Certain House Republicans have decided to shift from the defensive to the offensive concerning their opposition to school choice as proposed by the rest of their party.
Superintendent of Public Instruction candidate and State Representative Michelle Udall (R-Mesa) introduced HB2185, a bill to require annual standardized testing for Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) recipients from grades 3-12. It would also require schools to post an aggregate of the test scores on their website, organized by grade level. The bill would exempt students with disabilities. State Representatives Joel John (R-Buckeye) and Joanne Osborne (R-Goodyear) signed on as cosponsors.
The bill continues the three legislators’ arguments that ESAs needed greater oversight. Udall stated last October that she’s not opposed to school choice outright if it comes with “appropriate accountability measures.” Udall explained that charter schools initially had the same problems that plague certain schools receiving ESAs currently.
“The issue I have with ESAs is the lack of accountability. When I tried speaking to proponents about appropriate accountability, they walked away from the conversation (on multiple occasions),” tweeted Udall. “When we first started charter schools, we had the same problem. The lack of accountability led to subpar education for many. We had to add accountability over the years. Our students can’t afford to repeat that mistake again with private schools that have even less accountability. Children at subpar public schools (D/F letter grades) already have access to ESAs. And when I submitted a proposal with some modest accountability and a restriction that children eligible for the expansion could only use ESAs to attend high achieving schools, they walked away.”
I’m not opposed to school choice with appropriate accountability measures. The issue I have with ESAs is the lack of accountability. When I tried speaking to proponents about appropriate accountability, they walked away from the conversation (on multiple occasions).
Udall’s latest bill was assigned to the House Education Committee, but hasn’t been given a date for review.
Last December, there were talks that the Maricopa County Republican Party would censure Udall, John, and Osborne for voting against State Representative Shawnna Bolick’s (R-Phoenix) expansion of the ESA program as part of the summer budget bill. The party passed the resolution to oppose the three legislators in their campaigns — “In Support of Parental Involvement and Choice in Education,” introduced by former State Senate President Russell Pearce — with nine votes in favor, one against, and one abstention. The following is the text of Pearce’s resolution:
“Whereas Republicans, like most Americans, believe that parents, not bureaucrats, should be making decisions for their children’s education; Whereas it is a core conservative belief that the people who matter most in our schools are our students and our teachers, even though liberals believe it is the administrators, diversity training officers, and vaccine mandate supervisors; and
Whereas what remains of the old public school monopoly continues to fight to obstruct efforts to
expand school choice in Arizona, because they are desperate to hang on to as much money and control as they can for as long as possible; and Whereas today’s Democrat Party is targeting parents and has weaponized the Department of Justice to pursue parents who oppose radical curriculum like Critical Race Theory; and Whereas Arizona parents know what is best for their children and deserve as many education options as possible; now, therefore, be it Resolved, that the Maricopa County Republican Party remains 100% committed to expanding
school choice options for students and parents; and further be it Resolved, that the Maricopa County Republican Party encourages parents to rise up, run for school board offices, and make their voices heard, and that the Maricopa County Republican Party will support those efforts whenever possible; and further be it Resolved, that the Maricopa County Republican Party calls attention to, and opposes Republicans who campaign as conservatives while voting against school choice and against the best interests of students and parents – specifically Representatives Joanne Osborne, Michelle Udall, and Joel John.”
The party also opted to pass a resolution to hold Udall accountable for her voting record.
Udall aligns neatly with her party on other school-related issues: opposition to masking and vaccination mandates, and critical race theory, to name a few. On the topic of school choice, however, Udall disagrees, coming from the perspective of an educator and candidate for the state’s superintendent of education.
I'm a mom. I'm a teacher. And I'm running for Superintendent of Public Education. Because our kids can't afford 4 more yrs of school closures, contentious mandates, and Critical Race Theory.https://t.co/kgB6uqCYm3
The struggle over the presence of critical race theory continues with a new bill proposing to ban the controversial academic concept from K-12 classrooms. State Representative Michelle Udall (R-Mesa) introduced the bill, HB2112, which passed 6-4 in the committee that Udall chairs, the Education Committee, on Tuesday.
State Representative Reginald Bolding (D-Laveen), Daniel Hernandez (D-Tucson), Jennifer Pawlik (D-Chandler), Judy Schwiebert (D-Phoenix) voted against the bill.
The bill would prohibit educators from using public money on instruction that blames or judges based on race, ethnicity, or sex. The bill would also prohibit teaching that one race, ethnic group, or sex is inherently moral or intellectually superior; that an individual is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive either consciously or unconsciously; that an individual should be discriminated against or treated poorly because of their race, ethnicity, or sex; that individual’s moral character is determined by their race, ethnic group, or sex; that an individual is responsible for actions committed by other members of their same race, ethnic group, or sex; that an individual should feel negative emotions because of their race, ethnicity, or sex; and that academic achievement, meritocracy, or traits like hard work are racist or sexist and created to oppress others.
Violation of the bill’s provisions may result in revocation of the educator’s teaching certificate and the charge of a $5,000 fine. School attorneys would confer with the attorney general or county attorney to determine whether a violation occurred.
Critical race theory (CRT) proposes that the U.S. was inherently and systemically racist from its founding and that racism persists through oppressive systems such as capitalism and Christianity. The theory claims that American meritocracy is a myth.
CRT relies on a concept of hierarchies called intersectionality, which asserts that personal traits such as race, gender, class, sexual orientation, disability, etc. determine one’s oppression and privilege. CRT presents a dichotomy: the inherent evil of “whiteness,” and the inherent goodness of “blackness.” In order to fully accept these perspectives, individuals must assume a “race-conscious” outlook on the world and reject the idea that racism comes from beliefs and actions rooted in the intentional hatred of race.
The ultimate goal of CRT is to overthrow this country and remake it in another image.
In the most informal sense of the word, CRT may qualify as a religion. Credit for popularization of the theory is often awarded to Kimberlé Crenshaw, a legal scholar and current law professor at UCLA School of Law and Columbia Law School. In 1995, Crenshaw authored the book “Critical Race Theory: the key writings that formed the movement” in an effort to explain CRT’s nature and purpose.
“Critical Race Theory is an intellectual movement that is both particular to our postmodern (and conservative) times and part of a long tradition of human resistance and liberation,” wrote Crenshaw.
The concepts that make up CRT may be presented independently or under different names, like: social-emotional learning (SEL), culturally responsive education (CRE), and anti-racism. Crenshaw acknowledged these superficial disparities in her 1995 book, assuring readers that unity exists behind these apparent differences.
“Although [CRT] scholarship differs in object, argument, accent, and emphasis, it is nevertheless unified by two common interests. The first is to understand how a regime of white supremacy and its subordination of people of color have been created and maintained in America and, in particular, to examine the relationship between that social structure and professed ideals such as ‘the rule of law’ and ‘equal protection.’ The second is a desire not merely to understand the vexed bond between law and racial power but to change it,” wrote Crenshaw.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Republican Arizona State Reps. Michelle Udall, Joanne Osbourne, and Joel John are coming under fire for their decision to deny over 700,000 kids school choice opportunities. The trio voted with all House Democrats to reject a proposal to expand the Empowerment Scholarship Account program.
Specifically, Udall, Osbourne, and John voted against an amendment offered by Rep. Shawnna Bolick that would have expanded the Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) program to low-income students (about 80% of whom are minorities) and kids of Veterans.
ESAs allow families to utilize their education tax dollars and spend those funds on education choices that they deem best for their children. These dollars can be used to attend micro/pod schools, private schools, hiring tutors, purchasing online curriculum, and other options that may work best for each unique student.
Critics say that by voting no on the Bolick amendment, Udall, Osborne, and John became the only three Republicans to vote against this measure and sided with the teachers’ union and anti-school choice groups like Save Our Schools.
Additionally, a poll conducted by the #1 pollster in the country according to the NY Times showed that 75% of Arizonan’s support school choice and that 73% of Arizonans support this specific effort of helping low-income children. This means that the vast majority of Republican, Democrat, and Independent voters all support school choice.
Supporters of ESAs say students in Arizona needed this expansion especially in light of the drastic learning loss from Covid due to the sub-standard “virtual” education provided due to the refusal of teachers to return to in-class learning.
Republicans have touted making changes to Arizona’s election laws since long before the current legislative session began Jan. 11. But only one major election-related bill has been signed by Gov. Doug Ducey so far, and on Wednesday another bill died and a third was put on hold.
In an unexpected move Wednesday, Republican Reps. Joel John and Michelle Udall cast their votes with all 29 House Democrats against SB1713, the Sen. J.D. Mesnard-sponsored bill which would have required voters to provide one bit of personal identification information on their early ballot affidavit before mailing it in.
SB1713 was introduced by Mesnard (R-LD17) in February to address concerns that a signature on the affidavit without some other identifying information was not sufficient to ensure ballot integrity. The bill later sat in the House for nearly two months before being amended Wednesday to require an early ballot voter’s date of birth to be included on the voter’s affidavit long with their Arizona driver’s license (or non-operating state ID) number or voter registration number.
The amendment passed but a short time later the newly worded bill failed 29 to 31 when John (R-LD4) and Udall (R-LD25) voted no, effectively killing the bill for the session.
Meanwhile, another election-related bill is on life support despite efforts by Sen. Kelly Townsend (R-LD16) and Rep. John Kavanagh (R-LD23) to push through more than 20 changes to how Arizona’s elections are conducted, changes Townsend says are needed to ensure “election integrity, election reform, and election security.”
Among the varied topics covered in SB1241 are the handling of data storage devices used during elections, affidavits for persons who process or count ballots, chain of custody requirements for election equipment, and what to do if there is a conflict between the state’s Election Procedures Manual and state law (hint: the law wins).
SB1241 also makes it easier to cancel a voter’s registration in another state upon their move to Arizona, allows voters who cast ballots at a voting location to request a receipt, prohibits any tabulation equipment from being connected to the internet, and requires all tabulation results to remain in the United States.
Some violations of the bill could be prosecuted as a Class 2 misdemeanor. In addition, it would force county elections officials to report to the Arizona Attorney General or the local county attorney any “inconsistent” signatures on early ballot affidavits.
A scheduled Third Read of SB1241 on Wednesday did not happen due to budget negotiations which led to the House recessing for the next week or so. Assuming it passed the House at some point, it would still need to go back to Senate to vote on the current amended version of the bill.
