Both are bills which siphon off funds from our public schools.
Here is the text of the message, which you can edit and personalize:
Thank you
for your service to our Commonwealth.
HB 8 will open Virginia to corporate virtual providers
who do not have the welfare of Virginia students as their top priority. It sets up a virtual school board and a
statewide virtual school. When
established in other states, such schools have been plagued by low graduation
rates, poor academic performance, and high dropout rates.
The September JLARC report on Efficiency and
Effectiveness of K-12 Spending asserted that, “Because there is limited research on the effectiveness and cost of
online learning programs in Virginia, the state should use a data-driven,
incremental approach to expanding access to fully online programs.”
This is just what
we are doing now. VDOE is piloting an
online high school program. Virtual
Virginia enrollment continues to grow, and many local school divisions, by
virtue of individual and collective efforts, are expanding virtual offerings to
students. This “incremental approach” is
the right path to take. HB 8 is
unnecessary.
Another major flaw
with HB 8 is the funding mechanism. The
bill calls for “the average state share of the Standards of Quality per pupil”
plus federal funds to be sent to the virtual school by the Department of
Education. This figure in not related to
any assessment of the cost of providing a virtual program; it is based on the
cost of providing the state share of support for a traditional
“bricks-and-mortar” school.
Please veto HB 8.
I also request that you veto HB 389. This bill creates a new government
entitlement, which siphons off funds now received by public schools, to create
Parental Choice Education Savings Accounts that can be used to pay for
education-related expenses. The manner
in which the funds can be used is poorly defined. These funds, intended to fund public
education, could be used for car payments and college tuition.
HB 389 requires no review of student progress, as is
required by IDEA, and there are no due-process provisions for parents if
progress is not being made, as is required by IDEA. The bill contains no accountability for the
quality of instruction provided.
The inclusion of sectarian schools raises a serious
constitutional question. TAG grants are
used to argue that the bill is constitutional, but the courts have drawn a line
between higher education and elementary and secondary education in this regard.
According to
multiple studies analyzing assessment data from voucher programs, students
offered vouchers do not perform better than their public school peers. Indeed, public school students have actually
been found to outperform private school students when test scores are weighted
to reflect socioeconomic level, race, and disability.
I urge you to veto
HB 389.
