MS House lawmakers push school choice as Senate chairman kills proposals. Read details
Hours after the Senate Education Committee killed several House priorities for the year, the House Education Committee on Tuesday killed a flurry of Senate bills and revived an effort to allow students to more easily move between school districts.
On Tuesday, as a legislative deadline loomed, the House Education Committee amended and passed only one bill sent over from the Senate. By the time the deadline passed Tuesday evening, both committees had let education initiatives in both chambers die, citing lack of support for some and wanting to continue negotiations on others.
While it is typical of every session for committees not to advance bills that passed the other chamber, House Education Chairman Rob Roberson, R-Starkville, said this could be seen as a tactic to force negotiations for at least some school choice legislation either this year or next.
"There's lots of places to put other things in conference," House Education Chairman Rob Roberson, R-Starkville, said. "As we're developing (through the session), a lot of the bills were probably going to die anyway. Anything that dies this year, we're going to be coming back with next year."
The House Education Committee, after learning the Senate killed several bills dealing with school choice, charter school expansion and school district consolidation, paused its business to speak with House leadership.
School choice: School choice in MS House lives by in-house rule, not Democratic principle. See details
When the committee met three hours later, it amended a Senate bill to allow for public-to-public school district movement for students, leaving all others on the cutting room floor.
That piece of legislation would allow for students to move to another school district without the permission of the school district of origin. The state would also pay for any student transfers and fund the idea with $5 million if it passes, per the House proposal.
Rep. Jansen Owen, R-Poplarville, said this was an effort to continue discussions on giving parents some choice for the children's education.
When asked why he killed the original House bill dealing with portability, Senate Education Chairman Dennis Debar, R-Leakesville, said there were concerns about how student funding would flow between districts, whether student athletes would have an unfair advantage and a lack of support in the Senate.
School choice lacks support: Why universal school choice is unlikely to pass in 2025 MS Legislature? Read here
"Nothing will happen this year as far as requiring public-to-public (portability)," Debar said. "I still would like to have it studied, so that might come up later this year. I do not believe you'll see anything regarding portability being implemented this year.'
Lt. Gov. Delbert Hosemann in a written response to the Clarion Ledger, said portability, or public-to-public school transfers, was not popular among his senators.
"I have always supported public-to-public portability with capacity requirements and will continue to do so despite not currently having the votes,"
House Speaker Jason White, R-West, called out Hosemann for not driving for the legislation despite making it a legislative priority.
"He supported it, he talked about it on a political stump even this past year," White said to reporters. "That bill (now) languishes somewhere in a committee."
DeBar also said that he killed the other school choice bills because he wants to wait for studies to be produced and discussed on charter school expansion and on a statewide school district consolidation effort.
The portability bill is part of a much larger debate in the state Capitol regarding school choice, a loose term for legislation seeking to give parents more state-funded choices for the children's education.
Those debates typically run hot for some Mississippi Democrats, who in the House have equivocated portability, or public-to-public school transfer reform, as being akin to a path toward legalized segregation in public schools, while others have voiced concerns about student athletes taking advantage of the program to play at better performing schools.
School choice tax credits: This week in politics: School choice bills return for second round in MS House
What is school choice? How are Mississippi lawmakers advancing the school choice agenda in 2025? See here
"This is a bill that claims to expand educational opportunities, but in reality, it plans to weaken our public school systems," Rep. John Faulkner, D-Holly Springs, said of the House portability bill before it passed out of the House in February. "It provides no funding for transportation, making it a privilege for those who can afford it, while leaving behind students in struggling districts. Furthermore, it risks diverting critical funds from under resourced schools."
As for what school choice legislation is left to consider this session, the field is almost clear. White, who has for the second year in a row put education reform, including school choice, within his top legislative priorities, has repeatedly said the state should do something to give parents more options for education.
Other school choice bills dealing with a tax credit program, the Children's Promise Act, also await further consideration in the Senate.
Grant McLaughlin covers state government for the Clarion Ledger. He can be reached at gmclaughlin@gannett.com or 972-571-2335
This article originally appeared on Mississippi Clarion Ledger: MS House: School choice again a focal point
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Infighting jeopardizes hopes of Democratic comeback
Intraparty fighting is threatening to stall the Democratic Party's efforts to rebuild seven months after President Trump's sweeping general election victory. The party has also been roiled by revelations and questions about the last months of former President Biden's administration and whether he was in the midst of a cognitive decline. They also will have to contend with a number of high-profile primaries in the year ahead. And ousted Democratic National Committee Vice Chair David Hogg has been at the center of controversy, using his political group to challenge incumbent House Democrats. History suggests Democrats have a chance to win back the House in next year's midterm elections, since the president's party usually uses seats in such cycles. But the multiple fractures for Democrats are a real risk. Some Democrats acknowledge the bad vibes hanging over the party, even as they argued things are brighter than they appear. 'The narrative right now is we're a bunch of losers running around like chickens with our heads cut off and I don't think that's the case,' said Mike Nellis, a Democratic strategist and former senior adviser to former Vice President Kamala Harris. He suggested some of the party's problems are just typical after a lost presidential election. 'We are a party out of power without a standard-bearer and that isn't going to change until the presidential election,' he said. Democratic infighting spilled onto center stage earlier this week when recording a recent DNC call was leaked, revealing DNC Chair Ken Martin venting about his frustration with Hogg — who denies being the source behind the leak. The audio came out just before DNC officials were set to vote virtually on whether to redo the vice chair elections. Later in the week, DNC members voted to redo the vice chair elections of Hogg and Pennsylvania state Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta (D). Hogg said after the vote that he would not seek the position again, saying he would focus on his group, Leaders We Deserve. 'It is going to remain my No. 1 mission to build the strongest party possible,' Hogg said. But in a subsequent series of social media posts following the committee's vote, Hogg alleged that Democratic Party leaders had been 'asleep at the wheel.' 'It became clear that Leaders We Deserve had to start primarying incumbents and directly challenging the culture of seniority politics that brought our party to this place to help get our party into fighting shape again,' Hogg said. Many Democrats have expressed public frustration with Hogg over the past few weeks, though Nellis said its importance is overstated. 'That is typical, classic, internal party fighting that happens everywhere and it gets outsized attention to its importance,' he said. 'Could our messaging be stronger? Yeah. Could we be more forceful in the way we're approaching these fights? Absolutely. But we are a unified party and we are fighting the worst of what Donald Trump is doing,' he continued. Democrats point to a slew of special election victories that have taken place within the first months of Trump's second administration as evidence the party is already hitting back and galvanizing against the administration. Last month, Douglas County, Neb., Treasurer John Ewing Jr. (D) ousted incumbent Omaha Republican Mayor Jean Stothert in a special election. That win followed a flipped Iowa state Senate seat in January and a win in an open Pennsylvania state Senate seat in March that Trump comfortably won in November. 'Some people in DC just want to win the argument, but I'm focused on winning elections. Since the start of the year, Democrats have an unprecedented track record of 30 wins and overperformances in races across the country, and up and down the ballot,' Martin said in a statement to The Hill. 'That's what I was elected to do, and we're doing it. Now, we are laser focused on winning in November 2025 and the midterms in 2026.' Still, with DNC tensions laid bare and finger-pointing over Biden's presidency persisting, Democrats have looked anything but unified from the outside. Democrats push back on the notion that they are the only party that is facing disunity at this moment, pointing to disagreements among Republicans on Trump's legislative agenda and the very public falling out between Trump and billionaire businessman Elon Musk. Amid his feud with Musk last week, Trump's approval rating in the Decision Desk HQ/The Hill average ticked down to 47.5 percent, 2 points less than his disapproval rating of 49.5 percent. 'Donald Trump has had the two worst weeks of his presidential term,' Nellis said, referring to recent economic data and Trump's feud with Musk. 'And immediately Donald Trump decides to execute an attempt to change the conversation to immigration and as always, he's taken it too far.' Trump's move to deploy troops to Los Angeles this week, coupled with Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) being forcibly removed from a press conference featuring Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, has served as a unifying moment for Democrats against Trump. 'If it's framed as immigration, Trump wins that argument. This is not about immigration, this is about government overreach,' Nellis said. Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright said it was time for Democrats to take back the narrative on the issue. 'I think it's one of those issues where we're going to have to grab the microphone on and let the other side know that they don't control the issue,' he said. 'I do think that bread and butter pocketbook issues are still going to run the day.' The first major test of Democrats' unity will come in November in Virginia and New Jersey's off-year elections. While the two elections do not always act as an accurate barometer ahead of the midterms, statewide wins would give Democrats a needed boost in making their 2026 argument. 'Everything has to be about our electoral success, expanding the map, as well as growing and strengthening our coalition,' Seawright said. 'I think in this moment we'll be judged every step along the way before 2028.'
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Padilla handcuffing raises the stakes for Democrats confronting administration
The handcuffing of Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) raises the stakes for future clashes between Democrats and the administration as acts of protest have been met with swift law enforcement action. Democrats have vowed to continue their pressure campaign on the administration over its immigration policies, but the incident involving Padilla and President Trump's forceful response to Democratic protestors raise questions over how such confrontations will intensify. The remarkable video shows Padilla being forced to the ground and then handcuffed after interrupting Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference, with the lawmaker identifying himself by name and title and saying he wished to ask a question. Trump administration officials said Secret Service agents responded as trained — removing an unknown figure as he pushed his way toward the front of a press conference. Democrats see it as the manhandling of a colleague and an escalation after the administration brought charges against Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) over her involvement in a scuffle that erupted when she and colleagues were attempting to visit a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility. 'This is another incident of Trump and his administration abusing their power and stopping members and elected officials from doing their jobs. I mean, this is just going to keep escalating,' McIver said in response to a question from The Hill. 'This is why we must continue to do oversight. We must continue to do our jobs, and be vocal about what this administration is doing. And it's a threat to our democracy. It's very sad. It's a sad day in America to see everything that is happening, from the situation with me to now with the United States senator being basically tackled to the ground.' Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) raised a more chilling prospect. 'It is a further dissension into anarchy and authoritarianism, and it is time that Republicans in the House and the Senate not only stand up for our institution, but stand up for democracy and call on Donald Trump to stop this lawlessness, or someone is going to get killed,' he told The Hill. The condemnation from Democrats of Padilla's treatment was immediate, with California Democrats walking down the Capitol steps in unison for a press conference that swelled as more of their colleagues from other states arrived. Rep. Adriano Espaillat (D-N.Y.) said Padilla was 'assaulted.' Numerous lawmakers said he was 'manhandled.' And Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) raised concerns that Democrats could face violent consequences even as he stressed the need to push back on what he dubbed an effort by Trump 'to show that he is not controlled by our Constitution.' 'We're heading down a dark, dark path, something that in my imagination I never thought we would reach. But this is where we are, and if, if they can do that to a member of Congress from New Jersey, a senior senator who was shouting at the top of his lungs, 'I am Sen. Alex Padilla,'' Gomez said. 'If it can happen to Alex, it can happen to any of those senators on the other side, or any member of Congress, or anybody. So I want to just stress that we're not going to give up. We're not going to be intimidated. We're not going to be cowards. We're going to keep fighting for our communities. …When is it going to be enough? When somebody gets shot in the streets of Los Angeles? When a member gets shot?' he said before trailing off as he became overcome with emotion. But many also urged caution and stressed the need to respond peacefully. 'They are trying to stage as many violent and political provocations as possible. And so we're in a dangerous situation right now. So I urge everybody on our side to act with maximum restraint and in the best traditions of non-violence,' Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, told The Hill before referencing Trump's Saturday parade. 'Because Donald Trump has a $100 million military extravaganza parade coming to Washington. They told people not to come to work on Friday. And he's threatening to send troops to other cities. So I regard the situation with immense gravity.' The potential for charges for Democrats engaging with law enforcement are no small matter. McIver, who was indicted by a grand jury this week after the administration accused her of using her forearms to attack law enforcement, could face up to 17 years if convicted. Democrats have called the prosecution a politically motivated case that twists her efforts to brace herself in the scuffle. And while Padilla is the only lawmaker who has been handcuffed, a staffer for Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) was also handcuffed after Department of Homeland Security officers pushed their way into the office without a warrant while looking for those protesting arrests at immigration courthouses. At the same time, there are risks to law enforcement, though it's highly unlikely the Trump administration would pursue any charges. 'These thugs who manhandled the senator probably don't know it's a federal offense to attack a member of Congress, but that's not what it's about,' Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said on the Capitol steps. 'It shouldn't be anybody in our country [who is] treated this way. So we speak out for Senator Padilla. We're speaking out for everyone who has a right to speak.' Shortly after Padilla was removed, Noem addressed the matter, saying the lawmaker behaved inappropriately but said she would meet with him, which she did not long after the press conference ended. 'I think everyone would agree that wasn't appropriate,' she said. 'When I leave here I'll find him and visit and find out really what his concerns were. I think everybody in America would agree that that wasn't appropriate, that if you wanted to have a civil discussion, especially as a leader, a public official, that you would reach out and try to have a conversation,' she said. The Department of Homeland Security later incorrectly said Padilla failed to identify himself and said he was not wearing his Senate pin, though he was wearing a shirt with the Senate logo on it. Few Republicans have answered Democrats' calls to rebuke the response to Padilla. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) called the incident 'horrible.' 'It's horrible. It is shocking at every level. It's not the America I know,' she said. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said, 'it looks like he's being manhandled and physically removed, and it's hard to imagine a justification for that.' But Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) leveled criticism at Padilla for missing scheduled votes that day. 'I think he should have been here in Washington voting,' Barrasso told reporters. 'He has a responsibility to his constituents to show up at work,' he continued. 'Not to go try to make a spectacle of himself.' For his part, Padilla was also surprised by his treatment, saying in an interview with Pod Save America that it took 'maybe half a second for multiple agents to be on me.' He said he snapped when he heard Noem describe herself as in Los Angeles to 'liberate' the city from its governor and mayor, motivating him to interject. He encouraged people to 'continue to speak up.' 'We have First Amendment rights in this country. Speak up, protest peacefully. But continue to speak up because Donald Trump would want nothing more than for all of us to just cower away and say nothing, and let him continue to abuse his power,' he said. 'We cannot let this be the norm.' But in the aftermath of the incident, he said he's left wondering what happens when there aren't cameras rolling, and people who do not have powerful positions like the one he holds encounter DHS and ICE agents conducting the raids. 'If a senator asking a question scares them so much that they'll deploy agents to put a United States senator in handcuffs, imagine what they're doing to people out there, maybe subject to an immigration raid, who have a question…may be requesting their lawyer but not getting that opportunity,' he said. 'These are dangerous times for the United States of America.'
CBS News
an hour ago
- CBS News
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and U.S. Rep. Marc Veasey discuss President Trump's "big beautiful bill", proposed tax and spending cuts
As the Republican majority in the U.S. Senate considers making changes to President Trump's "big, beautiful bill", Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas vowed, "We're going to get this done. We will get the one big, beautiful bill passed, and the reason we're going to is because we have to." Cruz made his comments to CBS News Texas Thursday during an interview for Eye On Politics. When asked what changes he would like to see made to the version of the bill passed by the U.S. House last month, Cruz said, "I'd like to see us cut more spending. I'll tell you one idea that I've been urging my colleagues to do, and an idea I urged the President in the Oval Office last week to do is to end the Federal Reserve's practice of paying interest rates on bank reserves. For most of the history of the Fed from 1913 until 2008, the Fed did not pay interest on reserves. Then it started paying interest on reserves fairly recently in 2008." A report by the Federal Reserve at the time said, "This policy gave banks an incentive to hold onto their reserves rather than lending them out, thus mitigating the need for the Federal Reserve to offset its expanded lending with reductions in other assets." But Cruz said it's too costly to taxpayers. "In the last couple of years of the Biden administration, that expenditure skyrocketed, and it's spending now over $150 billion. That is your and my taxpayer money that is going straight to big banks. Ending that practice, that one change alone, would save $1.1 trillion over the next ten years." Cruz said the U.S. could save another $2 trillion over a decade by cutting more federal spending. "For example, removing illegal aliens from federal government welfare benefits that saves hundreds of billions of dollars. Another is expanding work requirements to receive federal benefits. I think work requirements are incredibly helpful and beneficial for young, healthy people." He also said the Senate's version of the bill will include his legislation for no tax on tips, a federal tax credit that provides incentives for school choice programs, and a what's called Invest America, which provides $1,000 to newborn children that can be invested for them. Parents, family members, and employers can also give up to $5,000 a year in a tax advantage account. "By the time he or she turns 18, they'll have $170,000 in that account, and if they keep contributing $5,000 a year, by the time that child turns 35, he or she will have $700,000 in that account." House and Senate Republicans favor extending and making permanent the income tax cuts approved in 2017 during President Trump's first term. When asked about the Congressional Budget Office's projections that the "big, beautiful bill will add $2.4 trillion to the debt if passed as is, Cruz rejected it. "Historically, CBO has been wrong in its scoring. Over and over and over again, they underestimate the economic growth from tax cuts. But what I'll say secondly, is I agree. We need to cut more spending." All Democrats in the U.S. House, including Representative Marc Veasey of Fort Worth, voted against the "big, beautiful bill." When asked what he favors, Veasey told CBS News Texas, "I probably would include a much smaller tax cut. I certainly believe that when we have an opportunity to cut taxes that we should. I'm not one of these people that think that we ought to be sending out extra punishment just because someone's been successful. That's not what I'm all about. I think that entrepreneurism and people that are wealthy in this country have created a lot of jobs. I just think that people need to pay their fair share. Kicking people off of health care services so Elon (Musk) can have a tax break is not what I'm all about." The national debt has grown to nearly $37 trillion and asked whether spending cuts are necessary, Veasey said, "Spending absolutely has to be cut, but it needs to be done responsibly." The CBO also projected that under the bill passed by House Republicans last month, 7.8 million people will lose their medicaid coverage by 2034. Veasey said, "I'm not surprised. It's going to be detrimental, particularly to a state like Texas, where you hae such a high percentge of residents that really do rely on medicaid services. You're going to see mortality rates rise and you're going to see a lot of people that voted for Trump, they are literally going to see their health care coverage ripped right from up under them." Republicans in the House and Senate have said the spending on Medicaid has grown unsustainably, and that they want to preserve it for the people who it was originally designed for: pregnant women, the poor, and the disabled. Republicans favor strict work requirements. But Veasey discounted that. "There are a lot of nuances in that, that I don't think the Republicans are explaining to people on purpose. Someone that's pregnant would need to verify, probably more than once during the pregnancy that they're actually pregnant. That's the sort of thing that is going to end up through attrition kicking people off the rolls. What it's going to do is exacerbate poor health care outcomes because people won't go to the doctor anymore because they won't have a practitioner. They'll go and get all of their needs through the emergency room." Senate Republicans hope to pass the "big, beautiful bill" by July 4th. It will then go back to the House for consideration.
