Republican lawmakers mull proposal to reject new Oklahoma academic standards
State Superintendent Ryan Walters speaks with Sen. Dave Rader after a Senate Republican Caucus meeting at the state Capitol in Oklahoma City on Monday. (Photo by Nuria Martinez-Keel/Oklahoma Voice)
OKLAHOMA CITY — After a private meeting with state Superintendent Ryan Walters, Republican lawmakers made no promises that a leading state senator's resolution would succeed in rejecting new academic standards proposed for social studies and science education.
Senate Education Committee chairperson Adam Pugh, R-Edmond, filed the resolution Thursday afternoon after half of the Oklahoma State Board of Education said they weren't aware of changes made to the social studies standards before they approved them in February. Pugh declined to comment while exiting a closed-door Senate Republican Caucus meeting Monday.
Walters joined the caucus meeting midway through. Afterward, he declined to share details of what he discussed but said he had a 'great conversation' and 'appreciated the invite.'
Senate President Pro Tem Lonnie Paxton, R-Tuttle, said after the meeting the GOP majority is still discussing whether it will put Pugh's resolution up for a vote by the full Senate. In previous weeks, he said there hadn't been 'a whole lot of movement to reject those standards' among the caucus.
Both the Senate and the House must agree on a resolution by Thursday to take any action on the standards. State law gives lawmakers 30 legislative days after receiving academic standards to consider them and vote. If the Legislature doesn't pass a resolution, the standards will take effect as written.
Academic standards dictate the topics that public schools must teach to students. They are reviewed and updated every six years.
Five House members signed on as co-authors of Pugh's resolution on Monday, including the chamber's No. 2 Republican leader, Speaker Pro Tem Anthony Moore, R-Clinton.
The group of co-authors also includes Common Education Committee Chairperson Dick Lowe, R-Amber; the committee's Vice Chairperson Danny Sterling, R-Tecumseh; Rep. Tammy West, R-Oklahoma City; and Rep. Mike Osburn, R-Edmond, who is listed as the principal House author.
Lowe said lawmakers are troubled by the review and approval process that took place with the state Board of Education, rather than about the contents of the standards. Many of the constituents living in their House districts are concerned, as well, he said.
'We see the process was probably not as transparent as we'd like to see in state government,' Lowe said.
Pugh's resolution similarly notes that 'questions exist regarding the transparency of the subject matter standard adoption process.'
Whether the House has the chance to vote on the resolution depends on the Senate passing it first. Lowe said it then would be 'a leadership decision' whether the resolution would get a hearing in the House.
House Speaker Kyle Hilbert, R-Bristow, will comment on the resolution if it passes the Senate and comes over to his chamber, his spokesperson said.
Gov. Kevin Stitt and one of his recent state Board of Education appointees, Ryan Deatherage, said they would like the Legislature to send the social studies standards back to the board for another vote. Stitt raised doubts about whether Walters' administration handled the process with the proper integrity.
Walters denied the governor's claims that the Oklahoma State Department of Education emailed board members a different version of the proposed standards from what they ultimately approved.
The Education Department provided email records indicating board members received a copy of the final draft at 4 p.m. the day before they met the following morning of Feb. 27 to vote on the standards. The board voted 5-1 to approve the standards and send them to the Legislature for final review.
The only board member who voted against them, Deatherage, said he hadn't had enough time to read through the lengthy document.
He and two other board members, Chris Van Denhende and Mike Tinney, said Thursday they weren't aware at the time of the vote of changes made from the original draft of the standards, which were posted publicly in December.
Some of the changes include the addition of language stating there were 'discrepancies' in 2020 election results, including 'sudden halting of ballot-counting in select cities in key battleground states, sudden batch dumps, an unforeseen record number of voters and the unprecedented contradiction of 'bellwether county' trends.'
Walters said he made the final decision to add the new language after his administration received public comment and input from focus groups. National conservative media personalities and Republican policy advocates made up the leading committee that reviewed the social studies standards.
Pugh's resolution points out the short timeframe that the board had to review the updated version. It also noted that the governor and board members requested the standards be returned to the state Board of Education 'for proper review and consideration.'
Given 'the magnitude of the decision' and the $33 million cost to implement the new standards, the resolution proposes the Legislature reject them in full for both social studies and science.
House and Senate Democrats filed resolutions last month to reject the social studies standards. Last week, they again urged their Republican colleagues to take action before Walters' proposal becomes mandatory teaching in all public schools.
Senate Minority Leader Julia Kirt, D-Oklahoma City, thought of how the new language would mix with the social studies homework her eighth grader brings home from public school.
'This week we talked about Brown v. Board of Education,' Kirt said during a news conference Wednesday. 'We talked about Plessy v. Ferguson. We're talking about very important concepts in history and social studies, and thinking about teachers having to try to present some of these (new) standards and my children trying to analyze them and understand the angle of them and to have critical thinking around them really deeply concerns me.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
39 minutes ago
- Newsweek
2024 Election Results Under Scrutiny as Lawsuit Advances
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A legal case questioning the accuracy of the 2024 election is moving forward. The lawsuit, brought by SMART Legislation, the action arm of SMART Elections, a nonpartisan watchdog group, filed the lawsuit over voting discrepancies in Rockland County, New York. Judge Rachel Tanguay of the New York Supreme Court ruled in open court in May that the allegations were serious enough for discovery to proceed. Newsweek has contacted SMART Elections for comment via email. People cast their ballots on the last day of early voting for the general election in Michigan at the Livingston Educational Service Agency in Howell on November 3, 2024. People cast their ballots on the last day of early voting for the general election in Michigan at the Livingston Educational Service Agency in Howell on November 3, 2024. Jeff Kowalsky/AFP via Getty Images Why It Matters The lawsuit could renew debate about the 2024 election, though it won't change the outcome since Congress has certified the results declaring President Donald Trump the winner. It comes amid unconfirmed reports that voting machines were secretly altered before ballots were cast in November's election. The federally accredited testing lab, Pro V&V, that signed off on "significant" changes to ES&S voting machines—which are used in over 40 percent of U.S. counties—"vanished from public view" after the election, according to the Dissent in Bloom Substack. What To Know According to the complaint, more voters have sworn in legal affidavits that they voted for independent U.S. Senate candidate Diane Sare than the Rockland County Board of Elections counted and certified, contradicting those results. The complaint also cited numerous statistical anomalies in the presidential election results. They include multiple districts where hundreds of voters chose the Democratic candidate Kirsten Gillibrand for Senate, but none voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic candidate for president. Max Bonamente, a professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and the author of the Statistics and Analysis of Scientific Data, said in a paper that the 2024 presidential election results were statistically highly unlikely in four of the five towns in Rockland County when compared with 2020 results. What People Are Saying Lulu Friesdat, the founder and executive director of SMART Legislation, said in a statement: "There is clear evidence that the Senate results are incorrect, and there are statistical indications that the presidential results are highly unlikely. "If the results are incorrect, it is a violation of the constitutional rights of each person who voted in the 2024 Rockland County general election. The best way to determine if the results are correct is to examine the paper ballots in a full public, transparent hand recount of all presidential and Senate ballots in Rockland County. We believe it's vitally important, especially in the current environment, to be absolutely confident about the results of the election." Max Bonamente said in a paper on the voting data from Rockland County: "These data would require extreme sociological or political causes for their explanation, and would benefit from further assurances as to their fidelity." Costas Panagopoulos, a professor of political science at Northeastern University, told Newsweek: "Statistical irregularities in elections should always be investigated, but the sources of such inconsistencies, which can include error or miscalculation, are not always nefarious. Still, scrutinizing election results can strengthen confidence in elections. Mistakes can happen. "In this case, the drop-off inconsistencies could reflect the idiosyncratic nature of the 2024 presidential election cycle. Alone, statistical comparisons to previous cycles cannot provide definitive proof of wrongdoing. "In any case, it does not appear that any of these inconsistencies would be sufficient to change the outcomes of any of the elections in question in New York state. That does not mean they should not be scrutinized, and any errors, if verified, should be corrected for the historical record. But there is not necessarily any need to invalidate any of these elections in these jurisdictions." What's Next The lawsuit is seeking a full, hand recount of ballots cast in the presidential and U.S. Senate races in Rockland County. A hearing has been scheduled for September 22.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Congress introduces bill addressing national guidelines for college sports
Congress introduces bill addressing national guidelines for college sports With the settlement of three athlete-compensation antitrust cases against the NCAA and the Power Five conferences having received final approval from a federal district judge on June 6, members of the U.S. House of Representatives have moved into action with new legislative proposals regarding national rules for college sports. On Wednesday, June 10, Reps. Lisa McClain, R-Mich., and Janelle Bynum, D-Ore., introduced a bill that comes shortly after Reps. Gus Bilirakis, R-Fla., and Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., circulated a discussion draft of a bill that would largely put into federal law the terms and new rules-making structure of the settlement. The discussion draft is set to be the centerpiece of a hearing June 11 by a subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Bilirakis, who has been involved in previous college-sports bill efforts, chairs the subcommittee. Guthrie chairs the full committee. The bill – in addition to being a bi-partisan presentation – continues recent work related to college sports from McClain, who is the current House Republican Conference chair. That makes her the GOP's No. 4-ranking member in the House. In April, McClain introduced a bill that would prevent college athletes from being employees of their schools, conferences or an athletic association. The discussion draft – as posted on Congress' general resource site, - includes language that specifically would allow the NCAA, and potentially the new Collegiate Sports Commission, to make rules in areas that have come into legal dispute in recent years and in areas that the NCAA wants to shield from legal dispute. The discussion draft, first reported on by The Washington Post, also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of federal law. In addition, the discussion draft includes a 'placeholder' section for language that likely would be connected to providing antitrust or other legal protection for various provisions. According the discussion draft, an 'interstate collegiate athletic association' would be able to 'establish and enforce rules relating to … the manner in which … student athletes may be recruited' to play sports; 'the transfer of a student athlete between institutions'; and 'the number of seasons or length of time for which a student athlete is eligible to compete, academic standards, and code of conduct'. The NCAA's rules regarding when recruits can be offered money in exchange for the use of their name, image and likeness; athletes' ability to freely transfer; and the number of seasons in which they are eligible to compete all of have been – or currently are being – addressed in federal and state courts across the country. That has raised concerns for NCAA officials about the future of rules such as those concerning academic eligibility requirements The discussion draft also includes language that would require most Division I schools to provide a series of benefits for athletes that are currently called for under NCAA and some conferences' rules but do not have the force of law. These include medical coverage for athletically related injuries for at least two years after the conclusion of an athlete's career; guaranteed financial aid that would allow an athlete to complete an undergraduate degree; and 'an administrative structure that provides independent medical care and affirms the unchallengeable autonomous authority of primary athletics health care providers (team physicians and athletic trainers) to determine medical management and return-to-play decisions related to student athletes.'
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Trump's 'big beautiful' spending bill could make it harder to claim this low-income tax credit
As Senate Republicans debate President Donald Trump's "big beautiful bill", a lesser-known provision from the House-approved package could make it harder to claim a low-income tax credit. If enacted as written, the House measure in the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would require precertification of each qualifying child for filers claiming the so-called earned income tax credit, or EITC, starting in 2028. Under current law, taxpayers claim the EITC on their tax return — including Schedule EIC for qualifying children. The provision aims to "avoid duplicative and other erroneous claims," according to the bill's text. But policy experts say the new rules would burden eligible filers, who may forgo the EITC as a result. The measure could also delay tax refunds for those filers, particularly amid IRS cutbacks, experts say. More from Personal Finance:Job market is 'trash' right now, career coach says — here's whyWhat a 'revenge tax' in Trump's spending bill could mean for investorsWhat Trump's plan to slash Pell Grant to lowest level in a decade means for you "You're going to flood the IRS with all these [EITC] documents," said Janet Holtzblatt, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. "It's just not clear how they're going to process all this information." Holtzblatt, who has pushed to simplify the EITC for decades, wrote a critique of the proposed precertification last week. "This is not a new idea, but was previously considered, studied and rejected for very good reasons," Greg Leiserson, a senior fellow at the Tax Law Center at New York University Law, wrote about the proposal in late May. Studies during the George W. Bush administration found an EITC precertification process reduced EITC claims for eligible filers, Leiserson wrote. During the study, precertification also yielded a lower return on investment compared to existing EITC enforcement, such as audits, he wrote. One of the key benefits of the EITC is the tax break is "refundable," meaning you can still claim the credit and get a refund with zero taxes owed. That's valuable for lower earners who don't have a tax bill, experts say. To qualify, you need "earned income," or wages from work. The income phase-outs depend on your "qualifying children," based on four IRS tests. "Eligibility is complicated," and residency requirements for qualifying children often cause errors, said Holtzblatt with the Tax Policy Center. For 2025, the tax break is worth up to $8,046 for eligible families. You can claim the maximum EITC with adjusted gross income up to $61,555 for single filers and $68,675 for married couples filing jointly. These phase-outs apply to families with three or more children. As of December 2024, about 23 million workers received the EITC for tax year 2022, according to the IRS. But 1 in 5 eligible taxpayers don't claim the tax break, the agency estimates. Nine Democratic Senators last week voiced concerns about the House-approved EITC changes in a letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. If enacted, the updates would "further complicate the EITC's existing challenges and make it more difficult to claim," the lawmakers wrote. Higher earners are more likely to face an audit, but EITC claimants have a 5.5 times higher audit rate than the rest of U.S. filers, partly due to improper payments, according to the Bipartisan Policy Center. The proposed EITC change, among other House provisions, still need Senate approval, and it's unclear how the measure could change. However, under the reconciliation process, Senate Republicans only need a simple majority to advance the bill.
