Category Archives: Education Politics

The Denver Post‘s website yesterday published an opinion column by Alliance for Choice in Education executive director Norton Rainey, decrying the “unsurprising” but disappointing defeat of House Bill 1296: HB 1296 would have provided low-income families with an annual $1,000 tax credit for enrolling their child in a private school. The bill would also have provided a grant of $1,000 to any public school that loses a student to a private school as a consequence of the tax credit. The legislation would have given low-income families a financial incentive to send their child to a private school, reduced public school class sizes as more children took advantage of the tax credit, and provided public schools with a $1,000 grant to help them give the children that remain a better quality education. What’s more, HB 1296 would have saved the state millions of dollar, according to the official fiscal note prepared by Legislative Council: $4.9 million in savings for the first year, $6.9 million in the second year, and as much as $26 million by 2022. [link added]

I pause from my regularly scheduled juvenile opining to acknowledge the passing of someone who gave many years of service to the state of Colorado — including many on behalf of public education. He and I wouldn’t have agreed on every issue, but there’s no doubt he was independent in thought, well-informed in his views, and passionate in his work. I’m talking about former Arvada state senator Al Meiklejohn, who died Monday at age 86 and will be put to final rest today. As reported in this week’s Denver Post obituary, Meiklejohn served six years on the Jefferson County Board of Education and “constantly pushed for public-school reform and better salaries for teachers.” For his service he has a Jeffco elementary school named after him. You know Senator Meiklejohn was a man of influence and stature when in the week of his death he has received such high praise from two very different sides of the education spectrum.

If you can dig way back into your memory banks, four months ago the Colorado Supreme Court decided it had a say in determining the state’s school funding policy — giving new life to the Lobato v State lawsuit. Recently, two of the plaintiff lobbying groups have been urging local school boards to agree to help pay the legal fees. In essence, this means taxpayers are funding both sides of a lawsuit to force taxpayers to spend more money on schools. As News 5’s Andy Koen reports, Colorado Springs School District 11 last week voted to spend $50,000 on the lawsuit, even though a Democrat state legislator says the money simply isn’t there in the budget, and an education legal expert says these lawsuits are ineffective (click here to watch a 2-minute video of the news story):

I know this sounds a little weird, but I think I’m experiencing a bad case of deja vu. The topics of three posts I wrote last week all re-emerged this Friday morning: On Monday the 15th I noted that the school spending transparency debate had returned to the State Capitol. While Senate Bill 91 here was killed, I see that our neighbors to the Southwest – Arizona – are giving serious consideration to a bill that would bring detailed spending transparency to public school agencies and all other governments. On Wednesday the 17th I highlighted our new podcast with Harrison superintendent Mike Miles about his district’s groundbreaking performance-based teacher pay program. Today the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) posted their interview with Miles about the very same topic in its weekly Teacher Quality Bulletin. Last but not least, on Thursday the 18th I brought your attention to Rick Hess’s new blog and promised to cut back on using the “It’s For the Kid” line. This morning the Education Intelligence Agency’s Mike Antonucci observes that it didn’t take very long for NEA to help make Hess’s argument for him. Here’s hoping the month of March brings something new. Have a […]

Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal featured a great (and timely) editorial piece titled “No (Tenured) Teacher Left Behind” — focusing readers’ attention on an issue that demands policy makers’ attention: School reformers generally agree that the most important education resource is the teacher. But one of the biggest obstacles to putting a good instructor in every classroom is a tenure system that forces principals to hire and retain teachers based on seniority instead of performance. California grants tenure to teachers after merely two years in the classroom. New York, like most other states, makes teachers wait a grand total of three years before giving them a job for life. In most cases tenure is granted automatically unless administrators object, which is rare. Colorado is like New York, in that teachers have a three-year probationary period before career tenure is rewarded. Some object and say that Colorado doesn’t have teacher tenure. If you mean the word tenure as such doesn’t appear in the law books, you’re right. But there are still plenty of bureaucratic hoops to climb that make removing a tenured teacher extremely costly and difficult. Remember this chart?

I guess some things in education you’re just not supposed to talk about. Hats off to the Fordham Institute for breaking one of the taboos and reporting on “private” public schools. What, you say? That doesn’t make sense? It does make sense when you understand what authors Michael Petrilli and Janie Scull are getting at: the fact that 2,800 public schools serving 1.7 million students in the United States have very, very low percentages of poor students in them. As they show, schools funded and run outside the government system aren’t the only ones that can be exclusive. The list of Denver-area “private” public schools is posted here (PDF). Those who are paying attention closely will note that 5 of the 55 on the list are public charter schools. That’s about in proportion to Colorado’s general school population, which reinforces our understanding that charters in our state cater to no more or fewer middle-class students than their neighborhood school counterparts do. I’m not saying we need to put an end to all of these exclusive schools — whether they be private or public, traditional or charter. The point is let’s stop bashing proposals to give publicly-funded scholarships (through vouchers or […]

Maybe you have heard of Coverdell Education Savings Accounts. Maybe you even have one for your kids. They were created by Congress in 2001 as a way to save $2,000 per year per child for qualified education expenses tax-free. It’s a good way for parents to save money to cover some K-12 private school tuition expenses, or school supplies, or even to provide some savings for a college education. But it appears, according to the Heritage Foundation’s Patrick Tyrrell, that Congress — by doing nothing — soon may limit what you can use your Coverdell ESA money for:

It may be a little off the topic of K-12 education, but it’s very relevant to many who work in Colorado’s public school system. The Evergreen Freedom Foundation (EFF) has published a new book titled Sweeping the Shop Floor: A New Labor Model for America. The old industrial labor monopolies that seemed to work for a different era have wreaked damage on Detroit, California and many other places. In its press release, EFF proposes something different: In response, the study proposes that the United States modernize its labor laws based on reforms successfully implemented several decades ago in New Zealand. The highly regulated nation found itself on the brink of bankruptcy by the late 1980s. New Zealand’s political leaders passed a series of sweeping economic and labor policy reforms modernizing the nation’s labor laws. In 1991 the Employment Contracts Act gave workers the choice of whether or not to be represented, and also made unions compete for members. Over five years, unemployment dropped from 11 percent to 6 percent and productivity increased significantly. “This new piece of legislation was not only a boon to New Zealand’s economy, but also had a strong social impact on its citizens,” says Mike Reitz, […]

Yesterday I heard education lobbyists testify before Colorado’s House Finance Committee that tax credits must be repealed to help offset budget cuts to K-12 schools. I can’t say whether or how much they have a point, because for years (or so big people tell me) of funding increases they have constantly said there’s not enough money. It kind of reminds me of that little boy who kept yelling something until nobody believed him anymore. Well, has it occurred to anyone that the structure of the system, the framework for how we spend money on K-12 education, might need to change? Is that even part of the conversation? Enter the Cato Institute‘s Adam Schaefer, who puts the spending on a national scale into context in his brand-new piece for National Review: K–12 schooling is the biggest item on state and local budgets. Judging by the 2005–06 totals from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), state and local governments now spend well over $500 billion each year on public K–12 education. The Bush and Obama administrations have overseen a startling increase in the federal involvement in and funding of K–12 education, but the federal government provides just 9 percent of education […]

The New Orleans Saints’ first trip to the Super Bowl may be the biggest story out of The Pelican State these days, but it’s not the only one. Serious school choice supporters ought to check out a great new article in Education Next. Harvard research fellow Michael Henderson details the interesting behind-the-scenes story how his native Louisiana came to adopt a now-growing private school choice program. How much of the momentum for creating the program was fueled by the terrible 2005 disaster of Hurricane Katrina? Or are there important lessons for school choice advocates in other states they can apply to their own political battles to expand educational opportunity for K-12 students? Michael Henderson’s account and analysis deserve some serious consideration. Please check it out.