Explaining LEARNS vote

Now that the legislature has given final approval to the education bill proposed by Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, I can say that she successfully completed one the most politically courageous moves I have ever witnessed.

She truly brought the discussion of improving public education out of the box. Even her political opponents had to concede that the LEARNS Act went far beyond the typical ideas proposed by educators wanting to improve public schools.

Even so, I ultimately voted against the bill and because it is such an important and far-reaching measure, I owe it to my constituents to explain my reasons.

The LEARNS Act was an omnibus bill. Like a Christmas tree, it had something in it for everyone. Packaging so many provisions in a single bill was an essential part of the governor’s strategy for winning legislative approval.

As is true with most omnibus bills, there are things in it I can agree with and there are things in it I don’t like. Almost every legislator had to make a similar decision as I did, weighing the good versus the bad.

For me, this omnibus bill drew lines that should not be crossed, and therefore I had to vote no.

Because it crossed those lines, it was too difficult for me to vote yes.

One example is that no matter how noble the cause, you must be able to pay for it, not just over the next few years but into the future.

The U.S. economy is going through tough times right now. We’re experiencing Inflation, shrinkflation and supply-chain issues. Our businesses are at the mercy of world events beyond our control that make our economy very unstable. Looking at the future, it doesn’t look as if the economy is going to get better. Being a farmer, I’d say I think things could get worse. Some financial experts warn us to prepare for a possible recession.

Considering current conditions and such a risky economic forecast, I believe it’s unwise to exponentially increase state spending. It doesn’t matter the government program, I would not choose the path of increased spending.

During debate I asked from the Senate floor, “if we increase spending on this program by $300 million, how can we reduce spending by that same amount elsewhere in the budget?” I did not get an answer.

My second cause for concern was how the vouchers were set up. I support vouchers, and I have since 2006. However, government should not pay them on the front end, as the LEARNS Act stipulates.

We should only pay them on the back end, after the student has shown a basic level of accomplishment. With scholarships, we don’t hand students the money until they achieve a minimum score on the ACT. By the same token we shouldn’t pay for vouchers until the student completes the semester. What if the private school decides in mid-semester to reject the student? Under the LEARNS Act the student returns to public school, but the private school keeps the voucher money.

I witnessed the debacle of the Ecclesia College scandal, so I worry that vouchers may go to schools that don’t have the best interest of the students at heart. Without any parameters in the LEARNS Act, I worry about startups taking advantage of the system, of parents and of students, in order to turn a quick profit.

In the Ecclesia case several people went to prison, including college president Oren Paris III. To this day the college has never opened its records, so we have no idea how public tax dollars were spent.

There has been no closure of the Ecclesia scandal, in my opinion. There have been local news stories on bad conditions and the hiring of a professor who was later arrested for trying to have sex with underage boys. It is a consequence of the college’s failure to perform background checks. The professor had previous convictions for a similar issue in his past.

Finally, the LEARNS Act was rushed through the legislature far more hastily than I would have liked. School board members, superintendents, teachers and parents were left out of the process.

This bill was filed late in the afternoon after most legislators had gone home. It was rushed through the entire process in two weeks. Dozens of people took off work to drive to Little Rock to speak on the bill. They were allowed five minutes before the Senate Education Committee to express their concerns. At a second meeting they were allowed only two minutes.

The speed with which this bill was rushed through is in stark contrast to how education bills usually proceed. They’re examined very thoroughly by all the affected parties, because school finance is so complex. Our children’s future prosperity is the ultimate goal, so we usually review education bills at length because the stakes are so high.

••• Bryan King represents District 28 in the Arkansas State Senate. The district includes all of Carroll County.