Budgets, Bullies and Party-Line Votes

February 5, 2007

 

A couple of interesting news items from the Capitol last week.

 

First, Governor Culver released his spending blueprint for the FY08 budget focusing on increased spending supported by tax increases.  He used a good portion of his public address last Tuesday to share with Iowans how he plans to raise revenue and then spend it on his new government programs – an auspicious start for a new governor in a state with a carefully balanced tax base.

 

Second, the Senate Democrats pushed through their special interest sanctioned version of a safe schools bill (SF 61).  Once again, they didn’t find a need to consider the bi-partisan interests expressed through a number of amendments offered by Republicans, they simply moved their version of an anti-bullying bill through on party-line votes – ironic.

 

It’s important to understand that no one believes bullying has any place in the schools or elsewhere in the world, although reality is cruel and most of us are occasionally subjected to environments that are less than civil.  We attempt to limit our exposure to these hostile places by leaving, but, of course, children are not usually in a position to simply leave a hostile school environment.  It’s because students lack the option of voluntary association with schools that we do need to make a clear statement in support of safe schools. 

 

But how do we make schools safer?  Senate Democrats would like you to believe that it’s possible to do so through legislation that delineates a particular list of characteristics that must be included in anti-bullying school policy.  Good people will disagree about the merits of the Senate Democrats’ list, but what we can all agree on is that in no way will this legislatively mandated list be inclusive of all characteristics and situations that will result in the creation of a hostile school environment.  A classic example in our rural areas is the potential for harassment associated with school mergers.  There is nothing in the Senate Democrats’ list to protect students experiencing a hostile environment based upon one group of students’ prejudice about the bullied student’s old school. 

 

Republicans offered an amendment to remove the language that creates the Senate Democrats’ list of protected students.  We wanted to make it clear that Iowa students should never doubt that state law will protect them from a hostile school environment.  The amendment was defeated.

 

As a graduate of an Iowa Catholic school and a parent of a graduate of an Iowa Catholic school, I’m deeply concerned about the potential legal problems the bill may create for our nonpublic schools.  The Senate Democrats’ version of a safe schools bill may conflict with religious doctrine taught in a nonpublic school curriculum creating a potential legal nightmare.  Simply put, if a student finds the curriculum in their nonpublic school creates a hostile environment, any number of lawsuits could be filed against the nonpublic school’s operating budget and endowment. 

 

Republicans offered an amendment obligating nonpublic schools to implement the anti-bullying legislation while limiting the possibility of curriculum based litigation if the curriculum is consistent with the nonpublic school’s religious doctrine.  Unfortunately, our amendment was defeated.

 

In the end we did pass the Senate Democrats’ version of the safe schools bill (SF 61).  I did vote for it and can only hope that Senate Republicans’ concerns for the students left off the list and the potential for excessive and burdensome litigation in Iowa’s nonpublic schools is unfounded.  Moreover, it is my hope that this legislation will be implemented by the Culver administration in a fair and rational manner that provides relief to all students experiencing a hostile school environment while protecting our nonpublic schools from predatory legal action.