DATELINE APRIL 1, 2004
VOTE POSTPONED ON RYBERG TERI-KILL BILL
The SCEA President Jan McCarthy and South Carolina State Employees Association Executive Director Broadus Jamerson testified to a Senate subcommittee today that the Teachers and Employees Retention Incentive (TERI) program was effective at encouraging skilled veteran educators and state employees to continue their service to South Carolina.
After more than an hour of discussion of S 779, a proposal by Sen. Greg Ryberg of Aiken County to eliminate the program, the subcommittee "carried over", or postponed, the bill to a subsequent, yet-unscheduled meeting.
Ryberg chaired the three-member subcommittee of Senate Finance. His colleagues on the subcommittee are Sen. Tom Alexander of Oconee County and Sen. Nikki Setzler of Lexington. Ryberg, a staunch opponent of TERI, used the meeting generally to fish for ammunition against the program, but Peggy Boykin, executive director of the State Retirement System, offered him little aid.
Boykin's presentation and questioning bore facts that suggest TERI is less of a detriment to the system than cost-of-living allowances (COLAs) to state retirees. (NOTE: Ryberg has sponsored a separate bill, S 846, to guarantee payment of annual COLAs to retirees. The SCEA and the South Carolina Coalition of Public Employees have announced their support of that proposal.)
A chart provided by Boykin illustrated that implementation of TERI and the 28-year retirement option in 2000 has caused only a net two-year increase in the state's unfunded liability, the long-term indebtedness caused by state employment benefits. Funding of COLAs, on the other hand, caused a net seven-year increase in liability. Unfunded liability is defined as the amount of funding required over a period of years to satisfy the state's statutory obligations to its employees.
Because of increased appropriations to the retirement system in the 1990s, the teachers' and state employees' retirement account's unfunded liability had been reduced to $319 million in 2000, with an amortization period of three years. The system's actuaries have projected that the liability would total more than $4.4 billion in 2004, with an amortization period of 27 years. The General Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the state's Budget and Control Board have designated a 30-year amortization period as the maximum for maintenance of the system's fiscal integrity.
Ryberg argued that the rapid increase in unfunded liability and extension of the amortization period warranted eliminating the TERI program. Under questioning from Setzler, Boykin noted that eliminating the TERI program would reduce the state's liability by only one year -- yielding little benefit to the system -- and that continued increases in COLAs without more direct appropriation from the legislature would likely cause the system to run into the 30-year maximum amortization period by 2006.
There was no discussion by the subcommittee of additional appropriations by the legislature to support the retirement system, through direct funding or through an increase in the employer contribution. Either option would help to ensure fiscal integrity of the system. Boykin also noted, in response to a question from Setzler, that the retirement system's board has no position on Ryberg's proposal to eliminate TERI.
Both McCarthy and Jamerson expressed their associations' consistent support for the TERI program and offered to support an amendment repealing the second of two 45-day annual leave payouts for state employees as a compromise to ease state agency costs. The annual leave payout does not affect most school district employees but is afforded to other state employees upon enrollment in TERI and again upon final retirement.
Ryberg filed S 779 in January 2003 and has spoken in favor of eliminating TERI several times since then, both in committee settings and during Senate sessions, charging that the program threatens the health and well being of the state retirement system. When an independent study was presented the Budget and Control Board earlier this month which showed that the TERI program did not threaten the system, Ryberg told The State newspaper that he "will continue fighting to dismantle the program regardless of the study's findings."
The text of Ryberg's bill can be found by clicking http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess115_2003-2004/bills/779.htm
DATELINE APRIL 5, 2004
HOUSE VACATIONS; DOE GETS 20 MINUTES IN HEARING
The South Carolina House, which adopted a budget last month under-funding the Education Finance Act by more than $270 million or $407 per child in public schools, is on vacation this week. The Senate, however, continues to mull its own budget considerations in various committees.
The Senate Finance Committee, chaired by Sen. Hugh Leatherman of Florence, will meet tomorrow at 3 p.m. to hear testimony from Dr. Bill Gillespie, state economist, and Dr. Holley Ullbrich, an economist at Clemson University's Strom Thurmond Institute.
On Tuesday morning, a subcommittee of Senate Finance will hear testimony from various education interests in a public hearing. The state Department of Education, which administers roughly 35 percent of the state's $5+ billion budget through K-12 public education, has been given twenty minutes on the hearing's agenda to make its case for funding in 2004-05. The subcommittee on public education is chaired by Sen. Harvey Peeler of Gaffney.
RYBERG IGNORES PRO-TERI DATA
Sen. Greg Ryberg, chief sponsor of S. 779, a proposal to eliminate the Teachers and Employees Retention Incentive (TERI), heard testimony last week that TERI program was not a primary factor in the financial stresses of the state retirement system.
But this testimony and the fact data supporting it hasn't deterred the Senator from his course. In recent days, many The SCEA members have emailed Ryberg's office to voice their opposition to his proposal. All have received the same email response, generated from the account of a Senate aide, Danny Varat, rather than from the Senator himself.
The response reads: "TERI contributes to the fiscal jeopardy of SC Retirement System, has stifled progress within the ranks of the state employees, and, in some cases, has actually caused the retention of bad employees. I cannot support the continuation of this program. Sincerely, W. Greg Ryberg"
Documents provided by the system's executive director, Peggy Boykin, to Ryberg and a subcommittee considering his bill last week demonstrate that TERI has added a net total of two years out of 24 to the state's unfunded liability amortization period, and that eliminating the TERI program would reduce that period by only one year.
Further, Ryberg heard testimony from The SCEA President Jan McCarthy and the S.C. State Employees Association Executive Director Broadus Jamerson that so-called "bad" employees are easily removed from state employment by managers who use effectively the state's fair employment and dismissal procedures. Whether or not an employee is participating in the TERI program has no bearing on the ability of a manager to remove an incompetent or ineffective employee.
DATELINE APRIL 15, 2004
SANFORD-VAUGHN VOUCHER BILL GETS TUESDAY HEARING
A voucher bill promoted by Governor Mark Sanford and sponsored by Rep. Lewis Vaughn of Greenville County has been scheduled for a public hearing on Tuesday, April 20, in Room 101 of the Blatt Building, the House office facility. The meeting will begin an hour after adjournment of Tuesday’s House session. As of this posting, about 30 voucher supporters have signed up to testify at the hearing.
The Sanford-Vaughn plan, House Bill 4098, offers state funding to parents of private, parochial, and home school students in the form of tax credits, which can be applied to either income or property tax liability. Parents reporting annual taxable income totaling less than $75,000 will qualify for the credits; this population is estimated to include approximately 95 percent of South Carolina’s residents. The amount of the credit will depend upon the grade level of the pupil for which the credit is claimed -- the credit is less for pupils in lower grades than in higher grades -- but the average credit is projected at $4,000.
This will be the first hearing on the voucher proposal in the 2004 legislative session. In a March press conference, Sanford urged lawmakers to adopt the bill this year, and House Speaker David Wilkins has promised Sanford -- following a widely-reported, closed-door meeting with representatives of the House majority -- to shepherd this and other Sanford initiatives through the House by the end of the month. Bills that have not been approved by either chamber by May 1, a "crossover date" under legislative rules, are considered dead for the session.
The SCEA opposes H 4908, maintaining its consistent opposition to any proposal that drains public dollars from public schools through vouchers, for many reasons.
Since 1998, public schools, educators, and students have been subject to higher standards and levels of accountability under the Education Accountability Act (EAA); private, parochial, and home schools are not subject to this act and its provisions, and H 4908 does not seek to hold them accountable under EAA.
While public schools are open to all of South Carolina students, private and parochial schools screen applicants and often do not allow enrollment of students with disciplinary concerns or special needs, or who otherwise do not qualify for enrollment under those schools' subjective criteria.
Further, while the Sanford-Vaughn proposal offers an average $4,000 voucher to parents of students in private, parochial, and home schools, Sanford proposed a base student cost of $1,810 under the Education Finance Act in his "executive budget" proposal to the legislature in January, and Vaughn voted for the House proposal of $1,827 per child in public schools. It is The SCEA's position that the EFA should be fully funded at $2,234 per child as the statute requires.
And finally, the voucher provisions of H 4908 are unconstitutional, as South Carolina’s Constitution prohibits them in Article 11, Section 4.
Tuesday’s hearing will be conducted by Vaughn, Rep. William Clyburn of Aiken, Rep. Shirley Henson of Berkeley County, and Rep. Lanny Littlejohn of Pacolet.
RALLY INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON WEBSITE
Educators and others are encouraged to promote The SCEA's virtual rallies and State House rally scheduled in April. A color flyer detailing the dates and times of these is available on the front page of the association's website. Local association leaders are contacting district superintendents and other community leaders to build a coalition of support for the rallies.
DATELINE APRIL 16, 2004
EOC POSTPONES DECISION ON SANFORD VOUCHERS
The state's Education Oversight Commission (EOC) this morning gave Governor Mark Sanford a pass in his effort to win public-funded vouchers for private, parochial and home schools. The EOC, which usually takes no official position on pending legislation, had scheduled a meeting by conference call to discuss H 4908, the controversial voucher bill promoted by Sanford and sponsored by Rep. Lewis Vaughn of Greenville County.
Observers believed that the commission would adopt a position during that call, and that the position would likely be in opposition to the bill. But a last-minute request from Sanford averted the potential embarrassment of having the EOC, an independent commission created by the Education Accountability Act in 1998, adopt this posture, and having its representatives speak against the governor's initiative in a public hearing scheduled for next Tuesday.
Barbara Nielson, Sanford's K-12 education advisor, was scheduled to represent the governor in the commission's conference call this morning, ostensibly to sell the administration's voucher plan. But Sanford contacted the EOC late Thursday and asked Chairman Bob Staton to have a "face-to-face" conversation about the bill instead. As a courtesy to Sanford, Staton told EOC members this morning, he agreed to appoint a four-member ad hoc committee which will meet with Sanford and/or his staff, "hopefully next week."
The agreement effectively handed Sanford the commission's silence on the bill, since Tuesday's public hearing will go without the EOC's representation and the delay will dilute any position the commission may take thereafter. Staton said the ad hoc committee will include himself and EOC members Harry Lightsey of BellSouth and Rep. Joe Neal of Richland County. The fourth member hasn't been determined, Staton said.
The delay didn't prevent EOC members from offering questions and pointed criticism of the bill during the conference call. Tracy Young Cooper, a former South Carolina Teacher of the Year, expressed concern about the maintenance of standards and lack of accountability if the voucher bill passes. "If this passes, where's the accountability?" Cooper asked. "Are we ensuring that the best, brightest and most capable educators are in front of these children? What's in the future for public education, if this legislation passes?"
Staton added his own questions to the conversation, wondering how parents could determine the quality of a private or parochial school if such schools were not held to the same accountability models as public schools. "Also, if you're putting state dollars in private schools, are they still private schools?" Staton asked.
Lightsey told commissioners that he was "open" to Sanford's proposal and would "actively explore anything that offers opportunities to improve education", but said state funding of vouchers "shouldn't diminish support for public education." "The private school system is just that -- a private school system -- and it's outside the realm of public education," Lightsey said. "I would oppose any attempt to make private schools an auxiliary of public schools by forcing them to give PACT tests and other things."
Commissioner Bob Daniel boiled the bill down to its core. "There are limited resources out there," he said. "It appears to me that this is an attempt to siphon off the dollars going to public schools." Daniel said he foresees some state regulation of private, parochial and home schools if the Sanford-Vaughn proposal were adopted.
Comments from spectators were not invited during the EOC conference call, but Staton was pressed to hear some comments following the meeting's adjournment. Representatives of the South Carolina PTA and various local PTAs had traveled from Greenville, Myrtle Beach and Charleston and were prepared to speak to the commission in opposition to the voucher plan, had the opportunity been afforded.
John Buzon, director of the Charleston Education Network, expressed disappointment that Nielson, the governor's education advisor, did not attend the meeting to explain the bill, as was advertised. He further asked that the EOC ad hoc committee's meeting with Sanford be conducted in public. "If it's not, then this arrangement could be interpreted as just a cheap trick," Buzon said.
"And unless I've read the statutes incorrectly, the Education Oversight Commission is about public education," Buzon argued. "That this body would even consider a bill that undermines public education, that this commission would even consider a proposal to take state funds out of public schools and weaken them, is unconscionable."
Buzon added that he and others representing his organization would attend Tuesday's public hearing on H 4908, which is scheduled one hour following adjournment of the day's House session in Room 101 of the Blatt Building, the House office facility.
Organizers of the hearing have chosen to limit speakers' remarks to three minutes. Approximately 30 voucher supporters have signed up to testify at the hearing, and The SCEA President Jan McCarthy is one of ten who will speak in opposition.
The SCEA opposes H 4908, maintaining its consistent opposition to any proposal that drains public dollars from public schools through vouchers, for many reasons.
Since 1998, public schools, educators and students have been subject to higher standards and levels of accountability under the Education Accountability Act (EAA); private, parochial and home schools are not subject to this act and its provisions, and H 4908 does not seek to hold them accountable under the EAA.
While public schools are open to all of South Carolina's students, private and parochial schools screen applicants and often do not allow enrollment of students with disciplinary concerns or special needs, or who otherwise do not qualify for enrollment under those schools' subjective criteria.
Further, while the Sanford-Vaughn proposal offers an average $4,000 voucher to parents of students in private, parochial and home schools, Sanford proposed a base student cost of $1,810 under the Education Finance Act (EFA) in his "executive budget" proposal to the legislature in January, and Vaughn voted for the House proposal of $1,827 per child in public schools. It is The SCEA's position that the EFA should be fully funded at $2,234 per child, as the statute requires.
And finally, the voucher provisions of H 4908 are unconstitutional, as South Carolina's Constitution prohibits them in Article 11, Section 4.
Tuesday's hearing will be conducted by Vaughn [(803)734-3141, HOM@scstatehouse.net], Rep. William Clyburn of Aiken [(803)734-3033, WC@scstatehouse.net], Rep. Shirley Hinson of Berkeley County [(803)734-2951, SRH@scstatehouse.net], and Rep. Lanny Littlejohn of Pacolet [(803)734-3007, LFL@scstatehouse.net]. The bill's co-sponsors and text may be found by clicking the following link: http://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/web_bh10.exe?bill1=4908&session=115
Educators and others interested in testifying against H 4908 and its voucher provisions on Tuesday should contact Allyn Powell, House Ways and Means Sales and Income Tax Subcommittee staff, at 803-734-3144.
BUDGET GIVEN PRELIMINARY NOD BY FINANCE CMTE
The Senate Finance Committee concluded its work on the largest part of its budget proposal at 10:45 p.m. Thursday, giving preliminary approval to a budget package that is not much different in expenditures from the House plan adopted in March. The Senate plan is very different in its sources of revenue, however, and in its proposed pay increase for state employees.
While the House followed the lead of Governor Mark Sanford and built its budget on projected earnings from the sale of the state's motor fleet and lands, the Senate benefited from last reports by state economists that revenue receipts are well above expectation. While the state Board of Economic Advisors anticipated growth of 1.3 percent this fiscal year, growth in the first nine months of the year has totaled three percent, and nothing suggests that the growth will falter in the remaining quarter.
The result is that the Senate has roughly $132 million in unexpected revenue to use, which Chairman Hugh Leatherman quickly devoted to plugging deficit holes. State employees benefited, perhaps owing to election-year politics, as Leatherman's own Executive Subcommittee recommended a three percent salary increase, compared to the one percent increase approved by the House. Teachers are not included in this recommendation.
The SCEA supports the Senate's efforts to recompense state employees after two years -- in some cases, three years -- of no salary or wage increases at all, particularly in light of annual hikes in State Health Plan premiums charged to these employees, and concurrent health care benefit reductions. The association reminds Senators that educators, many of whom also haven't received salary or wage increases in two and three years, suffer the same premium increases and benefit reductions as other state employees.
While several members of the Senate Finance Committee paid lipservice to raising the Education Finance Act's base student cost beyond the $1,827 approved by the House -- including some who earned single-digit scores on The SCEA's 2003 Legislative Report Card -- no serious action was taken to ensure that increase.
The SCEA will work with education advocates among the Senate membership to offer appropriate amendments during the Senate budget debate.
DATELINE APRIL 20, 2004
VOUCHERS PURSUED ON TWO FRONTS TUESDAY
Voucher supporters will outnumber opponents by nearly two to one at this afternoon's public hearing on House 4908, a bill promoted by Governor Mark Sanford and sponsored by Rep. Lewis Vaughn of Greenville. With each speaker being afforded three minutes for remarks, the 48 proponents and 18 opponents will take the hearing well past three hours.
But while the public hearing is conducted on the first floor of the Blatt Building, the House office facility, Sanford and Vaughn are pursuing a second, quieter route to vouchers at the same time on the fourth floor of the same building.
Vaughn, chairman of the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Sales and Income Tax, is set to begin his hearing an hour following adjournment of today's House session, likely near 2 p.m. That hearing is located in Blatt 101. But at 2:30 p.m., Rep. Bob Walker of Landrum is convening his House Education Subcommittee on K-12 Education in Blatt 433, and his agenda includes House Bill 4445, a bill co-sponsored by Vaughn and Rep. Rex Rice of Greenville. Its purpose is two-fold: to establish a statewide school district for charter schools, and to establish vouchers -- called "academic passports" in the bill text -- to allow public funding to flow to private and parochial schools. It is unclear whether the timing of debate on the two voucher bills is coincidental.
But the parallel scheduling potentially allows one voucher bill to slide through subcommittee quietly while the attention of the education community is almost wholly focused on another in public hearing. The SCEA will monitor subcommittee activity on both bills. The SCEA President Jan McCarthy, the South Carolina PTA President Chuck Saylors, the South Carolina School Boards Association President Leni Patterson and Charleston Education Network Director John Buzon are four of the 18 voucher opponents scheduled to speak to the Vaughn subcommittee.
McCarthy urges members and others to contact Rep. Shirley Hinson of Berkeley County [(803)734-2951, SRH@scstatehouse.net] and Rep. Lanny Littlejohn of Spartanburg County [(803)734-3007, LFL@scstatehouse.net] through the afternoon to seek their votes against H 4908. Rep. Bill Clyburn of Aiken County, the fourth member of the Vaughn subcommittee, has made clear his opposition to this and other voucher proposals. The bill's co-sponsors and text may be found by clicking the following link: http://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/web_bh10.exe?bill1=4908&session=115
The SCEA opposes H 4908, maintaining its consistent opposition to any proposal that drains public dollars from public schools through vouchers, for many reasons.
Since 1998, public schools, educators and students have been subject to higher standards and levels of accountability under the Education Accountability Act (EAA); private, parochial and home schools are not subject to this act and its provisions, and H 4908 does not seek to hold them accountable under the EAA.
While public schools are open to all of South Carolina's students, private and parochial schools screen applicants and often do not allow enrollment of students with disciplinary concerns or special needs, or who otherwise do not qualify for enrollment under those schools' subjective criteria.
Further, while the Sanford-Vaughn proposal offers an average $4,000 voucher to parents of students in private, parochial and home schools, Sanford proposed a base student cost of $1,810 under the Education Finance Act (EFA) in his "executive budget" proposal to the legislature in January, and Vaughn voted for the House proposal of $1,827 per child in public schools. It is The SCEA's position that the EFA should be fully funded at $2,234 per child, as the statute requires.
And finally, the voucher provisions of H 4908 are unconstitutional, as South Carolina's Constitution prohibits them in Article 11, Section 4.
McCarthy also urges members and others to communicate their opposition of H 4445 and its voucher provisions to members of the Walker subcommittee through the afternoon as well. The Rice-Vaughn proposal is similar to the Sanford-Vaughn voucher bill in its provision of tax credits for parents whose children attend a school other than a public school, which includes private, parochial and home schools.
RALLY INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON WEBSITE
Educators and others are encouraged to promote The SCEA's virtual rally on Wednesday, April 21, its State House rally scheduled on Saturday, April 24, and its second virtual rally scheduled on Wednesday, April 28. A color flyer detailing the dates and times of these is available on the front page of the association's website, www.thescea.org. Local association leaders are contacting district superintendents and other community leaders to build a coalition of support for the rallies.
DATELINE APRIL 20, 2004 Part Two
LITTLEJOHN WALKS, VOUCHERS PASS BY 2-1 VOTE
After listening to about three hours of testimony, Rep. Lanny Littlejohn left this afternoon's public hearing on H 4908, handing Governor Mark Sanford a victory in his bid to win public-funded vouchers for private, parochial and home schools.
H 4908, which passed by a two-to-one vote, may be taken up by the full House Ways and Means Committee on Wednesday. Chairman Bobby Harrell has scheduled a meeting 90 minutes following adjournment of Wednesday's House session.
The SCEA President Jan McCarthy urges members and other educators to contact Harrell and other committee members to voice opposition to H 4908 in anticipation of its consideration at that meeting. A list of committee members is found at the end of today's Dateline.
It was not certain that Littlejohn would have voted to oppose the measure, promoted by Sanford and sponsored by Rep. Lewis Vaughn of Greenville. Littlejohn's long career in public education, which included service as a public school teacher and coach, a principal and school board chairman, all in Spartanburg District 3, suggested that he might vote to oppose the bill.
Despite several conversations with educators in recent days -- including some local board members and education lobbyists -- Littlejohn had not clearly indicated his position on the bill by this afternoon. Spartanburg District 3 Superintendent Jim Ray traveled to Columbia specifically to seek Littlejohn's support in opposing the measure before the hearing began, shortly past 2 p.m.
If Littlejohn had voted with Rep. Bill Clyburn of Aiken County, the resulting tie vote would have killed the bill in subcommittee. At about 6:15 p.m., after testimony was offered alternately by about 20 proponents and 20 opponents, Vaughn cut short the hearing with more than 20 voucher supporters still left to speak.
Although testimony against the bill was offered by two of her Berkeley County constituents, including a member of the local school board, Rep. Shirley Hinson moved to adopt the Sanford-Vaughn voucher plan. Clyburn spoke briefly against the motion before Vaughn recorded the two-to-one vote.
More than 125 voucher supporters, mostly students representing private, parochial and home schools, packed the conference room and wore matching lime-green t-shirts emblazoned with the words, "Put Parents in Charge: Pass School Choice Now." Another 50 or so gathered under a tent outside the Blatt Building.
The SCEA President Jan McCarthy referred to the t-shirted children in her remarks opposing the voucher plan, noting the disparity between the proposed $4,000 tax credit for payment of private school tuition and the $1,810 proposed by Sanford as a base student cost for public school pupils.
"For every one of the green shirts out here, that's two times what you're paying for public school students," she said.
Littlejohn, who was present for McCarthy's testimony, challenged her -- and The SCEA's -- focus on the Education Finance Act and its base student cost, rather than taking a more expansive view of education funding from all sources. McCarthy responded, "These are the laws you all have passed."
Immediately following McCarthy's testimony, The SCEA was attacked by Ed McMullen, leader of the South Carolina Policy Council. McMullen characterized the association as the "South Carolina Education Union", saying that it and "the education establishment" were guilty of "deceptions" through the organization's "Keep the Promises" campaign, including the series of billboards urging lawmakers to fully fund the Education Finance Act. "I'm tired of their fear tactics," McMullen told the subcommittee.
Among the testimony offered against H 4908, the South Carolina School Boards Association President Leni Patterson illustrated its absurdity by imagining the application of its logic to other potential tax-creditable scenarios. Patterson is also chair of the Laurens District 55 school board.
"Through these tax credits, you're allowing some citizens to opt out of their civic responsibility to support education through their tax dollars and placing more burden on the rest of us," Patterson said. "In that line of thinking, why shouldn't I get a tax credit for choosing not to participate in the penal system or the judicial system, or for never having used some of the state-maintained roads and bridges? And what happens when all those adults who have no children in school want their tax credit as well?"
Peggy Torrey, vice president for education policy of the South Carolina Chamber of Commerce, said the chamber, too, opposed the bill for its lack of accountability for public expenditures in private, parochial and home schools.
Among the highlights and lowlights of the afternoon's hearing were the following notes:
--Rep. Doug Smith of Spartanburg County, a co-sponsor of H 4908, said it was "time to have a social, philosophical and moral debate about this. How long can we support a system that only produces moderate improvements?"
--Rep. Joel Lourie of Richland County called the proposal "the wrong idea at the wrong time," noting that the House majority recently adopted a budget that "underfunded the Education Finance Act by 20 percent." "We've made historic progress in public education. When you're turning the corner, you don't pull the plug," Lourie said.
--Molly Spearman, government affairs liaison from the Department of Education, said passage of the bill represented "an alarming precedent for our state to set." "We ask that you give us your full, unwavering support," Spearman said. Public school educators, parents and students "all accepted the responsibilities required by the Education Accountability Act and now by No Child Left Behind. We believe that accountability is necessary to having the trust of the public. H 4908 requires none of this accountability from private and home schools."
--Teresa Middleton, principal at Miracle Academy and Preparatory School in Russellville, boasted that 100 percent of her students in grades K-3 score annually at or above the fiftieth percentile in standardized tests, thanks to smaller class size and individualized instruction. But under questioning, Middleton noted that her school has enrolled no students with special needs in grades K-12, and only three such students in her nursery program. "If we had more students, we could hire a special ed teacher," she said.
--Dr. Steve Hefner, superintendent of Richland District 2, observed that "tuition tax credits are a stand-on for vouchers and will divert funds from public schools at a time when they are badly needed." "There are no sanctions in this bill for private schools that fail the same standards as public schools, and public schools are required to accept any student, any day," Hefner said. Regarding Sanford's lopsided proposal to fund $1,810 per child in public schools but an average $4,000 per child in private schools, he declared, "Diverting any money from public schools is a travesty, but this is way out of line." When Vaughn mentioned the appeal of competition as a means to improve public schools, Hefner fired back. "We're not afraid of competition -- we compete every day. We only ask that the competition be on a level playing field."
--David Cope, a member of the Jasper County board of education, said he did not represent the majority opinion of that board in his whole-hearted support for vouchers. The education environment in Jasper County, Cope said, "offers no alternative. We don't have a performing public education system." Asked by Clyburn whether he supported the school equity lawsuit under way in Manning, Cope said he was "absolutely opposed to that suit and I'm embarrassed that Jasper County is a part of it. We do not have an underfunded program in Jasper County. At the current level, they are more than adequately funded."
--Rep. Jeff Duncan of Clinton asked the subcommittee to "be honest about education funding." "'Put Parents in Charge' makes us challenge the status quo," Duncan said. "Are we challenging public schools? Yes. But who knows more about the educational needs of a child? A mother, a father or a bureaucrat? I'll stand with the parent."
--John Buzon, director of the Charleston Education Network, cautioned the subcommittee to study the bill carefully for unintended consequences before leaping to adopt it. "Once you squeeze this tube, you're not going to be able to put the toothpaste back in. You won't be able to look these children in the face and say 'oops'," he said.
--Dr. Jim Carper of the University of South Carolina advised lawmakers that H 4908 violated neither the state nor federal constitutions, and that voucher programs in other states have had "no catastrophic effect" on public school finances there. "We're in the midst of a choice revolution," Carper said.
--Kathleen Bounds, a member of the Berkeley County Board of Education, expressed "vehement opposition," noting that the bill provides "no benefit whatsoever to the vast majority of children in South Carolina." "To further aggravate funding shortfalls is totally anathema to me," Bounds said. "This proposal is anything but right on the money. This is explicit abdication of support for public schools. H 4908 needs to be stopped in its tracks."
--Huey Mills, a Lancaster County pastor and private school administrator, quoted "A Nation at Risk," a report authored by the Reagan-era Department of Education, and President George W. Bush in his support for school choice through vouchers. Of the variety of public school reforms since the 1980s, including outcome-based education, investment in school technology and national board certification of teachers, "none resulted in widespread success," Mills said. "Progress means change and without change, progress is impossible," he added, criticizing what he called the "Chicken Little mentality" of the state's education community. Voucher opponents' focus on the bill's lack of accountability was "a red herring at best, and dishonesty at worst," he said. Mills noted that data on the state Department of Education's own website indicates that "the best performing schools in South Carolina are religious ones, then private ones."
--Phyllis Gildea, president of the Charleston County PTA and mother of two public school students in Mount Pleasant, told the subcommittee, "We do need change. This, however, smells like tax relief."
--Susan Knight, a Lancaster County parent, criticized Sanford for his lack of support for public schools, as represented by his promotion of H 4908. "Governor Sanford and you, our elected officials, should be supporting opportunities for all of South Carolina's children rather than a select few. Our public tax dollars will be given away with no strings attached," Knight said. "The public has no measure of whether our tax dollars are being invested wisely. This is poor stewardship. It offends me that our governor is willing to give private school students greater financial support than he's willing to give public school students." Knight presented the subcommittee more than 300 letters from other Lancaster County parents opposing the voucher bill, and she said more were on the way.
McCARTHY URGES CONTACT OF WAYS & MEANS MEMBERS The House Ways and Means Committee includes the following lawmakers: Harrell, Rep. Larry Koon, Rep. Thomas Keegan, Rep. Rex Rice, Rep. Herb Kirsh, Rep. Jim Battle, Rep. Bill Clyburn, Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, Rep. Dan Cooper, Rep. Bill Cotty, Rep. Ralph Davenport, Rep. Tracy Edge, Rep. Alex Harvin, Rep. Shirley Hinson, Rep. Ken Kennedy, Rep. Chip Limehouse, Rep. Lanny Littlejohn, Rep. DeWitt McCraw, Rep. Jim McGee, Rep. Denny Neilson, Rep. Rick Quinn, Rep. Roland Smith, Rep. Teddy Trotter, Rep. Lewis Vaughn and Rep. Annette Young.
For contact information for these, click on the following link:http://capwiz.com/nea/sc/dbq/officials/directory/directory.dbq?command=statedir&state=SC H 4908's co-sponsors and text may be found by clicking the following link: http://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/web_bh10.exe?bill1=4908&session=115
The SCEA opposes H 4908, maintaining its consistent opposition to any proposal that drains public dollars from public schools through vouchers, for many reasons.
Since 1998, public schools, educators and students have been subject to higher standards and levels of accountability under the Education Accountability Act (EAA); private, parochial and home schools are not subject to this act and its provisions, and H 4908 does not seek to hold them accountable under the EAA.
While public schools are open to all of South Carolina's students, private and parochial schools screen applicants and often do not allow enrollment of students with disciplinary concerns or special needs, or who otherwise do not qualify for enrollment under those schools' subjective criteria.
Further, while the Sanford-Vaughn proposal offers an average $4,000 voucher to parents of students in private, parochial and home schools, Sanford proposed a base student cost of $1,810 under the Education Finance Act (EFA) in his "executive budget" proposal to the legislature in January, and Vaughn voted for the House proposal of $1,827 per child in public schools. It is The SCEA's position that the EFA should be fully funded at $2,234 per child, as the statute requires.
And finally, the voucher provisions of H 4908 are unconstitutional, as South Carolina's Constitution prohibits them in Article 11, Section 4.
DATELINE APRIL 21, 2004
For other education-related legislative news from The SCEA, visit www.thescea.org.
THE SCEA VIRTUAL RALLY SET TODAY
Wednesday marks the first of two virtual rallies sponsored by The South Carolina Education Association, with the second set for next Wednesday, April 28.
A virtual rally is one employing electronic means to bring together the state's education community at the same time behind a common banner. Educators -- and students, in many cases -- are calling and emailing legislators today. Educators and others are encouraged to contact their lawmakers with two messages: Urge House members to vote against H 4908, the Sanford-Vaughn voucher bill, and urge Senators to fully fund the Education Finance Act with appropriations of $2,234 per child.
Virtual rallies were adopted by The SCEA Delegate Assembly as an alternative to appearing en masse in Columbia during school hours. Demands placed by state standards and accountability legislation curb educators' ability to plan rallies on school days, although many have taken annual leave to lobby lawmakers one-on-one during this session.
A full rally at the State House is also planned for Saturday, April 24, at noon. Local associations of The SCEA are organizing groups to attend the event, where a variety of the state's education leaders -- including State Superintendent Inez Tenenbaum, Rep. James Smith, Sen. Kay Patterson and Superintendent Jim Ray -- will join The SCEA President Jan McCarthy in calling for full funding of the Education Finance Act and the defeat of vouchers. A color flyer detailing the dates and times of these is available on the front page of the association's website, www.thescea.org.
VOUCHER BILL ON WAYS & MEANS AGENDA
Rep. Bobby Harrell's House Ways and Means Committee, which will meet 90 minutes following today's House session, will take up H 4908. The SCEA President Jan McCarthy urges members and other educators to contact Harrell and other committee members to voice opposition to the Sanford-Vaughn voucher plan.
The House Ways and Means Committee includes the following lawmakers: Harrell, Rep. Larry Koon, Rep. Thomas Keegan, Rep. Rex Rice, Rep. Herb Kirsh, Rep. Jim Battle, Rep. Bill Clyburn, Rep. Gilda Cobb-Hunter, Rep. Dan Cooper, Rep. Bill Cotty, Rep. Ralph Davenport, Rep. Tracy Edge, Rep. Alex Harvin, Rep. Shirley Hinson, Rep. Ken Kennedy, Rep. Chip Limehouse, Rep. Lanny Littlejohn, Rep. DeWitt McCraw, Rep. Jim McGee, Rep. Denny Neilson, Rep. Rick Quinn, Rep. Roland Smith, Rep. Teddy Trotter, Rep. Lewis Vaughn and Rep. Annette Young.
H 4908's co-sponsors and text may be found by clicking the following link: http://www.scstatehouse.net/cgi-bin/web_bh10.exe?bill1=4908&session=115
The SCEA opposes H 4908, maintaining its consistent opposition to any proposal that drains public dollars from public schools through vouchers, for many reasons.
Since 1998, public schools, educators and students have been subject to higher standards and levels of accountability under the Education Accountability Act (EAA); private, parochial and home schools are not subject to this act and its provisions, and H 4908 does not seek to hold them accountable under the EAA.
While public schools are open to all of South Carolina's students, private and parochial schools screen applicants and often do not allow enrollment of students with disciplinary concerns or special needs, or who otherwise do not qualify for enrollment under those schools' subjective criteria.
Further, while the Sanford-Vaughn proposal offers an average $4,000 voucher to parents of students in private, parochial and home schools, Sanford proposed a base student cost of $1,810 under the Education Finance Act (EFA) in his "executive budget" proposal to the legislature in January, and Vaughn voted for the House proposal of $1,827 per child in public schools. It is The SCEA's position that the EFA should be fully funded at $2,234 per child, as the statute requires.
And finally, the voucher provisions of H 4908 are unconstitutional, as South Carolina's Constitution prohibits them in Article 11, Section 4.
DATELINE APRIL 21, 2004 Part Two
For other education-related legislative news from The SCEA, visit www.thescea.org.
NOON RALLY SCHEDULED ON SATURDAY, APRIL 24
A full rally at the State House is also planned for Saturday, April 24, at noon. Local associations of The SCEA are organizing groups to attend the event, where a variety of the state's education leaders -- including State Superintendent Inez Tenenbaum, Rep. James Smith, Sen. Kay Patterson and Superintendent Jim Ray -- will join The SCEA President Jan McCarthy in calling for full funding of the Education Finance Act and the defeat of vouchers. A color flyer detailing the dates and times of these is available on the front page of the association's website, www.thescea.org.
VOUCHER BILL BLOCKED FOR '04 SESSION
Governor Mark Sanford's proposal to divert public funds to private, parochial and home schools through vouchers won't become law in 2004 but is still alive for symbolic consideration by the House.
H 4908 was taken up by the full House Ways and Means Committee this afternoon, but only briefly. Rep. Lewis Vaughn, the bill's sponsor and chairman of the subcommittee that conducted a four-hour public hearing on Tuesday, presented it to the committee for discussion. But Rep. Shirley Hinson, who yesterday moved to adopt the bill after the lengthy hearing, moved this afternoon to "adjourn debate" on the bill, postponing discussion of it until a later meeting date.
Hinson offered her motion "for the sake of the committee members, to give us all time to talk to our communities and think about amendments." Without discussion, Chairman Bobby Harrell called for a voice vote on Hinson's motion, which passed without dissent.
The entire presentation, motion, and vote lasted less than two minutes.
Today's action only means the bill cannot become law this year. Under legislative rules, bills must pass one chamber by the May 1 "crossover" date in order to be considered by the other chamber by the legislative session's deadline, June 3. Because the window of opportunity for successful committee and House debate on the bill is so narrow, H 4908 cannot become law but is still alive for symbolic debate and passage by the House.
The SCEA President Jan McCarthy thanks members and others who communicated with their representatives in today's virtual rally, and thanks those lawmakers who have pledged their opposition to this and other voucher proposals.
WORKING PARENTS CRIMINALIZED BY H.B. 4653
A bill that subjects some parents to jail sentences and fines was first rejected by a bipartisan vote in the House Education Committee this afternoon, then strangely reconsidered and approved along mostly party lines after a visit from House Speaker David Wilkins to the meeting. House Bill 4653, co-sponsored by Wilkins and Rep. Doug Smith of Spartanburg, is two bills in one: it strengthens current statutes regarding student truancy, and it criminalizes parents who do not attend teacher conferences after being notified of such conferences three times.
Specifically, H 4653 allows magistrates, at the request of district superintendents, to subpoena parents who, for any reason, do not respond to notifications to attend teacher conferences, or who do not attend these conferences. If the parent then fails to appear before the magistrate, he or she will be subject to 30 days imprisonment or a fine of up to $500 for contempt of court.
The SCEA supports measures to reduce truancy and the state's dropout rate. But the association voiced its concerns to subcommittee Chairman Bob Walker that H 4653 employs criminal penalty, rather than incentive, to motivate parental involvement in their children's education. In debate on the bill by the full committee, several lawmakers questioned the wisdom of criminalizing parents who may be unable to attend conferences because of work schedules or inadequate transportation.
Rep. Joe Neal of Richland County noted that many of his constituents are single parents, many of whom hold more than one job, and many of whom work outside their child's school district or far from their child's school.
While Neal also sought to improve parent participation in public schools, he suggested that the state bore a burden to address the root causes of their present inability to participate, rather than to impose criminal penalty. "For some of these parents, a fine of $500 might as well be a million dollars, because they don't have it," Neal said.
Those who voiced principled opposition to the bill included Rep. Gene Pinson of Greenwood County, Rep. B.R. Skelton of Pickens County and Rep. Ken Clark of Aiken County, all members of the House majority party. Pinson, whose wife is a public school teacher, suggested that home visits by educators would eliminate the need for criminal action. Skelton cautioned against the intrusion of state government into the lives -- and parenting abilities -- of citizens.
Other committee members -- Rep. Joel Lourie of Richland County, Rep. Vida Miller of Georgetown and Rep. Bessie Moody-Lawrence of York County -- also spoke against the bill. Only Rep. Joanne Gilham of Hilton Head and Rep. Don Smith of Aiken County joined Walker in voicing support. Neal moved to table the bill, and the vote -- first taken by voice, then by a show of hands -- killed the bill, as Pinson, Skelton and Clark voted with Lourie, Moody-Lawrence, Miller and others to table it.
Within minutes, Wilkins appeared in the rear of the committee room and was heard soliciting a list of those committee members who voted to table the bill. While the committee worked through the remainder of its agenda, Wilkins spoke to several lawmakers around the table. When the committee finished its work, past 6 p.m., Skelton moved to reconsider the vote by which H 4653 was tabled.
Following a parliamentary skirmish of tabling motions and roll call votes, a final vote was taken and the measure was adopted, this time with Pinson, Skelton and Clark voting to approve the Speaker's bill.
DATELINE APRIL 29, 2004
For other education-related legislative news from The SCEA, visit www.thescea.org.
BILLS FAIL CROSSOVER
Two controversial bills failed to meet the May 1 "crossover" deadline for Senate consideration when the House adjourned today shortly past noon without taking action on them. The failure means that proposals to eliminate from permanent statutes the obligation of local school districts to fund education, or to subject some parents to criminal penalties for repeatedly missing school conferences, cannot become law this year.
The STATE PRAISES FRIENDS' ED PLEDGE
An editorial by Nina Brook, Associate Editor of The State, offered that newspaper's approval of a pledge drafted by the Friends of Education Coalition for distribution to lawmakers.
The SCEA is one of several statewide education organizations, with the S.C. Association of School Administrators, the S.C. School Boards Association, the S.C. PTA and others, who adopted a definition of support for public education last year and adapted that definition for use as a pledge to be signed by lawmakers. The pledge includes five principles of support for public schools.
"These five principles truly represent a pro-public education point of view that puts students and classrooms first," Brook writes.
"These are mainstream values that are the bedrock of our society. Any lawmaker who means it when he or she vows to support public education should have no problem signing this pledge." Brook's column is found at this link: http://www.thestate.com/mld/state/news/opinion/8545614.htm
Copies of the pledge will be mailed to officeholders this weekend. The pledge will be available on The SCEA's website next week and at the May 15 rally honoring the 50th anniversary of Brown v. Board of Education in Columbia.
"POLICY COUNCIL" ATTACKS THE SCEA
A broadside published by the South Carolina Policy Council was distributed to House members at their desks and Senators in their offices this morning in an attempt to undermine the pro-education pledge drafted by the Friends of Education Coalition. Rep. Lewis Vaughn of Greenville, who most recently led the effort to win public funding of private and parochial schools through vouchers, authorized the distribution in the House chamber.
The group is called "South Carolina's premier conservative think tank" by House Speaker David Wilkins, a council member. While its stated agenda includes providing "cutting edge policy research and information", its latest report on education funding was roundly discredited for errors and inaccuracies during its presentation to the S.C. Education Oversight Commission this spring.
Under a banner headline, "The True Political Agenda of the SCEA and NEA", the council's attack suggests that The SCEA and NEA "are working under the guise of an organization called the Friends of Education Coalition".
It does not note that the Friends, an informal meeting of education leaders and lobbyists attended occasionally by legislative committee staff, includes representatives of parents (The S.C. PTA), administrators (the S.C. Association of School Administrators), local elected education leaders (the S.C. School Boards Association) and certified and non-certified education professionals (The SCEA). Regular attendees include the S.C. Chamber of Commerce, the S.C. School Improvement Council, the S.C. Association for Rural Education, the S.C. Association of School Psychologists, the S.C. Association of Black School Professionals, Delta Kappa Gamma, the S.C. League of Women Voters, and representatives of the Pee Dee Education Consortium and the Olde English Consortium.
The council's attack asserts that "all South Carolina legislators support public education" but doesn't address the substance of the Friends of Education pledge.
Rather, it represents erroneous data as "facts" to criticize the pro-education agenda of The SCEA and the National Education Association. The council's broadside complains that many of The SCEA's members "are not actually teachers but support staff, such as bus drivers, cafeteria workers and janitors."
But its chief criticism is that "NEA is a labor union that is squarely opposed to most meaningful education reform. In addition, the NEA and SCEA funneled thousands of dollars into South Carolina during the last election cycle to defeat education reform candidates like Governor Mark Sanford."
"It is clear that the NEA and SCEA's fringe propositions have nothing to do with education and everything to do with promoting a radical political agenda that is contrary to the views held by South Carolinians," it reads. "There are more appropriate ways to demonstrate support of public education than by signing a pledge sponsored by these groups."
