For Immediate Release
Sharon Cherubin,  www.unitepa.org
Don Adams,  www.independencehallteaparty.com
___________________________________________________________________

Independent Poll:  Pennsylvanians at Complete Odds with SB1;
Prefer Scholarship Program over School Vouchers
 
Lancaster, PA (November 10, 2011) -- A new 'eye opening' Independent Pulse Opinion Research telephone survey of 500 Pennsylvania voters--taken this past Saturday after a contentious ten month statewide debate on school choice--shows that a majority of respondents oppose major aspects of SB1--an education bill backed by Governor Tom Corbett and passed by the PA Senate two weeks ago.
 
The results, published below, indicate that an overwhelming 78% would prefer a school choice voucher program open to all students, regardless of family income.  Only 20% of likely voters support school vouchers solely for low-income families as proposed in SB1.
 
The survey also shows that 59% support an existing tax credit system, known as the Educational Improvement Tax Credit Program, over a new voucher program.
 
Sponsored by UNITEPA in cooperation with the Independence Hall Tea Party Association, the poll was commissioned to gain an honest school choice perspective from PA citizens, after a national lobbyist group, Freedomworks, Inc., conducted a lengthy and expensive pro-SB1 campaign.
 
Both UNITEPA and the Association, strong advocates of school choice, have withheld support from SB1 because it excludes children in the bottom 5% of persistently failing public schools whose parents are considered middle income and working poor.  Viewing the current SB1 bill as an "entitlement" program, they have instead supported "real school choice" legislation that would include middle and low income students in a voucher program.
 
They have also been strong supporters of HB1330, a bill which would double the existing EITC program making scholarships available for both low and middle income students without creating another bureaucracy.  HB1330 overwhelmingly passed the house in May and currently sits in the Senate Education Committee.
 
"It is unconscionable that our Governor and State Senators would deny children, attending persistently failing schools, a proper and safe education purely based on income requirements.
 
"Duquesne Consolidated School is a prime example of the government's inability to use common sense.  Out of the 436 attending students, 433 of them will qualify for a voucher, leaving 3 middle income students behind. Why are we funding failure?", says Sharon Cherubin, Executive Director of UNITEPA.
 
SB1 passed the Senate with over 60 pages of amendments that were added to the bill just 24 hours prior to the vote--giving citizens and legislators little time to vet them.  The bill now sits in the House Education Committee where its future is uncertain.
 
###
 
Pennsylvania Survey of 500 Likely Voters
Conducted November 5, 2011
By Pulse Opinion Research
(Pulse Opinion Research LLC is an independent public opinion research firm using automated polling methodology and procedures licensed from Rasmussen Reports.)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________


FREEDOMWORKS THROWS 30,000 KIDS UNDER THE BUS
The Real Story behind the Failure of the School Choice Bill - SB1
June 30, 2011 -- Sharon Cherubin, UNITEPA & The Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice
 
Lancaster, Pa -- The burning question today on every parent's mind in Pennsylvania is -- "What happened to school choice and the promise that Governor Corbett made to the Commonwealth?".  SB1 is what happened - not school choice.  SB1 was never about school choice nor was it about creating a road map in education reform for the children of Pennsylvania.  SB1 was used to seduce the public into believing that "every child" would have the same opportunity - when our politicians knew that the end result would have been another entitlement program, leaving thousands of low-middle income children behind.   Their school choice message was confusing and lacked any sense of clarity. 
 
At the helm of SB1 stood the self appointed national lobbying firm, FreedomWorks, lead by Dick Armey, former House Majority Leader and US Congressman.   FreedomWorks launched a full blown campaign with printed SB1 backpacks, stickers, yard signs, t-shirts and other paraphernalia prior to the bill even being available to the public.  It was quite a display of arrogance and misjudgement on their part.  They waltzed into town with a financial arsenal that no tea party organization could match -- spending thousands, if not millions of dollars on their self-serving publicity stunt. Yet with all of their clout, SB1 was a total cluster and failed miserably.
 
The School Choice debate was intense at times due to the tactics used by FreedomWorks and Dick Armey's decision to pick Pennsylvania as the next state on their campaign hit list.  Ironically, they even squelched the voices of the sponsors of SB1 by overpowering their school choice message with a FreedomWorks message of  -- "do as I say or else".  Many state Senators were not accustomed to being bullied by National Lobbying groups to the extent of having the threat of mass ad campaigns launched against them.  Even the SB1 panels organized by FreedomWorks were one sided and were more of an SB1 marketing pitch than an open discussion.  They used naive' grassroots groups as props to give the illusion that the Conservative Movement was on board with SB1.  FreedomWorks hoped that having these leaders support would give the bill grass-roots credibility, according to an article published in the New York Times, 6/29/11.  Their strategy backfired when they were flanked by Conservative activists that organized to stop this entitlement voucher bill and lobby for academic freedom for ALL children in Pennsylvania.
 
FreedomWorks was completely satisfied with "throwing 30,000 children under the bus".  SB1 would have left behind thousands of low-middle income children in failing schools with little hope of being able to escape our deteriorating education system.  It is an atrocity that a National organization would take such a stance to push legislation that would actually harm thousands of children.  Every family has different needs and every child's needs are different.  FreedomWorks claims, according to a statement on their website,  that "Pennsylvania parents should have the power and opportunity to choose their child's school and reap the benefits of free-market competition".  Yet, this sentiment was not reflected anywhere in SB1.
 
In response to the lack of leadership and clarity on school choice, UNITEPA and the Independence Hall Tea Party Association formed the Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice, comprised of 22 grassroots organizations.  Because of their commitment to REAL school choice and their persistence, new legislation was drafted by Representative Curt Schroder that would rescue ALL children in failing schools and alternatively empower ALL children in every school with choice.  Schroder's bills are equitable, principled and fair, unlike the blundered SB1 bill which ironically helped pave the way for true academic freedom because it was such a failure.
 
We all know that the Pennsylvania School system requires reform.  We know our schools are failing.  Kids are being tormented, bullied or worse in our public schools.  So if FreedomWorks would have just listened to the real grassroots citizens and sat down at the table, we might have REAL School Choice today.  They invested their donors monies so much into SB1 that they could not afford to pull back and see the forest for the trees.  FreedomWorks plowed their way into the school choice conversation without doing their homework or consulting with those on the ground. They simply used their old playbook which worked in other states.
 
When National Lobbying groups try to commandeer the movement, it is felt across the entire grassroots network.  The grassroots does not like being bullied or pigeon holed into a particular issue without an honest debate.  Here, the debate was silenced, the lies ensued and FreedomWorks did more damage than good.
 
The Coalition will be attending education hearings over the summer and will be back in the fall, fighting for all of the children of this Commonwealth.  We can only hope that our legislators are wise enough to push back the overbearing lobbyists and teacher's unions and do the right thing for ALL of the children in Pennsylvania.
 
__________________________
 
The Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice and UNITEPA thanks every single grassroots citizen for standing up for truth, principle and all of the children of this commonwealth.  Your phone calls and your perseverance is what helped shape the debate and change the paradigm.  SB1 is dead, but the school choice debate is alive and well.  We will be pushing hard in the fall for equitable, fair and principled legislation that does not alienate or discriminate any child.  Thank you for trusting our judgement and our commitment to freedom and liberty. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

A Voice for Choice

NATIONAL REVIEW
June 6, 2011

A VOICE FOR CHOICE
Meet the Pennsylvania Democrat willing to take on teachers’ unions

JOHN J. MILLER

Three Philadelphia businessmen captured the attention of Pennsylvania’s political class last year when they pumped more than $5 million into the campaign of state senator Anthony H. Williams, a black Democrat seeking his party’s nomination for governor. John P. Martin, a reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer, spoke of the money’s “potential to catapult Williams past other contenders.” One of his sources, G. Terry Madonna of Franklin and Marshall College, warned darkly of the ethical implications: “Here’s the point: Money buys . . . access and influence.”

The cash didn’t purchase Williams a victory. He came in third in the Democratic primary, well behind Dan Onorato, who went on to lose to Republican Tom Corbett in November. But the contributions may have served an unexpected purpose: By giving Williams an opportunity to promote his signature issue of school choice, they created the preconditions for the passage of one of the most ambitious pieces of conservative legislation any state will consider this year. Pennsylvania could approve what its secretary of education, Ronald Tomalis, calls “the most expansive school-choice law in the nation, involving more kids across a greater geographic area than anywhere else in the country.”

Success would be a direct result of last year’s elections, which saw Republicans sweep into the governorship and rack up historic majorities in the state legislature. “I’m confident we’re going to have school choice,” says Governor Corbett. Before that can happen, however, a school-choice bill co-authored by Williams (who remains a state senator) must survive what may be its most difficult test: overcoming skepticism from tea-party activists who insist that it doesn’t go far enough. The confrontation poses a challenge for Republicans as they try to convert the exuberance of tea parties into the practical realities of governing, with its odd-bedfellow coalitions and frustrating compromises. Should conservatives seize a significant victory for school choice that appears to be within their reach right now — or should they press for more and risk failure?

At the center of the debate is Williams, a longtime legislator from Philadelphia and a true-blue liberal on many issues. “I supported Barack Obama in 2008 and I support him today,” he says. Yet on education policy, he dissents from his party’s teachers’-union orthodoxies. His bill would provide state-funded vouchers to low-income students. If approved, it would affect more than 70,000 kids who attend lousy schools in its first year, rising to more than 600,000 in its third, when all low-income students would qualify. By the fourth year, it starts to include the middle class; a family of four that makes about $67,000 would become eligible. “Why should the children of poor parents trapped in failing public schools be forced to remain there?” asks Williams. “Democrats are supposed to be for the little guy, for a level playing field, and for diversity and inclusiveness.”

Williams isn’t a newcomer to school choice — he has backed it for years. His mother was a public-school teacher, but he experienced the benefits of a private education when he received a scholarship to Westtown School, a Quaker academy. “When I first ran for office, I was like a lot of Democrats and thought that public schools just needed more money,” says Williams. “But I knew from my personal story that there were other options. I did some research and decided to come out aggressively for school choice. I got a lot of pushback from my party, but it was the right thing to do.”

Williams was a foot soldier in Pennsylvania’s last school-choice showdown, a near-miss affair in 1995. Tom Ridge was the new Republican governor, and he had included vouchers as one part of an education-reform package. The package as a whole stumbled in the statehouse, but when its elements came up for individual votes, they all passed — with the exception of school choice. “We tried a bunch of ways to get it through,” says Gene Hickok, who was Pennsylvania’s secretary of education at the time. “Nothing worked.” Democrats voted against it en masse — Williams was one of just a few renegades — and enough Republicans chose not to anger the teachers’ unions. Toward the end of his governorship, Ridge managed to secure a tax credit for companies that donate to scholarship programs for poor families. Apart from this, school choice was dead for the rest of his time in office. It remained dead under his two-term successor, Democrat Ed Rendell.

Meanwhile, the philosophy that public education simply needs more tax dollars flourished. Since 1996, Pennsylvania has doubled its spending on education to $26 billion per year, which works out to about $14,000 per child. That’s almost 30 percent above the national average, and more than the averages of 39 states. Under current funding formulas, Harrisburg schools receive close to $17,000 per student. As Matthew J. Brouillette of the Commonwealth Foundation observes, this is more than a year’s tuition at Penn State. Despite these resources, 64 percent of the district’s eighth-graders aren’t proficient readers. “We have to look at alternatives such as school choice,” says Brouillette.

Last year, as Williams considered a bid to succeed Rendell by running on a school-choice platform, he approached the three founding partners of the Susquehanna International Group, a Philadelphia-based trading company. Arthur Dantchik, Joel Greenberg, and Jeff Yass aren’t easy to label — they’ve given money to politicians from both parties — but they’ve shown a clear interest in education reform. They’ve donated to Philadelphia charter schools as well as national organizations that promote school choice, such as the Cato Institute and the Institute for Justice. They jumped at the chance to fund the statewide campaign of a black Democrat who speaks with passion about one of their favorite policy ideas. They opened their wallets, encouraged well-heeled friends to do the same, and took advantage of Pennsylvania’s campaign-finance laws, which don’t restrict the size of political contributions. They also set up a political-action committee to support legislative candidates who favor school choice.

Their cash didn’t make Williams the nominee, but it gave him a bullhorn and allowed him to talk about school choice in Democratic circles. Shortly after Onorato took the Democratic nomination, he endorsed the Williams approach. Suddenly, school choice wasn’t a bucket-list project for free-market purists, but rather a bipartisan cause with a real chance of success in the Keystone State. “The investment in Williams changed the political landscape,” says John Kirtley of the American Federation for Children, which promotes school choice nationally. By January, school choice was on the agenda in Harrisburg. Corbett touted it in his inaugural address. In the state senate, Williams teamed up with Jeffrey Piccola, a Republican colleague who also had fought for the Ridge bill. The chamber’s leadership signaled its priorities when it positioned the Piccola-Williams proposal as Senate Bill 1 in the current session.

As the legislation worked its way through committees this winter and spring, Williams remained a key ally. He spoke at rallies and organized busloads of inner-city kids to visit Harrisburg. Williams also encouraged a couple of trade unions to break solidarity with the teachers. In Philadelphia, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 98 and the Laborers’ District Council endorsed school choice. “We believe that children from all economic backgrounds deserve a chance for a bright future,” said John J. Dougherty of IBEW Local 98 in a press release. “School choice programs will give them that chance.” According to a Pulse Opinion Research poll, the strongest support for school choice comes from blacks: 69 percent support it. Black lawmakers don’t show the same enthusiasm, but Williams isn’t as lonely as he once was: A dozen or more of them may vote for school choice this year.

For now, the bill remains in the senate. Its true challenge lies in the other chamber. Pennsylvania’s house has a big GOP majority, but that doesn’t automatically translate into a majority for school choice. Some Republicans rely on teachers’-union talking points. “I don’t think vouchers do anything to improve schools,” says Jim Marshall of Beaver County. “Vouchers privatize the whole system and leave holes in the existing public schools.”

If Marshall worries that school choice goes too far, many of his colleagues believe that the Williams bill doesn’t go far enough. By limiting eligibility to low-income students at first, it keeps vouchers out of the hands of middle-class families. Moreover, the scholarships are limited to the portion of Pennsylvania’s school funds that come from the state government (as opposed to the federal and local governments), and the funding formulas apply — meaning that even though the vouchers are limited to low-income students, kids in wealthier districts will receive less money. Vouchers are worth around $9,000 in some areas, but in others it’s not nearly as much. “Where I live, a voucher would be worth only about $1,500,” complains Mario Scavello, a Republican from Monroe County in the Poconos. “That’s not equitable.”

The ringleader of conservatives who oppose a limited school-choice bill is Rep. Curt Schroder of suburban Philadelphia. “In the senate, they’re settling for a foot in the door rather than reaching for the stars,” he says. “If I were pushing a watered-down bill on another subject, everybody would be screaming ‘RINO.’” In tea-party lingo, RINO — “Republican in Name Only” — is practically a cuss word.

If Schroder offers replacement legislation, he’ll have plenty of support from tea-party groups. “We should have school choice for all children, including homeschoolers,” says Sharon Cherubin of UNITEPA, a Pennsylvania grassroots conservative organization. “The current bill isn’t about civil rights — it’s about special rights. We aren’t going to compromise. I’d rather have no bill than this bill.” Cherubin recently produced a video that denounces the legislation. More than 20 tea-party groups have endorsed the video, and they’re trying to distribute it through social-media networks. “It kills us to be in this position, squabbling with conservatives,” says Don Adams of the Independence Hall Tea Party. “We should be working together on a comprehensive school-choice bill.”

Many conservatives, of course, feel the opposite way — they wish everyone could agree on an incremental approach that pockets a victory now and creates the possibility for expansion later. They worry that the perfect could become the enemy of the good. “If I were recreating the world, we’d have school choice out of the box,” says Piccola. “But this bill is a huge first step. It starts a path to universal school choice.” Republican U.S. senator Pat Toomey, a tea-party favorite, favors this approach as well: “I absolutely support this bill,” he says. “It would allow us to make enormous progress.” Supporters also point out that the legislation almost doubles the tax-credit scholarship program introduced during the Ridge years: Funding soars to $75 million, with middle-income families allowed to participate. “This is an essential part of the equation,” says Brouillette of the Commonwealth Foundation. “It will make school choice a reality for a lot of people.”

On May 10, a large bipartisan majority in the house passed an expansion of the tax-credit program — but pointedly did not take any action in support of vouchers. Many school-choice boosters had hoped the Piccola-Williams bill would become a law by summer. Republican senate majority leader Dominic Pileggi now says it’s probably postponed to the fall. Pennsylvania could be headed for a replay of its experience in 1995: success for education reform, but with the exception of vouchers.

Teachers’ unions are working hard to exploit the rift on the right. They’ve launched an ad campaign whose slogan is “No voucher tax” — a theme that’s meant to resonate with conservatives, right down to the twang of the guy who grumbles through a 30-second advertisement that claims school choice will make government bigger rather than smaller. Nobody’s taxes go up, so it’s a bizarre assertion — but hardly the first in the long war for vouchers. When it comes to school choice, people who have wanted to oppose it never have had much trouble finding excuses.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

May 11, 2011
For Immediate Release
Contact:  Sharon Cherubin, 717.413.3973, www.unitepa.org
              Teri Adams, 215.620.3055, www.ihtpa.org
 
 
Grassroots Coalition Leaders Endorse HB 1330;
Call Senator Piccola's Remark Irresponsible
 
Harrisburg, PA (May 11, 2011) -- The Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice, an association of over 20 Pennsylvania groups representing thousands of voters, has announced, today, its full support of House Bill 1330, an expansion of the state's Educational Improvement Tax Credit program that provides tuition assistance to middle and low income students attending private schools.
 
Yesterday, HB 1330 passed the Pennsylvania House of Representatives by a vote of 190-7.
 
At the same time Coalition leaders were endorsing HB 1330, they were condemning the remarks of State Senator Jeff Piccola (R-PA) that the bill was "dead on arrival" in the Senate.
 
"While we congratulate PA House members for their overwhelming support of HB 1330, we have no idea what prompted Senator Piccola, a school choice advocate, to say the bill was 'dead on arrival' in the Senate," said Coalition leader, Teri Adams, President of the Independence Hall Tea Party Association.
 
"The EITC Scholarship program is a clean, budget neutral, and proven program--why would Senator Piccola, Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, make such an irresponsible remark?"
 
Coalition leader, Sharon Cherubin, Executive Director of UNITEPA, added "the EITC Scholarship program is a broad-based, highly touted program that reflects real school choice.
 
"It is estimated that 80,000 Pennsylvania school children will benefit from this program in the first year.  In the following year, that number could double," she said. 
 
"And the good part is that the EITC Scholarship Program is strictly financed by corporate donations.  In exchange for donations, the state provides participating corporations with generous tax credits.   The program is not a budget buster."        
 
 
#   #   #


________________________________________________________________________________________________

THE REASON FOR REFORM:  CHOICE OR FAILING SCHOOLS?
THE REASON FOR REFORM: 
CHOICE OR FAILING SCHOOLS?
Contact:  Sharon Cherubin, 717.413.3973,               
Teri Adams, 215.620.3055,   
Grassroots Coalition Leaders Endorse HB 1330; Call Senator Piccola's Remark Irresponsible Harrisburg, PA (May 11, 2011) --

The Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice, an association of over 20 Pennsylvania groups representing thousands of voters, has announced, today, its full support of House Bill 1330, an expansion of the state's Educational Improvement Tax Credit program that provides tuition assistance to middle and low income students attending private schools. Yesterday, HB 1330 passed the Pennsylvania House of Representatives by a vote of 190-7.  At the same time Coalition leaders were endorsing HB 1330, they were condemning the remarks of State Senator Jeff Piccola (R-PA) that the bill was "dead on arrival" in the Senate. "While we congratulate PA House members for their overwhelming support of HB 1330, we have no idea what prompted Senator Piccola, a school choice advocate, to say the bill was 'dead on arrival' in the Senate," said Coalition leader, Teri Adams, President of the Independence Hall Tea Party Association. "The EITC Scholarship program is a clean, budget neutral, and proven program--why would Senator Piccola, Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, make such an irresponsible remark?"  Coalition leader, Sharon Cherubin, Executive Director of UNITEPA, added "the EITC Scholarship program is a broad-based, highly touted program that reflects real school choice.  "It is estimated that 80,000 Pennsylvania school children will benefit from this program in the first year.  In the following year, that number could double," she said.   "And the good part is that the EITC Scholarship Program is strictly financed by corporate donations.  In exchange for donations, the state provides participating corporations with generous tax credits.   The program is not a budget buster."  

THE REASON FOR REFORM:  CHOICE OR FAILING SCHOOLS?Contact:  Sharon Cherubin, 717.413.3973,               Teri Adams, 215.620.3055,   Grassroots Coalition Leaders Endorse HB 1330; Call Senator Piccola's Remark Irresponsible Harrisburg, PA (May 11, 2011) -- The Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice, an association of over 20 Pennsylvania groups representing thousands of voters, has announced, today, its full support of House Bill 1330, an expansion of the state's Educational Improvement Tax Credit program that provides tuition assistance to middle and low income students attending private schools. Yesterday, HB 1330 passed the Pennsylvania House of Representatives by a vote of 190-7.  At the same time Coalition leaders were endorsing HB 1330, they were condemning the remarks of State Senator Jeff Piccola (R-PA) that the bill was "dead on arrival" in the Senate. "While we congratulate PA House members for their overwhelming support of HB 1330, we have no idea what prompted Senator Piccola, a school choice advocate, to say the bill was 'dead on arrival' in the Senate," said Coalition leader, Teri Adams, President of the Independence Hall Tea Party Association. "The EITC Scholarship program is a clean, budget neutral, and proven program--why would Senator Piccola, Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, make such an irresponsible remark?"  Coalition leader, Sharon Cherubin, Executive Director of UNITEPA, added "the EITC Scholarship program is a broad-based, highly touted program that reflects real school choice.  "It is estimated that 80,000 Pennsylvania school children will benefit from this program in the first year.  In the following year, that number could double," she said.   "And the good part is that the EITC Scholarship Program is strictly financed by corporate donations.  In exchange for donations, the state provides participating corporations with generous tax credits.   The program is not a budget buster."  

________________________________________________________________________________________________

What is the real purpose of Pennsylvania's "School Choice" Bill - SB1
April 19, 2011
Sharon Cherubin
Executive Director UNITEPA, Lancaster
 
The Pennsylvania Public School System is under a microscope once again, as our legislators scramble to sell the "school choice" bill to the public.  Millions of dollars have been pumped into our public school system with the unions standing by defending the cost and the outcome.  The National Education Association Union is the largest union in the United States with a budget of $353 million dollars and 3.2 million members.  40% of 9th grade students in Philadelphia will drop out of school.  44% of Pennsylvania's eleventh graders are not proficient in math, while 34% are not proficient in reading.  Pennsylvania ranks 43rd on average SAT scores. The schools blame the parents and the parents blame the schools for a spiraling decline in academic achievement in the public system.
 
For years, Pennsylvania has heard the battle cry by legislators and school choice advocates: "Every child deserves school choice!", "School Choice means the parent gets to choose how to best educate their child", "School choice is a civil right", and most recently, "The parent should be the arbiter when it comes to their child's education"!  Yet, SB1 does not reflect any of these sentiments or good policy as our politicians have not been able to define REAL school choice.  They offered a weak bill that had no vision for the future of our mandatory public education system and no real reform.  As a result, the bill was unexpectedly pulled from the schedule last week.  Where is the road map for fixing a bureaucratic public education system and the promise of Choice?   Families want to see a thoughtful plan and legislation from their elected officials that is equitable and principled.  They voted for transparency and accountability in November yet many officials have been living in a vacuum and not injecting themselves into this decade old conversation. 
 
This is a gladiator moment for our Senators and Representatives.  Most are watching policy groups, teacher's unions, grassroots organizations and school choice advocates battle it out while they sit at the Capitol waiting for the dust to clear.   Yes, the unions are making calls and aggravating the Senate members who have not been bought and paid for, but for the majority, they are silent on this extremely important issue.  The politicians that are speaking out do not have control over the message nor do they fully understand the great divide among supporters and those that stand on principle.
 
Although reform is being prompted by failing schools, it should be about choice and giving parents the ability to choose what is best for their child.  In July of 2010, SB1 was written under the assumption that any family making over 130% of the poverty line has school choice.  This assumption declares that if you have the means to move outside of a failing school district then that is choice.  If you have the ability to get a second or third job to pay for private school, than that is choice.  Many surveys have been conducted to prop up SB1 but no one has asked the middle income families if they should be exempt because they might have the means.  A large majority of parents might have the will to choose private education but they do not have the power. 
 
May 5th is the 10th Birthday Celebration for the outstanding "Educational Improvement Tax Credit Program".  Pennsylvania should celebrate with those that had the vision and foresight ten years ago and be thankful for the assistance that has come from local businesses and corporations.  But maybe this year our government should be thanking the thousands of Pennsylvanians who have voluntarily opted out of public education.  They save the state over 4 billion dollars every year by making the personal sacrifice to educate their children in a non-public setting.  How about a cake for the 22,000+ homeschoolers who saved the state over $286 million dollars last year by educating their children at home?   Taxpayers are the ones who support public education.  This money is not the property of the public school system.  The money should follow the child.  
 
School choice is not really about school choice in SB1.  It is about creating another government program which gives a small segment of the population special rights.  Last week, middle income families were added to the fourth year in an attempt to appease grassroots critics that believe the bill is a liberal idea meant to fix a government problem.  Now, middle income families will have to plan their child's education on an unreliable system which does not guarantee funding.  The middle income provision is based on leftover monies that may or may not be available.
 
There are some outstanding schools in Pennsylvania and yet no one has taken the time to compare the success with the failures in order to duplicate what works.  We cannot afford to fund failure.  Most parents fully understand that more money and more time is not going to fix our broken school system.  Parents want the power to choose how to educate their child.  So how do we get there? Instead of sending out SB1 support groups peddling a bill that is based on the premise that "vouchers" will inflict pain on the unions, let's build a road map for REAL reform.   We could suggest the following:  offer the EITC money up front with a "voucher " program that is supplemental not primary, place a cap on the amount of the "voucher", provide homeschooling families and private school students tax credits for educational supplies and specialized classes and offer individual tax credits for those that want to contribute to the EITC program.  We could also investigate the possibility of Educational Savings Accounts which function similarly to Health Savings Accounts.  A universal voucher program is not "school choice".  The government still has control over "your" money and it is an invitation to inflated tuition costs and special interest groups.
 
For two years, the grassroots movement has worked tirelessly to promote the principles of our founding fathers, elect righteous leaders and defend our freedoms and liberty.  So everything that we have worked for to restore this great nation will be in vain if we pass the baton onto a generation of future leaders that cannot meet basic academic standards.  SB1 is Senate Bill One because it is a Senate Priority.  So remind your Senators that "Choice" is the priority.  Parents make the best decisions for their own child's education, not government!  

________________________________________________________________________________________________

For Immediate Release
Contact:    
Sharon Cherubin, www.unitepa.org
Teri Adams,  www.ihtpa.org
 
Coalition Leaders Call Today's Pro-SB 1 Rally Premature; Say Bill Fails to Offer Real School Choice,
Despite Senate Amendment 
 
Harrisburg, PA (April 12, 2011) -- The Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice, an association of over 20 Pennsylvania groups representing thousands of voters, has sent a letter (below), today, to Pennsylvania Senate and House leaders asking that SB 1 be
amended to include middle income children in a more effective manner.
 
"While getting the Senate Appropriations Committee to amend SB 1, as it did yesterday, is a partial victory for our Coalition--proving that we are correct in our assertion that the bill does not adequately cover the needs of middle income students, we are certain the Amendment still has not addressed our main concerns," said Coalition leader, Teri Adams, President of the Independence Hall Tea Party Association.
 
"Why does SB 1 wait until the fourth year to vaguely include middle income children?  At the very least, the 27,000 middle income children attending failing schools should be included in the first year, along with the low income students already covered in the bill."
 
Coalition leader, Sharon Cherubin, Executive Director of UNITEPA, added "We cannot stand idly by and watch the Pennsylvania Assembly draft a 'school choice' bill which offers guarenteed school choice to only one segment of the student population, while leaving middle income students with the uncertainty of leftover funding.
 
"In order to achieve real school choice, middle income children must be given more than lip service.  Our proposed Amendment provides them, along with low income students, an opportunity to escape failing schools and to achieve academically.        
 
"Sadly, today's rally in support of SB 1 is premature.  We must act now to do better for our children--we are running out of time and options."
 
#   #   #
 
April 12, 2011

The Honorable Joseph Scarnati
The Honorable Jake Corman
The Honorable Anthony Williams
The Honorable Jeffrey Piccola
The Honorable Dominic Pileggi
The Honorable Lloyd Smucker
The Honorable Mike Folmer
The Honorable David Argall
The Honorable Sam Smith
The Honorable Mike Turzai
The Honorable William Adolph
The Honorable Paul Clymer
The Honorable Curt Schroder
The Honorable Scott Boyd
 
Dear Members,
 
The Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice, representing tens of thousands of Pennsylvania Tea Party activists and Conservatives, has formed in opposition to Senate
Bill 1 in its present form.
 
We cannot, in good conscience, support a bill which is more "entitlement" than "school choice" and are writing this open letter to outline our position. The Coalition, itself, is comprised of over 20 Pennsylvania groups who are withholding support from this bill unless it is amended -- and, given the stakes, will make the outcome of this legislation a litmus test issue in the 2012 elections.
 
The fact remains that while the proponents of SB 1 have been selling it as a broad, inclusive bill, it does not provide any meaningful financial assistance to the 27,000 middle income children currently attending failing schools or other middle income children, who, if the bill is not amended, will be left out of the "school choice" promise.
 
(Since half of all Pennsylvania's 11th graders are not proficient in Reading and Math, according to PSSA test scores, the problem of "failing schools" is an even broader matter.)
 
Despite claims that SB 1 already benefits middle income families through the EITC Scholarship Program, we respectfully disagree. The average EITC Scholarship is only $1,100. Not enough to make a substantial difference for many children.
 
At the Pennsylvania Leadership Conference held this past weekend, Senator Jeffrey Piccola, a prime sponsor of SB 1, admitted that the bill was drafted in July, 2010 and was not redrafted to reflect the results of the November, 2010 elections.
 
In July, 2010, the Democrats controlled the PA House and the Governorship. The bill was specifically written to appease Democratic Legislators and a Democratic Governor. The bill has not been altered to reflect the reality of the new Republican majority in the PA Assembly and a new Republican Governor.
 
Also, this past weekend, Senator Piccola promised to amend SB 1 to include middle income children whose family income is 300% above the poverty level. He suggested that the addition would be made in the fourth year of the program--depending on fiscal savings
in the first three years. While this is movement in the right direction, it is simply not enough. In order to garner our coalition's support for SB 1, we urge the PA Senate amend the bill to include the following:
 
1. In the first two years of the program, any child in the Commonwealth attending a failing
    school, whose family adjusted gross income (AGI) does not exceed $85,000 based on
    a family of four, will be entitled to receive a combination of EITC Scholarship and
    voucher funding totaling no more than $5000. (EITC Scholarships, if available, must be
    applied for before a voucher could be granted.)  If an EITC Scholarship were to exceed
    $5000, the student would not be eligible to receive a voucher.
 
2. In the third year of the program, any child attending a Commonwealth school, whose
    family AGI does not exceed $85,000 based on a family of four, will be entitled to receive
    a combination of EITC Scholarship and voucher funding totaling no more than $5000.
    (EITC Scholarships, if available, must be applied for before a voucher could be
    granted.)  If an EITC Scholarship were to exceed $5000, the student would not be
    eligible to receive a voucher.
 
3. Parents of all Home Schooled and private Cyber Schooled children, whose AGI does
    not exceed $85,000, based on a family of four, shall be entitled to receive personal tax
    credits of up to $2,000 per child, ranging in ages of 4-19, to cover the expenses of
    legitimate books, supplies,and specialized classes.
 
4. Include specific language to protect non-public schools from intrusive federal and state
    regulation.
 
The inclusion of these provisions, which take into account the Commonwealth's current budget situation, would make SB 1 a real "school choice" bill, that, if enacted, would put Pennsylvania at the forefront of national educational reform. It would be a bill that all Pennsylvanians could be proud to support.
 
On behalf of the Grassroots Coalition for Real School Choice,
Teri Adams, President,
Independence Hall Tea Party Association, 215.690.4043
Sharon Cherubin, Executive Director,
UNITEPA of Lancaster County, 717.413.3973 

Copyright © 2012    www.unitepa.com & www.unitepa.org    All rights reserved.