Anthony, Allison, Brown speak on the voucher bill

Note: Following is an encapsulation of remarks made by legislators during today's debate. While this note does reflect remarks made by these lawmakers, it is not a full and verbatim transcript of the remarks.

Rep. Mike Anthony: Where is the superintendent who represents 700,000 children in this state?

I said as a freshman, One of these days, you're going to awaken the sleeping giant of this state -- the teachers of this state. When the message gets to them and they understand it -- you sit back and laugh because teachers don't vote -- when that happens, you won't see this kind of stuff.

I want to apologize to my delegation in Spartanburg who got those nasty report cards over this.

Every parent has one opportunity to educate your child. Does that mean you have to be for choice? No, but it means every time I saw parents engaged in their child's education, they got it. Parents have to be engaged.

I don't like that "minimally-adequate" requirement we got back from the courts.

The people who run the schools now are adjudicators -- the judges, litigators -- the lawyers -- and legislators.

This is going to weaken the General Fund budget, because this process has been fought for by mean-spirited people. To my colleagues in Spartanburg, I can't imagine you voting for this, the way they treated you.

Wait 'til next year. What are they going to bring back next year?

How can we throw away $37 million to appease 65,000 when we can't fund the 700,000 who have chosen public schools? This is just tossing water in their faces.

Remember what I said: One of these days, we're going to awaken the sleeping giant.

Rep. Rita Allison: I have a few things to share before you go home.

I stand here... conflicted. I am, over how we got here.

I've been in the General Assembly for a number of years, and through the Governor's office, and throughout that time I know parents who wanted parental choice, parents who cared and who wanted parental choice.

Then there was the other side, parents who were scared there wouldn't be enough money to fund public education.

This bill is not a silver bullet to determine whether public education is funded.

I think so much of Mr. Anthony. In his heart, he puts the child in the center of everything. That's what we have to do. We have public schools I would put up against any in the nation. But we also have weak links. We are as strong as those weak links, public and private. They have to be brought up.

We have to have the will to do what we haven't had the will to do. We took up tax reform without any education funding in it. We have to stop and think about what we're doing. We have to be able to do for the teachers the things they need to teach every day, and parents have to be involved.

This is not the silver bullet. We'll have to do our job to support public education in our state and keep it going.

I want to thank you for the civility in this body today. There hasn't been that civility on the journey to this. We should not be pitting education against education in this state; it should be the best thing to happen to any child in this state, private or public.

I hope we've learned a lesson through this journey we've taken on choice. It's not about drawing a line in the sand and becoming an obstructionist and threatening people because they have a feel about something. It's about allowing people to come together at a table.

Rep. Boyd Brown: Obviously I'm against the bill. I went to private school in Fairfield County; those are not the best public schools in the state, but we're trying to make them better.

By taking children out of those schools and putting them in a segregated private school is not the answer. It weakens our public education system.

It's a vehicle, so they can come back next year and chip away some more, the guys who work for Howard Rich. They're going to find a way to keep getting paid by Howard Rich.

I have two main problems. One is the way that group conducts business. We've an honorable county delegation targeted, a member from the Low Country blasted on a blog because she stood up for what her constituents want.

What you're saying with this bill is that this IS the way to get things done. When it comes to school choice, that's what it took to get this passed. All it took was legally being on the take from Howard Rich.

Arthur Ravenel said, If you can't take their money and vote against them, you have no business being in politics in the first place.

Instead of voting on the interests of Howard Rich, you need to vote in the interests of your constituents.

They picked off people like Keith Kelly, an honorable man, and that's they way they got things done.

Second is what it actually does to public education. On most Friday nights, like many of you, I'm at a football game. These public schools have always been, and despite Howard Rich, the backbone of our communities. We don't gather in church; it's still pretty segregated. It's now the football stands, the basketball arena.

We're incentivizing parents to take their children out of public schools, and keep them home, and fracture our communities more than they're fractured now. In encourage all of you to vote against it.

Anthony's Amendment 25 tabled

Note: Following is an encapsulation of actions taken and remarks made by legislators during today's debate. While this note does reflect remarks made by these lawmakers, it is not a full and verbatim transcript of the remarks.

Anthony's Amendment 25 eliminates the PASS test and uses another test that can apply to private schools as well as public schools.

White moved to table; Anthony requested roll call.

Vote: 56-55, tabled.

Anthony's Amendment 2 tabled

Note: Following is an encapsulation of actions taken and remarks made by legislators during today's debate. While this note does reflect remarks made by these lawmakers, it is not a full and verbatim transcript of the remarks.

Rep. Terry Alexander: Is this really apples to apples?

Anthony: No, different levels of deductions for different children, private schools versus home schools.

Alexander: Isn't a state test part of apples-to-apples?

Anthony: That's my amendment. It's only fair. I've never figured out why accountability didn't come with this.

Rep. Eric Bedingfield: A certain portion of federal education dollars is tied to identifying a state test.

Anthony: It's a mandate from the federal government that we identify a state test. We don't have a choice.

Bedingfield: Jo Anne Anderson said there are ways to compare apples to apples without using the same test.

Anthony: I saw the good work the EOC did, but I will tell you this: I know that the Stanford test is much different from ours. We created the PASS test to meet NCLB. Why wouldn't you want to take the state test if you take the state dollars?

Bedingfield: At the appropriate time, I will move to table this amendment.

====
Anthony: Under Inez Tenenbaum, we created the third toughest test in the nation.

___: In Pickens County, we had a child who enrolled in a private school. At Christmas, they decided that couldn't afford it and went back to a public school. Could they take the deduction?

Anthony: I don't know.

Rep. Tommy Pope: There's a lot of tension and teacher lament that teachers are just teaching to the test. Do you think the PASS test is good for our schools?

Anthony: I think it's outlived its time.

Allison: Move to table the amendment.

Anthony requested roll call.

Vote: 63-53, tabled.

Anthony's amendment 2 is debated

Note: Following is an encapsulation of actions taken and remarks made by legislators during today's debate. While this note does reflect remarks made by these lawmakers, it is not a full and verbatim transcript of the remarks.

Rep. Gene Pinson, debating Amendment 2 by Rep. Mike Anthony, asked if there's another measurement to use besides the PASS test.

Anthony: Each state has to declare a state test. We've declared the PASS test is our test. If you're going to take state money, it's fair to take a state test.

Rep. Jackie Hayes: We have no problem with children attending any school their parents want them to attend. When we're talking about state funds, we want everyone on the same page.

Anthony: This goes way back to 2003, Put Parents In Charge. Then, tax credits. This is the ultra, ultra light of all the voucher bills that have come before us.

Hayes: In your tenure, have your constituents asked you for a tax credit?

Anthony: Yes, we have a Christian day school; those are the parents who have asked for it. But we have 700,000 children in our public schools who take the PASS test. If these folks were willing to take this test, we'd be more comfortable.

Hayes: Would this give every student a chance to go to a private school?

Anthony: They'd always have to be accepted. It doesn't guarantee any physically or mentally handicapped kids would go to a private school.

Voucher debate begins in the South Carolina House

Note: Following is an encapsulation of actions taken and remarks made by legislators during today's debate. While this note does reflect remarks made by these lawmakers, it is not a full and verbatim transcript of the remarks.

Rep. Rita Allison has offered Amendment 1 to HB 4894, the voucher bill. Allison was one of several Republicans who voted against the voucher bill last year. Her amendment is adopted.

Rep. Mike Anthony offered Amendment 2, asking that students receiving vouchers be subject to testing as well as children in traditional public schools.

"Grades 3 through 8 take the PASS test. A big thing about choice for 10 years has been competition, competition, competition. You can't compete without a level playing field. If their parents are going to be allowed to get a deduction, it's only fair that they take a test."

The State details Zais's parsimony, lack of advocacy

Situations like these make me wish there were cameras in committee rooms, so we could all watch the outright foolishness that occurs in them.

In today's The State, reporter Seanna Adcox adds more details to what we knew about Superintendent Mick Zais's lack of commitment to advocating for South Carolina's public schools and the children they serve.

Zais asked a Ways and Means panel not to cut a key funding stream for classrooms but did not ask for an increase. The so-called base student cost primarily pays teacher salaries. The current per-student allocation is $1,880 because of recession budget cuts, though a state funding formula calls for it to be $2,790 this year.

Noting the economy remains uncertain, Zais told the budget-writing panel his budget request for 2012-13 is largely unchanged from the current budget, with a few exceptions. That included $14.5 million to cover student increases, to prevent a drop in base student cost.

"These dollars go to the classroom, and that's where our priorities should be," Zais said.

With a puzzled expression, Rep. Michael Anthony, D-Union, asked, "Why, then, as state superintendent of our public schools, are you not asking for an increase to catch up?"

Mike Anthony's a straight shooter and a lifelong educator -- one of the precious few serving in the legislature -- and I'm sure he knows hundreds or thousands of educators whose success depends upon adequate funding.

House Minority Leader Harry Ott grilled Zais, repeatedly asking whether he's telling teachers they should go a fourth year without a raise.

The Republican superintendent said he's not sure the money is available, and legislators can provide more than he is requesting.

Budget advisors expect an additional $913.4 million in one-time and recurring revenue because of surplus from the fiscal year that closed June 30, along with more money coming in this fiscal year than legislators budgeted, plus continued growth. But required increases - including property tax relief, health care and reserve funds - gobble up most of that money.

It would cost $553 million to restore the base student cost to $2,790, according to the state budget office.

Ott said the Republican-controlled Legislature is highly unlikely to put any more into public education than Zais seeks.

"Your job is to fight for what you think is important for education. You have to take a position," said Ott, D-St. Matthews. "You get to write your budget for whatever you want. You are the man in charge of the request. We find the money."

Not to put too fine a point on it, but damn right.

Our Constitution authorizes one person -- only one, in the whole vast system of South Carolina's government -- to advocate on behalf of public schools and our children, and Zais won that position. Knowing he's tightfisted and opposes public education, maybe he shouldn't have run for the office. But he did, and he won, and whether or not he likes it, it's his job to tell the legislature how much it's going to cost to bring our public schools up to speed, and to walk the halls in Columbia every day in search of those funds. To do less is to abrogate his responsibility.

One would think that a man who rose to the rank of general in the United States military would understand responsibility and would honor it.

Teachers are usually paid based on their years in the classroom and level of degree. But legislators have suspended the step increases for the last several years. Zais said the Legislature could choose to return to the minimum salary schedule.

"How they make it up is up to them," Zais said.

At best, this is disingenuous of Zais. Our legislative majority isn't going to drop so much as a pecan without someone shaking their tree. As superintendent, you advocate for what you want, and you point out every instance that you don't get it from lawmakers.

For reference, Zais might do well to review the superintendency of Inez Tenenbaum, a superintendent who understood the job. Of course, Inez had been an educator before becoming an administrator. Clearly, it made a difference.

Zais' largest request for additional money - $36 million - would buy enough new school buses to comply with the state's 15-year replacement cycle, so the agency can get buses from the mid-'80s off the road. All but five of the state's 201 buses that date from 1984 through 1987 are for students with disabilities.

He also sought an additional $5 million to keep buses fueled and running. With two-thirds of the agency's fleet more than 15 years old, the buses are expensive to maintain and not fuel-efficient, Zais said.

Last year, the Legislature designated up to $12 million in unclaimed lottery money toward replacing them - overriding Gov. Nikki Haley's veto - but the money depends on how many prizes go unclaimed. So far, the agency has received just $2.2 million, which will buy buses for the School for the Deaf and the Blind in Spartanburg, said Zais spokesman Jay Ragley.

The last time legislators designated money for school buses was 2007, when they approved replacing the statewide fleet every 15 years. That would require buying nearly 380 yearly. But that law has been ignored amid the economic downturn.

The economic downturn has nothing to do with ignoring the school bus law; our legislators ignore laws when the wind blows and when it's still, when it rains and when it shines, when it's day and when it's night. Ignoring a law is taken as a prerogative of holding power.

Seanna, here's a great question whose answer ought to be included as context every time the Educating Finance Act and its base student cost as mentioned: How many years -- and specifically, which ones -- has the EFA's base student cost been fully funded since the law was enacted in 1977? I'm confident that someone in the Rutledge Building could tell you, if Zais would allow his staff to talk to the media. Or, you could file a FOIA request to get the data.

Zais recommends closing an incentive program for teachers earning national certification, which provides an annual bonus of either $5,000 or $7,500 - depending on when they applied - for the 10-year life of the certificate. Nothing would change for teachers already in the program.

Zais said studies indicate the expensive program does not improve student learning, but rather that already-excellent teachers pursue the additional certification.

Indeed, we want to leave behind absolutely no incentive for children to aspire to become teachers, and college students to consider education as a viable and stable career choice, and for education professionals to be compensated for their pursuit of additional credentials and professional development. The quicker we can remove all incentive, the quicker they'll leave the profession and we can get down to the business of closing public schools and selling their assets to private companies.