Public charter schools get strong support from North Dakota Senate
Sen. Michelle Axtman, R-Bismarck, speaks on the Senate floor during the organizational session on Dec. 4, 2024. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)
A bill authorizing public charter schools in North Dakota cleared the Senate Thursday on a 40-7 vote. It will now advance to the House of Representatives, which previously was split on a similar bill.
Senate Bill 2241, sponsored by Sen. Michelle Axtman, R-Bismarck, received little pushback from lawmakers during floor debate. However, during the bill's public hearing, education and public school associations raised concerns about diverting teachers and resources away from traditional K-12 schools, which could significantly affect rural school districts.
'Senate Bill 2241 is not about replacing, or reducing, the importance of our traditional public schools,' Axtman said. 'It's about expanding opportunities for students and families who are looking for another alternative public school option.'
She said, as part of their licensing agreement, charter schools would have to demonstrate that they have community support for their proposed locations.
'Without strong community support, a charter school simply will not open,' Axtman said.
Sen. Larry Luick, R-Fairmount, said he struggled to find the difference between public schools and public charter schools.
Axtman said there was very little difference. She added charter schools would have a specialized learning approach, they wouldn't be able to levy local tax dollars for infrastructure, and they would be governed by an internal school board, not by a public school board.
Her bill would also prohibit charter schools from charging tuition or engaging in religious programming. It would also require the charter schools to meet or exceed public school academic and graduation benchmarks.
Public charter schools would be prohibited from accessing the school building fund and instead need to rely on per-pupil state aid payments, donations and federal grants.
Charter school bill narrowly fails in North Dakota House; Senate considers similar bill
'Improved student outcomes are the ultimate goal of our public education system and this bill provides another public school tool we can use to achieve this goal,' she said.
A fiscal note attached to the bill could not determine the financial impact for the state of establishing charter schools.
In a recent interview, Nick Archuleta, president of North Dakota United, a union representing teachers and public employees, said public schools are becoming more innovative by allowing more student schedule flexibility and incorporating career and technical education programs into their offerings.
During the committee hearing, members of the North Dakota Council of Educational Leaders, North Dakota Small Organized Schools and North Dakota School Boards Association told lawmakers they opposed the bill because it could create additional workforce strain at a time when some school districts are already struggling to recruit and retain staff.
Another public charter school bill, House Bill 1358, narrowly failed in the House chamber on Jan. 31. That bill would have allowed up to 27 public charter schools to be established by 2029. The proposal called for the new charter schools to receive the same per-pupil payment that other public K-12 schools receive.
North Dakota House advances 1 of 3 Education Savings Account bills
Axtman's bill does not provide a cap for the number of charter schools that can be established each year.
Lawmakers also are considering other bills related to Education Savings Accounts, with a vote expected soon on Axtman's Senate Bill 2400.
The House has approved House Bill 1540 that would use money from the state's general fund to help families pay for private school or private classes.
As the bill passed the House, Rep. Pat Heinert, R-Bismarck, urged action because the Trump administration is expected to supply funding to the states for school choice.
'If we do not pass a bill … we will then have to adopt the federal government's guidelines,' Heinert said. 'We know we don't like their guidelines very much.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
36 minutes ago
- The Hill
Republicans lay groundwork for ‘total tax cliff' at end of Trump's term
Congressional Republicans are laying the groundwork for a tax cliff at the end of President Trump's term in office. While the conference is pushing to make the 2017 Trump tax cuts permanent, additional measures geared toward working-class Americans are being slated for expiration at the end of 2028. 'It means that's going to be an issue in the next presidential race,' House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris (R-Md.) said Tuesday. The major expiring tax breaks in the House-passed version of Republicans' domestic agenda bill are boosts in the standard deduction, the deduction for seniors, and the child tax credit, along with the cancellation of taxes on tips, overtime pay, and car loan interest. Budget hawks are saying this sets up a 'tax cliff' in the legislation similar to the one Republicans are now trying to surmount, since most of the 2017 Trump tax cuts expire at the end of this year. 'There's a total tax cliff in there. There's about $1.5 trillion worth of taxes that expire in four years, five years, which means what? In five years, they'll just keep them going. This is why we end up with the same problem,' Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said last week. 'It is 100 percent a gimmick to have tax cuts that you're putting in place for four or five years,' he added. The legislation is likely to undergo substantial changes in the Senate, including a change in the accounting baseline that will allow trillions of dollars worth of deficit additions coming from the extension of previous tax cuts to be ignored. But senators are sounding open to maintaining the split between making the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) permanent and allowing the additional cuts for workers, families, retirees and consumers to expire. 'The general feeling of Senate Finance is the TCJA — we need to make that permanent. We need to make the business provisions — the expensing, the R&D provisions — we need to make those permanent. The other things, I think we should discuss it,' Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), a member of the Senate Finance Committee, said last week. Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) stressed the objective of overall permanence while saying the additional cuts could be subject to change. 'Our intent is to make the tax cuts permanent. Now, something like the child tax credit, with a huge transfer payment aspect to it, I'd have to say that's something I'd have to check on. Other tax cuts and reductions, depending on score and how the votes come down, that could change,' he said last week. The expiring cuts are mostly ones that were proposed by President Trump while he was on the campaign trail. They appealed to various constituencies and came fast and furious in the run-up to the election. Seven different targeted tax proposals were floated in September and October, according to a tally by news agency Reuters. Trump proposed making auto loan interest fully deductible at a speech in October in Detroit, the capital of the U.S. auto industry. He pitched getting rid of taxes on tips in June in Las Vegas, Nev., a battleground state with an enormous hospitality sector. He proposed a tax credit for family caregivers at a rally at Madison Square Garden in New York, a state where more than 4 million people take care of loved ones. Many in the policy establishment — both left-leaning and right-leaning — view Trump's additional cuts as ancillary, if not altogether undesirable. 'I would prefer those things would be completely off the list,' Daniel Bunn, president of the Tax Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington, told The Hill in November. 'It's not good policy. It does not move in the same direction that the 2017 reforms work.' William Gale, co-director of the more liberal Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, wrote in a commentary last year that canceling taxes on tips was a bad idea. 'The obvious problem is that the proposals are inconsistent with sound tax policy. The less obvious problem is that exempting tips would not even help the vast majority of low-income workers,' he wrote. While senators sound open to keeping the division between permanent and temporary tax cuts, they're also wary about creating another tax cliff that is likely to factor into political debates in the future. 'They're doing that for only four years, and all of a sudden that stops? I'm not real high on tax policy that expires,' Johnson said of the no-tax-on-tips provision. 'If it's good enough to include, let's make it permanent. Let's have that discussion.' The Senate has a lot more room to work with than the House since its budget baseline for the bill could allow about $5.5 trillion in expiring tax cuts to be left out of the accounting. However, conservatives in both chambers have expressed concerns about the potential deficit impact of the GOP bill, which has rattled financial markets and spurred a sell-off in the bond market. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated last week that the House's version of the plan would add $2.4 trillion to the nation's deficits over roughly the next decade. In a follow-up analysis requested by Democrats, Congress' official budget scorer estimated additional interest costs resulting from the plan would amount to $551 billion over a decade — a change that would 'increase the cumulative effect on the deficit to $3.0 trillion.' While top Republicans have sought to discredit the CBO's scoring of the measure, there has been distress in both chambers, as well as the White House, over the overall cost and the fact that it is projected to grow the economy by just 0.03 percent. The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) estimated that the bill would grow the economy from 1.83 percent to 1.86 percent over the long run, representing little change from the Federal Reserve's latest prediction of 1.8 percent made prior to the passage of the legislation in the House. 'The Democrat inspired and 'controlled' Congressional Budget Office (CBO) purposefully gave us an extremely low level of growth, 1.8 percent over 10 years — how ridiculous and unpatriotic is that!' Trump wrote on social media earlier this month. One of JCT's models shows the legislation reducing U.S. capital stock by 0.9 percent over the budget window, leading to an overall decrease in economic output. 'The first and second half effects result in a decrease of 0.1 percent on average over the entire budget window,' JCT found. Democrats have seized upon the expiring cuts that Trump proposed as evidence that the bill is skewed toward the wealthy — though lower income tax rates for lower earners will be made permanent as part of the bill. 'Why is this bill designed to take away some of the benefits that you claim people are going to have?' Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) asked Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent during a hearing Wednesday. 'The senior tax credit expires … No taxes on tips expires.' Despite locking in lower tax rates for lower earners, forecasts project the House-passed tax bill will benefit higher earners more and will redistribute wealth from the bottom to the top of the income spectrum. Half of the bill's passthrough deduction alone, which was worth more than $200 billion in 2022, went to the top 1 percent of taxpayers by adjusted gross income, according to the JCT.
36 minutes ago
Colombia's president bypasses lawmakers and issues decree to let voters decide on labor reform
BOGOTA, Colombia -- Colombian President Gustavo Petro on Wednesday bypassed legislative opposition and signed a decree summoning voters to the polls in August to decide changes to the country's labor laws, including whether workdays should be limited to eight hours. The decree fulfilled Petro's threat to Congress to put his labor system overhaul before voters should senators not approve the 12-question referendum themselves. He issued the measure in a tense political climate following the Saturday shooting of opposition senator and presidential candidate Miguel Uribe Turbay during a public event. The referendum has become the crux of long-running tensions between the executive and legislative branches. After Congress rejected Petro's labor reform twice, most recently in March, he sent lawmakers a 12-question referendum proposal on May 1 as Colombian law requires that the Senate rule on the advisability of referendums. The legislative body two weeks later voted 49-47 against the measure, prompting Petro to accuse lawmakers of fraud. Petro, Colombia's first leftist president, has accused Congress of working against the interest of workers and has asked them to demonstrate across the country. The referendum's questions include whether workers should receive double pay if they work during holidays; whether daytime workdays should end at 6 p.m.; and whether open-ended contracts should be offered to workers to prioritize job stability. The disagreements between Petro and Congress date back to the start of his term in 2022, but they have heightened as he seeks to consolidate his legacy ahead of next year's legislative and presidential elections. Uribe remained in critical condition Wednesday following his shooting in broad daylight Saturday during a political rally in the capital, Bogota. Authorities investigating the motive have not ruled out the possibility that it was a targeted attack on the opposition. They are also considering whether it was an attempt to destabilize the current government, or retaliation by illegal armed groups. In anticipation of court challenges, Petro on Wednesday said his government will send the decree to Colombia's Constitutional Court for review. At the same time, the Council of State is considering a lawsuit seeking to annul the Senate's vote.
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
The MAGA assimilation test: Why Rubio passed and Graham failed
Want to figure out how to win over MAGA? Take two former Senate colleagues as an instructive case study. Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-S.C.) recent trip to Ukraine infuriated MAGA, which has placed a target on his back despite his close friendship with President Trump. Secretary of State Marco Rubio hails from similarly hawkish roots. But he's moved squarely into the camp of MAGA favorites. Why it matters: Understanding why Graham is still seen as an outsider — and how Rubio made it inside the tent — offers a roadmap for Republicans trying to thrive in a MAGA-dominated GOP. Trump may have run his last race, but MAGA is here to stay — and few Republicans have spotless records when it comes to commentary on Trump or his ideology. Behind the scenes: Conversations with sources in MAGA media and the movement at large reveal a consistent perception of the two senior Republican figures. After Trump locked up the presidential nomination in 2016, both Graham and Rubio benefited from efforts to develop personal relationships with the new GOP king-maker. But Graham never shook his neoconservative instincts — especially on foreign policy — and MAGA noticed. Rubio, by contrast, listened, adapted, and sold himself as a convert. "Rubio clearly thought about this stuff, formulated a plan to address it and then communicated that plan," said one senior right-wing media figure. "Graham just went about business as usual in Washington." Flashback: In Trump's first term, Graham took massive heat from liberals for cozying up to the man who had humiliated him in 2016, trashed his close friend John McCain, and threw out decades of foreign policy that drove Graham's raison d'etre in Washington. Zoom in: Throughout it all, Graham never fully embraced Trumpism. He bonded with Trump personally, not philosophically. In 2017, Graham advocated for Congress to grant a pathway to citizenship for undocumented "Dreamers" brought to the U.S. as children in exchange for border security measures. Earlier this year, Graham pushed for U.S.-backed Israeli military strikes on Iran to destroy its nuclear program. Then in late May, he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky — flashing a thumbs up with a leader so reviled in MAGA circles that conspiracy theories of Nazism and cocaine use are commonplace online. What they're saying: "Lindsey Graham may actually represent one of the last times that a senator could actually be so flagrantly flippant about public perception on the right," The National Pulse's Raheem Kassam told Axios. "I think the trend is towards, not against, populism. And somebody like Graham really is a dinosaur now." Between the lines: Rubio took a different tack — gradually aligning himself with MAGA positions over time. After Trump's election in 2016, Rubio — a longtime immigration reformer in the Senate — was an early supporter of the border wall. In early 2024, despite his record of hostility toward Russia as an influential member of the Foreign Relations and Intelligence committees, Rubio voted against another foreign aid package to Ukraine. And after voting to certify the 2020 election results, he refused to commit to doing the same in 2024. The intrigue: Rubio's evolution has played out in full public view. The former senator honed his MAGA fluency as a fixture on both cable news and Trump-aligned platform like Steve Bannon's "War Room." As a top Trump official, he's become adept at picking the right enemies nd fights — from China to pro-Palestinian green-card holders to Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), with whom he had a viral showdown last month. "There's this sense that Rubio's just come of age, and he's comfortable in his own skin," a second senior MAGA media figure said. "The version of Rubio that that was out of step with the base was much younger, had not paid his dues nearly as much. And he's just come around." Yes, but: That doesn't mean Graham is reviled or irrelevant. He's still close to Trump and constantly heaps praise the president — a relationship that earns him some forgiveness. "Sen. Graham has supported President Trump from the beginning and has been a loyal ally in the Senate fighting for the America First agenda," said Alex Latcham, the head of Senate Republicans' super PAC and a Trump campaign alum. "President Trump and Sen. Graham remain united in their commitment to keeping Americans safe and prosperous, and anyone who suggests otherwise is attempting to advance a false reality."
