Updates on 2 homeschool bills ammendments

[Raineyrocks]

New Hampshire
HOME | LAWS | ORGANIZATIONS | CASES | LEGISLATION | HEADLINES
   New Hampshire
May 2, 2008

Senate Bill 337: Modifications to Home Education Law

Sponsors:
Senators Iris Estabrook (D), Joseph Foster (D), and Martha Fuller Clark (D), and Representatives Emma Rous (D) and J. Timothy Dunn (D)

Summary:
Senate Bill 337 increases filing requirements for homeschooling families. The requirements include the following:

   1. Submission of a curriculum description to the participating agency prior to the first year of a homeschooling program, and;
   2. The following deadline for submission of notification paperwork: within 30 days of the anniversary of commencement of the home education program or by the first day of school in the local school district.

There are two or three proposed amendments.

Carson/Hill Amendment

Representative Sharon Carson, Rock 3 (R) and Representative James O'Neil, Hills 3 (D) have introduced a bi-partisan amendment to add legislators to the Home Education Advisory Council (HEAC) and to create a commission to study home education in New Hampshire to see if additional legislation is warranted. The amendment is expected to also contain a provision to require New Hampshire homeschoolers starting a homeschool program notify their participating agency within five days of commencing the program and then re-notify annually by the first day of school in their resident school district.

Rouse Amendment

Bill sponsor and committee Chair Representative Emma Rous has submitted an amendment that requires New Hampshire homeschoolers to notify within five days of commencing a homeschool program and then submit curriculum information within 30 days. Her amendment also introduces new language that could be interpreted as requiring homeschoolers to actually meet with their participating agency. While the Rouse Amendment also includes language that appears to exempt homeschoolers from having to potentially meet with school officials or to even provide subsequent notification if their assessments meet or exceed the requirements in the law, this new language requires more consideration and scrutiny than time allows for in the remaining days of the session. By changing the law to add this language, there will be confusion on the part of participating agencies regarding their duties and obligations. The amendment include clarifying language stating that school officials do not have a role in "approving or rejecting" homeschool plans and that parents should have as much flexibility as possible in implementing homeschool plans. The amendment also includes appointing legislators to the HEAC. All of this new language, however interesting, is unnecessary, since the current law is operating successfully and introduces too much change that has not been properly considered.

Ingbretson Amendment

It is reported that this Amendment would remove the requirement to submit draft proposed curriculum information.

Status:
1/2/2008      (Senate) Introduced and Referred to Education Committee
1/29/2008      (Senate) Hearing, February 5, Room 103, State House, 8:45 a.m.
2/5/2008      (Senate) Amended by Senator Estabrook and Referred to Finance Committee
3/5/2008      (Senate) Amended in Education Committee Executive Session and recommended by a vote of 4-2 "ought to pass" to the full Senate
3/6/2008      (Senate) Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment for March 13
3/13/2008      (Senate) Passed Senate with Amendment, Roll Call Vote 14-10
3/19/2008      (House) Introduced and Referred to Education Committee
4/2/2008      (House) Public Hearing, 10:30 a.m., LOB 207
4/15/2008      (House) Continued Public Hearing, 10 a.m., TBD possibly Representative's Hall
4/28/2008      (House) Subcommittee Work Session 10 a.m. LB 207
4/30/2008      (House) Subcommittee Work Session 11 a.m. LB 207
5/6/2008      (House) Executive Session 10 a.m. LOB 207

HSLDA's Position:
Oppose.

Action Requested:
1) Contact or personally visit members of the Education Committee politely telling them in your own words:

    "I am familiar with the Rous and Carson/O'Neil amendments. The most prudent course of action would be for the committee to vote ITL on S.B. 337 because the law is working right now and there is no problem to solve. However, if you feel something must be done, then please support the Carson/O'Neil amendment and vote no on the Rous amendment."

2) Attend the Executive Session of the House Education Committee on May 6 at 10 a.m. in LOB 207 if you can—you will not be able to speak, but your presence will show the committee that homeschoolers are opposed to the bill and are watching.

3) Plan to attend a possible rally and to observe floor debate as early as May 14 if the bill is scheduled for a vote by the House in a form that is unacceptable.

The House Education Committee is as follows:

1. Rep. Emma L. Rous (D), Chair
(603) 868-7030
emma.rous@leg.state.nh.us

2. Rep. J. Timothy Dunn (D), Vice Chair
(603) 357-7993
dunnbt@verizon.net

3. Rep. Judith E. Day (D), Clerk
(603) 964-1816
judy.day@leg.state.nh.us

4. Kimberly C. Shaw (D)
(603) 882-2845
kcshawed@aol.com

5. Rep. Charles B. Yeaton (D)
(603) 736-9087
cyeaton@metrocast.net

6. Rep. Claudette R. Jean (D)
(603) 883-3824
crjean2@verizon.net

7. Rep. Claire D. Clarke (D)
(603) 796-2268

8. Rep. Kimberley S. Casey (D)
(603) 772-8506
caseycorps@aol.com

9. Rep. Barbara E. Shaw (D)
(603) 626-4681
beshaw3@aol.com

10. Rep. Scott A. Merrick (D)
(603) 788-4311
d.merrick@tufts.edu
   

11. Rep. James M. O'Neil (D)
(603) 424-3059
jmoneil1@comcast.net

12. Rep. Judith T. Reeve (D)
(603) 524-2644
reeverj@metrocast.net

13. Rep. Sharon M. Carson (R)
(603) 434-2489
bladensfield@hotmail.com

14. Rep. Paul Ingbretson
(603) 989-3092
ingbretson_studio@yahoo.com

15. Rep. David W. Hess (R)
(603) 485-9027
dave.hess@leg.state.nh.us

16. Rep. William J. Remick (R)
(603) 788-2444
wremick@ne.rr.com

17. Rep. Nancy F. Stiles (R)
(603) 926-6467
nancy.stiles@leg.state.nh.us

18. Rep. Karen K. McRae (R)
(603) 497-2186
karen.mcrae@leg.state.nh.us

19. Rep. Elenore Casey Crane (R)
(603) 881-9048
repcrane@comcast.net

20. Rep. Pamela G. Price (R)
(603) 888-4774
pamela.price@leg.state.nh.us

[Raineyrocks]

May 2, 2008

New Hampshire--ACTION STILL Needed
to Defeat Harmful Homeschool Legislation

Dear HSLDA Members and Friends:

Thanks to your tireless effort and involvement, S.B. 337 continues to
be a focal point of activity in the House Education Committee. In the
last week, a subcommittee of the Education Committee has held two
working sessions to try "fix" S.B. 337.   Representative Sharon
Carson, Rock 3 (R) and Representative James O'Neil, Hills 3 (D) have
introduced a bi-partisan amendment to add legislators to the Home
Education Advisory Council ("HEAC") and to create a commission to
study home education in New Hampshire to see if additional legislation
is warranted. 

Although the amendment does remove the requirement to submit
curriculum information, it is expected to contain a provision to
require New Hampshire homeschoolers initiating a homeschool program to
notify their participating agency within five days of commencing the
program and then re-notify annually by the first day of school in
their resident school district. 

Chair Emma Rous has also introduced a very troubling amendment that is
too complicated to explain here--for information on the Rouse
amendment visit the S.B. 337 home page at
http://www.hslda.org/elink.asp?id=5079 .

The best course of action for New Hampshire Homeschoolers is for the
legislature to leave the law alone.  However, momentum in the
Education Committee to pass "something" appears strong and that is why
we need your help now more than ever.

ACTION REQUESTED

1. Go to the S.B. 337 homepage at
http://www.hslda.org/elink.asp?id=5079 then contact or personally
visit members of the Education Committee, politely telling them in
your own words: 

"I am familiar with the Rous and Carson/O'Neil amendments.  The most
prudent course of action would be for the committee to vote ITL on
S.B. 337 because the law is working right now, and there is no problem
to solve.  HOWEVER, if you feel something must be done, then please
support the Carson/O'Neil amendment, and vote no on the Rous
amendment.

2. Attend the executive session of the House Education Committee on
May 6 at 10 a.m. in LOB 207 if you can--you will not be able to speak,
but your presence will show the committee that homeschoolers are
opposed to the bill and are watching.

3. Plan to attend a possible rally and to observe floor debate as
early as May 14 if the bill is scheduled for a vote by the House in a
form that is unacceptable.

It will take continued effort and perseverance to defeat this
legislation.  If we continue to stay involved, we can preserve
homeschool freedom in the Granite State.   It is a privilege to be in
this battle with you, and I encourage all of you to continue praying
about the outcome of this issue.  Thank your incredible support so far
and for all that you do each day to preserve homeschool freedom in New
Hampshire!

Sincerely,

Michael P. Donnelly
HSLDA Staff Attorney

[Raineyrocks]

New Hampshire
HOME | LAWS | ORGANIZATIONS | CASES | LEGISLATION | HEADLINES
   New Hampshire
May 2, 2008

Senate Bill 337: Modifications to Home Education Law

Sponsors:
Senators Iris Estabrook (D), Joseph Foster (D), and Martha Fuller Clark (D), and Representatives Emma Rous (D) and J. Timothy Dunn (D)

Summary:
Senate Bill 337 increases filing requirements for homeschooling families. The requirements include the following:

   1. Submission of a curriculum description to the participating agency prior to the first year of a homeschooling program, and;
   2. The following deadline for submission of notification paperwork: within 30 days of the anniversary of commencement of the home education program or by the first day of school in the local school district.

There are two or three proposed amendments.

Carson/Hill Amendment

Representative Sharon Carson, Rock 3 (R) and Representative James O'Neil, Hills 3 (D) have introduced a bi-partisan amendment to add legislators to the Home Education Advisory Council (HEAC) and to create a commission to study home education in New Hampshire to see if additional legislation is warranted. The amendment is expected to also contain a provision to require New Hampshire homeschoolers starting a homeschool program notify their participating agency within five days of commencing the program and then re-notify annually by the first day of school in their resident school district.

Rouse Amendment

Bill sponsor and committee Chair Representative Emma Rous has submitted an amendment that requires New Hampshire homeschoolers to notify within five days of commencing a homeschool program and then submit curriculum information within 30 days. Her amendment also introduces new language that could be interpreted as requiring homeschoolers to actually meet with their participating agency. While the Rouse Amendment also includes language that appears to exempt homeschoolers from having to potentially meet with school officials or to even provide subsequent notification if their assessments meet or exceed the requirements in the law, this new language requires more consideration and scrutiny than time allows for in the remaining days of the session. By changing the law to add this language, there will be confusion on the part of participating agencies regarding their duties and obligations. The amendment include clarifying language stating that school officials do not have a role in "approving or rejecting" homeschool plans and that parents should have as much flexibility as possible in implementing homeschool plans. The amendment also includes appointing legislators to the HEAC. All of this new language, however interesting, is unnecessary, since the current law is operating successfully and introduces too much change that has not been properly considered.

Ingbretson Amendment

It is reported that this Amendment would remove the requirement to submit draft proposed curriculum information.

Status:
1/2/2008      (Senate) Introduced and Referred to Education Committee
1/29/2008      (Senate) Hearing, February 5, Room 103, State House, 8:45 a.m.
2/5/2008      (Senate) Amended by Senator Estabrook and Referred to Finance Committee
3/5/2008      (Senate) Amended in Education Committee Executive Session and recommended by a vote of 4-2 "ought to pass" to the full Senate
3/6/2008      (Senate) Committee Report: Ought to Pass with Amendment for March 13
3/13/2008      (Senate) Passed Senate with Amendment, Roll Call Vote 14-10
3/19/2008      (House) Introduced and Referred to Education Committee
4/2/2008      (House) Public Hearing, 10:30 a.m., LOB 207
4/15/2008      (House) Continued Public Hearing, 10 a.m., TBD possibly Representative's Hall
4/28/2008      (House) Subcommittee Work Session 10 a.m. LB 207
4/30/2008      (House) Subcommittee Work Session 11 a.m. LB 207
5/6/2008      (House) Executive Session 10 a.m. LOB 207

HSLDA's Position:
Oppose.

Action Requested:
1) Contact or personally visit members of the Education Committee politely telling them in your own words:

    "I am familiar with the Rous and Carson/O'Neil amendments. The most prudent course of action would be for the committee to vote ITL on S.B. 337 because the law is working right now and there is no problem to solve. However, if you feel something must be done, then please support the Carson/O'Neil amendment and vote no on the Rous amendment."

2) Attend the Executive Session of the House Education Committee on May 6 at 10 a.m. in LOB 207 if you can—you will not be able to speak, but your presence will show the committee that homeschoolers are opposed to the bill and are watching.

3) Plan to attend a possible rally and to observe floor debate as early as May 14 if the bill is scheduled for a vote by the House in a form that is unacceptable.

The House Education Committee is as follows:

1. Rep. Emma L. Rous (D), Chair
(603) 868-7030
emma.rous@leg.state.nh.us

2. Rep. J. Timothy Dunn (D), Vice Chair
(603) 357-7993
dunnbt@verizon.net

3. Rep. Judith E. Day (D), Clerk
(603) 964-1816
judy.day@leg.state.nh.us

4. Kimberly C. Shaw (D)
(603) 882-2845
kcshawed@aol.com

5. Rep. Charles B. Yeaton (D)
(603) 736-9087
cyeaton@metrocast.net

6. Rep. Claudette R. Jean (D)
(603) 883-3824
crjean2@verizon.net

7. Rep. Claire D. Clarke (D)
(603) 796-2268

8. Rep. Kimberley S. Casey (D)
(603) 772-8506
caseycorps@aol.com

9. Rep. Barbara E. Shaw (D)
(603) 626-4681
beshaw3@aol.com

10. Rep. Scott A. Merrick (D)
(603) 788-4311
d.merrick@tufts.edu
   

11. Rep. James M. O'Neil (D)
(603) 424-3059
jmoneil1@comcast.net

12. Rep. Judith T. Reeve (D)
(603) 524-2644
reeverj@metrocast.net

13. Rep. Sharon M. Carson (R)
(603) 434-2489
bladensfield@hotmail.com

14. Rep. Paul Ingbretson
(603) 989-3092
ingbretson_studio@yahoo.com

15. Rep. David W. Hess (R)
(603) 485-9027
dave.hess@leg.state.nh.us

16. Rep. William J. Remick (R)
(603) 788-2444
wremick@ne.rr.com

17. Rep. Nancy F. Stiles (R)
(603) 926-6467
nancy.stiles@leg.state.nh.us

18. Rep. Karen K. McRae (R)
(603) 497-2186
karen.mcrae@leg.state.nh.us

19. Rep. Elenore Casey Crane (R)
(603) 881-9048
repcrane@comcast.net

20. Rep. Pamela G. Price (R)
(603) 888-4774
pamela.price@leg.state.nh.us

So far I have a : This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.

Delivery to the following recipients failed.

      judy.day@leg.state.nh.us (she's #3 on the list)

[J’raxis 270145]

What was the rest of the bounce message? That's probably just a bad address, but something more might be going on. The General Court's email system is already horribly misconfigured in one way, so maybe they broke it worse and it won't accept incoming mail now.

[Raineyrocks]

What was the rest of the bounce message? That's probably just a bad address, but something more might be going on. The General Court's email system is already horribly misconfigured in one way, so maybe they broke it worse and it won't accept incoming mail now.

I actually wrote 20 emails and this was the only that bounced so I guess that's not bad?

Hold on, I'll look but I'm pretty sure that was the whole bounce message, wait a minute.   Okay, I don't understand it but here's the whole thing:
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.

Delivery to the following recipients failed.

      judy.day@leg.state.nh.us

Reporting-MTA: dns;email.gcis.nh.gov
Received-From-MTA: dns;barracuda.leg.state.nh.us
Arrival-Date: Fri, 2 May 2008 23:23:46 -0400

Final-Recipient: rfc822;judy.day@leg.state.nh.us
Action: failed
Status: 5.1.1

[J’raxis 270145]

5.1.1 simply means an invalid address.

[Raineyrocks]

5.1.1 simply means an invalid address.

Oh well, I guess 1 out of 20 isn't bad.

[J’raxis 270145]

Try jed1226@earthlink.net. That's her email as listed on the House website.

[Raineyrocks]

Try jed1226@earthlink.net. That's her email as listed on the House website.

Okay, great! Thanks!

[FreelanceFreedomFighter]

 

I'm out of the area right now, so I can't get to the statehouse... I'll email.

One of the reasons we chose NH (besides the liberty-minded, pro-freedom, pro-gun, FSP, porcupines, etc) was because of the homeschooling situation. (That was significantly improved just a year or two ago!)

I'm going to go to the HSLDA website and check around. If these commie bastards are going to screw with our freedoms (again), then we'll be looking for a different venue to reside! I just don't want the government bureaucratic terrorcrats to have any means to indoctrinate my children!

Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone fighting these commie bastards!

[margomaps]

I'm out of the area right now, so I can't get to the statehouse... I'll email.

One of the reasons we chose NH (besides the liberty-minded, pro-freedom, pro-gun, FSP, porcupines, etc) was because of the homeschooling situation. (That was significantly improved just a year or two ago!)

I'm going to go to the HSLDA website and check around. If these commie bastards are going to screw with our freedoms (again), then we'll be looking for a different venue to reside! I just don't want the mafia bureaucratic terrorcrats to have any means to indoctrinate my children!

Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone fighting these commie bastards!

The purpose of this SB337 was to make it more annoying for parents to homeschool their kids, by requiring them to submit a curriculum, and to give notice to local school officials earlier than the current law mandates (which is within 30 days of taking your kids out of school, or something to that effect).  All the nastiest bits of the legislation were removed during house committee executive session the other day.  What's left was a watered-down bill that sets up a commission to further study the issue, and maybe a couple of other less-bad-than-originally-thought requirements.  It received a 9-8 "ought to pass" recommendation from the committee, but there's still a good chance it will be killed.

See Dave Ridley's report on the matter: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYzeJxJAkOg

Honestly, the home-schooling laws in NH aren't really that great compared to a lot of other states.  I'm surprised you would so quickly bail on NH just because the legislature tried to do something you didn't like.  I've got news for you: the legislature will always be doing something you don't like, and quite likely it will be on one of your hot-button issues sooner or later.  Don't be a fair-weather activist.  Come to NH and help make things better.

[kola]

welcome to Naziville, USSA.

[NJLiberty]

Honestly, the home-schooling laws in NH aren't really that great compared to a lot of other states.

That's a bit of an understatement, but they certainly could be worse, and were worse two years ago. While I still hope that SB337 is killed in the House it is so watered down now that it essentially just changes the notification period. The proposed committee could be a good or bad thing depending on who is elected in NH this fall. With a friendlier legislature next term maybe we can get them watered down even more.

If we all waited to move to NH, or wanted to leave NH, just because the laws weren't to our liking, or because the legislature was up to no good yet again, there would be no one left in NH. Moving from NJ, where we have no interference in home schooling, to NH is going to be an inconvenience for me and my family. I find the NH homeschooling laws to be intrusive and of absolutely no help in securing an education for my daughter, but that isn't going to deter me from coming. Once I get there I can work to get them reformed until they resemble the non-intrusive laws found in a large number of states, and in the meantime do what I can from here.

George

[Luke S]

Yeah, these homeschooling bills are really ridiculous. I knew two people who were homeschooled in Michigan, a boy and a girl. I don't know what happened to the boy, I lost touch with him after awhile, but he was quite the fine, upstanding, educated young gentleman while I knew him. I do know that the girl grew up to be an upstanding psychology grad student, wife, and mother. She is 24 right now but has the maturity of a 40 year old in my opinion. Homeschooling gave both of them an additional edge even over those who had attended private schools, in my opinion. Now I'm not saying it would work that way for everyone, and I'm not calling it a one size fits all solution. But there is no doubt in my mind that the government definitely needs to butt out of parents' private business in raising and schooling their children.

[FreelanceFreedomFighter]

It's not that I'm "leaving" NH or even "not going" to NH. In order to protect our freedoms, liberties, God-given rights, and privacy, we've been very careful (and somewhat fortunate) to have places to go in multiple states. Unfortunately from a homeschooling perspective, one of those states has "high regulation" and the others have "moderate regulation" (per the HSLDA website). Of the "moderate regulation" states, NH is still the best, BUT we have been contemplating selling down to one or perhaps two places. And we've discussed making a change so that we can have one place (perhaps not the only one) in a state that has absolutely no homeschooling regulations. The problem seems to be that with the rather long list of "hot button issues" (as margomaps says), each of the places we can go has it's very own pros and cons. We don't have a place in NJ, but then again, as NJLiberty points out, there are other problems for a pro-freedom family in NJ. This is true across the board. If a place is good on one issue, it is often not good to very bad on others. And my own take on what LukeS said... The terrorcrats have no legitimate authority to interfere with parents' private business in the education and raising of their children.

margomaps (and everyone who cares to know) Just an FYI...

I have been involved in securing my (and my family's) freedoms, liberties, rights and privacy for over 30 years. I have survived by being careful and wary of the terrorcrats. Twenty years ago, I (and a couple of like-minded folks) had our own freedom-minded, information-based, "get the truth out" radio show on a well-known radio station (in that area, not NH)... Until we were informed basically that our "reservations on the cattle cars were already made". That was enough for me. If it were just me, that would be one thing, but each of us had children that we want (wanted) to protect and secure their future liberties, freedoms, rights and privacy from the terrorcrats. We've "dispersed". But to a person, we've each spent years and years to personally take care of our families freedoms. I don't "bail" on places lightly, but I don't believe for one second that the terrorcrats have our best interests in mind... not one second and I certainly don't trust them... not for one second. You can label me a "fair-weather" activist if you like, but as I've said on these forums before, better to be free and alive to keep working for the cause than to go head-to-head with the terrorcrats and find yourself caged or (worse) dead insuring that you can not fight for your family's freedoms, liberties, rights and privacy ever again. Civil Disobedience is noble in many respects and I applaud those who take those actions in many cases, however, there is no such thing as legitimate gubermint, it is simply organized crime with a flag. All gubermint is slavery at the point of a gun. I don't believe in the jurisdiction or authority of any group of thugs (even if they call themselves "gubermint") anywhere in world. But I won't sacrifice myself as a martyr to individually and openly go against that group of thugs either. People can claim all they want that we have huge numbers. 20-30 years ago, I would have bought into that. Now, I just don't see it. The FSP and other groups in NH are promising and that is why we have a place in NH, but those groups aren't powerful enough to stop the commie bastards. We do our part, but we've also seen what has happened to good, honest, decent people who simply want to be left the hell alone, but are forced to take a stand against the evil thugs and terrorcrats that call themselves "gubermint". People like the Browns, who never got their one simple request of "show us the law"... People like Lauren Canario, who stood against the evils of imminent domain and violations of the constitution (and how I found these forums, even though she doesn't know me and never met me)... People like the Scotts, who were raided in the middle of the night and murdered in cold blood simply because someone wanted their valuable property... I could go on for pages and pages... and go back at least thirty years from personal knowledge. Speak out too much and then when you get a visit in the evening by some thugs dressed in suits in a black crown vic telling you that you're "on the radar"... see how "foul-weather" you're willing to be. Last thing I need is to be "suicided"... Sorry for the rant... I'll just go back to lurking and be a "fair-weather" friend. 

(I just realized that every reference I made to "gubermint", spelled correctly, automagically got changed to "mafia"...  )