OKLAHOMA CITY
Article 13, Section 13-4 of the Oklahoma Constitution is the section of the state’s constitution that gives the legislature the authority to compel school attendance for all children that are “sound in mind and body” from the ages of 8 to 16. The section reads as follows:
The Legislature shall provide for the compulsory attendance at some public or other school, unless other means of education are provided, of all the children in the State who are sound in mind and body, between the ages of eight and sixteen years, for at least three months in each year.
The clause, “unless other means of education are provided” is the clause that has allowed Oklahoma to enjoy the most robust homeschooling environment of any state in the union.
According to the Constitutional Home Educators Alliance (CHEA), that robust environment is now under direct attack through several of the “school choice” bills currently being pushed through the legislature – several of which have the backing of prominent conservative groups and legislators.
The biggest threat, according to CHEA, comes from the Sen. Greg Treat (R-Oklahoma City) sponsored bill, SB 1647. The bill, entitled the Oklahoma Empowerment Act, creates the Oklahoma Empowerment Account – a school voucher-type program that allows parents to take the money the state allocates to the public school for their child’s education and use it to help pay for private schools or homeschool expenses.
The groups supporting that bill, which include the Oklahoma Council for Public Affairs (OCPA), laud the bill as a way of allowing children from poor and underperforming schools a way out of those schools through either private education or homeschooling.
However, Jana Belcher, a founding member of CHEA and Vice Chair of the CHEA board, has a very different take on this bill.
“It’s not empowerment. It’s enticement and entanglement.”
Last week, Ignite Liberty interviewed three ladies – Jana Belcher, Carrie Bertrand, and Jenni White – who are at the forefront of the fight against “school vouchers” in an effort to better understand their argument against it. Jana Belcher and Carrie Bertrand are founding members of CHEA. Jenni White is a long-time conservative activist, former mayor of Luther, and founder of ROPE (Restoring Oklahoma Parental Empowerment).
White pointed out that the act itself is based on flawed logic. “We already have ‘school choice’ in Oklahoma. Parents can choose to send their kids to public school, public-school at home (via EPIC and other virtual charter schools), private school, or parent-led, parent-taught homeschool. If they can’t afford private school, we already have the Lyndsay Nicole Henry Scholarship that pays for children with special needs or from underperforming schools to attend the private school of their choice.”
“What this truly does,” according to White, “is incentivizes government control of private schools and de-incentivizes homeschooling.” It does this through the promise of a parent being able to take the approximately $3,900 the state would normally allot to the school district and send it to the parents that enroll in the program. The group claims that any state funds disbursed to the parents would automatically come with strings attached, giving the government more control over not only private schools but over homeschoolers as well.
Their point has validity to it, as Senator Treat admitted in committee hearings last week that there would have to be accountability for the funds disbursed. “If a parent is going to take the funds and go to Disney World, then obviously that’s a problem.” Treat went onto say that 10% of all of the “education savings accounts” through this program would be audited every year. Any evidence of wrongdoing would then be turned over to the Attorney General’s office for investigation.
As written, the bill only allows parents to use the funds to enroll their children in “education service providers” that the state has approved to receive empowerment funds. According to the bill as currently written, education service providers are defined as,
a person, business, public school district, public charter school, magnet school, institution within The Oklahoma State System of Higher Education, or organization that receives payments from a parent directing an Oklahoma Empowerment Account to provide educational goods and/or, services to empowerment students.”
The bill defines “qualified expenses” as the following:
- tuition and/or fees at a private school accredited or in the process of obtaining accreditation by the State Board of Education or another accrediting association approved by the State Board of Education
- tuition and/or fees for non-public online learning programs
- services contracted for and provided by a public school district, public charter school, or magnet school including but not limited to classes and extracurricular activities and programs,
- tutoring services provided by an individual or a tutoring facility,
- textbooks, curriculum, or other instructional materials including but not limited to supplemental materials or associated online instruction required by an education service provider,
- computer hardware or other technological devices, educational software, and applications that are used to meet an empowerment student’s curriculum needs,
- tuition and/or fees for a curriculum or program, along with related instruments, supplies, accessories, and materials, that provides instruction in drama, music, speech and debate, agriculture, or other similar activities,
- school uniforms,
- fees for nationally standardized assessments including but not limited to assessments used to determine college admission and advanced placement examinations as well as tuition and/or fees for tutoring or preparatory courses for the assessments,
- tuition and/or fees for summer education programs and specialized after-school education programs; provided, however, that such expense does not include before- school or after-school childcare,
- tuition, fees, instructional materials, and assessment fees for a curriculum or program offered by a technology center school,
- educational services and therapies including but not limited to occupational, behavioral, physical, speech- language, and audiology therapies,
- tuition and fees for concurrent enrollment at an institution within The Oklahoma State System of Higher Education,
- fees for transportation paid to a fee-for-service provider for the student to travel to and from an education service provider,
- or any other qualified expense approved by the Agency.
According to this, then, a parent would be barred from using Empowerment Act funds to purchase curriculum to teach their children themselves without express permission of the Agency responsible for administering the program. Nor could they use Empowerment Act funds to pay for expenses related to joining one of the many homeschool co-ops around the state unless that co-op has been approved by the state to be an “education service provider.”
CHEA argues that the notion that parents would have to get permission from the state to use these funds to educate their children themselves flies in the very face long-established Supreme Court precedent:
Our jurisprudence historically has reflected Western civilization concepts of the family as a unit with broad parental authority over minor children. Our cases have consistently followed that course; our constitutional system long ago rejected any notion that a child is ‘the mere creature of the State’ and, on the contrary, asserted that parents generally ‘have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare {their children} for additional obligations.'” U. S. Supreme Court, PARHAM v. J. R., 442 U.S. 584 (1979)
While it is true that homeschool parents wouldn’t be forced – yet – to take these funds, CHEA believes that the lure is too great for those families wanting to homeschool. As a result, those families will enroll in the program thinking it is the same thing as homeschooling, when in reality it is very different.
The trickle-down effect of that decision could do irreparable damage to the rich homeschool landscape that Oklahoma families have enjoyed for so long. As these funds make their way into the numerous homeschool organizations that have served the homeschool community for years, it would bring state regulation with it.
When pressed as to the concern about the legislature being able to use this bill as a way of controlling homeschoolers, Treat responded, “whether some future legislature is going to do that or not, we can’t really fight that battle now.”
According to CHEA, the legislature shouldn’t even open the door to the possibility.
The Digital Wallet Program
It appears as though the funds would be disbursed differently from other state benefit programs. There is a separate bill authored by Rep Ryan Martinez (R-Edmond), HB 3482, that would create a “digital wallet” program that appears to be the funding mechanism for the Empowerment Act funds.
According to the bill, the Digital Wallet Program is designed to, “increase learning opportunities for students, establish new flexibilities for families, empower families to create education solutions that fit the unique needs of their children, and to empower and encourage the state to directly support families.” The funds would be distributed by “the Governor, or his or her designee.”
CHEA has spoken to Rep Martinez to express their concerns about the bill. Since then, it was been activated and as been moved to the House Appropriations and Budget Education Subcommittee for consideration.
The Cautionary Tale of EPIC and the OKC Storm
CHEA has been speaking out for almost a decade against the creeping advancement of state influence into the homeschool world through the intermingling of state funds into homeschool extra-curricular programs via EPIC Charter School “learning funds.” Their argument has merit.
Back in 2019, one of the most prominent homeschool athletic associations in the state, the OKC Storm, was investigated by the OSBI in direct connection to their investigation of EPIC Charter Schools. OSBI officials raided the home of OKC Storm founder and athletic director Kurt Talbot, seizing his computer and cell phone in the process.
In the warrant, the OSBI alleged that the OKC Storm unlawfully received state funds through EPIC. The warrant stated, “Kurt Talbot employed over a dozen coaches who were not certified teachers and provided direct instruction to players. Kurt Talbot admitted that state appropriated funds were used to buy uniforms for Epic students, cover some of the costs of paying the coaches, and other expenses of the OKC Storm.”
Though no charges were ever brought against the Storm, homeschool parents run the very real risk of having their homeschool day interrupted by an investigation from state agencies should they take the bait and participate in the Oklahoma Empowerment Account program…and it wouldn’t even take anything as drastic as an OSBI investigation.
According to Section “N” of the proposed legislation, it would only take an “anonymous report”:
The Agency may promulgate rules to implement the provisions of this act, which shall include but not be limited to, (1) Establishing or contracting for the establishment of an online anonymous fraud reporting service; (2) Establishing an anonymous telephone hotline for fraud reporting.”
For CHEA, that risk alone is far to great to warrant passage of SB 1647.
SB 1647 passed out of the Senate Education Committee by the narrowest of margins, 8-7. It only passed because the Senator McCourtney utilized the privileges granted to him as Senate Floor Leader to vote in the committee.
The bill now heads to the Appropriations Committee. If it passes out of that committee it will head to the full Senate for consideration. As of now, if the bill passes the Senate it appears to be doomed in the House, as the Speaker of the House has said the bill will be “dead on arrival.” That, of course, could change.
Tax Credits Instead of Vouchers
In response to their advocacy against the bill, CHEA has been ruthlessly attacked on Facebook, in particular by those directly associated with OCPA, accusing them of not caring about kids in difficult family or educational situations.
The attacks appear to be baseless, however, because the group is backing a version of “school vouchers” that does not pose a threat to homeschoolers.
SB 1471 (included in Ignite Liberty’s legislative tracker) would create refundable tax credits through the state tax structure that would allow parents to receive a tax credit for their children’s educational expenses of up to $2,500. Should a parent fall into the income category that would grant them a refund, those funds would be received in the form of a state tax refund through the Oklahoma Tax Commission.
So those same “single moms” Mr. England referred to in his tweet would likely be eligible for tax credits under that program.
Because this money is not given to the parents through the Oklahoma Empowerment Accounts, there would be no strings attached as to how the parents use it. In actuality, it would be a refund for money the parents have already spent on their child’s educational expenses.
According to a summary of the bill, “The Oklahoma Tax Commission (OTC) may require applicants for the credit to submit copies of such receipts or similar financial documentation as may be necessary to confirm the taxpayer’s statement of the allowable credit.” This would both prevent any fraud, waste, or abuse by the parents as well as eliminate any avenue for the state to directly interfere with how a parent chooses to homeschool their child.
CHEA has been working behind the scenes to try and strengthen this bill even further by allowing parents to receive the $2,500 in tax credits without having to spend the money first – similar to how the Advanced Child Tax Credit from the CARES Act was paid out last year. This too could be done without the unwanted “strings” attached that would give the government a way into the homeschooler’s home.
SB 1647, according to Belcher, Bertrand, and White, would allow the state to, “follow the money first to the child, and then into the home where they would map the progress of the child via 300 different datapoints in the state’s longitudinal database.”
Additional Threats to Homeschooling
While SB 1647 presents the gravest threat, there are other bills that are equally concerning to CHEA for homeschoolers and private schools.
SB 1583 creates a “transfer allowance” that would allow a parent to transfer their child out of a failing school to the private school of their choice at the state’s expense. The summary for this measure directly points out the avenue that this gives the state for direct influence over a private school, stating, “The measure requires the State Department of Education to approve private schools in which students may enroll.”
SB 1509 is the most recent version of the “Tim Tebow” law attempted to pass through the state legislature. The law would provide a path for homeschool students to participate in extra-curricular activities at public schools, but only under strict guidelines.
According to the bill summary, “The measure allows a student to demonstrate adherence to academic standards by a method of evaluation agreed upon by the student’s parent or legal guardian and the resident district superintendent.” This gives the public school superintendent direct influence over how homeschool parents educate their children. If they feel a homeschool family should be using the same sex-ed curriculum, or the same SEL (social-emotional learning – another word for Common Core) programs the school uses then they would be within their power to force the parents to comply.
They Just Want to be Left Alone
Above all, CHEA emphasized that homeschooling families to not want any of these bills. They simply want to be left alone to educate their children according to the dictates of their own conscience.
They pointed out that homeschool parents have a long history of making whatever sacrifices were necessary to provide their children with the opportunities to be successful in their chosen fields. They have not yet needed the help of the State, and they don’t need it now.
Beyond that, the voucher programs seem to have a history of poor success. According to EdChoice.org, Florida’s voucher program is only used by 4.9% of students despite 62% of their students being eligible. Given how Florida’s program has been touted for its success by the proponents of SB 1647, it draws to question if there are other influences behind the scenes.
The American Federation for Children has been the largest nationwide organization pushing the school choice agenda. Their local lobbyist, Jennifer Carter is the wife of Ray Carter, the director for independent journalism for OCPA…the main statewide organization pushing SB 1647.
Jennifer Carter was also the Chief of Staff to former State Education Superintendent Janet Barresi, the superintendent largely responsible to getting Common Core passed in Oklahoma. Though it has since been officially rescinded, it continues in many school districts as Social Emotional Learning (SEL).
OCPA’s influence is likely why even some of the most conservative, pro-homeschooling senators have voted in support support of SB 1647 in committee.
Interestingly enough, the Senators most willing to listen to the arguments from CHEA were Democrats J.J. Dossett (D-Owasso), and Jo Anna Dossett (D-Tulsa). They both voted NO along with Sen. Carrie Hicks (D-Oklahoma City), Sen. Tom Dugger (R-Stillwater), Sen. Brenda Stanley (R-Midwest City), Sen. Blake Stephens (R-Tahlequah), and Sen. Dewayne Pemberton (R-Muskogee).
The senators that voted YES on SB 1674 were as follows:
Sen. Nathan Dahm (R-Broken Arrow)
Sen. Jake Merrick (R-Yukon)
Sen. Joe Newhouse (R-Tulsa)
Sen. Marty Quinn (R-Claremore)
Sen. Zack Taylor (R-Seminole)
Sen. Adam Pugh (R-Edmond)
Sen. Greg McCortney (R-Ada)
Sen. Greg Treat (R-Oklahoma City)
Ignite Liberty will continue to monitor the status of the legislation mention in this article. If you wish to subscribe to CHEA to receive their legislative updates in order to get updates on every bill that affects homeschooling in Oklahoma click here, then scroll to the bottom of the page.
