Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Tag

private school

A Discussion About Oklahoma Homeschool And Other Education Legislation

homeschooling tax credit

Wednesday, March 5th, Michael and I talked to Jana Belcher and Robert Scott – both Homeschooling parents who have been heavily involved in lobbying the legislature to remove homeschoolers from the Parental Choice Tax Credit voucher legislation. It was a really great conversation and covered much more than just homeschooling. Please find the full live video here on our YouTube channel and on Rumble as well.

For years, trying to fight this tax credit, so many of us have said that private schools will just raise their rates once the tax credit comes online. If more students come to the school, more teachers and instructional materials will be necessary, raising the price. And not only that, it just gives a school a good excuse to raise rates. In the clip below, Robert gives an example of exactly that happening.

In the clip below, Robert talks about the data bill we’ve been warning about. Though we didn’t talk about the specific inclusion of homeschoolers in the database, years ago when Julia Seay, Lynn Habluetzel and I were studying data collection and trying to stop implementation of a State Longitudinal Database, we had found information indicating that there were fields in the database for collecting data related to homeschooling – which concerned a whole lot of homeschoolers.

And finally, in the last clip I pulled from the full video, Robert shows us that every individual who files for the Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit has their name and the amount of their tax credit listed in the Oklahoma Tax Commission, Tax Credits database online. There is no address or phone number listed, just the name and the amount of the tax credit, but the point is, anyone can look you up to see your ‘award’.

Below is a PDF of Robert’s slide presentation. Please share this information with friends and family – and especially homeschoolers who want to take this government handout.

0

National School Choice Week Is A Taxpayer Scam

All one has to do is type in the two-word phrase “school choice” in our website’s search box to know that I’ve thought the idea of ‘school choice’ to be a scam for a very long time. Oklahoma HAS already has school choice. We have a Constitutional provision for homeschooling, we have charter schools and magnate schools and neighborhood schools and private schools and online schools – OKLAHOMA HAS IT ALL. Every Oklahoman has the ability to make whatever ‘choice’ they want by which to educate their children.

The part of the ‘school choice’ idea I DESPISE, is the part where government tells taxpayers that they’ll take our money by force and then give it to other taxpayers who ‘can’t afford’ to put their kids in a private school because public schools are so bad – the Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit Program.

Why do I hate this plan? Well, again, you can always search the website to get the full scope and picture, but this post is going to include a few screeds I’ve posted to my Facebook page in the past couple days.

This is the original post. There are lots and lots and lots of comments on this post, so I suggest you peruse it. Lots of good discussion. And I’ll remind you – you may not agree with me – and that’s okay, but we’ve GOT to have discussion on this topic before it gets any further out of hand. Don’t forget, REPUBLICANS – supposed bastions of limited government – are pushing this concept hard and have been for over a decade. This is a HUGE problem.

But back to my screeds. WordPress will not let me embed the post, so you’ll just have to click the link and navigate to the post. Sorry. Stupid WordPress.

But here’s the post for today (1.28.25) copied below. It’s based in part on the conversations we were having on that post.

I’m going to go ahead and try this one more time. And I’m not being ugly here, I’m simply being stoic and direct. Some of you will think I’m ‘mean’ – and that’s fine – everyone is entitled to their opinions, however, thinking I’m ‘mean’ doesn’t invalidate my argument or the personal observations that spawned them.

It’s not up to taxpayers to ‘fix’ public schools – it’s PARENTS. Parents have all control over their own children – and I’ve argued that when legislators come in to try and ‘fix’ schools, they end up removing parental control which makes parents and their children, more wards of the state than they are already. The more the government parents parents, the less they’ll parent themselves. It’s simple human nature.

If parents were really interested in their children’s educations because they believed they could give their children something better than the education they’re getting in government schools, there would be few government schools with large student populations at this point.

For those who are compassionate about parents who are poor and have no real choices other than government-funded education – (BTW; government should be completely immune from ‘compassion’ – that’s a perspective for individuals, not governments who operate solely with money taken by force from its citizens) – then you need to be compassionate with your own dollars. You should start a school in your community that you fund – either yourself or with enough individuals willing to help out of private pocketbooks – so that poorer community members have the opportunity to attend a government school alternative.

Here’s what will happen with the majority of attendees to this school (because I found the exact same thing when I moved from being a ‘regular’ school teacher to a ‘charter’ school teacher); parents will be very motivated/active for a short time, then, they’ll stop coming to meetings and will only be reachable when their child has problems. At that point, they’ll find a way to blame you – or the school – for their child’s actions because their child wouldn’t ______ (fill in the blank). (Incidentally, I also found this at my youngest son’s homeschool co-op as well. A parent would bring their child who had been kicked out of government school to the co-op – they’d just open the car door and drop them off – when most parents would stay. There, the kid would cause problems for everyone else in the classroom and eventually be removed from the co-op too.)

Most parents today don’t want CHOICES – they want someone to take care of their children for them – they want a babysitter and/or a bankroller. Oh, they’ll fight that statement tooth and nail and scream and holler about how mean it is to say something like that, but actions speak louder than words. Why are government schools (even those in expensive neighborhoods) stuffed with parents that won’t take even a night out of their schedules to go to their school board meetings or attend a parent/teacher night? Why? Because by and large, parents are happy with whatever is going on in the school until something goes bad – their child is failing, or is being sidelined on a sports team, or is creating issues in the classroom – and once there is a problem, it suddenly becomes the school’s fault, or the teacher’s fault and SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE.

Everything goes back to FREE WILL. We all have it – and as Christians, we should be pointing to that fact over and over and over again. If people want to do things, they do them. If they don’t, they won’t. The ‘compassion’ of using tax dollars (someone else’s money) to send kids to private schools won’t fix that.

As Jesus said in the New Testament – the poor will always be with us (Mark 14:6). Jesus knew that some people won’t make good CHOICES and that some people are too lazy, uncaring, or improperly educated enough to make good choices. Taking tax dollars from one person (maybe a person like me who homeschooled their kids and still had to pay for public schools too) and giving it to another (to do the same thing I did without ‘government help’) won’t make them CARE for their children any more than they already do. It doesn’t work, but by creating and perpetuating this system, one of the things you will do – is violate my religious conscience by sending my tax dollars to a Madrasa or a Satanist school. I’ve read the Bible. My God is a jealous God. Is it right for me to pay for the teaching of another religion?

In fact, isn’t this the same argument people (Christians?) use against the giving of public tax dollars to Planned Parenthood to perform abortions? Yup. It’s the same argument and people should realize that there is no difference in philosophy between paying for abortions and paying for people to send their kids to private schools – people just don’t want to confront the ugly truth; a large percentage of parents aren’t willing to make more of a commitment to their children’s education than what is found in their local public school. Period. That’s not an excuse for government intervention at any level.

So, look, the bottom line is this – we Republicans are either going to follow the path of limited government like has been embedded in our Platform since its near inception – or we’re going to abandon the idea of Party altogether. Right now – in my opinion – saying I’m a Republican is meaningless. I believe in the Constitution – as written, not as litigated in a court of law – and LIMITED GOVERNMENT. I also believe that any legislator who believes that taking money from citizens by force and then giving it to other taxpayers to fund an activity they could work out for themselves without access to my tax dollars is WRONG. Period. Sadly, this puts me out of sorts with so many people who believe themselves to be Republican – but that’s a problem for ALL Oklahomans – not just me.

1

Parent Choice Voucher Program Not Ready December 1st As Promised, Treat Frustrated

Without spending a lot of time re-hashing our stance on the Parental Choice voucher program – the state should NEVER, ever, ever, EVER, allow tax dollars to be used as tuition to a private school – no matter how hard you have to work to find the ‘right’ words to make it sound palatable to the plebes. More on this later this week.

Friday, December 1st, the Parental Choice voucher program was supposed to be open for enrollment. Next thing I know, there’s a communication in my inbox from Senate Pro Temp Greg Treat:

Interesting. KOSU reports that the vendor MERIT is to blame for the delay.

KOKH reports that MERIT is a vendor for the voucher picked by the Oklahoma Tax Commission from a list supplied by OHMES. It wasn’t a competitively bid job. The job of collecting applications wasn’t done inside the OTC, it was farmed to an out-of-state vendor. (Remember when that happened with Federal educational funds dispersed to Oklahoma during COVID? If you’re not sure, look here and here.) All that local Oklahoma student data – to an out-of-state vendor that uses a data warehouse called SNOWFLAKE that functions in the cloud. All one needs to do is look at this page on the Merit site where you see the term “digital wallet” and there’s no way a parent SHOULDN’T wonder where the data associated with their family’s application will go.

Julianne Romanello has done a very large amount of research on Merit and the tax credit/voucher and has found that this whole scheme – vouchering private schools under the government umbrella while collecting huge amounts of data on students – is just another way to connect students to the global education workforce pipeline. She’ll be the first guest on the FIRST ROPE Report after the holidays (Wednesday, January 10th – so mark your calendars NOW!) BEFORE our legislature goes into session, to talk about this. In the meantime, please find our video about all the data collection pathways and the State Longitudinal Data Base on YouTube. Parents, it’s time to OPT OUT of these systems of tracking your children. That’s all I’ll say for now.

In addition, it’s important to note that the tax credit/voucher program started out in the hole. The deal struck with MERIT was for nearly 4 million dollars, yet the legislature had only appropriated one million dollars for set up. Imagine that, the government over-budget on something. But then, imagine the government actually doing the job the legislature intended them to do.

So, Jenni, you gripe and moan but offer no solutions. Well, not exactly. For years our mantra has been, “don’t tax us for failing schools” or alternatively “don’t tax us for public education we don’t use”. So, instead of providing a blanket voucher to people to take government tax dollars to a private school where they’ll then be subject to government regulation, just let us keep our money – period. Don’t take it, make it government property and then return it to me with strings (or to a private organization or individual with strings), just let me keep my own money. If you want to argue that these dollars are not tax dollars, that they’re yours, you’re just getting them back, watch these two short videos culled from interviews we’ve had on the ROPE Report.

Also, please take the time to watch my video on the Oklahoma parental tax credit. You might be surprised what you learn.

0

Liberty Chained

Guest post by Ann Kerr

School choice. Parental choice. It sounds good. It looks good. But, is it really all that it is cracked up to be?

A new Oklahoma law, hailed by Governor Stitt as a major victory for parents and
students in Oklahoma, is just about to move into action with the Tax Commission’s
adoption of an emergency rule this week.

While the text of the bill originally failed and faltered, it was “saved” by some resourceful legislators, who simply gutted another bill, pasted in the language, and ran it through under a different number.

The new law does two things. First, it provides families that are not in the public school
systems – either brick and mortar or virtual charter schools – with reimbursement for
certain educational expenses. Public money, potentially millions of dollars out of the
state budget, is promised to private schoolers and traditional homeschoolers, who up until
now have been completely private and parent-directed.

Second, the new law lays the groundwork to gather a wealth of information about private schoolers and traditional homeschoolers alike. Previously private information will now be public information shared between government agencies.

The law is not simply about school choice or parental choice. The “parental choice” law
results in government control and involvement. When eligible families seek
reimbursement, they will be required to give information to receive public funds.
Specifically, the reimbursement law necessitates that the Oklahoma Tax Commission
analyze requests for certain reimbursement of fees, curriculum and other educational
expenses and cross-reference requests with the Department of Education for validity. If
the Tax Commission reviews the information and finds that money was handed out
improperly, then the tax man will come back to families and “capture” what was lost.
Further, the Department of Education is required to create an online platform for the
exchange of information, ratings and reviews of educational providers. (Look out
Amazon)

These rich sources of unnecessary and intrusive information-gathering could obviously
be used by the state to paint a picture of the entire private and homeschool communities
and would likely lay the groundwork for future regulation. Opting out would no longer
be an option.

While private school and homeschool freedom has not been obliterated yet, the chain is
now placed around educational liberty – just as a choke chain is put around an animal‘s
neck – as a sign of warning and threat to obey.

When the government offers something “free,” it is never free. It appears that the chain
may only grow tighter and tighter, until parents have no educational choices at all. The
real losers will be the children.

Warning – homeschoolers and private schoolers. Look out for the knock on the door and the man on your porch, who says, “Hello, I am with the government, and I am here to help.”

0

What Do The Oklahoma Tax Commission (OTC) Rules Say About The Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit?

The Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit Act (OPCTCA) – HB1934 – directed the OTC to create/promulgate rules “to implement the provisions of the [Act]” (page 6 and page 8). To that end, the OTC has created rules and now has them open for public comment until 4:30pm on Thursday, October 12th of this year. The rules can be found here. The Oklahoma Statutes created from HB1934 can be found here.

Beginning Monday (10/2), I began to compare the rules to the bill. The rules cannot mirror the bill/statute word for word, because the OTC rules will include verbiage specific to the Act’s implementation. After speaking with Representative Sherrie Conley, I did learn, however, that the rules do have to mirror the legislative intent of the Act – the OTC couldn’t add things via the rules process that weren’t already specified by the Act or the intent of the Legislature in creating the Act. Consequently, I confined my review of the rules to that parameter.

Wednesday, October 4th on our ROPE Report LIVE podcast, I explained my findings – but also, the reasons ROPE cannot abide the Act in the first place. You can find a clip of this video on the front page of the website, but the FULL video can be found on YouTube and Rumble. I think it’s worth a watch for the topics covered.

WHAT CONCERNS DID I HAVE WITH THE RULES?

I really didn’t find any place that did not mirror the legislative intent of the Act. In other words, I couldn’t find any law making through the rules. I did, however, take issue with a couple things:

  • There are two versions of “Taxpayer” in the rules. One called “Taxpayer” that copies the definition from the Act, and another called “Oklahoma Taxpayer” that defines that OTC verbiage for a tax payer. These two should be combined because it is confusing to have two “Taxpayer” definitions.
  • Under the definition of “Eligible Student”, the OTC adds to the Act’s definition by including the words, “and is registered with the Oklahoma Tax Commission”. What? Why would a child under 18 be registered with the Tax Commission? Their taxpayer parents/guardians are registered, not the child. This designation needs to go in my opinion (IMO). I don’t even see how it’s helpful here and it makes me nervous because we ALREADY collect so much data on CHILDREN in Oklahoma.
  • Warrant. There are several problems here IMO.
    • The Act’s definition of “Warrant” says, “means an order for payment directing the State Treasurer to disburse funds to a designated payee. A warrant operates like a paper check.” (page 2 near the bottom of the page)
    • 3D (top of page 5), says this, “Payment of the credit shall be made by the Tax Commission with an individual warrant made payable to the taxpayer and mailed to the private school where the eligible student is enrolled or expected to enroll. The taxpayer shall restrictively endorse the warrant to the private shcool for deposit into the account of the school, unless the tuition and fees for the eligible student have already been paid by the taxpayer.”
      • Why would the OTC send a paper check two places? Why does the school get it and the school ALSO get a warrant mailed to them? The taxpayer has to ‘restrictively’ (meaning they can’t endorse it for personal use – but then, how many people are going to have to be hired to check up on this?) endorse the check they receive to the school. Why doesn’t the parent just take the warrant to the school and not have the OTC issue two warrants?
      • This makes no sense IMO. In fact, the only reason I can see this ‘procedure’ being used is to make it seem as though the payment is coming from the family to the private school – which it is not. According to Forbes Oklahoma Income Tax Calculator, a married couple filing jointly have to make $180,000 before their Oklahoma income tax is $7500 (it’s $7,497) – the ‘reimbursement’ provided by the state for each child to go to private school. Therefore, the state pays the tuition to the private school for every child who applies for the ‘credit’ in a family that earns $180,000 or less.
      • This is extremely important because AG Gentner Drummond “is withdrawing a legal opinion that gained national attention for its support of creating religious charter schools” citing that he believes that state money going to private schools is unconstitutional. Not ony that, but there is a lawsuit to stop the publicly-funded Catholic online charter school already proposed.
      • Incidentally, a KOSU poll from last year found that voters oppose public money going to private schools – which is probably why House and Senate leadership (with cover provided by “school choice” groups Americans For Prosperity (AFP), OCPA and American Federation of Children) – lied to legislators and/or twisted arms to get them to agree that the Act was a ‘tax credit’.

Now, I could go more in depth about the OPCTCA here, but I did that in the video – and will continue to do it as time goes on with the vain hope that the people will see the errors in this idiodic scheme and tell the Legislature to do away with it because, in the long run, this WON’T help parents like the Legislature REDUCING OUR TAXES IN THE FIRST PLACE. The idea that the government overtaxes me and then wants to return money to me – most of it that it stole from OTHER PEOPLE to give me (redistribution of wealth) in the first place – is anathema because the government’s ‘gift’ gives it so much more control over me than if the taxes weren’t taken from me (by force) in the first place.

Believe me, as a Christian, I HATE being the one to stand up and say, “You can’t give my taxes to a private school”, but I’m only doing it because I firmly believe that this whole “school chioce” scheme is to make sure that the public money going to private schools will make private schools public so that NO PARENT HAS A CHOICE as to how their child/children is/are educated.

WHAT SHOULD WE DO NOW?

According to the OTC website, “Written comments will be accepted until 4:30 p.m. on October 12, 2023, at the Oklahoma Tax Commission, Oklahoma City, OK 73194, Attn: Lisa Haws, or by email to parentalchoice@tax.ok.gov.”

So, I’m sending an email to Lisa Haws that says,

Dear Ms. Haws,

Please consider the following comments regarding the Oklahoma Parental Choice Tax Credit Act rules:

There are two versions of “Taxpayer” in the rules. One called “Taxpayer” that copies the definition from the Act, and another called “Oklahoma Taxpayer” that defines that OTC verbiage for a tax payer. These two should be combined because it is confusing to have two “Taxpayer” definitions.

Under the definition of “Eligible Student“, the OTC adds to the Act’s definition by including the words, “and is registered with the Oklahoma Tax Commission”. Why would a child under 18 be registered with the Tax Commission? Their taxpayer parents/guardians are registered, not the child. This designation needs to go in my opinion (IMO). The designation of “taxpayer” already covers who pays taxes.

The Act’s definition of “Warrant” says, “means an order for payment directing the State Treasurer to disburse funds to a designated payee. A warrant operates like a paper check.” (page 2 near the bottom of the page)

  • 3D (top of page 5), says this, “Payment of the credit shall be made by the Tax Commission with an individual warrant made payable to the taxpayer and mailed to the private school where the eligible student is enrolled or expected to enroll. The taxpayer shall restrictively endorse the warrant to the private shcool for deposit into the account of the school, unless the tuition and fees for the eligible student have already been paid by the taxpayer.”
  • Why would the OTC send a paper check two places? Why does the school get it and the school ALSO get a warrant mailed to them? The taxpayer has to ‘restrictively’ (meaning they can’t endorse it for personal use – but then, how many people are going to have to be hired to check up on this?) endorse the check they receive to the school. Why doesn’t the parent just take the warrant to the school and not have the OTC issue two warrants?
  • This makes no sense IMO. In fact, the only reason I can see this ‘procedure’ being used is to make it seem as though the payment is coming from the family to the private school – which it is not. According to Forbes Oklahoma Income Tax Calculator, a married couple filing jointly have to make $180,000 before their Oklahoma income tax is $7500 (it’s $7,497) – the ‘reimbursement’ provided by the state for each child to go to private school. Therefore, the state pays the tuition to the private school for every child who applies for the ‘credit’ in a family that earns $180,000 or less.

Thank you so much for your consideration of my comments.

Sincerely,

Jenni White

Education Coordinator

Reclaim Oklahoma Parent Empowerment (ROPE)

jenni@rope2.org

CLOSING

Please feel free to make any changes to my letter – also, feel free to examine all the information for yourself to see if I missed something or if you don’t particularly agree with my criticisms of the Rules.

Please watch the ROPE Report LIVE video for more information on the OPCTCA.

0

Is SB1647 (Education Voucher) Now Only For Homeschooling Families? An Analysis.

Often, it takes hours to really read a bill because it’s important to look up associated laws and terms that may not be obvious to the reader. Then it requires reading passages over and over and comparing them to other passages to make sure of context. Truly, to do it right, each bill requires a substantial time investment to read properly. And to think – legislators must read hundreds of bills during just one half  of session alone…

I am not going to paste the entire bill into this post. Please find it here and download the version that was posted March 3rd, labeled, “Senate Floor Version March 2, 2022”.

PLEASE NOTE: ROPE will never be for an education voucher system – only a tax credit system. This analysis simply explains the major issues we’ve found in the bill.

*Page 1: Section 1B: “by directing State Aid for which each child is eligible to the education provider of their choice”. 

Page 16: Section 5 lines 3 and 4 – fund is to contain “appropriations, gifts, grants, donations, and bequests”.  

This is a mixing of public and private funds and certainly not simply “State Aid” making these sentences inconsistent.

*Page 2: Section 2 A3: “OEA means the account in which funds are deposited by the Agency…” 

Page 7: Section 2G1: “The Agency shall notify the State Department of Education and request calculation of the amount of State Aid for which the student is eligible.”

Page8: Section 2 G2: “The State Department of Education on a monthly basis shall transfer to the Agency for deposit into the OEA Revolving Fund”

Page 15: Section 5 creates the Oklahoma Empowerment Account Revolving Fund to which “All monies accruing to the credit of the fund are hereby appropriated and may be budgeted and expended by the office of the Agency (State Treasurer) for the purpose of implementing the provisions of the OEA”. Monies “received by the office of the State Treasurer from appropriations, gifts, grants, donations, and bequests”.

Another apparent inconsistency: The Agency deposits funds, the OSDE transfers funds, “appropriations (State Aid?), gifts, grants, donations, and bequests” are placed in this account. 

*Page 2: Section 2 A4: “Education Service Provider means a person, business, public school district, public charter school, magnet school, institution within the Oklahoma State System of Higher Education or organization that receives payments from a parent directing an OEA…”

Why would the OEA pay a PUBLIC school for any service? Wasn’t the idea for kids to go OUTSIDE the public school? So this bill uses state and private funds to pay public schools? Why? For what function?

*Page 2: Section 2A5: “Eligible student means a resident of this state who is eligible to enroll in a public school in this state…” 

“Eligible student shall not mean a student who is educated pursuant to the other means of education provided for in subsection A of Section 10-105 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes”.

An “eligible student” then is: 1. Any student who can go to public school 2. Whose family income is 300% of free/reduced lunch price and 3. Not educated by “other means”.

*Page 3: Section 2A6: “Empowerment student” is an OEA eligible student. 

 Page 5: Section 2Cb – (parent must sign an agreement upon application for the OEA to):

– b. not enroll eligible student as a full-time student in a public school district, public charter school or magnet school AFTER acceptance of an OEA

– d. not accept a scholarship from the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for Students with Disabilities Program while participating in OEA

Page 5: Section 2D – “Nothing in this act shall be construed to require that an empowerment student be enrolled full time or part time in a private school or a nonpublic online school”.

Let’s review: to be a student ‘eligible’ for the OEA, that student 1. can’t be enrolled in public school 2. can’t be a student in the LNH scholarship 3. isn’t required to be enrolled at a private school 

Granted, 2D is so poorly written it’s hard to make heads or tails of, but if it’s saying that an OEA Empowerment student isn’t required to be in private or non-public online school or public school, or an LNH scholarship student – the ONLY category left would have to be HOMESCHOOL student. I would doubt that’s what’s meant, but that appears to be what was said.

This bill as written, then, creates two types of ‘homeschool students’: those who get state funds and those who “Constitutionally educate” their children and don’t take state funds – but it doesn’t appear to apply to private schools.

This is a HUGE issue. EPIC (public school at home) has already muddied the water in the mind of the public as to what Constitutional “by other means” homeschoolers are (parents pay taxes for public schools and assume all economic responsibility for the raising and education of their children). How in the world would anyone be able to tell which homeschoolers are NOT taking public funds and which ones WERE?  And how would a homeschooler that takes public funds be any different than an EPIC user now? While this may seem like a nothing to most people, once a form of homeschooling is identified by state law and regulated, it will be very easy to regulate the other – it’s precedent. To date, homeschooling in Oklahoma has been so successful and unprecedented because of the “by other means” language in the state Constitution, which has NEVER been defined and therefore very hard to be regulated. 

*Page 3: Section 2A8b: Qualified expenses – “tuition and/or fees for non-public online learning programs”

2A8d: “services contracted for and provided by a public school district…”

Why would the state provide state funds to send an Empowerment Student to an already-funded state school when the idea was to remove the student from a public school? 

*Page 4: Section 2A8k: “tuition, fees, instructional materials, and assessment fees for a curriculum or program offered by a technology center school 

Page 5: Section 2A8m: “tuition and fees for concurrent enrollment at an institution with the Oklahoma State System of Higher Education.

This seems like an open door for fraud. Students in Oklahoma under 18 may attend technology center schools without paying for the service. Universities charge for books and fees, but not tuition for concurrent coursework.

 *Page 7: Section 2F: “Any unused funds remaining in the OEA at the end of the applicable calendar year shall be remitted to the General Revenue Fund.”

Page 8: Section 2H: “An education service provider shall not share, refund or rebate any amount of an OEA with the parent or empowerment student. A refund or rebate for goods or services purchased with an OEA shall be credited to the OEA.”

Why shouldn’t ANY unused or rebated funds return to the OEA? The General Revenue Fund is a ‘slush fund’ that can be used for any reason. Why take money from the state coffers and then not return it to the account from which it was to be distributed in the first place? 

*Page 9: Section 3 C: “participation in the OEA program shall have the same effect as a parental revocation of consent pursuant to 20 U.S.C. Sections 1414(a)(1)(D) and 1414(C) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act”…

It appears that parents who take the voucher may not have their child evaluated for a disability while on the program. I assume because the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship already covers disabled children.

*Page 10: Section 3 F, 1, 2: All of this information from lines 12-23 appear to be creating the Digital Wallet.

ROPE has had major concerns with the Digital Wallet program. We believe it pulls kids into the State Longitudinal Data Base where reams of data are collected and sent to many, many state agencies and it’s a perfect place for implementation of ESG (social credit) scores. 

Superintendent Ryan Walters is not only the state’s Secretary of Education, but he runs an organization called Every Kid Counts OK (ECKO). During the pandemic, Governor Stitt applied for federal CARES ACT funds. Eight million dollars was funneled through ECKO using a digital wallet private vendor called “Class Wallet“, so the program has already been beta tested. Now that they’ve used the program and a private vendor to take payments, it appears the next step is to take the program state wide as the backbone of an educational voucher system.

Since federal money was funneled through a private organization, there is no direct oversight set in place for the movement of those funds at the state level. This is not at all a transparent way to handle tax dollars at any level – but then again, creating an entirely new bureaucracy in the State Treasurer’s office isn’t the way to make government smaller, more local and more responsive either.

Early in the session this year, ROPE noticed that Representative Martinez in the House and Senator Quinn in the Senate, both had “Creating the Digital Wallet Program Act” bills. We went to both authors, explained our issues and asked them to please not run the bills. Both actually agreed, yet we were stunned to see Senator Quinn’s on the Senate Ed Committee roster 2/22/22.

That afternoon, I made a phone call to our Secretary of Education, explained our concerns to him and asked that Oklahoma not go down the digital wallet road. Fortunately, Senator Quinn’s bill was pulled from committee and Representative Martinez’ bill was not heard. 

In politics, however, those with an agenda ALWAYS have a fail-safe. It appears SB1647 contains the language that is that fail-safe for this program.

In closing, though I read – and marked up every line of the bill – I didn’t cover every line of the bill here – I just stuck to the issues of greatest concern to us.

Since we have begun lobbying against this particular bill, our group – and me personally – have been the brunt of numerous character assasinations – I’m a liar, I don’t care about others, I’m an elitist, I want kids trapped in failing schools. 

Certainly, this is disheartening and frustrating, but no matter what dissenters say, our stance is defined upon the following three concepts – the same three upon which our organization has stood from the beginning; 

1. Personal Responsibility 

2. Smaller government 

3. Individual Liberty

SB1647 grows government, infringes on the individual liberty of those who have taken the personal responsibility to care for their own children to the point of paying twice (taxes and tuition) and takes responsibility from churches and individuals to help those who need help. The concept is wrong and the bill is poorly written. That’s really about all there is to it.

Jenni White

Education Director, ROPE

1

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.

1

The Problems With “School Choice”

Every legislative session in Oklahoma, the topic of “School Choice” rears its head. People become “School Choice” advocates because they believe the concept will put parents back in the driver’s seat for their children’s education. But what does the term “School Choice” actually mean?

EdChoice, an organization that has been touting “School Choice” for many years, provides this definition: 

School choice allows public education funds to follow students to the schools or services that best fit their needs —whether that’s to a public school, private school, charter school, home school or any other learning environment families choose.

This makes sense to me. School Choice has to be about MONEY. It can’t be about a choice of schools, because Oklahoma has a near smorgasbord of choices to provide parents for schooling their children. Let’s look at them:

  • Here in Oklahoma, our Constitution makes it clear that parents have the absolute right to direct the education of their children through homeschooling. Homeschooling is an educational choice.
  • Oklahoma has 1784 public schools. Last session (2021) SB783 was passed. This law allows parents to be able to transfer their child/children among public schools instead of them being assigned to a school according to their zip code. Transfer amounts to a choice.
  • Here in Oklahoma, we have a thriving private school network of 96 schools. Parents who are able and would like to do so, may CHOOSE to send their child/children to a private school. 
  • Oklahoma also has a thriving Charter school network – some brick and mortar – and others virtual. Parents can choose whether or not to send their child/children to either type of charter school.

So, it seems it would be hard to be an Oklahoma parent who then argues you don’t have much of a choice as to where you sent your child to school. Yes, not all parents can afford to homeschool or put their child/children in private school, yet that doesn’t negate these as valid choices and many parents work hard to scrimp and save in order to keep their children home or send them to a private school.

Fortunately, Oklahoma has a HUGE NUMBER OF SCHOOL CHOICES available to parents, so why do we continually talk about “School Choice”?

Returning to EdChoice’s definition, because legislators feel that parents should be able to send their children to ANY school they want, something that can only happen if tax dollars are appropriated to people who can’t afford to send their child/children to private school or keep them home for homeschool.

Herein lies the problem. Once money leaves the hand of a citizen as a tax, it becomes property of the government who receives the tax. Now, it’s the government’s job to make sure that tax dollar is accounted for transparently. 

Let’s say that Oklahoma gives parents part or all of the money it would have spent to educate their child and says, “Here, you can use this any way you’d like to educate your child.”

The thrilled parents then take that money to a private school and enroll their child. Unfortunately, the private school that receives the funds is now accountable to the state to make sure that money is spent properly. 

In order to do that, the state now has the ability to ask the private school to perform certain tasks to assure them of the way in which that money is spent and suddenly, the private school now has strings from State government it never had before. How many strings can a private school have to the government for state money before it’s no longer really a private school? At what point does the State government get to tell the private school what kind of curricula they may offer, or regulate the type of teachers they want to hire because, well, accountability of taxpayer funds?

Unfortunately, there’s more. Oklahoma has never fully repealed Blaine Amendment language from our Constitution. The Blain Amendment is a failed federal law created in the late 1800’s proposed to ostensibly prevent Catholic schools by denying them access to public funds. Though the federal law failed, many states added similar language to their Constitution, as did Oklahoma.

It would be an extremely difficult task to take funds designated as public, give them to parents and allow them to finance a child’s private school education – especially at a private religious school.

We’ve all seen the mess that has been created by Epic Charter School’s administrative arm – Epic Youth Services. If state funds are given to parents to use for expenses related to the homeschooling of their children, how could the state not expect parents to account for every dime of state money provided them? They certainly would have every right to do so, yet now a homeschooling parent could find themselves in the unenviable situation of having to report to the state on behalf of their homeschool. 

What if the state doesn’t ‘like’ a type of curricula a parent chooses, or the type of activity a child prefers? What happens to the autonomy of the homeschooling parent in that case?

Granted, it seems like a stretch – and legislators would be sure to say that would never happen – but who in the world would have ever thought that in the last two years the government would force people to wear masks, take vaccines and shut down businesses? Hopefully, if we’ve learned anything else from the pandemic, we’ve learned that governments are less about individual rights and more about power and control.

And what about taking public money and giving it to parents to allow their children to homeschool or attend private school? What about the families who scrimp and save to provide these options for their children? Isn’t that the state creating an equity program?

TRULY, THERE SEEMS TO BE NO WAY FOR THE STATE TO ALLOW PARENTS TO HAVE STATE MONEY TO FINANCE THEIR CHILD’S EDUCATION. The only way to do anything of the sort is some form of TAX CREDIT:

1. Allow parents to keep the money they WOULD HAVE given to the state in taxes for public education. This way, the money is only ever the parents – it never becomes the property of state government. Parents can use that money to help finance a private education, or homeschool their child/children.

2. Allow parents who are unable to finance their child’s private or homeschool to apply for ‘scholarship’ funds placed into an account by people who want to donate to the scholarship. Oklahoma already has the Oklahoma Equal Opportunity Education Scholarship, that can simply be broadened.

3. Parents should begin planning for their child’s education early on and make after-tax deposits into the State 529 Plan.  Though ostensibly a college savings program, funds may be deducted to pay for homeschool or private school expenses as well.

Unfortunately, like with so many things, there is no free lunch in education. It’s important to understand the issues surrounding “School Choice” and not merely carry the flag of “School Choice”.  Private schools do not need any further state regulation and homeschoolers want absolutely no interference from government in their schools. Let’s be VERY CAREFUL then, when we discuss the term “School Choice” and keep government sequestered in its own lane.

1

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑