December 8, 2015 Senator Ron Johnson Senator Tom ... - Politico

December 8, 2015 Senator Ron Johnson Chairman Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs 386 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510

Senator Tom Carper Ranking Member Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs 513 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510

RE: Amendments to S. 2171, the Scholarships for Opportunities and Results Reauthorization Act Dear Chairman Johnson and Ranking Member Carper, On behalf of AASA, The School Superintendents Association, representing more than 10,000 school administrators across the United States, I write to urge you to oppose the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results (SOAR) Reauthorization Act. Specifically, we have grave concerns with some of the amendments that will be voted on tomorrow by the Committee. While we cannot support the reauthorization, we voice our support for several amendments offered by Committee members that would place important limits and requirements on the schools participating in the program such as ensuring no voucheraccepting private school has a student body of more than 50% of students who receive a voucher. Additionally, we support any and all amendments that would mandate that private schools accepting voucher students comply with the federal civil rights laws and requirements applicable to D.C. public schools. In addition, we support a more rigorous evaluation of the program, and a requirement that no federal funding be allocated to private schools before we meet our federal obligations to adequately fund public schools. Below is a complete list of the amendments AASA supports and opposes. Amendments AASA Opposes   

Johnson Amendment #1: To add findings and to strip manager’s amendment language. Johnson Amendment #2: To condition funding of DC public schools on certain criteria and makes IDEA money portable to voucher school Booker Amendment #1: To increase the scholarship award from $12,000 to $15,000

Amendments AASA Supports   

Baldwin Amendment #1: Requiring schools accepting voucher students to comply with the same federal civil rights laws applicable to public schools Baldwin Amendment #2: requires compliance with Title IV of Civil Rights Act Baldwin Amendment #3 requires compliance with Title VI of Civil Rights Act

       

 

    

Baldwin Amendment #4 requires compliance with Title IX of Education Amendments Act Baldwin Amendment #5: requires compliance with the Equal Educational Opportunities Act Baldwin Amendment #6: requires compliance with IDEA Baldwin Amendment #7: requires compliance with Section 504 of Rehabilitation Act Baldwin Amendment #8: requires compliance with Title IV the Age Discrimination Act Baldwin Amendment #9: requires compliance with Titles II and III of ADA Baldwin Amendment #10: conditions program funding on fully funding IDEA Peters Amendment #1: requires all the federal civil rights protections as the House MTR, minus the Age Discrimination Act, and requires reporting to the Dept. of Ed. as part of “Civil Rights Data Collection” Peters Amendment #2: adds “actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity” to nondiscrimination provision in SOAR Act McCaskill Amendment #1: requires parental notification that Title IX does not apply to students in voucher schools and that schools must provide information on where students and parents can seek Title IX remedies Carper Amendment #1: requires schools to be accredited by the list of accrediting agencies in the D.C. School Reform Act of 1995 to receive vouchers; Carper Amendment #2: requires the study to be conducted using the strongest possible research design Carper Amendment #3: inserts “disability” into nondiscrimination section of SOAR Act Carper Amendment #4: puts cap on students in voucher schools at 50% Carper Amendment #5: puts cap on students in voucher schools at 85%

Washington, D.C. already offers a multitude of public school choices for parents through its expanding charter school system. If the city wishes to maintain the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, it can do so with local funds. Taxpayers across the nation should not be forced to subsidize an ineffective program that sends small numbers of D.C. students to private schools with little oversight. Thank you for the consideration of our viewpoints. If you have any questions or concerns, please reach out to us. Sincerely,

Sasha Pudelski Assistant Director, Policy & Advocacy