February 18, 2023 • 31 mins
In this episode of IEA's HOTLINE Podcast, we discuss Week 5 of the Idaho Legislature’s 2023 session. Our panel's analysis centers on the advancement of the session’s first voucher bill earlier in the week, the outlook for Gov. Brad Little’s proposals on educator pay, attempts politicize traditionally non-partisan institutions in the state and a renewed effort to censor libraries.
Joining today’s conversation are:
- IEA’s Political Director Chris Parri
- IEA Executive Director Paul Stark
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Mike Journee (00:12):
Welcome to Idaho education Association's hotline
podcast, a weekly discussionabout what's happening at the
Idaho legislature around publiceducation and the policy
priorities of ies members, IEAmembers or public school
educators from all over thestate. They're Idaho's most
important education experts, andthey use their influence to
fight for free quality andequitable public education for
(00:32):
every student in the state. I'mMike journee, communications
director at the IEA and I'll beyour host for this episode of
hotline. Today we discuss weekfive of the Idaho legislature is
2023 session, discussion centerson the advancement of the
sessions first voucher bill thisweek. The outlook for Governor
Brad littles proposal oneducator pay attempts to
(00:52):
politicize traditionallynonpartisan institutions in the
state, and a renewed effort tocensored libraries. Joining me
for today's conversation, ouries political director, Chris
Perry, and IEA executivedirector Paul Stark.
Hi Chris Paul, thanks forjoining me. We'll talk about
week five of the Idaholegislature today, guys. And it
(01:14):
was a big week for educationpolicy this week at the
Statehouse with a voucher billthat we've been talking about so
much came forward in the IdahoSenate. It was in the Senate
Education Committee, Senate Bill1038, sponsored by Tammy
Nichols, from Middleton andBrian Lennie from Nampa. And it
(01:34):
went through as we expected, itwent through the Senate
Education Committee prettyeasily they there was two days
of testimony, it was probablyabout a a two to one ratio of
those who were against it, whotestified. And the same ratio
voted for it. On the when thecommittee voted six to three out
(01:55):
of vote. And so now the bill isheaded to the Senate for Chris
and, you know, luckily, this iswhere every Idaho senator is
going to have to stand to becounted about whether or not
they support public education.
Right?
Chris Parri (02:06):
Yeah, I mean, we've long talked about how the
current makeup of the SenateEducation Committee isn't very
representative of even theSenate itself and let alone
Idahoans in general. So we knewpretty far ahead ahead of time
that we would probably get a sixthree vote on this voucher bill.
And that's how it ended up. Butwhat we don't think I
(02:29):
necessarily planned for was justhow excellent the testimony was
for our team. It was incredible.
And like you mentioned two toone, for sure. We outnumbered
them, as you would expect. Andman just extremely like
professional, great testimonyand clear and concise. And I'm a
big fan of when people leave alittle bit of time on the board.
(02:49):
They were timing it at twominutes.
Mike Journee (02:53):
And one minute toward the end of the day. I
mean, they're really cuttingdown really trying to
Chris Parri (02:57):
get get it out there and get the vote done. But
yeah, I loved it. It was veryconcise and direct. And we heard
from folks all over the stateand with all sorts of different
positions on other things. ButUnited on this front for sure.
Mike Journee (03:11):
Yeah, one of my favorite things that came out of
the pandemic is this remotetestimony that they're allowed
to do that they can do nowthrough video. It's really
great. But I thought it wascool. Yeah. Paul, you testified
on behalf of the the associationand our members in that and how
did you feel like thedeliberation went and whatever,
(03:33):
you know, we're doing a littlebit of outreach to members to
get folks to stand up and becounted and be heard with
senators as it goes to thefloor. Any any insights about
where we think this might go onthe on the House floor on the
Senate floor?
Paul Stark (03:48):
You know, I don't know, it could go any number of
directions. But what I do knowis I've read through the bill
very carefully. And there arelike so many problems with this
bill, like immense number ofissues. I testified, again,
limited to two minutes, Itestified on the biggest, which
I think is the accountabilityissue, the lack of
accountability. And that's thething is this money will flow to
(04:12):
all kinds of private schoolsthat have no reporting
requirements. Someone told methe other day, you know, as a
teacher, I could, I could holdschool in my garage. If I get 10
students, I'm making more moneythan I am now. And I could only
you know, I would only teach twohours a day and I could, you
know, teach whatever I want.
Without any testing without andtechnically, you would qualify
(04:33):
under this bill for you know,1000s and 1000s and 1000s of
dollars.
Mike Journee (04:40):
I hadn't thought about that. That's absolutely
true, isn't it?
Paul Stark (04:42):
Yeah, like a teacher could just quit and say I'm
teaching a pod. Our listenersshouldn't should you on mute
during this point, but no, I'mjust kidding. But a
Chris Parri (04:51):
micro school,
Paul Stark (04:52):
you could teach a micro so you can make something
up you can make whatever Yep.
And, and there's no curriculumeither. There's no school board
that's accountable for it.
Anybody you know, and you couldteach anything from a far right
fascist doctrine to, you know,totally the far left doctrine,
you know, you could, you couldliterally indoctrinate students
on the taxpayer dime, it's, it'scrazy. And that's just one
(05:14):
aspect of it. Oh my gosh,there's so many other things
that this bill has problems, andI'd be happy to talk to anybody
about it
Mike Journee (05:23):
And I'm going to play a clip here from from
Senator Dave Lent, the chairmanof the committee here in this
minute is pretty lengthy, butbut one of the things that I
noticed from the testimony fromthose who were coming before
were to testify, there were alot of people who, who do
homeschool and and and it seemedto me like that choice, they
(05:44):
were looking for some financingof that choice in their home.
And there was also a lot ofdiscussion about from small
business owners who seemed to beinterested in the in the in the
free market aspect of this andhow there's an opportunity there
to make money off of this. Imean, there were some folks who
testified specifically aboutthat and said some of those
(06:05):
things out loud, it was kind ofshocking too.
Paul Stark (06:07):
One of the one of the hidden things in that bill
is these administrative fees.
And they said it's going to be4% in the first two years, and
then we'll go down to 2%, orsomething like that. Or no, it's
three, and then it goes down totwo. But in the first two years,
the state taxpayers would bepaying $600,000 a year just to
administer this program. That'ssome private company, who's
going to make over a half amillion dollars a year. And then
(06:29):
just to administer this program,if you don't think there's
profiteering under this, thisbill, you're fooling yourself.
Mike Journee (06:40):
I want to play a clip from from Chairman of the
Senate Education Committee whovoted who was one of the three
who voted against thislegislation. It's a very lengthy
clip, but it really kind of sumsup his thoughts about this
legislation. And so let's listento what Senator daveland has to
say.
Sen. Dave Lent (06:56):
And as I look around the country, I look at
Wisconsin, Arizona, Ohio andIndiana. And as you look down
the road, four or five years,you see hundreds of millions of
dollars going into the process.
And the good senator fromDistrict One, Senator Herndon, I
loved his pie description. Andif I could steal it for a
second, basically, we ended uppaying for device. And I think
(07:19):
that's where the money comes in.
And that's what we need to beaware of accountability is
interesting, we're usingaccountability to judge our
current system. But yet, whatwe're proposing to go to has no
accountability, we will not knowhow those students do, we will
send the money out as arepresentative of my
(07:39):
constituents, I cannot in goodfaith, send money out with no
accountability, that would causeme not to be a good steward of
the precious tax dollars, thatthose people in my district are
paying. I see if we have asuccess through here, it's going
to include some level ofaccountability. We look across
(08:02):
the country of Ohio and otherstates. They have built that in
there probably is an Idahosolution here. But I think it
with respect to the sponsors.
This is probably too much toofast.
Mike Journee (08:14):
So he that really summed up his perspective. And I
think that's probably theperspective a lot of folks
Chris, going into the onto thefloor vote here. We know, we've
heard a lot of folks expressedsimilar concerns about this. You
know, unfortunately, it soundslike the senator isn't
completely opposed to the ideaof vouchers if there's some
accountability attached to it,but I think he's pretty
(08:37):
thoughtful about about thingsand wants to make sure we do
right. We're going and this isgonna be a close vote on this on
the Senate floor, isn't it?
Chris Parri (08:43):
Yeah, I think it's gonna be a dead heat, very
narrow, whichever direction itgoes. The thing I liked about
what Senator Allen had to saywas that it if there was
anything good that came out ofthis discussion about quote,
unquote, school choice, and ESAisn't vouchers and stuff this
year, is the attention that it'spulled to the public framework
that we already have for schoolchoice, or options, or whatever
(09:05):
you want to call it, and Idahothat does have accountability
already. And I think that a lotof folks, you know, me as well,
coming into this conversation, Iwasn't aware of all of the
school public school optionsthat the state provides here.
And it's been great to learnmore about those. And I hope
also that people around thestate are doing the same thing
(09:26):
and taking stock of the choiceswe already have. Because for all
of the good options that thestate currently has and can
support. It's only as good aspeople know about it. Right. So
I think what daveland is kind ofsaying there as well, Senator
Linda's saying there is thataccountability has to come with
this. And when public money goessomewhere, taxpayers are
(09:48):
entitled to that accountability.
So you
Paul Stark (09:50):
know, I can if I can jump in to you know, it's
interesting going on thatnotion, because everybody's
talking about this is, you know,choice and parental choice and
we need more choice. Butinterestingly in this bill
doesn't actually add any newchoice. All the choices that are
contemplated in this bill existstoday. Right now, what we're
talking about is who pays forthe choice and which I've said
(10:12):
before. And that's all thatwe're talking about. Someone
aptly said, this is a fundingbill. This isn't a school
choice, Bill.
Mike Journee (10:21):
So let's go back to the screen, I can talk a
little bit about what's comingthe vote, we're working really
hard to turn out members to getthem to email lawmakers, and to
let them know what they feelabout this right. We feel like
we've got about a half a dozenswing votes, probably the play
with within with the Senate. Sowe're really focusing on on
those folks, and making surethat they hear from our members
(10:45):
about this record.
Chris Parri (10:46):
Yeah, I think there, there's, like you said, a
handful of votes that folks thatsupport school choice in and,
you know, in the broad sense,but also are troubled by the
accountability stuff, andtroubled by a lot of the same
things that Senator lintmentioned in his debate there.
So yeah, I think we have areally good shot of if our
(11:08):
educators are able to get intouch with our senators and have
a good conversation about them.
This is not even if you supportschool choice, this is not the
version that you want to seecome to fruition in Idaho, it is
copy and paste from all theseother states doesn't fix any of
the policy failures we've seenin those states. Like Senator
Lynch said, there's a way ofdoing this in Idaho, and we've
maybe we are already doing isprobably my perspective on it.
Yeah, yeah.
Mike Journee (11:31):
So I guess I want to do a little disclaimer,
disclaimer here, too. For ourlisteners, we know we're going
to be talking a lot a lot todayabout some of the a lot of the
bad for education, things thatare in front of the legislature
right now. And I guess we shouldput a little context around that
this is the time of year, whenall of the early bills that come
(11:52):
from a variety of corners of thelegislature, that that always
might, these are the ones wherethey start getting to full
hearings, they start makingheadlines, people start paying
attention to them, we want tomake sure that we that we put
that into context, that theseare things that are going to be
kind of dominated in session,this middle part. And we're
(12:13):
gonna move in toward the thebudget discussions later on to
where it's really the rubbermeets the road as far as
education policy goes. Right. SoI just wanted to put that out
there before we keep going. Thenext one I wanted to talk about
the next legislation I want totalk about was the Idaho launch
scholarship. This was acornerstone of the governor's
lineup for the for the study ofthe state this year, his
(12:36):
legislative priorities in thisbill, it's it provides a $500 to
attend any in State UniversityCommunity College Technical
College or workforce trainingprogram, after folks graduate
from high school, after studentsgraduate from high school, so
it's, but I wanted to talk aboutit a little bit in the context
(12:56):
of the debate that's gone onaround it, and how that might
play out for another part of thegovernor's legislative
priorities. And that's the thethe teacher pay proposals that
he made coming forward. And so,you know, there's been a lot of
drama, it seems like this couldkind of be a harbinger for for
the kinds of debates we're goingto see. And the kind of
(13:17):
conversation you're gonna seearound that teacher paid
discussion. Right, Chris?
Chris Parri (13:21):
I think there's a potential for it, for sure. I
think still teacher pay remains,I think one of the most
politically popular aspects ofthe entire of the governor's
agenda. So it might be a littledifferent there. But I think
something to keep in mind,particularly for members with
the launch scholarships is thatteachers are in in demand career
that could be helped with thescholarship funds as well. So
(13:44):
the, you know, the scholarshipswill go to folks, and the state
will decide which careers are indemand, nursing, teaching, a lot
of CTE stuff, so welding andthings like that, as well. So I
think that's important as ifeducators are willing to get
involved on this one. We can getbehind this as well, the as it
(14:06):
pertains to the teacher paydebate, I do think that, that
it's been a little bit of asurprise to see this launch
program have such a difficulttime making it through the
house, it only got one vote, itwas uh, it got through the house
with one, one extra vote,basically had that vote turned,
it would have failed in thehouse. So in the Senate, they're
(14:26):
anticipating extremely closeagain. And a lot of the same
swing folks that we need to getin touch with on vouchers are
the same folks that are a littlebit wavering, perhaps on the on
the launch program. So it'll beinteresting to see where this
goes. I do hope that there'smore political oomph behind the
teacher pay. So we can get thatthrough a little easier, easier
(14:48):
hope but yeah, it isn't. Itisn't a good sign necessarily
for the Governor's prioritiesthat his first big legislative
push is hitting so manyroadblocks, I
Paul Stark (14:57):
think, and I think this is just a emphasize
doesn't, Chris that howimportant elections are, you
know, and if anybody doubtsthis, you know, this, the
current situation we findourselves in, just demonstrates
elections matter, every votematters. And, you know, we saw,
you know, Representative Sims,for example, lose his seat with
just a handful of votes. And so,you know, getting involved on
(15:21):
that election side of it will,in turn, produce better results
in the legislative side of itbig time.
Mike Journee (15:28):
So I wanted to spend a few minutes talking
about this kind of this thingthat we're starting to see
around a number of bills, anddiscussions that are happening
in the legislature right nowaround introducing more
partisanship in some of thethings that have traditionally
(15:48):
been nonpartisan institutions.
In our state, we have a new billthat would overhaul school
trustee elections, which havetraditionally been nonpartisan.
And it it, it does a number ofthings. But one of the main
things it does is it requiresfolks to declare party
(16:09):
affiliation, or an unaffiliatedstatus in doing this, there's a
similar bill around city councilseats, that's happening. And
then we also have thisconversation around the joint
legislative oversight committee,which is a bipartisan commission
that oversaw the office ofperformance evaluations in this
state, which was basicallythey're the the local equivalent
(16:31):
of the OMB and at thecongressional level, for in
favor of a committee dominatedby the majority, which is in
Idaho, the Republican Party, ofcourse, for now, for and so and
so the all of these things showto me, a real concerted effort
(16:53):
to bring forward legislation andto push things into a corner.
That's much more dominated by asingle political party as
opposed to things that are basedupon good government and good
decisions and unbiased data andthose kinds of things. Guys, are
you seeing the same kind ofthing.
Chris Parri (17:14):
So the in the reason I said for now is because
these kinds of pushes,particularly when you get to,
like legislative whistleblowergroups, like like the
Legislative Council, that youmentioned, the, it always seems
attractive when it's your partyand the majority to start
rolling black or like to startinjecting more partisanship
(17:34):
because you obviously aredominating the legislature. But
it wasn't that long ago thatDemocrats were in control of the
legislature in Idaho, or had thegovernor's seat or something
else. So the tides can turnpretty quick. And I think if the
tides were to turn, you'd havethe Republicans asking for a
bipartisan whistleblowercommittee as they should, like
we should have bipartisanship.
Where needed and nonpartisanship should be the default, in
(17:57):
my opinion,
Paul Stark (17:59):
you know, when, when has ever a one party system
really benefited the people thatthey, you know, like never so
red flag, you know, and that'swhere good policy is made when
you have diverse ideas anddiverse viewpoints, and allow
things to follow the process, ofcourse, but a one party rules
all never ever has ever inhistory resulted in a really
(18:23):
good result.
Chris Parri (18:24):
And I do think so I think if if you were to talk to
folks who support the idea ofmaking the municipal elections,
political and the or partisan,and the school board elections
partisan as well, I think theymight say that it's more
transparent, because you know,you have a person now declaring
their affiliation with a party.
The problem I have with thosebills is that the, it is
(18:46):
empowering the parties, becausethis is a two way street. Yes,
the voter will see the AR the Dnext to a person's name and can
make assumptions based on thatif they'd like. But the party is
also then empowered to furtherget involved in these local and
municipal elections. And partyofficials are not elected by the
(19:09):
general public, they are notaccountable to the general
public. And I think, you know,most people see independent
thinking as a real value. So theidea of us boiling down really
complex conversations at thelocal and school board level,
into these kind of myopicpartisan ones, like really bums
me out, honestly, I've worked ona lot of these elections, and
(19:31):
it's never good when you startgetting into well, you're
Democrat and you're Republican,or you're a socialist and you're
a fascist or whatever. It's notit never is beneficial.
Mike Journee (19:40):
And it brings all the baggage of the national
political debates into into theconversations about our schools
into the conversations about ourlocal municipal governments in
ways that just wouldn't be thereotherwise. Right. And I think it
also I think it does one morething, I think it I think it
also marginalizes some One whowants to run for one of these
(20:02):
offices to do good work fortheir community or do good work
for their local schools? Andputs them at a disadvantage
against someone who might havethe backing of the party
machine. Right, exactly.
Chris Parri (20:14):
Yeah. I mean, there's no consolidated
independent party of Idaho, youknow, for the folks that don't
fit nicely into the partyplatforms of the Democrats or
the Republicans to get behindthem and support them in the
school board elections or stufflike that, like, you are going
up against these behemoths. Ifyou are just an independent
voter or independent candidate,
Mike Journee (20:34):
and we're seeing that kind of involvement
already. You know, even evenwithout this, the lack of a
partisan tag on on these, theselegislators were starting to
recede all over the place.
Paul Stark (20:46):
So yeah, there's the attitude of conform or be cast
out. And that's your onlyalternatives. Yeah.
Mike Journee (20:54):
So I in a similar vein, I want to talk a little
bit about libraries, we'restarting to see some some things
around libraries again, thisyear, of course, last year, we
had the one bill that wouldcriminalize librarians. If if
someone if a kid got ahold ofinappropriate materials in their
(21:15):
in their library and that kindof thing, we still, we've got
another bill coming outtargeting library private
pornography, which made itsdebut on Monday. I don't know of
any librarian around who wouldwho would willingly allow some
kind of inappropriate materialsto be out there for kids to get
hold of.
Chris Parri (21:33):
There's a false assumption here that this bill
seems to point out that, youknow, librarians have nefarious
intents, when they distribute ormanage the information in their
buildings like that it is nottrue. I think our librarians in
the state of Ohio do a greatjob. And I've talked to the
Library Association and aboutthis issue, and they're getting
(21:54):
activated on it, as well. One ofthe things that freaks me out a
lot about this is the threat oflibrary districts losing their
insurance, as well, theirliability insurance and stuff,
because at that point, you'rerecruiting insurance companies
into this, this whole issue. Andgood point it. It really freaks
me out to have folks that arecompletely unaccountable to
(22:16):
Idaho, to Idaho ones kind ofpushing this as well, or to or
getting involved potentially,based in this in this kind of
wild debate.
Mike Journee (22:25):
And this isn't the only thing that's happening
right now, Paul, we are seeingthis debate going on in other
ways. Kuna School District put25 books under review after
after some some legislators saidthat they should, and that's
comes on the heels of NampaSchool District doing the same
thing last year. And then we canthis week, I don't know if you
guys saw this headline or notCanyon county commissioners
received a petition to dissolvethe Meridian Library District
(22:47):
claiming the district librariescontains sexually explicit
materials available to children.
So there's an across the boardattack here that's happening.
And it seems it sounds veryfamiliar given a lot of the
conversations that we're havingin the legislature about the
conversations that we seehappening in school districts
and school board meetings andelsewhere, around the
Statehouse,
Paul Stark (23:09):
You know, no one is in favor of something
pornographic being in libraries.
No one wants children to beexposed to things above their
age. And I don't think anybodywould disagree with that
statement. But what we see iscensorship. And that's really
the slippery slope, you openthat censorship door, and where
does it lead to next? You know,let's not have any books that
discuss we have a two partysystem in the United States. You
(23:30):
know, I mean, at what point dowe stop what we subjectively
find objectionable?
Mike Journee (23:39):
And who defines what's objectionable?
Chris Parri (23:41):
That's right.
Paul Stark (23:42):
There's a legal precedent under the 14th
Amendment called the void forvagueness doctrine that would
kick in here as well, in some ofthese laws, but, you know, every
trustee kind of or librarycounsel or whatever, it may be
that governing body, you know, Iencourage them to review books.
Yes, you should do that. I mean,that should be part of what you
do. But what I'm afraid of isthis, the the mob mentality that
(24:04):
exists that says, now you haveto start censoring thing that we
the mob find objectionable, andif it if it is, you know,
objectionable and it's not ageappropriate, yes, take whatever
measures you need to, but butthere's processes for that there
are processes, I'm just moreafraid of what doors are we
opening, you know, and itwasn't, whatever, whatever it
(24:27):
was, like, seven years ago orsomething, you know, we saw in
Germany book burning parties andthings like this. And this,
this, this mob mentality canswing in very radical ways that
are very counter to the verythings America was set up to
protect, you know, from ourfounding fathers, the freedom of
(24:48):
the press, and the lack ofcensorship was vital to
America's foundations. And it'sembodied of course in the First
Amendment.
Chris Parri (24:56):
It's it's really funny to me too, because like
the books that have caused stuffor quote unquote caused such an
uproar are things like The KiteRunner like in Toni Morrison's
books like, these are not likefantastic graphic, obscene
books. These are prettywonderful books actually, that,
you know, some group, some tinygroup of extremely loud people
(25:18):
with a lot of time on theirhands are compelled to take big
action on and can threaten abunch of political action. And
like I said, get the, you know,liability, kind of conversation
going and all this other stuff.
This bill gives those folks tonsmore power to bring to fruition
their version of censorship. Andit's pretty gross, I move it
(25:39):
makes me mad.
Mike Journee (25:43):
And it's likely that our members who are
librarians are going to bear thebrunt of this. I mean, that's
one of the reasons I want totalk about this. This really
impacts school librarians,school libraries, and the
ability of, of them to be ableto do their job without the fear
of of being arrested, right?
Paul Stark (26:01):
Isn't it strange how the current political mob
mentality has vilified some ofthe most revered individuals and
communities like librarians,like teachers, you know, that
historically have have held areally high place. And then this
propaganda machine has nowdiscredited these good people,
they're still the same goodpeople that they were in the
(26:22):
70s. And the 40s. They're thesame good people, same good
natures. And yet, these mostimportant parts are now
vilified, and somehow tried toput into such a bad light.
Librarians are good people. Andif anybody doubts that, go talk
to your librarian and find out
Chris Parri (26:41):
or Paul, I could set up my micro library and get
perhaps voucher tax money,
Paul Stark (26:47):
the micro library, the School of micro librarians,
yes.
Mike Journee (26:52):
So in in the interest of trying to end on
somewhat of a high note, right.
We've been talking about a lotof a lot of disheartening things
that are happening right now.
But I'm so I wanted to we did wedid get worried this week, that
legislation last year, arounddyslexia. There was a really
(27:13):
solid appropriation that wenttoward that this week, $1.5
million went into that. And thisis for, for continuing
education, for professionaldevelopment for educators who
want to know more about how toteach dyslexic kids is about
providing money for materialsand programs for that for
dyslexic kids in school. Sothat's something our members
(27:36):
really cared about last year,they were really supportive of
this legislation, I thinkthey're going to be really happy
to hear about this, this billgoing forward. And, it being
funded.
Chris Parri (27:45):
Totally, the no good deed goes unpunished. So
there was a problem last yearwith the rollout of some of this
dyslexia work, after thelegislature passed, passed it.
And this is an attempt to helpremedy that and get school
districts and educators andeverybody running on the same
wavelength so that we canactually start delivering these,
(28:05):
these great services, I think,to kids who need it.
Paul Stark (28:08):
It's a long time coming. Yeah, definitely for
dyslexia, especially any parentof anyone with dyslexia. And
this is a long, long timecoming, and we're glad to see it
here. And I should also say thatthe IEA is going to be providing
professional development ondyslexia to meet those
requirements under the statutefor educators. And as always the
IPAs, professional developmentwill be top class.
Mike Journee (28:33):
One more positive note, I wanted to kind of touch
on something you mentioned in astaff briefing earlier this
morning, Chris, about we alreadytalked about the educator salary
stuff is a very popular thing.
But in particular, you mentionedtoday in our staff meeting that,
that there is the pay foreducational support
professionals, those folks whoare bus drivers, who are our
(28:55):
front desk, staff, members,counselors and other folks,
education support staff, the payproposal for the governor there
that still seems like it's got awhole lot of support behind it.
And I know our members are gonnabe really pleased about that,
because they've heard, we'veheard a lot from them about how
important it is that they havepartners in the building,
(29:18):
helping with all these otherthings that go on outside of
their classroom in addition to,to inside.
Chris Parri (29:25):
So, my sense is that there's a lot a lot of
momentum behind the classifiedclassified Pat, that staff pay.
And that is it's reallyencouraging. People might play
games with the teacher pay, andwe'll be pushing really hard to
get that through because thoseare probably going to be two
separate appropriations bills.
It's possible. It's still kindof we're still waiting to see
how this kind of filters out andwhether or not there's
(29:48):
legislation attached ordifferent budgetary items or
something like that. But theword on the street so to speak
in the legislature is thatpeople are lining up to support
the classified staff increasesas the school district's
desperately needs. That's reallygood news. Fingers crossed. I'll
keep everyone posted on on howthose conversations develop,
because we're still pretty earlyon it. But
Mike Journee (30:11):
yeah. Alright guys, thanks again for joining
me today for the hotline podcastand, and this good conversation.
Again, I want to want tounderline that there's probably
some really good news comingdown the road. These are..this
is the time of year when westart dealing with all the
ridiculousness that comes out ofcertain corners of the
legislature. And that makes alot of headlines usually. And
(30:34):
so, just want to sum that upgood before we before we sign
off, but, but thanks again forthe conversation.
Paul Stark (30:40):
Thanks, Mike.
Chris Pa (30:41):
Awesome. Thanks, Mike.
Mike Journee (30:44):
Thank you for listening to Idaho education
Association's hotline podcast,and this discussion about week
five of the 2023 Idaholegislature. Thanks as well to
my colleagues, Chris Perry andPaul Stark for joining me.
Please watch for future updatesabout new episodes on IEA social
media channels, or sign up foremail updates on our website at
Idaho eaa.org. I'm Mike journee.
And as always, I hope you joinme in thanking Idaho's public
(31:07):
school educators for everythingthey do for our State students,
families and public schools.
Welcome to Idaho education Association's hotline
podcast, a weekly discussionabout what's happening at the
Idaho legislature around publiceducation and the policy
priorities of ies members, IEAmembers or public school
educators from all over thestate. They're Idaho's most
important education experts, andthey use their influence to
fight for free quality andequitable public education for
(00:32):
every student in the state. I'mMike journee, communications
director at the IEA and I'll beyour host for this episode of
hotline. Today we discuss weekfive of the Idaho legislature is
2023 session, discussion centerson the advancement of the
sessions first voucher bill thisweek. The outlook for Governor
Brad littles proposal oneducator pay attempts to
(00:52):
politicize traditionallynonpartisan institutions in the
state, and a renewed effort tocensored libraries. Joining me
for today's conversation, ouries political director, Chris
Perry, and IEA executivedirector Paul Stark.
Hi Chris Paul, thanks forjoining me. We'll talk about
week five of the Idaholegislature today, guys. And it
(01:14):
was a big week for educationpolicy this week at the
Statehouse with a voucher billthat we've been talking about so
much came forward in the IdahoSenate. It was in the Senate
Education Committee, Senate Bill1038, sponsored by Tammy
Nichols, from Middleton andBrian Lennie from Nampa. And it
(01:34):
went through as we expected, itwent through the Senate
Education Committee prettyeasily they there was two days
of testimony, it was probablyabout a a two to one ratio of
those who were against it, whotestified. And the same ratio
voted for it. On the when thecommittee voted six to three out
(01:55):
of vote. And so now the bill isheaded to the Senate for Chris
and, you know, luckily, this iswhere every Idaho senator is
going to have to stand to becounted about whether or not
they support public education.
Right?
Chris Parri (02:06):
Yeah, I mean, we've long talked about how the
current makeup of the SenateEducation Committee isn't very
representative of even theSenate itself and let alone
Idahoans in general. So we knewpretty far ahead ahead of time
that we would probably get a sixthree vote on this voucher bill.
And that's how it ended up. Butwhat we don't think I
(02:29):
necessarily planned for was justhow excellent the testimony was
for our team. It was incredible.
And like you mentioned two toone, for sure. We outnumbered
them, as you would expect. Andman just extremely like
professional, great testimonyand clear and concise. And I'm a
big fan of when people leave alittle bit of time on the board.
(02:49):
They were timing it at twominutes.
Mike Journee (02:53):
And one minute toward the end of the day. I
mean, they're really cuttingdown really trying to
Chris Parri (02:57):
get get it out there and get the vote done. But
yeah, I loved it. It was veryconcise and direct. And we heard
from folks all over the stateand with all sorts of different
positions on other things. ButUnited on this front for sure.
Mike Journee (03:11):
Yeah, one of my favorite things that came out of
the pandemic is this remotetestimony that they're allowed
to do that they can do nowthrough video. It's really
great. But I thought it wascool. Yeah. Paul, you testified
on behalf of the the associationand our members in that and how
did you feel like thedeliberation went and whatever,
(03:33):
you know, we're doing a littlebit of outreach to members to
get folks to stand up and becounted and be heard with
senators as it goes to thefloor. Any any insights about
where we think this might go onthe on the House floor on the
Senate floor?
Paul Stark (03:48):
You know, I don't know, it could go any number of
directions. But what I do knowis I've read through the bill
very carefully. And there arelike so many problems with this
bill, like immense number ofissues. I testified, again,
limited to two minutes, Itestified on the biggest, which
I think is the accountabilityissue, the lack of
accountability. And that's thething is this money will flow to
(04:12):
all kinds of private schoolsthat have no reporting
requirements. Someone told methe other day, you know, as a
teacher, I could, I could holdschool in my garage. If I get 10
students, I'm making more moneythan I am now. And I could only
you know, I would only teach twohours a day and I could, you
know, teach whatever I want.
Without any testing without andtechnically, you would qualify
(04:33):
under this bill for you know,1000s and 1000s and 1000s of
dollars.
Mike Journee (04:40):
I hadn't thought about that. That's absolutely
true, isn't it?
Paul Stark (04:42):
Yeah, like a teacher could just quit and say I'm
teaching a pod. Our listenersshouldn't should you on mute
during this point, but no, I'mjust kidding. But a
Chris Parri (04:51):
micro school,
Paul Stark (04:52):
you could teach a micro so you can make something
up you can make whatever Yep.
And, and there's no curriculumeither. There's no school board
that's accountable for it.
Anybody you know, and you couldteach anything from a far right
fascist doctrine to, you know,totally the far left doctrine,
you know, you could, you couldliterally indoctrinate students
on the taxpayer dime, it's, it'scrazy. And that's just one
(05:14):
aspect of it. Oh my gosh,there's so many other things
that this bill has problems, andI'd be happy to talk to anybody
about it
Mike Journee (05:23):
And I'm going to play a clip here from from
Senator Dave Lent, the chairmanof the committee here in this
minute is pretty lengthy, butbut one of the things that I
noticed from the testimony fromthose who were coming before
were to testify, there were alot of people who, who do
homeschool and and and it seemedto me like that choice, they
(05:44):
were looking for some financingof that choice in their home.
And there was also a lot ofdiscussion about from small
business owners who seemed to beinterested in the in the in the
free market aspect of this andhow there's an opportunity there
to make money off of this. Imean, there were some folks who
testified specifically aboutthat and said some of those
(06:05):
things out loud, it was kind ofshocking too.
Paul Stark (06:07):
One of the one of the hidden things in that bill
is these administrative fees.
And they said it's going to be4% in the first two years, and
then we'll go down to 2%, orsomething like that. Or no, it's
three, and then it goes down totwo. But in the first two years,
the state taxpayers would bepaying $600,000 a year just to
administer this program. That'ssome private company, who's
going to make over a half amillion dollars a year. And then
(06:29):
just to administer this program,if you don't think there's
profiteering under this, thisbill, you're fooling yourself.
Mike Journee (06:40):
I want to play a clip from from Chairman of the
Senate Education Committee whovoted who was one of the three
who voted against thislegislation. It's a very lengthy
clip, but it really kind of sumsup his thoughts about this
legislation. And so let's listento what Senator daveland has to
say.
Sen. Dave Lent (06:56):
And as I look around the country, I look at
Wisconsin, Arizona, Ohio andIndiana. And as you look down
the road, four or five years,you see hundreds of millions of
dollars going into the process.
And the good senator fromDistrict One, Senator Herndon, I
loved his pie description. Andif I could steal it for a
second, basically, we ended uppaying for device. And I think
(07:19):
that's where the money comes in.
And that's what we need to beaware of accountability is
interesting, we're usingaccountability to judge our
current system. But yet, whatwe're proposing to go to has no
accountability, we will not knowhow those students do, we will
send the money out as arepresentative of my
(07:39):
constituents, I cannot in goodfaith, send money out with no
accountability, that would causeme not to be a good steward of
the precious tax dollars, thatthose people in my district are
paying. I see if we have asuccess through here, it's going
to include some level ofaccountability. We look across
(08:02):
the country of Ohio and otherstates. They have built that in
there probably is an Idahosolution here. But I think it
with respect to the sponsors.
This is probably too much toofast.
Mike Journee (08:14):
So he that really summed up his perspective. And I
think that's probably theperspective a lot of folks
Chris, going into the onto thefloor vote here. We know, we've
heard a lot of folks expressedsimilar concerns about this. You
know, unfortunately, it soundslike the senator isn't
completely opposed to the ideaof vouchers if there's some
accountability attached to it,but I think he's pretty
(08:37):
thoughtful about about thingsand wants to make sure we do
right. We're going and this isgonna be a close vote on this on
the Senate floor, isn't it?
Chris Parri (08:43):
Yeah, I think it's gonna be a dead heat, very
narrow, whichever direction itgoes. The thing I liked about
what Senator Allen had to saywas that it if there was
anything good that came out ofthis discussion about quote,
unquote, school choice, and ESAisn't vouchers and stuff this
year, is the attention that it'spulled to the public framework
that we already have for schoolchoice, or options, or whatever
(09:05):
you want to call it, and Idahothat does have accountability
already. And I think that a lotof folks, you know, me as well,
coming into this conversation, Iwasn't aware of all of the
school public school optionsthat the state provides here.
And it's been great to learnmore about those. And I hope
also that people around thestate are doing the same thing
(09:26):
and taking stock of the choiceswe already have. Because for all
of the good options that thestate currently has and can
support. It's only as good aspeople know about it. Right. So
I think what daveland is kind ofsaying there as well, Senator
Linda's saying there is thataccountability has to come with
this. And when public money goessomewhere, taxpayers are
(09:48):
entitled to that accountability.
So you
Paul Stark (09:50):
know, I can if I can jump in to you know, it's
interesting going on thatnotion, because everybody's
talking about this is, you know,choice and parental choice and
we need more choice. Butinterestingly in this bill
doesn't actually add any newchoice. All the choices that are
contemplated in this bill existstoday. Right now, what we're
talking about is who pays forthe choice and which I've said
(10:12):
before. And that's all thatwe're talking about. Someone
aptly said, this is a fundingbill. This isn't a school
choice, Bill.
Mike Journee (10:21):
So let's go back to the screen, I can talk a
little bit about what's comingthe vote, we're working really
hard to turn out members to getthem to email lawmakers, and to
let them know what they feelabout this right. We feel like
we've got about a half a dozenswing votes, probably the play
with within with the Senate. Sowe're really focusing on on
those folks, and making surethat they hear from our members
(10:45):
about this record.
Chris Parri (10:46):
Yeah, I think there, there's, like you said, a
handful of votes that folks thatsupport school choice in and,
you know, in the broad sense,but also are troubled by the
accountability stuff, andtroubled by a lot of the same
things that Senator lintmentioned in his debate there.
So yeah, I think we have areally good shot of if our
(11:08):
educators are able to get intouch with our senators and have
a good conversation about them.
This is not even if you supportschool choice, this is not the
version that you want to seecome to fruition in Idaho, it is
copy and paste from all theseother states doesn't fix any of
the policy failures we've seenin those states. Like Senator
Lynch said, there's a way ofdoing this in Idaho, and we've
maybe we are already doing isprobably my perspective on it.
Yeah, yeah.
Mike Journee (11:31):
So I guess I want to do a little disclaimer,
disclaimer here, too. For ourlisteners, we know we're going
to be talking a lot a lot todayabout some of the a lot of the
bad for education, things thatare in front of the legislature
right now. And I guess we shouldput a little context around that
this is the time of year, whenall of the early bills that come
(11:52):
from a variety of corners of thelegislature, that that always
might, these are the ones wherethey start getting to full
hearings, they start makingheadlines, people start paying
attention to them, we want tomake sure that we that we put
that into context, that theseare things that are going to be
kind of dominated in session,this middle part. And we're
(12:13):
gonna move in toward the thebudget discussions later on to
where it's really the rubbermeets the road as far as
education policy goes. Right. SoI just wanted to put that out
there before we keep going. Thenext one I wanted to talk about
the next legislation I want totalk about was the Idaho launch
scholarship. This was acornerstone of the governor's
lineup for the for the study ofthe state this year, his
(12:36):
legislative priorities in thisbill, it's it provides a $500 to
attend any in State UniversityCommunity College Technical
College or workforce trainingprogram, after folks graduate
from high school, after studentsgraduate from high school, so
it's, but I wanted to talk aboutit a little bit in the context
(12:56):
of the debate that's gone onaround it, and how that might
play out for another part of thegovernor's legislative
priorities. And that's the thethe teacher pay proposals that
he made coming forward. And so,you know, there's been a lot of
drama, it seems like this couldkind of be a harbinger for for
the kinds of debates we're goingto see. And the kind of
(13:17):
conversation you're gonna seearound that teacher paid
discussion. Right, Chris?
Chris Parri (13:21):
I think there's a potential for it, for sure. I
think still teacher pay remains,I think one of the most
politically popular aspects ofthe entire of the governor's
agenda. So it might be a littledifferent there. But I think
something to keep in mind,particularly for members with
the launch scholarships is thatteachers are in in demand career
that could be helped with thescholarship funds as well. So
(13:44):
the, you know, the scholarshipswill go to folks, and the state
will decide which careers are indemand, nursing, teaching, a lot
of CTE stuff, so welding andthings like that, as well. So I
think that's important as ifeducators are willing to get
involved on this one. We can getbehind this as well, the as it
(14:06):
pertains to the teacher paydebate, I do think that, that
it's been a little bit of asurprise to see this launch
program have such a difficulttime making it through the
house, it only got one vote, itwas uh, it got through the house
with one, one extra vote,basically had that vote turned,
it would have failed in thehouse. So in the Senate, they're
(14:26):
anticipating extremely closeagain. And a lot of the same
swing folks that we need to getin touch with on vouchers are
the same folks that are a littlebit wavering, perhaps on the on
the launch program. So it'll beinteresting to see where this
goes. I do hope that there'smore political oomph behind the
teacher pay. So we can get thatthrough a little easier, easier
(14:48):
hope but yeah, it isn't. Itisn't a good sign necessarily
for the Governor's prioritiesthat his first big legislative
push is hitting so manyroadblocks, I
Paul Stark (14:57):
think, and I think this is just a emphasize
doesn't, Chris that howimportant elections are, you
know, and if anybody doubtsthis, you know, this, the
current situation we findourselves in, just demonstrates
elections matter, every votematters. And, you know, we saw,
you know, Representative Sims,for example, lose his seat with
just a handful of votes. And so,you know, getting involved on
(15:21):
that election side of it will,in turn, produce better results
in the legislative side of itbig time.
Mike Journee (15:28):
So I wanted to spend a few minutes talking
about this kind of this thingthat we're starting to see
around a number of bills, anddiscussions that are happening
in the legislature right nowaround introducing more
partisanship in some of thethings that have traditionally
(15:48):
been nonpartisan institutions.
In our state, we have a new billthat would overhaul school
trustee elections, which havetraditionally been nonpartisan.
And it it, it does a number ofthings. But one of the main
things it does is it requiresfolks to declare party
(16:09):
affiliation, or an unaffiliatedstatus in doing this, there's a
similar bill around city councilseats, that's happening. And
then we also have thisconversation around the joint
legislative oversight committee,which is a bipartisan commission
that oversaw the office ofperformance evaluations in this
state, which was basicallythey're the the local equivalent
(16:31):
of the OMB and at thecongressional level, for in
favor of a committee dominatedby the majority, which is in
Idaho, the Republican Party, ofcourse, for now, for and so and
so the all of these things showto me, a real concerted effort
(16:53):
to bring forward legislation andto push things into a corner.
That's much more dominated by asingle political party as
opposed to things that are basedupon good government and good
decisions and unbiased data andthose kinds of things. Guys, are
you seeing the same kind ofthing.
Chris Parri (17:14):
So the in the reason I said for now is because
these kinds of pushes,particularly when you get to,
like legislative whistleblowergroups, like like the
Legislative Council, that youmentioned, the, it always seems
attractive when it's your partyand the majority to start
rolling black or like to startinjecting more partisanship
(17:34):
because you obviously aredominating the legislature. But
it wasn't that long ago thatDemocrats were in control of the
legislature in Idaho, or had thegovernor's seat or something
else. So the tides can turnpretty quick. And I think if the
tides were to turn, you'd havethe Republicans asking for a
bipartisan whistleblowercommittee as they should, like
we should have bipartisanship.
Where needed and nonpartisanship should be the default, in
(17:57):
my opinion,
Paul Stark (17:59):
you know, when, when has ever a one party system
really benefited the people thatthey, you know, like never so
red flag, you know, and that'swhere good policy is made when
you have diverse ideas anddiverse viewpoints, and allow
things to follow the process, ofcourse, but a one party rules
all never ever has ever inhistory resulted in a really
(18:23):
good result.
Chris Parri (18:24):
And I do think so I think if if you were to talk to
folks who support the idea ofmaking the municipal elections,
political and the or partisan,and the school board elections
partisan as well, I think theymight say that it's more
transparent, because you know,you have a person now declaring
their affiliation with a party.
The problem I have with thosebills is that the, it is
(18:46):
empowering the parties, becausethis is a two way street. Yes,
the voter will see the AR the Dnext to a person's name and can
make assumptions based on thatif they'd like. But the party is
also then empowered to furtherget involved in these local and
municipal elections. And partyofficials are not elected by the
(19:09):
general public, they are notaccountable to the general
public. And I think, you know,most people see independent
thinking as a real value. So theidea of us boiling down really
complex conversations at thelocal and school board level,
into these kind of myopicpartisan ones, like really bums
me out, honestly, I've worked ona lot of these elections, and
(19:31):
it's never good when you startgetting into well, you're
Democrat and you're Republican,or you're a socialist and you're
a fascist or whatever. It's notit never is beneficial.
Mike Journee (19:40):
And it brings all the baggage of the national
political debates into into theconversations about our schools
into the conversations about ourlocal municipal governments in
ways that just wouldn't be thereotherwise. Right. And I think it
also I think it does one morething, I think it I think it
also marginalizes some One whowants to run for one of these
(20:02):
offices to do good work fortheir community or do good work
for their local schools? Andputs them at a disadvantage
against someone who might havethe backing of the party
machine. Right, exactly.
Chris Parri (20:14):
Yeah. I mean, there's no consolidated
independent party of Idaho, youknow, for the folks that don't
fit nicely into the partyplatforms of the Democrats or
the Republicans to get behindthem and support them in the
school board elections or stufflike that, like, you are going
up against these behemoths. Ifyou are just an independent
voter or independent candidate,
Mike Journee (20:34):
and we're seeing that kind of involvement
already. You know, even evenwithout this, the lack of a
partisan tag on on these, theselegislators were starting to
recede all over the place.
Paul Stark (20:46):
So yeah, there's the attitude of conform or be cast
out. And that's your onlyalternatives. Yeah.
Mike Journee (20:54):
So I in a similar vein, I want to talk a little
bit about libraries, we'restarting to see some some things
around libraries again, thisyear, of course, last year, we
had the one bill that wouldcriminalize librarians. If if
someone if a kid got ahold ofinappropriate materials in their
(21:15):
in their library and that kindof thing, we still, we've got
another bill coming outtargeting library private
pornography, which made itsdebut on Monday. I don't know of
any librarian around who wouldwho would willingly allow some
kind of inappropriate materialsto be out there for kids to get
hold of.
Chris Parri (21:33):
There's a false assumption here that this bill
seems to point out that, youknow, librarians have nefarious
intents, when they distribute ormanage the information in their
buildings like that it is nottrue. I think our librarians in
the state of Ohio do a greatjob. And I've talked to the
Library Association and aboutthis issue, and they're getting
(21:54):
activated on it, as well. One ofthe things that freaks me out a
lot about this is the threat oflibrary districts losing their
insurance, as well, theirliability insurance and stuff,
because at that point, you'rerecruiting insurance companies
into this, this whole issue. Andgood point it. It really freaks
me out to have folks that arecompletely unaccountable to
(22:16):
Idaho, to Idaho ones kind ofpushing this as well, or to or
getting involved potentially,based in this in this kind of
wild debate.
Mike Journee (22:25):
And this isn't the only thing that's happening
right now, Paul, we are seeingthis debate going on in other
ways. Kuna School District put25 books under review after
after some some legislators saidthat they should, and that's
comes on the heels of NampaSchool District doing the same
thing last year. And then we canthis week, I don't know if you
guys saw this headline or notCanyon county commissioners
received a petition to dissolvethe Meridian Library District
(22:47):
claiming the district librariescontains sexually explicit
materials available to children.
So there's an across the boardattack here that's happening.
And it seems it sounds veryfamiliar given a lot of the
conversations that we're havingin the legislature about the
conversations that we seehappening in school districts
and school board meetings andelsewhere, around the
Statehouse,
Paul Stark (23:09):
You know, no one is in favor of something
pornographic being in libraries.
No one wants children to beexposed to things above their
age. And I don't think anybodywould disagree with that
statement. But what we see iscensorship. And that's really
the slippery slope, you openthat censorship door, and where
does it lead to next? You know,let's not have any books that
discuss we have a two partysystem in the United States. You
(23:30):
know, I mean, at what point dowe stop what we subjectively
find objectionable?
Mike Journee (23:39):
And who defines what's objectionable?
Chris Parri (23:41):
That's right.
Paul Stark (23:42):
There's a legal precedent under the 14th
Amendment called the void forvagueness doctrine that would
kick in here as well, in some ofthese laws, but, you know, every
trustee kind of or librarycounsel or whatever, it may be
that governing body, you know, Iencourage them to review books.
Yes, you should do that. I mean,that should be part of what you
do. But what I'm afraid of isthis, the the mob mentality that
(24:04):
exists that says, now you haveto start censoring thing that we
the mob find objectionable, andif it if it is, you know,
objectionable and it's not ageappropriate, yes, take whatever
measures you need to, but butthere's processes for that there
are processes, I'm just moreafraid of what doors are we
opening, you know, and itwasn't, whatever, whatever it
(24:27):
was, like, seven years ago orsomething, you know, we saw in
Germany book burning parties andthings like this. And this,
this, this mob mentality canswing in very radical ways that
are very counter to the verythings America was set up to
protect, you know, from ourfounding fathers, the freedom of
(24:48):
the press, and the lack ofcensorship was vital to
America's foundations. And it'sembodied of course in the First
Amendment.
Chris Parri (24:56):
It's it's really funny to me too, because like
the books that have caused stuffor quote unquote caused such an
uproar are things like The KiteRunner like in Toni Morrison's
books like, these are not likefantastic graphic, obscene
books. These are prettywonderful books actually, that,
you know, some group, some tinygroup of extremely loud people
(25:18):
with a lot of time on theirhands are compelled to take big
action on and can threaten abunch of political action. And
like I said, get the, you know,liability, kind of conversation
going and all this other stuff.
This bill gives those folks tonsmore power to bring to fruition
their version of censorship. Andit's pretty gross, I move it
(25:39):
makes me mad.
Mike Journee (25:43):
And it's likely that our members who are
librarians are going to bear thebrunt of this. I mean, that's
one of the reasons I want totalk about this. This really
impacts school librarians,school libraries, and the
ability of, of them to be ableto do their job without the fear
of of being arrested, right?
Paul Stark (26:01):
Isn't it strange how the current political mob
mentality has vilified some ofthe most revered individuals and
communities like librarians,like teachers, you know, that
historically have have held areally high place. And then this
propaganda machine has nowdiscredited these good people,
they're still the same goodpeople that they were in the
(26:22):
70s. And the 40s. They're thesame good people, same good
natures. And yet, these mostimportant parts are now
vilified, and somehow tried toput into such a bad light.
Librarians are good people. Andif anybody doubts that, go talk
to your librarian and find out
Chris Parri (26:41):
or Paul, I could set up my micro library and get
perhaps voucher tax money,
Paul Stark (26:47):
the micro library, the School of micro librarians,
yes.
Mike Journee (26:52):
So in in the interest of trying to end on
somewhat of a high note, right.
We've been talking about a lotof a lot of disheartening things
that are happening right now.
But I'm so I wanted to we did wedid get worried this week, that
legislation last year, arounddyslexia. There was a really
(27:13):
solid appropriation that wenttoward that this week, $1.5
million went into that. And thisis for, for continuing
education, for professionaldevelopment for educators who
want to know more about how toteach dyslexic kids is about
providing money for materialsand programs for that for
dyslexic kids in school. Sothat's something our members
(27:36):
really cared about last year,they were really supportive of
this legislation, I thinkthey're going to be really happy
to hear about this, this billgoing forward. And, it being
funded.
Chris Parri (27:45):
Totally, the no good deed goes unpunished. So
there was a problem last yearwith the rollout of some of this
dyslexia work, after thelegislature passed, passed it.
And this is an attempt to helpremedy that and get school
districts and educators andeverybody running on the same
wavelength so that we canactually start delivering these,
(28:05):
these great services, I think,to kids who need it.
Paul Stark (28:08):
It's a long time coming. Yeah, definitely for
dyslexia, especially any parentof anyone with dyslexia. And
this is a long, long timecoming, and we're glad to see it
here. And I should also say thatthe IEA is going to be providing
professional development ondyslexia to meet those
requirements under the statutefor educators. And as always the
IPAs, professional developmentwill be top class.
Mike Journee (28:33):
One more positive note, I wanted to kind of touch
on something you mentioned in astaff briefing earlier this
morning, Chris, about we alreadytalked about the educator salary
stuff is a very popular thing.
But in particular, you mentionedtoday in our staff meeting that,
that there is the pay foreducational support
professionals, those folks whoare bus drivers, who are our
(28:55):
front desk, staff, members,counselors and other folks,
education support staff, the payproposal for the governor there
that still seems like it's got awhole lot of support behind it.
And I know our members are gonnabe really pleased about that,
because they've heard, we'veheard a lot from them about how
important it is that they havepartners in the building,
(29:18):
helping with all these otherthings that go on outside of
their classroom in addition to,to inside.
Chris Parri (29:25):
So, my sense is that there's a lot a lot of
momentum behind the classifiedclassified Pat, that staff pay.
And that is it's reallyencouraging. People might play
games with the teacher pay, andwe'll be pushing really hard to
get that through because thoseare probably going to be two
separate appropriations bills.
It's possible. It's still kindof we're still waiting to see
how this kind of filters out andwhether or not there's
(29:48):
legislation attached ordifferent budgetary items or
something like that. But theword on the street so to speak
in the legislature is thatpeople are lining up to support
the classified staff increasesas the school district's
desperately needs. That's reallygood news. Fingers crossed. I'll
keep everyone posted on on howthose conversations develop,
because we're still pretty earlyon it. But
Mike Journee (30:11):
yeah. Alright guys, thanks again for joining
me today for the hotline podcastand, and this good conversation.
Again, I want to want tounderline that there's probably
some really good news comingdown the road. These are..this
is the time of year when westart dealing with all the
ridiculousness that comes out ofcertain corners of the
legislature. And that makes alot of headlines usually. And
(30:34):
so, just want to sum that upgood before we before we sign
off, but, but thanks again forthe conversation.
Paul Stark (30:40):
Thanks, Mike.
Chris Pa (30:41):
Awesome. Thanks, Mike.
Mike Journee (30:44):
Thank you for listening to Idaho education
Association's hotline podcast,and this discussion about week
five of the 2023 Idaholegislature. Thanks as well to
my colleagues, Chris Perry andPaul Stark for joining me.
Please watch for future updatesabout new episodes on IEA social
media channels, or sign up foremail updates on our website at
Idaho eaa.org. I'm Mike journee.
And as always, I hope you joinme in thanking Idaho's public
(31:07):
school educators for everythingthey do for our State students,
families and public schools.
Popular Podcasts
Bookmarked by Reese's Book Club
Welcome to Bookmarked by Reese’s Book Club — the podcast where great stories, bold women, and irresistible conversations collide! Hosted by award-winning journalist Danielle Robay, each week new episodes balance thoughtful literary insight with the fervor of buzzy book trends, pop culture and more. Bookmarked brings together celebrities, tastemakers, influencers and authors from Reese's Book Club and beyond to share stories that transcend the page. Pull up a chair. You’re not just listening — you’re part of the conversation.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com