A majority of Idaho House Democrats voted today against a fuel-tax increase while pledging support for comprehensive transportation solutions and smart use of taxpayer dollars.
“Democrats have been saying since January that this is no time for the state to raise taxes on struggling Idaho families and businesses,” House Minority Leader John Rusche said after the vote. Fourteen of the 18 House Democrats voted against the measure, which was defeated on a narrow 32-37 vote.
“Democrats are not against transportation investment,” added Assistant House Minority Leader James Ruchti. “Idaho is increasing the Idaho Transportation Department’s budget and accepting millions in federal stimulus funds for transportation at the same time we are trimming state workers’ pay and making historic cuts to education. This tunnel vision doesn’t reflect our values as Idahoans.”
“The recent ITD audit showed that the agency isn’t using taxpayer funding as efficiently as it should. Beyond that, we see no effort on the part of the House Majority leadership to propose truly comprehensive transportation solutions that include local option authority for local communities,” Rusche said. “They also can’t recognize that fuel taxes will not solve our state’s future needs. Idaho remains stuck in the mid-20th century because of the House Majority’s refusal to wake up to reality. Democrats will continue to stand for comprehensive, 21st-century transportation solutions.”
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Monday, April 6, 2009
Weeks 11 &12: legislators' reports
Here are excerpts from some of the e-mail newsletters that Idaho Democratic lawmakers sent home to their constituents about Weeks 11 and 12 of the 2009 Idaho Legislature. If you would like to receive regular updates from your legislators - Democrat or Republican - be sure to let them know.
Rep. James Rusche (District 7) - Our House Democratic fundraiser is being held this Thursday. This is an annual event that we hold at the end-of-the Session called the "Sine Die," or adjournment, party. Every year at this event we hold a silent auction on items donated by our caucus members and businesses throughout the State. This year, one of the silent auction items is a basket of books comprised of a favorite book donated by each member in the minority caucus with a short inscription that includes a favorite quotation from the book. I chose The Lord of the Rings as my book and included the quote "Go not to the elves for counsel, for they will say both no and yes." One of my favorite lines.
This quotation sums up some of the dysfunction here. First we cannot use the stimulus because it might have strings. Now we are using as much as we can get. Members of the majority party have argued that in order to help the economy recover, we must get money into people's hands and circulating through the economy and thus are proposing corporate tax cuts. At the same time, I have heard the same members refuse to use "rainy day" funds to help stabilize the education budgets and maintain needed State services. On the one hand they are saying we must stimulate in order to recover, yet on the other they are saying we will not spend because we might not recover.
Another saying goes "Meddle not in the affairs of wizards, as they are subtle and quick to anger." I might use that saying for the Governor, but he really seems quite patient with the House. I think we are headed to a collision over micromanaging the agencies though. The appropriation bills have language directing how each department should respond to lower budgets rather than just setting the budget and letting the managers manage. As the top manager for the State, the Governor rightly takes exception to that instruction. WE will be settling that next week, I think. ...
... The day-care licensing bill cleared the House Health and Welfare Committee. This bill has been in play in the Legislature for the last five years without success, so I am happy to finally see some progress. At the same time, the vote in committee was to send it for amendments, extensive amendments, that may dilute the intention of the bill. The amendments to the bill include requiring licensing only for pay establishments with seven or more unrelated children (the original bill called for licensing of day cares for four or more children) as well as the removal of requirements for continuing education for day-care workers in facilities with fewer than 13 children. Some of the amendments proposed may carry a cost to the State of some $30,000 thereby decreasing its chance of survival in the House considering our budget shortfalls. I am hopeful the bill will be successful. While not as good as it could be, it is still a net improvement in the safety of kids in daycare.
Rep. Bill Killen (District 17) - On Tuesday (March 31) this week the House took up the sole remaining transportation funding bill on its amending order. The process is somewhat arcane with the body dissolving and reconstituting as a committee of the whole; though it sounds ominous, nobody is transformed, no puddles are scattered about the chamber, but magically, we no longer have a Speaker, but rather a chairman of the committee of the whole. Once constituted the various bills are ripe for change; in this case H 135 from the Transportation chair, JoAn Wood, was offered up with eight possible amendments – an unusually high number. The list included Local Option Authority, various fuel tax increases, and changes to the State vs Local revenue split percentage. Like the arcade moles, they popped up throughout the morning debate with all but one roundly dispatched by the mallet wielding members of the body.
The bill itself, as amended, will be coming back for an up or down vote on Tuesday the 7th; based on what happened this week I expect it will get whacked soundly and expire on the floor of the House. With the economic downturn still at full throttle, legislators are extremely reluctant to raise taxes or fees of any kind, particularly with about $400 million still untouched in our rainy day funds. A cynic might suspect that the reluctance to commit to using those funds now is somehow tied to the fact that next year is an election year and if we run short then, after having committed those funds now, might force sitting legislators to consider a tax increase in an election year. ...
Sen. Elliot Werk (District 17) - Legislation introduced in the House to decrease the reimbursement for public school transportation funding has reached the Senate after a valiant fight by House Democrats to defeat or amend the bill. H-256 is co-sponsored by Republican Sen. John Goedde – a former trustee of the Coeur-d’Alene school district and chairman of the Senate Education committee and Rep. Bob Nonini chairman of the House Education committee. The bill purports to cut public education busing reimbursement by $4.2 million in fiscal year 2010.
The bill cuts the public education budget by eliminating funding for field trips, decreasing the reimbursement for school busing from the current 85 percent to 50 percent of allowable costs, instituting a very complicated formula for providing additional grants for transportation, and finally eliminating the flexibility of school districts to calculate their reimbursable costs using either a per student or per mile basis. This last provision in the bill was specifically targeted at the Boise School District and could result in a loss of $1.45 million to the district for costs already incurred this school year.
I firmly believe that my job as a legislator is to support the best possible public policy regardless of the players involved. Personal animosity, anger, envy, and grudges have no place in the public policy arena. Unfortunately the portion of H 256 that targets the Boise school district comes from a long standing grudge held by Sen. Goedde and some members in the House.
During House debate on H 256 one Republican lawmaker even stood up and stated that the Boise district uses up everyone else’s money! He could not have been more wrong since, like every other district in the state, the Boise district receives funding through the statewide funding formula. The added fact that the Boise district tax base supports rural schools all over the state through our immense contribution to the tax revenues of the state general fund makes it difficult to understand the mentality of some of these legislators.
The provision in H 256 that eliminates field trips is also startlingly short-sighted. It belies an attitude toward public education that any enrichment is a luxury. As we all know, field trips are an integral part of the learning process.
It is a sad testament to our legislature that a bill like H 256 would ever see the light of day, not to mention the certainty of passage (although hopefully amended). Our children’s education deserves more than actions based on grudges, misinformation, and a lack of appreciation for a well-rounded education for our children.
Rep. Phylis King (District 18) - Back in 2001 or 2002, the legislature had a surplus. So they cut the Idaho income tax by 0.1 percent valued at $150 million, (and) 60 percent of this cut benefitted the wealthiest 5 percent of our population. Then in 2004 they had to “temporarily” raise sales tax because the economy tanked. Sales tax disproportionately hurts lower income families. The result of those two moves was that the legislature shifted revenues from the wealthy to lower income families.
After a year they let the temporary tax revert to the original 5 cents. But because there was not a lot of objection to the penny sales tax, and there was a hue and cry to do something about property tax, Governor Risch, in the summer of 2006, held the “special” session where the legislature voted to raise the sales tax to 6 cents permanently. They also voted to move the Maintenance and Operations portion of public education funding from property tax funding to the General Fund.
Sales tax and income tax are the largest sources of General Funds and are not as stable from year to year as a source of funding as property tax funds. So now for the first time in Idaho’s history we are cutting education funding and teacher pay, and once again state employees do not get even a cost of living increase.
My beef is that there is a pattern here. Idahoans are willing to raise their sales tax by a penny or gas tax by 2 pennies, for the good of the state, but the legislature uses that willingness to shift more and more taxes onto hard working families and away from those who can more afford to pay. The makeup of this legislature refuses to rethink their policy on income tax, tax exemptions, corporate taxes, etc. We are 46th in the nation for state employee salaries and 44th in the nation in average teacher salaries. Agency heads say they cannot recruit and retain employees and are losing talented people to other states.
Sen. Nicole LeFavour (District 19) - Do the Co-Chairs of the Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee, Senator Dean Cameron and Representative Maxine Bell really decide how much to cut Idaho education budgets or how much and in what way to cut state employee and teacher pay? No.
Wednesday night Dean Cameron and Maxine Bell sat on the stage in front of more than 600 teachers and parents and had to defend cuts to education and teacher pay because Governor Otter and House Leaders Mike Moyle, Ken Roberts and Scott Bedke didn't feel obligated to come defend their own parts in really deciding how these budgets will be set.
Wednesday night Dean Cameron sat in the middle of a huge line of silent law makers under the lights and read from a script. I know he didn't relish it. He is a kind, reasonable man who I believe tries hard to do the right thing in a place that has changed much over the past five years. He said he had no choice but to cut education. In the realm of politics he did not. In the realm of the real world there are ways to keep education budgets whole for 2010 and 2011 even if the economy worsens.
But some Republican leaders refuse to put education higher than roads or business tax cuts in their set of priorities. These people ran on smaller government platforms and if it means cutting schools, laying off teachers and state employees and cutting pay till it all unravels, they will do it. They have done it. Privatizing broken government services puts our tax dollars in the hands of businesses, which may or may not do a better job than government.
These leaders, along with Tom Luna, Bob Nonini and John Goedde I believe would privatize education, like we've privatized health care, even if such a system would benefit only those with enough money to pay for a good education. Even if those with less money would get something less for their children. ... read more at Nicole's blog.
Rep. Wendy Jaquet (District 25) - ... What was extremely disappointing last week was the negation of House Bill 252, a collaborative approach for districts to declare an "emergency" and open up contracts for personnel reductions. Representatives Rusche, Chavez and Pence spent a month in early morning meetings with majority party members and education stakeholders only to have two bills come forward that were never discussed in this working group. The trust that was engendered from the collaborative approach has been greatly damaged as a result of majority party actions.
A second concern of mine was highlighted in The New York Times this weekend. The article indicated that the federal government's Department of Education will be monitoring how states use their education stimulus/stabilitization funds. General funds, they said, are not to be freed up from education to be put elsewhere and the Secretary of Education Arne Duncan may come forward in the next few weeks with more clarification rules on this matter. The majority party's JFAC motion for k-12 education used $20 million dollars more of stimulus money and transferred it to the general fund. This may not work and we might be looking at this again. When I said earlier this week that I thought we would be out of here on April 10th, I could have been mistaken. ...
Rep. James Rusche (District 7) - Our House Democratic fundraiser is being held this Thursday. This is an annual event that we hold at the end-of-the Session called the "Sine Die," or adjournment, party. Every year at this event we hold a silent auction on items donated by our caucus members and businesses throughout the State. This year, one of the silent auction items is a basket of books comprised of a favorite book donated by each member in the minority caucus with a short inscription that includes a favorite quotation from the book. I chose The Lord of the Rings as my book and included the quote "Go not to the elves for counsel, for they will say both no and yes." One of my favorite lines.
This quotation sums up some of the dysfunction here. First we cannot use the stimulus because it might have strings. Now we are using as much as we can get. Members of the majority party have argued that in order to help the economy recover, we must get money into people's hands and circulating through the economy and thus are proposing corporate tax cuts. At the same time, I have heard the same members refuse to use "rainy day" funds to help stabilize the education budgets and maintain needed State services. On the one hand they are saying we must stimulate in order to recover, yet on the other they are saying we will not spend because we might not recover.
Another saying goes "Meddle not in the affairs of wizards, as they are subtle and quick to anger." I might use that saying for the Governor, but he really seems quite patient with the House. I think we are headed to a collision over micromanaging the agencies though. The appropriation bills have language directing how each department should respond to lower budgets rather than just setting the budget and letting the managers manage. As the top manager for the State, the Governor rightly takes exception to that instruction. WE will be settling that next week, I think. ...
... The day-care licensing bill cleared the House Health and Welfare Committee. This bill has been in play in the Legislature for the last five years without success, so I am happy to finally see some progress. At the same time, the vote in committee was to send it for amendments, extensive amendments, that may dilute the intention of the bill. The amendments to the bill include requiring licensing only for pay establishments with seven or more unrelated children (the original bill called for licensing of day cares for four or more children) as well as the removal of requirements for continuing education for day-care workers in facilities with fewer than 13 children. Some of the amendments proposed may carry a cost to the State of some $30,000 thereby decreasing its chance of survival in the House considering our budget shortfalls. I am hopeful the bill will be successful. While not as good as it could be, it is still a net improvement in the safety of kids in daycare.
Rep. Bill Killen (District 17) - On Tuesday (March 31) this week the House took up the sole remaining transportation funding bill on its amending order. The process is somewhat arcane with the body dissolving and reconstituting as a committee of the whole; though it sounds ominous, nobody is transformed, no puddles are scattered about the chamber, but magically, we no longer have a Speaker, but rather a chairman of the committee of the whole. Once constituted the various bills are ripe for change; in this case H 135 from the Transportation chair, JoAn Wood, was offered up with eight possible amendments – an unusually high number. The list included Local Option Authority, various fuel tax increases, and changes to the State vs Local revenue split percentage. Like the arcade moles, they popped up throughout the morning debate with all but one roundly dispatched by the mallet wielding members of the body.
The bill itself, as amended, will be coming back for an up or down vote on Tuesday the 7th; based on what happened this week I expect it will get whacked soundly and expire on the floor of the House. With the economic downturn still at full throttle, legislators are extremely reluctant to raise taxes or fees of any kind, particularly with about $400 million still untouched in our rainy day funds. A cynic might suspect that the reluctance to commit to using those funds now is somehow tied to the fact that next year is an election year and if we run short then, after having committed those funds now, might force sitting legislators to consider a tax increase in an election year. ...
Sen. Elliot Werk (District 17) - Legislation introduced in the House to decrease the reimbursement for public school transportation funding has reached the Senate after a valiant fight by House Democrats to defeat or amend the bill. H-256 is co-sponsored by Republican Sen. John Goedde – a former trustee of the Coeur-d’Alene school district and chairman of the Senate Education committee and Rep. Bob Nonini chairman of the House Education committee. The bill purports to cut public education busing reimbursement by $4.2 million in fiscal year 2010.
The bill cuts the public education budget by eliminating funding for field trips, decreasing the reimbursement for school busing from the current 85 percent to 50 percent of allowable costs, instituting a very complicated formula for providing additional grants for transportation, and finally eliminating the flexibility of school districts to calculate their reimbursable costs using either a per student or per mile basis. This last provision in the bill was specifically targeted at the Boise School District and could result in a loss of $1.45 million to the district for costs already incurred this school year.
I firmly believe that my job as a legislator is to support the best possible public policy regardless of the players involved. Personal animosity, anger, envy, and grudges have no place in the public policy arena. Unfortunately the portion of H 256 that targets the Boise school district comes from a long standing grudge held by Sen. Goedde and some members in the House.
During House debate on H 256 one Republican lawmaker even stood up and stated that the Boise district uses up everyone else’s money! He could not have been more wrong since, like every other district in the state, the Boise district receives funding through the statewide funding formula. The added fact that the Boise district tax base supports rural schools all over the state through our immense contribution to the tax revenues of the state general fund makes it difficult to understand the mentality of some of these legislators.
The provision in H 256 that eliminates field trips is also startlingly short-sighted. It belies an attitude toward public education that any enrichment is a luxury. As we all know, field trips are an integral part of the learning process.
It is a sad testament to our legislature that a bill like H 256 would ever see the light of day, not to mention the certainty of passage (although hopefully amended). Our children’s education deserves more than actions based on grudges, misinformation, and a lack of appreciation for a well-rounded education for our children.
Rep. Phylis King (District 18) - Back in 2001 or 2002, the legislature had a surplus. So they cut the Idaho income tax by 0.1 percent valued at $150 million, (and) 60 percent of this cut benefitted the wealthiest 5 percent of our population. Then in 2004 they had to “temporarily” raise sales tax because the economy tanked. Sales tax disproportionately hurts lower income families. The result of those two moves was that the legislature shifted revenues from the wealthy to lower income families.
After a year they let the temporary tax revert to the original 5 cents. But because there was not a lot of objection to the penny sales tax, and there was a hue and cry to do something about property tax, Governor Risch, in the summer of 2006, held the “special” session where the legislature voted to raise the sales tax to 6 cents permanently. They also voted to move the Maintenance and Operations portion of public education funding from property tax funding to the General Fund.
Sales tax and income tax are the largest sources of General Funds and are not as stable from year to year as a source of funding as property tax funds. So now for the first time in Idaho’s history we are cutting education funding and teacher pay, and once again state employees do not get even a cost of living increase.
My beef is that there is a pattern here. Idahoans are willing to raise their sales tax by a penny or gas tax by 2 pennies, for the good of the state, but the legislature uses that willingness to shift more and more taxes onto hard working families and away from those who can more afford to pay. The makeup of this legislature refuses to rethink their policy on income tax, tax exemptions, corporate taxes, etc. We are 46th in the nation for state employee salaries and 44th in the nation in average teacher salaries. Agency heads say they cannot recruit and retain employees and are losing talented people to other states.
Sen. Nicole LeFavour (District 19) - Do the Co-Chairs of the Joint Finance and Appropriations Committee, Senator Dean Cameron and Representative Maxine Bell really decide how much to cut Idaho education budgets or how much and in what way to cut state employee and teacher pay? No.
Wednesday night Dean Cameron and Maxine Bell sat on the stage in front of more than 600 teachers and parents and had to defend cuts to education and teacher pay because Governor Otter and House Leaders Mike Moyle, Ken Roberts and Scott Bedke didn't feel obligated to come defend their own parts in really deciding how these budgets will be set.
Wednesday night Dean Cameron sat in the middle of a huge line of silent law makers under the lights and read from a script. I know he didn't relish it. He is a kind, reasonable man who I believe tries hard to do the right thing in a place that has changed much over the past five years. He said he had no choice but to cut education. In the realm of politics he did not. In the realm of the real world there are ways to keep education budgets whole for 2010 and 2011 even if the economy worsens.
But some Republican leaders refuse to put education higher than roads or business tax cuts in their set of priorities. These people ran on smaller government platforms and if it means cutting schools, laying off teachers and state employees and cutting pay till it all unravels, they will do it. They have done it. Privatizing broken government services puts our tax dollars in the hands of businesses, which may or may not do a better job than government.
These leaders, along with Tom Luna, Bob Nonini and John Goedde I believe would privatize education, like we've privatized health care, even if such a system would benefit only those with enough money to pay for a good education. Even if those with less money would get something less for their children. ... read more at Nicole's blog.
Rep. Wendy Jaquet (District 25) - ... What was extremely disappointing last week was the negation of House Bill 252, a collaborative approach for districts to declare an "emergency" and open up contracts for personnel reductions. Representatives Rusche, Chavez and Pence spent a month in early morning meetings with majority party members and education stakeholders only to have two bills come forward that were never discussed in this working group. The trust that was engendered from the collaborative approach has been greatly damaged as a result of majority party actions.
A second concern of mine was highlighted in The New York Times this weekend. The article indicated that the federal government's Department of Education will be monitoring how states use their education stimulus/stabilitization funds. General funds, they said, are not to be freed up from education to be put elsewhere and the Secretary of Education Arne Duncan may come forward in the next few weeks with more clarification rules on this matter. The majority party's JFAC motion for k-12 education used $20 million dollars more of stimulus money and transferred it to the general fund. This may not work and we might be looking at this again. When I said earlier this week that I thought we would be out of here on April 10th, I could have been mistaken. ...
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Week 10: legislators' reports
Here are excerpts from some of the e-mail newsletters that Idaho Democratic lawmakers sent home to their constituents about Week 10 of the 2009 Idaho Legislature. If you would like to receive regular updates from your legislators - Democrat or Republican - be sure to let them know.
Rep. John Rusche (District 7) - What many have called our “going home” bill failed on the House Floor last week. After close to two hours of debate, the Governor’s proposal (H246) to raise fuel taxes by 30 percent over the next three years failed by a vote of 27-43. This was a tough vote. The arguments in favor of the bill were well articulated and I agree that Idaho’s roads need ongoing funding for maintenance. At the same time, I just can’t justify raising taxes on Idaho families in these difficult economic times.
The other transportation bill proposed by the Governor, H247, which proposes increases in vehicle registration fees, was pulled last week. There were numerous errors in the bill and there were also concerns that the bill did not receive any hearing in the House Transportation Committee. Over the next week or two, I expect that we will see several new revenue-raising bills to help pay for road maintenance. The Governor has made transportation his #1 priority for this legislative session and if he does not see some headway, I expect the Governor may get out his veto stamp.
Governor Otter and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna are proposing to cut the public education budgets by $110 million for Fiscal Year 2010. This is in funding for staff as well as transportation (field trips and daily busing), textbooks, school maintenance funding (interesting, we can cut money to maintain schools but need to raise taxes for roads). Education is key to our State’s future. Cutting public school funding while saving both stimulus money and our own Education Reserve Fund seems shortsighted. When the school tax shifted from property tax to our general fund (sales and income tax), we set up the Public School Stabilization Fund with $100 million just in case those tax revenues fell short. It does not seem wise to refuse to use this rainy day fund now. Isn’t it why the fund was set up?
Rep. Phylis King (District 18) - ... In the tenth week of the session, JFAC (Joint Finance Appropriations Committee) is working hard to hear all the agency rewrites of each budget with the Stimulus Money in mind. Education is one of the more important budgets to me. They used about $80 million of PESF (Public Education Stabilization Fund), but then, last Wednesday, they replaced that money with Stimulus money. So the PESF has not been touched and if we can get the governor and superintendant to agree, we will use it in 2010 and 2011. ... In the debate about an increase in the gas tax, the Democrats brought up the fact that the Governor’s transportation bills raise $61.8 million for roads and bridges and yet he is cutting $62 million from education. We think that demonstrates the governor’s priorities.
By the way, the gas tax bill to increase gas tax by 3¢ in July 2009, 2¢ in 2010 and 2¢ in 2011, failed to make it out of the house by 27 to 43. There were major flaws in the registration fee increase bill and it was pulled back. We may see a new registration fee bill on Tuesday in transportation. The fuel tax saga continues with the Governor threatening to put the GARVEE road projects into the stimulus money instead of funding the eight projects already identified.
Many organizations, cities, and counties applied for other Federal Stimulus money. They worked hard to get their applications to the Governor to meet his deadline last week. Unfortunately, they were not considered. I feel badly that expectations were so high and deflated so quickly!
Rep. Branden Durst (District 18) - I am pleased to announce that my joint effort, HB 84, with Rep. Donna Pence (D-25B) was passed out of the House on Friday by a vote of 57 to 7, with 6 legislators absent.
The bill, for those of you that don't know, will allow parents of children that turn five years old after September 1st and attend a private kindergarten, to continue on to 1st grade so long as they can pass an assessment that is approved by the State Department of Education. It also provides a new safeguard for children that attend an out-of-state kindergarten that turned five after September 1st by requiring them to also take the assessment to demonstrate they are prepared to enter first grade.
Really, this is a pretty small change that will impact less than a few dozen students a year. The most classic example is one that I coincidentally heard of yesterday while visiting my doctor. He has a son that was born on September 2nd, one day too late. Under the current law his son has to wait another year or commute to an out-of-state private kindergarten if he wants to start first grade next year with the rest of his peer group. What's worse is his son is very big for his age and will likely dwarf the other children when he starts kindergarten in the fall. Anyway, this is a good change and hopefully parents will feel more empowered to do the right thing for their children.
Sen. Nicole LeFavour (District 19) - ... This morning we had to make a decision we have been putting off while the world adjusted to what the more than one billion in stimulus funding will mean. We had to decide how much to cut state employee pay. There were seven motions or proposals. In the heat of the attic in this big old cement and stone building anything seemed possible. As we passed out the motion sheets in that room that used to be part of the county jail, the options seemed to contract.
By the time we got to our committee room in front of the cameras our choices were down to three. Three bad motions made on the table in that comparatively cold and empty room. All three motions proposed to cut state employee costs by 5 percent. The worst one of these passed. It cut every state employee’s pay by 3 percent and then mandated 2 percent more in employee cost be cut through furloughs, keeping positions vacant and if necessary through layoffs.
The House members were lock step for this motion and its 3% salary reduction and 5 percent net cut in personnel funding. Why in any rational way they would want that, I do not know. We could have given more room for agencies to use furloughs more or vacant positions. We could have used dedicated funds or stimulus funds to keep it at 4 percent or even 3 percent total personnel cuts. But leadership in the House has been twisting arms for weeks. I’m not sure what any state employee ever did to them or if it is just that those particular Republican leaders need to keep hating government, even when government is our tax dollars, people’s jobs, people’s lives. ... more at Nicole's blog
Rep. James Ruchti (District 29) - It was nice to see some of you over the weekend at our Legislative Listening Tour. We were discussing legislative issues that are affecting you at home and it was good to get feedback from our constituents. ... On a good note, SB1100, which proposed a statewide franchise for cable operators has been pulled by the bill's sponsor as a result of comments from many of you as well as hard work by Representative Elaine Smith. Currently, in order to receive the right to use the public right-of-way for cable infrastructure, companies must negotiate a franchise with local cities and counties. This bill proposed that one franchise be granted by the State for operation throughout the State. The main concern regarding SB1100 was the impact it would have on public access channels. This bill would have limited a local community's ability to request that cable companies provide public access channels. There were also concerns that the bill would result in lost revenues for operating public access channels.
As a preview to what is coming up this week, a daycare licensing bill (S1112aa) will be considered by the House this week. This legislation already passed in the Senate by an overwhelming majority. If passed by the House, the measure would require licensing of all day-care operations that care for four or more unrelated children. It would set minimum standards including criminal background checks, health and fire safety inspections, and child-staff ratios. Some of you attended the town hall meeting I held a few months ago on this topic. I think this is good legislation and I will be voting for it. These are the bare minimum standards the State should be setting to ensure that our children are safe.
Rep. John Rusche (District 7) - What many have called our “going home” bill failed on the House Floor last week. After close to two hours of debate, the Governor’s proposal (H246) to raise fuel taxes by 30 percent over the next three years failed by a vote of 27-43. This was a tough vote. The arguments in favor of the bill were well articulated and I agree that Idaho’s roads need ongoing funding for maintenance. At the same time, I just can’t justify raising taxes on Idaho families in these difficult economic times.
The other transportation bill proposed by the Governor, H247, which proposes increases in vehicle registration fees, was pulled last week. There were numerous errors in the bill and there were also concerns that the bill did not receive any hearing in the House Transportation Committee. Over the next week or two, I expect that we will see several new revenue-raising bills to help pay for road maintenance. The Governor has made transportation his #1 priority for this legislative session and if he does not see some headway, I expect the Governor may get out his veto stamp.
Governor Otter and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna are proposing to cut the public education budgets by $110 million for Fiscal Year 2010. This is in funding for staff as well as transportation (field trips and daily busing), textbooks, school maintenance funding (interesting, we can cut money to maintain schools but need to raise taxes for roads). Education is key to our State’s future. Cutting public school funding while saving both stimulus money and our own Education Reserve Fund seems shortsighted. When the school tax shifted from property tax to our general fund (sales and income tax), we set up the Public School Stabilization Fund with $100 million just in case those tax revenues fell short. It does not seem wise to refuse to use this rainy day fund now. Isn’t it why the fund was set up?
Rep. Phylis King (District 18) - ... In the tenth week of the session, JFAC (Joint Finance Appropriations Committee) is working hard to hear all the agency rewrites of each budget with the Stimulus Money in mind. Education is one of the more important budgets to me. They used about $80 million of PESF (Public Education Stabilization Fund), but then, last Wednesday, they replaced that money with Stimulus money. So the PESF has not been touched and if we can get the governor and superintendant to agree, we will use it in 2010 and 2011. ... In the debate about an increase in the gas tax, the Democrats brought up the fact that the Governor’s transportation bills raise $61.8 million for roads and bridges and yet he is cutting $62 million from education. We think that demonstrates the governor’s priorities.
By the way, the gas tax bill to increase gas tax by 3¢ in July 2009, 2¢ in 2010 and 2¢ in 2011, failed to make it out of the house by 27 to 43. There were major flaws in the registration fee increase bill and it was pulled back. We may see a new registration fee bill on Tuesday in transportation. The fuel tax saga continues with the Governor threatening to put the GARVEE road projects into the stimulus money instead of funding the eight projects already identified.
Many organizations, cities, and counties applied for other Federal Stimulus money. They worked hard to get their applications to the Governor to meet his deadline last week. Unfortunately, they were not considered. I feel badly that expectations were so high and deflated so quickly!
Rep. Branden Durst (District 18) - I am pleased to announce that my joint effort, HB 84, with Rep. Donna Pence (D-25B) was passed out of the House on Friday by a vote of 57 to 7, with 6 legislators absent.
The bill, for those of you that don't know, will allow parents of children that turn five years old after September 1st and attend a private kindergarten, to continue on to 1st grade so long as they can pass an assessment that is approved by the State Department of Education. It also provides a new safeguard for children that attend an out-of-state kindergarten that turned five after September 1st by requiring them to also take the assessment to demonstrate they are prepared to enter first grade.
Really, this is a pretty small change that will impact less than a few dozen students a year. The most classic example is one that I coincidentally heard of yesterday while visiting my doctor. He has a son that was born on September 2nd, one day too late. Under the current law his son has to wait another year or commute to an out-of-state private kindergarten if he wants to start first grade next year with the rest of his peer group. What's worse is his son is very big for his age and will likely dwarf the other children when he starts kindergarten in the fall. Anyway, this is a good change and hopefully parents will feel more empowered to do the right thing for their children.
Sen. Nicole LeFavour (District 19) - ... This morning we had to make a decision we have been putting off while the world adjusted to what the more than one billion in stimulus funding will mean. We had to decide how much to cut state employee pay. There were seven motions or proposals. In the heat of the attic in this big old cement and stone building anything seemed possible. As we passed out the motion sheets in that room that used to be part of the county jail, the options seemed to contract.
By the time we got to our committee room in front of the cameras our choices were down to three. Three bad motions made on the table in that comparatively cold and empty room. All three motions proposed to cut state employee costs by 5 percent. The worst one of these passed. It cut every state employee’s pay by 3 percent and then mandated 2 percent more in employee cost be cut through furloughs, keeping positions vacant and if necessary through layoffs.
The House members were lock step for this motion and its 3% salary reduction and 5 percent net cut in personnel funding. Why in any rational way they would want that, I do not know. We could have given more room for agencies to use furloughs more or vacant positions. We could have used dedicated funds or stimulus funds to keep it at 4 percent or even 3 percent total personnel cuts. But leadership in the House has been twisting arms for weeks. I’m not sure what any state employee ever did to them or if it is just that those particular Republican leaders need to keep hating government, even when government is our tax dollars, people’s jobs, people’s lives. ... more at Nicole's blog
Rep. James Ruchti (District 29) - It was nice to see some of you over the weekend at our Legislative Listening Tour. We were discussing legislative issues that are affecting you at home and it was good to get feedback from our constituents. ... On a good note, SB1100, which proposed a statewide franchise for cable operators has been pulled by the bill's sponsor as a result of comments from many of you as well as hard work by Representative Elaine Smith. Currently, in order to receive the right to use the public right-of-way for cable infrastructure, companies must negotiate a franchise with local cities and counties. This bill proposed that one franchise be granted by the State for operation throughout the State. The main concern regarding SB1100 was the impact it would have on public access channels. This bill would have limited a local community's ability to request that cable companies provide public access channels. There were also concerns that the bill would result in lost revenues for operating public access channels.
As a preview to what is coming up this week, a daycare licensing bill (S1112aa) will be considered by the House this week. This legislation already passed in the Senate by an overwhelming majority. If passed by the House, the measure would require licensing of all day-care operations that care for four or more unrelated children. It would set minimum standards including criminal background checks, health and fire safety inspections, and child-staff ratios. Some of you attended the town hall meeting I held a few months ago on this topic. I think this is good legislation and I will be voting for it. These are the bare minimum standards the State should be setting to ensure that our children are safe.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Bad education legislation: the sequel?
The week before last, it appeared that a bipartisan panel had drafted acceptable compromise education legislation to help Idaho through the economic downturn. Here's a post that Rep. Liz Chavez, a member of the panel, wrote March 11. Now, however, it appears that many of the earlier bills' worst aspects have resurfaced. Here's an email Rep. Chavez sent last night:
Well, just when I think that the Idaho Legislature and the process of government can't get any more interesting......it does.
After working for a month and a day, meeting every day at 7:00am to work out legislation (HB252) that provides tools and procedure in the case of a catastrophic economic emergency that give the state and local school districts flexibility, today we heard new legislation that begs the question,"What are we doing?"
The Chair of the House Education Committee Rep. Bob Nonini, introduced proposed legislation reducing the state's reimbursement to our local school districts from 85 percent down to 50 percent. This will effectively take away any and all field trips for curriculum enhancement. However, because athletics is not reimbursed, that will not be impacted.....but this may have spillover effects that we can't see right now.
There will be two more pieces of proposed legislation presented on Monday. One will be to cut the Early Retirement for Teachers in half for this year and eliminate it entirely in 2010. This plan doesn't cost money, but in fact saves money as veteran teachers, who are often at the end of the salary schedule are replaced by new teachers who are on the lower end of the salary schedule.
The other piece is a plan to freeze the steps and lanes, meaning the years of experience and education, into which all teachers fit to be paid.
My frustration and dismay in all of this is that the legislation we worked on so hard for over a month, was that every group that would be impacted by this legislation were sitting at the same table and we came to agreement on the tools to use in an economic emergency. So the question has to be, "Why do we need these pieces of legislation? Why can't we send the funding to the school districts and let the duly elected Board of Trustees and the local teacher's association work it out?"
So here's the deal. I need your help. I need every one of you to call the Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna at the Department of Education, the phone number is 1-800-432-4601 and register your concern, or Representative Bob Nonini at the House of Representatives 1-800-626-0471.I would also encourage you to email your concerns to Rep. Nonini at bnonini@house.idaho.gov and to anyone else that you think might have some influence on the course of this legislation.
Well, just when I think that the Idaho Legislature and the process of government can't get any more interesting......it does.
After working for a month and a day, meeting every day at 7:00am to work out legislation (HB252) that provides tools and procedure in the case of a catastrophic economic emergency that give the state and local school districts flexibility, today we heard new legislation that begs the question,"What are we doing?"
The Chair of the House Education Committee Rep. Bob Nonini, introduced proposed legislation reducing the state's reimbursement to our local school districts from 85 percent down to 50 percent. This will effectively take away any and all field trips for curriculum enhancement. However, because athletics is not reimbursed, that will not be impacted.....but this may have spillover effects that we can't see right now.
There will be two more pieces of proposed legislation presented on Monday. One will be to cut the Early Retirement for Teachers in half for this year and eliminate it entirely in 2010. This plan doesn't cost money, but in fact saves money as veteran teachers, who are often at the end of the salary schedule are replaced by new teachers who are on the lower end of the salary schedule.
The other piece is a plan to freeze the steps and lanes, meaning the years of experience and education, into which all teachers fit to be paid.
My frustration and dismay in all of this is that the legislation we worked on so hard for over a month, was that every group that would be impacted by this legislation were sitting at the same table and we came to agreement on the tools to use in an economic emergency. So the question has to be, "Why do we need these pieces of legislation? Why can't we send the funding to the school districts and let the duly elected Board of Trustees and the local teacher's association work it out?"
So here's the deal. I need your help. I need every one of you to call the Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna at the Department of Education, the phone number is 1-800-432-4601 and register your concern, or Representative Bob Nonini at the House of Representatives 1-800-626-0471.I would also encourage you to email your concerns to Rep. Nonini at bnonini@house.idaho.gov and to anyone else that you think might have some influence on the course of this legislation.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Democrats kill tax increase
Democrats in the Idaho House voted today to defeat a tax increase sought by Gov. Butch Otter.
“While I agree that Idaho's highways and bridges are in need of repair and we have an investment we need to protect, I disagree with the timing for a tax increase on Idahoans,” House Minority Leader John Rusche of Lewiston said after the vote. During floor debate, Rusche said, “We do need to preserve our shared assets, not just the roads and bridges but also our schools and universities.”
“Right now, our economy is stalled and Idaho's unemployment rate is rising,” Rusche added. “More than 51,000 people were without jobs last month, with the unemployment rate reaching double digits in many places. Idaho families and businesses are suffering and now doesn't seem the time to increase their tax burden.”
“On the one hand, Idaho’s roads are cash poor … but on the other hand, many of our constituents are finding themselves cash poor,” Assistant Minority Leader James Ruchti of Pocatello said. But Idahoans understand the need for some cutbacks. “They understand we can’t fully fund everything because they are going through the same thing … so they get it. The question we need to ask is: Do we get it?” Ruchti added that with the state’s many needs, “if we’re pouring it all into transportation infrastructure, I think we’re truly going down the wrong road.”
The tally on HB 246 was 27 for and 43 opposed. All but three Democrats voted against the bill. One who supported it, Rep. Shirley Ringo of Moscow, said that she hoped that the Legislature would invest in “human infrastructure” as well as transportation needs.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Child-care safety bill needed now
By Senator Tim Corder & Representative George Sayler
Last week, the Senate passed by a 30-5 vote Senate Bill 1112, a proposal to change Idaho's outdated and inadequate child-care statute. Supporters of child-care reform have tried for years to amend current laws that leave thousands of children vulnerable. The vote is a bright star on what has been a dark horizon of child care in Idaho.
Unfortunately, some now want to cast a shadow over that star. In his March 15 column, Wayne Hoffman tried to discount the impact SB 1112 would have in improving child-care safety and alleged that the law would be costly and burdensome. We would like to correct these misperceptions.
If enacted, SB 1112 would end the loopholes that create safety issues for many children and that provide opportunities for people, including sexual predators, to harm children. The current law allows anyone to care for six or fewer children without any regulation or oversight, and it has minimal requirements for group care facilities taking care of seven to 12 children.We have a mountain of evidence showing the need for change. Current problems range from children being sexually abused to providers being intoxicated, to other health and safety violations. Current law makes it virtually impossible for the state to take action in most cases.
SB 1112 would provide a consistent, minimum statewide system of safety requirements for children in child-care facilities where four or more children, unrelated to the provider, are being cared for on a regular basis for compensation. It would require criminal background checks and health and safety inspections. Firearms and water safety measures are included, there must be a working phone on the premises, and maximum group size and child-staff ratios are established.
The bill would provide a process for the Health and Welfare Department to monitor these standards and suspend, deny or revoke licenses where illegal activity or serious threats to health and safety are found or where convicted sex offenders are on a child-care facility's premises.
Hoffman referred to an incident where a fire inspector showed up at a licensed child-care facility and found children being kept in locked plywood cubbyholes. His point was that licensing did not prevent the abuse. We are not claiming to be able to prevent all abuse, but the inspection would not have happened without the licensing requirement. The abuse would have continued.
Hoffman argued that more licensing takes away family responsibilities or may be too burdensome on small providers and costly to parents. Nothing could be further from the truth. Licensing fees are based on the number of children being cared for and actual costs of providing the license. Where licenses have been required in cities with ordinances, no decrease in the availability of child care has occurred.
Under Senate Bill 1112, parents would retain primary responsibility for child care, but the state would take a larger role in ensuring that all child-care facilities meet minimum health and safety standards. We believe the state has that responsibility. We also believe it is the parent's responsibility to choose the type of child care most suitable for their family. Unfortunately, parents don't always fulfill their responsibility. As Hoffman acknowledged, some parents will only be concerned with the cost and may even place their children in locked cubbyholes. Why should their children be put at risk?
This year, the Legislature has required veterinarians and mortgage brokers to be licensed and have criminal background checks. Passage of SB 1112 will send the message that our children are at least as important as animals and money.
Sen. Tim Corder, R-Mountain Home, and Rep. George Sayler, D-Coeur d'Alene, are co-sponsors of Senate Bill 1112.
Let's hold off on more charter schools
By Senator Dick Sagness
In a recent speech on education, President Obama surprised some listeners by saying that the nation needs more charter schools. It’s true that, at their best, charter schools can be laboratories of educational innovation. However, many states are struggling with how to fund charter school expansion at a time of shrinking or stagnant budgets for traditional public schools. Boise School District officials have announced they must lay off 122 teachers next year, and other districts are certain to require similar layoffs.
Yet amid these deep cutbacks, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna has called for lifting the cap on charter schools. I think that’s the wrong idea during this current economic downturn, and I have introduced legislation to put a three-year moratorium on new charter schools. The Senate Education Committee agreed to print Senate Bill 1085 way back in mid-February, but it’s been languishing there ever since. That’s a shame, because SB 1085 is needed at a time when Idaho’s traditional public schools face historic cuts. Allow me to explain why Idaho needs this moratorium:
When a new charter school starts, the vast majority of the students moving to the charter school district come from the traditional school district in which the charter school district resides. When the students move to the charter school district, the money allocated per child under state formula follows the child. In other words, the money that was supporting the student in the traditional public school is now supporting the education of the child in the charter school district. On the surface this makes sense except, like many things, the devil lies in the details.
When a child leaves the traditional public school district, many of the district’s costs remain essentially the same. Base costs for teachers, administration, facilities, maintenance, transportation and other support functions have to be maintained as they were before, but with the shift of funds to the charter school district, the traditional district has fewer dollars to cover essential costs. In some larger districts like Pocatello or Nampa, the charter school district receives more funding per child than the traditional public school district receives.
Each new charter school district gets about $1.3 million in funding for its first year – money that follows students from the traditional public school district to the charter school. However, since Idaho law says that if the traditional public school district loses 1 percent of its student population during the first year of the new charter school district operation, the traditional district in which the charter school district resides will be compensated for 99 percent of the revenue lost to the charter school district. This means that six new charter school districts could drain about $8 million per year from overall funding for K-12 schools.
Senate Bill 1085 would put a moratorium on starting new charter school districts for three years, July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2012, a period for which most people agree Idaho will continue to have serious revenue shortfalls. If we don’t do this, approximately $8 million dollars per year – or up to $24 million over the three years – will have to be taken from state funding for K-12 schools. This makes no fiscal or educational sense. If you agree that this would do grave damage to Idaho’s children, contact Senate Education Committee Chairman John Goedde and ask that the committee hear Senate Bill 1085.
Senator Dick Sagness of Pocatello is retired dean of the College of Education at Idaho State University.
In a recent speech on education, President Obama surprised some listeners by saying that the nation needs more charter schools. It’s true that, at their best, charter schools can be laboratories of educational innovation. However, many states are struggling with how to fund charter school expansion at a time of shrinking or stagnant budgets for traditional public schools. Boise School District officials have announced they must lay off 122 teachers next year, and other districts are certain to require similar layoffs.
Yet amid these deep cutbacks, Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna has called for lifting the cap on charter schools. I think that’s the wrong idea during this current economic downturn, and I have introduced legislation to put a three-year moratorium on new charter schools. The Senate Education Committee agreed to print Senate Bill 1085 way back in mid-February, but it’s been languishing there ever since. That’s a shame, because SB 1085 is needed at a time when Idaho’s traditional public schools face historic cuts. Allow me to explain why Idaho needs this moratorium:
When a new charter school starts, the vast majority of the students moving to the charter school district come from the traditional school district in which the charter school district resides. When the students move to the charter school district, the money allocated per child under state formula follows the child. In other words, the money that was supporting the student in the traditional public school is now supporting the education of the child in the charter school district. On the surface this makes sense except, like many things, the devil lies in the details.
When a child leaves the traditional public school district, many of the district’s costs remain essentially the same. Base costs for teachers, administration, facilities, maintenance, transportation and other support functions have to be maintained as they were before, but with the shift of funds to the charter school district, the traditional district has fewer dollars to cover essential costs. In some larger districts like Pocatello or Nampa, the charter school district receives more funding per child than the traditional public school district receives.
Each new charter school district gets about $1.3 million in funding for its first year – money that follows students from the traditional public school district to the charter school. However, since Idaho law says that if the traditional public school district loses 1 percent of its student population during the first year of the new charter school district operation, the traditional district in which the charter school district resides will be compensated for 99 percent of the revenue lost to the charter school district. This means that six new charter school districts could drain about $8 million per year from overall funding for K-12 schools.
Senate Bill 1085 would put a moratorium on starting new charter school districts for three years, July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2012, a period for which most people agree Idaho will continue to have serious revenue shortfalls. If we don’t do this, approximately $8 million dollars per year – or up to $24 million over the three years – will have to be taken from state funding for K-12 schools. This makes no fiscal or educational sense. If you agree that this would do grave damage to Idaho’s children, contact Senate Education Committee Chairman John Goedde and ask that the committee hear Senate Bill 1085.
Senator Dick Sagness of Pocatello is retired dean of the College of Education at Idaho State University.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
