the nation!

No data had been collected on the Lindsey Nicole Henry voucher for children with disabilities for 10 years, until last year, providing no previous accountability to taxpayers for the program.

Data for 2021 indicate that after a 31 million dollar investment over the 10 years, only 1,135 students took advantage of the program in 2021 and of those that reported their status (112), only 32% (36) were economically disadvantaged.

“We have denied an equal playing field” to children sentenced to a failing neighborhood school

How have we done that? I just cited 8 ways parents can direct the education of their children and showed that, when offered, most parents don’t take advantage of voucher programs or tax credit scholarships.

But beyond that, since when did a ‘conservative’ talking point become ‘equaling the playing field’?

I searched the term ‘equaling the playing field’ and found this slide show about how COMMON CORE equaled the playing field for all kids. Now that’s great! But, as we said it would for YEARS, Common Core – making every child have the same curricula across the US – FAILED SPECTACULARLY, never amounting to any kind of positive change on student achievement of any kind.

CONSERVATIVES DO NOT USE GOVERNMENT TO ‘EQUAL PLAYING FIELDS’, we want the government to stay in its own lane and allow PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND THE MARKET TO CREATE CHOICE.

“Those who oppose educational choice where money follows the child display an arrogant and callous disposition to the less fortunate”

Gosh, I guess, people like Ben Carson, whose single mother worked three jobs to allow Ben and his brother a great education and Mark Robinson (Lt. Gov. of North Carolina) whose family was dirt poor but made sure he and his siblings were well educated have it all wrong. Government should have come in and incentivized their transformation – because government ALWAYS produces programs that work.

I find it sad that a Christian Conservative, would – essentially – call those who want LESS government and more personal responsibility ‘arrogant and callous’.

In Matthew 26:11, Jesus tells us that the poor will always be with us.

Leviticus 23:22 quotes the Lord as saying, “When you harvest the crops of your land, do not harvest the grain along the edges of your fields, and do not pick up what the harvesters drop. Leave it for the poor and the foreigners living among you.”

In other words, INDIVIDUALS, left part of the harvest for the poor to harvest themselves. The Romans taxed the Jews horribly, but their religion told them it was THEIR responsibility to help the poor.

As PragerU said in a recent Instagram post, “Jesus advises us to be of “generous spirit” – to show kindness, to assist the widow and the orphan. But he clearly means this to be our responsibility.”

Conservatives are those who promote LESS GOVERNMENT, PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, PRIVATE COMPETITION and INDIVIDUAL GIVING.

“More than that, they also fail to understand that no parent should see their educational dollars forced into the government’s failed model of education.”

Nope, we get it – we just want it done THE RIGHT WAY – via tax credit and tax credit scholarship. Both would remove money from public education, but do so BEFORE the money is taken by the government in the first place.

Here’s something Bob doesn’t apparently understand – the legislature appropriates education dollars. Why don’t we ALL advocate that, instead of giving more and more tax dollars to FAILING government education, the legislature use the grade card the State developed to get ESSA funds, to pull funding from failing schools?

Bob acts as though schools just fail by themselves. It’s a cascade of failure from appropriations and over-regulation by the state and federal governments, through parents who have let school boards run amok by trusting they were doing the right thing and never checking up.

Bob complains that government schools are unGodly and parents shouldn’t have to leave their children in that situation.

OF COURSE THEY ARE! THEY ARE PROPPED UP BY SECULAR GOVERNMENT MONEY! Do you honestly think that sending government money into home and private schools WON’T PRODUCE THE SAME RESULTS? It absolutely will. Right now, the only thing staving off an atheistic society are Christian home and private schools. Why do you want to compromise the two things that are working under complete parent control? That makes absolutely no sense!

In fact, schools that participate in the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship – including private Christian schools – are required to comply with the antidiscrimination provisions of 42 U.S.C., Section 2000d, which the Biden Department of Justice has used to force schools into transgender bathroom policies and anti-discrimination policies protecting transgender athletes. I’ll just leave that there.

Why not instead work with churches to create programs like microschools, learning pods or to provide daily tutoring, or even create a school specifically for those below the poverty line? The Biden Justice Department can’t force policy there. Again, why does GOVERNMENT have all the answers? Don’t conservatives think the private sector has those?

In closing, Bob calling me “a bit callous, heartless and cold” for wanting the private sector to do their job instead of allowing government to do that is a bit social justice warrior for me – especially in the face of Conservative principles. Government doesn’t provide choices, the private market does and the more government ‘does’ the less churches and the private market do.

Note this: in 2021, homeschooling and private schools grew and Oklahoma public schooling LOST STUDENTS thanks to parents deciding to homeschool and leave government schools ON THEIR OWN POWER.

Just recently I posted a meme to our social media about how single-parent families could homeschool and was inundated with OTHER ideas as well:

coming together to co-house and afford housing to homeschool
working from home and schooling when able in their schedule
church-created homeschool coops for single parents
teaming up with other families to create a coop so that each day the parents rotate so one is in charge of the children every day
teaming up to hire a tutor to teach all the children each day
homeschool families bringing in children of single parents to school with their own kids (I did this with the child of a single friend. She just became a part of the family and she graduated with my own!)

These are AWESOME ideas that parents came up with all on their own without the ‘benevolent’ hand of the government ‘helping’ them.

CONSERVATIVES, STOP TRYING TO USE GOVERNMENT TO SOLVE THE PROBLEMS WE LET GOVERNMENT CREATE IN THE FIRST PLACE. The only ways to help students out right now (other than making the legislature responsible for their funding of failing schools) is to provide individual family tax credits for home and private schooling and tax credit scholarships for the same. This would help parents and ‘punish’ failing schools without government strings while allowing the free market to work.

February 15, 2022 5

Oklahoma Government Schools Give 6- 12 Grade Students Surveys To ‘RAT OUT’ Friends, Neighbors and Parents For Grant Funds – HELP US PASS SB1448 TO HELP STOP THIS NONSENSE

These are just a few representative questions from the Oklahoma Prevention Needs Survey for 6th grade which can be found here. Questions for the 8, 10 and 12th grade survey is found here. These questions are being asked of students as young as SIXTH GRADE.

But not only are 6th grade students asked to ‘RAT OUT’ their friends, this survey asks similar questions about PARENTS and NEIGHBORS!

This was forwarded through a parent in Edmond Public Schools. The school sent a letter out via email to parents to inform them of the survey and their right to opt out.

THERE WAS NO LINK IN THE LETTER TO THE DIRECT SURVEY, just descriptions of a few of the more minor questions and a notice that parents could DROP EVERYTHING AND COME TO THE SCHOOL TO VIEW THE SURVEY.

Of course I believe that every parent should do just that, but why not make it easy to access the survey questions online? Everything else – including learning – has been shuttled online, why not a link to these INVASIVE surveys?

WHAT ARE THE PARTICULAR PROBLEMS WITH THIS SURVEY?

1. The Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment protects students from being given surveys paid for with Federal funds that ask the following type questions:

Please note how many of the questions in the screenshot above VIOLATE THE PPRA!

Ahhh, but herein lies the kicker – it doesn’t protect children from invasive surveys given at the state level – including this one!

This is why ROPE worked with author, Senator Shane Jett, to create a bill (SB1448) that would force school Administrators to sign an affidavit that a survey does NOT violate the PPRA. Please ask your legislator to Co-Author this bill with Shane Jett, to protect our children from these invasive surveys.

2. If a parent got interested at all from the letter sent by the school they could internet search “Oklahoma Prevention Needs Survey” and they would find this – on the Oklahoma State Department of Education website:

Please note – you are to contact an “EPIDEMIOLOGIST” for information. According to Wikipedia: Epidemiology is the study and analysis of the distribution, patterns and determinants of health and disease conditions in defined populations. It is a cornerstone of public health, and shapes policy decisions and evidence-based practice by identifying risk factors for disease and targets for preventive healthcare.

Why in the world would we be using class time to assess student populations for reasons of ‘SHAPING POLICY DECISIONS”? Schools appear to be having a terrible time making sure a majority of their students can read at grade level.

Because results of the surveys will be used to “collect school-level data needed for grant program eligibility”! Our kids are being given invasive surveys asking them to tattle on friends and family members FOR MONEY.

3. Edmond public schools assures parents that these are ANONYMOUS surveys and that no personal data will be attached to the surveys. This is a bald-faced lie. No school can guarantee that student data will be kept anonymous – especially if surveys are to be given by a THIRD PARTY. The Oklahoma Prevention Needs Survey is being given through the OSDE by Oklahoma State University researchers. How many people will handle that data? How can the school prevent a name or id from being attached to the survey?

ROPE has written a great deal about the dangers of student data collection that came with the Common Core. All one needs to do is use the search engine to search the word “data” on our blogspot and find numerous well-researched articles that explain the nature of data collection and why data can never really be anonymous. Or, if you don’t trust us – internet search the terms “student privacy”. That should provide plenty of information indicating the LACK of privacy for students when data is collected through government schools.

FYI: If a parent found the page on the OSDE website and tried to “click for more information” they would find that the page goes NOWHERE.

Using the Way Back Machine found a page that went directly to the Oklahoma State Department of Health (OSDH) website. This page gives more information about the surveys and says,

The survey also includes risk and protective factors, which are attitudes, behaviors, and opinions that research has shown to be highly correlated with these health risk behaviors.

Exactly the things that schools should not be giving to children according to the PPRA.

These are not the only surveys being given to students in our public schools. This blog talks a bit about the Youth Risk Behavior surveys which ask – not only questions about drug use – but ask very personal questions about sexual behavior – another taboo topic according to the PPRA.

HERE’S THE BOTTOM LINE: PARENTS! DO NOT ALLOW YOUR CHILDREN TO TAKE ANY SURVEYS OR FILL OUT ANY QUESTIONNAIRES AT SCHOOL – and help us pass SB1448 this 2022 session!

February 4, 2022 0

Government Take-Over in Invented Emergencies (SB1647 – The Oklahoma Empowerment Account Program)

Guest Post by Emily Hladik (Bio below)

SB 1647 creates the Oklahoma Empowerment Account Program under an emergency declaration. As an Oklahoma homeschool mom, I oppose this legislation.

While I believe the state of Oklahoma’s public education is in a state of emergency, this legislation attempts to expand publicly funded education without addressing the actual issues with existing public education. Private schools and homeschooling families that participate in this government expansion will do so at the price of their own autonomy and constitutional freedom. This bill is being promoted as a silver-bullet solution, touted as not growing government and heralded as a champion of protecting private schools and homeschooling in Oklahoma—absurdities.

Supporters of this legislation claim the Oklahoma Empowerment Act (OEA) is the solution to the ills of public education.

It names an “Agency” to be created within the OK Department of Treasury and allows for private contracting of services (see Page 3 and Page 10). The “Agency”, remember that’s the Department of Treasury, will be in charge of creating and approving applicants and setting standards for educational vendors and determining qualified expenses for parents.

Not the OK State Department of Education, not the parents (their choice is limited to the approved vendors list), but the Treasury Department (or the contractor they hire).

You don’t ‘cure’ public education simply by re-assigning it to a new bureaucracy.

In fact, the only mention of the Department of Education comes on Page 8; their part is to report the cost per student enrolled in the OEA program to the Treasury Department. If the Department of Education can’t provide quality education via public schools, charter schools, and virtual schools, why would the Department of Treasury do any better at picking curriculum, programs, and schools to be participants in the OEA scheme?

The OEA is being labeled as an alternative to failed pubic education and promises on Page 15 that the program will not to expand the regulatory authority of the state beyond the means necessary to enforce requirements in the act. Geez, I wonder if it will be as limited and narrow as the US Congress’ use of the necessary and proper clause. From the text of SB 1647, there’s actually much expansion of the regulatory authority of the state already planned.

First, there’s a prohibition on “educational services providers” from sharing empowerment funds with parents (see Page 9). So parents can use funds to pay for a math tutor, but not themselves if they are teaching their children math? Each school and family that participates in the program will be subject to an audit.

Next, the state will approve educational service providers (see Page 9-10), so will homeschool families that want to participate have to be approved? What are the standards and when will those be available for review? What is the process to challenge rulings?

Finally, there will be random annual audits of 10% of OEA accounts, with cases of suspected fraud being referred to the Attorney General (see Page 11-12).

What protections are there for small private schools and parents from bureaucrats, armed with the power to audit and intimidate? What’s the oversight on the audits? And that’s just the “necessary to enforce” regulation authority that’s been disclosed, can you imagine how much more this program will grow government?

Supporters of this bill have made the outlandish claim that this government program actual protects private education and homeschooling. According to these “experts,” government intervention will increase the rights and freedoms of private businesses and individuals. It’s inconceivable, but if it wasn’t for this illogical headline I may have missed this conversation altogether.

I’ve homeschooled in several states, most of which have illiberal requirements.

For example, in Virginia homeschooling families must notify the state of their intent to homeschool. I had to verbally notify the school and filed a letter with the school district of my intent to homeschool my children.

In South Carolina homeschooling families are required to join associations that certify academic progress is being made to the state. I don’t know the history of these states’ homeschool laws, but I do know only Oklahoma has the constitutional right to homeschool. It is a major reason we choose to live in Oklahoma.

If 2020 has taught me anything, it’s to fight for what I believe in and never trust politicians who push radical agendas through invented emergencies.

Here’s the link to SB 1647 Oklahoma Empowerment Act . I encourage you to read it for yourself and tell your legislator to oppose this government power grab and FIX the publicly funded education system that already exists!

Bio, Emily Hladik:

I am a homeschool mom, creator of www.GreatAmericanStudies.com, and co-founder of Enid Freedom Fighters. I have a M.Ed., have been an adjunct instructor of history and political science, and married to my U.S. Marine (Ret.) husband for over 20 years.

February 3, 2022 1

SB1447 STOPS MANDATORY SCHOOL BOARD TRAINING and SB1445 REDUCES ALL SCHOOL BOARD TERMS TO TWO YEARS

Over the last several years, it has become abundantly clear that many K12 public school boards do not have the best interest of parents at heart. For the last several years, parents across the country have expressed frustration over issues such as mask policies, Critical Race Theory and inappropriate reading material, only to have their microphones turned off, be completely ignored by Board members, or forced out of meetings by police.

At the end of last September, the contentious issue of parents and school boards came to a head when the National School Boards Association (NSBA) penned a letter to the Biden administration asking them to review whether angry parent outbursts can be acted upon as violations of the Patriot Act – indicating their wish to have dissenting parents treated as terrorists.

By October 4^th, Attorney General Merrick Garland was directing the FBI to meet with federal and local law enforcement and state AGs toward the end of “addressing” school board outbursts and “threats”.

Public outcry over the letter quickly resulted in school board associations across the US canceling their memberships in NASBA, sending NASBA reeling to a corner from which they issued a public apology.

The Oklahoma State School Boards Association (OSSBA) did neither. Though a group of Oklahoma law makers sent a letter to OSSBA President Shawn Hime asking him to withdraw from NASBA over the letter, Hime refused to answer and – as past president of NASBA – continued OSSBA’s association with NASBA anyway.

The news only gets worse. Thanks to an FOI request submitted by grassroots parents group, Parents Defending Education, it became clear that Biden Secretary of Education, Miguel Cardona, actually ASKED NASBA to write the letter to the Biden administration and later, Cardona added the head of NASBA to the board which governs the National Association of Educational Progress (The Nation’s Report Card) ostensibly as a “thank you” for his service.

Why would the OSSBA ignore the request of state legislators to withdraw from NASBA – especially after the controversy continued?

Because the OSSBA is not for parents, they are for the education bureaucracy.

In fact, the OSSBA is no stranger to controversy. The OSSBA fought every effort to stop Common Core, frequently siding with the Superintendents union (CCOSA) and the OEA among others. They have been for every teacher pay raise offered – especially the enormous Step Up plan in 2018.

The OSSBA is a non-profit corporation which, though it has partners, receives millions of dollars a year from public schools for dues, training and other services, making it an organization paid ostensibly with tax dollars.

Though HB1775 was passed last year to stop the teaching of CRT tenets in public schools, the OSSBA seems very preoccupied with race. There’s a section of their blog entitled, “Voices” which has several essays on race and a post outlining “The Problem With HB1775”.

Then there are some very problematic trainings based on race and equity:

Then there is their affiliation with the NASBA Equity Symposium:

Then, there’s all the lobbying they do. Last year they wanted to stop school board elections from being held in November:

According to Title 70 5-110, school board members are to receive 15 hours of training over a five year term.

Elected legislators are not required to receive training prior to taking their seat – nor are they to take continuing education courses.

City Council members and Mayors are required to take a one day course given by the Oklahoma Municipal League (OML).

Why should school board members be forced to receive so much more training than any other elected official?
Why is the OSSBA listed in law as a training provider? Isn’t that protectionism?
Why would the law say that ELECTED school board members can be removed if they do not take training? How can an official elected by the PEOPLE be removed by the government for not taking mandatory subjective training?

School Board members should NOT be forced to take statutory training, nor should they be able to be ‘fired’ if they refuse mandatory training, nor should a non-profit PRIVATE organization be listed in law as a training provider.

SB1447 by Shane Jett repeals statutory training and, instead provide optional training for school board members at their local vo-tech, where the money would stay in their town instead of going to a non-profit organization that doesn’t need more state money. It also removes the OSSBA as a training provider and repeals the section that allows school board members to be fired for not attending training.

SB1445 reduces school board terms to two years.

Title 70 5-107a describes the length of school board terms. Elementary District members serve 3 year terms. Independent districts with five-member boards serve 5 and 7-member boards serve 4.

Most district terms are 4 years. If a school board member begins their term fighting parents at every turn, like a school board member from Deer Creek Schools, Lorrie Bamford, no change can be made to the seat for FOUR YEARS, leaving parents with little ability to have a voice in their child’s school throughout their entire high school career!

State Representatives are elected EVERY TWO YEARS. Why should a school board member have a term longer than a State Representative?

A two-year term could make it easier for busy community members to serve at least one term on their local school board, increasing the pool of possible candidates – plus, prevent authoritarian Board Members from becoming entrenched in their position and hard to remove in favor of more parent friendly candidates.

Please support these two bills by asking your Senator and Representative to sign on as Co-Authors! OSSBA will do everything it can to make sure neither of these bills pass the legislature and we’ll need YOU to see that they do!

February 2, 2022 1

Month

Then there are some very problematic trainings based on race and equity:

Then there is their affiliation with the NASBA Equity Symposium:

Then, there’s all the lobbying they do. Last year they wanted to stop school board elections from being held in November: