Members unanimously approved the legislation, another sign that improving reading outcomes is a goal shared by both Republicans and Democrats. 

“This is how I learned how to read in the 1960s,” said Democratic Rep. Lucy McBath of Georgia. “When implemented correctly, the science of reading has been proven to help children learn to read and to write more effectively.”

The bill defines the science of reading as instruction that teaches phonics and phonemic awareness, and also builds vocabulary, fluency, comprehension and writing skills. The legislation would prohibit grantees from allowing , the practice of prompting students to identify words based on pictures or other clues in a sentence. The bill now moves to the full House.

“We should not be using federal literacy funds to promote discredited approaches to literacy,” said Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, a former Republican now running for reelection as an independent. 

The committee’s passage of the bill follows a before House appropriators in which both Democrats and Republicans the growth in reading outcomes in southern states like Mississippi and Alabama and asked experts how to spread that progress more broadly. The House proposal, however, is not the only effort underway to revamp the long-running Comprehensive Literacy Development Grant program. Some advocates say updated legislation should also require schools receiving grant funds to screen children for reading difficulties, inform parents whether their children are reading below grade level and assign reading coaches to low-performing schools.

“If we’re going to update it, let’s do it right,” said Ariel Taylor Smith, senior director of the National Parents Union’s Center for Policy and Action. She expects that a Senate plan would also ensure that teacher preparation programs follow the science of reading. “Let’s actually check in on whether teacher preparation programs are doing right by kids and using the most recent research.”

The nonprofit will dig further into those issues next week at on Capitol Hill featuring leaders from Tennessee and the District of Columbia, both of which have implemented reading reforms, like pointing districts to and providing to teachers on how students learn to read. 

An ‘implementation war’

Experts welcome Congress’ interest in the issue. But broad agreement that students need phonics-based instruction doesn’t mean the debate over the best way to teach reading is settled.

There’s still a reading war, but not between the phonics and whole language camps, said Karen Vaites, a literacy advocate who highlights lessons on reading reform from states that have seen growth on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. 

Now, she said, there’s an “implementation war.”

“Everybody agrees on phonics, but how much phonics? How much instructional time should it get?” she asked. “Do you do teacher training first or do you do curriculum paired with teacher training?”

Another proposal under consideration would require the U.S. Department of Education to reserve 10% of the grant awards for states whose fourth grade reading scores on NAEP rank in the lowest 25% for two consecutive administrations of the test. Vaites questioned whether such states would make the best use of the funds. 

“I worry a lot about throwing dollars toward the people that by demonstration have the least leadership capacity,” she said.  

, part of a 2010 federal budget agreement, was the first iteration of the state literacy grant program. , tracking awards to 11 states in 2017, found that not all states directed funds toward the highest poverty schools or used the money to buy reading programs based on research. Overall, the study found no significant differences in reading performance between schools that received the funds and those that didn’t, but there were small positive effects in Louisiana and Ohio. 

Striving Readers preceded the Comprehensive Literacy State Development grants, . But the program hasn’t been revised in a decade. Smith, with the National Parents Union, said the program should reflect the latest knowledge about what’s working in classrooms. 

“We’ve learned a ton about the science of reading,” she said.

Kari Kurto, national director of policy and partnerships for the Reading League, a national nonprofit promoting the science of reading, said the grant program is important because it’s one of the only ways state education agencies “can truly influence” what happens in classrooms. She said she appreciates that the bill includes her suggestion that instruction should also support students’ oral language skills. 

“This legislation will go a long way toward solidifying our nation’s commitment to evidence-based literacy instruction,” she said. “As a Democrat, I am so thrilled to see this movement finally receiving the bipartisan support we always dreamed of.”

Concerns over local control

While every state has taken some action to improve reading instruction, recent examples in two states show that concerns remain over one-size-fits-all approaches.

California passed a reading reform bill last year, but not before lawmakers agreed to that kept the state from mandating teacher training and state-approved curricula. The California Teachers Association said an earlier version of the bill would have interfered with local control and worried the plan overemphasized phonics at the expense of other literacy skills.

In Massachusetts, and object to portions of “that attempt to legislate the specific curriculum that schools would be expected to purchase and implement.” The is also opposed.

Any federal legislation won’t delve into specific reading programs. prohibits it, but Vaites said there are still ways to strengthen the grant program.

“I think we’re all trying to figure out the mechanism that is going to hold state leaders accountable in a way that isn’t just sprinkling dollars around,” she said. 

After more than 24 hours of negotiations and a from Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries opposing the “Big, Beautiful Bill,” the House on Thursday passed President Donald Trump’s tax-and-spending package by a 218 to 214 vote. The president plans to sign the legislation on July 4.

The House made no changes to the bill after the Senate passed it Tuesday, despite opposition from Republicans who thought it strayed too far from the version they passed in late May. Rep Keith Self of Texas posted on X that their original tax credit scholarship proposal would have created a national voucher program, while the Senate version “leaves blue state students in failing schools with ‘optional’ school choice.” He still voted for the bill, but two Republicans voted against it — of Pennsylvania and .����

Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who sponsored the school choice provision, said “enshrining the first ever federal school choice provision into our nation’s tax code is a major win. We will continue to advocate for and pass improvements moving forward.”

The Senate on Tuesday passed the nation’s first federal tax credit scholarship program as part of a massive tax and spending President Donald Trump wants to sign by July 4.

But the provision is significantly watered down from the one school choice advocates have been working toward since the first Trump administration. As it currently stands, states may opt in, meaning many Democratic-majority states probably won’t participate.

Jim Blew, co-founder of the Defense of Freedom Institute, a conservative think tank, called the Senate passage “an important step toward making sure every family and teacher in our country enjoys education freedom.” But the restrictions, he said, will “make it very, very hard to put funds into the hands of families who just want to get their children in a better school.”

House staff began deliberations over the bill immediately, with a vote expected Wednesday. But it’s unclear how members will greet the revamped choice plan.

The plan grants donors to scholarship organizations a tax credit for the same amount they contribute. Those nonprofits then award funds to families for private school tuition and other educational expenses. But unlike the more expansive plan the House passed in late May, the Senate gives states a say over which groups can participate and strikes language that would have prohibited any control over private schools. That could be a major sticking point for House members, said Joshua Cowen, an education professor at Michigan State University and a vocal voucher opponent.

“Maybe they’ll just hold their nose and pass it,” he said. But that would come at the cost of “the most wide-ranging federal regulations we’d ever see on private and religious K-12 schools.” 

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, a longtime supporter of tax credits for school choice, didn’t mention the revisions when he addressed the chamber during the early morning hours Tuesday after members worked on Trump’s “one big beautiful bill” through the night. 

“This tax credit provision will unleash billions of dollars every single year for scholarships for kids to attend the K-through-12 school of their choice,” he said, calling school choice “the civil rights issue of the 21st century.” 

The new program is just a small part of a legislative package that continues Trump’s 2017 tax cuts and could add at least to the national debt by 2034. With a trifecta in Congress and the White House, Republicans passed the bill in a party-line vote. But Vice President  J.D. Vance still had to break a 50-50 tie in the Senate after opposition from Republican Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky, Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Susan Collins of Maine.

Child tax credits and Trump accounts

The legislation includes other child-related provisions, including the extension of an existing $2,000 . The House version boosts it to $2,500, while the Senate version increases the credit to $2,200. “Trump accounts,” a new feature, would provide for children that they could later use for education or a house.

Among the most controversial changes are cuts and work requirements for Medicaid and food assistance programs for low-income families. The $1 trillion proposed cut to Medicaid could especially who are more likely to depend on the program for health care. 

On the Senate floor Monday morning, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the “reforms” make the program more efficient by targeting “people who are supposed to benefit from Medicaid.” But Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, ranking member of the finance committee, warned: “Kids with disabilities will lose health care.” 

Those provisions have generated far more debate among GOP members than the school choice provision. But Republicans made significant changes to that portion after a Senate official Thursday that it didn’t meet the standards for reconciliation and would require 60 votes to pass. In addition to allowing government oversight, Republicans dropped the total amount a donor can contribute from 10% of their annual income to $1,700.

“To raise $1.7 million for scholarships, [organizations]need to identify 1,000 donors, which is a lot harder to do,” Blew said. “That wasn’t done to help students or families.” 

Multiple questions remain over which families stand to benefit the most from the program. Some existing scholarship groups target funds to low-income students, but the federal program lacks such a requirement. 

The bill sets eligibility at 300% of median income, meaning that in higher-income areas, families earning nearly half a million dollars could use the scholarships. Preference for the scholarships would also go to students who received them the previous year or to their siblings, contributing to concerns that families who already have their children in private schools would be more likely to receive a voucher. 

“You can be a very wealthy family in a very wealthy area and still be eligible for [these] funds,” said Jon Valant, director of the Brown Center on Education Policy at the left-leaning Brookings Institution. “Who knows exactly how this is going to play out.”

DeVos calls it a ‘win’

Supporters say the program will bring private school choice to students nationwide at a time of increasing demand. Tennessee’s newly expanded voucher program, for example, received in the first few hours it was open on May 15, creating technical glitches 

Opponents argue the program allows donors to avoid taxes and would fund tuition at schools that discriminate against students. 

The House version, Cowan said, “rams” vouchers into states like Michigan that have rejected them since . Michigan billionaire Betsy DeVos, who promoted a similar federal plan as education secretary during Trump’s first term, to get a voucher initiative on the ballot in 2023. and said no to private school choice initiatives last November, and voters repealed a program lawmakers passed in that state in 2024. 

In other states — , and Utah — judges have ruled that voucher programs violate the law. 

On Tuesday, DeVos sounded a triumphant note, calling the Senate passage “a major win for students and families” .

Cowan said the vote would not give the former secretary “her long-sought after goal of forcing vouchers into the states using the tax code” and gives “substantial authority to state governors and perhaps [education] agencies to say ‘no.’ ”

Education Secretary Linda McMahon that limits student loans for college, but had nothing to say about the school choice aspect of the bill.

Critics frequently cite the scarcity of private schools in rural areas as the reason they oppose vouchers. from the Urban Institute shows that over 60% of students in urban areas live within two miles of a private school, compared with just a quarter of students in rural areas. 

Participation in the new program depends on how many families apply and the size of scholarships. Historically, take up rates have been relatively low with new voucher programs, said Colyn Ritter, a senior research associate at EdChoice, an advocacy organization. 

If scholarships are large enough to cover the full ride to some private schools, which , more families might seek a scholarship, Ritter said. But that amount wouldn’t be enough to afford more expensive schools in the Northeast. 

If scholarship awards are as low as $2,500, that might offer a cut on tuition for families who can make up the difference, but it wouldn’t be enough to make private school an option for a family in poverty, he said. 

Families could use the scholarships for homeschooling costs, like tutoring, curriculum and educational therapies. But Ritter called homeschoolers a “hard-to-predict” group. The population has grown more diverse racially and politically. Some, he said, could be “early adopters” of the new funds, but many homeschoolers are still leery of government-run programs.

“We just want to make sure that there are no strings attached and that we won’t end up in some government database that can track us and tell us what to do in the future,” said Faith Howe, president of Texans for Homeschool Freedom.

The Children’s Scholarship Fund in New York is one of the nonprofits that would likely participate in the program. The group has affiliates in 23 states, including several blue states, that are closely watching negotiations over the final wording, said spokeswoman Elizabeth Toomey.

Her organization has a small homeschool pilot program and might take advantage of the new legislation to expand it. Forty families currently receive $1,000 to spend on approved expenses through the ClassWallet platform, the same way many state education savings accounts operate. But the group’s core mission, Toomey said, is awarding roughly 7,000 scholarships each year to students from low-income families across New York City.

Recipients receive, on average, about $2,500 toward tuition, but Toomey said the new federal program would allow the organization to increase the award and serve more families. She acknowledged that a scholarship might not help the “poorest of the poor,” but has helped push many families “into a position where they can afford private school.”

The committee also voted to move the nomination of Kimberly Richey to lead the Office for Civil Rights. A conservative civil rights lawyer, Richey served in the second Bush and first Trump administrations.

The votes for both nominees fell along strict party lines, 12 to 11. 

“These nominees are crucial to enacting President Trump’s pro-America agenda,” Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy, who chairs the committee, said in a statement.

With the Senate focused on passing President Donald Trump’s tax bill and roughly 200 nominations awaiting a vote, it could be several weeks before both are confirmed.

Schwinn would oversee K-12 policy. During a June confirmation hearing, she expressed support for a more hands-off approach from Washington while also strengthening reading instruction based on science.

A week after the hearing, she participated in at a Nashville charter school with Education Secretary Linda McMahon to promote one of the Trump administration’s top priorities — school choice. The visit came as the department has increased funding for charters while proposing over $4 billion in cuts to other programs. 

If confirmed, Richey would take over a civil rights office with a much leaner staff following mass firings in March and recommendations from McMahon for further reductions. She vowed to continue the department’s actions against schools that permit antisemitic demonstrations and allow trans students to use facilities or compete in sports consistent with their gender identity. 

Those views have drawn opposition to her nomination from civil rights groups that advocate for LGBTQ students. In advance of Thursday’s vote, the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, along with 45 other organizations, sent senators saying Richey “has not demonstrated a willingness and ability to enforce civil rights law and protect all students in our country from discrimination.”

Some hope she’ll prioritize disability complaints. As acting assistant secretary for civil rights during the pandemic, she into districts that failed to provide students with disabilities services written into their individual education programs.  

“She was responsive during the first Trump term and pushed through the COVID complaints,” said Callie Oettinger, a special education advocate in Fairfax County, Virginia.

‘She has Linda McMahon’s ear’

While Richey’s track record fits squarely within the Trump administration’s ultra-conservative agenda, many education insiders view Schwinn as a moderate who largely avoided culture war clashes while holding schools and students accountable for progress in reading. 

Unlike McMahon, Schwinn has always worked in education. The California native founded a charter school in Sacramento in 2011 and held top positions in Delaware and Texas before Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee appointed her commissioner in 2019. 

“Penny has the strongest literacy chops of any state supe I’ve known, and she has Linda McMahon’s ear and trust,” said Robert Pondiscio, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. 

But tends to follow her. Under her leadership in Tennessee, was higher than normal. Conservatives who calling on senators not to confirm Schwinn argue that she holds progressive views on educational equity and proposed an unpopular effort to conduct “well-being” checks on students during the pandemic. 

Others question her judgement, pointing to incidents in which and directed no-bid contracts to companies where Schwinn had personal connections, including her husband, Paul Schwinn.

But those complaints didn’t sway Republicans on the committee, and Pondiscio dismissed the backlash to Schwinn as “B.S.” In a February commentary, he that her “conservative critics want a culture warrior, not an administrator focused on competent governance and delivering results.”

���’s who hope her confirmation brings more attention to core education issues.
“If you see the secretary spending her time on curriculum and instruction,” he said, “that will be Penny’s thumbprint.”

Though Democrats probed where she stands on President Donald Trump’s plan to shutter the department, the former Tennessee education commissioner appeared to answer questions to their satisfaction. 

Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire homed in on the administration’s move to end grants to train and hire K-12 school mental health professionals — part of a that passed with bipartisan support. 

“Do you think that what the department did helps or hurts the communities that were counting on the funding that they were promised?” she asked. “If confirmed, do you commit to reigning in the chaos and operational failures that we are seeing at the department?” 

Schwinn said the department will open a new competition for those grants and promised to “have an efficient, effective and outcomes-oriented department.”

She voiced support for Trump’s ultimate goal to eliminate the department and repeatedly said states and local communities are in the best position to make decisions about education. As a charter school founder who served in the Delaware and Texas education agencies before leading Tennessee’s for four years, Schwinn has a reputation for working . She pushed for and using pandemic relief funds to implement a statewide tutoring program. A vote on her confirmation is expected in the coming days.

“What we need to do is ensure that we’ve created a system that is going to drive outcomes,” she told GOP Sen. Jim Banks of Indiana. “That is not going to happen from the federal government, whether there’s a Department of Education or not.”

At the same time, Schwinn implied that there is a role for the department in ensuring states intervene in their lowest-performing schools. 

“There must be a commitment to ensuring that our most struggling schools improve because our students deserve that,” she said.  

A from the Government Accountability Office found that less than half of states are meeting those requirements under the Every Student Succeeds Act. Schwinn’s tenure in Tennessee, for example, included overseeing a state turnaround effort known as the Achievement School District. Considering it a failure, the state legislature and will try another approach. 

“There’s real tension there,” Thomas Toch, director of FutureEd, a think tank at Georgetown University, told ����Ӱ��. “Will the Trump administration make a meaningful commitment to school improvement? Or will [Education Secretary Linda] McMahon and her team dodge that responsibility in the name of local control?”

Some observers have called Schwinn a smart pick for her focus on and her attempts to avoid some of the more divisive culture war debates of the post-pandemic era. But to others she has a troubled track record that includes contracts with vendors that gave the of interest. On Wednesday, ����Ӱ�� reported that after Trump nominated her, she registered a new business in Florida with a longtime colleague. While the venture was ultimately dissolved, Schwinn’s sister replaced her as a manager a few weeks before the nominee submitted her financial disclosure documents. 

Some parent groups have vehemently opposed her nomination, viewing her as more left-leaning than most Trump nominees. 

“It amazes me that President Trump would consider Penny Schwinn conservative,” said Tiffany Boyd, a homeschool advocate who opposed Schwinn’s plan to conduct well-being checks on students during the pandemic. Schwinn nixed the idea after strong backlash. Boyd also cited a that focused, in part, on attracting more teachers of color — efforts that the department now says push “illegal diversity, equity and inclusion.”

But none of that surfaced during the hearing. Even Republican Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri, who has the “left’s indoctrination of students,” opted to skip direct questions to Schwinn and said he would submit them in writing. 

The committee interviewed Schwinn as part of a panel, along with Kimberly Richey, Trump’s choice to lead the Office for Civil Rights, and two Department of Labor nominees. In that format, the senators focused on issues most important to them — for example, Chairman Bill Cassidy emphasized better serving students with dyslexia.

“As the Department of Education streamlines educational funding, how can we ensure that resources are there to identify and address an issue, specifically speaking of dyslexia?” he asked.

Schwinn touted Tennessee’s move to include “characteristics of dyslexia” as a disability category in its state education funding formula and ramp up screening of students’ early reading skills. The federal government, she said, could do a better job of guiding states on this issue and sharing lessons from states that have posted the greatest gains in literacy, like and Louisiana.

Some advocates are eager to have an educator who prioritized reading instruction at the department. 

“We love her track record of improving student outcomes in Tennessee and talking a bit more technically about literacy and the science of reading — which we think having leadership on the federal level around is going to be key,” said Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Foundation. 

But she stressed that it was , now at risk under the Trump administration, that informed those improvements.

“The research and the funding for all these ‘state miracles,’ ” she said, “come from regional and federal efforts — which I think a lot of folks are forgetting.” 

The business venture never got off the ground, but the arrangement could raise ethical issues for Schwinn as she heads before the Senate education committee for confirmation Thursday.

The colleague with whom she co-founded the business, Donald Fennoy, told ����Ӱ�� in an interview that the enterprise, named New Horizon BluePrint Group, was intended to combine their expertise as education leaders. Fennoy, the former superintendent of the Palm Beach County School District, was to consult with districts, while Schwinn, who has experience in Delaware, Texas and most recently as Tennessee’s education commissioner, would focus on state leadership. The pair have known each other for a decade, Fennoy said, meeting when they were part of the 2015-16 class of the Broad Academy, an education leadership program.

But the business does not appear among financial ties outlined in mandatory disclosure documents Schwinn submitted to the Office of Government Ethics on March 24. One reason could be that three weeks earlier, Schwinn’s sister, , replaced her as manager of the business, according to state documents. Sully, a former assistant principal at a Texas charter school, has far less educational experience than Schwinn or Fennoy.

On Friday, as ����Ӱ�� began asking Schwinn and the department questions about the venture, Fennoy dissolved the company, documents show, listing “business never started” as the reason.

“Right when we were securing the name, she got a phone call,” Fennoy told ����Ӱ��, referring to the nomination. The plan, he said, was to bring in at least one more leader with district experience and build a team to do work “nationally and internationally.”

On Jan. 18, Trump announced his pick of Schwinn to be the department’s deputy secretary, citing her “strong record of delivering results for children and families.” The LLC wasn’t registered until Feb. 18. 

But pressed for details about why Schwinn registered the business after her nomination, Fennoy appeared confused about the timeline. “This is on what day?” he asked in response to a reporter’s question. He did not respond to additional questions sent by email.

Contacted by ����Ӱ��, Schwinn referred the matter to the Education Department. Madison Bidermann, a department spokesman, declined to address why Schwinn moved forward with a business venture after her nomination and said the nominee “​​worked with the relevant ethics officials and resolved any conflicts.”

Sully did not respond to attempts to contact her over email.

The Florida LLC would have been just one of Schwinn’s many business interests, detailed in the disclosure filed with the federal government. She stated in May that if confirmed, she would divest or resign her positions at multiple companies. 

Historically, potential business conflicts could raise red flags for senators vetting a potential nominee. As deputy secretary, Schwinn would be tasked with overseeing federal policy and a vast network of K-12 programs — the same policy and programs that districts might seek help from a consulting firm to navigate. 

She would also enter the department at a crisis point, as Education Secretary Linda McMahon drastically cuts staff and cancels funding to reach Trump’s goal of eliminating the department. The proposed 2026 budget slashes over $4 billion from K-12 programs, raising concerns that officials won’t be able to carry out their congressionally mandated duties 

‘This administration is unique’

The period between nomination and confirmation is typically a time when candidates distance themselves from financial entanglements and potential conflicts of interest. 

“Once you’re nominated, the typical rule of thumb would be that you kind of slow down,” said Dylan Hedtler-Gaudette, interim vice president for policy and government affairs at the Project On Government Oversight, a nonprofit focused on government accountability. “You probably wouldn’t establish a new LLC, for example” 

But Schwinn is not a typical nominee, and this is not a typical administration.

Trump reportedly held an exclusive dinner on May 22 for investors in his , a form of cryptocurrency. As president, he of his business empire. In the midst of negotiations with over punishing U.S. tariffs, for example, the country approved the development of Trump hotels and golf courses. Previous reporting revealed that FBI Director Kash Patel from a Chinese “fast fashion” company, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s wife in companies that contract with that department.

It’s not unusual for administrations to run into trouble with officials who have close ties to the industries they oversee, Hedtler-Gaudette said. In 2022, his group filed a complaint about a in charge of digital services who had investments in the tech industry.

“But this administration is unique,” he said, “and just doesn’t seem to take any of that into consideration.”

Schwinn is also an unusual choice. She has fans among GOP moderates and Democrats. The former and earned respect for toward academic recovery in Tennessee and implementing far-reaching instruction. 

For a Trump nominee, she has also faced a high degree of conservative ire. Some of that is due to her past support for the kind of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives the Trump administration wants to eliminate from schools, like . But accusations of conflicts of interest and other ethical lapses have followed her for years.

They include a $4.4 million that the Texas Education Agency signed in 2017 with SPEDx, a Georgia software startup, despite what a state audit called Schwinn’s “professional relationship” with a subcontractor for the company. At the time, she was a deputy superintendent of the state agency.

Critics also point to an in 2021 that the Tennessee Department of Education signed with TNTP, a teacher training organization where her husband was employed at the time. The state’s procurement office approved the contract and Schwinn agreed to distance herself from the project, but some lawmakers still considered the deal a “”

“ ‘Drain the swamp’ is a phrase coined by President Trump, signifying the removal of corruption and special interests from government,” said J.C. Bowman, executive director of Professional Educators of Tennessee, a non-union association. “Many conservatives oppose Penny Schwinn’s nomination as deputy secretary of education, believing she embodies the interests they want to eliminate from the agency.” 

Others say she left the state better off. She pushed requirements that districts screen students for reading difficulties and use a phonics-based curriculum. After the state passed a in 2021, roughly 30,000 teachers received in the science of reading. The investments paid off. Tennessee was among the first to see test scores bounce back after the pandemic. Results from show students continue to make gains. 

To many education advocates, she represents the best chance to shift the national department’s focus away from culture war issues and toward bipartisan priorities like improving literacy and maintaining accountability. 

“I certainly wholeheartedly hope she gets approved, and think members on both sides would be gratified by her performance in office,” said Rick Hess, director of education policy studies at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. 

Yet dozens of have sent senators letters outlining why they think she’s wrong for the job. They list, for example, her affiliation with Chiefs for Change, made up of left-leaning district and state officials, and cite about her support for they say has elements of critical race theory, which holds that racism in America is systemic.  

Several that Ruby Bridges’ children’s book about being the first Black child to integrate a white elementary school referenced “a large crowd of angry white people.” a first grade book about seahorses was inappropriate because it explains how males carry the eggs.

While never implemented, her plan to conduct “well-being” home visits during the pandemic parents who consider it an example of government overreach.

If the committee advances Schwinn’s nomination, Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Republican who is running for governor, is expected to vote against her, multiple sources told ����Ӱ��. 

“She’s a Democrat, through and through,” said Elizabeth Story, legislative chair for the Tennessee chapter of Moms for Liberty, the conservative advocacy group that opposes progressive ideas in school about race, sex and gender. “We need President Trump to withdraw her.”

Just after her nomination, she met with anti-DEI activist Chris Rufo in an apparent effort to reassure the Trump administration she would be a good fit. According to on X, she promised to “shut down the terrible programs at the Department of Education, fight critical race theory, gender cultism, and DEI in America’s schools, and support new initiatives on school choice and classical education.”

If she loses the support of some conservatives, she may have to lean on Democrats to secure her nomination.

To Leslie Finger, an assistant political science professor at the University of North Texas, that would be an appropriate finale to a nomination that has veered far from the typical Trump playbook.

“In many ways, she seems opposed to the Trump administration’s education agenda,” she said. “One might think it was meant to show that they want to reach across the aisle on education issues, since she would be supported by bipartisan education reform types. But when has the Trump administration taken actions to signal bipartisanship?”

Since leaving her post as Tennessee commissioner, Schwinn has invested in and been involved with companies at the forefront of education, her disclosure forms show. Those include , an AI reading curriculum program; , a vendor that manages education savings accounts in multiple states; and , an online curriculum and assessment company. She’s also a board member for Really Great Reading, a literacy program used in , and a consultant for , a lobbying firm.

Blake Harris, former communications director for Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, a Republican, founded BHA, where Schwinn served as chief operating officer until February. Two other LLCs she owns would cease operations, she wrote in a letter to the Education Department. 

John Pelissero, a government ethics expert at Santa Clara University in California, said her financial ties deserve a closer look.

“What she puts down on her disclosure form for her confirmation is always kind of an important starting point for how transparent she will be,” he said. “Scrutiny should be given to whether she has the capacity to demonstrate that she’ll act in the public interest.” 

‘A pragmatist’

Schwinn isn’t the first Trump nominee to face opposition from Republicans. Sen. Mitch McConnell, the former majority leader from Kentucky, Hegseth and Health and Human Services Secretary But those objections focused more on the nominees’ qualifications, said Jonathan Collins, an assistant professor of education and political science at Teachers College, Columbia University.

Conservatives’ concerns about Schwinn, “seem like more of a test — or critique — of her loyalty to the new Republican culture war coalition,” he said. “She’s as moderate as it gets. She’s a pragmatist who in no way pushes far-left progressive policies.” 

Under McMahon, the department required states to sign a certification saying they wouldn’t implement DEI programs. The Office for Civil Rights has also prioritized investigations into state and district policies allowing transgender students to in school sports. 

Not all parental rights advocates are opposed to her nomination. 

Moms for America, founded in 2004, is a conservative, Christian organization that shares many of the same values as Moms for Liberty. Last year, the group presented Trump with its .

The organization, however, said Schwinn would make “an excellent choice” for deputy secretary, citing her “extensive experience as an educator, innovator and state leader.”

As the department’s number two, she would oversee K-12 initiatives, which McMahon has said will prioritize the science of reading, school choice and giving states more control over education. 

“She has a proven ability to improve student outcomes, champion school choice, and navigate crises like the pandemic,” the organization said in a statement to ����Ӱ��. “We stand by her candidacy for nomination as deputy education secretary and wish her the best in that role.” 

Disclosure: According to financial disclosure documents filed with the Office of Government Ethics, Penny Schwinn earned $250,000 as a consultant and adviser to the Walton Family Foundation. The foundation provides financial support to ����Ӱ��.

“It clearly cannot be shut down without it,” Linda McMahon said during a confirmation hearing before the Senate education committee. “We’d like to do this right. We’d like to make sure that we are presenting a plan that I think our senators could get on board with.”

During the nearly three-hour session, frequently disrupted by protestors opposed to her nomination, McMahon offered a far less combative tone than some of the president’s other lieutenants in recent days, voicing support for maintaining funding for most major education programs, including Title I and special education. 

The apparent discrepancy has fed a sense of whiplash. Just yesterday, Trump named North Dakota state Superintendent Kirsten Baesler as assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education after previously nominating former Tennessee education chief Penny Schwinn as deputy secretary. Both are well regarded, even among many Democrats. 

But also this week, Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency decimated the department’s research arm and continues to comb through contracts to identify what it considers waste and fraud. On Tuesday, Trump called the department “ 

During the hearing, Democratic Sen. Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire described the current state of play as “very elegant gaslighting.” 

“I am going to take you at your word that you will enforce the law,” Hassan told McMahon. “Three weeks ago, the president unilaterally cut all federal grants by issuing an indefinite freeze. That’s an unconstitutional, and yes illegal, action.”

Sen. Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington and former head of the committee, put McMahon on the spot over how she might answer to both Congress and the White House. 

“What will you do if the president or Elon Musk tells you not to spend the money Congress has appropriated?” Murray asked.

And Sen. Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from Alaska, warned McMahon that federal law would limit her from restricting curriculum topics Trump opposes. 

“You may be in a position where you are not able to prohibit teachers from discussing LGBTQ issues with students,” she said. 

McMahon came down on the side of local control.

“The federal government is not the school board here, if you will, for our nation’s schools,” she said.

Sen. Jim Banks of Indiana, a Republican, noted that some of the protesters who interrupted testimony in the hearing room said they were teachers.

“Can you imagine … these people teaching our kids in classrooms across America?” he asked. “I wanna get politics out of the classroom. I want political flags and political statements and ideologies out of the classroom.”

While she offered less barbed rhetoric than Trump or Musk, McMahon voiced support for what she called DOGE’s “audit.”

“It is worthwhile to take a look at the programs before money goes out the door,” she said. “It’s much easier to stop the money that’s going out the door than it is to call it back.” 

McMahon, former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, is one of tapped to lead Trump’s administration. In her comments Thursday, she held tightly to Trump’s key education priorities — advancing private school choice, preventing trans students from competing in sports consistent with their gender identity and fighting antisemitism. 

“If I am confirmed, the department will not stand idly by while Jewish students are attacked and discriminated against,” she said. 

But her responses offered few details and at times demonstrated a lack of understanding of the laws she’d be responsible for enforcing.

Currently chair of the America First Policy Institute, a far-right think tank, she stumbled when Murray asked her to identify the provisions of the Every Student Succeeds Act, the overarching K-12 education law that requires annual assessments and accountability for student performance. And she appeared to support the more expansive definition of sexual misconduct embraced by the Biden administration rather than the 2020 Title IX rule the department is now slated to reinstate. 

“I think sexual harassment should be prohibited in any case,” she said.  

She expressed support for rolling back Biden’s focus on diversity, equity and inclusion, which the Trump administration has already demonstrated by placing employees connected to DEI on administrative leave. But when Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, from her home state of Connecticut, explained that the president’s stance against DEI could prompt schools to stop teaching African American history, she said Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday and Black History Month should be celebrated. 

‘Anti-public education policies’

Despite her inexperience in education, McMahon has been far less controversial than some of Trump’s cabinet choices, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was confirmed Thursday, and Department of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. Kennedy is an anti-vaccine activist who some worry will compromise children’s health, and Hegseth has faced allegations of sexual misconduct and drinking on the job as a former Fox News host. 

After two failed bids for the Senate, McMahon, whose confirmation is expected to advance through the committee next Thursday, led the Small Business Administration during Trump’s first term. But she’s better known for turning WWE into a $9 billion enterprise with her now-estranged husband Vince McMahon.

Her confirmation took longer to schedule than those of most other cabinet nominees as the Senate education committee waited for her to complete ethics paperwork detailing vast financial assets and ties to far-right organizations. 

As a board member of Trump Media & Technology Group, which runs the president’s Truth Social platform, she earns $18,400 quarterly. As , with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission shows she received stock in the company worth more than $800,000 in late January. She is also on the advisory council for the Daily Caller, a conservative media outlet that has given her . 

“I have concerns about her role in pushing a lot of anti-public school, anti-public education policies,” Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union, an advocacy organization, told ����Ӱ��. The Daily Caller often criticized Biden’s education agenda and promoted private school choice. 

If confirmed, McMahon, whose net worth is over $ 3 billion, has promised to step down from those positions, forfeit any shares in Truth Social that she doesn’t yet fully own and divest from those that she does within three months. She also earns interest income from that fund school construction across the country and has pledged to divest from those programs as well.

For some Democrats, McMahon elicits a sense of deja vu. 

“I don’t think it would be that different from [Betsy] DeVos,” said Oregon Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, ranking member of an education subcommittee in the House. Bonamici was among the members of Congress who with department staff last week to discuss DOGE’s activities, only to be denied entry to the building. 

“There’s no question that we still have work to do with our public education system,” she said. “What message do we send around the country to the parents, to the world, that we’re shutting down the Department of Education?”

But those who support her nomination described her as prepared.

“I think it went well,” said Neal McCluskey, director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the libertarian Cato Institute. “The focus wasn’t really on her, but Trump policies and DOGE, so I see no reason she won’t be confirmed.”

One Trump supporter said that underneath the chaos is an agenda to focus the department on four key priorities — eliminating DEI, cutting waste, giving more power over education to the states and expanding school choice. In this view, that is why Trump is continuing to nominate staff for top policy positions despite his caustic words.

“The President is moving on several fronts at once, so it’s easy to conflate actions as if everything is designed to ‘close down the department,’ ” said Jim Blew, a former department official under DeVos and co-founder of the conservative Defense of Freedom Institute, a think tank. “He needs a strong array of political appointees in key positions to make all four parts of his vision happen.”

“We can’t exit this decade with students, in particular low-income students, performing worse than they were performing when they entered the decade,” said Kevin Huffman, CEO of Accelerate, a nonprofit funding academic recovery efforts. “My biggest fear is just that people will use the Department of Education as a battering ram for other issues and not use it as a force to take on academic outcomes for kids.”

The Republican nominee, declaring this the “golden age of America,” in battleground states, like Georgia and Florida, than he did in 2020. As expected, Republicans flipped the Senate and will hold at least a 52-seat majority, with a few races left to call. Control of the House remains undecided. 

Observers expect Trump to immediately nullify the Biden administration’s Title IX rule that extends protections against discrimination to LGBTQ students. 

Those who campaigned for Trump, and agree with his promises to end in schools, celebrated his comeback.

“American parents voted for their children’s future,” Tiffany Justice, co-founder of the conservative Moms for Liberty advocacy group, . Her name is already among those being tossed around as a possible . She told ����Ӱ�� that she “would be honored to serve the next president of the United States of America.”

Most clues about Trump’s early priorities come from the conservative Heritage Foundation’s , or Project 2025. In addition to eliminating Title I funding for low-income students and Head Start for preschoolers from poor families, the plan would remove references to LGBTQ people throughout federal policy.

But even if Washington ends up with a GOP trifecta and federal appointees handpicked by Heritage, the president-elect might not be able to deliver on some of his more bold promises to dismantle the education department and of illegal immigrants.

“Some of this rhetoric will be tempered with reality once the administration changes,” said Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union. “This is a president that we are very accustomed to. I understand people are nervous; they’re very concerned. But when it comes down to it, there’s also the reality of governing.”

Eliminating the education department, for example, would require 60 votes in the Senate and would likely be unpopular in the House as well, even if Republicans are still in control, said David Cleary, a former Republican Senate education staffer now working for a left-leaning lobbying firm.

“The votes wouldn’t materialize,” he said.

Michael Petrilli, president of the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute, added that “draconian cuts” in spending would also be difficult to pass. That’s why Trump is expected to accomplish some of his conservative agenda through executive orders.

“Let’s assume that there is no grand reawakening to the problems that America faces and people stay in their partisan foxholes,” Cleary said. “Trump will have to take a page out of [President Joe Biden’s] playbook and do a lot by executive action and regulatory plans.”

That would include halting enforcement of Biden’s Title IX rule — which, because of litigation from Republican-led governors, currently applies to only 24 states. Officials would likely restart the process of restoring the 2020 regulation completed under former Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, which narrowed the definition of sexual assault and expanded due process rights for the accused.

One LGBTQ advocacy organization called Trump’s victory “an immediate threat.”

“Today, many in our community feel a profound sense of loss and concern for the future,” Melanie Willingham-Jaggers, executive director of GLSEN, said in a statement, pointing to Heritage’s Project 2025 as the blueprint for how Trump would roll back policies that allow trans students to play on sports teams or use restrooms that match their gender identity. “With these changes, our young people could face increased discrimination, reduced access to safe spaces and diminished legal recognition.”

Trump, a and, at 78, the oldest candidate ever elected president, is also expected to push for private school choice, perhaps along the lines of the $5,000 that passed a House committee in September. But despite the GOP’s enthusiasm for vouchers and education savings accounts, which allow parents to use public funds for private school tuition and homeschooling expenses, some advocates would like to see greater support for the charter sector.

Petrilli, a self-described “never-Trumper,” said he’s worried about returning to “the political dynamics” of Trump’s first term, which didn’t benefit charter schools.

“Reform-oriented Democrats were sidelined or silenced,” he said. “Given that there are a lot of kids in blue states like California, New York, and Illinois who desperately need high-quality educational options, this would be a terrible development.”

But Rodrigues sees some bright spots in Republicans’ focus on parental rights and school choice. “Those things can be positive when not taken to the extreme,” she said.

She’s encouraged by the prospect of Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana becoming chair of the Senate education committee, where he has already highlighted the importance of improving . 

While the National Parents Union has had close interaction with Education Secretary Miguel Cardona and the White House, she said leaders have had ongoing “deep conversations” with those on both sides of the aisle.

“Progress will be made for children in any and all conditions, regardless of what happens in the House and the change up in the Senate,” she said. “I think the depth of our relationships are not confined to one particular party.”

The union’s political action committee began the 2024 cycle with $4 million in cash on hand, raised $12 million and has spent $13 million – leaving it with roughly $2 million to dole out before Election Day, according to the latest data from , the non-partisan organization that tracks money in politics.

The vast majority of its spending this election cycle – roughly $9 million – was donated to super PACs supporting Democrats and to local, state and federal candidates and parties. Among the top receivers: $3 million to the Senate Majority PAC, $1.6 to House Majority PAC, $445,000 to the Harris Victory Fund ($300,000 of which was originally donated to the Biden Victory Fund before the president stepped aside), and $420,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.  

The AFT is traditionally one of the biggest supporters of Democrats, lending both the power of its PAC’s purse for advertising and mailings, and its strength in numbers for boots-on-the-ground get-out-the-vote operations.

Among the top 20 PACs based on contributions to Democratic candidates, total fundraising, total spent, and total spent in independent expenditures and communication costs, the AFT’s PACs place 8th. It’s donated $1.5 million to democratic congressional candidates, including to 196 House Democrats and 19 Senate Democrats.

“Kamala Harris and Tim Walz believe in the promise of America and will spend their time solving problems, not sowing fear, so every American can partake in that promise,” AFT President Randi Weingarten said in a . “But it’s not just what we can gain, it’s also what we will lose with Trump and Vance: our democracy, our freedoms, our public schools, our right to have a union, a vote and a voice. Extending the ladder of opportunity or destroying it.” 

“Union members get this,” she said. “And that’s why we will fight every hour of every day for the next fortnight to get out the vote to elect candidates who proudly stand for freedom, democracy and opportunity.”

Earlier this month, the AFT teamed up with the National Education Association, the Service Employees International Union and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees – the nation’s largest public service unions – in a coordinated, multi-state voter outreach initiative across battleground states.

“This joint action represents a significant escalation of labor’s political engagement, with the unions pooling resources and mobilizing their combined membership of several million workers and includes people of all backgrounds working across the public service – as nurses, child care providers, sanitation workers, first responders, teachers, education support professionals and higher education workers, among others,” the of the effort reads.

Notably, labor unions play an outsized role in many of the election’s most crucial swing states: 21% of votes cast in Michigan in the 2020 presidential election were from union households, representing approximately one-fifth of the electorate, according to the union. The same is true for Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, where union households accounted for 18% and 13% of votes cast, respectively.

But civil rights activists and free speech groups warn that the legislation, dubbed the Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act — which combines two previous bills on students’ internet use that failed to gain traction — could lead to censorship of politically divisive subjects online and prohibit minors, particularly transgender youth, from accessing vital information.

Ahead of the Senate’s bipartisan 91-3 vote, Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York, celebrated what he called “a momentous day” that would soon lead to “perhaps the most important updates in decades to federal laws” designed to protect kids on the internet. The rules ban tech companies from feeding targeted ads to kids, collecting teens’ personal information and allowing young users to opt out of personalized algorithm recommendations.

“Too many kids experience relentless online bullying, too many kids have their personal data collected and then used nefariously,” Schumer said in support of the bill. “And sadly, sadly, too many families have lost kids because of what happened to them on social media.”

The legislation now moves to the House, where it faces an uncertain future when representatives return from a six-week summer recess Sept. 9. If passed, the Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act could fundamentally reshape the online experiences for young people — .

Despite the legislation’s overwhelming support in Washington, it has faced opposition from critics across the political spectrum who argue the bipartisan bill’s “duty of care” provision could be used to curtail, or at least chill, constitutionally protected speech. Under the rules, tech companies would be required to take “reasonable” measures in their products’ design to mitigate harms including cyberbullying, eating disorders, the promotion of drugs and sexual exploitation. The provision, these critics argue, paves the way for a new censorship tool that lawmakers could potentially weaponize to thwart teens’ access to politically divisive subjects, including content designed to help transgender youth.

“The government should not be standing between youth and what kinds of content they can access any more so than they should be standing between youth and their doctors and their health care decisions,” said Dara Adkison, the executive director of the nonprofit TransOhio, which offers resources to transgender youth, on a Zoom call Tuesday. On the call, Adkison joined other advocates, including those from the groups Fight for the Future and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, to outline their opposition to the bill. 

Last week, the American Civil Liberties Union in a lobbying push, where they met with lawmakers on Capitol Hill to voice their objections to the bill. During Tuesday’s call, Jenna Leventoff, the civil rights group’s senior policy counsel, said the rule could have a detrimental impact on students who are “naturally curious” by placing limits on their ability to learn. 

Civil and LGBTQ+ rights advocates aren’t alone in crying foul. In a post on X last week, the anti-abortion group Students for Life Action said the legislation offered “broad powers and vague definitions” that could prevent young people from speaking out in opposition to abortion. 

“Without concrete definitions, those targeted by a weaponized federal government will almost always include Pro-Life Americans,” the group posted on the social media site. Empowering the Federal Trade Commission to “decide what constitutes potentially stressful or allegedly harmful messaging,” the group posted, “will lead to more abuse” of power. 

Targeting transgender content online

Advocates working on behalf of transgender children, however, have perhaps been most vocal in their opposition — and statements from leading Republicans have fed the fire. 

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, a Republican from Tennessee who co-sponsored the act alongside Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, has suggested a desire to use the rules to restrict youth access to online content about transgender people. In an interview with the Family Policy Alliance, the lobbying arm of the prominent evangelical group Focus on the Family, Blackburn said that “protecting minor children from the transgender in this culture and that influence” is among the top issues that conservatives should act on. 

“I’ve got the Kids Online Safety Act that I think we’re going to end up getting through, probably this summer,” Blackburn said in the 2023 interview promoting the legislation’s duty of care provision. “[The internet] is where children are being indoctrinated. They’re hearing things at school and then they’re getting onto YouTube to watch a video, and all of a sudden this comes to them.” 

In a statement Tuesday, Blackburn said the bill “is a major step forward in protecting children” and will “save countless innocent lives from being exploited online.” 

The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, has similarly endorsed the legislation as a strategy to block materials designed for LGBTQ+ youth. In 2023, that “keeping trans content away from children keeps them safe.” 

Among the bill’s supporters is the nonprofit Fairplay for Kids, a nonpartisan group that has whose children were subjected to cyberbullying and online child sexual exploitation.

Josh Golin, the group’s executive director, said in a statement Tuesday that the legislation would force Big Tech to end business practices that have “fueled a mental health crisis and cost the lives of countless children around the country.” 

The group its efforts from “transphobic and homophobic activists threatening to weaponize” the legislation, noting that it supported an amendment to the proposal that was made to help satisfy LGBTQ+ advocates’ concerns. A previous version of the legislation empowered state attorneys general to decide what types of content is harmful to children, while the amended bill empowers the Federal Trade Commission to enforce its provisions. The changes satisfied some LGTBQ+ groups, including​​ The Trevor Project, but failed to rein in the legislation’s most vocal critics. 

‘More harm than good’

The Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act comes amid bipartisan accusations that social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok — with algorithms designed to keep users hooked and coming back for more — have harmed children’s well-being and, in some cases, pushed young people to suicide. It follows congressional testimony by two Meta whistleblowers who accused the social media company of knowing that apps like Instagram fueled dissatisfaction about body image and other insecurities among its younger users, but maintained a “see no evil, hear no evil” culture and did nothing to mitigate its harms.

Research on social media’s effects on youth well-being remains a point of contention. In a recent analysis, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine found to conclude that social media use impacts adolescent well-being at the population level. Social media sites can expose children to online harassment and fringe ideas, researchers noted, while uplifting other children by fostering a sense of community. 

The bill passed by the Senate on Tuesday combines two previous legislative efforts — the Kids Online Safety Act and the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act — into one package. It excludes a third, controversial provision that sought to ban children under 13 years old from creating social media accounts and prohibit students from accessing apps like Instagram on school and library internet networks. That effort, led by Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz and Hawaii Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz, was met with widespread pushback from education groups.

The three dissenting votes Tuesday came from Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah.  

In a statement last week, Wyden argued that the bill’s amendments make it less likely to be “used as a tool for MAGA extremists to wage war on legal and essential information to teens,” but the changes remain insufficient. “A future MAGA administration could still use this bill to pressure companies to censor gay, trans and reproductive health information,” he said.

The Software and Information Industry Association, a trade group that represents ed tech companies, said in a statement Tuesday that it had similar concerns. The duty of care provision, the group said, could “do more harm than good” by requiring that tech companies “aggressively filter content and age gate content, putting user’s privacy at risk.” 

The legislation could also , according to an analysis by the Public Interest Privacy Center, which outlined how the provisions would allow students to opt out of adaptive tests or personalized learning and “enable parents and students to limit their screen time on a math app to five times per year — essentially opting out of using that ed tech platform.”

During the Zoom call on Tuesday, Evan Greer, the director of the nonprofit digital rights group Fight for the Future, argued that conservatives have made clear their intention to restrict students’ access to gender-affirming content. Greer pointed to Project 2025, a collaboration by the Heritage Foundation and more than 100 conservative groups to build should Donald Trump retake the White House in November. 

The blueprint links gender-affirming content to pornography, claiming that “children suffer the toxic normalization of transgenderism with drag queens and pornography invading their school libraries,” and that such material “has no claim to First Amendment protection.” 

“Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women,” the document claims, arguing that the materials are addictive like a drug and psychologically destructive. “Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.” 

On Tuesday, the same day that the digital safety legislation cleared the Senate, as Trump sought to distance himself from the group and Democrats used it to warn against the former president’s reelection bid. 

“There is a movement in this country that has been very explicit about their intention” to create laws that “go after online resources for some of the most vulnerable young people in this country,” Greer said. “We should take them at their word.”

But one person feels especially perturbed by the botched implementation of the new Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA.

Lamar Alexander — former governor of Tennessee, U.S. education secretary and Republican leader of the Senate education committee — thought the would be his legacy.

He was so bound up with the quest to streamline the process that he became known for  the 108-question paper form at press conferences.

“There are not many things that happen in Washington, D.C., that really improve the lives of 20 million American families every year,” he told ����Ӱ�� last week. “This did, and once they implement it properly, it will be a great relief to these families.” 

But the string of delays and mean that three months after the rollout, some high school seniors still don’t know if they’ll be able to afford college.

“I’m very disappointed with it,” he said. “​​If they spent more time figuring out how to implement FAFSA and less time forgiving student loans, they might have done better.”

Alexander, 83, served as governor of Tennessee from 1979 to 1987 and then as president of the University of Tennessee until President George H. W. Bush appointed him as education secretary. But he said it wasn’t until he was in the Senate that he understood how much of a barrier the form was to some students getting into and completing college.

In a brief interview, Alexander discussed how he would have handled the rollout differently, his ongoing work advocating for higher education in Tennessee and writing his political memoirs.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

����Ӱ��: For readers who don’t know the history, why was simplifying the FAFSA so important to you?

Lamar Alexander: In 2005, the third year I was a senator, a group of college presidents from Tennessee came to see me and explained that the complexity of the 108-question form was the single biggest obstacle to low-income students going to college. It was difficult to fill out and many low-income students needed to get their grandmother’s tax returns. Maybe she didn’t have them or didn’t want to give them. They talked about the verification process, which means that if you made a mistake on the form you might lose your Pell Grant in the middle of your first semester. I was too junior at that time to do much about it, but 10 years later when I became the ranking Republican on the education committee I got busy on it. 

As time went on, Gov. Bill Haslam in Tennessee signed offering two years of free tuition for community colleges. Filling out the FAFSA was the single biggest obstacle to two years of free tuition for Tennesseans going to college. When I had a hearing on it — I can still remember the day — we had witnesses from many different points of view, and I asked four witnesses to write a letter each explaining what they would do. They looked at each other and said, “We don’t have to write four letters. We can write one. We all agree.”

Did your frustration with the process begin when you were a university president?

I didn’t pay that much attention. I didn’t really see the size of the problem. I didn’t know it affected 20 million families every year. What people forget is you have to fill this out every year, and it’s easy to make a mistake. That means it’s easy to lose your scholarship. 

How much have you paid attention to the chaos that has unfolded over the past few months?

I hear about it first hand — the problems it’s causing right now with admissions officers who are having a hard time telling families how much financial aid they’ll receive and families who are having a hard time deciding what school they can attend. I’m hearing a lot about it, not so much from the news. 

There’s really no excuse for it. The problem is not the law. The law was thoroughly vetted.

If you were still leading the department, how do you think you would have handled the implementation? 

If McDonald’s has a new hamburger, they don’t roll it out to the whole country. They test it in a few markets, sometimes for a long time. This is too important to 20 million families just to throw a big mess out to them. That would have been the wise thing to do, to say, “OK, we’re going to gradually begin to implement this, and we’re going to test it and make sure it works. And then within a year or two more, we’ll make it available to all 20 million families.” 

I’m very disappointed with it. ​​If they spent more time figuring out how to implement FAFSA and less time forgiving student loans, they might have done better. 

Do you miss being in the U.S. Senate? 

I miss my friends, but I had 18 years. That’s long enough, and I’ve moved on to other things.

When I was in the Senate, I would tell people, “It’s hard to get here. It’s hard to stay here, and while you’re here you might as well try to accomplish something. And you can’t accomplish anything in the Senate unless you get 60 votes.” I learned how to count in the Maryville City Schools. So you have to work across the aisle if you want to get a result. There’s no reason to run if all you want to do is make a speech. You can do that at home.

How are you spending your time now?

I’m on the . Number two, I’m helping the University of Tennessee create the , which was just officially dedicated. And number three, I’m helping Maryville College, in my hometown, create a . It will have an environmental education program, which fits. We’re right in the foothills of the Great Smoky Mountains, which is one of the most biodiverse places in the world. I’ve gotten drawn back into higher education without trying.

I’m also writing a memoir. I’m about finished with that. I kept a diary, so there are lots of interesting stories, interesting people, lots of things that I got to work on that didn’t make much news — like fixing FAFSA — but helped a lot of people.

“If my son was home, then I would be taking care of him,” said the Stanford University student, who’s now working on a doctorate in neuroscience. “These programs really support people as they’re improving their lives.”

She was among the parents and advocates who celebrated in January when the oft-gridlocked House overwhelmingly passed a that includes a new increase for the program — one that experts project would benefit roughly in the first year. But the plan has hit an unexpected wall in the Senate where some Republicans are hoping to kill it.

“The chamber we never thought we would be waiting on is the Senate,” said Ariel Taylor Smith, senior director of policy and action for the National Parents Union, one of several organizations ramping up pressure on skeptical Republicans before they return from recess April 8. She’s opposed to lawmakers revising the bill in order to appease opponents. “It will delay aid for families at a time when peanut butter costs $8.”

If the measure doesn’t pass, it could be well over a year before Congress takes up a similar proposal. That’s when they’ll consider renewing the , which doubled the child tax credit to $2,000 and expires at the end of 2025. But advocates say families need “” now as inflation continues to strain household budgets. The proposed child tax credit, which would apply to the families are filing this spring, is not as expansive as one Congress passed in 2021. But experts say it would help bring down , which has jumped since the larger benefit ran out.

“I think this is the best chance we have of passing the tax package this year,” said Elyssa Schmier, a vice president for government relations with , an advocacy group. “We hear from families every day that are struggling to afford child care, medicine for their children, groceries and rent. Any way we can provide them support… in a timely manner, not only benefits moms, families and children, but the local economy as well.”

The 2021 pandemic credit, which allowed families to receive up to $3,600 per child, split into monthly payments, cut child poverty in half, showed. As a parent living “paycheck to paycheck,” Izabel said the monthly payments allowed her to rely less on food pantries. 

But Democrats failed to get Congress to make that level of support permanent.

Senate finance Chair Ron Wyden of Oregon, a Democrat, and Rep. Jason Smith, a Missouri Republican who leads the House Ways and Means Committee, struck the current bipartisan . The proposal would gradually increase the refundable limit of $1,600 per child to $2,000 by 2025 and allow parents to get the maximum benefit for each of their children. Right now, the more children in a family, the more parents have to earn to get the full credit. 

For example, a single mother of two earning $15,000 a year receives $1,875 under the existing 2017 rate, but under the Wyden-Smith proposal, would receive $3,600 on her 2023 taxes and $3,750 the following year. 

But Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, the ranking Republican on the finance committee, strongly that would allow families to still earn the credit even if they work less. He thinks it turns the program into instead of one that rewards work. Wyden has offered to .

The bill needs 60 votes to overcome a filibuster and get to a floor vote. But experts say it’s unlikely Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would advance the legislation unless he’s confident it would pass. Republican is among those still in favor of the plan, which also includes tax incentives for businesses. But so far, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell seems to be .

“There are easily 10 Republicans who like the bill, but [it’s] unclear if they will vote yes without leadership being on board,” said David Plasterer, a senior associate at Results, an anti-poverty nonprofit. “The hope is that businesses and constituents will be all over Senate Republicans.”

 ‘Economic impact’

Democrats wanted to see relief for families similar to the 2021 expansion. That’s why of Connecticut, who voted against the House bill, called it “a watered-down policy for the sake of making a deal.”

The monthly payment provision, Plasterer said, was especially important to families with school-age children, who used the funds for basic needs like food and rent, but also spent it on child care, afterschool programs and educational materials.

But there’s also an advantage to getting a bigger tax refund — especially when it comes to education, he said. The extra money can go towards buying a car, which can help alleviate some of the transportation challenges that exacerbate chronic absenteeism, particularly in , he said.

Originally from rural Indiana, where he worked with low-income fathers at a social service agency, he said the only time during the year when families had thousands of dollars available was when they received their tax refund.

“Those families are doing repairs to their car, or buying a used car,” he said. “If you don’t have a car, you can’t get to school.”

Polling conducted by the National Parents Union shows among parents from both parties for expanding the tax credit. With the pro-business benefits in the plan, like deductions for research and development, Smith said she doesn’t understand why some Republicans aren’t on board. 

“When you think about the economic impact of the total package,” she said, “it should be a no brainer.”

Since 2021, the company has seen more than a tenfold increase in sales from government contracts, primarily with school districts — from $174,000 to $2.13 million, according to , a data service. The , and Akron, Ohio, districts are among those requiring all middle and high school students to slip their phones into the rubbery envelopes each morning and unlock them with a magnet at the end of the day.

“All signs point to 2024 being even busier,” said Sarah Leader, the company’s spokeswoman. With an using the pouches this year, the company has doubled in size to 80 employees to meet the demand. 

“It’s a game changer,” said Patricia Shipe, president of the Akron Education Association. She worked with district leaders to pilot and then adopt the Yondr system this year. Students are less distracted and schools feel calmer, she said. “The transitions between classes are faster because kids are not on their phones.”

Most districts already students from using phones in class for non-academic reasons. But phone-free advocates say tighter restrictions are necessary to refocus students on learning following the pandemic and to minimize the negative impact of social media on .

Such moves typically draw strong reactions. Some parents see phones as integral to staying in touch with their children during emergencies.

But many welcome the opportunity to curb frequent disruption. Teens report being on social media “almost constantly,” according to from the Pew Research Center. Efforts to break their habit, at least during school hours, could get a critical boost if Congress passes that would create a $5 million grant program to cover the costs of “secure containers” like Yondr or wall-mounted .  

“Widespread use of cellphones in schools are at best a distraction for young Americans; at worst, they expose schoolchildren to content that is harmful and addictive,” Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, a Republican, said in about his bipartisan proposal with Sen. Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat. “Our legislation will make schools remain centers of learning.”

Congress would still need to approve funding for the program. The legislation also directs the Education and Health and Human Services departments to study the impact of cellphone bans on student achievement, mental health and behavior. 

A ‘security nightmare’

Getting student violence and bullying under control is one reason the Akron school board approved its with Yondr in June for 10,446 pouches. Leaders hope locking up phones during the day will halt a troubling pattern of students not only using them to on social media, but record the altercations on video. 

“It was happening daily in our buildings and multiple times a day,” Shipe said. As in many districts, physical attacks against teachers had also increased. “It was just a real security nightmare.”

Many students have rebelled against the changes. And Shipe warned that opposition to losing what she described as “an appendage” for most teens “gets worse before it gets better.” Online discussion threads among students include ways to destroy the pouches, and demonstrations on TikTok show how bending the magnetic closure prevents them from locking.

But as Shipe notes, those who sabotage the pouches typically keep their phones hidden during class, if only to avoid getting suspended. 

“There are just a lot of positives,” she said. 

Many researchers and advocates agree that school phone bans have more benefits than drawbacks. In October, nearly 70 child advocates, educators and mental health experts sent Education Secretary Miguel Cardona asking him to urge schools to adopt phone-free policies. Late last month, an author of the letter met with a senior department official, but didn’t get the response she wanted. 

“The secretary does not intend to act on our phone-free schools letter,” said Lisa Cline, part of the , a coalition focused on limiting children’s use of digital devices. 

Cardona has yet to reveal his opinion on banning phones, but he’s frequently mentioned the role social media plays in the mental health problems facing students. In March, Cardona said media companies should be for “the experiment they are running on our children.” Two months later, the that the department would work with other agencies to issue model policies for districts on phone use.

An Education Department spokesman said officials are still preparing that guidance and are working “in close partnership” with on the issue.

Under the Senate bill, districts would need to get feedback from parents on cellphone restrictions before applying for funding, and the bill directs Cardona to choose grantees that will “likely yield helpful information” on the impact of phone bans. The program also would allow exceptions for students with disabilities and those who need phones for translation apps or to treat health conditions.

While Yondr’s growth is one piece of evidence on the trend, pointed to the popularity of phone bans among parents. In a sample of nearly 11,000 parents with a child in school, 61% agreed with getting phones out of the classroom. The National Parents Union is currently collecting more data on the issue, but the stance of its president, Keri Rodrigues, is firm.

“The data is clear,” she said. “[Phones] should absolutely be banned during the school day. Every parent I talk to has agreed.”

International points to higher test scores when phones are out of sight, and say students tune in to class more when they’re not scrolling on social media. In Massachusetts, where Rodrigues lives, the state education department already for districts that clamp down on use, and Commissioner Jeffrey Riley has hinted at .

But aren’t on board.

“Parents are afraid because of school shootings,” said Melissa Erickson, executive director of Alliance for Public Schools, a Florida nonprofit that aims to inform parents about education policy. “That’s a statement of the times.”

She called those in favor of strict bans “tone deaf” to the way students socialize. Kids depended on devices to stay connected to friends and teachers during the pandemic. Banning them, she said, sends a mixed message.

“We told them that one-to-one is everything and now we’re taking it away,” she said. 

‘The extreme end’

Florida has gone further than any state to curb use during school hours. Gov. Ron DeSantis signed in May that prohibits students from accessing social media, especially TikTok, and from using phones except when teachers approve their use for educational purposes.

Districts, however, have some discretion. After instituting limits on use during class this year, Pasco County Schools Superintendent is calling for a by the 2024-25 school year. The Hillsborough district board that allows students to keep their phones if they are “powered down, silenced, and stored out of sight unless authorized by staff.”

Last year, teachers tended to set their own rules, said Kendal Coulbertson, who graduated in May from Armwood High in Hillsborough. Some teachers, she said, didn’t mind if students used their phones as long as they were turning in their assignments and getting good grades.

But she thinks a ban goes too far.

“I was engaged in conversation. I was engaged in learning, and I think, honestly, that should be the goal rather than going to the extreme end,” she said. She added that are a “real issue” and students want to be able to reach their parents in case of an emergency. “There could be some type of middle ground.”

Like parents, educators are split on the issue. In some districts, including Akron and Florida’s , bans on phones extend through lunch, a time when teens typically check in with social media. 

“It has to be all or nothing,” said Shipe, the Akron union leader. Teachers, she added, shouldn’t have to haggle with students to lock their phones back up after lunch. 

Enforcement was a daily struggle for Dina Hoeynck, a former teacher in Cleveland who taught graphic design. At her school, students had access to their phones between class periods and teachers were in charge of ensuring they were locked up — a system she described as “impractical.”

“Going through the rigamarole of having students lock their phones at the start of class and unlock them at the end felt like a massive waste of time,” said Hoeynck, who kept needle nose pliers on hand to straighten pins on pouches when students bent them. “It led to a significant loss of instructional time and created unnecessary power struggles between teachers and students.” 

Mark Benigni, superintendent of Connecticut’s Meriden Public Schools, is among those who oppose a blanket policy,

“We must educate our students on the appropriate and effective use of cellphones as we do for all technology,” he said. “We also need to recognize that today’s cellphones offer numerous opportunities to enhance learning, organization and communication. Many students are emailing teachers using their cellphone and district-provided emails.”

Benigni happens to be Cardona’s former boss. Before President Joe Biden tapped him to be secretary, Cardona served as assistant superintendent in Meriden until becoming Connecticut’s education chief. While the district didn’t pass its until April 2021, Benigni said it closely follows practices in place when Cardona worked there: Students can’t use phones during instructional time unless a teacher permits it or if they’re necessary to access the district’s online learning platform. 

“The secretary always supported the safe use of technology when he was here,” Benigni said. “There are times when teachers need to have students put them away.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans on Wednesday night failed to garner enough votes to block a new Biden administration rule on an income-driven repayment plan for federal student loans.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com. Follow Arkansas Advocate on and .

The Texas Senate unveiled Monday its main bill to establish an program, a priority for Gov. this special session.

, authored by Sen. , R-Conroe, would allow families access $8,000 of taxpayer money to pay for private schools and other educational expenses such as uniforms, textbooks, tutoring or transportation among other things.

“Educating the next generation of Texans is a fundamental responsibility, and it is my belief that empowering parents with school choice will encourage competition, innovation and ensure that every student in Texas has the opportunity to find an educational path for their unique needs,” Creighton said in a statement.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

The state comptroller’s office would establish and administer these education savings accounts. The bill seeks to allocate $500 million from the general revenue fund for the next two years to pay for the program. The comptroller’s office would also be in charge of preventing fraud and misuse of funds — a major area of concern for many lawmakers — as well as approving an organization to help process applications and approve vendors and participating private schools.

Creighton says that the program will not siphon money away from public schools as the funding comes from general revenue, not the , which is the main source of funding for the state’s K-12 public schools.

The bill does not require private school students to take a state-administered academic achievement exam, something that school voucher critics in the Texas Legislature have said an education savings account proposal should have to even consider it.

If passed into law, almost any student who was enrolled in a public school last year would be eligible to apply for the program, as well as any student ready to enroll in Pre-K or kindergarten.

The bill includes a formula to prioritize entry to the program if there are more applicants than funds available. Forty percent of open spots would go to students who receive free or reduced lunch; 30% to families who earn between 185% and 500% of the federal poverty line; 20% to those with disabilities; and 10% to those who attended public, private or home-school in the last school year.

The filing of SB 1 came hours after Creighton announced , a $5.2 billion school funding bill that would allocate most of the money to teacher raises and include a small funding increase to help schools pay their rising bills.

It remains to be seen whether the funding bill can even move forward. The only education-related item in Abbott’s agenda for the special session was education savings accounts, a school voucher program that would give families access to state funds to pay for their children’s private schooling. The state constitution says lawmakers can only pass bills related to the governor’s agenda items during special sessions. The governor can at any time modify the agenda.

Creighton said SB 1 and SB 2 work in tandem and show that lawmakers can provide more schooling options for Texas families while also adding public school funding. During the regular session, two proposals to create an education savings account program and give teachers pay bonuses, also authored by Creighton, fizzled in the House amid disagreements over vouchers and how to give teachers raises.

In a Hail Mary play at the end of the regular session, Creighton his education savings account proposal — similar to the one he announced Monday — to House Bill 100, a school finance bill. That bill eventually died after House members once again stood firm against school vouchers, though the move left public schools with and other rising expenses.

The future of an education savings account program remained uncertain as this year’s third special session started Monday with Texas Republicans . Lt. Gov. called on House Speaker to resign because the speaker demanded he return $3 million to a major backer, the Defend Texas Liberty PAC, after The Texas Tribune reported its leader had met with a white supremacist and antisemitic activist. Patrick accused Phelan of using this weekend’s Hamas attack on Israel for political gain.

Meanwhile, Texas House Democrats signaled their intent to once again stand against any kind of school voucher program.

Rep. of San Antonio, chair of the House Democratic Caucus, told reporters his group is “very clear: no vouchers and no deals.”

“A voucher scam is a poison pill that will end up taking more out of our public schools than it puts in,” said Rep. , D-Austin.

Mark Jones, a political science professor at Rice University, said he believes Abbott and the Senate are on the same page when it comes to public school funding and school vouchers.

SB2 “is the main carrot Abbott is using to entice the anti-voucher Republicans and the small number of persuadable Democrats to vote for school choice legislation,” Jones said. “The quid-pro-quo is that once school choice legislation is en route to the governor’s desk, Abbott will place public school funding on the special session agenda, thereby allowing the Senate and House to quickly pass SB2 or a comparable House bill.”

This article originally appeared in  a member-supported, nonpartisan newsroom informing and engaging Texans on state politics and policy. Learn more at texastribune.org.

Disclosure: Rice University has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete .

GOP lawmakers say that partisan school boards would provide greater transparency for voters, but Democrats and other critics argue that nonpartisan boards should serve all families in Florida’s massive education system, .

The voters would be the ones to make the decision — through a Constitutional amendment on the ballot — if proposed legislation is successful in the 2023 session.

The legislation, SJR 94, is now heading to the full Senate for consideration. The state House has already approved the measure.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

Florida voters would determine if the races for non-partisan district school board members should instead be partisan affairs, potentially teeing up for partisan politics in 67 school districts across the state.

The bill would be presented as a constitutional amendment on the ballot of the next general election or at an earlier special election to make school boards races partisan and signify whether a candidate is a Democrat, a Republican, a different party all together, or even not affiliated with a party.

The legislation finished its final committee stop Tuesday morning during the Senate Rules committee after very little discussion from the lawmakers, though some Democrats voted against the bill.

Sen. Joe Gruters, a Republican representing parts of Manatee and Sarasota counties, is a sponsor of the bill. He argues that the partisan school board elections would provide greater transparency for voters. He was formerly the chair of the Republican Party of Florida and argues that “all these elections are partisan.”

“You can say I’m an expert in partisan politics because I was the chairman of the state party and longtime chairman of my local party,” Gruters told lawmakers Tuesday. “And, I want to say, all these races are partisan now. What we’re doing is we’re pulling the bag off of people’s heads, allowing people to have full knowledge of where people stand.”

While those Democrats who opposed the bill did not discuss their opposition on Tuesday, previous opposition on the legislation argued that school board elections should remain nonpartisan.

Another concern with the bill involves No Party Affiliate voters who would be cut out from part of the election process of school board candidates, as Florida is a closed primary state.

Meanwhile, the House version of the bill has already been approved by the full House on a 79 to 34 vote, with Democrats in opposition of the legislation. Both the House and Senate will have to approve the same legislation before it goes to Gov. Ron DeSantis.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Diane Rado for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com. Follow Florida Phoenix on and .

Idaho’s Senate Education Committee introduced a bill modeled after Arizona’s universal education savings account program on Tuesday, with a stated price tag of $20 million in state funds, according to from legislators.

Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton, is a member of the education committee and the bill’s sponsor. The legislation, titled “Freedom in Education Savings Accounts,” would establish savings accounts using public funds equivalent to 80% of the most recent student funding allocation as calculated by the state.

Committee Chairman Dave Lent, R-Idaho Falls, did not allow discussion on the bill before Sen. Ben Toews, R-Coeur d’Alene, motioned to print it. The bill could be granted a full hearing before the Senate committee in the coming weeks of the legislative session.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

Unlike 529 education savings accounts, which are investment accounts with tax benefits meant to be used for postsecondary education such as college or trade school, education savings accounts typically take the per-pupil spending allocated by a state’s student funding formula and distribute that money to parents for use at a private school or for homeschooling. The bill does not specify if religiously affiliated schools would be included as eligible institutions, but Sen. Brian Lenney, R-Nampa, introduced a bill Monday that would repeal Idaho’s , which prohibits the Legislature and all other public entities from using public funds to support religious organizations.

Under the current calculation, that amount for Idaho students would be $5,950.

“Idaho has limited school choice, but that is not enough,” Nichols told the committee, saying some children face discrimination in education simply because of where they live, their family’s income, disability or race. She then went on to describe other reasons families might want to find a different option.

“Declining test scores, overcrowding, students not meeting grade level benchmarks, bullying, staffing shortages, curriculum issues, indoctrinization (sic), and the list goes on, are contributing to numerous frustrations with the status quo,” Nichols said.

The funds, according to the legislation, could be used for:

• Tuition or fees at a private school or online program approved by the Idaho State Department of Education
• Required textbooks
• Educational therapies from a licensed or accredited provider, curricula and supplementary materials
• Educational and psychological evaluations, assistive technology rentals and braille translation
• Tutoring and tuition for approved vocational and life skills classes
• Fees for standardized tests or college entrance exams, textbooks required by an eligible postsecondary institution
• Fees to manage the education savings account
• Classes and extracurricular programs offered by a public school
• School uniforms and transportation
• Computer hardware and devices primarily used for educational purposes

Savings account would empower parents ‘rather than the unions,’ Middleton senator says

Nichols said 26 states have introduced education savings account bills this year, including Utah, Iowa, Washington and Wyoming. While the policy’s proponents say it is beneficial for students, families and schools, opponents have pointed to states like Wisconsin, where costs have than original estimates and caused property taxes to increase.

The American Legislative Exchange Council, a corporate-backed organization that drafts and disseminates model legislation geared toward conservative policies, was in establishing Arizona’s education savings account program, including providing model legislation language.

“The goal is that through an ESA, parents will be the ones we empower rather than the unions and education bureaucracies that have dominated school governance and the learning and higher standards that students need,” Nichols said. “We can no longer ignore the facts and must change business as usual.”

According to a release from the Idaho Freedom Caucus, which includes Nichols, individual accounts would be randomly audited on a quarterly and annual basis to prevent misuse of public funds. The bill would also establish a parent review commission as well to review the implementation of policies and procedures for the program, parental concerns and any work to address complaints about the program. The commission would consist of six members who are parents of students participating in the program and would be appointed by leadership of the House and Senate majority and minority leaders and two would be appointed by the governor.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Idaho Capital Sun maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Christina Lords for questions: info@idahocapitalsun.com. Follow Idaho Capital Sun on and .

Kate was ultimately diagnosed with dyslexia, and the ensuing years of private school and tutors it took to get her the help she needed shaped the lives of both her parents. In Baton Rouge, Laura opened a charter school for students with dyslexia. In Washington, the moderate Republican advocates for changes in federal policy. 

Now ranking member of the Senate education committee, Sen. Cassidy has a powerful perch from which to draw attention to a reading disability that affects an estimated Americans. “At some point you’ve got to concede that the status quo is not working,” he told ����Ӱ��. “If you look at reading scores, they’ve not budged.”

But student achievement hasn’t budged much at Louisiana Key Academy either. The school, which Laura Cassidy co-founded in 2013, has never earned higher than an F in the state’s school grading system. Its performance score this year — based mostly on state test results — is 39.9, compared to a .

At the same time, the school has won praise for providing targeted, foundational literacy instruction for students who were grade levels behind in their traditional schools. Parents whose children failed to develop reading skills in district schools, even with special education, have watched them gain confidence and earn good grades at Key. The state board recently granted the charter approval to expand to two additional sites and add a high school. 

“There is huge demand for Key Academy,” said Caroline Roemer, executive director of the Louisiana Association of Public Charter Schools. But though the school is clearly filling a void, officials shouldn’t let up on holding charters like Key accountable for students’ progress, she said.

“We will never say choice is enough,” she said. Academic improvement should also be the objective, she said, bluntly adding that it’s important for schools to find “the balance between the power of choice [and] the expectation that the goal is to suck less.”

The earlier, the better 

At a time of heightened interest in how children learn to read, the Cassidys’ combined work demonstrates the challenges — and also, the paradoxes — facing families with dyslexic children and the schools they attend.

To Laura Cassidy, a retired surgeon, the F on the state’s report card is not a reflection of dyslexic students’ ability to learn. Many arrive in third, fourth and fifth grade when parents realize they aren’t catching up with their peers. 

“After January, most traditional schools teach to the [state test], and we don’t do that. We’re trying to produce fluent readers,” she said. “The earlier they come to our school, the better because they’re in an environment where they’re like, ‘Oh, OK, I’m not the only one who was struggling with this and I’m not stupid.’ ” 

Despite the F, the school earns a B from the state for student progress. Its performance score has increased since 2019 when it was 36.3. 

When their children are younger, many parents are more concerned with their improvement than hitting state proficiency targets, said DeJunné Clark Jackson, president of the nonprofit Center for Literacy and Learning, near New Orleans. But as they prepare for graduation, those grades tend to matter more,

“The reality is the school is swimming upstream,” said Jackson, also a leader of parent advocacy group Decoding Dyslexia Louisiana. But it’s “reaching parents in a place of desperation.”

Angela Normand hit that point when her son Max was in third grade. He was getting D’s and F’s in reading at his school in Tangipahoa Parish, about 40 miles from Baton Rouge. Teachers told her that boys sometimes learn to read more slowly than girls. But even with special education, he didn’t improve.

He entered Key Academy in January 2020, and within two months, “he was reading every sign on every building,” she said. Despite remote learning through the end of the school year, Max’s reading skills grew stronger. Now in sixth grade, he has five A’s and one B. 

She said the “unfair, inaccurate grade” the state gives the school has probably deterred other parents from exploring whether Key Academy can help their children.

‘The plight of families’

The low grade hasn’t hurt state support. When the school first renewed its charter in 2018, the board added an to evaluate schools that serve students well below grade level. While Key Academy students must still take the Louisiana Educational Assessment Program, the schools also give additional standardized tests that measure students’ phonological, fluency and vocabulary skills.

State accountability systems “are not set up to deal with a school like this,” said John White, former Louisiana state superintendent. The adults responsible for Key Academy’s students, he added, “were not the adults who were there for the origin of the students’ struggles.”

He credited the Cassidys for simultaneously “drawing attention to the plight of families” whose children have dyslexia and advancing school choice. 

A second school opened this year in Covington, east of Baton Rouge, despite opposition from the local St. Tammany Parish district, where there has never been a charter. A third site will open in Shreveport next year. An October report from the state board, supporting the expansion, said the charter offers “compelling evidence” for its model and would provide something that doesn’t otherwise exist in that area.

The Cassidys, meanwhile, have advocated for reforms that would impact all Louisiana schools, including that recognizes training in dyslexia therapy in teacher licensing. 

‘Not blue or red’

At the federal level, Sen. Cassidy— still a practicing gastroenterologist — focuses on some of the same thorny issues facing dyslexic students. He demonstrated his awareness of those challenges during a committee hearing last summer on pandemic learning loss.

“Did they fall further behind than their peers?” he asked Connecticut Education Commissioner Charlene Russell-Tucker about students with reading disabilities. “Do you screen children for dyslexia?” 

And he in 2021 that would make dyslexia a separate disability under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Currently, it’s part of a larger “specific learning disability” category. The change, he said, would draw more attention to dyslexia and help ensure students get help earlier, especially since don’t require screening.

But his bill faces resistance from some special education advocates. Denise Marshall, CEO of the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, said learning disabilities “tend to co-occur” and that removing dyslexia from that category might cause educators to miss other needs.

White, Louisiana’s former state superintendent, hopes Sen. Cassidy’s role on the committee will also prompt conversation about foundational reading skills at a time when states and districts have federal relief funds to train teachers and purchase curriculum.

“Now,” he said, “would be an opportunity for some leadership in Washington to say, ‘Lets connect the dots.’ ” 

Sen. Cassidy said Sen. Bernie Sanders, the committee chair, will set the agenda. But he hopes to work with Democrats on the issue, mentioning Sen. John Hickenlooper of Colorado, who about own struggles with dyslexia, and Sen. Maggie Hassan, who in 2016 when she was governor of New Hampshire.

“This issue is not blue or red,” Sen. Cassidy said. “This is, ‘Do I care about a child achieving potential even if the child learns differently?’ I’d like to think that would give us a lot of common ground.”

For schools, the longest period in history with a 50-50 U.S. Senate will likely be remembered for one thing — Democrats’ passage of a massive COVID-relief bill that provided $122 billion in federal funds for K-12.

On March 4, 2021, Vice President Kamala Harris cast a key tie-breaking vote from the Senate dais that allowed the $1.9 trillion pandemic recovery passage to move forward.

“Nobody can use scarcity as an excuse,” said Charles Barone, vice president of K-12 policy with Democrats for Education Reform, a think tank, and a former Democratic staffer in the Senate. “There won’t be any other packages like that for at least another decade.”

With new senators expected to be sworn in Tuesday, the Senate reaches the end of an era. Democratic Sen. Raphael Warnock’s in Georgia concluded only the fourth time in history that the Senate was evenly split between the two parties. And even though Arizona Sen. Kyrsten Sinema has officially to become an independent, the way she votes isn’t expected to change much. That shifts the balance to 51-49 for the Democrats. By many accounts, the Senate make-up has worked in . He scored wins with the American Rescue Plan and a key known as the Inflation Reduction Act. ���’s also seated than any president since John Kennedy. 

But for those who latched onto Biden’s broad education agenda, the past two years have been bittersweet. Despite delivering an unprecedented windfall for pandemic recovery, Democrats had to sacrifice other education proposals, like two years of preschool and funds to rebuild aging school buildings.

At first, having Democrats in control of Congress and the White House “gave people enough hope that they aimed high and tried to shoot the moon,” Barone said.  

But it wasn’t long before Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a fiscally conservative Democrat, put up roadblocks that forced Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and the rest of the party to scale back their ambitions. 

With a 50-50 Senate, there’s “no room for error,” said Bethany Little, principal at EducationCounsel, a consulting firm.  

“The slightest change in the wind can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory,” she said. There was momentum for the party after Biden’s election, but once that sense of urgency waned, “you couldn’t get some really big agenda items that Democrats have wanted for a long time.”

Those included major increases in funding for child care and pre-K, two years of free community college and the extension of a higher child tax credit that data shows by almost 30%. Little called those proposals “generational shifts that were all on the table at once.”

After nearly a year of negotiations with Manchin and multiple rewrites, Biden’s so-called Build Back Better plan emerged as the Inflation Reduction Act, a shadow of the original package. It passed 51-50 on Aug. 7, with Harris breaking another tie.

The vice president was also called on to tip the balance in favor of Catherine Lhamon to lead the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. Republicans opposed her confirmation because of positions on issues such as school discipline and transgender students’ rights they see as examples of government overreach.

‘The holy grail’

Advocates for federal spending on school construction were especially disappointed when dedicated funding to repair and rebuild schools was dropped from spending bills in an effort to win Manchin’s blessing.

“This country would absolutely have gotten help for its aged school buildings if we had had a Congress able to deliver good policy,” said Mary Filardo,  executive director of the 21^st Century School Fund, which focuses on modernizing the nation’s schools.

Biden’s original included $100 billion for school construction and repairs. When Democrats cut that provision, Filardo and education groups hoped it would resurface in Build Back Better. That didn’t happen. 

“School Infrastructure is like the holy grail,” Barone said. “It always seems within grasp, and then it isn’t.” 

The loss of a dedicated funding bill means many districts are now using American Rescue Plan funds for major facility upgrades.

Ironically, the Education Department frowns on those decisions, issuing last month that “strongly discourages” districts from using the money that way.

‘The future of public policy making’

Even though Manchin helped rein in progressives on a few of their big-ticket priorities, that didn’t stop the GOP from portraying Democrats as a party on a spending spree.

“What the Democrats have done is extraordinarily harmful to the future of public policy making,” said David Cleary, Republican staff director for the Senate education committee.

Both the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act were the result of budget reconciliation, a process that allows the party in charge to pass legislation without any votes from across the aisle. Those multi-billion-dollar packages “ruined the opportunity to come together,” Cleary said.

The Biden administration, he said, has taken the same approach in pursuing policies and actions bound to annoy Republicans.

The Education Department’s effort to undo what Cleary called former Secretary Betsy DeVos’s “chef’s kiss perfect” Title IX regulation is one example. Biden’s proposed rule would extend protections against sexual discrimination and harassment to transgender students and, Cleary argues, roll back due process rights for those accused of sexual misconduct.

He also called Biden’s plan to forgive up to $20,000 in student loan debt per borrower “an abomination” that further divides Republicans and Democrats and sends the message that “no one ever has to pay for education.” The U.S. Supreme Court the fate of the plan next month.

Even though Democrats still control the Senate, the Republican majority in the House will change the dynamic when both chambers get to work this winter. 

Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, for example, could find himself facing increased scrutiny from the House education committee over issues such as districts’ spending of COVID relief funds.

“They won’t be able to ignore [Republicans’] letters and hearing requests,” Cleary said.

Legislatively, is expected to make much progress on their agendas. But that also means Sinema’s knack for — on issues such as infrastructure, and — could become more valuable if members want to get anything done. 

Following the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, she used her relationships with Republicans to help Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy and Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina on gun control. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act passed by a vote of 65 to 33 and provides roughly $2 billion for safety improvements, school climate initiatives and student mental health services.

“She’s deeply committed to the Senate as an institution,” Cleary said. 

Like his former boss, Sen. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Cleary said Sinema is willing to chip away at her “big vision” with smaller victories. That sets her apart from members such as Vermont progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders and conservative Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

Their style, he said, is more like: “I want what I want. You can’t have anything, and why am I not winning?”

Correction: An earlier version of this story contained an incorrect figure for the size of a federal pandemic recovery package.

Now that the Democrats will stay in control of the Senate next year, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a far-left independent, has officially announced his intention to chair the education committee. According to a statement from his office, he’ll likely focus more on higher education and health care issues than K-12.

Meanwhile, conservative Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky — in line to be the top Republican on the committee — that he will instead take the role of ranking member on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. That leaves Louisiana Sen. Dr. Bill Cassidy as the next Republican in line for the job. Cassidy, an advocate for , is also considering a

The progessive believes in free college for all and wants to triple funding for poor schools.

The conservative once campaigned to abolish the U.S. Department of Education.

One is the son of a former Libertarian Party candidate for president and sounds a consistent drumbeat on schools: The federal government should stay out.

The other, ranked by one scorecard, is a self-described democratic socialist known for pushing just one education cut — to charter schools.

But in the latest example of the nation’s topsy-turvy politics, Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders and Kentucky Republican Rand Paul will soon be first in line to run the Senate education committee.

“They’re a heck of an odd couple,” said Rick Hess, a senior fellow and director of education policy studies at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.

“Alpha and omega,” quipped Jack Jennings, a retired education policy expert and former Democratic staffer for the House.

Depending on the outcome of this week’s election, the two firebrands are the top contenders to be chair and ranking member of the Senate HELP Committee, which also oversees health, labor and pension issues. While it may seem increasingly inaptly named in an era of gridlock and rabid partisanship, the committee wields considerable power, overseeing a $235 billion education budget and issues from special education to preventing sexual harassment and discrimination in schools.

With Republicans already proposing to restrict lessons on gender identity and sexual orientation and the Biden administration engulfed in a to wipe out billions of dollars in student loan debt, there’s plenty of potential for the two to clash. Neither senator’s office responded to requests for comment.

The succession battle is triggered by the expected transition of longtime chair Patty Murray of Washington to a leadership position on the appropriations committee — that is, if she wins  against a suddenly formidable challenger—  and the retirement of ranking member Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina.

From COVID closures to parent protests at school board meetings, the committee has seen its share of hot-button topics over the past two years. While hearings have been clearly partisan, Murray and Burr have kept the tone fairly civil.

Bethany Little, principal at EducationCounsel, a consulting firm, sees it as the end of an era in which members wanted “to get things done.” That’s how it was, she said, when she worked for the committee under former Democratic chairs Edward Kennedy and Tom Harkin. 

“There is a shift in the posture of the people taking charge and their interest in making a deal and being able to find middle ground,” she said.

The ascendency of Sanders/Paul — or Paul/Sanders — is by no means assured. Earlier this year, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said he expects Paul to run the committee if the GOP flips the Senate. But first, Paul has to defend his seat in Congress, which he’s expected to do in solidly Republican Kentucky. Sanders, for his part, would have to give up chairmanship of the budget committee. 

Some say that’s a switch he’d be likely to make. 

The senator “got his green money,” Hess said, referring to climate-related provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act. But for free preschool and community college, part of the original version of that bill, fell by the wayside. 

Sanders recently said he’d like to revive efforts to pass what he has described as “transformational” programs for families, such as the larger child tax credit that was part of the American Rescue Plan. But he never wanted to stop at two years of free community college. He wants to be free and for the federal government to cancel all student debt.

As an advocate for , the chairmanship would also allow him to lead the panel that oversees the government’s various health-related agencies.

Health care issues might also be a reason why Paul, an eye surgeon, would savor the chance to chair the committee. Paul is known for his regular with medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci over COVID policies and vaccines. Paul wants to investigate allegations that tie Fauci to the virus’s creation by funding research in China. While Fauci categorically denies the allegations, an Oct. 20 Paul fundraising email declares, “If you help me win, I promise to subpoena every last document of Dr. Fauci’s unprecedented coverup.”

“���’s so off the rails on just about everything,” said Charles Barone, a former Democratic staffer in the Senate and now vice president of K-12 policy with Democrats for Education Reform, a think tank. “His level of combativeness and his general aversion to anything bipartisan is problematic.”

Paul was the among the handful of Republicans to the Every Student Succeeds Act in 2015. Aside from wanting to put Education Secretary Miguel Cardona out of a job, he also proposes sending federal directly to parents.

Jennings said moderate Republicans on the committee — Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Mitt Romney of Utah — could mitigate some of Paul’s  rhetoric.

But as for the Vermont senator, he said, “I don’t think there’s any restraint on Sanders. He speaks his mind.”

As Election Day nears, predictions on whether Democrats will hold onto the Senate change almost by the hour. According to election forecaster FiveThirtyEight, they are now in a with Republicans, who in the polls.

Regardless of who leads the committee, as long as one party holds a slim majority, there’s little chance members would advance bipartisan bills, said Michelle Dimino, deputy director of education for Third Way, a center-left think tank. 

“It’s more likely to stay in the realm of hearings and investigations,” she said. 

Hess said he could see Republicans questioning how districts are spending COVID relief money, and Jennings added that they would likely try to stop the Biden administration’s move to cancel student debt.

“There’s enough for them to muck around in,” Jennings said.

Possible common ground

Despite their differences, the two iconoclasts have one thing in common: They are both known for bucking their own parties — a trait that could make them occasional allies. One issue where the pair could find common ground is testing and accountability. the federal requirements to assess students annually as “Washington’s intrusion into the classroom,” and Sanders is an of standardized testing.

They might also find agreement on protecting student privacy. Paul has sought to roll back government surveillance programs, and Sanders is “wary about big tech collecting data” on students, said Lindsay Fryer, senior vice president of Penn Hill Group, an education lobbying firm.

Paul is also up for the top Republican seat on the homeland security committee and has said he doesn’t plan to make until after the election. That committee the , which would still give Paul a chance to put his stamp on expanding school choice.

Republicans want to see the program, which serves about 1,800 students, have “stable financial footing,” said Lindsey Burke, director of the Center for Education Policy at the conservative Heritage Foundation. Right now, she said, it exists “at the whim of Congress.”

American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten is among those who probably hopes he’ll choose homeland security. She told ����Ӱ�� that the prospect of him leading the education committee “absolutely” keeps her up at night as she travels the country for Democratic candidates.

Given how far apart the parties are on education, leaders might have no problem with Paul and Sanders promoting their out-of-the-mainstream ideas.

But the opposite could also be true. 

Hess said Republicans could regret giving more attention to the idea of eliminating the education department. Likewise, he said, the “Democrats might be better off if Sanders doesn’t have such a visible, public platform to talk about giving money away.”

����Ӱ��’s senior reporter Jo Napolitano contributed to this report.

Delta was causing cases to spike, and the schools where many Head Start programs are housed typically had mask mandates in place. 

But in February, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention revised its guidance to reflect lower transmission rates. Mask rules for young children, the CDC said, should be the same as those for the general population.

Now Coyne, a Head Start director in the Boulder area, is confused. “Head Start feels like the lone place where masks are required,” she said. “For staff, it feels really out of context.”

Members of Congress, including several Democrats, agree.

Earlier this month, the Senate approved that would “disapprove” the rule, essentially wiping it off the books. was introduced last month in the House, but it’s unclear if action will be taken soon. The White House said President Joe Biden won’t sign it. Officials say the mandate — which even requires staff and children to wear masks outside — gives parents “additional confidence” that their children are safe and protects infants and toddlers in Early Head Start programs who can’t wear masks. It’s also necessary, they argue, because a vaccine for young children has yet to be approved.

“Parents of children under 5 are in a really difficult position right now. They don’t have the choice to vaccinate their children, so they are dependent on the adults who care for them to do everything they can to continue protecting them,” Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, a Democrat and chair of the education committee, said before the May 3 vote. 

She opposed the resolution, saying it would permanently hamstring the administration’s ability to mandate masks and vaccines in Head Start in the event of a new,dangerous variant or a future pandemic. , in fact, have reinstated mask mandates or are strongly urging students to mask because cases are rising.

Once a vaccine is available for younger children she said it could make sense to revisit the rule, “but we are not there yet.”

Both Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech have asked the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to approve their vaccines for younger children. Reviews were scheduled for , but the governors of Colorado and Massachusetts have to act sooner. 

South Dakota Republican Sen. John Thune, who sponsored the resolution, suggested that if Biden can on immigration along the southern border, he should do so for young children. 

“The scientific evidence for masking toddlers is shaky at best,” he said on the Senate floor, citing the World Health Organization against masking children under 6 and that masks inhibit language and social skills. Children also face of serious illness from COVID, studies show. 

Researchers, however, have found that masks on preschoolers interfere with their development. 

Meanwhile, half the states don’t have to follow the rule because in two cases blocked it. That leaves the rest of the country in limbo.

“It’s messy, it’s tricky, and that’s why we go back to Head Start roots — locally driven with high standards,” said Tommy Sheridan, deputy director of the National Head Start Association, which represents both families and programs. The rule, he said, is making it hard to hire staff. “The administration knows this is something that needs to change.”

In December, the association asking for waivers from the rule or solutions that “balance safety with local circumstances.”

David White, CEO of WNCSource Community Services, a Head Start grantee serving four North Carolina counties in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, estimates that his centers have lost about 25 of their 220 staff members because of the vaccine mandate. With early-childhood programs already coping with staff shortages, he’s concerned about having enough teachers this fall.

If the vaccine mandate makes it harder to attract and retain staff, and if it “means having closed classrooms because parents don’t like the mask mandate,” he said, “at some point it becomes counterproductive.”

But for who have dyslexia, like Anri Haglund, now 14 and a seventh-grader in Michigan, reading birthday messages often comes with anxiety and stress as they try to decipher them or read them aloud at parties.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

“There was one birthday card,” Haglund recalled to the Michigan Advance. “It was a word that I think I’ve seen, but I just never read it because I would just kind of mumble it and sometimes get away with that. And I was just kind of sitting there sweating and thinking, ‘What if I screwed this word up?’” 

So what is dyslexia? According to the , it is “a specific learning disability that is neurobiological in origin. It is characterized by difficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abilities.” Problems with reading comprehension are common.

In the classroom, Haglund struggled without many systems in place to help him work through his literacy issues. 

“Something that was difficult with school when I was younger was reading, spelling and writing,” Haglund said. “And one of the strategies my teachers told me that really didn’t work for me was, if I didn’t know a word, or if I couldn’t sound it out, they would say, ‘Reread and reread it.’ And that was just not working. … I just kind of felt like, ‘Oh, I’m stuck at the same spot.’”

Dyslexia poses significant threats to many elementary children learning to read but can affect adults, too. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that about 15% of Americans have dyslexia. It is also estimated that only one in 10 children with dyslexia will receive an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and get the services they need to learn how to read. 

But a bipartisan bill package making its way through the Michigan Senate would create systems for identifying and intervening to better assist students with dyslexia. 

Here’s what the bills would do:

• , introduced by Sen. Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor), would ensure school districts screen children in grades kindergarten, 1st grade, 2nd grade and 3rd grade for dyslexia and reading disabilities by utilizing a universal screening assessment.
• , introduced by Sen. Lana Theis (R-Brighton), would mandate teacher preparation institutions to include instruction on the characteristics of dyslexia, the consequences of dyslexia, evidence-based interventions and accommodations for students with dyslexia and create a classroom style that uses multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) to ensure the needs of students are met.
• , introduced by Sen. Dayna Polehanki (D-Livonia), would mandate that new teacher’s certificates only be granted to those who have received instruction on the characteristics of dyslexia, secondary consequences of dyslexia, effective interventions, accommodations for those with dyslexia, and methods to create schoolwide and classroom systems by using MTSS.
• , introduced by Sen. Jim Runestad (R-White Lake), would create a seven-person advisory committee consisting of people from various professional backgrounds that have knowledge on screening and interventions for dyslexia, who would be charged with helping to develop a dyslexia resource guide.

Runestad told the Advance the bills will empower students with dyslexia and equip them with the interventions necessary to thrive in a school environment. 

“If these kids don’t get early help and early intervention, they’re never going to be good readers; they’re gonna have all kinds of learning issues,” Runestad said. “It’s been proven over and over and over if you get these kids the resources, the intervention early they can be absolutely fabulous students.”

Irwin said the bills would address an issue in the 2016 third-grade reading law mandating students who are more than a grade level behind in reading levels to be held back. He said this package will “make sure that they include a component that will help our educators identify kids who have characteristics of dyslexia” and then use “multi-tiered systems of support interventions in the classroom to bring those kids up to speed.” 

The bills last month were reported out of the Education and Career Readiness Committee and are now on the Senate floor. A similar package was in 2020, but was not taken up for a vote. 

Irwin touted bipartisan support for the bills.

“Sometimes it doesn’t matter what party they’re from, you know, this is about literacy,” he said, adding that “this is about doing the right thing for reading.” 

Susan Schmidt, a former teacher and current tutor to kids for dyslexia, including Haglund, helped bring the idea for the bills to the attention of lawmakers and helped in crafting the legislation. She told the Advance that throughout her time teaching, she saw numerous colleagues who “didn’t have the training” needed to help students with dyslexia. 

Schmidt said the bills could help relieve stress for parents and children. Some parents are left to turn to expensive tutoring to help their child, which can be even more difficult for low-income families. 

“All these parents, you know, they’ve sort of been waiting for some answer for the dysfunction of what they’ve gone through,” Schmidt said. “It’s as simple as let’s train our teachers, let’s get them screened, let’s intervene early. I mean, it’s dead simple, but it’s very complex in the outcomes of what happens.”

Elyse Presnell-Swenson, who has with dyslexia and is the parent of a child with dyslexia, has also been a vocal advocate for the bills. She helped lead the , Michigan Dyslexia Laws, which aims to boost visibility for the legislation and the issue of dyslexia in schools. 

“I don’t think any parent should have to go through what we’re going through, or any child,” Presnell-Swenson said. “Every child has a right to learn how to read.” 

Shannon Koenon, a board member of the Michigan Chapter of International Dyslexia Association, told the Advance that the bills “get at the root” of the issue and will ensure that steps are taken to help students in the classroom who have dyslexia. 

“They’re all going to be impactful,” Koenan said. “Educating those teachers, I think, is key. Because once they know the correct methodology and the science behind it, then they will start teaching differently in the classroom. … People are going through school and are not able to read. This will correct that.” 

Haglund, who spoke in favor of the bills in the Michigan Senate committee in November, said they will ensure other students get the help they need. 

“I’m quite happy to have dyslexia because it comes with so many amazing things,” Haglund said. “I think [the bills] would be very helpful, especially for younger kids who, like myself, who didn’t get the opportunity to work with a tutor who knew about dyslexia, and didn’t give me the same strategies over and over.”

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Susan Demas for questions: info@michiganadvance.com. Follow Michigan Advance on and .

Following an outcry from LGBTQ Floridians, Sen. Jeff Brandes proposed an amendment to HB 1557 to decrease the focus on the LGBTQ community and center the legislation on the broader scope of human sexuality.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

“If the intent is not to marginalize anyone let’s make sure we aren’t,” Brandes, of Pinellas County, told the Senate Appropriations committee on Monday.

But GOP colleagues weren’t convinced and the amendment failed. The bill soon will be considered on the Senate floor, and it’s likely to pass in the GOP-controlled Senate as Florida and other states are plowing through legislation that can create a chilling effect in classrooms.

HB 1557 is designed to limit how the LGBTQ community is discussed in public school classrooms by restricting conversations, considered “instruction,” particularly related to the youngest elementary children. But those limitations could be felt in higher grades.

Described as the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” bill by LGBTQ advocates, the legislation, which is nebulous, says that classroom “instruction” on “sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students.”

Sen. Brandes hoped to make a slight wording change — swap language that would place bans on instruction of “sexual orientation or gender identity” in kindergarten through 3rd grade classrooms with “human sexuality or sexual activity.”

“I think we can all agree…that discussions of sensitive subjects between kindergarteners and third graders should be best handled at home,” Brandes said at the Monday Senate Appropriations committee.

When the committee didn’t approve Brandes’ change, he expressed hope that a similar adjustment could be made on the Senate floor.

He said: “This bill has to go to the floor, we have the opportunity to soften this, to accomplish both goals: to ensure that these conversations can be had at home and to not impact our neighbors (the LGBTQ community).”

Joseph Knoll, who works with an LGBTQ healthcare facility called Spektrum Health, said that he is “deeply concerned” about the mental and physical health of kids potentially affected by the bill.

“I do agree that conversations should be age appropriate, but I do not agree that we should be adopting into law any discriminatory language that would single out specific people,” Knoll said.

Another concern is the push to increase parents’ access to information on their students.

The bill allows parents to sue school districts if they are not privy to situations related to their children or if their students are encouraged to have discussions on sexual orientation and gender identity, continuing the philosophy of Florida’s new Parents’ Bill of Rights law that parents have a right to direct the upbringing and education of their child.

But during public testimony on Monday, LGBTQ students, educators and advocates worry that students would not confide in educators and school staff for fear of being ‘outed’ to an unsupportive family.

A high schooler from Orange County named Will Larkins, told the committee that some parents are not supportive of their LGBTQ children.

“I’ve heard different members of the Legislature something along the lines of ‘parents know what’s best for their kids.’ When it comes to the queer community that is not true,” Larkins said. “If parents know what’s best for their kids, why did my best friend get kicked out of his house and have to live with me? Larkins continued: “Why do some many kids get abused for their sexuality and gender identity?”

Senate sponsor Dennis Baxley, a Republican who represents areas in Central Florida, said the outrage about the legislation is “fabricated by the media” and overblown.

“This (HB 1557) does one simple thing —it decides who’s in charge,” Baxley continued. “And I believe it is imperative, if we love children that we put parents in charge. And that these intimate decisions with their lives should not be made by an institution. They should be made in a family if at all possible.”

He also said that the bill protects against what he calls “social engineering” and brings “sensitive conversations” back to the parents.

Senate Minority Leader Sen. Lauren Book argued that teachers are not indoctrinating students.

“These (educators) are professionals who have gone to school for years and years. They have degrees, many of them with advanced degrees. We trust them with everything,” Book said.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Florida Phoenix maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Diane Rado for questions: info@floridaphoenix.com. Follow Florida Phoenix on and .

“As much as it breaks my heart to admit this, I have to be honest — I don’t know if I want him to do it,” she told lawmakers Tuesday during a  hearing on school staff shortages. “Not unless our teachers are finally provided with the support they need to do the job properly.”

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

And in just , Esposito-Visgitis outlined the challenges facing educators, warning of possible early retirements and less interest in the profession resulting from limited resources and burnout.

Teachers are “wearing more hats than we ever thought possible,” Esposito-Visgitis testified. Educators also serve as counselors, security aides, therapists, referees, surrogate parents, mediators, and mask monitors who are losing their planning periods while covering for their colleagues amid a national staffing crisis folded into the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Any one of these elements — retirements, departures, and fewer new teachers — is a cause for concern. Taken together? We are soon facing the teacher shortages that have plagued other states for a number of years now,” she cautioned.

Before the pandemic, there was already a growing staffing shortage, especially among classroom substitutes, and COVID-19 has only exacerbated educational challenges. This has resulted in teachers losing their preparation periods and lunch breaks to cover for their colleagues and administrators consolidating classrooms due to limited resources.

Adam McCormick, a teacher in the Scranton School District, told lawmakers that “under normal circumstances,” he would have taken a professional day to appear before lawmakers. Instead, he asked school administrators to coordinate a schedule, so he could still teach on Tuesday and not “tax the already tight schedules of my colleagues and students.”

Shortages also are not limited to the classroom. Ahead of the 2021-22 school year, districts nationwide reported a , which forced some schools to shut down in-person learning or find alternative ways to provide transportation to and from school each day.

In December, the Republican-controlled General Assembly tried to alleviate the burden by passing ,  by Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf, that gave schools added flexibility to fill classroom vacancies during the 2021-22 and 2022-23 academic years.

Rich Askey, the president of the Pennsylvania State Education Association, the state’s largest teacher’s union, praised the bill as a step toward solving the shortage by expanding the pool of those eligible but urged better pay to help recruit and retain substitutes.

On Monday, Askey testified that Pennsylvania has seen a 66 percent decline in Instructional I certificates, the most basic teaching certification, issued to in-state graduates and a 58 percent decline in certificates issued to graduates planning to work out-of-state.

“This is not sustainable,” he said. “And we anticipate it will continue to get worse.”

The cost of attaining a bachelor’s degree paired with maintaining certification is one of the top barriers for those who want to enter the teaching profession and stay in the classroom, Askey testified. He added that it’s almost impossible for teachers with high student loan debt to remain in the field, especially those working in states with low salaries.

“Moreover, we must remember that teachers do not just get a bachelor’s degree,” he said. “There are fees associated with assessments to achieve certification, certification fees to [the Pennsylvania Department of Education], costs for the 24 post-baccalaureate credits required to get an Instructional II certificate, and finally, the ongoing costs associated with professional development for the rest of their career.”

Panelists looked to a , with one Republican co-sponsor, as a potential solution to help address some of the challenges facing school districts. 

The legislation, authored by Sen. Vincent Hughes, D-Philadelphia, would establish high school career and technical education programs designed to provide students with hands-on experience to career pathways and kick-start the training and credentialing process for free. 

The bill also expands dual enrollment programs and establishes a Diversification and Workforce Fund, which would provide grants to colleges to increase diversity in teaching programs. Finally, the legislation would mandate that the state Department of Education collect and publish data, set goals, and coordinate efforts to recruit and retain teachers.

Larisa Shambaugh, chief talent officer for the School District of Philadelphia, also stressed the importance of student loan forgiveness for educators, similar to the recent relief program for nurses and other front-line health workers.

Sen. James Brewster, D-Allegheny, a former teacher, said Republicans in the General Assembly are the biggest challenge to education investment and reform.

“The answer is money,” Brewster said. “And the votes we need [are] on the other side of the aisle.”

One day before Tuesday’s hearing, Senate and House Democrats announced a $3.75 billion spending plan for education, staff recruitment and retention, and classroom resources. 

The proposal, which the lawmakers hope to pass as part of the 2022-23 state budget, would use $2.75 billion out of the general fund and $1 billion from unspent federal American Rescue Plan funds allocated to Pennsylvania last year.

Although Wolf said he would consider the spending proposal as he prepares his budget recommendations, there are signs of pushback from GOP budget officials.

In a statement issued Tuesday afternoon, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairperson Pat Browne, R-Lehigh, said the Democrats’ proposal “far outstrips our current revenue capacity and places our financial position in a multi-billion dollar deficit when the federal stimulus period is over.”

He added: “A historic tax increase will be the only means to maintain this commitment in the wake of the massive challenges of a global pandemic, record inflation, and labor shortages affecting employers across our commonwealth.”

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Pennsylvania Capital-Star maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor John Micek for questions: info@penncapital-star.com. Follow Pennsylvania Capital-Star on and .

The vote came the day after the Senate passed a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill, which now goes to the House. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she won’t introduce the infrastructure package for a vote until she’s assured all 50 Democrats in the Senate are on board with the rest of the party’s agenda regarding social, immigration and climate policies. But to get there she’ll have to balance competing agendas within her own party.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ����Ӱ�� Newsletter

“The House will continue to work with the Senate to ensure that our priorities for the people are included in the final infrastructure and reconciliation packages, in a way that is resilient and will build back better,” Pelosi said in Tuesday.

Moderate Democrats, however, her to take action on the infrastructure bill now and not wait until later this fall when committee leaders in the Senate work out the details of the $3.5 trillion bill. Observers say it could be late fall before the plan passes the Senate.

“After years of waiting, we cannot afford unnecessary delays to finally deliver on a physical infrastructure package,” moderates said in a letter. “As we continue to recover from the pandemic, the American people are counting on us to drive real results for them in every single Congressional district.”

Senate Democrats are using a process called reconciliation that allows them to pass the spending package without any Republican votes.

Sen. Krysten Simena of Arizona, who took the lead on negotiating with Republicans over the infrastructure bill, and Joe Manchin of West Virginia, another moderate Democrat, have suggested the $3.5 trillion figure is .

But Rick Hess, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said he doesn’t think most Democrats will be “treating the fiscal implications of budgetary rules with much seriousness.”

Manchin crossed the aisle in a long vote session last night to approve to the budget resolution that opposes allowing federal funds to support the teaching of critical race theory in K-12 schools, such as hiring consultants for teacher training. Sponsored by Arkansas Republican Tom Cotton, the legislation would add to several state laws banning educators from teaching that racism is embedded in U.S. systems to advantage white people.

It’s the larger $3.5 trillion package that concerns most education advocates. In to Congress Monday, 17 leading organizations urged lawmakers to include at least $130 billion in the reconciliation bill for school facilities — a concern that was left out of the infrastructure bill.

“The longstanding neglect of school facilities disproportionately impacts low-income school districts and those districts with particularly aging facilities,” the letter said. “These districts often lack a local tax base that can be leveraged for new school construction, major capital improvements, or building renovations and modernizations.”

School nutrition advocates want to see permanent funding for free school meals beyond the 2021-22 school year. Over 400 organizations have signed saying such a policy “eliminates the cost barrier for families who do not qualify [for free or reduced-price meals], but who still struggle to make ends meet.”

It’s unclear, however, whether Democrats can stretch the $3.5 trillion to cover everything they’d like to deliver, including $200 billion for pre-K, $109 billion for two years of free community college and several teacher education and higher education initiatives. The president’s agenda would also extend an increase in the Child Tax Credit for four more years and include paid family leave.

The U.S. Senate passed the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill on Tuesday, with 19 Republicans joining 50 Democrats in approving the measure. 

“I want to thank a group of senators, Democrats and Republicans for doing what they told me they would do,” President Joe Biden said. “They said they’re willing to work in a bipartisan manner, and I want to thank them for keeping their word.

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the result of a long negotiating process with Republicans, addresses the “clear and present danger” of lead pipes carrying drinking water, reduces transportation costs and increases internet access, Biden said.

“During remote learning during the pandemic last year,” he said, “we saw too many families forced to literally sit in their vehicles in a fast food parking lot so their children can get on the internet they couldn’t afford and didn’t have access to at home.”

The bill — the first phase of Biden’s domestic agenda — now heads to the House, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi isn’t expected to introduce it until it’s clear that all Democrats will support the second, and larger, social spending package.

The U.S. Senate is expected to pass a bi-partisan $1.2 trillion on Tuesday that includes funding for electric school buses, eliminating lead pipes in schools and expanding the nation’s access to broadband.

Most of President Joe Biden’s agenda for education and families, however, is included in a separate $3.5 trillion Senate Democrats unveiled Monday, with plans to pass legislation over Republican opposition.

Progressive House members have been threatening for months that they won’t approve one without the other, setting up a potential drawn-out battle this fall if Democrats don’t get everything they want in the larger “American Family Plan.” Republican leaders, meanwhile, have urged Democrats to separate the two packages to ensure that to fix roads and bridges and expand public transportation, among others, make it to the president’s desk. Thus far, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi the piecemeal approach, showing a determination to pass as much of the president’s agenda as possible within his first year in office.

“I don’t believe leadership would move one [bill] without being confident the other is locked down,” said Julia Martin, legislative director of Brustein and Manasevit, a Washington-based education law firm.

The strategy, she said, is an effort to ensure the larger social spending bill — which includes universal pre-K, free community college and an extension of the Child Tax Credit — would pass despite reservations from moderates over the cost and objections from more liberal members that it doesn’t go far enough.

With Democrats in control of both houses in Congress, they can pursue a process known as reconciliation, which doesn’t require any Republican votes.

“If you’re doing a one-party bill anyway, there’s a lot of pressure to pass long-standing and more liberal priorities,” Martin said.

Some Democrats, for example, want to see the larger Child Tax Credit, which families began receiving last month, . The one-year increase passed as part of the March relief bill, and Biden’s plan extends it through 2025. House and Senate Democrats are also pushing for , but Biden’s proposal doesn’t go that far. ���’s calling for free school meals for all students in the , covering about 70 percent of students in the elementary grades.

The chance Democrats could lose more seats in Congress is another reason they’re pushing to pass both packages. With midterm elections next year, some experts expect Republicans to challenge the majority on issues such as .

Democrats “could very likely lose the House in ‘22, so this is the moment,” said Danny Carlson, associate executive director for policy and advocacy at the National Association for Elementary School Principals.

The $3.5 trillion package includes $726 billion for the Senate education committee, which will write bills for pre-K, expanding access to child care, building and renovating schools, and addressing teacher shortages. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, in a letter Monday, asked the committees to submit their bills by Sept. 15.

He also urged Democrats to “go on the offense” during the upcoming recess “to explain how our budget will lower costs and cut taxes for American families.”

But Republicans argue it will only increase the national debt. In , Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called the package “far-left radicalism” and said on the floor Saturday that budget committee Chairman Bernie Sanders’s “socialist shopping list will make every disagreement we’ve had in landing the infrastructure compromise look like a rounding error.”

Last week, the Congressional Budget Office released showing the infrastructure bill would increase the federal deficit by $256 billion over the next 10 years. That figure the bill, but is fueling objections to additional spending

McConnell specifically mentioned the administration’s child care proposal, calling it “government meddling … that would privilege certain families’ choices over others.’”

Biden’s plan seeks to lower the cost of child care, while still giving parents options, including centers and family child care providers. But some conservatives argue there’s still too much emphasis on group settings.

Katharine Stevens, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said while she understands that full-time child care is essential for working parents, “it’s not optimal for the majority of children — even harmful for some — during the most crucial period of development.”

The plan would increase pay for providers, which can allow centers to hire better-qualified teachers, but Stevens said ensuring all programs reach high quality is still “a very big if.”

When Congress returns in the fall, the Senate will also have to take up the fiscal year 2022 budget. The House has already passed seven appropriations bills, including nearly $103 billion for the Department of Education, a $29 billion increase over 2021.