Latest news with #schoolchoice

Yahoo

5 days ago

Politics
Yahoo

Republican announces bid to unseat Dem U.S. Rep. Landsman in district covering Warren County

Jul. 25—An Air Force veteran and former CIA official announced his 2026 congressional campaign with the intent of unseating incumbent Democratic U.S. Rep. Greg Landsman in a vulnerable southwest Ohio district. Eric Conroy, a Cincinnati Republican, bills himself as the product of four generations of blue-collar workers. He told Fox News Digital ahead of his announcement that he wants to be a "common-sense advocate" in Washington, D.C. He's running to represent Ohio's 1st Congressional District, which covers much of Cincinnati, the eastern portions of Hamilton County, and all of Warren County, in the U.S. House of Representatives. His campaign website outlines a political platform that includes tighter border security, supporting school choice, protecting crypto from over-regulation, cutting burdensome code as a means to help small businesses, and more. The website also calls out Landsman for a 2023 vote against a U.S. House resolution that generally prohibits transgender women from participating in women's scholastic sports. "Eric believes that women's sports should be reserved for biological females to ensure fair competition. He supports legislation that clearly defines sex based on biological difference in federal law to protect the fairness of women's athletic competitions from elementary school to college," his website reads. Landsman was first elected to the U.S. House in 2022, defeating a Republican incumbent with 52.8% of the vote. When he was reelected in 2024, Landsman became the first Democrat to represent OH-1 in consecutive terms in decades. At the time, Landsman credited his electoral success to his practical approach. "Voters want normal, pragmatic, reliable, and bipartisan leadership — and they know they get that with me and our team. We get things done for folks in southwest Ohio. We do the work, and we do it in a bipartisan way," he said. ------ For more stories like this, sign up for our Ohio Politics newsletter. It's free, curated, and delivered straight to your inbox every Thursday evening. Avery Kreemer can be reached at 614-981-1422, on X, via email, or you can drop him a comment/tip with the survey below.

Yahoo

22-07-2025

Politics
Yahoo

Maryland Gov. Wes Moore avoids taking stance on Trump's school choice plan

BALTIMORE — Democratic Gov. Wes Moore isn't yet taking a stance on whether Maryland should opt into a new school choice program implemented at the federal level, as advocates and opponents rally over the issue. 'The Governor is committed to ensuring that every student in Maryland has the best education possible,' Moore's spokesperson Carter Elliott said in a statement. 'The Trump Administration's approach on this issue has never been tried before. We are evaluating all of the options to ensure Maryland students have the best opportunities to succeed.' The federal school choice plan was passed as part of President Donald Trump's expansive tax bill earlier this month. If Maryland opts in, taxpayers could choose to donate up to $1,700 toward private education grants in the state and receive the same amount back as a tax credit. A spokeswoman for Maryland Congressman Andy Harris, a Republican, wrote in an email that he strongly supports federal school choice and that '[e]very child — regardless of zip code, income, or background — deserves access to a quality education that fits their needs, not a one-size-fits-all system.' Maryland's U.S. Sens. Angela Alsobrooks and Chris Van Hollen, both Democrats, also didn't say whether they would support Maryland opting in. 'I am committed to making sure all of Maryland's students get the education they deserve,' Alsobrooks said in an emailed statement on Monday. 'Meanwhile, this Administration is taking the opposite approach — working to dismantle the Department of Education and undermine the promise of an education for all Marylanders, by further eroding the resources districts, teachers, and students desperately need to succeed.' Van Hollen said in an emailed statement, 'Instead of working to achieve the goal of ensuring that every child receives a quality education, Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress are attacking public schools and the federal resources they depend on to support students while pumping more dollars into private education.' School choice advocates argue that opting in would be a win for Maryland families who are dissatisfied with public school options, while opponents contend that the program would remove students from public schools, depriving them of funding and resources. School choice is complicated to implement and it's been a 'sticky issue' in the past, said Roger Hartley, dean of the College of Public Affairs at the University of Baltimore. He added that with another election season on the horizon, politicians may avoid taking sides on the issue without first 'having done their homework.' Maryland has a small private school voucher program at the state level — Broadening Options and Opportunities for Students Today (BOOST). It provides around $9 million in the form of vouchers to help families send their kids to private and religious schools. Moore has proposed cuts to the program in the past, which began under his Republican predecessor, Larry Hogan, though BOOST has continued so far during Moore's administration. Funding debate Advocates for the new federal program note that it would be funded at no cost to Maryland. 'It doesn't cost the state a dime,' said Jeff Trimbath, president of the Maryland Family Institute, noting that the state faced significant deficits that it had to adjust for during the past legislative session. But Liz Zogby, co-chair of the Maryland Down Syndrome Advocacy Coalition, noted that even though the program doesn't cost state dollars, it will take money out of public schools if they lose enrollees. This can be especially harmful for students with disabilities, who need public school resources and may not be able to attend a private school, she said. 'Let's say you have a student who is not being well-served in a private school, not making progress, acting out, having challenging behaviors because they're not being well-supported — that school can just expel them,' Zogby said. But in public schools, she said, an Individualized Education Program (IEP) meeting would be convened to figure out how to help the child. 'So they don't just kick kids out,' she said. Whom does school choice benefit? There's also a debate over which students would benefit from the program. Kalman Hettleman, a former member of the Baltimore City school board and the Maryland Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education, said school choice funds 'go mainly to people of means,' since scholarships may not cover the full cost of a student's private school tuition. 'In many cases, the education savings accounts and vouchers will be able to go to people who have already left the public schools [and] are paying the whole private schools' bill already,' Hettleman said. Trimbath noted most schools offer other scholarships that could supplement a school choice scholarship, and that most schools 'means-test' their support, offering more money to lower-income students. Garrett O'Day, deputy director of the Maryland Catholic Conference, urged Moore and state education leaders to opt into the program and said that even if Maryland doesn't participate, Maryland taxpayers can still choose to donate to scholarship organizations in other states. 'In other words, if the state doesn't opt in, Maryland dollars will go out of state to the detriment of Maryland kids who need it, taking away money available for education for both public and private school students,' he wrote in an email. 'Unpredictable federal funding cuts' Paul Lemle, president of the Maryland State Education Association, advocated against the opt-in for Maryland. 'We strongly oppose giving away public funds to private schools as Maryland public schools — which serve 90% of Maryland students — continue to face chaotic, drastic, and unpredictable federal funding cuts to schools that will hurt students and the supports they depend on,' he said in a statement. Harris' spokeswoman wrote in his statement that school choice is 'not about taking money away — it's about giving parents control.' 'The federal plan is designed to empower families, not bureaucracies,' she said in an email to The Sun. 'When parents can choose the best education for their child, all schools — public and private — must compete to improve. That's a win for every student, including those with disabilities, who will benefit from increased options tailored to their needs.' A spokesperson for the Maryland State Department of Education did not respond to a request for comment. _____

Texas Lawmakers Aim To Address Unfinished Business In Special Session

Forbes

22-07-2025

Business
Forbes

Texas Lawmakers Aim To Address Unfinished Business In Special Session

AUSTIN, TEXAS - APRIL 23: Gov. Greg Abbott speaks during a bill signing in the State Capitol on ... More April 23, 2025 in Austin, Texas. Senate Bill 14 introduces and establishes a new Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office which seeks to create better practices within state agencies and terminate unnecessary regulations. (Photo by) Following the early June conclusion of the Texas Legislature's regular session, one that was marked by the enactment of a long sought conservative goal, the state's first school choice program, Governor Greg Abbott (R-Texas) has called a special session starting this week to address unfinished business. In his proclamation calling legislators back to Austin, Governor Abbott laid out a special session agenda that is likely to generate spirited debate, particularly over proposed reforms that could serve as national models for reining in government spending and limiting the rise in property tax burdens. Nation's First Taxpayer-Funded Lobbying Ban In approving Senate Bill 19 during the regular session this spring, the Texas Senate, as it has done multiple times in previous sessions, passed legislation that would prohibit local government officials from hiring contract lobbyists. After the Senate transmitted SB 19 to the House, however, the bill was referred to the House State Affairs Committee, where it subsequently never received a hearing before the end of the regular session. Though SB 19 did not receive consideration in the House during the regular session, Governor Abbott added the proposal to the special session agenda, presenting lawmakers with another opportunity to get this reform to the Governor's desk before the next regular session in 2027. Not only does SB 19 have the votes to pass out of the Senate and backing from the Governor, Speaker Dustin Burrows (R) has also expressed his support. Senator Mayes Middleton (R-Galveston) reintroduced his proposal to end taxpayer-funded lobbying for consideration during the special session as Senate Bill 12. Senator Middleton and other supporters of SB 12 point out that taxpayer-funded lobbyists are frequently the top opponents of conservative reforms that would reduce property tax burdens, limit increases in property tax bills, and restrict the growth in government spending. In 2023 alone, local government officials across Texas spent nearly $100 million on contract lobbyists. Senator Middleton explains that the impetus for this proposed reform is not primarily about the amount of taxpayer dollars being spent on lobbyists, but the fact that local government officials frequently hire contract lobbyists to advocate against taxpayer interests. 'The practice of taxpayer-funded lobbying violates the principles of constitutional order and limited government,' noted the Texas Public Policy Foundation's James Quintero and John Bonura in a report published earlier this year. 'Local governments that spend tax dollars to hire lobbyists oftentimes do so for the purpose of securing higher taxes, more spending, and greater regulatory authority.' Local government officials and the contract lobbyists they hire with taxpayer dollars are the most vocal opponents of SB 12. Many legislators, including Republican legislators, are loathe to upset them if it can be avoided. Speaker Burrows, however, has already demonstrated he does not shy away from disagreements with local officials in the name of advancing conservative reforms that he thinks are needed. In 2023, for example, Speaker Burrows championed legislation that bars local governments from imposing new regulations on an industry or activity that is in a field already regulated by state government. That proposal, referred to by opponents and supporters alike as the 'Death Star' bill, introduced the concept of 'field preemption.' While the implementation of Speaker Burrows' field preemption bill has been held up in court since Governor Abbott signed it into law in 2023, Texas's Third District Court of Appeals issued a ruling last week that will allow it to at last take effect. 'The Death Star is now fully operational,' Speaker Burrows posted to X shortly after that ruling came down on July 18. Similar to the Death Star bill, SB 12 will need to overcome robust opposition from local government officials, but lawmakers appear committed to getting this long sought conservative policy goal to the Governor's desk this summer. 'The special session will be a total failure if the Texas legislature fails to ban taxpayer-funded lobbying,' Representative Briscoe Caine (R) posted to X on the first day of the special session. Many Believe Time Has Come For The State To Limit The Growth Of Local Spending Barring local officials from hiring contract lobbyists isn't the only special session agenda item that is sure to draw the ire of local politicians. So too will Governor Abbott's call for lawmakers to consider legislation 'reducing the property tax burden on Texans and legislation imposing spending limits on entities authorized to impose property taxes.' While Texas is one of eight no-income-tax states and boasts a lower overall tax burden than most states, it does have one of the nation's highest average property tax burden. According to the non-partisan Tax Foundation, Texans face the nation's sixth highest average property tax burden. Texas already has a law in place preventing state spending from rising faster than the rate of population growth and inflation, but localities do not face a similar restriction. Governor Abbott and many in the Texas Legislature believe that greater restrictions on local spending growth are needed to keep rising property tax burdens in check. The state does have a property taxpayer safeguard on the books referred to as 'the rollback rate.' The Texas rollback rate was reduced in 2019 to require that local governments receive voter approval if they wish to increase spending faster than 3.5% annually (2.5% for school districts). Because of the many exemptions and exclusions in Texas's rollback rate, local government officials across Texas have been able to grow their budgets and property tax burdens much faster than 3.5% annually despite the 2019 rollback rate change. Though the rollback rate reduction of 2019 has saved taxpayer billions of dollars in property tax payments over the past half decade relative to what would've been paid under the higher rollback rate, it has proven to be an insufficient taxpayer safeguard. If Texas lawmakers were to use the special session to remove the exclusions that prevent the rollback rate from being the strong spending cap that it has the potential to be, they could prevent unsustainable increases in property tax burdens moving forward. 'Reducing the rollback rate from 8% to 2.5% for school districts and 3.5% for most other local governments, along with requiring an automatic election to exceed those caps, was a step in the right direction,' said Vance Ginn, a Texas-based economist who previously served as chief economist at the White House Office of Management and the Texas Public Policy Foundation. 'However, the 2019 rollback rate changes fell short in a few key ways, particularly its exclusion of new property, property located n natural disaster areas, and other jurisdictions significantly weakened the protection the rollback rate provides to Texas taxpayers. Despite the improvements made to the rollback rate in 2019, property taxes were hiked 13.7% by special purpose districts, 11.5% by counties, and 9.5% by cities in 2023, which reduced the property tax relief from the state that year.' 'The lesson learned is that the rollback rate should be 0% for all property and all jurisdictions,' Ginn added, noting that 'a local spending limit and a 0% rollback rate would help rein in the excessive burden of local governments.' In addition to enacting the state's first school choice program, Governor Abbott and state lawmakers passed other reforms that were praised by conservatives. The research and development tax credit that businesses can apply against their state gross receipts tax liability was scheduled to expire at the end of 2025. Not only did Governor Abbott and Texas lawmakers prevent that tax break from expiring, they passed legislation to make the R&D tax credit more generous and permanent. 'For every $1 in R&D incentive, Texas gains $12.47 in Gross State Product over 20 years,' Senator Paul Bettencourt, noted in a statement posted to X shortly after the Texas Senate passed the Senate Bill 2206, bill to boost and permanently extend the R&D tax credit. 'This bill creates 6,662 new jobs annually, $445M in labor income, and $748M in GSP growth every year. SB 2206 ensures Texas remains a national leader in research, innovation, and job creation — making sure our economy keeps pace with the demands of the 21st-century.' The strengthening and permanent extension of the state's R&D tax credit isn't the only form of tax relief that employers received during the regular session. With the enactment of House Bill 9 in June, Texas lawmakers and Governor Abbott advanced business personal property tax relief through an increase in the inventory tax exemption from $2,500 to $125,000. This tax cut, which is subject to voter approval, is projected to save Texas employers $400 million annually. 'Cutting the inventory tax has long been a priority of our members here in Texas,' NFIB State Director Jeff Burdett said following the signing of HB 9. 'By increasing the exemption, Main Street employers will have more of their hard-earned money to expand their operations, invest in their employees, and contribute to their communities.' Texas voters will also get the chance to vote on a constitutional amendment that would prohibit state taxation of capital gains thanks to a constitutional amendment that Governor Abbott and state legislators referred to the ballot during the regular session. Texas already has a constitutional prohibition against taxing income, which was approved by voters in 2019. The new constitutional amendment specifically barring taxation of capital gains, if approved by voters, would make clear that a capital gains tax is also off limits per the Texas constitution. After a regular session in which Governor Abbott and state lawmakers accomplished significant and historic reforms, they return to Austin this week to tend to matters that were not addressed before time ran out on the regular session. Some think that a second special session could even be in the offing, depending on how this one goes. While Governor Abbott and Texas legislators were catching up with the rest of the country by providing school choice, the special session presents them with an opportunity to pass reforms that could serve as national models that other states seek to adopt, reestablishing Texas as a state on the leading edge of conservative governance and policy innovation.

Will Democratic Governors Choose the Kids Over Campaign Cash?

Wall Street Journal

21-07-2025

Politics
Wall Street Journal

Will Democratic Governors Choose the Kids Over Campaign Cash?

Regarding 'Democrats' School Choice Dilemma' (July 14): Michael J. Petrilli's argument—that it is a 'tough dilemma' for Democratic governors whether or not to opt-in to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act's school-choice program—is scary. If blue states embrace it, the reconciliation act would provide scholarships that are popular within black and Hispanic communities, that provide low-income children access to a safe and quality education, and that don't cost states a penny. This is only a hard thing to say yes to if governors prioritize pleasing teachers' unions that provide them political contributions above securing low-income children a good education. Shamefully, the Democratic Party seems to only oppose more domestic spending when it comes to educating children in ways that displease labor leaders.

New Federal Tax Credit Boosts School Choice—but Blue States Face Big Decision