It is rare when I agree with Representative Curtis (R – Clearfield, District 14); so on those rare occasions that I do, I feel it is worth noting.

With HB 124, In-State Tuition for Veterans, Oda is saying in no uncertain terms, thank you, to the men and women who serve (or have honorably served) our country by offering them in-state tuition to our state colleges and universities even if they do not meet normal residency requirements. The best part is that this bill would even extend residency status to active personnel family members as well.

I am grateful that we as a state are willing  to dig a little bit deeper to show our appreciation for the sacrifice these soldiers have shown.  We may disagree about the merits of the conflicts we are fighting, but bills like this show that we as citizens know there is a huge difference between the politics of war and the on-the-ground realities of war.

Kudos to Representative Oda for proposing this bill. It may cost us more, but I say it is a price worth paying.

To contact Rep. Oda, Click Here or call 801-773-9796

Impact: 2

Need: 3

Overall: 2

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

There is always a cute dance that takes place at the start of every legislative session, where we get to see just how mean, crazy, out of touch, or (gasp dare I say it?) reasonable newly elected or appointed legislators are.  Well, I am sorry to say that Representative Steve Eliason (R-Sandy, District 45) appears to be falling on the “mean” side.

By proposing HB 285, Repeal of Higher Education Tuition Assistance Program, Eliason is attempting to remove a job creator in our state…and I don’t quite know why. Heck, I even tried to find any news-clipping or blog post that might explain this bizarre move. Nothing.

So I have to presume that Eliason is coming from a budget hawk, starve the beast, mentality where any government spending is bad government spending. Even if such spending is good for the state.

The Higher Education Tuition Assistance program is specifically designed to help low income students pay for the high price of college; where the only barrier to their education is not a lack of ability, but a lack of funds. The program, presumably, helps dozens, if not hundreds, of students receive a college degree – a degree that will allow them to receive higher paying jobs…by extension helping the state economy.

As of the time of posting, no fiscal note was attached to the bill, so I can’t tell you exactly how many dollars go to students.  But I have to believe that every single one of those dollars is an investment in our state and our citizens. By trying to reverse this bill, Eliason is trying to reverse course for our state.

To contact Rep. Eliason, Click Here or call 801-673-4748

Impact: 2

Need: 0

Overall: -3

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

Senator Ben McAdams (D-Salt Lake City, District 2) is taking charge and working hard to hold legislators accountable with SB 117 – Publication of Education Fund Revenue Reductions.  The bill is very straight forward, but will have big ramifications by holding lawmakers feet to the fire.

The bill, in short, would require any bill that negativity effects education funding be reported to the legislature.

Think about that for a moment.

It means that, unless a bill sponsor can specifically show that a reduction in public education funding is beneficial to the public education system, they will have a very public forum showing that their bill takes money away from our already underfunded school system.

Of course, I am skeptical that this bill will actually go anywhere – after all, why would legislators actually want to be held accountable to other lawmakers and the public? That means that they would actually have to step out of the closed door.

To contact Sen. McAdams, Click Here or call 801-618-1946

Impact: 3

Need: 5

Overall: 5

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

I must admit that I was impressed when I saw that Senator Karen Morgan (D – Salt Lake –District 8) proposed SB 31, Classroom Size Amendments. It is short, it is sweet, and it cuts to the very core of one of the principal problems with Utah schools: large class sizes.

Morgan is proposing that there be no more than 18 students in a kindergarten class, 20 students for a 1st grade class, 22 students in a 2nd grade class, and 24 students in a 3rd grade class in any English, math, science, or social studies class.

The bill provides feasible ways for this goal to be achieved from a logistical stand point by allowing so called “paraprofessional’s” to teach classes to these students. These paraprofessionals would essentially take on a group of students during the school year and teach them the curriculum assigned – meanwhile the primary teacher could focus their efforts on students that are struggling.  If, of course, the classroom already met these guidelines, the school would not need to pay to bring in one of these professionals.

Aye, there’s the rub. This bill has a fiscal note points out that the initial cost of this bill will be between $12.7 and $31.2 million just to get the bill off the ground. By the time the bill is fully phased in, it will cost the state between $22 and $67 million a year ,depending on various factors.

I am not saying that this means I think it is a bad bill – far from it, I am just saying our “never tax anyone, slash budgets everywhere” Republican controlled legislature probably won’t warm up to the idea. Hell, they thumb their noses at the mere thought of increasing funding for education in general, let alone when a specific policy is brought up.

Good luck Senator Morgan, I am pulling for you. If I might make one suggestion, be sure to point out that your Republican colleagues bring very little to the table, and you are eager to find solutions.

To contact Sen. Morgan, Click Here or call 801-943-0067

Impact: 3

Need: 4

Overall: 5

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

Like a shuffling zombie, Senator Stewart Reid (R – Ogden,District 18) is bringing back from the dead last years awful resolution that attempts to change the Utah Constitution so that the Governor, rather than the State Board of Education, controls the supervision of our public education system.

Yes, the only thing that Reid changed this year was the title: SJR 5, Joint Resolution on Education sounds slightly easier to pass than last year’s SJR 9, Joint Resolution – Governance of Public and Higher Education. But pull the two up in separate tabs, and you will see that it IS EXACTLY THE SAME.

Because this is the exact same bill, I will give the exact same objections:

I think Reid is being disingenuous…(because he) is on the anti-public education bandwagon and sees this as an excellent way to break down public schools in favor of private schools and vouchers.

Public education should be in the hands of a board of education because their focus will not be diverted by other matters – furthermore day-to-day education decisions would not become political. By shifting control to the governor, we are ensuring that the needs of public education will be further neglected and ground breaking and revolutionary education techniques will be ignored to ensure the status quo is maintained, ensuring a safe election.

Last year the bill failed to make it out of the Senate – mostly because it was continually circled. Generally items are circled because the sponsor did not think they have enough support to actually pass the bill, so they use it as a way to buy more time and support. It did finally limp over to the Senate where it soon had its enacting clause removed (neutering the bill in the process).

I prey that this year the zombie bill meets the same fate.

To contact Sen. Reid, Click Here or call 801-337-4182

Impact: 4

Need: 0

Overall: -5

Questions about the rating system? Click Here

To view other bills in the 2012 Bills to Watch series, Click Here

It is a sad state of affairs when the best we can boast regarding education in the State of Utah is that we were able to hold the line on education funding; but that is exactly the case. What makes it even sadder is that this is actually an improvement.

We must acknowledge, however, that this really is an improvement in the education system. Tight budgets have made education funding an easy target over the past few years, and to actually be willing to put money back into the system is a sign that things might actually be improving. But, lets not kid ourselves, Utah still holds the dubious title of having the lowest per-student spending in the nation. A great deal of investment has to take place before we catch up with Puerto Rico…

This year also saw the implementation of performance based evaluations for teachers rather than just relying on seniority when looking at filling a position. Though controversial, it is an understandable step to take; with such limited resources in our state as it is, we should ensure that the best teachers, rather than the oldest, keep their jobs. The Utah Education Association, somewhat rightly so, is concerned that this would give administrators the ability to fire older teachers and hire younger ones in an attempt to cut budgets and flood schools with inexperienced (and therefore lower paid) teachers.

But, thankfully, the legislature was willing to cut into its budget woes by now allowing school districts to put advertisements on school buses. It now appears that another staple of a child’s youth will now be perverted by a McDonald’s ad.

Higher education received zero support in its budgets this year. Indeed, the Board of Regents just announced tuition increases of anywhere from 5 to 11.8 percent, depending on the institution. At the same time, our colleges and universities now have “mission based” education, creating what amounts to school specialization. While good in theory, it could lead to stagnation in the overall education system as colleges are now discouraged from innovating.

The biggest stories, however, were the attempts to weaken education in the state. There was an attempt to give the governor control over education, and in sister legislation, eliminate the State Board of Education. Baring that, an attempt was made to make school board elections partisan, ensuring that Republicans have out and out control of teaching students, and opening up public education to the perils of electioneering and radicalization.

Overall, cuts to higher education, along with just “holding the line” on K-12 education, means that we as a state really took a step backwards. This, combined with attempted attacks on the very foundations of education has lead to low marks for the legislature. I am going to have to ask them to please see me after class.

My grade for the 2011 Utah State Legislature on Education: C-

Up next: Overall

It must be throwback day here at Blue in Red Zion, after all, the topic today seems to be the resurrection of bad bills. Well, Senator Howard Stephenson (R – Draper, District 11) is continuing the trend by proposing SB 224 – Partisan School Board Elections – a bill that mimics Senator Curt Bramble’s from 2007. As a bit of history, Bramble’s bill was killed on the last day of the session, despite attempts to rush it through both chambers.

Proponents of the bill claim that it would add more competition to the election of state school boards and, in theory, that is true. This is because only people interested in running for state school boards do so because they have a passion for education or reform – pish, why would we want to limit it to that when political parties could easily recruit members from their ranks to do the same job…even if they don’t know what they are doing!

And that is the root of the problem. Although I am not going to pretend that school boards don’t suffer from the same partisan bickering associated with many other sections of government, I have to wonder why we have to make the education of our children so overtly political.  As an example, when Bramble proposed his bill back in 2007, he defended his bill by saying that a “very positive outcome” of his legislation would be that advocacy groups such as the pro-voucher Parents for Choice in Education could more easily get involved and, presumably elected, if his bill would pass. Bramble even went so far as to say that “that’s what (he was) hoping for.”

And that should raise warning flags.

Supporters of Brambles bill got behind the legislation, not so much because they wanted to make the election of school board members more democratic (note the little “d”), or improve the quality of our school board – no, they got behind it because they saw it as another way to force an agenda that, in this case, was not supported by the public.

It is safe to assume that supporters of Stephenson’s bill feel the same way.

Sadly, one of the reasons partisan politics exists is that people don’t have to think as hard when they walk into the ballot box. Most voters know (or think they know) what a party stands for – and an “R” or a “D” next to the name of the candidate acts as a sort of short-cut for voters, giving them the ability to opt out of researching a candidate. Another sad reality that we have to consider is that people already don’t research State School Board candidates, meaning that, if someone chooses to vote in that election in the first place, they most likely will choose at random. Although that system is far from perfect, it does have the effect of partially canceling out votes, making it easier for the educated voters to make a decision.

By passing this bill, we would be further perverting an already perverted system by allowing party politics to greatly influence the outcome of an election when voters may not otherwise produce a certain result.

For what it is worth, this bill is actually further behind in the legislative process than its 2007 cohort was with nine days left in the session. Hopefully this bill will see the same fate.

Urgency Score:

Click here to contact Senator Stephenson.

We all know the price of college is not getting any lower, and the burden for these costs are often placed on students who’s caloric intake on any given week consists of ramen noodles and whatever was left over from when they crashed the underwater basket-weaving clubs meeting in hopes of getting a sweet, sweet slice of free pizza as advertised on a flyer. I too remember those days, and let me tell you, every little bit helps.

That is why I was pleased to see Senator Karen Mayne’s (D –  Salt Lake, District 5) SB 69 – Sales and Use Tax Exemption for Textbooks for Higher Education. As you might suspect, the bill would remove the sales tax on textbooks when they are bought from a company who’s sales come primarily from textbooks – sorry Barnes and Noble, ya don’t make the cut on this one.

Now, because we are not taking in tax revenue, this bill is going to cost the state some $100,000, meaning that the average savings per student is going to be around $10 – but this number can be deceiving. This bill benefits those who stay in college and pursue a degree, if only because, as you go further in your education, books become more specialized; as they become more specialized, fewer are printed. Now if you open your economics text book (see what I did there?) you will see that as supply goes down, price can go up – even if demand is going down.

Every year I went after my degree, the price of books rose by around $100-125. By my senior year I was paying $700 for text books per semester. I can only imagine what someone pursuing a masters or doctorate must pay – if you are dropping $1500 on books every four months, an extra $150 in your pocket every year is much appreciated I am sure.

Is there a cost to the state? Yes. But by making an education a little more financially feasible, we are ensuring that we have a well educated workforce that will attract and sustain higher-end businesses in our state. This may be a loss now, but it should pay large dividends in the future.

Urgency Score:

Click here to contact Senator Mayne.

Senator Howard Stephenson (R – Draper, District 11) has rightly taken a lot of heat lately about his statements saying that state universities give away “degrees to nowhere.” Although it is concerning that a public official feels this way about higher education, I must admit that I am very pleased to see the same senator propose SB 65 – Statewide Online Education Program.

The bill would create what amounts to an online high school that would allow people to take the classes necessary to graduate with a diploma.

We need to keep in mind that, although the majority of the state lives in urban areas, there are still large swaths of land where people simply do not have easy access to a brick and mortar high school. By logging on, these students could still receive a quality education and work towards a better life.

These online courses will have to meet the same standards a traditional school course would in order to be accredited. Furthermore, the organization administering these online course will have to report frequently to the State Board of Education to ensure that students are actually learning something.

Hopefully these kids can get their diplomas and move on to earn those degrees to nowhere.

POST – POSTING REVISIT: Several of my fantastic readers have pointed out that there is, apparently, already an online high school program in the state (sorry, I don’t have the money for fact-checkers and only have the ability to infer from what I see in a bill). I see now that Stephenson is simply trying to create a private system that uses public funds to educate children. Though I am not opposed to private education, I am opposed to paying for it on top of the public system.

Because of this, I am downgrading Stephenson’s bill severely, to a -5 from its original score of 2 as this is bad policy and a drain on the education system.

I knew I shouldn’t have trusted the guy.

Urgency Score:

Click here to contact Senator Stephenson.

It is rare that both MRW and I agree so strongly on public policy, but when we both have such a visceral reaction to a policy like we did when I told her about SJR 9 – Joint Resolution – Governance of Public and Higher Education as proposed by Senator Stuart Reid (R – Ogden, District 18).

The resolution would shift control and supervision of the public education system away from the State Board of Education and to the governor.

Senator Reid seems to be pitching the idea as some sort of time saving measure, as the school board currently has too many needs, thus creating a cacophony of requests when the legislature meets. This would simplify the process and just allow the governor to advocate for public education from kindergarten to college.

Reid is clearly missing the point or, – perhaps education asks for so much because the legislature gives it so little. More to the point, I think Reid is being disingenuous about his intentions in the first place.

I suspect Reid is on the anti-public education bandwagon and sees this as an excellent way to break down public schools in favor of private schools and vouchers.

Public education should be in the hands of a board of education because their focus will not be diverted by other matters – furthermore day-to-day education decisions would not become political. By shifting control to the governor, we are ensuring that the needs of public education will be further neglected and ground breaking and revolutionary education techniques will be ignored to ensure the status quo is maintained, ensuring a safe election.

Bad idea Senator Reid, very bad idea.

Urgency  Score:

Click here to contact Senator Reid.