Legislature Week 4 and Vouchers

This week we take a brief look at Week 4 of the 2025 Idaho Legislature and take a deep dive on the current state of the voucher debate. Guests are Quinn Perry, associate executive director at the Idaho School Boards Association and Chris Parri, political director at the Idaho Education Association, as well as Matt Compton, IEA's associate executive director.

Host: Mike Journee

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Unknown: 0:00

Music.

Mike Journee: 0:12

Welcome to the IEA reporter podcast, a regular discussion about the news and events important to Idaho Education Association members and those who value public education. IAEA members are public school educators from all over the state and members of the largest union in Idaho. They're Idaho's most important education experts, and they use their influence to fight for free, quality and equitable public education for every student in the state. I'm Mike Journee, communications director at DIA and I'll be your host for this episode. Today, we discuss the fight to keep vouchers out of Idaho. Anti public education forces are hard at work trying to bring these taxpayer funded subsidies for private education to our state. We'll talk with Quinn Perry, the Associate Executive Director of the Idaho School Boards Association, and Chris Perry, the IAEA political director and chief lobbyist about how that fight is developing at the State House. But first, a quick summary of what happened this week during a 2025 legislature with IEA Associate Executive Director Matt Compton. Matt, thanks a lot for joining me for this quick update about what happened at the legislature this week. Lots of bills related to education, but we also have another bill that's not particularly related to education policy that is deeply impactful of education in our state, though, and it's a union busting Bill targeting the Idaho Education Association and its members. I think there's no question that this legislation is repented to cripple this union and perhaps kill it. I think some lawmakers would appreciate that sentiment if it were to happen. Thoughts on this legislation,

Matt Compton: 1:50

I think no doubt that's the intention of this legislation, reminding folks that this bill was brought to us by the National Freedom Foundation, which is, you know, right wing think tank that has made it its mission to really tear down public education and public schools across the country. So now they have their layover in Idaho during our legislative session, and they're doing what they can to undermine the interests of the Idaho Education Association. Noteworthy in the bill is that it's only the teachers union that is targeted. It doesn't cover things like the firefighters Union or the police union or any other organized labor. It is specific to Idaho teachers, and is centered in Title 33 of Idaho code, which is all about education.

Mike Journee: 2:35

Yeah, it's for those who are following at home. It's health bill 98 It was introduced by Representative Judy Boyle out of Midvale, and it is an extension of legislation that was brought last year 2024 bill that was erratically defeated on the House floor with some very courageous votes from Pro public education lawmakers. This bill in particular, has a provision that wasn't in last year's bill around payroll deduction. A lot of our members have for many, many years, been able to pay their union dues through payroll deduction. Anti union legislators across the country have been successful in other states, but using that provision by banning the use of payroll deduction to pay union bills as an attack on teachers unions, and they're trying to do it here. Matt, as you know, this union has been preparing for this moment. We knew this legislation was going to be coming. Our AEA auto pay campaign all last summer was geared directly toward this threat, but we're not there yet. Clearly anti public education, lawmakers think there's still threat to this union by including this in this legislation. Have you heard much about that provision at the State House?

Matt Compton: 3:48

We have not heard much that was an argument that we used last year about how this would be just really crippling. They heard the call, and they understand that this could have a dramatic effect on the Idaho Education Association, because that legislation would go into effect immediately. So starting on January 1 or earlier, all school districts would need to cease doing any kind of payroll deduction. So I'm glad that the IA made the smart decision to start moving folks off of payroll deduction and onto the auto Bay campaign. Yeah, but we still have a significant portion of our members who are still using payroll deduction. And I want to direct folks to the IEA website, io, ea.org, and look across the top there, auto pay is featured, and members can go there and look at the information we have there about switching from payroll deduction to auto pay. We need every member could do that so that this threat is taken away from the Idaho legislature forever. Mike, there are a couple other bills that I want to share with you that I think are noteworthy. We had talked last week and in previous weeks about the threat that these voucher schemes have in Idaho. We discussed how representative Wendy Horman. Out of Idaho Falls had introduced a tax credit voucher sometime last week. She came back this week, making some modifications to that legislation, and reintroduced it as House Bill 93 and there's actually a couple of noteworthy changes in that legislation that I think folks should be concerned about. First and foremost in the original legislation, the very first bill, it was only eligible for folks who are not enrolled in public schools. Now this would be available to students who enrolled in public schools. That obviously increases the number of folks who can take advantage of this and increases the cost of it. There was an addition that the accountability measure that this voucher would have is some kind of parent led qualitative survey about how parents feel students are doing in school, which parent involvement is fantastic, but that's leaps and bounds from what a traditional public school has to do to demonstrate that their students are meeting proficiency and growth. The change from House Bill 39 to 93 now also includes parents ability to do small like micro schools, where parents could hire one teacher for, say, seven or eight students, and that was a provision that was not allowed in the original legislation.

Mike Journee: 6:23

Yeah. So listeners can continue listening to this podcast later on. We have a great discussion with Idaho School Board Association Associate Executive Director Quinn Perry, and Ida's political director Chris Perry, about vouchers in this legislative session pretty exhaustive conversation about that decision and that it should be good listening for folks who want to know more about what's going on. Matt, in addition to Representative hormones bill, Senator lent voucher bill, which is an extension of the empowering parents grant program, which basically an education savings account voucher. Using that program. We're expecting to have a public hearing on that bill of what from what I'm hearing early next week.

Matt Compton: 7:07

That's what I'm hearing as well. I believe that the legislature, both bodies, are looking for an opportunity to have the same conversation about vouchers at the same time, proposing the houses version versus the Senate version and see which of those two meets the governor's requirements when it comes to transparency and fairness and accountability. So it's going to be very interesting to see if anything comes out in the wash. Yeah, so Matt, there's another bill that we've been talking about for the past couple of weeks, legislation brought forward by Representative Ted Hill out of Eagle, which would prohibit the display of a number of flags in classrooms with the section of government flags and military flags. This is a legislation that we believe is aimed in fact, Hill is admitted. It's a legislation that that was spurred by him seeing a pride flag behind an educator in an online classroom. That bill passed the House of Representatives, so it's on its way to a hearing Senate Committee. This piece of legislation doesn't do anything for students in the classroom. Not only is it harmful for the students, but a pretty terrible example of civics instruction that you would tell students that they should and could have their first amendments violated because the flag or a visual display that they brought to school was somehow politically offensive. I think that we can do better than this. Before I go, I wanted to share one more last minute development. Chris and I met with stakeholders in the governor's office yesterday morning, where we talked about the other $50 million that he earmarked for new innovative education practices. He had $50 million for the voucher legislation, and then he also had another $50 million set aside for new innovation, the three places that we are looking to make substantive investments policy wise, going to be in literacy classroom, behavioral issues and rural school facilities. I believe next week we're going to see some legislation comes out that actually really deals with the needs of students in Idaho classrooms. That's fantastic. That's really good to hear. And I know the fact that you guys do have the year of the governor's office is an important part of the IEA influence at the state house, so the ability for you guys to go in there and have those conversations is critical. One last bill I want to talk on. And then a high note, we do have a bullying bill that was brought by Representative Chris Mathias out of Boise, that was approved by the House Education Committee and has also passed the House of Representatives on a pretty strong vote and is now headed to the Senate for consideration. Matt, this bill essentially requires parents to be notified if their child at. A student was involved in some kind of bullying incident, whether they are the aggressor or the one who is being bullied. This is good legislation. It does help students. I'm glad to see that the agarose house agreed. I agree with you. This is great legislation. Representative Matthias took a swing at this last year in house education, and wasn't able to get it across the line, so I was very excited to see it out of committee and then, you know, crossing the House floor with 44 votes to 26 that's very, very good it. It is really important that lawmakers start talking about some of the non academic issues that students are facing in schools, and this is a good start.

Mike Journee: 10:43

Great. Well, Matt, thanks again. That concludes our roundup of what happened at the Idaho State House this week, and looking forward to see where that bill goes and more updates on the rest of the legislation we've been discussing. You. Next up on the IAEA reported podcast how the fight against taxpayer funded subsidies for private education known as vouchers, is taking shape. I talk with Gwen Perry, the Associate Executive Director of the Idaho School Boards Association, and Chris Perry, the IAEA political director, about how the fight against vouchers shaping up the Idaho State houses session. Well, Quinn Perry, Chris Perry, no relation, spelled differently. Thanks for joining us today, and we're going to talk about vouchers today, guys, I think it's safe to say that vouchers are probably the most talked about issue at the Idaho legislature this year, bar none, whether education issues or any other issues, this seems to be the issue of the year. Is that? Y'all perspective?

Quinn Perry: 11:54

Definitely my perspective. I feel like more than ever I'm giving more community presentations. I think I've spoken at three chambers of commerce in the last few days. I've been on several podcasts. And, yeah, when I'm having legislative meetings, it's almost the number one want to be talked about thing this year.

Chris Parri: 12:13

So, you know, school choice or vouchers, or esas, whatever, being like the talk of the town in the State House is that it's not that important to like regular human beings. In Idaho, we did in our polling, there's just so many more people concerned about teacher pay, fixing facilities, just general, inadequate funding for their public schools. I think only 3.8% of people responded that school choice should be the number one priority of the legislature, which ranked like ninth or 10th or something in our poll. Like it is just not the talk of the town in amongst normal people, but it is dominating the conversation about education in the building, which just kind of lends itself to the idea that the legislature isn't really talking about the real issues in the state,

Mike Journee: 13:01

right? We've talked about that a couple times on here, Chris and how, you know, it seems like these culture war issues seem to be the thing that they really want to litigate in the legislature. And it really is not about helping kids or helping teachers do their job better, or administrators or school board members or any of that. It's about scoring those culture war so it's really unfortunate, guys, I want to ask next, what, what brought us to this point to where this issue is front and center of all the issues at the state house? Can you talk a little bit about that?

Quinn Perry: 13:34

Well, I think part of it is just the amount of national attention that Idaho has gotten for the fact that we are a largely very conservative state who has not expanded what these are being sold as conservative policies, even though, by their own merit or their own set of values, not conservative, right? This is like a government handout without any kind of strings attached, or accountability or transparency or anything that you normally hear conservatives when they talk about government appropriation. So I think it's a combination of the national attention that we're getting. I mean, Texas, Idaho and Tennessee are the three targets for these pro voucher groups, and they invested heavily into our state elections in the May primary that I think are influencing that conversation. So I think that's why it's dominating. But also I think largely it's reflective of our state legislature maybe does not value public education, and I think that's another reason why this conversation and redirecting funds away from our public schools is really at the forefront.

Chris Parri: 14:41

Part of this is revealed in the actions of the groups pushing these initiatives. If you have to spend millions of dollars in primary elections to get your idea across the finish line, if you have to hire millions of dollars worth of lobbyists to sell your stuff to the legislature in places like Kentucky and. Alaska also very conservative places, voters rejected these at the polls. So you see that these are not aligned at all with actual conservative values. But there's well moneyed interests that don't put a lot of value in government and in taxpayer money, just in general, and the idea that we can actually get real things done for people and would instead just kind of take all that tax money and turn it into profits for themselves. You see corporate greed really crystallizing in these policies and attacking states like ours, attacking Texas, Tennessee, all of these other red states, some of them have rejected them after they've experienced them. Others are having a harder time, like Arizona, trying to unpeel these awful policies.

Mike Journee: 15:42

Yeah, and it's the dollars that we're talking about are big. I mean, generally, I think you can say across the nation, about half of every state's budget is spent on public education. So they see those numbers and they say, Hey, if we can get a piece of taxpayer dollars in other places of the budget, why can't we get our hands on that, you know? So that's a big attraction to folks and the anti government folks who are in the legislature are perfectly willing to tear down those institutions before we get too far into the details of the session, guys, I'd like to define what we mean when we're talking about vouchers. I think one of the best definitions I've ever heard came recently from a really great panel at the IEA lobby dinner that you were a part of last weekend. Quinn, I believe it was Paula Keller from the Idaho business for education, who said it this way. She said, if you're spending taxpayer money on education, and public schools do not benefit from that spending. It's a voucher.

Quinn Perry: 16:37

Yeah, that definition that Paula uses actually from Josh Cowan, who is a really well known researcher on the school voucher movement. I mean, it's really any redirection of taxpayer money towards private and religious education, particularly where those same institutions aren't having to follow any of the oversight, accountability or transparency that's guaranteed and regulated in our public schools. So the proposals floating around the legislature, there's now been several introduced, but they all fit that bucket. But I will say that, you know, if you're using the governor's four words, which were fair, accountable, responsible and transparent, yes, the fart test, as I like to joke with folks, the proposals look very different in their approaches to those four words. So even though all bills that have been introduced are indeed a voucher bill, their approaches could not look more different.

Mike Journee: 17:32

Yeah, that's right, and I was going to ask Chris about to a little bit about that next. So we do have two bills that are kind of the main contenders for everybody's attention right now. One was brought by Representative Wendy Horman of Idaho Falls and her ally in the Senate. Let me Lori Denton heart talk out of meridian. And then there was another brought by Senator David lent out of Idaho Falls. And they do, you're right. Quinn, they take two very different tax in their approach to vouchers. Chris, I'm going to ask you to talk a little bit about representative hormones bill, and then Quinn, if you'll talk a little bit about Senator mitts bill after that, that'd be great. Give us a little bit of a flavor about how these bills approach vouchers and where they go. And I will say representative hormones Bill was reintroduced this week in the house, education, I'm sorry, in the house Revenue and Taxation Committee. So Chris talk a little bit about her bill. Wouldyou?

Chris Parri: 18:25

Yeah? So Representative hormones legislation over the past several years has really been the representation of all of the things I mentioned before, of those huge money groups, the big donors, the lobbyists, all of those massive groups that have pushed these policies elsewhere, Harmon has been the vessel for that legislation, so she hasn't changed her proposals very much over the years, they've always kind of fit the unaccountable, not fair, irresponsible and completely opaque set of principles that these big groups push. So in this iteration, it's interesting, Mike, that you almost said that it was introduced in the House Education Committee, because ostensibly, this is an education issue that ought to go through an education committee. But if you remember when our good friend, representative, Julie Yamamoto, was chair of House Education, she was not really a huge fan of these policies. So to get around the education committees and potential critiques of these policies, they decided to do a tax credit which could go through the rev and tax committee. So that's the voucher we're seeing from representative Horman. Is a tuition tax credit, essentially that would reimburse people for tuition expenses up to $5,000.70$500 for students with special needs. It's not exactly clear how this would work, how it would actually accomplish the stated goal of helping low income families afford tuition. Five grand is not going to get you very far with much of the tuition in the state and you. What working family is going to front 15 grand for tuition and hope they get five grand in a couple months from the government. It's capped as well. So I don't think we have any other kind of tax credit in the state that is trapped. So there's a chance that you just run out of money before you can even get your reimbursement, and then suddenly you're in financial turmoil after having to count for that five grand tuition credit. So my tin foil hat is that they'll do this. They are totally fine with that financial turmoil that these families might experience when they try to pay for tuition, and then next year, the year after, they'll come back around and say, look at these families that were counting on us to pay them money for their tuition and can't afford it. So we have to expand the program, they're basically creating artificial demand on the backs of families that they are breaking promises to. And I think that's so gross, but again, tin foil hat, but it's that's what has played out in other states. So the reintroduced version of representative hormones bill doesn't really change that much. It more specifically calls out that these expenses can be used for homeschool and micro school and learning pods, and, you know, igloo schools, I don't know, just any kind of descriptor that you could come up with. And then there's some sort of survey that parents have to fill out that kind of gestures at the accountability arguments we've been making, but doesn't really do anything functional. So anyways, it's the same as we've always seen from representative Horman.

Mike Journee: 21:21

So essentially, Chris, what we're looking at here is a tax credit that will not cover the typical cost of a private school education, and that would likely only be used by people who are already sending their kids to expensive private schools, and will not be an enticement for working class families who want their kids to get a private school education because it does not make up the difference in the typical tuition correct and has zero accountability, asks nothing of the schools that would benefit from these tax funds. Well, Quinn, Okay, Senator Dave Lentz bill it takes a totally different tack on vouchers. Tell us a little bit about his bill.

Quinn Perry: 22:05

Well, Senator Lenz bill does not create a new and program, but it expands really, what is an education savings account that already exists in Idaho law called empowering parents. So listeners may recall that in 2021 actually the same sponsors of the House tax credit brought the empowering parents grant program, and originally it included private school tuition at the time that was non negotiable for Governor little and the education stakeholders, but we agreed that a Low Income Grant Program for educational expenses, especially in the height of The COVID pandemic, was important. It created that program. So Senator Lenz bill expands the existing empowering parents program. Right now you're capped at $1,000 per child, and I think 3000 per family. This increases that to 5000 per child, with an overall family cap of 15,000 and it includes private school tuition. It also includes tuition to pre kindergarten programs, which is another stark difference between the House and Senate Bill. But Senator Lenz approach definitely takes into the account the governor's four pillars. Senator Lentz Bill does require private schools to you know, you have to register to be eligible. So it's not a free for all for any private school, home school, etc. The schools actually do have to register. And when they do, they have to attest to some of the following. So for example, they have to attest that they are fingerprinting and background checking their employees. They have to follow special education laws, which, again, just to point out something Chris had said. You know, the platitudes that we hear often from the provoucher folks are that like, Oh, this is to give families a choice and a leg up, but private schools often deny students with disabilities, like they are very open and transparent about that. So this would require those schools to offer special education. They would also have to follow the parental rights laws for Idaho. So that's the laws that were recently expanded in the 2023 legislative session that really ensures that parents have rights to their child's education. It also requires the school to attest to meeting the indoctrination law that was passed in 2021 so that's maybe more commonly known as the anti critical race theory law, and they do have to be accredited, which in you know to give credit to Senator Lent is critical, because in states with universal expansion, which Senator Len's bill is a use a universal ESA it just is technically 5% of the money can go to anyone with an adjusted gross income of 80,000 or above. But we do see a lot in states where these private schools are popping up in, like strip malls, or I talk about this a lot where, like, a public charter school was actually closed by regulators in Arizona because they had poor financial problems, but also 0% proficiency in math, they were closed by. Regulators in Arizona. Then 30 days later, they just reopened as a private school and are receiving, you know, however much money per student. So yeah, Senator Lenz, Bill certainly takes a different approach. But again, our fear and what I want folks to know is that it doesn't matter what income levels you put or the cap on spending, or these accountability requirements, the pro voucher lobby are going to come for all of it. They're going to try to lift the income eligibility, they're going to try to deregulate, and, you know, remove oversight, and so as soon as we get these into place, like the lobbying war, will forever begin to ensure that more money is going towards private schools with less regulation and oversight.

Mike Journee: 25:42

Yeah, that's what we've seen all across the country, wherever they the camel gets its nose in the tent. As they say, the later iterations of the bill just continue to grow and become more expansive and heat up more of the budget, budget that should be going to public schools. And so that's it's an MO That is very well worn all across the country, and you know, frankly, I think the two of you have a lot of credit to take for the fact that that hasn't been the case here in Idaho yet. The education stakeholders, the folks that we've been engaged with, the who were part of our the great press conference that we had on IEA Lobby Day, and have been part of this conversation all along, deserve a lot of credit. Idaho is one of the few red states in the country that has no voucher program at all because of that and so and of course, also because of Governor's littles previous rejection of vouchers. And I wanted to talk a little bit about that, I think that's a big factor in the way this conversation has shaped out. This year, he started off the legislative session in the state of the state saying he wanted to spend about $50 million on some kind of a school choice program, but his one big caveat to that was accountability and how we do that. So I'll talk a little bit about what accountability means. I've had some of our IEA members ask this very question of me, accountability is a watch word around this, and as you pointed out, it's the centerpiece of Senator Lentz bill, which makes it probably a little more palatable than it would be. We strongly oppose vouchers in any form at the IEA, and will continue to do so, but talk a little bit about this accountability concept, if you would. What does that actually mean when we're talking about a voucher program.

Quinn Perry: 27:30

no bill will ever be able to duplicate the type of oversight, transparency and accountability that's guaranteed in our public schools, right? And that's because public schools have been institutions for a very long time, and a lot of these regulations exist for lessons learned and ensuring that we're providing the the right and appropriate health and safety and protections of children. So I think accountability comes in a lot of different ways, and I'm not going to suggest that all accountability is meaningful accountability. There is a ton of red tape that the state legislature puts on public schools for redundant reporting things that you know, perhaps they were suspicious about investing and wanted to know that return on investment. So an example, the student eligible under the voucher also has to take a nationally normed reference test to ensure that learning is occurring. So I don't like using accountability as like, Oh, it's a test that you take to make sure that the you know, no, that's the transparency piece. Are the taxpayers able to see that this the that learning is occurring with their students, right? But it also is like that due process. It's ensuring that people are given a fair chance to have an equitable right to an education. It means that people aren't discriminated against based on how they show up to the school house doors. It means that we're providing a fair and consistent approach so ensuring that standards are being taught and that all children are kind of progressing at a certain level. It ensures that your teachers are certified, that they are, you know, well trained, they're provided professional development. So, like, I don't even know that you could, like, encompass accountability in one area. Like, we could go down 50 different rabbit holes about what accountability looks like, but it's ensuring that taxpayer money is going out and that there are regulations or oversight how that money is spent, and particularly how it's not being spent, meaning that we're not sending taxpayer dollars out that are going to support discriminatory practices against students with disabilities, or that we're sending them to institutions that aren't even fingerprinting or background Checking, you know, employees, and we're not putting children, you know, in the hands of predators, again, with funded by the taxpayers. So I think that's one way to look at it, but would love to hear anyone else's opinions.

Mike Journee: 29:52

Yeah, I think that's all great. One of the ways I think about it as well too, Chris, is, you know, every tax Dollar that is spent in the public school system is in some way either allocated or overseen or regulated, if you will, by an elected official, someone who has to be on a ballot, and the voters of that school district or that state vote those folks into place. They are elected officials who are accountable to voters, and they're the ones who are spending these tax dollars, and voucher program does not do that, right? Chris, look, not at all.

Chris Parri: 30:30

And so I think you brought up a good point there, Mike, like, what happens our public schools? Can you can hold people accountable directly to that, right? Do you know what's going on? It's very transparent what's going on in public schools. And you can go back to your school board, sorry, Quinn and unelect, a whole bunch of them, if you really want to part of the lack of accountability, lack of transparency we see in these voucher programs is that no one wants to be held accountable for what these private schools are up to, which is when a private school is like, Oh, I don't want to background check out, you know, our employees, and then legislators are like, and I don't even want to know who those employees are. It's like, okay, who do we hold accountable? Then when something terrible happens, right? So there's, again, it's, it's almost ridiculous, and it would be funny if it like, wasn't like, staring down our our necks right now. But yeah, so the like, type of accountability that we typically see in conversation the legislature right now, as Quinn mentioned, background checks, compliance of parental rights in education, disclosing operating budgets. Right this goes to the idea that, like these private schools, just raise their tuition immediately as soon as they get these vouchers, which, of course they would. Why wouldn't they? For as much love the free market gets from legislatures, they sure love messing with it when it serves their big money. Groups abide by, you know, anti discrimination, comply with state laws that prevent indoctrination test students, as Quinn mentioned, and ensure the funding goes to low income families. These are all prioritized by Idaho voters, but you also see the lobby groups pushing vouchers very opposed to essentially every single point here, which goes again to the point like, if you pass Senator Lenz bill, for example, a more thoughtful approach that's not going to stop these groups from coming back and trying to explode every single piece of regulation inside of it. More point on this too, which I find just so infuriatingly ironic, is that the same legislators who are the most passionate about this unaccountable voucher legislation complete black box of just tossing taxpayer money into a hole along with students, are the ones that have made the lives of teachers and students In public school so micromanaged and regulated in the first place. So the exact same legislators are the ones are saying, we need to micromanage what flags are in your building and micromanage every single bit of your curriculum, and yet they're totally fine with giving taxpayer money to schools that have no accountability, no transparency and no regulations. So again, you just see this bias against public schools and then this complete giveaway to private schools.

Mike Journee: 33:09

Yeah, and what? And one of the things that I think I kind of gravitate toward is the fact that we don't have any examples of what accountability looks like in a voucher bill from anywhere else around the country where this is going on. It doesn't exist. And Chris, you brought up the fact that they don't want to be held accountable. The folks who are advocating for vouchers don't want the parents who are going to be receiving this, these public tax dollars, accountable for how they're spent, which is, it's an incredible concept to me. Tell us how our listeners might be able to engage on this issue. What are some ways that they might be able to let lawmakers know how they feel about this?

Quinn Perry: 33:45

Oh, man, well, reach out to them immediately, whether they're on these relevant committees or not. This issue will be the issue of the session. And you know, I think unfortunately, with Governor Brad little kind of setting aside money in his State of the State address for this, the likelihood of a voucher bill hitting his desk is is going to be very likely. And so it is so important that folks lean in on the accountability and that transparency piece. Because I've been saying this, I think whatever hits his desk likely is signed into law and will forever be the stealing of accountability, transparency, etc, like our colleagues across the country, other states, like Arizona, Ohio, Indiana, Florida, they would be begging for some of the accountability that we're seeing perhaps in Senate Bill 1025, right, like background checks and fingerprinting. And we've learned that you can't go back and add it, because the out of state lobbyists will push and push and push against that. So it's so important and critical that folks are also, you know, saying to them, we don't support the redirection of our taxpayer dollars away from public schools and into the hands of unaccountable, non transparent private schools, but that they're also leaning in on those four words of fair, accountable, responsible and transparent andSo have conversations, pick up the phone. Don't just email. Like, pick up the phone when you can leave a voicemail. Try to get in touch with your legislator. Also have like, dinner table conversations, like, get your friends and neighbors involved in this. I think a lot of people are waking up to what is actually going to happen to their neighborhood public schools once these voucher bills become law, it is so critical that you engage your communities, your friends, neighbors, your friends at church, business, community, whoever you have to be engaged on this and reach out today to your legislator.

Chris Parri: 35:34

I would echo everything Quinn said. Another thing that we've seen throughout the years is that some legislators are kind of caving to the pressure and saying, Look, you know, let's just, I'm tired of this conversation. Give them a tiny voucher and we'll move on and move forward, or whatever. When you talk to legislators, don't let them off the hook. That's not how being legislator works. You don't just get to make a bad vote and then get forgiven by every constituent in your district, right? Hold them accountable to this and let them know this is not cost free. This is not a free vote. You just get to make that screws over your public schools, right? You can't do that. You're a legislator. You have power. You were elected for a reason, and if you go back on those promises to your pro public school constituents, you do not deserve their support in the next election. I think it's really, really key that people point that out, particularly when, again, only three point, I just saw the poll, 3.8% of the people said that this is a priority, compared to, you know, well over half of the people that were asking the open ended questions saying, fix our public schools in a good way, right? So I don't know it just it really makes me angry when people just kind of cave to the pressure. It's like, come on, like, represent Giuliana Moto is a good example of this. She was happy to lose she I mean, obviously she would prefer to still be in office, but she was happy to be voting the way that she knew was right throughout her entire tenure in the legislature. And then again, we had a guy from Arizona, a former legislator, who voted for the ESA because of some of that pressure, who now says that that was the biggest regret of his life. And if he could go back to the legislature again and redo that, that would be the one vote at the top of his list that he would change. So don't let legislators be that guy. You know, it's really frustrating to see people caved to these kind of things. And oh so more specifically. So Wendy hormonal will be in the house revenue Tax Committee on the House side, and then Senator Lenz bill will be in the Senate Education Committee on the Senate side. So those are kind of the committees to reach out to.

Mike Journee: 37:41

Thank you, Chris. I appreciate that. And your point underscores elections matter. Elections matter, and people who care about these issues need to make sure that they and their friends and their family get out and vote, bring good people to the out of the legislature. So guys, my last question is pink. Quinn, already thrusts on us a little bit, where do you think this is all going to end this year?

Chris Parri: 38:06

I think Speaker Mike Moyle will ensure that a voucher bill hits the governor's desk. So I think there's still a lot of time left in the legislative session for these policy debates to fold out. Our hope, of course, is that the legislature wakes up to these voucher schemes and reject them wholeheartedly, but we know that that is an unlikely thing, so it just really encouraged folks to lean in on what that means. But I think there's still a lot of time to be had between now and then, so just reach out to folks and really get them engaged. Maybe I'm a little more optimistically Quinn, but just like barely, I would say, I think that there's still a chance we get nothing because of the way the conversation has shifted. Senator Lentz bill gives us a chance to compare and contrast these two very different pieces of legislation, and the more that we can emphasize the things missing from representative hormones bill, which is again on the House side, that is Mike Moyles preferred voucher bill. And the more we can say, Why are these very popular things missing from this bill? I think the more we can kind of pit those two bills against each other, the higher our chance of getting nothing goes. So we really need to emphasize that contrast and make sure again, that the particularly folks in the Senate remains strong and committed to an accountable bill or no bill at all, and make sure the governor, as well, doesn't if you know if representative hormones bill, as it currently is written, hits his desk again that does not pass Quinn's fart test, as she said, the fair, accountable, responsible and transparency tests that the governor laid out, and so he should not be allowed to sign that bill without facing his constituents and explaining why he's signing it. I think it's really key that we hold these folks accountable to the things they said, and don't get distracted by rhetoric from the pro voucher lobby groups.

Mike Journee: 40:00

Yeah. And the governor was very clear in his State of the State address that he would not support something that did not have accountability measures similar to what public schools face. So thanks to both of you so much for this conversation. It was a good one. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of developments around this as things go forward, because expertise is second to none, and I want to thank you both for what you do down the State House.

Quinn Perry: 40:26

Thanks for having us.

Chris Parri: 40:28

Thanks, Mike,

Mike Journee: 40:32

thank you for listening to this episode of the IAEA reporter podcast, and thanks to Quinn Perry, the Idaho School Board Association and the IAEA is Chris Perry and Matt Compton for joining us. Please watch for updates about new podcast episodes on IA social media channels or sign up to receive IAEA reporter email updates on our website@idahoea.org I'm Mike Journee, and as always, I hope you join me in thanking Idaho public school educators for everything they do, first aid students, families, public schools, you.