Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Tag

SB1647

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

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.

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.

1

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑