Bill would kill federal education funds

An Idaho lawmaker wants to end federal funding for education across the state, rejecting millions of dollars currently being used to provide special education to students with disabilities, supply meals to low-income students and teach struggling students how to read.

Rep. Ron Nate, R-Rexburg, authored House Bill 413, which would amend the Idaho code to reduce and then eventually eliminate federal funding for students in kindergarten through 12th-grade over the course of the next decade.

“Idaho will be free to make its own education policy decisions without threat of reduced or eliminated federal funds,” the bill states. “This legislation provides a negative impact on the state general fund by approximately $12 million in fiscal year 2019 based on projected federal funding to the state.”

If passed into law, Nate’s bill would have a profound effect on local school districts by leaving them with massive budget shortfalls to deliver federally mandated programs.

Post Falls School District receives more than $3 million annually from the federal government. Roughly 45 percent of the students in the Post Falls School District are taking part in the free or reduced food program for breakfast and lunches.

“The programs that we are currently able to provide because of federal funding would have to be pared down and some eventually eliminated unless there would be a huge infusion of either state or local money to replace the federal funds,” said Post Falls School District Superintendent Jerry Keane. “We are required by law to provide services to our students with disabilities, and school districts will need to continue to offer those services with or without federal funds.”

The district’s special education program receives $1 million annually.

“This amount only covers a small portion of our overall costs for special education services,” said Keane. “The state and the district are required to complete numerous lengthy and complex reports in order to receive these federal monies.”

Coeur d’Alene School District receives $8.6 million annually to fund special education, nutrition programs and reading programs.

“The federal funds we receive each year ensure that we are meeting the needs of our most vulnerable students and their families,” said Coeur d’Alene School District spokesman Scott Maben. “For example, the money helps ensure equal access to education for students of low-income households and children with disabilities.”

Rep. Paul Amador, R-Coeur d’Alene, said he hadn’t read the bill yet, but said Nate’s bill is classified as a “personal bill,” which means it bypasses the traditional committee process and is placed in the House Ways and Means Committee.

“It’s where bills go to die,” said Amador. “These types of bills have very little chance of being heard. Personal bills are meant to bring attention to an issue or to make a political statement.”

If passed, the bill would reduce federal funding to $300 million in 2019 and then annually cut $40 million until there is zero funding from the feds.

“From what I understand the concept is to wean ourselves off of federal funds for education over the next 10 years,” Amador said. “The concept being that if we don’t take federal funds we don’t have to deal with the requirements mandated by the federal government. While in theory I can see why some people might be attracted to this idea, in reality it doesn’t quite work out that way.”

Other members of the North Idaho delegation were quick to dismiss the idea on Tuesday.

“At first blush, I don’t see any way that Idaho can afford to turn away federal money for education,” said Ron Mendive, R-Coeur d’Alene. “It has been referred to the Ways and Means Committee where it has a 99.9 percent chance of dying.”

Sen. Mary Souza also opposed the idea.

Don Cheatham of Post Falls said he hadn’t read the bill, but was against it, noting that Idahoans pay federal taxes and those dollars should be used to help Idaho students.

“I am not sure where we would come up with the money,” said Cheatham. “I also don’t want to place any additional burden on taxpayers via bonds and levies because we can’t properly fund education.”