Latest news with #HouseBill1017
Yahoo
17-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Civics education has long been neglected in Oklahoma schools to the detriment of our society
Students work on an art project on April 8, 2024. (Photo by Nuria Martinez-Keel/Oklahoma Voice) Ever since I was a child, Oklahoma schools have struggled in terms of teaching history and civics. Even when I was too young to understand what Joseph McCarthy's 'Red Scare' was, I could sense that educators remained intimidated by what I learned was rightwing propaganda. And when I became a teacher at John Marshall High School in the early 1990s, school systems were pressured to use Texas-approved textbooks that were designed to comply with the teach-to-the-test mindset fostered by the Reagan administration's 'A Nation at Risk' campaign. After the House Bill 1017, known as the Education Reform Act of 1990, however, our teachers saw incremental improvements in teaching and learning – even in government classes. But, the Bush administration's No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and the Obama administration's Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 especially undercut civics instruction. As districts were forced to focus on math and reading test scores, social studies was largely ignored. Although I was actively involved in resisting data-driven, competition-driven reforms, I must admit that I was too diplomatic when defending civics. I silently worried that our abandonment of social studies could be the most destructive result of corporate school reforms. But I was reluctant to criticize colleagues who gave up on the fight, and I didn't say aloud that our failure to teach government and history could help undermine American democracy. Today, however, our democracy is clearly in danger. At a time, for instance, when a president claims that he can seek a third term and seems to think he can ignore federal courts, a solid understanding of the Constitution is necessary. Moreover, today's students are anxious and feel disengaged and powerless in a world challenged by rapid changes in the climate, demography and technology. Fortunately, Lindsey Cormack's 'How to Raise a Citizen (And Why It's Up to You to Do It)' gives me hope. She offers practical – and bipartisan – approaches for discussing political issues and governmental processes that are very similar to what worked in John Marshall classrooms. And guess what? Cormack doesn't dump the entire challenge on schools and educators. Cormack builds on the traditions of parents taking on the role of discussing government and politics at the dinner table and encouraging their children to get involved in community and local government activities. The book reminds me about the ways my high school students, their communities and I taught each other how to actively participate in our democracy. Our academics shifted focus during presidential or mid-term elections, or when state or local politics dominated the headlines, or even when extreme events, like the Oklahoma City bombing, 9/11, or wars in Iraq and Afghanistan occurred. When English classes started reading Ralph Ellison's 'The Invisible Man,' I would teach about his experiences growing up in Oklahoma City. The students were especially insightful when guest lecturers visited, and during field trips to places like art museums, the 'Deep Deuce,' where Ellison grew up, and the state Capitol. This was especially true when a veteran of the Sit-In movement joined us in repeated trips to the Capitol. Legislators were always enthralled by the students' wisdom. Above all, student saw high-level instruction as a sign of respect, and responded by learning in a holistic and meaningful way. But in recent years, I've seen a shift in how we teach because of corporate school reformers teach-to-the-test mandates. It was only a few years ago, I was so hopeful that schools, families and communities would come together so we could nurture a commitment to civics education and our 21st century democracy. Now, I worry that our failures to teach civics and history have helped undermine our society's commitment to political institutions. I fear lawmakers will be unable to gather the courage to stand up to rightwing attacks on schools by state Superintendent Ryan Walters and his supporters that aim to mandate history standards such as 'identifying discrepancies in the 2020 election,' the 'halting of ballot-counting in select cities,' 'the security risks of mail-in balloting' and 'the unprecedented contradiction of 'bellwether county' trends.' I'm also concerned that our leaders won't have the gumption to push back against the Trump administration's focus on defunding promising education and nonprofit programs. Because it will take a village and diverse strategies to build on our communities' strengths and to raise and educate our children. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Daylight saving time: Where Arkansas efforts to ‘lock the clocks' stands
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KNWA/KFTA) — Arkansans will soon lose one hour of sleep as the clocks spring forward on March 9, marking the start of daylight saving time. However, some Arkansas lawmakers are attempting to 'lock the clocks' and end the twice-a-year time change. Arkansas is one of at least 31 states with bills introduced in their current legislation regarding time change, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. One bill currently in the Arkansas legislature, House Bill 1069, would keep standard time year-round and eliminate daylight saving time. The bill would allow state employees the option to adjust their work schedule one hour earlier during the portion of the year when other states observe daylight saving time. HB1069 is sponsored by Rep. Stephen Meeks (R-Greenbrier), and if passed, Arkansas would join Arizona and Hawaii as the only states to not observe daylight saving time. As of March 6, the bill remains in the House with no updates since Feb. 13. This bill is not the only attempt by Arkansas lawmakers to end the time change in the Natural State. Daylight saving time 2025: These states are trying to 'lock the clocks' State Rep. Sarah Capp (R-Ozark) filed House Bill 1368 in February 2019, which would adopt year-round standard time and eliminate daylight saving time in Arkansas. However, Capp withdrew the bill 23 days after filing it. Rep. Johnny Rye (R-Trumann) filed House Bill 1017 in 2020, the exact opposite of Capp's bill. Daylight saving time would be adopted year-round and standard time would go away. The bill passed the House in February 2021 by a 71-24 vote but died in a Senate committee meeting in October of that year. Rye tried again in 2022 with House Bill 1039, which would have also adopted daylight saving time. One month later, Rye withdrew the bill. Meeks made an attempt in 2023 with House Bill 1568. The bill would have eliminated daylight saving time and observed standard time year-round. The bill was withdrawn three weeks later. Another attempt made in 2023 was done by Rep. R. Scott Richardson (R-Bentonville) and co-sponsored by Rep. Wayne Long (R-Bradford) with House Bill 1104. It was also withdrawn about two weeks after it was filed. Whichever Arkansans prefer, the clocks will be turned back an hour on Sunday. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
19-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
South Dakota prison project faces legislative, legal hurdles
South Dakota's plan to build an $825 million men's prison complex in rural Lincoln County has sparked clashes of opinion not just among property owners in the area but within different levels of government. A major legislative showdown is evolving in Pierre as state lawmakers and Gov. Larry Rhoden debate whether to pass the final funding piece to begin construction on the prison on farmland between Harrisburg and Canton. Members of Lincoln County's Board of County Commissioners have been swept into controversy, either fighting for county zoning authority or taking heat from residents for not speaking out more forcefully. Arguments also reached the legal system due to the efforts of Neighbors Opposed to Prison Expansion (NOPE), a group of landowners that fought the state's effort and sued to prevent the project from moving forward. To help sort it all out, News Watch sought different perspectives of some of the key people involved. Of all the opinions surrounding the decision to build a new prison on Lincoln County farmland, the most consequential was delivered Oct. 23. It came in the form of a court decision from the Second Judicial Circuit, where Judge Jennifer Mammenga granted the state's motion to dismiss a lawsuit from opponents of the project, including members of NOPE. The ruling, since appealed to the South Dakota Supreme Court, was a blow to organized efforts to stop or delay construction. Those efforts were re-channeled to the legislative and public relations arena after Mammenga's decision came down, nearly a year after the lawsuit was filed. The crux of the complaint was that the state's prison plans violated Lincoln County zoning laws and clashed with the county's comprehensive plan. The state argued that the landowners bringing the lawsuit lacked standing and the state was protected by the legal doctrine of sovereign immunity, which puts limits on when the government can be sued. That doctrine in state law, according to judicial precedent, dictates that sovereign immunity exists when a state agent's duty is discretionary (allowing for flexibility of action) rather than ministerial (rigidly following orders). Mammenga characterized House Bill 1017 from the 2023 legislative session as allowing the DOC to purchase property for the prison but not mandating where or when to do it, calling the duties conferred by the law 'discretionary and properly delegated." As for the question of state authority versus county ordinances, the judge stated that 'a county by its very nature is a legislative creation, and therefore seemingly lacks the authority to preempt state law.' On Feb. 5, moments after the House of Representatives adjourned for the day at the Capitol in Pierre, legislators Will Mortenson and Aaron Aylward walked down the hallway stride for stride. Anyone who expected the Republican colleagues to be in lockstep regarding the state prison project, however, hasn't been paying attention to party politics in South Dakota. Mortenson, a Fort Pierre lawyer and former House majority leader, is viewed as part of the GOP establishment, with connections to U.S. Rep. Dusty Johnson. He supports House Bill 1025, which would provide the final funding piece to green-light construction on the chosen site. Previous legislation has funneled $567 million into an incarceration construction fund (an estimated $643 million with interest), which means the commitment in one-time dollars from 2025 would need to be $182 million to reach $825 million. "This has been four years coming, and if it's four more years, it's going to cost a billion dollars or more," said Mortenson. "If you think it's expensive now, just wait." Aylward, a job recruiter from Harrisburg who represents Lincoln County, serves as vice chair of the South Dakota Freedom Caucus, which touts limited government and landowner rights as part of the party's recent populist wave. He staunchly opposes the funding bill, which would authorize the DOC to spend $763 million on prison construction on top of the $62 million appropriated last year to prepare the site and arrange for electric, sewer and water utilities. "It's not looking good right now," said Aylward when asked about HB 1025 getting the two-thirds vote it will require from both houses to reach the governor's desk. "Things are so tight budget-wise right now that people can't justify going forward with this." The proposed site of a new men's prison in rural Canton, S.D., near the corner of 278th Street and 477th Avenue. The project has sparked clashes of opinion not just among property owners but within different levels of government. The bill suffered a setback on Feb. 12, when the House State Affairs Committee sent it to House Appropriations without an affirmative "do pass" recommendation, with ongoing operational costs one of the key concerns. The push for new prison facilities gained urgency during former Gov. Kristi Noem's time as governor and is linked in many ways to her legacy, for better or worse. The Legislature has already committed $87 million to build a new women's prison in Rapid City, with a likely completion date of early 2026. In her final budget address Dec. 3, Noem spoke of the state men's penitentiary 'falling down' and being older than the state itself, urging legislators to pass a final funding package so that construction on a new facility can begin. Enter Rhoden, sworn in as the state's 34th governor on Jan. 27, two days after Noem was confirmed as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. The Meade County rancher and legislative veteran faces a tough political scenario, especially with a likely run for re-election looming in 2026. Populist groups touting landowner rights have become a rising political force in South Dakota, with the massive rural prison project one of their top concerns. Rhoden must balance those objections with the fact that he was Noem's lieutenant governor and inherited the role as 'chief wrangler' to push the final funding through the Legislature. Any inkling that Rhoden would waver in this role was answered during his introductory press conference Feb. 6, when News Watch asked him about his approach to getting the bill passed and what happens if the effort falls short. 'I'm not prepared to discuss it not happening,' Rhoden said. 'I believe that it will.' This story was produced by South Dakota News Watch, an independent, nonprofit organization. Read more stories and donate at and sign up for an email every few days to get stories as soon as they're published. Contact Stu Whitney at This article originally appeared on Watertown Public Opinion: South Dakota prison project sparks backlash from residents
Yahoo
13-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Senate Education committee passes different bill requiring schools take cash for events
The Senate Education committee voted 4-3 to pass a bill Thursday morning to require schools accept cash for school-affiliated events. Rapid City Republican Sen. Greg Blanc's Senate Bill 219 is very similar to Valley Springs Republican Rep. John Sjaarda's House Bill 1017, which failed in the House two weeks earlier. SB 219 will be heard in the Senate next week. The bills came as a reaction to the Sioux Falls School District and other local school districts switching to a new system for cashless ticketing with Iowa-based company Bound. More: Sioux Falls School District faces opposition to cashless ticketing system The district said at the time it made the change for 'convenience, enhanced safety, efficiency and environmental impact,' and noted contactless payment has 'become the norm around the country.' Blanc said he brought SB 219 to 'represent all people, especially those who are legitimately being disenfranchised.' He was supported by multiple people who said they were turned away from school events because they wanted to pay with cash, not a credit card. Brandon resident Susan Luschas, and her daughter Soraya Luschas, who open enrolls to attend Lincoln High School, said since the cashless ticketing policy has taken effect, sometimes they're let into events for free, sometimes their cash is taken and they're let in, or sometimes they're turned away from events. Sioux Falls resident Michele Klimek said she tried to work with the Sioux Falls School District office to pay in cash for a ticket for her daughter to attend a high school theater production but said the Instructional Planning Center was unable to provide it and redirected her to the school where the production would take place. Klimek said she spoke with that high school's athletic director, who wrote down her name and the names of people who would join her at the play, and her entry fee was waived. She said she hasn't attended a local school event since because it was a 'hassle for all involved.' Board speaks on cash bill: Superintendent contract, legislation and more: 6 things to know from Monday's school board meetings Fellow Sioux Falls resident Nikki McCormick said she and her husband were recently denied access to Howard Wood Field to watch their son, a junior in the Lincoln High School marching band, march on the field, because they wanted to pay in cash. Spearfish resident Jennifer Baron said she didn't feel comfortable agreeing to the 'privacy and tracking policies' of an out-of-state company like Bound. She said it's an issue when she travels to Sioux Falls for school events, and worried it may affect Rapid City school events in the future. Sam Nelson, lobbyist for the Sioux Falls School District, said one of the proponents who described their experiences with non-admission to an event was actually offered admission free of charge and they refused it. He didn't specify which of the proponents did this. Nelson said SB 219 is an 'attempt to create an issue, and make something bigger than what it really was.' He added it is Sioux Falls' right not to change their policy, and said proponents have made no official request for the board to change its policy. South Dakota High School Activities Association director Dan Swartos told the committee the SDHSAA accepts cash at all its events, like tournaments and championships at the end of each sports season, or for all-state band, jazz band and show choir events. But he said the SDHSAA has considered going cashless because some events have $10,000 to $20,000 in starting cash in the cash box, and cashless systems have fewer opportunities for fraud, he added. HB 1017 failed: South Dakota House fails to pass bill requiring cash for school events. But it could come back He noted the SDHSAA has no control over what kind of ticketing systems larger venues like the Mitchell Corn Palace or Sanford Pentagon use for events, and said SDHSAA events already face competition for those spaces with bigger events. He said he was concerned the bill could lead to the SDHSAA losing out on those venues in the future. Lobbyists with the Greater Sioux Falls Chamber of Commerce and South Dakota Retailers Association said much the same, and questioned on the day of school events at these larger venues, who would be responsible for taking the cash payments. They called it an imposition on private businesses. Heath Larson with Associated School Boards of South Dakota said he opposed the bill from a 'local control perspective,' and asked that the committee let local school boards work through the process and work out any 'bugs' at the local level. This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: Committee passes new bill requiring schools take cash for events
Yahoo
31-01-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Cash for school events bill stalls in House
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — The problem Republican Rep. John Sjaarda said he wanted House Bill 1017 to fix started in seven school districts in the Sioux Falls area. Sjaarda, of Valley Springs, said in the House Thursday, those districts were not allowing attendees to use cash for tickets at school activities. He sponsored House Bill 1017 which would have required districts to accept cash for tickets and concessions after learning that some had been denied tickets at some of the schools. For Rhoden, Venhuizen: A week of making history The opinions of HB1017 were split among lawmakers from Sioux Falls who commented in the HB1017 debate on Thursday. The bill failed to reach a majority with 34 votes in favor and 32 against. Speaker of the House Rep. John Hanson said he noted the sponsor's intent to reconsider. HB1017 was a 'knee-jerk reaction,' to policies several school districts recently started, Republican Rep. Brian Mulder of Sioux Falls said Thursday. He's learned that cardless attendees have been accommodated. 'Largely the pressure is coming from one or two individuals over the thousands that attend events,' Mulder said. Mulder said school districts including Sioux Falls need time to evaluate the policy and make changes if needed. To Mulder and several others, this is a local control issue and not an issue for state government. Republican Rep. John Hughes, of Sioux Falls, said attendees including parents and youth, who are required to use cards to pay for events are paying an additional type of tax because of fees attached to card use. 'This is the House looking out for families…,' Hughes said, who is newly elected. The intent of HB1017 may be good but it would have a potential negative impact, said newly elected lawmaker Democrat Rep. Erick Muckey of Sioux Falls said. School districts often work with third party vendors as they host state tournaments, he said. HB1017 could create a problem by requiring third party vendors to take cash. Sjaarda said HB1017 was intended to allow everyone to fully participate in attending activities. While he doesn't support government overreach, 'I realize this is a place where government needs to do its job,' Sjaarda said. HB1017 is a case where government would try to do too much, said Republican Rep. Roger DeGroot of Brookings. Parents and others who may have concerns or frustrations about a cashless policy need to talk with their school boards about possible changes, DeGroot said. Parents told the House Education committee that they did contact the school board(s), said committee member and bill supporter Republican Rep. Josephine Garcia, who is newly elected from Watertown. 'The process failed them,' Garcia said. It is a strange thing to argue about using cash which has been used much longer than cards, said bill supporter Republican Rep. Tony Randolph of Rapid City. 'I certainly don't believe this is a local control issue,' Randolph said in support of HB1017. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
