Adds students residing in New Hampshire with a parent or guardian on active military duty to the priority guidelines list for education freedom account eligibility.
(New Title) adding students with a parent or guardian on active military duty to the education freedom accounts priority guidelines.
AFT-NH opposes any exapnsion of school vouchers at this time. The State of NH does not have the revenue to adequately fund public schools so all students have the opportunity to learn and thrive in their local, neighborhood public school. It is not time to look at any expansion of the school voucher program. Scarce revenue would help more students if invested in public school districts with weak property tax bases.
Students belong in their communities. By moving students with higher support needs away from their own neighborhoods we isolate them and we "other" them. Each student should be part of the community where they live and education should be supportive and accessible for all.
Enough manipulation of voucher eligibility already. The Legislature has already made everyone eligible. From there, all applicants can take their turn.
Testimony in Opposition to HB 1832 Honorable Members of the House Education Committee, I am here to oppose House Bill 1832, which proposes to add military families to the priority eligibility list for the Education Freedom Account (EFA) program. While this bill seeks to recognize the unique challenges faced by military-connected students, it does so within an already fragile and inequitable EFA system, which is largely unaddressed in this proposal. 1. Inadequate Addressing of Systemic Issues The legislation acknowledges the educational disruptions that military families experience due to frequent relocations. However, merely adding military families to the priority list for EFAs does not address the underlying issues of funding adequacy and oversight mechanisms that are critical to ensuring educational equity. Adverse Underpinnings: The EFA system has historically been criticized for its lack of funding and inconsistent oversight. By simply broadening eligibility, we risk providing symbolic accommodation without creating the structural supports necessary for meaningful change. 2. Potential Marginalization of Other Vulnerable Groups While the bill may seem equity-positive for mobile military families, it raises concerns about intersectionality and the unintentional marginalization of other vulnerable student populations. For instance, students with disabilities, students of color, and those from low-income families may find themselves further sidelined in favor of new priority groups, without additional resources allocated for their specific needs. Who Benefits: The primary beneficiaries appear to be military families who can take advantage of the EFA program, potentially accessing educational options that might suit their transient lifestyles. Who Does Not Benefit: This shift may inadvertently disadvantage other marginalized groups who have long been advocating for equitable funding and resources. If the focus is solely on military families, the needs of other vulnerable populations may continue to be overlooked, perpetuating systemic inequities within the education system. 3. Lack of Trauma-Informed Approaches The legislation fails to incorporate trauma-informed practices and supports tailored for students who are experiencing the stresses related to military life, such as relocation and the absence of a parent due to deployment. Trauma-informed strategies are crucial for effectively supporting students as they navigate the emotional and social challenges tied to their unique situations. 4. Short-Term Solutions vs. Long-Term Equity In a landscape where educational equity is paramount, we must strive for sustainable, long-term solutions that ensure all students receive a quality education regardless of their circumstances. By focusing on short-term adjustments such as priority additions to the EFA system, we risk perpetuating a system that prioritizes expediency over holistic educational reform. Conclusion In conclusion, while House Bill 1832 seeks to address the needs of military families, it does so at the potential cost of broader educational equity and stability for all students in New Hampshire. Instead of merely expanding priority eligibility, we should work towards enhancing funding adequacy, implementing robust oversight mechanisms, and ensuring trauma-informed reforms that reflect the needs of all vulnerable students. Thank you for your consideration.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.
Position recorded without written comment.