Category Archives: Fiscal Freedom

Funders joined together to launch the California Black Freedom Fund, a new $100 million initiative to provide resources to Black-led power-building organizations in the state. Pictured here is Hollywood Boulevard painted with the words 'All Black Lives Matter' in Los Angeles, California. Getty Images

Text size

Twenty-five philanthropic organizations and funders have jointly launched the California Black Freedom Fund, a new $100 million initiative to provide resources to Black-led power-building organizations in the state over the next five years.

With an initial investment of $32.4 million, the Fund will raise additional money through a mix of foundation, corporate, and individual donor support. Funders currently participating in the new initiative include the Akonadi Foundation, the Annenberg Foundation, The California Endowment, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, and Emerson Collective, among others.

The Silicon Valley Community Foundation will provide fiscal and administrative management of the fund.

Building a better future for everyone starts with centering [on] those who have been

politically, socially, and economically marginalized, Priscilla Chan, co-founder and

co-CEO of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, said in a news release Thursday. The fund will ensure that Black-led organizations and movements have the power, resources, and recognition to continue their missions and make racial equity a reality in California.

In its first round of grantmaking, more than $6 million was awarded to three established Black networks, including Black Census and Redistricting Hub, a network of over 30 organizations maximizing participation in the census; Black Equity Collective, a community public-and-private partnership in Southern California; and PICO California: Live Free/ Bring the HEAT, an organization targeting basic health, safety, and well-being for people and communities.

The California Black Freedom Fund plans to make three rounds of grantmaking in 2021, with the next round set for late February.

The funders joined forces to address a history of underinvestment in Black-led organizations. According to the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy, only 1% of community foundation support was specifically designated for Black communities in recent years.

To make racial justice and equity real in California, philanthropy needs to elevate its

investments in Black organizations who are focused on advocacy, organizing and holding our institutions accountablesomething that we call power-building, Lateefah Simon, president of Akonadi Foundation, said in the release.

In addition to grantmaking, the California Black Freedom Fund will also provide capacity-building support through technical assistance in communications, narrative change, and policy; research and data; and convening and learning opportunities, to the Black-led recipient organizations.

See the original post here:

California Launches a $100 Million Fund to Support Black-Led Organizations - Barron's

Palm Beach Post

On Nov.20,2016, I had just finished watching the live press conference with then-President Barack Obama in Lima, Peru. It wasat the end of his foreign trips for his administration and I have to say that, for certain, he was an elitist.

He had nothing bad to say about Donald Trump. He wantedMr. Trump to be a great president because if he succeeds, we all succeed. Obamahad no teleprompter, and his answers were elaborate, thoughtful, incisive, and measured as inthe entire eight years of his presidency.

Not everyone will agree with all of his policies but I believe that history will be more than kind to his presidency.

More: Editorial: Stop this effort to push government into the dark

If being thoughtful, compassionate, intelligent, brave, forgiving and inclusive is considered elite, count me in. If dedicating one's life to the idea thatallAmericans should have a share in the pursuit of liberty, freedom, and the chance to achieve one's dreams, I'll be there. If being an elitist means that our children and grandchildren will be able to breathe clean air and drink clean water, I want to be a part of that.

If being safe from the threat of being shot by some crazed lunatic who has a 30-gun arsenal and a history of violence, that's where I'd like to live. If being an elitistmeans that you trust that God gave us not only dominion over the earth but its stewardship as well, I want to participate.

More: Editorial: On COVID-19 and climate change, denialism is deadly

I want to live in a world where science is reveredbecauseit's the study of the Creator's universe and learning with our God-given minds about our God-given world is one of the best ways we can say thank you.

If I have to be able to think beyond the next fiscal quarter, the year, the term, and yes, beyond my life to leave a legacy our species can be proud of, then that is the elite world in which I want to live and I would be honored to be called an elitist. Deal me in!

TOM HIGGINS, STUART

The rest is here:

Point of View: If being intelligent and caring is elitist, count me in - Palm Beach Post

Months AHEAD of the crucial Assembly polls in the state, Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Friday announced a number of schemes and sops, including a hike in the annual aid of farmers.

Banerjee presented a vote-on-account for Rs 2.99 lakh crore in the Assembly.

The estimates for the first few months of the new fiscal, starting April, will be taken up for discussion over the next two days.

On the 125th birth anniversary year of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, Banerjee dedicated the vote-on-account to the freedom fighter.

The Trinamool chief said towards the end of her speech, It is he, who while addressing our countrymen, said: Give me blood, I will give you freedom. In most humble pursuance of this ever-memorable saying, I would like to address people of my state. Keep faith in me, I will give you unconditional and selfless service with utmost dedication.

She added, it is Netaji in whose memory we shall set up a monument, we shall undertake a programme named Taruner Swapno and reconstitute the State Planning Commission.

During Fridays speech, Banerjee also announced that she proposed to construct one Jai-Hind Bhavan in each district. We have decided to build 20 lakh houses for the SC and ST communities and upgrade mud houses into pucca ones. We are allocating Rs 1,500 crore for the project. We have also decided to provide aid to government-recognised unaided madrasas, and Rs 50 crore has been allotted for the same.

The chief minister also said that the budget for the Krishak Bandhu scheme has been increased to Rs 6,000 crore from Rs 5,000 crore, keeping in mind the interest of farmers.

We will build 100 new schools in tea garden areas. Also, 100 new English-medium schools would also come up in areas dominated by SC and ST communities. For this, we plan to recruit at least 300 para teachers, she said.

See the original post here:

Bengal polls near, Mamata bets big on sops with vote-on-account - The Indian Express

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press will continue to expand its work with law school clinics across the country in 2021 with the support of three generous grants from the Legal Clinic Fund, Lodestar Foundation and First Look Medias Press Freedom Defense Fund. The investments will support the Reporters Committees work with legal clinics nationwide, including those that are members of the Free Expression Legal Network. The Reporters Committee launched the Free Expression Legal Network in 2019 in partnership with the Yale Media Freedom and Information Access Clinic to promote collaboration among law school clinics, help law students gain important hands-on experience representing journalists and connect potential news media clients with legal support.

We are grateful for the support of the Legal Clinic Fund, Lodestar Foundation and Press Freedom Defense Fund as we continue to bring together the efforts of numerous law school clinics to provide newsgatherers of all types with pro bono legal support, said Bruce Brown, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. There is a tremendous opportunity to grow the capacity of these clinics to support journalists and news organizations, especially at the local level, in overcoming legal challenges they may face while working to bring important information to their communities.

A $200,000 grant from the Legal Clinic Fund a collaborative effort to support the growth and sustainability of legal clinics across the U.S. that seek to advance and defend First Amendment rights, media freedom, and transparency in their communities and nationally has enabled the Reporters Committee to hire a full-time clinical legal fellow to work with its attorneys who direct the University of Virginia School of Laws First Amendment Clinic. The UVA clinic offers hands-on experience to law students in free speech and press freedom cases, primarily for local news organizations. The Legal Clinic Fund is supported by the Abrams Foundation, Democracy Fund, Heising-Simons Foundation and The Klarman Family Foundation. The Miami Foundation serves as its fiscal sponsor.

The Legal Clinic Fund was established to help create a new legal backbone for local journalists all across the country, and we are glad to partner with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and UVA in that mission, said Joshua Stearns, director of the Public Square Program at Democracy Fund. Ensuring local journalists have access to the legal support they need is critical to defending our free press and its role in our democracy.

In addition, the Lodestar Foundation made a $50,000 challenge grant to support the Reporters Committees day-to-day administration of the Free Expression Legal Network, building upon its initial investments beginning in 2017 that were instrumental in realizing the vision for the network and launching it two years later. This additional grant will help ensure that journalists and documentary filmmakers can continue to access the legal resources and representation they need through a Reporters Committee attorney, law school clinic or a pro bono local counsel at a law firm, and encourage others to provide funding to support this work.

The Press Freedom Defense Fund met the Lodestar Foundations challenge grant with a $50,000 gift that will also support these efforts. Both investments will enable the Reporters Committee to expand upon the strong foundation of the Free Expression Legal Network and grow the learning opportunities and resources available to collaborating clinics.

Journalism has been under attack, especially independent and local newsrooms who do not have access to the vital legal guidance they need when it comes to reporting information that is in the public interest, said David Bralow, legal director for the Press Freedom Defense Fund. Our Fund exists for this very reason, to support those who are unjustly threatened in pursuit of a free press and open society. Were proud to support the Reporters Committee and Free Expression Legal Network with this grant, and we remain dedicated to our work in engaging valuable legal clinics nationwide to help support the journalists who could benefit from their counsel.

The Reporters Committee regularly files friend-of-the-court briefs and its attorneys represent journalists and news organizations pro bono in court cases that involve First Amendment freedoms, the newsgathering rights of journalists and access to public information. Stay up-to-date on our work by signing up for our monthly newsletter and following us on Twitter or Instagram.

Visit link:

Reporters Committee to expand work with law school clinics in 2021 - Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press

The budget proposals to strengthen public sector banks (PSBs) are welcome. On the one hand, they seek to relieve banks of their bad loan burden by setting up an asset reconstruction company (ARC) and transferring the non-performing assets (NPAs) to the ARC. On the other, it proposes to augment bank capital, eroded by provisioning against bad loans. One route to recapitalise the banks is for the government to put in more capital. Another is to bring in fresh investors and bring the governments stake below 50%, that is, privatise the banks in question. This is a welcome strategy. Banks would not lend, unless freed of their NPA burden. And retaining ownership of some banks in the public sector and focusing on capital infusion to make them strong, while letting others be owned and controlled by non-State operators, would make them more robust as well.

Raising capital from the public will give the government more fiscal room, reduce the taxpayer burden to recapitalise banks, allow PSBs the freedom to go outside the trail of vigilance and fix their own remuneration plans. Not unexpectedly, bank unions want a rollback of the privatisation plan. The government must engage with the unions. An essential requirement is to improve the regulation and supervision framework that would make the nature of ownership inconsequential for the working of the bank. Raising equity capital from the public is a superior option to burdening the taxpayer for recapitalising banks. Preferential allotment of shares to bank employees could smoothen the transition. Global capital is available now in plenty, and cheap. Strengthening supervision, and internal systems, especially risk management, will inspire investor confidence to draw the capital needed.

But PSBs need to overhaul their current decision-making structure and culture. Market-linked remuneration must replace current, repressed salaries. Fintech and a bond market should keep banks on their toes. Senior bankers pay must be tiered, with larger components linked to medium- and long-term performance, subject to clawback.

This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Economic Times.

END OF ARTICLE

Original post:

Shot in the arm for banking reform - Economic Times

Its so lamentably easy to stew with the ongoing gush of bad news.

Punxsutawney Phil has fled to his hidey hole after glimpsing six more weeks of vaccine chaos. The insurrectionist in exile has hired two new lawyers one of whom refused to prosecute Bill Cosby, the other was slated to defend Jeffrey Epstein. Moderate Senate Republicans, who suddenly care about fiscal conservatism again, want to give suffering Americans one-third of the COVID relief money proposed by President Biden. House Republicans seem to be fine with a member who thinks that Jewish space lasers cause wildfires and that a plane never hit the Pentagon on 9/11. All this and more, the usual detritus of our era. But believe it or not, Ive found some good news!

Lest we forget, the electorate laid waste to the autocratic MAGA grifters and replaced them with credentialed people who actually embrace enduring American values. The new secretary of state, Antony Blinken, is Exhibit A. Im still marveling at what he told the press corps on his very first day:

President Biden said that he wants truth and transparency back in the White House briefing room, that fully applies in this room as wellI know were not always going to see eye to eye, thats not the point of the enterprise. Sometimes well be frustrating to you. I imagine there are a few times when youll be frustrating to us. But thats to be expected. Thats exactly, in some ways, the point. But you can count on me, you can count on us, to treat all of you with the immense respect you deserve and to give you what you need to do the jobs that youre doing that are so important to our country and to our democracyIts an adventure. I am really, really glad that were in it together. Welcome back to the press room. This is your press room.

Pinch me now.

I suppose we shouldnt applaud when an American official defends freedom of the press, but it sure beats enemy of the people. Its a step up from Mike Pompeo, the back-bench House Republican hack who failed upwards all the way to the State Department, where he trashed the truth and shredded our moral authority worldwide.

Here at home, were locked in a battle between democracy and incipient grassroots fascism. Ultimately, its a battle between truth (the lifeblood of democratic self-governance) and lies (the toys of fascists). If lying wins, we will lose our national soul, perhaps forever.

Blinken plays a key role in that battle. A secretary of states core nonpartisan mission is to tout American values around the world and press freedom is crucial to that mission. Blinken, by dint of his instincts and experience, understands that America has no business preaching to other nations about freedom unless it sets an example for all to see.

Pompeo, who lashed out at reporters who dared ask him about the impeachable acts of his boss, abolished regular press briefings and assailed journalists as unhinged, never seemed to grasp the State Departments mission.

One priceless moment came in 2019, when Trump decreed in a tweet that North Korea was no longer a nuclear threat. Shortly thereafter, Pompeo appeared on Jake Tappers CNN show.

Tapper asked: Do you think North Korea remains a nuclear threat?

Pompeo: Yes.

Tapper: But the president said he doesnt.

Pompeo: Thats not what he said.

Tapper: He tweeted, Theres no longer a nuclear threat from Korea. Thats just a direct quote.

And how embarrassing it was, for a secretary of state, to be lectured by an interviewer in Kazakhstan.

One year ago, on the eve of a trip to that country, Pompeo had unleashed an F-bomb tirade on an NPR reporter whod sought to ask him inconvenient questions, and had thrown another NPR reporter off his plane. His foreign interviewer brought up the NPR incidents and asked him: What kind of message (about America) does it send to countries like Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Belarus, whose governments routinely suppress press freedom?

Pompeos answer: Its a perfect message.

Suffice it to say that, on the eve of Antony Blinkens welcome ascent, the worlds supposedly top democracy was no longer a champion of press freedom. According to the international rankings posted by Reporters Without Borders, America is currently 45th in the world trailing nations like Botswana, Latvia, Lithuania, and Namibia.

As Blinken said, This is a critical moment for protecting and defending democracy, including right here at home. Theres not a moment to lose.

Dick Polman, a veteran national political columnist based in Philadelphia and a Writer in Residence at the University of Pennsylvania, writes at DickPolman.net. Email him at[emailprotected]

Previous

Link:

Dick Polman: Starved for some good news? Listen to the new secretary of state - pressherald.com

Lansing The leader of a nonprofit whose work for the statehealth department has ballooned during the COVID-19 pandemic said the group has had "long overdue discussions" about imposing stricter requirements for contracts involving the state.

Michigan Public Health Institute CEO Renee Branch Canady appeared before a House Appropriations subcommittee Wednesday, telling lawmakers that she started having conversations on the matter with Elizabeth Hertel of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services prior to Hertel's becoming the department's director on Jan. 22.

The nonprofit, which was created through a state law to assist the state with public health research, disclosed $166 million in funded projects for this fiscal year, up 93% from $86 million in projects two years earlier. The Detroit News reported last week on concerns about the group's close ties to the department and the fact it falls outside transparency and bidding protocols government agencies face.

Renee Branch Canady, chief executive officer of the Michigan Public Health Institute, speaks to Michigan House members during a subcommittee hearing on Wednesday, Feb. 3, 2021.(Photo: Michigan House TV screenshot)

This is not like private sector business," Canady said of the nonprofit Wednesday. "Although its public health and we often have to move expediently, we dont cut corners to move expediently."

Canady acknowledged that the organization's budget had grown during the pandemic and that 90% of its funding flows from the state. But she said the institute isnot a "pass through" for the department.

Canady and Hertel recently discussed shifting some information technology contracts back in-house to the state and limiting the number of employees contracted through MPHI to work at the state health department, Canady said.The discussion was "long overdue," she said.

"The vast majority of MPHI terminations are terminated because the department has been able to convert the position to acivil service position, which is the ideal," Canady said.

MPHI's growing budget has prompted worries about the accountability of those dollars. The nonprofit's employees have grown from roughly 300 to 900 in recent years. During a recent Attorney General's office investigation into a contract involving MPHI, a state procurement officer said the health department "often used MPHI to avoid oversight."

But Canady and Hertel disagreed, noting a large chunk of the federal funds flowing through the agency had strict use and reporting requirements.

Republican lawmakers pressed Canady for more information on MPHI's role in the health department's functions.

Rep. Mary Whiteford, R-Casco Township, chairwoman of the House Appropriations Health and Human Services Subcommittee, noted that state employees told theAttorney General's office representatives that MPHI was used to get contracts executed more quickly.

Canady said she wasn't sure how the department decides which contracts would be managed by the institute.

Rep. Rep. Ann Bollin, R-Brighton Township, questioned whether MPHI was subject to the Freedom of Information Act, the law that requires government agencies to make records available on request.

Canady replied that her understanding is the institute is not subject to FOIA, but she added that the organization is transparent.

When all state departments were placed on a hiring freeze during the pandemic last year, MPHIcontinued hiring because it is not under the same civil service rules, Canady also told lawmakers.

The nonprofit hires hundreds of contract employees to work within the state's 14,000-employee Department of Health and Human Services. The agency'semployees can drive state-owned vehicles and members of the state health department are on the governing board of MPHI.

The institute gained the spotlight last year when state officials used it to establish a nearly $200,000contract with a Democratic-linked groupas the state sought to ramp up its contact-tracing efforts at the peak of the pandemic. The contract was eventually canceled amid media scrutiny.

eleblanc@detroitnews.com

cmauger@detroitnews.com

Read or Share this story: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2021/02/03/nonprofit-had-overdue-discussions-growing-state-health-contracts/4372578001/

More here:

Nonprofit had 'overdue discussions' on growing state health contracts - The Detroit News

David Smith remembers dancing to music in his head and having conversations with television shows during 16 months in solitary confinement at Norfolk City Jail.

Your mind plays tricks on you, Smith said. There was a slow disconnect with reality. I didnt recognize the pain that was happening in me, nor did I have the emotional strength to fight back, institutionally.

Smith is no longer an inmate, but his goal is to end the torture that he said Virginia inmates have endured while sitting in solitary confinement. Smith served a three-year sentence after pleading guilty to 10 counts of possession of child poronography in 2013. Now Smith works with the Virginia Coalition on Solitary Confinement to lead the charge for legislative change.

Sen. Joseph D. Morrissey, D-Richmond, introduced Senate Bill 1301, to prohibit solitary confinement in adult and juvenile correctional facilities. The Senate Appropriations and Finance Committee voted 12-4 Wednesday to advance the bill with amendments.

The amended bill would allow inmates to be held in solitary confinement for 48 consecutive hours, but that can be extended to allow for an investigation to be completed. Isolated, or solitary, confinement is defined in the bill as being confined in a cell alone or with another inmate for more than 20 hours a day for an adult and 17 hours a day for a juvenile.

The Virginia Department of Corrections would still be allowed to use solitary confinement in three circumstances: if an inmate is a threat to themself or others, during a facility-wide lockdown or for an inmates own protection.

The bill originally proposed that inmates receive medical evaluations within 8 hours of being placed in solitary confinement. The department would need to hire additional registered nurses, physicians, psychologists, psychiatrists and cognitive counselors to complete the evaluations.

Without amendments, Morrissey said the fiscal impact report determined the bill would have cost at least $23 million to implement. After consulting with Corrections, Morrissey also eliminated the original requirement that some inmates be offered at least three hours of activities intended to promote personal development.

Theres nothing currently preventing Corrections from placing inmates in isolated confinement for long periods of time, according to Morrissey.

Studies show that solitary confinement begins to have debilitating mental and physical effects in as few as 10 days being isolated and exacerbated for those individuals already suffering from a mental illness, Morrissey said during the committee meeting.

The General Assembly passed a bill in 2019 that required the department to release statistics of who is in restrictive housing, the departments name for solitary confinement.

Vishal Agraharkar, a senior staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, said thousands of Virginia inmates have been affected by solitary confinement over the last couple of years.

In the last couple of years, around 7,000 and 6,500 people have cycled around some form of restrictive housing department wide, which showed a real need for the bill, Agraharkar said.

Jerry Fitz, corrections operations administrator and legislative liaison for the Virginia Department of Corrections, said during a bill committee hearing that the number of Virginia inmates in solitary confinement decreased by 60% from January 2016 to June 2020.

Thats roughly 908 individuals less than when the study started in 2016, Fitz said.

Agraharkar represented Nicolas Reyes, an inmate who spent more than 12 years in solitary confinement at Red Onion State Prison in Southwest Virginia. The ACLU filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of Reyes that ended in a settlement in January. As a part of the settlement, the department agreed to create a language access policy to ensure those with limited English skills are provided access to facilities, programs and services.

In the long run, if you make sure that people are being kept in solitary for as little time as possible and you work toward eliminating it all together, youre going to see savings in terms of mental health costs, Agraharkar said. Public safety will be helped as well by making sure were not putting people in conditions that are extremely harmful long term to their mental health.

Agraharkar added that in the first half of 2020 the Virginia Department of Corrections spent over $1 million on just two lawsuits related to solitary confinement that the ACLU of Virginia obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request. He also said it costs two to three times more to construct a prison thats designed to hold people in solitary confinement than one designed for a general population.

Solitary confinement has significant cost in addition to all the harm that it does to people that are essentially tortured on the inside, Agraharkar said.

The bill isnt the first attempt at banning solitary confinement in the commonwealth. Del. Patrick Hope, D-Arlington, introduced House Bill 795 in 2018, but it was left in a subcommittee. The committee didnt pass the bill in 2018 because they didnt think it could be funded after looking at the fiscal impact statement, Agraharkar said.

Morrissey said he thought the bills would make less work for the department and not more.

Intuitively it would strike me that if were eliminating solitary confinement, then were eliminating the necessity for DOC corrections officers to monitor the doings of somebody in solitary confinement, Morrissey said. I think it would be less work, but thats just an intuitive analysis.

Smith said his lawyers told him solitary confinement would be the best alternative for his safety. Then he quickly realized how detrimental it was to his mental and physical health. Smith said hes read letters from inmates serving time in solitary confinement and they inspire him to push for change.

I didnt fight on the inside, so Im sure as hell going to fight now, Smith said. We cant let them be silent, weve got to amplify those voices to show whats going on.

The bill heads to the Senate. If passed, the bill would take effect in July 2022.

See more here:

Amended bill to limit solitary confinement heads to Senate floor | The Henrico Citizen - Henrico Citizen

Rep. Marjorie Porter| Portsmouth Herald

When the results of the election in November became clear, giving Republicans the control over the NH House, the NH Senate, the Executive Council, and the Governors office, I had a feeling I was going be experiencing a lot of deja-vu.

I was right. With total control, my colleagues from across the aisle got right to work, filing bills to bring back all their old favorites.

I admit to going into my files to look for articles I had written before that I could simply dust off and use again. I found many. Guns in Reps Hall? Check. Cutting business taxes? Check again. So-called Right to Work? Constitutional amendments to ban income and sales taxes? School vouchers? Check, check, and (Oh boy!) check again.

I decided to go with the last one.

Back in 2017, when Republicans last controlled things, the Senate passed SB 193, a bill creating an educational voucher system in the state. It worked like this. A scholarship program would be set up for families that wanted to send their children to private, religious, or home schools. The program would be funded by the states education trust fund, which is in turn funded by our taxes. It would be administered by a privately-run scholarship granting organization.

Parents could apply for a scholarship. Once approved, the state would send the money to the scholarship granting organization. The organization kept a percentage and sent the balance on to the school of choice on behalf of the parents.

Cleverly calling the scholarships education freedom accounts, the hope was this would be an end run around the constitutional ban on using tax dollars to fund religious education.

There were income limits and other restrictions on who was eligible to receive a scholarship, and caps on the numbers each year, but in the end the bill died a not-so-quiet death after coming out of the House Finance committee with recommendation for more study.

Why? Because Finance had determined the program, even with all the restrictions and caps, would end up costing local property taxpayers$99 millionover 10 years. They could not condone the downshifting.

Fast forward to 2021, and this years HB 20 the voucher bill on steroids.

HB 20 has been described as the most expansive voucher program in the country. Gone are the income limits, caps, and restrictions. In fact, it is estimated 95% of all K-12 students in New Hampshire would be eligibleeven those currently in private schools. Families earning $40,000 or $400,000 or moreall are eligible.

Red flags are popping up all over the place with this bill, serious ones including constitutionality, but I am going to focus only on the financial today.

Scholarship amounts are based on the adequacy aid given per NH public school student, minus the fees the private scholarship granting organization charges. The bill says that fee can be as high as 10%.

Currently, the base amount of aid is $3,786, but it varies and can go as high as $8,458. If a student is in public school, that money goes to the school district. Under this bill, if the student leaves public school, the money goes with them. The Departmentof Education estimates the net decrease to the local school for each departing student would be $4,603. If 10 students leave a district, the loss to the district will be $46,030, although fixed costs to run the school will not change. Local taxpayers will make up that difference. (We saw the harm done when school enrollment dropped due to the pandemic this year. Hillsboro-Deering enrollment went down 60 or so students, and the loss to the district in state and federal aid was more than $500,000.)

The argument is the program wont cost the state any money because the adequacy aid will simply be going to the scholarship program instead of the public school.

The state does not grant adequacy aid to students attending private or home schools. But under the provisions of this bill, students currently enrolled in private schools, and most likely homeschools, will also be eligible for scholarships.

So, heres some math. According to the NH Dept. of Education, there are currently 16,294 students enrolled in private schools in NH, and 6,110 students being home schooled. Assuming they each would apply for scholarships (and why wouldnt they?) and each received just the base aid amount, the cost to the state education trust fund would be$84,821,544,money that is not currently being spent.

Add that to the money needed to fund public school kids who might apply, and the total amount is daunting.

It is not clear where that money will come from, as we are already facing a school funding crisis. Business taxes are one of the main sources of revenue for the education trust fund, but the governor is calling for business tax cuts.

As alarming as these figures are, of even greater concern is the virtual lack of public oversight of all this money. The private scholarship organization has control over not only who is granted aid, but also what educational programs and expenses are approved. It must only provide an annual report that it creates and perform limited random audits of scholarship accounts. And according to a report from Reaching Higher NH,There is no stated provision where the scholarship organization must complete a comprehensive financial audit, submit proof or records of fiscal management, or any other oversight to ensure that the organization, or families, are using public funds for their stated purpose. *

Those of you who have attended school district and town meetings over the years and are used to overseeing how our every tax dollar is being spent, certainly must see the folly in this. Tax dollars given to a private organization with no oversight, to be spent as they see fit. What could possibly go wrong?

And finally, the list of education-related expenses the voucher dollars can be used for is long and ambiguous, and includes any educational expense recommended by the scholarship organization and approved by the DOE. Like, say, field trips.

So, heres a scenario you might like to consider. A wealthy family, homeschooling their seven children, could apply for and receive a grant totaling $23,851 after fees, and take their family on a wonderful field trip to Europe on the taxpayers dime.

All the top Republican leadership in the NH House and Senate are co-sponsors of this bill. Theyve even named it after the late Speaker Hinch, to honor him. I understand the Governor is on board, along with the education commissioner.

Andall this timetheyve been telling us THEY are the fiscally conservative party. Go figure.

Democrat Majorie Porter of Hillsborough has beena member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives since 2010. This column is published via InDepthNH.org. The views expressed are those of the writer.

Go here to see the original:

Opinion/Porter: School voucher program could be used for field trips to Europe - Seacoastonline.com

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem claimed in a Fox News interview on Tuesday that, thanks to her states unique approach to the coronavirus pandemic, they got through it better than virtually every other state.

Noem, a Republican who has opposed mask mandates and many pandemic-related restrictions, delivered the boast after Fox host Laura Ingraham favorably compared South Dakotas health and economic performance to that of more strict and Democratic-run New York. Ingraham then asked Noem why the media has targeted her for criticism.

Noem said, You know, Laura, I really think its about control. They have used, for the last year, fear to control people. Noem continued that since the science made clear it was impossible to completely stop the virus, only to slow it down and protect vulnerable people, she decided to allow people to be flexible to take care of their families and still put food on the table.

That was a unique approach that, for our people, really worked well. We did have tragedies, and we did have losses, but we also got through it better than virtually every other state. And I think the media hates that, Noem said. Because it really is a testimony to what Republicans believe in, what conservatives believe in.

Facts First: Noems claim that South Dakota got through it better than virtually every other state is false with regard to public health: South Dakota has had the second-most coronavirus cases per capita and is in a tie with Connecticut for the sixth-most coronavirus deaths per capita, according to Johns Hopkins University data as of Thursday.

It is true that South Dakota has done better than virtually every other state on a key economic measure its 3.0% seasonally adjusted December unemployment rate was tied for best in the country but Noem didnt specify on Fox that this is what she was talking about.

Also, of course, no state is actually through with the pandemic. While Covid-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths are all on the decline in the US, they are declining from record levels. On Wednesday, South Dakota reported three new coronavirus deaths, 209 new cases, and a total of 133 people currently hospitalized with the virus.

Noems comments dismayed Dr. Nancy Babbitt, a primary care physician in Rapid City, South Dakota. Babbitt told CNN that it is painful from a doctors point of view to see the governor celebrate her economy-focused decisions without explaining that those decisions caused real pain and suffering from additional infections and additional deaths.

Noem supported some limited pandemic restrictions in 2020. But she has generally been a vocal opponent of restrictions and mandates, earning national media attention and sparking some speculation about the possibility of a run for president in 2024 by advocating for freedom and personal responsibility.

Noem has also endorsed large gatherings without social distancing. South Dakotas fall coronavirus crisis came after the annual, massive Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in August, which Noem supported holding during the pandemic.

South Dakota had experienced 12,280 coronavirus cases per 100,000 people as of Thursday, per Johns Hopkins data which means about 1 in 8 state residents were known to have had the virus. (As in other states and countries, the true number may be substantially higher.) North Dakota, at 12,851 cases per 100,000 people, was the only state with a worse per-capita figure; New York which is far more densely populated and which experienced its first big outbreak when less was known about the virus was at 7,423 cases per 100,000 people.

South Dakota had experienced 201 coronavirus deaths per 100,000 people as of Thursday which means about 1 in 500 people in the state were known to have died from the virus. Only New Jersey (244 deaths per 100,000 people), New York (227), Massachusetts (213), Mississippi (208) and Rhode Island (207) had done worse by this measure.

South Dakota had relatively few cases and deaths in the first half of 2020, when some other states, including New York, were already mired in a crisis. But South Dakota then had a massive fall outbreak, with new cases peaking in November and new deaths in early December.

Noem spokesman Ian Fury pointed out to CNN that South Dakota experienced its pandemic peak in the fall and has since seen a major improvement in its numbers, while the situations in other states have gotten worse since the fall. Given the difference in the timing of each states outbreak, Fury said, its hard to do an apples-to-apples comparison at this point.

Fair enough its absolutely possible that South Dakotas performance relative to other states will look somewhat better in, say, three months or six months. But theres just no good argument now that South Dakota has gotten through the pandemic better, from a health perspective, than virtually any other state.

So what was Noem boasting about on Fox? Fury said the governors comments were about not only public health but about the state economy and budget.

Fury cited the low state unemployment rate that actually declined in 2020, the fact that the state has a fiscal surplus while some states that imposed stricter restrictions are experiencing fiscal struggles, and the fact that South Dakota is seeing an influx of residents from other states.

Fury also mentioned that South Dakota has so far been a national leader in the speed with which it has vaccinated residents for the virus, a fact President Joe Bidens administration has acknowledged.

Still, Noem did not explain on Fox that she was talking specifically about how South Dakota has done well by financial measures or in its pace of vaccination. She simply made a general declaration that South Dakota has done better than virtually any other state in getting through the pandemic. Thats a highly incomplete account of the states story.

More:

Fact check: South Dakota governor ignores poor health numbers to claim state's pandemic performance has been 'better than virtually every other state'...