There were good reasons why some 75,000 Idahoans signed petitions last year ¬to overturn three education-related laws enacted by the legislature: the Luna Laws are bad education policy and bad fiscal policy. They impose top-down, one-size-fits-all mandates that tie the hands of local school boards, divert money from our already scarce classroom resources, and use that money for expensive laptop and online class schemes that will do nothing to improve student achievement.
These laws require the state to buy laptops for all high school students, whether or not they need or want them. They require high school students to take online classes—the completion rates for which are very low compared to traditional classes—in order to graduate. The business model for large, for-profit corporations offering these online classes is based on high student/teacher ratios, often packing 100 to 200 students in a single class. Not surprisingly, these out-of-state corporations have made generous campaign contributions to those who are pushing these laws.
Second, these laws limit local control. State leaders have long criticized the federal government for dictating one-size-fits-all policies that do not fit the needs of Idaho. So why should we accept what Idaho’s politicians have imposed on our local school districts? Local school boards must be allowed to continue to make the decisions that are best for their communities, their teachers and most of all, their students.
Beyond the flawed provisions contained in the laws, we must understand how these misguided laws originated. They were proposed at a time when the legislature was looking to further reduce expenses for our public schools. In other words, it was a plan to do education on the cheap, further starving a system of public schools that was already on life support.
Based on U.S. Census data, Idaho ranked fiftieth in the nation in per pupil spending in 2010. Then, according to the Center on Budget Policy and Priorities, Idaho reduced funding for our schools by 19 percent during the recession—the fourth deepest cuts in the nation.
We are told these laws will be fully funded, but proponents haven’t identified a single source of revenue to pay for them. The laptops alone will cost $180 million over the coming years—three times the original projection. With so much money being diverted to new spending programs mandated by the Luna Laws, more and more communities are asking local taxpayers to make up for the legislature’s funding cuts in order to avoid cutting teachers.
More than 80 districts around the state have supplemental levies this year, amounting to a record high of $140 million. Projections for next year are a stunning $170 million. Smaller, rural districts often have a harder time passing levies, thus widening the funding gap between larger and smaller districts.
There is much that we can do to improve the way our public schools educate our children. But there is nothing in these laws that actually “reforms” how Idaho students are taught. These three laws were rammed through the Idaho legislature last year without the input of parents, teachers, school board members and administrators.
There’s a better way to improve our schools. To make that possible, we need to begin by voting No on Propositions 1, 2, and 3.
Mike Lanza, a parent of two public school students, is Chairman of the Vote No on Props 1, 2, and 3 campaign and co-founder of Idaho Parents and Teachers Together.
Next Post
Big Sky Tournament Preview
Wed Oct 31 , 2012
It’s been six years since Idaho State hosted the Big Sky Tournament. The last time the Bengals hosted the tournament, in 2006, they won the title. They will be hoping for similar results this weekend. The Big Sky Tournament gets underway Friday, Nov. 2, and Sunday, Nov. 4, at Davis […]
